3 ms·

> Fool me once. So you're saying that you based your stance on the Iraq War from what the mainstream media told you? That's the problem right there! I was aga

> Fool me once. So you're saying that you based your stance on the Iraq War from what the mainstream media told you? That's the problem right there! I was against the Iraq War from the start. Concretely, I was at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15_February_2003_anti-war_protests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15_February_2003_anti-war_prot... , so my recollection isn't just post-rationalization. It was an uphill battle against the US mainstream media for sure. The anti-war stance only turned out to be more and more vindicated as time went on. Meanwhile when I saw what happened to Ukraine in 2022, I couldn't see anything besides a justified war of self defense and self determination. I had been relativizing what had been happening in Ukraine previously, along with other global US involvements, as the US military industrial complex doing its thing. But the 2022 invasion was a clear cut attempt to conquer and subjugate the country - with Russia as the aggressor just as the US had been in Iraq. I've always been abstractly pro-self-defense, but it's been a weird feeling supporting a specific war, especially in agreement with the mainstream. I reflect on it often, but my conclusions are stable. I also lament the US political capital that was wasted on Iraq, that allows Russia to successfully propagandize western support for Ukraine as being from the same vein, despite Russia being the clear aggressor.

willcipriano 3y ago
I agree with all your points. I don't see how it is a problem for a US citizen. Russia isn't a serious threat to the US, nor are they even really much of a threat to Europe if military spending is any indication. If funds were unlimited, sure but right now we have other problems and can't afford it.
- mindslight 3y ago
  Whether it is in our national interest to materially support Ukraine is a different question than whether doing so puts us on the right side. I would say the answer to that is also yes. The US is essentially the leader of a nominally consentual economic federation [0], which is what allows USD to remain the world reserve currency while creating more of it. If the US does not support a country that is trying to economically integrate with us, it's a strong data point that perhaps developing a relationship with the US isn't so valuable. This would facilitate the diminishing of US dominance that China is salivating over. Furthermore, it's not like the big dollar amounts for Ukraine are being sent over there, or even being spent today. Rather it is the value of supplies that have already been manufactured and were sitting around. But rather than sitting on a huge military stockpile and considering the problem solved, we're better off rotating through stock and making sure that manufacturing supply chains still work. (I hate this reason because it was also a justification for Iraq, Afghanistan, and other assorted military actions. But it's true) And lastly, solving domestic problems at home is not due to a lack of funds/resources, but rather a lack of political will because entrenched interests benefit from the status quo, and shamelessly buy politicians to maintain it. [0] of course many times those giving consent are elites of a society, at the expense of the rest of the citizens. But that is still progress from "surprise, there's a foreign army marching through your streets!"

willcipriano 3y ago

I agree with all your points. I don't see how it is a problem for a US citizen. Russia isn't a serious threat to the US, nor are they even really much of a threat to Europe if military spending is any indication. If funds were unlimited, sure but right now we have other problems and can't afford it.

mindslight 3y ago
Whether it is in our national interest to materially support Ukraine is a different question than whether doing so puts us on the right side. I would say the answer to that is also yes. The US is essentially the leader of a nominally consentual economic federation [0], which is what allows USD to remain the world reserve currency while creating more of it. If the US does not support a country that is trying to economically integrate with us, it's a strong data point that perhaps developing a relationship with the US isn't so valuable. This would facilitate the diminishing of US dominance that China is salivating over. Furthermore, it's not like the big dollar amounts for Ukraine are being sent over there, or even being spent today. Rather it is the value of supplies that have already been manufactured and were sitting around. But rather than sitting on a huge military stockpile and considering the problem solved, we're better off rotating through stock and making sure that manufacturing supply chains still work. (I hate this reason because it was also a justification for Iraq, Afghanistan, and other assorted military actions. But it's true) And lastly, solving domestic problems at home is not due to a lack of funds/resources, but rather a lack of political will because entrenched interests benefit from the status quo, and shamelessly buy politicians to maintain it. [0] of course many times those giving consent are elites of a society, at the expense of the rest of the citizens. But that is still progress from "surprise, there's a foreign army marching through your streets!"