justastranger,

It’s like every time there’s a war everybody forgets how fucking long they take. WW2 took six years. The Vietnam War took almost 20 years, same with the Afghanistan War. Anybody expecting anything solid within the next couple years is delusional. Ukraine is in it for the long haul.

MindSkipperBro12, (edited )

Frontlines were actually moving, especially in the Eastern Front. Not so much in China and the Pacific, though.

novibe,

“We’ll fight til the last Ukrainian!” - libs

Burp,
Burp avatar

*support

CaptainAniki,

deleted_by_author

  • Loading...
  • rjs001,

    Huh? We said the libs said that and the GOP are libs

    OKRainbowKid,

    “We shouldn’t help the rape victim and they should hope that it’s over quickly. Also, it’s actually not rape, it’s a special sexual operation and they deserved it.” - Tankies

    gnuhaut,

    And shelling civilians in the Donbas is presumably the equivalent of putting on a nice dress in your metaphor?

    Make extremely inappropriate and wrong rape comparison ⇒ Accuse anyone who disagrees of being a rape apologist ⇒ FUCK TANKIES!

    Extremely normal and sound logic there, definitely not just vibe-based emotional manipulation.

    barsoap,

    Ask Prigozhin whether that shelling actually happened. You swallowed Russian propaganda hook, line, and sinker.

    gnuhaut,

    ohchr.org/…/OHCHRThematicReportUkraineJan2014-May…

    OHCHR estimates that between mid-April 2014 and 31 May 2016, at least 9,404 people, of which up to 2,000 are civilians, have been killed as a result of the conflict. The vast majority of civilian casualties, recorded on the territories controlled by the Government of Ukraine and on those controlled by armed groups, were caused by the indiscriminate shelling of residential areas, in violation of the international humanitarian law principle of distinction.

    Na better believe Prigozhin, that guy never told a lie or said anything that was totally wrong.

    barsoap,

    What do you believe your source to say, exactly? That Ukraine shelled indiscriminately? If so, you should read it again.

    gnuhaut,

    Yes it says that exactly, unless you think the “armed groups” shelled themselves.

    barsoap,

    Maybe the armed groups headed by known criminals (look at who ran those “people’s republics”) shelled the civilians? They also shot down MH-15.

    gnuhaut,

    You do realize that direction of the shelling wouldn’t be hard to determine? If you look at the side of a shelled building you know roughly which direction the shells are coming from. In your worldview OHCHR was duped by some elaborate conspiracy of repeated false flag attacks. That doesn’t even pass the sniff test. Also, why bring MH-15 into this? You cannot discredit my OHCHR source by bringing this up, what’s the connection there?

    barsoap,

    The OHCHR report you linked doesn’t state who bombed, from what I skimmed. But I’m sure you read it and can point me to such a finding?

    Speaking of MH-15, who slaughtered people in Bucha? Which side is bombing shopping centres during the day and apartment buildings in the night? We all know that. And now you come with a source which does not establish that Ukraine bombed civilians and you want me to believe it wasn’t the Russian side which has a well-established pattern of doing the exact thing? In Chechnya, in Syria, in Afghanistan?

    I’m not saying that you can’t – if the evidence is there, go ahead, post it. But actually post evidence and not what you decided was evidence without even reading half-way through the thing.

    gnuhaut,

    I don’t think I can go any more official than the OHCHR, and I don’t think I can convince you of your good vs evil narrative with any source. People got shelled, it’s obviously implied they got shelled by the other side, and no theory to the contrary is put forward in the report.

    I’ll let you ponder this: This would be the first conflict in which one side commits all the war crimes. Even more curious, the side which commits no war crimes has a bunch of volunteer units literally using Nazi, SS and Bandera iconography. You know, the guys that marched hundreds of thousands of civilians into the woods and murdered them. Does that seem plausible to you?

    WldFyre,

    You’re talking about the side that has the Wagner group, right?

    novibe,

    Funny how if you’re against another endless war you’re a tankie and support Putin…

    I’m neither a tankie nor I support Putin. But I also don’t support NATO and the Empire.

    But just as a note, most “tankies” don’t support Russia and know Putin is a conservative capitalist. I mean he is the direct result of the dismantling of the USSR by internal revisionists (tsarists and capitalists) and the CIA.

    But again, it’s the Iraq war all over again. And you libs are doing THE SAME THING. It’s hilarious.

    Cabrio,

    Funny how pacifists are the first to cry when someone hits them.

    boredtortoise,

    Let’s not ruin pacifism, self-defense can be a form of it

    CaptainAniki,

    deleted_by_author

  • Loading...
  • boredtortoise,

    Pacifism can be both, ending all wars and defending against fascism

    Cabrio,

    pacifism /ˈpasɪfɪz(ə)m/ noun the belief that war and violence are unjustifiable and that all disputes should be settled by peaceful means.

    Feathercrown,

    How is that funny

    rastilin,

    There's a load of things I could say, but they would all be pointless, so I'm going to say this. It would be less depressing if you were actually being paid by the Russians.

    EDIT: Which, you know, is not actually out of the question.

    novibe, (edited )

    “Being against war means you are our enemy!” - the “pacifist”, “anti-war”, liberal.

    BitPirate,

    it’s the Iraq war all over again

    Oh so you’re against the invasion after all?

    novibe,

    More than you guys it seems. You’re all salivating at the idea of Russians dying and this war never ending.

    OKRainbowKid,

    Putin could stop this war and thus Russians from dying at any minute. He’d just have to give up on imperialism.

    BitPirate,

    I’d be happy if Russia would simply send its soldiers home.

    novibe,

    Me too. We take Putin out, return the USSR, and then we dismantle the far-right apparatus in Ukraine as well. We close all US military bases and shut down NATO.

    We then impose on the US strict international laws to never have a military, to interfere or invade another nation again, or it’s dismantled and given to all 3rd world countries it fucked over the past 100 years.

    Franconian_Nomad,

    „Libs“ we’re against the Iraq war. It divided the US population and the whole western world. Never listened to American Idiot?

    I’m confused. You want us to protest against one sort of imperialism, but not the other?

    novibe,

    I think you’re remembering incorrectly bro… After 9/11, if you didn’t support invading any vaguely Muslim country you were a traitor. Fucking libs on TV were cheering for killing Saddam and invading Iraq, dismissing any attempts to question why would that even make sense as weak-spined traitorous behaviour.

