5 ms·

I truly hope the same measures will be taken against US or other nation's acts of aggression in the future. e.g. Yemen, Afghanistan,Iraq. This is a great preced

I truly hope the same measures will be taken against US or other nation's acts of aggression in the future. e.g. Yemen, Afghanistan,Iraq. This is a great precedent to set.

happytoexplain 5y ago
How can they distinguish good from bad justifications for aggression? Russia's current actions seem to be at one extreme, while, say, responding to an attack from another government would be on the other extreme (barring extenuating circumstances), while the US usually has an (ostensible) justification somewhere in the middle. Afghanistan after 9/11 is a good of example of something that was hard for another western nation to argue against the justification for starting (how it went is another story).
- shadowgovt 5y ago
  > How can they distinguish good from bad justifications for aggression? On a case-by-case basis. As you note, the international community probably wouldn't have reacted against the US regarding Afghanistan (and probably should have regarding Iraq).
- nsonha 5y ago
  "good aggression" Be aware that most people cannot read Chinese or Russian, and as such their whole world perspective is fed by an one sided narrative. I suggest you listen to these[1][2] talks, and Putin's speech[3] on NATO expansion in Munich in 2007. Pozner[1] pointed out that up to 2007, Putin really tried to be friend with the West, including asking to join NATO. Of course they were "the enemy". [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X7Ng75e5gQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X7Ng75e5gQ [2]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4 [3]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQ58Yv6kP44 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQ58Yv6kP44
  - happytoexplain 5y ago
    Please try not to misquote me. I made no reference to good aggression, only justifiable aggression. Even then, while it would be fine to form an argument that no such thing exists, it's unrealistic to despise the man who returns a punch. As for Russia's reasonable concerns about the West and the nigh-impossibility of objectively or thoroughly observing foreign points of view - both are true and important, yet neither serve in the least to justify attacking Ukraine's capital.
  - prox 5y ago
    That sounds great until you figure out that Putin has a reason for everything. The problem is not so much Putin, or even his viewpoint that Russia doesn’t feel safe (I can even see the merit of such a stance) , but the fact that is that he is not accountable to his people. If he was a normal president and with a functioning democracy, I doubt we would even be at the current situation. I saw the videos of Putin with his advisor (the Spy chief) and that was an exercise in “tell me what I want to hear.”
    - hollerith 5y ago
      Being accountable to the people didn't stop the leaders of the US from engaging in plenty of acts of agression and territorial expropriations these past 230 or so years. And I wouldn't be terribly surprised if most Russian voters will end up approving of the invasion provided Russian casualties and costs don't get too high.
      - prox 5y ago
        That’s not the point really I tried to make (sorry if I was being unclear). I have a choice to (try at least) vote out the president who starts wars if I don’t agree with it. I could protest freely and massively on the streets. There is no such option in Russia. If I was a Russian citizen that fact alone would be cause for concern.
      - nsonha 5y ago
        The US leaders are way more reckless than Putin. The difference is, as pointed out in the lecture in one of the videos, that it's in a incredibly secure position in an unipolar world. US foreign policies have been a series of failures without any real consequence save for 9/11. No one is gonna sanction the US nor start a war with it.
  - lm28469 5y ago
    > Putin's speech[3] on NATO expansion in Munich in 2007 Ukraine would never had joined NATO because it was an active war zone anyways. Putin didn't have to do anything to avoid Ukraine joining NATO. Listening to his current explanations for the invasion doesn't make him sound like a good guy no matter the language or the perspective. > Putin really tried to be friend with the West And relations were relatively good until he decided to invade Ukraine, he just severed every diplomatic bridges and every single chances of progress for the next decades(s). Putin's not the Devil but he clearly is the aggressor here. Ukraine was a sovereign state with a democratically elected government. You'd be hard pressed to use the "b-bu-but it's both sides" rhetoric here.
    - fuoqi 5y ago
