|
Actually the US should not have conquered Iraq in an illegal war justified using lies. That way the stage for Iraq's current situation would not have been set. You are still in iraq.
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 02:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 15:23 |
|
|
You still haven't answered where the US is killing millions of people right now.HorseLord posted:So when will america stop killing millions of people?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 02:06
|
|
|
Lichy posted:So you're saying millions of people have died throughout American history and that means America is still murdering millions of people? The processes america uses to kill millions of people have not stopped, so yes, they still are in fact murdering millions of people. I understand your government is still very upset that invading Syria turned out to be politically unsalable.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
HorseLord posted:The processes america uses to kill millions of people have not stopped, so yes, they still are in fact murdering millions of people. I understand your government is still very upset that invading Syria turned out to be politically unsalable. Which government? What?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
HorseLord posted:The processes america uses to kill millions of people have not stopped, so yes, they still are in fact murdering millions of people. I understand your government is still very upset that invading Syria turned out to be politically unsalable. Thank you codepink so much for saving the Syrian people from an imperialist intervention to overthrow their democratically elected lead-What?  Oh. OH.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 02:12
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:Thank you codepink so much for saving the Syrian people from an imperialist intervention to overthrow their democratically elected lead-What? Nice hotlink.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 02:14
|
|
|
Lichy posted:Which government? What? Oh, are you not a yank? Be more clear.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 02:15
|
|
|
HorseLord posted:Nice hotlink. What the hell. Is it 2006 again and no one told me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
HorseLord posted:Oh, are you not a yank? Be more clear. I'm actually a Russian citizen. I think when you start assuming everyone you are arguing with is literally your self-professed number one political enemy you need a break from D&D. A single look at my profile would have told you this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
HorseLord posted:So when will america stop killing millions of people? Are you including estimations of death counts related to stuff like the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory being bombed and the Iraq sanctions in tossing out this number?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
Lichy posted:I'm actually a Russian citizen. I think when you start assuming everyone you are arguing with is literally your self-professed number one political enemy you need a break from D&D. A single look at my profile would have told you this. I think you being Russian actually makes the poo poo you type worse. Americans at least have the excuse of being in the centre of their own rulers' propaganda; I would expect you to at least remember the time you took the USA's advice on everything and your life expectancy dropped by a decade.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 02:24
|
|
|
HorseLord posted:The processes america uses to kill millions of people have not stopped, so yes, they still are in fact murdering millions of people. I understand your government is still very upset that invading Syria turned out to be politically unsalable. It would be nice if one thing (America) was responsible for most of the deaths and problems in the world. Unfortunately it's not. Believing it is is childishly naive.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 02:29
|
|
|
ThirdPartyView posted:Are you including estimations of death counts related to stuff like the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory being bombed and the Iraq sanctions in tossing out this number? There are probably some super interesting discussions to be had about the cost effectiveness and ethics of sanctions in the unipolar world order. I am not sure HorseLord is a great choice for participant, but I am open to him (? although the username IS gendered) proving me wrong and posting something interesting and thought provoking on the topic.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 02:30
|
|
|
HorseLord posted:"people should not be poor when there is enough wealth to go around", "democracy should actually exist, the masses of people should actually participate in politics, and the marginalised and oppressed should take centre stage in that" are the two cornerstones of everything I think. It's impossible to pretend those things are destructive to vulnerable people unless your idea of vulnerable means oligarch. HorseLord posted:I think you being Russian actually makes the poo poo you type worse. Americans at least have the excuse of being in the centre of their own rulers' propaganda; I would expect you to at least remember the time you took the USA's advice on everything and your life expectancy dropped by a decade.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 02:34
|
|
|
HorseLord posted:I think you being Russian actually makes the poo poo you type worse. Americans at least have the excuse of being in the centre of their own rulers' propaganda; I would expect you to at least remember the time you took the USA's advice on everything and your life expectancy dropped by a decade. Ah yes those well known US advisors to Russia, Gorbachev, the gang of eight and Chubais. The Soviet Union didn't need anyone's advice to fall apart and thank loving god it did. Let's also conveniently forget USAID and how the US sponsored the loving strategic nuclear forces throughout the 90s so the army wouldn't sell nuclear weapons for food. Jesus dude.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 02:38
|
|
|
Lichy posted:Ah yes those well known US advisors to Russia, Gorbachev, the gang of eight and Chubais.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 02:41
|
|
|
