Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: BroJoeK

“And here is where your almighty stupidity reigns supreme, blinding you to the First Law of Human Nature: weakness provokes aggression from bad people.”

If you must, continue being the fool.

The US is NOT weak, and never will be. No nation will ever seek incineration by us.

How is it even possible, outside psychosis, to care whether the old Russian Empire is restored? We have no REAL interests in any of those countries. Only ephemeral abstract interests at best.


204 posted on 03/04/2023 7:48:03 AM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies ]


To: Mariner
Mariner: "If you must, continue being the fool.
The US is NOT weak, and never will be.
No nation will ever seek incineration by us."

Of course not, but there's no need to risk incineration if the US will only defend our own borders and territorial waters.
That still leaves 93% of the globe's land area available for conquest by aggressive & brutal dictators.
Russia and China together have a huge head start, already owning 18% of the world's land mass, almost three times the size of the United States with over three times our population.
By the time any aggressive dictators owned 93% of the world's land mass, the US's tiny 7% will be inconsequential and the dictators will have many different levers of power to force Americans to their will.
No need for dictators to ever risk incineration, if the US won't help defend other friendly democracies.

But even more important, the very words, "strong" and "weak" are 100% relative, so what was strong in the past can today be very weak, even though in absolute terms it didn't change.
I could choose any number of examples, an obvious one is 20th century battleships -- in 1914 dreadnaughts were the naval kings of battle.
By 1941 battleships were more powerful than ever, but were reduced to support roles by aircraft carriers, the new naval kings of battle.
So "strong" and "weak" are relative terms.

The US today is stronger, in many ways, than we were in 1945.
But we are decidedly weaker than we were in 1945, relative to the rest of the world.
So sure, at some future point, we could be as strong as ever in absolute terms, but if aggressive dictators own 93% of the world's land mass and we will only defend our own 7%, then we will be relatively weak and pathetic.

Mariner: "How is it even possible, outside psychosis, to care whether the old Russian Empire is restored?
We have no REAL interests in any of those countries.
Only ephemeral abstract interests at best."

The United States is, by definition, "ephemeral" and "abstract"!
We are as ephemeral as the American dream, we are as abstract as the US Constitution.
We are a nation of abstractions -- laws not men, the Constitution not ethnicities, freedom not a state religion, elections not a dictator's iron fist.
If we lose the war over ephemeral abstractions, then we cease to exist as a country.

So there is nothing more important in the known Universe than ephemeral abstractions, like the US Constitution.
Our friends and allies around the world make life much easier for us.
If they are defeated by aggressive empires, our lives and ephemeral abstractions will become increasingly more difficult.

206 posted on 03/05/2023 4:07:43 AM PST by BroJoeK (future DDG 134 -- we remember)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson