5 ms·

Mitch McConnell: We Cannot Repeat the Mistakes of the 1930s

14 points by vwoolf 2y ago

vwoolf 2y ago
https://archive.ph/Xgf9R https://archive.ph/Xgf9R
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
rayiner 2y ago
This is fallacious neocon reasoning. Countries are always looking to expand their borders, for many reasons. Few of them are Nazi Germany. What Russia is doing now is much closer to what Bismarck did in unifying Germany or Garibaldi did in unifying Italy. Or what Iraq tried to do with Kuwait. Would it have been justified for Europe to intervene militarily when the US wrested California and Texas from Mexico? Maybe or maybe not, but it certainly wasn’t the first step in the US taking over the world.
- FuckButtons 2y ago
  No, it’s nothing like German or Italian unification. That’s ahistorical nonsense. In both of those cases there had been decades of nation wide, protests, insurrections and guerilla movements in favor of creating a sovereign nation to prevent domination by foreign powers, Austria in the case of Italy and France in the wake of napoleon for the minor German states. In Ukraine there has been a decades of nation wide protests insurrections and guerrilla movements in favor of creating a sovereign Ukrainian nation so that they will no longer be dominated by Russia. Putin is not garibaldi, he is not unifying a people who have shown they want to be part of some wider national project, he is an imperialist.
  - rayiner 2y ago
    You think Germans and Italians all wanted to be part of a single nation? Bismarck and Garibaldi marched with armies. So did the U.S. You think Mexicans wanted to be part of the U.S.? Putin obviously has expansionist aims. But regional expansionism is widespread, and rarely something countries on the other side of the world need to be involved with. Kuwait certainly didn’t want to be part of Iraq, but that wasn’t any of our business either. Same for South Korea and south Vietnam.
- mpalmer 2y ago
  As long as we're talking about fallacious rhetoric, you set the bar at a country having to "be" Nazi Germany, instead of just having similar expansionist goals. You avoid mentioning NATO and the reasons Putin views it as a threat, probably because it would undercut your claim that there are no worthwhile parallels to WWII here.
  - rayiner 2y ago
    My point is that “Nazi germany” is a small subset of “expansionism” and the latter is widespread and mostly none of our business. Borders shift. It’s not America’s job to police whatever borders happened to exist at some arbitrary point in time all over the world.
    - mpalmer 2y ago
      > [expansionism] is widespread and mostly none of our business. I know you understand how alliances work, so I'm really fascinated that thus far you appear to be studiously avoiding mention of the most consequential alliance in history, one which happens to have significant bearing on US involvement in the war in Ukraine.
      - rayiner 2y ago
        “Alliance” is just code for “Team America: World Police.” If everyone is our “ally” then we are just the world’s border police. Our real allies are the UK, Canada, France, Germany, and Japan. None of those countries are endangered by Putin. They were also not endangered by Iraq invading Kuwait, communists taking over Vietnam or Korea, whatever happened in the Balkans in the 1990s, and all those events that led to mistaken wars over the last 70 years.
        mpalmer 2y ago
        Our "real" allies don't include NATO signatories? Germany isn't threatened by Russia? Absolutely hilarious and ahistorical. Anyone playing the silly rhetorical games you're playing isn't trying to convince anyone with reasoned arguments.
chaorace 2y ago
Fun fact: Mitch McConnell was born in 1942
wumeow 2y ago
> Some vocal corners of the American right are trying to resurrect the discredited brand of prewar isolationism and deny the basic value of the alliance system that has kept the postwar peace. By “some on the right “ you mean your presidential candidate and most of your party.
- rayiner 2y ago
  Not to mention most liberals until five minutes ago. If you had told me twenty years ago that supposed democrats were agreeing with Mitch McConnell and acting out Team America World Police, I wouldn’t have believed you. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0372588/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0372588/.
  - dctoedt 2y ago
    > Not to mention most liberals until five minutes ago. Some fringe leftists are isolationists, to be sure. Liberals? No.
    - rayiner 2y ago
      The mainstream liberal position back when I was a Democrat is that America’s policing of the world was a bad thing. The movie “Team America: World Police” reflected the sentiment of Jon Stewart watching younger Democrats. Stanning for NATO and “our allies” was for evil neocons like Bush and Cheney.
      - sdwr 2y ago
        "policing of the world" is already politically fraught. The classic leftist argument is that America entered unjust foreign wars for political points / foreign resources / dick waving.
        rayiner 2y ago
        Leftists don’t think we entered Vietnam or Korea for resources. And when I was a mainstream young liberal in the 1990s and early oughts, the complaint was about why we have “military bases around the world.” That wasn’t because we thought those were for extracting resources.
mmaniac 2y ago
Peace? What are you, some kind of Nazi?
hi-v-rocknroll 2y ago
Perhaps he's hoping for something extra from the defense contractor lobby or that America should return to policies neocolonial Monroe Doctrine with CIA coups, but this time claim Africa, and get ourself involved in more wars. Going neocon agro W-style won't improve America's geopolitical status. Maybe he's having trouble coming to terms with China rivaling America's economic power and military projection that vaguely resembles what America did, albeit more flagrantly aggressively.

