No invasion is never good, not from IS not from russia not from china not from Israel not from germany and not from korea (both sides) as examples
I don’t really pick general sides, but with an invasion, for me, it is clear that the invading party is generally the bad guy
There was nearly no loss nor gains of Landmasses within Ukrine for over a year now, but since Ukrine got their fighter jets, they took some Russia land, apparently.
To try predict the future, I think Ukraine’s Plan to get more and more of Russia land in order to trade all lands back as they were before war, may work, given the NATO (especially US) keeps on giving the weapons and ammunition to Ukraine.
Ahh yes, history always begins on the day of the invasion. The western allies were wrong to invade France on D-Day as being the invader is always bad. There is never any preceding events that may give light to the motives of the attacker. For good or for bad. Libs ‘consider world events not just on in the moment vibes’ challenge: impossible.
There being no losses or gains in Ukraine is because Russia has changed its tactics, they’re now grinding it out until Ukraine collapses totally due to lack of material and manpower, not going for territorial gains. Despite this they’re still making strategically important gains in Ukraine. You know Russia has reclaimed a quarter of that land in Kursk back already don’t you? Also that it is a tiny region of land they claimed in the first place, 300 down from 400 square miles. Your vision of the future where Ukraine takes huge swaths of Russia and trades for occupied Ukrainian lands is never going to happen.
Ok so you do accept that history can provide legitimate motives for an event?
Ukraine did not invade Russia
Cmon you’re almost there, one nations invasion isn’t the only thing that could justify another nations invasion. Other acts of violence across the border of another nation could be legitimate grounds for an invasion too.
And to the second part, so to your logic, every country that is weaker than a neighbour should just let them in taking all the land?!
Again, I literally did not say that, that’s your logic not mine. I don’t believe in nations full stop. It’s a very dumb concept that seeks to divide and control. I believe all nations should be dissolved and we should all live in stateless queer communist paradise.
But…
How I think the world should be is irrelevant. What I believe other countries should and shouldn’t do is irrelevant. This is idealism. Idealism is nonsense.
The only thing that matters is the material reality of a situation. The material reality is nations exist. Nations use violence to further their interests. Some nations are stronger than others. Some nations band together in defensive pacts to prevent aggression from larger neighbours. Some strong nations band together in pacts to assert their will and control over weaker nations and dole out violence with impunity. Whether anyone should or shouldn’t do these things is neither here nor there, the simple fact of the matter is that they do engage in these actions, therefore what matters is how you react to the current situation. And the material reality of the Ukraine war, as it is right now, is that Ukraine will lose and Russia will win. So what is your desired course of action given the existing material reality?
Second, as long as you stay within your boards at being a dick, I can accept it and think that it no justification for invasion.
It is not my logic either ✌🏻 I just wanted to be sure that I understood correctly. Turns out, seems like not.
As last point, I think supporting Ukraine is a good thing, since I don’t want the signal present that you can just invade your little neighbour without worldwide consequences. No matter the outcome.
I would wish same would happen to Isreal, which is invading 3(?) countries right now…
No invasion is never good, not from IS not from russia not from china not from Israel not from germany and not from korea (both sides) as examples
I don’t really pick general sides, but with an invasion, for me, it is clear that the invading party is generally the bad guy
There was nearly no loss nor gains of Landmasses within Ukrine for over a year now, but since Ukrine got their fighter jets, they took some Russia land, apparently.
To try predict the future, I think Ukraine’s Plan to get more and more of Russia land in order to trade all lands back as they were before war, may work, given the NATO (especially US) keeps on giving the weapons and ammunition to Ukraine.
Ahh yes, history always begins on the day of the invasion. The western allies were wrong to invade France on D-Day as being the invader is always bad. There is never any preceding events that may give light to the motives of the attacker. For good or for bad. Libs ‘consider world events not just on in the moment vibes’ challenge: impossible.
There being no losses or gains in Ukraine is because Russia has changed its tactics, they’re now grinding it out until Ukraine collapses totally due to lack of material and manpower, not going for territorial gains. Despite this they’re still making strategically important gains in Ukraine. You know Russia has reclaimed a quarter of that land in Kursk back already don’t you? Also that it is a tiny region of land they claimed in the first place, 300 down from 400 square miles. Your vision of the future where Ukraine takes huge swaths of Russia and trades for occupied Ukrainian lands is never going to happen.
A invasion in answer of a recent invasion to reclaim the land back is nit making you the bad guy.
Ukraine did not invade Russia.
And to the second part, so to your logic, every country that is weaker than a neighbour should just let them in taking all the land?!
Ok so you do accept that history can provide legitimate motives for an event?
Cmon you’re almost there, one nations invasion isn’t the only thing that could justify another nations invasion. Other acts of violence across the border of another nation could be legitimate grounds for an invasion too.
Again, I literally did not say that, that’s your logic not mine. I don’t believe in nations full stop. It’s a very dumb concept that seeks to divide and control. I believe all nations should be dissolved and we should all live in stateless queer communist paradise.
But…
How I think the world should be is irrelevant. What I believe other countries should and shouldn’t do is irrelevant. This is idealism. Idealism is nonsense.
The only thing that matters is the material reality of a situation. The material reality is nations exist. Nations use violence to further their interests. Some nations are stronger than others. Some nations band together in defensive pacts to prevent aggression from larger neighbours. Some strong nations band together in pacts to assert their will and control over weaker nations and dole out violence with impunity. Whether anyone should or shouldn’t do these things is neither here nor there, the simple fact of the matter is that they do engage in these actions, therefore what matters is how you react to the current situation. And the material reality of the Ukraine war, as it is right now, is that Ukraine will lose and Russia will win. So what is your desired course of action given the existing material reality?
First, yes
Second, as long as you stay within your boards at being a dick, I can accept it and think that it no justification for invasion.
It is not my logic either ✌🏻 I just wanted to be sure that I understood correctly. Turns out, seems like not.
As last point, I think supporting Ukraine is a good thing, since I don’t want the signal present that you can just invade your little neighbour without worldwide consequences. No matter the outcome.
I would wish same would happen to Isreal, which is invading 3(?) countries right now…