Why do you believe in American foreign policy?

[Antiwar]

Note that we're in the 'International Politics' forum.

* Concise preferred but not required.

* Starting no further back in history than 12 years before 1950, but mostly starting from 1950.

* Open mic.

* Keep in mind that the US government essentially has nuclear weapons ready to blow any nation away.

* What narrative do you believe that makes the directly above point a good thing?

 

[Mycroft]

Note that we're in the 'International Politics' forum.

* Concise preferred but not required.

* Starting no further back in history than 12 years before 1950, but mostly starting from 1950.

* Open mic.

* Keep in mind that the US government essentially has nuclear weapons ready to blow any nation away.

* What narrative do you believe that makes the directly above point a good thing?

Your thread. You first.

 

[Antiwar]

Your thread. You first.

I don't believe American foreign policy is a good thing.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

What part of American foreign policy? How can one agree or disagree with ALL of American foreign policy ever? We have done a lot of things under a lot of different administrations. Even within one administration there are different parts of the government that have different goals/motivations.

 

[Jkca1]

What policy?

 

[Ahlevah]

I don't believe American foreign policy is a good thing.

During the Cold War, do you think Germans preferred to live in West Germany or East Germany, and why? Or how about Koreans? North or South?

 

[Evilroddy]

Antiwar:

There is much about American foreign policy which is praiseworthy and should be lauded. But the militarism embedded in so much of American foreign and domestic policy is toxic and is paupering the country while transferring scarce public monies to very few and very rich private hands. US War policy is a make-work project which kills millions, ruins tens-of millions of lives, ruins land, topples economies or states and destabilises large regions of the world.

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

 

[Ahlevah]

Antiwar:

There is much about American foreign policy which is praiseworthy and should be lauded. But the militarism embedded in so much of American foreign and domestic policy is toxic and is paupering the country while transferring scarce public monies to very few and very rich private hands. US War policy is a make-work project which kills millions, ruins tens-of millions of lives, ruins land, topples economies or states and destabilises large regions of the world.

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

Have you noticed that many people on this planet live under authoritarian or totalitarian regimes? These are not nice people. We need to carry a bigger stick than they do. Because if we don’t, who will?

 

[Evilroddy]

Have you noticed that many people on this planet live under authoritarian or totalitarian regimes? These are not nice people. We need to carry a bigger stick than they do. Because if we don’t, who will?

Ahlevah:

Given that the US supports authoritarian regimes like Brazil, Honduras, Guatemala, Morocco, Algeria, Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arrabia, Israel, The UAE, The Philippines, China, India, Indonesia, Poland, Hungary, Austria, and many more, so your criticism lacks bite. Furthermore, have you noticed that the American Governmeent is becoming more Authoritarian itself and is rapidly creating a public/private surveillance state while militarising its own police and law enforcement agencies and has recently been increasingly the use of military forces to backstop civilian forces in law enforcement roles. Put your own house in order before attacking others for their authoritarianism. Also don't "save" others from tyranny by bombing the shit out of them. That is not helpful.

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

 

[Antiwar]

What part of American foreign policy? How can one agree or disagree with ALL of American foreign policy ever? We have done a lot of things under a lot of different administrations. Even within one administration there are different parts of the government that have different goals/motivations.

What policy?

A. Read title. Look at who started the thread. Reply quickly. Move on.

B. Read title. Read #1 comment. Consider what #1 means. Think about #1. Think about how you want to respond. Start writing a thoughtful reply. Compare your reply to the thread theme. Decide if you want to reply to the thread theme or bypass it. Either way, write a thoughtful reply (even if it appears to be a smartass reply). Re-read your reply for clarity (for others) and errors. Edit comment. Consider deleting the parts of the reply that aren't thoughtful. Edit reply again. Edit reply again. Move on. Think of something you want to change that might make the reply more thoughtful. Return to thread and edit reply again.

 

[reinaert]

I don't.

It's just that right now the beast of war and exploitation has an enemy worse than itself.

 

[Antiwar]

What part of American foreign policy? How can one agree or disagree with ALL of American foreign policy ever? We have done a lot of things under a lot of different administrations. Even within one administration there are different parts of the government that have different goals/motivations.

What policy?

Allow me to break it down further. Click to expand, if quote auto-collapsed.

[not that important =>] Note that we're in the 'International Politics' forum.

[not that important =>] * Concise preferred but not required.

[important because it frames the thread by giving a range/timeline =>] * Starting no further back in history than 12 years before 1950, but mostly starting from 1950.

[trying to give space, signal that I'm not going to harangue replies quite as much =>] * Open mic.

[very important =>] * Keep in mind that the US government essentially has nuclear weapons ready to blow any nation away.

[very important =>] * What narrative do you believe that makes the directly above point a good thing?

