[verdverm]

I think the reason people most cite for putting America on the list with Russia is that we started a war that affects the entire world. America is destroying boats in the western hemisphere with missiles instead of interdicting and following international law. The list goes on...

There are other places that ought be on that list before Cuba, like Yemen, where missiles are actually flying from and disrupting a second straight. It is also likely you are overestimating the support from Russia and China. Russia has been unable to support its allies anywhere near where they promised or we perceived. China doesn't find Cuba of strategic importance, Iran is a far more effective avenue for them against America. Recent secondary sanctions have cut off many of the non-adversarial countries that were doing business in Cuba.

[ericmay]

When I mentioned Iran in my mind I was including all of their terrorist proxies (Hamas/Palestine, Hezbollah, Yemen, &c.). I didn't intend to rank order here. I should have been more clear - my fault.

> America is destroying boats in the western hemisphere with missiles instead of interdicting and following international law. The list goes on...

Yea but that's a misunderstanding on the part of those who look at these activities and then think they know what's going on.

> It is also likely you are overestimating the support from Russia and China.

Well now that the US is becoming much more assertive we've been able to diminish that support and show, as you can I think see as well, how ineffective both Russian and Chinese support for 3rd party countries is. That includes not just Venezuela but Iran as well. The point though is less so to do with the specific level of support, and more of the general anti-democratic alignment that these nations find themselves supporting.

[rbanffy]

> that's a misunderstanding on the part of those who look at these activities and then think they know what's going on

So, bombing civilian boats rather than intercepting them, then bombing the survivors, is not what it looks it is. Would you like to explain what it is?

[verdverm]

I find it hard to debate when you cannot acknowledge our own (american) propaganda and the effect it has on our people. Watching international news will show you things you cannot find from domestic sources. France24 is my primary. Another thing you will see is far more decorum in reporting.

[ericmay]

I acknowledge it but too often it's the primary topic and I think it's of less importance. What are the facts and what policies and such are we pursuing? That's what is important. What are your biases? What international news are you watching that is feeding you misinformation about the current state of the world? This goes both ways.

I'm not sure specifically what you wanted to debate though, but I'd be happy to do so. France24 is fine but you have to remember that international news is also extremely subject to certain biases and propaganda effects despite the marketing around transparency. I watch international news, and read and speak very basic French and have traveled throughout the world so I'm well acquainted with such topics.

I'm admittedly a little disappointed that when you found someone seemingly disagreeing with you that you immediately turned to suggesting that I need to acknowledge some unknown propaganda effect and that such an effect colors my worldview or understanding of various topics to such a degree that I must not know what I'm talking about or whatever.

[verdverm]

> some unknown propaganda effect

The number of Americans that believe the 2020 elections were stolen is one place where we can see effect (I make no assumptions about your position on this topic)

[ericmay]

I'm not following your point here. Americans are subject to propaganda? Yes so are every other country and people on the planet.

And no, the election wasn't stolen.