6 ms·

> What does peace look like to you? Peace is what the United States has had with Vietnam since 1975. How can we understand that, when the reason for going to

> What does peace look like to you? Peace is what the United States has had with Vietnam since 1975. How can we understand that, when the reason for going to war, at the cost of 58,000 American lives, was that without an intervention, the domino theory predicted that the world order would inevitably collapse? It didn't. Vietnam, notwithstanding the pandemic, is a tourist destination where 18 year old American kids have the time of their live in complete safety. Money for peace would investigate this outcome with the aim of advancing our theoretical knowledge so we might get it right next time, in time to avoid conflict.

eitland 5y ago
Problem is the West had just experienced the failure that was to try to make peace with a mad dictator (Hitler) a few decades before. Also the Communists were quite open about their plans for world domination.
- wombatmobile 5y ago
  Hitler was killed in 1945. Are you saying the West was unable to distinguish between Hitler and other world leaders, 20 years later? That sounds like a cognitive bias, akin to PTSD. Surely it would be better for the world to develop therapies for that cognitive bias instead of going to war. > Also the Communists were quite open about their plans for world domination. Didn't the Russians defeat Hitler, at the cost of 22 million Russian casualties? What plans for world domination are you referring to? Can you point to any act of armed aggression by the Russians against a Western government? Can you point to any act of armed aggression by the Chinese Communist Part against a western government?
  - wombatmobile 5y ago
    People who prefer peace to war know what kind of people downvote comments like this without offering a substantive response.
  - eitland 5y ago
    > Are you saying the West was unable to distinguish between Hitler and other world leaders, 20 years later? Stalin was almost every bit as bad as Hitler and outlasted him by almost a decade. Others were just as bad just less "successful". Also, after a painful lesson in dealing with mad dictators I'm actually glad the west didn't forget the lesson so fast. > Didn't the Russians defeat Hitler, at the cost of 22 million Russian casualties? I give you this, this is partially true: They absolutely played a huge part in it but were themselves saved by Churchill after doing the same blunder as the west: trusting Hitler. > What plans for world domination are you referring to? Please do read up on the history of international Communism and Socialism. > Can you point to any act of armed aggression by the Russians against a Western government? Besides numerous proxy wars, occupying half of Europe, and, more recently starting a war against Ukraine and shooting down MH-17? > Can you point to any act of armed aggression by the Chinese Communist Part against a western government? They haven't dared that quite yet as far as I know but they've broken the agreement with Britain about Hong Kong quite thoroughly, they keep stealing fish (note: the west has also been guilty of this).
    - wombatmobile 5y ago
      > They haven't dared that quite yet as far as I know but they've broken the agreement with Britain about Hong Kong quite thoroughly, What do you know about the history behind the "agreement with Britain about Hong Kong"?
      - eitland 5y ago
        You can look it up quite easily. That way you don't have to trust me and my interpretation :-)
        wombatmobile 5y ago
        It's not me I'm enquiring about, or the history of China and Britain. I'm advocating investing in peace. You seem to be saying the bad guys were bent on taking over the world, so the good guys were justified in going to war to stop them. If it were that simple, war would be inevitable, and killing all the bad guys would fix the problem once and for all. But the history of conflict is more complicated than that, and you know it. That's why you declined to state the facts you know about Hong Kong, which was a part of a sovereign nation that was invaded by foreign powers and held hostage. I'm not saying the suppression of freedom in Hong Kong is 2021 is a good thing. If you put it in to context, it is a tit for a 100 year old tat, that was proceeded by the Opium Wars, which I'm happy to discuss with you further, but we'd achieve more by talking about peace. How do we put an end to infinite rounds of tit for tat that escalate into violence and destruction? We started off talking about Vietnam, which today is a Communist nation that hosts tourists from all over the western world, as charmingly and enthusiastically as its former coloniser, France. How can that be? Why isn't Vietnam full of retribution for the deaths and mayhem wrought on it by foreign powers? If we investigate that, and have the courage to re-think history back to the point where we invaded that country to kill communists so as to promote freedom, what might we learn? I don't know the answer, because we haven't done the investigation, which would cost a few million and take a few years. Those millions haven't been allocated by any western nation, but their collective budgets for war is in the trillions every year. Why is that? If we start with that question, we'll be on the way to developing tools for peace. What even are "tools for peace"? You might be interested to ask Chuck Feeney. He's no communist. He's an American businessman who made billions out of Duty Free Shopping in Hong Kong. Chuck invented the whole category of Duty Free Shopping at airports, an art he pioneered and mastered. What did he do with those billions? Well, he didn't buy any Mazerattis, Ferraris, Teslas, penthouses, yachts, movie studios or rocket ships. Those things didn't interest him. The guy was more interested in a different form of happiness, and so he spent the fruits of capitalism chasing peace. https://www.atlanticphilanthropies.org/insights/insights-books/viet-nam https://www.atlanticphilanthropies.org/insights/insights-boo... https://layingfoundationsforchange.org/region/viet-nam/ https://layingfoundationsforchange.org/region/viet-nam/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevenbertoni/2020/09/15/exclusive-the-billionaire-who-wanted-to-die-brokeis-now-officially-broke/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevenbertoni/2020/09/15/exclus...

