War in Venezuela: The US Invasion

[Lexicus]

As far as I can find the last formal declaration of war between two recognized states was from Iraq to Iran in 1980. The U.S. nor any NATO ally to my knowledge has done so since World War II.

Regarding the question of, does the president have the legal authority to order military action? Yes, he does, within the confines of the constitution and the war powers act.

Does the president have the power to use the military against drug cartels? Probably. I don’t think it’s been challenged in court yet, but the tendency of the judiciary is to defer to executive authority in military matters insofar as I believe precedent has either been, or in some cases, not been established.

One such use perhaps illustrative of the point is the killing of Abdul al-Awlaki, a 16-year-old U.S. citizen whose father (Anwar) was an al-Qaeda propagandist and brought his son with him. The official White House response effectively amounted to “sucks to be that kid.” That was my response too, but hey, as far as legal limits on presidential power goes with the military, our leaning is toward not tying his hands.

edit: the above case was under the Obama administration

@Akka in reality the US Constitution clearly assigns the power to declare war to Congress and insofar as the War Powers Act gives the President de facto or legal power to unilaterally take the country into armed conflict (which may be legally defined as something other than "war", also generally as a mechanism to subvert the constitutional requirement that Congress declare war) it is clearly and obviously unconstitutional.

There is further commentary to be made about how thoroughly NATO countries have adopted the Hitler playbook for Barbarossa: don't even pay lip service to the sovereignty of subhumans and barbarians who are also our enemies, just unleash the troops.

 

[amadeus]

in reality the US Constitution clearly assigns the power to declare war to Congress

Yes, but article 2, section 2 designates the president as the commander in chief of the army and navy.

it [the War Powers Act] is clearly and obviously unconstitutional.

I was speaking from the fact that it has not been ruled as such by the courts.

There is further commentary to be made about how thoroughly NATO countries have adopted the Hitler playbook for Barbarossa: don't even pay lip service to the sovereignty of subhumans and barbarians who are also our enemies, just unleash the troops.

It’s not as much Barbarossa so much as that as a formal instrument the declaration of war has gone by the wayside. Take the 1991 Gulf War, being done by UN Security Council resolution. In another case, the Falklands—Great Britain wasn’t obliged to issue a formal declaration of war under the UN charter which protects the right of countries to self-defense.

For the fun part: I wonder if Congress could, under its powers to issue letters of marque, authorize the use of privateers to capture the drug vessels. Those missiles get expensive—better to outsource it to the private sector.

 

[Birdjaguar]

isn't Hegseth supposed to be a veteran with drinking problems and not an exactly brilliant record or whatever ? He would REALLY order the Military to do things .

Here is his history on what he think of military law.

Pete Hegseth told US soldiers in Iraq to ignore legal advice on rules of engagement

Defense secretary shares anecdote in The War on Warriors and rails against ‘rules and regulations’ governing war

www.theguardian.com

 

[Kaitzilla]

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/128/all-info

the US Congress of course

Wow, I thought Drugs of Mass Destruction was brilliant satire by H4run.

And there it is in Congress already

 

[Broken_Erika]

Wow, I thought Drugs of Mass Destruction was brilliant satire by Hyrun.

And there it is in Congress already

Satire is Dead

 

[danjuno]

The Onion is just actual news now.

 

[Klaus Hergersheimer]

As far as I can find the last formal declaration of war between two recognized states was from Iraq to Iran in 1980. The U.S. nor any NATO ally to my knowledge has done so since World War II.

Regarding the question of, does the president have the legal authority to order military action? Yes, he does, within the confines of the constitution and the war powers act.

Does the president have the power to use the military against drug cartels? Probably. I don’t think it’s been challenged in court yet, but the tendency of the judiciary is to defer to executive authority in military matters insofar as I believe precedent has either been, or in some cases, not been established.

