Ah, the old ‘what if they kill their own people’ routine. Cute. Let’s review what you call stopping murder:

Iraq (2003): No WMDs. Half a million civilians dead. The regime? Gone. The chaos? Permanent.

Libya (2011): NATO bombs under the pretext of ‘protecting civilians.’ Gaddafi gone. Now it's slave markets and warlords.

Vietnam (1965–75): Millions dead. Napalm on villages. All to stop “communist tyranny.”

Syria (2010s): Armed rebels, covert ops, proxy war. Millions displaced. All under ‘moral obligation.’

Chile (1973), Congo (1961), Iran (1953): Regimes killed? Sure. But installed by the West. So who's the killer here?

You don’t protect civilians by bombing them. You don’t rescue people by flattening cities.

Stop pretending airstrikes are humanitarian hugs.

This got boring the moment you started quoting the Pentagon like it's a philosophy textbook. Come back when you’ve read history, not just headlines.

nostr:nevent1qqs8lh9laxytpgj8a6e7uzx6htq4jlyrqprwkqwt8hz5q8uwlm5k9acpr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmp0qgsd3zqjjhmygtwfxjql3zxakhn5464dmty52l30k77sne50f4wgmdcrqsqqqqqp9uwxun

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I asked you hypothetical question. Why you quote history to me?

If a regime kill its own citizens, is it ok to bomb the regime itself (without killing any civilians in the way somehow)?

What if you colonize it with a democracy? Will it be ok?