I hear this one a lot from libs I argue with. Common sense tells me the real problem would be in the USA because we'd have nothing for all these young, armed, dumbasses to do. Bonus points if you have academic sources
"If I stop beating my wife every night, she will act up"
"If I stop doing obvious imperialism, the puppet governments I installed will get yeeted, or they will intensify their fascism in order to not be yeeted, so the massgraves will be your fault"
“If I stop beating my wife every night, she will act up”
What else do they need?
Fair,
"It's not democracy if you are being occupied"
"The army is there to protect businesses and nothing else, and the people from there want them OUT"
maybe point out worldwide polling about how the US is the biggest threat to peace? like, people around the world don't see it the way Americans do, there's protests even in allies like Korea and Japan all the time over our bases
Thats basically what just understanding imperialism informs me of, didn't know of those examples. Thanks!
If you travelled back in time to 1850s England, I'm 100% sure you would hear the same thing about their colonial troops.
If you travelled back to decolonization you would hear it from people resisting.
Even if taken as good faith concern for international comrades it still boils down to white savior bullshit so yeah I think you're right
Not academic in the slightest but...
"Stability" is when the current order suits american and therefore capitalist interests. I'm not particularly interested in lesser-evil-ing our empire compared to what theoretically comes without it
Destabilization creates room for innovators to evolve in an entrepreneurial environment.
Who actually thinks we actually still need troops in Germany, Korea or Japan? What are they "stabilizing"? Most of our troops abroad aren't even in places where there are or will be any fighting.
Well Korea is DPRK brainworms in my experience, same with Japan I guess?? Honestly I forgot we had troops there. Got me on Germany though
In some sense yes, but a lot of the destabilization was caused western countries inserting themselves into places they had no right to be in. Them staying would not help the region become more stable.
Yeah but if you say that to someone educated about Marxism they'll say "thats not very materially relevant now is it" and womp womp
there is, which is why reparations and reconciliation policies should be in order (see if a lib finds an excuse against that). (and bringing troops back wouldn't stop active USA destabilization in those countries tho)
not that reparations/reconciliation would happen or that if it happened it wouldn't be tied to neocolonial strings too