      >Ukraine would never had joined NATO because it was an active war zone anyways. It does not prevent NATO from supplying weapons and training the Ukrainian army. The US reconnaissance planes have conducted regular patrols over Ukrainian territory. The British even tried to build naval bases in Berdyansk and Ochakovo. And with active and heated territorial disputes it's easy to see a hypothetical scenario of Ukraine trying to re-capture Donbas and Crimea by force after it felt it's sufficiently strong or Russia is weak enough, like Georgia tried with South Osetia. >And relations were relatively good I suggest watching the following videos if you want to learn about alternative points of view: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X7Ng75e5gQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X7Ng75e5gQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4
  - bcrosby95 5y ago
    > including asking to join NATO. Did he? All I could come up with this: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/04/ex-nato-head-says-putin-wanted-to-join-alliance-early-on-in-his-rule https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/04/ex-nato-head-s... According to this person he didn't ask to join, he asked why he wasn't asked to join, and wanted to skip the process that countries-that-don't-matter have to go through.
    - gloriana 5y ago
      From greenwald: https://greenwald.substack.com/p/war-propaganda-about-ukraine-becoming?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjo0MjkyODg4NywicG9zdF9pZCI6NDk0MDI2MjgsIl8iOiJkeWtiSyIsImlhdCI6MTY0NTk5ODc2MSwiZXhwIjoxNjQ2MDAyMzYxLCJpc3MiOiJwdWItMTI4NjYyIiwic3ViIjoicG9zdC1yZWFjdGlvbiJ9.Ueusd1SdJqN0H5J7mW3hynIytepOnHF16KbddNSZsfo&utm_source=url https://greenwald.substack.com/p/war-propaganda-about-ukrain... And slightly more edgy: https://niccolo.substack.com/p/fuck-it-russias-final-break-with?utm_source=url https://niccolo.substack.com/p/fuck-it-russias-final-break-w...
jl6 5y ago
It is dark comedy indeed to see Russia’s apologists defend their actions with whataboutism about the US war in Iraq. Guess what, we think that one was illegitimate too. Good work throwing the Ukraine invasion on the pile of unjust wars. Bush and Putin can sing a Nuremberg duet together.
- FpUser 5y ago
  >"Guess what, we think that one was illegitimate too" And this is why the offender is currently suffering under the heavy weight of sanctions having exterminated boatloads of people. Oops. Sorry. Move along. Next.
- gloriana 5y ago
  Imagine Russia ousted Treudeuo for crimes against peaceful protestors (freezing bank accounts without trial etc) as occurred this month in Canada. He then sends weapons and trainers to Canada to build up resistance and military installations in Canada, perhaps even offering a treaty for Canada to join Russia as military defense allies. This is basically what the USA/Europe did in Ukraine in 2014 (McCain and company was there and USA spent 5B on NGOs overthrow democratically elected leaders of Ukraine and helped install pro US gov). Chomsky's take is not bad: https://twitter.com/zei_squirrel/status/1495330478722850817 https://twitter.com/zei_squirrel/status/1495330478722850817
2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
You don't think the war in Afghanistan was justified? After 9/11 the US invoked NATO article 5 and allies went to Afghanistan with the US.
- dumdumdumdum 5y ago
  Just because you've invoked some article amongst your buddies doesn't make a war justified. The hubris is astounding.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
    ~3,000 people died on 9/11 and it was planned in Afghanistan. If that's not justification then what is?
    - dboreham 5y ago
      Pakistan and Saudi seemed to have quite a bit to do with it also, but...no invasion there.
      - gambiting 5y ago
        That's a deflection, not an answer to that question.
      - Vecr 5y ago
        The US was in Pakistan right after 9/11 though, marines and staging bases and everything. They didn't invade, because they had assets already there and Pakistan let more in.
    - dumdumdumdum 5y ago
      100x civilians died because of the war in Afghanistan, which was mainly planned in the US. Looking forward to disagreeing with your Afghani twin about the justification for invading and occupying the US for 20 years.
      - 5y ago
rnk 5y ago
The us attacking Iraq on false pretenses was clearly unlawful. Afghanistan is different, but would appreciate other views. Tthe country (and bin Laden and others) were clearly behind 9/11. Do you see it as possible for there to be a legal or lawful war between countries when one attacks the other? Saudia Arabia attacking Houthis and Yemen seems like a clear illegal action. At least the ongoing attacks.
tim333 5y ago
Ukraine is despot tries to overthrow democracy. Those others are not.

I truly hope the same measures will be taken against US or other nation's acts of aggression in the future. e.g. Yemen, Afghanistan,Iraq. This is a great precedent to set.

happytoexplain 5y ago

How can they distinguish good from bad justifications for aggression? Russia's current actions seem to be at one extreme, while, say, responding to an attack from another government would be on the other extreme (barring extenuating circumstances), while the US usually has an (ostensible) justification somewhere in the middle. Afghanistan after 9/11 is a good of example of something that was hard for another western nation to argue against the justification for starting (how it went is another story).

shadowgovt 5y ago
> How can they distinguish good from bad justifications for aggression? On a case-by-case basis. As you note, the international community probably wouldn't have reacted against the US regarding Afghanistan (and probably should have regarding Iraq).
nsonha 5y ago
"good aggression" Be aware that most people cannot read Chinese or Russian, and as such their whole world perspective is fed by an one sided narrative. I suggest you listen to these[1][2] talks, and Putin's speech[3] on NATO expansion in Munich in 2007. Pozner[1] pointed out that up to 2007, Putin really tried to be friend with the West, including asking to join NATO. Of course they were "the enemy". [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X7Ng75e5gQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X7Ng75e5gQ [2]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4 [3]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQ58Yv6kP44 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQ58Yv6kP44
- happytoexplain 5y ago
  Please try not to misquote me. I made no reference to good aggression, only justifiable aggression. Even then, while it would be fine to form an argument that no such thing exists, it's unrealistic to despise the man who returns a punch. As for Russia's reasonable concerns about the West and the nigh-impossibility of objectively or thoroughly observing foreign points of view - both are true and important, yet neither serve in the least to justify attacking Ukraine's capital.
- prox 5y ago
  That sounds great until you figure out that Putin has a reason for everything. The problem is not so much Putin, or even his viewpoint that Russia doesn’t feel safe (I can even see the merit of such a stance) , but the fact that is that he is not accountable to his people. If he was a normal president and with a functioning democracy, I doubt we would even be at the current situation. I saw the videos of Putin with his advisor (the Spy chief) and that was an exercise in “tell me what I want to hear.”
  - hollerith 5y ago
    Being accountable to the people didn't stop the leaders of the US from engaging in plenty of acts of agression and territorial expropriations these past 230 or so years. And I wouldn't be terribly surprised if most Russian voters will end up approving of the invasion provided Russian casualties and costs don't get too high.
    - prox 5y ago
      That’s not the point really I tried to make (sorry if I was being unclear). I have a choice to (try at least) vote out the president who starts wars if I don’t agree with it. I could protest freely and massively on the streets. There is no such option in Russia. If I was a Russian citizen that fact alone would be cause for concern.
    - nsonha 5y ago
      The US leaders are way more reckless than Putin. The difference is, as pointed out in the lecture in one of the videos, that it's in a incredibly secure position in an unipolar world. US foreign policies have been a series of failures without any real consequence save for 9/11. No one is gonna sanction the US nor start a war with it.
- lm28469 5y ago
  > Putin's speech[3] on NATO expansion in Munich in 2007 Ukraine would never had joined NATO because it was an active war zone anyways. Putin didn't have to do anything to avoid Ukraine joining NATO. Listening to his current explanations for the invasion doesn't make him sound like a good guy no matter the language or the perspective. > Putin really tried to be friend with the West And relations were relatively good until he decided to invade Ukraine, he just severed every diplomatic bridges and every single chances of progress for the next decades(s). Putin's not the Devil but he clearly is the aggressor here. Ukraine was a sovereign state with a democratically elected government. You'd be hard pressed to use the "b-bu-but it's both sides" rhetoric here.
  - fuoqi 5y ago
    >Ukraine would never had joined NATO because it was an active war zone anyways. It does not prevent NATO from supplying weapons and training the Ukrainian army. The US reconnaissance planes have conducted regular patrols over Ukrainian territory. The British even tried to build naval bases in Berdyansk and Ochakovo. And with active and heated territorial disputes it's easy to see a hypothetical scenario of Ukraine trying to re-capture Donbas and Crimea by force after it felt it's sufficiently strong or Russia is weak enough, like Georgia tried with South Osetia. >And relations were relatively good I suggest watching the following videos if you want to learn about alternative points of view: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X7Ng75e5gQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X7Ng75e5gQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4
- bcrosby95 5y ago
  > including asking to join NATO. Did he? All I could come up with this: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/04/ex-nato-head-says-putin-wanted-to-join-alliance-early-on-in-his-rule https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/04/ex-nato-head-s... According to this person he didn't ask to join, he asked why he wasn't asked to join, and wanted to skip the process that countries-that-don't-matter have to go through.
  - gloriana 5y ago
    From greenwald: https://greenwald.substack.com/p/war-propaganda-about-ukraine-becoming?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjo0MjkyODg4NywicG9zdF9pZCI6NDk0MDI2MjgsIl8iOiJkeWtiSyIsImlhdCI6MTY0NTk5ODc2MSwiZXhwIjoxNjQ2MDAyMzYxLCJpc3MiOiJwdWItMTI4NjYyIiwic3ViIjoicG9zdC1yZWFjdGlvbiJ9.Ueusd1SdJqN0H5J7mW3hynIytepOnHF16KbddNSZsfo&utm_source=url https://greenwald.substack.com/p/war-propaganda-about-ukrain... And slightly more edgy: https://niccolo.substack.com/p/fuck-it-russias-final-break-with?utm_source=url https://niccolo.substack.com/p/fuck-it-russias-final-break-w...

