Correct to some extent. They are trying to re-group and establish supply lines. Where they are really holding back is the airforce; they have not put a lot of their best planes into action, nobody is sure why,
I mean..... were we intentionally trying to kill civilians? Do you want me to compare carpet bombing civilian neighborhoods intentionally? I seriously don't understand why people keep comparing Iraq/Afghanistan with this. We weren't trying to annex those countries. We weren't going in with the objective to subjugate and control.
One is a war crime. One is not. Intentionally bombing civilians is against international law. But I still think plenty of people protested the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm not sure where you're going with this. They were not exactly popular wars. If you're wondering why the entire world wasn't freaking out, it's because Those wars happened in remote places with sub-par technology. They mostly played out in the early-to-late 2000s when camera phones weren't really a thing. Civilian deaths were spread out. An accidental drone strike in a small village here and there isn't even remotely the same thing as carpet bombing a populated European city. Right now we're watching a nuclear power invade and destroy a first world nation in Europe, completely unprovoked.
you use of "european" and "first world nation" bugs me. Reeks of a superiority complex and (not so subtly) indicates that a white man with blonde hair blue eyes is beyond being the subject of such attacks. My point is that THIS is the kinda messaging the media is repeating ad nauseum.
Oh good grief. I'm using "European" because of the level of exposure. The entire fight is front and center. It's not in some remote village. And what the fuck is that shit about blonde hair and blue eyes? Wow dude...... talk about inferring some serious bullshit.
Yes, you always have to be concerned about all-out war, especially in the nuke era. But there are only 3 major options here to stop that from happening. 1. Sanctions 2. Ignore Putin and let him do what he wants. 3. Start an all-out war to prevent Putin from starting an all-out war. For right now, option 1 makes the most sense.
Honestly, I think it has more to do with people being shocked that a European country is being invaded... makes it feel closer to home. Most wars in the last few decades were fought in third world countries. Places far away. Places that I think people just assume will have conflict. Out of sight, out of mind. But with Ukraine, it's what many people would consider to be a metropolitan, civilized, beautiful country. Also, everyone chalked Iraq and Afghanistan as "pat yourself on the back" wins against dictators or oppressive regimes. Civilian deaths were collateral damage in the war on terror.
I hate to continue this convo but you should take a look some pics at Baghdad before Bush invaded it. Or Tehran in the 80s. And fwiw, rural Ukraine is pretty backwards. I think it would just be easier to call it what it is. White people getting attacked and in disarray is... unusual and the media doesn't know how to handle it.
Baghdad for sure got messed up, but how much of that was from us just randomly blowing stuff up? There was a lot of suicide attacks over a span of 2 decades. The Iraqi people were thrilled when we first got there. They couldn't wait to go out and tear down the statues.
Why stop with Afghanistan and Iraq? There have been recent wars in Africa that have killed, displaced, raped, millions of civilians. I think everyone agrees, wars suck. Crimes against civilians are especially vile. But... unfortunately, wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Africa don't draw the rest of the world into them. We have two very big and fairly recent examples of how a war in Europe can literally explode into multi-nation, multi-continent conflicts.
Over 100k (and repeatedly reported as an underestimate) civilians died in a war that Iraqis didn't even want. Let's not re-write history into justifying Bush's personal agenda as some rescue mission against an oppressive regime.
