“Against” isn’t the word that I’d use, but that doesn’t make it wrong.

What’s wrong are the first two uses and the last appearance of “it’s”, which is a contraction of “it is” and not the possessive pronoun it’s intended to be.

No the word is ”from”. Plus what he ^^^^^ said about the possessive “its”.

….its independence…. from XYZ country.

If for some reason you needed to use the word “against” you could say “ABC gained its independence against the wishes of XYZ.”

No. The word you are looking for is from.

Of course it’s from.

@LuckyGuy it’s always against the wishes of country X, or Y or, Z though.
Thanks all.
@CWOTUS the misuse of the it’s and its doesn’t cause harm. It doesn’t worsen the relationship between the people in the country in question and the independent nation in question. The word against does

If you already knew the correct word was “from,” why did you ask this question?

@flo, if you think that fighting a war of independence against (or from) some other nation doesn’t cause “bad relations” at least during the time of the fighting, then I guess it’s a good thing that we aren’t neighbors.

As a writer and professional communicator, I heartily disagree with you, @flo, about the unimportance of using its vs. it’s. Incorrect punctuation has the potential of drastically altering intended meaning.

If you were a writer or journalist you would appreciate this.

@CWOTUS You nalready answered the OP. “Against_isn’t the word that I’d use, but that doesn’t make it wrong.” From is the only correct word to use, “against” is absolutely not. Why? Because using that word adds oil to the fire, see the word “worsen”.

“gainst”?

@CWOTUS was pointing out that if there is concern over the right word to use in a sentence, there should be as much concern for using the correct punctuation in a sentence.

@Pachy Who said it’s unimportant? It is important but not compared to the importance of from vs against

In 1937, when asked how he could worry about the misuse of language when the Japanese were bombing Shanghai, Karl Kraus responded that “If all commas were in the right place, Shanghai would not be burning.”

No, it’s not @flo. Using the obviously wrong word along with the wrong punctuation shows ignorance, period.

@flutherother Here is your source:
https://www.newcriterion.com/issues/2006/9/the-consequences-of-richard-weaver
“In 1937, when asked how he could worry about the misuse of language when the Japanese were bombing Shanghai, Karl Kraus responded that “If all commas were in the right place, Shanghai would not be burning.”
I’m about to post an OP about it.

Stop with the OP stuff already. You aren’t using it in the right context. It usually means Original Poster, and that would be you in this case. It’s referring to a person. You’re using to to refer to a post, so your last sentence read “I’m about to post an original post about it.” That’s terribly redundant. Plus you don’t even know if it’s “original.”

Here is another source.
http://www.abbreviations.com/abbreviation/Original+Post

That link didn’t tell me anything. There was only one comment by some random person who said what they thought it meant. It can mean “Original Post,” but it is usually used to refer to the person who wrote the post.

Context, key word.

By the way, who is more random than who?

There are questions, (mine and others’) that need actual answers.
https://www.fluther.com/201886/what-statement-was-karl-kraus-referring-to-withif-all-commas-were/

OK. Context. So you meant to say “I’m getting ready to post an original post.” Why say the word “post” twice? Why not say what everyone else says, “I’m going to post a question about it”?

You are far more random than I .

I was referring to the person in the link who answered the question “What is the abbreviation for original post?”

It’s and its also context. Red or read (punctualtion, spelling…) same thing. Noone gets confused as to what the person means. It is consequential for English language tests, for example but not for…

Yes, and you used the word “it’s” in the wrong context in your sentence. There is a difference between context and opinion you know. In your opinion it doesn’t matter. In everyone else’s opinion it does.

”...in your sentence.” Why is that interesting?

Not in the least. Just wrong.