sutton9999
Registered Member
What Trump does in Venezuela is great for China, even greater when Trump seizes Greenland.
Venezuela - US Conflict: News, Updates
- Thread starter Bharatah
- Start date
ghazi52
THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Trump says Venezuela ‘turning over’ up to 50m barrels of oil to US
Reuters | AFP
January 7, 2026
A crude oil tanker sails along the shore of Lake Maracaibo, in Zulia state, Venezuela on January 6, 2026. — AFP
US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that Venezuela’s interim government will deliver up to 50 million barrels of oil to the United States, and that the proceeds “will be controlled by me” as president.
The development is a strong sign that the Venezuelan government is responding to Trump’s demand that they open up to US oil companies or risk more military intervention.
Trump has said he wants interim President Delcy Rodriguez to give the US and private companies “total access” to Venezuela’s oil industry.
Venezuela has millions of barrels of oil loaded on tankers and in storage tanks that it has been unable to ship due to a blockade on exports imposed by Trump since mid-December.
The blockade was part of rising US pressure on the government of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro that culminated in US forces launching a “large-scale strike” in the country and kidnapping him this weekend.
Top Venezuelan officials have accused the US of trying to steal the country’s vast oil reserves.
Venezuela will be “turning over” between 30 and 50 million barrels of “sanctioned oil” to the US, Trump said in a social media post.
Soldier35
Registered Member
The United States allegedly used LUCAS (Low-Cost Unmanned Aerial System) drones for the first time during Operation Absolute Resolve in Venezuela on January 3. Published videos show the drones' distinctive engine sound, similar to that of Iranian Shahed-136 drones or Russian Geran-2 drones. There is no official information yet from the US Department of War. LUCAS kamikaze drones were developed by the American company SpektreWorks and were first shown in July 2025. LUCAS drones are believed to be based on the FLM 136 target drone, previously shown by SpektreWorks. LUCAS drones can perform reconnaissance, operate in a swarm, or serve as a communications relay. The alleged technical specifications of LUCAS drones include: The drone's payload is 18 kg, with some estimates suggesting up to 50 kg. Flight time is up to 6 hours, at speeds up to 185 km/h. The drone's range is up to 650 km at altitudes up to 5,500 meters. It's worth noting that LUCAS drones are currently inferior in performance to the Geranium-2 drone. The estimated price of a LUCAS drone is $35,000-40,000.
ghazi52
THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
US Energy Secretary Chris Wright is in charge of executing the deal, Trump said, adding that the oil will be taken from ships and sent directly to US ports.
Supplying the trapped crude to the US could initially require reallocating cargoes originally bound for China, two sources had told Reuters earlier on Tuesday.
The Asian country has been Venezuela’s top buyer in the last decade and especially since the United States imposed sanctions on companies involved in oil trade with Venezuela in 2020.
“Trump wants this to happen early so he can say it is a big win,” an oil industry source said.
Venezuelan government officials and Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), the government and state oil company***,*** did not provide comment.
Supplying the trapped crude to the US could initially require reallocating cargoes originally bound for China, two sources had told Reuters earlier on Tuesday.
The Asian country has been Venezuela’s top buyer in the last decade and especially since the United States imposed sanctions on companies involved in oil trade with Venezuela in 2020.
“Trump wants this to happen early so he can say it is a big win,” an oil industry source said.
Venezuelan government officials and Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), the government and state oil company***,*** did not provide comment.
ghazi52
THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Chevron in control of Venezuelan oil flows to US
US crude prices fell more than 1.5 per cent after Trump’s announcement, with the agreement expected to increase the volume of Venezuelan oil exported to the US.That flow of oil is currently controlled entirely by Chevron , PDVSA’s main joint venture partner, under a US authorisation.
Chevron, which has been exporting between 100,000 and 150,000 barrels per day (bpd) of Venezuelan oil to the US, is the only company that has been loading and shipping crude without interruption from the South American country in recent weeks under the blockade.
It was not immediately clear if Venezuela would have any access to proceeds from the supply. Sanctions mean PDVSA is excluded from the global financial system, its bank accounts are frozen and it is blocked from executing transactions in US dollars.
Venezuela has been selling its flagship crude grade, Merey, at around $22 per barrel below Brent for delivery at Venezuelan ports, giving a value for the deal at up to $1.9 billion.
Rodriguez, sworn in as interim president on Monday, is herself under US sanctions imposed in 2018 for undermining democracy.
ghazi52
THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Talks involve possible auctions with US buyers
Venezuelan and US officials this week discussed possible sales mechanisms, including auctions to allow interested US buyers to bid for cargoes, and issuing US licences to PDVSA’s business partners that could lead to supply contracts, two sources told Reuters.Those licences have in the past allowed PDVSA’s joint venture partners and customers, including Chevron, India’s Reliance, China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) and European Eni and Repsol, to have access to Venezuelan oil to refine or to resell to third parties.
