The fact that the cureent winner of the Nobel Peace Prize has called on the foreign power most responsible for the problems in her home country to launch a war against her home country is all the proof anyone should need of how much of a sham this prize is (if Kissinger getting it has gone out of living memory, of course).
Not to say that the Maduro regime is not terrible, it obviously is, but cheering on a literal invasion makes you either a complete moron, or a psychopath of the highest order, hoping to rule over the ashes.
Sure, that would be good, but that doesn't justify US military action in any way, shape or form. If the USA was concerned with this, they could just bring this up before the UN council and ask for an authorization to conduct a specific military operation in Venezuela to put this right.
> fact that the cureent winner of the Nobel Peace Prize has called on the foreign power most responsible for the problems in her home country to launch a war against her home country is all the proof anyone should need of how much of a sham this prize is
...wouldn't the alternative be to listen to what she's saying?
[Note: in the following, I will use quote marks around thinks I'm paraphrasing, since there is no official transcript and I don't have the patience to carefully check every word]
She says that the killings of Venezuelan citizens that were killed by the US army were the fault of Maduro, by his refusal to stop collaborating with drug dealers. She also calls Maduro's actions "starting wars with other countries", parroting Trump talking points. She is saying that "finally, there is action from an international coallition", calling her own state a "narco terrorist" state, again parroting Trump pro-war talking points.
When the interviewer point blank asks her if she would support US strikes on Venezuelan territory, she says that "the escalation that is taking place is the only way to get Maduro to understand that it's time to go" - so yes, she does support such strikes. To furhter the point, she talks about such escalation being the last chance for a peaceful transition, and that they have tried everything else. The interviewer presses on this point, and asks her again whether, given that Maduro was unlikely to give up power, she thinks US military actions are the only way forward - and again she confirms, using vague language - "it is absolutely required for a credible threat to exist".
All of this part starts at around the 6m mark and continues to the 12m mark at least.
I rejoice any time something doesn’t go Donald Trump’s way because he frequently says that he hates me and wishes to do me harm. I separately agree that Nobel Peace Prize awards often don’t make much sense.
No, his hatred is quite general, directed at various groups which I belong to some of. One time I remember well, for example, is when he posted a video of himself dumping poo on No Kings protesters (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna238521). If a friend or relative responded to some political dispute with a video of them pooping on me, I’d be pretty scared.
The fact that the cureent winner of the Nobel Peace Prize has called on the foreign power most responsible for the problems in her home country to launch a war against her home country is all the proof anyone should need of how much of a sham this prize is (if Kissinger getting it has gone out of living memory, of course).
Not to say that the Maduro regime is not terrible, it obviously is, but cheering on a literal invasion makes you either a complete moron, or a psychopath of the highest order, hoping to rule over the ashes.
You could argue the winners of elections should get to run the country they are elected to.
Sure, that would be good, but that doesn't justify US military action in any way, shape or form. If the USA was concerned with this, they could just bring this up before the UN council and ask for an authorization to conduct a specific military operation in Venezuela to put this right.
> fact that the cureent winner of the Nobel Peace Prize has called on the foreign power most responsible for the problems in her home country to launch a war against her home country is all the proof anyone should need of how much of a sham this prize is
...wouldn't the alternative be to listen to what she's saying?
Sure, listen to her here:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2025-10-31/internal-em...
[Note: in the following, I will use quote marks around thinks I'm paraphrasing, since there is no official transcript and I don't have the patience to carefully check every word]
She says that the killings of Venezuelan citizens that were killed by the US army were the fault of Maduro, by his refusal to stop collaborating with drug dealers. She also calls Maduro's actions "starting wars with other countries", parroting Trump talking points. She is saying that "finally, there is action from an international coallition", calling her own state a "narco terrorist" state, again parroting Trump pro-war talking points.
When the interviewer point blank asks her if she would support US strikes on Venezuelan territory, she says that "the escalation that is taking place is the only way to get Maduro to understand that it's time to go" - so yes, she does support such strikes. To furhter the point, she talks about such escalation being the last chance for a peaceful transition, and that they have tried everything else. The interviewer presses on this point, and asks her again whether, given that Maduro was unlikely to give up power, she thinks US military actions are the only way forward - and again she confirms, using vague language - "it is absolutely required for a credible threat to exist".
All of this part starts at around the 6m mark and continues to the 12m mark at least.
Someone could be both anti-Trump and anti-Nobel Peace Prize 2025 winner. It could be the case.
I rejoice any time something doesn’t go Donald Trump’s way because he frequently says that he hates me and wishes to do me harm. I separately agree that Nobel Peace Prize awards often don’t make much sense.
Trump takes time out of his day to specifically say he hates you and wishes to do you harm? That sounds really scary, random HN user.
No, his hatred is quite general, directed at various groups which I belong to some of. One time I remember well, for example, is when he posted a video of himself dumping poo on No Kings protesters (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna238521). If a friend or relative responded to some political dispute with a video of them pooping on me, I’d be pretty scared.
2 replies →
Main character syndrome.
2 replies →