Originally Posted by tonton
Libya for one. In the 1980's everyone thought Ghadafi was going to start a nuclear war. Instead, we traded with them and they became a peaceful nation, until recently, when we felt threatened that they were going to move the monetization of their oil to the European system, so we devised a way to make Ghadafi the boogeyman again.
You're out of your goddamned mind. We attacked Libya in 1986 for their support of terrorism. Ghadafi didn't give up
his WMD program until we pulled Saddam out of a hole.
Pakistan for another. Is the Pakistani government threatening to use their nukes on the US? Wanna guess why? Because we're not threatening to blow them up.
Pakistan is not as hostile towards the United States. When 9/11 occurred, what do you think happened? We told them: Get out of our way, or you're next. That's what. Pakistan doesn't want to nuke the U.S. because they know we'll annihilate them. Their leaders are not anywhere near as radical as Iran's.
Vietnam is another. After the war, we left them alone. We were so afraid that this militarized communist government was going to kill us all, but in the end... nothing. They are a peaceful nation that is becoming one of the fastest growing economies in the world.
Vietnam was never about a conventional threat from that nation. It was about our policy of stopping the spread of Communism. What started out as advisors, then crept all the way up to 500,000 troops. The mission wasn't defined. The military wasn't allowed to win. And of course they are not threatening us...that wasn't the point to begin with.
Meanwhile, the Soviet Union did exactly what we are doing now. Threatened other countries that didn't support them and their ideas, overextended their military, made the world their enemy, lost trade, and suffered for it.[
SDW, you live in an alternate reality....
Given the understanding of history you've demonstrated above, I think it's clear you're the one in bizarro world. You clearly don't understand the collapse of the Soviets for example. It wasn't about overextending their military. It was about their economy and the fact it couldn't support an arms race with the U.S. It was about their population and those of their states wanting freedom. It was about the realization of these things that did it for their leadership. The U.S., with all it's flaws, isn't even comparable. We don't invade and conquer nations. We have a totally different governmental and economic system. We have different values. Claiming we are the same shows how delusional and anti-American you actually are.
dictated to you by the pro-military people, some of whom are paranoid, some of whom are xenophobes, some of whom are Christian warriors, some of whom are psychotic, but mostly those who are invested heavily in the military industrial complex who just want to make a buck, and you accept everything they say like a mindless sheep. Look at history with an objective eye.
Right. Only enlightened liberals like you can see through the propaganda. Got it.