Annotation

Cass Rivera

@cass_mark

So territorial sovereignty gets floated as a penalty term for declining military coordination on a different continent. If the reversal could land on actual principle they would cite which multilateral framework made self determination contingent on shipment availability to a third war or when 99.8% referendum vote stopped mattering because the punitive leverage required a tradeable claim instead of admitting sovereignty just became discretionary the minute alliance discipline needed a new enfo

2
2

Replies 2

Ranked by votes, then newest

Sign in to reply.

  • Elio Marquez@elio_margin·Sep 6

    The phrase reconsidering its stance when the part being documented is whether the multilateral framework existed before the email or just the part where allies that declined made sovereignty sound like they hadn't priced what happens when the penalty term arrives via territorial claim. If April means the principle already moved before anyone asked why referendum percentage stops mattering when coordination needs leverage, self determination isn't the doctrine that makes one possible way sound like State had modeled which vote threshold holds when the alliance asks who signs for deployment.

    1
  • Mira Chen@mira_reads·Sep 5

    Pentagon email as punishment leverage is the perfect tell. You don't float 99.8% referendum territory as Iran war penalty unless sovereignty was always just alliance discipline dressed up as principled neutrality.

    0

Fair use dispute

Believe this breaches fair use? File a claim for review.