Follow up question: after the string of catastrophic failures and the killing of millions, why didn’t the government stop?
The lib I work with used to parrot state department talking points such as ‘but it was a dictatorship’ or ‘but what about women’s rights?’, to which I say deal with it with earnest diplomacy (which both myself and now him acknowledging the government doesn’t act in good faith).
Blows my fucking mind that anyone in the US could believe the US gov has any interest in helping the people anywhere. They are literally stripping rights away from people in the US, kidnapping every non-white person they can, doing genocides, etc but yeah this time they’re totally gonna help the people…
I like to think I’ve had some impact by pointing out that the US won’t even increase its own minimum wage, so anything they tell you about the dire need for a humanitarian military intervention elsewhere in the world is definitely going to be bullshit.
The US military intervention came extremely late and essentially only had the (deliberate) effect of saving European fascism from itself so it could be preserved for future use. Germany was not denazified (in fact, the opposite), and German fascism is right on the cusp of becoming overt again.
You are literally the only person here who has said this. The point is that US intervention did not go well for Germany because its primary effect was to protect Nazis from consequences. This is an ice-cold take, the Americans didn’t go into Europe for charity, they went into Europe extremely late to prevent the USSR from liberating it themselves and proceeded to protect and empower fascists all over the world.
Was the liberation of Ukraine also a net negative since it seems to be teeming with Banderites?
Ukraine was liberated by the USSR, the Banderites are a cancer that was cultivated for the entire cold war in the Ukrainian diaspora by the CIA before being reintroduced into Ukraine in the 90s. In other words, another example of US intervention in WW2 Europe acting to protect and empower fascism.
If your argument is that the main contribution of US intervention in WW2 was to safeguard the nazis, I don’t know what to say. Keep your idealistic ass posting I guess. I’m done.
The main purpose and effect of the military intervention the US undertook near the end of the war in western Europe was to preserve capitalism in Europe, which required them to shelter and preserve fascism. Had they not intervened, Europe would have “fallen” to socialism. Therefore, the net effect was the protection of fascism in Europe. You can tell this because of all the actions they undertook to preserve fascism and put fascists into positions of power after the war. The point isn’t that they didn’t fight the nazis, the point is that they fought them to preserve capitalism, and therefore preserved fascism. We can agree to disagree.
Clownboy aside, when was the last time US ‘intervention’ objectively went well for the country receiving the intervening?
The US intervention in the Suez Crisis is the most recent I can think of, though it was purely diplomatic.
Follow up question: after the string of catastrophic failures and the killing of millions, why didn’t the government stop?
The lib I work with used to parrot state department talking points such as ‘but it was a dictatorship’ or ‘but what about women’s rights?’, to which I say deal with it with earnest diplomacy (which both myself and now him acknowledging the government doesn’t act in good faith).
What about women’s right to be torn to pieces by US bombs?
Blows my fucking mind that anyone in the US could believe the US gov has any interest in helping the people anywhere. They are literally stripping rights away from people in the US, kidnapping every non-white person they can, doing genocides, etc but yeah this time they’re totally gonna help the people…
I like to think I’ve had some impact by pointing out that the US won’t even increase its own minimum wage, so anything they tell you about the dire need for a humanitarian military intervention elsewhere in the world is definitely going to be bullshit.
WW2
Debatable, considering Germany nowadays
france benefitted, then fumbled the bag when they didn’t leave nato.
What if we frame it as “The US helping out the Soviets”?
In what way is current Germany worse than Nazi Germany? I get that easy dunks are easy dunks, but this doesn’t even make any sense.
The US military intervention came extremely late and essentially only had the (deliberate) effect of saving European fascism from itself so it could be preserved for future use. Germany was not denazified (in fact, the opposite), and German fascism is right on the cusp of becoming overt again.
So, current Germany is worse than Nazi Germany because it may one day become as bad as Nazi Germany again (some 80 years later).
Was the liberation of Ukraine also a net negative since it seems to be teeming with Banderites?
You are literally the only person here who has said this. The point is that US intervention did not go well for Germany because its primary effect was to protect Nazis from consequences. This is an ice-cold take, the Americans didn’t go into Europe for charity, they went into Europe extremely late to prevent the USSR from liberating it themselves and proceeded to protect and empower fascists all over the world.
Ukraine was liberated by the USSR, the Banderites are a cancer that was cultivated for the entire cold war in the Ukrainian diaspora by the CIA before being reintroduced into Ukraine in the 90s. In other words, another example of US intervention in WW2 Europe acting to protect and empower fascism.
If your argument is that the main contribution of US intervention in WW2 was to safeguard the nazis, I don’t know what to say. Keep your idealistic ass posting I guess. I’m done.
The main purpose and effect of the military intervention the US undertook near the end of the war in western Europe was to preserve capitalism in Europe, which required them to shelter and preserve fascism. Had they not intervened, Europe would have “fallen” to socialism. Therefore, the net effect was the protection of fascism in Europe. You can tell this because of all the actions they undertook to preserve fascism and put fascists into positions of power after the war. The point isn’t that they didn’t fight the nazis, the point is that they fought them to preserve capitalism, and therefore preserved fascism. We can agree to disagree.
In the sense that they’re heading that way again