Imagine a world where a former president orders a daring raid into another country, capturing its leader. That's precisely what happened in Venezuela, and it's sparking intense debate. But here's a twist: legendary golfer Greg Norman is publicly praising the move.
Greg Norman, the iconic two-time British Open champion and former CEO of LIV Golf, voiced his strong approval of former President Donald Trump's actions in Venezuela during an appearance on "Fox & Friends" with Steve Doocy. Speaking from Florida, Norman didn't hold back his admiration for how the U.S. handled the situation that led to the apprehension of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.
Norman emphasized his belief in Trump's genuine patriotism. "He’s true to his word," Norman stated. "And I said this during his first term, I’ve known quite a few presidents but he’s the first president I’ve spent time with that has true stars and stripes flowing through his blood." This is quite a statement, given Norman's global exposure and interactions with numerous world leaders.
He then directly addressed the Venezuela situation: "So, what he did in Venezuela, I applaud it. That timing, the execution of it just showed the pure strength and the might and the will of the United States to protect their hemisphere and they should protect their backyard." This raises a critical question: What exactly did the U.S. do in Venezuela?
According to reports, on January 3rd, Trump announced that U.S. special forces had conducted a "large-scale strike" against Caracas, resulting in the capture of Maduro and his wife. Both were subsequently transported to New York City and appeared in a Manhattan federal court on January 5th, facing drug charges. Both pleaded not guilty. But here's where it gets controversial... Was this a legitimate law enforcement operation, or an overreach of executive power?
The raid followed months of mounting pressure on Venezuela, coupled with over two dozen strikes in Latin American waters targeting alleged drug traffickers. These actions were reportedly part of Trump's broader strategy to combat the flow of drugs into the United States. It's worth noting that the Trump administration consistently refused to recognize Maduro as the legitimate head of state, accusing him of leading a drug cartel. In December 2025, Trump even suggested it would be "smart" for Maduro to step down.
The Trump administration defended the capture of Maduro as a "law enforcement" operation. Then-Secretary of State Marco Rubio argued that congressional approval wasn't required, as the operation didn't constitute an "invasion." And this is the part most people miss... The legal justification for such an action is complex and open to interpretation. Was this a necessary measure to protect U.S. interests, or a violation of international law?
This situation sparks intense debate about U.S. foreign policy, the limits of presidential power, and the definition of intervention. What are your thoughts on Greg Norman's stance? Do you agree with his assessment of Trump's actions in Venezuela? And more broadly, what role should the U.S. play in addressing political and criminal issues in other countries? Share your opinions in the comments below. Is it the duty of the United States to intervene in such situations, or should it focus on domestic issues? Let's discuss!
