Image is of the Freedom Band performing at the end of the Second National Congress of the Socialist Movement of Ghana, sourced from this article. The same article contains most of the information used in the preamble below.
A little over a week ago, the Socialist Movement of Ghana concluded its second National Delegates Congress in Aburi, gathering 300 delegates from across the country. There, they deepened their commitment to the working class of Ghana and committed to intensifying political education and organization at the grassroots. The SMG itself decided to not electorally contest the 2024 elections in Ghana, but still presented a manifesto, and nonetheless managed to get two SMG members parliamentary seats in the National Democratic Congress.
Anyway, back to the National Delegates Congress: the delegates agreed that the Western imperialist system is now under a profound crisis, in which the likely future is a heightening of brutality, chaos, and resource plundering - a future which must be resisted and organized against.
To summarize their various statements and condemnations:
- Inside Ghana: a commitment to women's rights, youth empowerment, and environmental protection.
- A condemnation of the resource plundering of the Democratic Republic of the Congo by imperialist powers.
- A salute to the people of Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso, in their campaign against outside imperial control in the Sahel.
- A condemnation of Morocco's illegal occupation of the Western Sahara, and a call for the UN to identify the independence of the Sahwari people.
- A strong condemnation of Israel's genocidal atrocities and massive terrorist operations against nearby countries, and support for Palestinian independence.
- Support for the people of Haiti against outside imperial domination.
- A call for the end of the blockade on Cuba and their removal from the State Sponsors of Terrorism list.
- Solidarity with Maduro and the people of Venezuela against the United States.
- A rejection of all imperialist aggression and sanctions against Iran.
- A condemnation of NATO's decades-long military expansion eastwards towards Russia, especially as it has now resulted in massive devastation and risks a third world war.
- And finally, a commitment to Pan Africanism and international solidarity with all oppressed peoples around the world.
A platform I think we all can agree to!
Last week's thread is here.
The Imperialism Reading Group is here.
Please check out the RedAtlas!
The bulletins site is here. Currently not used.
The RSS feed is here. Also currently not used.
The Zionist Entity's Genocide of Palestine
Sources on the fighting in Palestine against the temporary Zionist entity. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:
UNRWA reports on Israel's destruction and siege of Gaza and the West Bank.
English-language Palestinian Marxist-Leninist twitter account. Alt here.
English-language twitter account that collates news.
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon. - Telegram is @IbnRiad.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis. - Telegram is @EyesOnSouth.
English-language Twitter account in the same group as the previous two. - Telegram here.
English-language PalestineResist telegram channel.
More telegram channels here for those interested.
Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict
Sources:
Defense Politics Asia's youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.
Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.
Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.
Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don't want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it's just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.
Simplicius, who publishes on Substack. Like others, his political analysis should be soundly ignored, but his knowledge of weaponry and military strategy is generally quite good.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists' side.
Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.
Pro-Russian Telegram Channels:
Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.
https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR's former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR's forces. Russian language.
https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.
https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.
https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster's telegram channel.
https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.
https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.
https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a 'propaganda tax', if you don't believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.
Pro-Ukraine Telegram Channels:
Almost every Western media outlet.
https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.
https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.
Is the US likely to succeed in regime change if it does invade Venezuela?
Something I've been wondering, if Venezuela is on the block is Cuba next? It's something that also has been wracking my brain too as both Cuba and Venezuela both have enjoyed significant help and diplomatic relations from China, wouldn't Cuba be easier to full-on invade?
With an invasion? 100% yes. But it will also plunge into an insurgency or civil war. Something like afghanistan did but with the amazon rainforest.
With whatever it is doing? Strikes followed by a decapitation attack then backing a local politician/party for regime change? They can fail but they'll get to try many times because Venezuela can't do anything about them sitting off the coast.
No way it is a 100%.
In fact I would say it is very unlikely with a ground war. A ground war plays to the strengths of the Venezuelan Army and people. The only card the gringos have is air strikes.
