Anonymous wrote:You weren't arguing the killing experience. You were arguing righteousness, and you failed. Thanks, though, for the acknowledgement that "might means right" is really your motto..
Anonymous wrote:That's bullshit and you know it. Support for the illegal invasion of Iraq in the US was universal across the aisle. That includes all mainstream liberal media, not one of which has issued a mea culpa, by the way. No surprise. America loves itself a good war. ... Wait, you're arguing that America has a right to invade anywhere anytime, and if people choose to resist the invader, it's on them? You're the best example of arrogant, ignorant American thuggery.
Anonymous wrote:On Bosnia. This is a memorial to Milica Rakic. She was a three-year old girl blown to bits by a NATO rocket as she was sitting on her training potty. One of 89 children (official count) killed by the NATO campaign. Her death is not listed among the victims the US acknowledges. It wasn't covered in any Western media. Her parents never received compensation from NATO.
Anonymous wrote:This gels with what our relatives in Iraq say. Saddam was not loved. But for America, people have nothing but pure, unadulterated hatred. Hatred that the Arabs describe as "I'll pay someone to shit on your mother's grave every day of their life." I await, though, your dismissals of this as "stuck in the past"-ness. Anything to avoid responsibility for the misery America rains on people.
Anonymous wrote:I'm a proud Arab so I have no idea what you're saying.
Anonymous wrote:Zelensky called for the West to adopt renewable energy.
Now a factory in the Netherlands is unable to make ammunition for Ukraine. The reason is there is a nearby data center that stores Tiktok videos, and this data center is using up all the available energy.
Anonymous wrote:Zelensky called for the West to adopt renewable energy.
Now a factory in the Netherlands is unable to make ammunition for Ukraine. The reason is there is a nearby data center that stores Tiktok videos, and this data center is using up all the available energy.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The Ukraine will have to cede territory to Russia and guarantee non nato status.
What's ironic is that if Russia had simply left Ukraine alone in 2014, Ukraine today would likely be a pliant pro-Russia state as it was throughout the 90s and early 2000s. Sure it was a corrupt state - like Russia itself - but it was firmly in the Russian orbit.
That was before the US instigated a coup to remove the pro-Russian leader. Putin wanted to keep the base in Crimea whose lease was expiring.
The Revolution of Dignity / Ukrainian Maidan was 100% organic to Ukraine.
It is laughable for you to suggest the US had any part in it.
As in: everyone is laughing at you for such a stupid suggestion. I feel sorry for how badly you are embarrassing yourself.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why did NATO with UN authorization intervene in Bosnia?
https://www.icty.org/en/cases/judgement-list
To whataboutski: what's the difference between an intervention and an invasion? If intervention is so bad then why is invasion good? Ethnic cleansing, rape as an instrument of war, and targeting civilians is very bad stuff. Arguing that it's ok, which to be clear is exactly what you are doing, because the US negligently unleashed a sectarian civil war in Iraq is despicable.
LOL interventions and invasions are only bad when committed by not-America.
When committed by America, they are righteous. Or, at their worst, regrettable but innocent mistakes.
Well based on your own words they seem to all be bad but at the same time you are using those criticisms to claim an invasion for territorial gain characterized by ethnic cleansing, widespread strategic rape, and the intentional targeting of civilians by the aggressor is a good tbing. It's easy to see why one could get confused.
But anyway, as you point out, Russia's invasion of Ukraine has unleashed a lot of forces within Russia that will inevitably lead to its downfall. It has also unified Ukraine in opposition such that it could never be integrated or peacefully controlled. Using Iraq as an example, the ethnic divisions within Russia will become more pronounced and antagonistic while the normalization of mass violence will leave a legacy of sociopathy among the population such that normalcy cannot be returned to in the near term. If the best case scenario for post-war Russia is Iraq then what is the worst case?
No, I never claimed it's a good thing, are you insane? that's you talking to voices in your head.
Using Iraq as an example, Ukraine is Iraq, not Russia. Divisions within Iraq (other than Kurds) are religious, not ethnic.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why did NATO with UN authorization intervene in Bosnia?
https://www.icty.org/en/cases/judgement-list
To whataboutski: what's the difference between an intervention and an invasion? If intervention is so bad then why is invasion good? Ethnic cleansing, rape as an instrument of war, and targeting civilians is very bad stuff. Arguing that it's ok, which to be clear is exactly what you are doing, because the US negligently unleashed a sectarian civil war in Iraq is despicable.
LOL interventions and invasions are only bad when committed by not-America.
When committed by America, they are righteous. Or, at their worst, regrettable but innocent mistakes.
Well based on your own words they seem to all be bad but at the same time you are using those criticisms to claim an invasion for territorial gain characterized by ethnic cleansing, widespread strategic rape, and the intentional targeting of civilians by the aggressor is a good tbing. It's easy to see why one could get confused.
But anyway, as you point out, Russia's invasion of Ukraine has unleashed a lot of forces within Russia that will inevitably lead to its downfall. It has also unified Ukraine in opposition such that it could never be integrated or peacefully controlled. Using Iraq as an example, the ethnic divisions within Russia will become more pronounced and antagonistic while the normalization of mass violence will leave a legacy of sociopathy among the population such that normalcy cannot be returned to in the near term. If the best case scenario for post-war Russia is Iraq then what is the worst case?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why did NATO with UN authorization intervene in Bosnia?
https://www.icty.org/en/cases/judgement-list
To whataboutski: what's the difference between an intervention and an invasion? If intervention is so bad then why is invasion good? Ethnic cleansing, rape as an instrument of war, and targeting civilians is very bad stuff. Arguing that it's ok, which to be clear is exactly what you are doing, because the US negligently unleashed a sectarian civil war in Iraq is despicable.
LOL interventions and invasions are only bad when committed by not-America.
When committed by America, they are righteous. Or, at their worst, regrettable but innocent mistakes.
Anonymous wrote:Why did NATO with UN authorization intervene in Bosnia?
https://www.icty.org/en/cases/judgement-list
To whataboutski: what's the difference between an intervention and an invasion? If intervention is so bad then why is invasion good? Ethnic cleansing, rape as an instrument of war, and targeting civilians is very bad stuff. Arguing that it's ok, which to be clear is exactly what you are doing, because the US negligently unleashed a sectarian civil war in Iraq is despicable.