[dealforager]

I've worked at tech companies that despise helping the US military. Please understand that the world is complex and although all superpowers have done terrible things, helping the US is the only way our children will live in a peaceful world. This isn't about democrats or republicans, the future of humanity will be decided in the next decade.

[woodruffw]

Any abject suffering that occurs over the next hours, days, and weeks doesn't excuse the historical record of abject suffering imposed by the US military.

It's perfectly consistent to be opposed to Russia's invasion of Ukraine and also reject the myth that the US's military is the only thing that maintains world peace.

[jollybean]

It's not a 'myth' that the US maintains world peace, it's a most obvious reality and it's disturbing that anyone wouldn't be able to see it plainly.

The world is not a 'peaceful place' with a bunch of wars now and again.

It's held together by force.

Peace is a balance of, and righteous management of power.

The US+NATO+Allies form the basis of that power. Unfortunately, without the US, that 'Team' would basically be dysfunctional and wouldn't really work.

The Panama Canal, Suez Canal, the Gulf, S. China Sea - all of it would be controlled by various regimes if it were not for US power basically keeping it all open for everyone.

Israel and Egypt the 'lynchpin' of peace in the ME is kept that way because of US power. All of he Middle East would be like Syria were it not for US/West.

Obviously Taiwan would be in China and Korea would be vanquished by N. Korea.

It's hard to know exactly how the cards would fall, but they would definitely fall one way or another.

Unfortunately, we don't have a solution for Ukraine, but thankfully, this will be mostly contained in Ukraine thanks to NATO.

[lnxg33k1]

Also because what Russia is doing right now is the same thing that US tried to do in the Bay of Pigs, settling a puppet government in a portion of a country then make it ask for help? That's CIA 101

[wernercd]

"abject suffering" And what about some of the most peaceful decades in human history? That means nothing, eh?

"only thing" Not the only thing by any stretch... but definitely a major reason and a hugely stabilizing force.

[speedgoose]

US the only way for a peaceful world? You should read a bit on the USA history and its military conflicts and you may change your mind. Wikipedia is a good starting point.

[goldenshale]

The period of US hegemony from WW2 until today has by far been the most peaceful time in the history of civilization. Unlike previous super powers, the US did not take over any other countries or colonize by force. We have done many horrible things, like support dictators, invade Iraq based on lies (to depose a dictator), etc., but we have also supported people all over after natural disasters, helped with foreign aid to relieve famines, policed global trade to enable fair markets, and many other good deeds. It's definitely not the only way, and we could do much, much better, but show me another major country that you would prefer hold the reigns of global power?

[probably_wrong]

I resent the implication that the US military is the only reason the world is at peace, and I bet plenty of NGOs feel the same - if anything, the US military is the one that has been pushing for new conflicts. And while it's true that all superpowers have done terrible things, the difference with the US is that plenty of them have stopped doing terrible things since.

I was not born yet when Germany started WWII, but I was alive to see the US declare torture as a valid means of interrogation and bomb civilians with no repercusions. And my living relatives who suffered under a US-backed military coup may not be as quick to forgive either. Maybe your children will live in a peaceful world, but for many of us that's cold comfort.

[unityByFreedom]

We aren't sending troops to Ukraine so that's irrelevant.

[k41da]

Give it 72 hours. The news cycle is leading the announcements tomorrow and the announcements that will inevitably come next week. If the news is already talking WW3 (and yes, they are) then it won't be long before the UN deploys it's own "peacekeeping forces" and the world goes hot.

[8note]

This requires a very specific version of peace, where it's still peaceful for those in power to use violence against those who don't.

[justshowpost]

> helping the US is the only way

When people are convinced that there is only one way, then the propaganda worked.

[thatguy0900]

Russia is a openly currupt oligarchy dictator state and China runs slave camps and genocides. It seems to pretty much just be helping the US or the EU at this point. Honestly I would say EU over us in a ideal world, probably.

[wyager]

Nuclear proliferation, like it or not, has done more for global peace than US military/trade hegemony. Ukraine gave up all its nukes in the 90s which is why this is happening now.

