Hardly the first time. I’d argue the US made the same mistake in Afghanistan in 2003, diverting resources to Iraq because Bush Jr. had such a hard-on for Saddam.
I agree with the viewpoints, but many voted for the Russia supporting party, and noone else got enough support in the primaries. There needs to be massively increased primary involvement before a systemic change to move away from the two party system can be feasible. I’m a big fan of ranked choice voting myself, but what big party candidate is going to advocate for that in the current climate? I’m hoping changes can happen over the next decade as my generation and the one below get even more active.
I mean involvement of the voters themselves. I push a lot of my friends to just go vote, but they still won’t. If you figure out how to get people to actually want to fix the situation, let me know.
I know that in America, currently, "peaceful protester" is an officially classified terrorist group. That was what Occupy Wallstreet resulted in.
I have no idea what Blue MAGA is even suggesting when they say "get more involved in government outside of election season". The concept doesn't exist.
I definitely still vote on measures.
When my choices are vote for Genocide and continued severe loss of privacy of freedom A or Genocide and continued severe loss of privacy of freedom B, all I can figure is vote disenfranchised. Won't check the damn box.
Primary results where people did that have already gotten Biden change his half hour chit chat with Bibi from "your US taxpayer dollars are on the way. The weapons you are buying with those dollars are on the way" to "your US taxpayer dollars are on the way. The weapons you are buying with those dollars are on the way, try to go easier on the civilians in Gaza."
If Biden suffers a shameful and embarrassing defeat, maybe the next Democrat will figure out the correct answer is "fuck you Bibi, you genocidal maniac. Israel is cut off, that money will now be invested into fixing the healthcare crisis in America, our military is moving humanitarian aid into Gaza, and if your genocidal asshats so much as point a gun in the general direction of our soldiers and the starving citizens of Gaza, you will enjoy our crosshairs."
I know that in America, currently, “peaceful protester” is an officially classified terrorist group. That was what Occupy Wallstreet resulted in.
The Cop City protestors are facing RICO charges right now for protesting a murderhog training camp; and they tried going after people out of state that contributed to the bail funds for those protestors. I’m not voting for a Dem ever again honestly.
ah yes, tying to get privacy people on your side, shame if there were estonian privacy people wouldn’t it. now follow gordons orders : www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQsAvQvAxg8
Where exactly is the free world? I assume you’re not referring to the bloc of nations currently exterminating the population of their 2 million person concentration camps; the bloc led by the nation with the highest prison population in the world, both in absolute and per capita terms. The bloc that has destroyed, invaded, and couped multiple countries in the past twenty years.
Russia is way worse. I’m in Hungary, and our government tries everything to scrub information about stuff they don’t like, all while putting Project 2025-tier evil stuff into our constitution, meaning it could be pretty much be undone by an armed rebellion, which will very unlikely thanks to what I call “weaponized doomerism” (pushing people into inaction via depression, crushed protests, and underfunded health care system), and “political gaslighting” (basically the method behind “you’ll be more conservative as you get older”).
Just say “civilised world” and make it clear you are a fascist. Atleast be honest.
Russia and non-white world will win, and west fascists will lose. Cry about it as much as you want, this is the last of the good days you monsters will live on this planet.
how the fuck do you manage to claim that the west is the free world™ while it is the empire to blame for the largest amount of worldwide suffering in the second half of the twentieth century? It is responsible for countless invasions, sanction regimes and assassinations with the goal of subjugating foreign nations, as well as courting nazis post ww2, like for example people like klaus barbie or wernher von braun, as well as the entire early government of the frg.
your fantasizing about a supposed military threat from the prc to taiwan and from russia to the rest of europe is nothing but pure projection, since you westoids apparently cant imagine someone acting from a different motivation than your own. the prc has time and time again stated that it prefers a peaceful resolution to the taiwan conflict and the province has never officially declared any grade of independence from the mainland, simply being under a different government, the roc.
russia on the other hand has absolutely no reason to start any military conflicts in western europe, something you would know, if you would even try to understand the lead up to the current situation.
your last sentence honestly just sounds like a thinly veiled blood for the blood god.
sadly, even if you follow russian propaganda to the word, which i dont btw, you would still more often than than not end up with the truth. maybe the west should try to be less evil.
Found this video about how Americans live. North Korean propaganda says we eat birds. All countries distort the truth, even ‘Merica. I wish more people understood this.
the video was actually not made by north korea. it is a parody created by a british comedy director. dprk media typically depicts the us in a fairly accurate manner, or at least more truthfully than how american media portrays korea.
