3 ms·

>We live on the knife's edge of peace Peace for who? America just formally ended a 20 year long war, with very little to show for it. Someone who is 18 today,

>We live on the knife's edge of peace Peace for who? America just formally ended a 20 year long war, with very little to show for it. Someone who is 18 today, has only known America in a time of war. How can you call this peace? (I know how, it's because you only talk about peace as peace for western nations.) Anyone would immediately be skeptical to the thought that we should immediately enter another war several thousand miles away. It's only when majority white western christians are being blown up that we are at the "knife's edge of peace". What is it called when it's muslims in the middle east or northern africa being blown up? I'm not convinced America needs to be proactive in an engagement with Russia to hold up what you consider "the knife's edge of peace".

rootusrootus 5y ago
> How can you call this peace? I think you already know the answer to that. When the 20 year old war is mostly all about sending some soldiers over to the middle east to bomb it, then it doesn't really feel like a war. For people in the US who choose to ignore it, they absolutely live in peace every day.
dash2 5y ago
You, too, may experience a difference if war comes not for a faraway people whom you like to feel indignant about, but to your own country, landing on your doorstep and destroying your neighbourhood. Perhaps it's very wrong that you will feel differently. But you will. That is what the knife edge means. Using the miseries of far-off people to encourage cowardice or putting your head in the sand is wrong, and foolish.
lolinder 5y ago
Afghanistan and Iraq were and remained local conflicts. Twice in the last century and once in the century before (Napoleon), a local conflict in Europe escalated into a world war in which millions died in the span of a few years. That doesn't make the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq right or just (I don't believe they were), but Europe has long been an extremely dangerous powder keg. We have had relative peace in the last 70 years because European great powers have successfully avoided actively shooting at each other. This move by Russia is a major threat to that stability and is categorically different than the invasions in the Middle East not because of race but because of the likelihood of escalation.
- lostlogin 5y ago
  > Afghanistan and Iraq were and remained local conflicts. Sort of, but Pakistan might not agree. The disastrous Iraq invasion had huge consequences for neighbouring countries and people argue over its contribution to significant knock on effects like the Arab spring.
fallingknife 5y ago
Peace for me. And I want my government to prioritize that over peace for other countries at every opportunity. It ain't pretty, but it's how the world works. And nobody gives a damn about "white western Christians." We set whole cities of white western christians on fire in WWII, and bombed white western Christians in the 90's on behalf of a Muslim population (Serbia / Kosovo).
dougmwne 5y ago
The conflict statistics bear out that we are in a lengthy era of peace. I am not being eurocentric, it's true for a vast stretch of the world since WW2. If you think we have not been in a time of peace, just wait till you find out what a time of war looks like. It will go from 3 ongoing conflicts to 100.

rootusrootus 5y ago

> How can you call this peace? I think you already know the answer to that. When the 20 year old war is mostly all about sending some soldiers over to the middle east to bomb it, then it doesn't really feel like a war. For people in the US who choose to ignore it, they absolutely live in peace every day.

dash2 5y ago

You, too, may experience a difference if war comes not for a faraway people whom you like to feel indignant about, but to your own country, landing on your doorstep and destroying your neighbourhood. Perhaps it's very wrong that you will feel differently. But you will. That is what the knife edge means. Using the miseries of far-off people to encourage cowardice or putting your head in the sand is wrong, and foolish.

lolinder 5y ago

Afghanistan and Iraq were and remained local conflicts. Twice in the last century and once in the century before (Napoleon), a local conflict in Europe escalated into a world war in which millions died in the span of a few years. That doesn't make the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq right or just (I don't believe they were), but Europe has long been an extremely dangerous powder keg. We have had relative peace in the last 70 years because European great powers have successfully avoided actively shooting at each other. This move by Russia is a major threat to that stability and is categorically different than the invasions in the Middle East not because of race but because of the likelihood of escalation.

lostlogin 5y ago
> Afghanistan and Iraq were and remained local conflicts. Sort of, but Pakistan might not agree. The disastrous Iraq invasion had huge consequences for neighbouring countries and people argue over its contribution to significant knock on effects like the Arab spring.

fallingknife 5y ago

Peace for me. And I want my government to prioritize that over peace for other countries at every opportunity. It ain't pretty, but it's how the world works. And nobody gives a damn about "white western Christians." We set whole cities of white western christians on fire in WWII, and bombed white western Christians in the 90's on behalf of a Muslim population (Serbia / Kosovo).

dougmwne 5y ago

The conflict statistics bear out that we are in a lengthy era of peace. I am not being eurocentric, it's true for a vast stretch of the world since WW2. If you think we have not been in a time of peace, just wait till you find out what a time of war looks like. It will go from 3 ongoing conflicts to 100.