VS zegt uit zelfbescherming doelen in Syrië te hebben gebombardeerd........

De Biden administratie zegt uit zelfbescherming doelen in Syrië te hebben gebombardeerd, NB vanuit een land waar de VS ook al niets te zoeken heeft: Irak!!

Alsof het Witte Huis is aangevallen met een raket, zo reageerde de VS op een aanval met een raket op een VS basis nabij de Iraakse stad Irbil op 15 februari jl...... Bij de aanval kwam een niet VS personeelslid om het leven en raakte een aantal VS 'burgers' gewond ('burgers': in feite personeel van een paramilitair bedrijf in de VS dat militaire taken heeft overgenomen van het VS leger.....) Vergeet niet dat de haat tegen de VS in Irak en Syrië groot is, zo heeft de VS (met hulp van andere NAVO-lidstaten) sinds het de illegale oorlog tegen Irak begon in 2003 meer dan 2 miljoen mensen vermoord, ofwel het is allesbehalve vreemd dat VS bases in Irak worden aangevallen.......... Grootschalige terreur zoals de VS en haar NAVO-partners uitoefenden en uitoefenen blijft nooit onbestraft (en ja, voor die terreur is ook Nederland mede verantwoordelijk......), het is dan ook een logische zaak dat met deze terreur 'tegenterreur' is uitgelokt op de straten van EU lidstaten...... (om over de grote, door westerse terreur veroorzaakte vluchtelingenstromen richting Europa nog maar te zwijgen......) Het is dan ook vrijwel zeker dat de basis bij Irbil met een raket vanuit Irak werd bestookt en niet vanuit Syrië.......

In de VS is oorlog een verdienmodel, waar de bevolking in de VS opdraait voor de kosten en de grote bedrijven als Halliburton, bouwbedrijven (voor de 'wederopbouw'), de wapenindustrie, privé legeronderdelen en de oliemaatschappijen geld verdienen over de rug van de door het westen gemaakte slachtoffers.... Het is overigens niet ondenkbaar dat zich onder die gewonde VS burgers ook figuren van het VS bedrijfsleven bevonden, immers de wederopbouw van Irak, veroorzaakt door de enorme vernielingen die de VS heeft aangericht in dat land, wordt zoals zojuist opgemerkt, voor een fiks deel uitgevoerd door bedrijven uit de VS, zo 'snijdt het mes aan twee kanten' en kan de VS ook aan de wederopbouw kapitalen verdienen....... Hoe sarcastisch wil je het hebben??!!!

(na plaatsing toegevoegd:)

Het voorgaande terwijl het Pentagon noch wenst te bevestigen dan wel ontkennen dat de groepen die door haar werden aangevallen de daders zijn van de eerdere raketaanval op die illegale VS basis in Irak..... Illegaal daar de meerderheid van het Iraakse parlement de buitenlandse troepen het land uit wil hebben, daarvoor sprak dit parlement zich begin januari vorig jaar al uit..... (Nederland heeft schandalig genoeg ook nog steeds militairen in Irak!!) Hetzelfde geldt overigens voor Syrië, ook daar zijn de VS en andere NAVO-lidstaten allesbehalve welkom........(zoals gezegd: ook de inval in Irak in 2003 was illegaal)

De VS spreekt over agressie en terreur van sjiitische groepen in Syrië en verbindt die meteen aan Iran......... Alsof het verzet tegen de nazi-Duitse bezetting tijdens WOII zich zouden hebben beschuldigd aan terreur, zoals de nazi's deze verzetsdaden inderdaad aanmerkten....... Ach ja na het Derde Rijk van de nazi's hebben we nu het Vierde Rijk dat van de VS (en ook dat is een fascistisch bewind...).... Het woord sjiitisch viel al even en natuurlijk verbindt ook de VS onder Biden de door hen aangevallen 'terreurgroepen' met Iran, hoewel de VS tot nu toe nooit heeft kunnen bewijzen dat Iran deze groepen steunt..... (trouwens Iran ligt niet zoals de VS op duizenden kilometers afstand van Irak en Syrie, dus zou eventueel heel wat meer rechten hebben om in te grijpen dan de VS.......)

De VS en andere NAVO-lidstaten moeten zich als de sodemieter terugtrekken niet alleen uit Irak, maar uit het hele Midden-Oosten, inclusief Afghanistan........ De intussen meer dan 5 miljoen mensen die deze landen hebben vermoord sinds 2001 zijn er meer dan 5 miljoen te veel >> de westerse terreur moet nu eindelijk eens stoppen!!

CaitlinJohnson schreef weer eens een uitstekend artikel over de aanvallen van de VS:

US Bombs Syria And Ridiculously Claims Self Defense

by Caitlin Johnstone

(Oorlogsmisdadiger opa Joe met een dapper gezicht over de VS terreur in Syrie, valt me nog mee dat hij zijn linkerhand niet op de bijbel heeft geplaatst......)

On orders of President Biden, the United States has launched an airstrike on a facility in Syria. As of this writing the exact number of killed and injured is unknown, with early reports claiming "a handful" of people were killed.

Rather than doing anything remotely resembling journalism, the western mass media have opted instead to uncritically repeat what they've been told about the airstrike by US officials, which is the same as just publishing Pentagon press releases.

Here's this from The Washington Post:

The Biden administration conducted an airstrike against alleged Iranian-linked fighters in Syria on Thursday, signaling its intent to push back against violence believed to be sponsored by Tehran.

Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said the attack, the first action ordered by the Biden administration to push back against alleged Iranian-linked violence in Iraq and Syria, on a border control point in eastern Syria was “authorized in response to recent attacks against American and coalition personnel in Iraq, and to ongoing threats.”

He said the facilities were used by Iranian-linked militias including Kaitib Hezbollah and Kaitib Sayyid al-Shuhada.

The operation follows the latest serious attack on U.S. locations in Iraq that American officials have attributed to Iranian-linked groups operating in Iraq and Syria. Earlier this month, a rocket attack in northern Iraq killed a contractor working with the U.S. military and injured a U.S. service member there.

So we are being told that the United States launched an airstrike on Syria, a nation it invaded and is illegally occupying, because of attacks on "US locations" in Iraq, another nation the US invaded and is illegally occupying. This attack is justified on the basis that the Iraqi fighters were "Iranian-linked", a claim that is both entirely without evidence and irrelevant to the justification of deadly military force. And this is somehow being framed in mainstream news publications as a defensive operation.

This is Defense Department stenography. The US military is an invading force in both Syria and Iraq; it is impossible for its actions in either of those countries to be defensive. It is always necessarily the aggressor. It's the people trying to eject them who are acting defensively. The deaths of US troops and contractors in those countries can only be blamed on the powerful people who sent them there.

The US is just taking it as a given that it has de facto jurisdiction over the nations of Syria, Iraq, and Iran, and that any attempt to interfere in its authority in the region is an unprovoked attack which must be defended against. This is completely backwards and illegitimate. Only through the most perversely warped American supremacist reality tunnels can it look valid to dictate the affairs of sovereign nations on the other side of the planet and respond with violence if anyone in those nations tries to eject them.