I’m so gullible. I wanted to make coffee out of snow after this video. I thought this was real too, until my wife told me it had to be fake. I wanted it to be real.
i feel ya, western propaganda against korea is sadly hard to undo, considering the sheer amount of it. a great way to do it through is to read korean history, with a wonderful beginners read on the topic being this book. after a while you realize that many of the claims against the dprk are often nothing but simple projection, like for example haircut policing being an actual thing in 1980s south korea.
im sorry to tell you that, but your reasoning is wrong form the first sentence to the last and contains a lot of lies and cia propaganda, which makes it a quite impressive piece of liberalism. lets examine.
already your first statement is wrong, due to the fact that only through studying the history of a particular regime you can begin to make sense of its structure and motivations in accordance with historical and dialectical materialism. it is obvious to anyone, that the us stood for oppression, subjugation and ethnic cleansing from its very inception and hasnt stopped ever since, with them even commiting genocide right now in gaza. with western europe nowadays being nothing more than a satellite of the us, you also mention china and russia, neither of whom are imperialist, since their capitalist economies arent yet in the late stages that make imperialist ambitions possible and necessary. moreover both have historically been victims of western imperialism, and while russia had in fact an imperialist phase until 1917, it never even came close to the atrocities commited by the west.
and no, anti-imperialists like me dont want “revenge”, but justice. such justice can only be achieved by dismantling the illegal settler colony named usa and finally freeing the prison house of nations.
in your second point, you, despite dismissing the study of history previously, try to make references to historical happenings. your only problem is, that you are wrong and end up with nothing but regurgitated cia propaganda, since russia isnt mirroring nazi germany in any way, quite the opposite. the only reason one like you could make such a statement is if you dont know how the nazis operated and who their supporters were. russia is being surrounded and attacked by fascist nato forces, as well as their neonazi proxies, since decades and has shown an incredible amount of restraint in that situation, not only referring from military measures for the longest time, but even trying to cooperate with western powers. the smo is just russia finally making a stand for itself, something that imho should have been done much sooner.
you then compare русский мир to the german lebensraum, concepts that are also entirely unrelated. the german nazi concept is simply a more modern version of the american manifest destiny, an incredibly vile genocidal ideology, that btw also inspired the current zionist colonial project, with the only difference between the two being that the older example succeeded. the russian one meanwhile, while of course being a nationalist concept worthy of criticism, only calls for a sphere of russian cultural and political influence, something that in comparison is rather harmless.
your later notions of alleged russian puppet states demanding to join nato, as well of the ukraine being sovereign after 2014 and most hilariously the west having some semblance of free press that is somehow enlightening the people just look like idealist phantasies with absolutely no ground in reality to me, with me honestly shocked how people are still believing such things after things like operation aerodynamic and operation mockingbird became public information.
the last thing i would like to point out to you is that demands for taiwanese independence should only come from indigenous taiwanese people, not immigrated han chinese who since then unjustly assumed the taiwanese cultural identity. incidentally the indigenous population is one of the core demographics among supporters of reunification with the prc.
and no, i dont claim russia and the prc to be perfect, but they are still obviously preferable over the greatest enemy of mankind that is western imperialism.
This is just sad to hear and i don’t think arguing on the internet is gonna bring is anywhere. I don’t understand where your US fantasy and obsession comes from, siting cases that are from the 50’ and not really related to your point. It sounds like desperate fearmongering by an authoritarian state to stay relevant in front of its population. Ironically, the aggressive actions of russia is what push EU countries away closer to the US as it doesnt leave us any other choice. Russia was a major trading partner and vital to european economies. Ukraine biggest allies after all are from eastern europe(ex russian colonies), the evil imperialist that wants to destroy russia doesnt seem that interested in the conflict as this thread is about. You can it how you want and replace revenge with justice but committing atrocities on your neighbor, is not a productive way for justice. Just shows some imperialistic bloodlust eastern european countries are wary off. Please dont forget that eastern europe are also people with their own minds and that the only thing we want is peace we would love to be closer to russia but its not the path your leaders are willing to go to. Instead creating divisions with whatever usa narrative they are pushing. Have a conflict with the us if thats what you want but please let us be and dont involve us in that.
I will mention gaza as it is so often used as an argument, but the evil controlled press puppet of the CIA is actually quite outraged by the actions of israel, followed by its population having more and more Europeans government taking an in increasingly harder stance, politics are slow but have to follow the heart of the population at some point. Dont forget that russians are the dominant ethnic group in israel since you love talking about historical points. We have our hands quite full with our issues here but seems like people cant stop to ask for our intervention abroad. I would like to remind that eu countries never vetoed anything, rather abstained and stayed out of the conflict as the world has shown us with ukraine that they dont want to intervene in foreign conflict.
