163
Zelensky admits Ukraine does not have military strength to reclaim lost territories from Russia
(www.independent.co.uk)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2024
163 points (89.0% liked)
World News
33507 readers
695 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
Well, that’s certainly a perspective.
Really unclear how the US forced Russia to invade, you’ll have to explain that part I think.
I mean RAND published a whole paper on this that you can read, it's not like this stuff was hidden https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR3063.html
The war exists only because Russia's conditions for peace are not accepted. No NATO (or missile bases) in Ukraine. There was a very patient peace agenda by Russia, signed by the west and Ukraine btw, before SMO.
The war exists because Russia invaded. You can’t have a “peace agenda” or “conditions for peace” until someone started a war in the first place, and that was Russia.
The war only started in 2021 if you ignore the fact that fascist Nazi militias were shelling civilians and civilian infrastructure in eastern Ukraine for 7 years before Russia launched its SMO. There were two ceasefire agreements signed (Minsk 1 & Minsk 2) that these militias consistently violated. If you don't believe me, you're welcome to see for yourself. A French journalist documented this and spoke to residents about the ongoing conflict. CW: death and devastation.
Get ready to be told that Russia should just walk all their troops back and that'd be peace achieved (bombing in the Donbas doesn't count, apparently, because it's the good Nazis doing it), like a fucking toddler's concept of geopolitics.
History ended in 1991 and started up again 30 years later. Everything in between doesn't count.
I don't believe your position can be honest. It basically says all bar fights are started by the one throwing first punch, no matter what threats are made. All US media and CIA subterfuge to corrupt democracies is not done for the benefit of the democracies. War on Russia is largely a US war on its allies, and tolerance for the concept that Russia is not forced to defend its existence, or have red lines where peace can thrive, just shows how corrupt and fooling democracy can be. Not that Ukraine is a democracy.
Not forced, more goaded. This is the war the US wanted, but it didn’t want to be seen as the one who started it.
NATO expansion:
.
US-backed Maidan coup & fascist attacks on Eastern Ukraine:
Love the “you made me do this to you” energy here, very progressive stance of believing that sometimes abusers just have to hit people, and there’s truly nothing that can be done about it.
The geopolitics of nuclear powers as an interpersonal relationship. Peak Marvel brain.
I've also seen this analogy: "Russia had no business in Ukraine, just as US had no business in Afghanistan". Apparently coming from someone who couldn't find Ukraine on the map and had no idea how much history and culture these two countries share
Yeah, analogies are hard when you take them as literally as possible.
Gringos and their fucking victim complex I swear. Y'all just got done toppling Syria and their people are already being stoned to death in the street when they're not being bombed. A few years ago you did it to Haiti, and they're starving to death, like you did it to Peru, and you did it to Libya, where there are slave markets now thanks to y'all.
So this is less an abusive partner insisting it's your fault and more a motherfucker who's killed hundreds waving a knife inches from your face insisting you're a menace for clocking him. The fact that the US launders its provocations through their client states doesn't mean the rest of the world is as stupid as westerners to buy it. We're not invested in empire, so we don't have to close our eyes and pretend we're the good guys in this.
Wow, I had no idea I personally intervened in Syria, Myanmar, Haiti, and Libya, I must have a ton of airline rewards and severe memory issues!
Don’t sins-of-the-father me if you don’t even know where I am, thanks in advance.
And the Olympic gold for comically missing the point by getting strangely defensive goes to...
I know libs don't do it personally, they limit themselves to cheering on genocides from their armchair and stamping down on people who want to stop their imperialist governments
Have you considered that doing an imperialism under a non-western flag is still doing an imperialism?
Russia, if given its druthers, would be imperialist, but since it presently doesn’t, it presently isn’t. Putin tried to join NATO once, to join the imperialist club, but that was rejected, because the US wanted Russia Balkanized & plundered instead. Russia has figured out it’s better off allying with Global South countries than attempting imperialist adventures upon them. And this war has accelerated that allyship.
It’s only imperialism if it comes from the West, otherwise it’s just sparkling being an asshole to your neighbors isn’t a winning argument.
It seems pretty clear you just don't know what imperialism is full stop.
In the present stage of history, yes. No country other than Japan or the western ones have managed to rise to the status of being imperialist powers. The reason is simple. The powers which became imperialist first delayed the development of the rest of the world by literal centuries, preventing any other people from becoming imperialist. Japan happened to escape this fate by geographical luck and developed early, allowing it to join the ranks of the imperialists.
There is a reason why the most dominant/advanced capitalist countries today are still the same ones that were advanced over a 100 years ago.
This has literally nothing to do with imperialism, which is the system by which a handful of the most advanced capitalist countries have consumed unparalleled sums of human labor from the whole of humanity for centuries on end.
It’s not exclusive to the West. Japan did it for sixty years, until it was made a vassal of the US, which it still is today[1][2].
I’m not sure what the point of this considering that I am specifically calling you out for refusing to admit Russia is doing an imperialism and your deflection is to say that Japan did an imperialism. Is that supposed to make Russia all clear to do an imperialism?
It seems you didn’t read what I linked to, so I’ll copypasta:
Still hinging literally everything on Donbas not being externally caused I see. As long as you cover up interference in other countries, it’s fine to use that as pretext to invade and do whatever you want.
So Donbas was externally caused because... we should trust you that it was?
But Ukraine's 2014 coup wasn't externally caused because... it was different from all the other times the US deposed a government, since this time they put congresspeople like John McCain on the ground? Even US, anti-Russian sources recognize it as fact.
At this point you have to be deliberately dodging the evidence to not recognize what's going on.
The very fact that you treat imperialism like an action and not a system shows that you don't have even the minimum possible of understanding of what it is.
It's imperialism if it has the characteristics of imperialism, wishing it really hard because that's a word that would be an amazing gotcha isn't enough. Imperialism is, to really overly simplify it: the extraction of surplus value, often in the form of labor through financial instruments from one country to another. Russia's position in the world is not that of imperialist extraction (except in the participation prior to the sanctions in the western financial sector) since capital was still consolidating its power over the working class in Russia, given that its capitalist system (another western imposition) wasn't developed enough to do so, and it was still mostly an export economy.
Now, I eagerly await for the flat-earth level analysis of "but I see it and I think it is imperialist".
I mean, we agree, Russia intends to exploit Ukraine’s natural gas reserves in the regions they are occupying, which definitely meets the definition you set out so…
Unless you’re insisting that Russia is going to just give that territory up after all this, despite them claiming they have a hereditary right to it all, because they just really wouldn’t want to accidentally profit off taking over their neighbors territory in which case, it sounds like the “flat earth level analysis” is coming from inside the house.
More deeply unserious nonsense.
As opposed to accusing someone on the Internet of personally overthrowing multiple governments, which actually very serious and definitely not nonsense…
This is also missing the fact that Russia and Ukraine already had a peace agreement, the Minsk II accords. Which Ukraine promptly violated by bombing Donbas for 5 years and killing upwards of 14 thousand civilians.
I’m sorry but those happened before the beginning of history, which started on February 24, 2022.
Jesus Fucking Gish Gallop Christ.
Nobody forced Russia to invade another sovereign nation. If anything it goes to show that being in NATO keeps you safe from Russia (just look at the baltic states). If Putin and/or Russia's goal was to stop NATO expansion this war already did the opposite.
All of those are Western sources, and most of them are well-known, MB/FC-blessed sources.
Next you’re going to tell me that NATO is a defensive alliance.