You're arguing US imperialism is the best interest for the whole world. It was definitely after WW2 considering the alternative but the only way to keep the US honest is a little friendly competition.

> You're arguing US imperialism is the best interest for the whole world

Where? Are you replying to the right message?

You may be assuming the author of the comment you’re replying to believes that what is in the best interest of the US is also in the best interest of Europe and the world.

Don't bother with complexity metrics just use claude code to work on a code base with high coupling and low cohesion.

Vapid

It was purely self interest don't piss off people so that regulators break our monopoly. Once the monopoly was challenged it became less important.

This is essentially the Trolley Problem.

No it's just harder to accurately tax each and every form of wealth so we proxy it by taxing income.

Syria, Libya, Kosovo probably more I am just naming the ones off the top of my head.

"started by" here was used to indicate that there was not already a shooting war in progress.

If you want to get technical, the US hasn't been involved in a war since WW2. See how annoying that is?

No more wars means stop putting Americans at risk to kill foreigners.

If you're going to get technical, you need to pick apart the AUMF for Iraq.

In any case, I personally don't think the US interventions in Bosnia or Haiti rose to the level of the colloquial understanding of "no more wars." This is to the extent that the public of 2024 was even broadly aware of those interventions.

Major point is this: in the last 50 years, every GOP president has started a trillion-dollar boondoggle in the Middle East that led to hundreds of thousands of deaths or more (count is still running in Iran, which the President credibly threatens to nuke every other week). Democratic presidents have initiated e.g. peacekeeping missions or the like with definite endpoints and missions. "Both sides" elides all of this as if they are the remotely equivalent.

(I'm on record suggesting that the US military should be reduced to a footprint necessary to defend only the US states and not foreign interests. 75%+ cuts in budget as a start. 11 carrier battle groups to ~4, two per coast. etc.)

> Democratic presidents have initiated e.g. peacekeeping missions or the like with definite endpoints and missions.

You can play word games all you want, this is what people care about:

https://dcas.dmdc.osd.mil/dcas/app/summaryData/deaths/byYear...

(Server not found)

Link me a video I want to be informed if this is actually the case.

This guy's story covers both (the crazy illegal actions and the nuclear weapons program.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mordechai_Vanunu

Apologies, I meant the chanting, the nuclear thing is well documented but yes thanks for the link to that.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/thousands-of-israeli-nati... (May 2025)

Iran has conflicting values and has never stopped funding groups that violently support their view even when Obama was president so this is a very myopic view to take.