Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

tandemxylophone t1_jdlkmxs wrote

Reply to comment by mainegreenerep in Another attack on an American base in Syria Friday after US retaliatory airstrikes on Iranian-backed groups by notunek

Isn't that pretty much a justification anyone can use?

Pretty much the entire history of US invasion was alliancing with the opposition and make them rise to power.

Russia can say they are getting rid of Nazis in Ukraine, and if they kill enough Ukrainians they are left with a pro-Russian population and all that's left is to get recognised by the Western biased International law.

−7

Antique-Scholar-5788 t1_jdnjg5p wrote

Yes, Americans fighting ISIS is the same as Russians committing genocide against Ukrainians.

Tankie logic.

5

tandemxylophone t1_jdocl8u wrote

The US isn't in Syria to fight ISIS. That's what the media says because its what the Western people care about (ISIS wouldn't have risen if the West back troops haven't supported the opposition into a civil war). They are there to fight a proxy war to get military alliance within the region. The US wants to get rid of the Pro-Assad, Pro-Russia team at all costs, even though they know their strategy to win will also end up in genocide of the Alawites.

Pretty much the war strategy of destabilisation absolves responsibility of any consequences that come from doing that, including the rise of ISIS. It absolved them from Iraq, Afghanistan, Guatemala, Haiti, Vietnam, Cuba, Venesuela, and El Salvador. So why is this any different?

And I'm not saying Russia is better, but that the a lot of people here don't understand the crimes committed by the US can be similarly abhorrent. Noam Chomsky also described that Sanctions are not ethical (due to the damage it does to civilians), but mostly used as a power play of the strong. The "International law" is not run on ethics, but the justice of the alliance who has the most power.

Right now a lot of people agree with the "law" because its an agreeable ally. Nobody will recognise a war crime the West has done until Russia, Iran, or China will do the exact same thing.

My point is, so many people here still has a notion of ethics and absolute justice in the US's motives and actions. They speak the legality instead of the power dynamics. I'm just suspicious of someone who believes in absolute justice for wars.

2

howie117 t1_jeamma9 wrote

Who said anything about ISIS? Why dont you tell that to the 1 million dead civilians killed by americans in the middle east. Why not critisize both russia and america for being genocidal terrorist war mongers?

1

Antique-Scholar-5788 t1_jechjz8 wrote

Source: trust me bro

1

howie117 t1_jed7fi8 wrote

"The U.S. post-9/11 wars have forcibly displaced at least 38 million people. At least 929,000 people have been killed by direct war violence in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, and Pakistan."

  • Watson Institute, Brown University

https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human

1

Antique-Scholar-5788 t1_jee1qfx wrote

Solid example of manipulating data for propaganda purposes.

Those numbers include such data as civilian deaths in the Syrian Civil War and US citizen/military death.

The US Middle East wars were obviously a mistake, but the US military didn’t target civilians. Equating that to what Russia is doing (or China by the CCP), and using whataboutism to justify it, is despicable.

1

howie117 t1_jefaq4b wrote

> Solid example of manipulating data for propaganda purposes.

lol, you mean from the US based Watson Institute and Brown University?

Why is one war worse than the other? Iraq/Afghanistan war even has more casualties. The whole world knows that both Russia and USA are warmongering terrorist nations. Why not condemn both for the wars and mass death? Or is it all about american exceptionalism? Every other nation in the world sees through the clear hypocrisy of americans.

1

Antique-Scholar-5788 t1_jefb6xj wrote

Nah, I mean claiming that US troops killed 1 million people, and then citing a source that definitely does not say that.

1

gc11117 t1_jdlr0qr wrote

So, for what it's worth in the case of Syria

>Isn't that pretty much a justification anyone can use?

Everyone IS using this justification. Iran's in there, Russia is in there, Israel is in there, and probably other foreign nations as well that I'm drawing a blank on. It's a free for all shit show.

2

Alioshia t1_jdlwngq wrote

America will never recognize pro-Russian anything.

1

tandemxylophone t1_jdmxuyk wrote

Pretty much my point. A lot of these war justification seems to lie not on an Internationally agreed definiton of invasion, but whether if you are allianced with the US or not. And "Internationally Recognised" is just who has power, not whether there's any ethical justification to it.

The West sends their military overseas to support a non-governmental faction-> Heroic democracy savers. Freedom fighters. Heroic murder.

Anyone else I disagree does it -> Terrorists and forces of evil that violate every single human right code out there.

I'm not saying anyone should be proud for killing others, but that there is some huge hypocrisy in that the West don't recognise their military endeavour of committing war crime isn't a war crime but simply a rewritten history.

4

this_dudeagain t1_jdn410h wrote

It's not a justification it's just the facts on the ground. Comparing it to Ukraine is ridiculous. Very different conflicts.

1

tandemxylophone t1_jdoelew wrote

Facts and legality is also backed by power, not ethics. Yes, it is fact, but the US also absolves itself from illegally invading Iraq because they make the rules. So many here say facts because it legitimises questionable practices behind that may get criticised.

If China convinces most dictator driven African countries to support that Taiwan is part of China, will you accept it as fact if over 50% agree to it? If China was the one in power, will you accept their legal definition of who is a terrorist? I don't think anyone is good, just that nobody wants to admit their side is evil too.

3