Pearl Harbor was a good excuse to start a war.

Attacking military targets inside Russia will be a tit for tat in an ongoing conflict.

This post was edited by Ashirgo on Nov 18 2024 06:54am

Which can be followed up by the Russians with a tit for tat and giving houthis some ship killing missiles in an ongoing conflict.

Iran is supplying both Russia and the Houthis with missiles, nothing new there I suppose.

I’m talking about missiles that would actually be able reach and take down a US naval asset not lower quality ones.

If Russia supplies high grade missiles which are then guided by Russian satellites geolocating and sinking a US destroyer, do they get to wash they hands because Habibi pulled the trigger?

This is what’s happening in Ukraine, we keep pretending to be non actors, continually moving the needle and expecting nothing to happen.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Nov 18 2024 07:11am

1. Pearl Harbor was crucial for control over the entire Pacific.
2. The US had not used Pearl Harbor as the launching pad for strikes on Japan prior to the Japanese attack.

In terms of international law, morals and common sense, there can be absolutely no doubt that the Russian airfields from which attacks on Ukraine are launched make for legitimate targets.



I find this narrative really amusing that Russia has shelled Ukraine for 2 years, brought in mercenary ground troops from other parts of the world (NK) and used weapons and equipment from Iran and China without Ukraine or NATO declaring war on them - but that it would somehow be this gigantic, irresponsible escalation when the tables are turned and Ukraine shells Russian bases, or that UA using NATO equipment to do so would be ground for Russia to declare war on NATO.

No, it's not. Ukraine and Russia are the two official belligerents. Russia has been attacking Ukraine with weapons supplied by its allies for two years. If Ukraine does the same - strike Russia with weapons supplied by its allies - that's a reciprocal answer. The Houthis sinking an American destroyer with Russian missiles would be equivalent to Japan sinking a Chinese ship with American missiles, or to Jordan sinking an Iranian ship.

So far, the warfare in this conflict has been largely contained to Ukraine and a few Russian provinces bordering it. Enabling Ukraine to strike back against Russian airfields in its vincinity doesn't change this calculus. If anything, it was the 'neo Axis' which has sought to expand the theater of war. They are the side which brought in tens of thousands of foreign soldiers. They are the side which began unprovoked attacks on civilian ships in the Red Sea. They are the side which began sharing missiles and drones to strike hundreds of kilometers inside of Ukraine's territory.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Nov 18 2024 07:32am

You could of just said rules for thee and not for me. We provide the means for Ukraine to attack various Russian targets, we provide them with intel, coordinates, etc. We gave them the training on how to operate ATACMS or whatever other high grade weapons, in some cases I'm sure western soldiers in possibly an unofficial capacity operated some of these higher grade systems. If Russia did the same with Houthis, it would be equivalent.

That's not a problem if Ukraine itself would shell Russia with low grade missiles. ATACMs can be equipped with nukes. They're provided and guided by NATO. See the problem there? Can you tell afterwards we're not at war with Russia? Do you want a direct war with Russia?

This post was edited by babun1024 on Nov 18 2024 07:48am

The American people didn't care about Pearl Harbor's geostrategic significant to our military. The people didn't watch the horror of the attacks and debate the minutiae of international law, they didn't look to the oil stranglehold in the far east or Japan's self-interests.
If NATO operatives are firing NATO missiles that rain down on Russian targets deep in the motherland, what narrative will the Russian people read into?

Even if Putin was every bit the dictator we make him out to be, he couldn't hold onto his nation if he allowed NATO to bomb Russia unanswered.
And there's no equivalence or reciprocation to be had. Ukraine and Russia aren't equals. Ukraine isn't a world power, isn't a nuclear power. Ukrainians crying foul over being bombed have the same weight as goat herders in Afghanistan and Iraq do to us.

Russian propaganda has claimed from the start that this is a war between NATO/West against them. Nothing new there.