US Military's Knee on the Throat of the World

[fncceo]

that would have unified the peninsula under democratic rule in 1945

If only they had unified, they would all have snappy uniforms, instead of food.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The So iets installed a dictator i the north

After Americans installed a military dictator in southern Korea, and three years after Americans prevented free elections that would have unified the peninsula under democratic rule in 1945.

Poor misunderstood Soviets.

America made us do it!!!

DURR.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

When have the rich ever existed in the absence of war or the threat of war?

Simply stupid.

If peace broke out tomorrow and lasted a thousand years, the rich would still exist.

Just as useless idiots like you would still exist.

 

[fncceo]

Poor misunderstood Soviets.

 

[georgephillip]

I know how korea would have faired under communist rule

the south would be as poor as the north

More likely a united peninsula would be richer today than either state today since it would not have been bombed into pebbles and dust by the heroic US Air Force between 1950 and 1953

I seriously doubt you know anything about the program Korea would have unified under in 1945 if not for an American military occupation:

People's Republic of Korea - Wikipedia

"The program of the PRK was presented in its 14 September twenty-seven point program.

"The program included: 'the confiscation without compensation of lands held by the Japanese and collaborators; free distribution of that land to the peasants; rent limits on the nonredistributed land; nationalization of such major industries as mining, transportation, banking, and communication; state supervision of small and mid-sized companies; …guaranteed basic human rights and freedoms, including those of speech, press, assembly, and faith; universal suffrage to adults over the age of eighteen; equality for women; labor law reforms including an eight-hour day, a minimum wage, and prohibition of child labor; and 'establishment of close relations with the United States, USSR, England [sic], and China, and positive opposition to any foreign influences interfering with the domestic affairs of the state.'"

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I don't think Russia and China can be viewed together. Russia seems to be about Putin's Russia reacquiring its territories of the Czarist era. That includes Ukriaine. Geogia and the Baltics. Putin's already reacquired Belarus. At the heart, I just don't think Russian's view personal autonomy as being as central to the reason of being as Westerners do.

I think it's guaranteed rich Russians have little regard for personal autonomy, but many Russians remember how rich Americans looted their country in the 1990s:

Dollar Recycling | Michael Hudson

"The ideal the United States would like China to do is to let U.S. investors do to it what they did to Russia after 1991.

"They told Russia that it needed to back its domestic Ruble issues by holding an equivalent amount of U.S. dollars, in the form of private dollar loans or dollar-denominated U.S. Treasury securities.

"This involved borrowing dollars from the United States instead of simply issuing domestic rubles.

"Russia paid 100 percent interest a year to U.S. investors in 1993-1994.

"Yet Russia did not need foreign exchange to pay domestic ruble-wages or to pay for domestic goods and services.

"But neoliberal advisors convinced Russia to back all Ruble money or domestic currency credit it created by backing it with U.S. dollars. Obtaining these dollars involved paying enormous interest to the United States for this needless backing.

"There was no need for such backing.

"At the end of this road the United States convinced Russia to sell off its raw materials, its nickel mines, its electric utilities, its oil reserves, and ultimately tried to pry Crimea away from Russia."

"Russia paid 100 percent interest a year to U.S. investors in 1993-1994.

Find any proof of Hudson's moronic claim?

 

[georgephillip]

Nope asshole. Blame China.

For Trump

Trump's Conflicts of Interest in China - Center for American Progress

 

[georgephillip]

The only good communist is a dead one.

Rube.

 

[Yarddog]

Which country poses the greatest threat to global peace?
Who gets rich from that?

"JULY 3, 2020
The US Military Has Its Knee on the Throat of the World
by ELLEN TAYLOR"

"As Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, observed, 'The character of war is changing frequency'.

"The messy, scrappy, unsatisfying, asymmetrical wars in the devastated Middle East have lost the interest of our warriors, as two worthier adversaries, China and Russia, have been conjured up, and now grip their attention.

"Although our budget comprises over 40% of the world’s military spending, and China and Russia spend respectively one-sixth and one-tenth of ours, the Pentagon refers to them generously as “near-peers”.

"China and Russia are not eager for these roles.

"We have had to torment them, like reluctant bulls in a bullfight.

"We sail our warships within twelve miles of their shores, conducting vast military exercises in the South China Sea, the Black Sea, the Persian Gulf and the Japan Sea.

"Thousands of US troops marched across Europe this spring to perform military exercises along Russia’s borders.