Just a point i find facinating, Its quite cute how you describe rusky mir, just think for a second how do you think a average german citizen would have described lebensraum in their times? Try to mature the world is not as black and white as you wish it was. I would like to remind you that the russian leaders called ukraine as a non state that should be eradicated, which i find quite at odd with your ‘pacific description’
Unfortunately and scarily, Russia is showing much of the same pattern as Germany in its most dark past, with the ruski mir looking more and more like the german lebensraum.
When you totally know what the lebensraum was.
The Nazis’ lebensraum project wasn’t just taking over a bunch of land in Europe, it was a settler colonial project inspired by the American policies of systematic forced displacement and extermination of the native populations under the doctrine manifest destiny.
Lebensraum was a pseudo-scientific racist theory formulated by pro-colonialism far right German thinkers, according to the lebensraum theory, a race needs a certain amount of space for themselves in order to attain their full potential and therefore need to take their necessary territory from “lesser” races by force. To summarise rapidly how it was developed, the German colonialists basically went “Look at America, they expanded to the west basically exterminating every native population in the way and replacing they with white settlers and now they’re super rich and powerful, so if we exterminate a bunch of native populations, take over their land and put native Germans in their place, we should become super rich and powerful too”.
The idea was put into practice in Namibia, then one of the German empire’s colonies, resulting in the genocide of the Herero and Nama.
Fast forward a bit, Adolph Hitler was visited in prison by one of the main colonialist thinkers behind lebensraum theory and Hitler was rapidly convinced to adopt it.
And that’s how was born the genocidal project of the Nazis in eastern Europe, just as their mentor the United States had rid “their” land of “lesser” north Americans natives to expand westward and make way for the “superior” whites, so would Germany rid eastern Europe of Jews and Slavs to make way for the “Aryans”.
Now comes the question: is Russia doing any of that? Does the Russian government believe in and promote a theory that rank races to justify the extermination of “lesser” ones? Is Russia shoving Ukrainians (or anyone else) in concentration camps and “reservation”? Do they steal Ukrainians houses and invite Russian natives to go live in the stolen houses in Ukraine?
The answer to all of those questions is no. If you think it’s yes you need to demonstrate it, saying “they look just like Nazis” without drawing any actual parallels between them is no better than saying “anyone I don’t like is a Nazi”.
The fact that all of russia’s puppet state demanded to join NATO (BTW: you cannot be invited it only works by writing an official demand to join and approval by all member state), is a revealing fact.
If a NATO country can somehow influence the elections and public opinion on NATO in those so called “Russian puppets”, which they very much can, they can make sure to have pro-NATO politicians in power who will demand a NATO membership, that way they effectively force the country to join while making it look like it was voluntary.
As we saw in Ukraine, Russia does not need any reason to invade a sovereign nation (their reason for invading looking also stangely like german justification for poland invasion)
“Russia does not need any reason to invade[…] their reason for invading looking also stangely like…”
Look, if you’re gonna spew bullshit, can’t you at least keep it strait and somewhat coherent?
Putin didn’t just wake up and decide he was feeling like invading something that day, whether you like it or not they had actual reasons to do it and the fact that you or I may or may not think those reasons are not legitimate does not matter since neither you nor I have a say in the Kremlin.
Also, once again you say “they look like Nazis” without showing why you think they look like Nazis. How are their reasons similar? Russia’s stated reasons for invading are to prevent all of their western frontier neighbors to become part of a military alliance they deem aggressive to them and to stop the killing of ethnic Russians in the Donbas and Luhansk regions and overthrow the current far right government of Ukraine, how is that similar to the Nazi’s excuses to invade Poland?
The countless horrors of torture, rape, murder and brainwashing by the russian state, seems to prove their reasoning right.
[citation needed]
That wouldn’t be the first time the west has falsely accused an enemy of those things so I’m really gonna need a source for that.
I do not claim that the west is perfect, with the actions of the united states and other in recent times, but claiming that russia or china have clean hands would be outright hypocritical.
You claim that the west is systematically better than Russia, China and other countries that the west considers rivals or enemy (funny coincidence that those are all countries the west don’t like isn’t it) and when we demonstrate to you that this is bullshit since the west has literally done almost every single thing you accuse China, Russia, etc of, often in worst and more than once, you go “Ha but I think the west is bad too” so that you can continue pretending to be objective even after we expose you massive pro-west bias.
Thanks to the free press, the western world made their population aware of this wrong actions and helped steer them in the right direction.
The press in the west is not free, it’s the private property of a handful of billionaires who, since they are their private properties, have complete control over what is or is not published in their outlets. I’d even say that given that the capitalists are the ruling class in the west, privately owned medias are really state owned medias with extra steps.
Not to mention the fact that western outlet are often in contact with organs of western governments, most notoriously with the CIA, who often dictate what the outlets should publish.
