4 ms·

The people we drop bombs on are citizens of somewhere too.

tourmalinetaco 2y ago
But listen, we have to defend democracy! (Despite being a federal republic.) We have to fund international interests! (Despite having various national problems.)
- FredPret 2y ago
  If everyone in America thought that, most of us humans would be dead and the remnants of our species would speak German, Japanese, or Russian only
  - tourmalinetaco 2y ago
    I strongly urge you to attend a history class, because only part of that is comparable to funding international wars for no gain or defensive reason. If the America of 1943 had the choice between its people or Ukraine, it would choose its people. Because that’s literally what we did while England and Poland was being bombed by the Nazis. It wasn’t until the Japanese made us get involved that we did anything. The closer example to now is indeed the cold war, but a lot of the “war on communism” was not only incredibly disruptive to smaller countries, and its efficacy over the long term was questionable, especially considering the USSR died out naturally.
    - Ancapistani 2y ago
      > It wasn’t until the Japanese made us get involved that we did anything. Lend-Lease began in 1941 - so we were exporting war materiel and technology years before we got directly involved in WW2.
    - throwpoaster 2y ago
      > especially considering the USSR died out naturally. What does this mean? You seem to say the war on communism did nothing because we won it anyway? How can you tell?
    - onepointsixC 2y ago
      You need new teachers then. The US was deeply involved long before Pearl Harbor, even if it didn’t have boots on the ground. The Soviets didn’t die out naturally, but due to the fierce competition with the US which they could not sustain that bankrupted them. North Korea never tried to compete in such a way which is why it continues to exist as a hermit Stalinist cult.
    - FredPret 2y ago
      It’s not nice or effective to imply I don’t know my history because I came to a conclusion you disagree with. For all you know I’m an absolute history nut. It’s better to ask for my reasoning and explain your own opposing point of view.
atlasunshrugged 2y ago
Like the Russians who are invading Ukraine? I mean yes, everyone is a citizen of somewhere, that's how we've structured global society but I'm not sure what your point is.
- ignoramous 2y ago
  > Like the Russians who are invading Ukraine The insinuation here is that even the civilians are invaders? OP is talking about what's brushed aside as collateral damage, especially easily when things go south overseas.
  - onepointsixC 2y ago
    Russian soldiers are typically citizens of Russia.
    - atlasunshrugged 2y ago
      Yes, although unfortunately sometimes they are soldiers of fortune from around the world lured through false promises to serve. https://www.dw.com/en/how-russia-is-recruiting-foreigners-to-fight-in-ukraine/a-70019040 https://www.dw.com/en/how-russia-is-recruiting-foreigners-to...
      - dralley 2y ago
        That's not the problem of the nation they participate in invading.
  - atlasunshrugged 2y ago
    OP said > The people we drop bombs on are citizens of somewhere too. Nowhere in that sentence did I see an insinuation that we were talking about civilians (and I was specifically talking about Russian soldiers). But when we discuss collateral damage, yes that happens sometimes and its awful. However, take how much collateral damage Ukraine causes in Russia when fighting back and how much Russia causes in terms of civilian lives, infrastructure, etc. and it feels pretty clear to me that democratic nations are probably net better at minimizing collateral damage (and generally following international norms and treaties for human rights) than authoritarian regimes.

But listen, we have to defend democracy! (Despite being a federal republic.) We have to fund international interests! (Despite having various national problems.)

FredPret 2y ago
If everyone in America thought that, most of us humans would be dead and the remnants of our species would speak German, Japanese, or Russian only
- tourmalinetaco 2y ago
  I strongly urge you to attend a history class, because only part of that is comparable to funding international wars for no gain or defensive reason. If the America of 1943 had the choice between its people or Ukraine, it would choose its people. Because that’s literally what we did while England and Poland was being bombed by the Nazis. It wasn’t until the Japanese made us get involved that we did anything. The closer example to now is indeed the cold war, but a lot of the “war on communism” was not only incredibly disruptive to smaller countries, and its efficacy over the long term was questionable, especially considering the USSR died out naturally.
  - Ancapistani 2y ago
    > It wasn’t until the Japanese made us get involved that we did anything. Lend-Lease began in 1941 - so we were exporting war materiel and technology years before we got directly involved in WW2.
  - throwpoaster 2y ago
    > especially considering the USSR died out naturally. What does this mean? You seem to say the war on communism did nothing because we won it anyway? How can you tell?
  - onepointsixC 2y ago
    You need new teachers then. The US was deeply involved long before Pearl Harbor, even if it didn’t have boots on the ground. The Soviets didn’t die out naturally, but due to the fierce competition with the US which they could not sustain that bankrupted them. North Korea never tried to compete in such a way which is why it continues to exist as a hermit Stalinist cult.
  - FredPret 2y ago
    It’s not nice or effective to imply I don’t know my history because I came to a conclusion you disagree with. For all you know I’m an absolute history nut. It’s better to ask for my reasoning and explain your own opposing point of view.

atlasunshrugged 2y ago

Like the Russians who are invading Ukraine? I mean yes, everyone is a citizen of somewhere, that's how we've structured global society but I'm not sure what your point is.

ignoramous 2y ago
> Like the Russians who are invading Ukraine The insinuation here is that even the civilians are invaders? OP is talking about what's brushed aside as collateral damage, especially easily when things go south overseas.
- onepointsixC 2y ago
  Russian soldiers are typically citizens of Russia.
  - atlasunshrugged 2y ago
    Yes, although unfortunately sometimes they are soldiers of fortune from around the world lured through false promises to serve. https://www.dw.com/en/how-russia-is-recruiting-foreigners-to-fight-in-ukraine/a-70019040 https://www.dw.com/en/how-russia-is-recruiting-foreigners-to...
    - dralley 2y ago
      That's not the problem of the nation they participate in invading.
- atlasunshrugged 2y ago
  OP said > The people we drop bombs on are citizens of somewhere too. Nowhere in that sentence did I see an insinuation that we were talking about civilians (and I was specifically talking about Russian soldiers). But when we discuss collateral damage, yes that happens sometimes and its awful. However, take how much collateral damage Ukraine causes in Russia when fighting back and how much Russia causes in terms of civilian lives, infrastructure, etc. and it feels pretty clear to me that democratic nations are probably net better at minimizing collateral damage (and generally following international norms and treaties for human rights) than authoritarian regimes.