"Arleigh-Burke class guided missile destroyers, with aerial escort, performed maneuvers this May, close to the Russian coast in the Barents Sea, to enforce 'freedom of navigation'".

Time to defund the Pentagon?

They can sail their warships within 12 miles of our coast too, oh wait, they aren't a blue water navy.

Trump ran on reducing tensions with Russia and reducing interventions, and you people dogpiled him and got him to back off on those policies.


I voted for him partially because of those positions. He won republican primaries in military friendly states, after making anti-intervention speeches, shocking pundits.


Where were you when your side (and many from my side) were beating the war drums against Putin?


I emailed the President and my congressmen on those issues. But I was not heard over the din of your people.


Where were you?

they want to have it both ways... PUTIN OWNS TRUMP.. blah blah... Putin and Trump connected.. blah blah... NOW Trump has been tormenting Russia .

Communists like this dim bulb don't need facts. He must be some old marxist professor thinking class is still in session

 

[georgephillip]

Dude, you are fucking worthless.

An old commie leftover.

You're the latest Lost Cause.
Maybe you should drink some bleach?

 

[georgephillip]

Knee on the throat of the world ? From a historical perspective the US is the most benevolent super power the world has ever known.

Compared to who?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The only good communist is a dead one.

Rube.

Is that why Russia has a larger GDP than us?

 

[martybegan]

Dude, you are fucking worthless.

An old commie leftover.

You're the latest Lost Cause.
Maybe you should drink some bleach?

Wow, going godwin you commie hump.

Fuck you with an aids infested tire iron.

 

[georgephillip]

Again, he wouldn't have cared about elections.

Where in Eastern Europe did they care about Elections?

Elections in Eastern Europe in 1945 were about as free as they were in eastern Alabama or Tennessee, or Texas, and none of those illegitimate contests changes the fact the US prevented free elections in Korea.

 

[martybegan]

Again, he wouldn't have cared about elections.

Where in Eastern Europe did they care about Elections?

Elections in Eastern Europe in 1945 were about as free as they were in eastern Alabama or Tennessee, or Texas, and none of those illegitimate contests changes the fact the US prevented free elections in Korea.

Wow, talk about Tu Quo Que.

You got nothing.

 

[Correll]

LOL!!!! I did not claim that we had Peace. That you pretended I did, and addressed that, is called a Strawman, and is the type of dishonest tactic people use, when they know that are defending a political position that is bullshit.

Based on your postings, I inferred you believed Trump was advocating for peace? If so, you would have to explain why his drone policies have killed more civilians than Obama's?

I was perfectly clear I was referring his intentions, not claiming any great results on this front.


YOur pretense of confusion is not convincing.


You are a partisan ideologue who is more concerned with advancing the ideology than any actual benefits to the People.

 

[my2¢]

I'm a fan of Virtual Railfan Grab Bag on YouTube. Last week there was a heck of a lot of movement of new military vehicles and tanks, especially passing through Santa Fe Junction in Kansas City. Had me wondering what was up?
From January of this year:

 

[Correll]

Bullshit. He barely touched on the issue and got burned by massive political backlash. From both sides.

How likely is it Trump can name all NATO states or even knows how many states belong to the organization? He is a con man who lies as often as he tells the truth. Anyone who believes anything he says is a blind partisan, a bigot, or a troll.

You don't need to be an expert on defense policy to know that promising to fight wwiii over Estonia is fucking stupid.


That you would pretend otherwise, is you knowing that you are losing the point and being dishonest to avoid admitting it.


My point stands.



He barely touched on the issue and got burned by massive political backlash. From both sides.



Would have been the perfect time, for principled anti-war people to come forward, across party lines, to support him...


If they were serious about Peace.



But, as we can see, Peace is not what they care about. Scoring Partisan points is.

 

[Correll]

It is obvious that Peace is less important to you that bashing the "rich".

When have the rich ever existed in the absence of war or the threat of war?

That was dramatic and silly.


My point stands.


It is obvious that Peace is less important to you that bashing the "rich".

 

[Correll]

You had a chance to celebrate one of history's great desegregaters, and instead you felt a need to attack Trump.

Neither Trump nor Nixon qualifies as a champion of integration, and one of them is an imbecilic racist.

...

I pointed out some impressive Nixon actions on the "civil rights" front, and you had the opportunity celebrate it.


Instead, you made a partisan attack.


That shows that you don't really care about civil rights, except as a tool to advance your partisan ideology.


That was you losing this debate. You can stonewall from here on out if you want, but all you will be doing is demonstrating how dishonest you are.