Kissinger’s more of an egoist of image than a realist about it
Word should be gotten to Nixon that if Thieu meets the same fate as Diem, the word will go out to the nations of the world that it may be dangerous to be America’s enemy, but to be America’s friend is fatal.
Europeans realizing they’re not America’s core interest after spending two years talking up a war with Russia is never going to stop being hilarious.
Citizens think it’s becoming unreliable regardless of who’s president.
Allies fear the US is becoming less reliable, with growing concern over a possible Trump return
Canada has straight up said we have a doomsday plan if the US goes really wonky.
Welp, time for Europe to start making nukes again. What could possibly go wrong?
[Happy French noises]
they can’t wait to give them to ukrainian nazis et al like they gave them to
Of all the things libs think is a sales pitch to vote for Biden “you have to vote for Biden or America’s global influence will decrease and other countries will realize were an unreliable and antagonistic ally” is probably their worst
yanks have never been reliable allies, just ask the people they left in Afganistan as one of the more recent examples
The Euros are convinced that
will come through and spare them. It will be interesting watching them realize that’s not quite the case.
As somebody who lives in a country that spends over the NATO agreed 2%, and for whom Russia is very threatening, I’m not entirely unhappy about what Trump is saying about European defence. We do need to put in more effort. Another thing is what he’ll actual do.
goddamn man it’s actually so fucking stupid to be fearful of Russia in Finland.
Yes, Russia, the state still grinding it out in Ukraine 2 years down the line, is suddenly going to invade Finland and trigger a war with the entire western world so they can uhhhhh steal Finland’s lovely lakes. You piss me off
Finland has been in NATO for less than a year. Before that we had a war in which USSR tried to take over the whole country and after failing at that, hovered over us for 50 years before collapsing.
But if you’re saying that we shouldn’t anymore be afraid of them now that we’re in NATO, perhaps you’re right. We’ll still need to be cognizant of the fact that Russia is our only potential enemy on this planet.
Yea we now who you are.https://duckduckgo.com/?q=mannerheim+hitler&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images
hovered over us for 50 years
“Their mere existence is a threat”
I guess you had to be there.
Think about what you’re saying.
- The USSR just existing next to you is a threat.
- But Russia is in the wrong for thinking NATO existing next to them is a threat.
Why is it OK when you say it but bad when they do? If you’re encouraging others to put themselves in your shoes (“you had to be there”), why can’t you put yourself in Russia’s shoes and see how they could reasonably perceive NATO as a threat?
I’m not actually saying that Russia just existing close to us is a threat. I’m saying that what Russia is doing and how it’s behaving, and how it talks publically is a threat.
But I do understand how NATO might be viewed as a threat to some nations or world leaders. I don’t immediately remember any particurarily good (liberal, free, non-oppressive, democratic) nations that NATO poses a risk to, however. Perhaps you can refresh my memory.
Removed by mod
I don’t immediately remember any particurarily good (liberal, free, non-oppressive, democratic) nations that NATO poses a risk to, however. Perhaps you can refresh my memory.
Liberal, free, non-oppreasive, democratic nations that oppose Western neocolonial interests tend to get coup’ed by the CIA and replaced with pro-Western fascists. Countries that do survive, like for instance Cuba, have their name dragged through the mud by an enormous propaganda machine - which also whitewashes or conveniently forgets the crushing of the leftist projects that don’t survive.
There are countless examples throughout history, but my go-to is Mohammed Mossadegh of Iran, in the 50’s. No doubt the line will be that “that was a long time ago so it doesn’t count,” but the CIA covered up their involvement for decades, and if I picked a more modern example you’d likely either deny involvement or say that the government deserved it.
Iran suffered under British colonialism for decades. In the 1800’s, the shahs signed all sorts of deals selling out the country at absurdly bad rates and no expiration, to fund their exorbitant lifestyles. A large scale popular movement ousted them, but the agreements remained, and a new dynasty took power with British support, and the exploitation continued. Britain secured enormous profit and wealth through Iranian oil while falsifying records to pay virtually nothing for it while the Iranians lived in abject poverty. For decades the Iranians sought a diplomatic resolution and we’re completely stonewalled.
Finally, another popular movement caused the shah to appoint Mossadegh as PM (a position that had previously been hand-picked by the British). Mossadegh nationalized the oil industry to enormous popular support, but the British responded with a blockade, and offered Eisenhower support in Korea and in forming NATO in exchange for having the CIA oust Mossadegh (an offer Truman had dismissed in disgust, as this was the first case of CIA involvement of regime change).
