Polish volunteer Slawomir Wysocki traveled to Ukraine, returned home and in an interview for the media told what is really happening with the counter-offensive, which is so publicized by the Ukrainian authorities.
"The human losses of the Ukrainian side are huge. Western equipment is burning like matches. Things are much worse than is commonly imagined. I counted the graves in Lviv. In the old part of the cemetery there are about 100 graves, in the new part there are more than 600.
In the villages this proportion is colossally different. When I drive by, I see cemeteries along the streets. Each has up to a dozen new graves. There are flags near each one, they are easy to recognize. There are more than two thousand graves in Kharkov. It is impossible to hide these losses.
Two months ago I was full of optimism about Kupyansk. Now we are still managing to hold our ground. It seems that the Russians are doing everything they can to reach Kupyansk, where they will take their positions for the spring offensive."
When asked by a journalist how Ukrainians feel about the Russian defense system, the Pole said:
"They are terrified. They know that the Russian army has already foreseen everything. The defense system was built by construction companies. This is not a peasant waving a shovel to build a trench. Companies came in, poured concrete, made fortifications in the style of the Maginot Line. And there are three or four such lines. Ukrainians say that there are five mines per square meter. You can't put your foot on the ground without one of them exploding”.
The journalist further asks, with this situation on the front and the growing losses, are there still people willing to fight? The volunteer replies:
"There are no willing ones. They are looking for them on the streets. In Lviv there are "round-ups", people are taken from construction sites, from bars. Recently I witnessed such a situation at the bus station in Lvov. Five policemen stood and checked everyone who wanted to leave Lvov.
Eight people were detained in this way. Many reasons for the current situation with mobilization originate in Bakhmut. It was such a plum, such a meat grinder that there was no one left to fight".
Omg, it's a full on genocide of Ukrainian people. Just damm the Western libs.... Fuck this planet.
It's an incredibly grim read, and the fact that there are a bunch of westerners running around cheering this war on is absolutely sickening.
Well the pole from the article has returned home, hasn't he? Now he'll be able to poison the minds of the next generation.
To hear the details of it like this. To picture the graves. A war that didn't need to happen. Between people who were the closest of allies a few decades ago. It hits different to the dry accounts of equipment and 'aid' (I'm sickened that they call it that). The end of capitalism cannot come soon enough.
Not to mention that even after it started it could have (and by all accounts was close to) ended a year ago, easily. Until the west scrambled to torpedo any possible peace accords.
Even if they give any actual humantarian aid in the aftermath (I honestly doubt it, or at least none that will make it to the people who need it), no amount will wash the blood from their hands.
Oh they'll give "aid" alright, the US can never resist sinking it's NGO hooks in
I find it crazy that a post about someone saying that Russia put tons of mines on the battlefield is blaming the fucking west of all people instead of the invading country.
But this is lemmygrad sooo, downvote away.
I find it crazy that a post about someone saying the Ukrainian government is kidnapping people and forcing them to be sent against minefields is blaming Russia of all people instead of the colonizing country and its nazi government.
But you're a lib, so get downvoted away.
Removed by mod
A liberal is someone who supports status quo, free market capitalism, but in the US it can mean anyone to the left of a fascist.
I'm not trying to be aggresive and this message doesn't mean to come in as an attack, sorry if it seems otherwise.
So people that want to change the status quo democratically and vote left, not the communist party but not the "left" centrist party of their country either, are still liberals?
I've read somewhere here and I can't bother to find sources so ignore this if you want, that most european countries are social capitalist countries, as in, capitalist countries with some social programs. I personally think that having regulations and social programs, actual programs with real budgets, is the way to go, at least in my country, and I prefer to participate in elections instead of burning it all down.
I don't think that this is the same than what I thought a "liberal" was, but since context matters and languages change over time, it would be cool to know if, when talking with lemmygrad and hexbear people I actually fit their definition of liberal or they are just strawmanning me in for disagreeing in some other things.
