It's a statement about Ukrainian Nazis i.e. Azov, and their accomplices, i.e. the Ukrainian state and NATO.
How it's written is absolutely clearly not a statement on civilians, bystanders, anti-war movements, or others neutral to the conflict.
It's actually not clear at all because the only quantifier it provides is an amorphous category.
If a racist person makes a statement about " removed" they can defend it saying they were only talking about a very small group but the reality is they're signaling to other racists they're talking about the whole culture.
Your coworkers are afraid the author is including civilians and bystanders in the group "Nazis".
there's nothing amorphous about it. nazis and their accomplices are bad. simple as. ukraine is now on the grips of widespread ethno-fascist militias who worship nazi iconography and believe that asians, ie russians, are incapable of humanity. ukraine has for years now been recruiting nazis across the world, from south america to the rest of NATO. none of this was controversial anywhere in NATO aligned media before the state department got their way.
Completely agree. But "which Ukrainians are Nazis" is Not defined here. Bad actors who just want to kill Ukrainians can imply there are more Nazis in Ukraine than there actually are
there are a lot of bad actors in this war, like the roving bands of far right militias formed around the ideal of ethnic cleansing and which now form some of the highest positions of the ukrainian government. without them there wouldn't be more than ten thousand dead civilians in the donbass over the last 8 years. the worst thing is there's people who defend them. who fall over themselves to equivocate every protest against them and the widespread worship of bandera and hitler iconography in NATO's latest ally.
none of which is surprising. it's standard 'lives in the international community' modus operandi.
I didn't expect "Russia shouldn't bomb civilians" to be so controversial.
What economic system do you support? I seem to have stumbled into a world that thinks very differently than me on some topics so I want to know how similar or different we are on others
This is a leftist instance, mostly non-sectarian but leaning a bit more ML than anarchist (there are anarchists here as well though). We believe in communism. The site's userbase is strongly anti-imperialist.
Why do you suppose the Ukrainian attempted ethnic cleansing of it's eastern regions was not talked about by NATO aligned media? Why do you suppose every territory liberated by Ukraine sees a sudden massacre of russian speakers? Why do you suppose NATO aligned media shows the corpses of russian supporters as though Russia killed them? Why do you suppose all parties left of far right were banned by the Ukrainian government? Why do you suppose Stephan Bandera is now an icon of the Ukrainian state ideology? Why do you suppose the Ukrainian government believes asians and russians are incapable of humanity? Why do you suppose NATO aligned media never includes Africa, South America and most of Asia when talking about the international community? What is your opinion on the NAFO death cult? Why do you suppose NATO invaded and killed millions in the middle east over the past 20 years, yet no one was indicted?
I get it, it can be hard to say killing civilians is bad. You used a lot of words but just couldn't get it out but that's okay because we both learned a lot along the way!
Killing civilians is a terrible thing. Such is war. I don't know in what part of the international community you live in, but my reality is that for every given year of my life NATO was engaged in either a war, a trade war, or in political assassinations and coups. Millions upon millions of deaths, not to mention the impoverished and the enslaved. I only wish more countries could resist them. Thankfully, Russia can protect their own. More unfortunately the Ukrainians were lied to. They elected a man on the promise of peace, that man, who now sees Apartheid as a model to follow, continued the banderite agenda without a care in the world.
I'm sure you like to pretend to think NATO is bad. But you don't. Not really. The germans too, cried on TV about how sad they were about the genocidal wars in the middle east. But they helped anyways. That's why you have no answers for me or for the dead. You don't have a care in the world, for NATO is a garden and the world is a jungle.
Whats with the bee in your bonnet about getting people to say "Russia bad"? NATO is worse and the people here don't generally support their arming the far right Ukranian regime to keep the war going until every fighting age Ukrainian is dead just to hurt Russia.
Thats not a coherent response. Seriously. In this case what is the alternative? What could putin have done in your opinion? Peaceful negotiations with the west? He did that for 8 years. The west used that time for arming ukraine. And then simply ignored the previous acords.
So what is the alternative. Simply capitulate to the west? They tried that. It is the worst fall in the standard of living in recent history. And guess what nato decided it was not enough becauserussia was more useful as an enemy.
Let nato ethnically cleanse the russians from estern ukraine. And then let this roge regime host a huge army at the russian border?
If anything the minsk acords, like the iran deal should teach us that the west is incapable of negotiation.
Opposing the designated enemy's participation in a war is not meaningfully different than any hawk's position.
You're still supporting escalation of the war and more civilians getting killed or displaced.
If you're against civilians getting blown apart in Ukraine, as someone living in a western country, your only option is to oppose your side's participation in the war.
We saw this same shit happen with WWI. The correct position on two imperialist powers at war was and still is revolutionary defeatism.
Yes its bad because it should have hapenned 8 years ago. The current mess is because putin decided to apease the west for nearly a decade letting them arm ukraine to the teeth. Until he had no choise but to act.
It's as bad as Vietnam invading the Khmer Rouge to stomp on Pol Pot, so in other word, not bad at all. The Kiev fascist regime will fall and no amount of NATO wunderwaffen and Ukrainian neonazis larping as the OUN will change that.
awful to witness, but predictable. Russia's main warm-water port is in Sevastopol, Crimea. And the Ukrainian border is a 5 minute missile flight from Moscow.
deleted by creator
It's actually not clear at all because the only quantifier it provides is an amorphous category.
If a racist person makes a statement about " removed" they can defend it saying they were only talking about a very small group but the reality is they're signaling to other racists they're talking about the whole culture.
