3 ms·

>How about don't play stupid whataboutist games in which somehow US crimes justify Russian ones? It's not whataboutism, its pointing out the absurdity that we'

>How about don't play stupid whataboutist games in which somehow US crimes justify Russian ones? It's not whataboutism, its pointing out the absurdity that we're heading towards a nuclear showdown over the very same acts the U.S. regularly engages in, even within recent memory. It's pointing out that the moral arguments only apply when the aggressors are not the U.S. This is not whataboutism, this is pointing out hypocrisy and naked manipulation.

cmrdporcupine 4y ago
> "It's pointing out that the moral arguments only apply when the aggressors are not the U.S. " I don't know where you were the night & weekend that the US started bombing in Iraq, but I was in the streets marching. I spent most of my teens 20s and 30s being active against US imperialism. So, yes, it's infantile whataboutism and strawman making. I and many others who take a stand against Russia's actions in Ukraine and elsewhere don't conform to this strawman image you and others have made. The crimes of the US do not justify the crimes of Russia, and I for one am glad to see consequences enforced against Putin's regime. Similar limits should also exist for US actions.
- hackinthebochs 4y ago
  >I spent most of my teens 20s and 30s being active against US imperialism. This isn't an issue of your personal credence, it's an issue of the arguments used to justify our current course of action by the decision-makers and their enablers. >and I for one am glad to see consequences enforced against Putin's regime. Similar limits should also exist for US actions. The problem is that no one defines exactly what "consequences" are and where the lines are. These discussions never go well so let's just skip to the end: is it your opinion that the U.S. should ensure Russia fully retreats from Ukraine, up to and including a nuclear exchange? (when the reply button isn't active you can click on the comment's timestamp and reply there)
  - mistermann 4y ago
    > The problem is... My thinking is a bit different: I would say an even more substantial problem is the near ubiquitous phenomenon whereby people believe that what they "see" to be "the" problem is necessarily the actual problem. Or in other words: a dangerous percentage of the population no longer has the ability to wonder about or desire to know what is true. Do you think there might be any validity to this theory?

cmrdporcupine 4y ago

> "It's pointing out that the moral arguments only apply when the aggressors are not the U.S. " I don't know where you were the night & weekend that the US started bombing in Iraq, but I was in the streets marching. I spent most of my teens 20s and 30s being active against US imperialism. So, yes, it's infantile whataboutism and strawman making. I and many others who take a stand against Russia's actions in Ukraine and elsewhere don't conform to this strawman image you and others have made. The crimes of the US do not justify the crimes of Russia, and I for one am glad to see consequences enforced against Putin's regime. Similar limits should also exist for US actions.

hackinthebochs 4y ago
>I spent most of my teens 20s and 30s being active against US imperialism. This isn't an issue of your personal credence, it's an issue of the arguments used to justify our current course of action by the decision-makers and their enablers. >and I for one am glad to see consequences enforced against Putin's regime. Similar limits should also exist for US actions. The problem is that no one defines exactly what "consequences" are and where the lines are. These discussions never go well so let's just skip to the end: is it your opinion that the U.S. should ensure Russia fully retreats from Ukraine, up to and including a nuclear exchange? (when the reply button isn't active you can click on the comment's timestamp and reply there)
- mistermann 4y ago
  > The problem is... My thinking is a bit different: I would say an even more substantial problem is the near ubiquitous phenomenon whereby people believe that what they "see" to be "the" problem is necessarily the actual problem. Or in other words: a dangerous percentage of the population no longer has the ability to wonder about or desire to know what is true. Do you think there might be any validity to this theory?