• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Live updates: Iran launches missile attack on airbase in Iraq housing US troops

SLoWMoTIoN

Milk Connoisseur
Feb 2, 2018
11,732
11,133
885
Japanese were fully dug in. The public was generally willing to fight. Japanese children were being taught to strap on explosives and let tanks roll over them. The Japanese were killing upwards of 10k Asian civilians a day across their occupied territory. Meanwhile, Russia was bearing down on Japan and would have carved another brutal slice through it. It saddens me to say it, but Nagasaki and Hiroshima almost certainly saved lives, even if we only count civilian.
Right. Japan had conquered all these small islands and were doing horrific shit as well. I believe they ONLY joined the war since Germany was the only country that saw them as humans. As back then the western states didn't consider them so.
I absolutely disagree. In total war the goal is to incapacitate your enemy. This includes eliminating their supply chain. No one is "innocent". A civilian making tanks for your enemy is just as much as a threat to your side as their soldiers.

You kill the other side until they decide they don't want to be killed anymore and submit. And then the war ends and actual lasting peace can take hold. This tit for tat shooting of military targets never de-escalates the situation.
We saw alot of that by both sides on the war but for some reason only the atomic bomb is mentioned.
 

TheContact

Member
Jan 22, 2016
3,107
986
555
I absolutely disagree. In total war the goal is to incapacitate your enemy. This includes eliminating their supply chain. No one is "innocent". A civilian making tanks for your enemy is just as much as a threat to your side as their soldiers.

You kill the other side until they decide they don't want to be killed anymore and submit. And then the war ends and actual lasting peace can take hold. This tit for tat shooting of military targets never de-escalates the situation.
by that logic you're an enemy because you work a job and pay taxes which fund bombs. there's a reason it's a legally criminal act to kill civilians in wartime. the loophole is collateral damage.
 

accel

Member
Sep 11, 2015
897
395
520
We're talking politics and elites, man...
I'll just say that I find your view on how the world and politics work way too simplistic to be useful. Things are much more complex than that. Eg, in the most utilitarian sense, sending "cannon fodder" to spill blood costs you votes and you are losing to opportunists who are tarring you as someone who wars unnecessarily.

Let's leave it though, this talk isn't for this thread.
 

Scopa

The Tribe Has Spoken
Oct 27, 2017
7,648
12,440
860
your mind
Japanese were fully dug in. The public was generally willing to fight. Japanese children were being taught to strap on explosives and let tanks roll over them. The Japanese were killing upwards of 10k Asian civilians a day across their occupied territory. Meanwhile, Russia was bearing down on Japan and would have carved another brutal slice through it. It saddens me to say it, but Nagasaki and Hiroshima almost certainly saved lives, even if we only count civilian.
Yes, yes and Stalin’s pogroms were instigated simply to save Russian lives. It was humane, dontchaknow.
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
20,078
41,021
1,290
USA
dunpachi.com
What flew over my head? You brought up indigenous Australians and I brought up indigenous Americans.

I like you Dun, but if me telling it like it is about the U.S.A. hurts your feels, then it is what it is.
If you have to make assumptions about how I feel, you're already a step behind me. Keep up. We can discuss serious topics without the grade-school baiting.

EDIT: And I really think the “smoothbrain” comment was unnecessary. As intelligent as you clearly are, it just shows how this “hoo-ra” mentality I always reference can blind people.
My posting history regarding war and conflict speaks for itself. Again, I suggest that you reexamine who's in the topic with you instead of dividing things into very simplistic, very arbitrary categories. I am not "hoo ra" in the least and challenging your characterization of world history (or as you put it, "telling it like it is", which already betrays your unwillingness to consider other viewpoints) does not mean I agree with the USA's behavior wholesale.

Nuance, friend. Nuance.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Dargor

pork_gamete

Member
Jun 3, 2014
1,246
1,158
575
Cowardly? Of course.

When the war started the US didn't go in because the current president had promised people Americans weren't gonna go die for another EUROPEAN war. There were many things that happened before America was forced to act against the Axis. Brazil joined until 1942 for a reason. Read a book.
Brazil joined in 42 due to pressure from the US. Our president at the time was actually fond of the Nazis, the fucker... That's politics and politicians, see, it's about interests..
 

Scopa

The Tribe Has Spoken
Oct 27, 2017
7,648
12,440
860
your mind
If you have to make assumptions about how I feel, you're already a step behind me. Keep up. We can discuss serious topics without the grade-school baiting.


