How many South American countries did China invade? How many Middle Eastern ones? How many in Polynesia? How many cold wars and color revolutions? How many gladio terror plots did China do?
-
-
Replying to @jarurik @Belisarian and
I see that the conversation has shifted from number of people killed, a topic that you picked up, to the number of countries invaded. From where I'm sitting, this seems like excessive cognitive dissonance.
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @DonTwatWaffle @Belisarian and
Why do stupid people insist on trying to discuss everything? What happens when you invade a country? When you overthrow its legitimate government? Flood it with weapons. Blockade it with sanctions? What happens, smart guy?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jarurik @Belisarian and
Imo post 1946 US foreign policy, while immoral at times and 95% self-serving, still utilizes a form of military *offense* that is more efficient & moral than any other historical great power. #1 driver of this is Rule of Law as sovereign vs autocratic leader as sovereign.
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @atlasontilt @Belisarian and
That is absolutely a fair opinion to have. However, it is relative. Whose morality and whose rule of law? A lot of the global anxiety and conflict is other people asserting they don't accept that particular morality and rule of law.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jarurik @Belisarian and
Yes superpowers have/will abuse their position. But the superpower has historically been Rule by Autocrat. Liberal Democracy is a mess, but it asserts Rule of Law at forefront and mitigates any one individual. Key change leads to better moral governance by superpower.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @atlasontilt @Belisarian and
Many people want an autocrat. Because it means someone is responsible. Democracy HIDES who makes these "law" decrees. Who decided this widely opposed deadly force protocol? Some nobody ex-sheriff who started his own consulting biz! Not the president, congress or governors!
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @jarurik @Belisarian and
Nobody decides - that’s the beauty. The war of ideas decides. And ya it’s awful, and manipulated, and alienating and often makes the wrong decision (but never veers too far off course which is the key distinction). Also China doesn’t offer a viable alternative. It’s an old model.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @atlasontilt @jarurik and
"That's the beauty" - if you really like power without responsibility for results - which it turns out, US elites really do. Get to make moral proclamations "Xenophobia is worse than a disease! Borders must stay open." and there are never consequences b/c no one made a decision.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @CovfefeAnon @jarurik and
Ya I get the inefficiency argument against US system, I’ve thought about it deeply vs alternatives, and I believe inefficiency is preferred to inevitable sociopathic autocrats. Moldbug’s Patchwork is most viable way to manage autocracy ive read-but it has A LOT of execution risk.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
That's not "inefficiency" - that's you getting *exactly* what you wanted "rule of law with localism" and it proving to nearly immediately lead to an outcome you claim to not like. This is "true Communism has never been tried" tier denial.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.