• Hubi@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Out of all of these the concerned pacifist is by far the worst IMO.

    • GreenMario@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ive seen posts that literally say “Ukraine is warmongering because they are defending themselves”.

      This is some “she was asking for it for exposing her ankles” shit.

    • PugJesus@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The Subjectively Objective Academic irks me the most, tbh. Talking points straight out of the 19th century.

      • dustyData@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s particularly irate because tradition is a finicky thing that means whatever to whoever is arguing wants it to be. Go far back enough and Russia was a Viking kingdom ruled from Kiev. So Russia traditionally belongs to Ukraine. Checkmate, enlightened faux-academics.

      • PugJesus@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        40
        ·
        1 year ago

        In isolation, sure, but in context, ‘war bad’ types are generally not agitating for the invader to stop, but for the defender to stop.

        • Akagigahara@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          34
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          IMO, it’s often not even “war bad” but “fighting bad”. Thus wanting the defender not to defend because that would be just as bad as attacking.

          I consider myself a pacifist, so I prefer peaceful and diplomatic ways before going to war. But if you are attacked, you have the right, if not the duty, to defend yourself and your citizens.

          Edit: changed citizen to cititens

          • credit crazy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            1 year ago

            Reading your edit not gave me the mental image of a country being attacked and their military just surrounds and protects one singular confused random citizen

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        We tend to think of the aggressor when we say war is bad. It makes sense, they’re the ones who initiate the conflict and make the war exist.

        Defending yourself in a war though is, well, defensible. Being anti war can never be an absolutist position. Otherwise, those who are fine with war only need threaten war to get what they want. Do you truly live in peace if it’s because you give the aggressor everything they want? I’d argue no.