International Thread 3

[Which Tyler]

Is that a favour to Boris? Possibly in exchange for the NHS?

Or just pig-ignarance and posturing as usual?

[Corvinus85]

Gunman kills six people at a hospital in the Czech Republic.

Quote

A gunman has killed six people in a hospital waiting room in the Czech city of Ostrava before shooting himself in the head, police say.

 

[The Anti-Targ]

On 12/10/2019 at 10:34 PM, Loge said:

Haven't seen this mentioned so far: The Trump administration is blocking the nomination of new judges on the WTO's Apellate Body. That means it becomes disfunctional and the WTO loses its capability to settle disputes between member states.

 

 

On 12/10/2019 at 10:54 PM, DireWolfSpirit said:

Wow, that doesn't seem normal.

I actually have mentioned this some time ago. This has been a long term problem, and it is very serious for international trade. It also ironically hurts the USA a fair bit. Because the USA is taking a number of cases to the WTO which is expected to find in favour of the USA. New Zealand is a party to some of those cases in support of the USA. But the loser of every case at the first level is guaranteed a right of appeal if they choose to take it. And with no appellate body (today I believe it went down from three judges (barely functional) to one judge (non-functional) the WTO rule stipulate that the original position of the losing party remains in force until the appeal is heard. So the USA will win its case in the WTO, but nothing will change if an appeal is lodged. And if the USA tries to bully its way through then it will run roughshod over the rules based trading system, and, well, chaos and rising tension.

One of our senior diplomats just under a month ago was saying to our team that we're headed to a Thucydides trap situation, and this specific possibility of not having a functional appeals system is a significant step in that direction. With a bit of luck the war won't be a shooty one, but an economic one would still be bad.

[Varysblackfyre321]

Bolivian rebels against the Facist usurpers are bracing for potential/likely military backlash :https://thegrayzone.com/2019/12/24/bolivia-free-territory-chapare-coup-invasion/

Also, the fascists are very candidly asking for Israel's help in quelling the left-wing terrorism in the country.

Ignoring the fact that a main reason that they are in power is because of right-wing terrorism.

I am not surprised there's little or no calls for US to intervene in Bolvia in order to help restore Democracy.

After all if a dictatorship benefits powers in Europe and the US, it's a necessary evil. 

If it doesn't you're a heartless monster if you don't support whatever methods utilized to oust the government by foreign powers. 

 

[Varysblackfyre321]

On 6/21/2019 at 1:04 AM, Heartofice said:

So going back to the original point we were talking about, yes I would rather the US was the dominant global power and sometimes you need to do unsavoury things to keep it that way. Don’t be naive and think we are all living in a hippy commune. Dictators are going to be installed,  now do you want them to be under US control or Russia’s? You decide 

This is an old post that I've already replied to but re-reading this thread  I realized something I should have brought up in regards to the bolded. If the US had decided to overthrow and Institute a dictatorship in your country I don't think you’d really care if it helped the US secure more power on a global stage. Or really more realistically,  just secure more money for a select few private interest. 

Presuming you don't like how said dictator is running the country, I don't think you'd care if some fat Americans on the internet said the US backing said dictator is bad did not suffer US government reprisal. I don't think you'd care much for the fact the US has(at this moment at least), have elections

If so why? Again you put much stock in the Democratic nature of the US as being the key difference. The only way for it actively matter is if the majority of the public(assuming their actual opinions shaped America’s foreign policy greater than a few special interest groups),  agrees with me and see the type of US Imperialism you applaud as not only evil but unacceptable. As in they’d disagree with you. 

You personally would be granted no more social/political freedoms under a US backed dictatorship or a Russia backed-dictatorship. 

I remember you lambasting me for being against a US backed coup in Venezuela because of the Human rights abuses there.  Mass-human suffering to you at the behest of a dictator is a travesty that demands military action from foreign superpowers-unless said dictator is friendly to the US. I think it'd be appropriate you never mention any supposed human rights abuses by a regime the US or UK hopes to topple. 

Because that's not the issue for you. The issue is whether or not said regime is friendly enough to the US or Uk, or just powerful entities that control it. 

 I think you realize the odds of the US staging an outright coup in your country, is infinitely lower than doing it in some poor Latin-American country with Socialist leanings, that doesn't have the courtesy of a fully-stocked nuclear arsenal. You can comfortably wag your finger at the mere thought of not cheering on US Imperialism because you yourself don't have to worry that much about it not negatively impacting your country. Or at least you don't see it having a negative impact. 

You spoke from a position of privilege. The privilege of already being on the right side of the US.

[Heartofice]

2 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

This is an old post that I've already replied to but re-reading this thread  I realized something I should have brought up in regards to the bolded. If the US had decided to overthrow and Institute a dictatorship in your country I don't think you’d really care if it helped the US secure more power on a global stage. Or really more realistically,  just secure more money for a select few private interest. 

Presuming you don't like how said dictator is running the country, I don't think you'd care if some fat Americans on the internet said the US backing said dictator is bad did not suffer US government reprisal. I don't think you'd care much for the fact the US has(at this moment at least), have elections

If so why? Again you put much stock in the Democratic nature of the US as being the key difference. The only way for it actively matter is if the majority of the public(assuming their actual opinions shaped America’s foreign policy greater than a few special interest groups),  agrees with me and see the type of US Imperialism you applaud as not only evil but unacceptable. As in they’d disagree with you. 

You personally would be granted no more social/political freedoms under a US backed dictatorship or a Russia backed-dictatorship. 

I remember you lambasting me for being against a US backed coup in Venezuela because of the Human rights abuses there.  Mass-human suffering to you at the behest of a dictator is a travesty that demands military action from foreign superpowers-unless said dictator is friendly to the US. I think it'd be appropriate you never mention any supposed human rights abuses by a regime the US or UK hopes to topple. 

Because that's not the issue for you. The issue is whether or not said regime is friendly enough to the US or Uk, or just powerful entities that control it. 

 I think you realize the odds of the US staging an outright coup in your country, is infinitely lower than doing it in some poor Latin-American country with Socialist leanings, that doesn't have the courtesy of a fully-stocked nuclear arsenal. You can comfortably wag your finger at the mere thought of not cheering on US Imperialism because you yourself don't have to worry that much about it not negatively impacting your country. Or at least you don't see it having a negative impact. 

You spoke from a position of privilege. The privilege of already being on the right side of the US.

Think you completely missed the point here.

If larger countries are always going to pick on the small ones, then would you rather it was the US, or Russia installing dictators?

[kiko]

34 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Think you completely missed the point here.

If larger countries are always going to pick on the small ones, then would you rather it was the US, or Russia installing dictators?

To be honest. It's better to have the bad luck of living under a Russia backed dictator.

If you don't believe, see what happened to the people of Cuba after they dared to throw out their US backed dictators. This triggered several attempts at US backed counter revolution and of course complete economic strangling by the USA. Their situation became so bad that they had no other choice than going to the only other power at that time, and became a USSR backed dictatorship, which left the people in an equally bad situation (except better Healthcare)

[Heartofice]

1 minute ago, kiko said:

To be honest. It's better to have the bad luck of living under a Russia backed dictator.

If you don't believe, see what happened to the people of Cuba after they dared to throw out their US backed dictators. This triggered several attempts at US backed counter revolution and of course complete economic strangling by the USA. Their situation became so bad that they had no other choice than going to the only other power at that time, and became a USSR backed dictatorship, which left the people in an equally bad situation (except better Healthcare)

Yeah, I don't live in Cuba. From my own personal point of view, as a westerner, I would rather it was the USA transmitting its soft power around the world, than China or Russia. Call me selfish or whatever, I don't really care. 

Unfortunately we live in a world where major powers use smaller ones for their own ends, and they don't do it in ways we like. That is just the way the world is. Would I rather it didn't happen? Sure. It is happening and will continue to happen. 
 

[Liffguard]

10 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

I would rather it was the USA transmitting its soft power around the world, than China or Russia.

Honest question, why?

[Heartofice]

15 minutes ago, Liffguard said:

Honest question, why?

