this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2023
115 points (96.7% liked)
GenZedong
8 readers
1 users here now
This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.
Serious posts can be posted here and/or in /c/GenZhou.
We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information.
Rules:
- This community is explicitly pro-AES (China, Cuba, the DPRK, Laos and Vietnam)
- No ableism, racism, misogyny, transphobia, etc.
- No pro-imperialists, liberals or electoralists
- No dogmatism/idealism (Trotskyism, Gonzaloism, Hoxhaism, anarchism, etc.)
- Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't like to refer to military initiatives of the USSR to be invasions. I think it cedes ground to capitalists and falsely equivocates. The correct term is liberate.
Its still an invasion by definition. What the intentions of the assaulting army are don't matter in regard to whether a military undertaking is an invasion or not.
We can't just pick and choose good sounding names and assume that changes reality, or that by adhering to a definition that that somehow cedes ground.
Invasion: A military offensive in which large numbers of combatants of one geopolitical entity enter territory owned by another such entity, generally with the objective of either: conquering; liberating or re-establishing control or authority over a territory, forcing the partition of a country; altering the established government or gaining concessions from said government; or a combination thereof.
I understand that. Yet most liberals will falsely equivocate regardless.
True Communists will correctly equivocate.