• halfelfhalfreindeer@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    No, it’s not just the taxes, though that’s obviously a component of it. A quick google search will lead you to find that they are obligated by law to directly contribute to Russia’s military efforts by registering its draft-eligible staff, turning over information relevant to the war, assisting in the delivery of military equipment, and providing physical infrastructure, among other things.

    Ukrainian or not, this isn’t just “oh well you’re kind of indirectly supporting the war by funding the government”. It is a very direct form of involvement.

    • Steeve@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s waay more efficient for you to link evidence of claims you’ve made than for everyone who comes across your comment to do a “quick google search”

    • rist097@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Can you give me an article, because I could not find anything googling, maybe I didn’t put the right search terms. I found a website under the domain boycottrussia.info, but a website like this I can hardly consider objective. Keep in mind there is a lot of disinformation on the internet, and one should be careful using references from both the Russian and Ukranian governments and their allies.

      Applying the same standard, should we boycott also all companies having business in Saudi Arabia, USA, and other countries that are involved in war efforts?

        • rist097@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Prime journalism we have here, pulling information out of ass:

          • “according to UK officials”,
          • "In its latest update … workers are most likely … ",
          • “The MoD update said … authorities are highly likely threatening”,
          • “One company has reportedly been set a target of 30 volunteers”,
          • "The move will likely primarily affect … ",
          • “This measure is highly likely at least tacitly endorsed by Moscow mayor …”,
          • "Russia is thought to have suffered around 200,000 casualties … "

          Didn’t name any sources, just vaguely UK officials (could be anyone). Every other word is likely, meaning they are just speculating.

          Complete bullshit on that article I have to say.