This week, some of those companies have begun making preparations for receiving Venezuelan cargoes again, two separate sources said.
The US and Venezuela have also discussed if Venezuelan oil can be used in the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve in the future, one of the sources said. Trump did not refer to this possibility.
ghazi52
THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Increased oil flows would be ‘great news’
US Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said on Tuesday that an increased flow of Venezuelan heavy oil to the US Gulf would be “great news” for job security, future gasoline prices in the US and for Venezuela.“Venezuela has an opportunity now to actually have capital come in and rebuild their economy and take advantage,” he told Fox News, when asked about talks between the governments on oil exports.
“With American technology, American partnership, Venezuela can be transformed.”
US refineries on the Gulf Coast can process Venezuela’s heavy crude grades and were importing some 500,000bpd before Washington first imposed energy sanctions on Venezuela.
PDVSA has already had to cut production due to the embargo, because it is running out of storage for the oil. Without a way to export oil soon, it would have to cut production more, one of the sources said.
Oil traders reacted to news of the deal talks on Tuesday. Differentials for some heavy oil grades in the US Gulf slipped around 50 cents per barrel on Tuesday on the prospect of more Venezuelan supplies.
Davey Crockett
Elite Member
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11
Document 8
James Madison to Thomas Jefferson
2 Apr. 1798
Writings 6:312--14
The President's message is only a further development to the public, of the violent passions, & heretical politics, which have been long privately known to govern him. It is to be hoped however that the H. of Rep will not hastily eccho them. At least it may be expected that before war measures are instituted, they will recollect the principle asserted by 62 vs. 37, in the case of the Treaty, and insist on a full communication of the intelligence on which such measures are recommended. The present is a plainer, if it be not a stronger case, and if there has been sufficient defection to destroy the majority which was then so great & so decided, it is the worst symptom that has yet appeared in our Councils. The constitution supposes, what the History of all Govts demonstrates, that the Ex. is the branch of power most interested in war, & most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care, vested the question of war in the Legisl. But the Doctrines lately advanced strike at the root of all these provisions, and will deposit the peace of the Country in that Department which the Constitution distrusts as most ready without cause to renounce it. For if the opinion of the P. not the facts & proofs themselves are to sway the judgment of Congress, in declaring war, and if the President in the recess of Congrs. create a foreign mission, appt. the minister, & negociate a War Treaty, without the possibility of a check even from the Senate, untill the measures present alternatives overruling the freedom of its judgment; if again a Treaty when made obliges the Legis. to declare war contrary to its judgment, and in pursuance of the same doctrine, a law declaring war, imposes a like moral obligation, to grant the requisite supplies until it be formally repealed with the consent of the P. & Senate, it is evident that the people are cheated out of the best ingredients in their Govt., the safeguards of peace which is the greatest of their blessings. I like both your suggestions in the present crisis. Congress ought clearly to prohibit arming, & the P. ought to be brought to declare on what ground he undertook to grant an indirect licence to arm. The first instructions were no otherwise legal than as they were in pursuance of the law of Nations, & consequently in execution of the law of the land. The revocation of the instructions is a virtual change of the law, & consequently a usurpation by the Ex. of a legislative power. It will not avail to say that the law of Nations leaves this point undecided, & that every nation is free to decide it for itself. If this be the case, the regulation being a Legislative not an Executive one, belongs to the former, not the latter Authority; and comes expressly within the power, "to define the law of Nations," given to Congress by the Constitution. I do not expect however that the Constitutional party in the H. of R. is strong eno- to do what ought to be done in the present instance. Your 2d idea that an adjournment for the purpose of consulting the constituents on the subject of war, is more practicable because it can be effected by that branch alone if it pleases, & because an opposition to such a measure will be more striking to the public eye. The expedient is the more desirable as it will be utterly impossible to call forth the sense of the people generally before the season will be over, especially as the Towns, &c., where there can be most despatch in such an operation are on the wrong side, and it is to be feared that a partial expression of the public voice, may be misconstrued or miscalled, an evidence in favor of the war party. On what do you ground the idea that a decln of war requires 2/3 of the Legislature? The force of your remark however is not diminished by this mistake, for it remains true, that measures are taking or may be taken by the Ex. that will end in war, contrary to the wish of the Body which alone can declare it.