America is the least worst of those options clearly. 

[Liffguard]

16 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

America is the least worst of those options clearly. 

Is it? Maybe internally (maybe). But I'm not sure the historical record of the USA's foreign interventions bears this out.

[Heartofice]

Just now, Liffguard said:

Is it? Maybe internally (maybe). But I'm not sure the historical record of the USA's foreign interventions bears this out.

As a Brit, yeah I’d rather America was the one taking charge and not China, it’s better for me.

[Liffguard]

How nice for you. I'm sure the relatives of the Middle-Eastern and South American dead are happy for you.

[Liffguard]

I'll admit, I was expecting to get an answer alluding to human rights or democracy or something similar. I don't think that the USA's international influence has ever really promoted these things, but I also accept that the opposite view is hardly uncommon. I was ready for a discussion about to what extent the USA actually supports the ideals that it frequently claims to support.

I honestly wasn't expecting the answer to be just literally self-interest.

So thanks for the candour, I guess.

[Heartofice]

4 minutes ago, Liffguard said:

I'll admit, I was expecting to get an answer alluding to human rights or democracy or something similar. I don't think that the USA's international influence has ever really promoted these things, but I also accept that the opposite view is hardly uncommon. I was ready for a discussion about to what extent the USA actually supports the ideals that it frequently claims to support.

I honestly wasn't expecting the answer to be just literally self-interest.

So thanks for the candour, I guess.

No it's quite simple. Which hegemonic power would I rather be in charge of the world right now? The USA or China, or even Russia. It certainly wouldn't be the totalitarian communist country or the dictatorship.. it would probably be the one most closely aligned to Britain and Western values. 

Why wouldn't it be about self interest? I think it's pretty silly to get all idealistic about these things. We don't live in a utopia and as much as we all wish the world played nice, it doesn't. If everyone is vying for power and control, I know which of those players is better for me. 
 

[kiko]

Think about it this way: China is making big inroads into African countries. Seems they feel much better treated by them than by USA, why could that be?

[maarsen]

22 minutes ago, kiko said:

Think about it this way: China is making big inroads into African countries. Seems they feel much better treated by them than by USA, why could that be?

They haven't waited long enough. 

[Varysblackfyre321]

4 hours ago, Heartofice said:

Think you completely missed the point here.

If larger countries are always going to pick on the small ones, then would you rather it was the US, or Russia installing dictators?

If it was your country would honestly care if the Dictator killing and torturing your family was a US, or Russia installed dictator?

I do not think you would. 

If not, please explain

You missed the point of my initial post. Which was really just saying the US shouldn't overthrow democracies, and install dictatorships.

If a US backed dictator is a racist homophobic Christian-Supremechist should I be joyful that an entity that would see people like me dead, is in power and another liberal democracy is dead? 

I do not think so.

I do not think the racists, homophobic, right-wingers, that the US props up are good for the world. It certainly not good for me given I live in this world.

Also, again I must point out your hypocrisy, and deceitfulness

You did not give a damn whether or not Venezuelans where suffering under a dictatorship. Your only true grievance was that they would be suffering under a none-US subservient dictatorship. 

3 hours ago, Heartofice said:

Yeah, I don't live in Cuba. From my own personal point of view, as a westerner, I would rather it was the USA transmitting its soft power around the world, than China or Russia. Call me selfish or whatever, I don't really care. 

Yes, you are selfish, but more than that your selfishness, isn't even profitable for you as a normal citizen.  A lot of thefacets of how US foreign Imperialism, mostly just benefits a few private interests. And has pretty been used to justify the erosion of it’s citizens rights. 

 It's not really benefiting unless you’re one of the companies has monetary interest in the countries the US could take control of.

I’m sure the trillions spent in Iraq and Afghanistan could probably be used to save a lot more lives in America. 

Also hypocrite, willing to moan about the travesty of the suffering going 

2 hours ago, Heartofice said:

As a Brit, yeah I’d rather America was the one taking charge and not China, it’s better for me.

