3 ms·

Congratulations on producing yet another specious half-assed defense of USA militarism! Wouldn't it be nice if its record spoke for itself? We still occupy Haw

Congratulations on producing yet another specious half-assed defense of USA militarism! Wouldn't it be nice if its record spoke for itself? We still occupy Hawai'i, as well as the entirety of continental USA. We still occupy the eastern third of Syria, as Trump said and Biden hasn't contradicted "to steal their oil". The various nations we occupy in Africa invite similar explanation. We occupied Philippines for decades, as colonial masters, until Japan kicked us out, after which we reoccupied it. As observed above, that wasn't a different thing from the colonization of North America, because it was done in the same racist way by the exact same racist army officers. We maintain military bases all over, every one a direct threat to the host nation should they stray from our political line. For example, how successful can Korean reunification efforts be while our sword hangs above their heads? This isn't winning wars. This is terrorizing populations. Over the decades we spent in Philippines we pioneered the sort of financial colonialism we codified at Bretton Woods. This has been extensively documented by economist Michael Hudson. After we trick a nation (i.e. pay off whichever corrupt locals we can maneuver into power) into signing up for this program, we oppress working people, extract resources, privatize public assets, and financialize the whole mess. Most of the surplus in the economy is exported to e.g. NYC and London. This is the real explanation for USA capitalism's "century of success". Our system can no more support itself without victimizing other nations than the Roman Empire could have thrived without slavery. As developing nations throw off our yoke (witness the "Россия" t-shirts worn in every nation in Africa), we'll have to organize very differently, or else the American 99% will suffer the same predations from the American 1% that were previously focused overseas. In four thousand years, China has never fought a war on the other side of the world with a nation (or with a ragtag bunch of goat enthusiasts) that could never threaten the territory of China.

toss1 4y ago
Right, congratulations on spouting straight-down-the-line CCP/Soviet anti-American tropes, while simultaneously conflating pre- and post-20th century / WWII world orders. Oh, and revealing yourself as a complete fool citing anythign Trump says as if it were fact. Yikes. And trying to claim that China is not expansionist despite it's post WW-II history? Yikes againb. Just look at the ACTUAL history in Korea, Tibet Uhigurs, "9-dash-line", Hong Kong, "Belt and Road Initiative" trying to take Africa, claims on Taiwan, and more. Again mistaking lacking the capability to project global power for the will. I never disputed that the pre-WWII order was the Age of Empire, going back to times of Alexander, and that the Americas were basically stolen from the native populations, going back to Columbus. That does not mean that things are the same, or that the Free World is not different from the Authoritarian regimes. I note that while you seem to love all these authoritarian regimes, you don't live there. I hope you're paid well for your trolling. Have a good day.
- jessaustin 4y ago
  Yikes! Did someone other than USA commander-in-chief decide which neutral overseas territory USA military would occupy? (That seems problematic! and also probably true...) Has anyone in public office ever offered another explanation? You're full of inexplicable confidence, so maybe we should ask you why USA military occupies the eastern third (that's the part with agriculture and oil) of Syria right now... [0] China discouraged Kim from invading RoK, and didn't come in on DPRK side until dumb-ass insubordinate MacArthur told them he was going to keep rolling across the Yalu. Well that went over about as well as NATO missiles in Donbass! Or Soviet missiles in Cuba! Belt and Road is simply a less abusive foreign investment regime than IMF/World Bank. Little wonder that it appeals more than what USA has on offer. If you actually agree that American Indians have been robbed and genocided, why be so quick to designate a convenient time before which we shouldn't worry about robbery and genocide? If you don't actually agree about the American Indians, on which side of the line does our strikingly similar subjugation of Philippines fall? Maybe we shouldn't care about that either, even though it was in the 20th century? Maybe you want to move the cutoff line? That seems a common maneuver when discussing the conflict in Ukraine. We're definitely not supposed to remember e.g. 2019 discussions of Ukrainian Nazis. [1] Recall we started talking about Pentagon's abysmal record of losing every war, then we moved to supporting sovereignty, then we moved to opposing authoritarianism, while you stipulated 'no one is talking about "winning wars"'. There was something about China empowering Pol Pot, which seems rather beside the point when it was USA that bankrolled him for years. [2] I forgot about him in my long lists upthread! There is some bad news about your final goalpost relocation. The bitter end must be the idea that our current participation in the Ukraine theater of WWIII is in opposition to "authoritarianism". Unfortunately, our puppet in that region is every bit the authoritarian as previous ones in other regions. He is banning political parties, closing down TV channels, disappearing residents [3], and feeding battalion after poorly trained battalion into the meat grinder of Bakhmut. For current Ukraine leadership, it's more important to pretend that Russia even cares about holding this minor town than it is to attempt to preserve military strength. When politics trumps security and respect for life, that is authoritarian. The late Barry Crimmins was occasionally asked the same cretinous question you pose: “Why don’t you go live somewhere else then?” Barry would reply, “Because I don’t want to be a victim of US foreign policy.” I support your material analysis, even while rejecting its rude implication. Most opinions about war are motivated by money. Unfortunately, in USA popular media, war is very profitable. [0] https://nationalinterest.org/feature/the-us-military-proud-owners-one-third-syria-25306 https://nationalinterest.org/feature/the-us-military-proud-o... [1] https://fair.org/home/action-alert-nyt-celebrates-neo-nazi-azov-unit/ https://fair.org/home/action-alert-nyt-celebrates-neo-nazi-a... [2] https://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/pol/polpotmontclarion0498.html https://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/pol/polpotmontclarion049... [3] https://jacobin.com/2023/02/ukraine-censorship-authoritarianism-illiberalism-crackdown-police-zelensky https://jacobin.com/2023/02/ukraine-censorship-authoritarian...

