I hate how “anti-war” has been hijacked by these people to mean, let imperialist countries invade whoever they want with no consequences. (in the case of tankies, any imperialist country that isn’t in NATO).
I hate how “anti-war” has been hijacked by these people to mean, let imperialist countries invade whoever they want with no consequences. (in the case of tankies, any imperialist country that isn’t in NATO).
What’s the principle behind Russia being allowed to prevent Ukraine or another country from entering alliances? Why doesn’t this same principle apply to the Baltic states? And if Russia were to successfuly capture all of Ukraine, would it then have a right to demand similar neutrality from Moldova, Romania, and other states it would then borders? And does the same principle apply the other way - i.e. would it have been just for NATO to say Belarus can’t ally with Russia when Lukashenko took over and invaded them?
The US just had an election where the most pro Israel candidate was unanimously approved by entire political establishment. CIA owns every candidate in every foreign democracy, and for some reason needs NGOs in Georgia too. Existential questions about “sovereignty” have to be considered within context of evil and democracy itself, the best vector for pure evil and corruption. “Foreign influence” democracy talking points include allowing all US/Israel foreign influence and blocking all other. Romania SC corruption recently is extreme intervention to ensure NATO slavery.
A different way to word this is why should Ukrainians be FORCED to suicide themselves and their property/prosperity to serve US ambitions of diminishment of Russia? The unliberated portions have lost the right to elections, and Zelensky’s platform was the exact opposite of war with Russia. Russia led the Minsk peace process to provide autonomy to Ukraine’s nazi persecuted eastern provinces. West’s hypocritical participation to delay in order to arm the nazis, was still acknowledging Ukraine’s nazi problem. Time to give nazis stronger ruler over Ukraine is your “what principle/right of interference is there”.
Ukraine and Canada should be free to diversify their trade. It is in their interests to be friendly with large trading partner. Russia should be allowed to build nordstream expansion when Ukraine chose extortionist fees for the pipelines in their country. US policy on nordstream has been a specfic war on Europe, extortionist profits to fund US weapon sales.
When you invoke the “axiom” of sovereignty to justify extreme evil and manipulated destruction of the sovereign, nuclear strikes on the root of the evil get justified by resistance to evil, whether or not you classify it as more evil, because you’re just asserting the right to fabricate war, and there is no principle that says you are right to win such a war.
NATO needs to be disbanded, and democracy restored to its members. If current corrupt subjugation persists, and Europe devoted to suicide for US empire power maximization, then certainly defense against NATO will depend on power balance to defend against NATO. US, adhering to its unprincipled invocation of evil pretending to be principle, has no moral issue in supporting Israel taking territory on “buffer zone pretext” followed by Israel 3 days later announcing that “this is great land to expand settlements in”, while bombing Southern Syria independents it pretends is ISIS, while arming/bribing actual ISIS in cooperation with Turkey support for same groups.
If principle mattered, secession of people who don’t like their rulers would be promoted. That they need protection from an ally by joining a different empire is unfortunate, but realist.
The crackheads elsewhere in this thread shout demonism of “Remember the history of soviet union” to justify evil today. It’s an unprincipled world.