Who’s more imperialist: USA, or Russia?

[TheReckoning]

I think the answer is fairly obvious here.

[Big Abraham]

Over its entire history, Russia. (To be expected of a European imperial dynasty that had existed for 900+ years.)

If we're comparing the United States and the current-day Russian Federation, then the U.S. is far and away more imperialistic.

[Storr]

The one that most recently annexed another country's territory.

*intense sarcasm* Unfortunately the US didn't invade Cuba in 1961, returned Okinawa to Japan in 1972, gave away Panama Canal in 1977. *end of sarcasm*

Don't get me wrong the modern (post-WWII) US has done plenty of imperialist things (Iranian coup, Grenada, invading Panama, invading Iraq, etc.

[PSOL]

The United States is more successful at imperialism.

[CumbrianLefty]

The United States is more successful at imperialism.

Partly because it is often (not always) more subtle about it.

[Antonio the Sixth]

The country that's actually, right now in the process invading its neighbors for the purpose of annexation and ethnic cleansing. It's not that f**king hard.

It's really remarkable that this is even a question. It's really a testament to the power of raw Ideology to melt people's critical thinking abilities.

[Mr. Smith]

Russia's the honest imperialist that just goes in, no care for anyone else...except maybe China.

USA is the Lee Atwater style one that goes abstract, since you can't say "Blood and Soil" anymore, so you get things like "sanctions" and "oil reserve currency", things like that.

[TheReckoning]

The country that's actually, right now in the process invading its neighbors for the purpose of annexation and ethnic cleansing. It's not that f**king hard.

It's really remarkable that this is even a question. It's really a testament to the power of raw Ideology to melt people's critical thinking abilities.

The USA has invaded far more territories than Russia since the creation of modern Russia. Additionally, it’s imposed it’s will/put pressure on many more countries than Russia.

[Pericles]

If Russia were the world superpower instead of the United States, do you really think the rights of smaller nations would be more respected than they are now?

[GeneralMacArthur]

The U.S.A. has not been imperialist since the days of McKinley/Roosevelt.

Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points were explicitly anti-imperialist.  In the 1930s and 40s, the United States was trying to find a smooth offramp to independence for the Philippines rather than keeping them as a territory.  When we conquered Japan and West Germany after World War 2, we rebuilt them and released them as independent nations within a decade.  As others stated, we even gave Japan some extra territory back later on.  The United States has had countless opportunities to invade and/or annex various Caribbean territories, but has not done so.  In fact even adoption of Puerto Rico as a state, a proposal supported by the actual Puerto Rican people, is opposed by the more imperialist party.  We even gave away the Panama Canal.

Most of the events cited as examples of "American imperialism" by people are not actually imperialism.  The Iraq War was a lot of things but it was not, by the typical definition, "imperialist."  Nor was the Iran coup imperialist.

"American imperialism" is just a meme phrase that gets thrown around by Russia and China, and the suckers who repeat their talking points unquestioningly, so they can create a whataboutism to excuse their actual imperialism (conquering and annexing territory followed by eradication of the conquered culture).

[Meclazine for Israel]

The US invades countries better.

[SnowLabrador]

Right now Russia, but as soon as Trump or DeSantis gets into office in 2025, that will change.

[Big Abraham]

Right now Russia, but as soon as Trump or DeSantis gets into office in 2025, that will change.

Biden is sending hundreds of troops to Somalia. How many wars did Trump start?

[It’s so Joever]

Right now Russia, but as soon as Trump or DeSantis gets into office in 2025, that will change.

Biden is sending hundreds of troops to Somalia. How many wars did Trump start?

Good thing Somalia wasn’t in a state of war or anarchy before Biden!

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

Right now Russia, but as soon as Trump or DeSantis gets into office in 2025, that will change.

Biden is sending hundreds of troops to Somalia. How many wars did Trump start?

Trump massively increased the drone strike program and loosened the rules of engagement in Syria and Iraq, in addition to increasing the frequency of boots-on-the-ground missions in Yemen. Formally, he started no wars, but he did increase bloodshed - although there’s a case to be made that his continued presidency would have prevented war in Ukraine.