My posting history regarding war and conflict speaks for itself. Again, I suggest that you reexamine who's in the topic with you instead of dividing things into very simplistic, very arbitrary categories. I am not "hoo ra" in the least and challenging your characterization of world history (or as you put it, "telling it like it is", which already betrays your unwillingness to consider other viewpoints) does not mean I agree with the USA's behavior wholesale.

Nuance, friend. Nuance.
Nah, I clearly hit a note with you. Hoo-ra indeed. I’ve learned a lot tonight.
 

Grinchy

Gold Member
Aug 3, 2010
23,670
8,351
1,115
a cave outside of Whoville.
Scopa Scopa and Psykodad Psykodad , I hope that while this gets a little heated, I can at least say that I have nothing against either of you personally. We just disagree on some fundamentals. There are no long-term hard feelings on my end.

I just feel that a purposeful attack on a US Embassy with the purpose of "Death to Americans!" is a terrorist act. I don't think that retaliating against that terrorism is terrorism. We can disagree on this, but I just don't understand why we would.
 

SLoWMoTIoN

Milk Connoisseur
Feb 2, 2018
11,732
11,133
885
Brazil joined in 42 due to pressure from the US. Our president at the time was actually fond of the Nazis, the fucker... That's politics and politicians, see, it's about interests..
Well yeah. Brazil was fine until the war started and had to rely on the US for trade in 39. So while the US did put some pressure on Brazil to join the war they only had too because fucking Europe had to pull the world into their shit again.
 

Xenon

Member
Not saying we haven't played our part but the Middle East is a world problem. This idea that things would be better if the US was not involved is ridiculous. There's so much fucked up history history in that region and blame to spread around evenly. Even if we pulled out now you still have Europe China and Russia with their dicks still firmly implanted. Also you can't leave out all the other countries in that region seem to encourage and even support terrorism and extremism.

As far as us meddling now I think it's only fair since we would have to be the ones to clean up whatever mess happened there regardless of who caused it. It truly is a no-win situation. I was almost happy when I heard Iraq was going to kick us out because it'd be nice to let them just stew and wash our hands of it.

And there's no doubt that the Iraqi War was a klusterfuk but I̶ ̶t̶h̶i̶n̶k̶ ̶w̶e̶ ̶a̶l̶l̶ ̶c̶o̶u̶l̶d̶ ̶a̶d̶m̶i̶t̶ ̶ I think that the region is more stable with Saddam Hussein and his regime gone. Sadly the country is a mess and there's a severe lack of foundation to build on. Especially when you have such strong division among the people who live in it.

I wasn't really down with war but I'm also not really happy with leaving things the way they are. Iraq like North Korea is a can that keeps getting kicked down the road but we're eventually going to have to deal with both of them. If Iran does get a nuclear weapon it's not even going to be like North Korea which has a dictator who very much wants to live.
 
Last edited:

autoduelist

Member
Aug 30, 2014
11,995
20,045
905
In what way?

There were no WMD.
Because your position was:

You choose your presidents, you live with the consequences.
And I was pointing out America has only been offered two warmongers to vote for for decades [jury still out on Trump].

You pointing out WMDs were a lie only proves my point. American voters have had no peaceful choice, and were only goaded into wars for decades based on lies. You should look up the Nayirah testimony, too... we were goaded into the original Iraq war [Gulf war] based on the lies of of a crying child.

You don't have to tell me about this shit. I don't support war. But you seem to think we want war, not understanding we have no choice and are lied to on top of that.

Trump was elected in large part to end these wars. You may think he won't. That's fine. It's still part of why he was elected. Hillary is and was a huge war hawk, at least Trump offered the possibility of peace, and still might find a path to it. Your hot takes in this thread, starting with hoping for another Vietnam, don't exactly come off as someone with the best interests of anyone in mind.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Dargor

Scopa

The Tribe Has Spoken
Oct 27, 2017
7,648
12,440
860
your mind
I just feel that a purposeful attack on a US Embassy with the purpose of "Death to Americans!" is a terrorist act. I don't think that retaliating against that terrorism is terrorism. We can disagree on this, but I just don't understand why we would.
This whole time, I’ve talked about America’s foreign policy history and their worldwide perception. I haven’t past comment on an embassy protest.

No hard feelings with me either, btw. I wish I could say the same for the rest, but I can feel their American imperialist jimmies rustled from here. I reckon I’ve made some new enemies, lol.

HOO-RA!
 