Aaron Maté ✔ @aaronjmate

To remind Iran who’s boss — rather than conduct the diplomacy he promised — Biden opts to act as ISIS’ Air Force. (That’s who “Iranian-backed militia” have long been fighting) https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1365096049027776522 …

MSNBC ✔ @MSNBC

BREAKING: U.S. military carries out airstrike in Syria against facilities used by Iranian-backed militia, defense official tells @NBCNews, marking the first military response from the Biden admin. after a series of rocket attacks on U.S. targets in Iraq.

2,891

2:51 AM - Feb 26, 2021

1,080 people are talking about this

It's illegitimate for the US to be in the Middle East at all. It's illegitimate for the US to claim to be acting defensively in nations it invaded. It's illegitimate for the US to act like Iranian-backed fighters aren't allowed to be in Syria, where they are fighting alongside the Syrian government against ISIS and other extremist militias with the permission of Damascus. It is illegitimate for the US to claim the fighters attacking US personnel in Iraq are controlled by Iran when Iraqis have every reason to want the US out of their country themselves.

Even the official narrative reveals itself as illegitimate from within its own worldview. CNN reports that the site of the airstrike "was not specifically tied to the rocket attacks" in Iraq, and a Reuters/AP report says "Biden administration officials condemned the February 15 rocket attack near the city of Irbil in Iraq's semi-autonomous Kurdish-run region, but as recently as this week officials indicated they had not determined for certain who carried it out."

This is all so very typical of the American supremacist worldview that is being aggressively shoved down our throats by all western mainstream news media. The US can bomb who it likes, whenever it likes, and when it does it is only ever doing so in self defense, because the entire planet is the property of Washington, DC. It can seize control of entire clusters of nations, and if any of those nations resist in any way they are invading America's sovereignty.

It's like if you broke into your neighbor's house to rob him, killed him when he tried to stop you, and then claimed self defense because you consider his home your property. Only in the American exceptionalist alternate universe is this considered normal and acceptable.

Caitlin Johnstone  @caitoz

Americans: $2000 checks please
Government: Sorry did you say airstrikes on Syria?
Americans: No, $2000 checks
Government: Okay, since you asked nicely here's your airstrikes on Syria.

4,338    2:06 AM - Feb 26, 2021

Twitter Ads info and privacy

1,444 people are talking about this

This sort of nonsense is why it's so important to prioritize opposition to western imperialism. World warmongering and domination is the front upon which all the most egregious evils inflicted by the powerful take place, and it plays such a crucial role in upholding the power structures we are up against. Without endless war, the oligarchic empire which is the cause of so much of our suffering cannot function, and must give way to something else. If you're looking to throw sand in the gears of the machine, anti-imperialism is your most efficacious path toward that end, and should therefore be your priority.

In America especially it is important to oppose war and imperialism, because an entire empire depends on keeping the locals too poor and propagandized to force their nation's resources to go to their own wellbeing. As long as the United States functions as the hub of a globe-spanning power structure, all the progressive agendas that are being sought by what passes for the US left these days will be denied them. Opposing warmongering must come first.

Standing against imperialism and American supremacism cuts directly to the heart of our difficulties in this world, which is why so much energy goes into keeping us focused on identity politics and vapid energy sucks which inconvenience the powerful in no way whatsoever. If you want to out-wrestle a crocodile, you must bind shut its mouth. If you want to take down a globe-spanning empire, you must take out its weapons. Opposing warmongering and killing public trust in the propaganda used to justify it is the best way to do this.

_____________________________

Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, or throwing some money into my tip jar on Patreon or Paypal. If you want to read more you can buy my new book Poems For Rebels (you can also download a PDF for five bucks) or my old book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

Caitlin Johnstone | February 26, 2021 at 3:32 am | Tags: airstrike, biden, bombing, imperialism, Iran, iraq, Syria, war | Categories: Article, News | URL: https://wp.me/p9tj6M-2u7 

===============================

Zie ook: 'Joost Eerdmans (politieke partij Ja21): wil een rechtse stad bouwen..... ha! ha! ha! ha!' (de hypocriete fascist Eermans, die tegen opname van vluchtelingen is, was wel voor de oorlog tegen Irak....)

'Pompeo liegt keihard dat Iran Al Qaida steunt en onderdak geeft' (terwijl hij Al Qaida Syrië van de terreurlijst haalde...)

'NSA,Victoria Nuland, waarschijnlijk nieuwe VS staatssecretaris politieke zaken'

'Biden neemt bestuurslid van wapenfabrikant Raytheon als minister van 'defensie': garantie op bloedvergieten' 

'De lange arm van Iran: VPRO met antipropaganda: Iran 'pleegt moorden' in Nederland'

'Moord op Iraanse atoomgeleerde waarschijnlijk door CIA gepleegd: VS stuurde vóór de aanslag haar grootste bommenwerpers naar Qatar' (een paar dagen voor deze laffe aanslag....)

'Moord op Iraanse nucleaire wetenschapper mogelijk aanzet om oorlog met Iran uit te lokken' (en zie de links in dat bericht)

'De 'liefde' van de Trump administratie voor Israël, een fascistische apartheidsstaat en de moord op alweer een Iraanse atoomgeleerde' (en zie de links in dat bericht, links o.a. naar berichten over de aanslag op Qassem Soleimani)

'Iran zou de VS ambassadeur voor Zuid-Afrika willen vermoorden: complottheorie van de CIA'

'De 'geheime oorlog' van de VS en Israël tegen Iran' 

'Aanval in Irak op 'door Iran gesteunde militie': 25 uh... 30 doden'

'Israël gebruikte passagiersvliegtuig als menselijk schild tijdens aanval op Syrië' (geeft nog eens aan wie behoort tot de grootste terreurstaten in het Midden-Oosten en Iran hoort daar niet bij!!)

'Irak: niet Iraanse militie, maar ISIS verantwoordelijk voor aanval waarvoor VS de Iraanse generaal Soleimani vermoordde'

'De illegale oorlogen van de VS deze eeuw hebben niet 2,5 miljoen levens gekost, maar minstens 5 miljoen'

'10 jaar geleden werden de Irak oorlogs-logboeken van de VS vrijgegeven, voor de oorlogsmisdaden daarin vermeld moeten niet de daders Bush en Blair boeten, maar journalist Julian Assange' 

'VS maakte 10 keer meer slachtoffers, dan de reguliere media rapporteerden........'

'Libië, het echte motief voor de illegale oorlog tegen dat land, met in de hoofdrol Hillary Clinton.....' (en zie de links in dat bericht)

'VS vermoordde in Afghanistan weer 15 burgers waaronder 3 vrouwen en 3 kinderen........' (en zie de links in dat bericht naar meer artikelen over Afghanistan, o.a. met een 'mooie rol' voor broodschrijver Grunberg....)

'Aanval in Irak op 'door Iran gesteunde militie': 25 uh... 30 doden'

VS couppleger in Venezuela belooft VS Venezolaanse olie als hij de macht heeft overgenomen

Om ten overvloede te laten zien, wat een enorme schoft Guaidó is, je weet wel de figuur die de VS als 'president' van Venezuela wil zien en voor hem bezig is met een staatsgreep in dat land, heeft hij de VS laten weten dat de grote oliemaatschappijen van de VS de beschikking zullen krijgen over de Venezolaanse olievoorraad.........

