The fact that Putin is the one who started this war? This war wouldnât be a thing if a) Russia didnât annex Crimea, b) Russia didnât send âtotally not Russian troopsâ into Donbas and c) Russia didnât do a full invasion of Ukraine. Not to mention this war would be over tomorrow if Putin withdrew his troops.
Putin started this and Putin can end this, itâs all his choice.
So⊠any idea why âPutinâ supposedly did all that?
Iâm not asking for justifications. Itâs just so weird to me that people apparently think that
Putin does what he wants in Russia as if he was an absolute monarch. (Yes, the elections were iffy, but he has a lot of support in Russia and the Duma still exists)
Putin doesnât need any reason to make Russia do things. (Nations donât do shit without reason)
And the moment Iâm trying to understand the situation a bit better, Iâm called a Putin troll, a fascist and get downvoted into oblivion.
So⊠any idea why âPutinâ supposedly did all that?
Euromaidan. Russian-aligned leader got kicked and in its place was taken by a pro-EU government. Putin lost control over Ukraine and that was unacceptable to him.
Putin does what he wants in Russia as if he was an absolute monarch. (Yes, the elections were iffy, but he has a lot of support in Russia and the Duma still exists)
But he does? His opposition either magically disappears or suddenly donât qualify for the election. The other âsuitableâ electoral candidates exists solely to keep the up the appearance of democracy. The Duma also exists to keep up appearances. And the reason Putin has a lot of support is because he has manufactured consent through the state owned media. Heâs also sowing indifference in the opposition by publicly eliminating opponents to indicate that this is what happens if you oppose him. He is ruling unopposed.
Putin doesnât need any reason to make Russia do things. (Nations donât do shit without reason)
What do you mean? Trump is literally slapping tariffs on its neighbors and nobody is stopping him. If you have an autocratic leader the state does what the leader wants. Putin wants to regain control of Ukraine and thatâs the only reason the Russian state needs.
Euromaidan. Russian-aligned leader got kicked and in its place was taken by a pro-EU government
âPro-EUâ is one way of putting it. Ukraine became an economic and militaristic threat to Russia.
Putin lost control over Ukraine and that was unacceptable to him.
Sorry, this kind of narrative is again way too much âgreat man theoryâ for my tastes.
But he does? His opposition either magically disappears or suddenly donât qualify for the election.
Yes, itâs a very obvious example of power politics in electoral politics. But there are still generals and ministers surrounding him. Putin is acting in the name of a sovereign nation. Individualising his goals and behaviors (acting as if itâs the whims of a person) is not helping if you want to understand the situation.
What do you mean? Trump is literally slapping tariffs on its neighbors and nobody is stopping him.
And there are reasons for him to do so. Itâs a strategy to further his goals. Iâm not claiming that the strategy is good or that I align with the goals, but the are there and itâs important not to lose track of them.
Putin wants to regain control of Ukraine and thatâs the only reason the Russian state needs.
Imperialism meaning to extend the power of a nation for its own benefit beyond its borders. This can be in militaristic nature by invasion, but also in economic nature via economical warfare.
Once you accept that definition, you see that the west is an imperialist player, too (otherwise, the US dropping out of Ukraine wouldnât be such a big issue).
I agree that Russia is imperialist and I disagree with their goals, as they disalign with mine. But I disagree with the westâs imperialist goals, too. In the end the Ukrainian and Russian people are pawns in the imperialist games of nations, which I canât condone.
If Russia loses, Ukraineâs economy will be so crippled and its population will be so decimated that it has no other choice than to take credit and be exploited from European companies. It will be like what happened in Greece, but 100 times worse. Selensky will be ok, as heâll most likely get some position at some board, but in any case: the Ukrainian people (the people whose interests are most aligned with mine) will lose in any case.
Considering the purpose of Euromaidan thatâs arguably the most reasonable way to put it if youâre willing to view the events in good faith
But there are still generals and ministers surrounding him.
What happened to Prigozhin after he decided to oppose Putin? Or all the oligarchs who were Putins allies but didnât agree with the invasion? Youâre quick to throw shade at Euromaidan but then act completely oblivious when it comes to Putin leading Russia.
