3 ms·

As if neither Trump nor Putin has reneged on a deal before. For fucks sake, who gives a shit about what Russia thinks? They suppress democracy and political o

As if neither Trump nor Putin has reneged on a deal before. For fucks sake, who gives a shit about what Russia thinks? They suppress democracy and political opposition. They poison journalists outside of Russia. They jail and kill public interest figures. They kidnap and jail Americans on false pretexts.

CapricornNoble 2y ago
[flagged]
- jquery 2y ago
  False equivalency, comparing the aggressor Russia with a country that's in a literal fight for its survival. Straight up Kremlin talking points. Not food for thought.
  - koolba 2y ago
    > comparing the aggressor Russia with a country that's in a literal fight for its survival. Straight up Kremlin talking points. Not food for thought. I'm sure Russia feels the same when considering the prospect of a neighbor joining an nuclear armed international alliance constructed specifically to oppose it's power and existence. My goto analogy for this is the hypothetical of Mexico joining the USSR. Sure it sounds far fetched, but how do you think the USA would react to that type of situation?
    - drawkward 2y ago
      Your goto analogy sucks. The USA is not trying to occupy Mexico. NATO is a defense pact.
      - koolba 2y ago
        I think you need to lookup the definition of the word hypothetical. The point of the exercise is to imagine a scenario where the players are reversed to imagine how they would react.
        drawkward 2y ago
        My quibble is not the hypothetical, it is your implicit claim that the situations are similar. Thats what an analogy is. The mere fact of your defending Russian invasion of Ukraine is enough to completely discredit your opinion on the matter.
      - CapricornNoble 2y ago
        >NATO is a defense pact. Oh lordy. I only ever hear this on the internet and I always find it bizarre. Who is telling people this? University professors? Where and in what subjects? Prime time news programs? Again, in what countries? I've been in the military for 20 years and I've never heard an NCO or officer utter these words. Because it's nonsense. Defense pacts don't conduct totally-offensive air campaigns against countries that none of their members are at war with.[1] There is no formal legal mechanism for NATO as an organization to act as an enforcement arm for UN Resolutions, by the way. If there was, NATO probably should have been bombing Israel since UN Resolution 497 in 1981. [1] https://www.nato.int/cps/ic/natohq/topics_71652.htm https://www.nato.int/cps/ic/natohq/topics_71652.htm
- drawkward 2y ago
  First off, youre misquoting me. Thats just despicable. Second, you have shown us three examples of Ukraine fending off Russian aggression. I dont know why you are advancing Russian propaganda, but the fact that you are provides moe than enough justification to completely ignore your claims.
  - CapricornNoble 2y ago
    > First off, youre misquoting me. Thats just despicable. The purpose is to demonstrate that the complaints have no morally universal application. Despicable actions by Ukraine are given a carte blanche. I find it bizarre that people hold it up as some sort of beacon of liberal democracy. >Second, you have shown us three examples of Ukraine fending off Russian aggression. So the ends justify the means? Anyone who feels they are "fending off aggression" can kill civilians with carbombs and fatally abuse American citizens in their prisons? That's your position? >I dont know why you are advancing Russian propaganda Are you saying that NPR and the Helsinki Times are Russian propaganda outlets? That strikes me as completely irrational, but nevertheless a very common viewpoint among European warhawks. It's no surprise that Europe wasn't invited to the peace talks in Saudi Arabia.

CapricornNoble 2y ago

[flagged]

jquery 2y ago
False equivalency, comparing the aggressor Russia with a country that's in a literal fight for its survival. Straight up Kremlin talking points. Not food for thought.
- koolba 2y ago
  > comparing the aggressor Russia with a country that's in a literal fight for its survival. Straight up Kremlin talking points. Not food for thought. I'm sure Russia feels the same when considering the prospect of a neighbor joining an nuclear armed international alliance constructed specifically to oppose it's power and existence. My goto analogy for this is the hypothetical of Mexico joining the USSR. Sure it sounds far fetched, but how do you think the USA would react to that type of situation?
  - drawkward 2y ago
    Your goto analogy sucks. The USA is not trying to occupy Mexico. NATO is a defense pact.
    - koolba 2y ago
      I think you need to lookup the definition of the word hypothetical. The point of the exercise is to imagine a scenario where the players are reversed to imagine how they would react.
      - drawkward 2y ago
        My quibble is not the hypothetical, it is your implicit claim that the situations are similar. Thats what an analogy is. The mere fact of your defending Russian invasion of Ukraine is enough to completely discredit your opinion on the matter.
    - CapricornNoble 2y ago
      >NATO is a defense pact. Oh lordy. I only ever hear this on the internet and I always find it bizarre. Who is telling people this? University professors? Where and in what subjects? Prime time news programs? Again, in what countries? I've been in the military for 20 years and I've never heard an NCO or officer utter these words. Because it's nonsense. Defense pacts don't conduct totally-offensive air campaigns against countries that none of their members are at war with.[1] There is no formal legal mechanism for NATO as an organization to act as an enforcement arm for UN Resolutions, by the way. If there was, NATO probably should have been bombing Israel since UN Resolution 497 in 1981. [1] https://www.nato.int/cps/ic/natohq/topics_71652.htm https://www.nato.int/cps/ic/natohq/topics_71652.htm
drawkward 2y ago
First off, youre misquoting me. Thats just despicable. Second, you have shown us three examples of Ukraine fending off Russian aggression. I dont know why you are advancing Russian propaganda, but the fact that you are provides moe than enough justification to completely ignore your claims.
- CapricornNoble 2y ago
  > First off, youre misquoting me. Thats just despicable. The purpose is to demonstrate that the complaints have no morally universal application. Despicable actions by Ukraine are given a carte blanche. I find it bizarre that people hold it up as some sort of beacon of liberal democracy. >Second, you have shown us three examples of Ukraine fending off Russian aggression. So the ends justify the means? Anyone who feels they are "fending off aggression" can kill civilians with carbombs and fatally abuse American citizens in their prisons? That's your position? >I dont know why you are advancing Russian propaganda Are you saying that NPR and the Helsinki Times are Russian propaganda outlets? That strikes me as completely irrational, but nevertheless a very common viewpoint among European warhawks. It's no surprise that Europe wasn't invited to the peace talks in Saudi Arabia.