4 ms·

You'd need to have been living on a different planet to think that the US is benign. Relatively benign to their own citizens but far and away the most globally

by Guthur 7y ago

You'd need to have been living on a different planet to think that the US is benign. Relatively benign to their own citizens but far and away the most globally antagonistic country over the last 50 years. The list of wars and interventions, arms dealing, extradition etc would be far beyond anything China has done. No government is beyond over stepping it's boundaries but unfortunately non US citizens do not have a constitution to protect them from the US government. China is threatening the US global trade dominance and the US is reacting in exactly the same way incumbents usually do and unfortunately trade wars between major powers have been historical quite bloody.

adventured 7y ago
> The list of wars and interventions, arms dealing, extradition etc would be far beyond anything China has done. There's good reason to be skeptical of your claim. The good the US has done is also radically beyond any good that China has done. Just the lives that the US will save in Africa, tens of millions of lives over time, is beyond anything any other nation in world history has ever done. During the US lead in the post WW2 era, liberal democracy has flourished around the world under the direct protection and encouragement of the US. That includes nations throughout Europe, Asia, Africa and Latin America. Compare 1935 (or 1850, 1900, 1920, etc) to 2015 when it comes to government systems around the world, violence rates, major armed conflicts, poverty, famine, life expectancy, real incomes, trade, etc. The world has never been better off than it has with the US as a superpower, not even remotely close. Last time I checked, for 70 years the US has overwhelmingly acted as a defender of liberal democracies, not an antagonist. It conflicts with nations such as Iran (theocracy), Cuba (dictatorship), the Soviet Union (authoritarian party dictatorship), Iraq (dictatorship), Venezuela (dictatorship), North Korea (dictatorship), Russia (dictatorship). Or is the US currently trying to topple Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Canada, Norway, Germany, Netherlands, Japan, Britain, France, Portugal, et al? Did I miss something? Just the good that the US did for Germany, Japan and South Korea in the post WW2 era alone is more than any other nation has done for the world in the past century. What does the world look like if China is the sole superpower by contrast? They're going to protect Taiwan's democracy? They're going to set Hong Kong free to become an independent democracy? Right. China has been a prolific arms dealer for a very long time. The difference between the US and China on arms dealing is per unit cost and who they primarily sell to. Most of the US arms dealing goes to liberal democracies in fact and involves very expensive hardware like the F35 or F16. China exports arms to at least 53 countries and is the world's largest seller of armed military drones; their largest drone clients are all low human rights countries. By contrast the US sells almost zero armed drones to foreign nations. The 25 nations list of buyers of US arms includes: Norway, UK, Italy, Greece, Canada, Germany, Mexico, Israel, India, Taiwan, Singapore, Japan, South Korea, Australia. What's the problem exactly with selling democracies arms to defend themselves? I also don't believe the US should be selling arms to Saudi Arabia, that's a black mark the US deserves credit for. When it comes to war, the Third Indochina War involved several hundred thousand dead between Vietnam and China (including soldiers and civilians). That's a war that China started with Vietnam. China has been in a constant state of long-term conflict with nearly all of its neighbors over territory. That includes India, South Korea, Indonesia, Vietnam, Japan, Russia, Malaysia and the Philippines. All of China's neighbors are afraid of it, save for North Korea. China has persistently aided and propped up North Korea, a nuclear armed dictatorship with zero human rights that has been constantly threatening to genocide South Korea for 50 years. In the last 50 years China completed its cultural eradication of Tibet, a process that took decades. China quasi peacefully (there was never a choice actually) annexed Hong Kong and has increasingly stripped it of independence and human rights. That process is accelerating right now. China constantly threatens to use its military to invade Taiwan and regularly takes dramatic actions to keep Taiwan isolated and terrified. They go so far as to threaten foreign nations that interact with Taiwan's leaders at all, and threaten foreign corporations for even mentioning that Taiwan does not belong to China. China just recently used military force to annex territory the size of France from their neighbors. The US using its superpower military to annex large swaths of territory from its neighbors is unthinkable in the post WW2 era. The US has maintained the longest unarmed border in the world with Canada, precisely because Canada doesn't fear a US effort to annex its territory. None of China's neighbors feel that way, for obvious reasons.
- hello_moto 7y ago
  You listed Indonesia. Let me show you what USA did in the past: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/10/the-indonesia-documents-and-the-us-agenda/543534/ https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/10/th... No. I do not trust USA.
- kenned3 7y ago
  I highly suggest you read about Hong Kong.. clearly you have little understanding of the history behind it. here's a quick primer for you. The English were running a huge trade imbalance against china (Tea for payment). The chinese did not purchase much from the english. The English created the "East India Company" to import opium to china (yes, that opium). The chinese did not want this, so the british went to war and won. China was forced to enter into a 99 year lease agreement. So.. what is this "annexed" you are referring to?
  - NeedMoreTea 7y ago
    The East India Company was formed in 1600. The tea and opium trades were company choices, not British government. It was the company that created the opium monopoly, the first opium war being nearly 50 years later. It was around the time of the second opium war, and the Indian rebellion, that the company was judged so out of control it was disestablished and all company assets to the state. Which led to the Indian Raj. Which is not to excuse any of this, but please get the timeline right. :)
    - monocasa 7y ago
      Seperating the East India company from the British government seems specious at best. The company was responsible for more GDP than the actual island of Britain, and was given explicit military support in their actions.
      - NeedMoreTea 7y ago
        They had an ridiculous degree of autonomy for much of their existence, their own large armies and their fleet included warships. At one point loaning a huge sum of money to the state in exchange for even more autonomy. It was only going into the 19th century that anything resembling control or oversight started to come into being. Which in no small part led to their disestablishment.

