3 ms·

Past is truly cyclic, probably because human nature doesn't change much, so similar situations lead to similar outcomes. There is another parallel example - Mu

by jajko 2y ago

Past is truly cyclic, probably because human nature doesn't change much, so similar situations lead to similar outcomes. There is another parallel example - Munich 1938 agreement to appease Hitler, with current 'negotiations' and push at all cost to stop russian aggression on Ukraine and appease puttin' (which doesn't care about war that much, he has his own goals which look like russian borders everywhere where Ukrainian currently are). To appease aggressor to avoid bigger war which was anyway inevitable. There is this famous saying "We had the choice between war or shame, we have chosen shame, and we will get war too".

rg10h 2y ago
This example has been used by U.S. politicians since WW2 against anyone they deemed a dictator. Followed by "bringing democracy" to the dictator's country, often followed by retreating after a failed war. Finland "appeased" Stalin by giving up Karelia and wasn't invaded even though it was no NATO member until 2022. Greece "appeased" Turkey by giving up parts of Cyprus. Ireland "appeased" the UK by giving up Northern Ireland. No serious historian buys the domino theory (countries being invaded one after another) with respect to Ukraine. Even Stephen Kotkin, a Ukraine war hawk, has complained about the Munich analogy.
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
  > Ireland "appeased" the UK by giving up Northern Ireland. This is a gross mischaracterization. NI was created as part of the partitioning of Ireland (1920), carried out at a time when the UK government in Westminster also controlled all of the island. In 1922, Ireland became an independent country, and at no time after that was it at war with the UK. There was a violent resistance to UK rule in Ireland (particularly leading up to 1921) but there was no recognized national actor negotiating with the UK. The eventual outcome could be seen as a victory for Sinn Fein, but this was not a pair of national actors at war and reaching an agreement to stop fighting. It was more a resistance movement which eventually won some of what it wanted (an independent Ireland) but not all (Ireland did not cover the entire island).
- yks 2y ago
  I am not sure what "serious" historians you self-select, but have you heard Russians at all? They want Europe, it's their sphere of influence. На Берлин!

by jajko 2y ago

rg10h 2y ago

This example has been used by U.S. politicians since WW2 against anyone they deemed a dictator. Followed by "bringing democracy" to the dictator's country, often followed by retreating after a failed war. Finland "appeased" Stalin by giving up Karelia and wasn't invaded even though it was no NATO member until 2022. Greece "appeased" Turkey by giving up parts of Cyprus. Ireland "appeased" the UK by giving up Northern Ireland. No serious historian buys the domino theory (countries being invaded one after another) with respect to Ukraine. Even Stephen Kotkin, a Ukraine war hawk, has complained about the Munich analogy.

PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
> Ireland "appeased" the UK by giving up Northern Ireland. This is a gross mischaracterization. NI was created as part of the partitioning of Ireland (1920), carried out at a time when the UK government in Westminster also controlled all of the island. In 1922, Ireland became an independent country, and at no time after that was it at war with the UK. There was a violent resistance to UK rule in Ireland (particularly leading up to 1921) but there was no recognized national actor negotiating with the UK. The eventual outcome could be seen as a victory for Sinn Fein, but this was not a pair of national actors at war and reaching an agreement to stop fighting. It was more a resistance movement which eventually won some of what it wanted (an independent Ireland) but not all (Ireland did not cover the entire island).
yks 2y ago
I am not sure what "serious" historians you self-select, but have you heard Russians at all? They want Europe, it's their sphere of influence. На Берлин!