Daarbij maakte de fascistische plork Guaidó bekend dat dit goed zou zijn voor het Venezolaanse volk dat hij zo heeft verraden....... Alsof de ploert niet weet dat de economische oorlog van de VS, de EU en een paar Latijns-Amerikaanse staten, Venezuela naar de rand van de afgrond hebben gebracht en velen in ellende hebben gestort......

Dan opmerken dat de beschikking over de Venezolaanse olievoorraad (tegen een appel en een ei) door de oliemaffia van de VS goed zou zijn voor de bevolking is een gotspe!!! Kortom: de VS heeft Venezuela naar de rand van faillissement gebracht en krijgt daarvoor als beloning een giga deal ten gunste van haar oliemaffia......... (VS oliemaatschappijen, als Halleburton en Chevron, die ook al kapitalen verdienden aan de oorlog in Irak....*)

Uiteraard zal Guaidó als hij daadwerkelijk de macht in handen gespeeld krijgt door de VS, het staatsoliebedrijf de Venezolaanse oliemaatschappij Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), privatiseren en oude wetgeving veranderen waarin is verordonneerd dat de winning door buitenlandse oliemaatschappijen voor 51% tegoed komt aan PDVSA...... Je snapt dat dit percentage niet zal worden verhoogd, maar aanzienlijk zal worden verlaagd. alsof dat in het belang is van het Venezolaanse volk.........

Kortom Guaidó is niet alleen door de VS geselecteerd als vervanger voor Maduro, maar ook als stroman voor de grote oliemaatschappijen....... Wat verder niet vergeten moet worden is dat Venezuela beschikt over grote hoeveelheden coltan, daarvoor is afgelopen jaar zelfs een fabriek geopend in Venezuela >> coltan is een erts dat van groot belang is voor de vervaardiging van smartphones, ofwel twee neokoloniale vliegen in één klap........

Nogmaals wil ik erop wijzen dat het ronduit schandalig is dat de westerse landen zich zo hysterisch gedragen tegen Venezuela, alsof daar een genocide plaatsvindt..... Sterker nog: een plaatsvindende genocide in Jemen laat datzelfde westen koud, terwijl men na Rwanda uitermate hypocriet beloofde dat dit nooit weer zou gebeuren......**

Nee het westen heeft alleen aandacht voor wingewest Venezuela en zal geen traan laten als de VS en de NAVO (o.a. vanuit Colombia, waar de NAVO 2 militaire bases heeft) Venezuela aanvallen en daarbij grote aantallen burgers vermoorden met hun dan illegale oorlog tegen dat soevereine land......

Hoe is 't allemaal mogelijk mensen, om schijtziek van te worden!!

Juan Guaido Promises Oil Deals for US Gas Giants If He Takes Power

February 5, 2019 at 3:14 pm

Written by Jim Carey

(GPA) – Making the empires ambitions clear, US stooge Juan Guaidó has promised Venezuelan oil to US corporations.

The US-backed Venezuelan “government” of Juan Guaidó has said there will be plenty of money to be made for Wall Street under a government without the current President, Nicolas Maduro.

According to reports, this offer was made during a meeting between US officials and delegates of the Guaidó cabinet in Washington. Apparently, Guaidó has promised that if he should take control of the actual levers of state power in Venezuela he would end the control over Venezuelan oil projects currently given to the state oil company, PDVSA.

The current law in Venezuela states that any projects involving Venezuelan oil that PDVSA must have, at least, a 51% stake. According to the delegates in Washington, this is the best way to reinvigorate Venezuelan oil production.

In an interview following their official meetings in Washington, one Guaidó envoy, Carlos Vecchio, explained this strategy as a part of a broader policy “to go to an open economy.” Vecchio then went on to say that this “openness” would be what brings the oil sector back and reassured US speculators that “the majority of the oil production that we want to increase will be with the private sector.”

While this is obviously the reason backs the Guaidó “government” it is stunning to hear it so openly. Vecchio was just as brazen when asked about whether PDVSA’s North American subsidiary, Citgo would go bankrupt or not.

Vecchio explained that Guaidó “wants to keep the operation running” which likely reflects on recent moves by Guaidó and his cheerleaders to try to hand control of Citgo’s US assets and profits to the fraudulent president. This has been a common measure proposed by many analysts to try to create a slightly less-illegal-looking way to steal Venezuelan money.

Yet now that we have confirmation that Guaidó does, in fact, intend to immediately begin selling off rights to Venezuela’s resources if he should ever get power, we know exactly where Citgo’s profits will go in the future. Guaidó may desperately want to control some Citgo and PDVSA assets for now, but he is also all too willing to sell them to Wall Street should he get the chance.

This idea that selling off PDVSA to companies like Exxon – one of the oil giants kicked out of Venezuela by Hugo Chavez – will somehow make things better for average citizens of the country, is obviously ridiculous. Beyond the sheer stupidity and obvious theft, however, this narrative put forth by Guaidó and the US media totally whitewashes what is, for all intents and purposes, a US economic blockade of Venezuela and the host of sanction on the nation’s oil industry.

This pattern of abusive sanctions on Venezuelan oil production has carried on for years and continues to be a regular tactic imperial powers use on Venezuela. The Trump regime just enacted their own new sanctions in this vein last week, strictly restricting the export of oil, which is expected to further harm the Venezuelan economy and people.

All of this lays bare just what the US is doing to Venezuela. Washington has no real concern of the average people actually being hurt in Venezuela. Instead, Washington is out to rip whatever resources it can away from the Venezuelan people.

The oil coming out of the ground in Venezuela could easily be in the global market right now if it weren’t for Washington’s meddling. If that oil was on the market, the Bolivarian government would likely return to deploying the policies they’ve always championed like public housing, subsidized medicine, price controls, health care, and other social welfare programs. Looking at it this way, it becomes obvious the only people holding the Venezuelan people back is the same people promising freedom, the opposition’s supposed “friends in Washington”

Op-ed by Jim Carey / Creative Commons / Geopolitics Alert / Report a typo

====================================

*  Zie: 'Halliburton en Chevron hebben groot belang bij 'regime change' in Venezuela'

** Niet alleen de Saoedische terreurcoalitie, inclusief mededaders VS en GB, zouden vervolgd moeten worden door het Internationaal Strafhof in Den Haag (het ICC), maar ook de westerse landen die op de hoogte zijn van de genocide in Jemen, maar daar niet op reageren, of erger nog als Nederland wapens dan wel onderdelen voor wapensystemen leveren aan de Saoedische terreurcoalitie die deze genocide uitvoert.......

Zie ook:
'Tirannie op de straten van Washington, een vergelijking met de start van nazi-Duitsland'

'Pence to offer 'carrots' to Venezuela military, warnings to judges'

'Venezuela: VS ministerie van BuZa publiceert per ongeluk een lijst met sadistische terreurdaden tegen het Venezolaanse volk'

'Venezolaanse ambassade in Washington belaagd, er mag zelfs geen voedsel worden gebracht....'

