A recent narrative has surfaced, predominantly shared through social media, suggesting that the United States employed sonic weapons during an operation to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. This story, originating from an alleged eyewitness, has drawn attention due to its dramatic claims. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt promoted the eyewitness account on X, inviting others to engage with the details of the statement.
The witness claims to have been a guard stationed at a military base in Caracas at the time of the operation. He recounted a scenario where all radar systems unexpectedly failed, creating confusion among the Venezuelan forces. “We were on guard, but suddenly all our radar systems shut down without any explanation,” the guard stated. “The next thing we saw were drones, a lot of drones, flying over our positions. We didn’t know how to react.” This introduction sets the tone for a reported operation marked by advanced technology and strategic prowess.
The narrative escalates as the witness describes the U.S. forces deploying from helicopters with unmatched efficiency. “They were technologically very advanced,” he observed. “They didn’t look like anything we’ve fought against before.” The sheer imbalance in numbers becomes clear when he reflects on the capabilities of the U.S. soldiers. “We were hundreds, but we had no chance,” he remarked, illustrating a scenario where the Venezuelan troops could not compete with the precision and firepower of their opponents. He claimed it felt as though each U.S. soldier was firing at an extraordinary rate: “300 rounds per minute.”
The most striking claim pertains to the use of sonic weapons against Venezuelan forces. The guard described an intense sound wave that incapacitated many Venezuelan soldiers. “At one point, they launched something; I don’t know how to describe it,” he relayed. “It was like a very intense sound wave. Suddenly I felt like my head was exploding from the inside.” The fervor of his testimony captures the chaos and fear experienced by those present, with the witness claiming that bleeding from the nose and vomiting blood ensued for many. “We couldn’t even stand up after that sonic weapon — or whatever it was,” he said, further emphasizing the debilitating impact of the attack.
He estimates the discrepancy in casualties starkly: “Those twenty men, without a single casualty, killed hundreds of us.” Here, the witness encapsulates both the skill of the U.S. forces and the tragic fate of the Venezuelan troops, drawing attention to a significant technological edge. “I swear, I’ve never seen anything like it,” he concluded, sealing his testimony with a sense of disbelief.
The White House and Pentagon have yet to confirm or deny the use of sonic or energy weapons in Venezuela, leaving the story in a murky area of speculation. Leavitt’s decision to share the dramatic account raises questions about its authenticity, as both government entities remain silent on the details of the operation. The complexities involved in modern warfare continue to unfold, particularly in regions fraught with political unrest like Venezuela.
This eyewitness account, with its vivid and alarming details, adds another layer to understanding the capabilities and strategy of the U.S. military abroad. If true, the implications of using advanced technology in combat situations present significant moral and ethical discussions that can resonate through the halls of power. It remains to be seen how this account will evolve as more information becomes available and what it might mean for future military engagements.
"*" indicates required fields
