Disagreeing with me? You would actually have to come up with something substantial to do that. You haven’t so far. As for you being a contrarian that’s you whole persona on this board for years. You never take a stand on things. You post **** on these boards just to see if it sticks.
Being your type of “anti war” is just being devoid from reality and just disregarding human nature. Your type of anti war just enables more war, more death and more aggression.
At this point, we are getting off tangent by assuming the reasons a person may not wish to be part of a war effort, much less the right of the State to send an innocent person off to death. This is basic Fight-or-Flight theory. From a basic human rights point of view, its up to the individual if they wish to Run, Fight or Die, not the States decision. Ultimately I believe a human is entitled to fairness, respect and all the gibberish the 60's hippies believed in (for the most part). I can't get into these assumptions or scenarios that fundamentally go against my beliefs (such as What About the Russians). I do not believe in supporting the lesser of two evils (ie: Ukraine isn't the beacon of greatness and just)
Consistently trying to be a wannabe edgy teenager and consistently picking the position. But really you are just arguing for Russia’s position because either you are too cowardly or trying too hard to be a troll.
War will always exist if there is someone out there who can justify the cost. This concept is nothing new and has been around for millennia's. The idea we need war to stop war is a Neanderthal type of thinking. We have lived in an age for quite some time that war is largely pointless, regardless of who is to blame. If people aren't dying from the lack of basic necessities, then economics can solve the issue.
Economics hasn’t solved who gets to control resources and territory. Human nature hasn’t changed so I’m not sure why you would think we live in an age where war is pointless.
Let me rephrase it for you. Nobody is dying because of the lack of food. If anyone is dying from a lack of food, its due to greed, corruption and stupidity. Same with water. Same with shelter If there is only enough of these basic resources for my tribe or your tribe to survive, then I will advocate killing your tribe if your tribe decides to make claim. However, we do not have that problem. We have a problem with people fighting over greedy and selfish behaviors. Case in point - Over the centuries, we have developed something called war crimes, article of wars, rules of engagement, and other legal frameworks. And over the centuries, they have become more restrictive. But the reality is, in true war, there are no rules.
Ah yes, the old, post something controversial, people don't like it and claim victimhood. Right out of the MAGA playbook Well done. DD
And yet we still have war despite all the words and “good intentions”. In the real world, might is still right.
I'm not even sure what Space Ghost is arguing about. Is this just some meta level ranting in the dream world? "War is pointless" is a pointless statement. Russia invaded Ukraine. Space Ghost would suggest what, saying "war is pointless" at the approaching soldiers as they cut off his penis and choke him to death on and then kidnap his children to be raised by Russians? What good is it to point out that war is pointless?
Obviously the conversation is meandering around on different points. Try keeping up if you're going to be critical.
Or just say what you mean…. You aren’t fooling anyone. Either you are a troll or an idealist devoid from reality.
It's more about if there was provocation (US-backed overthrow of Yanukovych, trying to bring Ukraine into the anti-Russia NATO military alliance, etc.) and was that provocation pointless.
Or really… it’s about Russia’s historically tendency to be imperialist and invade their neighbors which prompted NATO’s formation. Russia is trying to get their empire back together. Your cause and effect ignores Russia’s behavior.
This simplistic mindset (Russia wants to take over the world) is what leads to dangerous escalation with a nuclear power.
The hyperbole of jumping from Russia wants to take over its “neighbors” to the “ world” is glaring…. But unsurprisingly given the level of knowledge you’ve demonstrated. So if a nuclear power is belligerent then we should just acquiesce? I’m sure that wouldn’t embolden them to use the nuclear threat over and over…. Apparently you’ll just keep handing over whatever Russia wants to keep appeasing them.