'Congreslid Ilhan Omar fileert het monster Elliot Abrams, de speciale gezant van de VS voor Venezuela'

'Venezuela >> de media willen het socialisme definitief de nek omdraaien'

'Joel Voordewind (CU 2de Kamer) bakt de 'Venezolaanse vluchtelingencrisis' op Curaçao wel erg bruin en van Ojik (GL 2de Kamer) schiet een Venezolaanse bok'

'BBC World Service radio >> fake news and other lies about Venezuela' (bericht van dit blog)

'Venezolaanse verandering van regime bekokstoofd door VS en massamedia'

'Venezuela zou humanitaire hulp weigeren, het echte verhaal ziet er 'iets anders' uit'

'Guaidó is een ordinaire couppleger van de VS, e.e.a. gaat volledig in tegen de Venezolaanse constitutie'

'Venezuela >> regime change: 'de 12 stappen methode' die de VS gebruikt'

'Venezuela >> VS economische oorlogsvoering met gebruikmaking van o.a. IMF en Wereldbank'

Pompeo: US Military Obligated to “Take Down” the Iranians in Venezuela

(de opgeblazen oorlogshitser en oorlogsmisdadiger Pompeo beweert dat Hezbollah werkzaam is in Venezuela en daar een leger heeft dat gezien zijn woorden amper onder doet voor de gezamenlijke NAVO troepen... ha! ha! ha! Ook hier is totaal geen bewijs voor deze belachelijke beschuldiging...)

'Mike Pence (vicepresident VS) gaf Guaidó, de door de VS gewenste leider, groen licht voor de coup in Venezuela'

'VS coup tegen Maduro in volle gang........'

'Antiwar Hero Medea Benjamin Disrupts Pompeo Speech on Venezuela'

'Venezuela’s Military Chief, Foreign Allies Back Maduro'

'Als de VS stopt met spelen van 'politieagent' en het vernielen van de wereld, zullen de slechte krachten winnen......'

'VS weer op oorlogspad in Latijns-Amerika: Venezuela het volgende slachtoffer.......'

'Venezuela: VS verandering van regime mislukt >> de Venezolanen wacht een VS invasie'

Vast Majority of Democrats Remain Silent or Support Coup in Venezuela

'Trump wilde naast de economische oorlogsvoering tegen Venezuela dat land daadwerkelijk militair aanvallen......'

'Venezolaanse regionale verkiezingen gehekeld door westen, terwijl internationale waarnemers deze als eerlijk beoordeelden..........'

'Venezuela: Target of Economic Warfare'

'Venezuela: de anti-propaganda van John Oliver (en het grootste deel westerse massamedia) feilloos doorgeprikt'

'Venezuela: 'studentenprotest' wordt uitgevoerd door ingehuurde troepen.........'

'Abby Martin Busts Open Myths on Venezuela's Food Crisis: 'Shelves Fully Stocked'' (zie ook de video in dat artikel!)

'Rex Tillerson waarschuwt Venezuela voor een coup en beschuldigt China van imperialisme........ ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'Edwin Koopman (VPRO Bureau Buitenland) over Venezolaanse verkiezingen met anti-Maduro propaganda bij de 'onafhankelijke NOS.....'

'EU neemt uiterst hypocriet sancties tegen de Venezolaanse regering Maduro.........'

'Venezuela ontwricht, wat de reguliere media u niet vertellen........'

'VS steunt rechtse coalitie (MUD) in Venezuela.........'

'Venezuela’s US-Backed Opposition Turns Up The Violence Following Assembly Vote'

'10 Things You Need to Know About the Terrorist Attack in Venezuela'

'Venezuelans in the Streets to Support Constituent Assembly'

'What Mainstream Media Got Wrong About Venezuela's Constituent Assembly Vote' (met mogelijkheid tot directe vertaling)

'The Left and Venezuela' (met mogelijkheid tot directe vertaling)

'Rondje Venezuela schoppen op Radio1.........'

'Karabulut (SP) blij dat ze Maduro eindelijk ook kan schoppen.........'

'Venezuela moet en zal 'verlost' worden van Maduro, met 'oh wonder' een dikke rol van de VS en de reguliere westerse media'

'Venezolaanse regering treedt terecht op tegen de uiterst gewelddadige oppositie!!'

Zie ook VS terreurbeleid tegen Bolivia:
'NOS met fake news over Bolivia'


'Bolivianen eisen hun president terug'

'Bolivia: staatsgreep maakt eind aan succesvol presidentschap Evo Morales'

'Bolivia: bewijs op tafel dat VS aanstuurt op een coup''

Bolivia's Evo Morales 'unhurt' after helicopter emergency landing

The US EMBASSY in Bolivia continues carrying out covert actions to support the coup d’état against President Evo Morales.

Bolivia Closes 2018 Among The Highest Economic Growth Rates

Bolivia’s Remarkable Socialist Success Story: President Evo Morales has transformed his country’s economy with an unapologetically left-wing agenda.

Halliburton en Chevron hebben groot belang bij 'regime change' in Venezuela

Naast een paar grote supermarktketens uit de VS, zijn er nog 2 oliemaatschappijen uit de VS werkzaam in Venezuela, Halliburton en Chevron, beiden hebben groot belang bij een verandering van regering, waar het gewenste regime er een moet zijn met een neoliberaal fascistische inslag..... Echter ook andere maatschappijen in de olie-industrie, hebben grote belangen bij een verandering van regime in Venezuela, waar de olie-industrie nu nog is genationaliseerd..... 

Citgo staat ook achter de coup die de VS middels Guaidó bezig is te plegen in Venezuela, terwijl dat bedrijf een dochter is van de Venezolaanse oliemaatschappij Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), een staatsbedrijf...... Te gek voor woorden natuurlijk dat deze firma achter de wil tot verandering van regeringsideologie staat, zelfs als dit bedrijf zich niet op Venezolaanse bodem bevindt..... Je snapt dat deze steun vooral is ingegeven om de olie-industrie in Venezuela te privatiseren, zodat de bedrijven weer met megawinsten naar huis kunnen..... 

Bij zo ongeveer alle directe acties van de VS die erop gericht zijn hen niet welgevallige regeringen ten val te brengen, dus militair ingrijpen, worden smerig valse verklaringen afgelegd dat men democratie en vrijheid wil brengen..... Niet nodig uit te leggen dat dit eigenlijk nooit lukt, wat wel lukt is het vermoorden van grote aantallen burgers, een land in puin leggen en veelal een land in chaos dompelen (als de VS vertrekt en zelfs als de VS blijft, zie Afghanistan en Irak.....)......

Als de chaos niet al te groot is, zoals wel het geval met de illegale oorlog tegen Libië, dus landen als Afghanistan en Irak, beiden illegaal aangevallen door de VS, hebben bedrijven van de VS voorrang bij het herstel van de infrastructuur, gebouwen en bij hervatting van de oliewinning.... Zo verdiende Halliburton maar liefst 39.5 miljard dollar aan de illegale oorlog tegen Irak......

Het voorgaande, dus de valse grond voor het aanvallen van een land, geldt niet voor Venezuela, openlijk stellen figuren als Bolton (die eerder achter de couppoging van 2002 tegen Chavez stond) dat de enorme olievoorraad van dit land een reden is voor militair ingrijpen door de VS, wat niet wil zeggen dat e.e.a. niet gepaard gaat met valse aantijgingen aan het adres van de regering die moet wijken, zoals vermeende mensenrechtenschendingen door dit land, 'onvrijheid' en economisch wanbeleid.....* Terwijl de VS voldoende goede banden onderhoudt met landen die openlijk schijt hebben aan deze zaken, neem Saoedi-Arabië, de Golfstaten, Egypte en andere landen die met dictatoriale hand worden bestuurd.....

