International Thread 3

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

4 hours ago, Liffguard said:

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

And the U.K’s history is so great?

Honestly this conversation seems silly. Sure the U.S. is flawed, but stating that you’d rather have China or Russia be the global hegemonic power is nothing short of insane.

[Liffguard]

18 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

And the U.K’s history is so great?

Oh, god no. The empire was a 300 year long atrocity.

Quote

Honestly this conversation seems silly. Sure the U.S. is flawed, but stating that you’d rather have China or Russia be the global hegemonic power is nothing short of insane.

To be clear, I don't think it's good when China or Russia overthrow governments and install dictators either. I just don't think there's any discernible difference for the people living in the countries being interfered with, whether it's the US, Russia, or China (or indeed the UK) doing the interfering.

And to say that the US is "flawed" doesn't seem to really engage with just how devastating US interference in third world countries has been.

[Rippounet]

19 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Honestly this conversation seems silly. Sure the U.S. is flawed, but stating that you’d rather have China or Russia be the global hegemonic power is nothing short of insane.

Unless you live in one, you don't want there to be a hegemon.

To put it differently anyone living outside the US has an interest in seeing US hegemony challenged. 

And anyone who thinks "Western values" matter in geopolitics knows zilch about geopolitics. 

[Varysblackfyre321]

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

Correct. It really isn't much of a concern of mine. I don't give it a second thought.

Thanks you for admitting to just flat-out lied about it ever having been such.

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

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

To the bolded my problem was that you weren't being honest. You used the supposed suffering of millions to justify Imperialism when you did not care about said suffering. I'm not asking you to care. I'm asking you never to pretend do so again. 

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

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.

 

Oh you sure look strong beating that strawman. Seriously dude, I didn't say China and Russia were better than the US. I did not say my life would be improved if either had the US’ current geo-Political power. I said them being so would not lead to an erosion to your rights. I’m here to tell you China or Russia would show no more disrespect if they had the same level of influence or power as the US. That you’re not being a stone-cold realist. You’re being naive fool supports the subjugation and brutalization of millions because you think some great benefit will trickle down to you. Most of the time it won't benefit you at all. 

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

Other than that, I have little interest in replying to another one of your nonsensical rants. 

You just desired to boast that you lied, and strawman me. Actually giving specifics on how most of American Imperialism would benefit the average British citizens in terms of protecting their rights does sound harder. 

[Larry of the Lawn]

2 hours ago, Heartofice said:

. 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. 

 

 

Not lying when I say that this attitude is probabaly as responsible for the sorry state of the world as any other.  Gotta look out for 'number one', eh?

[Conflicting Thought]

2 hours ago, Heartofice said:

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.

 

Wow, you are so ignorant, like your level of analysis is like paper thin. Why do you people engagging with this person, he clealry has put no thought what so ever to what he is saying.  Its like having a discussion with a teenager ( and even then, his level of disscourse is mininal). 

I do think the topic is interesting, but please dont get side tracked with someone who dosent have arguments and has nothing interesting to say. 

 

[Heartofice]

15 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Thanks you for admitting to just flat-out lied about it ever having been such.

To the bolded my problem was that you weren't being honest. You used the supposed suffering of millions to justify Imperialism when you did not care about said suffering. I'm not asking you to care. I'm asking you never to pretend do so again. 

Oh you sure look strong beating that strawman. Seriously dude, I didn't say China and Russia were better than the US. I did not say my life would be improved if either had the US’ current geo-Political power. I said them being so would not lead to an erosion to your rights. I’m here to tell you China or Russia would show no more disrespect if they had the same level of influence or power as the US. That you’re not being a stone-cold realist. You’re being naive fool supports the subjugation and brutalization of millions because you think some great benefit will trickle down to you. Most of the time it won't benefit you at all. 

You just desired to boast that you lied, and strawman me. Actually giving specifics on how most of American Imperialism would benefit the average British citizens in terms of protecting their rights does sound harder. 

When did I lie. I’m very confused here.

