• AHemlocksLie
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Riiiiight. You just completely coincidentally claim that instances of resistance to your aggression are bad. The only time you find resistance to you acceptable is when it’s impotent.

    The topic at hand was Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in the context of attempting to avoid war. I made no direct comments about other topics, nor did I intend to imply anything beyond that. To quote the comment that sparked all of this:

    it’s pretty clear that Russia tried very hard to prevent the situation in Ukraine from devolving into a war.

    Russia is responsible for their own actions. Regardless of the facts that form the basis for the decision, if their true goal is to avoid war in a region, the best solution is to not militarily invade that region. That’s it. That’s my full claim. You can try to argue about whether or not Russia was justified to invade, but that’s not what I’m talking about. I’m talking about Russia wanting to not fight in a region they attacked after making a deal to not invade that region.

    • Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      The topic at hand was Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in the context of attempting to avoid war

      Cool. You are yet to present any sort of argument for how giving NATO years to stop aggression was a bad way to avoid war.

      To quote the comment that sparked all of this: …

      Yeah. So, how was giving you years to stop your aggression a bad way to avoid war? How should have Russia approached this?

      Russia is responsible for their own actions

      And you should be held responsible for your actions. The rest of the world has every right to resist you. You have no ground to tell the world how to resist you.

      if their true goal is to avoid war in a region, the best solution is to not militarily invade that region

      Russia gave you years to stop aggression. You didn’t.

      That’s it. That’s my full claim

      So, you decided to completely ignore what the person you were responding to was talking about, and you can’t even provide a supposedly-better alternative way to respond to your aggression. Good to know.

      You can try to argue about whether or not Russia was justified to invade, but that’s not what I’m talking about

      The person whom you were responding about said that Russia did try to avoid war, which is true. Russia did give you years to stop your aggression. You keep pretending as if that did not happen.

      I’m talking about Russia wanting to not fight in a region they attacked after making a deal to not invade that region

      You mean after NATO enacted a coup there and after NATO reneged on its promises to not do what it did, and after NATO tried to establish a military presence there to attack Russia?