You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
31 points
*

They started the whole conflict out of a desire to expand their arbitrary lines in the sand to include ukrainian territory.

Why do you think Russia invaded, exactly ? they started the whole conflict after decades of making NATO encroachment along their borders a clear red line and being very clear what would happen if it was crossed

The US still kept meddling in Ukraine (and other post-soviet states), with Russia making every effort short of war to try and stop that - like offering loans just as large as the IMF loans for example, except without asking for the batshit insane austerity measures the latter did

Then the CIA backed a far-right coup there in 2014, and much of the following years were spent with NATO financing and training nazi soldiers there in preparation of trying to take back Crimea, while breaking the Minsk agreements in the meantime (I’ll pass on the various atrocities and huge reframing of nazi criminals as national heroes in Ukraine there at the same period, since it’s barely related, but it is worth a mention too)

Now both Ukrainian and Russian people are dying. A peace deal would stop that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

I wonder what part of this is supposed to justify Russia’s indiscriminate bombing of civilian populations

permalink
report
parent
reply

Lolyou think this is “indiscriminate”? Fuck, you should’ve zeen Fallujah or Vietnam or Korea. Ukraine has so much infrastructure and housing left in perfectly usable conditions. One of my major issues at the beginning was that I expected Russia to be much more violent and have been very surprised at how little of the violence has been on non-combatants

permalink
report
parent
reply

Russia has definitely not engaged in total war.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

From what you wrote, do you have a major issue with, in your view, how little violence Russia has inflicted on civilians? Glad that you’re disappointed.

My point stands. All that blabber does not justify the acts of Russia.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

I wonder that too

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Are you suggesting that Russian aggression is justified because they demanded something of a sovereign nation which was refused?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Russia can cry about their red line all they want, but it wasn’t in the treaty. The Revolutions of 1989 made it clear Eastern Europeans weren’t interested in Russian control, the Balkans were unstable, and the Chechen & Georgian wars stoked fear in the former Soviet states. All NATO had to do was open their doors, and again, nothing in the treaty forbade it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points

nothing in the treaty forbade it.

“I’m not legally prohibited from doing this” is rarely a good argument

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I’m not sure there are any good arguments in geopolitics.

permalink
report
parent
reply

1989 Revolutions? Wholesale dismemberment of the USSR more like. And treaty didn’t say it. The Russians sure as fuck did.

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!worldnews@lemmy.ml

Create post

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

Community stats

  • 4.8K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 126K

    Comments