The next time the US has a Korea, a Vietnam, an Iraq
nobody else is gonna sign up to join.
31-35, M
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
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).
Livingwell · 61-69, M
@sarabee1995 I agree. We didn't win any wars in isolation. And we need our Allies for policy. If I remember, we refused to get involved initially in WW2 and then we were attacked. This seems to be going that route with NATO as a target.
sarabee1995 · 26-30, F
@Livingwell I don't see the current administration honoring our commitment to European security. This is unfortunate.
But, I also see a positive result coming from this. Europe will stand up and come out from under our right shoulder and take it's rightful place among the powers of Earth.
Instead of China and the US occupying the two "super-power" seats, there will be a third and it will be a unified Europe with its own military and its own 500-million-plus population and GDP. A Europe on an equal footing in the world is a nightmare for our current administrations America-first policies, but it is a very good thing for the world and for an engaged America.
But, I also see a positive result coming from this. Europe will stand up and come out from under our right shoulder and take it's rightful place among the powers of Earth.
Instead of China and the US occupying the two "super-power" seats, there will be a third and it will be a unified Europe with its own military and its own 500-million-plus population and GDP. A Europe on an equal footing in the world is a nightmare for our current administrations America-first policies, but it is a very good thing for the world and for an engaged America.
Longpatrol · 31-35, M
@sarabee1995 I'd like that to be the case but it's a "more unified" Europe that includes Hungary which has always been ready to snarl up the works. Until Fidesz is voted out....
Livingwell · 61-69, M
@Longpatrol I think there are a few "cogs" to slow things down. But a stronger Europe is a good thing and I hope the money we save does go to the American people. But with multiple billionaires involved and having an easily swayed ear using praise, I'm not so sure.
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.