I hate how “anti-war” has been hijacked by these people to mean, let imperialist countries invade whoever they want with no consequences. (in the case of tankies, any imperialist country that isn’t in NATO).
Similar to how libs view the genocide in palestine.
Wait, why are tankies siding with magas? I’ve been intentionally away for a minute, what did I miss?
Did something major happen in the last three days? Or is this the usual redirection of hate after we’ve found something to rally around?
Fash and red fash are basically the same thing loyal to different empires.
Maga-Communism is a thing for a while: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackson_Hinkle
Removed by mod
Your description of the tankie position doesn’t explain why they call for Ukraine to surrender like Russia isn’t the aggressor. Leftists in general do realize it’s a proxy war like you said, but we call for the invader to stop invading. Because, you know… The victim of an invasion surrendering doesnt usually lead to good outcomes for the victim.
What an insulting interpretation that yet again ignores Russian responsibility for this war. It was ONLY their decision.
Removed by mod
What do you mean?
If you keep feeding the troll we’ll end up with troll shit all over the lawn.
“Everybody saying things I don’t like is a russian troll”
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
Make more new accounts, that’ll convince people. Moron.
I don’t think the average American has that level of planning. It’s more likely people just don’t like Russia invading other countries willy nilly
Removed by mod
I didn’t realize America was a hive-mind purely driven to make money for defence contractors.
Removed by mod
It seems unlikely that all the people failing to understand international policy in obvious ways, would have stocks and shares in the armaments sector. It’s more likely that they’re clueless. :)
Removed by mod
It’s like their version of STOP RESISTING.
My Mom said Russia had to attack Ukraine, because they were trying to join NATO. I asked why she thinks Ukraine was trying to join NATO. I’m still digging for a bedrock of logic.
Part of the problem with game theory and finding a “bedrock of logic” is that game theoretical analysis is often recursive. It’s not a stack of prepositions and conclusions; it’s often a loop. Sort of like a resonance structure. I’ve got my gun aimed at you because your gun is aimed at me because my gun is aimed at you … recursively forever.
My understanding is that the US/NATO and the USSR/Russia, ie the two sides of the Cold War, have maintained a sense of peace and security by maintaining a buffer between the two sides. A buffer of distance, which is relevant because it relates to the time it takes nuclear weapons to travel from one adversarial territory to the other.
The Cuban Missile Crisis was basically caused because Cuba was too close to the USA for nuclear missiles to be stored in a way that the balance of MAD could be maintained.
The public declaration (by Kamala Harris, incidentally) that Ukraine would join NATO is a violation of a promise made by Reagan that NATO would not extend to the border of Russia.
It’s similar to the USSR’s attempt to install nuclear missiles in Cuba, in the sense that it’s simply too close.
That’s my understanding of the motivation behind Russia’s invasion. I’m quite new to all this though.
So it’s less like “Stop resisting!” and more like “Drop the gun!”
My suspicion is that MAD overall is diminishing in its power to stabilize the world militarily, as a result of new military technologies coming into play (space-based weapons, drones, AI, hypersonic missiles, iron dome scenarios) as well as more and more nuclear powers coming online, and the increasing probability of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of non-state actors.
And finally there’s China’s overall rise toward the role of hegemonic power.
The Cold War basically organized itself (and hence organized the influences that minimized military action) around two major powers. Now there’s a third major power that’s rapidly accelerating toward becoming the major power. It’s changing all the equations that balanced out in the 1970s, 80s, etc.
The Cuban Missile Crisis was basically caused because Cuba was too close to the USA for nuclear missiles to be stored in a way that the balance of MAD could be maintained.
The so-called Cuban Missile Crisis was caused by Kennedy moving nuclear missiles into Turkey, within striking range of the USSR. It never would have happened if Kennedy hadn’t decided to start swinging his dick around.
The reason Ukraine wanted to join NATO is that Russia already had occupied Crimea and part of Georgia before. All that after Ukraine gave up all the nukes they still had from USSR times. Ukraine was not a threat to Russia before the occupation of Crimea.
Distance is really not much of a factor any more, and hasn’t been for a long time. Kaliningrad and St. Petersburg can already be reached by submarine launched cruise missiles in less than 15 minutes (conservative estimate). And let’s face it, with MAD being a thing, any kind of nuclear strike is likely to escalate into all-out nuclear annihilation, anyway. This makes any attempt at overwhelming the opponent a losing proposition. So in that sense nothing has changed since, oh, the mid-1970s?
Then there is the argument that Russia doesn’t want a long shared border with NATO. Guess what, their aggression has caused Finland and Sweden to join NATO, which has only added to their shared border with NATO. That they already had with Poland and the Baltic states (there is no treaty nor official document prohibiting NATO expansion).
