EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 3277
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
| ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12392 Posts
On March 12 2016 01:41 Mohdoo wrote: I would argue that having a far and away clearly militarily superior country in the world serves a purpose similar to nukes wherein conflict is prevented by the prospect of how much damage would be done. Consider Russia with Ukraine and it's other bordering countries. If the US suddenly stopped caring and took out everything we've got around there, Europe would be a colony in a week. In that regard, I think the US has caused problems in its quest for utter and complete dominance. I would say that th damage caused is significantly less than the damage created by a militarily competitive planet. By being the clear winner, conflict is prevented. Not gonna pretend we didn't fuck shit up along the way, but I truly believe nukes and the United states military are ultimately peace keepers because of how necessary diplomacy becomes. This argument is based on the premise that in order to be the military dominant presence in the world, you have to be a dick. That's not the case. | ||
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
On March 12 2016 02:01 OtherWorld wrote: It's always funny to see Americans try to defend their international policies It's always funny to see the French try to defend their international policies. + Show Spoiler + See how easy that was? Please refrain from dismissive one liners. If you have criticism that ought to be discussed, level it, and we can respond. If you want to do ad hominem attacks on people, please just don't. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15737 Posts
On March 12 2016 02:01 OtherWorld wrote: It's always funny to see Americans try to defend their international policies Interesting how this post contributes ideas to this thread as well as France contributes to global stability. On March 12 2016 02:04 Nebuchad wrote: This argument is based on the premise that in order to be the military dominant presence in the world, you have to be a dick. That's not the case. Can you point to a time in history where military dominance was achieved without creating victims? | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12392 Posts
On March 12 2016 02:09 Ghanburighan wrote: It's always funny to see the French try to defend their international policies. + Show Spoiler + See how easy that was? Please refrain from dismissive one liners. If you have criticism that ought to be discussed, level it, and we can respond. If you want to do ad hominem attacks on people, please just don't. If you're going to blame him for saying that you really should have something to say about "we won WW2" as an argument against people who criticize the US today... | ||
Souma
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
I likey. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12392 Posts
On March 12 2016 02:11 Mohdoo wrote: Can you point to a time in history where military dominance was achieved without creating victims? Again, creating victims is not being a dick by definition. No one is blaming you for creating victims during WW2 (Hiroshima excepted for some, and with good reason). Being a dick is helping overthrow the democratically elected government of Iran in 1953. Being a dick is supporting dictatorship over democracy in plenty of south american countries (sometimes to fight communism, sometimes literally for bananas). Being a dick is the Iraq war led under false pretenses. Being a Dick is Cheney (yeah, I went there). | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
|
oBlade
United States5902 Posts
On March 12 2016 01:20 Simberto wrote: And by "solving the worlds problems" you mean "fuck shit up even more", right? Like the whole iraq mess that destabilized the whole region, where you decided "Well some people blew up a building of ours, and we can't find them to bomb them, but we gotta bomb something because we need revenge, so lets bomb some other guys we can find but who are not in any way connected to the initial assault" Do you agree with Trump when he says Saddam was a great guy who killed terrorists? | ||
|
lord_nibbler
Germany591 Posts
You just have to live with the consequences. Like Russia becoming a much bigger 'partner' to European countries than you were ever comfortable with in the last 150 years... | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
On March 12 2016 02:09 Ghanburighan wrote: It's always funny to see the French try to defend their international policies. + Show Spoiler + See how easy that was? Please refrain from dismissive one liners. If you have criticism that ought to be discussed, level it, and we can respond. If you want to do ad hominem attacks on people, please just don't. I don't think I've seen a single French try to defend France's international policies in this thread. And with reason ; except in French far-right movements, you won't find many French people ready to defend stupid things we've done in the past. + Show Spoiler + Honestly, the main point of this shameful one-liner was to mock and bait the hypertrophic and brainless patriotism that is one of the American things that's the strangest to us Europeans. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15737 Posts
On March 12 2016 02:37 lord_nibbler wrote: What you guys do not realize is that the EU (except UK) would like you to pull back just as much! You just have to live with the consequences. Like Russia becoming a much bigger 'partner' to European countries than you were ever comfortable with in the last 150 years... Yeah, partner. They partner well with their neighbors. I'm sure you'll have a great time with that. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On March 12 2016 02:01 OtherWorld wrote: It's always funny to see Americans try to defend their international policies Anecdotally, I'd say that most Americans have no real interest in international politics and tend to base their beliefs about foreign policy on a very simplistic worldview. Most don't know or care about anything that happens as a result of what the government does. Generally it boils down to some form of "X good Y evil" where X is the US and any ally of the moment, and Y is any country that the leaders of the government want to act against. Any opposition to foreign adventurism tends to come from simplistic views such as "we need to spend less money" or "Y is winning we doing bad job" etc. Listen to Republicans talk about foreign policy and that's pretty much the extent of how much most Americans that don't come from other countries actually think about the issues. That's why it generally seems so ridiculous. Not to say that the nations of Europe haven't made their fair share of FP blunders, but at least a fair number of Europeans actually care about these issues in more than a superficial manner. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On March 12 2016 02:40 Mohdoo wrote: Yeah, partner. They partner well with their neighbors. I'm sure you'll have a great time with that. Everyone love the big, fuzzy, cuddly Russian bear! | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
| ||
|
Reaps
United Kingdom1280 Posts
| ||
|
Yoav
United States1874 Posts
On March 12 2016 02:37 lord_nibbler wrote: What you guys do not realize is that the EU (except UK) would like you to pull back just as much! You just have to live with the consequences. Like Russia becoming a much bigger 'partner' to European countries than you were ever comfortable with in the last 150 years... Honestly, at this point I think we should just make a public letter that Russia is welcome to take any European country that misses its NATO military spending benchmarks next year without any fuss from us. Sure, lots of Europe is too invested in the silly world they've invented where war is "obsolete" so I think the threat wouldn't be taken seriously by lots of people, but it could be hilarious to see what happens to them. We might even arrange safe passage for the Russian troops through Poland as long as they behaved themselves on the way. As for the Arab world, I kinda think we just leave the miserable mess to sort itself out. Maybe give the Kurds some tanks on the way out. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On March 12 2016 02:40 Mohdoo wrote: Yeah, partner. They partner well with their neighbors. I'm sure you'll have a great time with that. Client/ satellite states ftw. Not to mention that the US military plays a critical role in responding to emergencies, keeping the lid on a lot of tensions and maintaining safe sea lanes. It's definitely in the US's interest to keep the world safer and more peaceful than it would be otherwise, but don't pretend for a moment the rest of the world doesn't benefit a lot. (mostly responding to the Euros) Perhaps we should just have let Russia take Germany after WW2 instead of partitioning it. And maybe the Marshall Plan was a bad idea after all? | ||
| ||
