4 ms·
Is it really a shock that an institution designed largely by Stalin (although FDR's idea) isn't fit for purpose? Time to hit restart, and perhaps not to include
by Nomentatus 4y ago
Is it really a shock that an institution designed largely by Stalin (although FDR's idea) isn't fit for purpose? Time to hit restart, and perhaps not to include the autocracies and miscreants.
- slater 4y ago
- Nomentatus 4y agoCompare and contrast Russian warcrimes with US conduct, however construed. I don't think you can make a close comparison. The Brits, when they led the world, were very considerably more nasty than the U.S..
- ninethirty 4y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Other_Losses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Other_Losses
- giraffe_lady 4y agoI think this comparison only stands if you narrowly view the US's actions in their own uniforms under their own flag. If you include covert assistance to coups and juntas, training fascist insurrectionists, supplying weapons to genocidal autocrats, and the proxy wars... well maybe still they aren't the same but they're playing in the same league for sure. It's not preposterous to make the comparison.
- amadeuspagel 4y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes
- Nomentatus 4y agoLucky for Canada, there's no war crimes page on Wikipedia for us! Canadian soldiers in WWI were actually explicitly trained to kill prisoners unless ordered otherwise and were famous for doing that the whole war. WWII had many examples as well, that show up in Barry Broadfoot's oral history of WWII.
- epolanski 4y ago> Is it really a shock that an institution designed largely by Stalin (although FDR's idea) isn't fit for purpose? It was an evolution of the league of nations actually. Considering that during the last 77 years none of the 30 biggest economies in the world fought each other (I think there are minor exceptions like Argentina-Britain over Falklands/Malvinas), I think UN isn't that bad. > Time to hit restart, and perhaps not to include the autocracies and miscreants. And who gets to decide who those are? Also, what is the purpose of a club that doesn't include all the nations? It's just an alliance.
- Nomentatus 4y agoNo, it was a successor to the League. The League had been an obvious catastrophe; not something you'd want to copy or merely revise. A very big alliance beats a nothing burger - and remember that the United Nations did exclude Germany and Japan in the beginning, for obvious reasons. It was originally the instantiation of an alliance.
- Nomentatus 4y agoRussia and China fought - not a full war, but they fought. Iraq-Iran, very very bloody. And the list goes on and on. The cold war was an exceptionally bloody period with casualties not out of line with the WWII period, there were a **ton of proxy wars.
- Nomentatus 4y agoAdd extensive air combat between Soviet pilots and American pilots in Vietnam, and Korea I believe.
- epolanski 4y agoAs I said there are minor exceptions. Iraq and Iran were not top 30 economies when they fought the war.
- colechristensen 4y agoCasualties absolutely were out of line with WWII. Go find a graph of war deaths divided by world population by year for the last two hundred years and make the comparison yourself.