Biden has sold out his voters on almost everything, but he’s the least pro-blob US president of the 21st century. As with Trump, his administration is partially co-opted by it, but he’s been a fair bit better at telling it where to get off (see: Afghanistan). Whatever Trump says on the matter is basically immaterial because he has proven to be easily manipulated by neocons when it matters, to the extent that he almost started a war with Iran.

[Yoda]

The US invades countries better.

In no small part due to the fact that said countries usually attacked us first and our military is not full of conscripts who sabotage their own army.

[Santander]

The US invades countries better.

In no small part due to the fact that said countries usually attacked us first and our military is not full of conscripts who sabotage their own army.

Iraq didn't attack the US. Either time.

[Samof94]

If Russia were the world superpower instead of the United States, do you really think the rights of smaller nations would be more respected than they are now?

No, not at all??? They never really cared about ordinary Cubans.

[Badger]

The US invades countries better.

In no small part due to the fact that said countries usually attacked us first and our military is not full of conscripts who sabotage their own army.

Iraq didn't attack the US. Either time.

True, but at least the first time they unquestionably conducted a Russian invasion of Ukraine like takeover of Kuwait. We kicked them out and wisely did not attempt to set up a puppet government to replace Saddam. We unfortunately gave him a no-fly zone that only covered fixed-wing aircraft but not helicopters which allowed him to slaughter the Kurds in the aftermath, but still.

The second Iraq war? Unquestionable imperialism. Subsequent development showed that BS about weapons of mass destruction was nothing more than thin cover to justify an invasion that was decided on in all but timing and details of execution in literally the first weeks of W's Administration.

Generally, I will at least defend the stated intentions of American imperialism. While there is undoubtedly a sector of both voters and the Intelligentsia who declare such Wars who simply want natural resources and chest thumping American Pride/ military Supremacy to be asserted, being a democracy we really can't make Wars unless the American people are at least mostly convinced that there is at least the tangible possibility that we can militarily defeat the bad guys and recreate Democratic institutions in their wake as was done in Germany, japan, and eventually South Korea and Eastern Europe upon winning the Korean and cold Wars respectively. Our frequent naivete combined with the sectors of the American foreign policy forces with bad intentions often believe that and lead to a lack of success like in Iraq and Afghanistan, but at least at base our intentions tend to be decent, with the old saying about the road to Hell being paved with good intentions being duly noted here as quite apt.

Russian imperialism has rarely if ever risen above the level, either at the highest levels for the grassroots, Beyond " Russia want, Russia take!", of which the recent invasion of Ukraine is no different.

[TheReckoning]

The US invades countries better.

In no small part due to the fact that said countries usually attacked us first and our military is not full of conscripts who sabotage their own army.

Iraq didn't attack the US. Either time.

True, but at least the first time they unquestionably conducted a Russian invasion of Ukraine like takeover of Kuwait. We kicked them out and wisely did not attempt to set up a puppet government to replace Saddam. We unfortunately gave him a no-fly zone that only covered fixed-wing aircraft but not helicopters which allowed him to slaughter the Kurds in the aftermath, but still.

The second Iraq war? Unquestionable imperialism. Subsequent development showed that BS about weapons of mass destruction was nothing more than thin cover to justify an invasion that was decided on in all but timing and details of execution in literally the first weeks of W's Administration.

Generally, I will at least defend the stated intentions of American imperialism. While there is undoubtedly a sector of both voters and the Intelligentsia who declare such Wars who simply want natural resources and chest thumping American Pride/ military Supremacy to be asserted, being a democracy we really can't make Wars unless the American people are at least mostly convinced that there is at least the tangible possibility that we can militarily defeat the bad guys and recreate Democratic institutions in their wake as was done in Germany, japan, and eventually South Korea and Eastern Europe upon winning the Korean and cold Wars respectively. Our frequent naivete combined with the sectors of the American foreign policy forces with bad intentions often believe that and lead to a lack of success like in Iraq and Afghanistan, but at least at base our intentions tend to be decent, with the old saying about the road to Hell being paved with good intentions being duly noted here as quite apt.

