this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2024
196 points (88.9% liked)

General Discussion

12127 readers
66 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy.World General!

This is a community for general discussion where you can get your bearings in the fediverse. Discuss topics & ask questions that don't seem to fit in any other community, or don't have an active community yet.


🪆 About Lemmy World


🧭 Finding CommunitiesFeel free to ask here or over in: !lemmy411@lemmy.ca!

Also keep an eye on:

For more involved tools to find communities to join: check out Lemmyverse!


💬 Additional Discussion Focused Communities:


Rules

Remember, Lemmy World rules also apply here.0. See: Rules for Users.

  1. No bigotry: including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
  2. Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
  3. Be thoughtful and helpful: even with ‘silly’ questions. The world won’t be made better by dismissive comments to others on Lemmy.
  4. Link posts should include some context/opinion in the body text when the title is unaltered, or be titled to encourage discussion.
  5. Posts concerning other instances' activity/decisions are better suited to !fediverse@lemmy.world or !lemmydrama@lemmy.world communities.
  6. No Ads/Spamming.
  7. No NSFW content.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Something that i find prettyd disgusting these days is how certain people put their political ideologies / viewpoints over human lives, for example, celebrating the russian invasion of ukraine because it is "a blow against US / NATO imperialism" completely ignoring all the warcrimes, the deaths, and the suffering generated by that war, the same happening with the palestinian genocide because "Israel is the only working democracy on the middle east", acting like their ideoligies are going to bring back to life all the dead people somehow

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What will stop Russia from doing the same to more countries?

[–] KISSmyOS@feddit.de -4 points 9 months ago (3 children)

The same thing that lead to the decolonization of almost all countries that were once occupied - it's neither possible nor profitable to rule over a populace that hates you and doesn't identify themselves as subjects to your rule in the long term.

[–] jobby@lemmy.today 4 points 9 months ago

And next up on the Disney Channel: The fall of the bad man because teh peepo don’t like him.

[–] GrayBackgroundMusic@lemm.ee 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

it’s neither possible nor profitable to rule over a populace that hates you and doesn’t identify themselves as subjects to your rule in the long term.

Slavery in the USA South disagrees with that. It was very possible and profitable. It would have continued but armed conflict ended that.

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Ah, so we should just let them attack countries until the internal problems get too big and the empire falls from within? And those countries should just suck it up in the meantime?

[–] KISSmyOS@feddit.de -2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Look, I have no good solution for this. No one has, the currently accepted solution is killing millions until the problem disappears behind the problems caused by the war.
I'm not telling anyone or any country what to do. I'm just saying, I won't ever support or participate in any war, defensive or otherwise.

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Look, I have no good solution for this. No one has, the currently accepted solution is killing millions until the problem disappears behind the problems caused by the war.

No, the currently accepted solution is defending yourself against an invading force. Ukraine isn't killing people to solve the problem, they are killing them to stop themselves from being killed.

And what if your solution doesn't work? What if Russia just expands and the current regime stays in power? You'll take away the sovereignty of possibly generations of people, and continually condemning more and more to the same fate, until maybe things collapse. And even then you have no guarantee that whatever comes after the collapse is, in any way, better.

There's a quote on this topic that puts this into words better than I can:

You think you’re better than everyone else, but there you stand: the good man doing nothing. And while evil triumphs and your rigid pacifism crumbles into bloodstained dust, the only victory afforded to you is that you stuck true to your guns.

[–] Maalus@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

So you admit your position doesn't solve anything.

[–] KISSmyOS@feddit.de 1 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Name one example from the past 110 years where war actually achieved the goal the "good guys" had before it started.

[–] jobby@lemmy.today 2 points 9 months ago

The Western intervention in Kosovo.

[–] aidan@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

World War 2 is the most recent I can think of

Edit: Desert Storm

[–] theangryseal@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Hitler would have been perfectly fine erasing people and cultures from existence too. I mean, the Jews weren’t the only people who were going in the camps to die. Once he was finished there, nothing would have stopped him from erasing the next group of people from the planet.

I would imagine that some of the very people who ran the camps were next in line even.

[–] KISSmyOS@feddit.de 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

World War 2 didn’t prevent the eradication of the Jews in Europe, though.
Only a few thousand who didn’t manage to flee survived.
It also didn’t prevent the destruction of an entire generation of men in the Soviet Union.
It didn’t bring about lasting peace, nor democracy. At its end, the next dictatorship was already on the rise.
Oh, and it killed 85 million people, 3% of the global population.

Any alternative result of non-intervention would have to be really fucking awful to be worse than that.

Desert Storm

So the goal of the coalition was that Kuwait is ruled by a dictator the US liked instead of one they didn't like, the Kurds were massacred and millions of them displaced, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were expelled from Kuwait and a budding popular freedom movement in Iraq crushed by Saddam Hussein?

[–] aidan@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The goal of World War 2 was to expel an invading army from occupied countries. The goal of Desert Storm was the same. Desert Storm didn't overthrow Saddam, that was years later in the Iraq war

[–] KISSmyOS@feddit.de 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If that was truly the goal, then 85 million people died over which man is in charge, and nothing else.
No, expelling an army is always just a means to reach your goal, cause the army stands between you and control over the people.

[–] aidan@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

If that was truly the goal, then 85 million people died over which man is in charge, and nothing else.

I mean yes. What are you saying it was about?