Lichy posted:Ah yes those well known US advisors to Russia, Gorbachev, the gang of eight and Chubais. USAID is unironically a useful soft power tool of the empire and also unironically one of the best things the US does abroad. What I'm saying is, it's the American  Edit: what, you don't have waterborne applecarts?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 02:42
|
|
|
Lichy posted:Ah yes those well known US advisors to Russia, Gorbachev, the gang of eight and Chubais. Maybe he was thinking of Jeffery Sachs and Larry Summers? Also, the 1990s were a complete nightmare not only for Russia but for the entire region. Also, I would say the new poles would be Beijing and New Delhi, and Moscow and Tehran to in regional terms. China will experience slower growth (it had too) but it doesn't mean it isn't going to continue to extend its influence in Asia and Africa. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 02:53 on Jun 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Maybe he was thinking of Jeffery Sachs and Larry Summers? Also, the 1990s were a complete nightmare not only for Russia but for the entire region. India, much like Brazil, is the superpower of the future and always will be. As for China, Every one of its Asian neighbors hates it except maybe Pakistan, and Russia is ambivalent at best
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 02:59
|
|
|
lol if this was actually the Soviet Union ppl like horselords would be among the first purged
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:00
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Also, I would say the new poles would be Beijing and New Delhi, and Moscow and Tehran to in regional terms. China will experience slower growth (it had too) but it doesn't mean it isn't going to continue to extend its influence in Asia and Africa.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:01
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Maybe he was thinking of Jeffery Sachs and Larry Summers? Also, the 1990s were a complete nightmare not only for Russia but for the entire region. it's increasingly dubious whether Moscow is even going to be regional hegemony inside the fsu, china almost certainly won't be regional hegemon in east asia because too many strong states (Japan, Russia, India) opposes it, China's experience so far in expanding into africa hasn't actually brought the country many benefits the us will remain first among equals for a long time, if for no other reason than because it's actually one of the least hated relevant power in any region with conflicts
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:02
|
|
|
Reason posted:How do you feel about Russia's incursions into Ukraine now with the rise of fascism there? They had originally said that one of the reasons for their actions was a worry about nazi factions gaining power and today we see in Ukraine that they in fact are after the US media denied for months that that was the case. Right, we saw the right sector types waving the flag of Stepan Bandera and being used as shock troops during the Maidan. Those people ushered in an opposition government that made both the singing of the Internationale and critiquing the Nazi collaborators a crime. There was also talk of repealing the law that made Russian a recognized language in Ukraine, though that ultimately didn't pass. While I don't think diplomacy via bayonet is acceptable on its face, I also recognize a situation for what it is and understand there's more reason for Russia to annex a region full of ethnic Russians under threat by nationalist gangs than, say, invading the nation of Iraq, which I believe is at least an ocean away from the United States. As is the theme, I don't particularly like it but I understand it. icantfindaname posted:The Non-Aligned was significantly better than Communism and was a good-faith effort to form an international union of postcolonial countries pursuing British-influenced Fabian socialism, but since the neoliberal turn of the 1970s and the collapse of the Communist bloc it sort of no longer has any purpose. Letting Iran in is a pretty big joke too, at least Yugoslavia and Cuba weren't typical Communist states, Iran is no different than any other major Asiatic empire openly hostile to liberal values Yes! I was hoping someone would bring up the Non-Aligned Movement. That was a good first step toward the sort of coalition I'm talking about. Unfortunately firm imperial allies like Saudi Arabia number in its membership and it's not a well-functioning organ, as you point out. But gotta start somewhere, I suppose. Typo posted:it's increasingly dubious whether Moscow is even going to be regional hegemony inside the fsu, china almost certainly won't be regional hegemon in east asia because too many strong states (Japan, Russia, India) opposes it, China's experience so far in expanding into africa hasn't actually brought the country many benefits I'd point out that Chinese "expansion" into Africa not yielding a ton of benefits is pretty decent evidence their aim isn't exploitation and extraction, though I will grant you their economy being less advanced means such extraction would be far less efficient and immediately profitable than the imperial projects of the United States. R. Guyovich fucked around with this message at 03:06 on Jun 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:03
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:India, much like Brazil, is the superpower of the future and always will be. As for China, Every one of its Asian neighbors hates it except maybe Pakistan, and Russia is ambivalent at best It isn't one power individually but their is collective degree of influence that is important and certainly they are far more active than they were 10 years ago. Moreover, it is quite obvious each of them are carving their own spheres of influence and they aren't going to stop. As far as India, while they are not a super-power by any means, there has been a considerable expansion of their military in the last couple years and in all honesty if Pakistan didn't have nukes they wouldn't stand a chance (China wouldn't stick their neck out for them either). Homework Explainer posted:Right, we saw the right sector types waving the flag of Stepan Bandera and being used as shock troops during the Maidan. Those people ushered in an opposition government