this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2025
662 points (99.0% liked)

Greentext

5779 readers
1171 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 45 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TheBat@lemmy.world 75 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (5 children)

War on drugs - drugs won

War on terror - terror won

War on woke - 🀞

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 36 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's never been about defeating those things, it's about expanding power using them as an excuse.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 24 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Exactly.

  1. War on Drugs - reduce minority voice in government
  2. War on Terror - PATRIOT Act, or whatever its current incarnation is
  3. War on Woke - probably government access to medical records and/or privacy generally, but I guess we'll see
[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

War on Drugs - reduce minority voice in government

And increase incarceration of certain people to expand legal slavery under the 13th amendment.

expand legal slavery

Maybe in some states, but in many (most?), they just become a burden on taxpayers.

[–] madcaesar@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago

War on poverty 😬

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

War on drugs - excuse to further oppress blacks and mexicans (successful)

War on terror - excuse to violently expand influence in the middle east (mission accomplished)

War on woke - 😟

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)
  • War on Woke - war on privacy and access to undesirable (to the state) information

As RATM says:

Who controls the past now, controls the future.

Who controls the present now, controls the past.

It's just Big Brother.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

that makes sense. to start utilizing their surveillance network more aggressively to their interests. trying to censor out "woke", as in socialism and anticapitalism in general, activism etc...

yeah this doesn't look good does it.

[–] taladar@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago

I mean they literally came out and said that they hate empathy.

[–] easily3667@lemmus.org 2 points 2 days ago (3 children)
[–] Zink@programming.dev 2 points 1 day ago

They are this clean cut folksy little musical group that had to start getting all political one day just to ruin Paul Ryan's workout.

Rage Against the Machine

Considering how tired and sleepy I feel, they may be winning this one.

[–] nutsack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 days ago

interesting

[–] smol_beans@lemmy.world 64 points 2 days ago (1 children)

His one job was to create profit for weapons manufacturers and he did that job very very well

[–] dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

His job was to do Israel’s bidding and remove Saddam.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Saddam and his family were genuinely awful, to be fair.

[–] dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Yes, but that’s not really why they removed him.

Plenty of horrible people ruling countries that America has no interest in removing as it doesn’t suit their needs.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 1 points 1 day ago

You're right, they don't go in and remove every dictator, and this one was because they had an ulterior motive.

Nonetheless, they did a good thing.

Yeah, like Russia...

[–] madcaesar@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

I always say, I celebrate Saddam getting fucked hard while still realizing the whole thing was fucked up. Especially since it was lead by a moron / lunatic

That's a nice side effect.

[–] straightjorkin@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

When you wage a war on an enemy, you win when the enemy is dead. When you wage a war on an idea, there's no final end point.

[–] Meep@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

First they funded, supported, and grew the terrorism, and THEN, they fought the terrorism. Then they funded other terrorists. But it's always in countries with natural resources they want.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 45 points 2 days ago (7 children)

Declaring war on a concept has never gone well for the states, has it? Drugs, terror, women, the list goes on.

[–] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 21 points 2 days ago

The war against woman is sadly going strong right now. More than drugs and etc ever has.

[–] Kurroth@aussie.zone 9 points 2 days ago

The US isn't known for winning wars historically.

Seems like it has worked pretty well:

  1. Vietnam/Korea/etc - most people hate communism
  2. War on Drugs - police get to arrest minorities, and felons don't get to vote (suppress minority vote)
  3. War on Terror - PATRIOT Act is still alive and well, it just has different names now

With the right perspective, they seem pretty successful to me, you just need to peek behind the curtain.

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago
[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Declaring war on a concept has never gone well ~~for the states~~, has it?

Ftfy.

[–] KingJalopy@lemm.ee 5 points 2 days ago

Matter of perspective. Ask halliburton how's it going...

[–] saltesc@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

Declaring war on anything. They need the Europeans to invite them to the final hours of one to chalk a W.

[–] Mniot@programming.dev 2 points 2 days ago

I'm holding out hope that we can still turn it around and defeat Santa Claus

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 24 points 2 days ago

Just like the "war on drugs" was never about stopping drugs, this was never about stopping terrorism.

[–] Fizz@lemmy.nz 10 points 2 days ago

What is anon complaining about he did his job. He declared the war. Then he kicked the can down the road for someone else to get the job of winning it.

[–] tkmtlmike@lemm.ee 9 points 2 days ago

No, man! He said war OF Terror...

[–] rImITywR@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] Stepskippin@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

New skill unlocked: "Lie with energy and in a few years fact checking becomes diabolical."

[–] GooberEar@lemmy.wtf 1 points 1 day ago

Gonna be honest, the idiom/meme "had one job" is almost never correct or appropriate and the role of president is certainly a situation where it does not apply. I find it irksome, most of the time, when people say/type it, without actually thinking things through and applying it appropriately. Don't care if it is an unpopular opinion because it is a fact that it is used incorrectly the vast majority of the time and haters gonna hate, only true appreciators gonna appreciate.

[–] jaybone@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Are we really going back this far, right at this moment?

[–] Kurroth@aussie.zone 7 points 2 days ago

Mate, I was traumatised when Dragonball z and PokΓ©mon were interrupted before school and this dude was on all the TV stations.

Nothing has been any good sense.

[–] doingthestuff@lemy.lol 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's not that far back at all. Most events we know about, everyone who remembers it are dead. This idiot lives in many people's memories today, and we're still dealing with some of the consequences.

And his brother was even the establishment favorite to win until Trump took over everything.