I’m barely reading this thread, but I can see someone holding the “good guys” to different standards than the “bad guys” as being the reason for this. The outrage against the bad guys doing bad shit kind of goes without saying. Whereas if the good guys do it, then it stands out.
I think the saying “all is fair in love and war” was made specifically for this purpose.
Our boi Jal is here arguing the bad guys aren’t half as bad as we think.
Like I said, I’m barely reading this. I was just making a comment on why that may not be generally true. I don’t intend it to apply to any specific instances of outrage.
I think cluster munitions should be banned and not made, but if they exist, then I am not going to judge a country that wants to use them against an invading force on their own land, where they have to suffer the consequences of unexploded munitions, especially when the invading force has already used them against civilian targets. Save me any crocodile tears about the people in Laos. The situation is not at all analogous.
Pretty gross accusation when you consider an old friend of mine was living there for a while, but can be understood as the by product of a general insouciance about the lot of people living a long way away, whereas Russians = orcs type racism can be understood as the main product of a lifetime of brainwashing and a lack of intellectual curiosity married to an inability to think for oneself.
It’s ok bruv, I get it.
Yes, it was better that the allies got the bomb than the axis you child.
If Ukraine wants to use them, that’s one thing. If we are going to supply the munitions to them, that’s a completely different matter
Holy shit you all are off the rails
Am I missing something or doesn’t Ukraine NATO membership mean instant WW3?
Article 5 doesn’t state “An attack on a member state shall necessarily result in global thermonuclear meltdown”.
Instead it says that “each and every other member of the Alliance will consider this act of violence as an armed attack against all members and will take the actions it deems necessary to assist the Ally attacked.”
So that could mean anything in practice, including sending flowers.
Of course
The analogy to the US cluster bombing of Laos in this conflict is… Russia cluster bombing Ukrainian civilians, and the only outrage you expressed over that was at the people calling the Russians monstrous, not the actual perpetrators of the atrocity. But with a mind so warped by forum animosity that you feel the need to get more angry at the people upset over war crimes than the war crimes themselves your sense of empathy is totally fucked.
So according to you everyone must join in the forum chorus of condemnation of Russia each time you (an irrelevant ex-mod) demand it, even though it’s obvious to anyone that the invasion was A VERY BAD THING, and if they don’t then fools will accuse them of having no empathy.
If you had any self-awareness you’d have looked at your own history of supporting conservative causes which led to bad outcomes and reconsider your conditioned reflexive response to Ukraine.
It’s the other way around. Letting Ukraine into NATO only makes sense to do once NATO has decided to intervene in the war (or the war is over).
The threat of this also means Russia won’t stop the war until they’ve has reached their maximal war aims.
Yeah, Ukraine membership of NATO is not happening for a good while yet - UKR are hoping for an official ‘intent to join NATO in the future’ announcement from NATO at the next meeting, not full membership - so WW3 at least a few months off 
Canada and Spain - Nato members, like the US and UK - also stated their opposition to the weapons, as did New Zealand, a Nato partner.
These weapons are problematic but the US isn’t even the first NATO country to supply Ukraine with these things. Turkey started sending them last year. Why is there an outcry now?
e class="onebox allowlistedgeneric" data-onebox-src="https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/01/10/turkey-cold-war-cluster-bombs-ukraine/">
Foreign Policy
The artillery-fired cluster munitions could be lethal to Russian troops—and Ukrainian civilians.
The planned US shipment is supposed to be a stopgap until artillery ammunition production can ramp up (in multiple countries, not just US).
The extra risk of using DPICM from specifically the US is pretty far down the list of things Ukrainian civilians have to worry about. Like there’s a war on. A war in which the Russians are targeting them directly. Including with cluster munitions. In cities.
This was Biden’s main point in an interview with Fahreed Zakarwa today. Ukrain needs shells and the US can’t make them fast enough and so is drawing down its stockpile of cluster munitions. Places like NZ and Spain are states that like to sign on to nice treaties but never have to change behavior or make difficult choices, just like countries that wont arrest Putin under the ICC.