No. of Recommendations: 2
You think that the issue is just whether the existing regime in Iran is good or bad or downright evil? Before we go blowing things up, we need to have a plan for what follows - and "anything is better than the current system" is not a plan.
You have the same knowledge of the existence of a plan or the nonexistence of a plan as I do, which is zero.
Really? Other than metaphor, what is the legal justification for an invasion of a sovereign state without any sanction by international body?
Did someone call for an invasion by us?
No, they didn't.
Except it can make sense, because the US being an irrational actor is not the only way this makes sense. The U.S. has made it abundantly clear that it will no longer act in Britain's interests. Or any other country's interests. It will act in the U.S.' interests. We have always prioritized our own interests, of course - but we have now signaled very clearly to the rest of the world that whatever importance we used to place on the interests of our allies and fellow liberal democracies has now been downgraded, close to near-zero.
More assertions as facts. Wrong.
First, let's define "Britain's interests". Is it in their interest to be weak, dependent on everyone else, have a crap economy and act against all that stuff that they wrote down in the Magna Carta? I'd say it's not.
Is it in their interest to more or less hand over one of the most strategic pieces of real estate on the planet to the Chinese? Nah, bruv.
Your yourself keep mentioning how the Europeans being complete weaklings is a boon to *us*. That's fascinating. I'm arguing that they rediscover their spirit and their ability to stand on their own two feet while you want them on their knees...which one of our visions is in their "Best interest"?
but we have now signaled very clearly to the rest of the world that whatever importance we used to place on the interests of our allies and fellow liberal democracies has now been downgraded, close to near-zero.
And this is still wrong. What Trump is doing is saying that the United States needs to look out for our own interests and not simply be a pass-through of cash or military support to countries that want our protection but don't want to contribute. Literally no one doesn't understand that.
It's not basing those decisions on "popularity" in the same sense as "high school" popular. Trump has alienated the electorate of many (most?) European countries by dismissing their interests and criticizing their nations.
Has he, now. I suspect it depends on whom you speak with. In the leftwingoverse only "Nazis" would agree with anything Trump says but I'll refer you to this statement
“There is a legitimate reason to have a debate about things like migration...[migration] has been disruptive and destabilizing...It needs to be fixed in a humane way with secure borders that don’t torture and kill people."
As far as "dismissing their interests", that's also quite wrong. How is it in Germany's real interest to build pipelines to Russia and make them the sole supplier of their energy? How is in their "interests" to de-induitrialize?
It's funny how arguments tend to get more complicated once definitions are questioned...
Going forward, we are now perfectly willing to damage their economies, injure their domestic industries, impose punitive measures against their trade, because we have the power to do so and because it benefits us to disregard their well-being. So those electorates are rationally assessing whether it is in their interests for their nations to closely cooperate with the U.S. - which gets expressed to their leaders in the form of support for such cooperation or not.
Yet more assertions masquerading as facts.
Did we tell them to stop producing energy? No.
Did we tell them to buy critical products from their enemies? No.
Did we tell them to stop funding their militaries? No.
What are we telling them? The exact opposite of all that stuff.
It's kind of funny that all the things you describe as "harming" Europe that we want them to do...actually make them stronger economically and militarily.
So who really has their best interests at heart? The people who put Europe in the position it's in now?
They used to be more unreservedly willing to be part of Team U.S.A. - Leader of the Free World and all that - because they could count on us to be a good Leader and look out for their interests as well as our own. But we've spent the last year demonstrating that's over - our interests are the only ones that count. America First. Well, these sorts of things will start happening a lot more frequently....
Lulz. I really think you don't understand how the Continentals + the UK view the United States historically. Like, at all. They've had a love/hate relationship with us for literally decades.