One such use perhaps illustrative of the point is the killing of Abdul al-Awlaki, a 16-year-old U.S. citizen whose father (Anwar) was an al-Qaeda propagandist and brought his son with him. The official White House response effectively amounted to “sucks to be that kid.” That was my response too, but hey, as far as legal limits on presidential power goes with the military, our leaning is toward not tying his hands.

edit: the above case was under the Obama administration

typically the president can order the military to act without congressional consent, yes, but within a circumstance that would be defending the country or its assets. But there are two problems here:

- One is that congress has already passed laws punishing drug runners: you're not allowed to import controlled substances into the US.
- That basically leaves Trump with his rhetorical flourish about drug addictions in the US being the "attack" on the country. Whatever you think about drug use, people do it of their own volition and that ought to be of more concern for those families than the government. One should ask him sincerely: are addictions running so high that Americans businesses are shuttering because of lack of sober employees? What deleterious effect (economic or otherwise) is coming from such an "attack"?

 

[H4run]

Wow, I thought Drugs of Mass Destruction was brilliant satire by H4run.

And there it is in Congress already

If Angst hadn’t quoted it, I wouldn’t have noticed, they really don't value us, right? We are like a kid to them.

I realized all of this after the conflict in Israel: no matter what’s done, no matter the reality on the ground, no matter the sentiment, both left and right almost unanimously voiced their condemnation loud and clear, FOR THE FIRST TIME (it's like a little miracle). Yet the US–Israel still do whatever they want. Why? Because they can.

We should have realized this sooner, like during the Iraq–Afghan invasion. All those moral arguments, all the academia and research backing them up, are just propaganda machines to smooth things over. And when things don’t smooth over? they still do whatever they want right in front of our nose, why? because they can.

No one can stop this except the Americans themselves. All these peoples who are sick of this will rise to power, only then perhaps things can change.

 

[GoodEnoughForMe]

Apparently the US has illegally seized a Venezuelan oil tanker

 

[Birdjaguar]

U.S. seizes ‘very large’ oil tanker off Venezuelan coast, Trump says​

The seizure was a significant escalation in the U.S. pressure campaign against Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his country’s oil-dependent economy.

December 10, 2025 at 4:02 p.m. EST4 minutes ago

A crude oil tanker off Maracaibo, Venezuela, in May. (Federico Parra/AFP/Getty Images)
By Samantha Schmidt, Matt Viser and Karen DeYoung

U.S. forces seized an oil tanker near the Venezuelan coastline Wednesday, President Donald Trump said, a significant escalation in the U.S. pressure campaign against President Nicolás Maduro and his country’s oil-dependent economy. “As you probably know, we’ve just seized a tanker on the coast of Venezuela,” Trump told a roundtable meeting of business leaders Wednesday afternoon. He described the vessel as “very large” and the “largest one ever seized, actually.” “And, other things are happening,” Trump added. “So you’ll be seeing that later, and you’ll be talking about that later with some other people.”

Trump did not provide further details about the seizure, the tanker, its owner or where it was headed. “Depending on what legal justification they used to seize the vessel, it could create a lot of problems for the regime,” a person familiar with the seizure said. The person, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive details, said the seizure could have a “big financial impact.”

The seizure adds a new tactic to the Trump administration’s months-long military campaign in waters near Venezuela. Since September, U.S. forces have launched strikes against more than 20 boats it alleges were carrying drugs to the United States, killing at least 87 people, while massing troops, warships and aircraft in the region. Trump this week told Politico that Maduro’s “days are numbered” and declined to rule out sending U.S. troops into Venezuela. Venezuela’s oil exports rose this year to a daily average of about 900,000 barrels, Reuters has reported. Its largest importers are China and the United States, particularly after the Trump administration in July reissued a license to the U.S. energy giant Chevron to resume operations in Venezuela.

The seizure of the oil tanker was announced hours after opposition leader María Corina Machado missed the Oslo ceremony to collect her Noble Peace Prize. Machado has been in hiding in Venezuela since January and barred by the government from leaving the country. Her daughter, accepting the honor in her place, said she would appear in Oslo soon. Machado has dedicated the prize in part to Trump “for his decisive support of our cause.”

 

[Klaus Hergersheimer]

NYT says it looks like the tanker is part of a smuggling operation. Was even sanctioned (under a different name) back in 2022.

Oil Tanker U.S. Seized Off Venezuela Has Faked Its Location Before, Data Shows

The ship has frequently carried oil from countries under U.S. sanctions, and its tracking data shows multiple recent trips to Iran and Venezuela.

www.nytimes.com

Oil Tanker U.S. Seized Has Faked Its Location Before, Data Shows​

The ship has frequently carried oil from countries under U.S. sanctions, and its tracking data shows multiple recent trips to Iran and Venezuela.

