this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2025
-20 points (8.3% liked)

Endless War

90 readers
67 users here now

Community critical of US Empire's thirst for endless war, its military and oil oligarchies and colonization of allies.

founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Thus, when Russia did invade, U.S. and European officials and the U.S. mainstream press cried, “Aggression! Aggression!” And they were right from a legal standpoint. Russia had no legal right to invade Ukraine, and Ukraine had the legal right to join NATO.

And that's where the debate should end.

Laws exist explicitly in order to clarify situations, because without laws, things fall into a hopeless mire of subjectivity and all too often end up being settled through a competition to see who's the most convincing liar or the most viscious thug, neither one of which is a quality that should be rewarded.

Ukraine has every right to join NATO and Russia has no right to invade Ukraine. The end.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Everyone has right to point nuclear missiles at the US in Cuba and Canada, then. If there are assholes, there will be countries threatened by assholes and forced to react.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Ah, yes, the old WMD excuse for economical gain USA used often.

Weird how this "fear of nukes" did not lead to the invasion of Finland when you were attacking Georgia and Ukraine. After sanctions, embargos, and other CIA-like activities, Russia did to them for years.

I find it disingenuous that you justify those actions as ok, just because USA did the same abhorrent things.

Before the "react" you write fervidly about, NATO was mostly done for, Finland and Sweden were happy and neutral. Germany was averse to military spending. Only the USA was dragging its allies to endless wars and forcing them to spend more. With the invasions, the list of applicants increased, and all the countries are happy using more of the GDP for warfare.

Maybe the deals done in closed doors are too complex for me to grasp their benefits, but none of them justify the killing of innocents.

For an anti-war community, you seem to promote war constantly. You have been defending the USA actions lately, you might want to update the description on that too.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I find it disingenuous that you justify those actions as ok, just because USA did the same abhorrent things.

Not clear on what you mean. If you are suggesting that all foreign influence is evil, US influence is seperate for being demonic puppetry of targets in order to diminish Russia and China, or permit corrupt privatization and US military base funding. That Russia offers trade or narratives that discouraged Ukraine and Georgia from being a suicidal US puppet has no evil to it.

With the invasions, the list of applicants increased, and all the countries are happy using more of the GDP for warfare.

That "happiness" is worrisome and irrational. Democracy is supporting "good pro nato nazis" while appoplectic over "bad anti nato nazis". The derangement of democracy, and pro war left/center is somehow a reactionary "win over the rational" like conservatives hurt themselves by supporting "wins over liberals".

Stoltenberg was very proud of the achievement you listed, including how it was used to provoke war on Russia, and ignore their requested path for security guarantees.

you seem to promote war constantly. You have been defending the USA actions lately, you might want to update the description on that too.

I deny this, but examples?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

disingenuous

Lol, you want to debate, but you had to invent arguments and assign them to me. This is ridiculous and you are very dishonest.

My text has several points, none of them you addressed and just insisted on spilling around your warmongering.

Even when we seem to agree that gov spending should be focused on something else than warfare - I find ironic your conclusions, "Russia started a war, and it was used to provoke war on Russia".

I deny this, but examples?

You know which ones, do not play coy

I feel like you don't really care what people write, you just use whatever to defend war, either that or your LLM/Call center script is broken.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

As mentioned, I did not understand your point, and went through possible interpretations.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Oh yes, it is very difficult to ask someone to explain something. It is easier to go from "it is wrong to justify an invasion by fear of nukes" to "all foreign influence is evil".

I re-read my text a few times, and I could not find anywhere saying that helping a nation build a dam, help with infrastructure or logistics projects, create economic blocs or easing bureaucracy for transit as being evil. Nice gymnastics over there to spill your warmongering propaganda.