• Deadend [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      “In culture war crap, we tend to align! Yeah it’s for different reasons! I’m only for or against something because the people I hate decided it’s a new front!”

      I swear they just do Ukraine support out of a culture war thing because 2016 elections, Russia and Trump.

    • aleph@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      … because this time the US is backing Ukraine against the aggressor, whereas in 2004 it was the aggressor?

      • emizeko [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        so when Victoria Nuland picked Ukraine’s new government after instigating a coup and they killed ~16,000 civilians people in Donbas between 2014 and 2022 those were friendly, non-aggressive artillery shells?

        • aleph@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          So you’re saying that Russia didn’t invade Ukraine first, before the separatist-controlled areas were shelled?

            • aleph@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              11 months ago

              Oh, so you’re saying that Russia illegally annexing Crimea in 2014 wasn’t an invasion of Ukraine?

              • CyborgMarx [any, any]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                You can always tell who the most ignorant libs are when they bring up Crimea lmao

                Crimea is not Ukrainian, it has always been a distinct cultural ethnic region and 97% of Crimeans voting for independence from Kiev should give you pause before you breathlessly insist they should remain beholden to a bunch of nazi banderites

                • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  “Acktually sweaty, don’t you know that if a vote has a higher than 80% yes vote, it’s automatically a sham? Every vote needs to be really close or else it doesn’t count and isn’t real democracy. Consensus isn’t democratic!”

                • aleph@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Crimeans wanting independence means they wanted to become part of the Russian empire again?

              • emizeko [they/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                11 months ago

                making it pretty obvious here that you have no idea who Victoria Nuland is and only started paying attention to any of this stuff in 2022

                • aleph@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  Oh, I’ve been following the whole thing for years and know who she is.

                  I just don’t think that her supporting pro-democratic and anti-corruption reform in Ukraine equates to it being okay for Russia to annex part of a neighbouring country.

      • blight [any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        Hmm I wonder if anything interesting happened in Ukraine in for example 2014. Nothing in particular comes to mind.

          • duderium [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Why did Clinton give so much money to Yeltsin in the 1990s? How were the modern nation states of Ukraine and Russia created, and how does their creation relate to amerikkka’s relentless focus on the destruction of the USSR?

              • duderium [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                “It’s different this time, we have to meddle with [foreign country], we have to fund highly reactionary forces there since they’re mysteriously the only ones who will work with us, this couldn’t possibly bite us in the ass in the future, just one more rightwing coup/proxy war bro I swear, just one more rightwing coup/proxy war, it’s the other side disrespecting human rights and democracy, it’s the other side doing imperialism and colonialism I swear bro, please, they’re just showing their agency bro—“

      • Owl [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        Russia is the aggressor in this war, and it’s bad that they invaded.

        Russia invaded Ukraine in response to continued US policy of bringing countries near Russia’s borders into NATO, a military treaty organization that Russia had tried to join but was barred from. Not acting would mean that Russia becomes increasingly encircled by military bases of a hostile superpower.

        The Ukrainians are the victims in a proxy war between two much larger powers. For the average Ukrainian, sooner the war is over, the better. Somehow repelling the invasion would be ideal, but every day of fighting destroys lives and homes.

        US policy in response to the invasion is to send military hardware to Ukraine, enriching its arms manufacturers and prolonging the conflict. They make the Ukrainian government pay for this by forcing the privatization of their government assets at bargain prices (note how this website exists and is fully translated to English). The actual fighting is still done by Ukrainians, who die for this.

        • jossbo@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          New here. I was reading all the snarky strawman comments here and thinking “what the fuck are these people on?”. Then I read your comment, which is clearly and concisely written, and makes good points. I hadn’t thought of it that way and it makes a lot of sense. Not saying my view is totally flipped around, but that’s some food for thought and I’ll be snacking down.

          Now will the rest of you calm down about owning libs and speak nicely to each other?

          • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Some additional food for thought (hopefully you aren’t full pete-eat):

            • November 2013: Duly-elected Ukranian president Viktor Yanukovych declines to sign the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement, sparking significant protests.
            • Dec 2013: John McCain tells Ukraine protesters: “We are here to support your just cause”
            • Feb 2014: Yanukovych agrees to early elections and a withdrawal of police from the capitol; the opposition agreed to surrender arms and cease violence. None of this was implemented and Yanukovych flees the country.
            • Mar 2014: In the midst of this turmoil, 97% of Crimean voters (83% turnout) vote to join the Russian Federation (staying with Ukraine was the other option on thr ballot). Crimea declares independence and is annexed by Russia shortly after. Despite the significant protests elsewhere in Ukraine, this is a peaceful process.
            • Sep 2014: West must arm Ukraine to fight “invasion”: McCain
            • 2014-15: Ukraine and Russia sign the Minsk agreements meant to stop the fighting between Ukraine and two other Russian-majority areas that want to leave Ukraine. These do not stop the fighting.
            • Feb 2015: Ukrainian neo-Nazi paramilitaries declare any agreement with “pro-Russia terrorists” was “unconstitutional” and that his unit “reserves the right to continue active military operations” – essentially nullifying the Minsk agreements.
            • Feb 2019: Before most Western media was interested in Ukraine, the reporting that was done described “neo-Nazi pogroms against the Roma, rampant attacks on feminists and LGBT groups, book bans, and state-sponsored glorification of Nazi collaborators.”
            • Dec 2022: In an interview published in Germany’s Zeit magazine on Wednesday, former German chancellor Angela Merkel said that the Minsk agreements had been an attempt to “give Ukraine time” to build up its defences.

            Given America’s long history of sponsoring coups around the globe, what are the chances the 2014 ouster of Yanukovych was organic? Had a prominent Russian politician visited DC on January 6th, 2021, and fired up the crowd against the government, what would your reaction have been? When you have neo-Nazis undermining the Minsk agreements from the start and Angela Merkel admitting they were not agreed to in good faith, what does that say about Russia’s diplomatic options? Is it possible that some parts of Ukraine really do want to leave?

  • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Imagine a conman rips you off a dozen times. It’s always the same scheme, too. The same conman comes to you again with the same scheme and says “but this is a legitimate business proposition!”

    Even if you do your due diligence (which you did all those other times, right?) and it looks above board, you have to realize that trusting him yet again makes you a fucking rube.

  • RandallFlagg@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I hope I don’t get castrated for this by everyone here but I’m genuinely curious so I’m going to ask. For coxtext, I’m a dirty commie retard hippie dick suckin left wing lib (not a meme, I am literally a Liberal Democrat). Now that that’s out of the way, I’d like to ask someone who disagrees with me why they think that supporting Ukraine is a bad move? The way I see it, the longer this war goes on, the weaker Russia gets. Sure it’s costing the US (and other countries) a lot of money and resources but we are essentially weakining a not-so-friendly country of ours without having to send our own troops to fight it. Why is this a bad thing? Should I not care if Russia gets more powerful than it already is? Am I retarded?

    • Venus [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      The way I see it, the longer this war goes on, the weaker Russia gets

      bruh you are cheering for throwing real human people into the meat grinder because it will cause negligible wear on the meat grinder’s parts. Isn’t that absolutely horrible? Ukraine sucks, Russia sucks, nothing comes of war between them but suffering for the innocent people who have absolutely no agency in the matter

    • The_Walkening [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      The way I see it, the longer this war goes on, the weaker Russia gets. Sure it’s costing the US (and other countries) a lot of money and resources but we are essentially weakining a not-so-friendly country of ours without having to send our own troops to fight it.

      I’m really skeptical of the “we’re grinding Russia down with this!” narrative because the USSR had been cranking out war materiel to compete with the USA for literal decades; the RF has been working around Western sanctions for years and IIRC have been really focused recently on economic self-sufficiency in a few spheres.

      They’re also the country with the most tanks in their fleet (total, not necessarily deployed), and they have air superiority, which Ukraine can’t really challenge.

      Honestly it looks like Ukraine will lose, but not before defense contractors get to sign contracts worth billions of dollars replenishing the West’s armories.

      Also by itself Ukraine’s government isn’t worth supporting, they’ve rolled back labor rights, allow the existence of fascist military units (Azov Battalion is part of Ukraine’s version of a Gendarmerie - a military unit that polices civilians), and they’re corrupt as fuck, they’re privatizing aggressively during wartime.

    • RedQuestionAsker2 [he/him, she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Snark free answer:

      We believe that the expansion of the American empire is one of the greatest threats facing the world today. The strength and reach of America far surpasses anything that Russia could ever hope to achieve. Russia is only a fraction of the political and economic power of America.

      We don’t like Russia. It is a neoliberal and reactionary state (like Ukraine). But we do not accept the idea that blood should be shed to weaken an “unfriendly” (read: designated target) state in service of maintaining American supremecy in the area via NATO.

      Tldr; why is the US supporting Ukraine a bad move? Because it supports US global supremacy.

      Snark:

      Liberal Democrat

      wtyp

      • RandallFlagg@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        I appreciate the answer, if you don’t mind me asking, are you American? If so, it just seems strange to me that you don’t want your own country to be a strong political and economic power. If you’re not an American, then that’s an understandable opinion to have. It’s possible I’m misunderstanding the theme of this instance.

        And also:

        Tldr; why is the US supporting Ukraine a bad move? Because it supports US global supremacy.