Just look at how they report on the genocide of Palestinians, does that look like fair and unbiased reporting to you? Those that look free pro Israel bias?
great analysis, comrade. i would like to point out though, that racist pseudoscience didnt start with the us, but rather that they were sadly able to inherit a quite rich tradition of this vile bullshit, ideas that were previously pushed by british intelligentsia. the idea of concentration camps was also arguably pioneered in america with the native american reservations.
Also if Europe isn’t concerned about Russia, why has Europe’s defense spending drastically gone up? Clearly there is more going on than your blase attitude is implying.
China is already bullying the Philippines too out of our own territorial waters, and they have already caused severe injuries to our countrymen. They literally want an entire sea to themselves and leave us with none. Just look at their nine dash line.
Edit: Here’s their nine-dash-line, they even want Malaysia’s sea, which is a long way away from chinese mainland, while they want seas close to the land territories of so many SEA nations.
It was recently on local news, but that’s not the only conflict that involved water cannons and ships. From the article you can see Vietnam— they once saved filipino fishermen from potentially drowning. (from Philippines) rappler.com/…/233079-how-filipino-boat-crew-was-s… (from Vietnam) e.vnexpress.net/…/all-gestures-no-words-as-vietna…. If china continues their actions, there are bound to be casualties. And if that happens, I’m not sure any of us will forgive them.
I’d pay good money to watch the Anglos crash and burn tbh. Like, PPV amounts of money. At this point it might be the only way to avert climate collapse; if possible at all, and I have no material reason to want to see you propagate or prosper. Die faster; and do a backflip on your way down.
You mean the “free world” that has Assange, Pablo González and lots of other journalists jailed? The same free world that has destroyed every country that didn’t fall in line with US interests?
The Russian Army is largely represented as a bunch of baffoons in the Western media, but it’s still one of the 3 largest armies in the world. Ukraine cannot hold their lines indefinitely, the only way to “win” against an opponent that has multiple times your materiel available is guerilla.
There’s no win for humanity through war against an opponent that has thousand of nukes. If one of the nuclear reactors in the region would had been seriously damaged you would be curse every cent that went into fueling this war. We are walking on a thin line already.
If nuclear deterrence actually worked then Russia wouldn’t have invaded Ukraine to begin with. You might as well just hand over all of your rights and bow to your nuclear overlords if you think it entitles them to anything.
There wasn’t a problem here until the US-backed coup in 2014 and subsequent killing of eastern Ukrainians and Crimeans (if you’re wondering why Crimeans overwhelmingly support Russia) by the coup gov for resisting, which also doesn’t respect the Minsk agreements to stay neutral.
You know that Lemmy is the last sanctuary of the most insane people ridiculed everywhere else where you see comments like that having positive rating lol.
Ukraine became reliant on US military aid after Russia invaded in 2014 with the help of separatists they funded. The same strategy they have employed in Georgia and Moldova.
There is zero evidence that the US did any coup in Ukraine. There is plenty for it being a revolution against Yanukovych after he broke his election promises and brutally supressed protests caused by that. That in turn triggered a full blown revolution.
The Minsk agreements were never honored by Russia as one of the clauses was for Russia to remove their troops from the regions, which never happened.
Post 2014 those regions were occupied by Russia. Ukraine was fighting against an occupation, not bombing civilians for fun.
Eastern Ukraine has never wanted to join Russia, it was occupied in 2014. Yanukovych was elected with the promise of closer economic ties with Europe, not Russia.
How is not a single part of your post true? Debunking bullshit always takes longer but I guess that’s the strategy with disinformation.
Apparently the mods on lemmy.ml support Russian disinformation as this got removed with the comment “Misinfo-see nuland/pyatt call”. I have heard that call in its full context as it gets brought up as the only evidence. What it actually ended up being were 2 US politicians discussing that the most likely person to take over as Yanukovych fled took over. Literally anyone familiar with the politics in Ukraine can come to the same conclusion.
Gaddafi is another example yes, but let’s not have any sympathy for a horrible dictator that tortured and abused his subjects to the point where they sodomized him with a bayonet.
The NTC initially claimed Gaddafi died from injuries sustained in a firefight when loyalist forces attempted to free him, although a video of his last moments shows rebel fighters beating him and one of them sodomizing him with a bayonet before he was shot several times.
Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice and Samantha Power were the three principal advocates of war against Libya in 2011, setting the North African nation on a free fall ever since. Demonstrations broke out in some Libyan cities against the government of late Muammar Gaddafi in February 2011, in what became known as the “Arab Spring” that engulfed the region. However, Libya’s promised spring turned into a destructive autumn during which Gaddafi was murdered on 20 October, 2011, and Libya was left anguishing in lawlessness, courtesy of the three women.
You mean insurgents funded by the west after having them give up their nuclear deterrence because it posed a major threat to capitalism/imperialism in the region.
