Actaea

3) There is a direct threat of mutual assured destruction or numerous casualties in the event of a full-scale conflict involving nuclear weapons. In this case, it is obvious that the major powers will not directly attack each other at the moment, but will try to force their opponent to start aggression first through various provocations.

Hmm... one more time. Did you even read the point you voted for?
I myself voted for Kitty Pink, I don't argue, there the thoughts are expressed correctly. And about the mushrooms: "A proposal is being considered for forcible change of power in favor of a more competent and responsible government, excluding representatives of corporations."
Everything that Heroist writes about "changing the government in Mushroomland with the consent and direct participation of Kitty Pink and without unnecessary bloodshed" - these are all non-violent methods. That's how it should have been done. But what is written in the vote is a military invasion of an independent country. Arandor specifically even clarified.
Even if we do not take Kitty Pink into account, Mushroomland has its own army, which will not lay down its arms when the country is attacked.

You are attacking a country that is part of a military alliance with Kitty Pink.

And this is up to Kitty Pink.

I strongly disagree. Whoever is the aggressor, whoever attacked – they bear the responsibility. Hitler attacked the USSR, but he was right, there was a bloody dictator executing people by the thousands. Stalin could have attacked Germany. “It is better to prevent disease than to cure it.” Stalin is certainly guilty.

Here you see, Togrul Isa oglu Ibrahimov, a diplomatic approach and the correct tone of negotiations are the key to peace and prosperity.

Hehe. Typical capitalists. He presented other people's (not just mine) attempts to resolve the issue peacefully as his own diplomatic successes.

From my point of view, if in a country that is on the list of economic leaders, leaders in production, etc., "savages with sticks" sit in the government, and the prime minister makes statements in the spirit of "hee hee, lol" - this is not normal. They have nuclear weapons. Okay. What prevents them from taking and using it (assuming that Kitty Pink does not control their army completely, but then this would mean that Kitty Pink simply keeps this country at gunpoint, which is also incorrect)? Well, like, "we weren't invited to the security council, let's shoot at them!" Corporations won't allow it? That's not an argument.

No matter how noble the motive, military intervention does not justify it and does not remove the blame from the one who unleashed the conflict.
I think many agreed with your point of view that what was written above is abnormal when they voted for including Mushroomland in the Security Council. But if you have a noble goal to prevent war (Well, like, "we weren't invited to the security council, let's shoot at them!"), why are you starting this war yourself?

p.s. I got the impression (from Heroist's post) that he is against military intervention; he just misunderstood what he was voting for.