Comments by "Peter Jacobsen" (@pjacobsen1000) on "Mick Wallace and Clare Daly Want to Save Us from NATO" video.

@gavinhillick Sorry, it was my impression that Mick Wallace and Clare Daly spoke about all of Europe and not just Ireland. You know, we're all together now, working for a common future. I'm not Irish, by the way, I'm Danish.
3
@burneraccount "the pro-war side has logged on". I'm pro-defense. Pro defending Europe against aggressors. I feel I hold the moral high ground in this respect.
2
In a European context Mick Wallace and Clare Daly are very much on the political fringe. Fortunately, fewer and fewer Europeans agree with them as the years go by. In fact, most European NATO members are now increasing their defense budgets. We need to be stronger in Europe and we want a more powerful NATO. It's embarrassing that we can hardly defend our own territory.
1
@colmlarkin8665 Haha, yes, I realize my opinion is in the minority here, but I expect educated people to be able to accept opposing views. I like to watch Useful Idiots and have been a subscriber since the beginning, though I feel it was more entertaining when Matt Taibbi was co-hosting.
1
@pmesa7305 Slurs will get you nowhere, but they may give you a short lived sense of moral superiority.
1
@burneraccount I don't think my position is morally superior with respect to war in general. There can sometimes be a good justification for war. If you look back in history, you may find wars that you feel were justified, but that other people feel were not. In the end, it's up to the individual to decide whether they think a war is justified or not. You (presumably) feel that the west is not justified in supporting Ukraine militarily, but I do. As a European, I feel particularly concerned about Russia's actions, at least since 2014. Of course I wish we could have had a good partnership with them, but our interests were unfortunately not aligned.
1
@burneraccount Ok, I understand that position and sympathize with it. But the United States has a strategic interest in strengthening NATO and weakening Russia. In other words, it's not a moral justification but a purely strategic one. I think many Americans, like people around the world, have little interest in 'strategic interests' because it's not a part of their life, and that's why most democratic countries always feel they need to persuade their voters on a moral level to support wars, even if the real reason is strategic and not moral. With respect to Ukraine, I think both a strategic and moral argument can be made, because Russia invaded Ukraine and not vice versa. This makes it easier for people to support.
1
@burneraccount Yes, and Europeans are making even more sacrifices, given how dependent we have been on Russian gas. For some reason, the American government doesn't try to explain to the American people why this is so important. Maybe they don't trust that people will understand it, so they go to moral arguments instead. I'm sure you have noticed how the American legacy media frames the conflict in moral terms: Stories about individuals who had to flee, or had their house bombed to rubble. These stories may give the clicks needed and they are easy to understand. It reminds me of how the US media was cheerleading the runup to the Iraq war. That's when I realized how untrustworthy the legacy media is.
1
@burneraccount Different polls taken in April, May and June all show that a majority of Americans still support assisting Ukraine with military equipment. Of course, there will always be dissenting voices, as there are with any issue.
1
@burneraccount That's a belief you have no evidence for. Perhaps you're a 'man of faith'. In any case, US government support is there for the Ukrainians who so badly need it. I'm grateful for that. As for gas prices and inflation, I'm just going to ride my bicycle (we do that in Europe, anyway), put on some warm clothes and eat cheaper food. That's nothing compared to what the Ukrainians have to go through.
1
@gavinhillick No, the previous commenter claimed that most Americans are opposed to assisting Ukraine. The polls refute that claim.
1
@gavinhillick Ok, it's hard to know exactly what people are replying to. So, opinion polls can only show what direction the general population is leaning towards. They do not say anything about whether their position is correct or not. My argument in favor of arming Ukraine is not based on majority opinion but on my own views about the situation. 1) I believe in the inviolability of national territory. (God knows we have had lots of problems in Europe in that respect before the UN was established). 2) My opinion is that Russia is a long-term destabilizing factor in Europe and beyond. 3) While I understand that Russia is equally worried about NATO, I foresee that we will always have clashes regardless, because the two sides will always try to advance their own interests. That's just the nature of competition/rivalry. 4) Ukraine has signaled a long-term interest in being aligned with the West, both in trade (EU) and in national security (NATO). We cannot predict how this conflict will end, but I see some interesting developments beyond Russia. It appears that the Central Asian states are now becoming interested in a closer relationship with Europe and the West in general. Most likely as a counterweight to Russian and Chinese influence. In a way, the world is still a bit like high school with cliques and 'mean girls' all trying to get the upper hand.
1
@crhu319 I don't what?
1
@gavinhillick You are going to have to quote me from a previous post, because I cannot find where I used opinion polls as an argument in favor of supporting Ukraine with military equipment. To be clear: Opinion polls can only show how people feel about an issue. They do not say anything about whether those people are right or wrong.
1
@m.ó.baoighill More likely, it's both, plus an alliance that will also promote European interests.
1