toss1 4y ago

Right, congratulations on spouting straight-down-the-line CCP/Soviet anti-American tropes, while simultaneously conflating pre- and post-20th century / WWII world orders. Oh, and revealing yourself as a complete fool citing anythign Trump says as if it were fact. Yikes. And trying to claim that China is not expansionist despite it's post WW-II history? Yikes againb. Just look at the ACTUAL history in Korea, Tibet Uhigurs, "9-dash-line", Hong Kong, "Belt and Road Initiative" trying to take Africa, claims on Taiwan, and more. Again mistaking lacking the capability to project global power for the will. I never disputed that the pre-WWII order was the Age of Empire, going back to times of Alexander, and that the Americas were basically stolen from the native populations, going back to Columbus. That does not mean that things are the same, or that the Free World is not different from the Authoritarian regimes. I note that while you seem to love all these authoritarian regimes, you don't live there. I hope you're paid well for your trolling. Have a good day.

jessaustin 4y ago
Yikes! Did someone other than USA commander-in-chief decide which neutral overseas territory USA military would occupy? (That seems problematic! and also probably true...) Has anyone in public office ever offered another explanation? You're full of inexplicable confidence, so maybe we should ask you why USA military occupies the eastern third (that's the part with agriculture and oil) of Syria right now... [0] China discouraged Kim from invading RoK, and didn't come in on DPRK side until dumb-ass insubordinate MacArthur told them he was going to keep rolling across the Yalu. Well that went over about as well as NATO missiles in Donbass! Or Soviet missiles in Cuba! Belt and Road is simply a less abusive foreign investment regime than IMF/World Bank. Little wonder that it appeals more than what USA has on offer. If you actually agree that American Indians have been robbed and genocided, why be so quick to designate a convenient time before which we shouldn't worry about robbery and genocide? If you don't actually agree about the American Indians, on which side of the line does our strikingly similar subjugation of Philippines fall? Maybe we shouldn't care about that either, even though it was in the 20th century? Maybe you want to move the cutoff line? That seems a common maneuver when discussing the conflict in Ukraine. We're definitely not supposed to remember e.g. 2019 discussions of Ukrainian Nazis. [1] Recall we started talking about Pentagon's abysmal record of losing every war, then we moved to supporting sovereignty, then we moved to opposing authoritarianism, while you stipulated 'no one is talking about "winning wars"'. There was something about China empowering Pol Pot, which seems rather beside the point when it was USA that bankrolled him for years. [2] I forgot about him in my long lists upthread! There is some bad news about your final goalpost relocation. The bitter end must be the idea that our current participation in the Ukraine theater of WWIII is in opposition to "authoritarianism". Unfortunately, our puppet in that region is every bit the authoritarian as previous ones in other regions. He is banning political parties, closing down TV channels, disappearing residents [3], and feeding battalion after poorly trained battalion into the meat grinder of Bakhmut. For current Ukraine leadership, it's more important to pretend that Russia even cares about holding this minor town than it is to attempt to preserve military strength. When politics trumps security and respect for life, that is authoritarian. The late Barry Crimmins was occasionally asked the same cretinous question you pose: “Why don’t you go live somewhere else then?” Barry would reply, “Because I don’t want to be a victim of US foreign policy.” I support your material analysis, even while rejecting its rude implication. Most opinions about war are motivated by money. Unfortunately, in USA popular media, war is very profitable. [0] https://nationalinterest.org/feature/the-us-military-proud-owners-one-third-syria-25306 https://nationalinterest.org/feature/the-us-military-proud-o... [1] https://fair.org/home/action-alert-nyt-celebrates-neo-nazi-azov-unit/ https://fair.org/home/action-alert-nyt-celebrates-neo-nazi-a... [2] https://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/pol/polpotmontclarion0498.html https://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/pol/polpotmontclarion049... [3] https://jacobin.com/2023/02/ukraine-censorship-authoritarianism-illiberalism-crackdown-police-zelensky https://jacobin.com/2023/02/ukraine-censorship-authoritarian...