An illegal act of war against Venezuela
We need to be done with the childish taunting that people who question the military operation "support" Maduro.
There are practical and national security reasons to arrest Nicolás Maduro, the vicious dictator of Venezuela. As a matter of public policy, holding him accountable for the crimes he committed, especially if there is evidence he is complicit in drug trafficking to these United States and is hostile to American interests, can be justified as a matter of public policy, whether you personally agree with that justification or not. This is especially true given Venezuela's alliances with Russia, China and Iran, all of which are hostile powers.
However, President Trump is not the only person in the federal government with authority in matters of war. Invading Venezuela to capture their president is an act of war against a sovereign state. If special forces from Russia or France did that to President Trump, we would retaliate with extreme force. The fact that Venezuela does not have the capacity to directly retaliate against these United States does not make it any less of an act of war.
President Trump did not get approval from Congress to start a war, and the Constitution is clear that Congress is the body that declares war. Yes, the President has the authority to act unilaterally against a direct or imminent attack to protect our nation. But even President Bush sought approval from Congress before invading Afghanistan, and the war crimes of September 11 were a far more serious and direct attack on these United States than drug trafficking. There is no reason this was so necessary that Congress could not have authorized some sort of action without being specific about what action would be taken.
In response to this, some conservatives have wailed about "traitors" in Congress "leaking" to the enemy. This is a flawed argument. Public votes - whether for a declaration of war or an "authorization to use military force" - are public. Iraq knew the invasion was coming in 2003, as did Afghanistan in 2001. Germany and Japan both knew we were coming when we declared war on both, and the Nazis were still taken off guard by D-Day due to brilliant misdirection by our armed forces. If every "leaker" was arrested and summarily executed before a shot was fired, Venezuela would still know that hostile action would take place - just not exactly when, where or what. The Constitution requires approval from Congress to go to war. You do not get to ignore the Constitution because of "leakers" in Congress.
Some have argued that the Constitution's delegation of war powers (specifically giving Congress the authority to declare war) is no longer relevant because of our global reach and the realities of modern warfare. I do not agree with this, but let's assume it is true. The proper solution is to amend the Constitution, not simply to ignore the law. Read Romans 13. Elected officials are obligated to obey the law as well as private citizens. We do not live in a monarchy where the king has absolute authority.
Furthermore, we need to be done with the childish taunting that people who question the military operation "support" Maduro. By that "logic," President Trump supports the Ayatollah in Iran, because he called off a retaliatory drone strike in his first term after deciding that 150 fatalities was a disproportionate response to Iran shooting down an unmanned drone. Does not striking Iran prove that President Trump is sympathetic to the Muslim terrorists who murdered our troops in Iraq and captured our embassy in 1979, holding Americans hostage? Of course not. Pretending that anyone who criticizes the strike on Venezuela "supports" a murderous Communist tyrant is as silly and dishonest as the claim that the only reason anyone would oppose Maduro is that he is serving "Globo Homo." It is possible to think Maduro was a murderous tyrant and also oppose military action to depose him.
President Trump has been gloating for a week that we will be taking Venezuela's oil for our own profit and that we will be running the country. Are we really going to be occupying and running a South American country? How are we going to ensure the new regime will be stable? How are we going to secure the oil without an occupation force, especially when Venezuelans who have lived in poverty under Maduro will want the wealth of their nation's natural resources to benefit them? This is a far cry from the self-proclaimed "peace President" who would get us out of military entanglements, spent the last decade railing against military interventions, and slammed former Congresswoman Liz Cheney as a "chickenhawk" in 2024. This is not what we were promised. We do not need a return to neo-conservative interventionism. We need to stick with America First.