Best deal they're likely to get, so of course the coup government is going to wipe their ass with it and choose Berlin 1945. I'm sure all the conscripts and their families will love that. I hope I'm wrong, but we've stopped them from surrendering before. Thinking in Blackrock terms, why let them stop now when land prices have so much lower to fall?
Yes, the opposition to ww1-style meat grinders fought for the benefit of military and real estate companies is a typical giveaway. You on the other hand would be calling people pinkos for protesting the Vietnam war, and Saddam Lovers 30 years after that.
I always wonder if these people realize they would be violently opposed to the civil rights movement I'd they were alive then.
That's some impressive cognitive dissonance, to say opposing oppression and "might makes right" is equivalent to opposing the civil rights movement
Oh yea you're really "opposing oppression" by giving unlimited weapons to famously corrupt self avowed neo nazis because they happen to be opposed to your geopolitical ally. The really impressive cognitive dissonance is describing literally anything America has done in the last 80 years as "opposing oppression".
You guys are the ones supporting press ganging 75 year olds and dropping them into the meat grinder so a bunch of pentagon consultants dont have to admit theyve been lying their ass off about every aspect of the war for years. How's that for oppression.
Also love to accuse the other person of trying to use "might makes right" arguments while actively trying to build a military alliance to surround Russia with nukes while calling them the aggressor.
Reporter: [REDACTED]
Reason: Spreading disinformation (Zelenskyy, the Jew, is not a Nazi)This is like saying racism is over because Obama. If the Gaza genocide has taught us anything, it’s that there are fascist Jews.
At the most generous, one might argue that Zelenskyy is an actor who played a TV president, and then, in Forrest Gump style, found himself president in real life, and got steamrolled by the imperial core compradors & fascists who are really in charge of the country.
- The U.S. Did Not Defeat Fascism in WWII, It Discretely Internationalized It
- History of Fascism in Ukraine: Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV
- Reuters, 2014: Leaked audio reveals embarrassing U.S. exchange on Ukraine, EU
- Leaked recording between Nuland and Pyatt: audio | transcript
- CouterPunch, 2014: US Imperialism and the Ukraine Coup
- BBC, 2014: Ukraine underplays role of far right in conflict
- Human Rights Watch, 2014: Ukraine: Unguided Rockets Killing Civilians
- Consortium News, 2015: The Mess That Nuland Made
- The Hill, 2017: The reality of neo-Nazis in Ukraine is far from Kremlin propaganda
- The Guardian, 2017: 'I want to bring up a warrior': Ukraine's far-right children's camp – video
- WaPo, 2018: The war in Ukraine is more devastating than you know
- Reuters, 2018: Ukraine’s neo-Nazi problem
- The Nation, 2019: Neo-Nazis and the Far Right Are On the March in Ukraine
- Jacobin, 2022: A US-Backed, Far Right–Led Revolution in Ukraine Helped Bring Us to the Brink of War
- Consortium News, 2022: Evidence of US-Backed Coup in Kiev
- Al Jazeera, 2022: Why did Ukraine suspend 11 ‘pro-Russia’ parties?
Go figure the cowardly liberal doesn't have a response or defense for their shitty beliefs that literally boil down to supporting nazis and instead tries to appeal to existing power structures to get dissenting voices silenced.
Another example of why they're deserving of nothing but open contempt.
To be fair, they may have gotten all their understanding from the Council of Foreign Relations and the Atlantic Council until three days ago, and my info-dump is about a week’s worth of reading 😆
Just read the comment report you made, were you born such a little worm or does it take considerable practice?
Do you have anything of substance to add?
:smuglord: "you're from Hexbear" isn't an argument
Why because they're the only one not suggesting "Russia should abaondon their two year long successful military operataion because that's what I, a whiny American liberal, want."
This deal is probably the last chance to save anything of Ukraine, and it will naturally be rejected because the west wants to fight this war to the last Ukrainian. People cheering this on really need to ask themselves what this was all for. Ukraine is in a far worse situation today than it was two years ago, and it will be in a worse situation with each and every day that passes. Western support peaked during the disastrous summer offensive last year, and Ukraine is now running out of trained and motivated soldiers. It's obvious to anyone with a functioning brain what the end result of all this will be.
Libs who think this offer is a bad thing, live in a completely invented reality
To all the people who believe Ukraine should continue fighting, why do you not volunteer?
The ukranians do not wish to fight this war. They have to be forced. The men are not allowed to leave, the average age in the army is 43 and the army has to forcibly conscript people to force them to the front 1 2 3 going so far as to raid high school gymsIt is clear the average ukrainian does not wish to fight. If you believe this war must continue, why do you not volunteer? Surely you are not that much of a coward that you find it acceptable people should be forced to be thrown into a meatgrinder?
In my opinion this,
To all the people who believe Ukraine should continue fighting, why do you not volunteer?
Is a pretty lazy argument. Most people have no interest in shedding blood, nor are they Ukrainian or Russian.
I think explaining western encroachment and that a lot of the modern militant Ukrainians are ideological descendants of Bandera and full-on fascists is the better way to go.
Fair point. If this were a situation were I was trying to convince the other part, then I would agree with you, my question doesn't create any strong argument and it is quite reductive. I've used it as a sort of gotcha in discussions when we reached the ideological level (russia is fascists genocider badman!) But to be quite honest I am not asking this as a gotcha now. I've asked it so much and never gotten an answer and I've gotten curious about what the honest answer is. I'd like to know how people can scream about fascism and against peace, while not being willing to fight themselves. If I truly believed the war in Ukraine was an existential threat, and was somehow able to square that with the fact ukrainians weren't willing to fight, and able to square that with the idea that was must go on, then I can't see how I wouldn't also be volunteering.
The question as I've posed it is flawed, it requires that we accept the people of Ukraine do not wish to fight and that the war is lost - I feel like I've presented a solid case for both, but it's still sort of a prerequisite - and anyone who agrees on those two fronts, is more than likely a person who is more informed than the person who thinks the war should continue. The venn diagramme overlap of people who can observe the basic facts, but still think the war should go on, is quite small.
Why wouldn't you argue for the aggressor to leave? Seems kind of backwards to tell the country that was invaded to roll over and just give up to its fascist neighbor.
I'm not arguing for anything. I'm asking a question and that question isn't wether or not it is morally right for Russia to invade Ukraine. I am asking you: Since the ukrainian people do not wish to continue this war, but you think they should, why aren't you volunteering? If you think Ukraine should not accept this peace deal, if you think the war should continue, why aren't you volunteering? If you think Russia is so horrendous that Ukraine cannot accept peace, why are you not volunteering?
"You oppose Russia yet you don't want to go fight them yourself, why?" is a ridiculous question that you're pretending is a rational one. You're intellectually dishonest af here, and you say you're "not arguing" simply because you're putting your absolute bullshit in the form of a question.
Once again not an answer, but I see the issue, you're illiterate! It seems like you have found other words than the ones I'd written. The question was "Since you think the war in Ukraine is so important that it should continue despite the fact that ukrainians themselves do not want to continue fighting, why are you not volunteering for the war?"
Initially I asked a question and you decided to engage by not answering the question, you're now offended that I want you to answer the question. If you had no intention of ever answering the question, why engage at all? You call it bullshit, but of us two I am the only to have played with open cards, I have been honest and forthright with my intention from the get go. I have even answered your questions! Yet you somehow feel that I have deceived you. Are you really so simple as to be able to feel deceived by a person who outright tells you what it is they want?
I'll explain now why it's such a dishonest question. It's a false equivalence that sets the bar for agreeing with an opinion at being willing to die for it yourself. That is incorrect, logically speaking. The bar for agreeing with this opinion would be whether or not I'd be willing to fight and die for MY country if it was being invaded by Russians. That's the core dishonesty of your question, that if I support their cause, I should be willing to fight and die for it myself.
I also wouldn't personally say that every last able-bodied man should fight. Say we have a Ukrainian man whose brother was killed, his brother's wife is disabled, and she has 6 kids. I would have nothing to say about what that individual man should do, and if he chose to help his sister in law get her orphaned children out of Ukraine, away from the war, and take care of them, that's his honorable choice. That brings us to the second dishonest part of your question, it sets the implied bar at a point where if one supports a country that continues fighting for its freedom against a violent aggressor, that we must naturally support the notion that every individual in that country should fight as well. It's taking a macro level question and trying to apply it to every individual; attempting to turn a nuanced opinion into a black and white one by disregarding the contextual realities at the individual level.
Your dishonesty is embedded in the question.
So once again you fail to answer the question lmao. Now you're trying to dance around the premise, pricking holes in it, but this too you cannot do. You're talking about "supporting the cause", vague nonsense. You also seem to think that I asked "if you want a country to win in an argument on the internet, why don't you go kill yourself in the war?" Are you dyslexic? Did you learn to read in that weird way where you recognize the shape of words instead of phonics?
I didn't ask "if you support Ukraine..." I asked "If you think the war should continue, despite the fact that the people no longer want to fight it, why don't you go volunteer?"You keep making up new things, try to read what I have written more slowly. Maybe ask an adult for help.
You say that I imply that "if we support a country, then every individual in that country should fight as well." No, buddy, just no.
I'm happy you've put on your big boy pants and tried your hand at rhetorics 101, but you really need to engage with the words you're presented with rather than the words you'd like for me to have written. If you think a war should continue, despite the fact that the people of the nation you claim to support no longer want the war to continue, then I think it makes logical sense that you go volunteer. I know that if I supported a war to such an extent that I argued against peace, despite the fact the people I allegedly "support" (agree with online) do not want the war to continue, then it would be because I saw this war as something more important than simple territorial warfare, since I think it's cool and good to throw unwilling people into a meat grinder for it. Since I am a "supporter" of this war to such an extent, then I would volunteer. I'm not, but you are, so why aren't you volunteering?Sure, I support the "ukrainina cause" Slava Ukraini! I also think they should accept the peace deal because the ukrainians do not wish to fight anymore. If you think they shouldn't, despite the fact they no longer wish to fight, then you are, in fact, not supporting their cause. You are supporting more dead ukrainians. If you think this war must continue despite the fact ukrainians do not want it to, then you must think it is of such a moral importance, why then do you not also think it is your moral imperative to go fight for it?
Now answer my question
And my question is why are you putting everything on the people who were invaded and not the aggressor? Are the Russian people not also being senselessly killed in a war started by their government?
Weasel, you're evading the question. My answer: Russia has presented a peace deal. Now answer my question you coward.
I'm a capybara, king of the rats, thank you very much. The question is why won't you condemn the aggressor and stop putting the onus of peace on the people who are being murdered by an aggressor?
Thrice you have been asked a simple question, thrice you have attempted to evade an answer. You're pathetic.
Or is it that you cannot read what I have written? It would seem so, your question is a repetition, not acknowledging the answer it has received.
