3 ms·

I don't think it's fair comparing the war on terror with the current pandemic handling. Back then the government attitude was "You killed 3,000 proud Americans,

I don't think it's fair comparing the war on terror with the current pandemic handling. Back then the government attitude was "You killed 3,000 proud Americans, we will avenge them by killing 300,000 Arabs! A eye for a hundred eyes!". It was clear from day one that USA was overreacting, and doing it in a way that was suspiciously profitable. The WHO is very different than the military industry complex, they're not taking over the world, they making recommendations based on evolving scientific data, and the governments of the world are free to ignore them because not even the UN has enough authority to force them. That so many shitty governments have accepted those recommendations to some degree is a miracle, owed much in part to the effort of their own scientists.

disambiguation 5y ago
You call it unfair, yet don't give insight into your criteria for fairness. No analogy is perfect. But the parallels are too strong to ignore. Studying history is about using the past to make sense of the present, and possibly even predict the future. Saying the USA was obviously overreacting from the start is just hindsight, and not representative of the sentiment at the time. Further I'm sure years from now we'll say the same, that many things we did during this pandemic were overreactions, and that it was obvious at the time. Comparing the MIC to the WHO is a false dichotomy. The WHO is historically an institution for the USA to project power internationally. The question of who is "taking over the world" is the territory of speculation. I said originally it remains to be seen how much manipulation is occurring. For example, the lab-leak hypothesis, once the ramblings of a mad man, has gained traction among officials as a likely source for the disease. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/17047986/wuhan-lab-leak-most-likely-cause-covid-pandemic/ https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/17047986/wuhan-lab-leak-most-l... If this proves to be true, it will have radical implications on the past 2 years.

disambiguation 5y ago

You call it unfair, yet don't give insight into your criteria for fairness. No analogy is perfect. But the parallels are too strong to ignore. Studying history is about using the past to make sense of the present, and possibly even predict the future. Saying the USA was obviously overreacting from the start is just hindsight, and not representative of the sentiment at the time. Further I'm sure years from now we'll say the same, that many things we did during this pandemic were overreactions, and that it was obvious at the time. Comparing the MIC to the WHO is a false dichotomy. The WHO is historically an institution for the USA to project power internationally. The question of who is "taking over the world" is the territory of speculation. I said originally it remains to be seen how much manipulation is occurring. For example, the lab-leak hypothesis, once the ramblings of a mad man, has gained traction among officials as a likely source for the disease. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/17047986/wuhan-lab-leak-most-likely-cause-covid-pandemic/ https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/17047986/wuhan-lab-leak-most-l... If this proves to be true, it will have radical implications on the past 2 years.