He’s got France and Turkey and maybe a few others, and a statement from about ten other countries wanting some sort of international move—just not necessarily a military strike.

Does "just not necessarily" mean "ten other countries want some sort of international move, but it's not necessarily a military strike, mind you"?

Is this meaning of "just" equivalently expressed by "mind you"?


It seems to be saying that they want to see some action, but that they do not want to see a military strike, as that would be going overboard and doing more harm than good.

I think that saying "but it's not necessarily a military strike, mind you" sort of misses the mark a little bit, and conveys the idea that the operation they have in mind is even more threatening than an ordinary military strike, like a nuclear missile or something.

As a replacement for "just", I think "mind you," and "but" both provide good approximations, but I don't think that "mind you" without a comma is any good, as in @dcaswell's answer

I also do not agree at ALL that the original version sounds awkward, speaking as a native Australian speaker.


Yes, "mind you not" conveys a similar thought.

I think you can also replace "just not" with "but not".

It's an awkward-sounding sentence as quoted.

  • mind you doesn't? Am I right in my answer? Or not? sorry. – user2492 Sep 8 '13 at 21:58
  • The very first word in my answer is Yes. You are right. Sorry for not being clear enough. Mind you is okay. – dcaswell Sep 8 '13 at 22:02

You're right in your understanding of it. I would say about the best replacement word for just would be though. "some sort of international move—though not necessarily a military strike."

As @dcaswell noted, the quoted version sounds awkward. I hear people use that construction occasionally, and I cringe every time. It sounds sloppy and, to my ear, even a bit childish.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy