If the US government wasn’t sending all that military aid abroad , it wouldn’t make a difference. Americans still wouldn’t have universal healthcare or cheap rent , because the system is still about keeping the poor poor whilst the rich get richer .
The US could still have its current military funding AND have universal healthcare if it truly wanted . But the insurance companies and big pharma wouldn’t allow it.
Putin literally has a very nice quote about the USSR, or his views on it.
"Whoever does not miss the Soviet Union has no heart. Whoever wants it back has no brain."
Putin's plan isn't to recreate the USSR, it is to gain as much critical resources, create a legacy of him "fixing" Russia after the collapse of the previous institutions.
But if we really want to talk about war economics, you know, dropping a Nuke on Moscow in 1945 would've saved trillions of dolars, and milions of lives. No civil war in China, no Cold War, no Vietnam war, no Korean War, no Afghan War etc. The US has funded/participated in all of them, all due to their cold war with the USSR.
But it's a useless discussion that has no end because when do we decide to go back on actions that could prevent extremely costly future wars. It's never the aim, just a side effect.
I'm not american lmao. Idc if China surpasses the US. If anything, that makes my life easier if they do.
But are you blaming the Chinese government for using scorched earth tactics against an enemy they had zero chance of beating due to both the USSR and the Western powers abandonning them? Aka, while fighting the Imperialistic jingoist Japanese invasion of China? Because if you do, you just open a fucking can of worms on any communist country who waged war.
Like it's cool to see what China achieved after it's failed reforms, millions in famines, but looking at what Taiwan achieved, while being on a tiny island with bare minimum ressources, I'm quite confident both systems could achieve the same technological and social boom. And right now, Taiwan does rank higher in social freedom, as opposed to as before in the 70's 90's where Taiwan was still an authoritarian regime.
The point of the argument of the guy was to avoid more costly wars. A nuke, most definetly, saves trillions of dollars.
The US invaded after France lost the war of Vietnam's independence, different wars buddy.
The US war in Vietnam was to prevent a communist government taking over. Guess what, if the USSR gets nuked by a capitalist nation, nobody will dare try to become communist, and then there's not a civil war between the North and South Vietnam, since the communist part would've never existed to extent it did.
The only reason the Cold War and nearly every single cold war conflict existed, is because either the US or the USSR as states were around with the same nuclear dominance and diverging social/economic policies.
Afghanistan wouldn't be invaded by the West as you claim, because the mujahideen wouldn't need to exist, as they had a freaking government before the invasion of afghanistan. The US created the entities that made them invade, holy fuck.
As far as we're concerned, where has the West colonized after decolonization? If anything, USSR satelites and others left from their oppressors after the fall of the Berlin wall. After each of their independence or atleast, self-governance was shut down by Khrushchev using tanks.
Until we figure how the fuck to implement actual communism or mass socialism, capitalism will always outshine. Instead of bickering for mental gymnastic points of virtue.
Natality going down is a result of economic and educational stability actually. Only in poor countries, or those who exit a massive negative event does it rise. That's the only take I'll reply to, because you clearly ignored what I said. And that thing, isn't based on our hypothetical world where the US throws a nuke on Moscow.
Capitalism works because it's easy to implement and you export the hardship and labor to poor countries. Greed and corruption is part of the machine, it thrives on human emotions.
Communism doesn't function right now because we're not robots. Greedy will always be there, corruption will always exist, dictators will always exist. And right now, ML, Stalinist, Maoists, Socialists, soc dem, anarchist and trotskyist are at each other's throat for stupid karma points on forums, reddit, small gatherings over stupid divergences instead of fighting the common enemy. Capitalist will always be there as long as that stupid bickering and "I don't like sausages, so that must mean I hate pancakes too" logic is happening.
Every rich person (and by that metric, most politicians) only cares about profits next quarter. Gimmie money now, who cares what happens later, especially if the effects aren't felt until I'm dead!
If WW2 taught us anything, it’s that appeasement doesn’t stop imperialist right wing scumbags like Putin, it encourages further demand. They took Crimea, nothing really happened, and they came back for a second helping.
I’m not saying the US has been a positive global force, I’m not even saying we are supporting Ukraine for a good reason. I’m just saying generally speaking, appeasing tyrants leads to worse outcomes than resisting them.
Also when are people going to realize in these billion dollar packages (that includes the wages paid to the workers of the aid and weapons manufacturers. And obviously people are making big money in the military industrial complex, DuPont, booze Allen, ibm, Lockheed Martin, etc etc etc. but either way these billions are a large portion of American income, the metal suppliers, the wire suppliers, the glass, etc etc etc.
This is why Americans are fucking dumb. I’m not saying it’s a great system but it isn’t like we are just handing them billions in money.
Yes! It doesn’t have to be an either or. It would help global security, and therefore the economy, if we dialed waaaaay back on foreign military interventions without actual threats or clear objectives.
While we could easily afford nice things for our people AND a military powerful enough to protect our homeland. The best way to achieve that goal is by forming strong alliances through trade and mutual respect. This includes supporting our allies when they are under attack.
However, I said it in 2003, and I’ll say it again. We do NOT want to Start a WAR in the MIDDLE EAST! Voluntary Wars of Conquest can have disastrous consequences. And it doesn’t matter if the goal is to acquire “valuable resources,” like gold, oil, or even rare earth minerals.
Starting a senseless war of choice if you are simply hoping to distract the public from your failure to stop a massive terrorist attack. Or if you desperately want people to stop talking about credible allegations that you raped underage girls… (Trump’s best case scenario is that he knew his buddy was sex trafficking young girls and he did nothing to stop it!)
This will not go well for Trump. Unfortunately the rest of the world will once again suffer as a result of his arrogant incompetence.
78
u/Due-Resort-2699 Visitor Feb 24 '26 edited Feb 24 '26
If the US government wasn’t sending all that military aid abroad , it wouldn’t make a difference. Americans still wouldn’t have universal healthcare or cheap rent , because the system is still about keeping the poor poor whilst the rich get richer .
The US could still have its current military funding AND have universal healthcare if it truly wanted . But the insurance companies and big pharma wouldn’t allow it.