153
Iranian lawmaker says Ukraine's drone support makes it a legitimate war target (www.euronews.com)
submitted 8 months ago by to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
138 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The head of Iran’s parliamentary committee on national security and foreign policy said that by providing drone support to Israel, Ukraine has “effectively become involved in the war.”

Zelenskyy earlier stated that Kyiv has already deployed interceptor drones and a team of specialists to help protect US military bases in Jordan.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -4 points 7 months ago (5 children)

Your comment implies that it is a binary choice. Lesser evil between the USA, Israel and Russia is a difficult shout, there is a cigarette paper between the three.

The three are also not the same, the USA is a far bigger threat to the world due to its military and financial might. Russia and Israel are not eating at the same table. It could probably be argued that they have the most twisted world views of the players here and I am very glad they are not in the conversation. China and the EU are the only other potentially global players. The EU are the USA's yes men who have been greatly upset to recently be told this reality to their face. China look to be an alternative but when you peel back the veneer they are closer to the USA in their set up than most people would care to admit.

The lesser evil one is a difficult argument to make, do you believe if either Israel or Russia occupied the USA's position as global hegemon that they would be better or worse?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 7 months ago* (4 children)

    My comment implies there is a primary contradiction, and the choice is between US hegemony and multipolarity.

    There is an empire, and only once it is destroyed can we even begin dealing with any of the lesser contradictions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    There are several empires, American one is just the most powerful. The way the Chinese and the Russians treat their people does not give me hope that their empires would act any differently. Britain and France have shown they are not to be trusted either based on their past atrocities.

    Would mutipolarity make things better or worse? I don't think that it matters, the fundamental nature of power and nation states make conflict and war inevitable. A multipolar world would likely make conflict more common. Can you name any wars of aggression that have honestly been done to improve the position of the country and its people and not just the elites? Vertical power structures are the problem, I would happily see the USA lose its position as hegemon but multipolarity won't change much.

    The logical conclusion every country should be looking towards now should be acquiring nukes. Maybe this is the path to peace.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    No. There's the global hegemon, and then there are the lesser regional powers that can't project force very far beyond their borders. Russia has been fighting for a decade over a relatively small piece of land that's literally directly on its border, it just isn't strong enough to even be an empire. There is only one empire under hegemony

    That will certainly change in a multipolar world, but that means we can pit them against each other. Without a hegemon that can rally the entire imperial core against every revolutionary project, this new world will be one where revolutionaries can use imperialist rivalries to create space for themselves. Multipolarity is the precondition for revolution.

    And in this new world, we'll need to reevaluate the contradictions. Russia is my enemy's enemy at this historical moment but in the new world I expect that to change. They are neoliberal capitalists, after all.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Despite Russia's failure on the battlefield they are still an old imperial power holding vast quantities of land from the days of the Romanov's. They still hold power over multiple cultures and ethnicities and brutally suppress secessionist movements.

    Fortunately the Trump government seems to be putting the American empire into an unrecoverable tail spin as a result of his and his movements almost unparalleled ignorance. We might just get to see this multipolar world, I actually think the future will be bipolar with India and China as the competing powers. The west has had its time.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago*

    They still hold power over multiple cultures and ethnicities and brutally suppress secessionist movements.

    That's literally every country on Earth. That's what countries are. The project of nation building is welding together different ethnicities and cultures into a single unified nation, and sometimes that requires putting down secession to maintain cohesion of a single state. If your definition of "empire" basically defines all countries as empires, it isn't very useful.

    I actually think the future will be bipolar with India and China as the competing powers. The west has had its time.

    The West won't vanish either, they're still going to be very powerful competing powers. It's likely going to break up into chunks, though, starting with the split that's emerging between the US and basically everyone else. Then, maybe, Europe will fracture further into blocs. No idea what Canada is going to do, probably get invaded and absorbed by the US or something.

    It's going to get ugly and strange. But, in that ugliness and strangeness, there will finally be space for revolution again.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent