#1 ·
Cahit said:The United States isn't even leading the operation in Libya
These are nothing more than little "excursions"—and quite often conducted via drones, no less. I wonder, how many NATO soldiers have actually fallen in these operations?
If NATO actually had significant skin in the game, they could sweep through Libya in a matter of days.
Sure, Mexico defeated them back in 1999, and the Taliban regime remains firmly in control in Afghanistan.
And I will reiterate: the United States, as the world's preeminent military superpower, isn't even strictly necessary.
Israel is sufficient. The bearded guy in Iran talks a big game against Israel—why do you think he hasn't been attacked yet?☕?
Anyway, I should wrap this up, as I can't exactly take my laptop home from the office:
I am certainly no enthusiast of American foreign policy. But then again, politics is driven by interests—the United States simply knows how to leverage them, which is why it occupies its current position on the global stage.
However, if I were forced to choose between a democratically elected government—where any random Black man can stand before millions and criticize the President (even using profanity)—and pro-Islamic regimes led by dictators who keep their impoverished citizens under their thumb, alongside those radicalized terrorists who pose a threat to "ordinary" people who might die just for criticizing a religion or fearing certain caricatures:
in that scenario, I know exactly which side I'm on. 🙂
BAT Kol started deleting posts that addressed the points above under the guise of them being "off-topic," yet somehow missed this one. What kind of moderation is that? If we are strictly following the off-topic rule, then this post should have been the first to go. Everything else followed from it. I request that this be removed from the thread as well.