US Military's Knee on the Throat of the World

[Mac-7]

The Korean War, The Vietnam War and wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. The total death toll of people killed by American troops in all these wars put together is over 12 million.

Sez who?

 

[Mac-7]

Which country poses the greatest threat to global peace?

Oooo, Lemme guess! The United States! Right? Now give me a big wet one for guessing right.

it is theoretically possible to have peace with communists and wacko muslims if we give in to ALL their demands

otherwise its off with the head

 

[georgephillip]

The Warsaw Pact was a group of slave countries under the domination of the Soviet Union, put together as a symbolic response to NATO. It was created after NATO and its disbandment in the 1990s has nothing to do with why NATO exists and why it should continue to exist.

NATO exists to facilitate US arm$$ales and prop up the US dollar as a global reserve currency, essentially requiring foreign states to pay for the US Empire:

Dollar Recycling | Michael Hudson

"My book 'Super Imperialism' was about how the United States has gained a free lunch by establishing the dollar as international reserve currency by replacing gold.

"I also showed that the U.S. balance of payments deficit is almost entirely military related to support its 800 bases around the world.

"Ending the gold-exchange standard in 1971 created a situation in which the excess U.S. dollars thrown off by the U.S. payments deficit end up in foreign central banks."

 

[toobfreak]

Which country poses the greatest threat to global peace?

Oooo, Lemme guess! The United States! Right? Now give me a big wet one for guessing right.

it is theoretically possible to have peace with communists and wacko muslims

It is NEVER possible to have peace with either group. You either kill them or they will kill you.

 

[georgephillip]

Those U.S. bases prevented World War III, the destruction of all life on the planet, prevented Soviet Communism from taking over the world, and continue to this day to bring stability to the world and the global economy

How's that "stability" working out in Iraq and Syria? Since 1945 the US has been the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet. It is the only country responsible for the deaths of millions of innocent civilians on the opposite side of the world. That was (is being) done to ensure 4% of the world's population controls 25% of global wealth. In case you haven't noticed, the stability of the global economy is currently being propped up by central banks bailing out the FIRE sector:

America’s Path To A FIRE Economy

 

[georgephillip]

Again, its not about how much you spend, but how much raw military capability you actually have in terms of troops, equipment and the quality and performance of those troops and equipment.

How would you rate Russian capability to invade the US versus a US/NATO invasion of Ukraine? If Russia had as many bases in Mexico and Canada as the US has in Europe and Asia, would that justify a declaration of war?

 

[georgephillip]

The United States has bases all over the world because countries want us there protected the global system that was created after World War II.

After WWII the US had 4% of the world's people and half of the world's wealth. Every foreign policy initiative since then has more to do with maintaining that imperial advantage than with promoting democracy or human rights.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegemony_or_Survival#:~:text=Chomsky's%20main%20argument%20in%20Hegemony,%2C%20political%2C%20and%20economic%20means.

"Chomsky's main argument in Hegemony or Survival is that the socio-economic elite who control the United States have pursued an 'Imperial Grand Strategy' since the end of World War II to maintain global hegemony through military, political, and economic means.

"He argues that in doing so they have repeatedly shown a total disregard for democracy and human rights, in stark contrast to the US government's professed support for those values.

"He further argues that this continual pursuit of global hegemony threatens the existence of humanity itself because of the increasing proliferation of weapons of mass destruction."

 

[esalla]

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?

Yea we had no right to stop those considerate nazies

 

[Mac-7]

Which country poses the greatest threat to global peace?

Oooo, Lemme guess! The United States! Right? Now give me a big wet one for guessing right.

it is theoretically possible to have peace with communists and wacko muslims if we give in to ALL their demands

otherwise its off with the head

It is NEVER possible to have peace with either group. You either kill them or they will kill you.

Are you speaking from the perspective of fence sitter who is never satisfied no matter which way the country goes?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There are numerous references that do not support your pro communist narrative

but you will reject them I’m sure

anyway you can start here

Your link contains support for my position on US meddling in Korea:

"When the Japanese defeat was assured, the Koreans immediately went to work to create an independent Korean government.

"First they formed the Committee for the Preparation of Korean Independence (CPKI). The committee quickly spread throughout Korea, with 145 branches by the end of August 1945.

"These branches were called People's Committees, and in many places they served effectively as the local government. On September 6, 1945, the CPKI elected fifty-five leaders to head the Korean People's Republic.

"This new Korean government favored reforms that would redistribute land and wealth, help workers, and uphold human rights for all Korean people."

"The United States arrives in the south

"Major General John Reed Hodge was appointed commanding general of the U.S. armed forces in Korea as soon as the war ended.

"The U.S. State Department was not able to make his mission in Korea very clear to him because the United States until that time had little understanding of Korea.

"While MacArthur instructed Hodge to treat the Koreans as a liberated people, Hodge also received orders from the U.S. secretary of state to 'create a government in harmony with U.S. policies.'

"Hodge, a very competent leader in battle but a poor diplomat (foreign relations negotiator), instructed his officers to treat Korea as an 'enemy of the state,' as quoted in Bruce Cumings's history, Korea's Place in the Sun: A Modern History."

Are you still mad that we stopped communism in half of Korea?

 

[Mac-7]

Are you still mad that we stopped communism in half of Korea?

He’s throughly pissed

 

[georgephillip]

You are a partisan ideologue. YOur pretense of caring so much about Peace, you showed to be false repeatedly already. Indeed, as with all the other issues too.

How can I be a "partisan ideologue" when I argue against supporting either major US political party?

Two Party Dilemma

"Upton Sinclair, political activist, social reformer, and writer had the answer over a hundred years ago— 'the two political parties are two wings of the same bird of prey. The people are allowed to choose between their candidates and both of them are controlled, and all their nominations are dictated by, the same [money] power.'"

 

[georgephillip]

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.

How likely is it peace will break out tomorrow and last a thousand years? About as likely as chicken-shits like you fighting the wars that make you rich.

 

[georgephillip]

Poor misunderstood Soviets.

View attachment 361497

 

[georgephillip]

Wow, going godwin you commie hump.

Fuck you with an aids infested tire iron.

 

[martybegan]

Wow, going godwin you commie hump.

Fuck you with an aids infested tire iron.

LOl, keep digging a bigger hole you Maoist dickhead.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

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.

How likely is it peace will break out tomorrow and last a thousand years? About as likely as chicken-shits like you fighting the wars that make you rich.

How likely is it peace will break out tomorrow and last a thousand years?

Zero.

Just highlighting, again, the idiocy of your claims.

 

[georgephillip]

Wow, talk about Tu Quo Que.

You got nothing.

The US Army prevented free elections in Korea in 1945.
Can you dispute that?
If not, you got nothing.

 

[martybegan]

Wow, talk about Tu Quo Que.

You got nothing.

The US Army prevented free elections in Korea in 1945.
Can you dispute that?
If not, you got nothing.

How could they have even organized elections when the occupations only started in August of 1945, and they still had to disarm and remove the Japanese troops and administrators?

 

[georgephillip]

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

How would any rational person believe they could ever know the intentions of a pathological liar?