4 ms·

It was out of the ashes of dead civilians that the Charter and Geneva Conventions were born, even before all the dead had been buried. You are an unserious pers

by cmurf 5y ago

It was out of the ashes of dead civilians that the Charter and Geneva Conventions were born, even before all the dead had been buried. You are an unserious person to talk of the only product humanity produced, that is intended to prevent world wars and crimes against humanity, as unreal. It is remarkable ignorance. https://twitter.com/W_Kononczuk/status/1510923871641387014 https://twitter.com/W_Kononczuk/status/1510923871641387014 https://twitter.com/juliaioffe/status/1511401538908004353 https://twitter.com/juliaioffe/status/1511401538908004353 The invasion of Iraq was never going to lead to a world war, was never about targeting civilians on purpose with malice and retribution. Russia invading Ukraine to de-nazify it? The idea the U.S. is filling Ukraine with Nazis? If Russia really believes this, and believes it has a moral obligation to stop us, what do they do if Ukraine wins? They are already by all accounts committing, with intent, a genocide. And it will get worse. China and India refuse to agree this is a violation of the Charter, let alone that Russia should immediately withdraw. The lines are being drawn now. There is no predicting how this turns out, but it isn't possible to exclude WW3 as one of the outcomes. You seem to have no comprehension, no awareness of the different order of magnitude the seriousness of these situations. But that would be consistent with being an unserious person.

trasz 5y ago
Sure, it was a nice idea, but it just doesn't work. Case in point: US invasions went unpunished, which in turn enabled Russia to do what it's doing.
- cmurf 5y ago
  This whataboutism is as nauseating as the ignorance. Are you trying to justify what the Kremlin is doing, by blaming the U.S.? You lament the numeric deaths of civilians, yet you promote the uselessness of the only things designed so far to prevent it. Whatever point you are trying to make is lost by you making excuses for Russia in 2022 while blaming the U.S. for 2003 (and not any of the other 30 member countries part of it), while proposing the latter lead to the former. If you've read the Charter, you know full well why the U.S. and Russia wouldn't ever be punished by the Security Council.
  - trasz 5y ago
    I'm the last person to justify what Kremlin is doing. Putin should hang. But it also shows that mechanisms that attempted to prevent it - those that you're describing - simply don't work. And they didn't work for a long time, as proven by US invasion on Middle East, which didn't result in any consequences to the guilty parties. And that - US being able to commit war crimes with impunity - convinced Putin he can do it too.
    - cmurf 5y ago
      >mechanisms that attempted to prevent it - those that you're describing - simply don't work Wrong. They do work. They just don't work perfectly. And even when they are working, they don't always lead to the preferred outcome. Nevertheless it is an institution we need. If we lose it, we lose all institutional mechanisms to prevent another world war. The five permanent members of the Security Council in effect have a veto. It was known at the time of adoption that should a permanent member engage in aggressive war, they would be expected to veto any enforcement action against themselves. This is the design of the Charter, the only way it could ever have been passed. None of the winners of the world wars would have willingly ceded their sovereignty so much that the entire rest of the world could have held them accountable after what had just happened. None of the five would have signed it. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. Does that sound like a pretty good axiom?

by cmurf 5y ago

trasz 5y ago

Sure, it was a nice idea, but it just doesn't work. Case in point: US invasions went unpunished, which in turn enabled Russia to do what it's doing.

cmurf 5y ago
This whataboutism is as nauseating as the ignorance. Are you trying to justify what the Kremlin is doing, by blaming the U.S.? You lament the numeric deaths of civilians, yet you promote the uselessness of the only things designed so far to prevent it. Whatever point you are trying to make is lost by you making excuses for Russia in 2022 while blaming the U.S. for 2003 (and not any of the other 30 member countries part of it), while proposing the latter lead to the former. If you've read the Charter, you know full well why the U.S. and Russia wouldn't ever be punished by the Security Council.
- trasz 5y ago
  I'm the last person to justify what Kremlin is doing. Putin should hang. But it also shows that mechanisms that attempted to prevent it - those that you're describing - simply don't work. And they didn't work for a long time, as proven by US invasion on Middle East, which didn't result in any consequences to the guilty parties. And that - US being able to commit war crimes with impunity - convinced Putin he can do it too.
  - cmurf 5y ago
    >mechanisms that attempted to prevent it - those that you're describing - simply don't work Wrong. They do work. They just don't work perfectly. And even when they are working, they don't always lead to the preferred outcome. Nevertheless it is an institution we need. If we lose it, we lose all institutional mechanisms to prevent another world war. The five permanent members of the Security Council in effect have a veto. It was known at the time of adoption that should a permanent member engage in aggressive war, they would be expected to veto any enforcement action against themselves. This is the design of the Charter, the only way it could ever have been passed. None of the winners of the world wars would have willingly ceded their sovereignty so much that the entire rest of the world could have held them accountable after what had just happened. None of the five would have signed it. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. Does that sound like a pretty good axiom?