 From my own perspective I’d much rather if there was a hegemonic power that it was the USA mainly due to them being our allies and the similarities we share than communist China or gangster Russia. Doesn’t seem that hard to compute does it. As Tywin said, any other opinion is insane. 

As I said if you genuinely believe there is no difference between them or that Russia being in charge would make no difference to Britain then I’ll just let you get on with your beliefs and your usual hyperbole.
 

[Varysblackfyre321]

40 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

And the U.K’s history is so great?

Honestly this conversation seems silly. Sure the U.S. is flawed, but stating that you’d rather have China or Russia be the global hegemonic power is nothing short of insane.

No one has argued that such a prospect is in it self more preferable. The idea wasn't even brought up before Hearttoice decided to straw-man me. 

What has been argued is that it doesn't make a difference to the people being brutalized by dictators if said dictator is backed by the US 

That it is not some how better for the US to go around destroying Democracies  because America has values(whatever the fuck they are),  closer to Britian’s or the ”West”.

That often times, it's imperialism either is not necessary given the government they want to oust would work with the Us or if an active drawback for it's citizenry. 

2 minutes ago, Conflicting Thought said:

Wow, you are so ignorant, like your level of analysis is like paper thin. Why do you people engagging with this person, he clealry has put no thought what so ever to what he is saying.  Its like having a discussion with a teenager ( and even then, his level of disscourse is mininal). 

I do think the topic is interesting, but please dont get side tracked with someone who dosent have arguments and has nothing interesting to say. 

 

Meh, I have to intercede here. I did rekindle the conversation here with in regards to the guy. 

The response is ridiculous, but I sought one. 

[Heartofice]

Just now, Varysblackfyre321 said:

What has been argued is that it doesn't make a difference to the people being brutalized by dictators if said dictator is backed by the US 

Wasn’t me arguing this if you are making that accusation.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

43 minutes ago, Liffguard said:

Oh, god no. The empire was a 300 year long atrocity.

300 years? I would have pegged it a t a lot longer than that. But it’s not all bad either, much like the U.S., which really complicates things.  

Quote

To be clear, I don't think it's good when China or Russia overthrow governments and install dictators either. I just don't think there's any discernible difference for the people living in the countries being interfered with, whether it's the US, Russia, or China (or indeed the UK) doing the interfering.

And to say that the US is "flawed" doesn't seem to really engage with just how devastating US interference in third world countries has been.

 

45 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Unless you live in one, you don't want there to be a hegemon.

To put it differently anyone living outside the US has an interest in seeing US hegemony challenged. 

And anyone who thinks "Western values" matter in geopolitics knows zilch about geopolitics. 

I think it’s more complicated than that, and every situation is different. Look at Africa verses South and Central America. The crisis at the U.S. Southern border is largely an externality of our terrible behavior in the region, yet on the other side of the ocean a lot of our actions in Africa have greatly increased the average life span. However, the West has completely destabilized the continent, while non-U.S. Western countries have done a lot for South America. Life is messy and this is no different.

That said, as someone who has lived in a developing country, the vibe I got was on the whole Western influence has been a positive thing even though we can all cite awful outcomes.

[Conflicting Thought]

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

300 years? I would have pegged it a t a lot longer than that. But it’s not all bad either, much like the U.S., which really complicates things.  

Not that complicated for the people at the end of the imperial spear, i dont think there would be a significant difference between us intervention or chinise or russian intervention, how much worse do you think it would be for us "3rd world countries" to have china  or russian sponsored dictatorships and human right violations, mi guess? Not that different at all. 

And why is only the US and the British that have complicated histories cuz its not "all bad"?. Doesen't china and russia have equaly (if not more) of a "complicated" (with good and bad) history? 

What is so speciall about US imperialism? 

[Conflicting Thought]

17 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

yet on the other side of the ocean a lot of our actions in Africa have greatly increased the average life span

Citation needed, pls. 

And how do you identify the positive of western influence?. 

You also have a conflict of interest here, being that you are from a western nation, don't you think that what you see as positive western influence could have a different optics for the people actually living in those countries?. 

