NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg is proposing to establish a fund of allied contributions worth $100 billion over five years for Ukraine as part of a package for alliance leaders to sign off when they gather in Washington in July.
So your argument is that since the public in these countries is brainwashed, they arent capable for voting for their leadership, therefore there is no democracy, only the illusion of democracy. Thus an invasion and imposing a new government through violence, maybe one that aligns better with your worldview, is an acceptable thing?
I dont know, i think this is a very slippery slope. I think brainwashed people deserved to be ruled by whoever they vote, thats what democracy is and has always been. Even in ancient Athens, you had demagogues and sophists(even if we ignore that women and slaves couldnt vote). And money could get you a better sophist, to teach you how to debate and manipulate people.
So is democracy a fake system that can never be achieved? And your alternative suggestion is what?
Thats like having your house on fire and saying “this is fine” meme. Do you think that war is never an option? That giving up and letting invaders take what they want is preferable because it “reduces” human suffering?
Would you advocate the same during WW2 and Germany/Italy’s invasions? Should the countries that got invaded not resist and should the UK/US not help those countries? Imagine if you were an american in WW2 and your government was giving hundreds of billions worth of equipment to the russians, in order for Russia to fight the nazis. Would you still say “why are we sending hundreds of billions to the corrupt nation of Russia, when that money could have been used in America instead”?
The isolationist rhetoric benefits the invaders, who can easily take out individual countries(or regions of countries), one piece at a time, while placating the rest.
Militarism is bad, thats why Europe had a shitty military ever since the end of the Cold War. Because every euro spent on tanks and planes, is a euro that isnt spent on healthcare and education. Europe could finally benefit from the peace dividend.
And then Russia decided one day to walk in and grab parts of Ukraine(Crimea and parts of Donbas). That started some alarms but Europe kept sleepwalking. Surely Putin wont go any further. But just like Hitler who conquered Czechoslovakia(and didnt stop there), Putin decided “why the hell dont i take the entirety of Ukraine, it isnt as if anyone will stop me, those european soycucks dont have the balls to do anything but write stern letters”.
And he almost succeeded. So after 3 decades of having basically 0 investment in military, Europe is now rushing to catch up. Because it doesnt matter how peaceful you are, it is basic game theory. If you are military weakened enough, at some point, someone, somewhere will come to power who will want to take advantage of that “weakness”.
Class warfare is irrelevant if people are not class conscious enough to stop war from both sides. Ok, i will use my magic wand and make everyone in Europe class conscious. But if russians arent class conscious enough to refuse the orders to invade a country, someone will need to stop them.
Again, imagine using the same arguments against nazi Germany. Imagine pleading german soldiers to not invade you and that class warfare is the real war. Do you think that would work?
Some people only respect power and think words are a sign of weakness.
There havent been wars in Europe, unlike literally any other period in history, for almost 80 years. Dont you think that is an impressive achievement? An achievement that the invasion of Ukraine has endangered? How would you feel if you were a baltic state like Latvia? A country that has been very prosperous since the end of the Cold War?
What does your rhetoric offer to a latvian? What tangible measures should someone in Latvia take, in order to protect their way of living from someone like Russia? Should they just ignore it and focus on class warfare? What class warfare currently exists within Russia? Or can exist within an authoritarian state like Russia? Do you think Russia is communist? Or wants to become communist?
I am trying to understand, what is your argument. What do you suggest the people of a country do when some other country invades them. Even if you think that countries are obsolete artificial constructs that need to be demolished, you surely understand there is a difference when a leader from another country takes over your country. Do you think Putin is a communist?
I mentioned the yugoslav wars in the post before that. The argument still stands, Europe has been mostly peaceful for the first time ever. Do you intend to actually answer any of the points of my post?
So your argument is that since the public in these countries is brainwashed, they arent capable for voting for their leadership, therefore there is no democracy, only the illusion of democracy. Thus an invasion and imposing a new government through violence, maybe one that aligns better with your worldview, is an acceptable thing?
I dont know, i think this is a very slippery slope. I think brainwashed people deserved to be ruled by whoever they vote, thats what democracy is and has always been. Even in ancient Athens, you had demagogues and sophists(even if we ignore that women and slaves couldnt vote). And money could get you a better sophist, to teach you how to debate and manipulate people.
So is democracy a fake system that can never be achieved? And your alternative suggestion is what?
That you spend 100 billions on something more useful than war
Thats like having your house on fire and saying “this is fine” meme. Do you think that war is never an option? That giving up and letting invaders take what they want is preferable because it “reduces” human suffering?
Would you advocate the same during WW2 and Germany/Italy’s invasions? Should the countries that got invaded not resist and should the UK/US not help those countries? Imagine if you were an american in WW2 and your government was giving hundreds of billions worth of equipment to the russians, in order for Russia to fight the nazis. Would you still say “why are we sending hundreds of billions to the corrupt nation of Russia, when that money could have been used in America instead”?
The isolationist rhetoric benefits the invaders, who can easily take out individual countries(or regions of countries), one piece at a time, while placating the rest.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-preparedness-the-road-to-universal-slaughter
Militarism is bad, thats why Europe had a shitty military ever since the end of the Cold War. Because every euro spent on tanks and planes, is a euro that isnt spent on healthcare and education. Europe could finally benefit from the peace dividend.
And then Russia decided one day to walk in and grab parts of Ukraine(Crimea and parts of Donbas). That started some alarms but Europe kept sleepwalking. Surely Putin wont go any further. But just like Hitler who conquered Czechoslovakia(and didnt stop there), Putin decided “why the hell dont i take the entirety of Ukraine, it isnt as if anyone will stop me, those european soycucks dont have the balls to do anything but write stern letters”.
And he almost succeeded. So after 3 decades of having basically 0 investment in military, Europe is now rushing to catch up. Because it doesnt matter how peaceful you are, it is basic game theory. If you are military weakened enough, at some point, someone, somewhere will come to power who will want to take advantage of that “weakness”.
Class warfare is irrelevant if people are not class conscious enough to stop war from both sides. Ok, i will use my magic wand and make everyone in Europe class conscious. But if russians arent class conscious enough to refuse the orders to invade a country, someone will need to stop them.
Again, imagine using the same arguments against nazi Germany. Imagine pleading german soldiers to not invade you and that class warfare is the real war. Do you think that would work?
Some people only respect power and think words are a sign of weakness.
You must be really young, in the past 3 decades there have been hundreds of wars.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars:_2003–present
Europe spends billions on war already, even more money than russia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_with_highest_military_expenditures
Don’t feed up on propaganda, government and rulers seek war
There havent been wars in Europe, unlike literally any other period in history, for almost 80 years. Dont you think that is an impressive achievement? An achievement that the invasion of Ukraine has endangered? How would you feel if you were a baltic state like Latvia? A country that has been very prosperous since the end of the Cold War?
What does your rhetoric offer to a latvian? What tangible measures should someone in Latvia take, in order to protect their way of living from someone like Russia? Should they just ignore it and focus on class warfare? What class warfare currently exists within Russia? Or can exist within an authoritarian state like Russia? Do you think Russia is communist? Or wants to become communist?
I am trying to understand, what is your argument. What do you suggest the people of a country do when some other country invades them. Even if you think that countries are obsolete artificial constructs that need to be demolished, you surely understand there is a difference when a leader from another country takes over your country. Do you think Putin is a communist?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yugoslav_Wars
I think you should read an history book of the past 50 years, many things happened
I mentioned the yugoslav wars in the post before that. The argument still stands, Europe has been mostly peaceful for the first time ever. Do you intend to actually answer any of the points of my post?