I appreciate the answer, if you don't mind me asking, are you American? If so, it just seems strange to me that you don't want your own country to be a strong political and economic power.

I'm an American and I don't want my county to be a strong geopolitical power. It's only the rich who gain any benefit from that, and they are engaged in class war against us, so the stronger they get the more they can hurt us. Instead of (the upper class of) my nation getting stronger, I want my class to become stronger. The interests of the working people of all nations are aligned against the common foe of the rich and powerful, and the richest and most powerful people in the world benefit from America getting stronger - not us.

Our politicians are wasting money that could be spent on schools, infrastructure, healthcare, or any number of things, on pointless weapons and slaughter because it allows them to line their own pockets through the military industrial complex. How on earth does the average American benefit from that?

If so, it just seems strange to me that you don't want your own country to be a strong political and economic power. If you're not an American, then that's an understandable opinion to have. It's possible I'm misunderstanding the theme of this instance.

Because these people are actually able to have empathy and view non-Americans as equal human beings worthy of having a life

it isn't only the US that is aiding Ukraine, it's NATO.

Bruv I've never had armed Chinese soldiers occupy my city to crush a pro-democracy movement, but I have starred down the barrel of US army M4s in Minneapolis.

America is NATO. Go look at the relative spending per member.

NATO is an arm of US imperialism. Its a force for US hegemony.

We don't support a "strong America" because we aren't liberals, or nationalists. We are comminists, socialists, and anarchists who all have an internationalist perspective. We side with the global working class against the global ruling class.

you don't want your own country to be a strong political and economic power.

If the influence of my country is a detriment to the healthy development and peoples of other countries then yes it absolutely is fine to not wish my country to be 'strong' in the sense you've defined.

I am American. I know you called yourself a commie jokingly, but I, and most people on Hexbear, am a principled communist.

We don't view the world through the lens of patriotism or defending "our" nation. The working class of America is also oppressed and exploited by the capitalist class of America. The exploitation is amplified when it is turned towards non-American states, especially those in the periphery. While we as Americans benefit from the exploitation of the periphery nations, we (the working class) have more in common with the working class of other countries than we do with our exploiters. Through this lens, we do not seek for our country to be "stronger" (read: globally militarily dominant). We want our country to be liberated from capitalist oppression, and we want other countries under our grip to be liberated, too.

I take your point about the US not acting alone because NATO countries are participating. I think if you look into the history and structure of NATO, you would find that the US has an outsized influence within NATO, and that most people who subscribe to realpolitik recognize that NATO is largely an arm of the US military. This is because of the global presence of the US military all over the world. Many of these countries depend on the US for defense, and the US can leverage its military strength to pressure the host countries into all kinds of policies. Look up a map of US military bases to get a real picture of the influence the US has over the NATO countries. If you really wanna make a comparison, then look at the number of foreign military bases held by the US vs. the number held by Russia or China. It's a staggering difference.