    Also, how can you say that while you support a never ending war in Ukraine?

    Is Russia imperialist? Yes. Is this invasion a tragedy? Yes. Did it happen, and will continue to happen for a long time in good part because of the US? Fuck yes as well.

    I don’t support Russia invading or winning the war. I don’t support NATO breaking its promises and meddling in Eastern Europe propping up Nazis.

    The US Empire is directly responsible for Putin, in the first place. And it’s now directly responsible for the extreme right in Ukraine.

    What anyone who’s actually against war wants is for the US Empire to fall and NATO to be dismantled. For Putin to fall and the Russian people to have freedom again. For the Nazis in Ukraine to not have power anymore.

    If you support sending billions in weapons to Ukraine (as fucking debt, Ukraine will be in debt to the US and Europe for centuries…), if you support war games in South Korea, Taiwan, if you complained when Biden left Afghanistan… you’re literally a war hawk.

    Franconian_Nomad,

    You blathering fool. I’m not your bro and never will be.

    When you see a school bully who fights a smaller kid who doesn’t want to give up his lunch money, what do you do? You are the kind of person shouting at the victim to comply to avoid any further bloodshed, right? You’re fucking filth. I think I even watched a Star Trek episode about your fucking kind, lol.

    Just for your information: NATO has nothing to do with this. Other than being a scapegoat of course. Quite the opposite, if Ukraine was part of NATO, this war would never happened. Why do you think Poland and the Chech Rebublic were so eager to join it? NATO is a defense pact. But I know, people like you don’t care. NATO is the big boogie man you need to justify your political views.

    And no, I don’t remember incorrectly. The Bush regime was republican. They faked evidence to attack Iraq. The were huge demonstations and turmoil Google the Dixie Chicks, listen to American Idiot. I’m not american. I’m german. We were one of the countries who were part of a so called “axis of evil” because we didn’t agree with the war. Shut the fuck up.

    I was always pretty left leaning. Never liked US-Imperialism since I got 16 and realised Tom Clancy Novels were pretty one-sided. But if supporting ukraine means I’m a Hawk, so be it. All I know is, I don’t want to be on your side!

    barsoap,

    We were one of the countries who were part of a so called “axis of evil”

    Slight correction, no, they didn’t go that far. We’re “Old Europe”.

    It was also when they renamed French Fries to Freedom Fries to protest the French being, well, French, as if the French wouldn’t already be constantly doing that. (Meanwhile Belgium was hoping someone would notice them).

    Franconian_Nomad,

    Thanks for the correction. And yes, I remember the freedom fries, lol! Poor Belgium.

    novibe,

    Your comment truly reeks of “I’m pretty left leaning” lmao

    Franconian_Nomad,

    Lol. What a pathetic comment. Are you trying to imply it’s “left“ to sit back and let imperialistic dictators invade other countries?

    You said it yourself. Putins war is imperialistic. Wow, if we had only a thing that would defer imperialistic Russia from attacking its neighbours. Oh, we have! NATO!

    And your comments reeks of dying braincells.

    novibe,

    “NATO is the answer to imperialism” LOL I’m dying

    Franconian_Nomad,

    I wrote to Russian imperialism, you imbecile.

    But I expect nothing less from a moron who writes that abolishing the NATO would bring peace.

    ShimmeringKoi, (edited )
    @ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net avatar

    It is 2023. I am being called a tankie for opposing the escalation of a needless slaughter engineered by the western military industial complex.

    It is 2003. I am being called a Saddam lover for opposing the escalation of a needless slaughter engineered by the western military industial complex.

    It is 1969. I am being called a commie and probably also racial slurs for opposing the escalation of a needless slaughter engineered by the western military industial complex. manhattan

    novibe,

    Alexa play “Story of my life” by One Direction.

    ARg94,

    Commie

    brain_in_a_box,

    What are you, 80 years old? The modern term is “tankie”.

    Radicalized,

    There’s a lot of angry liberals replying to your post, so I thought I’d link a great video on how/why the war in Ukraine came to be:

    youtube.com/watch?v=LL4eNy4FCs8&si=gaMRzFwo5J…

    This channel is leftist but they aren’t communists, as far as I know.

    Tldw: This war was completely avoidable. Had the US/NATO kept its promise to not expand eastward none of this would have happened. Even Biden said that 25 years ago. Americans groomed certain Ukrainians for political office, and prevented others from running. There was an opportunity to end the war last year on somewhat decent terms for Ukraine, but Boris Johnson rushed in to stop it from happening, promising massive support. But war exhaustion has caught up and Ukraine is running out of people, and western leaders are already starting to call for the end of the war — except this time it will be on russias terms and Ukraine is going to get fucked. Big western capitalists have had their fingers in this pie because there’s a lot of money to be made in the country. That’s it.

    Anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows that Putins invasion was a horrific, imperialist move. Any commie you see protesting the war isn’t doing it because they support Russia (Russia is a capitalist country), they’re doing it because they don’t support NATO. We are often the makers of our own enemies here in the west. Viet Cong, Taliban, ISIS, and Russia were all created or shaped by western (mainly US) policies.

    novibe,

    Libs gonna lib man…

    barsoap,

    Judging by the tl;dw that video is hitting bingo on this one.

    Radicalized,

    Thanks I’ll watch it when I’m home from work. Right now it looks like it’s just some guy talking, whereas the video I linked only talks about things that are public knowledge. I haven’t watched yours yet though.

    Egon,
    @Egon@hexbear.net avatar

    You should probably judge by the video, you moron

    Raikin,

    Seems like to you being a lib means not falling for badly researched, one-sided videos?

    Radicalized,

    You didn’t watch the video did you? They don’t mention anything that

    All you liberals give cons a lot of shit for being bloodthirsty war hawks but you froth at the mouth at the thought of war too. You’ll look at situations like what’s happening in Gabon and Niger, say “wow the French are fucked and they kind of deserve it for what they did to those countries”, and then develop an amazing blind spot for western imperialism in Eastern Europe.

