The flimsy support for Ukraine doesn't erase 50 years of catastrophic effects of USA interventionism

You can cherry pick a few good things. Ukraine, Kosovo, Korea, maybe Libya, the first Gulf war, the Berlin air-lift

Then you come back to reality. The war on terror, El Salvador, Chile, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Laos, arming the Saudis, Irak, Afghanistan

If you engage in 50 or so interventions and all except one fail miserably, often in horrifying ways that result in the deaths of millions of people, it’s really hard to maintain that that’s a good record.

▲

psunavy03 18 hours ago | parent [-]

OK, so we're just going to handwave away any positive impact the US has had in preserving the rules-based international order for the past 70 years and amplify every US failure, while not even taking into consideration the alternatives like Russia and China. Keep living in your bubble.

	▲	sebstefan 16 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		You do whatever you want. >preserving the rules-based international order The USA's foreign policy is anything but rules-based. They're brutal and barbaric. You can agitate China and Russia as being scarier, that doesn't make the U.S. military a force of good. If you're asking the whether they have their place being shoved at the center of Defcon you have to take in the whole picture
	▲	stickfigure 17 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Exactly. We can just look at the North/South Korea divide to see the alternative world histories that could have been.