Does American Imperialism really exist?

>w. bush
>not a liberal
liberal does not mean "left-wing"

it's wrong either way, but a native power that oppresses its citizens can't really function if its people revolt against it (unless the oppressive regime is supported abroad, which makes the situation really one of foreign oppression). this makes it more easily fixable than having a bunch of malevolent outsiders ruling over you, because they'll be able to actually fight you if you oppose them

Bait of this size shouldn't even be possible!

Nope.

>what is liberal foreign policy
God is this all neckbeards or are there any fucking IR majors on this board or at least people with the slightest amount of brain power.

Americans screw up meanings in a regular basis. See fascism, corporatism and most recently racism.

It's glorious, isn't it?

>doesn't mention their aid for Iraq in a war of conquest, including helping them target Iranian troop build up knowing that the Iraqis would use chemical weapons.
Somehow this is the part that bothers me.
(Because the "Helping Iraq > Invading Iraq" turnabout was so damn fast, 1988 to 1990.

American Imperialism is just Western Imperialism, which in turn is just Globalization.

it's not inherently bad, but it is what it is.

no

we aren't establishing rajas anywhere

Sí

No, America just protects and expands commercial imperialism.

>American Imperialism is just Western Imperialism, which in turn is just Globalization.
Your half right. Western Imperialism is far broader than American Imperialism but American Imperialism is currently globalistic.

Yes

Yeesh, don't blame him for his education. I understand what liberalism is. I'm not an IR major though. That major is just begging to have tons of subversive dogma pumped into your rectum

I'm not sure how (((American))) you would consider Hollywood, but it is an example.

This. It's better to watch from afar and let commie states piss all over themselves and eventually die.

>China and India have taken more people out of poverty in the past thirty years than the welfare state has in the history of Man

Not really. They just turned from dirt poor to barely above dirt poor. Also that poverty stat has been budged by China by lowering it's threshold so they can say they have "more people" lifted out of poverty.

t. Ibn Abdul al-Wahhab
Islam is a shit political ideology and you're getting flushed down the toilet along with commies and fascists and there's nothing you can do about it

Yes, but that isn't a bad thing.

This is actually pretty accurate in its brevity. Americans; the niggers of whites.

Yes.

And the world is more peaceful and wealthier than ever before.

Yes. So is Russian, Chinese, British, French, German, etc., etc., etc. imperialism. Americans are just a bit more prominent recently and successful at it than others. In fact, I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a nation which doesn't try to extend its sphere of influence/control.

>wrong
Getting spooky here, lads.

Yes. America is also the most powerful and greatest nation on Earth. No other country preceding has been capable of doing what it has done in the last 70 years.

you're thinking of g*rms

Yes but it is disguised as protecting the interests of the local populace.

yes, on the moon

+2 happymeals sent to cubicle

What a cringy image.

>China and India have taken more people out of poverty in the past thirty years than the welfare state has in the history of Man and that's just with the basic applications of free trade and market forces.
Milton Friedman pls go

Look, I don't want to be the one to say it, but fuck it, it must be said.

(((American Imperialism)))

This is what europoors actually believe

American imperialism is merely an extension of British imperialism, and you could make the arguement that British imperialism is merely an extension of Venician imperialism, or oligarchism. Rule via a small clique.

Protip: It's good to keep in mind the metastasis of financial ideas. From Babylon to Rome to London.

Because you should respect a counries soverignty enough to not try and control the events of its own goverment.

If the cause your nation sopports morally/politically is not the popular one, dont try and force the favorable outcome just let them and leave them to there own devices.

All you do then is treat them with mutual respect and if your way of doing things trully is better they will change eventually.

so thats why you kill off the (relatively) secular dictators that keeps the islamists at bay?

>accuse someone of being spooked while posting an extremely spooked image
what did he mean by this?

Yes.

Not really. Imperialism based in America is not done to the benefit of the American nation, but instead it benefits a rootless, cosmopolitan elite that actually hates Americans.

no

now back to playing Call of Duty with you

>Americans win
>"omg they are attacking their poor innocent enemies!"
>Americans lose
>"haha they can't into war!"

really can (and have) do this to every military history

T. Alex Jones

Yes, America is an evil empire.

What would you prefer?

No.

Know.

Even Russia is better then yanks

So an evil Russian empire? Weren't they borderless communists?

