Difficult question - Ukraine vs Iraq
Interesting discussion on Reddit by people with more knowledge than I.
Were Iraqis hopeful about the US invasion in 2003?
Back in the day of 9/11 or so, 20 years there was a lot less coverage on events and you couldn’t use a device to watch videos and the news and get the info basically at present time. I mean, on the weather channel, a friend of mine told me the weather was worst than it’s ever been. Now, considering how much worldwide coverage, about what is going on in the world, 24/7, is at the tips of our fingers, everything is blown out of proportion. Mainstream media is not going to want to sort out who the true good/bad guys are. Trust your instincts, as you are your only master.
Trust your instincts??? in an environment where you're bombarded with information and only the most salient and most repeated narrative has a chance of sticking before the next catastrophe wipes away the media landscape and replaces it with an ever new deluge of more horrific images without verified sources??
no. read actual books by actual scholars.
_________________
I can read facial expressions. I did the test.
In a thread filled with stupid claims, this is the stupidest. People can disagree about morality, but this is a blatant factual inaccuracy that I find it hard to imagine anyone falling for.
The US only has about 900 troops stationed in Syria as part of the fight against IS. They control almost no territory. https://www.kurdistan24.net/en/story/23 ... -to-remain
I (the OP) apologize if I've made any stupid claims.
I thought the OP was reasonable, or better than that. Questioning whether double standards exist, without excusing Putin, is valuable, even if I myself would come to a slightly different conclusion. You were asking good questions and challenging pre-conceptions.
The Trump-Saddam comparison was… misguided. Trump hasn’t actively supported ethnic cleansing or execution of his opponents. But while it was maybe a bit stupid, it’s also fairly benign. Ignorance of the depths of evil Saddam sunk to is entirely reasonable for a Westerner - after all, there are a lot of people who the US has opposed on pretty flimsy grounds, and I know I can’t immediately sort them perfectly into neat piles.
I'm not convinced Trump is any less malign than Saddam but we can agree to disagree on that.
But having accepted there was some sort of moral imperative to remove him from power, was the US attack the right approach? I don't think that Bush and Cheney did this for purely altruistic reasons. But then how should it be done? I submit that our world is not properly organized to deal with such a situation in a morally defensible manner. Perhaps we have to just learn to deal with having such people in our world.
stupid question: why Trump? Trump was a buffoon and did his best to divide the US, but his foreign policy was ... basically non-existent. The positives about that are clear: at least he didn't start a major war.
But compared to Bush, who is responsible for the mess in Afghanistan and Iraq, the torture, the detainments without trial, and Obama, whose foreign policy was a continuation of that but with more extrajudicial killings, I'd pick Bush for the comparison with Saddam, not Trump.
_________________
I can read facial expressions. I did the test.
From my understanding, Hussain was a dictator and people there were not happy. Plush Bush lied about his reason wanting to invade there and it got voted in. But I remember then people were not happy about the invasion.
_________________
Son: Diagnosed w/anxiety and ADHD. Also academic delayed.
Daughter: NT, no diagnoses.
stupid question: why Trump? Trump was a buffoon and did his best to divide the US, but his foreign policy was ... basically non-existent. The positives about that are clear: at least he didn't start a major war.
But compared to Bush, who is responsible for the mess in Afghanistan and Iraq, the torture, the detainments without trial, and Obama, whose foreign policy was a continuation of that but with more extrajudicial killings, I'd pick Bush for the comparison with Saddam, not Trump.
Trump’s foreign policy wasn’t coherent, but by any measure is unfavourable to compare to Obama. On drone strikes, Trump escalated their use, and eventually stopped reporting them: https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/2019/ ... -s-numbers
Strange to blame Bush for “the mess in Afghanistan” - that mess predates his Presidency by a long way, and the intervention there was essentially a model. The invasion, approved by the UN, was a coalition of nations from three continents. The subsequent occupation was supported by almost everyone, even Russia, and led to the most peaceful period in Afghanistan’s recent history.
The invasion of Iraq could reasonably be compared to Saddam’s invasion of Iran, although I have laid out what I perceive to be some important differences elsewhere.
Where Trump is closer to a dictator than Bush is in things like:
- openly threatening to start a nuclear war
- blackmailing Ukraine to get Zelensky to lie about one of Trump’s political opponents
- pressuring officials to overturn the results of a free and democratic election
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Putin Admits He Invaded Ukraine "to impress Jodie Foster" |
02 Apr 2024, 2:48 pm |
Very important question. |
29 Jan 2024, 2:41 am |
Hi, new WP user with question |
14 Mar 2024, 9:09 pm |
Question if there is more to psychosis than just SZA
in Bipolar, Tourettes, Schizophrenia, and other Psychological Conditions |
10 Apr 2024, 8:18 pm |