  • Praise the Sun
Reactions: Grinchy

Psykodad

Member
Apr 9, 2018
2,064
2,705
375
Scopa Scopa and Psykodad Psykodad , I hope that while this gets a little heated, I can at least say that I have nothing against either of you personally. We just disagree on some fundamentals. There are no long-term hard feelings on my end.

I just feel that a purposeful attack on a US Embassy with the purpose of "Death to Americans!" is a terrorist act. I don't think that retaliating against that terrorism is terrorism. We can disagree on this, but I just don't understand why we would.
No worries, I have nothing against anyone personally either.
Heated discussions are fine as long as we can ultimately respect eachother.

I get your point about the embassy and what you're saying is true, but I feel that it's a direct result of Americas presence in a foreign country they directly helped destroy.

It's all muddy though and I don't think we'll come to an agreement on who's at fault, but we all should be able to at least express our thoughts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Grinchy and Scopa

Cybrwzrd

Anime waifu panty shots are basically the same thing as paintings of the french baroque masters, if you think about it.
Sep 29, 2014
6,374
9,388
910
by that logic you're an enemy because you work a job and pay taxes which fund bombs. there's a reason it's a legally criminal act to kill civilians in wartime. the loophole is collateral damage.
There are no such things as collateral damage, in the doctrine of total war.

And yes, were I alive during WW2, I would have been an enemy of the Axis.

We aren't at total war.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SLoWMoTIoN

Scopa

The Tribe Has Spoken
Oct 27, 2017
7,648
12,440
860
your mind
What is of greater value to you, actually getting to know me by taking me at my word that I'm not hoo ra?

Or sticking to your assumption that I'm hoo ra based on a few lines in this thread?
I didn’t start with the insults, Dun. If you want to take the high road, do it right.
 

Psykodad

Member
Apr 9, 2018
2,064
2,705
375
Because your position was:



And I was pointing out America has only been offered two warmongers to vote for for decades [jury still out on Trump].

You pointing out WMDs were a lie only proves my point. American voters have had no peaceful choice, and were only goaded into wars for decades based on lies. You should look up the Nayirah testimony, too... we were goaded into the original Iraq war [Gulf war] based on the lies of of a crying child.

You don't have to tell me about this shit. I don't support war. But you seem to think we want war, not understanding we have no choice and are lied to on top of that.

Trump was elected in large part to end these wars. You may think he won't. That's fine. It's still part of why he was elected. Hillary is and was a huge war hawk, at least Trump offered the possibility of peace, and still might find a path to it. Your hot takes in this thread, starting with hoping for another Vietnam, don't exactly come off as someone with the best interests of anyone in mind.
That's the downside of democracy.

And once again, I'm not literally hoping for a war.
BUT if it comes to that, I hope it'll be "another Vietnam" so the US becomes a bit more humble.
At least, for a while
 

autoduelist

Member
Aug 30, 2014
11,995
20,045
905
Why are you hoping for something that isn't going to happen? You don't usually seem like a crazy guy so I refuse to think you're hoping for something that can't possibly exist.
There is a chance we don't go to war. Exceedingly slim. But that's what hope is for, if hope has a purpose at all.
 

pork_gamete

Member
Jun 3, 2014
1,246
1,158
575
I'll just say that I find your view on how the world and politics work way too simplistic to be useful. Things are much more complex than that. Eg, in the most utilitarian sense, sending "cannon fodder" to spill blood costs you votes and you are losing to opportunists who are tarring you as someone who wars unnecessarily.

Let's leave it though, this talk isn't for this thread.
It's simplistic but true... you can add in variables to make it seem more complex but reality is, the US was gonna benefit greatly from the war. The WW2 discussion started exactly because of this behavior which we've seen on all recent wars the US has headed except Vietnam.

Or you'll tell me Iraq wasn't about the oil?

What about Iran? The recent discovery of the new oil fields has nothing to do with what's happening right now?

All lovely coincidences, right?
 

Scopa

The Tribe Has Spoken
Oct 27, 2017
7,648
12,440
860
your mind
And there's no doubt that the Iraqi War was a klusterfuk but I think we all could admit that the region is more stable with Saddam Hussein and his regime gone.
WTF? Completely and utterly disagree.



Kind of a cop out, man. Comparing Stalin to Fat Man and Little Boy? It's not like Russian populace was committing atrocity on a sickening scale.
Genocide vs Nukes

hmm, is there a third option?
 

