From “Peace on Earth” to Regime Change: Why Invading Venezuela for Oil Should Alarm Every Patriot

Just over forty-eight hours ago, we watched President Donald Trump, America’s self-proclaimed “President of peace,” wish for “peace on earth” as his sole New Year’s resolution for 2026.

Today, we wake up to the news that he has launched a military attack on Venezuela, kidnapped President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, and declared that the United States will now “run” the country and be “very strongly involved” in its oil industry. This is not peace. This is a naked act of war for oil, wrapped in the tattered, hypocritical banner of a “war on drugs.”

A “President of Peace” Launches an Unconstitutional War

Let’s be clear: this action is a flagrant violation of the U.S. Constitution. The president did not seek congressional authorization for this act of war, a requirement he would be the first to scream about if a Democrat were in office.

Democratic lawmakers immediately called it out. Rep. Jim Himes stated he had “seen no evidence” to justify action without Congress, while Sen. Andy Kim said Trump “rejected our Constitutionally required approval process.” Rep. Jerry Nadler labeled it a “grave abuse of power.”

Even Trump’s own Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, offered the feeble excuse that this wasn’t “the kind of mission you do congressional notification” for—a statement that should chill every conservative who believes in the separation of powers.

The Monumental Myth of the “Drug War” Justification

The official line is that this is about stopping narco-terrorism. They’ve indicted Maduro on drug charges. But this justification is as hollow as a campaign promise.

• Why Venezuela and Not the Real Sources? If this is truly about drugs, why are we invading Venezuela, a minor player, instead of Colombia, the world’s primary source of cocaine? Why not China, the sole producer of the fentanyl precursors devastating American communities? The geography doesn’t add up unless the goal isn’t the drugs at all.
• A Pardoned Kingpin and a Terrorist Guest. The hypocrisy is breathtaking. Just last month, Trump pardoned former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández, convicted of trafficking 400 tons of cocaine into the United States. Meanwhile, just weeks ago, Trump hosted Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa, a former al-Qaeda-linked commander recently removed from the U.S. terrorist list, for White House talks. So which is it? Are we killing drug lords or pardoning them? Are we fighting terrorists or inviting them over for tea?
• The CIA’s Dark History. Anyone who thinks the CIA and drug trafficking are strangers hasn’t read history. Gary Webb’s “Dark Alliance” investigation for the San Jose Mercury News exposed how CIA-backed Contra rebels in Nicaragua helped flood U.S. cities with crack cocaine in the 1980s. Webb’s reporting was attacked by the mainstream press, and he later died from two gunshot wounds to the head—a death officially ruled a suicide that stretches credulity past its breaking point. As one commentator noted, if Webb killed himself with two shots from a .38, “then I’ve got a bridge I’d like to sell you in the desert of New Mexico.”

The Real Target: “We’re Going to Be Very Strongly Involved in It”

Forget the drug fairy tale. Trump himself told us the real reason.

When asked about Venezuela’s future, he didn’t first speak of democracy or liberty. He said, “We’re gonna be very strongly involved in [the oil industry]. That’s all. What can I say?” He added that U.S. oil companies would “spend billions of dollars” and that “the money coming out of the ground” would reimburse the U.S.

This is an oil grab, pure and simple. It’s the Iraq playbook all over again: manufacture a crisis (Weapons of Mass Destruction then, narco-terrorism now), invade, and seize the resource. Just ask Pat Tillman—oh, wait, you can’t.

Pat Tillman, the NFL star turned Army Ranger, became a potent propaganda tool until he saw the Iraq war for the “illegal and unjust” disaster it was. He was planning to meet with Noam Chomsky and speak out. Then, in 2004, he was killed in Afghanistan by “friendly fire”—three bullets to the forehead from an M-16 at close range. Army doctors suspected fratricide, but their request for an investigation was denied. His critical voice was permanently silenced.

A Challenge to Fellow Conservatives

To our friends, to those who, like us, voted for Trump—three times—this is a moment for brutal honesty.

Ask yourself: If Joe Biden had launched an unauthorized war, kidnapped a foreign leader, and then immediately started talking about how American companies would take over the country’s oil reserves, what would your reaction be? You would be (rightly) up in arms. You would be shouting about constitutional violations, imperialism, and crony capitalism until you were blue in the face.

Now, perform a simple thought experiment that exposes the utter lawlessness of this act. Imagine if the roles were reversed. Picture waking up to news that a foreign power—say, China or Russia—had launched a surprise military strike on American soil. Their jets bomb strategic sites near Washington D.C. and Mar-a-Lago in the pre-dawn hours. Their special forces storm a presidential residence, capture a sitting U.S. president and the first lady, blindfold them, and transport them to a foreign warship to face a “show trial” in Beijing or Moscow for crimes defined by their government. The invading nation’s leader then goes on television to announce they will now “run” the United States and will be “very strongly involved” in managing America’s technology sector or agricultural heartland for their own benefit.

The very idea is unthinkable. It would be universally decried as an act of war, a profound violation of international law and national sovereignty, and an invitation to global chaos. Yet, this is precisely what the United States has just done to Venezuela. As Senator Mark Warner warned, this action crosses a line that authoritarians will be eager to exploit: “What stops Vladimir Putin from asserting similar justification to abduct Ukraine’s president?” When we normalize kidnapping foreign leaders, we invite a world where might makes right, and America’s own leaders are no longer safe. This isn’t statesmanship; it’s thuggery that erodes the very rules-based order that has historically protected the United States.

Conclusion

So, let’s recap this masterclass in hypocrisy. After a decades-long economic war on Venezuela—a punishment for the sin of believing its oil belongs to its own people, not Chevron—the “President of Peace” has finally escalated to the bombs-and-kidnapping phase. All to stop drugs from a country that’s not the main source, while pardoning actual drug kingpins and rolling out the red carpet for former terrorists. How did that strategy work out in Cuba, Libya, Iraq, or Syria, by the way? Are we aiming for another forever war, but this time in our own hemisphere?

This was never about morals or Maduro’s many faults—though, for a crowd that claims to value family values, it’s worth noting he presides over a country that’s banned pornography, abortion, gay marriage, sex changes, and usury. No, let’s spare ourselves the monumental myth. This is about oil and regime change, period. The only thing Trump has truly captured is our nation’s last shred of credibility on the world stage.

We cannot abandon our principles for a politician. The belief in limited government, congressional authority over war, and national sovereignty does not disappear when our guy is in power. This act is wrong. It is dangerous. It sets a precedent that China or Russia will be all too happy to exploit the next time they want to “arrest” a foreign leader they don’t like.