27
"Violence is never the answer" unless it is white people doing it (lemmy.ml)
submitted 2 months ago by to c/memes@lemmy.ml
141 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/27603744

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 2 months ago (10 children)

Good, so we agree that simply being invaded does not suddenly put a government on the right side of history.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (9 children)

    There's a bit of a difference between a punch to the face and a punch to the face in return. Or are we going to pretend these are the same thing?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago* (8 children)

    We're not talking about a bar fight dude, we're talking about eight years of ethnic cleansing and the threat of being nuked within minutes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    I hear the best way to prevent being nuked is turning a cold war into a hot war.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (6 children)

    The best way to avoid being nuked is to ensure those interested in nuking you don't have first strike capabilities no matter the cost.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    no matter the cost

    I did not expect to find a supporter of the US bombing of Iran in this discussion.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (4 children)

    I wish I knew as little as you about world events. Iran had a fatwa against nuclear weapons the idea of them trying to make them was as true as Iraq having weapons of mass destruction.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

    Iran had a fatwa against nuclear weapons

    That part is entirely true! However, as you are certainly aware, given your immense knowledge about world events, many country leaders have previously said one thing and done a different thing. From the publicly available data I can gather, Iran was not complying with international agreements they had ratified regarding enrichment limits up to about 2015. Given the publicly available information, I am willing to believe that Iran actually did not further their nuclear weapons program under JCPOA between 2015 and 2018. I don't believe there is much doubt that they have since picked their nuclear weapons program back up; at the very least after the US re-introduced sanctions.

    On a side note tying this back to the original discussion: Ukraine did have nuclear weapons and gave them up only under broad guarantees of continued independence... so... yeah.

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

    Ukraine did have nuclear weapons and gave them up only under broad guarantees of continued independence… so… yeah.

    I wonder what country has a history of not only using nuclear weapons but using "allied" (vassal nations) on the borders of competing nations to host their arsenal to threaten first strike capability. Might want to look into what actually caused the "Cuban" missile crisis. American nukes in Turkey threating first strike capability and the breakdown of MAD.

    Also your Iran strawman was fucking stupid and I shouldn't have bothered responding to it. It was completely unrelated to what I said, even if Iran developed nuclear weapons they wouldn't have first strike capability on the US so it isn't relevant to doing whatever necessary to frustrate those attempting to destroy MAD by achieving first strike capability.

    so... yeah...

    Also also pointing out what is logical for a force to do in the face of certain situations doesn't mean I support it and especially doesn't mean I generally support any other force taking related but different actions. Really reminding me why I hate deabtebros.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)

    Great. I also don't love any country having nukes, so there's already two of us. I was well aware that your point was not about Iran, that's why I made the cynical counterpoint I made.

    I'm also aware of the history of the Cuban missile crisis and fully agree with your analysis of who's to blame for escalating and for de-esalating the situation. Serious question 1: Can you point me to any credible sources that the US was about to place nukes in Ukraine in 2022? I can only find statements by some Ukrainian government officials in 2021-2022 that they want NATO membership or develop their own nukes, but no affirmation by any of the Western nuclear powers and no indication that they wanted both. That also happened long after Russia had invaded Ukrainian territory in 2014 and under continued intimidation of Ukraine by Russia. Serious question 2: Can you point me to statements by NATO officials indicating they want to nuke Russia or Russian positions on occupied Ukrainian territory? Because Putin has made several rather thinly veiled nuclear threats over the last 4 years.

    Edit: Iran is far away from the US, but it's very close to many US allies. Russia, too, has nukes outside its borders (Belarus), and was openly considering to expand that list, though the US is admittedly way bigger in that regard.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

    Great. I also don’t love any country having nukes, so there’s already two of us.

    I think it has been proven repeatedly by the US that if you wish to truly be sovereign nukes are non-negotiable which is a great tragedy. (Libya, Venezuela, Iraq, Yemen, etc.)

    I was well aware that your point was not about Iran, that’s why I made the cynical counterpoint I made.

    Your cynical counterpoint was still stupid as it was about a related but entirely different situation. A country having nukes and being able to bypass MAD are 2 vastly different scenarios.

    As for your second paragraph it's all irrelevant to the point at hand which is that if there is a risk of a country (especially one with a history of attempting to) bypassing MAD against you frustrating that attempt by any means necessary is the logical step to take.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent