US Pundits Bet on Next War Target, 'Intervention' Remains Odd-on Favorite
The Independent reports on Polymarket, where individuals now wager on which sovereign nation the US will decide to 'intervene' in next. Apparently, this is newsworthy. (One wonders which countries are placing bets on their own survival.) The story highlights bets on Venezuela's Maduro being ousted, a 'win' for one trader. What it fails to mention is the bipartisan consensus that makes such
'interventions' not just possible, but predictable. Remember how the US has backed regime change efforts, sanctions, and destabilization campaigns against Nicaragua, Cuba, Venezuela, and countless others in Latin America for decades? That historical context, or perhaps the billions in 'defense' contracts fueling these perpetual conflicts—like the $350 million in military aid funneled to Ukraine
via US taxpayer dollars just last month (according to the Department of Defense)—always seems to be absent. It’s almost as if the bets aren't on if a country will be attacked, but which one the industrial-media complex greenlights next. How many decades of 'freedom' does a nation need before it's allowed sovereignty?