And finally, how hard is it to understand that NATO is a defensive alliance? It is neither politically geared to nor militarily capable of mounting a conquest of Russia. The fact that so many of Russia’s neighbors are eager to join the alliance should be a pretty strong hint as to why it needs to exist in the first place. It is Russia that cannot be trusted, not NATO. And you can’t make your neighbor “drop the gun” in their own house. The Ukrainians were stupid enough already to return their nuclear arsenal to Russia in return for explicit security guarantees. What a mistake that was.
Don’t even get me started on how China is criminally underrated as a manifest threat to world peace…
I don’t even know what they (western tankies) get from this. Average dumbass Russian only cares about his ass, and the pretended “glory”. There is no “Conservative brotherhood which spans across the ocean”. They don’t speak your language, they don’t have the same problem, and they hate YOU with passion, because on average, they are racist and dumb.
So my only hypothesis is that tankies think (??) that by going “contrarian” they show how smart they are, and that “did the research” lol.
I’m not a tankie, but I probably am what everyone in this thread is calling a “tankie”, so here’s my answer:
Yes, it is extremely bad that Russia invaded Ukraine. The ideal scenario would have been Ukraine quickly repelling the invasion when it happened. But we don’t live in magic fantasy world where everyone gets what they deserve. We live in the real world, where Ukraine cannot possibly defeat Russia in a war. The option which saves the most Ukrainian lives is a negotiated peace, with Russia getting much more of what they want than we would like.
All that is achieved by pouring more weapons into Ukraine is prolonging the meatgrinder for years, wiping out an entire generation of Ukrainians and risking a global nuclear war.
Ukraine had a negotiated peace before the 2022 invasion, after the 2014 invasion. Why would a 2025 negotiated peace be any more reliable?
No, it’s because “America bad”. There’s a lot of reasons to hate America, and the drip feeding of munitions to Ukraine is one of them. I think we should have been sending everything from the start with the only restriction being no hitting civilian targets. A million 155 shells a week. Tomahawks. Predator drones. Hell, even F-15s. I agree, end the war, but end it in a Ukrainian victory with their borders restored.
The best way to minimize the overall violence of a fight is to use enough force in the first moments to end the fight.
Generally speaking. Maybe.
It’s even worse than that. It’s “America bad, therefore Russia good.” As if there has to be some sort of cosmic balance.
as if there has to be some sort of cosmic balance
Got me laughing, very true observation
There was never any chance of Ukrainian victory. Russia is not that weak and everyone knew it from the start.
But arming ukrainians and sending them to die weakens Russia, so the US likes that. It’s all a game, and none of it was ever in the interest of Ukraine nor its people.
Russia has a long and proud history of losing to "smaller, weaker " countries. Russo Japanese war, WW1, Polish Soviet war of 1919, the winter war, Afghanistan, Chechen war until they paid homage to the Kadyrovs. there’s no reason to think there was never a chance at Ukrainian victory. Russia fumbles the bag plenty. But I get it. America bad so Russia stonk and good.
America bad so Russia stonk and good.
I think this kinda reductionist bs abolishes any kind of discussion. What does this have to do with anything? Where did I say such things?
But arming ukrainians and sending them to die weakens Russia, so the US likes that.
Right there. You said it right there And you’re changing the subject. Russian victory was never a forgone conclusion. History has shown us that.
Kyiv in three days!
I had a reply for a similar comment; trying to link it here, to avoid copy-pasting: https://lemmy.ml/post/23582488/15569369
I’m sure you’ll just dismiss this all as Western Imperialist propaganda since it disagrees with your worldview, but:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Kyiv_convoy#Three_day_war_plan
Of course, in public, Putin was much more pragmatic.
He said it would be two weeks.
https://time.com/3259699/putin-boast-kiev-2-weeks/
So would you prefer, “Kyiv in two weeks?” I’ll go with that. Exactly the same stupid idea.
Seems to me that Ukraine still exists as a country and that wouldn’t be the case if not for international support.
Are you hoping for a restoration of the Soviet Union? Any other countries on your list that don’t deserve to exist?
Yet 3 years later Russia still has not completed its objectives, took its eye off Syria, and needs troops & ammo from North Korea.
And all it took was 1,000,000 dead Ukrainians!
Murdered by Russian. So tell me, in this peace of yours, who gets what and why?
You’re blaming them for defending themselves???
Would have been nice to send a message to Vlad on day 1.
“Turnabout is fair play”
Tankies entire world view is formed around hating the US.
They will glorify terrible regimes that literally commit genocides and straight up murder thousands of innocents just because that regime is in opposition to US influence.
They use left wing language, but they do not care about leftist issues. They do not care about disabled people getting focibly euthanised, about anyone who dares critique the regime being forcibly silenced, about minorities being genocided (unless the US or NATO does it), that their “socialist states” literally have billionaires while others starve. They think it’s all US propaganda. (Alternatively, they’ll admit part of it and say it’s for the greater good).
