386
Turns out we blew up all those boats in the Caribbean for nothing
(www.esquire.com)
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 29 Jul 2026
386 points (100.0% liked)
politics
30605 readers
2144 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
The problem is that to most Republican voters, the fact that this didn't actually impact drug supply isn't really all that important. What matters to them is that - theoretically - "bad people" got killed. They're more interested in punishing people they see as evil than they are in actually improving the world. Even the ones who won't openly admit - or even admit to themselves - that they just like seeing brown people get killed will still defend this as an ultimately good action because it satisfies their twisted notion of justice. The meting out of punishment is what matters to them, far more than whatever social good that punishment is actually supposed to achieve.
It's the same reason why they have so little interest in welfare policies even when those policies are demonstrably cheaper than the alternative. They won't give shelter and money to homeless people even when it's shown to reduce crime, for example, because the most important thing to them is that no one should ever be given something that they "don't deserve." They're less interested in reducing crime than they are in seeing the poor suffer for whatever imagined sins made them poor.
I think the logic here is that if we punish/eliminate the "bad people" then the world will improve. But we can't just enact policies to help people because if we try to do good things, the "bad people" will just ruin it for everyone. So it all circles back to punish/eliminate the "bad people". And when that inevitably doesnt work, its cause there's still more "bad people", we just have to find them.
Since Reagan they have been pushing a "War on Drugs". For those people "Since we are at war killing people is perfectly fine."
Cops shooting an unarmed drug dealer in the back is okay with them. So is using the military randomly kill people in other countries.
I disagree. I don't think that's the reasoning at all, because they don't even think about it that deeply. It's not about the idea that logically this course of action will somehow make the world better. It's about the feeling that the world needs to conform to their twisted ideas of fairness, and that feeling overrides any reason or logic.
"He's not hurting the people he's supposed to be hurting."
FTFY
Its always been about racism. Same thing with all the bullshit with ICE, all of it is nothing but unfettered racism.
I literally addressed this exact argument in the comment you replied to, but you just skipped right past that part.
Yes, but you stated it like it was a secondary motive or just a bonus from killing the "bad people". When I'm saying that the only reason for any and all action done by this administration has been to hurt people of color, plain and simple. Well that and enrich themselves in the process.
Exactly, the problem isn't how bad trump is, there's always going to be insanely evil people -- the problem is the hundreds of millions who gave him power. There would be nothing wrong with a world where trump is the same amount of insane evil but ends up in prison where he belongs. He's not the problem, the rest of us are.
Every word of this is true, and it requires very little conversation with anyone on the right to see how true it is.
Lemmy gold for you sir or madam.