6 ms·

Putin launched a war against Ukraine in order to conquer it the traditional sense, ie to replace the existing government with his own government. The long term

Putin launched a war against Ukraine in order to conquer it the traditional sense, ie to replace the existing government with his own government. The long term goal is for Russia to control this country's government. The wars started by the US typically have the goal of establishing a democratic government. Japan is an example of a successful outcome. Iraq has a functioning democracy now. This policy is often criticized as "nation building." The long term goal is not for the US government to control these countries.

pcmoney 5y ago
I would add the US did not unilaterally start the war in Iraq or Yugoslavia and definitely not the one with Japan. In the case of Japan, the US rebuilt an enemy after they attacked the US without a declaration of war and made them an ally and trading partner.
- gpt5 5y ago
  It's actually quite interesting that US has managed to convert quite a few of its rivals to allies. Japan, Vietnam, Mexico, Germany and its allies, many Arab countries come to mind. I'd argue that even China and Russia, while not allies - are also not enemies.
- travisgriggs 5y ago
  This highlights one of my growing ethical dillemas. I am a US citizen, and sometimes I am really ashamed of my country. We have done some really bad stuff. We’ve done a whole lot of shady stuff that is complicated to pass simple judgement on. But the US has done good stuff as well. They loan money, send aid, rebuild, provide. Some times the motives are duplicitous in these acts of good. But the bottom line is, when I travel abroad I feel like I can confidently say “we’re like a two year old, sometimes we do sweet/good things, and other times we’re naughty.” When it comes to USSR/Russia, I am not aware of the good acts. It’s not just that thy do bad things, it’s that I never hear of any of the good things they do in the world at large. And so I’m honestly curious, is Russia as a foreign actor just that much more self interested? Or do we not hear about it in the West, because it doesn’t pay to report on it.
  - vincnetas 5y ago
    I would say not only abroad, but also at home only small fraction of Russian population can thank their government for what they are doing. It's a kleptocracy rich in natural resources.
  - sneak 5y ago
    > When it comes to USSR/Russia, I am not aware of the good acts. It’s not just that thy do bad things, it’s that I never hear of any of the good things they do in the world at large. The red army took Berlin and ended the Nazis. It was an Allied victory but it came about because Russia put their full might into stopping Hitler. This is not insignificant if you don't like what the third reich was up to. It came at a tremendous cost to mother Russia, 20M of her sons died in the process. I encourage you to visit the war memorial in Treptower Park. It is built out of the red marble stripped from Hitler's Reichschancellery, and it is a hauntingly powerful place.
    - nickpp 5y ago
      That was 80 years ago and since then the Soviet Communist regime killed more people than Hitler. Their "good deeds" are becoming thinner and thinner.
    - lb1lf 5y ago
      While undoubtedly true, one should keep in mind that Stalin first cynically entered into a non-aggression pact with the nazi regime, showing blatant disregard for Poland in the process. Not to mention that a significant part of the Soviet Union's losses in WW2 came about from a similar disregard for the lives of its own soldiers. This is not to discount the sacrifice made by those who fought and died, though. (And Treptower Park is, as you say, hauntingly powerful. I've been there on three occasions when visiting Berlin.)