 

[Antiwar]

Antiwar:

There is much about American foreign policy which is praiseworthy and should be lauded. But the militarism embedded in so much of American foreign and domestic policy is toxic and is paupering the country while transferring scarce public monies to very few and very rich private hands. US War policy is a make-work project which kills millions, ruins tens-of millions of lives, ruins land, topples economies or states and destabilises large regions of the world.

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

Thanks for the relatively [<= minor ouch] thoughtful reply.

I disagree. I think your comment starts as a Trojan horse strategy, and you don't really believe the first sentence.

Please consider my #12 comment.

Your "Cheers and be well" reminds me of an interesting YT channel's (Chubbyemu) signing off saying: (I hope I got it right; I don't feel like making sure) 'Take care of yourselves, and be well.'

Do you like this one?:

Peace out, MFRs.

 

[code1211]

Note that we're in the 'International Politics' forum.

* Concise preferred but not required.

* Starting no further back in history than 12 years before 1950, but mostly starting from 1950.

* Open mic.

* Keep in mind that the US government essentially has nuclear weapons ready to blow any nation away.

* What narrative do you believe that makes the directly above point a good thing?

Belief in America's foreign policy requires a willing suspension of DISbelief.

The globalist goals and politically motivated interference in the affairs of sovereign nations around the world are the tools and the outcomes of actions from flawed and unwise, misdirected, criminally motivated autocrats in Washington DC.

Of course, I could be wrong.

 

[Evilroddy]

Thanks for the relatively [<= minor ouch] thoughtful reply.

I disagree. I think your comment starts as a Trojan horse strategy, and you don't really believe the first sentence.

Please consider my #12 comment.

Your "Cheers and be well" reminds me of an interesting YT channel's (Chubbyemu) signing off saying: (I hope I got it right; I don't feel like making sure) 'Take care of yourselves, and be well.'

Do you like this one?:

Peace out, MFRs.

Hmm.

It seems wee bræ Antiwar was not burped today or is slightly constipated because what should come out of him in private is coming out in public. Poor little Antiwar.

Nonetheless thank you for your relatively (minor) civil reply which was otherwise devoid of any analysis or merit.

Your thought on my position on American Foreign Policy is wrong. Your comment #12 reminded me of a bad Jackkson Pollock painting if someone had used minimal thought and poor language skills instead of paint to throw at the canvas.

Since you don't seem to like, "Cheers and be well." as a closing note, then for you alone I will change it.

I didn't think much about rude sign off, but in its spirit:

Sod off until you can be civil, ya whining bawsack.
Evilroddy.

 

[craig]

Note that we're in the 'International Politics' forum.

* Concise preferred but not required.

* Starting no further back in history than 12 years before 1950, but mostly starting from 1950.

* Open mic.

* Keep in mind that the US government essentially has nuclear weapons ready to blow any nation away.

* What narrative do you believe that makes the directly above point a good thing?

Compare 1880-1950 to 1950-now. If the United States had not assumed leadership the world would now look very much like Orwell's 1984.

 

[Antiwar]

Hmm.

It seems wee bræ Antiwar was not burped today or is slightly constipated because what should come out of him in private is coming out in public. Poor little Antiwar.

Nonetheless thank you for your relatively (minor) civil reply which was otherwise devoid of any analysis or merit.

Your thought on my position on American Foreign Policy is wrong. Your comment #12 reminded me of a bad Jackkson Pollock painting if someone had used minimal thought and poor language skills instead of paint to throw at the canvas.

Since you don't seem to like, "Cheers and be well." as a closing note, then for you alone I will change it.

I didn't think much about rude sign off, but in its spirit:

Sod off until you can be civil, ya whining bawsack.
Evilroddy.

I'm being very civil, but I also like to get to the roots of issues and people's commentary. If you don't understand #12 (that the US government essentially has nuclear weapons ready to blow any nation away), then that's on you. If you want to pretend that you're above and beyond, go ahead, I can't stop you. If you'd like to elevate the discussion(s), then do your part.

If you're pissed at "Peace out, MFRs," you probably shouldn't be (because that's not specifically directed at anyone).

 

[Evilroddy]

@Antiwar

Seven other states have nuclear weapon inventories other than the US and Russia has more nuclear weapons than the USA. The problem isn't the nuclear weapons, it's the militarism which could lead to their use. Keep the militarism in check and the nukes continue to be weapons of deterence rather than first-strike weapons.

If we can neuter the militarists and lower tensions globally then there will be opportunities to lower nuclear weapon inventories further through verifiable nuclear-arms reduction treaties. That is the kind of cautious and verifiable process/progress that the world needs. I don't think that we'll ever get inventories down to zero anytime soon among nuclear-armed states, but we should not let the perfect good be the enemy of the possible good.

Ending as you see fit.
Evilroddy.