US Open To Talks, Just Not About Its Own Strikes
The Guardian (and by extension, the U.S. State Department’s narrative) dutifully reports Venezuela's Nicolás Maduro is “open to talks” on drug trafficking, while conveniently sidestepping a 'reported CIA-led strike' Donald Trump 'claimed' was on a cartel-used docks. The absurdity isn't merely Maduro's non-answer, but the uncritical framing: dialogue is always conditional on U.S. terms, especially
when oil reserves are in play, as Maduro rightly reiterates . One might wonder if 'talks' mean anything when the other side is allegedly conducting military operations on your sovereign territory. The U.S. routinely charges foreign leaders with drug crimes (see: Noriega, Manuel; Panama, 1989), then unilaterally enforces its 'justice' with 'massive military deployments to the Caribbean Sea,' as
documented . This cycle—accuse, militarize, then demand 'talks'—isn't diplomacy; it's a playbook for regime change disguised as civility. How many countries must capitulate before the 'rules-based international order' applies to everyone?