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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I want peace, but not if that means Russia takes Ukraine against their will by force.
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.
If nothing else, your honesty is refreshing lol
Seriously, this is still about 2016 and that Russiagate bullshit for these people
Russia invaded their country with a military with the intent of taking land. What would peace look like?
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!
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.
They did start with it. Does “Minsk II” mean anything to you?
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.