It is clear that you are psychotic, lusting for ukrainian blood. You wish for them to die in a meat grinder they do not wish to enter. A meat grinder of a war against an opponent who has offered a peace deal. You seem to think they should not accept this deal, so why don't you go fight? The ukrainian people obviously do not wish to fight, they no longer see a reason to continue this war, since they must be forced to fight. Yet you think they should continue, so go support them the best way you can: with your body. But you won't, and you won't answer why, for the answer would require you to admit a deeper rot in your soul. Shame on you and shame on you for attempting to utilize these sad attempts at debatelord parlor tricks. I asked my question in good faith, I was genuinely qurious, yet from the moment you responded you have done naught but ignore this simple question.
Also you're really bad at doing what you're trying to do, it's incredibly obvious how much a shitty little turd you're being
The coughing will begin in three days.
I think it's very clear who is the psychotic one here. Thank you for the conversation, Prime Minister Chamberlain.
Czechoslovakia, that's a bingo! Thank you so much for filling out my bingo board. Sadly this still isn't an answer to my question, you have failed yet again.
Literally doing the playground "no u". Lemmy.ml isn't sending their best :(
Sorry for using 5-dollar words, english isn't my first language (it's russian, Putin has paid me personally for this interaction) and so sometimes I phrase things weirdly. Personally I'm used to people not speaking a language perfectly, so I try not to shame them for weird language use, but that's just one of the many ways I've been raised better than you. I'd like to thank my mother and yoursSorry guys I ain’t reading all this right now but this ^ is “I have depicted myself as the chad wojak and you as the soy wojak”
Replying to a question with an unrelated question is rude and derails the conversation. Fucking answer them directly you fucking coward.
The question is why won't you condemn the aggressor and stop putting the onus of peace on the people who are being murdered by an aggressor?
The people being murdered... Oh, you mean the Russian-speaking population of Eastern Ukraine? The ones who the openly fascist banderite government (that coupe'd the democratically elected government in 2014) were trying to ethnically cleanse when Russia stepped in and prevented it? Yes, I do support those people of Donbas, and seeing as they support Russia, you should too if you care about innocent people getting murdered. Similarly, I condemn the aggressors, the aforementioned banderite Ukrainian fascists and their NATO backers.
I'm not the person you were asking, but yes, I also support the people of Western Ukraine, the vast majority of whom do not want to fight in this war but are being press ganged, literally kidnapped off the street by the Ukrainian government and shipped off to be cannon fodder and die on the front line. I fully support them and advocate for the immediate end of this war so that no more of them will die needlessly in this senseless meat grinder that NATO and the Ukrainian government insist on perpetuating despite their inevitable loss. If you care about human life and if you care about justice, then you would completely support Ukraine immediately accepting this peace offer. If you think human life is cheap (especially if it's foreign to you) and that Ukrainian working class people are expendable and should go ahead and die for the sake of lines on a map that favor western countries, then yeah, that would be in line with cheerleading for the Ukrainian government and opposing the offer of peace.
You're calling someone else a weasel while calling this "offer" a peace deal? Look in the mirror.
I said what I said, you're not in charge of shit here. Nobody needs to answer your stupid question first in order to speak their mind. How about you start by acknowledging that Russia is the fascist aggressor in this war, could stop it at any minute by returning to their own territory, and admitting that they're simply the bad guys in this war? Can you say that?
It strikes me as quite odd that you would be offended about me insisting on wanting an answer. This started out with me asking a question and you then... decided to jump in to not answer it? Of course you're allowed to speak your mind, and I'm allowed to address your inane pathethic attempts at steering the conversation away from it's starting point - To me that question is the whole point of this interaction. You are somehow offended at the fact that I would like to have my question answered, it's really odd. Do you often get mad when people expect that dialogue proceeds in a rational fashion?
I will however do you a solid and address your questions. I recommend that you look at how I go about this concept of "answering a question" which seems to strike such furor within you, and use it as inspiration for the day you yourself find the ability to answer simple queries.How about you start by acknowledging that Russia is the fascist aggressor in this war, could stop it at any minute by returning to their own territory, and admitting that they're simply the bad guys in this war?
Russia is a capitalist state run by oligarchs. Putin is a homophobe, I hope one day the russian people will be blessed with a government that governs for the people rather than over the people. The reasons for war are more complex than "mustache twirling bad man." Your request here reveals your simplistic worldview of "good guys" and "bad guys", these are not motivations for war.
I do not support Russia, however I am a realist and realise that no war has ever ended by the victorious party packing up and going home just because. Russia has offered a peace treaty and it is clear the ukrainians do not wish to fight anymore. I personally see no reason to continue a war that has already been lost especially not when that war has, as I've taken pains to illustrate, no popular support. I do not agree with the invasion of Ukraine, but I am able to observe and accept material reality, which is that Ukraine has no soldiers, no people willing to fight, it has to force people to go to the front where they die in droves for no gain, and now they have been offered a treaty which would put an end to this bloodshed. I think they should take it because I think the war should end.You think (this I must assume since you cannot answer a simple question, nor engage with the basic arguments I have thus far presented) that despite the fact that that Ukraine has no soldiers, no people willing to fight, it has to force people to go to the front where they die in droves for no gain, and now they have been offered a treaty which would put an end to this bloodshed, they should not accept peace for some reason. Charitably I assume that people who hold this opinions of yours, hold it because they think the war is important in some way, and not because they lust for the blood of ukrainians. This is where my curiosity lies and where I would like to have it answered: Since people like you believe this war is so important that it must continue, why do you believe it is not important enough for you to go volunteer? You seem to believe Ukraine is a liberal democracy like the ones in the west and that Russia is a fascist dictatorship invading for no good reason except to murder or subjugate every single ukrainian. Therefore Ukraine must not accept a peace deal even though ukrainians do not want to fight. I don't believe that, but if I did, I would go volunteer for Ukraine, since the war would then be so important for me. So how come? How come you can believe that Russia is so bad, so evil, so monstrous, so wrong, yet you do not believe you should go support the country that you think should reject the peace its people are clamoring for?