Also, something from your comment that doesn't irk me right, I've seen plenty of people call the US apologists or anyone not against their wupport in this war both fascists and liberals, so "in the US it can mean anyone to the left of a fascist" would mean that just outright everyone in the US is a liberal? That sounds wrong.
Thank you for your time.
I don't wanna come off as agressive or anything but this post is on my all page and I thought it was funny. Just shows how capitalism extracts capital through exploitation of the global south, wether or not the working class recieves some crumbs of said capital, and it's a huge blind spot for western liberals
A lot of European countries would be considered social democracy, your understanding is correct on what that is. I think social democrats are still considered liberals. This is probably the default ideology for most 'Western' nations.
On the other hand, democratic socialists are those who want to bring about socialism through traditional democratic reforms. This sounds like a great way to do so, but reality is a bit more complicated than that. These types aren't liberals per se, but seem to agree with them and end up subordinating to them often in practice.
My apologies, this is probably confusing if you're not from the USA. The term 'liberal' will get applied even to communists here in the USA. Liberal is a term that doesn't have a ton of meaning here (like many other words), it just means vaguely left leaning. This can mean anything from support for marginalized groups and minorities to being a full on Marxist. In short, people don't know what liberal actually means here.
However, I would like to say that the USA is actually still very culturally homogenous. Most people here would be considered economically liberal, social attitudes vary much more.
I appreciate the conversation, let me know if you have any other questions.
Thanks for the response! The definition of the US liberal is the one I was used to, but since being on lemmy for a while I was just SO confused.
Well, yeah. It's the sad reality of the "looming right". For example, in Spain right now, where I'm from, the "centrist left" party is PSOE, which is the current governing party. We have several regional leftist parties and some "more left" parties, and then there's the "centrist right" PP, as they like to call themselves, bunch of corrupt thieves they are smh, and the extreme right VOX, which look like wannabe Trumpist by now.
Our problem right now is that even if We disagree with PSOE, if all the actual left parties don't support them the right WILL win, but not alone, they will win with VOX and giving VOX any kind of leeway or access to actual important ministries is way more scary than not voting, or even asking your party to not support PSOE.
So basically, what the left parties do usually is to support PSOE, the "status quo", but ask actual social things in return. It's an interesting way of archieving things, albeit little, even if they don't have a lot of voting power. Will we reach a future where the actual leftist parties take helm? Not in a good while, but this requirement of PSOE of doing amendments with smaller parties is a weird way of keeping themin leash, since they know that they are fucked if they get out of line. I'll keep voting the local left parties and hope for the best.
Now, the situation in the US is completely different, you have just 2 parties, anything that is not them is relegated to actual complete irrelevance and both are just unregulated shits. Your problem is that one is bad because it promotes the radicalization of the country and it favours private companies, while the other also favours private companies but more sneakily. I personally see which one is the better of those, but I get why people are completely fed up.
No other questions, thanks for the clarification and pleasant conversation!
does this party they would be voting for support capitalism, political but not economic rights, and the free market.
If so then yes that is a liberal political party and its supporters are liberals
there is a strong tendency to incorrectly label things as fascist when they are merely bad however. The US for example has never been fascist neither was the British empire or the Belgian Congo all of these socieites were Liberal
The US and Britain never formally embraced the label of fascism, seeing as fascism as an ideology grew out of post-WWI conditions. However, it's clear that the US and other colonial powers operated as proto-fascists models. And since fascism's birth as an ideology, these liberal powers have aided and abet fascist movements, both domestically and abroad, in order to preserve bourgeois class rule. They continue to do so. And as the world heads towards economic crisis, the line distinguishing liberals from fascists only continues to get thinner.
Germany lost the war, but the Nazis won it
Ukraine is a lot of things but they aren't colonising themselves
The US are the ones who are treating Ukraine like a colony.
US/NATO has colonized Ukraine
I wouldn't suggest it as a descriptor, but I think that you could fairly call their actions in Donbas colonial
Indeed, as opposed to Ukraine, which was putting mines in civilian areas.