US troops are not in Germany to protect Germany.
-
@kdwarn It was a post war shifting that basically set it in play. As the only industrial power left standing after the wars devastation defacto allowed the weight of world fiscal power to tilt towards america. Though i'm sure there were cheerleaders here that facilitated it, I don't think it started as a cohesive plan. Just became a side effect of the post war climate, the marshal plan & ensuing cold war positioning. However it started, we're married to it now
@Beggarmidas I think there's quite the difference between isolationism and reducing the number of U.S. troops and bases across the globe. I'd argue that the world, and the average U.S. person, would be far better without U.S. imperialism. Besides that, should the value of the U.S. dollar decrease, it would mean fewer imports and more exports, which would be a good thing.
-
@Beggarmidas I think there's quite the difference between isolationism and reducing the number of U.S. troops and bases across the globe. I'd argue that the world, and the average U.S. person, would be far better without U.S. imperialism. Besides that, should the value of the U.S. dollar decrease, it would mean fewer imports and more exports, which would be a good thing.
@kdwarn Also...Are you aware of how imperialism actually worked? I suggest a full review & comparison before jumping to such a conclusion. That whole 'imperialist' tag was an outcropping of soviet propaganda that cemented itself in the western mindset as a sort of proto-meme. The USA was in most ways a direct opposite of imperialism. The marshall plan would have never have taken place were it true. There were some bad actor companies that did bad shit despite it, but not as a matter of US policy
-
@kdwarn Also...Are you aware of how imperialism actually worked? I suggest a full review & comparison before jumping to such a conclusion. That whole 'imperialist' tag was an outcropping of soviet propaganda that cemented itself in the western mindset as a sort of proto-meme. The USA was in most ways a direct opposite of imperialism. The marshall plan would have never have taken place were it true. There were some bad actor companies that did bad shit despite it, but not as a matter of US policy
@Beggarmidas overthrowing democratically elected governments and sabotaging popular movements in the interest of US corporations. That’s US policy and I feel it’s quite right to label that imperialism. Maybe neo-imperialism, but whatever I’m not really concerned about the semantics. I just have no interest in the US military murdering people around the world in the name of capitalism.
-
@Beggarmidas I think there's quite the difference between isolationism and reducing the number of U.S. troops and bases across the globe. I'd argue that the world, and the average U.S. person, would be far better without U.S. imperialism. Besides that, should the value of the U.S. dollar decrease, it would mean fewer imports and more exports, which would be a good thing.
@kdwarn Eh, with one caveat. The USA did pursue some imperialist practices pre world war one, but we'd largely ended those practices by 1908. (Might have been 1912. Forgive my aging memory) It was more of a 'we did it because everyone was doing it' sort of geopolitical thing. EG the international 'norm' Once we'd decided we were going to encourage/endorse ending of colonialism practices globally we abandoned those overtones at the policy level.
-
US troops are not in Germany to protect Germany. They’re there because the US needs bases to conduct operations beyond the North American continent. If Trump withdraws them, he will harm the United States, not Germany.
It’s absurd how many Americans fail to grasp this.
@Strandjunker If you're ever wondering about Trump's motives, just ask yourself "what would Putin do?". But currently Russia can't even beat Ukraine, and they'd be no match for Europe, with or without the U.S. #agent_krasnov
-
US troops are not in Germany to protect Germany. They’re there because the US needs bases to conduct operations beyond the North American continent. If Trump withdraws them, he will harm the United States, not Germany.
It’s absurd how many Americans fail to grasp this.
That might be THE logistics base to support operations in the mid-East if Al Udeid is all shot to Hell.
-
@kdwarn Eh, with one caveat. The USA did pursue some imperialist practices pre world war one, but we'd largely ended those practices by 1908. (Might have been 1912. Forgive my aging memory) It was more of a 'we did it because everyone was doing it' sort of geopolitical thing. EG the international 'norm' Once we'd decided we were going to encourage/endorse ending of colonialism practices globally we abandoned those overtones at the policy level.
@Beggarmidas Central and South America in the 1900s? Various African countries?
-
US troops are not in Germany to protect Germany. They’re there because the US needs bases to conduct operations beyond the North American continent. If Trump withdraws them, he will harm the United States, not Germany.
It’s absurd how many Americans fail to grasp this.
-
US troops are not in Germany to protect Germany. They’re there because the US needs bases to conduct operations beyond the North American continent. If Trump withdraws them, he will harm the United States, not Germany.
It’s absurd how many Americans fail to grasp this.
Only stupid voters can elect and reelect a stupid president.
-
US troops are not in Germany to protect Germany. They’re there because the US needs bases to conduct operations beyond the North American continent. If Trump withdraws them, he will harm the United States, not Germany.
It’s absurd how many Americans fail to grasp this.
@Strandjunker Whoa whoa whoa....
You're saying the USA needs allies to help keep them safe?!?!?!eleven?!?!!!?
-
US troops are not in Germany to protect Germany. They’re there because the US needs bases to conduct operations beyond the North American continent. If Trump withdraws them, he will harm the United States, not Germany.
It’s absurd how many Americans fail to grasp this.
@Strandjunker
If it happens gradually it is even good for Europe.
There are a lot if folks, including me, that don't want to be dependent on any other countries outside Europe. So Trump is actually doing us a favor. -
US troops are not in Germany to protect Germany. They’re there because the US needs bases to conduct operations beyond the North American continent. If Trump withdraws them, he will harm the United States, not Germany.
It’s absurd how many Americans fail to grasp this.
-
@dissident @Strandjunker
Remember, Trump serves only himself and Putin.@Guillotine_Jones @dissident @Strandjunker Benjamin Netanyahu enters the chat.
-
@baglava @Strandjunker Well it's taken Putin about 4 years to march 250km into Ukraine.
At that rate, we can expect him in Lisbon sometime in 2090.
Do we think he'll still be alive in 64 years?
@JimBliss @baglava @Strandjunker
Could fragile egos like Vladimir and Donald bear the thought that life on Earth would go on after they’re gone? -
US troops are not in Germany to protect Germany. They’re there because the US needs bases to conduct operations beyond the North American continent. If Trump withdraws them, he will harm the United States, not Germany.
It’s absurd how many Americans fail to grasp this.
Most Americans can't see past next Friday. The Trump regeim sees only the worst in people.
-
US troops are not in Germany to protect Germany. They’re there because the US needs bases to conduct operations beyond the North American continent. If Trump withdraws them, he will harm the United States, not Germany.
It’s absurd how many Americans fail to grasp this.
@Strandjunker @pluralistic tRump & his supporters have less intelligence than soap bubbles
-
M madsenandersc@social.vivaldi.net shared this topic
