People be like "Oh, I'm against war" then immediately call you [insert enemy] shill if you speak up against the current one.

even better- be against “regime change” bombing and “defensive preemptive strike” lies too. even with no civilian deaths it’s still dumb as shit.

I wonder if all the women we kill will be allowed to be buried in bikinis

To be fair, there is certainly a time and place to intervene in how a country is governing.

I would hope we would all agree that the US intervention into WW2 was a good thing, even though a lot of civilians were killed in the process.

Obviously war is always terrible, and will almost always result in the deaths of people who didn't deserve it, but it is sometimes necessary.

Not saying that is or isn't the case here. Just pushing back on the notion that bombing another nation is necessarily always wrong.

And not to put too fine a point on it, but if Iran had run a successful op to bomb Netanyahu and also hit an elementary school in the process, I don't know that it would generate the same level of outrage here. And if the reason for that is, "well of course, Israel deserves it," then that undercuts the very point the meme is making.

Countries going against each other is part of this world (sadly). I don't care that much if they play a dumber version of chess with their military assets.
But fucking KEEP THE CIVILANS AND THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE OUT OF THIS. There is NO reason at all to bomb a school or hospital.

You explained it, and I think most people, including most Americans, agree.

I don't buy for one second that bombing the school was a mistake. I expect it was part of the plan to stir up protests in the U.S. to further justify taking over the mid-term elections under some "emergency order".

Clearly I don't mean the entire war, they just took advantage of the opportunity to further other ends.

Even if there’s a change in regime, the likelihood that it will be for the better is slim. The crazy dictator will just be replaced with some other crazy dictator.

Its almost like bombs dont make a region more stable and capable of long lasting meaningful reform

*shocked pikachu face*

Now we have to look out for false flag attacks around the country. That will be an excuse to put elections on hold

WWII was the last necessary war. And only because literally everybody was dragging their ass to avoid being involved in stopping what was obviously building.

True, but also I've had people telling me I have to 'critically support' the government of Iran, or else I'm just as guilty as if I dropped the bombs myself.

Nah, fam. I can be against two things.

A country's sociopolitical problems are theirs to solve, not a foreign actor. This should be one of the tenets of self-determination.

Some on here told me recently that that's a perfectly good reason to go bomb another country and kill its leader.

Yeah I don't support bombing civilians. I will however celebrate the death of IRGC members and leaders :)

Iirc, the crazy dictator they've got is already a result of foreign interference in the first place. I might be thinking of Pakistan, or maybe it's both.

It is not always possible to do. Italy and Germany were under a brutal dictatorship. The allied intervention was needed to help moderate democratic parties, oppressed by the regime, get the necessary strength to promote positive change. There are lot of nuances to take into consideration for each country.

True, we should bring international army to Minnesota, that's what the people in Minnesota wants: freedom from oppression.

This is a stupid take.

The Allies didn't go to war with Italy and Germany because of their internal sociopolitical problems, to instill democracy to dictatorships. They did it because The Axis were invading other countries.

If those dictatorships had kept to themselves they may have survived much longer than they did.

Maybe you're thinking of Libia, or was it Iraq? Wow this happens so often it's hard to keep track of it all.

Don't get me wrong, Hitler and the nazis and especially all the bystanders who ignored were all awful, but literally nothing good comes from some foreign countries meddling in other countries politics.

Imagine France decided trump was evil and they would get rid of him and suddenly Macron becomes the leader of the US. Yeah people will be happy that trump is gone, but imagine what happens next: people are mad because they are essentially controlled by a foreign power, their political system just gave weight to some other guy and now the nazis will rise up again because they feel like they need to "liberate" their nation from "the chains of foreign forces" and "make the country strong again". And this is only national reactions. No one knows what France constitutes as "a dictator". Maybe Canada is next? Now they have to build defenses against hostile actions like this one. And because France did it, maybe Spain will copycat, and maybe they might pick Portugal just because they would love to indirectly control it. And now you have to justify why that's different than Russia trying to "purge a country of Nazis", you know, stuff they are literally using right now to justify their war of aggression.

