US politics (4 Viewers)

[Lili Marlene]

So she has the "worst record possible" because she was previously Secretary of State and now she's running for President?

Ok.

No, the USA has the worst record possible and she helped it along with that record and now she's running for president. I mean, I guess it does make her qualified if the American foreign policy of the past decade is the one you want to continue.

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

Well, the past decade has been far better than the one before it, surely?
The "Don't do stupid shit" doctrine has certainly been an improvement over what went before, from what i can tell.

The Iran deal stands out. I'd certainly take more of that.
Showing tentative signs of disengagement with the Saudis as opposed to doing their bidding.
It's not all good, but the line on the graph seems to be pointing the right way.

You could easily argue that there have been worse international actors in the last 10 years than the US

 

[Unicron]

You could easily argue that there have been worse international actors in the last 10 years than the US

If that's the case it could be argued that most of it is fallout from US policy in the previous years.

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

If that's the case it could be argued that most of it is fallout from US policy in the previous years.

I dunno.

I blame the internet for a lot of the current trouble.

All this Arab Spring goings on, is people living under hellish govts and systems being able to communicate and organise for the first time ever.
Syria as a case in point. The US has done basically nothing there, arguably made the situation worse.
Libya they intervened and made the situation worse.
Damned if you do.....
Putin has an entire civil service department of internet trolls on the payroll. He recognises the danger of free communication in an authoritarian regime.

Lots of people like to pick countries they like, or particularly they hate. "America is this, and America is that"
We should be against forms of govt and types of policy.
If you think that imperialism is bad, there are some Ukrainians that could really use your support.

 

[Lili Marlene]

Damned if you don't? The USA has pretty much never not done a thing that involved meddling with others. Just because US troops aren't on the ground doesn't mean they're not taking and funding sides, sure they're only the biggest arms exporters in the world

American-led intervention in Syria - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You don't have to "hate" the USA to be unhappy with their foreign policy.

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

Damned if you don't? The USA has pretty much never not done a thing that involved meddling with others. Just because US troops aren't on the ground doesn't mean they're not taking and funding sides, sure they're only the biggest arms exporters in the world

American-led intervention in Syria - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You don't have to "hate" the USA to be unhappy with their foreign policy.

You're unhappy with anyone sending arms to the Free Syrian Army?

That's an interesting position to take.

 

[Lili Marlene]

I'm unhappy that you were trying to position the US as "doing basically nothing" when the truth is far from this.

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

I'm unhappy that you were trying to position the US as "doing basically nothing" when the truth is far from this.

if you want to characterise the US position as being other than trying to stop a wholesale slaughter of a civilian population by its own military, and get peace talks to happen, with virtually no boots on the ground, then you're free to do so.

Compared to the other actors in Syria, the US involvement has been minimal.
The "don't do stupid shit" doctrine in effect.

If you hate aggressive foreign military involvement, there's a whole lot of butchered and slaughtered Syrian civilians would love to talk to you.

 

[Lili Marlene]

if you want to characterise the US position as being other than trying to stop a wholesale slaughter of a civilian population by its own military, and get peace talks to happen, then you're free to do so.

WHY DO THE USA HAVE A POSITION IN THE FIRST PLACE? Lets go back a bit... oh look at this map, it came about as a result of USA vs. Russia in their last proxy war, what a surprise:

Foreign involvement in the Syrian Civil War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you hate aggressive foreign military involvement, there's a whole lot of butchered and slaughtered Syrian civilians would love to talk to you.

What is this nonsense? Stop making this personal, stop with this "would love to talk to you" stuff you keep spouting. There are thousands of dead people in Yemen, who have been drone-bombed by the USA and have pieces lying all over the street, their children picking through their remains wondering what they ever did to deserve this, who would love to talk to you, who loves the US foreign policy so much.

Compared to the other actors in Syria, the US involvement has been minimal.

We are, or were, not talking about other actors in Syria.

But hey listen, I'm all for peace. What I'm saying is the US lost the moral authority on governing international relations long ago, at least as far back as Hiroshima.

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

it came about as a result of USA vs. Russia in their last proxy war,

If that's what you believe, then fine. It's not a common characterisation that I see. If you want to keep going back to Wikipedia to find stuff that suits your narrative, that's fine too.

It is not a proxy war. Russia, Iran et al wants Assad and his barbarous regime kept in place, cos they are playing geopolitical chess with the country.
The US and EU want to stop the slaughtering of civilians and get around a peace table. They want the war and the killing and the death over.
That is what is happening.
That's why Clinton is a better candidate than Trump. Specifically for what is happening in Syria. And also Ukraine.

I'm not blanket defending US policy. The drone program (while I don't think it's killed "thousands" in Yemen) should be stopped.
Killing is wrong, not any one government.
Bombing Hiroshima was as awful as firebombing Dresden, and the argument for alternatives is academic.
Taking sides other than what will end in the least death and suffering of innocents is useless b.s.

