Wow the sheer lack of self-recognition in this guy... Dude, you ARE the Nazi that you pretend to be fighting against. It doesn't matter if you're American or Russian, you 'proud boys' are all the same.
Thank God the Ukrainian military isn’t notoriously packed with Nazis! Because Biden has already given $75 billion to these people, and what do you call someone who gives money to Nazis?
They didn't deny that. Both armies are packed with nationalists
Did you wake up this morning telling yourself that you were going to both-sides Nazism?
Could you give me a source or any proof that the Russian army is packed with Nazis?
They constantly crack down on fascists all the time ever since Putin was in office. Russia probably has the strongest anti Nazi culture of any country
https://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/24/world/europe/24iht-russia.html
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-medvedev-nationalism-idUSTRE70G4DP20110117
https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2015/9/23/behind-russias-ultra-nationalist-crackdown
Critics say the Kremlin is to blame for the rise in neo-nationalist movements, arguing they have been allowed to flourish in recent years.
Unlike many human rights activists and the country’s marginalized gay community, neo-nationalists have been allowed to hold rallies -- a right guaranteed by the Russian constitution.
Yet amid this crackdown, President Vladimir Putin’s government has also sought to forge its own state nationalism – and used elements of the ultra-nationalist agenda in its increasingly anti-Western, neo-conservative and isolationist ideology
many ultra-nationalists fled Russia – sometimes preferring to fight in eastern Ukraine on both sides of the conflict.
The largest players in the field of official, Kremlin-sanctioned nationalism are the deeply conservative and immensely powerful Russian Orthodox Church, the resurgent “armies” of Cossacks, czarist-era paramilitary forces, and right-wing parties.
the Kremlin cultivates ties with [far right groups] in the European Union to promote Moscow’s agenda. (...) representatives of Western far-right political parties, including neo-Nazi groups from Germany, Greece, and the UK, met for a Kremlin-funded conference in St Petersburg
Very strong antifascist culture indeed.
That's great you're so easily willing to only read and absorb the inserted opionated editorial propaganda yet completely ignore the real reporting backed by material reality
Where are all the Nazis and nationalists in the military and government like you claimed. Tell me
Unlike Russia, who claims to be fighting Nazis while bringing in people who proudly wear their Nazi tattoos in both the public and private armies. And really, if you believe the hype that Russia is fighting against Nazis then you haven't been paying attention, and I have a bridge to sell you.
Where is the evidence for this? Rehabilitation of Nazism is against the law in Russia but encouraged in both the USA and Ukraine.
Just to be clear, the US hasn't provided any money. They've provided that much value in assets. Those assets already existed and we're sitting around in storage, which required money to maintain anyway. They were constructed with the idea of fighting both China and Russia at the same time. They are being used to fight Russia, which decreases the level of stock that needs to be maintained to fight both of those nations at once. It's quite possibly saving money, or at least not costing nearly the price tag that is said.
The US has been rather open about funding the entire Ukrainian government more or less since the war began (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/04/28/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-request-to-congress-for-additional-funding-to-support-ukraine/), which cannot be done entirely by sending them old military equipment. And the idea that we are saving money by provoking a nuclear power has got to be one of the craziest things I have read in quite some time.
It's largely arms and ammunition.
And the idea that we are saving money by provoking a nuclear power has got to be one of the craziest things I have read in quite some time.
What does them having nuclear weapons have to do with anything? Either they're in the wrong for invading a sovereign country or not (although international politics is never about right and wrong, but it's about power). Just because they have nuclear weapons they should be allowed to do whatever they want? So the US should be free to invade any other nation without consequences too, right? What a joke.
If we're removing the need to maintain old equipment, it's removing a cost. The cost was maintained to fight Russia, and this weakens Russia, so future costs are decreased. It saves money, right? It doesn't matter who is provoked. It doesn't change that fact. Sure, we're also sending aid and other things, but the goal is to create a good outcome for the US. Ukraine produces a lot of food, so securing them is in our benefit, along with any other agreements. You can disagree with this if you want, but that's international politics. Russia wanted the same except with total annexation and subservience. I'd say remaining autonomous is a better outcome for them.
What does them having nuclear weapons have to do with anything?
Oh I don’t know, their ability to drive the human species to extinction? You can’t enjoy your treats if you’ve been incinerated in a nuclear blast 😉
Just because they have nuclear weapons they should be allowed to do whatever they want?
Remind me again which country developed these weapons first, and then used them against civilian targets when their enemy had already been begging to surrender for six months?
So the US should be free to invade any other nation without consequences too, right? What a joke.
