I’m replying to your edit: the link you gave concluded with “questionable” which explicitly stated part of that determination was from pro-Israel advocacy groups while also stating they did not fact check this source.
For a site based on combating bias that’s pretty ironic.
Again I appreciate the credibility check, but this particular instance demonstrated to me that MBFC isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.
“Overall, we rate Mondoweiss as Left Biased and Questionable due to the blending of opinion with news, the promotion of pro-Palestinian and anti-zionist propaganda, occasional reliance on poor sources, and hate group designation by third-party pro-Israel advocates. (D. Van Zandt 3/4/2017) Updated (12/07/2023)“
Gonna be honest here, kinda disappointed in mediabiasfactcheck for using the “hate group designation by third-party pro-Israel advocates“ as a measure of credibility while also stating they don’t fact check this source. Brings down my view of them which sucks cause I liked them.
I appreciate Darkthoughts for linking the credibility measure for discussion though. More posts need that.
It’s a bad answer to the existential question of death
If they know what they’re doing and we know what they’re doing, but we actually do nothing to stop it before it come to a head, how much are we culpable for the outcome? This goes for Russians, Chinese, and Americans.
All that to say, I’m not gung-ho about ramping up war productions just yet
The article mentions the US warned of an imminent attack last month and the Russian state dismissed it. Russia also has a history of utilizing false flag operations to start shit, so I’m leaning towards that atm (before more details come out)
I agree with the other guy. The media made sound bytes of Trump during his first presidential run because it was popular and directly contributed to him winning, which is now a problem for all of us.
My skepticism arises from similar articles saying the same thing about Russia, though those had more analysis about the transition to a wartime economy, that come at the same time as this article.
I’m concerned media article like this are primers for accepting conflicts down the line as there seems to be a looming threat of greater conflict that’s being highlighted here. I’m an advocate of working together and see war as an incredibly stupid objective so part of this may be just not wanting to believe humans are this stupid.
How much is this fearmongering to justify increased military spending and how much is this true? This is the second article I’ve seen in 2 days about “unprecedented” military buildup in Russia and China.
War is fucking stupid. Anyone who wants war is fucking stupid. China and Russia’s autocrats are evil stupid, but are they stupid enough to create another great conflict that we all have to suffer through? Why the sudden change now? Russia tried the quick takeover and that’s failed miserably, drawing them into a prolonged conflict with high casualties.
With all that said, I also recognize the US is a declining world power (from the absolute top to now in competition with others) and stories like this are excellent for drumming up movements to try and maintain that absolute power position.
So how much is this article (and other recent ones) US propaganda?
What about all republicans that have public office right now?
The world would be a better place if they were.
It’s “support the victim” but verify. Blindly supporting anyone is… problematic to say the least.
The Central Park 5
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Park_jogger_case
When the first trial began in August 1990 against Salaam, Santana and McCray, Meili agreed to testify. On the witness stand, she talked about what her normal running practices had been and what she had been wearing that night.
“I remember I was very nervous," she said. “I thought, ‘I know I have no memory but I wanted people to know the condition that I had been in.’”
The police were shit at their jobs, and they used Meili to convict those boys.
I think comparing Venezuela to China is apt here. Both are “leftist” governments that the US is nominally opposed to, but we still allow trade with China despite growing tensions. Venezuela, and Cuba too, got embargoes from the US because of the idea of the Monroe doctrine and Roosevelt corollary (my neighborhood, my rules). The US can hurt them more for not falling in line.
I’d also argue the US is particularly mad at both nations because they escaped the cycle of the School of the Americas (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Hemisphere_Institute_for_Security_Cooperation) tendency to create right-wing dictators from US trained army officers in left swinging South American states.
I guess my point is that it’s the US leveraging its power to get what it wants, and I’m biased but trying to look at it from a more objective perspective. The US does not act as a monolith, there are people who oppose bases / promote isolationism which complicates the matter.
As an American I’m personally pissed that we have to deal with the sins of our forefathers for being greedy and trying to rectify that is going to be a slow process.
We’ve kept our hands off Venezuela
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-68139518.amp
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF10715
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gideon_(2020) - *US mercenaries
We haven’t pulled a Vietnam on Venezuela likely because of OPEC connections.
You cannot deny the influences of historical actions on modern politics. There’s a direct line of people who supported / enacted US power ambitions, that you’ve agreed with, to the modern day. Many of these people are either on their deathbed or 1-2 generations gone. Kissinger just died two months ago.