    - pcmoney 5y ago
      Remember the USSR was allies with the Nazis and only turned on them because they were betrayed. Spending your citizens lives cheaply is not a noble thing. The US had nukes and its manufacturing and soldier population was massive. Coupled with the Western allies Germany was going to lose once America entered the war (see Churchill’s memoirs). USSR did accelerate it though.
- tomp 5y ago
  Think of Cuba. US tried to invade then imposed sanctions simply because it didn’t want Cuban allies and the fact that they were supplying them arms. US would 100% attack and invade any country in their “sphere of influence” if they felt threatened, it’s just that their soft power is better and nobody even dares to try.
  - pcmoney 5y ago
    That was also after Cuba nationalized its industries, many of which had US shareholders without paying them, had political purges that murdered hundreds of thousands (Che shirts celebrate a mass murderer) got in bed with the USSR and tried to put nukes on the island. The idea that Cuba was minding its own business is laughable. Nobody wants a psychopath neighbor on a moscow leash with nukes 90mi from their border…
    - tomp 5y ago
      You're factually wrong. US tried to invade Cuba (Bay of Pigs) and then (as a result) nukes were put on the island. I guess Russia doesn't want a neighbor on a US leash with military bases on their border either...
      - pcmoney 5y ago
        Yes on order of timing around nukes or when we knew of them. But fidel was a tyrant who impoverished his people. The funniest thing was his hearse braking down and having to be pushed by his soldiers. Really summed the mans contributions…
readthenotes1 5y ago
Or to remove the democratic government...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
sudosysgen 5y ago
The US replaced the governments of multiple countries with its puppets, see Afghanistan. Try to tell me with a straight face that the previous Afghan government was democratic and represented the will of the Afghan people. You cannot. Iraq's democracy is about as successful as Russia's, that is, not at all. The US installed a dictatorship in South Korea, and overthrew or contributed in the overthrow of many more.
- roca 5y ago
  The US-supported Afghan government wasn't worse than the governments before or after it. South Korea's an interesting example. It was a dictatorship, now it's a thriving democracy. Ditto for Japan, Taiwan, West Germany. Sometimes things turn out alright.
  - sudosysgen 5y ago
    I still don't see how that's an excuse for killing hundreds of thousands of innocents, though.
    - roca 5y ago
      In Afghanistan? Unlikely to be hundreds of thousands of civilians killed by Americans/allies. https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/civilians/afghan https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/civilians/af... says "at least 71,000 civilians killed" and many of those would have been killed by other side(s). "Justified"? Probably not, but we'd have to determine what alternative actions America/allies should have taken instead and compare. I mean, "avoid all US-caused civilian deaths by letting AQ continue to operate from Afghanistan with impunity after 9/11" would not obviously have been the right thing to do.
d0mine 5y ago
I wanted to live in a world you presented: benevolent power spreads the wealth around the world. Unfortunately, it is just a fairytale for little children.
- pcmoney 5y ago
  So why has wealth been spread around the world during a period of US hegemony and naval dominance?

