Why do you ask?
Do you believe invading militaries should not be opposed?
Or do you see the Russian military as the good guy here?
Do you believe invading militaries should not be opposed?
Or do you see the Russian military as the good guy here?
And here people make it look like a weekend outing with some pals - hey, you should have called Jack out because he unnecessarily yelled at me! Yeah!
And because there’s clear difference of outrage when brown, yellow, black lives are bombed into oblivion, burnt into tar, whisked away into nothingness from sovereign territories without any accountability and repercussions compared to when the war is right inside Europe. Yeah, that’s real. But you all can’t see that. Why? Because it has been given a catchy name “Global War on Terror”? By the way, this is not a thing of past. It is still going on. Full throttle.
Others see that. Have been seeing for decades. Have seen the f..ing cold war and its farce as well.
So why GP asks? That’s why GP asks that’s everybody is bad here and calling Russia out bad will mean calling others’ actions/deeds good while possibly shooting themselves in the foot.
> Do you believe invading militaries should not be opposed?
Yes, should be. “Every” invading army should be. Every! Colonial powers should pay. Aggressors should atone, reimburse. In an ideal utopia inhabited only by pure flower children and silver snowflakes all this would happen maybe.
Not your or someone’s selective outrage!
Bit does it happen? No.
In the real world that doesn’t happen, it hasn’t happened, and hence many countries and entities are “not stupid enough” to catch a flying arrow in someone else’s yard in their own hinds. However heinous or a bad bully that archer is. Because as I said that’s the better of two bad options for many.
of course. and OP answered with the same answer.
please stop strawmanning, the joke is on you for not accepting the evidence. try to open your eyes to the murderous hypocrisy and deep-rooted racism of Global North/Western imperialism.
https://jacobinmag.com/2020/06/jakarta-method-vincent-bevins...
Similarly, everybody hates imperialism, and Putin's war is still wrong. It doesn't change what actions we must take to stop Putin.
If they are doing something bad, should they avoid punishment?
So, which categories can we apply? In the end, much like standard crime, there can be only one: Are they following the standards set by international law, or are they not? And that we cannot honestly answer as of now. Consider these basic questions:
1. Is the Russian military responsible for the decision to wage what we in the west consider a "war of aggression" against Ukraine? To parse that question lightly more pointed: Has every member of the Russian forces currently engaged in the Ukraine theatre signed off the decision to invade?
2. Is the Russian military collectively responsible for any action the Russian military and/or the Russian political leadership takes?
3. Can we be certain that all the information we get is truthful, especially when it comes to information that would suggest Russian military war crimes?
4. Which amount of civilian casualties is "acceptable" before it becomes a punishable war crime? When "we" kill civilians, "we" call it "collateral damage". At which point does collateral damage become a war crime?
5. Is the Ukraine war illegitimate? When considering this question, please take into account that we may have several gaps in our understanding of the situation, and that we tend to wave away Russian sources as "enemy propaganda".
If they are breaking international law, the decision makers in the Russian political leadership and military should be judged and potentially punished by an international court of law. Unfortunately, that only works as long as they are a member of that court (or are thoroughly defeated), and Russia isn't - much like the US - (and is unlikely to be defeated).
you would tell the Americans to continue the bombing in Yemen?
Because of people like you, with moral relativism.
And truly the Nazis basically won WW2 given Operation Paperclip and all the massacres the US oversaw afterwards in Vietnam, Iraq, Afganistan, Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, etc.
Sure we might not speaking German or wearing swastikas, but the American Eagle is currently financing genocide (let's use Yemen as the example here) and the only media attention we can seem to get is for Ukraine because their aggressor is our geopolitical enemy
I'm all for the sanctions against Russia before someone accuses me of whataboutism. However, I would like to see stronger international standards, as well as an ICC joined by the US. That requires the US to allow for international oversight and not have a Hague invasion clause. Are Americans willing to be held to the same standard as their enemies? If not just say might makes right and remove this pretense that it's about war crimes or human rights
Do you think the Ukrainians feel differently?
What a disgusting point of view.
"I don't like those countries and they're angry with me".
I guess that puts any invasion as justifiable.
Try that in US, what will happen? Nothing.
Russia (and China) are big countries and dangerous ones because ruled not by the rule of law but by a will of rulers and oligarchs. And now we have opportunity to stop at least one of them.
have you been to the US and/or UK? what do you make of the capitalist owned and capitalist controlled media?
> Russia (and China) are big countries and dangerous ones because ruled not by the rule of law but by a will of rulers and oligarchs.
ah cool, so they don't have weird things like FISA courts and a huge national security apparatus (sort of like this CIA thing), and army, which together coups countries and assassinates leaders? [1]
> And now we have opportunity to stop at least one of them.
who is this 'we' you speak of? [2]
[1] https://jacobinmag.com/2020/11/washington-bullets-cia-coups-...
You may be surprised to learn how irrelevant the corporate media is now, very low viewership counts, and a flourishing alternative media ecosystem, where everyone can believe what they want.
This diversity of information sources has its echo-chamber downside, but no one is being imprisoned because of their views like in Russia or China.
there's also this Youtuber who got a 'home visit' from the US govt. for 'anti-American sentiments' on his channel: https://www.reddit.com/r/BreadTube/comments/k2wt7j/youtube_a...
alienation growing everywhere (parallel with increasing inquality) means capitalist realism is everywhere, so yeah, maybe the censorship and encroachment on free speech is less visible, but that's also because our imagination has been shot meaning we can't easily imagine and write about/describe alternatives. remember Thatcher's "there is no alternative" (TINA), Fukuyama's 'end of history', etc.? many in the working class now struggle to see our chains.
Change it - to try that “about US” and “be in” Yemen, Pakistan, Egypt, etc. Then see what happens to the individual! Guess?
Even this comment of yours reeks of hypocrisy. You are totally focused on “what happens to people in the US” and as long as that’s fine all is hunky dory.
In your comment you’ve totally not even touched upon what “USA has been doing outside USA - to other countries - usually the developing and underdeveloped countries”. Because that is “well.. you know… you know..”.
> by the rule of law
Which fucking law? Whose rule? Whose rule of law?
Entire fucking colonialism was a “legal endeavour”, in fact essentially a “civilising” the “natives” expedition that the kind white world took upon itself with great pains to do in the name of God and the King. Is that kind of rule of law you’re talking about? Because that kind of thinking never went anywhere during nid 1900s. It’s right there.
Well, then I guess Russia also decided to sell Ukraine some “freedom”. Oh, that sounds horrible? But why so?
The US is unlikely to invade Poland in order to displace the polish people with Americans. To some degree a war over oil resources feel much less threatening to countries than a war for lebensraum, especially for countries which don't have a lot of oil resources. Every nation however has land, and thus every nation is a target when a country like Russia is after territory. This is a big reason why a lot of countries around Russia is currently increasing their military budgets, loosing more money on that then any losses to the economy from not buying conflict resources from Russia. If you are pumping your money into the military, it makes economical sense to not fund the military threat you are defending against.