If it was a NATO aggressive action then ALL would be involved not just a portion.
As for the US using it military might, it has been bitten enough to know it is just a waste of money. Unless you have a costed strategic end game policy, simply removing dictatorships is not enough.
They dropped a bomb on a nation that was guilty of murdering up to 10m people. They were also not the initial aggressive beligerant. They do not have control with 80 nations, they have a non aggression pact. Yep, there are parts of the US media that is screwed up. That comes with free press. Does Russia have a free press?
There is only one country that is looking to test out the mad doctrine, who also sent nuclear weapons to a vassal state: Russia.
Mexico will not join BRICs because they would then have to leave USMCA trade agreement. Cuba, your nearest neighbour, can do whatever it wants. The US does not get to dictate anymore by military might. They have done in the past. To do so today would bring other trade deals into conflict. The EU would be very against this. This does not mean the US cannot use its financial might, which it clearly does and often.
Also none of this factors in that joining NATO, by definition, involves giving up some part of your nations sovereignty. NATO in reality acts as an extended arm of the US military and it’s industrial complex, and in joining, countries are subjected to this reality of Atlanticism.
Simply not true. Being part of NATO is not an aggressive pact. It is only enacted if another member is attacked. One or more members being aggressive does not mean the rest have to follow. The US and the UK attacked Iran as individual nations. The US has the biggest say in NATO because they spend more than anyone else by quite some distance. Something that is changing because of the Russian attempts to annex Ukraine into its own borders.
Not arguing there. But this was 80 years ago. You would think that making threats of this nature would be something that you would show restraint considering we have a history.
I totally agree people should research news stories these days. It is easy to make money from sensationalism. However, in this light:
For example, EA was voted “Worst Company in America” multiple years in a row, when it’s really just a software company whose worst sins would probably amount to gross overworking/general poor treatment of their employees.
How about loot boxes and how it was designed to attract the gullible to throw cash at the company. Those gullible people stole money from parents in some cases and bankrupted them in the process. So no, this is not some minor discretion. EA was recognised within the gaming community as being the most egregious when it came to loot boxes, but they are certainly not a solo entity in this type of venture.
I agree this is still not as bad as the tragedy that chocolate companies have adopted to make money. They don't just use child labour though, there is plenty evidence of children being abducted into slavery also.
As for NK being not a wonderful place to live. This is not true as it is a great place to live for some. Even George Orwell recognised that by stating "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others".
Let us see that same opinion once you have been the victim of a burglary. I have replaced two back doors to the tune of a few thousand quid. I spent years with higher home insurance because of the claims. Yet they never even got in. My cameras only record when my property line is breeched.
Syldon @ Syldon @feddit.uk Posts 46Comments 685Joined 2 yr. ago
When the argument becomes ridiculous, trolling is allowed. The argument was lost when there was an attempt to accuse the US of threatening with nukes.