dorankj wrote: Sun Jan 11, 2026 8:25 am
3. Getting the number one proven oil reserves in the world running again even at the levels that it was 30 years ago (~3mbd) before Chavez stole it and ruined it to 1mbd will help bring energy prices down further and won't go to our world enemies in the black market.
Your understanding of price, supply and oil production is about as useless as most of what you post here.
Oil is selling - now - in the $50-55/bbl range, down from $100-120 a few years ago. The markets are awash with oil right now, hence the low price.
But, the marginal cost of bringing a new bbl of oil to market, worldwide, is right now in the range of $70-75.
So, price will have to increase before any oil company is going to be interested in investing. Also, much of Venezuela’s oil is off-shore….some of the more expensive to develop and produce. That is why oil companies call Venezuela ‘uninvestable’.
My Dad was a top Petroleum Engineer for one of the oil majors, and worked in Venezuela. I know how this stuff works.
.
To your points Ken:
1) Trump's actions are outside the legal framework of international law. When he breaks laws he tears down alliances and loses the trust and support of our allies, which we need whether you'll acknowledge it or not. The Maduro regime is still intact in case you hadn't noticed. The new president has agreed (Trump tells us, she doesn't) to work with Trump. Until they don't.
2) See my post above talking about China's reaction to go full tilt with alternative energy. China and Russia will solidify what's already a strong relationship, that's not going away and with BRIC still in play the PetroDollar is still jeopardized.
3) The build out to bring the infrastructure in Venezuela back online is way way out there, see the article I posted, which also faces the distinct chance that oil will be yesterday's fuel by that time and the market just won't be there.
4) I see you're saying that there's no point in being a super power and pay all this money into defense if the US doesn't use it to go on the offense. Trump has threatened 6 countries now but yet has to demonstrate he has a plan for the day after. The day after takes taxpayer funding and allies. With the Congress having just voted against allowing Trump to continue attacks on Venezuela there's a good chance they'll balk at letting him go after Iran, Cuba and certainly Greenland.
This article was written on the 6th, before Trump met with BigOil's CEOs about a return to Venezuela and the CEO bluntly told Trump, Venezuela is 'uninvestable'. But the piece, written by experts, lays out the challenges well.
1.Rid the world and especially the Venezuelans of a evil dictator who refused to leave after losing elections, who has destroyed his country (with SOCIALISM!) starved it's people and decimated it's source of wealth.
2.Kicked out our enemies' influence from this hemisphere China, Russia, Iran and even socialist Cuba have far less influence and cheaper sanctioned oil to cause all the problems they have for years.
3. Getting the number one proven oil reserves in the world running again even at the levels that it was 30 years ago (~3mbd) before Chavez stole it and ruined it to 1mbd will help bring energy prices down further and won't go to our world enemies in the black market.
4. Trump has shown once again that when he speaks he means it. Maduro should have taken the out a week ago, now every tin-pot dictator knows not to f*** with Trump/America. That strengthens us across the world, causes deterrence and helps us influence positively other bad actors (hello Ayotollas in Iran)
How is it genius to attack a Country in order to grab their resources, only to find out that not only the companies who have the ability to harvest the resource/oil have no interest in doing so but the resource itself will have no market? With that kind of genius Trump will have succeeded in opening the door for China to rise economically to the top super power. Good job genius!
The factor not being talked about enough is that China was the largest consumer of Venezuelan oil...now cut off. And then look back at Russia and the sanctions on their ability to export oil...to China.
In recent years China has gone all out to convert to alternative energy. This will act as a further incentive. If BigOil ever gets behind Trump's plans for Venezuela it will be decades before production arrives and by then the largest consumer will have weaned itself off oil, as will many other nations. Venezuela will end up holding a product that has very little demand on the world stage.
Breaking News: Simultaneous drone attacks on the White House and Mar-a-Lago. WHITE HOUSE DESTROYED. No word on survivors. Rescue operations underway. Vice President Vance moved to “a secure undisclosed location.” Other military targets also hit.
It really started as just another contingency plan. Danish and Canadian intelligence put together the plan after the success of Ukraine’s “Operation Spiderweb” in June of 2025. As things more rapidly deteriorated later in 2025 the plans were accelerated.
The plans were clever — rather than attempting to sneak all of the equipment into the United States they had their people purchase the components needed within the United States and assembled them at multiple safe houses. Final mission software was developed and tested in Denmark and delivered over the Internet.
When a Marine Expeditionary Unit on USS Bougainville landed Marines in Nuuk, Greenland on 3 March 2026 those plans were put in motion. By that time the Danes and Canadians had an estimated three thousand drones available for operations within the United States. In the very early hours of 5 March they struck.