The Founders' Constitution
Volume 3, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11, Document 8
The University of Chicago Press
The Writings of James Madison. Edited by Gaillard Hunt. 9 vols. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1900--1910. See also: Federalist
Document 8
James Madison to Thomas Jefferson
2 Apr. 1798
Writings 6:312--14
The President's message is only a further development to the public, of the violent passions, & heretical politics, which have been long privately known to govern him. It is to be hoped however that the H. of Rep will not hastily eccho them. At least it may be expected that before war measures are instituted, they will recollect the principle asserted by 62 vs. 37, in the case of the Treaty, and insist on a full communication of the intelligence on which such measures are recommended. The present is a plainer, if it be not a stronger case, and if there has been sufficient defection to destroy the majority which was then so great & so decided, it is the worst symptom that has yet appeared in our Councils. The constitution supposes, what the History of all Govts demonstrates, that the Ex. is the branch of power most interested in war, & most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care, vested the question of war in the Legisl. But the Doctrines lately advanced strike at the root of all these provisions, and will deposit the peace of the Country in that Department which the Constitution distrusts as most ready without cause to renounce it. For if the opinion of the P. not the facts & proofs themselves are to sway the judgment of Congress, in declaring war, and if the President in the recess of Congrs. create a foreign mission, appt. the minister, & negociate a War Treaty, without the possibility of a check even from the Senate, untill the measures present alternatives overruling the freedom of its judgment; if again a Treaty when made obliges the Legis. to declare war contrary to its judgment, and in pursuance of the same doctrine, a law declaring war, imposes a like moral obligation, to grant the requisite supplies until it be formally repealed with the consent of the P. & Senate, it is evident that the people are cheated out of the best ingredients in their Govt., the safeguards of peace which is the greatest of their blessings. I like both your suggestions in the present crisis. Congress ought clearly to prohibit arming, & the P. ought to be brought to declare on what ground he undertook to grant an indirect licence to arm. The first instructions were no otherwise legal than as they were in pursuance of the law of Nations, & consequently in execution of the law of the land. The revocation of the instructions is a virtual change of the law, & consequently a usurpation by the Ex. of a legislative power. It will not avail to say that the law of Nations leaves this point undecided, & that every nation is free to decide it for itself. If this be the case, the regulation being a Legislative not an Executive one, belongs to the former, not the latter Authority; and comes expressly within the power, "to define the law of Nations," given to Congress by the Constitution. I do not expect however that the Constitutional party in the H. of R. is strong eno- to do what ought to be done in the present instance. Your 2d idea that an adjournment for the purpose of consulting the constituents on the subject of war, is more practicable because it can be effected by that branch alone if it pleases, & because an opposition to such a measure will be more striking to the public eye. The expedient is the more desirable as it will be utterly impossible to call forth the sense of the people generally before the season will be over, especially as the Towns, &c., where there can be most despatch in such an operation are on the wrong side, and it is to be feared that a partial expression of the public voice, may be misconstrued or miscalled, an evidence in favor of the war party. On what do you ground the idea that a decln of war requires 2/3 of the Legislature? The force of your remark however is not diminished by this mistake, for it remains true, that measures are taking or may be taken by the Ex. that will end in war, contrary to the wish of the Body which alone can declare it.
The Founders' Constitution
Volume 3, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11, Document 8
The University of Chicago Press
The Writings of James Madison. Edited by Gaillard Hunt. 9 vols. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1900--1910. See also: Federalist
F-22Raptor
Elite Member
Meengla
Elite Member
Someday Stephen Miller's words will come to taint the Trump II Presidency. Here is a full article about Mr. Miller's ideology. Indeed, as I have been pondering, Trump II is significantly different from Trump One Presidency; the guy came with a 'mission' and with vengeance this time around.
Stephen Miller has spent the bulk of his White House career furthering hard-right domestic policies that have resulted in mass deportations, family separations and the testing of the constitutional tenets that grant American citizenship.
Now, Mr. Miller, President Trump’s 40-year-old deputy chief of staff for policy and homeland security adviser, is casting his hard-right gaze further abroad: toward Venezuela and the Danish territory of Greenland, specifically.
Mr. Miller is doing so, the president’s advisers say, in service of advancing Mr. Trump’s foreign policy ambitions, which so far resemble imperialistic designs to exploit less powerful, resource-rich countries and territories the world over and use those resources for America’s gain. According to Mr. Miller, using brute force is not only on the table but also the Trump administration’s preferred way to conduct itself on the world stage.
“We live in a world in which you can talk all you want about international niceties and everything else, but we live in a world, in the real world, Jake, that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power,” Mr. Miller told Jake Tapper of CNN on Monday, during a combative appearance in which he was pressed on Mr. Trump’s long-held desire to control Greenland.
“These are the iron laws of the world since the beginning of time,” he said.
This aggressive posture toward Greenland — and in turn, the rest of the world — is a perfect encapsulation of the raw power that Mr. Trump wants to project, even against Denmark, the NATO ally that controls Greenland. The moment also illustrates how people like Mr. Miller have ascended to the inner circle of a leader who has no interest in having his impulses checked, and how they exert their influence once they arrive there.
The moment also shows just how differently Mr. Trump has operated in his second term from how he did in his first.
