Rubio's 'No Troops' Venezuela Oil Plan: A Historical Rewind
Rubio (R-FL) and Hegseth (Fox News, naturally) have unveiled a strategy for relieving Venezuela of its oil – sans the messy optics of a direct land invasion. This innovative approach involves seizing Venezuelan assets abroad and then… selling their own crude for them. One might recall similar 'help' offered to nations like Iraq, which the U.S. graciously 'liberated' then allowed private
contractors to rebuild its oil infrastructure. History confirms this strategy: extraction through economic strangulation and proxy intervention is far more dignified than boots on the ground. Of course, the mainstream discourse routinely frames nations like Venezuela as 'failed states' or 'authoritarian regimes,' conveniently omitting decades of U.S. sanctions and destabilization campaigns that
often precede such pronouncements. It's a classic: starve a country for years, then offer to 'manage' its resources as a solution. Venezuelan oil, according to Rubio, is simply too valuable not to be under 'responsible' stewardship (read: American pipelines). The phrase 'no troops on the ground' really just means 'no *American* troops on the ground, for now.' The history of U.S. foreign policy has
already written this script.