[Raja]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

 I think it’s more complicated than that, and every situation is different. Look at Africa verses South and Central America. The crisis at the U.S. Southern border is largely an externality of our terrible behavior in the region, yet on the other side of the ocean a lot of our actions in Africa have greatly increased the average life span. However, the West has completely destabilized the continent, while non-U.S. Western countries have done a lot for South America. Life is messy and this is no different.

That said, as someone who has lived in a developing country, the vibe I got was on the whole Western influence has been a positive thing even though we can all cite awful outcomes.

This whole thing is quite the take.

[Raja]

56 minutes ago, Conflicting Thought said:

don't you think that what you see as positive western influence could have a different optics for the people actually living in those countries?. 

Nah dude - he's been to 'a developing country' & checked out the 'vibe'

Defo checks out

[Varysblackfyre321]

5 hours ago, Heartofice said:

When did I lie. I’m very confused here.

When you professed a false sorrow over the plight of Venezuelans in the last International thread. It was quite frankly a nauseating act because it was so obviously disgenuine. 

You don't care about it. That's fine enough. You should have never have pretended to done so

5 hours ago, Heartofice said:

From my own perspective I’d much rather if there was a hegemonic power that it was the USA mainly due to them being our allies and the similarities we share than communist China or gangster Russia.

To the bolded so? The fruitful nature of trade, and military cooperation between the US  won't lessen by virtue Russia or China having the same level of global clout as the US currently does. 

And it's not as if Britian must stay shackled only to the US, and never have more cordial relations with China or Russia. Even if it costs them favorability points with  US Britain should look out for Britain eh? If cozzying a totalitarian regime is it what it takes to get ahead, I see no reason for you to object.

Also yes Russia is an oligarchy, and China is communist. Got that out of your system? Good.

Russia or China  would be probably be no more or less intrusive in your internal politics than America already is. 

Or what they already currently are.

Not because they respects you. But because a full on invasion simply would be unfeasible and they get plenty enough from a cooperative relationship. If a right-wing dictatorship took over your country today, the US would probably just  applaud and do nothing. ”Shared” values(which you've vague about as to what exactly those are) be damned. 

I mean Turkey is an ally of the US. Their relationship did not seem to help them keep their Democracy whatsoever. If being a US ally is supposed to help protect your rights clearly the US did not get the message. 

If the guy who robs and kills your neighbor is ideologically similar to you, that does not mean you should applaud or excuse the robbery and murder.  Especially when those acts did not actually do anything to benefit you.

 

5 hours ago, Heartofice said:

As I said if you genuinely believe there is no difference between them or that Russia being in charge would make no difference to Britain then I’ll just let you get on with your beliefs and your usual hyperbole.

”IF YOU DON'T SUPPORT ALL US BACKING/INSTINTUTING DICTATORSHIPS RUSSIA AND/CHINA Will TAKE OVEREER AND YOUR and MY RIGHTS WILL BE LOST!!!!!”ALSO YOU THINK RUSSSIA AND CHINA ARE BETTER THAN THE US!

You mean that type of hyperbole man? The type you've demonstrated this thread to justify the US imperialism? 

If you genuinely think the majority US the majority of dictators it props up/supports which massacre great numbers of civilians, are necessary to protect your rights as a British citizen please actually make a case for how.

You've cried that America' " Western  values”(whatever the fuck you mean by that) as reason to think you benefit, as if America's foreign policy remotely reflects any respect to any sort  "western value" and pointed to the fact currently the two countries are Allies. You’re reasoning for for why it would be harmful for you if the US were to stop supporting Saudi-Arabia's massacre of tens of thousands of Yemenis seems to be lacking. 

If you could  show how your life would be severely negatively affected if China or Russia had the same level of global influence as the US currently has actually show go into detail as to how. 

I’ll be honest I do not expect you to do so. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

6 hours ago, Conflicting Thought said:

Not that complicated for the people at the end of the imperial spear, i dont think there would be a significant difference between us intervention or chinise or russian intervention, how much worse do you think it would be for us "3rd world countries" to have china  or russian sponsored dictatorships and human right violations, mi guess? Not that different at all. 

