The neoliberal left

[VarrangianBard]

Yet having a (de facto) two-party system, with two right wing parties, has produced a country that goes to war (rather invade or bomb) more often than any other. It would do good to change that while there is still time and it isn't past the point where polarization itself disables any prospect.

I think you have the causality reversed there. Us being so good at war means it's easier for the left to support it than to fight against it.

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

I think you have the causality reversed there. Us being so good at war means it's easier for the left to support it than to fight against it.

Not winning a single war for decades while skyrocketing the national debt is being so good at war? Are you also selling rain? Becouse I could use some...

 

[Kyriakos]

^ +1 for username (Varrangianbard)

 

[VarrangianBard]

We won gulf, we won Serbia. We removed Saddam. We removed Qaddafi. We have a bigger military than the rest of the world combined. I'd say we're good at war. Which is why both parties see it as the solution to everything, even in situations where it's objectively a terrible idea.

 

[VarrangianBard]

^ +1 for username (Varrangianbard)

Thanks, I was pretty pissed I didn't notice the typo.

 

[Kyriakos]

Thanks, I was pretty pissed I didn't notice the typo.

I was alarmed by it, yet googling it it seems some people just write with with double r anyway.
Though you can pm a moderator if you want to change it to varangianbard; they will help.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Greeks are so much more noble than USians. If they were in control of the world's most powerful military they'd never use it.

Oh.

Wait.

 

[Kyriakos]

Greeks are so much more noble than USians. If they were in control of the world's most powerful military they'd never use it.

Oh.

Wait.

Just saying that you could be a force for good, or at least more for good. And not just for others, but for your own selves
As for Greece; don't worry, we managed to lose at least four empires, while the US at worst can only lose one.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

That "be a force for good" bit has never worked. It seems extremely unlikely that it ever will.

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

Greeks are so much more noble than USians. If they were in control of the world's most powerful military they'd never use it.

Oh.

Wait.

If Greeks were missusing the world's most powerful military the USians would keep their mouth shut - constantly and unconditionaly with smile and brownie points.

Oh.

Wait. They've got THEM!

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

That "be a force for good" bit has never worked. It seems extremely unlikely that it ever will.

Actually WWI and WWII begs to differ.

 

[VarrangianBard]

That "be a force for good" bit has never worked. It seems extremely unlikely that it ever will.

South Korea is a thing. And kosovo. And kuwait. Apparently we only do right by people whose name starts with k. Good news for the kurds I guess.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I should have ended that with "in the long run."

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

while the US at worst can only lose one.

I hope that to hope so is the right thing to hope for.

South Korea is a thing. And kosovo. And kuwait. Apparently we only do right by people whose name starts with k. Good news for the kurds I guess.

Kosovo is crime syndicate led state supressing minorities with USian military base in it. Kuwait is undemocratical ahistorical piece of territory created by British for facile acces to oil resources via divide and control method.

 

[VarrangianBard]

Ok, so... we should ignore the repression of ethnic minorities and allow large balance of power shifts in an already volatile region?

 

[Berzerker]

South Korea is a thing. And kosovo. And kuwait. Apparently we only do right by people whose name starts with k. Good news for the kurds I guess.

I dont know, we backstabbed them under Nixon and Bush... Maybe the 3rd time's the charm

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Ok, so... we should ignore the repression of ethnic minorities and allow large balance of power shifts in an already volatile region?

No, we should keep on doing the best we can until someone else comes along to do it, but we should always keep in mind that we are most likely doing at least as much harm as good.

 

[VarrangianBard]

No, we should keep on doing the best we can until someone else comes along to do it, but we should always keep in mind that we are most likely doing at least as much harm as good.

I disagree. I think if we can achieve our goals without an occupation, and those goals are conducive to long-term stability it's fair for us to take action. Unfortunately we haven't done that since the 90s

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I disagree. I think if we can achieve our goals without an occupation, and those goals are conducive to long-term stability it's fair for us to take action. Unfortunately we haven't done that since the 90s

Generally speaking, dictators provide the longest term stability. So "goals conducive to long term stability" usually are going to be obviously "bad" and we tend to avoid them. An overthrown dictator leads to chaos, occupation or not, but we usually associate that with "good."

 

[VarrangianBard]

IMO the best model is to have a dictatorship transition into a functional democracy, by providing initial stability, which later carries over into long term stability through free elections. Thats how it happened in almost every example of a functional democracy there is today. So yeah. Killing dictators for no reason is bad. Trying to create democracy out of nothing is also bad. I'd say regime change in general is a bad goal to shoot for for those reasons. But there are also other war goals that are not inherently terrible, like aiding the seccession of a repressed minority group, or the defense of a smaller country against an aggressor.