Libya went from one of the poorest countries in the world to having the highest human development index in Africa by 2010 under the socialist government. Housing and healthcare were made a human right and youth literacy reached pretty much 100%.
Yes, I’ll have sympathy for the country that was basically extorted by the west through brutal sanctions into disarming itself so it could be invaded and destroyed, as any human should.
He made it better for Arabs, everyone else was treated horribly. But hey I guess being a dictator is fine as long as the people you like are being treated okay and fuck everyone else. How very Modi of you.
I wouldn’t put it that way exactly. Ukraine was a constituent part of the USSR, and eastern Ukraine was a major industrial hub. I don’t know the history of it, but perhaps giving the nukes to Russia was part of the deal made in the Post-Soviet transition in Ukraine.
Ukraine was very much at peace with Russia as it always had been before the 2014 coup and the resulting fascist gov that didn’t care about such agreements.
Russia has no right to carry out a genocide—any more than Ukraine had the right to carry one out on people of the Donbas for almost a decade—but then again Russia isn’t carrying out one, despite what Five Eyes governments & corporate media insist.
I will concede that there are a few fascist elements in Russia, but they aren’t in power, and one of their most well-known figures (to Westerners at least) recently died.
.
Neither Navanly nor the Azov Battalion are aberrations: the US has been maintaining fascist cells in Europe our whole lives, as a backstop against Europe ever gaining a real independence from the US, or worse, becoming socialist.
In particular, the US doesn’t want Europe and Russia to develop closer ties, because it doesn’t want the “Eurasian landmass” to ever cohere, because it would become too self-sufficient and powerful for the US to control. Zbigniew Brzezinski laid this theory out when the Soviet Union fell. That’s why the US tried to convince Europe not to build Nord Stream 2 and then later not to turn it on, why Biden said he would “bring an end to it” if Russia invaded, and why they ultimately did bring an end to it.
The US also very much wants regime change or balkanization in Russia so it can resume its neocolonial plundering of it, which started under Yeltson and ended under Putin.
Why are you citing Navalny (granted, fascist) and not Dugin, Rogozin and Prokhanov who are actually close to the current government?
And let’s not forget about Putin’s obsession with Ilyin, who, and I don’t want to put words incorrectly here, is a literal fascist, like a canonical one.
Bullshit. Dugin is a Western chauvinist fascist who is ideologically aligned with the Ukrainian coup government and the Ukrainian Nazis who terrorized the Donbas for almost a decade before Russia intervened two years ago. In what universe is he Putin’s “right-hand man”?
The US would absolutely love to have a regime change that put Dugin in power, because he would invite the American shock therapists back in to finish the plundering that they started in the ’90s under Yeltsin, and that Putin put an end to.
My agenda is (1) to save the lives & livelihoods of working class people and (2) anti-imperialism. My agenda is not to carry water for Ukraine’s neoliberal government, which has allowed Global North capitalists to neocolonize it to the detriment of its people.
You mean the Donbas where Ukraine was fighting Russia after they annexed Crimea?
The Donbas is not Crimea; they don’t even touch.
In 2014 the US facilitated a coup, installing a far-right comprador government, because the democratically elected government was insufficiently subservient to US interests. In response, Russia annexed Crimea, a region whose history and people were more aligned with Russia. There wasn’t much fighting involved because the people of Crimea largely welcomed this.
But getting back to the Donbas: how is bombing apartment complexes in one’s own country for nearly a decade “fighting Russia”? That was a neonazi ethnic cleansing project with the support of their own government and the CIA.
In the 1990s he formulated the strategic case for buttressing the independent statehood of Ukraine, partially as a means to prevent a resurgence of the Russian Empire,[citation needed] and to drive Russia toward integration with the West, promoting instead “geopolitical pluralism” in the space of the former Soviet Union. He developed “a plan for Europe” urging the expansion of NATO, making the case for the expansion of NATO to the Baltic countries.
Any ideas where I can find out more about Brzenzinski’s plans after the fall of the Soviet Union?
there are fascists in Ukraine, like in a lot of countries
Most countries don’t have a fascist government that violently suppresses the left. Israel and Ukraine are about the only ones (and maybe Modi’s India to an extent?) right now.
It’s not about a “right” to invade. The point is this was the only option left with a coup gov that doesn’t care about prior peace agreements, kills people for resisting (like Eastern Ukrainians in DPR & LPR and Crimeans), and is being blocked by the US and UK from negotiating.
People in this thread clearly don’t understand what the implications are. There is a very clear danger of war on the European continent that will involve NATO and by proxy the US. Aid for Ukraine is the absolute cheapest option. Europe is not going to just let Ukraine fall and will ramp up their involvement. We already have France willing to send troops.
