Image Transcription:
An 8-panel Phoebe Teaching Joey meme.
The first panel is Phoebe from Friends saying "Russia".
The second panel is Joey from the same show replying with "Russia".
The third panel is Phoebe saying "has invaded".
The fourth panel is Joey repeating back "has invaded".
The fifth panel is Phoebe saying "Ukraine".
The sixth panel is Joey repeating back "Ukraine".
The seventh panel is Phoebe saying the completed phrase "Russia has invaded Ukraine".
The final panel shows Joey proudly proclaiming "NATO just started a proxy war".
No, here we see the classic double standard where the US does a lot worse than many other countries but calling it out is "whataboutism" because the talking heads on the TV said we should all be mad at this thing and not think about what led up to this.
Russia is not justified in invading Ukraine, but let's not ignore that Ukraine is yet another proxy war that the US uses to destroy other countries and retain sole superpower status. Do you not see the increased rhetoric against China as well? Any country that could ever potentially rise up or aid in the rising up of a country that isn't the US gets smacked down. Just like how the US was screaming about Japan taking over the world in the 80s while engineering financial collapse through things like the Plaza Accord and that was their ally. This behavior isn't some insane conspiracy theory, it's all laid out in the Wolfowitz Doctrine.
It costs a lot to invade a country and nobody does it willy-nilly. The US has been fucking around in Ukraine for decades and has pushed to economically cut off Russia the entire time. Putin played into their hand by invading and he was absolutely wrong to do so, but he was losing Ukraine anyway so he probably figured "fuck it".
Well there ya go, what else is there to talk about?
Golly, how could Russia have possibly avoided this war? Hm, maybe by not invading.
Ooh, sounds scary. I guess if the US wants to be the sole superpower, it makes anything Russia does in order to try and be a superpower totally ok, and we should let em do it.
"Fuck it, if these people want to voluntarily, democratically seek closer economic and political ties to Europe, what's the difference? I should probably kill hundreds of thousands of my own troops and hundreds of thousands more civilians in a devastating military fiasco riddled with war crimes."
You can see how that's not better, right?
You obviously see the world in black and white. Someone can be not justified in doing something yet have reasons for doing them, just like how someone isn't justified in physically beating someone up over words but you could see why it'd come to that, depending on the words and the situation. "I would simply not invade" is a braindead take for something as vast and complicated as geopolitics. Seriously, put some thought into your worldview. You have about as much nuance as a picture book for kindergartners.
Then again, your stance appears to be "I guess if the US wants to be the sole superpower we should let them" Then you follow it up with literal CIA propaganda about "the people" wanting this or that. Golly gee the people have spoken here https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/nov/26/ukraine.usa and here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WV9J6sxCs5k
That would be like saying "the people" wanted Jan 6th to happen but the big bad government quashed the people's movement.
I guess Russia had better invade us so they can ensure we do the thing we actually wanted to do all along, but at gunpoint!
If the discussion was about US imperialism sure, but it wasn’t. You used it as a way to shift the argument to something else. It’s fine though, I asked you a question back about the same thing, but don’t act like I’m some how making your double standard argument here which you shoehorned in. Then to assume you know where my information is coming. How about this, I can do the same thing. I can assume you get your information from crackpot conspiracy theorists that want to sell you vitamins for your brain…
It’s interesting you keep bringing up Paul Wolfowitz and his doctrine. It failed as a means of control, doing more harm than good. How many US administrations are we removed from Bush and that way of thinking? Whatever the US doctrine is at the moment isn’t that.
So we heard a lot about Ukraine before the invasion, and then surprise! They were invaded. Xi Jinping has been making aggressive moves as of late, not just rhetorically but literally. His move on Hong Kong for example. Taiwan seems to be up next. I’m sorry, why wouldn’t we be hearing about China? If anything US doctrine is to react not pre-empt.
I don’t understand your last paragraph. You start off by saying no one gets into a war Willy-nilly then go on to say Putin just said “fuck it” as his reasoning before going to war.
Virtually all global politics involve the US, so yes, the discussion has to include US imperialism. It wasn't like the US was hands-off until Russia invaded out of nowhere and then that's when the US decided to get involved.
You're naive if you think the Wolfowitz doctrine and its ideologies have simply gone away with the Bush administration. This has been the blueprint for US foreign policy since the end of the cold war.
Yes, we did hear a lot about Ukraine getting invaded and then they got invaded, but the trouble didn't start like a couple weeks before the invasion. Funny that you claim that I'm merely assuming I know where your information is coming from when you keep repeating US mainstream media talking points over and over. Following your logic, North Korea would have dropped multiple nukes on South Korea and Japan by now. You hear a lot about China conducting military drills or encroaching on air space, but you won't hear the same about the US even though they do the same. Is it because you can trust the US? Is it because the US owns all airspace on Earth and thus can go where they please?
"Fuck it" in this context doesn't mean "I got off the wrong side of the bed this morning, I think I'll go invade a country today", it means "I believe I've run out of options and I will do this out of desperation".