Listen to this article · 2:52 min Learn more

Russia
Reported locations from Feb. 6 to Dec. 8
North
Atlantic
Ocean
United
States
CHINA
IRAN
North
Pacific
Ocean
North
Pacific
Ocean
INDIA
Spotted several times here between Oct. 29 and Dec.4
Indian
Ocean
Spotted on Oct. 3
AUSTRALIA
South
Atlantic
Ocean
South
Pacific
Ocean
Note: The Skipper’s reported locations are transmitted by its own transponder. The spotted locations are reported by TankerTrackers.com and verified by The Times.
Sources: MarineTraffic; TankerTrackers.com.
Pablo Robles, Keith Collins and Rebecca F. Elliott/The New York Times

By Christiaan Triebert and Riley Mellen
Published Dec. 10, 2025Updated Dec. 11, 2025, 12:09 a.m. ET
The oil tanker seized by the United States off the coast of Venezuela on Wednesday may have been trying to conceal its whereabouts by broadcasting falsified location data, according to a New York Times analysis of satellite imagery and photographs.
Image

The oil tanker Skipper, seen in a satellite image about six miles off the coast of Venezuela, on Nov. 27. The ship’s location signals at the time broadcast false information that it was off the coast of Guyana, hundreds of miles away.Credit...Airbus
U.S. officials did not publicly name the vessel, but one official told The Times that it was a ship called the Skipper. Although the vessel’s location transponder indicated that it was anchored in the Atlantic Ocean near Guyana and Suriname, The Times found that from late October to at least Dec. 4, the ship was actually hundreds of miles away off Venezuela.

A satellite image captured on Nov. 18 shows the tanker docked at the country’s José oil terminal while its transponder showed that it was elsewhere.
Image

The Skipper, on the right, at the José Terminal in Venezuela on Nov. 18. At the time, the ship’s broadcast location indicated it was off the coast of Guyana.Credit...Planet Labs
The ship’s location was further corroborated by a photograph taken from land as it loaded oil. The image was provided by TankerTrackers.com, a company that monitors global oil shipping.
Image

Credit...TankerTrackers.com
In the image, the ship sits low in the water, suggesting that it was weighed down after taking on a significant amount of cargo — about 1.8 or 1.9 million barrels of oil, according to TankerTrackers.com.
On Wednesday afternoon, Attorney General Pam Bondi posted a video of the purported seizure operation on social media. The footage, which The Times could not independently verify, shows helicopters hovering over the tanker as armed people in camouflage rappel onto the ship’s deck.

Data provided by TankerTrackers.com suggests that the ship has frequently carried oil from countries under U.S. sanctions. The vessel’s tracking data shows multiple trips to Iran and Venezuela over the last two years.
“Skipper has transported nearly 13 million barrels of Iranian and Venezuelan oil since joining the global dark fleet of tankers in 2021,” said Samir Madani, the co-founder of TankerTrackers.com, referring to ships that obscure their true locations. The ship delivered Iranian oil to Syria in 2024 when it was under the control of Bashar al-Assad, helping his government prolong a civil war, Mr. Madani said.
From February to July this year, the ship transported nearly two million barrels of crude oil from Iran to China.
The ship, under a previous name, was placed under sanctions in 2022 by the U.S. Treasury Department, which said the vessel was part of “an international oil smuggling network that facilitated oil trades and generated revenue” to support the Iranian-backed forces of Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps’s Quds Force.
Additional satellite imagery analysis was provided by Christoph Koettl.

Editors’ Picks​

For Real, a Natural History of Misinformation​

The Best Historical Fiction of 2025​

On a Prison Baseball Field, a Reporter Finds a Familiar Love of the Game​

Christiaan Triebert is a Times reporter working on the Visual Investigations team, a group that combines traditional reporting with digital sleuthing and analysis of visual evidence to verify and source facts from around the world.
Riley Mellen is a reporter on The Times’s Visual Investigations team, which combines traditional reporting with advanced digital forensics.

 

[SemiLazyGamer]

US to seize oil from seized tanker near Galveston, Texas since the tanker is too big to enter the Houston Ship Channel.

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/supertanker-skipper-seized-by-us-near-venezuela-is-heading-houston-sources-say-2025-12-12/