60
submitted 3 days ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ristoril_zip@lemmy.zip 7 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

If the point of supporting Ukraine is to support the international order of respecting borders, then an absolutist interpretation would mean you stop at your border when repelling invaders.

On the other hand, that would certainly result in invaders loading up on personnel and materiel on their side of the border until they reached some critical mass for a re invasion.

A lot of people might not remember the first Gulf War where the international community defending Kuwait stopped at the Iraq border. I think it could be argued that was a mistake on multiple levels, even ignoring everything we know that came after.

[-] Cagi@lemmy.ca 0 points 3 days ago

"The side that stays within its fortifications is beaten"

Napoleon Bonaparte

Not only do you need to strike at the enemy's territories and hold it to win, you need to threaten to keep it if you want to restore your original borders. Going to the peace table with enemy cities your pocket is a classic way to negotiate for your own land back. The more Russian land the Ukranians take, the more likely we will see a restoration of old borders.

[-] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 days ago

Funnily enough you quote the dude that first planned to ally with Russia but get swept into the prototype of modern geopolitics and attacked it, not staying within his fortifications, and that led to him and his empire being utterly and completely crushed. Though unlike current followers of the evolution of the same geopolitical strategy, he at least didn't had ample historical precedence for this madness.

load more comments (39 replies)
this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2024
60 points (86.6% liked)

World News

32083 readers
1021 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS