• carpoftruth [any, any]@hexbear.netM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    strategically the US benefits by creating chaos and disaster, particularly in the mid east. it allows easier control of petroresources through divide and conquer. america doesn’t suffer from being next to an open geopolitical wound - other nations do. I don’t think it’s accurate to describe previous US occupations as disasters, at least not strategically.

    russia is in a different position - they have invaded a country right next door to them. it is in their strategic interest not to make ukraine a failed state. they still might, but their strategic interests are different.

    • Grapho@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      21 hours ago

      They aren’t disasters in the short term, but long term every one of those has resulted in a huge wave of service members that come back heavily radicalized or very mentally ill or both, not to mention the anti Americanism that becomes mandatory in whatever political organism takes control after the US has to retreat.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      20 hours ago

      It’s true the incentives for the US are different, and a lot of people line their pockets from the forever wars. They’re disasters for US as a country, but not for the oligarchs responsible for creating these disasters.