    Obviously this war shouldn’t have happened. Obviously Putin is an asshole. Obviously what’s happening in Ukraine needs to be stopped.

    We (the west) made our own monster though.

    BitPirate,

    All you liberals give cons

    All this my team, your team rhetoric…

    Honest question, but how many times a day do you think about events and try to fit them into one of these two categories? At what point do you start using these terms interchangeably for good and evil?

    These days, I try to skip posts from people who crossed that line. Left, right or centre. If someone has limited their mental capacity to binary decisions, it’s not worth arguing with them, because the answer to everything will always be “my team”.

    ours,

    And Russia expected their little venture to be done in days.

    Corkyskog,

    It was never supposed to turn into a real war. They wanted to assassinate Zelenskyy put some Russian plant in as president, annex some more land and call it a night. Obviously Zelenskyy survived and the rest is history.

    ours,

    “No plan survives first contact with the enemy”

    hansl,

    “Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth."

    Fogle,

    We can hope Putin dies from being an old fuck and Russia gives up

    Blursty,

    The US is on its last legs though. It badly needed this win. The US falls before Putin dies.

    IonAddis,
    @IonAddis@lemmy.world avatar

    I always take a peek at the comment history when I see things like this. And this guy basically just woke up to say things like this in one specific thread.

    I’m no longer a mod of anything these days, but if I had a mod-hammer I’d send you into the next galaxy.

    rjs001,

    To say the truth. The Us is collapsing and soon their Nazi vassals in Ukraine and Isntreal will also suffer a complete and utter collapse (god willing)

    vokkez,

    What drugs are you on and where can I get some?

    Edgelord_Of_Tomorrow,

    Clearly hasn’t compared the US and Chinese economic data

    vokkez,

    Lol literally every single line of that post is absolutely nonsense.

    The US is on its last legs though.

    Lol in what universe? By way metric is the most powerful nation in the world limping along?

    It badly needed this win.

    If we badly needed a win we wouldn’t be sending 30+ year-old surplus gear. Ukraine would have F-35s instead of the air force trying to pawn off A-10s because we’re retiring them and don’t want to break them down.

    The US falls before Putin dies.

    Unless he’s a Highlander there’s no fucking chance.

    SheeEttin,

    That’s not strictly true. On the short end, there was the six-day war. On the long end, there was the hundred years’ war.

    Putin was clearly aiming for the short option, but then I suppose most belligerents usually are.

    threegnomes,

    The Anglo-Zanzibar War lasted less than an hour

    5714,

    ‘Gunboat diplomacy’ isn’t very diplomatic.

    SkyezOpen,

    Dude took the low end and said “fuck that we’ll do it twice as fast.”

    The good news is I don’t think Russia can continue to sustain these kind of losses for 199 more years.

    Hexadecimalkink,

    Neither can Ukraine…

    justastranger,

    I’d actually love to see a graph that shows the distribution of lengths of various wars

    TWeaK,

    That’s because it isn’t really about any particular military objective, it’s about creating business for the war industry.

    Pyrate37,

    Not the correct response to say to those who hold the purse strings to your war chest. Especially one particular country whose political tide can turn and drown you.

    GivingEuropeASpook,

    Did I read the same article as everyone else? I don’t get where “failed offensive” is coming from. It was western media that created the impression of an impending counter-offensive that would all but end the war, not anything from Ukraine’s armed forces as far as I know.

    Since launching a much-vaunted counteroffensive using many billions of dollars of Western military equipment, Ukraine has recaptured more than a dozen villages but has yet to penetrate Russia’s main defences," … NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg told CNN that Ukrainian commanders deserved the benefit of the doubt. 'Ukrainians have exceeded expectations again and again," he said. “We need to trust them. We advise, we help, we support. But… it is the Ukrainians that have to make those decisions.”

    This doesn’t sound like a “failed” offensive to me. The “much-vaunted” part came from the West, not Ukraine. It sounds to me like western officials got themselves psyched up based on nothing and are now whining about it. So like, yeah, critics of the slow counteroffensive, shut up. You sound as ridiculous as the people who acted like Kyiv would be taken by March 2022.

    CanadaPlus,

    You sound as ridiculous as the people who acted like Kyiv would be taken by March 2022

    I mean, in that case Russia was the much superior force on paper, and it didn’t happen because they’re more incompetent than was thought possible for anyone. I think you make a good point but this isn’t a great comparison.

    SoyViking,
    @SoyViking@hexbear.net avatar

    Given the substantial losses of men and equipment and the meagre gains I do think it is safe to assume that the counteroffensive does not go as well as Kiev has hoped for.

    GivingEuropeASpook,

    Totally – but I think in the west, people were conditioned to expect breakneck speeds similar to the initial invasion and push towards Kyiv by Russian forces or the rapid advance last year of Ukrainian troops that pushed out Russians from Kyiv suburbs and northeastern Ukraine.

    In my mind, a “failure” would mean that they gained nothing – not even a few small villages.

    mihor,
    @mihor@lemmy.ml avatar

    3 months for getting past the screening line while losing majority of your combat capability is… well… abysmal.

    GivingEuropeASpook,

    while losing majority of your combat capability

    We’re watching this conflict unfold from a million miles away, how could you possibly know that they’ve lost most of their combat capability? That wasn’t mentioned in the article. If the article is paywalled for you, I was able to read it entirely with Firefx’s easy-read button.

    mihor,
    @mihor@lemmy.ml avatar

    You should check out Telegram and Youtube, you have numerous videos and photos of destroyed Ukrainian armor, drone strikes on radars and artillery, while analysts count everything. The brigades were already at most 50% of capacity before the offensive, but many have been rendered combat ineffective since, meaning there are too many casualties to be able to continue operations, so the reserve brigades (many of which were meant to exploit the breakthrough if it succeeded) have been rotated in already. In short, Ukraine broke its teeth on the screening line so now they are throwing everything but the kitchen sink at the front. After the offensive stalls for good and the Rasputitsa begins, Russia will most likely begin its own offensive, which will be disastrous for Ukraine.

    GivingEuropeASpook,

    You should check out Telegram and Youtube, you have numerous videos and photos of destroyed Ukrainian armor, drone strikes on radars and artillery, while analysts count everything.