Answer my question
Russia is neither fascist nor "the aggressor." Anyone who doesn't recognize that Russia entered a civil war where one side (a coup government with an actual fascist military that openly admits their fascism) was trying to ethnically cleanse the other side (who are speakers of the Russian language) doesn't know what the fuck is going on and has almost certainly swallowed gallons of propaganda.
could stop it at any minute by returning to their own territory
And then what would happen to the people of Eastern Ukraine, the Donbas? They would get ethnically cleansed. But I guess you don't give a shit about that? Or you literally didn't know about that?
and admitting that they're simply the bad guys in this war?
Baby-brained simplistic bullshit. No, Russia is not "the bad guy" in this war and you need to expose yourself to more of the world than fucking marvel movies. Also, the word fascist has a meaning, it's not a synonym for "bad guys," and if you had any exposure to the world beyond your little bubble from which you lap up propaganda like it's ice cream, you'd know that (for example) the US just as if not closer to being fascist than Russia.
Russia is the bad guys in this war!
If I was still a child who believed in good guys and bad guys, I would just present these pictures with no comment. Instead, I'm presenting them with a "lol".
Show
Show
It is literally a peace deal and you're not answering because you know being honest about what you feel should be done here would reveal you to be the Internet Douglas Haig we all know you are.
The point is that many people caught up in the propaganda seem perfectly happy to let an infinite number of Ukrainians die for their project. It's apparently very important to fight Russia with life and life (Ukrainian), but not so important that they'd take any risk themselves whatsoever. It speaks to both the dehumanization of the Ukrainian people, of treating them like fictional heroes rather than conscripts pushed around by larger forces, as well as the implicit sociopathy of the armchair warhawk. The hope, of course, is that the inconsistency prompts someone to actually question their own inconsistencies, as most people don't think of themselves as warhawks or several times more human than a Ukrainian.
Though there are some other incorrect lines of thought in your comment.
Why wouldn't you argue for the aggressor to leave?
That is not a human on this Lemmy server who can think and respond to the point. And even if you were in the room with some powerful person with the capacity to personally impact the outcome, your request would mean nothing because that's not how geopolitics work.
These are not comparable things. Instead, this rhetoric is a thought-terminating cliche intended to recenter The Bad Guy (TM) rather than address the point made.
Seems kind of backwards to tell the country that was invaded to roll over and just give up to its fascist neighbor.
Who is talking to countries? We are people talking to one another.
Thanks for addressing a lot of things I let slide for the sake of a good discussion, and thanks for doing it far more succinctly than I could've.
Okay, I told the Russian Federation to leave and they said no. Now what?
If this was the deal after Russia annexed the Crimean Peninsula, I could see it being ok. However, this is the second invasion in a decade.
What keeps Russia from invading a decade later?
Not having Ukraine join NATO while saying "hey we might give ukraine nukes that could hit Moscow in 4 minutes"
Not to play into Hexbear stereotypes, but unless there are some dramatic political changes in Ukraine, I'd rather Russia invade Ukraine again in 10 years to be honest.
I wouldn't trust Nazis with nukes.
What keeps Russia from taking more territory now until there's no Ukraine left?
Taking everything you say at face value, the options for Ukraine are:
- Take a deal that maybe you can't trust, but it at least gives you time to breathe.
- Keep fighting, and with the war going how it is eventually lose more than what you've already lost.
- Attempt to draw other states into the conflict so that you have a shot at what might be considered a victory, likely years more down the road under the best of circumstances.
There is no justification for 2, and 3 is highly unlikely -- if other states haven't entered the war already, they're not going to do so now.
They will.
Russia is running on fumes and Ukraine is continuing to bolster up. Russia needs time to reup
This has been the narrative since shortly after the war began. All that's happened since is Russia has slowly advanced.
Pick one: Russia is running on fumes, or Russia should have won a year ago.
The coherent opinion here is that it's a slow, grinding war and the side that has lost more and more territory as it continued will continue to do so.
Shouldn't the Leopard tanks have turned the tide of battle? Or the NATO equipment and training? Or the other round of NATO equipment and training? Or the MANPADS? Or the third shipment of NATO equipment and training? Or the F-16s that are totally coming any day now (which will definitely turn the tide of the war guise! It's not silly to make a plane that can't handle dirt on the airway)? What about the drone tactics Ukraine used to terrorbomb russian civilian targets, wasn't that supposed to turn the tide of the war? What about the bombing of the Crimea bridge, how come that didn't turn the tide of the war?
You guys keep saying Russia is about to run out of equipment, but they still have stocks and stocks of shells, meanwhile NATO countries are struggling to rearm after having donated so much equipment to Ukraine. Maybe there isn't a wunderwaffe that will win the war, and maybe it's senseless to continue this meat-grinder. The Ukrainians don't want to fight, they have to be forcibly conscripted.
But! If you think they should continue to die for some vague cause, why don't you go volunteer? They need bodies. The average age is 43, so you won't be turned away for being "too old" or "too young". Why don't you volunteer for Ukraine?
