"I think we’re the ones who have not been acting in good faith," the 2024 Democratic presidential candidate said.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said Wednesday he believes Russia acted in “good faith” amid the Kremlin’s invasion of Ukraine, adding the U.S., in fact, bore heavy responsibility for the ongoing war.
Nope, sorry, I am still not having it. The Russians are the only ones jeopardising peace in the region. NATO is a defensive pact. If Russia didn’t invade their neighbours, they would have nothing to fear from NATO. You are still apologising for Russian aggression and blaming its cause on the west, even if you’re trying to say it in an intellectual way or “both sides” it.
Jesus, I would love to see the world as simply as you do. You are literally going to avoid engaging with or thinking about every single point and reduce it to “Russia bad, NATO good?” You really see zero nuance in the history of NATO, its conception, its expansion, and the power it has? Does it not give you even a little pause? If not NATO, what about the world leaders who wield it?
I’m not trying to sound “intellectual,” and if I do it is because I am trying to be very specific and clear in what I say. I understand how closely this aligns with tankie talking points. That said, there is some level of intelligence or curiosity necessary for these conversations. If you reduce conflict around the world to some Marvel-esque “bad guy invades because he’s evil” scenario and never stop to ask who created the bad guy, you are never going to be able to understand human conflict or contribute to the avoidance of it.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !news@beehaw.org
Breaking news from around the world.
News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Nope, sorry, I am still not having it. The Russians are the only ones jeopardising peace in the region. NATO is a defensive pact. If Russia didn’t invade their neighbours, they would have nothing to fear from NATO. You are still apologising for Russian aggression and blaming its cause on the west, even if you’re trying to say it in an intellectual way or “both sides” it.
Jesus, I would love to see the world as simply as you do. You are literally going to avoid engaging with or thinking about every single point and reduce it to “Russia bad, NATO good?” You really see zero nuance in the history of NATO, its conception, its expansion, and the power it has? Does it not give you even a little pause? If not NATO, what about the world leaders who wield it?
I’m not trying to sound “intellectual,” and if I do it is because I am trying to be very specific and clear in what I say. I understand how closely this aligns with tankie talking points. That said, there is some level of intelligence or curiosity necessary for these conversations. If you reduce conflict around the world to some Marvel-esque “bad guy invades because he’s evil” scenario and never stop to ask who created the bad guy, you are never going to be able to understand human conflict or contribute to the avoidance of it.
Sure, attack my intelligence and curiosity rather than the argument that only an aggressive nation has anything to fear from a defensive alliance.