US 'Drug War' rhetoric targets Venezuela, shields real players
📰 THE STORY: The Financial Times reports that Mexico is in sight of a potential Trump administration, suggesting a hardline approach due to alleged drug ties with Venezuela. The article implies US frustration with Mexico's refusal of military intervention to combat fentanyl, framing Venezuela as a destabilizing force. 🔍 WHAT THEY'RE NOT TELLING YOU: Historical Context: The US 'War on Drugs' has
been a convenient pretext for intervention in Latin America since at least the 1980s. In 1989, the US invaded Panama, ostensibly to capture Manuel Noriega on drug trafficking charges, but primarily to remove a former CIA asset who had outlived his usefulness. The CIA's own involvement in drug trafficking, from the Golden Triangle in Southeast Asia during the Vietnam War to the Contra supply
networks in Nicaragua in the 1980s, is a documented historical fact, consistently ignored when 'drug ties' are used as a casus belli against uncooperative nations. Double Standard: The narrative of a 'drug-state' is selectively applied. While Venezuela is consistently demonized for alleged drug trafficking, with evidence often disputed or lacking independent verification, major US allies like
Saudi Arabia and Colombia (despite receiving billions in US aid to combat drugs) face far less scrutiny regarding their own documented roles in global illicit economies. The media rarely frames the US financial system — which launders trillions in illicit funds globally, including drug money — as a root cause. Follow the Money: The 'War on Drugs' is a multi-billion dollar industry. US defense