5 ms·
but why put yourself in a false dichotomy?
by boston_clone 9mo ago
but why put yourself in a false dichotomy?
- morshu9001 9mo agoThere isn't one, the third option was to do nothing. But there wasn't a fourth option.
- boston_clone 9mo agoYou can actually “prefer” none of what’s happening. Being honest about doing bad things doesn’t make them less bad. Doing bad things covertly is still bad.
- morshu9001 9mo agoI'm not convinced that this is a good or bad thing yet
- amrocha 9mo agoYou’re not convinced that the US invading other countries and deposing presidents is bad? In a world where nuclear weapons exist?
- morshu9001 9mo agoWhat's the implication here, we're supposed to threaten to nuke them instead? It only works if you're willing to follow through.
- Bud 9mo ago[dead]
- boston_clone 9mo agoInstead of strawmanning and presenting yet another false dichotomy, try answering their question.
- morshu9001 9mo agoI'm not the one who brought up nukes and legit don't understand what they meant by that. To answer the other question, yeah I can generally see some valid reasons to remove a foreign leader from power. Not sure about Maduro.
- amrocha 9mo agoWho’s we? I’m guessing you’re not a general in the US military, so I don’t know why you’re inserting yourself into this decision. Do you think a nuclear war would be good for you? Obviously not, so you shouldn’t want your government to threaten to start one. And you shouldn’t support your government when they signal to the world that the only way to be safe from interventionism is to develop nuclear weapons. Or when they signal to other superpowers that they don’t respect international treaties, or the sovereignty of other nations.
- morshu9001 9mo agoNuclear war with who?
- amrocha 9mo agoDoes it matter?
- morshu9001 9mo agoIf the answer is "nobody" then yeah. Venezuela doesn't have nukes. North Korea or Russia aren't going to nuclear war over a country they don't even have a security agreement with, or even if they did. The US has already attacked Iran, Iraq, and Syria (under Assad).
- solenoid0937 9mo agoIt's an objectively fantastic thing when those presidents are doing things not in our interests. We obviously haven't and won't do this to a nuclear-armed country.
- amrocha 9mo agoWhat the fuck do you think China is going to do next time the US does an “exercise” in the china sea? What the fuck do you think Iran is going to do next time Israel acts up and the US supports it?
- solenoid0937 9mo ago> What the fuck do you think China is going to do next time the US does an “exercise” in the china sea? They will continue to blow hot air but ignore it, unless they truly and sincerely believe it is a real military action worth starting a war over (and destroying both economies over.) > What the fuck do you think Iran is going to do next time Israel acts up and the US supports it? They will continue developing their weapons program thinking they can do it in secret, and it will continue to get compromised and/or blown up.
- amrocha 9mo agoThe brazen callousness with which you advocate for the spread of nuclear weapons and the subjugation of other nations’ sovereignty is disgusting. You’re probably one of the worst people I’ve ever interacted with.
- solenoid0937 9mo agoI don't really care what you think of me, but please adhere to the HN guidelines[1] for civil discussion, this sort of fulminating and personal attack simply has no place here (though there are other websites for that, if you so desire.) Re. nuclear weapons, sovereignty - I am not "advocating" for anything. I am simply describing the factual reality of international relations, and "political realism," the school of thought that governs international relations between superpowers in the current day and throughout most of human history. That you are ascribing to this description some sort of moral stance on my part is a judgement error on yours. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- boston_clone 9mo agoThen your understanding of US foreign policy and what’s currently happening is too shallow.
- morshu9001 9mo agoSo are you an expert on Venezuelan politics? I'm not.
- boston_clone 9mo agoNo, but I am one with regard to US foreign policy. Since you’re not (by your own admission), spend more time reading the globalist (1950s - present) reasons why the US meddles with foreign governments and what forcibly creating a power vacuum does for the local populace. Then you’ll be better equipped to have a conversation with knowledgeable people about the topic at hand, instead of blithely wondering “hmm, is it actually bad when we extra-judiciously remove a head of state because we want oil?”
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- morshu9001 9mo agoYou don't know me. I know for sure that an actual US foreign policy expert wouldn't be so arrogant.
- boston_clone 9mo agoYeah, and no true Scotsman would put sugar in their porridge. Read a book. Brinkley's Rise to Globalism is a good start.