- 11 Oct 2021 11:28
#15194029
Yes, it did. I remember "Freedom Fries" even if you don't.
No, it wasn't. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, and nor did it have any weapons of mass destruction.
So as kneejerk reaction of a hegemon leading to the deaths of hundreds of thousands and the destruction of an entire nation is okay, while Russia defending its vital strategic interests on its own doorstep with minimal casualties on either side is not okay? How do you work that out?
And that's your 'analysis', is it?
JohnRawls wrote:You are trying to obfuscate. The reasons, causes and objectives matter. US didn't stoke nationalism or jingoism and so on, Russia did.
Yes, it did. I remember "Freedom Fries" even if you don't.
US was directly attacked, Russia was not.
No, it wasn't. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, and nor did it have any weapons of mass destruction.
US response was a kneejerk reaction of a hegemon basically while Russian reaction was a way to be perceived strong and they really had very little choice in the matter because they already provoked the whole nationalism and jingoism mantra.
So as kneejerk reaction of a hegemon leading to the deaths of hundreds of thousands and the destruction of an entire nation is okay, while Russia defending its vital strategic interests on its own doorstep with minimal casualties on either side is not okay? How do you work that out?
Russian invasion was a consequence of their own jingoism and nationalism stocking. The same situation happened when Yushenko came to power but the situation in Russia was less jingoistic and nationalistic because it had growth so there was no invasion at the time. On the other hand, when Yanukovich collapsed then Russia already stocked the flames, unleashed its propaganda and so on. Hence the outcome that we have.
And that's your 'analysis', is it?
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Marx (Groucho)