They want power, over others, forever.
Removed by mod
You lack nuance.
You can’t see your own hypocrisy here at all and it’s rich af.
Do you wish someone supported Iraq against America?
By the usual tankie logic, Iraq should have just given up. They had no chance to win the war.
A much simpler way of putting that second picture is: " . . . but that doesn’t mean you have to support another empire."
Removed by mod
/me sees title. “Oh, these comments are gonna be fun…”
Red-painted fascists just can’t help themselves. War is Completely Justified Resistance And Blowback until someone actually fights back, at which point it’s Pointlessly Extending The Conflict
I don’t understand how other communists can defend Russia at this point. It feels to me like most of them forget that Russia is no longer a communist country.
They’re capitalists. Putin is often using christo-fascist tactics. He’s also pushing for Russian imperialism in very capitalistic ways. Also, Russia was 100 percent the agitators here.
Just because it challenges US worldwide hegemony doesn’t automatically make it good, boys.
Removed by mod
Seriously. Those dumb Iraqis who fought back deserved to die.
Tankies might as well be called CINOs — communists in name only. Their defining feature is reverence towards authoritarian leaders. They revere Putin and Xi as “strong” leaders and completely ignore how little their regimes have in common with the socialist workers paradise Marx envisioned.
My favorite is when they argue that China has billionaires and private property and a stock market because Marx said you have to go through capitalism to get to communism. Which… doesn’t somehow also apply to the West?
Gee I wonder who you could be referring to mmmmhhh gee I really wonder.
Tankies?
Sorry I dropped the /s somewhere
What makes you say they don’t think it applies to the West? I don’t follow your logic there.
Because if you tell them China is just as capitalist as the West, they tell you it absolutely isn’t and is a communist country.
Ok but China is absolutely not as capitalist as the west, and that’s an insane thing to say.
I’d buy that line if China wasn’t integrating those large businesses (albeit slowly) into the public sector, something the west is not doing, but rather moving to deregulate more and more (Thanks Trump! /s)
And yet it’s still not a communist country. I get that you want it to be a communist country, but it isn’t.
You won’t see me argue that China is communist, it’s socialist as it stands now with the stated goal of becoming communist
I’ll stick with “Cosplay Commies”.
I especially despise how Putin and Xi were seen as ‘strong’ leaders, but when shit hit the fan in the last 5 years, they just hid away from repercussions
Do you know what you’ve done!? You’ve summoned him! He’s like Beetlejuice, say three Marxist terms and he appears. Combie will be here soon.
MAGAts are either too stupid to realize or too fragile to acknowledge that they’re getting ass-fucked by putin. It’s just pathetic.
It’s so bizarre to see those old Soldiers of Fortune readers, with their “Better dead than red” tee shirts, all now rooting for Russia.
Are you aware the Biden administration hasn’t spoken to Putin’s staff in two years?
Is there, in your analogy, a macho, straight, totally non anal-sex-related kind of dignity in that refusal to communicate with a nuclear adversary?
I just listened to Tucker Carlson interview Sergei Lavrov. Is that me just going to town on Putin’s veiny cock? Is this whole thing just a big revealer of who’s really gay and who’s not?
I just listened to Tucker Carlson interview Sergei Lavrov.
Thanks for giving us ample reason to not care about your opinions.
Yes. You are going to town on his weiny cock.
multi-polar imperialism
For the fucking tankies and MAGAts, if the French and King Louis XVI would have turned their backs on the US colonials from 1775 to 1783, the Red Coats would have crushed your rebellion and you would have been another Dominion like Canada. Hang on, someone press reset.
You mean I would have had universal healthcare?!
Mother fucking French…
So I understand that MAGA is U.S. based, but how many of the “tankies” do you really think are from the U.S.
Even this place is full or russian propaganda? Referring to some comments.
Removed by mod
It’s generally pretty easy to spot. Just look for a short inflammatory sentence without any substance or relevance. They try to fan the flames of conservative meme culture to try and rile up angry and useless debate.
short inflammatory sentence without any substance or relevance you say? Does this count as an example?
MAGAts are either too stupid to realize or too fragile to acknowledge that they’re getting ass-fucked by putin
Yes, that’s a great example of how propaganda influences the culture of discussion. Russia has been a key source of pushing this kind of rhetoric for a long time, with the specific goal of shifting the culture away from meaningful debate and toward juvenile, reactionary responses. Even though the comment you highlighted comes from the opposite point of view, it’s a perfect example of how effective Russian propaganda campaigns have been at shaping and distorting cultural discourse, muddying the waters and preventing genuine conversations from taking place. Your example is a result of their efforts as I highlighted in my original statement.
Definitely.
deleted by creator
