I love the semantic shenanigans that “risk” and “threat” sorts use – Risk is totally just snake oil.
“They’re a threat!”, sure… a low risk, insignificant threat. But still technically a threat. You can claim anything is a threat, given that risk assessments are totally subjective silly things. “We’ve identified flying pigs as a threat in our risk registry, so we gotta invest billions into an anti-flying pig slush fund! Security!!”
The states has been openly boasting about the numerous international war crimes its been committing for the past two years. No other country has challenged them directly on it, and few have even voiced their disagreement, out of fear of economic repercussions. No one is a threat to the US, except the US and its idiotic people / administration. Its partly why their self-destruction in international politics is so tragic.
Threat verbiage allows for non-threats to still be called threats, that’s the point of what I was highlighting. Flying pigs are not a threat, they don’t exist – dragons are not a threat, they don’t exist either. You can still throw them on a Risk Registry/Threat listing, and call them a threat, because there’s no definitive, objective, quantifiable process for determining what a threat is.
So yes, you can say Cuba is a threat. Even though for all practical purposes it isn’t a “real” threat or a credible threat, you can still put it on a list and declare it ‘technically’ a threat to US national security. Just like you could put flying pigs on that list, or dragons, even though neither of those things exist, nor would any sane person think theres a real risk of america falling due to flying pig attacks – if they’re on a threat list, they’re a threat.
I love the semantic shenanigans that “risk” and “threat” sorts use – Risk is totally just snake oil.
“They’re a threat!”, sure… a low risk, insignificant threat. But still technically a threat. You can claim anything is a threat, given that risk assessments are totally subjective silly things. “We’ve identified flying pigs as a threat in our risk registry, so we gotta invest billions into an anti-flying pig slush fund! Security!!”
The states has been openly boasting about the numerous international war crimes its been committing for the past two years. No other country has challenged them directly on it, and few have even voiced their disagreement, out of fear of economic repercussions. No one is a threat to the US, except the US and its idiotic people / administration. Its partly why their self-destruction in international politics is so tragic.
Yes, but Realistically no, Cuba never did anything that harmed USA in any meaningful way.
USA however has massively harmed Cuba for 70 years now.
Threat verbiage allows for non-threats to still be called threats, that’s the point of what I was highlighting. Flying pigs are not a threat, they don’t exist – dragons are not a threat, they don’t exist either. You can still throw them on a Risk Registry/Threat listing, and call them a threat, because there’s no definitive, objective, quantifiable process for determining what a threat is.
So yes, you can say Cuba is a threat. Even though for all practical purposes it isn’t a “real” threat or a credible threat, you can still put it on a list and declare it ‘technically’ a threat to US national security. Just like you could put flying pigs on that list, or dragons, even though neither of those things exist, nor would any sane person think theres a real risk of america falling due to flying pig attacks – if they’re on a threat list, they’re a threat.
I didn’t contradict you, technically yes, realistically no.
Which is also what you write in your response.
I edited my post to make that part more clear.