this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2023
335 points (98.3% liked)
World News
32628 readers
654 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Fun fact, they went to the Soviet Union too. Paperclip was very much mirrored by Osoaviakhim. So whatever point you're trying to make by bringing this up, I'm afraid it's very much a both sides thing. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make though. None of what you said makes the comparison I was responding to any less ridiculous. Hitler and his party, funnily enough, were not defined as fascists by protecting the sovereignty of Vichy France, not least because they didn't actually do it.
Thanks for at least confirming you're not operating in good faith. No, I think Putin has a variety of goals here that include securing a more defensible land route to the peninsula that Russia previously stole in 2014 and attempting to place a puppet (or at least friendly) regime in charge. That you're uncritically buying the justifications of a warmongering dictator is proof positive to me that you based your entire opinion here on "whatever the opposite of America is" as if it's a playground football game. I don't need to like how America acts to also not like how Russia acts.
I only agree that we shouldn't view Russia or Russians as fundamentally evil of dehumanize them with language like "orcs". But really... do you view Russia as a liberal democratic state? I'm sorry but are you out of your mind? And surely they are not led by ordinary people but by a class of oligarchs under the lead of the godfather of this mafia state.
Also you say you don't care about border disputes between countries. You're wrong that this is up to the people sharing this border. Legally that's a very ignorant statement as there are very good reasons that the UN member countries are extremely reluctant to accept any changing of borders, especially not by force. International law puts emphasis on stability of borders. Also it makes border conflicts every countries' business. So yes: Even as a Euro-American you're very much entitled to have an opinion about it and legally it's your countries' duty to have a stance on it. No one is on the sidelines here.
All liberal "democratic" states are ruled by a class of oligarchs/capitalists, and not by ordinary people. Why are you citing evidence that's perfectly compatible with a liberal "democracy" as if it was somehow at odds with it?
That might be the case in the US where capitalists have much more influence over election outcomes and politicians themselves are often part of dynasties that accumulated enormous wealth. This is however not comparable to many European countries. Sure, you have capitalists in all capitalist societies. But their direct influence on election results is much smaller and politicians are very often ordinary people and not obscenely rich or privileged by their ancestry.
A whole different aspect is that these ordinary people, once they came into power, lend their ears way too much to capitalist interests and the likes of lobbyists, often ignoring the problems and needs of ordinary people and focussing instead on catering to the industry.
The people could however not vote for these politicians if they realized that their policies thwart their own interests. If they fail to do so, it's their own fault that the conditions for the majority are not improving. How can you fix the stupidity?
Do you? So let's say the UK decided to funnel weapons in to Ireland to restart the Troubles and then sent tanks in to annex Donegal. Would you be similarly opposed to arming Ireland against a much larger and better-armed neighbour? After all it'd hugely expand the UK's exclusive economic zone at sea and significantly reduce the length of the border to defend against Ireland, it seems beneficial for Britain. I don't know about you, but I'd hope someone would back Ireland up in that situation.
I'm not
Good job Ukraine has had two elections since then huh
It is interesting how so many of Russia's neighbours have pro-Russian separatist movements that always seem to have Russian backing
What leverage do you think Ukraine's supporters actually have to prevent a peace? They'd stop supplying it weapons? Well you apparently want them to do that anyway. Presumably that's because you think Ukraine can negotiate peace without being armed enough to fight Russia. In which case these peace-blocking supporters have no leverage with which to block peace.
Of course they have even less leverage over Russia, which could end this war tomorrow by literally just fucking going home
I didn't claim to be unbiased in the slightest. I am openly pro-Ukraine here. Because I'm generally against countries invading their neighbours and killing hundreds of thousands in order to annex territory, no matter how beneficial it might be to the invader.
This is literally just American exceptionalism for people that don't like America. Other countries also do things. Russia has a track record of exactly this kind of thing.