"The war began 12 April 2014, when a fifty-man commando unit headed by Russian citizen Igor Girkin seized Sloviansk in Donetsk oblast. [...] Russia covertly supported the separatists with troops and weaponry. It only admitted sending "military specialists", but later acknowledged the separatists as Russian combat veterans. [...] By late August 2014, Ukraine had re-taken most separatist-held territory and nearly regained control of the Russia–Ukraine border. In response, Russia covertly sent troops, tanks and artillery into the Donbas."
There are plenty of sources listed in the Wikipedia article if you need them. The fighting in Donbass was a territorial annexation conducted by Russia against Ukraine and a precursor to the full-scale invasion that began in 2022. It's no coincidence that this occurred at the same time as the invasion of Crimea.
So you basically only have a very very basic understanding fed to you via anonymous completely unverifiable people that built a narrative using entirely western sources?
What's your opinion on the 2014 coup?
What's your opinion on the language law change that sent 3 regions of Ukraine into revolt seeking independence because they genuinely feared for their lives?
What's your opinion on the trade unionists being burned alive?
What's your actual opinion? Not whatever you can google and dredge up to repeat from a completely different person as if it is your own view. What is YOUR opinion. When is the last time you actually investigated something and formed your own opinion rather than regurgitating someone elses?
What do you think about Ukraine being a Nazi haven and Ukrainian fighters committing ISIS-style war crimes/using illegal cluster munitions in the Donbas? Curious for your opinion!
On that basis, do you think it was justified for Ukraine to bomb the region, kill people living there (which presumably they should want to save from Russia), and violate their ceasefire agreement?
Lmao you don't engage with those that do, instead you choose to post shit like this. If you were actually interested you would answer the questions @Awoo@hexbear.net gave you, but you didn't, because you don't. This is what I'm talking about when I say you exist in an echo chamber
This is a common pattern. Awoo is very good about engaging with liberals in good faith and asking questions that would be easy to answer if the person answering them has a genuine interest in the topic. For some reason, she tends to get ignored. Seems like a thankless task, really.
I always enjoy seeing awoos polite takedowns and the stunning silence they leave, because I can always point to them when the intruding lib inevitably complains about being treated rudely and people not engaging in good faith. It's like a failsafe. This is a perfect example.
It's so easy to genuinely engage with them and expose the fact that they actually don't know anything about the topic.
For most of us here, who have an understanding that goes waaaaay beyond that of reading a fucking wikipedia article, it's super easy to get into details that simply aren't covered by them and make them feel out of their depth.
I take this approach because the silence many of them leave is deafening and exposes a lot. But, for a rare few, it makes them actually think about how they don't know anything. For some of them they simply have never had it exposed to themselves that their entire understanding is derived from quickly glossing over a wiki article. The ones that cite wikipedia are the most obvious examples of this, these are the ones with the lowest understanding.
And if they do engage? Well some of them actually end up doing some critical thinking. I find people tend to be more willing to engage over China things than Ukraine. I think people feel more self-assured that what they know about China is true so their confidence levels to engage are higher. It's the lack of confidence that causes them to ignore me @Raebxeh@hexbear.net
I don't find it easy at all, I think your patience is impressive. I remember spending a lot of time engaging earnestly with one user, trying to make them wrap their head around the concept of "source critique" to make them understand why they couldn't just skim wikipedia and call it a day. They did all the bad faith lib debatelord stuff that you run into and it just never stopped.
That interaction was kinda it for me, after that I just can't be bothered to be as nice and calm as you.
I'm not really engaging earnestly with them. I go through the motions fully expecting nothing. I do this because one, it exposes them for lurkers and two, on very rare occasions it sets a person on the path to deprogramming.
The appearance of earnest engagement is just an aesthetic I pull off because it is necessary to achieve both of the above outcomes. Authenticity is the quality I am for but deep down I am jaded and bored of doing this all the time. However I can never bring myself to stop, not given that I've seen first hand the creation of new comrades from it.
Thoughts on Donbass?
"The war began 12 April 2014, when a fifty-man commando unit headed by Russian citizen Igor Girkin seized Sloviansk in Donetsk oblast. [...] Russia covertly supported the separatists with troops and weaponry. It only admitted sending "military specialists", but later acknowledged the separatists as Russian combat veterans. [...] By late August 2014, Ukraine had re-taken most separatist-held territory and nearly regained control of the Russia–Ukraine border. In response, Russia covertly sent troops, tanks and artillery into the Donbas."
