Conversation

I'd rather a country with 20,000+ nukes didn't outright collapse, tbqh. Although if it's a choice between that, and the US clinging on to power for another 20 years & condemning us to a hothouse earth, we might as well take the risk.
1
Replying to
I think we're talking past each other. The country best placed to fund green tech, or defund fossil fuels, or change the state of the oil game, is the US. That will remain true for the entire window of opportunity to do anything except pray, unless the models are very wrong.
2
Replying to
Possibly, but it'd require wholesale systemic change for them to use that potential in a way that isn't imperialistic & neo-colonialist & counter-productive. Certainly, their 800+ military bases should be retooled for disaster prep & relief, then handed over to host states.
1
Replying to
I think the difficulty of systemic change is oversold as often as it's undersold. Realistically, it's sufficient for the current US system to collapse, provided the right people manage to seize the momentum. But the US is such a crazy place, it's hard to predict how it'd go.
1
1
Replying to
The other thing is, when you look at places like the ex-Soviet bloc, these countries all got neoliberalized into new types of shitholes, in spite of their revolutions. But the US was the primary agent of that neoliberalization. What happens if it collapses? Who subverts *that*?
2
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Yeah, yeah, I didn't say you're all combat veterans. But even you know how to shoot. I can only name one or two people I know from outside the US who'd be comfortable (practically speaking) firing a rifle at a moving target.
1
1
Show replies
Replying to and
Not talking bout army as much as pure number of people trained in use of weapons, tactics etc. Blackwater hasn't really showed any greater competence than US army, either, AFAICT, considering all the fuckups they had in Iraq.