As much as I like shitting on the US, I think all of the comments here are forgetting that this wouldn’t be a 1v3. It would be a world war. There would be no winners.

[–] FakeNewsForDogs@hexbear.net 27 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Yes, it would be cataclysmic. In the longer term though, I would argue that just about everyone on the planet would be a winner if the US empire were finally put down. You can’t really overstate how much of an impediment the US is to global human welfare and development.

[–] Mr_Blott@feddit.uk 6 points 3 months ago

World's biggest terrorist organisation

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone -1 points 3 months ago

okay, but the US is kiiiinda terrible, but if the US loses here then china/russia/iran win…

so its not like the US just goes away; the US is replaced by full autocratic

[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 20 points 3 months ago (1 children)

There would be an immense toll, but it would mean the destruction of the US, Israel, NATO, and neoliberalism generally, which I think means there is also room for optimism. If I may gesture towards Mark Twain, there are two Reigns of Terror here, and though we have reason to fear the latter one, it will not last as long or kill as many as the former one that it puts an end to. If there is not a nuclear holocaust, anyway

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 29 points 3 months ago (2 children)

If there is not a nuclear holocaust, anyway

That's a pretty fucking big "if"

[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 11 points 3 months ago

Granted

[–] InternetUser2012@lemmy.today 5 points 3 months ago

It's pretty obvious it's not a big "if".

[–] Zipitydew@sh.itjust.works 15 points 3 months ago

And that Palantir is an MIC contractor. They would have this outlook because it would keep them busy. The reality of such a scenario is far more unrealistic.

[–] PanArab@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 months ago

No winners is a fair outcome that I can live with.