[Pants-of-dog]

The exiles you met in Canada.

So you are saying that the coup supporters were the ones who stayed.

This implies that you are saying that the US created a coup.

Is that what you mean to say?

Perhaps you meant that the exiles I met in Canada were all anti-democratic coup supporters.

—————-

@Rugoz

I seem to know more about US involvement in Latin America than most people. Many of the people who think the USA are a good force internationally are not aware of, for example, their support for human rights abuses in Honduras.

[wat0n]

Perhaps you meant that the exiles I met in Canada were all anti-democratic coup supporters.

Bingo, and that happens to be the obvious interpretation. Although the party as a whole counts as "anti-democratic coup supporters".

The whole Grenada mess seems to be eerily similar to the mess among Afghan communists that got the Soviets to intervene, actually.

[Pants-of-dog]

Bingo,

Then your sentence is an irrelevant insult targeting people you never met and do not know.

[wat0n]

Then your sentence is an irrelevant insult targeting people you never met and do not know.

Or who may not even exist for that matter.

[Pants-of-dog]

Or who may not even exist for that matter.

Exactly, yes.

———————

I was musing on why different people from the same country would have markedly different views on the same act of US involvement in their country.

It makes sense to assume the following:

1. The USA acts in its own self interest.
2. The USA acts unilaterally in the developing world in order to establish regimes that benefit the USA.
3. Different people in each of these countries will have different reactions to said involvement for various reasons.
4. Money is going to be one of these reasons because of US support for capitalism.
5. It is therefore safe to say that many people in whatever country the USA is involved in support the USA and its involvement because they benefit financially.

So we see that it is not only the self interest of the US that is interesting when we talk about the who and why of criticising US policies.

We can also look at people within the USA who are negatively impacted by US policies, which are many and most of these people also feel they have good reason to criticise or be negative about the USA.

But the most interesting group, in my opinion, are those who have been negatively impacted and still support the USA.

[Drlee]

I am very critical of the USA. That is what patriots do.

[annatar1914]

I am very critical of the USA. That is what patriots do.

@Drlee ;

Well said, Drlee. Now of course there's a distinction between being critical and being subversive and undermining, but I think we understand that.

[boomerintown]

I am very critical of the USA. That is what patriots do.

Agreed. Anybody who cares about his or her country should be critical of it.

I interpreted the question more if we viewed USA as a positive or negative roll in the world so to speak.

[Godstud]

@boomerintown America's role in the world, as a state, is negative. I am not loath to admit that Americans mostly have a positive role, once you get past that, though.

[Crantag]

I don't think Americans have an overall positive role, I think they are in the best interpretation a bunch of blundering idiots and complete morons.

[boomerintown]

But what would the world look like without USA? More power to Russia and China. Would that be a better world?

[Potemkin]

But what would the world look like without USA? More power to Russia and China. Would that be a better world?

For Russia and China, it probably would be. Lol.

[boomerintown]

For Russia and China, it probably would be. Lol.

True.

At least for Putin and the Communist Party, not sure about the people though. But I dont think they would be effected either way, they are victims of their regimes either way.

[Pants-of-dog]

But what would the world look like without USA? More power to Russia and China. Would that be a better world?

Russia is not a serious contender for global hegemon. China seems like it is much better poised to become the top world power, with the USA a close second.

I think it would be more peaceful, simply because the US starts way more wars than China. Or possibly, Russia and China combined.

There would also be less sanctions against leftist governments around the world, so we might see more economies opening up to international trade.

[Rugoz]

But what would the world look like without USA? More power to Russia and China. Would that be a better world?

It would be a disaster. For the people in Russia and China, because those regimes could brutalize their people without restraint, and internationally, because both would prop up equally hideous regimes around the world.

[Godstud]

@Rugoz Really?

35 countries where the U.S. has supported fascists, drug lords and terrorists
https://www.salon.com/2014/03/08/35_cou ... e_partner/

How The U.S. Government Has Supported The Deaths Of Hundreds Of Thousands
The United States has historically forged alliances with some pretty questionable if not absolutely cruel regimes.
https://allthatsinteresting.com/us-dictator-alliances

A few good deeds doesn't erase this reality.

[Rugoz]

The United States has historically forged alliances with some pretty questionable if not absolutely cruel regimes.

Like every government out there. The question is against whom those allliances are forged. I have no intention to discuss utilitarian vs. deontological ethics here.

The US and its Western partners propagate values such as human rights, the rule of law and accountable government through their foreign policy and various international instutitutions. Even countries like Russia and China have to pay lip service to that stuff. Russia in particular has made a farce out of it, but it still has to operate within that framework.

[Beren]

For Russia and China, it probably would be. Lol.

For Russia it definitely would be because they've never profited much from trading with the US, but they lost the Cold War to them and still feel threatened by NATO. Meanwhile, China won't mind the US much once they've replaced them as the global hegemon.

[B0ycey]

But what would the world look like without USA? More power to Russia and China. Would that be a better world?

I don't see the world being better without the US actually, the same way we kind of need China right now. That isn't to say the US are positive or incidentally negative for the world. Just that with its presence there is order. I cannot imagine the existence of the UN without the US and I do thank them for the foundations of a stable Europe along with them funding its rebuilding post WW2. But they do obviously interfere in other regimes and nations politics that aren't allies and that can't be ignored especially given we have had a few illegal wars due to their geopolitics. Which I guess is why we need China now (who over took Russia). There has to be another hegemony to counter the US interference that 'so called rogue' states can turn to in order to keep the US under control. And the US presence will of course do the same against China doing the same thing. A single hegemony power is perhaps the real danger for the world.

[Rugoz]

"funding its rebuilding post WW2"

Still peddling that nonsense I see. Stop it already, the numbers don't lie.