US Military's Knee on the Throat of the World

[Bush92]

What does your head and Epstein's cock have in common? Both are egg shaped.

Will you SOB like a SNOWFLAKE when Trump finishes like Jeffrey?

You are so insanely stupid it's laughable! Trump triggers you daily!

 

[Mac-7]

Are you aware no Koreans were consulted at Yalta?

Thats how the world worked in 1945

 

[Mac-7]

Did cotton die after the slaves were freed?

freed by white men btw

Freed by poor white men while many rich white men who kept slaves had statues to their "heritage" raised in public parks.

Chattel slavery allowed the US to prosper for nearly the first century of its existence. Without the advantages of unpaid labor and free land, America would have found it much more difficult to compete with Europe.

The Economics of the Civil War

Your economic assumptions are totally wrong

the 18th and 19th Century morals were far different than where we are in the 21st Century

but the entire world was equally bad or worse than what you complain about in American history

 

[Mac-7]

Can you name any other free elections anywhere on the planet that were monitored by international supervision in 1945?

Your idealism is targeting only America

The great menace in 1945 was communism where no free elections were ever held

 

[georgephillip]

You are making no sense. You are conflating...pretty much any type of greater than tribal structure with "capitalism" and assigning all the ills of the world to your imaginary category.

We were discussing warfare and its relationship to the formation of vast private fortunes. So far, you haven't provided any historical examples of when the latter existed without the former which is what I asked you for.

 

[Correll]

You are making no sense. You are conflating...pretty much any type of greater than tribal structure with "capitalism" and assigning all the ills of the world to your imaginary category.

We were discussing warfare and its relationship to the formation of vast private fortunes. So far, you haven't provided any historical examples of when the latter existed without the former which is what I asked you for.

Because as I pointed out, both are universal.


That does not imply in any way a connection. YOu are insane.

 

[georgephillip]

Sure. All of them. Every public figure, has someone who will say bad shit about them. That you think that proves ANYTHING, is you being bat shit crazy.

I asked you to supply another example of one specific charge against Trump by a former professor:

Obviously, every public figure has her critics, but this particular accusation seems unique to Don the Con.

 

[georgephillip]

You do know that marxism is a totalitarian ideology that has killed more people that Fascism, right?

I know capitalism is killing more people today than Marxism, do you?

How Capitalism Kills During a Pandemic

 

[georgephillip]

Your saying wacism, makes you look retarded

Are you denying the racism that existed in the US in 1945?
The officer corps of the US Army was composed almost entirely of white males at that time, and many openly proclaimed their supremacy and bragged about their inability to distinguish Korean from Japanese.

Your desperation to defend bigotry makes you pathetic and irrelevant.

Jim Crow "Justice" In Korea, The Case of Lieutenant Leon Gilbert | Digital Pitt

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You are making no sense. You are conflating...pretty much any type of greater than tribal structure with "capitalism" and assigning all the ills of the world to your imaginary category.

We were discussing warfare and its relationship to the formation of vast private fortunes. So far, you haven't provided any historical examples of when the latter existed without the former which is what I asked you for.

You still haven't shown how the 5 richest Americans needed war to create their fortunes.

Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Ellison.

Go!!!

 

[Correll]

Sure. All of them. Every public figure, has someone who will say bad shit about them. That you think that proves ANYTHING, is you being bat shit crazy.

I asked you to supply another example of one specific charge against Trump by a former professor:

Obviously, every public figure has her critics, but this particular accusation seems unique to Don the Con.

Sure. you asked. THe difference is that conservatives have lives, and don't have hoards of ideological hacks spending their days researching and compiling useless trivia like that, for me to easily post.


You lefties, especially you leftie academics have repeatedly proven that you will say anything to advance the lefty agenda. And lying? YOU DO THAT ALL THE TIME.


YOU HAVE NO CREDIBILITY. NONE.