One who consider a proxy war where thousand people die and a country get destroyed the “cheapest option” tells you how much they are in bad faith. For politicians your life is indeed cheap and something they can trash away for profits
Generally, I’d agree with that sentiment. However, what path forward would provide the best way out of the situation and discourage further conflict in the region?
When we look at the lead up to WW2, we see a build-up of tension by Germany and attempted appeasement by the other major powers in an effort to avoid another breakout of war in Europe, only a few decades after the first great war ravaged these nations.
Notable events:
Remilitarization of the Rhineland (Mar 1936) – this was a clear power move and violation of the Treaty of Versailles that ended WW1. With no real reaction from the France/Britain, this was a clear indication to Hitler he could continue to push things much further.
Anschluss (Annexation of Austria, Mar 1938) - Germany was prepared to take Austria by force, but managed to do so with only the threat of violence. This was also against the Treaty of Versailles and also had no real reaction from the Allied powers.
Sudetenland conquest (Sept 1938) - Germany pressures Czechoslovakia for pieces of it’s territory that border Germany. British PM finally gets involved, allowing the exchange of territory for a promise of peace. This is the famous " Peace for our time declaration.
Czech/Slovokia split and occupation/control (Mar 1939) - Under further pressure and threat of invasion, Czechoslovakia split and both come under German control.
Invasion of Poland by Germany and USSR (Sept 1939) - First open conflict. France and Britain declare war on Germany, roughly a year after the “Peace for our time” negotiations/declaration that clearly made a difference!
As you can see, in the build-up to WW2, the European powers that opposed German expansion sought alternatives. They even allowed Germany to push its weight around on its neighbors, taking territory from others, and consolidating power. By the time the great powers were forced into conflict by open war in Poland, they were no longer in a position to hope to control Germany at all, doubly so with their apparent new cooperation with the USSR.
Knowing what happened, it’s easy to see that any intervention by France and/or Britain, whether it sparked violence or not, in the early days of German aggression would have almost certainly led to a less powerful Germany, perhaps one that could not have taken over most of Europe so easily.
I think the key take away from all of this is that, modern nations that have a desire for conquest are a danger to all. They are not to be believed, they should not be appeased, they should not be rewarded. Any violence against free nations should be resisted, supported by all free nations, but without escalation to full-blown nuclear war.
The danger of washing our hands of the conflict and saying something like, “Violence bad. End the war. They can have Ukraine/Donetsk/whatever.” is that Russia won’t stop there. They’ll get bigger, stronger, and move on to the next target when they’re ready.
The horrible part about all of this is that the apparent best way to keep long-term violence down is to continue the fighting now. The longer the conflict continues, and the more humiliated Russia becomes, the less likely Russia will chose to do a similar invasion in the future.
Generally, I’d agree with that sentiment. However, what path forward would provide the best way out of the situation and discourage further conflict in the region?
Stopping the war industry and ceasing all sort of imperialistic activities, even on one side alone will put at end on most conflicts but every ruler is in for more wealth and power, they don’t want to stop. This does not mean that because someone is doing it everyone has to follow suit, it literally means that every corrupted politician and their government seek war.
If there’s anything to be extrapolated from history is that ramping up for war and fueling authoritarian regimes brings you exactly war and dictatorships.
Any violence against free nations should be resisted
So do you agree that palestine should have the rights to defend themself against israel?
The danger of washing our hands
If there’s anyone washing their hands is politicians drinking champagne in dubai next to russian yachts. The same politicians that send people money to ukraine goverement.
Stopping the war industry and ceasing all sort of imperialistic activities, even on one side alone will put at end on most conflicts but every ruler is in for more wealth and power, they don’t want to stop. This does not mean that because someone is doing it everyone has to follow suit, it literally means that every corrupted politician and their government seek war.
I think this is overly naive and simplistic.
So do you agree that palestine should have the rights to defend themself against israel?
(I’m not as well versed in this conflict, but a few thoughts from my perspective)
The situation and power dynamics are quite different there. I don’t have any easy answer unfortunately.
Palestine doesn’t have a conventional army or a means to fight Israel the same way Ukraine is fighting Russia.
Israel’s reaction and occupation of Gaza Strip is horrible.
Historically, Israel’s treatment of Palestinian people has been completely unacceptable.
Hamas’ actions have been awful, both historically and with the first attack in October where they started this conflict. Their attacks routinely target civilians, which is unacceptable.
So, if there are people living in Palestine who want to fight the occupiers, that perspective makes sense to me. So, at the most basic level, yes – I think they should be able to defend themselves. However, Hamas historically seems prioritized only in hurting Israel, and their actions routinely hurt Palestine in a number of ways. Plus, supporting terrorist organizations (like Hamas) with arms/training/etc has worked out poorly for the US in the past.