 

[Lili Marlene]

If that's what you believe, then fine. It's not a common characterisation that I see. If you want to keep going back to Wikipedia to find stuff that suits your narrative, that's fine too.

I'm sorry for being able to back up my points.

It is not a proxy war. Russia, Iran et al wants Assad and his barbarous regime kept in place, cos they are playing geopolitical chess with the country.
The US and EU want to stop the slaughtering of civilians and get around a peace table. They want the war and the killing and the death over.

The US plays more geopolitical chess than every other country put together.

That is what is happening.
That's why Clinton is a better candidate than Trump. Specifically for what is happening in Syria. And also Ukraine.

That is very much debatable, specifically on whether or not the US should be involved in these matters at all.

I'm not blanket defending US policy. The drone program (while I don't think it's killed "thousands" in Yemen) should be stopped.
Killing is wrong, not any one government.

Agreed.

and yeah, I was overstating Yemen, it's probably in the hundreds for civilian casualties.

Bombing Hiroshima was as awful as firebombing Dresden, and the argument for alternatives is academic.

I wasn't arguing for alternatives, I was saying they lost their moral authority by using nuclear weapons on civilians. What's academic is whether or not this should maybe go back to the earlier fire-bombings of Japanese cities (to take a specific US example rather than bringing in the UK). Either way, they lost it.

Taking sides other than what will end in the least death and suffering of innocents is useless b.s.

I don't see how the USA constantly inviting themselves to join in wars all over the world has ever helped matters.

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

I don't see how the USA constantly inviting themselves to join in wars all over the world has ever helped matters.

Off the top of my head
WWII
Yugoslavia/Kosovo
Somalia - tried to stop a domestic, always limited effectiveness
Korea - which one would you rather be living now?
Kuwait (swings and roundabouts)
Taiwan - not a war, more of a got-your-back type deal
Cold War - dunno how people feel about Communism, I'm not a fan.

Probably more, but that's not the point, cos it's just as easy to list the shitshows.
The west has to do better in the situations it's involved with now.
International involvement in some situations is a must. It is the nature of a country's involvement that matters.
Isolationism from a world power is not necessarily a good thing, as it encourages bad action by others.
If the US leaves Asia, China walks all over the Asean countries.
If the EU drops sanctions against Russia, Ukraine is lost to aggression.
If the US, EU and Russia (props to Vlad!) hadn't gotten involved, Iran would have nukes by now. Or would have been nuked by Israel.

It is not good and bad countries, it is good an bad actions. As I see it.

The right thing to do is be involved for the right reasons with the right actions.

 

[Lili Marlene]

International involvement in some situations is a must. It is the nature of a country's involvement that matters.
Isolationism from a world power is not necessarily a good thing, as it encourages bad action by others.

Yes i would agree, but what we can't have is freedom at home (to a limited extent, the US has more people in prison per capita than every other country in the world bar the tiny Seychelles) and colonialism abroad. Why are there US bases dotted all over the world?

as for all your examples:

Yugoslavia- Kosovo - Ukraine and Yugoslavia you don't have to read this but my point is more and more stuff keeps coming out about this war that paints the picture as very different to how NATO and the US State Department wants it to be painted. I don't like conspiracy theories, and I'm very edgy about anything that looks like one but there are some serious questions to be asked there. It's certainly not cut and dry.

Somalia - every country in Africa has been utterly fucked over by the west's colonialist actions past and present. Frankly, we should be paying reparations to them for the next 500 years.

Korea - ehhhh.... you mean the cold war?

Taiwan - don't know enough in all honesty.

Cold War - I feel what Russia had was fairly awful and not communism. I have no idea if I would like communism, but I know what unchecked capitalism has done to the world.

If the US, EU and Russia (props to Vlad!) hadn't gotten involved, Iran would have nukes by now. Or would have been nuked by Israel.

Well thank God we have nukes and know how to use them responsibly, not like those savages over there, right?

It is not good and bad countries, it is good an bad actions. As I see it.

The right thing to do is be involved for the right reasons with the right actions.

Well, look, we can agree to disagree on whether the US has ever had the right reasons. Just to be clear though, I'm not saying the USA, or anyone else, is a "bad" country.

 

[Lili Marlene]

Well maybe we can say the Islamic State is a bad country.

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

Well thank God we have nukes and know how to use them responsibly, not like those savages over there, right?

There isn't really a response to this.

I have no idea if I would like communism

Or this.

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

Well maybe we can say the Islamic State is a bad country.

Not a country.

But not a good place to be certainly.

 

[hydromancer]

WOW! BREAKING=> Julian Assange Suggests Seth Rich - Who Was MURDERED in DC - Was Wikileaks DNC Source!

 

[pete]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[nooleen]

jesus, that was a bit off

 

[pete]

jesus, that was a bit off

i know. it was supposed to be a roast of rob lowe.