Comment by sapphicsnail
5 days ago
Don't think we (Americans) would be happy if another country invaded and started capturing people to face trial in their country.
5 days ago
Don't think we (Americans) would be happy if another country invaded and started capturing people to face trial in their country.
This is naive. No other country would dare do this to the US because the US would simply rain literal hellfire upon them.
Your mistake is in equating the US to other countries. You cannot. It is a superpower.
When other countries act hostile to the US, it can simply ignore their sovereignty at a whim, and this is a huge benefit to living in US.
Is it unfair? Sure. Who cares?
This is wrong and hilariously short sighted. Other countries don't respect America due to military might - they do so because of decades of mutually beneficial trade agreements. Soft power is infinitely more useful than hard power.
You can take that into the past tense now I think.
Both play a significant role. Many countries absolutely respect us because of our military might. They rely on it because they don't want to divert funding from welfare to build out their own militaries. As such, they ally with us, creating inroads to trade et al.
Obviously, there's more than just military might, we have the most innovative and powerful economy on the planet as well.
However, with a country like Venezuela, where none of our allies truly care what we do (sure, they might blow hot air but whatever), we are free to use hard power to achieve our objectives.
People who don't live in a superpower. People who care about international law. People who would rather the most powerful countries didn't act like bullies whenever it suits their interests.
"Who cares?" was glib on my part, I admit. It was obviously stated from the perspective of an American relying on that power, towards other Americans.
However, international law has always been a thin veneer over the reality of international relations. History shows that nations act in their own self-interest, regardless of the "rules."
The concept of one country "bullying" another is irrelevant moralizing. You are applying playground rules (or the rules of civil society) to a global stage defined by anarchy: there is no "teacher" to stop the "bullying" here. It is a zero-sum game of security and power. At this level, "bullying" isn't a meaningful concept, only leverage is.
Should the world be this way? I wish not. Political realism is a grim framework. Unfortunately, game theory tells us that so long as any one superpower believes in realism, the rest of us must as well, or risk getting outmaneuvered. And Russia/China certainly believe in it.
4 replies →
> Is it unfair? Sure. Who cares?
What do you mean, "who cares"? Obviously a lot of us not from the US care, and many Americans care, too.
It should obviously be read as: "Who cares [that matters to the superpower at hand, and are they willing to actually do anything about it?]"
Even if the answer to the first part can be narrowed down to a few nations, the answer to the second part can be narrowed down to zero.
Israel did that in Argentina with Adolf Eichmann, and the US celebrated it.
They actually had 6 million good reasons.
And he was head of state? (retorical question).
What Trump just did is an act of war, undeclared and deceitful in every way.
It makes diplomacy much harder to do in the future. It makes the US untrustworthy.
> It makes the US untrustworthy.
That's explicitly been the case since 45 was elected a second time. Even if we get an adult in charge again, there is no guarantee of stability anymore with the way the population is.
9 replies →
That other country will quickly learn why America doesn't have free healthcare ;)
If Trump successfully stole the election in 2021, I'm sure there would have been many Americans who would be happy for Canada or England or France to capture him and put him on trial..