[addictionna]

[Sharon]

Absolutely devastating is an understatement

I have worked in a morgue and my mother has worked in an undertakers. No matter what state a corpse is in, a family member has the right to view them despite the possible mental repercussions. A person torn up by a train was viewed as the family could not cope with not seeing them in the flesh to say goodbye. Because they had not seen the remains, they could not grasp the fact they were dead and had to see with their own eyes.

The situation here seems to be that poor father seeing with his own eyes then displaying typical extreme fury at the state of affairs and trying to take in what has happened to his child. No propaganda or suchlike I wouldn't think.

Very very tragic.

[Johnny Alias]

the dad here is taking it a lot better than I would have

[tiki]

No need to understand what he is saying its all in his emotions.

[spike it hard]

alah snackbar! this kid is now travel size

[Fr33dom]

Originally Posted by tootsieflowrslave ↗

I have only one question:

Assuming a different course of history where the U.S. never achieved the global power projection it indulges in now, how can we be sure that any other nation would not have followed the same path the U.S. did in its quest for power, control, and greed?

My point being isn't to validate U.S. foreign policy but to show that what the U.S. is doing is human nature and whoever takes our place in the future will inevitably engage in same hegemonous policies to secure it's position as the world's top dog for as long as it can before the next civilization takes it's place. That is of course, assuming we don't plunge ourselves into the dark ages after another world war first. Even so, the same global structuring would likely reestablish itself after a very long time of recovery. The only difference will be the players, not the game.

YOur wrong. China itself could economicaly kill the USA within 1 day, Saudi Arabia too, but iam sure wether China noir Russia would ever act like the US. EVERY Country can get everything he wants peacefully, maybe he pays more, but he can. But The US, it whole fucking history long, get everything for free, if somebody doesnt act like they want, invade and start a war, stage wars, support terrorists, make putches, use the CIA to kill leaders etc etc.
The main problem is that the United States has unending money, they will never pay back their debts, but they can everytime make more, because if you dont lend them money or ressources u get attacked.
However back to russia and china. Me for myself, i am absolutely sure they wouldnt have behaved like the US. And im sure the US as we know today, will end up within the next 10 years. As soon as more people wake up, and the more than 33 million VETS start rebelling, the US will get self destroyed. And the world a better and safer place.

[profezzorx]

It's Howdie Doodie Time!!!

[Kaboom]

NATO did that to kids in Iraq.

[Kaboom]

NATO did that to kids in Iraq.

[tootsieflowrslave]

Originally Posted by Fr33dom ↗

YOur wrong. China itself could economicaly kill the USA within 1 day, Saudi Arabia too, but iam sure wether China noir Russia would ever act like the US. EVERY Country can get everything he wants peacefully, maybe he pays more, but he can. But The US, it whole fucking history long, get everything for free, if somebody doesnt act like they want, invade and start a war, stage wars, support terrorists, make putches, use the CIA to kill leaders etc etc.
The main problem is that the United States has unending money, they will never pay back their debts, but they can everytime make more, because if you dont lend them money or ressources u get attacked.
However back to russia and china. Me for myself, i am absolutely sure they wouldnt have behaved like the US. And im sure the US as we know today, will end up within the next 10 years. As soon as more people wake up, and the more than 33 million VETS start rebelling, the US will get self destroyed. And the world a better and safer place.

I thank you for your input, although I disagree with most of it. This is probably an exercise in futility but I will try to explain why with as much of a pragmatic approach as I can.

1. From an economical standpoint, why would China divest itself from U.S. treasury bonds? If China were to do this as a means to shut down the U.S. economy (which it cannot by itself anyway as it only holds roughly 15% of U.S. debt), it's remaining bonds would rapidly decline and the falling value of Treasury bills would destabilize the global economy. So China would effectively cause hyperinflation with the prices of its own goods, nobody would invest in them any longer, and in turn cause a staggering unemployment rate within its own borders. This would not bode well for a country that has more political instability than the mainstream media has been advertising. Whether you like it or not, China and the U.S. economy are inter dependant. We buy their stuff, they buy our debt.

2. Considering that about 45% of U.S. oil consumption is sourced from either the U.S. or Canada whereas only about 10-15% from Saudi Arabia, it would do more harm to Saudi Arabia's economy than the U.S. Although this would cause oil prices to go into the Startosphere for the U.S., its effects would also be extremely counter productive for global trade as higher oil prices equate to inflation of goods. On top of all that, a comprimised Saudi economy of the magnitude it would face by this kind of decision making would aggravate the sociopolitical instability that is currently simmering in that country into an implosion of its government an possibility of a civil war.

3. The U.S. is not alone in national debt. China has the equivalent of $3 trillion in national debt. Although nowhere near the magnitude of U.S. national debt, China has been trending on reckless spending within its own borders and doesn't show signs of slowing down.

5. Russia already has engaged in power projection. This happened during the cold war, so who's to say they wouldn't if they held the keys to global military and/or economic dominance. Besides that, history has demonstrated over and over again that an empire of great wealth and power will do whatever it can to keep its distinction. Humans by nature are greedy and controling misers and this behavior transcends cultural beliefs and practices. Before the U.S. became a superpower, the most powerful nations in Europe colonized almost every corner in the globe. Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan tried to conquer Eurasia, Rome conquered Gual, and the list goes on. Bottom line is this, the U.S. didn't invent hegemony but it did have the privilege of technological advances to project its influence in an unprecedented manner in human history.

Let me end it by saying that I do agree with you on a few points. U.S. foreign policy is rife with hypocrisy, hegemony, and is not standardized by moral principles. I am fully aware when my government takes interest in intervening in an international crisis, the terms "liberating" and "freedom" actually translate to "control" and "serve our interests or else." I think America has lost touch with its own ideals at home and abroad, but this seems to be a product of history repeating itself. In any event, the undermining of its own principles may very well lead to its demise from within. It almost happened during the civil war and if it were to happen today, it would no doubt grant you your wishes. However, the new rulers of the world may not necessarily be any better than the ones we have now and I doubt they ever will be.

Edit: my last comment implies that no matter who is dominating global affairs, corruption, greed, and dominance will always characterize whoever is privileged enough to hold that position. Whether it be China, the U.S. or Russia. This is a game of power politics not morals or principles and it never will be.