There are plenty of sources listed in the Wikipedia article if you need them. The fighting in Donbass was a territorial annexation conducted by Russia against Ukraine and a precursor to the full-scale invasion that began in 2022. It's no coincidence that this occurred at the same time as the invasion of Crimea.
So you basically only have a very very basic understanding fed to you via anonymous completely unverifiable people that built a narrative using entirely western sources?
What's your opinion on the 2014 coup?
What's your opinion on the language law change that sent 3 regions of Ukraine into revolt seeking independence because they genuinely feared for their lives?
What's your opinion on the trade unionists being burned alive?
What's your actual opinion? Not whatever you can google and dredge up to repeat from a completely different person as if it is your own view. What is YOUR opinion. When is the last time you actually investigated something and formed your own opinion rather than regurgitating someone elses?
the geopolitical understander has logged on, it's over lads
Gonna use this one neat trick for my next paper
What do you think about Ukraine being a Nazi haven and Ukrainian fighters committing ISIS-style war crimes/using illegal cluster munitions in the Donbas? Curious for your opinion!
On that basis, do you think it was justified for Ukraine to bomb the region, kill people living there (which presumably they should want to save from Russia), and violate their ceasefire agreement?
and keep shelling them in violation of what like both minsk agreements
Man this is the most lib shit I've seen on hexbear in forever. Keep going lad
Removed by mod
Lmao you don't engage with those that do, instead you choose to post shit like this. If you were actually interested you would answer the questions @Awoo@hexbear.net gave you, but you didn't, because you don't. This is what I'm talking about when I say you exist in an echo chamber
This is a common pattern. Awoo is very good about engaging with liberals in good faith and asking questions that would be easy to answer if the person answering them has a genuine interest in the topic. For some reason, she tends to get ignored. Seems like a thankless task, really.
I always enjoy seeing awoos polite takedowns and the stunning silence they leave, because I can always point to them when the intruding lib inevitably complains about being treated rudely and people not engaging in good faith. It's like a failsafe. This is a perfect example.
@Awoo@hexbear.net thank you for your service
It's so easy to genuinely engage with them and expose the fact that they actually don't know anything about the topic.
For most of us here, who have an understanding that goes waaaaay beyond that of reading a fucking wikipedia article, it's super easy to get into details that simply aren't covered by them and make them feel out of their depth.
I take this approach because the silence many of them leave is deafening and exposes a lot. But, for a rare few, it makes them actually think about how they don't know anything. For some of them they simply have never had it exposed to themselves that their entire understanding is derived from quickly glossing over a wiki article. The ones that cite wikipedia are the most obvious examples of this, these are the ones with the lowest understanding.
And if they do engage? Well some of them actually end up doing some critical thinking. I find people tend to be more willing to engage over China things than Ukraine. I think people feel more self-assured that what they know about China is true so their confidence levels to engage are higher. It's the lack of confidence that causes them to ignore me @Raebxeh@hexbear.net
I don't find it easy at all, I think your patience is impressive. I remember spending a lot of time engaging earnestly with one user, trying to make them wrap their head around the concept of "source critique" to make them understand why they couldn't just skim wikipedia and call it a day. They did all the bad faith lib debatelord stuff that you run into and it just never stopped.
That interaction was kinda it for me, after that I just can't be bothered to be as nice and calm as you.
I'm not really engaging earnestly with them. I go through the motions fully expecting nothing. I do this because one, it exposes them for lurkers and two, on very rare occasions it sets a person on the path to deprogramming.
The appearance of earnest engagement is just an aesthetic I pull off because it is necessary to achieve both of the above outcomes. Authenticity is the quality I am for but deep down I am jaded and bored of doing this all the time. However I can never bring myself to stop, not given that I've seen first hand the creation of new comrades from it.
Modern day Socretes.
Nooooooooooooo
Please change your avatar picture to a condescending bust.
Ehh it's the whole "the comment isn't for the person you're responding to, it's for the reader"
Listening to a liberals dumb shit talking points they got filtered through colbert from the Biden campaign has no value.
Her showing that the liberals don't have anything of substance to contribute other than reddit bot comments is way more valuable IMHO.
deleted by creator