Once you accept that definition, you see that the west is an imperialist player, too (otherwise, the US dropping out of Ukraine wouldnât be such a big issue).
The US dropping out isnât a big issue because of economics issues, itâs because of militaristic reasons as in the US is cutting military aid. Ukraine will worry about the economy when they no longer have to worry about their independence and the only way they get to keep their independence is if they get military aid.
I agree that Russia is imperialist and I disagree with their goals, as they disalign with mine. But I disagree with the westâs imperialist goals, too. In the end the Ukrainian and Russian people are pawns in the imperialist games of nations, which I canât condone.
And why are they pawns in an imperialistic game? Because Russia meddled in Ukrainian affairs. Would I want Ukraine to be truly independent? Yes. But thanks to Russia that is not a possibility. Had Russia not meddled Ukraine would have a far more neutral position on the world stage.
Now Ukraine either ends up under the iron thumb of Russia (much like Belarus) or Ukraine ends up economically dependent on the EU. Of the two choices IMO itâs pretty clear which is a more favorable outcome.
Considering the purpose of Euromaidan thatâs arguably the most reasonable way to put it if youâre willing to view the events in good faith
I disagree. Iâm far from an expert on Euromaidan, but from what I gathered, the perspective of the Donbas is widely ignored by most western media. I only managed to find articles in German, so youâll have to excuse me, but if youâre interested, youâll probably find a way to translate those:
Those articles suggest that the Euromaidan was not only a âpro EUâ thing, but can be understood as an attempt of ultranationalist Ukrainians to infiltrate the Ukrainian government. The same journalist said in an interview (sorry, in German as well) that she interviewed pro Maidan activists in 2014 and that she canât imagine that the rebellion was this coordinated without the possibility of outside forces supplying training and resources to the combatants.
What happened to Prigozhin after he decided to oppose Putin? Or all the oligarchs who were Putinâs allies but didnât agree with the invasion? Youâre quick to throw shade at Euromaidan but then act completely oblivious when it comes to Putin leading Russia.
Sorry if I failed to make my point clear. My point isnât that Putin isnât an autocrat. My point is that Putin is acting as a stateâs sovereign. Heâs not acting out of his private interest, but out of the interest of a nation.
The US dropping out isnât a big issue because of economics issues, itâs because of militaristic reasons as in the US is cutting military aid.
Never said that it was.
Ukraine will worry about the economy when they no longer have to worry about their independence and the only way they get to keep their independence is if they get military aid.
Yeah, the independence of the Ukrainian state. I donât think that the interests of the Ukrainian state align with the Ukrainian people. Especially considering that the latter are currently dying in the name of the former. And if the former gets its âindependenceâ, it will have done so at an incredible cost of human lives. And I doubt that all the debt from military aid (those arenât âpresentsâ from the west) will lead to fulfilling lives for Ukraineâs population in the future.
Yes, the âbad guysâ are bad. But the âgood guysâ donât act out of the kindness of their hearts, either.
And why are they pawns in an imperialistic game? Because Russia meddled in Ukrainian affairs. Would I want Ukraine to be truly independent? Yes. But thanks to Russia that is not a possibility. Had Russia not meddled Ukraine would have a far more neutral position on the world stage.
Their âpawn-nessâ started way before 2022, when NATO did their sable-rattling in Ukraine. They canât afford a neutral position. Just like Taiwan canât and Vietnam or Cuba couldnât.
I disagree. Iâm far from an expert on Euromaidan, but from what I gathered, the perspective of the Donbas is widely ignored by most western media. I only managed to find articles in German, so youâll have to excuse me, but if youâre interested, youâll probably find a way to translate those:
Iâm not ignoring the counter-protests in the east. To my knowledge most of the ones that happened during Euromaidan either had people paid to âprotestâ or they could barely get people together to protest. Most of the eastern protests happened after Euromaidan and considering how quickly Russia jumped into those regions I wouldnât be surprised if they were a front to destabilize those regions.
Those articles suggest that the Euromaidan was not only a âpro EUâ thing, but can be understood as an attempt of ultranationalist Ukrainians to infiltrate the Ukrainian government. The same journalist said in an interview (sorry, in German as well) that she interviewed pro Maidan activists in 2014 and that she canât imagine that the rebellion was this coordinated without the possibility of outside forces supplying training and resources to the combatants.
