• Meep@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    First they funded, supported, and grew the terrorism, and THEN, they fought the terrorism. Then they funded other terrorists. But it’s always in countries with natural resources they want.

    • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s never been about defeating those things, it’s about expanding power using them as an excuse.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        2 days ago

        Exactly.

        1. War on Drugs - reduce minority voice in government
        2. War on Terror - PATRIOT Act, or whatever its current incarnation is
        3. War on Woke - probably government access to medical records and/or privacy generally, but I guess we’ll see
        • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 days ago

          War on Drugs - reduce minority voice in government

          And increase incarceration of certain people to expand legal slavery under the 13th amendment.

    • umbrella@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      War on drugs - excuse to further oppress blacks and mexicans (successful)

      War on terror - excuse to violently expand influence in the middle east (mission accomplished)

      War on woke - 😟

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago
        • War on Woke - war on privacy and access to undesirable (to the state) information

        As RATM says:

        Who controls the past now, controls the future.

        Who controls the present now, controls the past.

        It’s just Big Brother.

        • umbrella@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          that makes sense. to start utilizing their surveillance network more aggressively to their interests. trying to censor out “woke”, as in socialism and anticapitalism in general, activism etc…

          yeah this doesn’t look good does it.

  • smol_beans@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    His one job was to create profit for weapons manufacturers and he did that job very very well

  • straightjorkin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    When you wage a war on an enemy, you win when the enemy is dead. When you wage a war on an idea, there’s no final end point.

  • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Declaring war on a concept has never gone well for the states, has it? Drugs, terror, women, the list goes on.

    • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      The war against woman is sadly going strong right now. More than drugs and etc ever has.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      Seems like it has worked pretty well:

      1. Vietnam/Korea/etc - most people hate communism
      2. War on Drugs - police get to arrest minorities, and felons don’t get to vote (suppress minority vote)
      3. War on Terror - PATRIOT Act is still alive and well, it just has different names now

      With the right perspective, they seem pretty successful to me, you just need to peek behind the curtain.

    • saltesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Declaring war on anything. They need the Europeans to invite them to the final hours of one to chalk a W.