1392
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2026
1392 points (96.4% liked)
Political Memes
12742 readers
1358 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
1) Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
2) No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
3) Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
4) No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
5) No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Libya. Yugoslavia. Syria.
But also, you are proving the both sides problem. Eisenhower sent a few hundred soldiers to Vietnam. It was the Democrats that escalated and went hog wild and it was the Republicans that signed the peace accords. Somalia followed the same patterns.
I was obviously including vietnam for Dems when I said 60 years. So in generations they have all been started by republicans. As much as you would like, none of the ones you mentioned were wars. Interventions yes, and republicans have been involved in many as well. But wars? Only the war mongering gop. With a shiny new Iran war to get the gop's heart pumping again.
Edit: You're .ml which are gop war minimizers now it seems. So strange.
So you're not using the legal definition of wars, and you're not using the coloquial definition of wars. You're using an idiosyncratic definition of war that proves your point. Well done. Someone should capture that technique. It's gold. Defining terms to match your objectives. Why didn't I think of that?
Add up the wars of the last 40 years in money spent and lives lost. Your favorite Gop are the undisputed champions.
So now it's 40 years, and not 60? Pretty explicit. The last party realignment was 1968, by the way. Which is why you're previous pick of 60 was so difficult to defend. I would expect you to know that, because you're such an informed voter, but I guess I should never underestimate the ignorance of my fellow Americans.
Regardless, in PR it's important that one plays their role. The Democrats need the Republicans to start the wars in order to maintain their grip on the anti-war vote. The Ds are obviously not anti-war, as evidenced by the fact that they don't ever reduce the military budget and they never hold Republicans accountable for breaking the law to launch wars. The Democrat stance on war is "well, we have to finish what our opponents started!" That includes genocide against Palestinians as much as it includes launching net new campaigns that were planned by Republican administrations, like Libya.
But we can also look at non-war deaths too. Economic sanctions from the US have killed way more than wars have. The research published by the Lancet showed an average of 800K dead per year for the last 50 years. Bi-partisan consensus in those sanctions, by the way. Way more devastating than wars. And sanctions kill children, pregnant women, the elderly, and the sick way more than war does.
And before you ask, the solution is ending the USA entirely.