that made both the singing of the Internationale and critiquing the Nazi collaborators a crime. There was also talk of repealing the law that made Russian a recognized language in Ukraine, though that ultimately didn't pass. I wouldn't say the Russians in Crimea themselves were under any threat, but at same time many ethnic Russians wanted to return to Russia and probably a majority did when they were given the opportunity to do so. At this point, independent polls say they want to stay. quote:Yes! I was hoping someone would bring up the Non-Aligned Movement. That was a good first step toward the sort of coalition I'm talking about. Unfortunately firm imperial allies like Saudi Arabia number in its membership and it's not a well-functioning organ, as you point out. But gotta start somewhere, I suppose. Well the non-aligned movement wouldn't exist without the Soviet Union in the first place, and there is a reason it largely disappeared with the Soviet Union. As for the Saudis, certainly by at least the 1980s they weren't non-aligned. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 03:10 on Jun 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:04
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:While I don't think diplomacy via bayonet is acceptable on its face
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:06
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:Should have ended the sentence there, but you had to continue on with "but anywhere there is a Russian Moscow must rule." Negotiating terms with the opposition government to ensure the safety of Russians in Crimea would have been far more preferable, but do you really think that would have happened? The Yatsenyuk government wasn't exactly installed on a platform of openness with Russia, after all. Quite the opposite.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:08
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:
China's expansion into africa is a third dickwaving contest, a third a place to put excess capital, and a third expectation of future gains there's isn't really a central organized plan in china w.r.t africa or w/e, it's a bunch of actors within the chinese state trying to make $$$ in various ways, it's just not working that well
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:11
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:Negotiating terms with the opposition government to ensure the safety of Russians in Crimea would have been far more preferable, but do you really think that would have happened? Edit: Do you think the mythical roaving gangs of Nazis were better or worse for people in Eastern Ukraine than the Russian rocket barrages and drunken mercenaries shooting down airliners? Typo posted:China's expansion into africa is a third dickwaving contest, a third a place to put excess capital, and a third expectation of future gains Rent-A-Cop fucked around with this message at 03:14 on Jun 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:11
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:Negotiating terms with the opposition government to ensure the safety of Russians in Crimea would have been far more preferable, but do you really think that would have happened? The Yatsenyuk government wasn't exactly installed on a platform of openness with Russia, after all. Quite the opposite. Yes. Yes, I do. If only because of a credible implicit Russian threat to, for example, annex Sevastopol directly and plunge eastern Ukraine into a disastrous civil war. You're on board with the general idea that regional and global imperial powers can force unfavorable agreements on mildly unfriendly but unprotected states, I assume. I happen to think the Crimea annexation was functionally inevitable, but Russia could have pursued a diplomatic answer if it felt like it and lost a little more than if it just presented a fair accompli and told Kiev to go gently caress itself.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:14
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:
haha the funny thing is that chinese billionares are only beginning to realize that investing in foreign poo poo in countries with lovely protection of property rights like latin america and africa is actually very bad idea it's gonna be super interesting what happens the first time some african or latin american
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:15
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:It isn't one power individually but their is collective degree of influence that is important and certainly they are far more active than they were 10 years ago. Moreover, it is quite obvious each of them are carving their own spheres of influence and they aren't going to stop. As far as India, while they are not a super-power by any means, there has been a considerable expansion of their military in the last couple years and in all honesty if Pakistan didn't have nukes they wouldn't stand a chance (China wouldn't stick their neck out for them either). But they aren't acting in concert at all. Every one of those countries being referred to have next to nothing in common with one another aside from being big, either geographically or demographically. Just because some British guy lumped a bunch of underdeveloped countries together under a catchy acronym doesn't meaningfully change the global balance of power and certainly doesn't herald the emergence of a multipolar world. Shoot, if you want to talk hard power fundamentals then India is the only member of the BRICs that isn't actually worse off than it was 10 years ago. Russia and China are in terminal demographic decline and Brazil is a political basket case.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:15
|
|
|
Typo posted:it's gonna be super interesting what happens the first time some african or latin american
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:17
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:Yes. Yes, I do. If only because of a credible implicit Russian threat to, for example, annex Sevastopol directly and plunge eastern Ukraine into a disastrous civil war. You're on board with the general idea that regional and global imperial powers can force unfavorable agreements on mildly unfriendly but unprotected states, I assume. Maybe so. Russia would certainly have more diplomatic credibility if they had pursued that course of action.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:18