It is a 100%. The US invading would not be fighting the whole country to effect a regime change. They would contruct bases around the capital that functionally the Venezuelans would not be able to do anything about because approaching them would just get their forces air striked.
A decapitation attack would occur alongside this, removing the tiny Venezuelan airforce from the board and their small amount of artillery. They would then make attempts to and successfully kill Maduro and key members of the government.
These bases will then become operational outposts that carry out various assassinations and disruptions against any attempt to organise. They will then back some local political puppets to bring order.
It's very similar to the playbook that occurs sitting off the coast, but they gain a significant force multiplier by having a half to a dozen bases instead of just a small mobile base floating off the coast.
You're imagining a war front line where Venezuela get an advantage because of sheer numbers. There will be no front.
It's a country full of mountains and forests, the US has never won a guerilla war in that situation. Actually, the US has never won a guerilla war at all in the long run, as far as I know.
Which is why I said it would succeed and then become an insurgency or civil war. Afghanistan but with jungles.
Your post I replied to doesn't refer to any insurgency or civil war. Maybe you mentioned that in another thread?
Edit: I see it now further up the chain. I agree with you there. I still don't think regime change success likelihood is quite 100%, the failsons are in charge.
But have you considered they'll just build bases? Why aren't you falling down and slavenly worshipping the infinite divine power of the US military, which always wins, which can never be countered, and that airstrikes have a 100% chance of toppling a hostile government? All they have to do is take out the bad guy, Maduro, which is easy, and the Venezuelan people, confused and foolish without their puppeteer, will walk repeatedly into the airstrike zone until the bombs have exploded away their anti capitalist, anti colonial aspirations?
This is very uncharitable understanding of what I've said.
Sorry for reading your words
Maybe if you'd inquired further (or read further before overreacting) we could have avoiding this entire fucking chain. Don't expect people to add in 100% of every nuance of things into a single comment? Like come the fuck on. The problem here is that you didn't read all of my words, you read some of my words and then reacted in the most negative way possible immediately with the least charitable interpretation possible.
Your declaration that the US would "100% succeed" in removing Maduro through a ground invasion is ridiculous and baseless. Then you string together a series of events that the US would just be about to do without any possible chance at resistance with no justification beyond "airstrikes". You depict the destruction of a government that has resisted the US for 20 years and enjoys deep popular support as absolutely inevitable at a point where the US empire is weaker than it's been in 80 years and would have to wage a brutal war closer to home than ever before with incredibly low levels of popular approval. There are no neighboring countries to stage an invasion from, like Pakistan was for Afghanistan. There is no ongoing civil war like there was in Afghanistan. The US is certainly not at the peak of its hegemonic power like it was in 2001. The Afghanistan comparison is totally off. The US has absolutely no way to secure a foothold except a combined amphibious/air assault, which is outstandingly complicated and difficult. You just wave away every obstacle with the airstrike wand to double down on absolute US military success - against someone from the neighboring country who has a far closer and better understanding of Venezuela and frankly has a lot more skin in the game, and you condescendingly told them what they were "imagining". You chose to reiterate the absolute certainty of your position despite all that.
They do not need to mount an amphibious assault, they only need to create an air corridor between the sea and the bases they intend to put on the ground.
Ah, like all the other anti- guerrilla wars the US has won
In every way, the opinion you are expressing is idealist, anti-marxist, and ahistorical
Edit: honestly your comment is one of the most embarrassing pieces of slop I've ever seen on this website, you should feel bad
I've literally fucking said it will turn into afghanistan wtf else do you want? They will succeed initially, then lose the insurgency or civil war that follows.
Stop being such a massive dickbag and actually read what else I've said here first? We don't even fucking disagree with each other ffs you're just kneejerking to being a douchebag instead of having an actual fucking conversation or reading anything else that's ALREADY BEEN SAID to understand that the fucking interpretation of my position that you're attacking isn't even fucking correct.