Russian imperialism has rarely if ever risen above the level, either at the highest levels for the grassroots, Beyond " Russia want, Russia take!", of which the recent invasion of Ukraine is no different.

The question is not, “who’s imperialism is worse”, it’s “who’s more imperialist.” You can understand that not all imperialism is the same morally while still recognizing imperialism as imperialism.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

The US invades countries better.

In no small part due to the fact that said countries usually attacked us first and our military is not full of conscripts who sabotage their own army.

Iraq didn't attack the US. Either time.

True, but at least the first time they unquestionably conducted a Russian invasion of Ukraine like takeover of Kuwait. We kicked them out and wisely did not attempt to set up a puppet government to replace Saddam. We unfortunately gave him a no-fly zone that only covered fixed-wing aircraft but not helicopters which allowed him to slaughter the Kurds in the aftermath, but still.

The second Iraq war? Unquestionable imperialism. Subsequent development showed that BS about weapons of mass destruction was nothing more than thin cover to justify an invasion that was decided on in all but timing and details of execution in literally the first weeks of W's Administration.

Generally, I will at least defend the stated intentions of American imperialism. While there is undoubtedly a sector of both voters and the Intelligentsia who declare such Wars who simply want natural resources and chest thumping American Pride/ military Supremacy to be asserted, being a democracy we really can't make Wars unless the American people are at least mostly convinced that there is at least the tangible possibility that we can militarily defeat the bad guys and recreate Democratic institutions in their wake as was done in Germany, japan, and eventually South Korea and Eastern Europe upon winning the Korean and cold Wars respectively. Our frequent naivete combined with the sectors of the American foreign policy forces with bad intentions often believe that and lead to a lack of success like in Iraq and Afghanistan, but at least at base our intentions tend to be decent, with the old saying about the road to Hell being paved with good intentions being duly noted here as quite apt.

Russian imperialism has rarely if ever risen above the level, either at the highest levels for the grassroots, Beyond " Russia want, Russia take!", of which the recent invasion of Ukraine is no different.

The question is not, “who’s imperialism is worse”, it’s “who’s more imperialist.” You can understand that not all imperialism is the same morally while still recognizing imperialism as imperialism.

The thing is that "more imperialist" is not really the morally relevant question here at all, is it? Approaching it this way has unsettling resonances with the anti-anti-Nazi WWII historiography one finds in parts of the former British Empire.

[TheReckoning]

The US invades countries better.

In no small part due to the fact that said countries usually attacked us first and our military is not full of conscripts who sabotage their own army.

Iraq didn't attack the US. Either time.

True, but at least the first time they unquestionably conducted a Russian invasion of Ukraine like takeover of Kuwait. We kicked them out and wisely did not attempt to set up a puppet government to replace Saddam. We unfortunately gave him a no-fly zone that only covered fixed-wing aircraft but not helicopters which allowed him to slaughter the Kurds in the aftermath, but still.

The second Iraq war? Unquestionable imperialism. Subsequent development showed that BS about weapons of mass destruction was nothing more than thin cover to justify an invasion that was decided on in all but timing and details of execution in literally the first weeks of W's Administration.

Generally, I will at least defend the stated intentions of American imperialism. While there is undoubtedly a sector of both voters and the Intelligentsia who declare such Wars who simply want natural resources and chest thumping American Pride/ military Supremacy to be asserted, being a democracy we really can't make Wars unless the American people are at least mostly convinced that there is at least the tangible possibility that we can militarily defeat the bad guys and recreate Democratic institutions in their wake as was done in Germany, japan, and eventually South Korea and Eastern Europe upon winning the Korean and cold Wars respectively. Our frequent naivete combined with the sectors of the American foreign policy forces with bad intentions often believe that and lead to a lack of success like in Iraq and Afghanistan, but at least at base our intentions tend to be decent, with the old saying about the road to Hell being paved with good intentions being duly noted here as quite apt.

Russian imperialism has rarely if ever risen above the level, either at the highest levels for the grassroots, Beyond " Russia want, Russia take!", of which the recent invasion of Ukraine is no different.