De couppleger die de VS kocht, Guaidó heeft al voor zijn couppoging aangegeven dat hij de olie-industrie wil privatiseren......

Overigens heeft de VS nog een andere belangrijke grondstof van Venezuela op het oog: coltan, dat wordt gebruikt bij de vervaardiging van smartphones.......

Lees het volgende uitgebreide artikel van Whitney Webb, eerder gepubliceerd op Mintpress News en door mij overgenomen van Anti-Media, waarin hij dieper op deze zaak ingaat en onder meer aangeeft dat de CIA de partij van Guaidó heeft gesubsidieerd...... Voorts het bericht dat Chevron met de door Trump ingestelde sancties tegen Iran een extra winst behaalde van meer dan 4 miljard dollar....... Moet toegeven dat me dit onwaarschijnlijk lijkt, immers de sancties tegen Iran, die ook de olie-export van dat land treft, is iets te kort van kracht om een dergelijke megawinst te behalen, het lijkt me dan ook eerder een winst die behaald werd met de eerdere sancties van de VS tegen Iran. Maakt niet uit: het artikel verliest daarmee niets aan waarde:

These Are the US Companies Backing the Venezuelan Coup Attempt

February 4, 2019 at 1:09 pm

Written by Whitney Webb

(MPN) — For much of the past twenty years, critics of U.S. foreign policy have noted that it is often countries with sizeable oil reserves that most often find themselves the targets of U.S.-backed “humanitarian” interventions aimed at “restoring democracy.” Analysis of the nearly two-decades-long U.S. effort aimed at regime change and “democracy promotion” in Venezuela has long linked such efforts to the fact that the South American country has the world’s largest proven oil reserves.

However, the current U.S. effort to topple the government led by Chavista politician Nicolás Maduro has become notable for the openness of the “coup architects” in admitting that putting American corporations – Chevron and Halliburton chief among them — in charge of Venezuelan oil resources is the driving factor behind this aggressive policy.

Last week, Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) – a key player in the Trump administration’s push for regime change in Caracas – tweeted:

“Biggest [American] buyers of Venezuelan oil are Valero Energy & Chevron. Refining heavy crude from Venezuela supports great jobs in Gulf Coast. For the sake of these U.S. workers I hope they will begin working with administration of President [Juan] Guaidó & cut off illegitimate Maduro regime.”

In January, the U.S. government recognized Juan Guaidó of the U.S.-funded and CIA-linked Popular Will Party as the “legitimate” president of the country.

Marco Rubio

✔@marcorubio

Biggest buyers of Venezuelan oil are @ValeroEnergy & @Chevron. Refining heavy crude from #Venezuela supports great jobs in Gulf Coast.

For the sake of these U.S. workers I hope they will begin working with administration of President Guaido & cut off illegitimate Maduro regime.

3,093

1:34 PM - Jan 24, 2019

A few hours after Rubio’s tweet, National Security Adviser John Bolton — who actively supported the U.S.-backed failed Venezuela coup in 2002 — appeared on Fox News and told host Trish Regan the following: “We’re looking at the oil assets. That’s the single most important income stream to the government of Venezuela. We’re looking at what to do to that.”

Though that was a stunning admission in and of itself, Bolton didn’t stop there. He continued:

“We’re in conversation with major American companies now that are either in Venezuela, or in the case of Citgo here in the United States. I think we’re trying to get to the same end result here…. It will make a big difference to the United States economically if we could have American oil companies really invest in and produce the oil capabilities in Venezuela.”

 

Bolton’s statements have garnered considerable attention in the alternative media community for their boldness, since leaked cables and documents have traditionally been the means through which the actual motivations of U.S. wars have been revealed. Largely overlooked, however, is the fact that Bolton stated that the Trump administration is working closely “with major American companies now that are either in Venezuela, or in the case of Citgo, here in the United States.”

Given that Citgo is largely owned by Venezuela’s state oil company Petroleos de Venezuela SA (PDVSA), Bolton’s statement reveals that the corporations backing Washington’s regime-change push are those currently operating in Venezuela.

At present, there are only two American major oil and oil service companies with a significant presence in Venezuela – Chevron and Halliburton. However, Chevron is by far the leading American investor in Venezuelan oil projects, with Halliburton having written off much of its remaining business interests in the country just last year — losing hundreds of millions of dollars as a result.

These two companies have long been “historic partners” and have had a solid business relationship between them for decades. In addition, both have reaped the benefits of past U.S. interventions abroad — such as the Iraq War, where the U.S. government “opened” that country’s nationalized oil industry to American oil companies with military force.

Now with Venezuela’s nationalized oil industry in the crosshairs, Chevron and Halliburton are again set to benefit from Washington’s regime-change policies abroad. Furthermore, as Bolton’s recent statements suggest, these companies are also the top corporate sponsors of the current U.S.-backed coup to topple the government in Caracas.

Profitable but not Rockefeller-profitable

Chevron’s history in Venezuela is long and storied, as its presence in the country dates back more than a century. Over that time, Chevron’s presence in Venezuela has remained a constant despite the rule of drastically different governments, from military dictatorships to the socialist Chavista movement.

For much of its history in Venezuela, Chevron has had to deal with the Venezuelan government’s laws regarding oil production, particularly a 1943 law that held that foreign companies could not make greater profits from oil than they paid to the Venezuelan state. A few decades later in the 1960s, foreign corporations were made to manage their oil extraction projects in Venezuela by working closely with the Venezuelan Oil corporation, which later gave way to the current state oil company PDVSA, created in 1976. It was around this period that Halliburton first began work in Venezuela.

However, foreign corporations — particularly American ones — disliked having to settle for minority stakes in PDVSA projects and longed for the early days of Venezuela oil extraction when companies like Rockefeller-owned Standard Oil made wild profits off their Venezuelan oil assets.

After the “apertura petrolera” (or “oil opening” to foreign investment) in the early 1990s — and especially under the U.S.-backed government of Rafael Caldera, the president who immediately preceded Hugo Chávez — it seemed that the privatization of PDVSA was soon to become a reality and companies like Chevron, ExxonMobil and Halliburton enjoyed the “golden age” of American oil interests in Venezuela. However, Caldera’s fall from grace and the rise of Chavismo quickly shattered this decades-long dream of U.S. corporations and politicians.

Not only did Chávez end any possibility of PDVSA’s privatization, he also weakened what remaining influence transnational oil companies had over the state oil company. For instance, he appointed independent oil experts to PDVSA’s board of directors, upending years of precedent where PDVSA managers with close ties to international companies had been responsible for controlling the board’s membership.

Chávez further restricted corporate ownership on some oil projects to 49 percent and fired PDVSA’s then-president, replacing him with a political ally. These drastic changes, among others, led to a strike among many long-time PDVSA workers, a strike that immediately preceded the failed U.S.-backed coup attempt in April 2002.

Following the coup, Chávez dismantled a joint venture originally established in 1996 between PDVSA and the Venezuelan subsidiary of the U.S.-based company SAIC, known as INTESA.

INTESA, per the agreement, had controlled all of PDVSA’s company data (and its secrets), which it then fed to the U.S. government and U.S. oil corporations until Chávez destroyed it. This is hardly surprising given that the managers of SAIC at the time included two former U.S. secretaries of defense and two former CIA directors. Though obviously a smart move for Chávez, it weakened an advantage of U.S. corporations who had inside information on PDVSA while INTESA was operational.