About midway through his first term, the president began joking with his aides about his desire to buy Greenland for its natural resources, like coal and uranium. At the time, his advisers humored him with offers to investigate the possibility of buying the semiautonomous territory. They did not think Mr. Trump was serious, or that it could ever actually happen. Those advisers are gone.
Flash forward to the second term. Mr. Miller has the president’s complete trust, a staff of over 40 people, and several big jobs that include protecting the homeland and securing territories further afield. A first-term joke made in passing about purchasing Greenland for its natural resources is now a term-two presidential threat to attack and annex the Danish territory by force if necessary, under the guise of protecting Americans from foreign incursions.
“Right now, Greenland is covered with Russian and Chinese ships all over the place,” Mr. Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on Sunday evening. “We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security.”
On Monday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told lawmakers that Mr. Trump plans to buy Greenland rather than invade it, though the White House later said the president had not ruled out the use of military force.
Russia and China are active in the Arctic Circle, but Greenland is not surrounded by their ships, and the United States has a military base on Greenland. Mr. Trump has also focused on Greenland because of its potential wealth of critical minerals.
Another crucial takeaway from the first Trump term that rings true to Mr. Miller’s rise: What was once mocked is now a threat to be taken seriously.
Mr. Miller, 40, grew up in wealthy Santa Monica, Calif., and attended a left-leaning high school. There, he was once booed and yanked off the stage during a campaign speech for student government in which a central plank of his platform was to investigate school janitors for inadequately picking up trash. His former classmates recalled that he seemed to enjoy the attention.
A quote from his 2003 yearbook is attributed to President Theodore Roosevelt: “There can be no 50-50 Americanism in this country. There is room here for only 100 percent Americanism, only for those who are Americans and nothing else.”
As a student at Duke University, Mr. Miller achieved some notoriety in conservative circles for defending three Duke lacrosse players who had been accused of rape.
“With the players at last nearing release from criminal charges, we are reminded that justice is not always swift,” Mr. Miller wrote in a column for the school paper in 2007. “Instead, it is often a crawl, gently creeping forward, which, if enough momentum builds, can turn into an avalanche. Unified, we can marshal this momentum.”
It later turned out the rape allegations were false.
After graduating, he found his way to Washington and by 2009 he was working for Jeff Sessions, then a senator from Alabama. Mr. Miller has come a long way from his work as a Senate staff member who regularly flooded inboxes across Washington with horror stories of undocumented immigrants. What then seemed to recipients as late-night, xenophobic fever dreams from a nameless staff member went unrecognized for what they really were: a set of deeply held beliefs that helped animate Mr. Trump’s first presidential campaign and, later, helped clinch his second term.
After amassing enough power to shape the administration’s crackdown on immigration into the United States and disparage entire communities of immigrants, as well as their children, Mr. Miller is echoing Mr. Trump’s foreign policy goals.
On CNN, Mr. Miller reiterated Mr. Trump’s intent to rule Venezuela and exploit its vast oil reserves after U.S. forces launched a raid on the Venezuelan capital and seized President Nicolás Maduro and his wife. And he said that no one would fight back if the United States were to decide to use its military to annex Greenland.
Republicans in Washington know that Mr. Miller is channeling the president when he speaks. The two spent the four years that Mr. Trump was out of power speaking on nearly a daily basis, “talking about what a second term agenda might look like before many of us even dreamed that there would be a second term,” said Senator Jim Banks, Republican of Indiana.
Mr. Banks called Mr. Miller “the smartest guy I’ve ever met in Washington,” and said that Mr. Miller had made sacrifices to do his work, including facing threats and moving his family into military housing in Washington. He said Mr. Miller was not going to back down.
“He’s often represented as an ideologue,” Mr. Banks said. “He’s incredibly pragmatic.”
At least one Republican has publicly criticized Mr. Miller’s remarks about Greenland. Representative Don Bacon, a retiring Republican congressman from Nebraska, called Mr. Miller’s comments “really dumb.” On X, Mr. Bacon said: “There is no up side to demeaning our friends. But, it is causing wounds that will take time to heal.”
Mr. Miller, of course, has the full backing of the Trump White House.
“The president has been driving all policy and Stephen faithfully executes what the president wants,” Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, said in a statement. “Whether it’s immigration, crime, trade, Greenland or Venezuela.”
She downplayed the idea that Mr. Miller was driving policy decisions and disputed the notion that Mr. Miller was on television promoting his views more often lately; she noted that he had been on television more than 200 times in 2025. The assignments were what had changed.
F-22Raptor
Elite Member
And another
Users who are viewing this thread
Pakistan Defence Latest
Country Watch Latest
-
-
-
How India’s New Nuclear Submarine Base Challenges China’s Naval Plans | WSJ (5 Viewers)
- Latest: Big_Strong_Brother_India
-
-