jl6 5y ago

It is dark comedy indeed to see Russia’s apologists defend their actions with whataboutism about the US war in Iraq. Guess what, we think that one was illegitimate too. Good work throwing the Ukraine invasion on the pile of unjust wars. Bush and Putin can sing a Nuremberg duet together.

FpUser 5y ago
>"Guess what, we think that one was illegitimate too" And this is why the offender is currently suffering under the heavy weight of sanctions having exterminated boatloads of people. Oops. Sorry. Move along. Next.
gloriana 5y ago
Imagine Russia ousted Treudeuo for crimes against peaceful protestors (freezing bank accounts without trial etc) as occurred this month in Canada. He then sends weapons and trainers to Canada to build up resistance and military installations in Canada, perhaps even offering a treaty for Canada to join Russia as military defense allies. This is basically what the USA/Europe did in Ukraine in 2014 (McCain and company was there and USA spent 5B on NGOs overthrow democratically elected leaders of Ukraine and helped install pro US gov). Chomsky's take is not bad: https://twitter.com/zei_squirrel/status/1495330478722850817 https://twitter.com/zei_squirrel/status/1495330478722850817

2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago

You don't think the war in Afghanistan was justified? After 9/11 the US invoked NATO article 5 and allies went to Afghanistan with the US.

dumdumdumdum 5y ago
Just because you've invoked some article amongst your buddies doesn't make a war justified. The hubris is astounding.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
  ~3,000 people died on 9/11 and it was planned in Afghanistan. If that's not justification then what is?
  - dboreham 5y ago
    Pakistan and Saudi seemed to have quite a bit to do with it also, but...no invasion there.
    - gambiting 5y ago
      That's a deflection, not an answer to that question.
    - Vecr 5y ago
      The US was in Pakistan right after 9/11 though, marines and staging bases and everything. They didn't invade, because they had assets already there and Pakistan let more in.
  - dumdumdumdum 5y ago
    100x civilians died because of the war in Afghanistan, which was mainly planned in the US. Looking forward to disagreeing with your Afghani twin about the justification for invading and occupying the US for 20 years.
    - 5y ago

rnk 5y ago

The us attacking Iraq on false pretenses was clearly unlawful. Afghanistan is different, but would appreciate other views. Tthe country (and bin Laden and others) were clearly behind 9/11. Do you see it as possible for there to be a legal or lawful war between countries when one attacks the other? Saudia Arabia attacking Houthis and Yemen seems like a clear illegal action. At least the ongoing attacks.

tim333 5y ago

Ukraine is despot tries to overthrow democracy. Those others are not.