3 ms·

If you think the world is stable as a result of the US, you should think again. It is exactly the contrary. The US itself is involved in wars since basically it

If you think the world is stable as a result of the US, you should think again. It is exactly the contrary. The US itself is involved in wars since basically its foundation. The reason you say this is because you probably live in the US or one of its rich close alies. Everyone else will tell you that life under US hegemony means constant wars, coups, and political instability.

ethbr0 4y ago
Could you give some examples? The US has certainly abused its power (notoriously, in the 60s and 70s at the height of the Cold War), but "constant" appears to be stretching historical fact to fit a narrative.
- coliveira 4y ago
  Are you forgetting that the US has been actively involved in non-stop wars around the world for the last 20 years? And before these wars started, it was doing "special operations" in eastern Europe, parts of Asia and Africa? And in Latin America it never really stoped its coups, military dictatorships and the such, especially in central America. And then of course there was the "cold" war and all the crimes in South Asia...
  - snovv_crash 4y ago
    Look at the hundred years before that. Everyone was fighting, all the time, not just one country with roughly one skirmish (by historical standards) at any single point.
    - bilbo0s 4y ago
      You are all missing the point. War is a constant. It was in the past. It is a constant today. And it will be in the future. All nations are, at heart, "evil" in this regard. Essentially, nations are just scaled up street gangs with more destructive weapons. The only proven method of keeping these street gangs from getting too far out of hand, of keeping all our war at the level of low intensity conflict, is MAD. Nations behave only at the barrel of a gun. To argue that America is "evil" is as irrelevant as it is to argue that America is "good". For instance, I know that all nations can be said to be "evil" at root, and "good" at root. Here's the thing though, do you think it matters to me if China is "evil" and "good"? Of course not, they're just a different street gang. The US has a responsibility to humanity to keep them in line. Should it matter to China that the US street gang is "evil" and "good"? No. They have a responsibility to humanity to keep the US in line. In the age of weapons of mass destruction, only mutually assured destruction has ensured these street gangs don't come into conflict. Relying on sunshine and rainbows and unicorns that crap out skittles is nonsense. This is not a children's game of "good guys-bad guys". There are no good guys or bad guys. Only nations, (street gangs), pursuing interests. They are kept in line only at the barrel of a gun. Take that gun away and they will run rampant.
      - Msw242 4y ago
        I mostly agree with you, except I don't believe that MAD is a sufficient deterrent, or that low level conflict is unlikely to evolve into large scale war. The best way, in my mind to minimize conflict is through a global monopoly on violence, one street gang to rule them all This is what the last 30 years have been
        bilbo0s 4y ago
        This is what the last 30 years have been Only they haven't. The reason the US and Russia haven't run rampant the last 30 years is because the US and Russia can blow each other away. So Russia satisfies itself with Georgia and now Ukraine. And the US satisfies itself with those nations in the MidEast region. Remove Russia, and the US would have been all over the yard. Remove the US, and Russia would have been all over the yard. And now with the rise of China, mankind is even safer. Not only that, but more of mankind have begun to enjoy the benefits of safety. The US and Russia were perfectly willing to fight a proxy war in Korea 70 years ago. They wouldn't dare do that today. Why? The Chinese presence in any MAD calculations. Today Africa is much safer, it is developing much faster. A large part of the reason for that is the presence of China. Now instead of proxy wars, the great powers compete to see who can deliver Africa the most undersea bandwidth for instance. This is a much better situation for Africans than the situation that existed when only the US and Russia were superpowers. And this situation exists because of MAD. It proves that an armed society is a polite society. The US, China and Russia are all fulfilling their responsibility to keep the peace by maintaining lethal arsenals of weapons of mass destruction so that they are each confident in their own ability to destroy the others. And that is good for all of us "little people" in the world. Whether we are American, Chinese or Russian. (And even good for us if we are Korean, African, or from South America.)
        coliveira 4y ago
        I agree. The result of N. Korea acquiring nuclear weapons was the cessation of the idea of direct war against the Korean regime. I believe if Iran already had nukes we wouldn't be talking about the possibility of war there, either.
throw0101a 4y ago
> If you think the world is stable as a result of the US, you should think again. "Stable" in some kind of Platonic absolute sense, or "more stable that things would have otherwise been"?

