Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
Pacifism is always an unpopular stance, because always, always, always, THIS war is different! THIS war is justified!
The way pacifists are treated right now, when they criticize involvement in the Ukraine war, is pretty similar to how pacifists were treated before the first World War.
But also, we shake our heads at the war enthusiasm before WW1, and don’t realize our own today. Cause this war is different.
(For the record, I’m not personally against supporting Ukraine. But I also realize not everyone who is against involvement is a Putin-bot)
With all due respect, you’re literally replying to a post saying that it’ll always be “This war is different, this war is justified” by emphasising how this war is different and this war is justified.
What is happening is directly pointing out that this was is NOT different. That this war is ALSO unjustified.
In war, the aggressors are the problem. Period. And lending support to the aggressed is not the same as supporting war.
It would work, simply letting Russia finish a genocide against Ukraine or Israel finish a genocide against Palestine. The conflict would certainly be resolved that way. But if you think it is an acceptable outcome, you value peace too highly.
Ok, misunderstanding. I’m not American - I didn’t see the connection with the US being the aggressor in the examples in the comic. I was just interpreting it as ‘Anti-War’.
The rest of the exchange makes more sense now!
I was honestly baffled, it felt like I was having a different conversation than everyone else.
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity
I realised that I’m in the bad here - I missed the connection between the specific wars in the cartoon (i.e. that the US was/supports the aggressor). I thought it was just anti-war in general.
Back when iraq was invaded, Saddam was the aggressor who bad WMD, it all turned out to be a lie.
How do you know that American government is telling it’s citizens complete facts about Ukraine war?
Yes I know Russia is the aggressor here and I am completely against the invasion. However, everyone knew that NATO expansion will trigger a war and US actively pushed for it. American governments hands are not clean when it comes to Ukraine war and American citizens don’t question it at all.
Which brings me to the cartoon here where if you say the above mentioned statements you will be called a tankie, Putin bootlicker etc.
But we must also look at pacifism as a convenient shield at times. There were “pacifists” in the Second World War who clearly weren’t ideologically opposed to war but were opposed to fighting hitler. I see letting putin continue as utterly chamberlainian.
Ok that’s not really fair. Declassified docs have revealed that Chamberlain knew damn well what was going to work and intentionally played down causus belli because he was buying Britain time to rearm, the problem was that time is a resource you buy for both sides, and the axis used theirs a lot better.
Not really comparable. If in 2003 the US did nothing Iraq would still be doing what it was doing and there would have been no war. If Ukraine stops fighting for even a day the country no longer exists.
It isnt special pleading when you can point out major differences between cases.
Kraut IMO made a pretty good argument based on exactly that point that Iraq would have been doing what it had been doing already,
That being that what Iraq was doing was plenty horrible on its own, and that Bush and co could have made an argument for US involvement just on the merits of stopping a genocidal dictator. The question with no answer is if the public would have accepted that argument for going into Iraq at the same time as Afghanistan.
Pacifism is always an unpopular stance, because always, always, always, THIS war is different! THIS war is justified!
The way pacifists are treated right now, when they criticize involvement in the Ukraine war, is pretty similar to how pacifists were treated before the first World War.
But also, we shake our heads at the war enthusiasm before WW1, and don’t realize our own today. Cause this war is different.
(For the record, I’m not personally against supporting Ukraine. But I also realize not everyone who is against involvement is a Putin-bot)
deleted by creator
I don’t that’s what he meant. He meant that many Russian soldiers are brainwashed by propaganda as well.
deleted by creator
With all due respect, you’re literally replying to a post saying that it’ll always be “This war is different, this war is justified” by emphasising how this war is different and this war is justified.
But that’s not what is happening.
What is happening is directly pointing out that this was is NOT different. That this war is ALSO unjustified.
In war, the aggressors are the problem. Period. And lending support to the aggressed is not the same as supporting war.
It would work, simply letting Russia finish a genocide against Ukraine or Israel finish a genocide against Palestine. The conflict would certainly be resolved that way. But if you think it is an acceptable outcome, you value peace too highly.
Oh, I agree. Personally I think the world has a duty to stop any country attempting to annex parts of any other country.
I was just tickled by that exchange.
deleted by creator
Ah, ok, I see what’s happened.
Ok, misunderstanding. I’m not American - I didn’t see the connection with the US being the aggressor in the examples in the comic. I was just interpreting it as ‘Anti-War’.
The rest of the exchange makes more sense now!
I was honestly baffled, it felt like I was having a different conversation than everyone else.
deleted by creator
Wasnt anything ticklish about the exchange, so kinda creepy that you were
The war in Ukraine is not justified. Supporting Ukraine’s defense is.
Don’t make the mistake of thinking the opponents of any particular military action are pacifists.
I agree?!
I’m honestly not sure what would make you think otherwise.
The words you wrote, primarily
Hanlon’s Razor, my dude.
I realised that I’m in the bad here - I missed the connection between the specific wars in the cartoon (i.e. that the US was/supports the aggressor). I thought it was just anti-war in general.
deleted by creator
I should say what to Russia? I don’t understand.
I agree that the world has a duty to stop any attempts a country might make to annex another country’s territory.
That war can end when Russia stops invading another country. Ukraine defending its citizens and territory is right and proper.
Where are you from?
Back when iraq was invaded, Saddam was the aggressor who bad WMD, it all turned out to be a lie.
How do you know that American government is telling it’s citizens complete facts about Ukraine war?
Yes I know Russia is the aggressor here and I am completely against the invasion. However, everyone knew that NATO expansion will trigger a war and US actively pushed for it. American governments hands are not clean when it comes to Ukraine war and American citizens don’t question it at all.
Which brings me to the cartoon here where if you say the above mentioned statements you will be called a tankie, Putin bootlicker etc.
It is none of Russia’s business which group Ukraine joins.
of course you are right. because this is high school and not eastern Europe with a complex geopolitical history.
iTs CoMpLiCaTeD
No tankie, it’s very simple. Russia is an imperialist nation. Should’ve been given a foot up their ass when they annexed Crimea.
predicted it.
You’re not even comparing apples and oranges
But we must also look at pacifism as a convenient shield at times. There were “pacifists” in the Second World War who clearly weren’t ideologically opposed to war but were opposed to fighting hitler. I see letting putin continue as utterly chamberlainian.
Ok that’s not really fair. Declassified docs have revealed that Chamberlain knew damn well what was going to work and intentionally played down causus belli because he was buying Britain time to rearm, the problem was that time is a resource you buy for both sides, and the axis used theirs a lot better.
Not really comparable. If in 2003 the US did nothing Iraq would still be doing what it was doing and there would have been no war. If Ukraine stops fighting for even a day the country no longer exists.
It isnt special pleading when you can point out major differences between cases.
Kraut IMO made a pretty good argument based on exactly that point that Iraq would have been doing what it had been doing already,
That being that what Iraq was doing was plenty horrible on its own, and that Bush and co could have made an argument for US involvement just on the merits of stopping a genocidal dictator. The question with no answer is if the public would have accepted that argument for going into Iraq at the same time as Afghanistan.
The war was illegal and justified by WMDs that weren’t there.
Yup. Support for the Iraqi war was at like 80% in the US when it started.