The illegal occupation has been going for decades. Yes, there is a lot of individual political events.
But I don't see how a macro analysis can end any ways other than "shits happened during this colonization of Palestine; Israel, UK and US are to blame for most evil shit".
I can concede that the conflict can present "complex" at first glance due to some Palestinians taking arms and themselves doing some heinous acts.
But this is all downstream of an illegal occupation by Israel. This conflict really isn't that complex. End the illegal occupation, then you can reasonably expect violent resistance to die down and to talk your way through it.
In which episode do they address the IOF letting Oct7 happen on purpose? Giving them a "moral" reason to kickstart a barbaric campaign in Gaza.
I did reference their operations in the south china sea, though.
You can argue about creeping boat operations in its own sea,
Did China invade any of those countries? Are they at war with any of the other country?
Since you are referencing a specific incident, it would appear you are more familiar with it than me, and I will yield the opportunity to explain it.
My post is very clear. China has no history of oversea military operation. You can argue about creeping boat operations in its own sea, but there is no reasons for us to get in a military conflict with China. I follow up the point with an actual credible threat that is more worthy of discussion than a country is 1. distant & 2. that got a massive economy without getting into any wars.
You're not making any point here, just crying whataboutism.
Explain to me what is "whataboutism" here.
Confrontation with China? The one country that hasn't been in any war in the last 50 years and has virtually no history of oversea campaign?
It's plain to see that there's some attempt to fearmonger to drive up military investment, at the same time that we are cutting in vital and actually relevant services.
I'm more worried about the US' foreign policy than either Russia or China. Not even a contest in term of instability factor or aggressive policies.
I don’t really give a fuck about someones imperialist feelings at that point.
Then why are you trying to defend NATO?
You’re only really opposed to an alliance hostile to you invading them if you plan to invade them
Do you understand the concept of encirclement?
Childishly inadequate comparison.
There's a world of difference between domestic abuse, and allowing an hostile alliance to encircle your country.
Furthermore, I recommend listening to the interview I linked above: Ukraine and Russia had a bilateral agreement together, that Ukraine broke. This is according to a french former monitor of the OSCE.
Russia announced that they would invade if Ukraine moved to join NATO. Who should we blame, the state that set clear boundaries, or the state that was recklessly told to break the boundaries?
Furthermore, according to a former international monitor from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), Ukraine is the party to blame for the breakdown of the previous agreement, not Russia.
The "Russia bad" narrative only makes sense if you start the story on february 2022 and refuse to learn anything about the context leading up to the SMO.
"I'm very concerned about my surgery, is the surgeon very talented?"
"Oh, he fucks"
"You mean that figuratively? As in, he's very good at what he does?"
"..."