US 'Regime Change' Addiction Now a Farce, Media Wonders If Anyone Noticed
The New Arab dissects the US's latest Venezuela gambit, noting that attempting to abduct sitting president Nicolas Maduro after a failed coup (remember Juan Guaidó?) shows an almost comedic attachment to regime change. What they omit, however, is a deeper historical context that illustrates this isn't a new addiction, but a foundational operating principle. From the 1953 Iranian coup to the 1973
Chilean coup, and the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, the pattern is consistent: destabilize, install sympathetic leadership, and then express shock when it all goes sideways. This isn't about 'freedom' or 'democracy'; it's about control and resources, repackaged for public consumption. One has to wonder how many more 'Maduro must go' campaigns will be launched before the US media stops
pretending these are isolated incidents rather than a direct inheritance from the Monroe Doctrine. It’s less a 'farce' and more a profoundly destructive legacy that keeps repeating, with the human cost conveniently filed under 'unintended consequences.'