Comments by "Stephen Jenkins" (@stephenjenkins7971) on "Kuwait War Meme" video.
-
113
-
39
-
23
-
16
-
15
-
13
-
13
-
11
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
@franzjoseph1837 True, but your policies explicitly benefit them, so it's seriously suspect and makes one wonder if you're just a fascist pretending to give a shit about these things. 99% of people accept that death happens in conflict and that most international laws are jokes, and while holding the US to a higher standard is fine, you're taking it so far that it would literally involve letting enemy combatants escape to fight another day because "muh war crimes". With your logic, slavery and the Nazi's would still be around since the Americans would have to NOT bomb cities while their enemies would gleefully engage in such tactics and worse. Sorry, but tying the hands of democracies to the point where more of their men die for no reason sounds awfully suspect to me. One thing to be against, say, US accidentally killing international observers and then covering it up. I'm all for calling the US out on that; but this? Hell no -you just want more Americans to die for your pride and that's fucked.
Saddam wasn't put into power by either the US or UK, he was supported against Iran; but that's it. Now you're engaging in Kremlin propaganda.
"meaningless bravado n racist chauvinism" What you want is literally the definition of meaningless bravado and racist chauvinism, genius. You want to spare people in a literal war because of some vague convention that literally nobody follows, that nobody seriously expects the US to follow, and only benefits foreign dictators to the detriment of democracies worldwide. The US would hold this standard against any people; not just against Iraqis. Hell, the US was WORSE against Germany, so cry me a river about racism when you want to treat another group of people better than the US has ever treated white combatants.
Thank God you have no position of power; you'd sell every democracy out to dictatorships because "muh internationalism" while dictators don't give a shit and kill your people behind your back. I take back what I said about you possibly being a fascist pretending to care at least; you're honestly just that naïve.
8
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
5
-
@franzjoseph1837 Yes, international laws are a joke. But they are a decent barometer. Countries can only hold themselves accountable; nobody held the US, USSR, or UK accountable for their "war crimes" Post-WW2 despite the USSR being almost as bad and being a part of the Nuremberg Trials. By every definition you can fathom, it is a joke; but again, we can use it to impose SOME limitations on cruelty in conflict. It usually doesn't work; but I'm all for trying. But you take it as an all or nothing thing, and that's beyond stupid.
LOL. "You caveman! You don't stick to the letter of the law that nobody follows! You allow mass murders and wars of conquest!" As if the US following such laws would stop any of it. What ends mass murders and wars and conquest is power. Either power imposed from the top-down in a Super UN that actually has teeth to invade a country, likely commit war crimes, and then capitulate it to capture the leaders who originally violated international law...or imposed between nations. Every war crime ever tried was imposed by between nations, almost all of which are usually also guilty of war crimes.
I called you a fascist because your ideas enable them. International law didn't prevent them from doing anything, it just prevented others from stopping them. I call it a joke precisely BECAUSE it doesn't stop anyone from doing war crimes! There is no system like a international police force to stop such things, and even if it did; it wouldn't even be able to do anything without committing war crimes anyway.
Idk your last point. How did international law help imperialism? Why do you now have different standards of international law? I thought all international law was good in your eyes? Are you now against SPECIFIC international laws or specific decisions made from them? Because that just makes you hypocritical now.
Idk how I'm projecting, tbh. You're the guy that would enable fascists, not me. I'm all for keeping international law and some standards; but it just flat-out doesn't stop people who firmly believe that they have some right to conquer and do anything for "their people". That's what makes them dangerous. They don't listen to anything BUT power, and international law doesn't have that, in reality. Not yet.
We are engaged officially because of the internet, which has jack all to do with international law. The US can do whatever it pleases with the internet and international law won't stop them, because in reality its a joke, as I said. Not that I advocate for that; I'm just pointing out that this is more because of US tolerance of free speech rather than the mythical and magical international law that somehow binds people together...though in reality it doesn't do shit outside of what nations want to do.
5
-
@franzjoseph1837 No, they're realistic. Like, as in; I haven't seen such general loyalty to international law outside of fascist people trying to hide their support of genocide by hiding behind international law. Literally the only other people I have ever heard of acting like you have.
Here's a fun fact; international law is a joke. It will always be a joke until there are actual consequences across the board for violating it. I'm all for stopping needless cruelty. Chemical attacks? Intentionally attacking cities without a military objective in mind? Attacking news reporters or the Red Cross? I'm all for holding such standards, and the rest of the world is too for the most part. I actually DO hold some standards, but I guess because I am unwilling to hold myself to impossible standards that means I'm a fascist now, huh? How very dare I.
Whose the fascist anyway? The person that would allow them to roam free and mass murder while you squeal about not letting them go when they withdraw? Or the person that smashes them while trying to maintain SOME human rights standards? Again, if we did things your way, the world would be beyond fucked. Slavery everywhere, likely lots of genocides allowed and having occurred, constant wars, democracies getting crushed, etc, etc. Hitler and Stalin would love you; the good man doing nothing because you stuck to international laws that nobody on the planet maintains.
Congrats, I'm sure you'd stand proud next to the bodies. Make sure to ask Holocaust victims whether they cared when UK Bombers turned Dresden into a giant inferno.
Do it again Bomber Harris.
I digress though. I used the Nazis as a clear example of your idealism crashing against the reality. I also used the Confederates, if you failed to notice. Both times the US engaged in massive bombing campaigns that reduced enemy cities to rubble, killing thousands of civilians. Against the Geneva Convention, against international law. I contend they were necessary, and not engaging in total war is borderline an attempt to help the Nazis and Confederates maintain their systems of genocide and slavery respectively. But I guess its A-OK as long as YOUR country isn't committing the killings, huh? Its moral abdication, and its every bit as disgusting as it was back in the day.
