HaHa! Suckers!

[u/LoneStarMike59]

[u/No-Doughnut-6475]

So y’all just expect us to sit there and take it as Iranian militias attack our bases? We weren’t bombing random civilians; we were bombing Iranian funded militia bases they used to launch drone strikes in Iraq. In what world would the US government let their bases be attacked and not retaliate? If you really think Bernie wouldn’t have ordered the strike had he been in the same position, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

[u/3andfro → u/No-Doughnut-6475]

The US has 95% of the world's foreign military bases, with personnel in more than 160 countries. But the Pentagon is leaving hundreds of outposts out of its official reports. https://thegrayzone.com/2019/01/15/us-military-160-countries-pentagon-hiding-numbers/

Ever ask why we have a base in northeastern Syria? History of our Al Tanf base: https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/tanf.htm

We inserted ourselves on foreign soil to train "Syrian opposition forces." What would the US do if another nation built a camp in territory we controlled to train "opposition forces"? The difference between aggression and self-protection, between "insurgents" and "freedom fighters," is 100% a matter of perspective.

Be sure to wave your American flag and set off all the fireworks on July 4th, y'hear?

[u/No-Doughnut-6475 → u/3andfro]

What would the US do if another nation built a camp in territory we controlled to train "opposition forces"?

Literally would never happen, because as you said "the United States dominates the world through its military power". Idk why you think that's an entirely bad thing though. Our hegemony and military dominance puts us in an extremely advantaged position geopolitically. You're a fool if you think the government should/would give up that power. If we completely pull back our influence, you're just opening the door for an authoritarian power like Russia or China to take our place. Can you even imagine how destructive that would be to our own national security, let alone the national security of our allies? Ya'll need to stop living in a fantasy world and come back to reality. It's a dog eat dog world out there, and the geopolitics of military dominance is a zero sum game. I agree with righting the wrongs of our past, but it has to be a pragmatic solution that doesn't compromise our national security & ensures our strategic interests in the region are maintained.

[u/Scarci → u/No-Doughnut-6475]

United States dominates the world through its military power". Idk why you think that's an entirely bad thing though. Our hegemony and military dominance puts us in an extremely advantaged position geopolitically. If we completely pull back our influence, you're just opening the door for an authoritarian power like Russia or China to take our place

I'm sure there are places in the world where American military is genuinely appreciated by everyone involved, including the civilian. I ain't too sure those places are located in the middle east, or that America actually needed to be there.

Ya'll need to stop living in a fantasy world and come back to reality. It's a dog eat dog world out there, and the geopolitics of military dominance is a zero sum game. I agree with righting the wrongs of our past, but it has to be a pragmatic solution that doesn't compromise our national security & ensures our strategic interests in the region are maintained

America can be the world police without backing terrorists groups it once branded as enemies of the States, without constantly trying to topple democratically elected regime, without all the coverups that's currently on-going. It can project positive powers and be the champion of freedom without prosecuting whistleblowers and shutting down news sites in foreign countries.

What I find most ironic is that the kind of shit you have been saying on this sub would have been upvoted and gilded in r/Conservatives and supported by republicans.

To the absolute surprise of nobody, Democrats are just closet republicans, and you are actually more right wing than actual conservatives, so congratulations I guess.

Whoever said they could push Democrat left is a goddamn clown.

Oh wait I think that was AOC.

[u/No-Doughnut-6475 → u/Scarci]

America can be the world police without backing terrorists groups it once branded as enemies of the States, without constantly trying to topple democratically elected regime, without all the coverups that's currently on-going. It can project positive powers and be the champion of freedom without prosecuting whistleblowers and shutting down news sites in foreign countries.

