Fun fact, the origin of “whataboutism” was its use as the phrase “whataboutery” during the Troubles in Ireland as the Irish accused the British of atrocities only to be dismissed as “whataboutery”
Weird how it’s always used as a thought terminating cliche to prevent criticism of the dominant empire, huh!
I’m not the one dismissing what any country has done. I’m saying they should both be held accountable.
The fact that the comment I was originally replying to was using that justification goes along with what you just said… which is pointing out what someone else did is no justification for any action. They both should be taken for what they are and judged accordingly.
I’m gonna try to follow your logic in good faith. If both Russia and the US should be held accountable for their crimes, then who should actually hold them accountable?
NATO is the international arm of the US military and it has committed war crimes over its entire decades of existence, some of the most recent ones in Iraq, Libya, and Syria. If the US is to be held equally accountable for their actions as the RF should be, then all NATO operations should be held under the same scrutiny.
So by this logic how can you support a NATO in it’s actions in Ukraine. Before Russia invaded, NATO was supported the bombing of the Donbass and the destruction of that region. If the US and NATO has a history of destabilizing regions through warfare for the benefit of the US, how can any of their actions be justified?
Fun fact, the origin of “whataboutism” was its use as the phrase “whataboutery” during the Troubles in Ireland as the Irish accused the British of atrocities only to be dismissed as “whataboutery”
Weird how it’s always used as a thought terminating cliche to prevent criticism of the dominant empire, huh!
Good thing it only works on idiots like you
Again, since you’re reading comprehension sucks…
I’m not the one dismissing what any country has done. I’m saying they should both be held accountable.
The fact that the comment I was originally replying to was using that justification goes along with what you just said… which is pointing out what someone else did is no justification for any action. They both should be taken for what they are and judged accordingly.
I’m gonna try to follow your logic in good faith. If both Russia and the US should be held accountable for their crimes, then who should actually hold them accountable?
NATO is the international arm of the US military and it has committed war crimes over its entire decades of existence, some of the most recent ones in Iraq, Libya, and Syria. If the US is to be held equally accountable for their actions as the RF should be, then all NATO operations should be held under the same scrutiny.
So by this logic how can you support a NATO in it’s actions in Ukraine. Before Russia invaded, NATO was supported the bombing of the Donbass and the destruction of that region. If the US and NATO has a history of destabilizing regions through warfare for the benefit of the US, how can any of their actions be justified?