ethbr0 4y ago

Could you give some examples? The US has certainly abused its power (notoriously, in the 60s and 70s at the height of the Cold War), but "constant" appears to be stretching historical fact to fit a narrative.

coliveira 4y ago
Are you forgetting that the US has been actively involved in non-stop wars around the world for the last 20 years? And before these wars started, it was doing "special operations" in eastern Europe, parts of Asia and Africa? And in Latin America it never really stoped its coups, military dictatorships and the such, especially in central America. And then of course there was the "cold" war and all the crimes in South Asia...
- snovv_crash 4y ago
  Look at the hundred years before that. Everyone was fighting, all the time, not just one country with roughly one skirmish (by historical standards) at any single point.
  - bilbo0s 4y ago
    You are all missing the point. War is a constant. It was in the past. It is a constant today. And it will be in the future. All nations are, at heart, "evil" in this regard. Essentially, nations are just scaled up street gangs with more destructive weapons. The only proven method of keeping these street gangs from getting too far out of hand, of keeping all our war at the level of low intensity conflict, is MAD. Nations behave only at the barrel of a gun. To argue that America is "evil" is as irrelevant as it is to argue that America is "good". For instance, I know that all nations can be said to be "evil" at root, and "good" at root. Here's the thing though, do you think it matters to me if China is "evil" and "good"? Of course not, they're just a different street gang. The US has a responsibility to humanity to keep them in line. Should it matter to China that the US street gang is "evil" and "good"? No. They have a responsibility to humanity to keep the US in line. In the age of weapons of mass destruction, only mutually assured destruction has ensured these street gangs don't come into conflict. Relying on sunshine and rainbows and unicorns that crap out skittles is nonsense. This is not a children's game of "good guys-bad guys". There are no good guys or bad guys. Only nations, (street gangs), pursuing interests. They are kept in line only at the barrel of a gun. Take that gun away and they will run rampant.
    - Msw242 4y ago
      I mostly agree with you, except I don't believe that MAD is a sufficient deterrent, or that low level conflict is unlikely to evolve into large scale war. The best way, in my mind to minimize conflict is through a global monopoly on violence, one street gang to rule them all This is what the last 30 years have been
      - bilbo0s 4y ago
        This is what the last 30 years have been Only they haven't. The reason the US and Russia haven't run rampant the last 30 years is because the US and Russia can blow each other away. So Russia satisfies itself with Georgia and now Ukraine. And the US satisfies itself with those nations in the MidEast region. Remove Russia, and the US would have been all over the yard. Remove the US, and Russia would have been all over the yard. And now with the rise of China, mankind is even safer. Not only that, but more of mankind have begun to enjoy the benefits of safety. The US and Russia were perfectly willing to fight a proxy war in Korea 70 years ago. They wouldn't dare do that today. Why? The Chinese presence in any MAD calculations. Today Africa is much safer, it is developing much faster. A large part of the reason for that is the presence of China. Now instead of proxy wars, the great powers compete to see who can deliver Africa the most undersea bandwidth for instance. This is a much better situation for Africans than the situation that existed when only the US and Russia were superpowers. And this situation exists because of MAD. It proves that an armed society is a polite society. The US, China and Russia are all fulfilling their responsibility to keep the peace by maintaining lethal arsenals of weapons of mass destruction so that they are each confident in their own ability to destroy the others. And that is good for all of us "little people" in the world. Whether we are American, Chinese or Russian. (And even good for us if we are Korean, African, or from South America.)
        coliveira 4y ago
        I agree. The result of N. Korea acquiring nuclear weapons was the cessation of the idea of direct war against the Korean regime. I believe if Iran already had nukes we wouldn't be talking about the possibility of war there, either.

throw0101a 4y ago

> If you think the world is stable as a result of the US, you should think again. "Stable" in some kind of Platonic absolute sense, or "more stable that things would have otherwise been"?