this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

World News

32318 readers
1013 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago

Gaddafi's Libya didn't seem to fit any of liberal, free, non-oppressive or democratic.

That's the point: your "well they deserved it" excuse is nonsense. Taking your arbitrary definition of "bad" countries at face value, all NATO interventions have done is make situations worse. Its actions are much more consistent with destroying regional economic competitors than with any sort of good faith effort to help anyone.

And all that is setting aside how the U.S. and its allies have destroyed any "liberal, free, non-oppressive" countries that don't adequately toe the U.S. line (see Indonesia and Chile, among others). The countries that remain have to choose between being subservient to the U.S. (to varying degrees) or becoming the type of state liberals like you deem deserving of wholesale destruction.

that intervention was based on a UN Security Council resolution, which no member (not even Russia or China) opposed

Russia, China, and three other states abstained, and only NATO countries actually dropped bombs.