You literally didn't
We very obviously do
Fuck off.
She did but don't let that get in the way of your whole thing
It's really not that big of a deal
Okay now you're being extra
One thing people don't consider much is the geography of Venezuela. It would be relatively easy for the US to seize the oil-producing Maracaibo region, but the capital and other major cities are separated from the Caribbean by an impassable mountain range. Not an easy feat to occupy Caracas.
Plus how Bolivarian insurgents can use Brazil as a base of operation or how the parts of Venezuela that border Brazil are also mountainous.
It's important to remember that regime change as installing an allied/puppet government that stays allied long-term(like west Germany) and regime change as in destroying the government and society and having whatever butcher warlord take power in the ruins when the invader leaves (HTS in Syria) are both losses for Venezuela and it's people, even if only the first is a "win" for the US.
I don't see anti-Maduro forces winning in any real civil war. Pro-Maduro forces have the insurgency advantage because they will most likely be supported by Brazil and use Brazil as a base of operation.
Are you really sure about that? I don't think that's likely at all. Lula might maybe allow brazil to be used as a diplomatic base for an exile maduro but not a military one, even then Cuba or Nicaragua are more likely
Same with Colombia tbh.
The analyses I've read and seen suggest that the US might aim for a decapitation strike against Maduro and his government, rather than a full ground invasion. It's possible they think they have someone waiting to fill the void if the strike works, but who knows if it will work.
The US could do an "Operation Just Cause" (US invasion of Panama and capture of Noriega) type operation in Venezuela and likely succeed. The strength of the Venezuelan military on paper does not match the reality. For instance, from recent military exercises and interviews with ex Venezuelan Air Force pilots, Venezuela likely only has 8 operational fighter aircraft (6 Su-30s and 2 F-16s) and the maintenance/readiness of these 8 is questionable. On paper they have 21 Su-30s, for instance. On air defence, the main big ticket item is a single S-300VM battalion, plus some Buk and S-125 systems, and a (on paper) a substantial supply of Igla MANPADs for use against helicopters. However the S-300VM system has not appeared or been mentioned in recent exercises (unlike the rest).
Maduro's claims on mobilisation are vastly exaggerated. When he talks about mobilising 4.3 million soldiers to defend Venezuela, that's literally every military aged male (between the ages of 18-35) in the entire country. The number of actual soldiers or militiamen is much lower than this. The idea that every single military aged male is armed and ready to defend the country is not realistic, not even Ukraine operates at that level in an all out war.
However such an invasion would require tens of thousands of US Marines, the Panama invasion involved 30 000 Marines. I don't think that the US has a force of that size ready to go currently. Strikes "against the cartels" are the more likely option right now.
I agree that the number is probably exaggerated, but they are mobilizing women and older people as well.
They need more than that. Venezuela is bigger, has more hostile terrain, and a more loyal populace than Panama under Noriega.
No. Venezuela has well armed militias with a deep knowledge of the mountain terrain that dominates the country. Worse than Afghanistan.
I don't think they can invade Venezuela without direct support from Brazil or Colombia, Guyana is too weak of a country and their borders are controled by Venezuela and Brazil, besides that Suriname hates Guyana due to border disputes and Suriname has a left-wing pro-military goverment in power.
Maduro is cooked, he has way too many domestic ops/opportunists to successfully run off to the hills and lead a resistance imo.
but any new Guaidos will face furious resistance, there will be no 'honeymoon' of disorganized resistance like in Iraq, and there's absolutely nothing for a new regime to offer the people that wouldn't go against their yankee master's goals.
What you describe reminds me a lot of Libya which is concerning.
Venezuela has already been through a transfer of power, i don't think there is a reliance on a 'house' of Maduro as there was for Gaddaffi. it should survive a loss of Maduro, as it has Chavez.
re: regime change I've gotta quote Rudy and just say "Why start now?"