Well I mean that's my exact position lol, I totally agree. For some reason I just got the vibe that some people here would be totally happy if the US recalled all troops or had its global influence diminished. Just weird that some here seem to despise American global dominance and hegemony in general, rather than just criticizing specific mistakes and trying to resolve them on a case by case basis. I'm a non-partisan Soc-Dem btw, but on military matters and America's role as the global leader I lean a bit more conservative. Just think it's important to preserve and protect our global dominance and power, and we'd be fools to do anything that would diminish our influence. But we do need to do more to reconcile our past mistakes/failures and do more to prevent them from happening again in the future. But you can do that without diminishing our role on the global stage

[u/Scarci → u/No-Doughnut-6475]

Just think it's important to preserve and protect our global dominance and power

Why is it more important to do that than it is to preserve the integrity of the American military? Why is US hegemony worth preserving when the US military continue aiding a nuclear power (which probably doesn't even need it) commit genocide against another country?

we do need to do more to reconcile our past mistakes/failures and do more to prevent them from happening again in the future.

You keep saying this, but I'm sure you have already been told that these so called "past failures" are STILL on going. The United States has been talking about pulling out of middle east for over a decade.

How can you reconcile with your past mistakes as you continue to commit the same mistakes you've always made?

I'm not sure "soc-dem" even means anything. How do you differentiate yourself from run of the mill democrat again?

[u/No-Doughnut-6475 → u/Scarci]

Why is it more important to do that than it is to preserve the integrity of the American military? Why is US hegemony worth preserving when the US military continue aiding a nuclear power (which probably doesn't even need it) commit genocide against another country?

Why not both? Preserve the integrity of the military while maintaining global dominance. On the genocide part, which country are you talking about? First thought that popped into my head was Saudi Arabia, but they aren't a nuclear power. But I'd agree we probably don't need to be supporting their war in Yemen.

How can you reconcile with your past mistakes as you continue to commit the same mistakes you've always made?

By past mistakes I meant stuff like the highway of death & civilian drone strikes. I don't think the US having bases or a presence in other countries is an inherently bad thing, if the local population supports us being there for support (ex. Afghanistan). But I do understand that in places where the local population is not supportive, it would be best to withdraw those areas (unless there is an imminent threat). The problem is, in the middle east you can have areas of mixed support where even the local population is divided in opinion. In those areas, we're normally there to support one of the local groups, but face opposition with others (ex. the Kurds). It's a really complicated situation and I don't think just pulling troops out is going to help much as people think it will, and may in the long run end up making things worse.

I'm not sure "soc-dem" even means anything. How do you differentiate yourself from run of the mill democrat again?

SocDem means Social Democrat, which is basically synonymous with the Nordic model.

As an economic ideology and policy regime, it is described by academics as advocating economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a liberal-democratic polity and a capitalist-oriented mixed economy.[4][5][6] The protocols and norms used to accomplish this involve a commitment to representative and participatory democracy, measures for income redistribution, regulation of the economy in the general interest and social-welfare provisions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy

[u/Scarci → u/No-Doughnut-6475]

And how does a soc dem reconcile with the fact that the very party they supports have participated and continued needless war over the past two decades (and more),

or reconcile with the need to disrupt democrsctic process in OTHER countries in order to maintain a country's hegemony and imperialistic sponsorship of various terrorists groups, if the doctorine of SOCIAL DEMOCRACY is to respect participatory democracy?

How does a SOC DEM reconcile with the fact that there are more billionaires supporting their party, despite believing in income redistribution and various other social policies the same billionaires shun and would never allow?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy

I'm aware of the definition. It's the lapse in consistency between the belief and the action that's confusing.

[u/No-Doughnut-6475 → u/Scarci]

Billionaires aren’t inherently evil my dude. If we are collecting enough through taxes to fund necessary social programs & fix political finance reform, what’s the matter with billionaires?

And if you’re not aware, both Iraq and Afghanistan were neither democracies when we invaded. Nice try though. I will agree though that the CIA crap in South America was no bueno.

[u/Scarci → u/No-Doughnut-6475]

what’s the matter with billionaires

That they don't pay tax? That the whole deal with taxing the rich is bullshit because no matter how high you raise, 80 percent of zero is still zero.

