If it stops removing democracy from countries, it would be a great start.

For eg, not removing democracy in Haiti, Chile, Guatemala, El Salvador, Iran, Palestine, Egypt, Bangladesh etc.

You forgot: Russia, N.Korea, China.

Why would I list Russia, n Korea and china in a list of democracies toppled by USA to put in a dictator?

Just to continue the list of nonsense examples.

Are you serious?!! All of these countries I listed had democratic governments couped out or attempted to be forced out by USA. If you are ignorant about history you can just Google it.

Or maybe staying ignorant is part of your grand strategy to avoid cognitive dissonance.

How is USA imposing a dictatorship on Chile nonsense?

.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Chilean_coup_d%27%C3%A9ta...

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries...

> How is USA imposing a dictatorship on Chile nonsense?

I read section about US involvement, and nothing there says they organized coup in 1973, in opposite, this link says that many sources confirm US were not involved into the coup: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_intervention_in_...

> Are you serious?!!

My critics is directed to your propaganda-troll alike communication style: thrown 10 names of countries without any specifics.

> I read section about US involvement, and nothing there says they organized coup in 1973, in opposite, this link says that many sources confirm US were not involved into the coup

Out of curiosity, skimmed the article a bit and look:

> They [Kissinger and Nixon] do take credit for creating the conditions that led to the coup. Kissinger says that "they created the conditions as great as possible." Nixon and Kissinger also discussed how they would play this event with the media and lamented the fact that, if this were the era of Eisenhower, then they would be seen as heroes.

Are you playing dumb or what?

> My critics is directed to your propaganda-troll alike communication style: thrown 10 names of countries without any specifics.

Seeing a spec in somebody's eye, but not noticing a log that's in your own, eh? Don't forget your tinfoil hat.

> Are you playing dumb or what?

creating condition: economic sanctions, is not the same as be involved in the coup.

Yeah, pushing someone of a cliff is definitely not the same as smashing their head with a rock.

Kommies completely restricted western trade. It was rules of engagement at that time, and US actions were soft comparing to kommies.

Sure, I guess sanctions were there just for the kicks without any real substantial effect. Just so that poor non-commies don't feel bad about themselves, since, you know, evil commies had already supposedly restricted all the trade.

> the US had dominated global economy as a result of WWII

or it is just capitalism is much more efficient than communism, or whatever bloody kommies tried to built.

Then maybe US obviously shouldn't aggressively burn down every other country, if it can't take responsibility?

And let's be honest, the US can't build an autonomous functional democracy in another culture, period. It's not the matter of resources, it's just theoretically impossible.

Just look at Afghanistan. It's "democracy" fell like a house of cards just as soon as the US had withdrawn it's troops.

Afgan people didn't want to fight for their freedom much, it would be better indeed to put these resources into Ukrainians.

Yeah, bad Afghan people didn't want to fight for a pro-American regime that supported brutal warlords and child prostitution. What a propaganda troll rhetorics.

Sorry to break it to you, but what had happened was exactly Afghan idea of freedom. A freedom from a puppet regime installed by invaders. It's not a healthy one, but there is nothing healthy to be expected after 20 years of being fucked by invaders "for their own good" under fancy fake slogans of "freedom".

But hey, war is peace, freedom is being a neocolony with a puppet government. Nothing new here.

> it would be better indeed to put these resources into Ukrainians

And those resources would be a shit load of NATO weaponry left to Taliban, eh?

I am not interested in discussing propaganda fantasies.

Well that's just escapism.

Or I value my time.

I admire your commitment to ignorance!

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/world/asia/us-soldiers-to...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2386629/

US is not perfect and you can find many more cases of misbehavior or conspiracies, but they are many times better in respecting human rights and development than regimes of Mao/Stalin/Putin/Xi.

Whataboutism is a good way to walk away from cognitive dissonance

https://www.google.com/search?q=greatest+danger+to+world+pea...

what is your goal in this discussion? What are you trying to achieve by personal attacks and low quality inputs? Just trying to vent?

You are using whataboutism, personal attacks and ignorance as a debating tactic - including quoting the CIAs words to exonerate the CIA. Its as if USA did not overthrow democracy to install the Shah of Iran. It's as if US government did not democratically elected Allende in Haiti. It's as if CIA backed banana republics don't exist in Latin America. It's as if USA did not send ships to the Indian ocean to assist west Pakistan with the genocide in Bangladesh to overturn the election results.

You are calling historical facts "fantasies" and making personal attacks on everything else. It's your commitment to ignorance even when all the information is shoved in your face that is impressive, much more than the whataboutism.

I in good faith checked your example with Chile, found that you didn't read link you posted, you compromised yourself and don't deserve any level of trust anymore nor any effort to check your other pointers. Again, what are you trying to achieve from this discussion?

> As I said I won't read your links anymore. Anything else? :-)

The commitment to ignorance and refusal to read, with celebratory, fait accompli, victory smiley is not surprising :) The stereotype of the proud ignorant American isn't without reason.

You were obviously arguing in bad faith from the beginning. The links for readers who will follow and are able to read, that would mostly be non Americans :)

You absolutely didn't read the Chile article in good faith. Instead you searched for a statement absolving CIA by the CIA. You live in a fantasy land where banana republics is just a clothing store. Not once have you acted in good faith. You are pretending to a level of ignorance that is completely unreal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9ta...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_Salvadoran_coup_d%27%C3%A...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1954_Guatemalan_coup_d%27%C3%A...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Haitian_coup_d%27%C3%A9ta...

https://www.newagebd.net/article/167119/kissinger-admits-us-...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh_genocide

https://chomsky.info/secrets04/

> You absolutely didn't read the Chile article in good faith.

you are free to follow your beliefs.

As I said I won't read your links anymore. Anything else? :-)