Meanwhile in the real world
- https://www.businessinsider.com/russias-army-15-percent-larger-when-attacked-ukraine-us-general-2024-4
- https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/attritional-art-war-lessons-russian-war-ukraine
- https://www.politico.com/news/2024/04/11/christopher-cavoli-russian-military-losses-00151718
- https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/10/politics/russia-artillery-shell-production-us-europe-ukraine/index.html
- https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68823399
- https://raport.valisluureamet.ee/2024/en/1-russian-armed-forces-and-the-war-in-ukraine/1-3-russian-military-industry/
What's amazing to me is that this stuff is now openly reported in western media, and we still have people running around talking about Russia collapsing any day now. I suspect that a lot of the people who got really invested in project Ukraine stopped paying attention a while back, and they're just regurgitating the talking points they memorized two years ago.
You stupid motherfuckers have been saying this shit since the war began without even the slightest bit of realization that Russia is an actual industrialized, manufacturing power, while the west has shipped almost all of its actual production to China and SEA
Ukraine is literally constantly running out of shit despite the entirety of NATO dumping military supplies on them and they're the ones conscripting 40+ year old men but lol "Russia is running on fumes"
"Why hasn't Russia won yet" because they're winning, stupid, they are winning a war of attrition, the fact that they're winning doesn't mean they can just magically teleport troops into Kiev and declare Game Over. This isn't some fucking paradox game, moron. The winning move is to keep grinding Ukraine into dust, not whatever dumbass shit you think Russia needs to be doing to win the war.
I can't stress enough how fucking stupid you are if you think Ukraine's current conscription reality is in any way indicative of them "bolstering up"
Offering someone a peace deal when you know they wont take it is a chad move. Just like Hamas saying it will disarm in exchange for a prisoner swap and a lasting end to hostilities.
I think it was a very calculated move actually. He did this right before the Switzerland circus, and it forced the west to say that they reject peace. This shows the rest of the world that it is indeed the west that wants the war to keep going which makes it impossible for western diplomats to go around claiming that Russia doesn't want peace.
You clearly vastly underestimate the Western diplomatic cores ability to lie in the face of obvious fact and get away with it
lol that's true, they will go on to make clowns of themselves regardless
The only way to end this war is to retreat from the war, stop fighting and killing and just chill already. But that will never be the case with a maniac like Putin and his minions in charge.
Hey we've got a military genius over here! Yes you're right, the way wars are negotiated is that the winning side completely gives up all terrain because we think they're stupid meanies and then they can ask for a peace pretty please.
Okay I just talked to Putin and he said they weren't going to leave and then negotiate, he called me stupid for suggesting it and asked me if I lived in fantasy land.
To be fair, that would have been the first time I'm history a peace deal was negotiated like that.That wouldn't end the war, that would result in the continued wholesale slaughter of eastern Ukranians by their own government, the thing that Russia jumped in to stop in the first place. Please stop thinking about geopolitics in childish terms of maniacs and minions, life is not a Marvel movie.
That wouldn’t end the war, that would result in the continued wholesale slaughter of eastern Ukranians by their own government
Did Ukraine do that? Genuine question, not really educated in the pre-war history. Sounds a bit unbelievable to me at first glance. Feel free to provide reading material.
Please stop thinking about geopolitics in childish terms of maniacs and minions, life is not a Marvel movie.
Of course not. I wanted to keep it short and on point.
However, war will continue as long as there are forces at play who want the war. Putin is certainly one of these war-driving forces, as well ashis minionshis top-people in military and politics. Given the expansionistic approach, the numerous threats, even against children, creates a pretty insane picture.Genuine question, not really educated in the pre-war history.
Yes. The Minsk I and Minsk II treaties were brokered between Russia and Ukraine. These treaties required Ukraine to stop shelling the LPR and DPR. Ukraine continued to shell these two regions despite these treaties. This was part of Russia's justification for their "Special Military Operation" which evolved into the full-scale war we see today (I consider them separate due to the fact Russia did not target critical infrastructure during the SMO, this doctrine only changed after further escalation).
These regions have a majority of ethnic Russians which is why they were targeted for shelling after Euromaidan in 2014. Since then tensions have only escalated.
Azov battalion have been integrated into the Ukrainian army. Part of their ideology is to rid Ukraine of Russians (this includes Ukrainian Russians.)
Sources:- Bombings of civilians
- a news report about the bombing of civilians
- war crimes fighting separatists in these regions
For "anti-ethnic-russian sentiment":
- Ukraine attempted to ban Russian and Yiddish in 2019
- Ukraine has now banned Russian language books, music
- This democratic nation banned 11 parties for being "pro-russian"
Several of the sources linked in this comment touches on the subject as well as things that happened more than two years ago.
Currently the Ukrainian army shows a callous disregard for civilians using them as human shields. This does not foster a sense of people being safe under the Ukrainian government.
Putin is certainly one of these war-driving forces, as well as his minions.
Lmao Putin is a politician like so many others, not some moustache twirling villain. You're not really providing any reason for war apart from "Putin bad". Yes, Putin indeed bad, but Putin not entirety of Russian state apparatus. Despite the propaganda that would have you believe otherwise Putin can't snap his fingers and have his will exerted. That's not how states are run, especially not for years on end. If you do that then you lose the support of your base and no one can rule alone.
This war has support among the populace and the political elite, if it didn't them Prigozhins coup would have had much more support. The political elite and population also don't support the war because they're evil, but for material reasons. Putin is actually on the less militant side in the Russian attitude, he has been widely critiqued for now immediately fully escalating to a war instead of an SMO and he has been critiqued for not doing it sooner. This video is a good surface level primer for why Russia has been motivated to do as it did.
