Except it doesn't because your own criteria



include exactly what you posted.


Maybe don't be so dishonest and it won't be so easy to find blatant contradictions. and I say that because it's blatantly obvious that imperialism still exists, so you're either dishonest or dumb, and I don't think you're dumb.

This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on Aug 28 2021 11:46pm

I mean, let's be honest: Biden didn't get 81 million votes because he's Joe Biden, he got 81 million votes because he was not Donald Trump.
What the Afghanistan debacle achieved is that it caused a lot of voters, but also Democratic officials and operatives, to realize that "not being Donald Trump" will only get you so far and is not good enough to get them through this term.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/05/13/gates_stands_by_statement_that_biden_has_been_wrong_on_nearly_every_major_foreign_policy_question.html

snap back to reality Sunday
even Obama’s sec def said Biden was wrong on all foreign policy matters

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/joe-biden-doesnt-have-a-perfect-foreign-policy-record-but-unlike-trump-hes-learned-from-his-mistakes/2020/09/27/62b417f6-fe77-11ea-9ceb-061d646d9c67_story.html?outputType=amp
tabloid known as wapo got it all wrong as usual

*sigh*

How about we call Afghanistan an example of "defensive imperialism"? I think that's the correct term to describe this special case. To elaborate:

I stand by what I was saying initially. Historically, imperialism has been linked with economic exploitation or a desire to expand one's geostrategic position. That's what I would call "aggressive imperialism".
Afghanistan was a special case in that it had become a safe haven for terrorists who were attacking the West on their own turf. The mission in Afghanistan sought to eliminate a geostrategic threat, but it did not serve to expand the NATO's geostrategic power beyond where it had been prior to 9/11. Hence, "defensive imperialism".


That's really something that should be kept in mind in this entire debate: the rulers of Afghanistan and their ideological allies from Al-Qaeda were the aggressors in this war. They were the ones who attacked America first, the American invasion of the country was a reaction to this attack. Without 9/11, no one in America or any other NATO member would have given any fuck about Afghanistan, the Taliban or their stone age islamism.

This is fundamentally different from, for example, the Iraq war which was based on a lie and was a favor to the oil and arms industry from the get go.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Aug 29 2021 12:00am

You could just admit you were wrong instead of making shit up after the fact to distract from it.

Nobody is buying for a second that you were thinking any of this. You had a knee-jerk response to the word Imperialism because the right has done their best to convince you that it's nothing but a buzzword and now you are distracting from the fact that you said something really stupid

This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on Aug 29 2021 12:05am

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

Wait a second, just for the record: I am not the one who said that imperialism doesn't exist anymore today. That was JohnnyMcCoy. Then, offthevoid pointed out that the NATO mission in Afghanistan is indeed not a classical example of imperialism, I concurred with this sentiment. So just to get this straight: nothing I said was wrong or making shit up. It admittedly took me longer than it should have to work out why exactly the Afghanistan case is different from your run-of-the-mill imperialism, but my perspective has been consistent all along.

Simply put, you're trying to pin me down for the stuff someone else said. Just because I don't explicitly push back against every outlandish claim anyone from "my side" makes does not mean that I agree with these claims or opinions.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Aug 29 2021 12:18am

This defense might work if I didn't point out you were defending the claim that imperialism doesn't exist multiple times. Now that I've pinned you on a blatant contradiction you feel the need to make this clarification. Just come off it, admit you were wrong, and stop making an ass out of yourself. You were actively attempting to defend Void and McCoy's assertion that imperialism doesn't exist by insisting that Afghanistan was not imperialism.





This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on Aug 29 2021 12:23am

Except that I never did that. I was arguing in support of offthevoids assertion that the Afghanistan case is a special one and not a suitable counterexample against Johnny's original claim that imperialism doesn't exist anymore.


This is clearly a non sequitur on your part. Me pointing out the flaws in your faulty counterargument does not imply that I agree with the position that your counterargument was intended to refute. You incorrectly assumed that I had committed an argumentam ad logicam, alleging that I must agree with the claim that imperialism doesn't exist anymore just because I rejected the specific counterexample you had brought up.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Aug 29 2021 01:03am