!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
John Stewart summarized it quite well. 20yrs ago they needed quite the presentation about Sadam having nukes, now rhey don't even bother to present any "evidence" to anyone anymore.
The reasons are aleays the same, though. Economic interest of domestic capitalists
Which one seems arbitrary to you? They've all got reasons, even if they're not good ones. They're certainly not chosen at random.
Vietnam, Korea, Desert Storm, bombing asprin factory in Africa, Afghanistan the first time, Iraq the second time, now Iran, oh yeah Cambodia (fuck Kissinger)
None of those were random. They all had reasons behind them. I'm not defending any of them, but they weren't chosen at random.
Care to defend how they were not arbitrary?
Vietnam and Korea were proxy wars against communist powers as the US was trying to prevent the spread of communism during the Cold War. The Gulf War/Desert Storm was a war against Iraq in response to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. The pharmaceutical factory strike was a response to attacks on US embassies in the region, along with the likely bad intelligence that the factory was being used to manufacture chemical weapons for al-Qaeda. Afghanistan and Iraq were part of the Global War on Terror as a response to 9/11 and to depose anti-American and anti-Western regimes. Iran this time around is again allegedly to prevent them from gaining nuclear capabilities. The bombing of Cambodia was part of the Vietnam war.
It should be noted that these were more or less the official reasons, along with a healthy dose of American imperialism, wanting to spread American ideology, gaining access to fossil fuels or other resources, or distracting from unpopular domestic issues.
So there were always reasons for these conflicts, whether justified or not, whether public or ulterior.
It's always ulterior there's no doubt about it, the first paragraph is as media biased as you can get on these matters so to anyone reading don't buy into these reasons, the US doesn't have anything to prevent or respond to, they only enforce and instigate
Give me a couple hours have to go for a monthly check up. But good knowledge bomb. Will have a reply when I get back
Another layer is, too a look at the long term effects of these wars and see what these are, like emerging competitive economies being hamstrung or anti-capitalist political support being disrupted/killed off
Alright bear with me I am on my phone so maybe answering this in parts while I am waiting for my doc. If you don't mind I'll take your first sentence. That was a belief, let me say that again BELIEF, It is kind of like saying every friendly country to your country is my enemy. Now you want to use communism, which is fine. But that is an Idea War. So lets Blame the whole WW2 on one person Hitler. But communism is always blamed on Russia. Which if you boil it down is back to one man Marx and Engels well thats two. I is the equivalent of saying your a Muslim so I am suspect on the way you believe. Communism is a belief and no one yet has won an idea war. Second sentence. Gulf War/Desert storm. That was just fighting someones else's war. But this time it's over a substance. I whole wholeheartedly agree. Was it just in anyway shape or form....NO. This is like your the teacher on the playground and break up a fight between to boys. You will not end the conflict because the boys will go else where and continue it one day. As for the substance OIL is just the flavor of the century, those who are smart invest in other tech. but say la V. Ok 3rd sentence..oh just saying my doctor is taking long and this is pretty good on a phone. Again the stuff in Kenya and Tanzania which bad intel is no excuse for auto implementing an attack that killed people who just disagree with the US. Would it have been that bad if we got our bases out of the Middle East? Now this is just leads us into the brink of paranoia like communism. But to believe that at the time we could not have hired at least one single person to walk up to said factory and investigate? There is a movie with Chris Lee that shows Iraq was buying aluminum rods or whatever to build a long range weapons program. Which is a belief with no back up. Except that woman who testified it was false of chemical weapons. Look up people like Valerie Pame and others. Plus Saddam last words while he was in his cell. Told a US Serviceman that it was bullshit. And they did it to keep Iran at bay. And said we The US should watch out for Iran. Damn still going on my phone. Because they were the real threat in the Middle East. Not going to acknowledge the Global War on Terrorism because I did not stand in front of a banner that said MISSION COMPLETE. Ever been to Cambodia? That place is fucked beyond belief, kind of seeing a pattern here?, by Kissinger. Just on the belief the Viet Cong were operating there. Also don't forget Laos. All in part of a theory/threat of some sorts that if he showed he was a "Madman" they wouldn't do shit and back off. This was Nixon BTW.
So would you agree with me that while the reasons were bad, they existed and that these were not places chosen to attack at random?
As long as you agree all the wars we both listed are arbitrary
I don’t think you understand what the word arbitrary means
Arbitrary describes an action, decision, or rule based on random choice, personal whim, or individual discretion rather than on any reason
None of those were random
Care to defend how they were arbitrary?
🤨
Sorry meant were not arbitrary. Fixed it and thank you for the catch.
The following is extremely simplified. You might also want to learn about 20th century treaties because I think those are critical to understanding the conflicts in east Asia.
Vietnam/Cambodia: proxy war between USSR and the US. Conflict originated from colonialism (see: French Indochina). Japan occupied the region towards the end of WW2 and when they surrendered the Việt Minh (communist) declared independence and opposed the return to French rule. France was like, hell naw and you get the First Indochina war. That ended with the country split into north and south (at the 17th parallel).The French, the USSR and China supported the split and convinced the North Vietnamese to accept. The US and the South Koreans did not agree. France left the conflict at this point and I guess that is why the Vietnam war was a new war 🤷♀️
Korea: Korea had been occupied by Japan since 1910. When the USSR and US defeated Japan they just kind of split the country in half, each responsible for administering a side until things settled down and they could have elections. As far as I understand there was no intent to colonize the old fashioned way, but this was also a proxy war so...
Desert storm: the popular answer is going to be oil but I think it's important to understand the impact the cold war had on this part of Asia too. I am way less familiar with these wars but the wiki article on the Cold War in Asia looks pretty promising.
Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory: This was bombed because of suspected ties to al-Qaeda. The US was in conflict with al-Qaeda at the time in retaliation for the embassy bombings. Again, this is all linked back to the Soviet-Afghan war.
Afghanistan the first time (?): do you mean 2001? The US decided the al-Qaeda was behind the attacks and that the Taliban was helping them. The Taliban was the government of Afghanistan. The US attacked them because they did not hand over bin Laden.
Iraq the second time: Oil. The Gulf war was never resolved. Regime change was the stated policy of the US since 1998. Bombing happened right after that (with the UK helping), but 9/11 gave them to excuse they needed to actually invade.
Iran: we've come full circle to the proxy wars again. Maybe that's a stretch but there is a shift in who the "world powers" are and I think that's raising the stakes in a conflict that is otherwise probably mostly about oil. Way back in the 1950s the Iranian government nationalized the oil industry so the US/UK supported a coup d'état which gave the shah (hereditary ruler) more power. The Iranian revolution replaced the shah with the Islamic Republic. Iran and the US have been in indirect conflict in the region since then basically. There are pro and anti Western groups in the middle east and it comes down to access to oil. Why now? Israel asked. Iran and Israel are enemies and the US has interest in regime change.
Mind if I use you and catty as examples of knowledge bombs? could use you in c/askhistorians
Respectfully, I'm not a historian and everything I shared came from my garbage memory of history class and Wikipedia 😅
I know the feeling. I am a wiki phile when I take that welbutrin in the morning I must go thru 10 or 20 pages before 9 am. But nice to meet you fellow stranger and great answer nonetheless
It's almost always about oil, land, money, power rather than whatever they tell you. None of it is random.
Are you throwing darts at random communities to post US politics shit without reading rules?
Umm no. Not all my stuff involves the US. Plus sometimes it makes for better discourse. If I knew more about other countries I would ask about them also. I don't post just about Politics. Have you seen my post history? Everyone else has. No. And I am not baiting users into an ideological war. How is my question provoking a war? It reads to me someone looking for a fight. Only thing I bait people on is good discourse and engagement which I think is a lost art because people are so quick to get offended...kind of like you right now..instead of having a nice disagreement or debate. If you would like to debate anything else make a post and I will be free to have a civil discussion. And it's a country I happen to be born and stationed in right now. If I was from lets say England majority of my questions would be about England. But hey seems like your looking for a fight...if you want to step outside, which I mean go to 4chan and have a shirts off fight I would suggest r/pol
This post is nonsensical. Your illiteracy might have undermined your propaganda campaign today.
Propaganda requires intent to something bigger more uncivilized. Ask a question is not. I just felt like starting a conversation. I may be the last one on the net that likes a good discourse
Pretty much: "Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business," https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Ledeen
The only US president or government who has ever done this is this one. Not plural, singular.
It was like 22 years ago that it came to light that the US and Britain lied about Iraq stockpiling WMD so they could invade Iraq. The US had been trying to find an excuse for a little while. It is maddening that GW Bush was able to rehab his image to folksy grandpa from blood thirsty war criminal.
It sure felt like there was more resistance from the public for that than for what Trump is doing now. There is a reason the education system has been allowed to go to shit and people are kept distracted with the red vs blue instead of seeing what every US administration has done on behalf of the american people.
Nah. Shit's pretty deliberately about making money for a handful of half-reptile child fuckers and perpetuating the culture war.