219
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2023
219 points (96.2% liked)
World News
32089 readers
987 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
Why is it being done?
This is how things start. Just like with weapons assistance, first it's a little then it's billions on the regular. This is an increase to an already way oversized presence of a foreign continents military in a delicate situation.
It's not a delicate situation for Ukrainians, they're defending their freedom. Accusing the US of escalation here when Russia violently invaded it's peaceful neighbor?
Do you understand what escalation means? Escalation doesn't have anything to do with who started it. It's a relative action: it escalates from some state. The USA is committing troops where it previously hadn't (or, more pedantically, is increasing the number of committed troops). This is escalation.
You can complain about Russia starting this, but you should also complain about the USA escalating the situation.
Wtf does this have to do with the US escalating their military presence? You do realize that once the us officially get involved it's WW3 with literal nukes, right? You don't seriously think a territorial conflict between Russia and Ukraine is worth nuking the world over, do you?
Remember how WW1 escalated? Treaties calling everyone into a pointless war over someone else's conflict.
nuclear war isn't the necessary outcome of ww3
Are you for real or are you being a troll?
Let's say the us gets involved. Article 5 is invoked in NATO and we get a WW1 style escalation into world war. Major nuclear powers are all involved. Someone is going to use a nuke. Maybe tactically at first but it will quickly spiral out of control. Unless something happens that renders all nukes inert, their use is all but guaranteed in WW3.
World war is not good in any instance, regardless if it triggers nuclear Armageddon. Europe has only just recovered from 1 and 2.
It sounds like you watch too many action movies.
Sounds like you don't understand history and don't understand the concept of NATO.
Study history, it gives you the context you need to think the world isnt an action movie and actually articulate your thoughts as to the flaws in my analysis based on historical facts and current world affairs.
Ad hominem attacks just show that you have no defense for the propaganda you're spewing. It's so transparent.
Then what exactly do you call your comment I'm replying to?
Seems exactly like an ad hominem attack. Something i only return in favor. You had absolutely nothing intelligent to say in response to me and it shows. Christ almighty, quit gaslighting everyone. We get it youre either a bot or working at a pentagon troll farm.
You must be really, really high.
You must have no historical understanding. I'd be happy to provide you a reading list to bring you up to speed.
Honestly I'm a little concerned you would say something like that in response to a statement like
Oh I understand. But I’m not really high with a touch of psychosis either.
No, you're just a warmonger. Happy to let the world burn in your own ignorance.
Seriously, learn history instead of trying to throw random insults at people online. The would would be much better off for it. I'm not joking about that reading list.
Do you really want to see if it is or not?