True or not?

>>1840561
Agreed, even their supposed allies France and England were fucked over by them in the Suez crisis, not to mention their trail of shit from Libya to India.

>>1840565
>even their supposed allies France and England were fucked over by them in the Suez crisis
Spotted the kike.

>>1840585
Spotted the Anglo, more like. Fucking seppos.

>>1840561
Seeing as how South Korea and Japan are some of the most prosperous countries on earth because of the US, im gonna say Khrushchev was full of shit.

It's a pretty ironic statement seeing as how most of the countries the Soviet Union supported have collapsed.

>>1840631
Korean unity, the "sunshine policy" was forcibly stopped by the US, causing sporadic problems between the two since 2007. Japan was administered as a puppet in Versailles esque circumstances.

The US is not a benevolent ruler.

>>1840631
Iraq
Afghanistan
Libya
Cuba
Angola
South Vietnam

and those are only recent memory. I could easily counter your argument on economies supported by the USSR with China's and Russia's transition from communism. Vietnam is also an emerging economy and I have no doubt that Cuba will also become successful.

>>1840631
Korea was ruled by a military dictator, and both beg the US for support against North Korea.

>>1840654
>The US is not a benevolent ruler

Is anyone truly one? Lets just be wild and say to an absurd degree.

File: internet-in-cuba.jpg (40KB, 470x353px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 470x353px

>>1840657
>I have no doubt that Cuba will also become successful.
Full planned economy has never been successful, state capitalism on the other hand has consistently been the most profitable form of government, as evidenced by modern day China.

>>1840664
Of course not, no one is. No country would lift a finger if it didn't help them in some way, but the US is often portrayed as a savior.

>>1840664
They frame themselves as benevolent rulers where other powers didn't. Rhodes famously sid he wanted to piant Africa in British red, where as Bush said he was going to "stop terrorism!" And then proceeded to harvest Iraq's oil and lay the scenes for the current situation today, with Kurds and Islamists running wild.

>>1840666
You misread what I said. Cuba will under go a transition as well and it will be similar to China I believe. It is inevitable that parts of capitalism will work their way into a communist or socialist country, just as principles of communism and socialism will work their way into a capitalist country.

>>1840671
>>1840672
Would you prefer the US to engage in open imperialism? Serious question, not being defensive.

>>1840654
You are a fucking idiot, the "sunshine policy" was nothing more than North Korea getting free humanitarian aid while still commiting human rights violations. If you honestly think the Kim regime would ever unify with the south while they are still in power than you might have brain damage. The fact that the 2002 incident occurred while this policy was still going on shows how full of shit it really was. Not to mention it was only a one way policy, with the south giving everything and the north doing fuckall.

>>1840671

The US is far and away the least evil empire to rule yet. It may be superseded by a less malevolent/more benevolent empire, but for now? Easily the lesser evil. Granted, your other options at present are Russia, and China.

>>1840880
This. If you actually think it has an 'empire' above the territories it owns, it's the most benevolent by a large margin. I'm talking about nowadays though, obviously there was some shady stuff in the old days

File: download (35).jpg (7KB, 300x168px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 300x168px

>>1840561
Sometimes, literally.

...The US does have a bad habit of stabbing both its allies and people they put in power in the back. This, however, seems to be a historical tradition of large global powers, and may just be an inevitability caused by the nature of the position. The more pieces you have on the board, the more sacrifices you are apt to make.

>>1840938

Hussein outlived his usefulness long before we actually caught him. He went off-script because the US didn't want either Iraq or Iran to win that war and tried and end-around, both with his weapons programmes and with the invasion of Kuwait.

>>1840898
If you really believe the shit today is any less shady than it was...

I mean, it wasn't that long ago that the CIA was caught selling cocaine in LA to fund the contras - and that's just the sort of thing we actually know about. I'm sure the shit we don't know about would curdle milk.

>>1840944
We wanted him to win the war with Iran because we believed they were under communist influence. (Plus, rather pissed at us, for good reason.)

We wanted him to kill the kurds because the Iranians were backing them, thus we gave him the nerve gas.

Then we gave him permission to invade Kuwait... Though I'm still not sure if that was entrapment, or just the left hand not knowing what the right hand was doing - which is another hazard of being a large world power.

>>1840954

There's no way the US preferred anything but a war that sapped both powers in the region. We might have told Saddam that we wanted him to win, but we would've done the same to Iran if we were on speaking terms at that point.

>>1840561
Well just realize that Americans goal isn't to make other nations prosperous, it is to improve power, prestige, and prosperity of Americans. With this in mind realize that all support will always be conditional and that America isn't trying make your country welthier for no reason.

>>1840962

It's true. The great goal of the US is to bring all these shitpile nations up to modernity so the US can actually trade with the world again.

File: Gunship_-_1986_-_MicroProse_Ltd..jpg (109KB, 1440x900px)

109KB, 1440x900px

>>1840958
Russia was going to get Iran's oil, and it wasn't that long ago that Iran attempted to nationalize it to take it away from our British allies. Thus we wanted Iran BTFO.

We put Saddam in power to begin with for this very reason.

There's a reason why the AH-64 Apache and F-14 Microprose games, that were popular in the 80's, had you taking off from US bases in Iraq to attack Iran. It was in fact based on the battle plans we had drawn up, predicting a heating up of the cold war in the Middle East. After Israel and Saudi-Arabia, Iraq was our bestest buddy in the region.

>>1840968
It's true and some people will say it worked too well.

>>1840981

Perhaps, but you could hardly call it malevolent.

>>1841015
Well no, but we have just had alot more resources with which to pursue our perceived interests, I truly do believe that no nationeed can be both power and consider a "good" nation

>>1841022

That's because in two hundred and thirty years, the US has had exactly one (1) major conflict on its soil. Europe, meanwhile, shits where it eats every 80-90 years with the regularity of a clock, and the timer is running out on Europe once again. If you look closely, you can see the emergence of the problems which will catalyze into the next European conflict.