• @assassin_aragorn
    link
    19 months ago

    You are going off on massive tangents I don’t have have the time to address. Let’s just step back a second. You’re getting too hung up on semantics.

    Do we agree war is bad? Do we agree that there’s no excuse for invading and oppressing people? Do we believe that genocide is fucked up no matter who’s doing it?

    If yes to all of the above, we’re in agreement. We dislike people who believe genocide and invasions are justified because they like the aggressive country.

    That’s the simplest I can distill this down to, and I do think we’re aligned on it. We just disagree on the term Tankie.

    • @UnderpantsWeevil
      link
      -29 months ago

      Do we agree war is bad?

      I think we agree its bad. I’m not sure we agree on how to end it. Too often, I see “War is Bad But Necessary” used as a caveat to continue it indefinitely.

      Do we agree that there’s no excuse for invading and oppressing people?

      There’s definitely some kind of excuse, given how many folks on this site are fans of D-Day and the Pacific Theater.

      I might argue that there’s no excuse in throwing human lives away for a nationalist ideal. Which is why the best response to Gaza is to get all those refugees the fuck out of there and on to a neighboring safe territory, while the worst response to Ukraine is to round up another 20,000 teenagers and charge them through Russian minefields.

      Do we believe that genocide is fucked up no matter who’s doing it?

      I’d like to think so. But at some point I gotta ask where this leads us? Is it to here?

      That’s the simplest I can distill this down

      But you lose a lot in the process.

      And when we get into the harder questions, the more historical bits and pieces, and the gray areas of a conflict that go beyond “Is Word Bad?”, I imagine you’re going to end up calling anti-war folks “Tankies” because the plans they have to end these conflicts don’t benefit the folks you’ve decided are on the Good Team.