The question is not, “who’s imperialism is worse”, it’s “who’s more imperialist.” You can understand that not all imperialism is the same morally while still recognizing imperialism as imperialism.

The thing is that "more imperialist" is not really the morally relevant question here at all, is it? Approaching it this way has unsettling resonances with the anti-anti-Nazi WWII historiography one finds in parts of the former British Empire.

I take a rather controversial position in that I don’t really view imperialism as being inherently wrong. What Russia is doing right now is certainly wrong, but that’s not because it’s imperialism- it’s because they’re killing civilians, among a host of other gravely immoral acts that are all pretty obvious. So yeah, who’s more imperialist isn’t the moral question- but the USA is still undoubtedly the more imperialist power, especially if one includes the economic lense that many Marxists do when analyzing these types of questions.

[Pericles]

If Russia were the world superpower instead of the United States, do you really think the rights of smaller nations would be more respected than they are now?

No, not at all??? They never really cared about ordinary Cubans.

I was being sarcastic. Russia are so imperialist they invaded the members of their own defensive alliance, as a country they have acted way worse than the US.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

The US invades countries better.

In no small part due to the fact that said countries usually attacked us first and our military is not full of conscripts who sabotage their own army.

Iraq didn't attack the US. Either time.

True, but at least the first time they unquestionably conducted a Russian invasion of Ukraine like takeover of Kuwait. We kicked them out and wisely did not attempt to set up a puppet government to replace Saddam. We unfortunately gave him a no-fly zone that only covered fixed-wing aircraft but not helicopters which allowed him to slaughter the Kurds in the aftermath, but still.

The second Iraq war? Unquestionable imperialism. Subsequent development showed that BS about weapons of mass destruction was nothing more than thin cover to justify an invasion that was decided on in all but timing and details of execution in literally the first weeks of W's Administration.

Generally, I will at least defend the stated intentions of American imperialism. While there is undoubtedly a sector of both voters and the Intelligentsia who declare such Wars who simply want natural resources and chest thumping American Pride/ military Supremacy to be asserted, being a democracy we really can't make Wars unless the American people are at least mostly convinced that there is at least the tangible possibility that we can militarily defeat the bad guys and recreate Democratic institutions in their wake as was done in Germany, japan, and eventually South Korea and Eastern Europe upon winning the Korean and cold Wars respectively. Our frequent naivete combined with the sectors of the American foreign policy forces with bad intentions often believe that and lead to a lack of success like in Iraq and Afghanistan, but at least at base our intentions tend to be decent, with the old saying about the road to Hell being paved with good intentions being duly noted here as quite apt.

Russian imperialism has rarely if ever risen above the level, either at the highest levels for the grassroots, Beyond " Russia want, Russia take!", of which the recent invasion of Ukraine is no different.

The question is not, “who’s imperialism is worse”, it’s “who’s more imperialist.” You can understand that not all imperialism is the same morally while still recognizing imperialism as imperialism.

The thing is that "more imperialist" is not really the morally relevant question here at all, is it? Approaching it this way has unsettling resonances with the anti-anti-Nazi WWII historiography one finds in parts of the former British Empire.

I take a rather controversial position in that I don’t really view imperialism as being inherently wrong. What Russia is doing right now is certainly wrong, but that’s not because it’s imperialism- it’s because they’re killing civilians, among a host of other gravely immoral acts that are all pretty obvious. So yeah, who’s more imperialist isn’t the moral question- but the USA is still undoubtedly the more imperialist power, especially if one includes the economic lense that many Marxists do when analyzing these types of questions.

The connotations of "imperialism" are bad enough in and of themselves that if you want to discuss it neutrally some other word would probably be better. It's tricky, though, because that word also can't seem like too much of a euphemism. jao

[Samof94]

If Russia were the world superpower instead of the United States, do you really think the rights of smaller nations would be more respected than they are now?

No, not at all??? They never really cared about ordinary Cubans.

I was being sarcastic. Russia are so imperialist they invaded the members of their own defensive alliance, as a country they have acted way worse than the US.

I know. They have troops in a breakaway area of Moldova right now.