SLoWMoTIoN

Milk Connoisseur
Feb 2, 2018
11,732
11,133
885
There is a chance we don't go to war. Exceedingly slim. But that's what hope is for, if hope has a purpose at all.
Sounds like war is gonna happen. They already had two old dudes saying Iran is dangerous.
WTF? Completely and utterly disagree.




Genocide vs Nukes

hmm, is there a third option?
WW2? Continued war and mutual extinction.
 
Last edited:

autoduelist

Member
Aug 30, 2014
11,995
20,045
905
Right. Japan had conquered all these small islands and were doing horrific shit as well. I believe they ONLY joined the war since Germany was the only country that saw them as humans. As back then the western states didn't consider them so.
Not just islands.




Japanese slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Chinese [and other] civilians.

Anyone wondering should look up Unit 731. I warn you, it is not safe for life. You will see images that will haunt you for life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CatLady

SLoWMoTIoN

Milk Connoisseur
Feb 2, 2018
11,732
11,133
885
Not just islands.




Japanese slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Chinese [and other] civilians.

Anyone wondering should look up Unit 731. I warn you, it is not safe for life. You will see images that will haunt you for life.
Oh I know about China I mentioned it before what I had forgotten about were the islands.
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
20,078
41,021
1,290
USA
dunpachi.com
I didn’t start with the insults, Dun. If you want to take the high road, do it right.
Maybe your assumption that "Being an American-dominated forum, you’ll get bombarded with the typical “hoo-ra!” dumbfuck bullshit" has interfered with your ability to read and engage without taking offense when none was intended. I'm not taking a high or a low road. I'm explaining my standpoint and you're digging in your heels after you jumped to conclusions.

You can either take me at my word or you can believe I'm "hoo ra" (which was your presupposition several pages ago before you and I exchanged a single sentence).
 

pork_gamete

Member
Jun 3, 2014
1,246
1,158
575
Not just islands.




Japanese slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Chinese [and other] civilians.

Anyone wondering should look up Unit 731. I warn you, it is not safe for life. You will see images that will haunt you for life.
The Japanese were fucking maniacs. Scum of the Earth. What they did to women, children and men is absurd. I don't think nuking them was a bad decision, instant reality check for a nation that thought too highly of themselves and had lost all its humanity.
 
Last edited:

llien

Member
Feb 1, 2017
6,981
4,349
775
Makes me wonder if they hit Ukrainian plane.
Steadily climbing and then immediately losing any contact doesn't look like engine malfunction (for starters, that model would continue to climb even with one engine disabled)


The Japanese were fucking maniacs. Scum of the Earth. What they did to women, children and men is absurd. I don't think nuking them was a bad decision, instant reality check for a nation that thought too highly of themselves and had lost all humanity.
It's important to remember that nuking them was not based on "they are fucking maniacs", but on "we want to save lives of our soldiers".
 

Xenon

Member
WTF? Completely and utterly disagree
Maybe I overshot that a little but I do believe the region is more stable. Saddam was constantly trying to pick fights and even started a war with its neighbors. If you think that was going to stop you are kidding yourself. It had an organized military that can actually do damage. Now the country is a mess but it still lacks the organization and strong of a military being controlled by a fascist dictator. It is simply not as influential as it once was.
 
Last edited:

pork_gamete

Member
Jun 3, 2014
1,246
1,158
575
It's important to remember that nuking them was not based on "they are fucking maniacs", but on "we want to save lives of our soldiers".
"And show the size of our dick". It was the necessary move, though, as bad as it is...
 
Last edited:

Cybrwzrd

Anime waifu panty shots are basically the same thing as paintings of the french baroque masters, if you think about it.
Sep 29, 2014
6,374
9,388
910
It's important to remember that nuking them was not based on "they are fucking maniacs", but on "we want to save lives of our soldiers".
And we were willing to kill every Japanese person who took up arms against us on the mainland until they surrendered. We made 1.5 million Purple Heart medals to prepare for the mainland invasion. We are still using that stockpile, because the nukes forced them to surrender.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CatLady

Scopa

The Tribe Has Spoken
Oct 27, 2017
7,648
12,440
860
your mind
Maybe your assumption that "Being an American-dominated forum, you’ll get bombarded with the typical “hoo-ra!” dumbfuck bullshit" has interfered with your ability to read and engage without taking offense when none was intended. I'm not taking a high or a low road. I'm explaining my standpoint and you're digging in your heels after you jumped to conclusions.

