You have 10 seconds to tell me why western imperialism is bad

Extra points of you don't use Marxist rhetoric.
Go!

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Qadeer_Khan
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unha
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

because it's inconsistent. why are you telling the norks that they can't have nukes when you let israel, pakistan, iran, india, china, etc. have nukes also go back to /r9k/

Because we don't have the stomach for it like our ancestors. The U.S. is shit at it and all it does is cost us money and lives.

Because we really have too many problems of our own to have to deal with other places that have much more problems than ours.

because the west never finishes the job of exterminating the subgroup of people they're trying to conquer for land

and then it comes back to bite them in the ass as we can currently see now

Hundreds of years later, it creates a society infected with whining faggots who are willing to give away the fruits of civilisation to the claws of savages.

>White imperialism
here's your answer
your race is consisted of subhumans, whites.

The norks aren't our friends, and we shouldn't let other countries have nukes if they're threatening to use them.
What's wrong with global American hegemony? You didn't really answer the question. Why should I, an American, prefer to live in a world where we weren't in charge?

Did Eliza get heroin overdose?

>sour grapes

Lel. Turkposters are so fucking salty they live in a shithole. Maybe you'll get your chance to be an actual empire again.

they're not america's friends because america placed an embargo and sanctions on it. even before the norks went after developing nukes, america has been conducting operations to try and dismantle it. if this is merely about nukes and if america is going to play judge jury and executioner then it has to be consistent

...

your race is dying out
we will bury you subhumans with jews, asians, blacks and browns.

We built the infrastructure to allow dumb niggers to prosper. In every case, it has been neglected and destroyed and then you're left with Zimbabweans begging for gibs from the people they stole from and murdered for decades until there were none left

You shouldn't trust niggers with nukes. They might nuke you.

They have a right as a nation to own nukes, but they do not have a right to launch them as a first strike against neighbors.

Going in and taking them is not going to happen. So best thing to do is to get them to do that shit underground where everyone wins.

This.

See Vietnam and all the "foreign intervention" thereafter. We're sending you to war, but please don't make it too warry, we want a nice war that looks good in our kike papers. Oh did 60,000 of your friends die for no reason? Well that's too bad, but here's a participation trophy because we tried.

>you will never do drugs and fuck with Eliza

>you have ten seconds to explain several moral frameworks and theories and how imperialism inevitably violates several moral tenets and other moral norms

you sound like a low IQ pleb that has a strong preference for info that's compressible to something bite-sized consumable thats easily digestable

Just because we call you roaches doesn't mean you'll actually inherit the Earth.

You've got the U.S. confused with cucked Europe. Stay the fuck over there.

Well, we don't "let" them, they did it on their own. Then once they have them, it's really hard to do anything about it.

And anyway, nuclear proliferation has nothing to do with imperialism, considering that nuclear weapons weren't even developed until the second world war, one consequence of which was the breakup of European global empires.

it promotes degeneracy worldwide instead of keeping it there where it should stay

Western Imperialism? What's that, the UK when the Queen was still in charge?
Two rules:
1. No Blacks
2. No Jews

Belgium.

I mean, that's a pretty severe oversimplification of global politics. I would say that the reasons for intervening in Vietnam were valid for the time, and the one thing we really screwed up about it was that we left too early.

>spreading western ideas = adopting shitskin ideas

fag logic.

Dubz, work work work

I honestly can't think of anything.

I have to wonder why the Turkroaches still consistently post here when they get so much automatic hate. Like, what motivates somebody to do that? What are they getting out of it?

If the U.S. actually had the balls for Empire we would not have half-left Iraq after 8 years, but stayed and finished the job. Middle East only knows force, but we were off paying for every goat we bombed with interest.

Meanwhile, they are taking those checks and buying guns to keep fighting. We're blowing up the same goddamn tunnels we built!

Get me Anzu's address and I'll suck your cock.

It's not an oversimplification by any stretch. Since Vietnam, everything has been a leftist meme. They want to wage war and spread American hegemony (or Greater Israel) but they're not actually willing to wage war. Sending thousands of their own servicemen to die horrible deaths for absolutely nothing, and then leaving the theater as a greater threat than what it previously was (Iraq), is preferable to the idea of having a mean war. Where the "international (((community)))" condemns imperialism and violence.

>word salad
Why not explain yourself? Why is imperislism immoral? What do you define as "moral"? Why is your espoused morality "correct"?

It wasted countless resources trying to educate and uplift blacks.

Pure hate. When your average IQ is like 80 you can't really do anything else but act out in aggression. I used to work in tech support and Turks were the absolute worst people to talk with.