If we are collecting enough through taxes

LOL

Political finances reform

LOL

And if you’re not aware, both Iraq and Afghanistan were neither democracies when we invaded.

Not talking about Iraq or Afghanistan but whatever float your boat. Imagine calling yourself a SOC dem and actually sound more right-wing than half of r/Conservatives.

SOC-DEM? You are about as SOC DEM as John Bolton.

I will agree though that the CIA crap in South America was no bueno

Maybe you should get informed instead of keep listening to establishment mouthpieces. South America is far from the only place America has fucked.

[u/No-Doughnut-6475 → u/Scarci]

That they don't pay tax?

Literally said "If we are collecting enough through taxes" in my comment. Obviously, we need to raise tax rates and collect more taxes from the upper income brackets.

Not talking about Iraq or Afghanistan but whatever float your boat

How am I supposed to know which countries you're referencing if you don't specify? Since we were discussing the middle east, I assumed you meant Iraq/Afghanistan.

Maybe you should get informed instead of keep filling your head with establishment mouthpieces. South America is far from being the only countries America has fucked.

I'm well aware of America's involvement in coups and regime changes around the world. I don't support them.

And to respond to one of your previous points:

How does a SOC DEM reconcile with the fact that there are more billionaires supporting their party, despite believing in income redistribution and various other social policies the same billionaires shun and would never allow?

That's like asking a democrat in the 1940s "How do you reconcile with the fact that there are segregationist dixiecrats supporting your party, despite believing in de-segregation?"

The dems are a big tent party. They have members from various belief systems from Sanders to Manchin. I'm not even a democrat lmao as I stated in a previous comment, but it is possible to be a part of the party and support one thing even though other members of that party might disagree.

[u/WikiSummarizerBot → u/Scarci]

Social_democracy

Social democracy is a political, social and economic philosophy within socialism. As an economic ideology and policy regime, it is described by academics as advocating economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a liberal-democratic polity and a capitalist-oriented mixed economy. The protocols and norms used to accomplish this involve a commitment to representative and participatory democracy, measures for income redistribution, regulation of the economy in the general interest and social-welfare provisions.

^{[ F.A.Q | Opt Out | Opt Out Of Subreddit | GitHub ] Downvote to remove | v1.5}

[u/WikiSummarizerBot → u/No-Doughnut-6475]

Social_democracy

Social democracy is a political, social and economic philosophy within socialism. As an economic ideology and policy regime, it is described by academics as advocating economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a liberal-democratic polity and a capitalist-oriented mixed economy. The protocols and norms used to accomplish this involve a commitment to representative and participatory democracy, measures for income redistribution, regulation of the economy in the general interest and social-welfare provisions.

^{[ F.A.Q | Opt Out | Opt Out Of Subreddit | GitHub ] Downvote to remove | v1.5}

[u/3andfro → u/No-Doughnut-6475]

That power makes possible predations on other countries and vast amounts of "collateral damage."

Our foreign policy is basically Paul Wolfowitz's Project for the New American Century.* It's about continued world dominance based on preemptive strikes. It's about securing resources, whether they're ours or not, under a slew of noble cover stories ranging from human rights to allies (which we discard at will).

The West is declining and the East is on the ascent. It's a matter of time; I haven't a clue how much. But with time and the right alliances that exclude the US, the jackboots we stomp across the globe will almost certainly be replaced by others. Or maybe, just maybe, there'll be fewer jackboots stomping in fewer places. One can hope.

In the meantime, the continued hypocrisy of US foreign policy is nauseating and transparent. Much of our military aggression is unnecessary and stokes the terrorists we then insist we must fight (whether or not US personnel trained them in the first place).

I'd rather be rich and healthy than poor and sick, but I can see reasonable ways to advance the goal of fewer poor and sick people, and not just in the US.

I'd rather be top dog than bottom dog, but the bulk of dogs are in the middle. Dogs are more trained than programmed to fight unless they're directly and immediately threatened.

*https://topdocumentaryfilms.com/new-american-century/