by Guthur 7y ago

adventured 7y ago

> The list of wars and interventions, arms dealing, extradition etc would be far beyond anything China has done. There's good reason to be skeptical of your claim. The good the US has done is also radically beyond any good that China has done. Just the lives that the US will save in Africa, tens of millions of lives over time, is beyond anything any other nation in world history has ever done. During the US lead in the post WW2 era, liberal democracy has flourished around the world under the direct protection and encouragement of the US. That includes nations throughout Europe, Asia, Africa and Latin America. Compare 1935 (or 1850, 1900, 1920, etc) to 2015 when it comes to government systems around the world, violence rates, major armed conflicts, poverty, famine, life expectancy, real incomes, trade, etc. The world has never been better off than it has with the US as a superpower, not even remotely close. Last time I checked, for 70 years the US has overwhelmingly acted as a defender of liberal democracies, not an antagonist. It conflicts with nations such as Iran (theocracy), Cuba (dictatorship), the Soviet Union (authoritarian party dictatorship), Iraq (dictatorship), Venezuela (dictatorship), North Korea (dictatorship), Russia (dictatorship). Or is the US currently trying to topple Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Canada, Norway, Germany, Netherlands, Japan, Britain, France, Portugal, et al? Did I miss something? Just the good that the US did for Germany, Japan and South Korea in the post WW2 era alone is more than any other nation has done for the world in the past century. What does the world look like if China is the sole superpower by contrast? They're going to protect Taiwan's democracy? They're going to set Hong Kong free to become an independent democracy? Right. China has been a prolific arms dealer for a very long time. The difference between the US and China on arms dealing is per unit cost and who they primarily sell to. Most of the US arms dealing goes to liberal democracies in fact and involves very expensive hardware like the F35 or F16. China exports arms to at least 53 countries and is the world's largest seller of armed military drones; their largest drone clients are all low human rights countries. By contrast the US sells almost zero armed drones to foreign nations. The 25 nations list of buyers of US arms includes: Norway, UK, Italy, Greece, Canada, Germany, Mexico, Israel, India, Taiwan, Singapore, Japan, South Korea, Australia. What's the problem exactly with selling democracies arms to defend themselves? I also don't believe the US should be selling arms to Saudi Arabia, that's a black mark the US deserves credit for. When it comes to war, the Third Indochina War involved several hundred thousand dead between Vietnam and China (including soldiers and civilians). That's a war that China started with Vietnam. China has been in a constant state of long-term conflict with nearly all of its neighbors over territory. That includes India, South Korea, Indonesia, Vietnam, Japan, Russia, Malaysia and the Philippines. All of China's neighbors are afraid of it, save for North Korea. China has persistently aided and propped up North Korea, a nuclear armed dictatorship with zero human rights that has been constantly threatening to genocide South Korea for 50 years. In the last 50 years China completed its cultural eradication of Tibet, a process that took decades. China quasi peacefully (there was never a choice actually) annexed Hong Kong and has increasingly stripped it of independence and human rights. That process is accelerating right now. China constantly threatens to use its military to invade Taiwan and regularly takes dramatic actions to keep Taiwan isolated and terrified. They go so far as to threaten foreign nations that interact with Taiwan's leaders at all, and threaten foreign corporations for even mentioning that Taiwan does not belong to China. China just recently used military force to annex territory the size of France from their neighbors. The US using its superpower military to annex large swaths of territory from its neighbors is unthinkable in the post WW2 era. The US has maintained the longest unarmed border in the world with Canada, precisely because Canada doesn't fear a US effort to annex its territory. None of China's neighbors feel that way, for obvious reasons.

hello_moto 7y ago
You listed Indonesia. Let me show you what USA did in the past: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/10/the-indonesia-documents-and-the-us-agenda/543534/ https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/10/th... No. I do not trust USA.
kenned3 7y ago
I highly suggest you read about Hong Kong.. clearly you have little understanding of the history behind it. here's a quick primer for you. The English were running a huge trade imbalance against china (Tea for payment). The chinese did not purchase much from the english. The English created the "East India Company" to import opium to china (yes, that opium). The chinese did not want this, so the british went to war and won. China was forced to enter into a 99 year lease agreement. So.. what is this "annexed" you are referring to?
- NeedMoreTea 7y ago
  The East India Company was formed in 1600. The tea and opium trades were company choices, not British government. It was the company that created the opium monopoly, the first opium war being nearly 50 years later. It was around the time of the second opium war, and the Indian rebellion, that the company was judged so out of control it was disestablished and all company assets to the state. Which led to the Indian Raj. Which is not to excuse any of this, but please get the timeline right. :)
  - monocasa 7y ago
    Seperating the East India company from the British government seems specious at best. The company was responsible for more GDP than the actual island of Britain, and was given explicit military support in their actions.
    - NeedMoreTea 7y ago
      They had an ridiculous degree of autonomy for much of their existence, their own large armies and their fleet included warships. At one point loaning a huge sum of money to the state in exchange for even more autonomy. It was only going into the 19th century that anything resembling control or oversight started to come into being. Which in no small part led to their disestablishment.