this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

World News

2310 readers
10 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

World war is never preferable. The human losses in these conflicts are minuscule compared to an all out world war with the current weaponry, a world war in this era will be the most bloody event hitherto.

[โ€“] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago

I disagree; world war is preferable to turning the other cheek (overly much, anyways), and this will increasingly become the case when and as things become more dire, and the west more deranged.

World war was preferable to accepting Japanese or Nazi suzerainty for the Soviets and China; it is certainly preferable for over 1 million Gazans starving to death as we speak- and now, with the west escalating yet again, no doubt it is becoming closer and closer to a reality in Russia, and in due time when and as they turn their attention east, China. The nuclear deterrent only works for so long as both sides are willing to use it- and I think, as socialists, but also simply as humans, we must never abandon the option entirely, not so long as it exists for the other side.

I agree with China and Russia's present approach of cautious engagement- time is on their side, on humanity's side. But when and as things ramp up- and it seems increasingly likely that they will, and it will almost certainly be western aggression as always that causes it to- eventually, there will come a point it crosses a line, where an equal or greater strike will be preferable, where outright war- even world war- will be preferable. And IMO it would be an abandonment of everything- every value, hope, and dream of the people, and the very essence of self-preservation and dignity, etc- to not strike with full and equal force should things come to that point.