Today, Explained — “Are we going to invade Venezuela?”

Date: October 29, 2025
Host: Estad Herndon (filling in), produced by Vox
Guests: Alex Horton (Washington Post), Jonathan Blitzer (The New Yorker)

Overview:

This episode examines the recent dramatic escalation of U.S. military action in and around Venezuela — including kinetic strikes on suspected drug boats and the buildup of U.S. forces in the region — and explores whether the U.S. is on the brink of war with Venezuela. Guests Alex Horton (Pentagon reporter) and Jonathan Blitzer (The New Yorker) break down policy rationales, shifting White House power dynamics, legality, and deeper motivations behind the Trump administration’s moves.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Timeline and Nature of Escalation

• Initial Events:

  • September: U.S. launches a series of deadly strikes on boats in the Caribbean allegedly tied to Venezuelan narco-terrorists, killing 57 over two months. (00:02–00:33)
  • Deployment of significant military assets: guided missile destroyers, thousands of troops, B-52 bombers, special ops helicopters (03:59–04:14).

• Unprecedented Policy Shift:

  • Historic precedent: U.S. Coast Guard would intercept, arrest, and prosecute suspects; now, military strikes are used instead.
  • Alex Horton: “That changed completely... when the U.S. started striking these vessels in the open ocean and Caribbean.” (03:06)

2. Justification for Action: Drugs & Regime Change

• Administration’s Claims:

  • President Trump alleges Venezuela (President Maduro) is sending both violent gang members and drugs (notably fentanyl) into the U.S. (05:06–05:18).

• Evidence (or Lack Thereof):

  • Horton notes the administration provides little hard evidence to support its claims. “What we know about these strikes officially comes from Truth Social posts... They haven’t tried to lay out a body of evidence.” (07:07, 07:20)
  • The ‘receipts’ or proof typically shown to justify military intervention (e.g., images of drugs, documented links to trafficking groups) are missing.

• Quote:

  • Alex Horton (on lack of evidence): “Are they oysters, or is it cocaine? I don’t know. So that’s about the extent of what we can know officially.” (08:11)

3. Alternative Motives: Oil & Resource Interests

• Alternative Analysis:

  • Driven less by anti-narcotics and more by economic/reputation factors — Venezuela’s oil, coastline, and potential financial benefit for the U.S.
  • Trump’s track record: tying U.S. interventions to resource leverage (Ukraine-minerals, Gaza-development deals). (09:26–09:50)

• Quote:

  • Donald Trump: “We want something for our efforts... rare earth, they’re very good. Rare earth, as you know, we’re looking for rare earth all the time.” (09:26)

4. Legality and Congressional Oversight

• Is This Legal?

  • Broad consensus among law-of-war experts: targeting suspected criminals with deadly military force is not only outside law enforcement norms but “looks like murder, and is patently illegal.” (10:42)
  • Trump administration is “testing the boundaries of international law… like Jurassic Park, testing the fences.” (10:42–11:48)

• Erosion of Checks and Balances:

  • Post-9/11 legacy: Congress no longer reining in presidential war powers.
  • Horton: “Congress abdicating authority of declaring conflict… this is no exception.” (11:58)

• Quote:

  • Estad Herndon: “Do we know why he’s doing it? Not exactly. And do we think it’s legal? Probably not. Who’s gonna stop him?”
  • Alex Horton: “...the people on Capitol Hill, right?” (11:48)

5. Who’s Driving Policy? The Rise of Stephen Miller

• Internal Administration Divide:

  • Two camps:
    • Camp Rubio (Secretary of State; hawkish, favoring sanctions/military pressure)
    • Camp Grenell (envoy; favors negotiation, de-escalation) (19:34–20:13)
  • Recent shift: Miller (“domestic policy czar”/immigration advisor) supports the Rubio approach, facilitating escalation (18:32–18:54).

