• @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          4
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Sure. I won’t move the goalposts too much here, and will accept that I was overly specific,… but I legitimately would describe that as separate from an invasion, and instead call that peacekeeping or something else.

          Invasion to me seems like imperialist action to further political or territorial goals.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            52 months ago

            You should probably look up what Trujillo got up to, since you admit some actions justify intervention.

            Like, for example, a CIA sponsored coup and assassination. But obviously they’re the good guys, right?

            • Match!!
              link
              fedilink
              English
              42 months ago

              i don’t know if this is a hot take but assassinations are better than invasions

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                02 months ago

                Unless the assassination, for random example, starts a civil war, because the people the imperial power wanted in charge ended up not having enough support to stay in charge.

                Or if it starts WW1.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 months ago

        But what if a country is invading another country so they will stop invading a country, blocking the attempt by the invaded and invading country to build a revive machine that takes up exactly the same space as it and the invaded country combined to revive hitler?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 months ago

          The other dude being a douche doesn’t make invasion correct.

          Peacekeeping and diplomatic pressure are different.