5 ms·
Because it helps get rid of Putin and its something we are able to do. Getting rid of Putin is our objective right now. Is it technically ethical and nice? May
by _bbny 5y ago
Because it helps get rid of Putin and its something we are able to do. Getting rid of Putin is our objective right now.
Is it technically ethical and nice? Maybe not, that can be debated. But I don't see why we should care. Russia's also seizing foreign property as well as invading another country, if you do want to have that ethical argument.
This is how the world works, I don't think we should get bogged down in whether it's technically entirely OK for those poor Russian-govt-linked billionaires to have less yachts. It's in our power, it's in our interest, and that's how the world works.
- ajsnigrutin 5y agoSo wait... if we europeans wanted to get rid of eg. clinton for bombing in yugoslavia, and then bush of the middle eastern crap (well, technically both bushes), we can just take away property of random rich americans?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- scotty79 5y agoNot random. All. And I fully expect the world to do it if USA ever does invade Mexico or Canda with tanks and starts shelling civilians just because they want to annex them. American oligarchs have total influence over American government. If they allow such thing to happen they are materially responsible for the damage.
- ajsnigrutin 5y ago> Not random. All. And I fully expect the world to do it if USA ever does invade Mexico or Canda with tanks and starts shelling civilians just because they want to annex them. Why mexico or canada? Why not for iraq? Afghanistan? Syria? Libya? Yemen? Jugoslavia? Why only for annexation and not for "just bombing" or even occupation, with yes, tanks? Shelling civillians? Like bombing a civillian train? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grdelica_train_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grdelica_train_bombing A bus? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lu%C5%BEane_bus_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lu%C5%BEane_bus_bombing How about escaping refugees? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_bombing_of_Albanian_refugees_near_Gjakova https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_bombing_of_Albanian_refug... Or a foreign embassy? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_bombing_of_the_Chinese_embassy_in_Belgrade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_bombing_of_the_C... Civillian tv station? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_bombing_of_the_Radio_Television_of_Serbia_headquarters https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_bombing_of_the_Radio_Tele... How about directly custer bombing a city? Twice. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ni%C5%A1_cluster_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ni%C5%A1_cluster_bombing A hospital? https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/balkans/stories/brussels052199.htm https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/balkans... So you agree, that if US/NATO doesn't immediately pull out from eg. syria, that switzerland can take away googles property in Zurich?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- scotty79 5y ago> Why mexico or canada? Why not for iraq? Afghanistan? Syria? Libya? Yemen? Jugoslavia? Why only for annexation and not for "just bombing" or even occupation, with yes, tanks? Because those are different things. > So you agree, that if US/NATO doesn't immediately pull out from eg. syria, that switzerland can take away googles property in Zurich? No, I don't agree.
- ajsnigrutin 5y ago"It's different when we do it"? Why don't you agree? Americans occupied a sovereign country, started a war there... why no sanctions against american oligarchs? And if not, why sanctions now against the russians?
- scotty79 5y agoIt's different when it's different. Full scale invasion with intent to annex with nearly complete global opposition is different from America going around the world to kill people at their whim, very often with support and acceptance of other nations and occasionally with support of large groups of people in countries America messes up. Putin invaded two countries and parts of Ukraine already in a predictible pattern. And next ones in line are NATO countries. I guess enough's enough to take action. Serbs in Yougoslavia tried to do racial cleansing. Ukrainians never had such ideas. By drawing such overstretched parallels you are no different than Putin supporting Russian now, nazi German after the WWII or Serb after they were stopped.
- ajsnigrutin 5y agoOh yes, "large groups" of bombed afghanis wanted to be bombed by amercans? And if UK and EU supported putin in ukraine (to make gas cheaper in europe for example), than the occupation of ukraine would be a good thing? So it doesn't matter that you destroy a country and kill a huge number of people, if your friends help or atleast "morally" support you with that? Putin has a russian minority in ukraine, that was being attacked for a long time now, by groups like Azov (who were globally marker as neonazis just a few months ago, by most mainstream media), and which are now a part of national guard (for the last ~7 years). You cannot call it racial clensing if all the people mentioned are white (serbs, albanians, russians, ukranians), but considering the amount of brown people the americans have killed in the last few decades, it makes you wonder.
- mrep 5y agoOf course, you are free to make your bed however you want. Just don't be surprised if the US responds by doing the same thing back to rich europeans.