14 points by vwoolf 2y ago

vwoolf 2y ago

https://archive.ph/Xgf9R https://archive.ph/Xgf9R

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

rayiner 2y ago

This is fallacious neocon reasoning. Countries are always looking to expand their borders, for many reasons. Few of them are Nazi Germany. What Russia is doing now is much closer to what Bismarck did in unifying Germany or Garibaldi did in unifying Italy. Or what Iraq tried to do with Kuwait. Would it have been justified for Europe to intervene militarily when the US wrested California and Texas from Mexico? Maybe or maybe not, but it certainly wasn’t the first step in the US taking over the world.

FuckButtons 2y ago
No, it’s nothing like German or Italian unification. That’s ahistorical nonsense. In both of those cases there had been decades of nation wide, protests, insurrections and guerilla movements in favor of creating a sovereign nation to prevent domination by foreign powers, Austria in the case of Italy and France in the wake of napoleon for the minor German states. In Ukraine there has been a decades of nation wide protests insurrections and guerrilla movements in favor of creating a sovereign Ukrainian nation so that they will no longer be dominated by Russia. Putin is not garibaldi, he is not unifying a people who have shown they want to be part of some wider national project, he is an imperialist.
- rayiner 2y ago
  You think Germans and Italians all wanted to be part of a single nation? Bismarck and Garibaldi marched with armies. So did the U.S. You think Mexicans wanted to be part of the U.S.? Putin obviously has expansionist aims. But regional expansionism is widespread, and rarely something countries on the other side of the world need to be involved with. Kuwait certainly didn’t want to be part of Iraq, but that wasn’t any of our business either. Same for South Korea and south Vietnam.
mpalmer 2y ago
As long as we're talking about fallacious rhetoric, you set the bar at a country having to "be" Nazi Germany, instead of just having similar expansionist goals. You avoid mentioning NATO and the reasons Putin views it as a threat, probably because it would undercut your claim that there are no worthwhile parallels to WWII here.
- rayiner 2y ago
  My point is that “Nazi germany” is a small subset of “expansionism” and the latter is widespread and mostly none of our business. Borders shift. It’s not America’s job to police whatever borders happened to exist at some arbitrary point in time all over the world.
  - mpalmer 2y ago
    > [expansionism] is widespread and mostly none of our business. I know you understand how alliances work, so I'm really fascinated that thus far you appear to be studiously avoiding mention of the most consequential alliance in history, one which happens to have significant bearing on US involvement in the war in Ukraine.
    - rayiner 2y ago
      “Alliance” is just code for “Team America: World Police.” If everyone is our “ally” then we are just the world’s border police. Our real allies are the UK, Canada, France, Germany, and Japan. None of those countries are endangered by Putin. They were also not endangered by Iraq invading Kuwait, communists taking over Vietnam or Korea, whatever happened in the Balkans in the 1990s, and all those events that led to mistaken wars over the last 70 years.
      - mpalmer 2y ago
        Our "real" allies don't include NATO signatories? Germany isn't threatened by Russia? Absolutely hilarious and ahistorical. Anyone playing the silly rhetorical games you're playing isn't trying to convince anyone with reasoned arguments.

chaorace 2y ago

Fun fact: Mitch McConnell was born in 1942

wumeow 2y ago

> Some vocal corners of the American right are trying to resurrect the discredited brand of prewar isolationism and deny the basic value of the alliance system that has kept the postwar peace. By “some on the right “ you mean your presidential candidate and most of your party.

rayiner 2y ago
Not to mention most liberals until five minutes ago. If you had told me twenty years ago that supposed democrats were agreeing with Mitch McConnell and acting out Team America World Police, I wouldn’t have believed you. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0372588/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0372588/.
- dctoedt 2y ago
  > Not to mention most liberals until five minutes ago. Some fringe leftists are isolationists, to be sure. Liberals? No.
  - rayiner 2y ago
    The mainstream liberal position back when I was a Democrat is that America’s policing of the world was a bad thing. The movie “Team America: World Police” reflected the sentiment of Jon Stewart watching younger Democrats. Stanning for NATO and “our allies” was for evil neocons like Bush and Cheney.
    - sdwr 2y ago
      "policing of the world" is already politically fraught. The classic leftist argument is that America entered unjust foreign wars for political points / foreign resources / dick waving.
      - rayiner 2y ago
        Leftists don’t think we entered Vietnam or Korea for resources. And when I was a mainstream young liberal in the 1990s and early oughts, the complaint was about why we have “military bases around the world.” That wasn’t because we thought those were for extracting resources.

mmaniac 2y ago

Peace? What are you, some kind of Nazi?

hi-v-rocknroll 2y ago

Perhaps he's hoping for something extra from the defense contractor lobby or that America should return to policies neocolonial Monroe Doctrine with CIA coups, but this time claim Africa, and get ourself involved in more wars. Going neocon agro W-style won't improve America's geopolitical status. Maybe he's having trouble coming to terms with China rivaling America's economic power and military projection that vaguely resembles what America did, albeit more flagrantly aggressively.