It's bad because it didn't exterminate non-whites :D

It's a robot. It just does what it's told.

There is literally nothing wrong with imperialism.

t. Monarchist

western ideas:
>democracy
>gay marriage
>wealth redistribution
>abortion
>divorce
>weed
>affirmative action

need I go on?

Like, uh like totally, like uhm
Stupid bitch

well given the current political climate and north korea at the forefront which is being threatened by, atleast what it views as, american imperialism, it seems appropriate to bring it up. and also it's the same way with north korea. they developed nukes on their own. they put enormous amounts of effort and time into engineering and testing them so why shouldn't they be allowed yet america hasn't said anything about the other countries when they've developed them. you can't have laws if there's no consistency in enacting them and showing partiality

They have an average of 90. 2/3 of 1 standard deviation less than an average white.

A list of good things or bad things depending on your culture.

I will agree with you. There are pros and cons to every system. I prefer a constitutional republic.

Imperialism is easier with a monarchy. Our government is not meant to function the way it has been for the past few decades.

If you rule over another people, you eventually have to give them the same treatment as your people get. It's a law of imperialism that's been true since Alexander at least. If you avoid imperialism, you don't need to go and grant other peoples equal rights to your people. For this reason, imperialism is bad.

It is an oversimplification, and also factually inaccurate. You're neglecting all the places around the world where American military power hasn't destabilized anything, like Iceland, Poland, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and so forth. Then there have been military interventions that worked out, like Grenada, Columbia, and Panama.

As for Iraq, it is less of a threat today than it was under Saddam. The Islamic State is more of a threat, but the Iraqi government is less. So you're incorrect there, too. Meanwhile you seem to have a really facile reading of international politics. Other nations will act in their own interests, condemning our actions when they see some gain in it. It's not even really about values, it's about what side of the bread is buttered. We're too nice to them, so they can get away with calling us names. But really, who gives a fuck if other nations say we're meany-heads for using our military? They aren't going to do shit about it, and everyone knows it.

At the same time, our military interventions aren't noble either. They are done for our own interests, whatever those may be (usually related to business). There's a reason why we're happy to fuck up Saddam, but not chase down Joseph Kony.

>corrupts government
>takes money out of your pocket and spends it on wasteful wars, gives it to the military industrial complex, then lobbies congress with said money

>totally not bribes fellow constituents, i always vote for your interests :^)


empire and republic cannot coexist

name one thing that you gain from the shit we are doing in the middle east

You have a good point that north korea built their own nukes, but don't say they did it on their own. Pakistani scientists did it for them. And who really cares what they view as the reasons for their problems? Those people are literally insane. They follow their Juche principles which include elements of religion that cause them to be irrational.

You're also wrong that the United States never did anything about other nuclear nations. The government does a lot of work on nuclear proliferation. Fuck, if it weren't for the intervention of the United States, India and Pakistan would have had a nuclear exchange already, and the blacks in South Africa would have nuclear weapons, and probably have used them on something really stupid.

The real problem with turkroaches isn't their IQ, it's their education system. They have a really broken mix of French ecoles and English style Prussian model schools. In the meantime, it's a banana republic where the schooling is funded by a pseudo aristocratic elite to include heavy doses of indoctrination in order to make the underclasses pliant.

Most of these aren't inherently western ideas. Sure, they have grown to be commonplace in western society, but that has nothing to do with westernization itself and is more a result of people leaning away from the western ideal because of "dude... weed, peace and globalization, coexist man".

we should have never have gone into vietnam

If the US wasn't a vassal state of Israel, I wouldn't have any problems with it.

Why the fuck should we teach nigro savages how to wipe their ass when we can create greatness right here at home

Because if you don't want someone to not keep their hands in their pockets, you should keep your hands in your own pockets.

>woman gets injured
>decides to instagram it
I don't understand why they do this.

It ended, that's why.
Look at what a shit show Africa is now that Europeans left.
Imperialism could have benefited both Europeans and the native Africans yet idiots across the globe decided imperialism was bad.