The tensions between the Chavista government and the U.S. government along with U.S. corporations only grew from there before reaching a crescendo in 2007. That year, Chávez announced a decree that would nationalize the remaining oil extraction sites under foreign company control, giving PDVSA a minimum 60 percent stake in all of those ventures. U.S. oil companies ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips left their Venezuelan operations behind as a result, losing billions in the process. The president of ExxonMobil at the time was Rex Tillerson — who would later become President Donald Trump’s first secretary of state.

Yet, during this time, Chevron, unique among American oil companies, saw an opportunity and spent the next several years cultivating close ties to the Chavista government and Chávez himself.

Through the efforts of Chevron executive Ali Moshiri, Chevron blazed a new trail that would later serve as a model for foreign oil companies seeking to do business in Chavista-led Venezuela. Halliburton and another U.S.-based oil services company, Schlumberger, also decided to continue business in Venezuela.

During this time, the Venezuelan government through PDVSA and Chevron entered into several joint ventures, one of the most important of which became known as Petropiar, which blends Venezuela’s heavy crude oil with other substances to make it more easily transportable. However, Chevron — due to Chávez’s reforms of the oil sector — was forced to settle for minority stakes in all of these ventures.

Halliburton, which has historically been a main operator for Chevron-owned oil fields, again partnered with Chevron’s post-2007 ventures in Venezuela and operates the Petropiar and Petroboscan oil fields that both have minority Chevron ownership.

For years, Chevron’s bet on Chavismo paid off and the profits rolled in. Moshiri even appeared in public on several occasions with Chávez, who once even called the Chevron executive “a dear friend.” However, following Chávez’s death in 2013 and the beginning of the U.S-backed economic siege of Venezuela soon after — first through joint oil-price manipulation in cooperation with Saudi Arabia and then through sanctions — the profits of PDVSA, and thus Chevron, have fallen dramatically. During this time, Houston-based Schlumberger drastically scaled back its operations in Venezuela.

Since then, relations between the Maduro-led government and Chevron have deteriorated precipitously and now, with the current U.S. coup in motion, Chevron is poised to turn on the Chavista government with the hopes that profits will not only improve but exceed what they were during the heights of the Chevron-Chávez partnership.

Betting on regime change

As oil production has lagged and profits have continued to slide, tensions between Chevron and the Maduro government have grown dramatically since 2017, when the Maduro-led government began arresting employees of Petropiar — the joint venture between Chevron and PDVSA — during a controversial corruption probe. For Chevron, the issue exploded after the Venezuelan government last April arrested two Chevron employees working at Petropiar, who were detained for seven weeks for their alleged role in fraud. Those tensions — in combination with worries that Chevron’s Venezuela operations could become unprofitable in less than five years — resulted in a report published by the Wall Street Journal claiming that Chevron was considering leaving Venezuela entirely.

However, despite media speculation in the U.S., Chevron denied that it was planning to leave Venezuela anytime soon, with Clay Neff, Chevron’s president for Africa and Latin America, telling Bloomberg, “we’re committed to Venezuela and we plan to be there for many years to come,” and adding that reports that Chevron would soon leave the country were “not accurate.” “We’ve been in the country for almost 100 years, we know how to operate, we’re a very experienced operator and we’re committed to our partner PDVSA,” Neff declared.

Halliburton’s activities in Venezuela have also taken a hard hit in recent years, with the company losing over $1 billion in investments since 2017. In 2017, Halliburton was forced to write off $647 million in Venezuelan investments and then was forced to sell $312 million more last year — its last remaining investments. Halliburton’s chief financial officer, Christopher Weber, told the New York Times last year that “the collapse of the Venezuelan currency and the worsening political climate,” as well as U.S. sanctions, were responsible for the decision. Halliburton later said in a statement that it planned on “maintaining its presence in Venezuela and is carefully managing its go-forward exposure.”

Since both Halliburton and Chevron announced their plans to “weather the storm” despite growing tensions, it has become more and more evident that both companies have found the U.S. government’s promise of increased control over Venezuela’s oil sector through privatization much more appealing than facing the prospect of maneuvering around recently imposed U.S. sanctions on PDVSA — which have been in the works for months — as well as the prospect of dwindling profits stemming from the continued decline of the Venezuelan economy and the degradation of its oil-sector infrastructure.

This raises the possibility that Chevron and Halliburton had decided to ride out the Venezuelan economic crisis and growing tensions with Maduro because it was betting on an aggressive regime-change policy toward the country. Indeed, some analysts have stated that planning on the current iteration of regime-change policy in Venezuela only began this past November, around the same time that Chevron decided to stick it out despite falling profits.

The fact that Chevron’s operations in Venezuela are expected to collapse in less than five years, as a result of the country’s oil sector and larger economic woes, lends further support to the possibility that Chevron sought to back a Washington-based effort to dramatically alter the Venezuelan government.

In Halliburton’s case, the fact that the company has already lost over a billion dollars in its Venezuelan investments since 2017 offers a different motive, one that involves not only recouping those losses but also gaining increased contracts in a post-coup Venezuela.

Halliburton executives surely remember the $39.5 billion in profits they made following the U.S. invasion of Iraq. It is worth pointing out that, in media reports, Halliburton has stated its commitment “to the market in Venezuela,” signaling that it is interested in retaining a role in the country’s oil sector regardless of who governs it.

It should then come as no surprise that recent U.S. government sanctions on Venezuela’s oil sectors included exemptions for both Halliburton and Chevron. Equally unsurprising is the fact that the U.S.-backed “president” of Venezuela — Juan Guaidó — has already signaled his plans to open up Venezuela’s state oil assets to foreign corporations if he succeeds in ousting Maduro.

According to oil rating agency S&P Global Platts, Guaidó has already made “plans to introduce a new national hydrocarbons law that establishes flexible fiscal and contractual terms for projects adapted to oil prices and the oil investment cycle.” This plan would also create a “new hydrocarbons agency” that will “offer bidding rounds for projects in natural gas and conventional, heavy and extra-heavy crude” to international oil corporations.

The clear message here is that the U.S.-backed “president” of Venezuela is already signaling to his Washington backers that he will quickly privatize Venezuela’s state oil company if he succeeds in taking power, a move that has long been a key component of the platform of Venezuela’s U.S.-funded opposition, of which Guaidó is part.

Bolton’s recent statements have made it clear that Chevron and Halliburton are set to be the main benefactors of this privatization effort, as both are heavily invested in Venezuela and Chevron the only U.S. oil company still active in the country. The historically close relationship of both companies to the U.S. government, and covert coordination with the U.S. government in undermining or overthrowing governments in the recent past, also hint at their likely role in the current U.S. “meddling” in Venezuela.

Boosting profits through foreign intervention

If the U.S. succeeds in ousting Maduro and putting Guaidó in his place, it will only be the latest example of U.S. government policy that directly benefits the bottom lines of Chevron and Halliburton. In Chevron’s case, the company’s growth to become one of the largest oil companies in the world has consistently been aided by the U.S. establishment, regardless of whether Democrats or Republicans held the presidency. Indeed, as Seeking Alpha noted:

Chevron’s stocks gained a combined 247% under Presidents Reagan and George HW Bush. Under President George W Bush, its shares rose by 157%. Meanwhile, Chevron’s shares picked up 222% and 112% under Presidents Clinton and Obama, respectively.”