    I used to in the first few months of the invasion, but I decided I’d only try to keep up with any significant developments (like if a city changes hands or something new happens, like a particularly brazen drone strike) for the sake of my own mental health.

    The brigades were already at most 50% of capacity before the offensive,

    Which YouTube sources were saying this?

    mihor,
    @mihor@lemmy.ml avatar

    Check History Legends, and I believe Weeb Union has been reporting it as well.

    GivingEuropeASpook, (edited )

    Subbed to both lol

    Edit: unsubbed from History Legends after noticing a pattern of “anti-woke” comments from him and his weird view of colonialism (inferring that African countries shouldn’t ask for reparations unless Arab countries are willing to do the same for Spain)

    BynarsAreOk,

    Respectfuly, it is painful to read shit like this from uninformed people.

    Here try googling this “Ukraine counter offensive goal crimea before:2023-07-01”(without quotes), just 3 random examples.

    Zelensky signaled Ukraine’s counteroffensive against Russia is underway. Here’s what to expect

    In terms of its goals, Kyiv has consistently said that it wants to recapture all of the territory controlled by Russia. In an address earlier this year Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said that included Crimea.

    “It is not an intention, it is our land. Crimea is our sea and our mountains,” Zelensky said.

    Ukraine ‘ready’ to talk to Russia on Crimea if counteroffensive succeeds lol lmao

    Ukraine’s counteroffensive: Goals, opportunities, risks

    In September 2022, in his only programmatic paper so far, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Lieutenant General Valeriy Zaluzhnyi offered only a rough sketch of how a Ukrainian counteroffensive might look. In the paper, he spoke of “several resolute, ideally simultaneous counterattacks.” One strategically crucial target Zaluzhnyi mentioned was the Crimean peninsula, which Russia illegally annexed in 2014. In Kyiv, all agree this is the main direction Ukraine should focus its efforts. But they are also expecting surprises and deceptive maneuvers. Many, however, doubt Ukraine has enough equipment and fighting power to regain the peninsula.

    Even western media tried to downplay it casting doubt from the beginning but the point I highlight is undeniably the planned goal was not achieved and it wont be achieved. Everyone would call that a failure.

    But even the fucking Nazis can’t agree on their own narrative and they’re just coping now

    Ukraine counteroffensive creeps ahead, measured in blood exactly 2 months ago, July 1st 2023

    Last week, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said the counteroffensive was “slower than desired”, without getting too specific. Ukraine says it has recaptured a cluster of villages in operations that liberated 130 square km (50 square miles) in the south, but this is a small percentage of the total territory held by Russia.

    Go tell Zelensky to shut the fuck up, oh wait.

    geophysicist,

    Who are “the fucking Nazis” in your comment?

    BynarsAreOk,
    geophysicist,

    What kind of evidence is that? There are neonazis in every country, that of course does not mean refering to a whole country as “fucking Nazis”

    GivingEuropeASpook,

    The presence of Neo-Nazis within a nation’s borders does not give another country just cause to invade unilaterally. The idea that, because Ukraine has Neo Nazis and incorporated groups like Azov into its formal military structure, it makes the Russian invasion justified, is to implicitly accept that bigger, more powerful countries are entitled to “spheres of influence” and thus should be able to unilaterally intervene in their neighbour’s politics when it suits them.

    Ukrainians aren’t particularly more supportive of Neo-Nazis than any other white-dominant nation in Europe – it was just an excuse by Russia to invade.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    billions of dollars of western equipment and they recaptured a dozen villages.

    The Russians have the parts of Ukraine they want and have fortified heavily which leads my analysis of the situation to be that Ukraine recapturing the taken area is not realistic and their goal of getting Crimea on top of that to be completely delusional

    tomatopathe,

    Ukraine needs to get within artillery range of certain major logistical hubs to hamper Russian reinforcement and supply via the southern corridor. And it is close, now. The Russian administrators of Melitopol have already abandoned the place.

    With ATACMS, this would have been easier, fyi.

    Only people who don’t understand the situation repeat the sort of thing you are claiming.

    Furthermore, the US aid to Ukraine was mostly stuff that was destined to be decommissioned. The “billions of dollars” is on paper, not in fact. Nothing Ukraine is receiving from the USA is current gen or in use by the US and therefore isn’t diminishing the US armed forces. Arguably it’s actually increasing US strength, since the USA is now ramping up artillery shell production.

    From a strategic standpoint, destroying the Russian military (estimated around 50% of Russia’s MBTs and Airforce) in exchange for stuff you weren’t going to use anyway is a bargain.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    no one wants them to hit those places with artillery if the Ukrainians start using American artillery on Russian cities the Americans will have kittens

    Russia has nuclear weapons which means there is a line that can’t be crossed with regard to dealings with them

    GivingEuropeASpook,

    It’s all about plausible deniability. The US didn’t want to arm them with anything that could reach Moscow and hit Russian territory in general, but the Ukrainians have developed the ability to do so on their own, so now US officials I think are more willing to discuss these things, since it can’t be directly traced to them (since now Russia can’t prove it was specifically American armaments or equipment used whenever it gets hit inside it’s territory).

    usernamesaredifficul,

    but the Ukrainians have developed the ability to do so on their own

    no they haven’t they’re using artilery equipment we gave them.

    GivingEuropeASpook,

    no they haven’t they’re using artilery equipment we gave them.

    Don’t blatantly lie.

    businessinsider.com/ukraine-weapons-can-hit-russi…cbc.ca/…/ukraine-develops-weapon-zelenskyy-says-1…

    So, if you wanna say “oh secretly it was still the US that supplied the drones or whatever”, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    I thought you were talking about artillery. Those drones are just repurposed consumer drones fitted with explosives they aren’t on the scale needed to make a major difference

    GivingEuropeASpook,

    Nope. Just to be sure I went back and checked my initial wording, and I can see why you thought I meant artillery. I should have specified that they are using their own domestically developed military equipment to strike targets within Russia, which could theoretically allow them plausible deniability to then use a couple of Western-supplied artillery, assuming they could do it in such a way that Russia wouldn’t be able to tell if it was a drone, IED, or proper artillery.

    Staines,

    These weapons are the kind of thing the Ukrainians have developed to “retaliate” against random civilian housing blocks whenever Russia craters a command center. They’re basically modern V1/V2 rockets “This will terrify the russian population into submission!!”

    tomatopathe,

    Lol really.