So, unfortunately, I think there are no “good guys” here (besides the civilians caught up in this who want peace). I think both Israel and Hamas steered into this conflict when alternative course of actions existed. Conflict between these groups has been ongoing for decades and has no good or simple solution.
Yeah, but Russia invaded Ukraine. So what should be done now.
If left to their own devices, Ukraine would be annexed to Russia and surrounding countries would be next. The casualties would probably be less here (not guaranteed) and the quality of life of the Ukrainians would drastically degrade.
If NATO sends boots on the ground, then it becomes a full blown world war with warring countries having lots of nukes. The casualties are enormous with a potential doomsday scenario.
Right now, NATO finance a proxy war. Ukrainians fight back and hard to shut out Russians. They need the tech and financing to do so. If they don’t have it, Russia takes over and we go back to the first scenario. Casualties are high.
There is no good ending where Russia negotiate peace and return home. War fucking sucks, and there is no good answer.
Yeah, but Russia invaded Ukraine. So what should be done now.
What about putting sanction on china for providing russia weapons or on emirates and turkey for allowing russian to just chill there and bypass restrictions?
If left to their own devices, Ukraine would be annexed to Russia and surrounding countries would be next.
Where do you got this from? Is Israel planning to invade the whole middle east after they invaded gaza?
the quality of life of the Ukrainians would drastically degrade.
Would it actually? Ukraine turned into an authoritatian regime under martial law where no man between 18 and 60 can leave the country. There’s probably many brave ukranians fighting for freedom but it’s the ukranian government getting money and weapons.
The casualties are already high and the country is getting destroyed, it’s just not happening in your garden
As long as it doesn’t mess up with their business no government in the world care if russia starts a war. Where’s the aid to gaza as a genocide is happening at the hands of israel? War is a business and politicians wants more of it
Where are the negative consequences for America? Why can America invade any country it wants and kill hundreds of thousands of innocent women and children but for some reason when Russia does it we have to show them they aren’t allowed?
Only America and its allies can start wars and commit genocides?
Because the US does interventionism, fund far-right politicians, etc., Russia (and China) can do as such, and even more. At least the US doesn’t want to “regain it’s old lost territories”.
In fairness it’s a solid criticism considering there’s two kinds of comparisons that aren’t made on equal footing. To argue U.S.'s kind of intervention is the same as the Russias, would be more appropriate to consider Russia’s pre 2014 involvement in Ukraine. If you want to compare full-scale military operations then ZILtoid makes a good point. We haven’t tried to annex another country in a long time.
I didn’t condone the USA’s actions, and it’s clear from your comment that you assume I would. It’s clear to me who is the aggressor in this conflict between Ukraine and Russia, and it’s not Ukraine.
Don’t let your disdain for one imperialist push you over to another.
I’m not talking about just money. Of course in current capitalist society we analyse through the lens of finances. But obviously the cost of war includes the loss of human life. And of course some people will manage to profit financially from war. This isn’t a revolutionary thought.
What I mean is that due to the obligation of being a NATO member, there is no way around having to join war in the EU. Actual boots on the ground, full blown, war machine goes choo-choo war. That costs many hundreds or even thousands of American lives. And yes, billions a day.
If you don’t want that, then having Putin lose in Ukraine in key. It’s key because it will diminish his political backing in Russia.
You don’t understand that the only danger of further war is again from US/NATO. Europe is going to let Ukraine fall because it has no choice. France is a laughing stock. Even what they threatened to send could do nothing.
I honestly don’t think Zelensky is a Nazi. He may be an open Nazi collaborator but I think he sees that as a necessity. Dictator yes, but lebensraum? You mean with the breakaways?
“By proxy” doesn’t change the nature of what he is. Collaboration is complicity. If there’s a Nazi at the table and 10 other people sitting there talking to him, you got a table with 11 Nazis.
Is Biden not that dictator already? Or is it going to be exclusively Trump, because US citizens do not care who gets genocided overseas as long as they get to live their mentally ill lifestyle more?
You know he just condemned 61 protestors to years of federal carceral slavery under the RICO act, which was INTENDED to be used against organized crime? Your man’s a straight-up fascist dictator, and you’re a collaborator.
If you’re talking about the “Cop City” protesters, that was Georgia State. Not Federal government. It’s 100% bullshit but it’s not Biden’s fault. It’s the Republican lead government of Georgia and their AG.
As the head of the Executive branch, it’s his law. RICO charges are federal charges, they carry FELONY time of up to twenty years if not longer because that’s just a guideline. It also falls to him to grant pardons. Ergo, his inaction is his fault. Do not come to me caping for settlers like YOU’RE THE GUY who can run defense for him. You are not him.
