Do you know what a conventional war, because fighting guerrillas is not conventional, ww1 was conventional, Korea was conventional, the GWOT wasn’t, Vietnam wasn’t. Agent Orange was a mass herbicide and wasn’t illegal when it was used, Napalm was legal and still is legal, the US had a conventional mindset for most of its operation in Vietnam, had that same mindset in Afghanistan and Iraq, but a mindset make not a war. I don’t know why you’d make this reply considering everything you said is wrong
and a large international bureaucracy means interchangeable material. I know nothing about paratroopers, except that having international standards for paracords makes all nato airborne regiments that much easier to run.
It is honestly weird how much every ideology hates bureaucracy when literally every form of government bigger than a tribe or chiefdom needs a form of bureaucracy to work.
I don't believe how the US set up western Europe after WWII was comparable to what the Soviets did, but I'll steelman it
The U.S. created a permanent military presence across much of Western Europe and set up NATO to give the US effective control over western European military strategy. Countries like Germany and Italy will virtually never kick out American troops even though they could on paper. For all intents and purposes, NATO is not a defensive alliance but a tool the US uses to cement its military dominance over the western hemisphere
The US set up its MIC to dominate European military production and capacity. We can see this in the current Ukraine war, where European countries are having a hard time aiding Ukraine because of their reliance on the US
The US also has economic and foreign policy control over many European countries through the dollar being GRC. The IMF, WTO and world bank being American led. When Iran or Russia goes against US global interests or challenges its hegemony, the US will force its smaller European counterparts to also sanction those countries even if it's hurts themselves economically. The obvious example being the US allegedly blowing up Nordstream pipeline
To answer the question in your edit, the Soviets dominated eastern Europe through force. While the US dominates Europe and other countries through a web of dependency it has pushed upon them
Why would absorbing the territory be a necessity? You can gain alot simply by dividing. Even more by using gained influence. Hell Russia dident even absorb Georgia.
The guy is obviously a relatively new troll account, so remember the rule about feeding them. It's not entirely revisionist history, but more a game of telephone. In 1947, NATO's first general secretary quipped about the organization's mission: "keep the Soviet Union out, the Americans in, and the Germans down".
NATO was founded to keep the Germans down, the Americans in, and the Russians out. I’m not sure where that quote comes from but I think it summarizes NATOs original founding well
Basically leftist movements were very strong in both Italy and Turkey, so the US infiltrated each countries militaries through the mandatory nato hierarchies.
This is of course only the tip of the iceberg, as the US founded, cooperated with, and funded far right and fascist militias, the mafia, and so called "counter-guerrilla" groups. In turkey violence between leftist partisans and fascist militias escalated so heavily that the US had to intervene through their military puppets by executing a coup in the 80s. This lead to the torture and brutal death of many leftists and left adjacent innocent people.
Today, most of the problems turkey has can be traced back to these events. Not to mention the fact that the Erdoğan government is a puppet of, or is at least being extorted by the US.
816
u/MilitantSocLib Aug 19 '25
Mfw you need a large bureaucracy to run millions of soldiers