A comment in the operational context:
Venezuela is a country of continental dimensions, with a rugged coastline and, further inland, an almost insurmountable barrier of jungles, mountains, and rivers. A successful amphibious invasion, the starting point for any regime change campaign, is a logistical challenge.
View attachment 165227
That's not all.
The idea of repeating a large-scale landing like Normandy is anachronistic, clearly not comparable in scale and number of participants. Even if conquered, the Venezuelan beaches would lead to a hostile interior, ideal for ambushes and guerrilla warfare, where the US lacks moral and operational preparedness, as its troops are heavily dependent on electronic technology and various resources, diminishing their operational capacity for ruggedness.
And I am disregarding the arduous task of Operation SEAD/DEAD (S-300VM), a cornerstone of US military doctrine.
If they put "boots on the ground" it will be yet another conflict to sustain, as the US is already committed on multiple fronts: supporting Ukraine, tensions in the Middle East, and containing China in Asia.
Opening a fourth front of high-intensity conflict in South America would be an invitation to disaster, overwhelming their logistical, financial, and intelligence capabilities should they be attacked by any country or group of countries.
