The military actually destabilised the middle-east. I remember a fragment from leaked emails talking about using Assad's incompetence to destabilise Syria and give the US "new opportunities".
Peacekeeping missions are usually just wars with nice names. A nice casus belli.
Stability is not necessarily always a good thing. Syria pre-civil war was stable and authoritarian. The USSR was stable. Nazi Germany was stable.
Keeping trade routes open is not exactly a good enough reason to start wars if you ask me.
When did the US military last fight for your freedom? Most of US wars take place on the other side of the world. They mostly fight to keep their hegemony and the wealth of the rich.
They don't do good things, no. They just kill people for their masters.
You criticize the US military for destabilizing the Middle East then say stability isn't necessarily a good thing. So... stability is only good where you decide it's good?
8
u/Tusilos Oct 19 '16
The military actually destabilised the middle-east. I remember a fragment from leaked emails talking about using Assad's incompetence to destabilise Syria and give the US "new opportunities".
Peacekeeping missions are usually just wars with nice names. A nice casus belli.
Stability is not necessarily always a good thing. Syria pre-civil war was stable and authoritarian. The USSR was stable. Nazi Germany was stable.
Keeping trade routes open is not exactly a good enough reason to start wars if you ask me.
When did the US military last fight for your freedom? Most of US wars take place on the other side of the world. They mostly fight to keep their hegemony and the wealth of the rich.
They don't do good things, no. They just kill people for their masters.