and what abput iraq 2001? Afghanistan? iran 1950? libya? literally all of latin america?
never mind the fact that all us intervention is for the purpose of protecting the interests of capital. korea is the way it is because of the us. it couldve been united under a popular government but the us and ussr intervened. South korea in the 50s was a brutal and oppressive dictatorship too, and didnt have a higher standard of living than the north until like the 80s. kuwait too was because the us propped up saddam in the first place.
there is no good us intervention because its never altruistic and always just whatever best suits the interest of american capital at the time
I’m not saving it’s always good, it’s not. but it’s not accurate to say it’s always bad either. US participation in World War II, and intervention in Korea, and the former Yugoslavia led to better outcomes than had they not occurred.
The North invaded the South and had almost overrun the entire peninsula, everything except Pusan, when the U.S. landed forces at Inchon. There’s no way the intervention can be spun as bad. You can certainly argue the US subsequently made a mistake when they continued advancing north after liberating Seoul and provoked Chinese intervention but that doesn’t invalidate the legitimacy of the initial intervention.
us military intervention is not a good thing…
it is sometimes
ex. Bosnia 1995, Kosovo 1999, Kuwait 1991, Korea 1950
and what abput iraq 2001? Afghanistan? iran 1950? libya? literally all of latin america?
never mind the fact that all us intervention is for the purpose of protecting the interests of capital. korea is the way it is because of the us. it couldve been united under a popular government but the us and ussr intervened. South korea in the 50s was a brutal and oppressive dictatorship too, and didnt have a higher standard of living than the north until like the 80s. kuwait too was because the us propped up saddam in the first place.
there is no good us intervention because its never altruistic and always just whatever best suits the interest of american capital at the time
I’m not saving it’s always good, it’s not. but it’s not accurate to say it’s always bad either. US participation in World War II, and intervention in Korea, and the former Yugoslavia led to better outcomes than had they not occurred.
korea???
The North invaded the South and had almost overrun the entire peninsula, everything except Pusan, when the U.S. landed forces at Inchon. There’s no way the intervention can be spun as bad. You can certainly argue the US subsequently made a mistake when they continued advancing north after liberating Seoul and provoked Chinese intervention but that doesn’t invalidate the legitimacy of the initial intervention.