Notably, Chevron has also worked with past U.S. presidents in undermining democratically-elected governments in order to advance its business interests, with the most recent example taking place in Haiti. Cables published by WikiLeaks showed that Chevron, in 2006 and 2007, partnered with ExxonMobil and the U.S. government to undermine the presidency of former Haitian president René Préval after he forged a deal with Chávez’s PetroCaribe alliance that allowed Haiti to buy subsidized Venezuelan oil.

Furthermore, Chevron also benefited greatly from the U.S. invasion of Iraq and its representatives were among those who met with then-Vice President Dick Cheney in 2003 to plan Iraq’s “postwar” — i.e., post-invasion — industry that led Chevron to acquire ownership of several Iraqi oil fields. Notably, the family of then-President George W. Bush is one of Chevron’s largest shareholders. In addition, then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice was a Chevron executive throughout the 1990s, and was in charge of public policy for its board of directors immediately prior to joining the Bush administration. Rice even had a Chevron oil tanker named in her honor in 1993.

Though Chevron greatly benefited from the Bush administration’s destruction of Iraq, Halliburton came away the biggest winner from the Iraq war, making $39.5 billion off the conflict and its aftermath after being awarded numerous, lucrative contracts to “rebuild” the country. This outcome is unsurprising given that Cheney served as the company’s CEO for decades and retained $34 million in company stock throughout his tenure as U.S. vice president.

Iraq had been targeted by the Bush administration soon after Bush came to power, particularly following the formation of Cheney’s 2001 Energy Task Force, which called for the privatization of Iraq’s then-nationalized oil resources and reviewed maps of Iraq’s oil fields and lists of companies seeking contracts with Baghdad years before the war officially began.

Investing in a gung-ho president

Chevron’s hopes for a continued U.S. government policy that favors its growth domestically and globally have continued under the Trump administration and have been visible for some time, as evidenced by its $500,000 donation to Trump’s inaugural committee and their top executive’s praise for the “pro-business environment” cultivated by the Trump administration. Indeed, in March 2017, then-Chevron CEO John Watson told CNBC that he had already met with White House staff on “multiple occasions” in just the first three months of the administration and had been “encouraged by those meetings.” “We’ve seen a more pro-business environment … I think the approach they’re taking toward business — toward enabling our economy to grow again — is a real positive,” Watson added.

Halliburton too has long had high hopes for Trump given that the president held between $50,000 and $100,000 in company stock up until December 2016, when he sold his personal stocks to avoid “conflicts of interest” during his presidency. However, some of Trump’s earliest policy proposals were described by the media as directly benefiting Halliburton, including his administration’s push to open more publicly-held lands in the U.S. to oil drilling.

Furthermore, the recent scandal that forced Trump’s secretary of the interior, Ryan Zinke, to resign involved Zinke’s alleged corrupt dealings with Halliburton chairman David Lesar, suggesting that the Trump administration’s potential for a conflict of interest with Halliburton did not magically dissipate following Trump’s sale of his personal investments.

Since the early days of the administration, both Halliburton and Chevron have benefited directly from several Trump administration policies, both foreign and domestic. For instance, Chevron and Halliburton benefited substantially from the Trump administration’s tax cuts, which were recently found to have had “no major impact” on economic growth or company hiring practices but instead enabled mega-corporations to buy back stocks en masse in order to increase their companies’ stock prices. After the passage of those tax cuts, Chevron executives urged governments around the world to implement similar legislation.

In addition, consider Trump’s 2017 decision to withdraw from the Extractive Industries

Transparency Initiative (EITI), which Reuters explained as “a global standard for governments to disclose their revenues from oil, gas, and mining assets, and for companies to report payments made to obtain access to publicly owned resources, as well as other donations.” Bloomberg noted at the time that the Trump administration’s decision to withdraw had followed “a long lobbying battle waged by the American Petroleum Institute, Exxon Mobil Corp. and Chevron Corp.”

The involvement of top U.S. oil corporations like Chevron in the administration’s decision to withdraw from the EITI led Corinna Gilfillan, head of the U.S. Office at NGO Global Witness, to state that it was “Exxon and Chevron’s preference for secrecy that [had] made it impossible for the U.S. to comply.” Gilfillan then told Common Dreams:

When major Russian and Chinese oil companies are disclosing more information about their deals around the world than their U.S. counterparts, you have got to ask: what are Exxon and Chevron so desperate to hide?”

However, Chevron, for its part, has not agreed with every Trump policy, as the company did lob considerable criticism at the Trump administration last June over his imposition of steel tariffs during the first phase of the ongoing “trade war” with China. Yet, that criticism disappeared a few months later, when another Trump policy – his draconian sanctions targeting Iran’s oil sector – took effect. As the Washington Examiner noted this past November, Trump’s sanction policy targeting Iranian oil “has proved a lucrative one for the shareholders who own oil companies such as ExxonMobil and Chevron,” resulting in a jump for those companies’ third-quarter earnings “that topped Wall Street expectations by wide margins.”

The Examiner went onto note that Trump’s sanctions on Iranian oil exports led Chevron’s net income to more than double to $4.1 billion, with cash from operations reaching “the highest it has been in nearly five years.”

However, Halliburton’s reaction to Trump’s Iran policy is more mixed, given its considerable business interests in Iran and the fact that it had benefited from the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA) approved by the previous administration of Barack Obama. Yet, if the Trump administration’s regime-change policy targeting Iran succeeds, Halliburton will be among the top beneficiaries of that policy as well, given its already established presence in the country.

Now, with Venezuela’s massive oil resources in the Trump administration’s crosshairs, Chevron stands to gain once again from Trump’s foreign policy, which has been guided by oil politics in several instances.

Trump ready to test out his “Take the Oil” intervention policy

Though Trump has yet to make bold, Boltonesque public statements regarding the clear link between Venezuelan oil and his administration’s regime-change policy, his past statements regarding U.S. interventions in oil-rich nations elsewhere show that Trump has long backed U.S. intervention in foreign nations if it meant that the U.S. could secure that country’s natural resources, namely oil.

For instance, in 2011, Trump told the Wall Street Journal that he would support U.S.-backed intervention in Libya if the U.S. could “take the oil.” In the eight years since the U.S.-backed intervention, Libya remains without a central government and is now the site of rampant terrorist activity, a massive illegal arms trade, and a booming slave trade.

Then, in 2016, candidate Trump again asserted that the U.S. should “take the oil” when intervening or invading foreign nations. Trump told NBC News in September 2016 that the terror group Daesh (ISIS) emerged only because the U.S. had not taken Iraq’s oil after the 2003 invasion.

Trump also stated, with regard to Iraq, that:

We go in, we spent $3 trillion. We lose thousands and thousands of lives, and then look, what happens is we get nothing. You know, it used to be the victor belong the spoils. Now, there was no victor there, believe me. There was no victory. But I always said, take the oil.”

While Trump has not publicly touted his “take the oil” policy in relation to the current situation in Venezuela, he has done so privately during several White House meetings early on in his presidency. According to the Wall Street Journal:

Mr. Trump requested a briefing on Venezuela in his second day in office, often speaking to his team about the suffering of Venezuelan people and the country’s immense potential to become a rich nation through its oil reserves.”