Yes, and it's extremely obvious

youtube.com/watch?v=-kcPyqMWems

>borderless communists
Nnnope

>Socialism in One Country (Russian: Coциaлизм в oднoй cтpaнe Sotsializm v odnoi strane) was a theory put forth by Joseph Stalin in 1924, elaborated by Nikolai Bukharin in 1925 and finally adopted by the Soviet Union as state policy.[1] The theory held that given the defeat of all the communist revolutions in Europe in 1917–1921 except Russia's, the Soviet Union should begin to strengthen itself internally

I was under the impression that communism was stateless, classless and moneyless.

Only theoretical gommunism

What else is there?

>>Americans win
>"omg they are attacking their poor innocent enemies!"
>Americans lose
>"haha they can't into war!"
where is the contradiction?
There is literally nothing wrong to laugh at the aggressors when they finally get their comeuppance

It's not communism, it is socialism.

You would laugh so hard at obese diabetics.

So all property owned by the state, in a national context. Like some sort of national socialism?

Sure, although not "National Socialism(tm)"

Isn't it kind of obvious that 'socialism in one country' means nationalistic socialism?

Dude, this is really the best you can do for American hypocrisy? You really think most Americans went hahahahahah!!! at Vietnam?

It's only offensive when it has the sting of truth.

And how would this national socialism be different from National Socialism(tm)? You know damn well that that necessitates censorship and consumption controls.

WIkipedia will tell you the difference between Stalinism and Nazism. It's not very hard to google it.

The difference being that Stalinism was simplistic totalitarianism under a dictator while the Nazis at least pretended to have some sort of systematic, predictable and legalistic method?

they blew up, 2 buildings, we blew up 2 countries.

whos laughing now shitbird?

Not really. The Fuhrerprinzip pretty much removed the constitution.

>Nazis at least pretended to have some sort of systematic, predictable and legalistic method?
ummm...wat? have you ever read about nazi germany?

While attempting to maintain a sense of order instead of just point a maurading band of raiders in this or that direction, not that there is much of a difference ultimately. Lynch mobs and witch hunts are just that.

yes their evil and should be genocided.

not you since it has increased your enourmous debt even more. have fun

Jokes on you, it would mostly be Mexicans.

American isn't a race henche anybody living in america i american

read a book reddit

Americans need to take their Beaner asses back to their own continent and stop bombing countries and massacring civilians because of muh oil.

>Only fucking liberals whose agendas of control get disrupted by these developments get triggered by this
funny because your whole post shrieks of reddit-tier liberalism
>Globalism, not globalization is the problem
what the fuck is the difference? are you retarded?

I don't understand what is being said. You literally outline the neo-liberal world view and then complain about "fucking liberals"

>Not wanting things pumped into your rectum

>stupid not american can't even take a picture correctly

I am jiggling with laughter right now.

Yeah, but it isn't inherently an issue. Most, if not all, successful countries seek to advance their position on the the global stage. People get butthurt about the US because it is good at it. Nobody likes to lose.

>US imperialism is good and lifts countries out of poverty

in that case
>my country elects Jacobo Arbenz in the 50s
>he takes UFCO's land and gives it to farmers
>country is (surprisingly) more prosperous than ever before, and well on its way to be a non-shithole
>US thinks this is too commie and removes him, then sets up 36 years of consecutive military dictatorships and civil war
>country is now still a third world shithole and is stagnating in human development, poverty, literacy and health

is this what the benefit of US intervention looks like? someone redpill me on this

Yes. The 20th century has proven that economic imperialism is far more powerful than military imperialism.

yeah enjoy your fredomz.

Under the "commie" label, they killed lots of leaders that weren't lefties in the first place.

>black text on a colored image
Truly the most enlightened race.

Meanwhile, America is funneling weapons and taxpayer dollars to Saudi Arabia, who in turn propagates Wahhab's very teachings.

>Writes on AMERICAN INVENTION
>Does American Imperialism really exist?
Yss. You're welcome.
Next question.

>Under the "commie" label, they killed lots of leaders that weren't lefties in the first place.

?

(Some of these were leftist but none were communist)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inejiro_Asanuma
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvador_Allende
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrice_Lumumba
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kwame_Nkrumah
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduardo_Mondlane
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amílcar_Cabral
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samora_Machel
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Garang
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/João_Goulart
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_José_Torres
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martín_Almada
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Héctor_Gutiérrez_Ruiz
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheddi_Jagan
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Mosaddegh
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shukri_al-Quwatli
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/José_María_Velasco_Ibarra
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobo_Árbenz

I was unaware that the World Wide Web was an American invention.

>writes

your country learned to respect private property.

fuck off class-cuck

Yea. What are you going to do about it, punk?

Brits.

>The difference being that Stalinism was simplistic totalitarianism under a dictator while the Nazis at least pretended to have some sort of systematic, predictable and legalistic method?

An-caps should be permabanned.