Iâm also not ignoring the influence of nationalists and ultranationalists in Euromaidan, however it doesnât change the nature of the protest because it started as protest against not signing the EU deal and it ended with a pro-EU government (and not an ultranationalist government). The ultranationalists actually started losing popularity the moment Euromaidan ended and over the years theyâve been slowly been rooted out from where-ever they dug into.
Sorry if I failed to make my point clear. My point isnât that Putin isnât an autocrat. My point is that Putin is acting as a stateâs sovereign. Heâs not acting out of his private interest, but out of the interest of a nation.
When you have an autocratic leader the state becomes an extension of their will. They can use the state for the interest of the nation or they can use the state for their own interests. I donât consider myself so well versed in Putinomics to know when Putin is acting out of self-interest and when Putin is acting in the interest of the Russian nation. If you can somehow tell the difference, good for you. I personally donât see how the war is in the interest of Russia (the nation). Sending your young people into the meat grinder is not in the interest of the nation (Ukranians on the front will tell you that Russia just keeps sending troops wave after wave straight into machinegun fire). Not retrieving your wounded is not in the interest of the nation. People struggling to put food on the table is not in the interest of the nation. I could keep going on about things that donât affect the average Russian but I think Iâve made my point how this war is by no means in the interest of the nation, Russian people are also suffering because of this senseless war that Putin could end at any moment.
Yeah, the independence of the Ukrainian state. I donât think that the interests of the Ukrainian state align with the Ukrainian people. Especially considering that the latter are currently dying in the name of the former. And if the former gets its âindependenceâ, it will have done so at an incredible cost of human lives. And I doubt that all the debt from military aid (those arenât âpresentsâ from the west) will lead to fulfilling lives for Ukraineâs population in the future.
Yes, the âbad guysâ are bad. But the âgood guysâ donât act out of the kindness of their hearts, either.
A completely irrelevant point considering this discussion started with the statement that this war wouldnât even happen if not for Russia. People wouldnât be losing their lives if Russia never invaded in the first place. Military aid wouldnât be necessary because there would be nobody to defend from. It all comes down to the fact that none of this would have happened if Russia hadnât started it.
Their âpawn-nessâ started way before 2022, when NATO did their sable-rattling in Ukraine. They canât afford a neutral position. Just like Taiwan canât and Vietnam or Cuba couldnât.
Iâve been giving you the benefit of the doubt up to this point, but this is where Iâm just going to call you a Russian propagandist because youâre either deliberately or ignorantly presenting Russian talking points. There is no NATO saber-rattling. NATO does not expand unless the country in question wants NATO to expand. Finland and Sweden are prime examples. NATO wouldâve loved for those 2 countries to join, especially during the cold war. Bases literally in striking distance from Leningrad and Moscow? If it was up to NATO thatâs 100% expansion. But it wasnât. Finland had Finlandization and Sweden didnât join out of solidarity for Finland. Even after the cold war Finland and Sweden didnât want to join NATO until Russia invaded Ukraine.
As for Ukraine. You can look up the polls, Ukraine didnât want to join NATO until Russia annexed Crimea, then within a matter of months the sentiment went from âI donât want to join NATOâ to âI want to join NATOâ.
And for NATO itself, NATO was probably on the verge of dissolution before the Russian invasion. When Trump started talking about stepping out of NATO other countries started questioning if NATO is even necessary anymore. Russian invasion is what has reinvigorated NATO. As with the last two points, it always ends up coming back to Russia being a fucking shithead to its neighbors.
And if we get back to 2014, when all of this started, it didnât start because Ukraine wanted to join NATO. It started because Ukraine wanted to join the EU. So NATO isnât even the reason this is happening.
Now, feel free to take your Russian talking points and fuck off.
To my knowledge most of the ones that happened during Euromaidan either had people paid to âprotestâ or they could barely get people together to protest.