 

[Correll]

Your saying wacism, makes you look retarded

Are you denying the racism that existed in the US in 1945?
The officer corps of the US Army was composed almost entirely of white males at that time, and many openly proclaimed their supremacy and bragged about their inability to distinguish Korean from Japanese.
Your desperation to defend bigotry makes you pathetic and irrelevant.
...

US policy in Korea, post WWII, was driving by legitimate foreign policy concerns.

You ignoring that, and focusing on Wacism, makes you look retarded.


Me pointing that out, is not the same as claiming that there was no racism in the US in 1945.


That you felt you had to lie about what I said, if your brain dealing with the fact that you know your position is morally and factually wrong.


You are in the wrong. YOu are the bad guy here. You support the bad guys.


The communists built a hell in their part of Korea, and we built a free and prosperous First World nation.


A nation that could ask US to leave anytime it wants, to get our "knee off their throat", if your view was correct.


Yet, they don't.


Because your view is insane, driven by your ideological madness and hate.

 

[Correll]

You are making no sense. You are conflating...pretty much any type of greater than tribal structure with "capitalism" and assigning all the ills of the world to your imaginary category.

We were discussing warfare and its relationship to the formation of vast private fortunes. So far, you haven't provided any historical examples of when the latter existed without the former which is what I asked you for.

You still haven't shown how the 5 richest Americans needed war to create their fortunes.

Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Ellison.

Go!!!

Marxist just say shit. THey know it is shit. They don't support it. When called on it. They are all Wally.

 

[U2Edge]

The Monroe Doctrine is from the early 19th century. The United States moved away from it at the start of the 20th century over 100 years ago.

That would've come as a big surprise to Woodrow Wilson:

Monroe Doctrine - Wikipedia

"Scholars such as Neil Smith have written that Woodrow Wilson effectively proposed a 'Global Monroe Doctrine' expanding US supremacy over the entire world.[citation needed]

"Some analysts[who?] assert that this prerogative for indirect control and sporadic invasions and occupations across the planet has largely come to fruition with the American superpower role since World War II.

"Such a expansion of the doctrine is premised on the 'nominal equality' of independent states.

"Such superficial equality is often undermined by material inequality, making the US a de facto global empire.[39]

"Smith argued that the founding of the United Nations played a role in the establishing this global protectorate situation."

Woodrow Wilson is the one that moved the United States away from it by intervening in World War I, European affairs. The Monroe Doctrine was about keeping affairs in Europe and the America's separate.

 

[U2Edge]

United States security was threatened by wars in Europe in World War I and World War II, and since World War II, its been a National Security priority to insure the safety and stability of Europe. U

That's the official "party line", claiming the US was interested only in maintaining stability and safety in Europe.

In fact, US elites knew they would finish WWII with 6% of global population and 50% of global wealth; virtually everything done since that time has been in service of a "Grand Area" subservient to US domestic needs:

American Foreign Policy

"During World War II, American planners were well aware that the United States was going to emerge as a world-dominant power, in a position of hegemony that had few historical parallels, and they organized and met in order to deal with this situation.

"From 1939 to 1945, extensive studies were conducted by the Council on Foreign Relations and the State Department.

"One group was called the War-Peace Studies Group, which met for six years and produced extensive geopolitical analyses and plans. The Council on Foreign Relations is essentially the business input to foreign policy planning.

"These groups also involved every top planner in the State Department, with the exception of the Secretary of State.

"The conception that they developed is what they called 'Grand Area' planning. The Grand Area was a region that was to be subordinated to the needs of the American economy. As one planner put it, it was to be the region that is 'strategically necessary for world control.'

"The geopolitical analysis held that the Grand Area had to include at least the Western Hemisphere, the Far East, and the former British Empire, which we were then in the process of dismantling and taking over ourselves.

"This is what is called 'anti-imperialism' in American scholariship.

"The Grand Area was also to include western and southern Europe and the oil-producing regions of the Middle East; in fact, it was to include everything, if that were possible.

"Detailed plans were laid for particular regions of the Grand Area and also for international institutions that were to organize and police it, essentially in the interests of this subordination to U.S. domestic needs."

