|
|
|
|
|
|
by joe_mamba
149 days ago
|
|
|
>the ones that do exceed it are the most free, most prosperous, and most powerful - NATO being a clear example You're beating it around the bush. Tell me how many Spaniard would voluntarily sign up to die to defend Bulgaria if shit were to hit the fan. THat's how you measure if strength of alliances stand the test of time, or if they're just worthless pieces of paper from a bygone era of peace and prosperity wrapped up in fake nationalism under a made up flag. > Or look at the US and NATO ten years ago compared to today. 10 years ago a lot more people in US and NATO countries could more easily afford a house and get a decent paying job with a higher purchasing power. What were you trying to prove with this? |
|
|
A lot and the evidence is overwhelming. Look at wars all over the world. Russians even sign up to defend Syria, for example. Americans sign up for wars all over the world, which have always been fought with allies - WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Iraq again, Afghanistan. Georgia helped the US in Iraq, along with many others. NATO fought alongside the US in Afghanistan.
> What were you trying to prove with this?
It's evidence of my claim; see the GP.
What's amazing is, despite being handed these wonderful things that made peace and prosperity, and being born and raised in them, people are programmed to say it can't work. Those people are the problem. Instead of opposing them or quitting, get to work - it almost couldn't be easier; someone else has already solved the problem. Compare the people who had to develop the Enlightenment, human rights, the post-WWII international order.
> bygone era of peace and prosperity
The era is what you make it - you are responsible for it. What are you making it, including with these words? Why aren't you solving the problems? The people who built the post-WWII international order, based on human rights, had just been through WWI and were fighting WWII - hardly an era of peace and prosperity - and look what they did.