You’re justifying the power projection after the fact. The original question was why does the US have bases everywhere and they didn’t just appear one day. Many bases are in conquered countries from WW2 (Germany, Japan). There’s also history of the US placing troops with countries that nominally align with US interests, despite their despotic nature (S. Korean dictatorship, S. Vietnam, Cuban Bautista government etc.). US operations have also been implicated in overthrows of democracy (Iran shah reinstatement, Guatemala’s 1952 coup on Jacobo Arbenz) and the US has also supported deplorable governments like the Khmer Rouge (nominally communists but at odds with Vietnam in 1977) out of spite.
It’s all power projection, and one that primarily benefits the rich within the United States.
People need to understand that Iran is a direct result of the US and the UKs oil ambitions, because the unpopular reinstatement of the shah bred the environment for the Islamic Revolution to thrive, take power, and cause the problems we see today including the Houthis who clearly would have no love for the US because of its supply of armaments to the Saudis who have been bombing them.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'état
In 2023, the CIA admitted that the move to back up the coup was “undemocratic”.
Honestly one of the funniest things I’ve read on Wikipedia
Agreed that ISIS is a real threat and that it’s all incredibly complex and short responses on Lemmy won’t do the topic Justice.
I disagree with the statement:
We don’t really take power “just to take power”
as the history of US “Manifest Destiny” and colonialism were 100% about taking power. We also have the Monroe doctrine and Rosevelt corollary as examples of the US attempting to take power over an entire hemisphere.
The history of US power ambitions have essentially lead us to the modern day funding of bases across the world as we spend more on our military than the next ~10 nations combined. I’d argue that with two large oceans on either side and friendly nations north and south, that money is not for “defense” purposes.
Meh, the short answer is power projection.
Post WW2, the United States still had their industry intact whereas everywhere else was destroyed so they were the wealthiest nation, which has continued to this day, and leaders at the time wanted to keep it that way.
Interesting article about the wealth: https://medium.com/the-worlds-economy-and-the-economys-world/a-short-history-of-americas-economy-since-world-war-ii-37293cdb640#:~:text=At the end of World,net exporter of petroleum products.
Bases around the world let the US respond to basically any small threat it wants to, which helped keep its “most powerful nation” position.
It hasn’t always been successful and US power hegemony seems to be on the decline, but they still have bases everywhere even if they’re extremely unpopular like Okinawa.
Could someone more informed tell me or point me in the right direction of why Pakistan and Iran are having border skirmishes?
Are there historical tensions there beyond the border? Is it more than a difference in religions?
Neocolonialism, but yes indeed! The West’s history of colonialism plays well into Russian and Chinese neocolonialism narratives.
I think giving a moniker like “Axis of evil” is just silly. The implication is that there’s an “Axis of good”, but good for who? A Houthi could call the West the “axis of evil” and it’s as valid a moniker. You and I both probably agree on a similar morality and the US /Europe are definitely better places for science, intellectualism, and morality; but not as a monolith.
The US currently undergoes rampant human rights violations (border/migrants), state sponsored starvation (ending meal programs) and the destruction of female rights (abortion), coincidentally all exemplified by the One Star state of Texas.
So I wouldn’t call the US as a monolith good. It’s better than Russia, China, Iran, N Korea and others, but we could be doing so much better. Our problem is that we’re fighting anti-imperialist/occupier sentiments from within living memory abroad as well as our own stupids at home.
There’s few differences between the state structure of North Korea and Saudi Arabia yet SA doesn’t show up on that list. Also this axis of evil is very funny to me because it’s just clearly from the American perspective, even though the US is to blame (UK is too) for the current shitty Iranian government because they reinstated and propped up the unpopular shah after a democratically elected revolution in the 50s, thus creating the environment the Islamic Revolution used to thrive.
IIRC houthis are Shia and their goal was to overthrow the presumably Sunni SA-backed Yemeni government. They have support from Iran due to Shia ties and are a thorn in SAs power projection in the region. The US is allied to SA and Israel and clashes with Iran so it’s not surprising they’re being used to disrupt western interests. They would clearly have no love for the US because of its weapon provisions to SA.
China and Russia, both adversarial to the US, love this and are clearly using anti-US / west sentiments to their benefit, even though they both are trash authoritarian governments. This is all, likely, a ripple effect from colonialism. China and Russia benefit from the US / the west having to fight the consequences of their colonialism, though both are neo-colonialists themselves.
TLDR: this is all not really that surprising.
Putin wants those excellent Baguettes
I love this, but I would like to state that Media Bias Fact Check seems to have a pro-Israel bias.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/mondoweiss/
I feel like “blending of opinion with news” and “occasional reliance on poor sources” is all that really need be said.