>Pakistani scientists did it for them
that's highly unlikely. did pakistan also give the norks satellite launch technology yet not have that themselves? no. the norks are clever and intelligent enough on their own

you're talking about the masses though. kim jong un and his high ranking party members who controls the affairs of the country don't actually believe in the whole juche ideal or any of the other propaganda. and what's so irrational about it anyway. irrational would be if they didn't place any sort of ideals to maintain structure

nuclear proliferation is after the fact that nukes have been developed. china, russia, etc have nukes with ICBM's already. america hasn't lectured them at all. the nuclear treaty didn't serve to prevent nucler development but to try and cut back on the nukes that already exists and you can't say otherwise because again, the norks already have nuclear weapons. so obviously there's a different political motive at play here

> doesn't know who ciara horan is
Don't even look her up, the rabbit hole is too deep

>American Imperialism
>Vietnam War
>58,500 dead
>Communists win

Why do I need to explain myself? Is stealing land through force wrong? Does a hostile foreign power who's source of legitimate authority over you is only violence seem right? It seems to me that the idea that land stealing and violent imposition of authority over unwilling denizens is inherent within imperialism and most people find it wrong. Why would anyone disagree?
>muh personal definition of imperialism
>but those aren't bad things
>might makes right

there are two types of imperialism

type 1: go into third world shitholes and slaughter their populaces before seizing natural resources

type 2: world police

only type 2 is bad

type 1 could be executed with brutal efficiency given modern industrial warfare

>foot slit selfie
NOPE.GIF

Western Imperialism was motivated by desire to help other races

>most people find it wrong
1 billion Han would disagree with you.

(((because its not western)))

We needed to stop the spread of Communism.

Because it violates the NAP towards those you conquer.

billion Han would disagree with you.
What?
>1 billion vs most people
>Chinese generally believe in the good that Country A can violently steal land from Country B and force it's will over the people of Country B, whether A = Senegal and B = Canada or A = Britain and B = China

>muh communism

lol and how did that turn out? JFK knew any war would be unwinnable just like it was for france, 60's militarybrass and CIA were fucking beyond mental and opposed to diplomacy

western imperialism has its pros and cons. but in order for it to have any sort of legitimacy it has to be consistent

>that's highly unlikely
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Qadeer_Khan

>did pakistan also give the norks satellite launch technology
No, that was the Russians.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unha
>This launch attempt was performed by a Paektusan-1 rocket, which used a solid motor third stage, a Scud-missile-based second stage, and a Nodong-1 based first stage.

>high ranking party members who controls the affairs of the country don't actually believe
Proofs? Pretty sure they believe it just as much.

>what's so irrational about it anyway
It is literally contrary to evidence, and based on a system of spiritually worshiping a dead man.

>america hasn't lectured them at all.
That literally isn't so.

>you can't say otherwise
That also literally isn't so.

Non-proliferation is about the spread of nuclear weapons, whether independently developed, or gifted from another nation. And it is a HUGE priority of the American government. Also Russian government, for what that's worth. There's a reason Russia has lots of nukes, but none of the former Soviet breakaway states like Ukraine or Georgia do.

The Vietnam war did bog down a Soviet and Chinese resources, which could have gone to other areas, like Latin America

Because western people dont profit. Only a few cronies in charge of the companies. For example indian colonization was a net loss for the average taxpaying member of the british commonwealth.

Cause we always fuck it up in the end by giving the stupid shits independence.

>how did that turn out?
Pretty well. Everyone realized that if they went Commie we would go fuck them up.

it just demonstrated how to fight the US and win...

A destabilized desert shithole is better for us than a post-Soviet nuclear buffer state. Do you want one Iran or five?

And it taught the US military how to fight the people who think that's how to beat us.

Causes resorce depletion, pollution, influx of refugees, social instabillity and structural violence.

Why is it good?

What do you think the occupations of Tibet and Xinjiang are? How is that not imperialist?

Die and murder people for what?
For some 0.00001% to have more money?

Kill humans over there that are no different to me because they don't have a piece of paper?
Give everyone us citizenship and thus that's it.

you have to understand that countries don't simply share nuclear technology. each nuke is essentially a liability to every other country that it isn't owned by. otherwise there would be some sort of obligation necessary from the other country. you don't have that sort of relationship between north korea and pakistan. if north korea was simply given nuclear technology by some other country then there'd be no reason for its previous nuclear tests. you're wrong on this and the satellite launcher was developed indigenously by north korea

>Proofs? Pretty sure they believe it just as much.
are you serious. think about it

>It is literally contrary to evidence, and based on a system of spiritually worshiping a dead man.
i mean what's irrational about them putting it in place when it serves to benefit them

>That literally isn't so.
when has america lectured china or russia about developing nukes

>That also literally isn't so.

did you type that with a straighface?

we still suck at large scale and long term counter-insurgency/guerrilla warfare

at least we're mammals

No, these wars are fought for corporations and banks desire to own all the resources of the world, everything else is secondary.

think about it. why would they believe their own propaganda that they use to maintain control