4 ms·
I suppose these people would have supported the British Empire against the Americans, the Soviets as they oppressed their client states, Saddam Hussein's oppres
by hackuser 11y ago
I suppose these people would have supported the British Empire against the Americans, the Soviets as they oppressed their client states, Saddam Hussein's oppression of the Kurds, the Serbs oppression of the Bosnians ... and every other act of imperial, government oppression. All in the name of order!
- nostrademons 11y agoI thought that was the point of the piece - that most Americans do support the U.S. over ISIL, the U.S. over Iraq, the U.S. over Panama, the U.S. over Vietnam. In all those cases, we are the hegemon deploying vastly superior weaponry over a small band of rebels. I viewed the article as an awareness-raising satire, making people think about how they may root for the underdog in Star Wars, but in their daily lives, they're just glad to be on the winning side.
- hackuser 11y agoI agree that military superiority is not what fundamentally defines right and wrong military action in people's minds, including mine. But there are other differences between, for example, Saddam Hussein suppressing the Kurds and the American Revolution.
- toyg 11y agoYou jest, but that's exactly what "we" do every day, sponsoring regimes like Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt, Singapore and so on. As long as a country is stable and doesn't openly work against "our" interests, we fully support them in the name of stability and order. In fact, looking at recent history it's quite clear how alternative policies will often turn out be much worse in the long run.