        I disagree with this because it isn’t only the US that is aiding Ukraine, it’s NATO.

        • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          I appreciate the answer, if you don’t mind me asking, are you American? If so, it just seems strange to me that you don’t want your own country to be a strong political and economic power.

          I’m an American and I don’t want my county to be a strong geopolitical power. It’s only the rich who gain any benefit from that, and they are engaged in class war against us, so the stronger they get the more they can hurt us. Instead of (the upper class of) my nation getting stronger, I want my class to become stronger. The interests of the working people of all nations are aligned against the common foe of the rich and powerful, and the richest and most powerful people in the world benefit from America getting stronger - not us.

          Our politicians are wasting money that could be spent on schools, infrastructure, healthcare, or any number of things, on pointless weapons and slaughter because it allows them to line their own pockets through the military industrial complex. How on earth does the average American benefit from that?

        • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Bruv I’ve never had armed Chinese soldiers occupy my city to crush a pro-democracy movement, but I have starred down the barrel of US army M4s in Minneapolis.

          America is NATO. Go look at the relative spending per member.

        • dinklesplein [any, he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          you don’t want your own country to be a strong political and economic power.

          If the influence of my country is a detriment to the healthy development and peoples of other countries then yes it absolutely is fine to not wish my country to be ‘strong’ in the sense you’ve defined.

        • RedQuestionAsker2 [he/him, she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          I am American. I know you called yourself a commie jokingly, but I, and most people on Hexbear, am a principled communist.

          We don’t view the world through the lens of patriotism or defending “our” nation. The working class of America is also oppressed and exploited by the capitalist class of America. The exploitation is amplified when it is turned towards non-American states, especially those in the periphery. While we as Americans benefit from the exploitation of the periphery nations, we (the working class) have more in common with the working class of other countries than we do with our exploiters. Through this lens, we do not seek for our country to be “stronger” (read: globally militarily dominant). We want our country to be liberated from capitalist oppression, and we want other countries under our grip to be liberated, too.

          I take your point about the US not acting alone because NATO countries are participating. I think if you look into the history and structure of NATO, you would find that the US has an outsized influence within NATO, and that most people who subscribe to realpolitik recognize that NATO is largely an arm of the US military. This is because of the global presence of the US military all over the world. Many of these countries depend on the US for defense, and the US can leverage its military strength to pressure the host countries into all kinds of policies. Look up a map of US military bases to get a real picture of the influence the US has over the NATO countries. If you really wanna make a comparison, then look at the number of foreign military bases held by the US vs. the number held by Russia or China. It’s a staggering difference.

    • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      The way I see it, the longer this war goes on, the weaker Russia gets.

      Why is the weakening of one of the few countries willing and able to challenge American unipolar hegemony a good thing from your perspective?

      • RandallFlagg@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        Well, it’s a good thing from my perspective because I’m an American, I want my country to be powerful.

        • Krause [he/him]@lemmygrad.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          I want my country to be powerful

          It’s not your country though, the state there is not subordinated to the social class you belong to. No matter how much you cheer on the bourgeoisie they will not stop being your class enemy.

        • Kuori [she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          a stronger u.s. means more death squads, more right-wing coups, more death. it means no leftist movements worldwide will be allowed to gain any meaningful ground. as a citizen of the u.s. i hope every day for its collapse

    • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      I want you to look at the words “supporting Ukraine” then look at the rest of the paragraph you said after it. Especially the “why is this a bad thing?” part. Compare that question to the rest of what you just said. Really consider the words you typed.

      Now tell me if that actually sounds like you “support Ukraine” at all, or if you’ve just fallen for the same Jingoistic propaganda the US uses to justify all its wars and foreign intervention. Dead Ukrainians are not supported Ukranians. If you actually support Ukraine, you should push for peace, not more weapons to be sold to their government.

      • RandallFlagg@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        That’s actually a fair point. To be totally honest, for me personally, I’m not exactly for Ukraine as much as I’m against Russia, if that makes sense. However, I do recognize that Ukraine got unfairly invaded by another country, and they should defend themselves.

        If you actually support Ukraine, you should push for peace, not more weapons to be sold to their government.

        I want peace, but not if that means Russia takes Ukraine against their will by force.

        • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Others in the thread have helpfully outlined Russia’s goals for this conflict, but it is important to note that this didn’t come out of nowhere one day (even if that is how the western press tries to present it.) This has been escalating since the coup in Ukraine in 2013, Russia has repeatedly tried to be diplomatic, and has had their concerns dismissed. Hell, Russia doesn’t even want to be antagonistic towards NATO if they don’t have to be (they even tried to join them in the early 2000s).

