War on drugs - drugs won
War on terror - terror won
War on woke - π€
this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2025
690 points (99.0% liked)
Greentext
6190 readers
1107 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It's never been about defeating those things, it's about expanding power using them as an excuse.
Exactly.
- War on Drugs - reduce minority voice in government
- War on Terror - PATRIOT Act, or whatever its current incarnation is
- War on Woke - probably government access to medical records and/or privacy generally, but I guess we'll see
War on Drugs - reduce minority voice in government
And increase incarceration of certain people to expand legal slavery under the 13th amendment.
expand legal slavery
Maybe in some states, but in many (most?), they just become a burden on taxpayers.
War on poverty π¬
War on drugs - excuse to further oppress blacks and mexicans (successful)
War on terror - excuse to violently expand influence in the middle east (mission accomplished)
War on woke - π
- War on Woke - war on privacy and access to undesirable (to the state) information
As RATM says:
Who controls the past now, controls the future.
Who controls the present now, controls the past.
It's just Big Brother.
that makes sense. to start utilizing their surveillance network more aggressively to their interests. trying to censor out "woke", as in socialism and anticapitalism in general, activism etc...
yeah this doesn't look good does it.
I mean they literally came out and said that they hate empathy.
Considering how tired and sleepy I feel, they may be winning this one.
interesting
His one job was to create profit for weapons manufacturers and he did that job very very well
His job was to do Israelβs bidding and remove Saddam.
Saddam and his family were genuinely awful, to be fair.
Yes, but thatβs not really why they removed him.
Plenty of horrible people ruling countries that America has no interest in removing as it doesnβt suit their needs.
Yeah, like Russia...
I always say, I celebrate Saddam getting fucked hard while still realizing the whole thing was fucked up. Especially since it was lead by a moron / lunatic
You're right, they don't go in and remove every dictator, and this one was because they had an ulterior motive.
Nonetheless, they did a good thing.
That's a nice side effect.
Declaring war on a concept has never gone well for the states, has it? Drugs, terror, women, the list goes on.
The war against woman is sadly going strong right now. More than drugs and etc ever has.
Declaring war on a concept has never gone well ~~for the states~~, has it?
Ftfy.
Matter of perspective. Ask halliburton how's it going...
Vietnam
The US isn't known for winning wars historically.
Seems like it has worked pretty well:
- Vietnam/Korea/etc - most people hate communism
- War on Drugs - police get to arrest minorities, and felons don't get to vote (suppress minority vote)
- War on Terror - PATRIOT Act is still alive and well, it just has different names now
With the right perspective, they seem pretty successful to me, you just need to peek behind the curtain.
Declaring war on anything. They need the Europeans to invite them to the final hours of one to chalk a W.
I'm holding out hope that we can still turn it around and defeat Santa Claus
Just like the "war on drugs" was never about stopping drugs, this was never about stopping terrorism.
When you wage a war on an enemy, you win when the enemy is dead. When you wage a war on an idea, there's no final end point.
No, man! He said war OF Terror...
Borat fan?
What is anon complaining about he did his job. He declared the war. Then he kicked the can down the road for someone else to get the job of winning it.
New skill unlocked: "Lie with energy and in a few years fact checking becomes diabolical."
First they funded, supported, and grew the terrorism, and THEN, they fought the terrorism. Then they funded other terrorists. But it's always in countries with natural resources they want.
Are we really going back this far, right at this moment?
Mate, I was traumatised when Dragonball z and PokΓ©mon were interrupted before school and this dude was on all the TV stations.
Nothing has been any good sense.
It's not that far back at all. Most events we know about, everyone who remembers it are dead. This idiot lives in many people's memories today, and we're still dealing with some of the consequences.
And his brother was even the establishment favorite to win until Trump took over everything.
Gonna be honest, the idiom/meme "had one job" is almost never correct or appropriate and the role of president is certainly a situation where it does not apply. I find it irksome, most of the time, when people say/type it, without actually thinking things through and applying it appropriately. Don't care if it is an unpopular opinion because it is a fact that it is used incorrectly the vast majority of the time and haters gonna hate, only true appreciators gonna appreciate.