Sorry, that just reeks of propaganda to me. Donezk has a distinct national identity from before it was declared to be a part of Ukraine. Additionally, the region came under economic pressure through the talks between Kiew and Europe, which would explain why there would be protests erupting in 2014. Stating that these protestors were paid is a highly spuriops claim without sources.
The ultranationalists actually started losing popularity the moment Euromaidan ended and over the years theyâve been slowly been rooted out from where-ever they dug into.
When was that supposed to happen? Back in 2022, Selensky spoke at the Greek parliament, accompanied by the Azov battalion. Since you accuse me of spouting propaganda: this claim seems like propaganda to me, as well.
I personally donât see how the war is in the interest of Russia (the nation).
Russia wants to assert its status as a super power in a world where the US donât allow for other super powers beside them. I thought it was well established that Russia has imperialistic interests, wasnât it?
(Ukranians on the front will tell you that Russia just keeps sending troops wave after wave straight into machinegun fire).
Ignoring the fact that what youâre going to hear from Ukrainian soldiers will be heavily filtered by Ukraineâs department of defense: AFAIK, Thatâs not (or no longer) Russiaâs strategy. Theyâre currently very slow and methodical in kettling in their military targets. Ukraine is currently the one who puts their soldiers in the meat grinder by not evacuating Russiaâs targets after they are considered to be lost.
Not retrieving your wounded is not in the interest of the nation. People struggling to put food on the table is not in the interest of the nation.
Yeah, thatâs a good deterrent for war. So why do you think the war is still going? Because Putin is evil? I just donât buy that childish logic which goes against any serious political analysis of anything.
BTW: Every state considers it justified to send outsits population into a war to secure its status as a sovereign. To a state thatâs currently at war, human lives are nothing but a kind of resource to be used to reduce the enemyâs (human) resource. Thatâs what a war is. No matter if youâre Putin, Selensky or Wilhelm II.
A completely irrelevant point considering this discussion started with the statement that this war wouldnât even happen if not for Russia.
Maybe, if you consider my point on the Ukrainian people (that should only give you context why Iâm skeptical of Selensky). But the fact that the âgood guysâ are no angels definetly has something to do why âPutin just wonât stopâ.
Iâve been giving you the benefit of the doubt up to this point, but this is where Iâm just going to call you a Russian propagandist because youâre either deliberately or ignorantly presenting Russian talking points.
Ukraine has beefed up their military substantially between 2014 and 2020. That didnât happen without the westâs help. And NATO is no stranger in involving itself outside its stated goals as a âdefense treatyâ (See: Kosovo war). I also donât get how Swedenâs and Finlandâs joining of NATO has anything to to with whether or not NATO provoked Russia. It is however a great example how NATO is used as an imperialist tool by its members, when you look at what Erdogan got out of Sweden joining NATO.
Youâre accusing me of repeating Russiaâs propaganda, Iâm accusing you of repeating NATOâs propaganda. But at least I know that you shouldnât trust either imperialist.
Sorry, that just reeks of propaganda to me. Donezk has a distinct national identity from before it was declared to be a part of Ukraine. Additionally, the region came under economic pressure through the talks between Kiew and Europe, which would explain why there would be protests erupting in 2014. Stating that these protestors were paid is a highly spuriops claim without sources.
When was that supposed to happen? Back in 2022, Selensky spoke at the Greek parliament, accompanied by the Azov battalion. Since you accuse me of spouting propaganda: this claim seems like propaganda to me, as well.
Another Russian talking point. Feel free to show me how Azov was still an ultranationalist entity in 2022.
Russia wants to assert its status as a super power in a world where the US donât allow for other super powers beside them. I thought it was well established that Russia has imperialistic interests, wasnât it?
I guess youâre capable of telling the difference between Russiaâs and Putins imperialistic interest, right? Iâm going to stick with itâs Putins imperialistic interest, not Russian. And heâs doing a fabulous job by showing how his army was incapable of doing large scale invasions and his high tech arsenal canât beat decades old western tech, all an excellent showing how the only super power Russia has is its insane amount people they can throw in the grinder.