• Miller’s Motives:

  • Expanding presidential power: Avoiding Congressional/foreign oversight, “a much more muscular, unfettered display of what the President can do.” (21:32)
  • Domestic messaging: Militarized response to immigration, blaming Venezuelan immigrants for crimes, shaping public perception.
  • “Get used to the idea of militarized American power on a daily level in your lives.” (22:58)
  • Criminalizing Venezuelan immigration as justification for broader action, similarly to the old MS-13 rhetoric, but targeting Venezuelans instead. (24:01)

• Quote:

  • Jonathan Blitzer: “This is language the administration has used. This is the MS-13 playbook, exactly 100%.” (24:31–24:41)

6. Are We Really Going to War?

• Fog and Uncertainty:
  • No clarity on endgame or next steps, even among insiders: “The short answer, as I understand it, is I have no idea. And it’s not clear to me that they have an idea.” (25:23)
  • U.S. posturing creates the impression that invasion is on the table. Jonathan Blitzer: “We don’t know if we’re going to war, but we know they want us to think that we might.” (26:01–26:07)
  • “It’s a really wild game of chicken. It’s hard to believe it’s happening.” (26:07–26:26)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Trump, on the campaign for violence:

  “We’re gonna kill them. You know, they’re gonna be, like, dead. Okay.” — Donald Trump (00:33)

• On Legal Norms:

  “It is hard to find any law of war expert or former military attorney who says, this isn’t law enforcement. This isn’t a military operation. You know, this looks like murder, and it’s patently illegal.” — Alex Horton (10:42)

• Motives and Power:

  “This is an opportunity, in Miller’s view, to expand the power of the President... He can call someone a narco-terrorist, and that’s that. That’s grounds enough to literally launch a premeditated murder attempt.” — Jonathan Blitzer (21:32)

• On Evidence:

  “That’s 10 minutes longer than Pete Hegseth or the President have answered questions about this to the American public... what we’re getting is sort of grainy 10-second videos... Are they oysters or is it cocaine? I don’t know.” — Alex Horton (06:45–08:11)

• On Immigration & Rhetoric:

  “This prison gang from Venezuela is infiltrating American cities. It’s literally invaded the country. This is language the administration has used. This is the MS-13 playbook, exactly 100%.” — Jonathan Blitzer (24:31–24:41)

• On Policy Uncertainty:

  “The short answer, as I understand it, is I have no idea. And it’s not clear to me that they have an idea.” — Jonathan Blitzer (25:23)

Timestamps for Important Segments

• 00:02–00:33 — Escalating military strikes and provocations
• 02:14–04:35 — Pentagon reporter Alex Horton details military escalation, troop and asset deployments
• 05:06–06:03 — Trump’s statements and the ambiguous CIA role
• 07:07–08:11 — Questions raised about evidence for strikes
• 09:04–10:13 — Possibility of ulterior motives: oil, economic interests
• 10:42–11:58 — Legality, congressional abdication of war powers
• 15:40–17:56 — Jonathan Blitzer explains “domino theory” and old/new policy difference
• 18:32–21:02 — Stephen Miller’s entry, the internal administration battle
• 22:58–24:41 — Militarization of domestic policy, Venezuela as new target group
• 25:23–26:26 — Uncertainty: “Are we going to war?”

Episode Takeaways

• The dramatic turn in U.S. policy toward Venezuela—escalating from counternarcotics to potential regime change through military means—is occurring under ambiguous justification and without clear legal authority.
• There is a lack of transparency about evidence and motives; economic (oil, minerals) and political (domestic power and immigration politics) factors appear as likely drivers as counternarcotics claims.
• Internally, aggressive voices such as Stephen Miller shape policy direction, shifting military and legal norms, with little Congressional oversight.
• While an actual U.S. invasion of Venezuela has not occurred, military posturing intentionally raises the specter of war—leaving the U.S. public, and much of the government, uncertain and uneasy about next steps.