The war continues because Russia remains in Ukraine. All Russia has to do is withdraw from Ukraine and needless death of both sides ends.
Russia isn't going to leave, and nothing the west has done got Ukraine closer to winning the war. What the west has achieved was to drag this war out and ensure that countless people died in the process. If anything, the west ensured that Ukraine is in a far worse position now than it was in March last year when US and UK sabotaged negotiations.
If still you think that Ukraine can win this war then you need to start engaging with reality. Your whole rant is premised on a nonsensical assumption that Ukraine can win. Meanwhile, comparing this to WW2 shows stunning amounts of historical illiteracy and utter lack of understanding in regards to causes of this war.
Finally, nowhere have I supported Russia in anything here. What I've explained to you is the objective reality of the situation. The fact that you see this in black and white terms of either supporting the west using Ukraine as a proxy in a war with Russia or supporting Russian invasion shows that you have infantile understanding of the world. Your childish insults are a further indication of your stunted mental development.
Your reactions to other people and your blaming of western nations very clearly puts you in the position of supporting Russia.
No, that puts me in a position of having actual understanding of the situation and reality of the war instead of regurgitating western propaganda the way you're doing.
Instead you keep trying to twist it on everyone else for having the absolute-fucking-audacity of defending themselves. I mean, how dare they fight for their nations survival and independence!
This is probably one of the very few conflicts in recent times where this war is black and white. There’s a very clear aggressor. This entire war is utterly pointless. It’s not difficult to see how Russia is the aggressor here.
It's not, and only an ignoramus or a propagandist would claim that. Your whole narrative based on the fallacy of homogenizing Ukraine. Let's take a look at a few slides from this lecture that Mearsheimer gave back in 2015 to get a bit of background on the subject. Mearsheimer is certainly not pro Russian in any sense, and a proponent of US global hegemony. First, here's the demographic breakdown of Ukraine:
Show
here's how the election in 2004 went:
Show
this is the 2010 election:
Show
As we can clearly see from the voting patterns in both elections, the country is divided exactly across the current line of conflict. Furthermore, a survey conducted in 2015 further shows that there is a sharp division between people of eastern and western Ukraine on which economic bloc they would rather belong to:
Show
Ukraine is clearly not some homogeneous blob, but a large country with complex cultural and ethnic situations.
Furthermore, the idea that NATO threatens Russia doesn't come from Russia. Plenty of western experts have been saying this for many decades. This only became controversial to mention after the war started. Here's what Chomsky has to say on the issue recently:
50 prominent foreign policy experts (former senators, military officers, diplomats, etc.) sent an open letter to Clinton outlining their opposition to NATO expansion back in 1997:
Show
Show
George Kennan, arguably America's greatest ever foreign policy strategist, the architect of the U.S. cold war strategy warned that NATO expansion was a "tragic mistake" that ought to ultimately provoke a "bad reaction from Russia" back in 1998.
Show
Jack F. Matlock Jr., US Ambassador to the Soviet Union from 1987-1991, warning in 1997 that NATO expansion was "the most profound strategic blunder, [encouraging] a chain of events that could produce the most serious security threat [...] since the Soviet Union collapsed"
Show
Even Gorbachev warned about this. All these experts were marginalized, silenced, and ignored. Yet, now people are trying to rewrite history and pretend that Russia attacked Ukraine out of the blue and completely unprovoked.
And of course, RAND published a whole study titled extending Russia where it proposes to use Ukraine as a western proxy the way is being done now. You're either a shill or a useful idiot for the empire, either way not a good look.
After the western sponsored coup in 2014 the eastern regions of Ukraine wanted to separate and Ukraine has been in a civil war since then. What Russia did is actually directly modelled on what NATO did in Yugoslavia where they recognized the independence of the breakaway regions and then had them invite NATO for help. That's literally the precedent that you NATO chuds set.
You still haven’t replied to my point about whether Russia or other nations should have surrendered when they were attacked by axis powers.
The point where you're trying to compare people of eastern Ukraine fighting for independence from the coup regime that was shelling them with cluster munitions to nazis? If you don't understand why that's an idiotic comparison, then what else is there to say to you.
Of course that’s bad.
Oh, it's bad, but the people the coup regime was shelling apparently don't get a right of self determination according to you.
The NATO crap isn’t even worth discussing and is just a flimsy excuse from Russia to try and justify the “special military operation”.
Actual geopolitical experts disagree, but I guess you think you know better because you've demonstrated such deep understanding of the subject in this thread. Fun fact is that Russia wanted to join NATO in the 90s and NATO told Russia to fuck off after which point NATO went on to invade a bunch of countries such as Yugoslavia, Libya, and Syria and continued to surround Russia militarily.
You're an ignoramus and you should be deeply ashamed of yourself.
It's pure speculation that shelling that went on for 8 years would continue? That shelling that went on in spite of two attempts at peace treaties wouldn't be stopped by an even-less-conditional treaty?
