More than a day has passed since the United States government invaded Venezuela, captured its leader and took over the temporary running of its government for the sake of capitalism. No new details have pointed to another motive.

Nicolas Maduro was an ineffective and corrupt leader, who did little to respond to the economic needs of his nation. The international community considers his reelection illegitimate, as he lost in a landslide, despite barring the opposition leader from running, and subsequently refused to leave office. He turned his back on drug trafficking from his country a long time ago, and he is now being charged in the U.S. as a participant in said trafficking. His mismanagement of his country has destabilized hemisphere neighbors by sparking the mass migration of millions of Venezuelans to Colombia, Brazil and the U.S. Maduro was a problem, no doubt.

But the Maduro problem has existed for a decade, which means it existed during the first Trump administration. Why was it necessary for Trump 2.0 to act when his first administration did not? Perhaps because the first administration had more human guardrails against Mr. Trump’s suspect behavior. This time, he appears more blatant in taking what he wants for personal reasons.

Donald Trump went in for the oil. Kind of like Saddam Hussein went into Kuwait in 1990. Kind of like Vladimir Putin went into Ukraine in 2014 and again in 2022.

There was no mention of democracy in the president’s address yesterday, but I stopped counting the number of times he mentioned the oil and how great, big, wonderful, American companies are going to now move into that market. Meanwhile, Maduro and his wife are facing charges in New York City for trafficking cocaine, despite Mr. Trump’s recent pardon of the former Honduran president for drug trafficking. Does the president simply not like the way Maduro did it?

I am left with two questions after yesterday‘s military success: where will the U.S. invade next and for what resources? What possible reason does President Trump have to show restraint against Mexico or Colombia, if either nation has something he wants (or any other with a military that couldn’t seriously challenge the U.S.)?

Second, how long will it take for this administration to justify shipping to El Salvador Venezuelans suspected of being gang members, because it can now argue that the U.S. is at war with Venezuela? That was a significant legal issue in arguing a violation of due process for Venezuelan nationals removed to mega-prison CECOT. Constitutional scholars said invoking the act required the U.S. be at war with the country of those being removed for being combatants. Even with Secretary of State Marco Rubio saying there is no war with Venezuela (did the president sign off on that assertion?), it may well show up in court papers, like an appeal of the recent D.C. District Court judge’s ruling that the administration owes some type of relief to the 137 Venezuela men sent to CECOT, in direct violation of the judge’s order. It is an argument now logical for an administration attorney to make.

So, with the president growing frailer, his poll numbers hovering near historic lows, an economy stuck in stagnant, and expired health insurance premium subsidies making countless American lives harder, what’s a little strongman invasion to turn the tide of Mr. Trump’s Epstein-induced bad mojo, right? It is disturbingly easy to imagine this as caution-to-the-wind motivation that accompanied greed.

Though Maduro’s removal is certainly being celebrated by many Venezuelan communities worldwide, that doesn’t mean the America-first, MAGA voters want the U.S. government running a South American country. So how long will there be American cheers where they currently exist? How will this play out politically, as well as practically? Does anyone know what actually happens next down there? Is there anyone we can ask, because neither the president yesterday nor Secretary Rubio this morning seemed to have an answer. They just know they’re thrilled about the oil.