4 ms·
"who have chosen to mostly rely on the US military for their own national security" I often wonder if statements like this are disingenuous. The US military "p
by Atlantium 8y ago
"who have chosen to mostly rely on the US military for their own national security"
I often wonder if statements like this are disingenuous. The US military "polices" parts of the world where American interests lie; ie Natural resources, supply chains, potential markets for American companies to exploit. When you say countries "choose" American military protection you are not considering the considerable economic pressure America can leverage when it wants something you have. In developing countries this can be a difficult choice too. By not spending on military you can spend elsewhere. Even if that means resources end up in the hands of politicians directly; which is no different to any first world country.
- Nimitz14 8y agoJust because some people who don't know any better say the US invaded Iraq for oil does not make it true. And ignoring Iraq, did the US intervene in the Balkans because of natural resources or potential markets? Or in Somalia? Please try and put in a little more effort into your thought process.
- pofilat 8y agoThe US occupied Iraq for over a decade, and installed a new government. The US spent a little time in the Balkans and Somalia and then gave up. There's a difference.
- trophycase 8y agoSo removing Saddam and stabilizing the power vacuum aren't justifications for spending 10 years?
- 394549 8y ago> The US occupied Iraq for over a decade, and installed a new government. The US spent a little time in the Balkans and Somalia and then gave up. There's a difference. A similar difference to the one that motivated its even longer occupation of the oil-less Afghanistan.