I’m gonna go with the blanket statement of:

If it’s getting in the way of your executive functions then it’s too much. If it takes any precedent over other things that you deem are your responsibility, then you need to take a step back.

I was surprised to see Robert Evans as a rolling stone writer. I love his podcasts. Article was a great read.

I think comparing Venezuela to China is apt here. Both are “leftist” governments that the US is nominally opposed to, but we still allow trade with China despite growing tensions. Venezuela, and Cuba too, got embargoes from the US because of the idea of the Monroe doctrine and Roosevelt corollary (my neighborhood, my rules). The US can hurt them more for not falling in line.

I’d also argue the US is particularly mad at both nations because they escaped the cycle of the School of the Americas (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Hemisphere_Institute_for_Security_Cooperation) tendency to create right-wing dictators from US trained army officers in left swinging South American states.

I guess my point is that it’s the US leveraging its power to get what it wants, and I’m biased but trying to look at it from a more objective perspective. The US does not act as a monolith, there are people who oppose bases / promote isolationism which complicates the matter.

As an American I’m personally pissed that we have to deal with the sins of our forefathers for being greedy and trying to rectify that is going to be a slow process.

We’ve kept our hands off Venezuela

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-68139518.amp

https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF10715

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gideon_(2020) - *US mercenaries

We haven’t pulled a Vietnam on Venezuela likely because of OPEC connections.

You cannot deny the influences of historical actions on modern politics. There’s a direct line of people who supported / enacted US power ambitions, that you’ve agreed with, to the modern day. Many of these people are either on their deathbed or 1-2 generations gone. Kissinger just died two months ago.

You’re justifying the power projection after the fact. The original question was why does the US have bases everywhere and they didn’t just appear one day. Many bases are in conquered countries from WW2 (Germany, Japan). There’s also history of the US placing troops with countries that nominally align with US interests, despite their despotic nature (S. Korean dictatorship, S. Vietnam, Cuban Bautista government etc.). US operations have also been implicated in overthrows of democracy (Iran shah reinstatement, Guatemala’s 1952 coup on Jacobo Arbenz) and the US has also supported deplorable governments like the Khmer Rouge (nominally communists but at odds with Vietnam in 1977) out of spite.

It’s all power projection, and one that primarily benefits the rich within the United States.

People need to understand that Iran is a direct result of the US and the UKs oil ambitions, because the unpopular reinstatement of the shah bred the environment for the Islamic Revolution to thrive, take power, and cause the problems we see today including the Houthis who clearly would have no love for the US because of its supply of armaments to the Saudis who have been bombing them.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'état

In 2023, the CIA admitted that the move to back up the coup was “undemocratic”.

Honestly one of the funniest things I’ve read on Wikipedia

Agreed that ISIS is a real threat and that it’s all incredibly complex and short responses on Lemmy won’t do the topic Justice.

I disagree with the statement:

We don’t really take power “just to take power”

as the history of US “Manifest Destiny” and colonialism were 100% about taking power. We also have the Monroe doctrine and Rosevelt corollary as examples of the US attempting to take power over an entire hemisphere.

The history of US power ambitions have essentially lead us to the modern day funding of bases across the world as we spend more on our military than the next ~10 nations combined. I’d argue that with two large oceans on either side and friendly nations north and south, that money is not for “defense” purposes.

Meh, the short answer is power projection.

Post WW2, the United States still had their industry intact whereas everywhere else was destroyed so they were the wealthiest nation, which has continued to this day, and leaders at the time wanted to keep it that way.

Interesting article about the wealth: https://medium.com/the-worlds-economy-and-the-economys-world/a-short-history-of-americas-economy-since-world-war-ii-37293cdb640#:~:text=At the end of World,net exporter of petroleum products.

Bases around the world let the US respond to basically any small threat it wants to, which helped keep its “most powerful nation” position.

It hasn’t always been successful and US power hegemony seems to be on the decline, but they still have bases everywhere even if they’re extremely unpopular like Okinawa.

The stream isn’t always consistent and I ain’t got the patience to clean that shit up. Sittings easier.

The comments on that video are cancer. That level of astroturfing reminded me of why I left Reddit lmao.

deleted by creator

The only things I’ve seen that are exclusively non-leftist is the conservative Lemmy that thinks Fox News and Newsmax is a credible source of information

peer reviewed properly

Is the important bit here. The timeline from that Wikipedia article shows it was published in 2005 and work disproving it’s claim came around in 2006.

If a scientists work is retracted it really kills any more funding they receive. They use examples like the DRBG one as what not to be.

I know someone in this field and sent him this article. He said the “NIST isn’t being transparent” claim isn’t true

https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=927303 https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/2020/NIST.IR.8309.pdf https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=934458

He also responded with “of course the NSA would try and mess with it, but if it’s peer reviewed properly I don’t see how they would be successful”

This is more nuanced response to the “Life in unfair” retort that the people who often use that phrase do not mean lol.

E.g. the people suing the Biden administration for student loan forgiveness

Doing what’s good for you and others is often very different from doing what’s good monetarily.

Nah I posted a response review of a book that someone recommended which was bad and had a lot of misinformation about Pitbulls.

Oh man you should publish your study with your n=1. I’m sure it will gain traction.

I mention huskies because despite your comment there a lot of huskies in shelters because people can’t meet the standard care requirements for the breed.

You wouldn’t get articles like this if all that mattered were individual traits: https://rescuedoghome.com/huskies-in-shelters/amp/

God you people are stupid lol

Lots of claims here with no evidence lol. Do you also believe the earth is flat because someone wrote an article about it once?

Looks like you just learned what quotation marks are too lmao

This is honestly a badly written article. I have a problem with the final statement of the abstract this article links:

Thus, dog breed is generally a poor predictor of individual behavior and should not be used to inform decisions relating to selection of a pet dog.

If you have a working dog breed, you need to maintain certain a level of activity or mental stimulation in order to keep that dog healthy and not bored. Many huskies are put in shelters because people cannot meet their energy demands. It’s disingenuous to disregard the breed’s physicality and how that affects their individual behaviors.

This article also states biddability was the trait linked most to breed which is an important factor in choosing a domesticated animal.