The next time the US has a Korea, a Vietnam, an Iraq
nobody else is gonna sign up to join.
31-35, M
sarabee1995 · 26-30, F
You are right because near irreparable damage is being done to our global reputation right now. But, your examples are widely different.
Korea was a UN police action. Granted, yes, the US was the largest participant, but it was a UN action.
Viet Nam was a proxy war in the greater East-West Cold War between America and its allies and the Soviet Union and its allies. In this war, America stepped in and took over when the French were defeated.
Iraq was many things, but primarily it was a regime change / nation building effort the likes of which we are inlikely to see again soon. Our new DNI, Director Gabbard, has spoken vigorously against such actions in the future (and, on this, I agree with her).
Korea was a UN police action. Granted, yes, the US was the largest participant, but it was a UN action.
Viet Nam was a proxy war in the greater East-West Cold War between America and its allies and the Soviet Union and its allies. In this war, America stepped in and took over when the French were defeated.
Iraq was many things, but primarily it was a regime change / nation building effort the likes of which we are inlikely to see again soon. Our new DNI, Director Gabbard, has spoken vigorously against such actions in the future (and, on this, I agree with her).
View 6 more replies »
Elessar · 26-30, M
@sarabee1995 Iirc it never passed because of the dumb unanimity rule; we could withdraw some funds (for which the 2/3 of the votes were enough) but never fully suspended their voting rights, as there was always a second "rogue" country to shield them (Poland before, Slovakia now)
As for the military project, I think Starmer's idea is right, both for Ukraine and beyond Ukraine: a parallel coalition of volunteering countries, so the alikes of Hungary doesn't get to throw wrenches in the machine, and non-EU countries like the U.K., Canada, Turkey and Ukraine itself can join regardless of membership status. Maybe even extend it to S.K. and Japan if they feel like Trump might turn his back on them next
As for the military project, I think Starmer's idea is right, both for Ukraine and beyond Ukraine: a parallel coalition of volunteering countries, so the alikes of Hungary doesn't get to throw wrenches in the machine, and non-EU countries like the U.K., Canada, Turkey and Ukraine itself can join regardless of membership status. Maybe even extend it to S.K. and Japan if they feel like Trump might turn his back on them next
Elessar · 26-30, M
@Longpatrol Yeah but they still have a significant army (look at how they've literally steamrolled on the Russian backed Syrian regime) and they're in active contrast with the Russians so the good ol' "the enemy of my enemy" still applies. Plus they're already in NATO right now. Having them in a military alliance but out of the E.U. seems the sweet spot to me.
TexChik · F
The recruitment since Trump has taken over is at a 15 year high. The new Sec Def is all about the actual warfighters, their safety, and giving them everything they need to overwhelmingly destroy an enemy if the need arises. Trump does not want wars, and he especially does not want America involved in one but will act if provoked
bijouxbroussard · F
SomeMichGuy · M
Longpatrol · 31-35, M
@TheOneyouwerewarnedabout It's purely about how they're treating their allies Now. The US is incapable of not interfering so I fully expect some third world country is gonna get it in the next twenty years.