    How many Russian civilians has Ukraine “indiscriminately killed”, compared to Russia’s “collateral damage” when they target “Ukranian command centers”.

    Reading this sort of abject nonsense on a day where a Ukranian market was hit with an S300, killing.a minimum 16 people, or when Russia spent the whole winter trying to freeze Ukrainians to death, or bombs cafés where authors and journalists are known to congregate…

    You know what, just fuck you, you genocidal apologist. And fuck Russia, nation of barbarians.

    GivingEuropeASpook,

    While i don’t doubt Russian civilians have gotten hurt or killed, ukraine isn’t targeting city centers or hospitals deliberately the way Russia has.

    UnicodeHamSic, (edited )

    You do realize that increasing us strength and military spending are bad things right? That just means more death and misery to thr world in general and US residents aslo?

    tomatopathe,

    Yes, we should just let China and Russia run roughshod over everyone.

    TBH, if the military just did some proper accounting and auditing, it would save a ton of money and be just as efficient.

    GivingEuropeASpook,

    The Russians have the parts of Ukraine they want

    This is revisionist. It was clear that Russia’s military objectives in invading the rest of the country last year were to remove Zelensky and put back a friendly government to Moscow. They failed, and now are falling back on what was always the more pragmatic and “reasonable” war goal of holding the pre-February 2022 lines of control + what they still have now. But, now that an all-out state of war exists between Ukraine and Russia, it’s “allowable” in the eyes of the West for Ukraine to try and regain all of its internationally-recognized territory in a way that it wasn’t before.

    …have fortified heavily which leads my analysis of the situation to be that Ukraine recapturing the taken area is not realistic and their goal of getting Crimea on top of that to be completely delusional

    I don’t mean to deride your analysis, but I also do wonder how much analysis some random Hexbear user can really make. I mean, I can look at maps of assessed control from the ISW and I hear about what goes down in some of the more nationalist Russian telegram channels but I deliberately try to avoid anything that makes me sound knowledgeable in military strategy and tactics.

    I will say, that given the general attitude here that we want choices and decisions to be taken that reduce the fighting and scale of death, Ukraine’s approach of incrementally retaking villages instead of throwing everything it’s got in a mad rush to break Russian lines shouldn’t be criticized.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    This is revisionist. It was clear that Russia’s military objectives in invading the rest of the country last year were to remove Zelensky and put back a friendly government to Moscow. They failed, and now are falling back on what was always the more pragmatic and “reasonable” war goal of holding the pre-February 2022 lines of control + what they still have now. But, now that an all-out state of war exists between Ukraine and Russia, it’s “allowable” in the eyes of the West for Ukraine to try and regain all of its internationally-recognized territory in a way that it wasn’t before

    This whole time the Russians have been talking about wanting the east exclusively the early rush to kiev was consistent with the stated aim of forcing Ukraine to surrender early into the war

    I will say, that given the general attitude here that we want choices and decisions to be taken that reduce the fighting and scale of death, Ukraine’s approach of incrementally retaking villages instead of throwing everything it’s got in a mad rush to break Russian lines shouldn’t be criticized.

    Even the Ukrainians are talking in that article about how hard it is to breach the Russian defences. The Ukrainians have thrown everything they had in a mad rush to break the Russian lines and only succeeded at retaking a dozen villages. It is ridiculous to assume the side with less soldiers, lacking air superiority, and ran by the most corrupt nation in Europe with vast amounts of support being resold by Ukrainian generals has any chance of defeating the larger power. Early in the war Ukraine had an advantage as it’s soldiers had in violation of the Minsk treaty been fighting in Eastern Ukraine for the last 8 years so were more militarily experienced now Russia has been fighting for a while they will have worked out much of the issues of their organisation

    GivingEuropeASpook,

    This whole time the Russians have been talking about wanting the east exclusively the early rush to Kiev was consistent with the stated aim of forcing Ukraine to surrender early into the war

    The “special military operation” to Denazify Ukraine was not intended to be limited solely to the East. Russia tried to replicate the US operation in Iraq, and had they been successful, they’d be in a very similar position to the US after toppling both Iraqi and Afghan leadership relatively quickly, stuck propping up government with limited popular support. Also, what about everything about NATO’s eastward expansion and Ukraine’s prospective membership? That has nothing to do with injustices against Russian-speaking people.

    The Ukrainians have thrown everything they had in a mad rush to break the Russian lines and only succeeded at retaking a dozen villages.

    This is literally the opposite of what the article says: “Some [Western analysts] faulted Ukraine’s strategy, including accusing it of concentrating its forces in the wrong places.” Sounds to me like they emphatically NOT making a rush at the targets the West wants them to.

    8 years so were more militarily experienced now Russia has been fighting for a while they will have worked out much of the issues of their organisation

    Right, just like how that Ukrainian counteroffensive is gonna start any day now… Its warfare. Neither side is honest about their operations, and neither side can afford to be honest about their battle plans, tactics, and strategies in order to actually make use of any of them. When Russia invaded the rest of the country, it was their modernized army that was gonna make quick work of the smaller weaker Ukrainian army. Even NATO was like “uh yeah we expect a protracted guerilla war after a quick Russian victory should Russia actually invade”.

    For the record, I wasn’t sure if Russia would actually invade, despite all the classic rhetoric that came from the Kremlin the year beforehand.

    Gsus4,
    @Gsus4@feddit.nl avatar

    This is why you should not defederate hexbear. Good, clean, comment. Just block the troublemakers (it’s about 60 of them) and the threads automatically look more cogent.

