The free world loses when Russia wins.
It’s pretty much an invitation to China to do the same in Taiwan and an invitation for Russia to start more wars in eastern Europe…
Helping Ukraine costs money. Not helping Ukraine costs even more.
wait, you are not being ironical?
how the fuck do you manage to claim that the west is the free world™ while it is the empire to blame for the largest amount of worldwide suffering in the second half of the twentieth century? It is responsible for countless invasions, sanction regimes and assassinations with the goal of subjugating foreign nations, as well as courting nazis post ww2, like for example people like klaus barbie or wernher von braun, as well as the entire early government of the frg.
your fantasizing about a supposed military threat from the prc to taiwan and from russia to the rest of europe is nothing but pure projection, since you westoids apparently cant imagine someone acting from a different motivation than your own. the prc has time and time again stated that it prefers a peaceful resolution to the taiwan conflict and the province has never officially declared any grade of independence from the mainland, simply being under a different government, the roc.
russia on the other hand has absolutely no reason to start any military conflicts in western europe, something you would know, if you would even try to understand the lead up to the current situation.
your last sentence honestly just sounds like a thinly veiled blood for the blood god.
Fuck off with your Putin propaganda.
sadly, even if you follow russian propaganda to the word, which i dont btw, you would still more often than than not end up with the truth. maybe the west should try to be less evil.
Found this video about how Americans live. North Korean propaganda says we eat birds. All countries distort the truth, even ‘Merica. I wish more people understood this.
It is a bad idea to trust and rely on Ameeica. Some Afgans learned this lesson in 2021, the same is happening to Ukraine now.
Many such cases!
Gaddafi’s is just sad. Such a terrible decision to give up their nuclear deterrence and trust western governments.
Nukes are why the DPRK hasn’t been invaded again, and why it hasn’t ended up Libya is now.
Time to end the war and give peace a chance.
Yeah, giving the five bordering regions of Russia to Ukraine, including Belgorod would be the best compensation.
nice job america, now in addition to everything else, you’ve lost a war you weren’t even fighting in. Fuck yeah!
Are you implying Ukraine has lost the war? That’s just not true, they still hold territory that according to Putin is part of Russia
deleted by creator
“you have lost” is past tense
Countries will get fed up of sending aid to Ukraine long before Russia decides to return its annexed territories. We’re already seeing signs of that.
If NATO isn’t willing to go in and force the Russians out themselves, I fail to see how this war is anything but a net gain for Russia. They will just sit back and let their “new territories” become more and more Russified.
To me, the aid is just a delaying tactic to allow Ukraine to continue fighting until the west can figure out a way to accept that Ukraine has lost its territories without losing face.
It’s a shit show, but I don’t share the optimism that a lot of people have for a Ukrainian victory. It’s like a game of chess, and it’s currently Ukraine/NATOs turn, because the Russians are already dug in.
Over 100k dead Russians isn’t really a “net victory” regardless of territory gained
People in this thread clearly don’t understand what the implications are. There is a very clear danger of war on the European continent that will involve NATO and by proxy the US. Aid for Ukraine is the absolute cheapest option. Europe is not going to just let Ukraine fall and will ramp up their involvement. We already have France willing to send troops.
Aid for Ukraine is the absolute cheapest option
One who consider a proxy war where thousand people die and a country get destroyed the “cheapest option” tells you how much they are in bad faith. For politicians your life is indeed cheap and something they can trash away for profits
So no aid to Ukraine and show Russia that it can indeed start wars where thousands die and destroy countries, without negative consequences?
Where are the negative consequences for America? Why can America invade any country it wants and kill hundreds of thousands of innocent women and children but for some reason when Russia does it we have to show them they aren’t allowed?
Only America and its allies can start wars and commit genocides?
Classic whataboutism.
Because the US does interventionism, fund far-right politicians, etc., Russia (and China) can do as such, and even more. At least the US doesn’t want to “regain it’s old lost territories”.
This is a delicate situation. If a NATO country is sending troops to Ukraine, it will escalate the war into a full blown world war.
We know what happened in both world wars, so there is no good answers here.
The good answer is not seeking war and destruction
Generally, I’d agree with that sentiment. However, what path forward would provide the best way out of the situation and discourage further conflict in the region?
When we look at the lead up to WW2, we see a build-up of tension by Germany and attempted appeasement by the other major powers in an effort to avoid another breakout of war in Europe, only a few decades after the first great war ravaged these nations.
