this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2024
412 points (96.8% liked)

World News

39032 readers
2349 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

When it comes to war America is not a Democracy and it never has been. You are going to get war every time, and when we can't fight, we will sell weapons to criminals who can.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Well, nowadays its become far less common, but we actually used to require Congress to declare any wars.

[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Funny how once theres a serious slate of the electorate that wants to stop war, things magically change like the Supreme Court handing Bush 2 an underserved victory, and congress somehow no long required to vote before wars. You we're never supposed to have a real choice on this.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That's cute and all, but history just doesn't agree. Vietnam is a good example of a war being stopped by public backlash. Regarding the takeover by the neocons and now attempted takeovers by fascists, yeah, that's sort of what authoritarians do. That does not reflect the system that continues to resist them though.

Depending on how things fall out in the coming decades, you may see what America under a real dictator is truly capable of, and how markedly different it will look from today.

[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Vietnam was stopped because the US was getting it's ass kicked and found themselves unable to unravel the ho chi minh trail. The protests against Bushes war in the middle east were the largest protests in the world at the time they happened and we stayed for another two decades because we were still making money. So if public backlash worked, we would have been out of Afghanistan by 2004. But it doesn't. Profit works.

See how the largest antiwar protest in US history lines up with Wars being started without congressional approval now? Modern antiwar sentiment started during vietnam, they weren't a majority until much later.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Getting its ass kicked after halting the Tet Offensive in its tracks, eh?

And comparing that to the tiny protests against the ME wars? You've got some funny ideas. Desert Storm was a UN coalition move at the invitation of Kuwait. Iraqi "Freedom" had around 90% support in the immediate post-9/11 era.

I don't know where you get your information, but I'd be curious to see your sources.

[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_the_Iraq_War

36 million protested

In the United States, even though pro-war demonstrators have been quoted as referring to anti-war protests as a "vocal minority",[4] Gallup Polls updated September 14, 2007, state, "Since the summer of 2005, opponents of the war have tended to outnumber supporters.

Exactly what I told you, the Bush wars solidified ths anit war electorate as the actual majority. Can you look at the facts now? They stopped voting on war once the antiwar electorate was big enough to stop them.

Heres a source for the largest demonstration in history. It even won a world record for it. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/15_February_2003_anti-war_protests

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago

That 36 million is a global figure. And yes, by 2005, two years after it started, public opinion had turned against it.

Here's an except from that article with some specific events noted:

On September 12, 2002, U.S. President George W. Bush spoke to the United Nations General Assembly. Outside the United Nations building, over 1,000 people attended a protest organized by Voter March and No Blood for Oil.

On September 24, Tony Blair released a document describing Britain's case for war in Iraq. Three days later, an anti-war rally in London drew a crowd of at least 150,000.[11]

On September 29, roughly 5,000 anti-war protesters converged on Washington, D.C., on the day after an anti-International Monetary Fund protest.[12

Note how much larger the London crowd was than the Washington DC crowd.