Comment by reaperducer
4 days ago
Yeah, we know this is all about oil
"War for oil" is always the easy go-to to criticize any American military action, even in countries that don't have oil.
And while Venezuela has oodles of oil, is this really the case of America wanting Venezuelan oil?
America has more oil than it knows what to do with, and because of that, prices are so low that there are lots of newspaper articles about how American oil companies have dramatically slowed exploration and production. Plus, even under the current administration, America is using more and more renewable energy sources (some states now get more than 50% of their energy from wind/solar).
With the whole Chevron situation, I'm willing to think that oil may play a role here, but again the "war for oil" seems like nothing more than a convenient slogan for a high schooler's protest sign.
Direct quote:
“Venezuela is completely surrounded by the largest Armada ever assembled in the History of South America. It will only get bigger, and the shock to them will be like nothing they have ever seen before — Until such time as they return to the United States of America all of the Oil, Land, and other Assets that they previously stole from us.”
This along with other direct quotes from officials is what led me to the conclusion that, yes, oil is a large factor.
Direct quote:
The problem is that you can't cherry-pick quotes from this administration and use them as a source of truth like you could with previous administrations.
Especially from Mr. Trump, who says something and then an hour later states the opposite. (See his record on solar, electric vehicles, various personnel and congressmen.) Keeping people guessing is part of this administration's strategy, and is inherited from how he did business.
It wasn't just him making such quotes, as I indicated before, and I made no attempt to make an exhaustive account of such statements which can be easily found elsewhere. It's very reasonable to conclude that that is an issue at play here. That is all I attempted to convey.
America has plenty of the wrong type of oil. They need heavy oil as that's what the usa oil refinery are made to handle, but they have a shortage of heavy oil, and a oversupply of light oil. Venezuela has the heavy oil they need
There's not loads of idle refinery capability just waiting for more Venezuelan crude in the US.
Yes it most probably about oil not democracy [1].
US even mastermind amd helped overthrowned Iranian elected government and then only recently admitted and apologized to that but the damaged already done [2].
[1] The real reason Venezuela matters [video]:
https://youtu.be/Pgwny1BiCYk
[2]1953 Iranian coup d'état:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9ta...
interesting how they say it's about drug trafficking but then keeps confiscaating oil tankers tho?
There are sanctions on Venezuelan oil due to the drug trafficking. The oil tankers are captured to punish violations of the sanctions. We don’t capture and appreciable amount of oil this way. And in fact the sanctions drive up the price of oil.
Yet another incoherent policy for this administration that will be interesting to see people defend. Why does Maduro get invaded and captured but convicted drug smuggler (and ex Honduran president) Juan Orlando Hernandez get pardoned?
3 replies →
> And while Venezuela has oodles of oil, is this really the case of America wanting Venezuelan oil?
Yes it is.
> But Trump has also made his desire for Venezuelan oil clear. He said that the blockade of sanctioned oil tankers going to and from the country would remain “until such time as they return to the United States all of the oil, land, and other assets that they stole from us.” He did not clarify what land and “other assets” he was referring to.
> In a social media post, Miller also characterized the expropriations as an injustice against the US. “American sweat, ingenuity and toil created the oil industry in Venezuela,” wrote. “Its tyrannical expropriation was the largest recorded theft of American wealth and property.”
> And in a 2023 speech, Trump was even more pointed about his designs on the country’s oil. “When I left, Venezuela was ready to collapse,” he said, referring to the end of his first term in the White House. “We would have taken it over, we would have gotten all that oil, it would have been right next door.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-12-17/trump-s-v...
This is especially silly because the US is always going to control oil extraction in Venezuela because nobody else has the technical capabilities required to do so profitably at a large scale.
There's no need to really fight with the Venezuelan government over this, unless Venezuela decided that they'd rather leave the oil in the ground.
What about Chinese, Russian or European oil majors ?
The only comparable large-scale extraction projects in the world would be the oil sands in Canada.
This is a super small niche, with oil margins constantly getting squeezed around the world it'd probably be tricky to convince anyone to significantly scale up production in Venezuela even if the US lifted all sanctions and whatnot.
I was shouting “War for Oil” in 2003 as a college freshman. In retrospect, was oil why we invaded Iraq? How much oil did we get out of the deal?
> How much oil did we get out of the deal?
Apparently a lot.
> The 2003 Iraq War, initiated as a U.S. unilateral action, has also been viewed through the lens of economic interests, particularly oil access. Following the conflict, significant American business opportunities arose, notably through contracts with oil companies to exploit Iraqi oil fields, marking the end of Iraq’s long-standing oil nationalization policy. Technological advancements were another key economic byproduct of these wars; innovations developed for military use often transitioned into civilian applications, influencing various sectors.
> Additionally, a trend towards privatization emerged, as private firms undertook roles traditionally held by the military, further intertwining the defense industry with the economy. This shift raised ethical concerns and sparked debate regarding the implications of privatizing military functions. Overall, the Iraq wars illustrate the complex intersection of military action, resource control, and economic interests within American foreign policy.
https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/military-history-and...
Assuming it was about oil was giving them far more credit than they deserve. That is a sane reason if an immoral one. I think it has far more to do with economic systems and opportunity. It is about creating freedom for capital. That means oil but also a mirage of schools, defence, healthcare, condos.
"US will be ‘strongly involved’ in Venezuela oil industry, Trump says after Caracas attacked and Maduro captured"
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2026/jan/03/caracas-e...
Yes, US foreign policy is connected to oil. It's not just about control but price.
Trump has a history of using resource cutoff as a bargaining or coercive tool. hes doing it with Minnesota right now with the scandal and has done it with NYC. control over oil flows to European allies or other allies and adversaries gives his tactic more reach.
The more credible narrative is Trump and co trying to do good for the Venezuelans and for the regular US folks! /s