Removed by mod
Russia isn't going to leave, and nothing the west has done got Ukraine closer to winning the war. What the west has achieved was to drag this war out and ensure that countless people died in the process. If anything, the west ensured that Ukraine is in a far worse position now than it was in March last year when US and UK sabotaged negotiations.
If still you think that Ukraine can win this war then you need to start engaging with reality. Your whole rant is premised on a nonsensical assumption that Ukraine can win. Meanwhile, comparing this to WW2 shows stunning amounts of historical illiteracy and utter lack of understanding in regards to causes of this war.
Finally, nowhere have I supported Russia in anything here. What I've explained to you is the objective reality of the situation. The fact that you see this in black and white terms of either supporting the west using Ukraine as a proxy in a war with Russia or supporting Russian invasion shows that you have infantile understanding of the world. Your childish insults are a further indication of your stunted mental development.
Removed by mod
No, that puts me in a position of having actual understanding of the situation and reality of the war instead of regurgitating western propaganda the way you're doing.
Where were you when these people were trying to defend themselves as reported by CNN, and where were you when this was happening?
It's not, and only an ignoramus or a propagandist would claim that. Your whole narrative based on the fallacy of homogenizing Ukraine. Let's take a look at a few slides from this lecture that Mearsheimer gave back in 2015 to get a bit of background on the subject. Mearsheimer is certainly not pro Russian in any sense, and a proponent of US global hegemony. First, here's the demographic breakdown of Ukraine:
here's how the election in 2004 went:
this is the 2010 election:
As we can clearly see from the voting patterns in both elections, the country is divided exactly across the current line of conflict. Furthermore, a survey conducted in 2015 further shows that there is a sharp division between people of eastern and western Ukraine on which economic bloc they would rather belong to:
Ukraine is clearly not some homogeneous blob, but a large country with complex cultural and ethnic situations.
Furthermore, the idea that NATO threatens Russia doesn't come from Russia. Plenty of western experts have been saying this for many decades. This only became controversial to mention after the war started. Here's what Chomsky has to say on the issue recently:
https://truthout.org/articles/us-approach-to-ukraine-and-russia-has-left-the-domain-of-rational-discourse/
https://truthout.org/articles/noam-chomsky-us-military-escalation-against-russia-would-have-no-victors/
50 prominent foreign policy experts (former senators, military officers, diplomats, etc.) sent an open letter to Clinton outlining their opposition to NATO expansion back in 1997:
George Kennan, arguably America's greatest ever foreign policy strategist, the architect of the U.S. cold war strategy warned that NATO expansion was a "tragic mistake" that ought to ultimately provoke a "bad reaction from Russia" back in 1998.
Jack F. Matlock Jr., US Ambassador to the Soviet Union from 1987-1991, warning in 1997 that NATO expansion was "the most profound strategic blunder, [encouraging] a chain of events that could produce the most serious security threat [...] since the Soviet Union collapsed"
Even Gorbachev warned about this. All these experts were marginalized, silenced, and ignored. Yet, now people are trying to rewrite history and pretend that Russia attacked Ukraine out of the blue and completely unprovoked.
And of course, RAND published a whole study titled extending Russia where it proposes to use Ukraine as a western proxy the way is being done now. You're either a shill or a useful idiot for the empire, either way not a good look.
Damn saved for further reading
Removed by mod
After the western sponsored coup in 2014 the eastern regions of Ukraine wanted to separate and Ukraine has been in a civil war since then. What Russia did is actually directly modelled on what NATO did in Yugoslavia where they recognized the independence of the breakaway regions and then had them invite NATO for help. That's literally the precedent that you NATO chuds set.
The point where you're trying to compare people of eastern Ukraine fighting for independence from the coup regime that was shelling them with cluster munitions to nazis? If you don't understand why that's an idiotic comparison, then what else is there to say to you.
Oh, it's bad, but the people the coup regime was shelling apparently don't get a right of self determination according to you.
Actual geopolitical experts disagree, but I guess you think you know better because you've demonstrated such deep understanding of the subject in this thread. Fun fact is that Russia wanted to join NATO in the 90s and NATO told Russia to fuck off after which point NATO went on to invade a bunch of countries such as Yugoslavia, Libya, and Syria and continued to surround Russia militarily.
You're an ignoramus and you should be deeply ashamed of yourself.
People in Donbas will certainly keep being killed if Russia withdraws
Removed by mod
It's pure speculation that shelling that went on for 8 years would continue? That shelling that went on in spite of two attempts at peace treaties wouldn't be stopped by an even-less-conditional treaty?
Removed by mod
No, I mean the civilians in Donbas and the separatist soldiers
Being popular and having friends is only suspicious to friendless losers
Removed by mod
You're the one who's brigading, I don't remember inviting you on our instance. Banned for brigading and possibly being a funded shill.
Read this to know why this is not a realistic line of argument.