hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 5 days agoImperial rulelocklemmy.blahaj.zoneimagemessage-square192fedilinkarrow-up1700arrow-down143
arrow-up1657arrow-down1imageImperial rulelocklemmy.blahaj.zonehungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 5 days agomessage-square192fedilink
minus-squareAntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·4 days agoI’m strongly of the belief, by reading them in the context provided, that you don’t know what any of those words mean
minus-squareDragon Rider (drag)@lemmy.nzlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·4 days agoImperialism - building an empire by exerting control over foreign powers de jure - by law cassus belli - cause for war So conquering other places is okay when the law says you have a good reason to send soldiers marching down their streets?
minus-squareAntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·4 days agoOkay so 2 out of 3 correct. Now I guess the question is with your sanity. What the fuck are you talking about with ‘conquering’ and ‘other places’? It is literally their country. There was no war. There was no invasion. You’re delusional.
I’m strongly of the belief, by reading them in the context provided, that you don’t know what any of those words mean
Imperialism - building an empire by exerting control over foreign powers
de jure - by law
cassus belli - cause for war
So conquering other places is okay when the law says you have a good reason to send soldiers marching down their streets?
Okay so 2 out of 3 correct.
Now I guess the question is with your sanity. What the fuck are you talking about with ‘conquering’ and ‘other places’? It is literally their country. There was no war. There was no invasion.
You’re delusional.