    Zrc,
    @Zrc@hexbear.net avatar

    anyone who disagrees with me is a troublemaker

    ShimmeringKoi,
    @ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net avatar

    Alabama good ol’ boy sherrifs in the 1960s be like:

    Annakah69,

    Am I a troublemaker? I may fit your criteria:

    I don’t think NATO should support Ukraine.

    geophysicist,

    I’ll bite. Why not?

    usernamesaredifficul,

    what does Ukraine bring to NATO except liability.

    geophysicist,

    NATO is a defensive pact to protect nations from russian aggression, or other states also of course. Ukraine was invaded by Russia. Plenty of geopolitical experts have discussed how financial support of Ukraine is the best investment when it comes to weakening the Russian military. Which makes them less of a threat to NATO

    usernamesaredifficul,

    yeah and if you believe that I’ve got a bridge to sell you

    ThereRisesARedStar,

    They were very defensive in Libya and Yugoslavia

    geophysicist,

    Nice argument, however the population supported it:

    According to a Gallup poll conducted in March and April 2012, a survey involving 1,000 Libyans showed 75% of Libyans were in favor of the NATO intervention, compared to 22% who were opposed.[1] A post-war Orb International poll involving 1,249 Libyans found broad support for the intervention, with 85% of Libyans saying that they strongly supported the action taken to remove the Ghadafi regime.[2]

    [1] news.gallup.com/…/opinion-briefing-libyans-eye-ne…[2] web.archive.org/web/20170608060559/…/article.php?…

    So it sounds more like you are just anti-NATO from an ideological perspective

    ThereRisesARedStar,

    Libya ended in open air slave markets lmao, and you’re citing western sources saying "well they aaked for it

    geophysicist,

    That is a ridiculous argument and you know it, unless your idealism has blinded you. “Something bad happened later so something good can’t have happened before”

    Yet you gloss over what it was like in these countries before. Here is an example of how Iraq was before: youtu.be/CR1X3zV6X5Y?si=QVE1b277NIVHnOUB

    Does that mean the Iraq invasion was good? No. However don’t remove all nuance from a discussion about helping the population overthrow a dictatorship, and the potential consequences of that action, just to attempt a cheap shot.

    ThereRisesARedStar,

    Gaddafi had his problems but sol massively improved under him. Given we back plenty of much worse dictatorships, it wasn’t done for altruistic reasons. It was done because he was giving a cut of the wealth to the masses instead of to neocolonial powers. Incidentally, improving sol and education like Gaddafi was doing tend to trend to democratic transitions over time.

    The open air slave markets were a direct result of the intervention. The US backed regime didn’t have a democratic mandate and didn’t have Gaddafi’s entrenched power structures and collapsed.

    geophysicist,

    It was done because he was giving a cut of the wealth to the masses instead of to neocolonial powers

    No, a no fly zone was instated because Gaddafi was ordering air strikes on his own citizens, to the extent that his own representative to the UN asked for the no fly zone:

    21 February 2011: Libyan deputy Permanent Representative to the UN Ibrahim Dabbashi called “on the UN to impose a no-fly zone on all of Tripoli to cut off all supplies of arms and mercenaries to the regime.”

    web.archive.org/…/libyan-ambassador-to-un-urges-i…

    Are you going to continue just making things up?

    ThereRisesARedStar, (edited )

    Yes, the US which is the largest drone striker in the world and where it is explicitly legal for the president to kill US citizens without trial went in with a moral imperative because of air strikes.

    Even if the Spanish sabotaged the USS Maine, the Gulf of Tonkin wasn’t made up, and WMD were in Iraq, the cassi belle are not the structural reasons why the invasions happened. You’re being intentionally credulous because you think US empire benefits you. It doesn’t.

    geophysicist,

    Yeah to be honest I’m a bit done with your mixture of fact and deliberate fiction to try to assist your ideology.

    Here is an actual factual paper on the reasons for the Libyan invasion

    foreignpolicy.com/…/libya-and-the-myth-of-humanit…

    link.springer.com/article/…/s12290-017-0447-5

    There are plenty of discussion points for you without needing to sprinkle in fiction for good measure.

    ThereRisesARedStar,

    So did you actually read those links lmao? Because if you did you have to acknowledge you were wrong about what you’ve said in this thread and I was mostly correct according to your links.

    geophysicist,

    Did you actually read what I wrote?

    ThereRisesARedStar,

    Yes, that is literally why I brought it up. Is there some subtext to this response I’m missing?

    UnicodeHamSic,

    It is not an alliance against the Russian federation. It was an alliance against the ussr. After that it became a rogue army for enforcing us hegemony. Every time it has been used it was to make the world worse. This mercenary core was originally made of nazi generals with nazi soldiers as well. So it really boggles the mind that anyone thinks they could be good for the world.

    GivingEuropeASpook,

    NATO is a defensive pact to protect nations from russian aggression

    NATO is a legacy of the Cold War that was aimless until the Russian invasion lol. The Soviet Union even tried to join NATO when it was first talked about and was rebuffed (and you can’t say it’s because “muh democracy,” as Greece, Turkey, and Portugal - a literal fascist state until 1974 - have all been or are authoritarian states at various points in their NATO memberships).

    Plenty of geopolitical experts have discussed how financial support of Ukraine is the best investment when it comes to weakening the Russian military.

    Plenty also argued from the collapse of the Soviet Union that NATO expansion into eastern Europe would antagonize Russia.

    geophysicist,

    Yeah it’s pretty clear you’re not trying to have a reasonable discussion when you mention that the USSR wanted to join NATO. That was an attempt to undermine the defensive pact by using it’s own rules about inter-member conflicts against it.

    One of the core strengths of NATO is that if a country is invaded then the other countries can’t just vote to kick that state out. There is no mechanism to remove another country from the group, by design. So you are either uninformed or deliberately misrepresenting it when you discuss issues with certain members during their membership

    barsoap,

    Complete nothingburger. What military capability do the Baltic states bring? Isolated geographical position, small countries with small armies and small economies.

    So it’s not a factor in the first place. But even if it was, Ukraine handily outranks Poland when it comes to providing capability. They have an extensive (largely state-owned btw) arms industry, very capable engineers, and, in case you haven’t noticed, fighting spirit.

    Last but not least they’re punching above their weight in Eurovision. Oh wait that was EU accession, not NATO.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    Isolated geographical position, small countries with small armies and small economies.

    worse than that what they bring to an alliance is pretty much no extra money or anything else but also a significantly higher chance of getting into a war

    frankly I’m of the opinions that everything east of Germany is a pretty cheeky imposition on Russias traditional standing in Europe. You can’t just break all the old rules for operating in Europe and not expect consequences

    barsoap,

    Traditional standing, yes, as colonial empire. It may be cheeky but why would it be bad standing up against that?

    You know what Russia could have done to prevent NATO expansion? Not invade Moldova, not invade Georgia, and deal with Chechnya in a manner that doesn’t smell of genocide. Make sure that Eastern Europe doesn’t feel threatened so that they don’t feel the need to join NATO. Of course the Baltics, Poland, etc, joined, they don’t want to repeat the experience of being a Russian colony.

    And just for the record no I’m not actually a fan of NATO, or better put the US being part of the whole shebang. Only positive thing about that is that without Europe in the mix the yanks would likely be even worse.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    they have that standing because they have the guns. They still have the guns so they still have the standing

    those rules don’t just exist for no reason they are to prevent war between the powers in Europe break those rules and you risk war. It doesn’t matter what the Balkans and Poland think they don’t have nuclear weapons

    barsoap,

    Oh yes Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine not being in NATO totally prevented war. How could I forget.

    It doesn’t matter what the Balkans and Poland think

    You’re a hexbear, so presumably self-identify as being on the left. Which then leads me to the question of WTF are you pushing talking points of geopolitical realists, “there are players and there are chess pieces”.

    It very much matters what those states think because, as sovereign states, they enjoy freedom of alliance. To deny that means that you think it is all nice and proper for Russia to still treat them as colonies.

    ThereRisesARedStar,

    Why do you think leftists would give two shits about nations as if they were people? Leftism is an internationalist ideology.

    barsoap,

    Because there’s people living in those countries.

    Go on, write a letter to an imaginary 6yold niece of yours in Mariopol explaining why it’s better that she lives in a mafia-run police state, than for Ukraine to decide its own fate.

    Also, states generally refuse to be poker chips, and they have all right to do so. Thus, by insisting that they be, you invariably create conflict.

    ThereRisesARedStar,

    Lmao you think there are major differences in qol between two neoliberal hellscapes. Actually that’s not fair. Ukraine has faired even worse since the undemocratic dissolution of the USSR.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    It very much matters what those states think because, as sovereign states, they enjoy freedom of alliance

    I don’t want to be allied with them because they bring nothing to an alliance except liability.

    Moldova, Georgia, and Ukraine not being in NATO prevented war between Russia and America, Britain, and France. And that is the big war that can’t be allowed to happen

    this isn’t a new phenomenon we are talking about the great game of empire and there are very good reasons why it was always the conventional wisdom to not mess with Russia over eastern Europe. If they are sovereign states then let them be sovereign states and deal with problems on their own

    barsoap,

    the great game of empire and there are very good reasons why it was always the conventional wisdom

    That wisdom is called appeasement and has failed again and again. Empires will empire, if you give them a finger they’ll wait for a bit and then take an arm.

    You seem to be completely realism-pilled. I have my issues with Kraut but watch this, it’s good stuff.

    If they are sovereign states then let them be sovereign states and deal with problems on their own

    If they are unemployed and homeless then let them be independent and deal with problems on their own. The fuck. And you call yourself a leftist.

    ShimmeringKoi,
    @ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net avatar

    That wisdom is called appeasement and has failed again and again. Empires will empire, if you give them a finger they’ll wait for a bit and then take an arm.

    I agree, the US should be forcibly disbanded by an international peacekeeping force after the last two centuries of imperialism and genocide. No point in waiting for us to get worse, we need to be stopped now.

    barsoap,

    I appreciate the sentiment but I don’t want to see what certain states will be up to if they don’t have the federal level to keep them in check.

    ShimmeringKoi,
    @ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net avatar

    Yeah, what if they threaten the world with nukes or open concentration camps on the southern border or something?

    GivingEuropeASpook,

    The same federal government that let abortion become illegal across half the country?

    GivingEuropeASpook,

    You joke (I think) but you actually illustrate why so many people are supporting Ukraine. The reaction of a lot of people to “the US should be forcibly disbanded by an international peacekeeping force” would be one of indignation and fury at the suggestion that foreign powers should violate one’s home and put their loved ones in danger in order to satisfy global political objectives.

    ShimmeringKoi,
    @ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net avatar

    Uhh given the last eight years of ethnic cleansing in the Donbas region by our coup regime in Ukraine, it’s really a better example of why so mamy countries around the world are supporting the russian federation here.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    That wisdom is called appeasement and has failed again and again. Empires will empire, if you give them a finger they’ll wait for a bit and then take an arm.

    No it’s called a sphere of influence and it’s just playing by the old cold war rules.

    If they are unemployed and homeless then let them be independent and deal with problems on their own. The fuck.

    countries are not people.

    barsoap,

    No it’s called a sphere of influence

    You say that as if geopolitical realism was the truth to end all inquiry, the insight to end all history.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    your approach seems to be just deciding you want the world to be a certain way and ignoring all evidence to the contrary. You have to live in reality

    barsoap,

    Watch that Kraut video. It’s not my responsibility to educate you.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    that video is an hour and a half long. You’ve watched it and everything you said so far hasn’t been anything I haven’t heard before or consider worth hearing

    barsoap,

    Why should we still play the old war game? How do realists decide which country is a poker chip and which is a player (one area where US and European realists differ btw: In the European view, Russia is not a player)? What do you do if a country doesn’t want to be a poker chip? Can you really ignore internal forces, can it all be boiled down to power politics? Why stick to a theory that was completely blind-sided by the end of the cold war and after that argued to subsidise the east so that it can continue?

    That’s just the tip of the iceberg.

    usernamesaredifficul,

    we play the old game for the same reason we started in the first place because the major powers have the ability to demand concessions because of the power of their militaries and economies.

    Russia is a player because it has a vast army and nuclear weapons

    if Ukraine wants to not do as they are told by Russia they are more than welcome to fight them. America and the other powers involving themselves in that fight risks major war however also it has proved ruinously expensive to the actual populations of those countries.

    Internal politics only matter if they are backed up by something

    this theory wasn’t blindsided by the end of the cold war. At the end of the cold war Russia was weak from crisis (incidentally largely because the Ukrainian local government so badly fucked up running a power plant and the early stages of a disaster that all the money in the soviet union was required to clean up the mess) anyway when Russia was weak and eating itself they couldn’t enforce the rights they had because of their strength now they are strong again they can

    barsoap,

    It was western media that created the impression of an impending counter-offensive that would all but end the war, not anything from Ukraine’s armed forces as far as I know.

