Comment by ericmay
2 days ago
> The US has bombed over a half dozen countries in the past year.
Which ones? I'm sure there's a very good reason for each so let's walk through them with civility.
> The US is led by a vile rapist abomination that openly threatens "annihilation"
Trump is probably a rapist but our justice system has failed to prosecute him. But the memory of justice is rather long. He may yet get his day. Separately yea who cares about the annihilation threats. Iran has been doing that for a long time. If they don't like hearing it maybe they should stop too.
> The US is repeatedly and proudly engaged in wantonly illegal piracy at sea. It boasts about the textbook definition of terrorism.
What examples do you have of wanton piracy?
> The US has done more to encourage nuclear proliferation in the last two years than in all of history.
I'd argue Russia has done more there by invading Ukraine.
> It has taught that everyone needs to get nuclear weapons, and many of them need to be pointed at the US.
No nobody has been taught that. But they have been taught that if they step out of line and don't have enough of a deterrent like North Korea, that if they try and build nuclear weapons they'll be on the receiving end of sanctions, and then if that isn't a good enough incentive we'll come bomb them and stop them. You are welcome.
> It has pushed the notion that might makes right, and if you have the ability you can steal and rampage whatever you want, in a lawless world.
Might does make right though. International law is just some stuff made up largely by western nations and backed by American military power. If you have no will or ability to enforce international law, like, idk, stopping Iran from building a nuclear weapon, then the law is pointless.
> Your claim that the US is holding the gates is absolutely perverse, and your worldview is most certainly some US exceptionalism bullshit.
No, it's not perverse. I just disagree with your point of view.
> This sort of idiocracy garbage utterly infects all corners of the US, and it keeps sloshing to the surface.
Isn't it embarrassing that all these idiots are the dominant force on the planet and you have to cry to them to help you against Russia and they make much more money than your citizens? If you're going to insult Americans like this you should at least have something worth insulting us over. I do think biking culture is way better than driving, but I'm not sure about much else.
I'd argue Russia has done more there by invading Ukraine.
Nope, nobody was talking about getting nukes after the invasion in 2022.
Everybody started talking about getting nukes after: (1) Trump has been threatening to leave NATO and casting doubt about upholding Article 5, so nobody is really sure if the nuclear umbrella extends to Europe anymore; and (2) Trump has threatened to invade Greenland.
Basically, nobody here trusts the US anymore, but politicians are keeping up appearances to race to scale up production capacity of arms, etc.
Trumpists will typically say "but why should the US provide the nuclear umbrella for Europe?" Which is woefully ignorant of history, the whole NATO nuclear sharing arrangement, etc. exists, because the US didn't want European countries like (West-)Germany to have their own nukes.
Isn't it embarrassing that all these idiots are the dominant force on the planet and you have to cry to them to help you against Russia and they make much more money than your citizens? If you're going to insult Americans like this you should at least have something worth insulting us over. I do think biking culture is way better than driving, but I'm not sure about much else.
Sorry, but the arrogance is perplexing. First, European countries contributed a lot more money to Ukraine than the US. Second, when the US, Ukraine, etc. signed the Budapest memorandum, they US implied that they would respond to a Russian attack.
However, when negotiating the security assurances, U.S. officials told their Ukrainian counterparts that, were Russia to violate them, the United States would take a strong interest and respond. [...] Washington did not promise unlimited support. The Budapest Memorandum contains security “assurances,” not “guarantees.” Guarantees would have implied a commitment of American military force, which NATO members have. U.S. officials made clear that was not on offer. Hence, assurances.
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/why-care-about-ukraine-an...
And this is exactly one of the issues of the US now. It is completely reliable. Make a trade agreement and then on a whim Trump can decide to shred it again.
The funniest case was that Trump wanted to impose tariffs when Denmark wanted to send troops to Greenland... Which is an autonomous territory of Denmark.
> Nope, nobody was talking about getting nukes after the invasion in 2022.
That's not what I recall. And I also recall a lot of hand-wringing over how it was a shame that Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons (in a manner of speaking).
> Basically, nobody here trusts the US anymore, but politicians are keeping up appearances to race to scale up production capacity of arms, etc.
That's not true. Internet commentators don't trust the US, but they don't represent all peoples or governments. Even the Danes trusted us enough to sign an agreement giving us perpetual military access to Greenland even if the Greenlanders declare sovereignty.
> Trumpists will typically say "but why should the US provide the nuclear umbrella for Europe?" Which is woefully ignorant of history, the whole NATO nuclear sharing arrangement, etc. exists, because the US didn't want European countries like (West-)Germany to have their own nukes.
I think you are somewhat off the mark here. Nuclear weapons are of course important, but France and the United Kingdom have them too. I guess a question you want to ask Europe is the details and history about France and the United Kingdom's own nuclear umbrellas. If they have them, why do you need American nuclear weapons? Not that I'm personally opposed to also extending ours.
For Americans (and I have various levels of agreement and disagreement) it's less about the nuclear umbrella and more about the placement and utilization of conventional forces. As you can tell with the Iran war and the early days of the Ukraine war, the United States (thanks in part to Europe) has been brow-beaten so much about (what was it, 14 countries someone said we bombed this year?) how bad America is and how awful and racist and "colonizer" America is and all that stuff that many Americans are just fed up with utilizing our military for much of anything or dealing with the problems of other countries.
I'm not, personally, because I think it would be beneficial for us to stop Russia in Ukraine, stop Iran in the Middle East, and avoid a war with China while maintaining the status quo regarding Taiwan, but you know when someone like some posters in this thread want to spend all day talking about how your country is full of idiots eventually people say, well, maybe you guys should take care of your own problems, even if it ends up worse off for everyone.
> Sorry, but the arrogance is perplexing. First, European countries contributed a lot more money to Ukraine than the US. Second, when the US, Ukraine, etc. signed the Budapest memorandum, they US implied that they would respond to a Russian attack.
You say that like there should have been an expectation that the US contributed the same or more? This expectation you have, that you created for yourself, is of your own making.
Second, let's not forget the UK also signed that memorandum and while Europe was busy denying the US and UK's warnings of an imminent Russian invasion, the US and UK were running 24/7 airlift operations to get supplies to Ukraine, provided intelligence, and more. We did respond to the Russian attack. There's no requirement for US forces to respond.
"Even the Danes trusted us enough to sign an agreement giving us perpetual military access to Greenland"
"Trusted". Christ, I guess you subscribe to the Dennis Reynolds "implication" style of coercion. Recall that Denmark readied blood supplies and literally prepared troops for a US invasion. From an ally. "Trusted". Good god.
No one "trusts" the US. It is a worldwide danger, where a pedophile rapist kleptocracy tries to export its profound stupidity to better nations.
In the end, Denmark reaffirmed an existing agreement from 1951. The one that already saw the US having military bases on Greenland per the alliance. They not only broadened it from just the US, they explicitly restricted it such that the US can only maintain such bases if they remain in NATO.
They took an existing agreement and reaffirmed it with new conditions. So Trump, Mr. We're Pulling out of NATO, basically redoubled on NATO just to have a win, where the win is just the status quo. Hilarious stuff. And this actually sells to some Americans?
When they played "Send in the clowns" for Marco Rubio to sign this new "agreement" was just poetic.
Where do you get your news from? Twitter? Because wow, every one of your take is straight from America exceptional land, and it's bizarre (I didn't respond to your other comments out of mercy, but good god you simply have no idea). The fact that Trump celebrated this agreement is because the midterms are coming up and this pathetic loser, having literally nothing to show but failure from his reign of idiocy, needed a "win".
> If they have them, why do you need American nuclear weapons?
You seem to have missed their point. There was a detente and a worldwide "order". Russia stepped out of line and almost the entire world punished them for it. The order mattered. Might does not make right, and in the rule of international law you can't just steal land or resources.
Suddenly Trump not only heralds Putin and wants to cement his battlefield wins, through his incompetent family reps Kushner (jesus christ) and Witkoff, he continually praises Putin and justifies his aggression, constantly repeating Russia's absurd justifications for this foolish war. Then Trump engages in the same behaviour on behalf of the US, stealing the resources of Venezuela, and openly threatening Cuba. And I guarantee that Trump has repeatedly talked to his drunken halfwit SecWar about invading Canada. They openly threatened invading Greenland, just because they want it.
Right now, every capable country should be getting nuclear weapons. Germany, Italy, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Brazil, Spain, and on and on. Putin tested the waters and Trump redoubled them and affirmed that there is no international rules, and everyone should be willing to murder billions of people. Any Americans -- having lived a life of peace, security, comfort and affluence -- who think this improves their lot is impossibly fucking stupid. All of history says uncountable Americans are going to die because of this foolish imbecile.
4 replies →