You can either take me at my word or you can believe I'm "hoo ra" (which was your presupposition several pages ago before you and I exchanged a single sentence).
That’s not an assumption, that is fact. (See any China/Russia/Tencent/you name it thread).

My ability to read is A1 fucking stellar and I take affront to that, sir. English is my pleasure!

I didn’t take offence, I pointed out your insult towards me.

You called me a “smoothbrain” directly and are yet to apologise for it.

I made a general reference to an American aggressive and nationalistic mentality which is a thing that exists as is evident whenever someone has the gaul to question America’s motives on anything foreign policy.

Like I said, you come across as intelligent. Your posts are well written. Yet, you immediately went for the personal attack.

What am I to think? If you aren’t Hoo-ra, why did that bother you so much?
 
  • Triggered
Reactions: Sakura Doritos

accel

Member
Sep 11, 2015
897
395
520
All lovely coincidences, right?
I'll reply to this isolated point: you are seeing patterns not because they exist, but because your mind is trained to filter out signal out of noise *even* in cases where doing this produces misleading results. You know what they say about statistics - that there are lies, damn lies, and statistics? The origin of this statement lies in statistics being hard despite seeming intuitively simple.

With your example, you think war in Iraq was about oil and war in Iran is about oil as well, and you see this as some kind of a big ruling pattern, but you are simply ignoring places which have oil where the US didn't go. Venezuela for one thing. It would be much easier for the US to invade Venezuela if this was about oil, because (a) there's more oil there, twice as much as in Iraq, (b) it's closer, (c) this would harm countries with which the US competes, like China (who have tons of money pumped into Venezuela now). But the US didn't invade Venezuela. Why? Because it's not about oil. Oil is part of the picture, but only part.

And in the end, oil doesn't even participate in the picture the way you imply it does - like goods to be sold. That's way too simplistic. What really is going on here is that, yes, oil is a source of money, but what's important to the US is not that this money goes to someone else instead of them (the scale is small), but rather that this money is going to regimes which then convert it into weapons including massively lethal ones including recently nuclear. The concern is mostly about that - that easy money from oil should not go towards massively lethal weapons and specifically not towards nuclear. Oil isn't alone in this - drugs are the same.

So, as I say, this is why your view is just too simplistic to be useful. You see oil and you immediately conclude that yeah, the US invaded Iraq because they wanted that oil to themselves. The reality is much, much, much more complex.

(And now I'll shut up wrt general questions like this, sorry for long texts. This is not the thread for this.)
 
Last edited:

Cybrwzrd

Anime waifu panty shots are basically the same thing as paintings of the french baroque masters, if you think about it.
Sep 29, 2014
6,374
9,388
910
I doubt it was necessary to bomb an actual town.
It is easy to sit back and armchair command a military 75 years after hostilities ended. The goal was to prevent American boys from dying. It was the right call because it ended the war decisively.

Had we just threatened them with an offshore nuke, they might not have called that bluff. We or the Russians (or both) would have invaded, and we would likely not have the Japan we do today because of it.
 

Scopa

The Tribe Has Spoken
Oct 27, 2017
7,648
12,440
860
your mind
Meh, I’ve gotta go to bed (2:12am, fuck).

Don’t destroy the world before I wake up you imperialist infidels!
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
38,521
5,422
1,575
Best Coast
Maybe I overshot that a little but I do believe the region is more stable. Saddam was constantly trying to pick fights and even started a war with its neighbors. If you think that was going to stop you are kidding yourself. It had an organized military that can actually do damage. Now the country is a mess but it still lacks the organization and strong of a military being controlled by a fascist dictator. It is simply not as influential as it once was.
Just like there is a direct line of cause and effect events from the US-Soviet involvement in Afghanistan to the formation of Al Qaeda, there is cause and effect chain of events from the USA's offensive action (that was not an official declaration of war nor was it an act of self defense in response to an attack) in Iraq to the entire clusterfuck the region is in now with ISIS, a failed Libyan state, and other nations like Syria, Somalia, and Yemen in peril, leading to a migrant crisis since everyone wants to GTFO of their blown up homes and neighborhoods.

So, if we're going to play the "what's worse?" game, I would rather have Saddam than ISIS/slave trades in Libya/migrant crisis/thousands of civilian casualties.

Oh yeah, I'd also want that $3 trillion back, as well as those 4,000 members of the US military still alive to see their families, and no PTSD for 20% of Iraq vets that contribute to the opioid crisis, among other things.