4
-
3
-
@franzjoseph1837 Following the geneva convention is a policy. Advocating for any action via the state is a "policy". That being said, I agree that Europeans should have relinquished all colonies Post-WW1. Or really, everyone should. No one would do it, barring maybe the US since they signed a treaty promising just that to the Philippines and Cuba, but again; international law forbade colonies to begin with. Everyone had a right to self-determination. In reality it stopped exactly nobody from having it; it took movements on the ground or between nations to end the period of Colonization. That's my damned point.
"he regime of Saddam Hussein who was put in power by the British and Americans so they could have access to the oil resources" Ah yes, somehow the British and Americans whom got pretty much no oil from Saddam, who had a state-owned oil company work Iraq's oil fields and no Western oil companies, totally helped him get into power in the first place. There is also literally any proof behind it behind you talking out of your ass because you want it to be true. God, you're such a propagandist. Did the CIA take your lunch money too? Or are you confusing Iraq with Iran, because that legitimately did happen.
Edit: And the idea that an Arab State wouldn't fall apart into warring fiefdoms immediately afterwards is just hilarious. There was zero unity amongst "Arab" states, otherwise they would've unified after breaking free. Egypt and Syria tried, but it broke apart relatively quickly. The difference is that the bloodshed would not be caused by Western Europeans being imperialists and instead be inflicted...between Arabs. Still, self-determination. On that we agree.
3
-
2
-
2
-
@beepboop1044 I wasn't even talking about the second Iraq War, genius. But seeing as you're getting paid to spread propaganda like a good puppet, I don't expect anything less.
Ah yes. The infamous regime change in all of these countries which actually happened and isn't Kremlin-backed propaganda hoping for some NPC tool online to spread it for them. Unless you're talking about the Cold War, because then it most likely happened. But I like that the countries you're complaining about are all crappy countries which pretty much deserve to be overthrown to begin with. Maybe these nations wouldn't be in so much danger of being overthrown if their dictators weren't so busy rolling over protestors with tanks, huh? Hell, China has the right idea in this case; give the people a better living standard and they'll tolerate a lot of crap.
US sanctioned NS2 at the behest of other EU nations. US doesn't control these nations, and never has; but Kremlinbot acts like this is US weakness when it's just an obvious thing when Germany does whatever the hell it wants. And no crap the West is crying about Ukraine; it's highly suspicious when 100,000 troops move in right near another nation's border. Russia is literally doing this while screeching like a little girl with no more than 10,000 US troops nearby and demanding that NATO kick out all of Easter Europe for their security. How pathetic is that, huh bot?
No one is crying about Taiwan in the West; that's China. If you haven't noticed, China is screeching at little Lithuania for daring to even acknowledge it lol
Belarus is being bitched at by Germany and Poland, but pretty much them. Also justifiably for literally pushing illegal migrants into these countries. But hey, you have a hardon for killing protestors and human suffering, so I get it; you like Belarus and its baby daddy.
AUKUS literally has nothing to do with buying crap from China, bootlicker. It has to do with bringing closer ties and military security; which is funny since China pretty much lost Australia when it initially was on China's side. Story of China in the last 5 years.
BRI is pretty much dead. Philippines which originally sided with China is now burning Chinese flags 24/7, Malaysia is seeking closer US ties, Vietnam is constantly harassing China, Indonesia which was originally neutral is also seeking more US military ties, etc, etc. Only one that hasn't turned on China I think are North Korea and Cambodia. But sure, stay in your little bubble.
Ah yes. Everyone we don't like is a puppet state; the usual modus operandi of dictator bootlickers who kill whoever they want because "tHeY'Re cIA-pAiD". I get it; you like to kill protestors when they don't like to lick boots anymore. Quit projecting on the rest of us, yeah?
The rest of the world doesn't like US intervention; or really -any intervention or "war". That being said, the rest of the world, or at least about 70% of the planet aligns with the US anyway because the alternative is infinitely worse in the form of genocide and oppression from the likes of China and Russia. How disgusting are the regimes you back that so many nations PREFER the US over them, huh?
2
-
@beepboop1044 Bruh, China's overseas infrastructure loan spending has declined massively in the past 4 years alone. BRI is dead, but you can't accept that your favorite dictator lied.
I am a Liberal, yes -and you're a disgusting bootlicker that laps up anything a dictator does as long as its anti-Western. Even if they're monsters to their neighbors. It's disgusting. It's also funny how you dismiss the Philippines but also ignore literally all the other nations that are turning against China in the SCS alone. Let alone East Asia. Mighty China all alone barring the weakest and tiniest of nations.
Nothing China or Russia can do but bitch and moan about Taiwan and Ukraine respectively; they want to expand but the US has them locked in their regions so their imperialist ambitions can't be realized. No matter how much foreign bootlickers try and cheerlead.
China is countered by the US alone, the US is just piling on because its smart. China can't even secure its own backyard, pathetic isn't it?
Hahaha, funny how you talk about recognition when you don't even need that. All you need is tacit backing; the US doesn't even recognize Taiwan but nobody doubts that the US will decimate Chinese fleets if it tries to be imperialist and steal foreign lands.
Imagine taking Trump who talks BS 24/7 at his word. By your logic China is weak and has folded to the US already, since Trump said so.
Ah yes, the US is itching for war so bad that it...hasn't even tried to push its advantage yet. You're just like Russia and China, crying that the US wants war when the US has been the passive party, it's pathetic. Tell me when the US sends 100,000 troops in either Taiwan or Ukraine or threatens to invade and forcefully add another nation into their territory. Your propaganda only works on weak-minded such as yourself. It's pathetic that you cry about imperialism but defend states that would invade democracies and crush independence.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1