eitland 5y ago

Problem is the West had just experienced the failure that was to try to make peace with a mad dictator (Hitler) a few decades before. Also the Communists were quite open about their plans for world domination.

wombatmobile 5y ago
Hitler was killed in 1945. Are you saying the West was unable to distinguish between Hitler and other world leaders, 20 years later? That sounds like a cognitive bias, akin to PTSD. Surely it would be better for the world to develop therapies for that cognitive bias instead of going to war. > Also the Communists were quite open about their plans for world domination. Didn't the Russians defeat Hitler, at the cost of 22 million Russian casualties? What plans for world domination are you referring to? Can you point to any act of armed aggression by the Russians against a Western government? Can you point to any act of armed aggression by the Chinese Communist Part against a western government?
- wombatmobile 5y ago
  People who prefer peace to war know what kind of people downvote comments like this without offering a substantive response.
- eitland 5y ago
  > Are you saying the West was unable to distinguish between Hitler and other world leaders, 20 years later? Stalin was almost every bit as bad as Hitler and outlasted him by almost a decade. Others were just as bad just less "successful". Also, after a painful lesson in dealing with mad dictators I'm actually glad the west didn't forget the lesson so fast. > Didn't the Russians defeat Hitler, at the cost of 22 million Russian casualties? I give you this, this is partially true: They absolutely played a huge part in it but were themselves saved by Churchill after doing the same blunder as the west: trusting Hitler. > What plans for world domination are you referring to? Please do read up on the history of international Communism and Socialism. > Can you point to any act of armed aggression by the Russians against a Western government? Besides numerous proxy wars, occupying half of Europe, and, more recently starting a war against Ukraine and shooting down MH-17? > Can you point to any act of armed aggression by the Chinese Communist Part against a western government? They haven't dared that quite yet as far as I know but they've broken the agreement with Britain about Hong Kong quite thoroughly, they keep stealing fish (note: the west has also been guilty of this).
  - wombatmobile 5y ago
    > They haven't dared that quite yet as far as I know but they've broken the agreement with Britain about Hong Kong quite thoroughly, What do you know about the history behind the "agreement with Britain about Hong Kong"?
    - eitland 5y ago
      You can look it up quite easily. That way you don't have to trust me and my interpretation :-)
      - wombatmobile 5y ago
        It's not me I'm enquiring about, or the history of China and Britain. I'm advocating investing in peace. You seem to be saying the bad guys were bent on taking over the world, so the good guys were justified in going to war to stop them. If it were that simple, war would be inevitable, and killing all the bad guys would fix the problem once and for all. But the history of conflict is more complicated than that, and you know it. That's why you declined to state the facts you know about Hong Kong, which was a part of a sovereign nation that was invaded by foreign powers and held hostage. I'm not saying the suppression of freedom in Hong Kong is 2021 is a good thing. If you put it in to context, it is a tit for a 100 year old tat, that was proceeded by the Opium Wars, which I'm happy to discuss with you further, but we'd achieve more by talking about peace. How do we put an end to infinite rounds of tit for tat that escalate into violence and destruction? We started off talking about Vietnam, which today is a Communist nation that hosts tourists from all over the western world, as charmingly and enthusiastically as its former coloniser, France. How can that be? Why isn't Vietnam full of retribution for the deaths and mayhem wrought on it by foreign powers? If we investigate that, and have the courage to re-think history back to the point where we invaded that country to kill communists so as to promote freedom, what might we learn? I don't know the answer, because we haven't done the investigation, which would cost a few million and take a few years. Those millions haven't been allocated by any western nation, but their collective budgets for war is in the trillions every year. Why is that? If we start with that question, we'll be on the way to developing tools for peace. What even are "tools for peace"? You might be interested to ask Chuck Feeney. He's no communist. He's an American businessman who made billions out of Duty Free Shopping in Hong Kong. Chuck invented the whole category of Duty Free Shopping at airports, an art he pioneered and mastered. What did he do with those billions? Well, he didn't buy any Mazerattis, Ferraris, Teslas, penthouses, yachts, movie studios or rocket ships. Those things didn't interest him. The guy was more interested in a different form of happiness, and so he spent the fruits of capitalism chasing peace. https://www.atlanticphilanthropies.org/insights/insights-books/viet-nam https://www.atlanticphilanthropies.org/insights/insights-boo... https://layingfoundationsforchange.org/region/viet-nam/ https://layingfoundationsforchange.org/region/viet-nam/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevenbertoni/2020/09/15/exclusive-the-billionaire-who-wanted-to-die-brokeis-now-officially-broke/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevenbertoni/2020/09/15/exclus...