That's a constructed fantasy. Yes, Noam Chomsky is a believer. Don't read or listen to Chomsky, at least for a while. Look at the raw data for yourself and then draw your conclusions.

 

[U2Edge]

1. Military spending is not an accurate way to measure military capability. I've already gone over this.

Would you say military spending is a necessary or a sufficient condition for Empire?

The US has 800 military bases outside its homeland because it spends more on "defense" than most of the rest of the world combined, and millions of innocent civilians are killed, maimed, or displaced.

Empires don't exist in the 21st century. The United States has never been an Empire at any time in its history. Not even close.

The United States does have many bases around the world, but most are small outpost. They exist primarily to aid the country they are in and the region they are in. They are also there to be prepared in case of an emergency. They are also involved in humanitarian relief throughout the third world. Such bases were critical in aiding civilian life in the region effected by the 2004 Tsunami.

The overwhelming majority of U.S. military force is stationed in the lower 48 states of the United States. In my opinion, not enough U.S. military force is deployed abroad given the global and national security risk out there.

 

[U2Edge]

Ukraine does not feel that the United States meddled in their country in 2014.

America's Ukraine Hypocrisy

"The extent of the Obama administration’s meddling in Ukraine’s politics was breathtaking.

"Russian intelligence intercepted and leaked to the international media a Nuland telephone call in which she and U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Geoffey Pyatt discussed in detail their preferences for specific personnel in a post‐Yanukovych government.

"The U.S-favored candidates included Arseniy Yatsenyuk, the man who became prime minister once Yanukovych was ousted from power. During the telephone call, Nuland stated enthusiastically that 'Yats is the guy' who would do the best job."

Great, Ted Carpenter, another Chomsky who never stops attacking America for any reason.

Its 2020, If Ukraine did not like America's actions in 2014, they would have severed relations and Yanukovych would still be in power. Two people in the State Department discussing the situation in Ukraine and what would be best for the United States in that situation. GOOD. That's their job! Its not an intervention. Nuland don't charge into Yanukovych's house forcing him to leave. Yanukovych was forced out by the Ukrainian people. The United States was critical of the human rights abuses of Yanukovych and they he treated people who were protesting his regime.

Interesting that your defending dictators like Yanukovych and Putin.

Ukraine is a free democracy, and they have chosen to be aligned with the United States, NATO, the European Union, instead of the Russian Federation which illegally invaded its territory and annexed its land.

Almost every single country on the planet recognizes Crimea as part of Ukraine to this day. There is no defending what Russia did. NONE!

 

[U2Edge]

If it was a staged coup as you claim, then Ukraine as an independent Democracy could launch sanctions against the United States and bring back Putin's puppets into Ukraine. Its been six years and they have not done that. WHY?

Because you can't sanction the global reserve currency especially if your military depends on that country for its Javelin missiles.

Why does Ukraine even need Javelin Missiles? Think about that carefully for a second.

 

[badbob85037]

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?

Isn't it great. No other country pose us a threat. But don't think they wouldn't give their right arm to destroy us. Maybe if you moved to Mexico where the military is a threat to no one you would feel better. You could set around the camp fire singing Kon By Ya or how ever you spell it. Freedom cost money and you don't seem to want to pay.

 

[georgephillip]

Bullshit. Your blame America first knee jerk is stupid and lazy and unsupported.

America is the biggest threat to global security today and millions of its victims from Korea to Kandahar are proof of that. You swallow "American Exceptionalism" without giving a single critical thought to how many innocent human beings are currently suffering to support your ignorance.

Dollar Recycling | Michael Hudson

"The U.S. strategy is to control of your economy in order to force you to sell your most profitable industrial sectors to US investors, to force you to invest in your industry only by borrowing from the United States.

"So the question is, how do China, Russia, Iran and other countries break free of this U.S. dollarization strategy?

"As now constituted, dollarization creates a circular flow that finances American military spending by forcing the costs onto foreign central banks holding dollar."