pcmoney 5y ago

I would add the US did not unilaterally start the war in Iraq or Yugoslavia and definitely not the one with Japan. In the case of Japan, the US rebuilt an enemy after they attacked the US without a declaration of war and made them an ally and trading partner.

gpt5 5y ago
It's actually quite interesting that US has managed to convert quite a few of its rivals to allies. Japan, Vietnam, Mexico, Germany and its allies, many Arab countries come to mind. I'd argue that even China and Russia, while not allies - are also not enemies.
travisgriggs 5y ago
This highlights one of my growing ethical dillemas. I am a US citizen, and sometimes I am really ashamed of my country. We have done some really bad stuff. We’ve done a whole lot of shady stuff that is complicated to pass simple judgement on. But the US has done good stuff as well. They loan money, send aid, rebuild, provide. Some times the motives are duplicitous in these acts of good. But the bottom line is, when I travel abroad I feel like I can confidently say “we’re like a two year old, sometimes we do sweet/good things, and other times we’re naughty.” When it comes to USSR/Russia, I am not aware of the good acts. It’s not just that thy do bad things, it’s that I never hear of any of the good things they do in the world at large. And so I’m honestly curious, is Russia as a foreign actor just that much more self interested? Or do we not hear about it in the West, because it doesn’t pay to report on it.
- vincnetas 5y ago
  I would say not only abroad, but also at home only small fraction of Russian population can thank their government for what they are doing. It's a kleptocracy rich in natural resources.
- sneak 5y ago
  > When it comes to USSR/Russia, I am not aware of the good acts. It’s not just that thy do bad things, it’s that I never hear of any of the good things they do in the world at large. The red army took Berlin and ended the Nazis. It was an Allied victory but it came about because Russia put their full might into stopping Hitler. This is not insignificant if you don't like what the third reich was up to. It came at a tremendous cost to mother Russia, 20M of her sons died in the process. I encourage you to visit the war memorial in Treptower Park. It is built out of the red marble stripped from Hitler's Reichschancellery, and it is a hauntingly powerful place.
  - nickpp 5y ago
    That was 80 years ago and since then the Soviet Communist regime killed more people than Hitler. Their "good deeds" are becoming thinner and thinner.
  - lb1lf 5y ago
    While undoubtedly true, one should keep in mind that Stalin first cynically entered into a non-aggression pact with the nazi regime, showing blatant disregard for Poland in the process. Not to mention that a significant part of the Soviet Union's losses in WW2 came about from a similar disregard for the lives of its own soldiers. This is not to discount the sacrifice made by those who fought and died, though. (And Treptower Park is, as you say, hauntingly powerful. I've been there on three occasions when visiting Berlin.)
  - pcmoney 5y ago
    Remember the USSR was allies with the Nazis and only turned on them because they were betrayed. Spending your citizens lives cheaply is not a noble thing. The US had nukes and its manufacturing and soldier population was massive. Coupled with the Western allies Germany was going to lose once America entered the war (see Churchill’s memoirs). USSR did accelerate it though.
tomp 5y ago
Think of Cuba. US tried to invade then imposed sanctions simply because it didn’t want Cuban allies and the fact that they were supplying them arms. US would 100% attack and invade any country in their “sphere of influence” if they felt threatened, it’s just that their soft power is better and nobody even dares to try.
- pcmoney 5y ago
  That was also after Cuba nationalized its industries, many of which had US shareholders without paying them, had political purges that murdered hundreds of thousands (Che shirts celebrate a mass murderer) got in bed with the USSR and tried to put nukes on the island. The idea that Cuba was minding its own business is laughable. Nobody wants a psychopath neighbor on a moscow leash with nukes 90mi from their border…
  - tomp 5y ago
    You're factually wrong. US tried to invade Cuba (Bay of Pigs) and then (as a result) nukes were put on the island. I guess Russia doesn't want a neighbor on a US leash with military bases on their border either...
    - pcmoney 5y ago
      Yes on order of timing around nukes or when we knew of them. But fidel was a tyrant who impoverished his people. The funniest thing was his hearse braking down and having to be pushed by his soldiers. Really summed the mans contributions…

readthenotes1 5y ago

Or to remove the democratic government...

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

sudosysgen 5y ago

The US replaced the governments of multiple countries with its puppets, see Afghanistan. Try to tell me with a straight face that the previous Afghan government was democratic and represented the will of the Afghan people. You cannot. Iraq's democracy is about as successful as Russia's, that is, not at all. The US installed a dictatorship in South Korea, and overthrew or contributed in the overthrow of many more.

roca 5y ago
The US-supported Afghan government wasn't worse than the governments before or after it. South Korea's an interesting example. It was a dictatorship, now it's a thriving democracy. Ditto for Japan, Taiwan, West Germany. Sometimes things turn out alright.
- sudosysgen 5y ago
  I still don't see how that's an excuse for killing hundreds of thousands of innocents, though.
  - roca 5y ago
    In Afghanistan? Unlikely to be hundreds of thousands of civilians killed by Americans/allies. https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/civilians/afghan https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/civilians/af... says "at least 71,000 civilians killed" and many of those would have been killed by other side(s). "Justified"? Probably not, but we'd have to determine what alternative actions America/allies should have taken instead and compare. I mean, "avoid all US-caused civilian deaths by letting AQ continue to operate from Afghanistan with impunity after 9/11" would not obviously have been the right thing to do.

d0mine 5y ago

I wanted to live in a world you presented: benevolent power spreads the wealth around the world. Unfortunately, it is just a fairytale for little children.

pcmoney 5y ago
So why has wealth been spread around the world during a period of US hegemony and naval dominance?