What I'm trying to say is any countries business is their own. Otherwise every foreign invasion is suddenly up to interpretation and that's just a bad ground rule for geopolitics.

The "Palestine is homophobic" one is especially hypocrite: unless Israel has special missiles, bombs and bullets which stop whenever they encounter a gay person, bombing Gaza kills far more gay people than homophobia in Palestine purelly because homosexuals are naturally a fraction of the civilian population being indiscriminatelly killed.

That kind of shit is "we'll kill you to protect you" hypocrisy from a murderous aggressor and only morons and murder-loving sociopaths parrot that crap.

Sure, I would agree with what you just said. The meme though, said that no behavior justifies bombing another country, as that's their problem to figure out. But obviously that's flawed.

I'm not justifying any particular war or action. Especially these most recent ones. Just pushing back against overly black-and-white thinking. Every action should be judged based on its merits.

And once the invaders had been put back into Germany, the allies just stopped at the border?

Would it be a defensive war? The only action taken against Iran in the past while was the bombing of their nuclear facilities, which was clearly a US action. Israel cheered it on, sure, but what action had Israel taken against Iran that would have justified Iran bombing them?

Iran isn't Palestine. Iran isn't Lebanon (despite all of their proxy militants there). I'm not justifying any of Israel's actions, but Iran bombing them would be more like if Poland started lobbing bombs at Russia, which I think we all agree would be a big escalation.

Are we stopping at territorial invasion (which Iran committed against UAE)? Iran is providing weapons to Russia, hezbollah, hamas, houtis and Iraqi militias. Iran is attaching ships on international waters. Iran is also active in hybrid cybernetic warfare against western countries. Where is the line you need to cross to make it justifiable to intervene?

You are dismissing an example that defeats your first point: indeed something good can come from foreign country meddling. Your “France” example is a case of bad that can also come from meddling. The outcome is what differentiate between good and bad meddling. Was UN and NATO meddling in Kosovo good or bad?

My guy, the hypothetical was if Iran had bombed Israel instead of the other way around. Reading comprehension is important.

Now I'm not saying this applies to the current circumstance, but just talking WWII.

If they stuck to their own countries, you are probably right that no one would have done anything. But would it have been so great that there was peace as Jewish people in Germany were so brutally killed?

Intervention should not be taken lightly or unilaterally by one or two nations, but it is sonething that should be an option to save a people from "their" government.

In real life?

They don't have a plan. This cut the head of the snake strategy never works. It hasn't worked on stopping organised crime or terrorist groups. When you murder someone they are rarely replaced by someone more moderate.

Probably 40% of the countries in the world are effectively authoritarian or dictatorships.

We’re not bombing all of them to “free” the people.

So the math is way off. It’s not about Epstein…this seems like people are inventing yet another conspiracy about this. Nobody is prosecuting trump, nobody is trying to. He’s surrounded by toadies and spineless democrats, he has the SCOTUS captured. All he has anymore is power. So therefore the likely reason for him doing what he’s doing is to keep himself in office by finding a way to stay a third term by force or by canceling midterms.

surrounded by toadies

What's a toady?

-Bari Weiss

Surely there's a middle ground between letting a murderous regime stay in power and bombing their civilians?

I mean . . . I got it.

Or oil and China...

Well, yes, that's why I explicitly said I wasn't saying this would apply to current scenario.

Israel itself is VERY homopohobic and virtue signals allyship with the queer community. so that justification outright doesn't hold up

online trolls have influence on real life flesh and blood people. that's the point of the online trolls

It's true. Not arguing that. For some reason it felt like they were discussing real-life encounters. Yes, the trolls have weight, but human interaction is much stronger.

He was a character on Neighbours.

I do not want to see people being killed, especially children, by war. Hell is hell and war is war, war is worse.