News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
I am not saying Venezuela will win, I am saying it has invested enough in air defense that the likelihood of the US being able to launch an air campaign without embarassing losses is lower than it appears at least in terms of how the media covers it, and the political consequences of a blundered strike that loses US lives and equipment in a high profile way would be devastating to an already very unliked republican party. Trump and his administration really can't risk looking any more dumb or incompetent than he does now, a limit is being reached though it is hard to believe one exists, it does.
If Trump and his cronies launches strikes, he will bungle the US militaries' advantage, this administration is too dysfunctional to do otherwise.
You sure though? I'd expect it at similar or lower level as Iran was. I might be wrong, though, certainly hope so. Funnily enough, they have also 2 or 3 F-16s.
I think the amount of money in the US military industrial complex that has gone into obsessing over how best to bomb Iran is probably incomprehensible. Venezeula too a degree, but not anywhere as much. There was no way Iran could entirely deny US airpower, but so what?
This isn't just a question of strike capable technology vs. counters it is about landscapes and who knows them best and has invested in their idiosyncracies, and I don't get the feeling Venezuelans have been wasting all this time thinking the US wouldn't try some shit like this.
Were the Iran strikes successful? What did they do but confirm to the world the irrationality of US foreign intervention under this administration?
If the US wants to project actual power into Venezuela it will have to get its hands dirty and that is where the wheels will immediately fall off.
Iran invested a hell of a lot more into air defenses and really it was Israel (which has significantly less military power than the US) that cleared the way for the one US air strike there. The effectiveness of that air campaign remains to be seen, but it certainly weakened the Ayatollah, and set back their nuclear weapons program. How much damage it did to their nuke program would be something that would be kept secret by all parties, so there's no way to know. Doesn't stop people with a political agenda from speculating of course.
Of course whether or not the strikes were effective doesn't change the fact that Israel was able to establish air superiority over Iran rather quickly. The US has the same weapon systems Israel has, and more of it. A lot more of it.
The US doing air strikes on Venezuela would be stupid for all kinds of geopolitical reasons, but the capability of Venezuela to inflict significant losses on the US military isn't one of them. Venezuela has older versions of the same weapon systems Iran had since Iran and Russia are their main suppliers.