610
submitted 1 year ago by NightOwl@lemm.ee to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] GivingEuropeASpook@hexbear.net 15 points 1 year ago

Ukraine escalated by violating the ceasefire.

Which one(s)? There were so many from 2014 onwards that I lost track. I'm always skeptical anytime one side gets all the blame for violating a ceasefire.

If Russia wanted to ensure the safety of the people of Donbas (which is a big if tbf), what should they have done differently, at any point leading up to the conflict?

If it really is about the people of Donbas and not annexing the land itself, they could have done what every country is supposed to do when the safety of people in a region is jeopardized – open their borders to refugees and asylum seekers. It would piss off Ukraine, but they could have just been like "Come across the border and we'll set you up with a Russian passport".

[-] Zuzak@hexbear.net 20 points 1 year ago

Which one(s)? There were so many from 2014 onwards that I lost track. I'm always skeptical anytime one side gets all the blame for violating a ceasefire.

Minsk II was the one I was referring to, but it's a fair point.

If it really is about the people of Donbas and not annexing the land itself, they could have done what every country is supposed to do when the safety of people in a region is jeopardized – open their borders to refugees and asylum seekers. It would piss off Ukraine, but they could have just been like "Come across the border and we'll set you up with a Russian passport".

Ok, let me rephrase that then. Do you believe that the people have Donbas have a right to self-determination and representation in government, and that that right would include having some possible roadmap to joining Russia, or should they be forced to either go along with whatever the new government wanted or abandon their homes and flee the country? Because I think that a lot of this mess could've be avoided if Ukraine had simply given them a referendum, but instead they banned opposition parties, which says to me that they knew how the people there would vote.

This is like saying that the US should've invaded Cuba when they started taking nationalizing property instead of doing what the other person said and accepting refugees and asylum seekers. There's always another way besides war and violence.

[-] Annakah69@hexbear.net 25 points 1 year ago

There isn't always another way besides violence. The German invasion of the USSR was a war of extermination. Laying down and dieing is not morally superior.

Fair enough. If you're defending yourself, then I suppose that's true. Which is incidentally another reason Ukraine has the right to defend themselves.

[-] sharedburdens@hexbear.net 24 points 1 year ago

I don't think the US dumping tons of weapons is actually helping defend themselves, it just seems to be getting conscripts killed. If they had actually negotiated after that karkiv offensive maybe you could have made the case?

[-] VentraSqwal@links.dartboard.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Well it's keeping them having some sovereignty over their own country instead of it falling in 3 days like everyone thought. Does Ukraine want to lose a bunch of their territory? That's the question and considering how hard they're fighting, it doesn't look like they do. If the average Ukrainian wants the ability to defend and keep their home, then I want that for them, too.

And war is unpredictable. Maybe Russia will lose the appetite for war soon, or maybe Ukraine will want to negotiate (but I'm sure they want to take what they can before then). Winter is coming.

[-] sharedburdens@hexbear.net 13 points 1 year ago

Does Ukraine want to lose a bunch of their territory?

It already has, and not in the way you think. In 2013 Ukraine had a president unwilling to take an IMF deal, and opted for the Russian one. The maidan coup happened and now they have a president who does whatever the money men want.

Even now there's a website up for openly privatizing Ukraine, and the ultimate outcome in a NATO victory explicitly is going to be the privatization of the breadbasket of Europe.

I mean, ya, the IMF sucks and further privatization of Europe is bad. But that doesn't mean you have to support Russia while they bomb and kill civilians or make fun of Ukrainian citizens for trying to defend their home and their lives.

[-] sharedburdens@hexbear.net 6 points 1 year ago

The extent of "support" for Russia has been extremely critical on hexbear. You all just say that anyone not falling over themselves to slava ukraini is a Russia supporting Putin bot.

[-] VentraSqwal@links.dartboard.social 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Not in any of the threads that hit the defederated servers at least. I've seen maybe two people from hexbear ever criticize Russia or mention something they did bad, while everyone else constantly shits on and memes on Ukraine and their defense effort. You guys say you do, but don't actually do it.

EDIT: I meant to say *federates severs.

[-] sharedburdens@hexbear.net 6 points 1 year ago

Well you've been on lemmy for 3 months, and just started running into us in only the last month, meanwhile we've been chatting and having struggle sessions about this type of shit for years to various degrees. (especially since 22)

Ever since the illegal dissolution of the USSR, Russia has been a capitalist shithole, the treatment of LGBT people there sucks. They are what we made them, politically.

You construe a lack of support for Ukraine with 'shitting' on them. I want to see the US drop support for Ukraine because it would mean that people like you and I stop dying on a daily basis for lines on a map. There have been many chances for a negotiated end, and from where I'm sitting the US went out of its way to blow those opportunities.

[-] marx_mentat@hexbear.net 4 points 1 year ago

The US did blow those opportunities because the people who own the US government profit wildly from this conflict. With no Afghanistan, they need another endless war to fill their wallets up with.

[-] sharedburdens@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago

As always, death to america

No worries, they're getting the war with China all queued up as we speak.

[-] marx_mentat@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago

Yeah good luck with that lmao

Please someone make it end lol

[-] marx_mentat@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago

Have you considered that maybe that's because of the threads that you pay attention to? Step outside of the Ukraine war stuff if you want to actually test that hypothesis of yours.

[-] marx_mentat@hexbear.net 6 points 1 year ago

If Russia was after lives they would be bombing the shit out of Ukrainian infrastructure. They currently hold the territories where the people who were being bombed by the Ukrainian government live.

They have been bombing tons of infrastructure. They've been hitting all over cities, hospitals, dams and reservoirs, etc. They're probably not going to bomb the places they currently control for obvious reasons but that doesn't mean they're not hitting places with civilians they don't currently control.

[-] marx_mentat@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago

I mean they haven't. You should look at what the US did in Iraq for a comparison.

load more comments (26 replies)
load more comments (37 replies)
load more comments (38 replies)
this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2023
610 points (94.1% liked)

World News

32328 readers
660 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS