17 ms·

The phrase "the free world" rubs me the wrong way. I'm obviously against what Russia is doing, any sane man would be. But as a middle eastern, the US to us has

The phrase "the free world" rubs me the wrong way. I'm obviously against what Russia is doing, any sane man would be. But as a middle eastern, the US to us has been 10x worse than Russia: They killed a million Iraqis, they killed Syrian civilians by bombing hospitals and schools. They overthrew a functional government in Libya, and they supported Syrian/Iraqi separatists (Kurds). They forcefully tried to build a military base in Lebanon. Not only that, but they also tortured, raped, and humiliated innocent Iraqis in Abou Gharib, without any major repercussions. Just because the US did it, doesn't mean that Russia is justified or less wrong, both are wrong, and neither get to call out the other for humanitarian reasons.

randomsearch 5y ago
If you think the US has been worse for the Syrians than Russia’s indiscriminate bombing of its cities, I cannot take the rest of your argument seriously.
- MarcellusDrum 5y ago
  The US overall has been worse to the Middle East overall than Russia is my argument. You knew that, of course, but you chose the vaguest claim in my argument, and ignored the rest which are also valid just to make yourself feel better. Which is fine, of course.
  - reitanqild 5y ago
    Reading this for a second time and sticking to what I said about being ashamed for many of the things the west did I'd also like to remind that Russia hasn't really done much at all in the middle East. But I can remember stories from my childhood about Russians tying up Afghan fighters and driving over them with tanks to make an example, so again without defending drone strikes on weddings or Abu Ghraib or anything other spectacularly bad I 1.) think it wouldn't have been much better if it was the Russians who went in 2.) think the reason why the Russian government hasn't been involved in more badness in the middle east until recently has not been its peaceful nature but the fact that they have been cash strapped.
    - MarcellusDrum 5y ago
      Your first response is very respectful and much appreciated. As for this comment, you have a fair point. I don't doubt that if you ask Ukrainians right now, they will say that Russia is 10x worse than the USA, and they would be correct. Looking at the big picture, all current superpowers are genocidal power hungry tyrants, to various degrees.
    - env123 5y ago
      Looking at history, Russia seems like the lesser evil here. It makes far more sense to have security concerns over your backyard. Attacking the local mosque on the other side of the river, because a Muslim robber came by is not self-defense
      - bratwurst3000 5y ago
        Tell that people living in ukraine at the moment. They certainly think the same way.
      - wiseowise 5y ago
        Ukraine is sovereign European country, not Russian backyard.
  - mellavora 5y ago
    If you want to be historically (more) accurate, you might want to go back to Churchill's decision to extend UK power to this region of the world, in an attempt to get the UK fleet to move from coal to oil power. You could also look at some of the responses and choices made by the people/cultures native to this region over the years since then. Yes, "cultures" is plural.
  - Aeolun 5y ago
    While I think that’s true to some extend, I have the feeling that Afghanistan is regressing now, which means that it must’ve arguably been better than it was before. at least for some half of the population. You can certainly question whether that was worth the cost.
reitanqild 5y ago
All good points. I am ashamed for both some of the things that happened and that way too few has been held responsible. Please forgive those of us who where tricked into it, too young to vote etc. I'll try to do my part to prevent more of it. Edit: as for the phrase "the free world", read it to mean "freer to those inside it" if that helps.
- avgcorrection 5y ago
  > Please forgive those of us who where tricked into it, too young to vote etc. Then you blame the voters of America when their government started an illegal war based on falsehoods.
  - mvc 5y ago
    Yes, UK and US foreign policy has been, and in many places around the world, is currently, ethically, morally questionable. As a UK citizen, of voting age for 20 years now, I'm guilty as charged. I voted for Blair before the Iraq war, but like many others protested on our streets in the build up (and I haven't voted for them since). Doesn't make us wrong about Putin though.
    - dhimes 5y ago
      I'm right there with you. I voted for Bush in 2000 based on his education platform; when it was clear the war was a major mistake that he wouldn't admit to, I tried to vote him out in 2004.
      - avgcorrection 5y ago
        So you’re to blame for an illegal war started after 2000? Because that was the initial, implied claim.
        mvc 5y ago
        Elections have consequences but electors sometimes need to come face to face with those who bear the consequences to remember that.
vman81 5y ago
> They overthrew a functional government in Libya That's not really an argument in itself tho.
- MarcellusDrum 5y ago
  It is if you look at the state of Libya today. They overthrew Ghadafi for the sole reason of him being anti-Imperialist, killing and ruining the lives of millions in the process.
  - Aeolun 5y ago
    More or less. They overthrew Gadaffi, but the country tore itself apart. I’m all for blaming the US where it’s warranted, but I don’t think that particular instance is it.
    - MarcellusDrum 5y ago
      I'd like (or hate, actually) to see what would happen to the US if a foreign power was able to fund a terrorist militia and overthrow their government. You have too much faith in the morals of humans who don't have a strong leadership that can hold them accountable.
      - cloverich 5y ago
        Obviously that's an important point, but OP's assertion has more to do with the cultural and practical history playing a role in the aftermath of a government falling. The US has been at relative peace internally for 150 years and has a relatively strong bent towards republican government. That's not something that can be quickly undone. The government "falling" in some countries is as simple as a particular leader being eliminated. In the US a leader being permanently removed from power on a regular cadence is not only normal but required. If someone came in and eliminated the current president (and his cabinet), the most likely outcome is we would just elect another. The second most likely is we would fracture into sub-nations / states, but still elect another. I don't see the scenario where we all start trying to kill one another -- there's very little difference between people across the US and most of us have family on both sides of the political spectrum / physical location.
mellavora 5y ago
I agree with your point that "the free world" seldom lives up to the values it proclaims. The difference might be that at least it proclaims them, and good people like yourself can hold them accountable to those values.
- Chris2048 5y ago
  > good people like yourself can hold them accountable Seems to me you can't really hold the US military to account, any more (or less) than you can the US police. Maybe a win here-and-there for political PR, but overall no.
- trasz 5y ago
  Lol, what? Remember when US Navy shot down a commercial airliner, killing some two hundred people? None of the responsible was punished for that; they got decorated instead.
throwrqX 5y ago
I suppose then if Nazi Germany just killed Jews and other undesirables in Germany and didn't try take over Europe then we should just stand back and do nothing because otherwise millions of Germans would also die? I wonder why people here seem to consider violent dictatorships and other such governments in equal standing with democracies.
- oneoff786 5y ago
  There are plenty of countries with active genocidal events going on right now. Should we invade all of them?
  - throwrqX 5y ago
    Well in a perfect world yes we would. However the world is not perfect, and most "white" people so to speak care more about white people than some Muslims in the Middle East or some Africans in Africa, that's just the reality of the situation. Hence why they're more interested in what goes on in European countries than in other ones.
    - oneoff786 5y ago
      So we go in, kill everyone doing the genocide, leave, and then another group takes power and starts doing more genocide. Do we do it again?
      - cjbgkagh 5y ago
        Genocide the genociders... what could go wrong
      - throwrqX 5y ago
        In a perfect world we do that and develop a plan that allows the country to develop and hence stop the circular rot like that.
cutemonster 5y ago
Assad and Putin intentionally bombed hospitals in Syria Not the US. Maybe they did some time unintentionally, but with Putin it was part of his plans. > they supported [the] Kurds Of course, the Kurds and the US and Iraq were fighting together against Daesh (the so called Islamic State). You're giving the impression that you like Assad, Putin, Erdagon, possibly Daesh as well. What kind of person are you, I start wondering. Agreed that the US has done lots of bad things in the middle east though. (Eg helping the Talibans climb to power, supporting Saddam Hussein for quite long etc)
- jessaustin 5y ago
  USA unsupervised services created Daesh, and supplied most of its weapons. This was done to destabilize Assad, and of course to enrich the weapons manufacturers. The idea that Assad and Daesh were ever allies is bizarre.
  - cutemonster 5y ago
    > The idea that Assad and Daesh were ever allies No one here said they were. You're misreading. "Seems someone likes Assad, maybe X" does not mean "Assad and X are allies". It's possible for someone to like both Stalin and Hitler although they weren't allies (in the end).
amcoastal 5y ago
The difference is the voters of the U.S. punished the presidents who did those things with huge political defeats that have now made most oversea invasions and hawkishness very unpopular political positions at the moment. Russians have a much tougher road to hoe to do the same thing, but it needs to be done for the moral reasons you lay out here.
- trasz 5y ago
  Not true, both got re-elected.
wowokay 5y ago
Yes but at least the US had probable cause to go into Iraq. The world was pretty much behind that decision. We were attacked, civilians were attacked directly, none of that conflict would have occurred if Iraq or neighboring countries stopped their terrorism.
- trasz 5y ago
  What you’ve just said isn’t any different from Russian propaganda.
  - wiseowise 5y ago
    Uhuh, isn't any different from calling Ukraine fiction, that it basically never existed, everyone is neonazi. Annexing Crimea, East of country and then attacking under deluaion claims.
    - FollowingTheDao 5y ago
      > everyone is neonazi No, but to say that the instigators of anti-russian sentiment in Ukraine are not mostly Neo-nazi's is ignorant. These articles go back years https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SBo0akeDMY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SBo0akeDMY https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/10/azov-far-right-fighters-ukraine-neo-nazis https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/10/azov-far-right... https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/136008/commentary_56.pdf https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/136008/commentary_56.pdf https://euromaidanpress.com/tags/azov-battalion/page/2/ https://euromaidanpress.com/tags/azov-battalion/page/2/ https://www.jstor.org/stable/40871070 https://www.jstor.org/stable/40871070
- rfrey 5y ago
  The world was not 100% behind the US invasion of Iraq, or even 20%. The US had the world's support, after 9/11, to go into Afghanistan. The US was emboldened by that and attacked Iraq with very little global support, for reasons unrelated to the 9/11 attack.
- graphpercolator 5y ago

randomsearch 5y ago

If you think the US has been worse for the Syrians than Russia’s indiscriminate bombing of its cities, I cannot take the rest of your argument seriously.

MarcellusDrum 5y ago
The US overall has been worse to the Middle East overall than Russia is my argument. You knew that, of course, but you chose the vaguest claim in my argument, and ignored the rest which are also valid just to make yourself feel better. Which is fine, of course.
- reitanqild 5y ago
  Reading this for a second time and sticking to what I said about being ashamed for many of the things the west did I'd also like to remind that Russia hasn't really done much at all in the middle East. But I can remember stories from my childhood about Russians tying up Afghan fighters and driving over them with tanks to make an example, so again without defending drone strikes on weddings or Abu Ghraib or anything other spectacularly bad I 1.) think it wouldn't have been much better if it was the Russians who went in 2.) think the reason why the Russian government hasn't been involved in more badness in the middle east until recently has not been its peaceful nature but the fact that they have been cash strapped.
  - MarcellusDrum 5y ago
    Your first response is very respectful and much appreciated. As for this comment, you have a fair point. I don't doubt that if you ask Ukrainians right now, they will say that Russia is 10x worse than the USA, and they would be correct. Looking at the big picture, all current superpowers are genocidal power hungry tyrants, to various degrees.
  - env123 5y ago
    Looking at history, Russia seems like the lesser evil here. It makes far more sense to have security concerns over your backyard. Attacking the local mosque on the other side of the river, because a Muslim robber came by is not self-defense
    - bratwurst3000 5y ago
      Tell that people living in ukraine at the moment. They certainly think the same way.
    - wiseowise 5y ago
      Ukraine is sovereign European country, not Russian backyard.
- mellavora 5y ago
  If you want to be historically (more) accurate, you might want to go back to Churchill's decision to extend UK power to this region of the world, in an attempt to get the UK fleet to move from coal to oil power. You could also look at some of the responses and choices made by the people/cultures native to this region over the years since then. Yes, "cultures" is plural.
- Aeolun 5y ago
  While I think that’s true to some extend, I have the feeling that Afghanistan is regressing now, which means that it must’ve arguably been better than it was before. at least for some half of the population. You can certainly question whether that was worth the cost.

reitanqild 5y ago

All good points. I am ashamed for both some of the things that happened and that way too few has been held responsible. Please forgive those of us who where tricked into it, too young to vote etc. I'll try to do my part to prevent more of it. Edit: as for the phrase "the free world", read it to mean "freer to those inside it" if that helps.

avgcorrection 5y ago
> Please forgive those of us who where tricked into it, too young to vote etc. Then you blame the voters of America when their government started an illegal war based on falsehoods.
- mvc 5y ago
  Yes, UK and US foreign policy has been, and in many places around the world, is currently, ethically, morally questionable. As a UK citizen, of voting age for 20 years now, I'm guilty as charged. I voted for Blair before the Iraq war, but like many others protested on our streets in the build up (and I haven't voted for them since). Doesn't make us wrong about Putin though.
  - dhimes 5y ago
    I'm right there with you. I voted for Bush in 2000 based on his education platform; when it was clear the war was a major mistake that he wouldn't admit to, I tried to vote him out in 2004.
    - avgcorrection 5y ago
      So you’re to blame for an illegal war started after 2000? Because that was the initial, implied claim.
      - mvc 5y ago
        Elections have consequences but electors sometimes need to come face to face with those who bear the consequences to remember that.

vman81 5y ago

> They overthrew a functional government in Libya That's not really an argument in itself tho.

MarcellusDrum 5y ago
It is if you look at the state of Libya today. They overthrew Ghadafi for the sole reason of him being anti-Imperialist, killing and ruining the lives of millions in the process.
- Aeolun 5y ago
  More or less. They overthrew Gadaffi, but the country tore itself apart. I’m all for blaming the US where it’s warranted, but I don’t think that particular instance is it.
  - MarcellusDrum 5y ago
    I'd like (or hate, actually) to see what would happen to the US if a foreign power was able to fund a terrorist militia and overthrow their government. You have too much faith in the morals of humans who don't have a strong leadership that can hold them accountable.
    - cloverich 5y ago
      Obviously that's an important point, but OP's assertion has more to do with the cultural and practical history playing a role in the aftermath of a government falling. The US has been at relative peace internally for 150 years and has a relatively strong bent towards republican government. That's not something that can be quickly undone. The government "falling" in some countries is as simple as a particular leader being eliminated. In the US a leader being permanently removed from power on a regular cadence is not only normal but required. If someone came in and eliminated the current president (and his cabinet), the most likely outcome is we would just elect another. The second most likely is we would fracture into sub-nations / states, but still elect another. I don't see the scenario where we all start trying to kill one another -- there's very little difference between people across the US and most of us have family on both sides of the political spectrum / physical location.

mellavora 5y ago

I agree with your point that "the free world" seldom lives up to the values it proclaims. The difference might be that at least it proclaims them, and good people like yourself can hold them accountable to those values.

Chris2048 5y ago
> good people like yourself can hold them accountable Seems to me you can't really hold the US military to account, any more (or less) than you can the US police. Maybe a win here-and-there for political PR, but overall no.
trasz 5y ago
Lol, what? Remember when US Navy shot down a commercial airliner, killing some two hundred people? None of the responsible was punished for that; they got decorated instead.

throwrqX 5y ago

I suppose then if Nazi Germany just killed Jews and other undesirables in Germany and didn't try take over Europe then we should just stand back and do nothing because otherwise millions of Germans would also die? I wonder why people here seem to consider violent dictatorships and other such governments in equal standing with democracies.

oneoff786 5y ago
There are plenty of countries with active genocidal events going on right now. Should we invade all of them?
- throwrqX 5y ago
  Well in a perfect world yes we would. However the world is not perfect, and most "white" people so to speak care more about white people than some Muslims in the Middle East or some Africans in Africa, that's just the reality of the situation. Hence why they're more interested in what goes on in European countries than in other ones.
  - oneoff786 5y ago
    So we go in, kill everyone doing the genocide, leave, and then another group takes power and starts doing more genocide. Do we do it again?
    - cjbgkagh 5y ago
      Genocide the genociders... what could go wrong
    - throwrqX 5y ago
      In a perfect world we do that and develop a plan that allows the country to develop and hence stop the circular rot like that.

cutemonster 5y ago

Assad and Putin intentionally bombed hospitals in Syria Not the US. Maybe they did some time unintentionally, but with Putin it was part of his plans. > they supported [the] Kurds Of course, the Kurds and the US and Iraq were fighting together against Daesh (the so called Islamic State). You're giving the impression that you like Assad, Putin, Erdagon, possibly Daesh as well. What kind of person are you, I start wondering. Agreed that the US has done lots of bad things in the middle east though. (Eg helping the Talibans climb to power, supporting Saddam Hussein for quite long etc)

jessaustin 5y ago
USA unsupervised services created Daesh, and supplied most of its weapons. This was done to destabilize Assad, and of course to enrich the weapons manufacturers. The idea that Assad and Daesh were ever allies is bizarre.
- cutemonster 5y ago
  > The idea that Assad and Daesh were ever allies No one here said they were. You're misreading. "Seems someone likes Assad, maybe X" does not mean "Assad and X are allies". It's possible for someone to like both Stalin and Hitler although they weren't allies (in the end).

amcoastal 5y ago

The difference is the voters of the U.S. punished the presidents who did those things with huge political defeats that have now made most oversea invasions and hawkishness very unpopular political positions at the moment. Russians have a much tougher road to hoe to do the same thing, but it needs to be done for the moral reasons you lay out here.

trasz 5y ago
Not true, both got re-elected.

wowokay 5y ago

Yes but at least the US had probable cause to go into Iraq. The world was pretty much behind that decision. We were attacked, civilians were attacked directly, none of that conflict would have occurred if Iraq or neighboring countries stopped their terrorism.

trasz 5y ago
What you’ve just said isn’t any different from Russian propaganda.
- wiseowise 5y ago
  Uhuh, isn't any different from calling Ukraine fiction, that it basically never existed, everyone is neonazi. Annexing Crimea, East of country and then attacking under deluaion claims.
  - FollowingTheDao 5y ago
    > everyone is neonazi No, but to say that the instigators of anti-russian sentiment in Ukraine are not mostly Neo-nazi's is ignorant. These articles go back years https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SBo0akeDMY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SBo0akeDMY https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/10/azov-far-right-fighters-ukraine-neo-nazis https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/10/azov-far-right... https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/136008/commentary_56.pdf https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/136008/commentary_56.pdf https://euromaidanpress.com/tags/azov-battalion/page/2/ https://euromaidanpress.com/tags/azov-battalion/page/2/ https://www.jstor.org/stable/40871070 https://www.jstor.org/stable/40871070
rfrey 5y ago
The world was not 100% behind the US invasion of Iraq, or even 20%. The US had the world's support, after 9/11, to go into Afghanistan. The US was emboldened by that and attacked Iraq with very little global support, for reasons unrelated to the 9/11 attack.
graphpercolator 5y ago