Go sign up for the ukranian military if you want to see more grist for the meat grinder, coward
Because advocating for it to continue is sending others to their death. Same energy as wanting president's children on the front line, because without that understanding, people are way more willing to advocate continuing slaughter
Liberals try not to be homophobic/transphobic for two fucking seconds challenge.
You are just like the Zionists that say the same about people standing with the people of Gaza.
I would say more but it would go against this instance civility rules, you'll just have to get creative with your imagination to know how we feel about the likes of you.
The options are a peace deal or a destruction of one of the parties, and Russia is not going to be destroyed by this.
What direction would you prefer for the people living in Ukraine?
whatever russia says, they mean to do the opposite. they've been pulling this nonsense from the start and this is no different, and we know this because they are STILL THERE. if they wanted peace, THEY'D LEAVE. ukraine doesn't have a choice, they have nowhere to go. they can't pull out of the conflict because they are literally the one being invaded. there is no logic to this argument. it's like ordering cheese and wondering why you are served cheese. it's plain and dumb.
ukraine doesn’t have a choice, they have nowhere to go. they can’t pull out of the conflict because they are literally the one being invaded
You are right in that they have nowhere to go but it's because NATO won't let them accept peace but will force them to keep fighting until that last working class Ukrainian is dead. Russia is literally offering them a way out of more bloodshed right now, literally the topic of this post. They also could have avoided all of this by simply honoring the Minsk Agreements, but it was Ukraine breaking those agreements (including by shelling their own people in the east) that led to Russia "invading" by entering a conflict that had already been initiated by Ukraine trying to ethnically cleanse the east. It's funny you start by saying that Russia is untrustworthy, but Ukraine and NATO are the ones who very explicitly and admittedly broke their agreements.
whatever russia says, they mean to do the opposite
This is silly. Do you think Russian politicians are always just having fun playing this word game or something?
they've been pulling this nonsense from the start and this is no different, and we know this because they are STILL THERE. if they wanted peace, THEY'D LEAVE.
That doesn't make any sense. Their occupation is leverage. Giving up leverage always puts you in a worse negotiating position. The original causes of the invasion are also unresolved. What you are essentially suggesting is that Russia capitulate for the third time re: Ukraine and hope for a different outcome. The reason they invaded in the first place is that nobody in leadership, rationally, thinks they should fall for that again.
The outcome you would like to see is likely impossible. So what possible outcome do you want?
ukraine doesn't have a choice, they have nowhere to go. they can't pull out of the conflict because they are literally the one being invaded. there is no logic to this argument. it's like ordering cheese and wondering why you are served cheese. it's plain and dumb.
I think this might just be a misunderstanding. Of course Ukraine can't un-invade itself. And I agree that Ukraine doesn't have much choice, but I think so in a different way. They don't have much choice because they are not really a sovereign county. Their terms are heavily influenced by Western powers. The original attempts at a peace deal we blown up by Westwen leaders. This is unfortunate for the people of Ukraine, as they don't deserve to die just so that Western countries can try to stick it to Russia.
I think the best outcome is to achieve a peace deal as quickly as possible.
Isn't it interesting that the official US gov line on Gaza, a sealed off prison zone currently experiencing a second Holocaust that the zionist entity has no intention of stopping, is that "Hamas could end this any time"
But the nazi coup government of Ukraine, which doesn't even have public support and which has rejected every peace offering for years and have broken multiple treaties because they just couldn't stop slaughtering their own people in the east...they are the smol beans with nowhere to go.
You have internalized a perfectly backwards propagandistic framing of the situation: It is the Kyiv regime that can end this tomorrow by simply accepting that the people of the Donbas region do not want to be ruled by them. Russia has no interest in western Ukraine, no interest in ruling a bunch of people who hate them, they want a buffer zone so they don't have a warmongering authoritarian power's nukes on their border
. I mean shit, we've been bombing their nuclear detection radar stations lately. If that's not the action of a deranged empire playing with the lives of the entire world, nothing is. Can you fucking imagine what the reaction would be if they were doing that to us? We would have scoured the planet of life by now.The Ukrainian state forces it's people to fight and does not allow them to leave. It has a choice and that choice is to listen to it's people and accept peace.
If you think they should fight despite the fact that they do not wish to, then go volunteer yourself. Otherwise let the people decide for themselves.
Also your suggestion that they should leave is funny. I mean yeah if we're in Fantasyland sure, they should leave. I also think Putin should give everyone a pony. Sadly we live in a world where Putin hasn't given me a pony, a world were parties doesn't give up leverage before a negotiation.
You guys keep talking about Russians being untrustworthy, but it was Ukraine that broke treaties https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements
'Russia is not going to X' is a very weak argument, and over the last 10 years Russia crossed many of those Xs, regardless of you thinking it's not going to.
But the X here is not about a Russian foreign policy decision per se, but about their overall military standing as part of their invasion of Ukraine.
Yeah, they lost black sea fleet almost completely, burned way over 30k lives to take over ruins of Bakhmut, about the same to destroy and 'take over's Avdiivka, got royally fucked with the assault on Vovchansk and Sumy direction, emptied their stock of towed artillery and APCs, had to borrow and from China, Iran and fucking North Korea, got sanctioned so much that rouble is now in free trade with yuan, committed genocide and ecocide, and generally lost over half a million of soldiers while aiming for week-long speed run to kill Nazi Jew zelenski. But sure this only made them stronger.
