3 ms·

> because they didn't suit the interests of the USA No, because they didn't suit the interests of halting the worldwide advance of totalitarian Communism. Gre

by tome 10y ago

> because they didn't suit the interests of the USA No, because they didn't suit the interests of halting the worldwide advance of totalitarian Communism. Great powers throw their weight around. What's creditable in the US case is that they threw their weight around in part to promote liberty and democracy across the world. Not every action can be taken as beneficent in isolation, but in bulk the US has been massively beneficent to the world.

ceejayoz 10y ago
> What's creditable in the US case is that they threw their weight around in part to promote liberty and democracy across the world. Oh, come on. They, at times, overthrew democratically elected heads of state like Allende in favor of military dictatorships that went on to torture tens of thousands.
- nixos 10y ago
  Still, the difference is that most countries play realpolitik 100% of the time, while America plays it (say) 50%. That's quite good.
- tome 10y ago
  Allende was a Marxist and it should be quite understandable that they sacrified their democratic principles in the cause of the greater liberty. I'm not going to defend any specific action especially when taken in isolation but in the large US global hegemony has been massively beneficient.
  - craigsmansion 10y ago
    Except for Middle America, South America, Africa, S-E Asia, the Middle-East, greater Persia. But other than those specific local actions, taken in isolation, it's all been massively good and massively beneficial.
  - guard-of-terra 10y ago
    If I'm not mistaken, neither late (that is post-Stalin) USSR nor its client states (this excludes N.Korea and China) did the kind of shit that USA-backed Pinochet did. Like throwing people in the sea, torturing civians by thousands, bombing presidential palace. The world was becoming a safer place, even on the wrong side of Iron Curtain, but this Chile thing was really a step backward. The guy was caught in UK and held behind bars for the rest of his life for a reason. Nope, I don't understand. What's the use of liberty and democracy when you end up worse than commies?
    - tome 10y ago
      I'm offering a rationale, not a defence. Not everything the USA has done has been selfless and not everything has worked out for the best, maybe not even the majority! But I must challenge the original assertion: when you take into account both capacity and intent, America was by far the most beneficient power of the 20th Century.

by tome 10y ago

ceejayoz 10y ago

> What's creditable in the US case is that they threw their weight around in part to promote liberty and democracy across the world. Oh, come on. They, at times, overthrew democratically elected heads of state like Allende in favor of military dictatorships that went on to torture tens of thousands.

nixos 10y ago
Still, the difference is that most countries play realpolitik 100% of the time, while America plays it (say) 50%. That's quite good.
tome 10y ago
Allende was a Marxist and it should be quite understandable that they sacrified their democratic principles in the cause of the greater liberty. I'm not going to defend any specific action especially when taken in isolation but in the large US global hegemony has been massively beneficient.
- craigsmansion 10y ago
  Except for Middle America, South America, Africa, S-E Asia, the Middle-East, greater Persia. But other than those specific local actions, taken in isolation, it's all been massively good and massively beneficial.
- guard-of-terra 10y ago
  If I'm not mistaken, neither late (that is post-Stalin) USSR nor its client states (this excludes N.Korea and China) did the kind of shit that USA-backed Pinochet did. Like throwing people in the sea, torturing civians by thousands, bombing presidential palace. The world was becoming a safer place, even on the wrong side of Iron Curtain, but this Chile thing was really a step backward. The guy was caught in UK and held behind bars for the rest of his life for a reason. Nope, I don't understand. What's the use of liberty and democracy when you end up worse than commies?
  - tome 10y ago
    I'm offering a rationale, not a defence. Not everything the USA has done has been selfless and not everything has worked out for the best, maybe not even the majority! But I must challenge the original assertion: when you take into account both capacity and intent, America was by far the most beneficient power of the 20th Century.