As title, if you have post or link any useful resource you have

  • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    3 months ago

    Sorry, I’m completely immovable on the stance that war is bad. Never once has mass human slaughter made the world a better place.

    I understand that, like everything, there are those who disagree. Moral relativism aside, those people are wrong, in the sense that I have zero tolerance for supporting campaigns of mass death.

    • Vanth@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      So if you have an immoveable stance against war, isn’t it just as likely someone out there believes they have a similarly immovable stance in favor of the draft?

      • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yeah, and that person, unlike me, is evil, because they are able to see human lives as pawns in a political game.

        • Vanth@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          3 months ago

          Uh, just to be clear, I’m not actually trying to sway you. Just pointing out to OP, and to you I guess since you’re engaging, that when someone holds an “immoveable stance” as they themselves say, and aren’t open to changing their views, it is highly unlikely one can convince them to change. Like, someone could up to you and say you’re wrong and evil for your views but that probably isn’t going to convince you, right?

    • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Is every alternative preferable to war? For example, should Ukraine have agreed to become part of Russia to avoid war?

      • SLfgb@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Quite a few nations capitulated against the Nazis within days or even without a fight to avoid war. It saved a lot of lives. Does that make it the right choice? Who is to say…

        What’s for sure is that Boris shouldn’t have vetoed the peace agreement in 2022.

        • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          I didn’t think it saved lives, since it empowered the Nazis to kill more people. So I say no it wasn’t the right choice.

          • SLfgb@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            Look it’s hard to say if it saved lives in the overall ww2 tally, but surrender to save lives was the rationale of the Generals eg in The Netherlands. They looked at what the Luftwaffe had done to Rotterdam, looked at what weapons they had themselves, considered the prospect of what was going to happen to Utrecht next, and decided that further resistance was futile. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netherlands_in_World_War_II#German_occupation

            • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Sorry, I don’t mean to say that it killed more people in every case. I agree there are could be cases where the outcome was certain, and maintaining strength for gorilla resistance and saving population centers was likely prudent.

              I was primarily referring to appeasement, where countries in Europe, mostly England, gave the Nazis land to avoid war.