Mossadegh, like many Iranians at the time, saw their struggle as being only against the British and trusted the US to uphold the values it preached and saw it as a potential friend. The CIA took over every newspaper in the country and started publishing anti-government propaganda nonstop. They hired false flag protesters, who claimed to support the government and then wrecked shit (as well as hiring protesters to march against the government). Politicians, vote counters, religious leaders, journalists, anyone with an ounce of power was getting bribed by the CIA. Mossadegh believed that these were genuine and legitimate expressions of dissent and did nothing to crack down. Finally, a US diplomat told him a made-up sob story about people at the embassy getting death threats from his supporters and threatened to close it, and Mossadegh got on the radio and told his supporters to stand down and stay home - the next day, the CIA launched a coup that ousted him from power.
What followed was the restoration of the shah’s power, which included hunting down leftists with secret police, banning traditional religious garb to make the country appear more Western, and of course the continued exploitation of Iranian oil, the proceeds of which went straight to the king’s bank account. When the Iranian Revolution of 1973 happened, decade of political repression of the left allowed the Islamic fundamentalists to be the ones that took power, and the US allowed the shah to flee there which outraged the Iranians, considering that he had previously been installed by them.
I could tell you the same story over and over again about countries all around the globe. Many nations had resources stolen from them via violence and colonialism and these resources remain in the hands of the people who took them, and anyone who attempts to reassert control over their own resources is putting themselves in the crosshairs of the the US and NATO, whether through sanctions, seizing assets, CIA backed coups, or overt military aggression. But all they have to do is cover up the truth or present a bullshit justification, and by the time it falls apart it’ll be too late to do anything about it, it’ll have faded from the public consciousness, and people will assert, without reason or evidence, that “they don’t do that anymore” dispite having clear means and motive to and never having faced any sort of punishment for it. Meanwhile the historical examples can continue to be used to intimidate countries outside of the imperial core who don’t have goldfish memories, and understand that they could be next. So they either comply with neocolonial exploitation, or they take measures to prevent CIA infiltration, which then gets them derided as “authoritarian” by people like you - and if they do neither of these things, then they get coup’ed and replaced by a fascist.
The world’s been a scary place for people under Biden.
I’m not saying correlation is causation but it can feel that way, people might long for the more secure past time under Trump.
Delusional
you sure are
Why the heck and when was the United States considered reliable?
Reliable in what context?
Oh I see defensively reliable.
It might not make a lot of sense to overwhelmingly rely your national defense on a partner separated by an ocean.
I’m glad the EU is taking more responsibility for their own defense, and I’m also surprised to see so many European leaders acting surprised that they should have to, or the idea of a European defense as a novel idea.
The US was considered reliable because, until Trump, both parties had identical foreign policy.
Which is actually a bad thing, because it doesn’t give voters a choice.
Whith only two parties there isnt much to choose between anyway
There’s more than two parties to choose from. There’s only two realistic choices because as a population you all choose to make it that way.
Don’t get me wrong, the US isn’t alone here. We have the same problem here in the UK. I usually vote for a third party that more aligns with my own views, not one of the main two, and people tell me I “wasted my vote”. My response is: Did I waste my vote, or did you?
Simpsons of course parodied the situation best when the two aliens both ran for president.
you all choose to make it that way.
Boomers make it that way. They’ve made it that way for decades.
As if it even matters which shitty imperialist party is in power lol
It matters hugely even internationally. If you’re female it would I’m guessing based on the fact that want to ban abortions. As a guy, I wouldn’t want to be forced to be stuck with a kid.
Are you not paying attention? I’m Australian, and the difference is totally night and day.
Last I checked abortions were banned while dems held the house, congress, and the presidency.
Only one of them wants to actively kill my queer friends, so yeah, it matters.
No queer friends in Palestine, I’m guessing. But even if only people in the US deserve life, Biden isn’t doing anything to stop LGBQT rights from being dismantled. It will get worse even if Biden wins a second term. If Democrats didn’t codify Roe v. Wade when they had the chance, why do you think they will do anything concrete to protect them, when they can use their fear to scare them into voting for them.
Yup, the same dynamic as the right and immigration. More to gain using as a political football instead. The tactics are from the same, cynical playbook, and partisans are happy to play along when it’s their team.
Sure are a lotta bots in this thread
^ found one
I mean under Biden the US bombed Nordstream and is attempting to vassalise the EU through the Ukraine war. I don’t think the president matters that much, the US will continue to act in its own interests regardless of who the president is