[landemva]

Libya was invaded after giving up nuclear in 2003. Clinton pushed for the invasion as Secretary of State, then she joked about the death on TV. https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/11/27/clinton-po...

It should not be a surprise that North Korea refuses to disarm.

[zionic]

They gave up those nukes with the promise we would protect them.

That trick of ours won’t work again.

[freeopinion]

I'm not convinced. Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Rwanda, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan again, Syria, Peru, Mali, ...

When you say "world peace", do you mean European peace? California peace? Where is your world?

[csee]

It does a lot for global peace right up until our extinction. We don't need thousands of nukes to maintain deterrence. We should reduce our nuclear stockpile to the smallest number that still maintains deterrence.

[mrec]

Ukraine never had the codes to use those nukes. They didn't give up a functioning deterrent.

[cute_boi]

The nukes never belonged to Ukraine, unfortunately. It was always controlled by Soviet Union.

[paxys]

Ukraine did not have the ability to launch a single nuke. They didn't give up anything.

[sorry_outta_gas]

It's hard to say, right now it looks like it's just letting countries armed to the teeth with them dominate whoever they want

[k41da]

This is happening because the sanctions put in place on Russia during the Trump admin were undone haphazardly by Biden. Russia is moving strictly because it knows it has the EU by the short hairs on energy and after the afghanistan exit the US is in a very strategically weak position.

We should be grateful Ukraine does not have nukes. 12 hours ago the world might've gotten 4000C hotter if they did.

[paxys]

Is what Russia is doing in Ukraine right now too different from the US military in Iraq and Afghanistan?

[rectang]

It's certainly different from Afghanistan. The invasion of Afghanistan by the United States was preceded by an attack by Al Qaeda on New York City. The attack by Russia on Ukraine is completely unprovoked.

[pfisherman]

Actually reminds me a lot of the run up to Iraq ca 2003, which was a disaster for all involved. Who in the world looks at the US invasion of Iraq and thinks it was a good idea that should be emulated?

[majgr]

I wonder if this is bot or paid Russian troll..

[denofgen]

What you're witnessing right now are the deathroes of the dictatorships like Russia and China with its aging leaderships. These dictatorships know that their time is limited; the democratic countries are getting stronger and more united. China, the one dictatorship that is supporting all the other dictatorships like Russia or Iran, is going into the final stages of debt/demographic/economic collapse. This is a pivotal time for the citizens of the free world to fight against these dictatorships.

And you can help by asking your government to sanction China. And stop buying goods from China

[landemva]

' the democratic countries are getting stronger and more united. '

I see no evidence for this statement in western Europe countries. EU negative interest rates are an indicator of failure not success.

[zthrowaway]

While I agree, I’m afraid all your comment did was pull the anti-US Russian trolls out into the open.

[ALittleLight]

I think you're just repeating what the parent comment said. Some big tech companies refuse to work with the American military.

I don't know if that's a good idea or not. I'm conflicted by my own hatred of the American government. At the same time, the obvious consequences of big tech refusing to work with the American military is a relative loss of power compared to countries like Russia.

[friedman23]

Stop spreading Russian propaganda that is 60 years out of date.

[sschueller]

The US moto is the same as that of the fictional character Peacemaker: "I cherish peace with all my heart. I don't care how many men, women, and children I need to kill to get it."

[radu_floricica]

Yesterday we'd have laughed at this. Today we get it.

[refurb]

I would argue the US needs to batten down the hatches and become more isolationist. Let Europe deal with European problems. It's clear from the last 70 years, since WW2, that the US meddling in others' affairs only leads to death, destruction and more negative sentiment against the US.

If LBJ stuck to his promise, we could have avoid a ton of mess in Vietnam: "We are not about to send American boys nine or ten thousand miles away from home to do what Asian boys ought to be doing for themselves."

We don't have a dog in this fight.

Edit: Apparently arguing for the US to not get involved in yet another foreign war warrants my comment being flagged.

[deeg]

It was a bad idea in the 1930's and it's an even worse idea now, with the globe being more interconnected than ever.

[icedistilled]

A similar sentiment was expressed in the 1930s.