Ignoring the fact that what youâre going to hear from Ukrainian soldiers will be heavily filtered by Ukraineâs department of defense: AFAIK, Thatâs not (or no longer) Russiaâs strategy. Theyâre currently very slow and methodical in kettling in their military targets. Ukraine is currently the one who puts their soldiers in the meat grinder by not evacuating Russiaâs targets after they are considered to be lost.
Iâm not ignoring that fact. I know that anything making Ukraine look bad wonât come through the Ukrainian filter. I have no reason to think theyâd filter Russia doing something incredibly stupid. Also source on Russia no longer putting their soldiers in the meat grinder (I guess technically theyâre not, theyâre now throwing Koreans into the grinder) and source Ukraine putting their soldiers in the meat grinder?
Yeah, thatâs a good deterrent for war. So why do you think the war is still going? Because Putin is evil? I just donât buy that childish logic which goes against any serious political analysis of anything.
So why is the war still going on?
BTW: Every state considers it justified to send outsits population into a war to secure its status as a sovereign.
Okay, thatâs justification for Ukraine to send its people into war considering their sovereignty is in danger. Whats the justification for Russia considering Ukraine isnât interest in taking over Russia?
Maybe, if you consider my point on the Ukrainian people (that should only give you context why Iâm skeptical of Selensky). But the fact that the âgood guysâ are no angels definetly has something to do why âPutin just wonât stopâ.
You just justified Ukraine using its people defending the sovereignty of Ukraine so your point about the Ukrainian people is moot because they wouldnât be needed to throw their lives away if there wasnât a war.
Ukraine has beefed up their military substantially between 2014 and 2020. That didnât happen without the westâs help.
Which ONCE AGAIN wouldnât have been necessary if not for Russian meddling. For fuck sake how many times do I need to repeat this same point over and over and over.
And NATO is no stranger in involving itself outside its stated goals as a âdefense treatyâ (See: Kosovo war).
And Kosovo was bullshit thing to use NATO for.
I also donât get how Swedenâs and Finlandâs joining of NATO has anything to to with whether or not NATO provoked Russia.
That is an example of NATO not expanding when NATO wants to expand, which is usually the kind of bullshit argument Russian trolls make when they talk about NATO saber-rattling.
It is however a great example how NATO is used as an imperialist tool by its members, when you look at what Erdogan got out of Sweden joining NATO.
Example of imperialism? The great imperialist nation of Turkey? Thatâs not an example of NATO being used as imperialist tool. Do you even know what imperialism means? fuck it, Iâm not commenting more on that, thatâs just beyond my capacity to handle stupidity.
Youâre accusing me of repeating Russiaâs propaganda, Iâm accusing you of repeating NATOâs propaganda. But at least I know that you shouldnât trust either imperialist.
Kinda a weird accusation considering you have literally given zero examples of me using NATO propaganda, unless you think everything I say is NATO propaganda. Also weird to claim you know to not trust either imperialistic entity but literally present Russian propaganda as your argument.
The fact that Putin is the one who started this war? This war wouldnât be a thing if a) Russia didnât annex Crimea, b) Russia didnât send âtotally not Russian troopsâ into Donbas and c) Russia didnât do a full invasion of Ukraine. Not to mention this war would be over tomorrow if Putin withdrew his troops.
Putin started this and Putin can end this, itâs all his choice.
So⊠any idea why âPutinâ supposedly did all that?
Iâm not asking for justifications. Itâs just so weird to me that people apparently think that
And the moment Iâm trying to understand the situation a bit better, Iâm called a Putin troll, a fascist and get downvoted into oblivion.
Euromaidan. Russian-aligned leader got kicked and in its place was taken by a pro-EU government. Putin lost control over Ukraine and that was unacceptable to him.
But he does? His opposition either magically disappears or suddenly donât qualify for the election. The other âsuitableâ electoral candidates exists solely to keep the up the appearance of democracy. The Duma also exists to keep up appearances. And the reason Putin has a lot of support is because he has manufactured consent through the state owned media. Heâs also sowing indifference in the opposition by publicly eliminating opponents to indicate that this is what happens if you oppose him. He is ruling unopposed.
What do you mean? Trump is literally slapping tariffs on its neighbors and nobody is stopping him. If you have an autocratic leader the state does what the leader wants. Putin wants to regain control of Ukraine and thatâs the only reason the Russian state needs.