Upd: oh boi do I forget to mention that for half a year Ukraine was effectively feigning of f the entire Russian army while having close to no weapons, and delivering majority of strikes with $500/piece plastic toys
In your first paragraph, you repeat an assessment handed down to Western propaganda. Were it true, it would be very surprising to find the reality that Russia dominates the Black Sea and Ukraine and NATO (we'll ignore Turkey, who doesn't really care lol) has no presence there. It would also be surprising to discover that the overall Russian economy is better than pre-war and that they are having no manpower issues, and are, in fact, now advancing on Ukrainian positions.
This is understandable, as the false prospect of a Ukrainian win is important for the propaganda apparatus that actually cares far more about hurting Russia than securing a future for Ukrainians.
But all of this is somewhat moot because it bears little relation to the point I made. Or maybe I am missing something? Please be explicit.
I repeat literally assessments of Russians, and claims of Putin himself. Domination of the black sea surely means evacuation of remains of Crimean fleet to Novorossisk, and almost complete absence of russian military in the black and Azov sea - confirmed by satellite imagery. Russia tried to turn hunger into weapon trying to block ships passing to Ukrainian ports, and failed - their unilateral withdrawal from the Istanbul agreement
I agree that russia braced their economics very well and handled the sanctioned better than most anticipated. However, the pressure mounts and the government is forced to raise taxes - surely not a sign of a blooming economy. Recent Ukrainian targeted hits at major refineries, turning Russia to import fuels - this is important both in military and economical contexts.
What I say is Russia is worse than it was at the beginning, despite territorial gains.
I repeat literally assessments of Russians, and claims of Putin himself. Domination of the black sea surely means evacuation of remains of Crimean fleet to Novorossisk, and almost complete absence of russian military in the black and Azov sea - confirmed by satellite imagery. Russia tried to turn hunger into weapon trying to block ships passing to Ukrainian ports, and failed - their unilateral withdrawal from the Istanbul agreement
Russians are people like anyone else. You, of course, can therefore find them saying just about anything. There is little overlap between what you have said and what Putin had said though I don't know why I should care about that.
I think you may be falling victim to propaganda when it comes to the Black Sea. Ukraine has nothing there. Nada. Zilch. The stories that are accurate describe the targeting and destruction of Russian vessels. Logically from what I just said, these are true. But Russia maintains its dominant presence, particurly in the Azov Sea.
I am interested, or maybe anticipating entertainment, by your idea that satellite imagery confirms your claim. My experience with such ideas is with teenagers pretending to know how to analyze raster imagery and lying through their teeth about it because it suits the needs of propaganda. This is what often gets filtered into the press. Please show me your Black Sea dataset with no Russian vessels, I would love to see it. I can even analyze it for the presence of vessels if you give me the data. Preferably, tiled GeoTIFF. I suspect, realistically, that you have third-hand information from propagandists, and can give me no such information. I anticipate disappointment.
I agree that russia braced their economics very well and handled the sanctioned better than most anticipated. However, the pressure mounts and the government is forced to raise taxes - surely not a sign of a blooming economy.
That is no such thing. Under a forced national industrial investment regime, a capitalist government raising taxes should be expected. There is a Russian neoliberal faction that threatens to throw a wrench into things but they have been forced into less stupid positions by circumstance.
Recent Ukrainian targeted hits at major refineries, turning Russia to import fuels - this is important both in military and economical contexts.
Important, yes. But why think it is good for Ukraine? More pressure on Russia only increases the likelihood that they adopt a typical sociopathic Western war strategy of complete destruction civilian life. That is something that has not actually happened. It's something I was wrong about in 2022. I did not think that Russia, a regional capitalist power, would use such restrained tactics. I had to rethink my understanding of Western psychology and militarism, as it is actually qualitatively different (and morw horrible) than every other instance. I had, falsely, projected cold Western logic onto others.
What I say is Russia is worse than it was at the beginning, despite territorial gains.
All economic indicators disagree, particularly when it comes to industrial capacity.
Ukraine is far from spotless on the treaty-upholding-front. The current government was installed by the US, which is in direct breach of the Budapest Memorandum. The government has broken Minsk I and II which was a large part of the russian justification for the SMO.
Hasn't anyone ever gone to a flea market? When you start a negotiation you don't say the "fair" price. You start way below the price you are willing to pay and the seller starts way higher than the "fair" price. But the point is starting the negotiation and reaching a middle point that satisfies both parties enough to have a deal signed.
"Why don't they just continue to lie and break treaties and do whatever they want instead?" - deffinitly the good guys
Can't join NATO with an existing territorial dispute. "Agreeing and joining NATO anyways" would be an official admission by the Ukrainian government that the territories currently held by Russia are not part of Ukraine anymore.
Presumably there are enough sane Ukrainian officials left to not want to wake up to nuclear hellfire.
well that's 2 absolute shit ass takes from "@midwest.social" in this thread, they're not sending their best
Listen, the pollen count has been through the roof here lately, we can't breathe well enough to get oxygen to the brain.
I made this comment more or less jokingly, but today I'm actually miserable. Jokes on me.
I was asking a question and received many helpful and some not so helpful answers.
Sometimes even realists and historical materialists wake up on the wrong side of the bed, and aren’t in the mood to answer the same question again, especially when it’s often asked in bad faith.
Joining NATO's not an instant process and Russia would just restart the war the second they got a whiff of the process starting.
I suppose Ukraine and NATO could try to work in secret but it'd be a very dangerous game, and would rely on the total cooperation of a not entirely united alliance.
Turkey would probably informed Russia immediately, or maybe Polish minister would brag on twitter like in case of Nordstream sabotage.
Yeah, something of that proportion could not be kept secret even if all NATO member states were all in total agreement and unity and even with the avowed silence of high officials. It also would at least partially defeat the purpose of NATO if a state joining it were to be kept secret.
