Trump is escalating global tensions with reckless rhetoric after claiming that Venezuela is surrounded by the largest armada in South American history, a statement that is factually and legally false but deeply dangerous. Under international law, a naval blockade is considered an act of war, and history shows that claims of encirclement often precede military conflict. Trump’s post goes further by asserting that Venezuelan oil and assets belong to the United States and by suggesting the country has been labeled a terrorist organization, neither of which followed any required legal or diplomatic process. Experts warn this is not policy but provocative language without institutional backing, the kind that fuels instability, panic, and escalation. When a president speaks as if war is already underway, even when it is not, words alone can move the world closer to conflict.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Venezuela nationalized oil fields in 1976, and paid partial compensation over the decades. Yeah, we a war right now over oil company compensation disputes from 1976!!!
AI (always iffy) overview
Who Got What (Examples):
ExxonMobil: Sought billions, ended up with a 2012 ruling for $255 million from an ICC case and a later $1.6 billion ICSID award (later annulled).
ConocoPhillips: Received large awards from World Bank tribunals, totaling billions, though enforcement and payment were challenging.
Total, Chevron, Statoil, BP: Agreed to give PDVSA majority control and remained as minority partners, avoiding full expropriation.
Williams Cos. & Exterran Holdings: Received payments ($420 million) for natural gas assets nationalized in 2009.
Rusoro Mining & Crystallex: Canadian mining firms settled claims for over $1 billion each after arbitration