|
|
|
annexing crimea/invading donbass btw is almost done entirely for the sake of domestic politics and fucks over russia's ability to control ukraine for at least a generation or two, it's actually really bad move from a geopolitical pov
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:20
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:But they aren't acting in concert at all. Every one of those countries being referred to have next to nothing in common with one another aside from being big, either geographically or demographically. Just because some British guy lumped a bunch of underdeveloped countries together under a catchy acronym doesn't meaningfully change the global balance of power and certainly doesn't herald the emergence of a multipolar world. When I say collectively, I mean in total, each one working individually for their own interests. As for Russia and China "in terminal demographic decline" , so it much of the West. Typo posted:annexing crimea/invading donbass btw is almost done entirely for the sake of domestic politics and fucks over russia's ability to control ukraine for at least a generation or two, it's actually really bad move from a geopolitical pov The Russians needed Sevastopol and the way things are going in Ukraine it isn't going to be "one or two generations." Post-Madian reform has done has well as reform went after the Orange Revolution. The war in Donbass was more unnecessary, but even then ultimately it did the job it was suppose to. MH-17 was an impressive gently caress up. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 03:27 on Jun 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:21
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:When I say collectively, I mean in total, each one working individually for their own interests. Sure, but that's always been the case. There has never been a single moment where there weren't a bunch of other countries pursuing their own interests independent of the US. One of the fallacies of this "multipolar world" rhetoric is that it assumes that there was ever a time when the US could get literally everyone to do what it want, when no country has been able to do that even at the height of their power. quote:As for Russia and China "in terminal demographic decline" , so it much of the West. The US, Canada, and parts of Europe will actually be saved by immigration, and even if they weren't they are nowhere near the sheer demographic skullfucking that Russia and China are getting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:25
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:When I say collectively, I mean in total, each one working individually for their own interests. As for Russia and China "in terminal demographic decline" , so it much of the West. Well, (Continental) Europe and Japan are, the US and UK are not
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:26
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:
the problem is that with donbass/crimea you made is impossible for another pro-russian government to actually get elected in ukraine for another generation or two if they did nothing after another 10 years you would have had another switch back to a pro-russian government like after 2010. ukraine can have maidan 2.0 at this point and not have pro-russian government if russia havn't invaded another pro-russian government within the next 2-4 years was prob 75% Typo fucked around with this message at 03:32 on Jun 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:28
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Sure, but that's always been the case. There has never been a single moment where there weren't a bunch of other countries pursuing their own interests independent of the US. One of the fallacies of this "multipolar world" rhetoric is that it assumes that there was ever a time when the US could get literally everyone to do what it want, when no country has been able to do that even at the height of their power. The issue is the more of influence they have working for their own interests is only increasing. The results of Iranian-Russian cooperation in the Middle East are clearly evident. quote:The US, Canada, and parts of Europe will actually be saved by immigration, and even if they weren't they are nowhere near the sheer demographic skullfucking that Russia and China are getting. Yeah, things are not going so well on that front politically either in the US or Europe. It is very much "TBD." It is more likely the developed world (and nearly developed world) are both going to experience a demographic crisis. Also, Russia has immigration even if they don't like it. icantfindaname posted:Well, (Continental) Europe and Japan are, the US and UK are not Yeah, large sections of the electorate in both the US and UK are becoming hostile to immigration, so yeah that isn't a certainty. Typo posted:the problem is that with donbass/crimea you made is impossible for another pro-russian government to actually get elected in ukraine for another generation or two if they did nothing after another 10 years you would have had another switch back to a pro-russian government like after 2010. ukraine can have maidan 2.0 at this point and not have pro-russian government if russia havn't invaded another pro-russian government within the next 2-4 years was prob 75% Ukraine seems pretty on schedule for a political crisis at this point, and thats without voting being allowed in the Donbass. It might take the Russians longer but at same time they have gotten the certainty of securing a naval port that was absolutely essential and having complete leverage over Ukraine in the future through the Donbass. Almost all the economic damage Russia got in return was from a oil shock that very likely would have happened if they hadn't done anything (the Saudi's main target was always Iran). Ardennes fucked around with this message at 03:39 on Jun 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 15:23 |
|
|
I think it's probably fairly telling that while 'the logical extension of this argument is that you would have supported Nazi Germany ahead of Britain and America' is an appalling slur, etc., not a peep has been raised against the apellation 'tankie'.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 03:33
|
|