And why is only the US and the British that have complicated histories cuz its not "all bad"?. Doesen't china and russia have equaly (if not more) of a "complicated" (with good and bad) history? 

What is so speciall about US imperialism? 

Well first I should say I don't know enough about China's history of conquests, but I do feel forcing their system on others would be worse because you'd have less rights, as demonstrated by the protests in Hong Kong.

Rarely are there positives in the short run, but over the longer course of history you can find examples where the net end game has some clear advantages, though rarely do the natives get to enjoy that as much as they should.

6 hours ago, Conflicting Thought said:

Citation needed, pls. 

And how do you identify the positive of western influence?. 

You also have a conflict of interest here, being that you are from a western nation, don't you think that what you see as positive western influence could have a different optics for the people actually living in those countries?. 

The Bush 43 Administration was a disaster at nearly every level, but one of the few things they got right was combating HIV/AIDS in Africa, which yes can directly lead to increased life spans.

And yes, I am aware of my biases and I am also aware that many nations don't want to emulate our systems.

5 hours ago, Raja said:

This whole thing is quite the take.

Do you disagree that the world is complicated and messy and that ignoring the nuances of it is a mistake?

[A wilding]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

The Bush 43 Administration was a disaster at nearly every level, but one of the few things they got right was combating HIV/AIDS in Africa, which yes can directly lead to increased life spans.

I know that this has been a US Republican meme for a long while, but it is not true. Actually they interfered with the existing successful "ABC" program (Abstinence, Be faithful, use Condoms) for which previous US administrations can take most of the credit, by insisting that the "C" part be dropped, apparently to appease US religious opinion. In doing so they set the fight against HIV back significantly.

 

[Raja]

19 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Do you disagree that the world is complicated and messy and that ignoring the nuances of it is a mistake?

Here's my problem with what you posted -

1. Citing the fact that you 'lived in a developing country' and felt 'vibe was positive' to support your point is a grossly ignorant thing to say. Firstly, there are innumerable 'developing countries' each with their own history, political context & foreign policy - they are not a monolith and in fact can be very different from each other, even if they're within the same region - Bahrain is wholly different from Saudi, even though they're a 20 minute drive from each other. Pakistan is wholly different from India, even though they can be similar culturally. Qatar is wholly different from Bahrain. There are *numerous* examples.

2. Based on your posts in the last two pages, I don't think you have seriously read about or talked to people that have felt the impact of US interference in the middle-east, south-east asia & Africa ( the list of nations here is quite large)-  people who have actually lived in those countries will tell you that US policy is more than 'flawed'. And then somehow saying that the PEPFAR program counterbalances that is fucking gross.

I am in agreement with Liffguard's post regarding being equally skeptical and resisting interference from all the countries being discussed here.

To me, these posts in the last two pages represent posts with a very facile understanding your own country's impact on other countries since the second world war and are indicative of a certain amount of ignorance, privilege and a lack of self-examination.

Edit: This is a separate point but you calling 'developing nations' 'failed states' a while back also doesn't lend much to your credibility as someone who actually accounts for any nuance.

 

[Conflicting Thought]

21 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

but I do feel forcing their system on others would be worse because you'd have less rights, as demonstrated by the protests in Hong Kong.

Dude. Like... Dude. 

 

21 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Rarely are there positives in the short run, but over the longer course of history you can find examples where the net end game has some clear advantages, though rarely do the natives get to enjoy that as much as they should.

Can you provide some examples, pls, with sources if you could. Or do you mean, clear advantages for the colonizers? 

 

21 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Do you disagree that the world is complicated and messy and that ignoring the nuances of it is a mistake?

This comes of as disingenuous. Are you defending colonization and imperialism?, what do you mean by saying the world is "complicated", wich nuances are we ignoring? 

[Larry of the Lawn]

On 12/31/2019 at 6:13 PM, Tywin et al. said:

 

Rarely are there positives in the short run, but over the longer course of history you can find examples where the net end game has some clear advantages, though rarely do the natives get to enjoy that as much as they should.

 

 

What's this from?  A "Whitewashing Colonialism 101" course catalog description?