3 ms·
Not everything is whataboutism (which is strangely the newest favourite word of everyone and my pet peeve). He is just criticizing people who criticize sanctio
by anon2020dot00 5y ago
Not everything is whataboutism (which is strangely the newest favourite word of everyone and my pet peeve).
He is just criticizing people who criticize sanctions. From his perspective, the cost of sanctions is trivial compared to the cost of war.
No whataboutism here.
"Man, you people who when babies are being exploded and apartment buildings attacked with missiles, an entire nation being invaded, who ask these questions about inconveniencing citizens of the attacking nation, are you even real?
The next time the USA invades someone I welcome for you to destroy my financial life and drive my family and I into subsistence farming if it helps to stop us. You have my permissions.
stop doing war."
- throw123123123 5y ago> the cost of sanctions is trivial compared to the cost of war. To whom?
- Karrot_Kream 5y agoAnd I'm arguing that the USA _has_ invaded other nations and left them worse for the wear. Like Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. You're right this isn't whataboutism, it's more like sanctions "for thee but not for me". The USA manufactured a flimsy reason to send boots on the ground to Iraq and Afghanistan, much like Russia manufactured a flimsy reason to send boots to the ground in Ukraine. There _were_ massive domestic protests over it. And yet the US did it and received no international censure. The "next time the USA invades I welcome ... [sanctions]" is a flimsy argument; the world has shown that sanctions don't apply when the US invades.