An estimated five hundred drones were released in Washington DC, and somewhat fewer in Palm Beach. Most of those drones were decoys put on random routes and were intended to be noticed and cause the DOD, Homeland Security, the Secret Service, and local law enforcement to react to the wrong things and look in the wrong direction. Some of the drones were targeted on Air Force One parked at Andrews Air Force Base. The rest, estimated at around one hundred and fifty, targeted the White House.
The drones were given carefully preplanned routes that mostly kept them on city streets below the tops of buildings and trees, so there was no way to detect them on radar. They were flying too low and too fast and there were far too many to effectively engage.
The drone’s warheads were small, estimated to be about 1kg. But they were a modified thermobaric weapon that efficiently created an enormous overpressure wave.
The effect was devastating.
The White House was completely destroyed by the first wave of drones. The two follow-on waves proved completely unnecessary and apparently some of them were redirected to the Old Executive Office Building, which suffered severe damage. Sources speculated that the OEOB might need to be razed and completely rebuilt.
The devastation at Mar-A-Lago was similar, but they used fewer drones and had set up fewer distractions.
While it was confirmed that President Trump was at the White House on 5 March, no one has been able to confirm where he is now or if he is even alive. Rescue operations at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue were ongoing and there were no reports of any survivors at this time.
Military experts described thermobaric weapons (also known as vacuum bombs) as devastating weapons both against living humans and structures. One was quoted as saying, “Nobody in the White House had a chance.”
Marine One was apparently dispatched to the White House a few minutes before the attacks. The current whereabouts and status of Marine One are unknown.
Interesting idea. And now that Trump has grabbed a Russian oil tanker off Venezuela, the Russians are screaming bloody murder so in this crazy world we're living in I wouldn't be surprised if Trump, Vance and Miller take a nasty nose dive off the 2nd floor of the WH sooner rather later, much like the multiple Russians who have opposed Putin and took a dive out of a 2nd story or higher building shortly thereafter.
In the swap that Fiona Hill testified to before Congress the deal was for Russia to get Ukraine and the US to get Venezuela. Since Trump has not delivered Ukraine to Russia but has now 'taken' Venezuela that deal has to be rubbing Putin the wrong way.
I sit here wondering how many shipping containers full of FPV attack drones Canada and Denmark have snuck into the country in the past year. And where they are stashed now.
Under a little-known Cold War agreement, the United States already enjoys sweeping military access in Greenland. Right now, the United States has one base in a very remote corner of the island. But the agreement allows it to “construct, install, maintain, and operate” military bases across Greenland, “house personnel” and “control landings, takeoffs, anchorages, moorings, movements, and operation of ships, aircraft, and waterborne craft.”
It was signed in 1951 by the United States and Denmark, which colonized Greenland more than 300 years ago and still controls some of its affairs.
“The U.S. has such a free hand in Greenland that it can pretty much do what it wants,” said Mikkel Runge Olesen, a researcher at the Danish Institute for International Studies in Copenhagen.
“I have a very hard time seeing that the U.S. couldn’t get pretty much everything it wanted,” he said, adding, “if it just asked nicely.”
Source: NYT today
"Congressman (TN-R) Andy Ogles: "It's important that we have a stake in Greenland, that they are quite frankly a protectorate of the US. They've been in relationship with Denmark -- that needs to end. We have spilled more blood protecting Greenland than the Danes ... we are the dominant predator force in the Western Hemisphere"
We are the dominate predator force
We are predators.
There's some irony there, coming as it does from an administration of convicted sexual predators.
But I digress, ironically.
Of course the bigger irony is that bit about "spilled more blood to protect Greenland than the Danes"
The ONLY thing Ogles could possibly be talking about is WWII, when US, Canadian, and UK forces (among others) garrisoned the North Atlantic to protect allied convoys against Nazi U-boots. And here Ogles is, 80 years later, threatening to seize territory and kill Danes like one of those Nazis. Irony indeed.
Unless, of course, Ogles is talking about Project Iceworm, when the United States snuck in a nuclear reactor and hid it in a base under the Greenland Icesheet in preparation for sneaking in nuclear missiles and building secret launch sites without Denmark's permission or knowledge. The project failed when the ice moved and the tunnels started to collapse, so the US abandoned the base, along with tons of nuclear, chemical, and biologic waste that is now emerging from the ice. Danes might end up spilling blood to clean up that mess.
But, really, what's the plan?
