4 ms·

There's a lot of comments about how outrageous the lack of a harsher response (in particular the lack of military action) from the west/NATO/USA is. But, whatab

There's a lot of comments about how outrageous the lack of a harsher response (in particular the lack of military action) from the west/NATO/USA is. But, whatabout the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan? Weren't they quite similar (the big difference being that those countries were not close to the US geographically and not really posing a big threat). Why was those invasions ok but not this one? Just to make clear: I'm definitely not in favor of the current invasion.

jacquesm 5y ago
> whatabout Yes, that's what that's called.
- phaistra 5y ago
  Are you going to address his point?
  - LaMarseillaise 5y ago
    Jacquesm demonstrated that there was no point, and therefore nothing to address.
jopsen 5y ago
> But, whatabout the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan? "whatabout" doesn't justify anything else. But I'll play. In both cases, there was a broad coalition. Troops didn't start an invasion without clear demands. Russia lied about their demands, said their troop deployment was for exercises. Until recently they maintained they weren't going to invade. Say what you want about Iraq and Afghanistan, but the intention of the coalition forces was clear. It's also worth noting that: (1) Afghanistan was self-defense, perhaps an overreaction (that can be debated). (2) An American president actually admitted that Iraq was a mistake. Did it take 6 years for Obama to get elected. To be clear I don't think Iraq or Afghanistan wars were completely justified (or good ideas). But there was plenty of diplomacy around it (all diplomatic attempts by Russia in Ukraine have been disingenuous). Russia didn't threaten the coalition forces with sanctions prior to the invasion. > There's a lot of comments about how outrageous the lack of a harsher response (in particular the lack of military action) from the west/NATO/USA is. There would probably be more outrage, if there was an intervention :D I'm certainly not arguing that it would wise for NATO to intervene.
- mardifoufs 5y ago
  The self defense claim for Afghanistan is just as flimsy as Russian claim of self defense in ukraine (they harbour our ennemies/nazis/etc). I'm all for condemning the russian invasion without necessarily bringing up the past but that does not mean you have to literally justify what america did in afghanistan. The only reason why it seems more reasonable to you aren't russian, and you think your team had better intentions. Also so what if they admitted it was a mistake in iraq? If putin admits ukraine was a mistake in 5 years is everything okay and we can just not be allowed to bring that event up again? The complete destabilization that war caused isn't just something you can dismiss because they said oopsie (not even apologizing). Calling the american diplomacy efforts in 2003 not disingenuous is just completely flat out wrong. It was probably even more dishonest than what putin has been doing, with fake leaks to the media and moving goalposts to assure an invasion will inevitably happen. Bush wanted the iraq war and to topple saddam no matter what concession he was willing to make Again, no need to even compare the events and I get you don't fully approve of the wars but the justification for the 2 wars is swinging way way too far into american apologism.
  - CRConrad 5y ago
    > The self defense claim for Afghanistan is just as flimsy as Russian claim of self defense in ukraine (they harbour our ennemies/nazis/etc). Aha, so Bin Laden and Al Qaeda weren't hiding in Afghanistan?
    - jessaustin 5y ago
      Not after 2001-12-16, the day when even super-warhawks like CFR admit ObL left for Pakistan. [0] Astute historians will note that the war continued for another two decades. [0] https://www.cfr.org/timeline/us-war-afghanistan https://www.cfr.org/timeline/us-war-afghanistan
      - CRConrad 5y ago
        Oops!?! TIL, thanks.

jacquesm 5y ago

> whatabout Yes, that's what that's called.

phaistra 5y ago
Are you going to address his point?
- LaMarseillaise 5y ago
  Jacquesm demonstrated that there was no point, and therefore nothing to address.

jopsen 5y ago

> But, whatabout the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan? "whatabout" doesn't justify anything else. But I'll play. In both cases, there was a broad coalition. Troops didn't start an invasion without clear demands. Russia lied about their demands, said their troop deployment was for exercises. Until recently they maintained they weren't going to invade. Say what you want about Iraq and Afghanistan, but the intention of the coalition forces was clear. It's also worth noting that: (1) Afghanistan was self-defense, perhaps an overreaction (that can be debated). (2) An American president actually admitted that Iraq was a mistake. Did it take 6 years for Obama to get elected. To be clear I don't think Iraq or Afghanistan wars were completely justified (or good ideas). But there was plenty of diplomacy around it (all diplomatic attempts by Russia in Ukraine have been disingenuous). Russia didn't threaten the coalition forces with sanctions prior to the invasion. > There's a lot of comments about how outrageous the lack of a harsher response (in particular the lack of military action) from the west/NATO/USA is. There would probably be more outrage, if there was an intervention :D I'm certainly not arguing that it would wise for NATO to intervene.

mardifoufs 5y ago
The self defense claim for Afghanistan is just as flimsy as Russian claim of self defense in ukraine (they harbour our ennemies/nazis/etc). I'm all for condemning the russian invasion without necessarily bringing up the past but that does not mean you have to literally justify what america did in afghanistan. The only reason why it seems more reasonable to you aren't russian, and you think your team had better intentions. Also so what if they admitted it was a mistake in iraq? If putin admits ukraine was a mistake in 5 years is everything okay and we can just not be allowed to bring that event up again? The complete destabilization that war caused isn't just something you can dismiss because they said oopsie (not even apologizing). Calling the american diplomacy efforts in 2003 not disingenuous is just completely flat out wrong. It was probably even more dishonest than what putin has been doing, with fake leaks to the media and moving goalposts to assure an invasion will inevitably happen. Bush wanted the iraq war and to topple saddam no matter what concession he was willing to make Again, no need to even compare the events and I get you don't fully approve of the wars but the justification for the 2 wars is swinging way way too far into american apologism.
- CRConrad 5y ago
  > The self defense claim for Afghanistan is just as flimsy as Russian claim of self defense in ukraine (they harbour our ennemies/nazis/etc). Aha, so Bin Laden and Al Qaeda weren't hiding in Afghanistan?
  - jessaustin 5y ago
    Not after 2001-12-16, the day when even super-warhawks like CFR admit ObL left for Pakistan. [0] Astute historians will note that the war continued for another two decades. [0] https://www.cfr.org/timeline/us-war-afghanistan https://www.cfr.org/timeline/us-war-afghanistan
    - CRConrad 5y ago
      Oops!?! TIL, thanks.