Comments by "ItCouldBe Lupus" (@itcouldbelupus2842) on "vlogbrothers"
channel.
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
 @rhymstien3975 I think the statement us correct but not your reasoning.
The US isn't the caretaker of the world, it's the occupier.
It's basically a protection racket, they police the world and get involved often when non one asks them to but it's for the benefit of the empire, not for the protection of others.
It's almost always purely about military positions and business interests.
The US doesn't stop atrocities and war crimes, it often funds and commits them, like with Pinochet for example.
And most of the time the US just makes other places worse, like in Iraq and Afghanistan for example.
They weren't wanted, the countries were even flourishing in the 70s and 80s but it was unacceptable and unhelpful to the US, so they spent billions of dollars and decades blowing the place up and making it worse, like they have done in many other places.
The US likes to cast itself as a noble protector of the "free world" but that's a farce, usually US intervention results in less freedom and more dead people.
It's about money and power.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
 @rhymstien3975 I think the statement us correct but not your reasoning.
The US isn't the caretaker of the world, it's the occupier.
It's basically a protection racket, they police the world and get involved often when non one asks them to but it's for the benefit of the empire, not for the protection of others.
It's almost always purely about military positions and business interests.
The US doesn't stop atrocities and war crimes, it often funds and commits them, like with Pinochet for example.
And most of the time the US just makes other places worse, like in Iraq and Afghanistan for example.
They weren't wanted, the countries were even flourishing in the 70s and 80s but it was unacceptable and unhelpful to the US, so they spent billions of dollars and decades blowing the place up and making it worse, like they have done in many other places.
The US likes to cast itself as a noble protector of the "free world" but that's a farce, usually US intervention results in less freedom and more dead people.
It's about money and power.
I think the US should try spending all their money and bringing their troops home, stop pretending to protect the world and stop exploiting it.
But they won't do the later any time soon, they are gearing up to expand outside its borders.
The rest of the world is capable of protecting itself and banding together to repel bad actors if they did try to invade some country.
The US could help, be an ally if necessary, but no one is asking for the US to do it for us. If we are in another world war and the fate of the world requires it, the US can swoop in and be the hero, put that military to good use.
But that hasn't been needed since the 40s and not how the US military has been used since the 50s.
An isolationist US would be interesting to see, but I don't think that will happen. They have spent a lot of money funding aid to balance out all the bad they've done but I think they will stop trying to balance things out by helping anyone and just increase the bad. The US citizens won't be helped and neither will the world, but the ultra rich and corporations will make more money.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1