Hacker News Reader

> The EU who usually likes to parade around by giving lessons of democracy to everyone is basically completely silent on the whole affair

It's actually worse than staying silent.

Von der Leyen has basically said "good job, now let's figure out the regime change". [0]

Kaja Kallas has parroted the made up drug trafficking lies. [1]

> besides Spain who came out saying that they would not recognize whoever ends up taking Maduro's place as the legitimate leader of Venezuela.

Spain at the very least had the decency of co-signing the joint Latin American statement condemning the act. [2]

[0] https://xcancel.com/vonderleyen/status/2007440364135674172 [1] https://xcancel.com/kajakallas/status/2007902058876448897 [2] https://www.euronews.com/2026/01/04/spain-and-5-latin-americ...

> Every petty tyrant or so called leader in Africa, Middle east, Asia and who knows where else now know that going to another country, snatching the leader and kidnapping them can be done without much consequences at any time so long as they go in guns blazing.

You can be 100% sure that the only thing they are thinking about is that it can happen to them, and this is what they will be thinking about during many nights ahead.

> now know that going to another country, snatching the leader and kidnapping them can be done without much consequences at any time so long as they go in guns blazing.

This sort of thinking was always true in history and geopolitics, as consequences come from those who enforce them. These other countries could try but they might have their own leader snatched soon enough if that's the case.

I’m curious which specific African countries have the capability to pull off what US did with this level of precision and literally no casualties. Moreover these countries already hate US, so shouldn’t they logically hate the US actions as well?

It's not about the feasibility itself, it's about the precedent that was set. Can you look in the eye someone and forbid them from doing something that you just did? It makes zero sense.

> no casualties

40 people died

> Moreover these countries already hate US, so shouldn’t they logically hate the US actions as well?

It doesn't matter if they hate the US or not. That is not the point. The point is that it makes this sort of actions completely legitimate.

> Can you look in the eye someone and forbid them from doing something that you just did? It makes zero sense.

It sounds like you're assuming the goal is moral coherence. It isn't; Trump and MAGA have always been completely philosophically untethered. The goal here is demonstrating that Trump is exempt from the rules he enforces on others. The more obviously hypocritical it is, the clearer the message: "We're strong enough that we don't need to be consistent." It's posturing and dominance signaling, nothing more.

> actions completely legitimate So if I'm a dictoator in Africa who hates US and the west, I'd first think oh that evil empire already did that so I can also do it too? Why would they even care what US does? This makes no sense.

> Can you look in the eye someone and forbid them from doing something that you just did? It makes zero sense.

American exceptionalism, not a new concept

I thought I'd read there was 40 deaths, is there an official source for no casualties?

GP means US casualties. As in the other guys lives don't count.

No I did not. Moreover the bodyguards were Cuban mercenary, not civilian nor Venezuelan military.

My mistake, you're right, Cuban mercenaries don't count.

The NYT reports that there are now 80 dead and that the number may rise.