4 ms·

It's unprovoked killing of innocent people. That should be enough.

by jstx1 5y ago

verdverm 5y ago
That was the same reason the US used for the Afghan war. If the people believe that there are bad people killing and Russia is going into Ukraine under similar special operations, would the people think this is a good thing for Russia to be doing?
- jstx1 5y ago
  Maybe you misunderstood what I meant or I'm missing your point. What I'm saying is that what Russia is doing is unprovoked killing of innocent people (which is enough for me to label is as wrong). I don't get the parallel with US/Afghanistan or why it's relevant here.
  - verdverm 5y ago
    > Russia is doing is unprovoked killing of innocent people While I agree, this is a matter of perspective. Many Russians believe they are only killing bad guys. Once civilians take up arms, they become part of the bad group killing "our people" (to the Russians, a subset anyhow) It's more complex because they each have relatives in the other country, Russia is trending towards a North Korean like state, and that there are very different histories told between the east and west. "He who controls the past, controls the future. He who controls the present, defines the past." > I don't get the parallel with US/Afghanistan or why it's relevant here. The terrorists killed innocents, then the US invaded a country, using the first as justification, then the US killed civilians, and in response civilians were "radicalized" and fought back. It's meant more as an example where perspective defines who's innocent and "justified"
    - jstx1 5y ago
      > The terrorists killed innocents, then the US invaded a country, using the first as justification, then the US killed civilians, and in response civilians were "radicalized" and fought back. I mean some of the words are the same ("innocent", "invade"). That's about all the credit I can give to your analogy.
- TheCoelacanth 5y ago
  The question was "is this invasion wrong?" not "was the US's invasion right?". Also, the US invasion was not unprovoked. There was an attack on the US that killed thousands of civilians by someone in Afghanistan who was being sheltered by the defacto government of Afghanistan.

It's unprovoked killing of innocent people. That should be enough.

by jstx1 5y ago

It's unprovoked killing of innocent people. That should be enough.

That was the same reason the US used for the Afghan war. If the people believe that there are bad people killing and Russia is going into Ukraine under similar special operations, would the people think this is a good thing for Russia to be doing?

jstx1 5y ago
Maybe you misunderstood what I meant or I'm missing your point. What I'm saying is that what Russia is doing is unprovoked killing of innocent people (which is enough for me to label is as wrong). I don't get the parallel with US/Afghanistan or why it's relevant here.
- verdverm 5y ago
  > Russia is doing is unprovoked killing of innocent people While I agree, this is a matter of perspective. Many Russians believe they are only killing bad guys. Once civilians take up arms, they become part of the bad group killing "our people" (to the Russians, a subset anyhow) It's more complex because they each have relatives in the other country, Russia is trending towards a North Korean like state, and that there are very different histories told between the east and west. "He who controls the past, controls the future. He who controls the present, defines the past." > I don't get the parallel with US/Afghanistan or why it's relevant here. The terrorists killed innocents, then the US invaded a country, using the first as justification, then the US killed civilians, and in response civilians were "radicalized" and fought back. It's meant more as an example where perspective defines who's innocent and "justified"
  - jstx1 5y ago
    > The terrorists killed innocents, then the US invaded a country, using the first as justification, then the US killed civilians, and in response civilians were "radicalized" and fought back. I mean some of the words are the same ("innocent", "invade"). That's about all the credit I can give to your analogy.
TheCoelacanth 5y ago
The question was "is this invasion wrong?" not "was the US's invasion right?". Also, the US invasion was not unprovoked. There was an attack on the US that killed thousands of civilians by someone in Afghanistan who was being sheltered by the defacto government of Afghanistan.