Joining NATO would mean nuclear holocaust. Thankfully some people are rational enough to realise that this would be a bad thing. Joining NATO in spite of pledging not to would also delegitimize NATO and Ukraine in the eyes of the international community furthering the developing multipolarity we see. There is also the question of wether or not NATO membership is even on the table for Ukraine. Before the war Zelensky was informed he had to pretend it was, while having been informed it wasn't behind closed doors.
I'll answer in two parts.
First, don't assume a post-peace-deal Ukraine would be allowed into NATO. There has never been any serious attempt to allow them in. Just threats for Ukraine to begin the process. It is not unlikely that NATO wouldn't even let them in.
Second, Russia could just invade again.
Because that eould be admitting defeat which loses a ton of territory and abandons a lot of Ukranian.
Russia is not anywhere close to winning the war, so there is no reason to capitulate.
Ukraine has been reduced to sending press gangs to kidnap old men to the front lines.
This isn't capitulation, this is cutting your losses while you have something left to hold onto.
There is absolutely reason to capitulate: the fact that the Ukrainian Armed Forces have an average age above 40 and are absolutely scraping the barrel by conscripting any poor man they find. There is no universe where Ukraine pushes back the front to recover any substantial amount of territory. They have already attempted to launch counteroffensives in better conditions, and all they've achieved is to slow down Russia, never actually regaining any territory. The only reason they're even in the war still is because NATO wants to sacrifice Ukrainian lives to weaken Russia, and corrupt Ukrainian politicians are making a quick buck by privatizing they country in the meantime. This is obviously not sustainable long term; in another year or two they won't be able to recruit more people, or they'll run out of artillery shlels.
The average age of the ukrainian
forced conscriptfighter is 43. NATO countries have emptied their stockpiles and are struggling to rearm, hampering their abilities to deal with other crises (like Ansar Allah), the West is staring down the barrel of a massive recession as gas prices still climb and production falls lower and lower. Russia is still able to produce enough shells to maintain a stockpile, and manages to hold and advance its fronts when it wishes, something that cannot be said for Ukraine or NATO.
The ukrainians do not wish to fight. They are being kidnapped to the front, their passports are taken from them. Why should this war continue? Russia is still ascendant, the ukrainians do not wish to fight, and they have just now received an incredibly generous offer? If you still believe this cause is necessary, why do you not volunteer? Ukraine needs bodies.
He is asking for much more than he currently holds. I'd expect this from a war party that is about to overrun the enemy. But despite Russia slowly getting the upper hand, they still have a long way to go to win this war and they still might lose it.
Therefore I don't think this is an honest offer.
Nah, there was never any point where Russia was going to lose this unless countries other than Ukraine joined in with more than just grift money and weapon donations but with actual troops on a large scale (beyond just small scale mercs that are easy to deny). And fortunately that wasn't too likely to happen because even the most belligerent NATO warhawks knew it would be seriously risking global nuclear war. So many internet armchair generals, mostly NAFO dipshits but plenty of Russia-aligned SMO-watchers too, were (and are) way too focused on the lines on the map, the fine details of kettles and who held what small towns, etc, all without recognizing the bigger picture: long term attrition. In that sense, Russia has always had the upper hand by a large margin. That's not going to change either. Russia is, as you say, "slowly getting the upper hand," in the more obvious ways but this was always what was in the cards and it's just going to continue in that same inevitable direction. The only way Russia will lose this war is if there is some major change in how things are set up on the global stage.
Also it's not really true to say that Russia is asking for more than they hold because even if some areas are still contested, Ukraine has no chance of hanging on to them. As others have noted, this is a very generous offer and I expect it's only being made because Russia is plainly aware that Ukraine will not accept it (in fact Ukraine cannot accept it because those who fund them, those who are using Ukraine as their proxy and who are ultimately responsible for all this, wouldn't allow them to). That's the only way in which this offer is "dishonest," if you consider it dishonest for Russia to propose a plan they know full well that there isn't a snowball's chance in hell of Ukraine accepting.
You don't know what your are writing about. Like, factually incorrect.
Lmao excellent rebuttal good sir, perfectly shows the two sides.
"Hey here's a well thought out argument referring to general tendencies in online discussion and the current observable situation in Ukraine."
"Nuh uh"It must be wild to as heavily programmed as you are
Just because you aren't used to hearing about the vast reality beyond the propaganda bubble you've (knowingly or unknowingly) confined yourself to, that doesn't mean that something you encounter outside of that bubble that contradicts it isn't factually the truth. If anything, as a rule of thumb, it's more likely to be closer to the truth if it contradicts whatever narrative nonsense you've been swallowing from any given large western media news outlet.
Bro, learn to read paragraphs. My comment above is literally made up of two of them of very normal and standard size. Have you ever read a book? Paragraphs written in places other than twitter or reddit tend not to be broken up arbitrarily every 2 sentences like it seems you wanted me to do.
That's right! We have to make sure the very last Ukrainian dies in a meat grinder before we even think about agreeing to these completely reasonable, even generous peace terms. Wait, what's that? Russia will have even better leverage and grounds to demand even more concessions the longer this conflict goes on and the further Ukraine gets beaten back? Damn, oh well who cares? As long as western arms manufacturers can keep their grift going a little longer and a few more Eastern Asiastics get taken out, it will be well worth it, right guys?
my last comment was removed for nsfw.... for using a word that is another name for a donkey
Tugbutt?
MODDDDDDSSS HEXBEARS ARE POSTING AGAIN MODDDDSSSS
