World News

32531 readers

519 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Putin said Russia has delivered tactical nuclear warheads to Belarus and said Russia could use similar weapons in Ukraine, but there was no need to do so more than a year into the invasion. (www.ft.com)

submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

59 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

I'm not sure if you wilfully missed the point of my comment or if I wasn't explicit enough. I wasn't commenting on whether or not that was Putin's motivation. My complaint was with the logic: "there can't be a Nazi problem in Ukraine, because Zelenskyy is Jewish". That's it. That logic is faulty and disingenuous, because that implies there is not a nazi problem in Ukraine, when there absolutely is.

[–] DevCat 6 points 2 years ago (2 children)

There is a nazi problem in pretty much every country, it may just have a different label. This does not justify declaring war.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Was it justified in WWII?

[–] DevCat 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If simply having nazis in your country is a justification, the US could have attacked itself as well. Today, we still have nazis, by one label or another, in pretty much every country. Declaring war is justified only when their actions reach a certain level.

And remember, countries don't have friends, they have interests.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

I see. I'm glad you answered this in the spirit it was intended. On reflection, it may have come across a bit sarcastic, which was not intended.

At what point would the shelling of ethnic Russians in Ukraine have justified war? This doesn't seem to have been the tipping point, as it happens, which seems to have been the threat of Ukraine joining NATO. But it is an important factor that goes well beyond 'just' having a Nazi presence, which I agree does not justify war (which can only be justified in self defence, in my view).

The US may have interests rather than friends, but China does things differently. Participation in the BRI, I believe, depends on a willingness to act as 'partners'. That concept seems closer to friendship than to mere interests. From a class perspective, a country's bourgeoisie will have interests rather than friends, but their workers can, must, be friends.

This would be clear cut where there were a dictatorship of the proletariat, which Russia is far from, nowadays. Still, if the notion of interests-not-friends is not universal, then a more subtle analysis of Russian actions may be required.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I'll just quote myself though honestly I shouldn't respond:

I wasn’t commenting on whether or not that was Putin’s motivation.

Note also that did I did not comment on the justness of declaring war.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

Not sure why your reply didn't show up in my mailbox but I happened to spot it when scrolling through the thread again... So to answer your question, no it wasn't about willfully missing your point, but rather that I wasn't certain exactly where your argument was leading. I did catch the drift of the idea that both arguments could be true, I've just been jaded by reading enough shills on reddit who came back with "Putin wuz justified!" shit that I didn't want to leave it to chance.