Time is on the side of the Russians in Ukraine and the Chinese on pretty much anything else when it comes to confronting the US empire.
But ever since the ceasefire in Lebanon and the fall of Assad I can’t help but feel that the Palestinian cause is getting worse every day. No one is lifting a finger for them except the Yemenis and it only seems that the Zionist fucks are getting closer to their objectives.
Civil war in “Israel” when? True Promise 3 when (lol)?
It doesn’t help that some of the loudest voices cheering for Assad’s fall where Palestinians and that sectarism is strong against Shia’s…
I’m confused what “completely surrounded” means here? Have you looked at a map of Russia in comparison to NATO countries?
I admit that was a thoughtless word to throw in there, so let’s instead say that very roughly speaking the land border of their population center was about half composed of NATO countries, and Ukraine and Georgia joining would essentially double that in terms of border length.
How many times do I have to warn my neighbor I don’t like their new security system before its okay to just take their house?
That’s not a good analogy. NATO membership brings with it US military bases and/or missile launchers, possibly nuclear ones. A better analogy would be “how many times do I have to warn my neighbor that I will not allow them to stockpile [edit: even more] weapons in their house and point even more of them at my house before I bust in there and take away their weapons?”
As a Canadian, I completely disagree. I’d really like some help with the 800 pound gorilla next door.
I completely understand the sentiment, but how large a percentage of the population of your country would you be willing to sacrifice to (most likely unsuccessfully) assert that right?
Edit: overall, it seems to me that you seriously underestimate the existential threat that NATO represents for Russia.
instead say that very roughly speaking the land border of their population center was about half composed of NATO countries, and Ukraine and Georgia joining would essentially double that in terms of border length.
That’s fair, you are of course right it’s a very important border.
That’s not a good analogy. NATO membership brings with it US military bases and/or missile launchers, possibly nuclear ones. A better analogy would be “how many times do I have to warn my neighbor that I will not allow them to stockpile [edit: even more] weapons in their house and point even more of them at my house before I bust in there and take away their weapons?”
Sure. The answer is still “you don’t get to take your neighbors house”.
What I really don’t like about this is everyone is justified to invade everybody.
If Russia can invade Ukraine, the Ukraine must equally be able to now “defensively invade” also.
So we just never sow for peace when theres tension, the strategy is to invade back and forth forever, with everyone justified by all the previous invasions?
I completely understand the sentiment, but how large a percentage of the population of your country would you be willing to sacrifice to (most likely unsuccessfully) assert that right?
I don’t have the authority to sacrifice anyone.
I am one voice in a democracy and if my fellow Canadians choose to sacrifice themselves for our country I hope I’m not too much of a coward to not be with them through whatever that means.
The only sacrifice I’m in charge of making is my own, and to that I just don’t know. I’ve never been tested like that.
Edit: overall, it seems to me that you seriously underestimate the existential threat that NATO represents for Russia.
There are plenty of “threats” out there. If suggest we start invading each other over each one then I think you overestimate the effectiveness of starting wars.
Sure. The answer is still “you don’t get to take your neighbors house”.
What I really don’t like about this is everyone is justified to invade everybody.
If Russia can invade Ukraine, the Ukraine must equally be able to now “defensively invade” also.
So we just never sow for peace when theres tension, the strategy is to invade back and forth forever, with everyone justified by all the previous invasions?
Again, I completely understand the sentiment. I am very antiwar myself and would much prefer if countries were all peaceful toward each other. The thing is, going back to my analogy, in a world without a police force that can take care of it for you, at some point you need to take action to defend yourself if your neighbor is seriously threatening you. I can certainly understand someone deciding to take aggressive action to get a situation like that under control before they get killed. This is not a blanket license for everyone to invade each other, but only a limited license to act in self-defense.
The real situation is even worse, by the way. It’s as if half your immediate neighbors on one side of your house were part of an “anti-you” coalition and had guns pointed at your house, then one more neighbor on that side had through a questionable process decided to join that coalition and place more guns pointed at your house.
I don’t have the authority to sacrifice anyone.
I am one voice in a democracy and if my fellow Canadians choose to sacrifice themselves for our country I hope I’m not too much of a coward to not be with them through whatever that means.
The only sacrifice I’m in charge of making is my own, and to that I just don’t know. I’ve never been tested like that.
I understand that. It was more a rhetorical question and a general “you”.
There are plenty of “threats” out there. If suggest we start invading each other over each one then I think you overestimate the effectiveness of starting wars.
Some threats are much more concrete and serious than others. Sure, wars are always unpredictable by nature and should only be used in very, very limited circumstances. I would very much have preferred that Russia wouldn’t have invaded Ukraine, but I understand their reasons for doing so, especially when they had been warning about it and explaining their rationale for years.
