Hacker News Reader

Comment by factsaresacred | Hacker News Reader

Tell us, what territory was the US annexing in these attacks?

And while they were saving Muslims from genocide in the Balkans, what islands did they steal?

Not all acts of war are the same.

US is not annexing Iraq because then US will have to grant US citizenship to Iraqis and they will be free to move to mainland US. Nobody wants that, so instead US bombs the shit out of Iraq, honors its "independence" by erecting a pro-American puppet government, and acts surprised when shit falls apart.

So yeah, not all wars are the same, but people suffer all the same.

A puppet government? Hardly. We simply replaced Sunni for Shiite and slightly shifted things in a millennial old civil war. It was naive optimism of the Potomac chess players that we could reshape a country by invading it.[1] Others have mentioned the US supporting heinous countries like Saudi Arabia. This is sadly true and should stop, despite what the referenced article says about “staying engaged”. Ceasing support of tyrants and ending overtly militaristic policies is not disengaging, but reevaluating failed policies.

But the US also acts through a democracy, while the countries mentioned above do not. I can criticize the stupid policies of the US in a public forum. The citizens of the countries listed above can not. Democracy is not the equivalent of an oligarchy or tyranny. The people of a country are different from the government that represents them. Unelected governments are illegitimate and a danger to the free world despite what their minions of propaganda post.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Life_in_the_Emerald_C...

> A puppet government? Hardly. We simply replaced Sunni for Shiite and slightly shifted things in a millennial old civil war.

When I read these type of comments I get truly scared on how the lives of non-western people don't really mean anything to lots of people.

There wasn't as slight shift in a conflict but an all out invasion causing hundreds of thousands of deaths in a few years. Millions if you consider the last 20 years.

> But the US also acts through a democracy, while the countries mentioned above do not.

Crimes committed by a democracy, a theocracy or a dictatorship are crimes all the same. That is how the rest of the world sees it and it's time for the west to start seeing it too.

> > But the US also acts through a democracy, while the countries mentioned above do not.

I guess the innocent men, women and children feel better having died at the hands of a democracy.

But, your comment did bring a smile to my face, especially as what is happening right now [0]

Democracy? Iraq War pt II. Led by Bush, declared illegal by many, unwanted by more. Led by Bush, democracy. How did he get installed again? Ahh yes, the Florida "recount". Where the governor was his brother and the partisan SCOTUS decided along partisan lines rather than recount.

------ [0] POTUS stating the current recount in Florida should be stopped, even though is mandated by state law. Democracy?

That the US is a proper democracy can be discussed: https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746

The US occupied Iraq for a decade and is still in Afghanistan. While we did not overtly annex, it is clear that the US attempted to control these countries. You would do better to make your point without the moralizing.

The fact is that the US is a global aggressor just as much as the other countries on the list.

> they were saving Muslims from genocide in the Balkans

If you're referring to the NATO bombing of Serbia, then you are incorrect -- there was no genocide in Kosovo.

The justification for the Western intervention (100,000's of people murdered by Serbia) was a lie [1] [2], and Milosevic (the "Butcher of the Balkans") was exonerated of the charges of war crimes, twice [3] [4].

[1] https://www.newstatesman.com/europe/2008/08/pilger-kosovo-wa...

[2] https://www.newstatesman.com/node/151946

[3] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/feb/28/warcri...

[4] https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-hague-tribunal-exonerates-...

[3] is an opinion piece, [4] says that he was exonorated. However, the wikipedia page says: "After Milošević's death, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) concluded separately in the Bosnian Genocide Case that there was no evidence linking him to genocide committed by Bosnian Serb forces during the Bosnian War. However, the Court did find that Milošević and others in Serbia had committed a breach of the Genocide Convention by failing to prevent the genocide from occurring and for not cooperating with the ICTY in punishing the perpetrators of the genocide, in particular General Ratko Mladić, and for violating its obligation to comply with the provisional measures ordered by the Court."

Just because he was personally exonerated does not imply no genocide happened.

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

Note that the parent didn't make argument about Bosnia at all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com