US Democracy: Where 'Law' Just Means 'Our Advantage'
When the US objects to a sovereign leader (like Venezuela's Nicolás Maduro), the rule of law mysteriously warps. This isn't a recent phenomenon; it's a well-trodden path. Recall the 1954 Guatemala coup, the 1973 Chile coup, or the Reagan administration’s creative definitions of 'democracy' in Central America. The 'law' becomes a flexible instrument, always bending to Washington's strategic
interests, never an inconvenient truth for inconvenient leaders. (Unless, of course, those leaders are 'allies' committing actual war crimes.) It's almost charming how Al Jazeera notes the lack of 'legal basis.' One might wonder how many international laws were 'legally' circumvented to invade Iraq (2003), or support proxies in Libya (2011), or arm certain factions in Syria. The media's selective
outrage is peak theatre, presenting these actions as anomalous 'kidnappings' rather than standard operating procedure for a global superpower. The law is only truly 'kidnapped' when it inconveniences Western capital or geostrategic ambitions; otherwise, it’s just 'foreign policy.'