America Should Not Directly Intervene in Venezuela

“The essential element in this scenario would be American leadership as opposed to direct American military intervention. While this method may take longer and, therefore, prolong human suffering in Venezuela, this is the only viable option. After all, freedom isn’t free, and the United States has had ample evidence over the last several decades that it cannot fight for other peoples’ independence.”

Advertisements

Losing Latin America

“Washington cannot abandon Latin America.  After all, the problems that afflict Latin America will inevitably ripple upward to the United States, causing grave political and economic dislocations.  They already are.  Imagine what happens if the United States retreats completely from the region and cedes its influence to rivals like China, Russia, and Iran – or Cuba, for that matter.”

The Cost of Doing Nothing About Venezuela

“The solution is to organize a massive regional response to the Venezuelan crisis. Countries like Colombia, Peru, and Brazil are all interested in mitigating Venezuela’s collapse. The Trump Administration must head a regional coalition that would aim to ameliorate the suffering of the Venezuelan people, while putting pressure on the regime in Caracas. Venezuela, more than Syria, is where a limited, American-led humanitarian intervention of regional powers should occur. The longer that the Trump Administration ignores the Venezuelan crisis, the more time America’s enemies have to harden their positions in our part of the world—which could directly threaten the United States.”

Just Who Is Coming Through Our Porous Southwestern Border?

The United States has become consumed with the issue of Illegal Immigration. Yet, from 2007-14, Illegal Immigration into the U.S. was at “net zero.” However, criminality (and potential terrorism) increased from 2011-15. This article assesses the security risks posed to America by allowing its southwestern border to remain open to all.