âPro-EUâ is one way of putting it. Ukraine became an economic and militaristic threat to Russia.
Sorry, this kind of narrative is again way too much âgreat man theoryâ for my tastes.
Yes, itâs a very obvious example of power politics in electoral politics. But there are still generals and ministers surrounding him. Putin is acting in the name of a sovereign nation. Individualising his goals and behaviors (acting as if itâs the whims of a person) is not helping if you want to understand the situation.
And there are reasons for him to do so. Itâs a strategy to further his goals. Iâm not claiming that the strategy is good or that I align with the goals, but the are there and itâs important not to lose track of them.
Imperialism meaning to extend the power of a nation for its own benefit beyond its borders. This can be in militaristic nature by invasion, but also in economic nature via economical warfare.
Once you accept that definition, you see that the west is an imperialist player, too (otherwise, the US dropping out of Ukraine wouldnât be such a big issue).
I agree that Russia is imperialist and I disagree with their goals, as they disalign with mine. But I disagree with the westâs imperialist goals, too. In the end the Ukrainian and Russian people are pawns in the imperialist games of nations, which I canât condone.
If Russia loses, Ukraineâs economy will be so crippled and its population will be so decimated that it has no other choice than to take credit and be exploited from European companies. It will be like what happened in Greece, but 100 times worse. Selensky will be ok, as heâll most likely get some position at some board, but in any case: the Ukrainian people (the people whose interests are most aligned with mine) will lose in any case.
Considering the purpose of Euromaidan thatâs arguably the most reasonable way to put it if youâre willing to view the events in good faith
What happened to Prigozhin after he decided to oppose Putin? Or all the oligarchs who were Putins allies but didnât agree with the invasion? Youâre quick to throw shade at Euromaidan but then act completely oblivious when it comes to Putin leading Russia.
The US dropping out isnât a big issue because of economics issues, itâs because of militaristic reasons as in the US is cutting military aid. Ukraine will worry about the economy when they no longer have to worry about their independence and the only way they get to keep their independence is if they get military aid.
And why are they pawns in an imperialistic game? Because Russia meddled in Ukrainian affairs. Would I want Ukraine to be truly independent? Yes. But thanks to Russia that is not a possibility. Had Russia not meddled Ukraine would have a far more neutral position on the world stage.
Now Ukraine either ends up under the iron thumb of Russia (much like Belarus) or Ukraine ends up economically dependent on the EU. Of the two choices IMO itâs pretty clear which is a more favorable outcome.
I disagree. Iâm far from an expert on Euromaidan, but from what I gathered, the perspective of the Donbas is widely ignored by most western media. I only managed to find articles in German, so youâll have to excuse me, but if youâre interested, youâll probably find a way to translate those:
https://www.hintergrund.de/politik/welt/mehr-aufstand-wagen/ https://www.hintergrund.de/politik/welt/wir-haetten-schon-auf-der-krim-angreifen-muessen/ https://www.hintergrund.de/politik/welt/rechtsfreier-raum/ https://www.hintergrund.de/politik/welt/charkow-terror-gegen-regimekritiker/ https://www.hintergrund.de/politik/welt/ich-will-keinen-faschismus-vor-meiner-haustuer/ https://www.hintergrund.de/politik/welt/wir-bezahlen-mit-unserem-blut-fuer-die-wirtschaftskrise-europas/ https://www.hintergrund.de/politik/welt/nichts-dringlicher-als-frieden/
Those articles suggest that the Euromaidan was not only a âpro EUâ thing, but can be understood as an attempt of ultranationalist Ukrainians to infiltrate the Ukrainian government. The same journalist said in an interview (sorry, in German as well) that she interviewed pro Maidan activists in 2014 and that she canât imagine that the rebellion was this coordinated without the possibility of outside forces supplying training and resources to the combatants.
Even the Atlantic Council claimed that âUkraineâs Got a Real Problem with Far-Right Violenceâ in 2018. I think it would be a stretch to accuse that think tank of Russian propaganda.
Sorry if I failed to make my point clear. My point isnât that Putin isnât an autocrat. My point is that Putin is acting as a stateâs sovereign. Heâs not acting out of his private interest, but out of the interest of a nation.