We take Greenland, right? And then America has access to vast tracts of fertile Greenland soil (they don't call it "Green Land" for nothing, amiright?). American homesteaders, like Vikings following Erik the Red, move to Green Land and establish farms. Many previously unemployed Americans now find well paying jobs as farm laborers harvesting this new Green Land bounty. And there it is, finally, Trump has lowered the price of groceries.
15 cent a pound Lebensraum bananas, Baby."
"Here's the exact text of President Trump's Truth Social post from January 6, 2026: "I am pleased to announce that the Interim Authorities in Venezuela will be turning over between 30 and 50 MILLION Barrels of High Quality, Sanctioned Oil, to the United States of America. This Oil will be sold at its Market Price, and that money will be controlled by me, as President of the United States of America, to ensure it is used to benefit the people of Venezuela and the United States! I have asked Energy Secretary Chris Wright to execute this plan, immediately. It will be taken by storage ships, and brought directly to unloading docks in the United States. Thank you for your attention to this matter! DONALD J. TRUMP
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA"
PAL wrote: Mon Jan 05, 2026 7:34 pm
It's reported that for the US to repair and upgrade their aging oil infrastructure that it will take years to do that. Nice.
How much is all this costing us? Oh, that's right the tariffs. Oh wait those are going to replace the income taxes that we won't have to pay.
The other undiscussed capital expenditure is that Venezuelan oil is hard to refine, and I don't think our existing refineries in the Gulf can handle that oil. So we'll need to build a bunch of new refineries at $10 billion each, or modify existing ones at nearly that price.
Even in the very best case I doubt Venezuelan oil will be economically relevant for twenty years.
Yes years, and Trump is expecting BigOil to pay for much of it with repayment through their profits from the oil. But of course that cost doesn't include having military boots on the ground which it sounds like Trump is declining to do by instead pressuring a broke Venezuela to provide protection 'to do it right'. No doubt he thinks that IOU's from a govt will be acceptable.
Then again, since Trump has cut Medicaid 15%, denied ACA subsidies and suspending childcare funding it wouldn't be a surprise if he uses those funds. He's already demonstrated that he's willing to rob a budget item to pay for one he wants to create.
But much like we saw with the DOGE boys who cut and ran, it seems Trump's plan is to start wars with the plan of taking over countries on a roll so he doesn't care about what it costs to occupy, only that his military has enough missiles to attack the next country or fishing boat.
It's reported that for the US to repair and upgrade their aging oil infrastructure that it will take years to do that. Nice.
How much is all this costing us? Oh, that's right the tariffs. Oh wait those are going to replace the income taxes that we won't have to pay.
"THE CRIMES THAT NEVER HELD UP
How a settled oil dispute became a criminal war case
White Rose
January 5, 2026
The justification has finally hardened into something concrete. Not because the evidence improved, but because force arrived first and law followed after.
On January 5, Nicolás Maduro was brought into a U.S. federal courtroom following a U.S. military operation inside Venezuela. He pleaded not guilty. His wife was detained with him. The charges, long announced but never tested, are now active in court.
That fact changes the stage. It does not change the record.
Start with what was originally claimed.
U.S. officials argued for years that Venezuela had stolen American oil. That claim was false then and remains false now. U.S. oil companies never owned Venezuelan oil. They operated under concession and lease agreements granted by the Venezuelan state, which retained permanent ownership of subsurface resources. That principle is not controversial. It is the foundation of modern international resource law.
When Venezuela nationalized its oil industry under Hugo Chávez, it exercised a right recognized worldwide. States possess permanent sovereignty over their natural resources. Nationalization is legal. Always has been.
What international law requires is compensation. That dispute was litigated.
Foreign firms were offered a choice. Accept minority partnership terms under PDVSA or exit and pursue compensation. Several chose to leave. None claimed their oil had been stolen. They sued.
Those cases went before international arbitration bodies, most notably the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes. The rulings were routine. Venezuela’s right to nationalize was affirmed. Venezuela was ordered to compensate for certain assets. Companies were awarded billions, often less than they demanded. This is how such disputes are resolved everywhere, including against the United States.
No U.S. territory was seized. No U.S. oil was taken. Contracts were terminated. Assets were transferred. Compensation was litigated. The legal process concluded years ago.
That should have been the end of it.
Instead, the narrative migrated from civil law to criminal law.
The U.S. Department of Justice charged Maduro with narcoterrorism, conspiracy to import cocaine into the United States, and conspiracy to use weapons in furtherance of drug trafficking. These charges were announced years ago. What matters now is what evidence has actually been produced.