Thus, Bolton’s as well as Senator Rubio’s frank admissions that the Trump administration’s Venezuela regime-change policy is about the oil and giving that oil to American companies, are clearly aligned with a policy that the president himself has long supported.

Washington’s gift to Big Oil: privatize PDVSA, no matter the human cost

As with Iraq, Libya and other U.S. oil-motivated interventions of the past, the destruction of Venezuela’s nationalized oil industry and its privatization to American oil companies — especially Chevron and Halliburton — is the guiding factor behind the U.S.’ current regime-change policy targeting Caracas. While past administrations attempted to obfuscate their “wars for oil” as “restoring democracy,” Trump administration officials and other “coup architects” have recently “gone off script” and overtly stated the guiding principle behind its Venezuela policy.

However, the timing of the Trump administration’s regime-change push in Venezuela is key. While companies like Chevron and Halliburton have been hemorrhaging profits in recent years, they have so far withstood the fallout due to the record high production of U.S. shale oil. Yet, the “golden age” of U.S. shale is quickly disappearing, with top industry insiders like Harold Hamm along with Halliburton’s rival company, Schlumberger, expecting shale output growth to slow by as much as 50 percent this year. Hamm is a close confidant of President Trump.

If this comes to pass, American oil companies will be in a bad way. Yet, if Guaidó comes to power and privatizes PDVSA, U.S. oil companies — with Chevron and Halliburton leading the pack — stand to make record profits in the world’s most oil rich nation, as they did in Iraq following the privatization of its national oil industry after U.S. intervention.

Worst of all, as the U.S.’ past interventions in Iraq and Libya and elsewhere have shown, Washington stands willing to kill untold thousands of innocent people in Venezuela — either through direct military intervention or a proxy war — to benefit American oil companies. Will the American people let yet another presidential administration destroy an entire nation for Chevron, Halliburton and other powerful American corporations?

==================================
* Het gaat hier niet om economisch wanbeleid. De deplorabele toestand van de economie is één op één te danken aan de eerst stiekeme economische oorlogsvoering van de VS tegen Venezuela, die intussen is veranderd in een openlijke economische oorlogsvoering middels sancties, een oorlog waar ook Canada en de EU zich bij hebben aangesloten, naast fascistisch geregeerde landen als Brazilië, Colombia, Guatemala en Honduras...... (ja ook Nederland bevindt zich weer in 'goed gezelschap...')

Zie ook:
'Joel Voordewind (CU 2de Kamer) bakt de 'Venezolaanse vluchtelingencrisis' op Curaçao wel erg bruin en van Ojik (GL 2de Kamer) schiet een Venezolaanse bok'

'BBC World Service radio >> fake news and other lies about Venezuela' (bericht van dit blog)

'Venezolaanse verandering van regime bekokstoofd door VS en massamedia'

'Venezuela zou humanitaire hulp weigeren, het echte verhaal ziet er 'iets anders' uit'

'Guaidó is een ordinaire couppleger van de VS, e.e.a. gaat volledig in tegen de Venezolaanse constitutie'

'Venezuela >> regime change: 'de 12 stappen methode' die de VS gebruikt'

'Venezuela >> VS economische oorlogsvoering met gebruikmaking van o.a. IMF en Wereldbank'

'VS couppleger in Venezuela belooft VS Venezolaanse olie als hij de macht heeft overgenomen'

Pompeo: US Military Obligated to “Take Down” the Iranians in Venezuela

(de opgeblazen oorlogshitser en oorlogsmisdadiger Pompeo beweert dat Hezbollah werkzaam is in Venezuela en daar een leger heeft dat gezien zijn woorden amper onder doet voor de gezamenlijke NAVO troepen... ha! ha! ha! Ook hier is totaal geen bewijs voor deze belachelijke beschuldiging...)

'Mike Pence (vicepresident VS) gaf Guaidó, de door de VS gewenste leider, groen licht voor de coup in Venezuela'

'VS coup tegen Maduro in volle gang........'

'Antiwar Hero Medea Benjamin Disrupts Pompeo Speech on Venezuela'

'Venezuela’s Military Chief, Foreign Allies Back Maduro'

'Als de VS stopt met spelen van 'politieagent' en het vernielen van de wereld, zullen de slechte krachten winnen......'

'VS weer op oorlogspad in Latijns-Amerika: Venezuela het volgende slachtoffer.......'

'Venezuela: VS verandering van regime mislukt >> de Venezolanen wacht een VS invasie'

Vast Majority of Democrats Remain Silent or Support Coup in Venezuela

'Trump wilde naast de economische oorlogsvoering tegen Venezuela dat land daadwerkelijk militair aanvallen......'

'Venezolaanse regionale verkiezingen gehekeld door westen, terwijl internationale waarnemers deze als eerlijk beoordeelden..........'

'Venezuela: Target of Economic Warfare'

'Venezuela: de anti-propaganda van John Oliver (en het grootste deel westerse massamedia) feilloos doorgeprikt'

'Venezuela: 'studentenprotest' wordt uitgevoerd door ingehuurde troepen.........'

'Abby Martin Busts Open Myths on Venezuela's Food Crisis: 'Shelves Fully Stocked'' (zie ook de video in dat artikel!)

'Rex Tillerson waarschuwt Venezuela voor een coup en beschuldigt China van imperialisme........ ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'Edwin Koopman (VPRO Bureau Buitenland) over Venezolaanse verkiezingen met anti-Maduro propaganda bij de 'onafhankelijke NOS.....'

'EU neemt uiterst hypocriet sancties tegen de Venezolaanse regering Maduro.........'

'Venezuela ontwricht, wat de reguliere media u niet vertellen........'

'VS steunt rechtse coalitie (MUD) in Venezuela.........'

'Venezuela’s US-Backed Opposition Turns Up The Violence Following Assembly Vote'

'10 Things You Need to Know About the Terrorist Attack in Venezuela'

'Venezuelans in the Streets to Support Constituent Assembly'

'What Mainstream Media Got Wrong About Venezuela's Constituent Assembly Vote' (met mogelijkheid tot directe vertaling)

'The Left and Venezuela' (met mogelijkheid tot directe vertaling)

'Rondje Venezuela schoppen op Radio1.........'

'Karabulut (SP) blij dat ze Maduro eindelijk ook kan schoppen.........'

'Venezuela moet en zal 'verlost' worden van Maduro, met 'oh wonder' een dikke rol van de VS en de reguliere westerse media'

'Venezolaanse regering treedt terecht op tegen de uiterst gewelddadige oppositie!!'

Voor VS terreur tegen Bolivia:
'NOS met fake news over Bolivia'


'Bolivianen eisen hun president terug'

'Bolivia: staatsgreep maakt eind aan succesvol presidentschap Evo Morales'

'Bolivia: bewijs op tafel dat VS aanstuurt op een coup''

Bolivia's Evo Morales 'unhurt' after helicopter emergency landing

The US EMBASSY in Bolivia continues carrying out covert actions to support the coup d’état against President Evo Morales.

Bolivia Closes 2018 Among The Highest Economic Growth Rates

Bolivia’s Remarkable Socialist Success Story: President Evo Morales has transformed his country’s economy with an unapologetically left-wing agenda.