          As others have said, we don’t support Russia, we aren’t Russian nationalists. We do however, want to try to understand a conflict and why it happens, and if there was any way to prevent it from happening so we can make sure similar conflicts don’t happen in the future.

          The problem with the western media (US media in particular) is that it tends to just point to another nation and just call them bad guys, like the villain in a movie. This doesn’t analyse anything or provide any preventative power (in fact, for the US, it is usually the opposite, they want wars so they can keep their military industrial complex ticking over and making profit off of death and destruction.)

          If people uncritically accept that an “enemy nation” is a bad guy, they can easily fall for the next bad guy, and the next, and so on forever. The only way to actually prevent stuff like this is to try and understand why it happens.

      • exohuman@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Russia invaded their country with a military with the intent of taking land. What would peace look like?

        • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Ah, silly me, I forgot, history began in Febuary 2022. War is peace, we can’t negotiate with the enemy. We just need to keep selling weapons for profit, I’m sure there’s no issue with that. Not like a country profiting off this conflict would encourage their citizens to think that Russia is a nation of mindless demonspawn who only understand violence. Just got to keep selling ineffectual and very profitable weapons and fight Russia down to every last man, woman and child in Ukraine. That’ll help the Ukrainian people! Much better than trying for that silly peace nonsense. After all, Russia did a bad guy thing. So we can’t talk, or discuss terms or try to understand them or their motivations. They the bad guys. It’s not like Ukrainian’s lives matter anyway, as the average smug American, I can’t even point to it on the map! And there’s plenty more people to die for our profits when those guys are all gone!

          • exohuman@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months ago

            Russia did do a bad guy thing. Ukraine doesn’t want to let them have their land. If Russia was interested in peace, maybe they should have started with it and not attacked a neighboring nation.

        • TheGamingLuddite [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Peace looks like guaranteeing Ukrainian neutrality by taking NATO membership off the table and likely ceding the DPR and LPR to the Russian federation at this point.

          At this point if Ukraine gained back the DPR it would almost certainly result in an ethnic cleansing.

          • exohuman@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            So Russia gets to attack a sovereign nation and demand their land and peace looks like just giving it to them along with making sure the country they attacked is open to future attacks? How is that in any way a justified peace solution? What prevents Russia from doing it again?

            • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              yes-chad yes.

              And what prevents them from doing it again is that they would have a buffer against NATO aggression, but you probably think NATO is a benevolent peace loving organization instead of a band of butchers and war criminals hell bent on subjugating the entire planet even if it kills every human being on earth.

        • FunkyStuff [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          How far do you want to go? Absolute peace would be the end of the nation-state and the use of violence to uphold class society. That’s an useless idea for this, though. Maybe a more useful goal for peace is stopping the encirclement, sanctioning, and blockading of all countries. Or not conducting coups to install puppet governments right next to geopolitical enemies. Or at the very least accepting diplomatic solutions to a war when they arise instead of slipping your proxy another check and sending a couple thousand more people to get killed.

          In short, we’re a long way out from peace, but NATO’s actions have arguably put the world in more peril and violence than even Russia’s. Even if that weren’t the case, unless you’re Russian yourself, you probably have a lot more you can do to pressure the NATO countries to stop fighting to the last Ukrainian, rather than somehow pray Putin into surrendering.

          • exohuman@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months ago

            Why can’t Putin stop attacking Ukraine? Why is it on everyone else to stop when Russia is clearly the aggressor here? The war would be over in a flash of Putin simply decided to stop attacking.

            • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Because NATO will use Ukraine as a base from which to destabilize, balkanize, and destroy the rf. That’s the answer. Until Ukraine is forced to accept Neutrality and NATO is forced out of Ukraine Russia won’t have a defense against NATO aggression.

    • ElHexo [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      without having to send our own troops to fight it

      Ukrainian troops and Ukrainian people are dying though, and they’re still human - for what? A couple of breakaway regions that have been fighting the government of Ukraine since 2014.

      • Tire@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        So if January 6th traitors were being aided with weapons from Russia we should have laid down and let them win to preserve lives?

        • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          A good comparison might be “what if Maine really wanted to be independent, or maybe even join Canada?”

          Would it make sense to:

          • Give American neo-Nazi paramilitaries free reign to attack Maine
          • Seek an alliance with a group of nations expressly designed to fight a war with Canada
          • Get into a bloody stalemate of a war with Canada if they invade on behalf of the people of Maine, who don’t want to be here anyway
          • Keep fighting that war long after the point it becomes apparent that we will not be retaking Maine

          A better solution would have been to negotiate with Maine separatists, perhaps addressing the reason they want to leave, and at bare minimum act like a sovereign state with a monopoly on legitimate violence and destroy the neo-Nazi paramilitaries in your own house. Might also help to avoid the “fuck Canada” military alliance, too.