Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Ok_Yogurtcloset8915 t1_j6asc09 wrote

Reply to comment by history_fan40 in Ukraine: ‘Fast-track’ talks underway for missiles, planes by bluelotus214

"violating neutrality"? what neutrality? no one has an obligation to Russia to remain neutral. there is no violation.

additionally, the first person to bring up the concept of objective vs. subjective wrongness was yourself. the person you initially replied to did not say it was objectively wrong. they simply said it was wrong. if you believe that there is no such thing as objective wrongness, then you should have no problem with their statement, as it must be their own opinion. if you believe their opinion that genocide is wrong is incorrect, argue with that, don't attempt to set up a strawman about moral objectivism

6

history_fan40 t1_j6bdkra wrote

> what neutrality

None of these countries are technically at war with Russia.

> the person you initially replied to did not say it was objectively wrong

Indeed, they did not directly state it, but it was heavily implied.

−2

Ok_Yogurtcloset8915 t1_j6bjhdm wrote

not being at war with Russia does not carry any obligation to not provide arms to Russia's opponent or to not sanction them. I have no idea what principles you think are being violated here.

it is simply your opinion that it was heavily implied. they did not state that they believe genocide is objectively wrong. without such a statement, it is senseless to try to start a debate about whether objective wrongness exists, as that isn't relevant to their point.

5

vkstu t1_j6bjw3m wrote

That sounds awfully subjective whether they implied or not.

5