    Or from NATO generals. At least not as an overall theme, or after actually understanding the situation on the ground.

    I’d say western media recalled the likes of Operation Desert storm, generally “it’s not a war but a drubbing” NATO operations, then saw the Kharkiv counter-offensive, missed that the fast mechanised advance was preceded by slogging advances until a breakthrough was achieved, and then expected the same thing to happen against the Surovikin line. Ukraine simply does not have the capacity to employ NATO offensive doctrine, more or less “hit the opposing force so hard in the air that they’ll find themselves fighting a land war against air superiority on their whole territory”.

    And the Surovikin line which wasn’t even the main obstacle as now transpired Russians had positions in literally every single forest belt parallel to the trenches visible from space. And mines, mines literally everywhere, Ukraine turned towards IR imagining to figure out where to best go through them (mines heat up in the sun and are then very visible at dusk).

    Russia, of course, also announced the offensive failed the day it started but that was to be expected.

    PowerCrazy,

    What a coincidence, “shut up” is what I tell people who can’t stop talking about Ukraine and Russia.

    jackmarxist,
    @jackmarxist@hexbear.net avatar

    Honestly I’m just sick of hearing about it.

    JakeHimself,

    Why?

    very_poggers_gay,

    Could be because the dominant narrative is just people (mostly Americans) cheering for more men, women, and children to be forced into the meat grinder by the thousands, just so they (who are cheering from safety on the other side of the world) can feed their twisted sense of justice and pro-American/NATO and “freedom”/“democracy” delusions.

    JakeHimself,

    I don’t know anyone cheering for people to die. Everyone I know that supports Ukraine does so because they feel for the victims of the missiles launched by Russia at schools and homes.

    Your explanation seems very emotionally charged, which I understand. Can you give anything more concrete? I, and many others in this thread, are very out of the loop.

    very_poggers_gay,

    Everyone I know that supports Ukraine does so because they feel for the victims of the missiles launched by Russia at schools and homes.

    What does that support look like?

    I, and many others in this thread, are very out of the loop.

    Again, I have a hard time believing this is true. This is a war. People die by the hundreds of thousands, and eventually millions, in wars. Providing uncritical support (as most liberals and “Slava Ukraine” types do) for any side in a war is still encouraging more deaths on all sides of the conflict. It is not a Marvel movie or gritty political sci-fi thriller that so many people seem to think it is.

    The longer the war goes on, the more people will die or be displaced, and the more money from working class people will get funneled into the military industrial complex. Nobody outside of the MIC is benefitting from the death and despair of this war.

    Most discussions about the conflict outside of leftist spaces is just liberals and conservatives fantasizing about Russia getting weaker (i.e., its people dying) and America/NATO/“freedom” getting stronger. The rare person will acknowledge that Ukrainian men must die for the latter to be true, but the reality of those deaths is often minimized or even celebrated. As well, anyone who dissents is typically accused of being pro-Russia, a bot, or a paid shill.

    See this freak

    This is a top comment on the top post of /r/UkrainianConflict fantasizing about making a Marvel movie montage of a war crime, and other users lapping it up

    Or click on any new thread and see all the highly rated comments like this, lusting for further destruction

    It took like two minutes to find these examples, and there’s countless more on lemmy, reddit, and the like. It’s almost undoubtably worse on Twitter or Facebook too shrug-outta-hecks

    JakeHimself,

    The support looks like donating supplies to aid the victims of the bombings.

    Yes, people are dying and I don’t doubt that there are internet idiots enjoying “carnage”, but I’m still not hearing what else you think people should be doing. Are you suggesting that Ukraine should surrender? Are you saying Russia should stop? Maybe that everyone should stop supporting the Ukrainian government until they sort this out between themselves? What are you talking about? You’ve found examples of unreasonable people with unreasonable stances, but please provide useful information to those of us that touch grass.

    Blimp7990,

    deleted_by_author

  • Loading...
  • very_poggers_gay,

    I have the feeling you know exactly what I’m talking about. I’m referring to comments like this (and god forbid you see a discussion about the war on reddit, where they make up the majority and get the most updoots and golds from kind strangers!!!) who thirst for bloodshed; who’ve been propagandized to think they will benefit from continued bloodshed; and revel in the comfort of knowing they will never experience the violence they wish upon the people of Ukraine and Russia

    Blimp7990, (edited )

    deleted_by_author

  • Loading...
  • Egon,
    @Egon@hexbear.net avatar

    You’re a terrible person, I hope you one day experience the growth necessary to realise how embarrassing this post of yours is.

    Franzia,

    Is only war, why you hef to be mad?

    thecodemonk,

    The comment threads here are weird. Who, in their right mind, would ever support a country like Russia? It’s mind blowing.

    Gsus4,
    @Gsus4@feddit.nl avatar

    Tankies.

    Tankiedesantski,

    You rang?

    bidenicecream,

    Tankies.

    I am very smart very-intelligent

    Annakah69,

    Enjoy your servitude in the crumbling empire rat-salute-2

    ShimmeringKoi,
    @ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net avatar
    Stuka,

    Imagine being proud of a t34. Oof

    AntiOutsideAktion,
    @AntiOutsideAktion@hexbear.net avatar

    You named yourself after a Nazi dive bomber.

    ThereRisesARedStar,

    T34s were part of the army that defeated nazi Germany. Cope and seethe.

    marx_mentat,
    @marx_mentat@hexbear.net avatar

    Your username is literally stuka. Also, remember when Germany had their asses destroyed by the red army? That was funny.

    Stuka,

    Haha, you think I’m gonna defend nazis? Nah, they were worse than the soviets, but not by much. You tankied are about equivalent to neo nazis in my book

    ThereRisesARedStar,
    ThereRisesARedStar,

    Deride us as woke next.

    hrosts,

    Why would anyone do that? Wokeness is rad and cool, while tankies love to do fascist apologia, which is highly unwoke

    SlyBlue,
    hrosts,

    Non-sequitur, I have nothing to reply to

    AntiOutsideAktion,
    @AntiOutsideAktion@hexbear.net avatar

    Literally a direct reply to the exact thing you said