Comparing the two, trump is more dictator-aligned seeing as how he openly talks the dictator talk, aka using government agencies to take out political opponents, dehumanizing minorities to curry favor with fascists, openly calling for the constitution of the US to be ripped to shreds, etc. And let’s be honest here, whether trump or Biden, they’d both be enabling the genocide of Palestinians. The only difference is that while Biden is enabling the genocide of Palestinians, trump would do that and stop aid to Ukraine, letting Russia genocide tf outta Ukraine as well.
Bidens admin just declared that Ukraine WILL join NATO a direct provocation and greatly increased chances for WW3, this along makes Biden the much much greater of the two evils.
This framing makes it seem like Biden is going against the majority congressional sentiment, but he is not. The US congress, overall, is supportive of sending military support to Israel, as evidenced by their passing bills other aid bills, which is a slower process.
NATO is seeking to take control of decision-making powers on future aid packages — normally led by the US — in an effort to limit the impact of a potential second Donald Trump presidency on the ongoing conflict.
This is wild. It’s bad enough that the US president has the power to start wars wherever he wants with no congressional approval. But now they’re trying to make it so that the only people with the authority to withdraw from a conflict are unelected NATO officials accountable to no one.
Dronies will support this, because they love endless war across the globe and want to remove any potential for popular support to achieve peace.
Without the support of Congress, it will be “difficult” for Ukraine to win, “even to stay,” Zelenskyy said in a video meeting with fundraising supporters, including Mark Hamill and billionaire Richard Branson.
Nightmare blunt rotation
Anyway, wow! You mean every time Russia was said to be slowing down or taking unsustainable levels of casualties wasn’t entirely true? Wow! surprised-pika
Everyone’s allowed a couple problematic faves. My favorite turn-brain-off movie is still Anchorman, even though they drop their first R-word about 90 seconds into the film.
You are right, you can’t use only information Ukraine or Russia provides. But it probably is the case that Ukraine was stomping Russia for pennies on the dollar earlier in the war. However, Russia is not a static force. They learn and change their tactics, and Russia spends more resources now than they did earlier.
It would be a grave mistake to stop aid to Ukraine while they are still willing and able to fight.
But it probably is the case that Ukraine was stomping Russia for pennies on the dollar earlier in the war.
When the aid was flowing the narrative was that this was a “good investment” which is why they sold you with this “pennies on the dollar” angle.
Put down the slava pipe and have a look at what the cost basis is for western military gear vs Russian stuff. It’s rarely better than 5:1 even for basic stuff like shells and advanced stuff runs at around 10:1. The idea that it was “pennies on the dollar” is crazy shit.
It’s all narrative. It doesn’t have a relationship to facts on the ground. It’s a sales pitch.
“Pennies on the dollar” refers more to the fact that we have mostly sent old equipment that’s already paid for and would otherwise never see the light of day, while also avoiding the use of any US/NATO manpower to massively undermine an adversary. It’s a great deal, i.e. pennies on the dollar.
I guess it’s edifer to just call everything a “narrative” though than try and understand current events.
It’s a great deal if you’re a monster who doesn’t pay any mind to the broken Ukrainian bodies littering the trenches for the past few years. More conscripts for the meat grinder, it’s cost-effective! Fucking ghouls, I swear.
And who’s to blame here? Have you considered blaming the invading force, or does it have to be the west for your sensibilities? Everything would be great if we all just rolled over when invaders arrive at the gates!
Psychopathic framing. “Look how efficiently we’re killing people!”
Also great example of conflating states with people. Maybe Ukraine still wants to fight, but Ukrainians are being conscripted against their will. In the same way, wearing Russia down may serve the interests of the US government, but it certainly doesn’t benefit the American people in any way. The best thing for the Ukrainian people would be to stop the killing at any cost, even if it meant territorial concessions. They could’ve saved countless lives if they’d done this from the start, and eventually that’s what’s going to happen anyway, but unfortunately countless people have died and countless more will before the ruling class decides to stop forcing the poor into the meat grinder.
How the fuck is my life supposed to be better because of dead Russian soldiers?
Hey that’s a nice home you have. We’re moving in. You can fight me for it but it will be long and bloody. Probably best you just move out and concede it to me.
The West has spent many times Russias military budget and hundreds of thousands of soldiers only to lose the war.
Russia will likely gain several states worth of land.
Unsure how this is a “good deal”, even in the most psychopathic framing possible. I’d think that would mean Russia is getting the good deal in that case? They have spent far less and gained actual winnings.
Yes, “you have lost” is present perfect and describes that the loss occurred at some unspecified point in time before. It can also describe a loss which effects can still be felt in the present.
The implication is that OP is convinced that Ukraine has no chance of holding their lines, as you correctly pointed out earlier.
Add comment