That’s a brilliant plan. Nuclear armed countries generally have a policy of “live and let live” once they get nuked so that should work out great.
That’s a brilliant plan. Nuclear armed countries generally have a policy of “live and let live” once they get nuked so that should work out great.
The glaring difference between the two is our level of active involvement.
Solidarity is one thing. Actually doing something about Sudan would require some sort of deliberate intervention.
In the case of Gaza we could likely make a huge difference if we just stopped arming the aggressors.
We don’t send arms to Sudan. We don’t send arms to Putin. We don’t send arms to the Sri Lankan military. We don’t send arms to Boko Haram. We don’t send arms to Myanmar.
I’ve been thinking about this exact question recently.
My Austrian grandmother and her sister were working class teenagers during the war. They couldn’t realistically have done anything to stop the Nazis. They didn’t really do much to help but since they were seamstresses they secretly snuck the Jewish family in the building some sewing supplies. It wasn’t much and they stopped when they were told that someone had reported them to the Gestapo. Their experience during the war was dodging bombs and trying to find something to eat.
None of that matters. When I was a kid growing up in the US people regularly made Nazi jokes as soon as they found out about my heritage. Nobody was willing to entertain any ideas that maybe those civilians shouldn’t have been held accountable.
History judged all of Germany and Austria harshly. It judged the civilians harshly and it judged their descendants harshly.
https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1144717
The world is watching.
It’s a bit more than “nobody”.
https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/09/1154391
The problem is that the minority that is uncomfortable doing or saying anything is backed by half the worlds carrier fleets and thousands of nuclear armed ICBMS.
It’s not just the sexual aspect that makes people uncomfortable.
Many people view it as childish. Children are really into their stuffed animals and love playing dress up. There is nothing inherently wrong with enjoying activities normally associated with children but other adults tend to look down on it.
Some furries like to talk about their fursona as a spiritual extension of themselves. Many people associate that kind of language with crazy old hippies.
Allies are only ever allies of convenience.
The US was allied with both the USSR and China for the sake of convenience. Right after that war the US allied with its erstwhile enemies, Japan, Germany and Italy for the sake of convenience. The Marshal Islands maintain diplomatic relations with both China and the US for their own convenience.
BRIC (South Africa joined later) was initially coined as a description of quickly emerging economies by a Goldman Sachs economist. Since then it’s become an actual trading block that coordinates on economic policy. It’s very obviously dominated by China but the other members see advantage in joining a club that’s not obviously dominated by the US.
The combined GDP of BRICS nations now exceeds the combined GDP of the G20. If it’s a joke, it’s a pretty successful one.
Just started playing Shapez 2. https://shapez2.com/
Hot damn, is that addictive.
The US has specific sanctions against Ramzan Kadyrov and if Musk violated any of them he could be prosecuted for sanctions violations.
That would be separate from a prosecution under “succor to the enemy”. As near as I can tell, that only comes into effect under the very specific case of declared wars and that sanctions alone, aren’t sufficient.
Article III, Section 3, Clause 1 says:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
It’s a fairly narrow definition. I haven’t found any cases where the USSC defines “enemy” but, given the preceding sentence, it looks like the heavily implied definition is, “Members of a nation that is at war with the United States.”
Officially, the US has only been at war 5 times. The last one was WW II.
I’m not arguing that Russia is trustworthy. I’m saying that nuclear retaliation is a standard policy for any nuclear power.
We’d be relying on an other Stanislav Petrov to save us. I don’t like those odds.