37
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 18 Mar 2025
37 points (95.1% liked)
World News
34719 readers
674 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
Doesn't look that sovereign to me, if the US can dictate their foreign policy, funded 9/10 of its media outlets and they pay for their entire military apparatus (with LOANS, no less). That sounds like a satellite state to me.
Anyway, you can keep plugging your ears and covering your eyes and pretending it hasn't been explained to you a hundred times that Russia doesn't need minerals, nor land, nor resources, but an assurance that nuclear capabilities aren't being deployed along its border. I don't mind deluded libs, y'all the ones burying the empire after all.
I mean if that was the entire point of the war wouldn't it still be a strategic failure considering the invasion prompted Finland to join NATO?
America pays for like 15% of Ukraine's military apparatus.
In terms of salaries, sure. In terms of ordinance, tho...
The US transfered almost the same amount of material as the entire Russian military budget each year of the conflict.
Ukraine is fighting for its sovereignty.
Russia's military concerns does not justify it's criminal invasion
https://chomsky.info/20220616/
The US is after the minerals within Ukraine. Russia has already gained the major resource of land. Both have interests to expand their sphere of influence, both have taken advantage of Ukraine for their own ends.
You can strawman all you want, but as a leftist I will continue to criticize the imperialism of every empire. It's not hard to be consistently anti-imperialist.
The largest imperial power in the world is the USA.
I agree
It's not hard to see the role played by NATO expansion and aggression.
When NATO deposed Gaddafi it proved it is not a defensive alliance. When it couped Ukraine and installed an ally it became an existential threat. How could Russia look at an aggressive military alliance expanding toward its border and not take precautions?
I agree, main reason I made the quote that long. That doesn't justify the invasion, especially since it only justified Europe's need for a defensive pact, one the US is quick to exploit which the quote mentions. A people fighting for sovereignty will get weapons to fight back by any means possible, which the US is exploiting for its own ends.
Russia was literally invaded three times and lost millions upon millions of lives because the border with Ukraine is indefensible. That's why Napoleon invaded Russia through it. It's why the Third Reich invaded Russia through it. And it's why Russia's national security requires Ukraine to be a neutral country that NATO is not operational in. What NATO was doing in Ukraine absolutely justifies Russia's actions. NATO simulated an invasion of Kaliningrad with Ukraine. It flew B-52s in exercises in Ukraine. It was literally building and exercising it's logistics chain to establish nuclear first-strike capabilities. That's been clear since the early 90s when Clinton duplicitously told Russia Ukraine would remain neutral while asking his own generals to draft a plan to include Ukraine in NATO. This is literally the definition of Russian national security. Ukraine needed to remain neutral and establishing a nuclear transnational military presence unaccountable to any sovereign nation or any nation's people with an ambition of nuclear first strike capabilities lead by the USA that explicitly and publicly reserves the right for a nuclear first strike is exactly the opposite of remaining neutral.
How to be consistently antiimperialist in any conflict: kill the yanks and their lackeys
Yeah, the state with the largest landmass by far in all of Eurasia desperately needs the land of a tiny state, more than it needs the manpower required to take it.
Absolutely deluded
Also, Chomsky has never seen a US war he couldn't find a way to justify. Even then, that entire quote is him listing all the times the US instigated this war and prevented peace. I wipe my ass with his opinions on what should've been done, he always seems to find a leftist sounding justification to follow the state department line.
If you think Chomsky has justified any US war you are delusional. And yes, Russia's interest is in expanding access to the Azov and Black Sea at the very least.
This is why we need understand imperialism in the Leninists sense and not in the liberal sense.
So, by this logic, Post-War Japan was not a sovereign state.
How a country must operate during wartime versus peace is extremely different. And the UK in WWII also issued bonds and took debt. Were they no longer sovereign?
That part of your argument is ridiculous. Ukraine is an independent nation with its own sovereignty and territorial authority.
Japan was a vassal of America post WW2, so the logic is correct.
It absolutely wasnt lmao, it was literally occupied. How is this hard for y'all?
What's more, long after occupation ceased on paper, the US had such an economic, military, and diplomatic stranglehold on Japan that they bailed out the US and killed their own economy in the process in the early 80s