jlh

joined 1 year ago
[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name -1 points 3 days ago

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_intervention_in_the_Syrian_civil_war

Obama did not do anything until the airstrikes against daesh, and even then it was very controversial for Obama in the US News. Less than 10000 us special forces have been in Syria, and Assad is still the dictator of Syria. Compare to the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, etc. where the US was in direct conflict with another state.

12 years of administrations don't count because they're not Biden, the current president. What the US does right now has nothing to do what it did in 2003. The US foreign policy cannot be 80 years of regime change in South America, because the current US regime didn't exist before 2021.

Its not brainwashing to defend peaceful democratic opposition to dictators. Who are you going to complain to about imperialism if the US and EU give up on democracy and everybody lives as serfs under the thumb of some warlord?

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 8 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

The imperialists in the bush administrations were the exceptions. There was a clear difference in American foreign policy between Bush Jr. and Obama.

It is important to recognize that countries do not have a foreign policy, presidents do. We can only describe trends that the presidents tend to follow. Iraq was not some shadowy CIA cabal, it was George W. Bush and Dick Cheney who had power at the time. If you want to characterize US foreign policy by public polling for support in the war, it is very clear that public support for the Iraq war has evaporated since 2003, which is why the US didn't intervene in Syria and let Russia and the Kurds duke it out. Fatigue from the Iraq War has also been used by Trump and his supporters to limit military support to Ukraine, NATO, and Taiwan.

Also, the Gulf War is not a good comparison. The Gulf war was a UN-directed intervention in response to the invasion of Kuwait. It was not a invasion coup like 2003.

Relevant video essays regarding American foreign policy post Cold War and the Russian propaganda depicting the US as "coup happy imperialists":

https://youtu.be/FVmmASrAL-Q?t=1916

https://youtu.be/7OFyn_KSy80

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 22 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (8 children)

The nuance is that American policy since the end of the cold war has been to use soft power to promote democracy. Offer pro-democracy propaganda to oppressed people, and sanction human rights violators. There is no evidence of the US funding insurgents in South America, Ukraine, Russia, or the PRC post-Cold War.

In contrast, Trump ordered the CIA to return to cold-war era coups and just straight-up invade Venezuela.

The first one is admirable and how foreign policy should be conducted, the second one is dangerous and is how America is portrayed in Russian propaganda.

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 8 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

The USSR blurred the line. There was decentralized industry and multiculturalism, but also Russian supremacy, genocide, and military conquest.

There was very much the threat of violence in 1990 and 1991, even if the original USSR framework was very liberal. Not to mention the USSR-led coups in Czechoslovakia and Hungary.

It's also important to note that the Russian SFSR itself was an empire ruled from Moscow before the revolution. That did not change much after the revolution.

https://youtu.be/tVRUBs3T4ic

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 7 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Yeah most Americans think that democracy/liberalism is just the natural state of the world and doesn't need any effort to maintain. That is very much not the case in Russia.

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 28 points 5 days ago

What is an election skeptic? Is that like a climate skeptic? The term is fascist thug.

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 9 points 6 days ago

The goths had half of Rome in the sack

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 26 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I don't think your block could stop us. It's too tiny for our discussion's width.

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 3 points 6 days ago

At the same time, no home or business lives in a vacuum. With large projects like this, developers are expected to contribute back to the city to build the infrastructure and neighborhoods around the project, like we see with this. It's better city design to build a neighborhood directly connected to the plant than it is to expect everyone to commute for an hour to get to work. Many company towns had very good urban design, even if they were mini-dictatorships.

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 122 points 6 days ago (13 children)

I dont use iOS, but are people seriously injecting AI in between them and their loved ones?

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 9 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

Unfortunately very car-centric design. The majority of the non-industrial land is paved over and used for parking, and another large portion is being used for grass in a desert.

https://www.gannett-cdn.com/authoring/authoring-images/2024/10/25/PPHX/75851918007-halo-vista-site-plan.jpg?width=2560

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's also important for governments to have humility and leave doors open for reconciliation.

Peace is achieved through heads of states apologizing.

view more: ‹ prev next ›