Did you know that history didn’t actually begin with the Ukraine War? Are you aware of how many governments the USA has overthrown worldwide since WW2?
and this weakens Russia
Weakness is when the enemy occupies a third of your territory and most of your productive capacity (Ukraine) and builds or strengthens alliances with other growing world powers (China, India, Brazil, and others). Weakness is when even liberals begin to understand the term “dedollarization,” which has the potential to be as devastating to the USA as a nuclear war.
It saves money, right?
Once again, you don’t seem to understand that you can’t save money when you’re dead. You would also save far more money if you took a break from deep-throating the capitalist boot.
Russia wanted the same except with total annexation and subservience
Where did any Russian official announce that the total conquest of Ukraine was the goal of the Special Military Operation? The goal was the denazification of Ukraine and the protection of Russian-speaking populations in the east. So long as Nazis keep committing suicide by hurling themselves into Russian artillery bombardments, I don’t see how these goals are difficult to achieve.
You are implying I agree with US invasions, which I don't.
You're also implying that since the US did it Russia should be allowed to. Is it bad when the US does it or not? If the US doing it is bad, then Russia doing it must also be bad (unless you don't actually care about invasions, but just like Russia/don't like the US). Be consistent or your opinion doesn't have any value.
Russia is "allowed" to do it for the same reason the US was "allowed" to invade Iraq.
How long until people start unironically and uncritically reposting from the Azov telegram channels?
but certainly far more on the Russian side...
Can you give a credible source to this claim?
Yeah I'm going to wait until the war is done, because this all seems highly anecdotal. Thanks for being intellectually honest about where you're coming from though.
Wasn't Bucha the place that had pictures of bodies with the white armbands (Russian collaborators in occupied territories) and Russian ration packs in the background and everyone was like "Russia did this!"
Can bad things about Russia not be pointed out? I thought hexbear users were happy to point out when Russia was in the wrong.
Yes, American soldiers would never do such things. They are distributing bananas and chocolate during war times to POW, have a lot of occasions to do so during the last decades.
Side note: The American army unofficially encourages their combat arms branch soldiers to shoot wounded combatants during combat and to double-tap the wounded and the dead while assaulting through killzones so they don't have to worry about 'bullshit rules' relating to capturing POWs including 'bullshit' things such as delivering life-saving first aid or the "hassle" of transporting them to a location to properly process them as POWs under the international rules of war.
Lemme put it this way. If I'm a brown person and I've made an enemy of both the Taliban and the U.S. military: which side do you think is better to be caught by? The side that will put a bullet in your head, or the side that will put an electric drill inside your head?
War is war. Either you are appalled that people are killing each other or you aren't, don't act like murderers not following "rules" matters to you.
What do American soldiers have to do with this? That is not even a good whataboutism.
this type of lazy between the ears thinking is making this worse for everyone; please consider stopping.
Shouting "whataboutism" every time someone brings up context isn't lazy?
You can judge governments against perfection, you can judge them against the governments they replaced, or you can judge them against peer governments. The two realistic options involve comparisons, and those types of comparisons happen to be a key component of what passes for international law, too.
Because the atomic unit of propaganda is not lies, it's emphasis. With any article about anything, the most important question to ask is "Why are they writing about this right now, instead of anything else?" Granted, prisoner killing strikes most of us as a ghoulsh thing, but that alone doesnt make this newsworthy in the context of a war. The newsworthy part comes when the western press chooses to amplify this story while quashing others, playing up the other team's crimes and ignoring our own,giving rise to the narrative of the enemy as universally inhuman and unworthy of mercy. Our war crimes are always accidents and mistakes, their war crimes are always the result of their inherent (perhaps hereditary) bloodlust.
The point of this "whataboutism" it to point out that this article is presenting the killing of prisoners of war as some kind of horrifying aberration from the norm, without actually saying what the norm is. Because the norm, for my entire life, has been the unnacountable mass slaughter by the US of not just POWs, but innocent people.
The killing of POWs is the norm, we set the norm, and now we're crying foul when our enemies follow this norm while sweeping it under the rug when our allies do the same.
Am I saying this makes the killing of POWs morally good? No. Byt what I am saying is that this article was written in bad faith to perpetuate a war where our ally has been shelling civillians and deploying death squads for nine years, with shells and death squad training we gave them.
Decrying the killing of noncombatants is fine and good in a vaccum, but it's a sick joke coming from the 200-year reigning Champion of Noncombatant Murder.
International law is one area where whataboutism is a perfectly valid and accepted line of argument. Unlike domestic law, there is no enforcement mechanism for stuff like war crimes and most laws aren't clearly written down. If a country like Russia or the US executes some prisoners of war, the war police isn't going to show up to write them a ticket.
International law only exists where countries agree it exists. Part of that agreement is treaties and the like, but most of it is what International lawyers call "state practice". Countries can say that a law exists all they want, but if they don't follow the law in their actions then the law doesn't exist.
Therefore, "America, you consistently fail to follow this law so I'm entitled to act as if it doesn't exist" is a totally reasonable argument as far as International law is concerned.
libs: look at this bad thing about russia i found online! (source: ihaterussians.ua/pleaseletusintonato)
He also says his comrades once took captive a Polish soldier, forced him to stand on his knees, and killed him by shooting him in the head.
Sounds like a foreign mercenary to which the laws of war relating to prisoners of war don't apply.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
the guy who killed him is also a mercenary. and poles live in ukraine, there are lawful combatants from the polish citizens of ukraine.
e: the article says "volunteer" but that still seems like something that would need a trial to determine whether they lacked protections before a summary execution. that should apply to any participants from neighboring countries' ethnicities
The definition of mercenary for POW purposes requires that the mercenary not be from the country which the armed forces are from. Russian guy fighting for Russian military via PMC is not a mercenary. Polish guy fighting for Ukranian military via PMC could be.
You're right in that a trial should be conducted but given that there's plenty of Ukrainians uploading videos of them torturing Russian POWs, I think we're well past that point.
you could also say the folding of the ukrainian foreign legion into the territorial defense forces formally makes them not mercenaries with an equal legal footing. either we stringently follow the geneva conventions and there are no mercenaries on either side, or we call a spade a spade
Bad take. Killing prisoners is unacceptable if it isn't in crisis or revolution.
Counterpoint: every last Azovite should have been lined up and shot after Mariupol, not bartered back to Ukraine in prisoner exchanges.
Yes. Denigrating a group of men taken as prisoners of war is a great comparison to executing them. They are obviously the same things and are expressly valid excuses from war crimes.
denigrating a group of people is part of the process by which a society decides to kill them all
Ahhhh Euromaidan Press. The legitimacy beneath my stream of piss coming from the 20th floor balcony.
The Russians have also NOT killed POWs.
Show
This is a war between armies of hundreds of thousands of combatants on each side. It's statistically impossible that neither side engaged in killing POWs, the question is who did it more? What is the culture of the army? Is it something done occasionally by individual units, hidden from commanders, or is it just accepted by the entire command structure?
During the battle of Mariupol, after cornering Azov (the hardcore Nazi unit) in the metalworking plant, the Russian forces offered them literally like a dozen chances to surrender.
Show
To the extent that the Russian public was getting seriously angry about it!
Show
The Azov commanders wouldn't give in*!
Show*They surrendered just days later
And how did the Ukrainians react to this?
Show
Having followed this war closely from the start, the "vibe" I get is that Russia is continuously humanitarian, frequently offers Ukrainians the chance to surrender and treats POWs well on the whole as a matter of military policy, and I feel confident saying the majority of mistreatment of POWs by the Russian side would have been done by Wagner, not the RU Army. Conversely, the Ukrainian army, riddled with rabid fascists and roving paramilitaries barely under the control of the political leadership, has constantly tortured and killed POWs and gloated about it on social media. I realise I should have saved the evidence, but that wasn't exactly the frame of mind I was in while seeing it at the time.
But when the OFFICIAL Twitter account of the National Guard posts shit like this
Show
I think it's safe to say 'humanization of the enemy' is not on the agenda.
riddled with rabid fascists and roving paramilitaries barely under the control of the political leadership, has constantly tortured and killed POWs
Civillians too!
remember that so suuuper cool time when Azov took a bunch of human shields prisoner, and then recorded themselves playing the terminator theme song to tweet at arnold swartzenager about how cool his support was
also, HORRIFYING that I could only find this video with titles that refer to the ethnic russian civilian meat shields as russian sabateurs
fucking nazis burn all Azov
Not to mention the Snake Island debacle.
If you don't recall, right at the start of the war, a small Ukrainian National Guard unit was stationed on "Snake Island", a tiny island in the Black Sea. A Russian warship approached the island and told them by radio to surrender. The commander replied "Russian warship, go fuck yourself!". The Russian warship opened fire and blew them all away. For their brave sacrifice, Zelensky posthumously awarded the "thirteen brave soldiers of Snake Island" various medals and honors, and "Russian warship, go fuck yourself! became a shining symbol of Ukrainian resistance against Russian aggression, plastered over the west's print and social media for days, until whatever the next thing was replaced it.
How it actually went:
Show
Show
About two weeks later, it turned out they actually had just surrendered and been captured. And there weren't thirteen, there were EIGHTY ONE of them. One of the soldiers told a reporter their commander was "an idiot trying to get us killed" and that Zelensky "didn't even care to know our names".
Is there an English source for this one that isn't, well, explicitly a front for laundering neoliberalism?
Not that I doubt that Russian (or Ukrainian) soldiers are doing war crimes on the regular, but a slightly less biased source would be nice if I plan to share it.
