7 ms·

I wonder how many countries today are not in war simply because of fear of retaliation from the USA.

sneak 6y ago
Say what you (or Kubrick) will about mutually assured destruction, it sure does seem to have prevented a lot of violence, despite also seeming totally insane.
- monadic7 6y ago
  I never got that logic—the US has been in armed conflict in various forms since the end of WWII, whether directly or through the CIA. It seems more like nukes enable violence from my perspective.
  - throwaway6734 6y ago
    The world was a much more violent place before pax americana.
    - sangnoir 6y ago
      > The world was a much more violent place before pax americana. Europe, for sure is a lot less violent, as for the rest of the world? I won't believe that on face value; south America specifically got more violent, and I suspect everywhere else is a wash (or is not attributable to American force projection). I attribute the peace in Europe to the EU rather than pax Americana.
      - throwaway6734 6y ago
        The EU was founded in 1993.
        sangnoir 6y ago
        A company named "Apple, Inc." didn't exist prior to 2007 either - that's just splitting hairs, IMO, a rose by any other name &tc, &tc. I assumed anyone who has passing familiarity with Europe's history and WWII knew exactly what I meant by "EU" - you may read it as "the European project", if that dunks your crumpet.
  - sneak 6y ago
    Being involved in conflicts where hundreds or thousands die is mostly preferable to being involved in wars where tens or hundreds of thousands die. Overall violent death is down on planet Earth drastically over time.
    - engineer_22 6y ago
      Food for thought: The Wars in the Congo are a counter example. 2nd Congo War is thought to have caused 5.4 million deaths and officially ended in 2003, just 18 years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Congo_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Congo_War
      - xxpor 6y ago
        Arguably that's the exception that proves the rule. Note how none of the great powers were really that involved (outside of the US providing "advisors").
  - CapriciousCptl 6y ago
    It’s like the big brother who says, “nobody can tease my sister except me.” There’s less teasing— he’s the only one doing it. But I’m with you, on balance wmds are terrible things. One use of them could outweigh all the violence they prevented.
  - ericb 6y ago
    It seems relatively peaceful: https://ourworldindata.org/war-and-peace https://ourworldindata.org/war-and-peace
Dirlewanger 6y ago
I mean, America being the world police is a meme, but also has some truth to it...
- consumer451 6y ago
  > but also has some truth to it... That is one heck of an understatement.[0] The global economic benefit of the stability brought by the US military being top-dog is vast, and appears to benefit many countries including China. There are plenty of valid criticisms of Pax Americana, but the global economic benefit, not so much imho. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pax_Americana https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pax_Americana
  - tolbish 6y ago
    The existence of the US hegemony is no secret. The only debate surrounds its longevity. The accepted tipping point is when its massive salaries start to even out with the rest of the world, with COVID-19 acting as a catalyst.
    - xxpor 6y ago
      Why would US salaries start to even out with the rest of the world? On a per capita basis, our GDP is still massively higher than every other large country.
      - webmaven 6y ago
        > Why would US salaries start to even out with the rest of the world? On a per capita basis, our GDP is still massively higher than every other large country. The hypothesis is that if most high compensation workers are remote, it opens up those labor markets to more competition from lower cost regions. IOW, as Covid-19 forces organizations to become remote-first, they perforce also become more outsourcing-friendly, or at least outsourcing-capable.
        kube-system 6y ago

Say what you (or Kubrick) will about mutually assured destruction, it sure does seem to have prevented a lot of violence, despite also seeming totally insane.

monadic7 6y ago
I never got that logic—the US has been in armed conflict in various forms since the end of WWII, whether directly or through the CIA. It seems more like nukes enable violence from my perspective.
- throwaway6734 6y ago
  The world was a much more violent place before pax americana.
  - sangnoir 6y ago
    > The world was a much more violent place before pax americana. Europe, for sure is a lot less violent, as for the rest of the world? I won't believe that on face value; south America specifically got more violent, and I suspect everywhere else is a wash (or is not attributable to American force projection). I attribute the peace in Europe to the EU rather than pax Americana.
    - throwaway6734 6y ago
      The EU was founded in 1993.
      - sangnoir 6y ago
        A company named "Apple, Inc." didn't exist prior to 2007 either - that's just splitting hairs, IMO, a rose by any other name &tc, &tc. I assumed anyone who has passing familiarity with Europe's history and WWII knew exactly what I meant by "EU" - you may read it as "the European project", if that dunks your crumpet.
- sneak 6y ago
  Being involved in conflicts where hundreds or thousands die is mostly preferable to being involved in wars where tens or hundreds of thousands die. Overall violent death is down on planet Earth drastically over time.
  - engineer_22 6y ago
    Food for thought: The Wars in the Congo are a counter example. 2nd Congo War is thought to have caused 5.4 million deaths and officially ended in 2003, just 18 years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Congo_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Congo_War
    - xxpor 6y ago
      Arguably that's the exception that proves the rule. Note how none of the great powers were really that involved (outside of the US providing "advisors").
- CapriciousCptl 6y ago
  It’s like the big brother who says, “nobody can tease my sister except me.” There’s less teasing— he’s the only one doing it. But I’m with you, on balance wmds are terrible things. One use of them could outweigh all the violence they prevented.
- ericb 6y ago
  It seems relatively peaceful: https://ourworldindata.org/war-and-peace https://ourworldindata.org/war-and-peace

Dirlewanger 6y ago

I mean, America being the world police is a meme, but also has some truth to it...

consumer451 6y ago
> but also has some truth to it... That is one heck of an understatement.[0] The global economic benefit of the stability brought by the US military being top-dog is vast, and appears to benefit many countries including China. There are plenty of valid criticisms of Pax Americana, but the global economic benefit, not so much imho. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pax_Americana https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pax_Americana
- tolbish 6y ago
  The existence of the US hegemony is no secret. The only debate surrounds its longevity. The accepted tipping point is when its massive salaries start to even out with the rest of the world, with COVID-19 acting as a catalyst.
  - xxpor 6y ago
    Why would US salaries start to even out with the rest of the world? On a per capita basis, our GDP is still massively higher than every other large country.
    - webmaven 6y ago
      > Why would US salaries start to even out with the rest of the world? On a per capita basis, our GDP is still massively higher than every other large country. The hypothesis is that if most high compensation workers are remote, it opens up those labor markets to more competition from lower cost regions. IOW, as Covid-19 forces organizations to become remote-first, they perforce also become more outsourcing-friendly, or at least outsourcing-capable.
      - kube-system 6y ago