foverzar

42 ms·

451.
by foverzar 4y ago
> NATO operated in Libya to implement a security council resolution, meaning it had at least the tacit approval of China and Russia as well. The criticism towards NATO in Lybia mostly boils down to NATO overstepping and going out of scop
452.
by foverzar 4y ago
> This is utter nonsense It simply doesn't correlate with your worldview, that is why you are being all dismissive. > Unlike Russia, NATO isn't invading members in order to force them to join. Note the "in order to forc
453.
by foverzar 4y ago
> There's a good chance Based on what exactly? Like, how do you imagine a successor would appear while the US devastates Russian army and how would they "have less face to lose" when their military is devastated? It is unl
454.
by foverzar 4y ago
> The US has the capability to devastate the Russian army and strategic Russian targets without the use of nukes or other WMD's And what happens next? It's not like there is some kind of enforced rule that WMDs aren't to b
455.
by foverzar 4y ago
> It is a tactic of bullies to reframe "defense" as "aggression" Of course, that is why the most common pro-NATO shilling narrative is that it is merely "defensive". NATO is just another military organizatio
456.
by foverzar 4y ago
So, this basically serves no real purpose, other than keeping appearances and sending proper signals to bored strangers on the internet, affecting nothing at all.
457.
by foverzar 4y ago
Why people pay so much more for a car with similar functionality as an another car? The price isn't really such a problem if you don't indocrtinate yourself into buying a new one each year. But this shouldn't be applicaple to
458.
by foverzar 4y ago
> Well they always do it "to defend human rights" Which is always a bullshit excuse to soothe the masses. > but suddenly that doesn't matter in India. Pffff, when had it really mattered to a culture, whose propaganda ha
459.
by foverzar 4y ago
One definitely doesn't even have to be an expert in rhetorics to identify your weak manipulations. 2 of like 100 missiles that might have just as well been shot down by the AA system (which, surprise, also shoot missiles, that might hi
460.
by foverzar 4y ago
> And whats is the Western response Why should west meddle in the affairs of a foreign country?
461.
by foverzar 4y ago
People call it a "revolution" though, don't they? Is there really a substantial semantical difference, or is it purely a rhetorical way of using nicer words?
462.
by foverzar 4y ago
What part of it did you identify as a personal attack? Calling out the US-centered infobubble perception is not a personal attack, just a reminder your perspective might not be a universal one.
463.
by foverzar 4y ago
> But for the sake of making this easy I’ll also quote it. Uh-uh, you forgot to quote the most important part where the specific meaning of these points are explained. I.e.: > Importantly, the victims of genocide are deliberately targ
464.
by foverzar 4y ago
Right? It's getting worse and worse with each update. I remember praising mac os memory management back in the days when you could just go to "Applications" folder and open everything at once without a hiccup. Today, even reb
465.
by foverzar 4y ago
"New"? What's so new about what seems to be like a common Automatic block signaling? I thought that this was a commonly used thing. Hence a small current on the rails (you can even tap into it and charge your phone).
466.
by foverzar 4y ago
Firstly I'd suggest you stop using big words you don't fully understand if you want to have a meaningful discourse. Otherwise it just feels like you are using random words with negative connotations just to sound impressive. Spoil
467.
by foverzar 4y ago
You've thrown out a wall of incoherent ideological nonsense, implying that supposed vacation preferences of Russians is somehow a counterpoint to the criticism and objective examples of failures of western foreign politics. With all yo
468.
by foverzar 4y ago
It's only that clear and blatant, when you cozily watch it on TV. A nice captivating narrative with clear morals, "good", "bad" and all the other storybook stuff that literally never happens in real life. I'm s
469.
by foverzar 4y ago
I am implying that countries with capable military that present themselves as "democratic" don't seem to fare substantially better in this matter. In fact, the things that are considered ok for them to do are some of the wors
470.
by foverzar 4y ago
Sorry, you've lost me at me your assumptions on how Russians tend to spend their vacations. I don't see how that it is related to war-game and security.
471.
by foverzar 4y ago
Ok, sorry I asked, should have expected such an ideologically exultant answer.
472.
by foverzar 4y ago
> We froze borders, expect by force where people were genocidal, or by diplomacy everywhere else, after world war two. Who are "we"? How did you "froze" border, what does that even mean? After the WWII the borders in
473.
by foverzar 4y ago
Population? What? Since when do nukes target "population" and since when is it a success metrics of a nuclear strike? Nukes target industrial and economic centers. Both NATO and Russia have enough nukes for at least 1% to bypass m
474.
by foverzar 4y ago
Why do you imply that it is a some discrete "just for lulz" action, rather than a continued mutual process?
475.
by foverzar 4y ago
It's a bit too late for that, there is already a precedent set. > Because of this the best and most stabilising thing that can happen if Russia uses a nuke is a devastating and overwhelming response that shows the world what happens
476.
by foverzar 4y ago
Awww, it's so cute when western folk think that they behave politically flexible and benevolent. Wake up, you people bring up this rhetoric on each collision with someone "inferior". South America, Africa, Central and Eastern
477.
by foverzar 4y ago
> If you live in a democracy, reach your politicians, bring the issue on the international level So, has that ever worked? The US for example still has a law to invade Netherlands if even one of its military criminals is caught and broug
478.
by foverzar 4y ago
Each of these conflicts had American Military Industrial Complex money involved. The Georgian one is especially curious in view of WikiLeaks evidence.
479.
by foverzar 4y ago
> Ticking a checkbox on a ballot with armed soldiers behind your back is not voting. > Any referendum carried out by an occupying force and followed by an annexation is against international law, specifically Article 47 of the Fourth
480.
by foverzar 4y ago
> They are master manipulators. Eheheh, eah, sure "master manipulators" without a shred of marketing talent.

More ›