Comment by sharedburdens [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net on I love Twitter rule

The vaush meme subreddit creeped me out.

What was that subreddit about? =/

196 had extreme crossover with the vaush sub, I think mods too? Either way I got banned for shittalking NATO there over 3 years ago and haven’t bothered to check in since.

Are you talking about this guy?

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/people/vaush

I didn’t participate in 196 when I was on Reddit. And I’ve just now learned about Vaush. For what it’s worth, I haven’t seen him mentioned on this 196.

Although I’m pro-NATO. I’ve no way to know how representative that stance is of the general user base of this instance. But I’m of the opinion that it’s a common position.

The observed baseline for libs on reddit is defending misogyny if you push back on it.

Obama was president when NATO returned the slave trade to Libya- to quote his secretary of state Hillary Clinton: “we came, we saw, he died”. I’m sure you have all sorts of state-approved positions on Americas state enemies, but that’s the historical reality you’re whitewashing.

I’ll admit my knowledge on US involvement in Libya is lacking. I was a junior in high school at the time and I don’t remember hearing much about it. I’ll have to read up on it if I’m going to debate it with you. At a glance, it looks Obama would agree with you. Reestablishing the slave trade in Libya doesn’t seem to be the outcome he was hoping for. edit: typo

https://www.newsweek.com/obama-responsible-libyan-slave-trade-730875

CW: Worst mistake?

Obama: Probably failing to plan for the day after, what I think was the right thing to do, in intervening in Libya.

From the article you just posted, I clicked the link to read what he actually said, and I read it as he expressed regret for not intervening more!

It’s like criminals expressing regret for getting caught.

I really don’t understand how someone can come the conclusion that NATO is a good thing? :/ They’ve carried out some absolutely awful military operations that have taken many lives. They are not, in any way, a “defensive alliance” and have never acted like one. Like, the bare minimum that I ask is “Russia and NATO are both bad” (and thats not even wrong, its just said in bad faith sometimes). But outright saying NATO is good? :/

The West has the right to defend itself. As does everyone.

NATO has intervened to stop genocide.

NATO is in fact a defensive alliance. Here is article 5.

“The west” as a whole does not have a right to defend itself. “The west” is not a nation. Considering it one has white supremacist vibes, I’m sure from your other posts that you don’t intend them, but the implications are there.

You have been lied to about Yugoslavia. In fact, the bombing of Yugoslavia would have been one of the atrocities I brought up, considering the 500 civilian deaths and 6000 civilian wounded that resulted from it. At the very least, while there may have been a genocide going on there, NATO’s goals were not to stop it. It was an excuse to enforce further western hegemony over the region. I Unfortunately I am not prepared with sources on that issue so I hope someone else in this thread will come through with some for you. I always forget to bookmark sources even though I know I’ll need them later. You’ll just hopefully trust me that I have read stuff about this before. I just forgot to save it.

Lastly, its stated goals mean nothing to me when they supported the invasion of Afghanistan (as just one example). Was that a defensive war?

sure were amazing defensive actions in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, and Iraq

The West has the right to defend itself.

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

I love Twitter rule(midwest.social)

196

!196@lemmy.blahaj.zone

Community stats

Community moderators