Publicly, there is no physical evidence tying Maduro personally to drug trafficking. No seized shipments. No financial records showing proceeds. No intercepted communications demonstrating command or direction. No operational documents. No orders. No acts shown to occur on U.S. soil under his control.
The case rests almost entirely on testimony from cooperating witnesses. Defectors. Convicted traffickers. Former officials seeking asylum or sentence reductions. Their claims have not been publicly corroborated with independent documentary or physical evidence linking Maduro personally to narcotics operations.
That gap matters because conspiracy cases still require overt acts. Association is not enough. Political hostility is not evidence.
The centerpiece allegation involves cooperation with FARC. But even U.S. intelligence assessments have never claimed Venezuela displaced Colombia as the primary cocaine hub. FARC’s drug production, revenue, and export routes were overwhelmingly Colombian. At most, Venezuela has been described as intermittently tolerating transit.
A data driven conclusion sharpens the picture.
Venezuela is not a primary cocaine transit state. This is supported consistently by U.S. and UN drug monitoring data. The dominant cocaine corridors into the United States run through Colombia, Central America, Mexico, and Caribbean maritime routes. European bound flows move overwhelmingly through West Africa. Venezuela appears marginally and inconsistently, at volumes far below those moved through U.S. allied states.
If volume justified escalation, much of the hemisphere would be under indictment.
The weapons charges collapse even faster. Charging a sitting head of state with arms trafficking ignores a basic reality of international law. Heads of state control national militaries, defense procurement, and arms logistics by definition. You may accuse a government of violating embargoes or supporting armed groups. You do not charge a president personally as if he were a cartel broker unless the objective is to erase the distinction between sovereign authority and criminal enterprise.
That erasure is the mechanism.
Once a head of state is reframed as a criminal suspect, sanctions become seizures. Seizures become detention. Detention becomes extraction. Law stops functioning as law and begins functioning as narrative cover for regime change.
The selectivity exposes the design. Allied governments that move weapons into conflicts face no indictments. States that facilitate far larger drug flows remain untouched. Sovereignty reappears instantly when power aligns correctly.
The contradiction becomes impossible to ignore when viewed domestically. The same administration now presenting itself as the global enforcer of narcotics law previously pardoned major drug traffickers and financial criminals. Not marginal cases. Large scale operators who moved real quantities of drugs and money through real networks.
Those pardons were framed as mercy or overreach corrected. Drug trafficking ceased to be an existential threat when it involved politically useful people.
This contrast tells us what the Venezuela charges are doing.
They are not about oil. That dispute was settled in arbitration panels years ago.
They are not about drugs. The data does not support it.
They are not about weapons. Sovereignty already covers it.
They are about converting a resolved sovereignty dispute into a criminal pretext for coercion.
The January 5 courtroom appearance does not resolve this. It intensifies it. The legality of the capture itself is now part of the case. So is the question of jurisdiction. So is the question of whether criminal law is being stretched to do the work of regime change.
This is not a defense of Venezuela’s government. Corruption, repression, and mismanagement are real. But those failures do not retroactively convert lawful nationalization into theft or marginal trafficking data into a justification for war.
The most honest conclusion remains unchanged.
There is evidence Venezuela is a corrupt and dysfunctional state.
There is no public evidence that Nicolás Maduro personally ran or directed a narcotics enterprise targeting the United States.
That gap is not accidental. It is the gap between law enforcement and power dressed as law.
When leaders stop arguing facts and start arguing myths, it is usually because the facts will not take them where they want to go.
In this case, the facts remain stubborn. Even now." Bruce Fanger
Annotated sources
Reuters reporting on Maduro’s January 5, 2026 court appearance and the circumstances of his capture, used for procedural facts only.
U.S. Department of Justice indictments filed in the Southern District of New York, reviewed for charge language rather than evidentiary claims.
ICSID arbitration rulings involving Venezuela and U.S. oil companies, cited for confirmation of lawful nationalization and compensation outcomes.
UNODC and U.S. drug monitoring assessments, referenced for long term cocaine transit patterns and volume comparisons.
Historical nationalization precedents and international law doctrine on permanent sovereignty over natural resources.
There are between eighty and ninety thousand US troops deployed in NATO countries. If we commit an act of war against Canada or Denmark those people instantly become POWS and billions of dollars worth of equipment we have deployed to Europe would be gone. And we probably wouldn't ever get it back. This would represent a substantial fraction of our active-duty military and some of our very best equipment.
It would take years to redeploy all of the people, equipment, and infrastructure out of Europe. Mostly for the infrastructure.
So any attack on a NATO ally would apparently involve sacrificing all of those people. How is that even taken seriously?
David Bonn 
