3 ms·

> To simplify it as "Russia invaded Ukraine" is foolish. Lol wat? It is that simple. Claiming that land other people live in, has its own language, and it’s ow

by lovich 4y ago

> To simplify it as "Russia invaded Ukraine" is foolish. Lol wat? It is that simple. Claiming that land other people live in, has its own language, and it’s own nation with internationally recognized borders, doesn’t make it not an invasion when you send troops over those borders. Is China incapable of invading anyone because their past empires held the view that they were the Middle Kingdom and all land was Chinese but just didn’t know it yet? Does only Russia get this ability to invade but not have it be an invasion?

refurb 4y ago
So when Vietnam invade Cambodia and overthrew the Khmer Rouge, we should have defended the Khmer Rouge’s “territorial integrity”? Or was that “different”? Somehow when people are clamoring for war, it's always "different" this time. That's how we ended up in Vietnam. "It's clear that China and the USSR are looking to take over SE Asia. Today it's Laos and Vietnam, tomorrow Malaysia, then Australia. We have to back South Vietnam as the security of the free world is at stake!" Of course you know how silly that sounds because you have 20/20 hindsight. But that's how it was explained the public at the time. Sound familiar at all? Your rule that territorial integrity must be defended no matter what doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. It's not a "red line" that we have to start a war over.
- lovich 4y ago
  > So when Vietnam invade Cambodia and overthrew the Khmer Rouge, we should have defended the Khmer Rouge’s “territorial integrity”? There are plenty of arguments to defend Vietnam in that instance. There are zero to argue that it wasn’t an invasion. > Sound familiar at all? Nah it doesn’t because that was America getting involved in a revolutionary/civil war for our own interests entirely. We were the invaders then, like Russia is now. And guess what, the US wasn’t the good guy in Vietnam just like Russia isn’t in Ukraine. Sending war material to a people defending their homeland against invasion is a war I am completely comfortable getting behind ethically. Come back to me if we start putting boots on the ground in the region or Ukraine start taking Russian regions and it’ll be a lot more gray for me

by lovich 4y ago

refurb 4y ago

So when Vietnam invade Cambodia and overthrew the Khmer Rouge, we should have defended the Khmer Rouge’s “territorial integrity”? Or was that “different”? Somehow when people are clamoring for war, it's always "different" this time. That's how we ended up in Vietnam. "It's clear that China and the USSR are looking to take over SE Asia. Today it's Laos and Vietnam, tomorrow Malaysia, then Australia. We have to back South Vietnam as the security of the free world is at stake!" Of course you know how silly that sounds because you have 20/20 hindsight. But that's how it was explained the public at the time. Sound familiar at all? Your rule that territorial integrity must be defended no matter what doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. It's not a "red line" that we have to start a war over.

lovich 4y ago
> So when Vietnam invade Cambodia and overthrew the Khmer Rouge, we should have defended the Khmer Rouge’s “territorial integrity”? There are plenty of arguments to defend Vietnam in that instance. There are zero to argue that it wasn’t an invasion. > Sound familiar at all? Nah it doesn’t because that was America getting involved in a revolutionary/civil war for our own interests entirely. We were the invaders then, like Russia is now. And guess what, the US wasn’t the good guy in Vietnam just like Russia isn’t in Ukraine. Sending war material to a people defending their homeland against invasion is a war I am completely comfortable getting behind ethically. Come back to me if we start putting boots on the ground in the region or Ukraine start taking Russian regions and it’ll be a lot more gray for me