There has never been a period of time where we weren't sending people to die for the country.
This is a misrepresentation, I'm not disputing that we shouldn't send people to die for the country or not, my main concern is that we're sending our young men to die in a way that is completely unnecessary. War is diplomacy by other means, and no American should be sent halfway around the world to die for strategic objectives that their own government can't clearly define over a Casus Belli that was completely made up on the spot. You yourself admitted that our foreign strategy has led to tragedy and failure. Sacrifices are necessary for the defense of the nation but this is something that should be used as an absolute last resort after all diplomatic means have been exhausted.
And it has not actually undergone a steady decline, America is plainly wealthier and more powerful than it has been in the past
America may be wealthier on paper or the GDP may have gone up but anyone with eyes to see knows how badly the American heartland has been hollowed out as a result of our endless pursuit of imperial ambition. The wealth is being concentrated in the hands of fewer and fewer people, many of whom aren't even American in the first place. Inflation is through the roof, rent is insane and things have gotten more expensive in general as real wages have stagnated. Just because the "number" goes up on a graph doesn't mean much for the average American struggling to make it in today's economy. Telling Americans that things have gotten better while their reality on the ground is straight up gaslighting.
But American interest in the Middle East is a continuous thing--America has been involved in the Middle East since Thomas Jefferson sent the Marines to Tripoli.
Yet another misrepresentation, our involvement in the Middle East may be storied but going to the Middle East to fuck up pirates and stop them from enslaving whites is an entirely different venture compared to having a long lasting imperial presence in the sandbox. These two approaches couldn't be more different but you're willing to wave your hand as if they are the same and we should just accept it. Since you're mentioning the founding fathers don't you remember that George Washington warned specifically against 'foreign entanglements' in his farewell address? Or are we going to start cherry picking what founding fathers did what now?
What are armies for in your view?
Armies are for defending the nation, for defending the blood and soil of the American people. Having armies is meant to protect us from invasion whether declared or otherwise, to assist the American people during times of disaster or crises, and if absolutely necessary to go and attack hostile countries that pose a clear and
imminent threat to us in such a way that there are clearly defined, realistic strategic objectives that work in our national interest. Our fucking around in the Middle East doesn't even meet half that criteria and if I were to be entirely honest the military has a far greater use stopping the invasion at our southern border. Something that has already been implemented, thank God. If I were to throw you a bone and tell you what intervention in the sandbox was the least worst I'd tell you that Desert Storm by far was the most successful. A short, well won victory that really didn't cost us anything. The problem is that the
rest of our interventions didn't go so smoothly.
Casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan are nothing compared to the slaughter in Ukraine
You can say that our casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan are lower compared to Ukraine but in the first place the two conflicts are hardly comparable. Attempting to point out the low casualty rates of our servicemen in the sandbox in an attempt to sell war is completely despicable. Not to mention all the suicides that happen every single year from our veterans who are permanently scarred by the things they've seen and done while they were sold a total lie that their mission was integral to vague notions of 'democracy' and 'freedom.' While the powers that be may see it differently soldiers are not cannon fodder to be thrown into a meat grinder at the first sign of trouble, and even though soldiers
do know what they're signing up for that isn't an excuse to fuck them up the ass and then deny them benefits as soon as the VA gets a convenient excuse.
People are working, country is rich, Internet's getting faster, computers are cool, luxuries are affordable, it's not so hard to make money, peace is the norm in the world, goods and services are generally quite abundant. Injustice is uncommon, and our government is hardly more or less evil than it was 10, 20, 50, or a hundred years ago.
Again, saying that the "country is rich" and that all of these material things that you allege to be came as a result of empire is simply laughable. As if we need to go around and start wars in countries the average American can't even put on a map in order for the material quality of our lives to improve? The internet getting faster and computers being cool has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion - these things would come about whether America was a totally isolationist country to a fault or an Empire of reavers bombing every single city with a name that we couldn't pronounce. Saying that we are prosperous because we are an Empire fucking off around the world is a prime example of post hoc fallacy.
Injustice is uncommon? You can't be serious, where have you been for the past 5 years where the government spent tremendous resources locking down everybody in their homes over a case of the fucking sniffles. People were told they weren't "essential" enough to go out and work to earn a living. Businesses were decimated by the injustice that was foisted upon us and Americans have absolutely no recourse. All the while law abiding Americans were arrested for defending their property and their lives during the 2020 race riots and the country was flooded with millions of criminal illegal aliens, while the authorities did absolutely nothing. Talk about rose colored glasses!
Look, I appreciate you going into this autism slap fight with me in a way that is relatively civil but it's abundantly clear that we have completely different perspectives on this matter. Food for thought, I guess.
