-->
@HistoryBuff
So which is it? Do we blame america for intervening in wars, or do we blame America for not intervening in wars?
Whichever is politically convenient at the time.
Choosing between America and Russia is like choosing between two evils
Posts
Total:
44
Easy answer: Go to Japan.
-->
@HistoryBuff
this is true. But weren't you just criticizing America for playing world police?
Well, when they are not playing that gameshow, they are selling arms globally and pretending they are not the enemies of global peace.
(sources of both Biden and Trump with the same policies)
It's amazing how well propaganda has indoctrinated the left to hate guns unless it's Raytheon selling them to Africa. A logical person would think that to be exclusively a right wing position, not a position unanimously supported by both parties with a few exceptions like Bernie Sanders.
Your examples of peace are easy to embrace only from the comfort of a NIMBY chair.
-->
@Greyparrot
Well, when they are not playing that gameshow, they are selling arms globally and pretending they are not the enemies of global peace.
so when america gets involved in conflicts, it is evil. And when america decides not to get involved in conflicts, it is evil. You are just starting from the assumption that america is evil and making up reasons to justify it. America does bad things, no one is denying that. They also have caused the most peaceful and prosperous time in world history.
Your examples of peace are easy to embrace only from the comfort of a NIMBY chair.
again, you are engaging in nonsense arguments. I never said the world is universally peaceful. It is not. Regions of the world are war prone and parts of africa are certainly included in that. But america is not causing wars in africa. It is not invading them, it is not making them fight each other. Africans want to fight and kill other africans. When america does nothing about that, they get blamed. When america tries to stop that, it goes badly since you can't force peace on those who want to fight, and america gets blamed.
The world today is much more peaceful than it was in the 1800's or 1900's. It is the most peaceful it has been in human history. Pointing out that wars still happen is irrelevant. I never said they don't. But there are alot less of them today than in any other period in history.
-->
@HistoryBuff
And when America decides not to get involved in conflicts,
Selling arms is getting involved. Just not the way you want to believe. You could very well make the argument that America is responsible both directly and indirectly in more warfare deaths than any other nation that has ever existed on Earth during its short 200 year reign. We are talking about trillions of dollars in arms sales across the globe over the decades resulting in hundreds of millions of people killed.
I thought you were a Sanders supporter on this?
-->
@Greyparrot
Selling arms is getting involved.
no, it's not. Sadly, war is business. Always has been, and likely always will be. All major nations in the world produce weapons. Most sell them to 3rd parties. Both because they like money, but also because it allows them to build up their defensiveness. Banning arms deals harms the ability of those companies to be able to produce weapons to supply america. I'm not justifying what america does, but it is much more complicated than you are attempting to portray it as.
And even if it were exactly what you are portraying it as, it still doesn't counter my main point. the world is the most peaceful it has ever been because of the united states. You still have not even addressed this fact as you keep desperately bringing up anything you can.
America is responsible both directly and indirectly in more warfare deaths than any other nation that has ever existed on Earth during its short 200 year reign.
lol, what? you either know nothing about history, or you are lying through your teeth. History is VERY bloody. Every empire has left a mountain of corpses in their wake. The british, the french, the russians, the chinese, the japanese, the mongols, etc. America probably wouldn't even rank in the top 10.
-->
@HistoryBuff
America probably wouldn't even rank in the top 10.
It's a known fact America supplies 40% of all the weapons traded across the globe.
The U.S. also provided more than half of the weapons purchased by 13 of the top 17 arms importers, with Saudi Arabia, Japan and Australia buying the most from the U.S.
Again, I thought you were a Sanders supporter?
-->
@Greyparrot
America probably wouldn't even rank in the top 10.It's a known fact America supplies 40% of all the weapons traded across the globe.The U.S. also provided more than half of the weapons purchased by 13 of the top 17 arms importers, with Saudi Arabia, Japan and Australia buying the most from the U.S.
ok. I pointed out that there are many empires who killed millions of people and that the US doesn't even come close to being as bloody as them. You replied with "american companies make and sell weapons". I mean, sure they do. And? America doesn't make countries go to war. They go to war because they want to. And whether it is American weapons, russian weapons, or chinese weapons, they are still going to go to war.
And none of these even attempts to address my point that the world is much more peaceful today than it ever has been in history.
you either know nothing about history, or you are lying through your teeth
These are the numbers dude. America is extremely bloodied especially in the past couple of decades. And that article doesn't even address the indirect deaths from funding and supplying foreign wars. How can you possibly paint such a rosy picture? If you died in a war in the last couple of decades, odds are very good it was done with an American gun. War propaganda has a shelf life in most history books.
-->
@HistoryBuff
Again, I thought you were a Sanders supporter?
-->
@Greyparrot
Again, I thought you were a Sanders supporter?
1) I did support bernie sanders' as president. He was the best candidate. It doesn't mean I necessarily approve of all of his policy positions
2) I do think america sells too many weapons to too many shitty people. I but also recognize that there is nuance here. For example, Russia is basically unable to build any of it's new T14 Armata tanks because they can't sell any. Russia can't afford (or doesn't want to spend that much) to build new factories to build them. If they could find buyers for them, then they could bring the cost per unit down by using economies of scale. But since no one wants to buy them, the cost per unit would be super high, so they don't build them. And their military is weaker as a result.
American weapons companies selling lots of weapons abroad means they have the capacity to build lots of weapons. If america finds itself in the position where it needs to buy alot of weapons suddenly, there are alot more available if they are already building them to sell to other countries. The factories and know how already exist and are ready to go. So there is a significant national security issue here.
3) selling weapons to countries gives you leverage over them. If their entire airforce is made up of F 16s they have to listen to what you say. You have the ability to cut them off from support for those weapons because they need software updates, replacement parts, etc. So if they want to say, invade their neighbor, you have the ability to pressure them into not doing it without having to threaten a war. Because going to war and then having your planes fall out of the sky would not be good. America can use this soft power for good, even if selling weapons itself might not be. So saying that selling weapons is automatically a bad thing, is not true.
-->
@HistoryBuff
selling weapons to countries gives you leverage over them.
So you admit this is all about power and not peace? I get the whole "peace through strength" narrative, but at some point, you have to wonder where that heavy hand ends?
America can use this soft power for good...
Iraq proved that we can't.
-->
@Greyparrot
So you admit this is all about power and not peace? I get the whole "peace through strength" narrative, but at some point, you have to wonder where that heavy hand ends?
of course not. I made a whole bunch of points, you picked one of them and said "so it's all about that". And power and peace are not mutually exclusive. every "pax" in human history was caused by that nation having power. America having more power than anyone else is what has caused the "pax americana". Power and peace are overlapping in this context.
America can use this soft power for good...Iraq proved that we can't.
what? One bad leader invaded another country for shitty reasons, and that means america can't do what it has been doing for decades? Which part of the world is the most peaceful it has ever been are you not getting? It doesn't matter how many shitty things you point out, because you are not engaging with my point. The world is in a much, much better place that it ever has been in the history of our species. Does america still do shitty things? Absolutely. That does not change the fact that world is a much, much better place because they are a super power. And nothing you have said has even attempted to deny that.
-->
@Bella3sp
Easy answer: Go to Japan.
True 😊