Your coworkers are afraid the author is including civilians and bystanders in the group "Nazis".
there's nothing amorphous about it. nazis and their accomplices are bad. simple as. ukraine is now on the grips of widespread ethno-fascist militias who worship nazi iconography and believe that asians, ie russians, are incapable of humanity. ukraine has for years now been recruiting nazis across the world, from south america to the rest of NATO. none of this was controversial anywhere in NATO aligned media before the state department got their way.
Completely agree. But "which Ukrainians are Nazis" is Not defined here. Bad actors who just want to kill Ukrainians can imply there are more Nazis in Ukraine than there actually are
there are a lot of bad actors in this war, like the roving bands of far right militias formed around the ideal of ethnic cleansing and which now form some of the highest positions of the ukrainian government. without them there wouldn't be more than ten thousand dead civilians in the donbass over the last 8 years. the worst thing is there's people who defend them. who fall over themselves to equivocate every protest against them and the widespread worship of bandera and hitler iconography in NATO's latest ally.
none of which is surprising. it's standard 'lives in the international community' modus operandi.
Okay I'm feeling lost in this convo a little so can we backup a sec
Is Russia's invasion and bombing of Ukraine bad?
Okay I'm feeling lost in this convo a little so can we backup a sec
Is Ukraine's decade of ethnic cleansing and bombing of the Donbas Republics good?
I'm not informed enough to have an opinion on that
But like my question? Avoiding?
Then you're not informed enough to have an opinion on this war, and are trying to cover it up with smugness
I didn't expect "Russia shouldn't bomb civilians" to be so controversial.
What economic system do you support? I seem to have stumbled into a world that thinks very differently than me on some topics so I want to know how similar or different we are on others
This is a leftist instance, mostly non-sectarian but leaning a bit more ML than anarchist (there are anarchists here as well though). We believe in communism. The site's userbase is strongly anti-imperialist.
Why do you suppose the Ukrainian attempted ethnic cleansing of it's eastern regions was not talked about by NATO aligned media? Why do you suppose every territory liberated by Ukraine sees a sudden massacre of russian speakers? Why do you suppose NATO aligned media shows the corpses of russian supporters as though Russia killed them? Why do you suppose all parties left of far right were banned by the Ukrainian government? Why do you suppose Stephan Bandera is now an icon of the Ukrainian state ideology? Why do you suppose the Ukrainian government believes asians and russians are incapable of humanity? Why do you suppose NATO aligned media never includes Africa, South America and most of Asia when talking about the international community? What is your opinion on the NAFO death cult? Why do you suppose NATO invaded and killed millions in the middle east over the past 20 years, yet no one was indicted?
I get it, it can be hard to say killing civilians is bad. You used a lot of words but just couldn't get it out but that's okay because we both learned a lot along the way!
Ps I agree NATO bad
Killing civilians is a terrible thing. Such is war. I don't know in what part of the international community you live in, but my reality is that for every given year of my life NATO was engaged in either a war, a trade war, or in political assassinations and coups. Millions upon millions of deaths, not to mention the impoverished and the enslaved. I only wish more countries could resist them. Thankfully, Russia can protect their own. More unfortunately the Ukrainians were lied to. They elected a man on the promise of peace, that man, who now sees Apartheid as a model to follow, continued the banderite agenda without a care in the world.
I'm sure you like to pretend to think NATO is bad. But you don't. Not really. The germans too, cried on TV about how sad they were about the genocidal wars in the middle east. But they helped anyways. That's why you have no answers for me or for the dead. You don't have a care in the world, for NATO is a garden and the world is a jungle.
Really cool that you know more about me than I do.
I bet we have lots of beliefs in common. I just don't understand or support your reluctance to say Russia is doing some very bad things
Whats with the bee in your bonnet about getting people to say "Russia bad"? NATO is worse and the people here don't generally support their arming the far right Ukranian regime to keep the war going until every fighting age Ukrainian is dead just to hurt Russia.
Get this smug lib shit out of here
Whats the alternative?
Lmao
Thats not a coherent response. Seriously. In this case what is the alternative? What could putin have done in your opinion? Peaceful negotiations with the west? He did that for 8 years. The west used that time for arming ukraine. And then simply ignored the previous acords.
So what is the alternative. Simply capitulate to the west? They tried that. It is the worst fall in the standard of living in recent history. And guess what nato decided it was not enough becauserussia was more useful as an enemy.
Let nato ethnically cleanse the russians from estern ukraine. And then let this roge regime host a huge army at the russian border?
If anything the minsk acords, like the iran deal should teach us that the west is incapable of negotiation.
Whats the alternative here?
Opposing the designated enemy's participation in a war is not meaningfully different than any hawk's position.
You're still supporting escalation of the war and more civilians getting killed or displaced.
If you're against civilians getting blown apart in Ukraine, as someone living in a western country, your only option is to oppose your side's participation in the war.
We saw this same shit happen with WWI. The correct position on two imperialist powers at war was and still is revolutionary defeatism.
Yes its bad because it should have hapenned 8 years ago. The current mess is because putin decided to apease the west for nearly a decade letting them arm ukraine to the teeth. Until he had no choise but to act.
It's as bad as Vietnam invading the Khmer Rouge to stomp on Pol Pot, so in other word, not bad at all. The Kiev fascist regime will fall and no amount of NATO wunderwaffen and Ukrainian neonazis larping as the OUN will change that.
awful to witness, but predictable. Russia's main warm-water port is in Sevastopol, Crimea. And the Ukrainian border is a 5 minute missile flight from Moscow.