Saddam was constantly trying to pick fights and even started a war with its neighbors.
Trying to prevent wars by starting one is completely illogical. Especially considering the case against the threat of Saddam's regime was wayyy overblown.
 

Stefan.North

Member
Mar 6, 2019
295
218
250
"Warmongering capitalist USA" has every reason to go to war against Iran, not for the sake of obtaining oil but for the sake of interrupting oil. USA is the #1 net exporter of both oil and natural gas, and that trend will continue for at least a decade or two. Meanwhile, middle east continues to be the unstable middle east. Destabilizing it further by adding yet another conflict into the region would push more customers into the USA's open arms. From the perspective of greed, this is what the USA should do.

I am hoping that Trump sticks to what he campaigned on, to keep us out of wars. If/when this blows over with no more military engagements, I wonder if the passionate posters calling the USA warmongers and terrorists will give credit where credit is due. Americans are sick of war and are sick of taking care of other countries that don't want us there. We do our best to keep the region stable which ensures oil for the eastern hemisphere from our oil-competition, and we get lambasted no matter what we do. Trump has talked about this endlessly and still gets mocked for it.

We'll find out in a few hours when he makes his address. Since there were no more incidents overnight, I
Americans are sick of war and are sick of taking care of other countries that don't want us there. We do our best to keep the region stable which ensures oil for the eastern hemisphere from our oil-competition, and we get lambasted no matter what we do. Trump has talked about this endlessly and still gets mocked for it.
Americans taking care of countries? Has any country invited USA to be taken care of? And no, not some fictive opposition that has marginal support in countries.

Protecting Lybians from Gadafi, where he was supported by majority, USA just took sides with opposition, declared him a terrorist and worst guy on planet and killed him.

Sadam Hussein was supported by USA against same Iran in Iran-Iraq war in 80s, he was a good guy back then. 20 years later he's worst than Hitler.

Osama bin Laden was freedom fighter against Soviets and a good guy in 80s. US also created mujahedin fighters and 20 years later...

American "solutions" and help are needed like a fan on Southern Pole. You ussually make things even worse, but feel like the other countries just couldn't work without you. A frog asks an elefant to protect him from a snake, and he steps on both of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scopa

eot

Member
Apr 13, 2012
10,547
997
660
I never said they did. I'm talking about the theatre in general. Should have probably made it more simple to understand.
I am right. I should have made it extremely simple for you to understand.
Why are you quoting me twice on mong? Your post wasn’t complex it was just poorly worded. Move on.
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
20,078
41,021
1,290
USA
dunpachi.com
Trying to prevent wars by starting one is completely illogical. Especially considering the case against the threat of Saddam's regime was wayyy overblown.
For the sake of argument, do you believe assassination is a valid peacekeeping measure for a civilized country to use against another?


Americans taking care of countries? Has any country invited USA to be taken care of? And no, not some fictive opposition that has marginal support in countries.

Protecting Lybians from Gadafi, where he was supported by majority, USA just took sides with opposition, declared him a terrorist and worst guy on planet and killed him.

Sadam Hussein was supported by USA against same Iran in Iran-Iraq war in 80s, he was a good guy back then. 20 years later he's worst than Hitler.

Osama bin Laden was freedom fighter against Soviets and a good guy in 80s. US also created mujahedin fighters and 20 years later...

American "solutions" and help are needed like a fan on Southern Pole. You ussually make things even worse, but feel like the other countries just couldn't work without you. A frog asks an elefant to protect him from a snake, and he steps on both of them.
These examples stand out because they caused a lot of damage. I don't see any complaints about the 1000+ US bases around the world -- especially in regions threatened by the soviets -- nor in regions threatened by high-seas piracy and by warlords taking over a nation. See: subsaharan Africa which the USA has mostly stayed out of in terms of large-scale military conflicts.

I mentioned this before, but there's a very well documented shift in worldwide opinion following the collapse of the USSR in the late 80s. All the events you mentioned were after that event.

USA is as guilty as any mercenary force can be: we willingly took the treasure for spilling blood. We are guilty of that. The notion, however, that all of our behavior is out of selfish ambition is hilariously naive and ignorant of history. If nothing else, our pearl-clutching allies have gotten us involved in several conflicts over the past century.

When the USA pulls away from the world scene -- and that is already in progress -- other nations will be shocked by how the new global system is operated. If we still have russians who lament the collapse of the USSR, I expect we'll have these same pundits lamenting the withdrawal of the USA from the world scene.
 
Last edited:
  • LOL
Reactions: Dargor