The Trutherizer
Executive Member
- Joined
- May 20, 2010
- Messages
- 8,257
The US chose to invade Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam.
Just a few from recent history. They have no business with lands far away but that is deemed okay
The multilateral (not just the US) intervention in Libya had my full support. After the Arab Springs Gaddafi was threatening to go door to door and hunt down and kill every single person in Libya who took part in protests. I supported the intervention. It is nobody's fault that Russia and Libya had a relationship going back a fair while. Gaddafi was out of control. Plain and simple. Russia should maybe consider supporting fewer dictatorships. But... (yeah... Putin doesn't mind dictators. Helping them out comes with the added benefit of driving millions of refugees towards the rest of Europe - Tsk... If only he could start driving them towards China for a change.)
In Iraq the first gulf war was a coalition of over 30 nations in response to Iraq invading Kuwait. No problem there.
The second gulf war was shady as f***. Saddam was a brutal, oppressive dictator. A thoroughly evil man. That said the US Bush administration, to my eyes, did not act entirely in good faith. It seemed way more about securing the world's oil supply than anything else. To them. That they were looking for an excuse in any case. Yet... It's worth noting that both Russia and China (both members of the UN security council) walked away with fat oil contracts afterwards. For all that Russia did not support the war (Iraq owed them money after all).
Afghanistan. Both the US and Russia at some time invaded Afghanistan. Both affecting regime changes of some sort. In the US defence it formed the end of a legitimate response to 9/11. It dragged on way longer than it should have. But after dealing with their agenda they remained by invitation of the Afghan government and in the interest of security in the region. For all that it was in vain.
Vietnam was not simply an invasion by the US. It was fundamentally a war between the incumbent government and rebels forces in Vietnam. The US backed the incumbent government. Russia backed pro-communist rebels. Both countries took part. Russia had thousands of military personnel directly involved in that war. Boots on the ground.
All the countries you mentioned today are still sovereign nations in their own right. Maybe with a more pro-West government. Maybe with a more pro-Russia/China government. But the people can say they live in their own country. Ukraine is having a rather hard time saying the same.
The Ukraine conflict, all the way from 2014 when Russia flipped Crimea. Is in my firm opinion pure conquest. A return not only to something resembling the cold war. Thinly veiled threats of nuclear conflict and all. But a return to the days of colonialism. Of which Russia has a long tradition going back to the 1400s. Along with the rest of Europe. But seems to want to continue today.
I actually feel China's annexation of Tibet also counts as colonialism, and that China's ambitions for Taiwan is the same. Sadly Tibet was actually far away from anybody who would care to oppose them. Taiwan's conquest, I feel, will be opposed tooth and nail purely because of Taiwan's industrial role in the world.
I oppose this neo-colonialism. Because it is good when the world protects each others borders. As per international agreement which Russia is also signatory to and beneficiary of.
As far as NATO and the EU is concerned. Ukraine is right on NATO's doorstep. It IS a European nation. NATO and the rest of Europe WILL oppose the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Because they can. And it is in their very real existential interest. That is not hard to understand at all.
Anybody out there feeling that it's unfair that Russia doesn't get to play empire (actual territorial expansion) will not change that. You understand?