Never said that it was.
Yeah, the independence of the Ukrainian state. I donât think that the interests of the Ukrainian state align with the Ukrainian people. Especially considering that the latter are currently dying in the name of the former. And if the former gets its âindependenceâ, it will have done so at an incredible cost of human lives. And I doubt that all the debt from military aid (those arenât âpresentsâ from the west) will lead to fulfilling lives for Ukraineâs population in the future.
Yes, the âbad guysâ are bad. But the âgood guysâ donât act out of the kindness of their hearts, either.
Their âpawn-nessâ started way before 2022, when NATO did their sable-rattling in Ukraine. They canât afford a neutral position. Just like Taiwan canât and Vietnam or Cuba couldnât.
Iâm not ignoring the counter-protests in the east. To my knowledge most of the ones that happened during Euromaidan either had people paid to âprotestâ or they could barely get people together to protest. Most of the eastern protests happened after Euromaidan and considering how quickly Russia jumped into those regions I wouldnât be surprised if they were a front to destabilize those regions.
Iâm also not ignoring the influence of nationalists and ultranationalists in Euromaidan, however it doesnât change the nature of the protest because it started as protest against not signing the EU deal and it ended with a pro-EU government (and not an ultranationalist government). The ultranationalists actually started losing popularity the moment Euromaidan ended and over the years theyâve been slowly been rooted out from where-ever they dug into.
When you have an autocratic leader the state becomes an extension of their will. They can use the state for the interest of the nation or they can use the state for their own interests. I donât consider myself so well versed in Putinomics to know when Putin is acting out of self-interest and when Putin is acting in the interest of the Russian nation. If you can somehow tell the difference, good for you. I personally donât see how the war is in the interest of Russia (the nation). Sending your young people into the meat grinder is not in the interest of the nation (Ukranians on the front will tell you that Russia just keeps sending troops wave after wave straight into machinegun fire). Not retrieving your wounded is not in the interest of the nation. People struggling to put food on the table is not in the interest of the nation. I could keep going on about things that donât affect the average Russian but I think Iâve made my point how this war is by no means in the interest of the nation, Russian people are also suffering because of this senseless war that Putin could end at any moment.
A completely irrelevant point considering this discussion started with the statement that this war wouldnât even happen if not for Russia. People wouldnât be losing their lives if Russia never invaded in the first place. Military aid wouldnât be necessary because there would be nobody to defend from. It all comes down to the fact that none of this would have happened if Russia hadnât started it.
Iâve been giving you the benefit of the doubt up to this point, but this is where Iâm just going to call you a Russian propagandist because youâre either deliberately or ignorantly presenting Russian talking points. There is no NATO saber-rattling. NATO does not expand unless the country in question wants NATO to expand. Finland and Sweden are prime examples. NATO wouldâve loved for those 2 countries to join, especially during the cold war. Bases literally in striking distance from Leningrad and Moscow? If it was up to NATO thatâs 100% expansion. But it wasnât. Finland had Finlandization and Sweden didnât join out of solidarity for Finland. Even after the cold war Finland and Sweden didnât want to join NATO until Russia invaded Ukraine.
As for Ukraine. You can look up the polls, Ukraine didnât want to join NATO until Russia annexed Crimea, then within a matter of months the sentiment went from âI donât want to join NATOâ to âI want to join NATOâ.
And for NATO itself, NATO was probably on the verge of dissolution before the Russian invasion. When Trump started talking about stepping out of NATO other countries started questioning if NATO is even necessary anymore. Russian invasion is what has reinvigorated NATO. As with the last two points, it always ends up coming back to Russia being a fucking shithead to its neighbors.
And if we get back to 2014, when all of this started, it didnât start because Ukraine wanted to join NATO. It started because Ukraine wanted to join the EU. So NATO isnât even the reason this is happening.
Now, feel free to take your Russian talking points and fuck off.
Sorry, that just reeks of propaganda to me. Donezk has a distinct national identity from before it was declared to be a part of Ukraine. Additionally, the region came under economic pressure through the talks between Kiew and Europe, which would explain why there would be protests erupting in 2014. Stating that these protestors were paid is a highly spuriops claim without sources.
