• ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 days ago

    I mean, you can do a pre-emptive surprise strike against a foreign military and still be the “good guys”. It’s just that we aren’t the good guys when we did this pre-emptive military strike against a foreign military… Or grade school girls… Because our top military brass has been replaced by retards loyal to trump.

    • theolodis@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 days ago

      Name one good guy that did a “pre-emptive” (whatever that means in this context, because Iran for sure wouldn’t have attacked the US) strike against a foreign military.

      • guy@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 days ago

        Iran absolutely would. How haven’t you heard of the imminent threat of an attack?! It has been there for 47 years man!

        • theolodis@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 days ago

          Yes, maybe Iran would if it wasn’t preemptively attacked every year. But also, are we considering Iran being the good guy?

    • forrgott@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 days ago

      Everybody is the hero in their own story. Incidentally, this is something Maga do not understand; they honestly believe everyone else just wants them to fail, that we all know we’re wrong and trying to take them down, anyway. For them, we all actively chose evil.

      But, my point is “good guy” is inherently subjective. But that means you cannot preemptively strike and not be the villain, as well.

      There is no “good guy” in the theater of war, though; to be involved is to be as evil as everyone else there.