Meh. Why? China would allow you to have your little elections, and function internally in much they same they you had before even if the US say were to cease to exist next week.

They would not convert you to communism(which they debatedly are not-theres a reason so many companies move their). They cannot actually invade you(nor would they try) based on your geological location, and the fact your country has nukes. 

You get to keep your precious little very vaguely alluded to Western/Britain values.

You personally have no good reason to see a US hegemony as a great end in it of itself worthy of dismantling dozens upon dozens of actual democracies worldwide. 

3 hours ago, Heartofice said:

Unfortunately we live in a world where major powers use smaller ones for their own ends, and they don't do it in ways we like. That is just the way the world is. Would I rather it didn't happen? Sure. It is happening and will continue to happen. 

And US could support the liberal Democracies it just often destroys. I personally would rather have it be they’d establish diplomatic and economic ties with these countries and help prop them to better secure themselves against imperialism from other superpowers. Often times the leaders of the countries the US wants to do regime change in are more than willing to work with the US. On their terms, which would not have their people and/or land exploited, so by a few private interests in the US or global stage. A mutually beneficial relationship. Take Ho minh. Guy wanted the US’ help in protecting his country from Russia and Chinese Imperialism. And asked for it repeatedly. Rebuffed at every turn, and we’d get the Vietnam war which killed tens of thousands, 

Or Cuba. The US  attempts at subjugation, rather than attempts at cooperation simply pushed the small country  into the arms of the USSR. The sanctions against it are absurd. They actively hurt both the US as a country and Cuba. They are not needed. 

2 hours ago, Heartofice said:

No it's quite simple. Which hegemonic power would I rather be in charge of the world right now? The USA or China, or even Russia. It certainly wouldn't be the totalitarian communist country or the dictatorship.. it would probably be the one most closely aligned to Britain and Western values. 

Because? Like, the US is not spreading these very vaguely alluded to values by you know instituting/ supporting dictatorships.

Like, I don't think supporting an Islamic theocracy like Saudi-Arabia which into propagates Wahabism, and funds Islamic terrorist organizations(many of which attack US citizens), is promoting any ”Western value” by any most people’s criteria. 

Maybe extreme racism, xenophobia,  homophobia and a blatant hostility to anything secular are British and Western values to you?  I mean that does tend to be the ideological transition of many of the places the US successfully overthrows. 

If not then, I honestly do not see how the US having more ”Western values” (whatever the hell you actually mean by that-I’d be surprised if you could describe some that weren't trampled upon by the US on global stage), really matters. 

It just seems superficial. 

It's like being happy your Christian neighbor was killed by a Christian rather than being murdered by a Muslim. 

2 hours ago, Heartofice said:

Why wouldn't it be about self interest? I think it's pretty silly to get all idealistic about these things. We don't live in a utopia and as much as we all wish the world played nice, it doesn't. If everyone is vying for power and control, I know which of those players is better for me. 

Clearly you don't. None of these players are good for you as an individual if they all act the same way on the global stage. 

[Heartofice]

Quote

You did not give a damn whether or not Venezuelans where suffering under a dictatorship. Your only true grievance was that they would be suffering under a none-US subservient dictatorship. 

Correct. It really isn't much of a concern of mine. I don't give it a second thought. I'm honestly not sorry about that at all. I'm simply being honest that I am far more worried about my own wellbeing and those around me than that of those in far away countries. Anyone saying otherwise is almost certainly lying. 

Other than that, I have little interest in replying to another one of your nonsensical rants. If you honestly believe that your life would be improved by having the Chinese Communist Party or Vladimir Putin in charge, or that those countries are better than yours, then you are entitled to believe that.

 

[Varysblackfyre321]

1 hour ago, kiko said:

Think about it this way: China is making big inroads into African countries. Seems they feel much better treated by them than by USA, why could that be?

@Heartofice does not care about that. Again he's very candid he only cares that a US hegemony is better because...they have values more aligned with the ”West” or Britain. I imagine if he thinks these values are spread/protected by the US on a global stage, he has very ugly interpretation of what qualifies as a ”Western” value.

If not he's just pointing to a really superficial difference.