When was that supposed to happen? Back in 2022, Selensky spoke at the Greek parliament, accompanied by the Azov battalion. Since you accuse me of spouting propaganda: this claim seems like propaganda to me, as well.
Russia wants to assert its status as a super power in a world where the US donât allow for other super powers beside them. I thought it was well established that Russia has imperialistic interests, wasnât it?
Ignoring the fact that what youâre going to hear from Ukrainian soldiers will be heavily filtered by Ukraineâs department of defense: AFAIK, Thatâs not (or no longer) Russiaâs strategy. Theyâre currently very slow and methodical in kettling in their military targets. Ukraine is currently the one who puts their soldiers in the meat grinder by not evacuating Russiaâs targets after they are considered to be lost.
Yeah, thatâs a good deterrent for war. So why do you think the war is still going? Because Putin is evil? I just donât buy that childish logic which goes against any serious political analysis of anything.
BTW: Every state considers it justified to send outsits population into a war to secure its status as a sovereign. To a state thatâs currently at war, human lives are nothing but a kind of resource to be used to reduce the enemyâs (human) resource. Thatâs what a war is. No matter if youâre Putin, Selensky or Wilhelm II.
Maybe, if you consider my point on the Ukrainian people (that should only give you context why Iâm skeptical of Selensky). But the fact that the âgood guysâ are no angels definetly has something to do why âPutin just wonât stopâ.
Ukraine has beefed up their military substantially between 2014 and 2020. That didnât happen without the westâs help. And NATO is no stranger in involving itself outside its stated goals as a âdefense treatyâ (See: Kosovo war). I also donât get how Swedenâs and Finlandâs joining of NATO has anything to to with whether or not NATO provoked Russia. It is however a great example how NATO is used as an imperialist tool by its members, when you look at what Erdogan got out of Sweden joining NATO.
Youâre accusing me of repeating Russiaâs propaganda, Iâm accusing you of repeating NATOâs propaganda. But at least I know that you shouldnât trust either imperialist.
This is the bare minimum Iâm going to do. You can find references to protesters being paid on the wiki page
Another Russian talking point. Feel free to show me how Azov was still an ultranationalist entity in 2022.
I guess youâre capable of telling the difference between Russiaâs and Putins imperialistic interest, right? Iâm going to stick with itâs Putins imperialistic interest, not Russian. And heâs doing a fabulous job by showing how his army was incapable of doing large scale invasions and his high tech arsenal canât beat decades old western tech, all an excellent showing how the only super power Russia has is its insane amount people they can throw in the grinder.
Iâm not ignoring that fact. I know that anything making Ukraine look bad wonât come through the Ukrainian filter. I have no reason to think theyâd filter Russia doing something incredibly stupid. Also source on Russia no longer putting their soldiers in the meat grinder (I guess technically theyâre not, theyâre now throwing Koreans into the grinder) and source Ukraine putting their soldiers in the meat grinder?
So why is the war still going on?
Okay, thatâs justification for Ukraine to send its people into war considering their sovereignty is in danger. Whats the justification for Russia considering Ukraine isnât interest in taking over Russia?
You just justified Ukraine using its people defending the sovereignty of Ukraine so your point about the Ukrainian people is moot because they wouldnât be needed to throw their lives away if there wasnât a war.
Which ONCE AGAIN wouldnât have been necessary if not for Russian meddling. For fuck sake how many times do I need to repeat this same point over and over and over.
And Kosovo was bullshit thing to use NATO for.
That is an example of NATO not expanding when NATO wants to expand, which is usually the kind of bullshit argument Russian trolls make when they talk about NATO saber-rattling.
Example of imperialism? The great imperialist nation of Turkey? Thatâs not an example of NATO being used as imperialist tool. Do you even know what imperialism means? fuck it, Iâm not commenting more on that, thatâs just beyond my capacity to handle stupidity.
Kinda a weird accusation considering you have literally given zero examples of me using NATO propaganda, unless you think everything I say is NATO propaganda. Also weird to claim you know to not trust either imperialistic entity but literally present Russian propaganda as your argument.