Notable events:
- Remilitarization of the Rhineland (Mar 1936) – this was a clear power move and violation of the Treaty of Versailles that ended WW1. With no real reaction from the France/Britain, this was a clear indication to Hitler he could continue to push things much further.
- Anschluss (Annexation of Austria, Mar 1938) - Germany was prepared to take Austria by force, but managed to do so with only the threat of violence. This was also against the Treaty of Versailles and also had no real reaction from the Allied powers.
- Sudetenland conquest (Sept 1938) - Germany pressures Czechoslovakia for pieces of it’s territory that border Germany. British PM finally gets involved, allowing the exchange of territory for a promise of peace. This is the famous " Peace for our time declaration.
- Annexation of territory from Lithuania (Mar 1939) - Lithuania pressed to give up territory under threat of war.
- Czech/Slovokia split and occupation/control (Mar 1939) - Under further pressure and threat of invasion, Czechoslovakia split and both come under German control.
- Invasion of Poland by Germany and USSR (Sept 1939) - First open conflict. France and Britain declare war on Germany, roughly a year after the “Peace for our time” negotiations/declaration that clearly made a difference!
As you can see, in the build-up to WW2, the European powers that opposed German expansion sought alternatives. They even allowed Germany to push its weight around on its neighbors, taking territory from others, and consolidating power. By the time the great powers were forced into conflict by open war in Poland, they were no longer in a position to hope to control Germany at all, doubly so with their apparent new cooperation with the USSR.
Knowing what happened, it’s easy to see that any intervention by France and/or Britain, whether it sparked violence or not, in the early days of German aggression would have almost certainly led to a less powerful Germany, perhaps one that could not have taken over most of Europe so easily.
I think the key take away from all of this is that, modern nations that have a desire for conquest are a danger to all. They are not to be believed, they should not be appeased, they should not be rewarded. Any violence against free nations should be resisted, supported by all free nations, but without escalation to full-blown nuclear war.
The danger of washing our hands of the conflict and saying something like, “Violence bad. End the war. They can have Ukraine/Donetsk/whatever.” is that Russia won’t stop there. They’ll get bigger, stronger, and move on to the next target when they’re ready.
The horrible part about all of this is that the apparent best way to keep long-term violence down is to continue the fighting now. The longer the conflict continues, and the more humiliated Russia becomes, the less likely Russia will chose to do a similar invasion in the future.
Generally, I’d agree with that sentiment. However, what path forward would provide the best way out of the situation and discourage further conflict in the region?
Stopping the war industry and ceasing all sort of imperialistic activities, even on one side alone will put at end on most conflicts but every ruler is in for more wealth and power, they don’t want to stop. This does not mean that because someone is doing it everyone has to follow suit, it literally means that every corrupted politician and their government seek war.
If there’s anything to be extrapolated from history is that ramping up for war and fueling authoritarian regimes brings you exactly war and dictatorships.
Any violence against free nations should be resisted
So do you agree that palestine should have the rights to defend themself against israel?
The danger of washing our hands
If there’s anyone washing their hands is politicians drinking champagne in dubai next to russian yachts. The same politicians that send people money to ukraine goverement.
Stopping the war industry and ceasing all sort of imperialistic activities, even on one side alone will put at end on most conflicts but every ruler is in for more wealth and power, they don’t want to stop. This does not mean that because someone is doing it everyone has to follow suit, it literally means that every corrupted politician and their government seek war.
I think this is overly naive and simplistic.
So do you agree that palestine should have the rights to defend themself against israel?
(I’m not as well versed in this conflict, but a few thoughts from my perspective)
The situation and power dynamics are quite different there. I don’t have any easy answer unfortunately.
- Palestine doesn’t have a conventional army or a means to fight Israel the same way Ukraine is fighting Russia.
- Israel’s reaction and occupation of Gaza Strip is horrible.
- Historically, Israel’s treatment of Palestinian people has been completely unacceptable.
- Hamas’ actions have been awful, both historically and with the first attack in October where they started this conflict. Their attacks routinely target civilians, which is unacceptable.
So, if there are people living in Palestine who want to fight the occupiers, that perspective makes sense to me. So, at the most basic level, yes – I think they should be able to defend themselves. However, Hamas historically seems prioritized only in hurting Israel, and their actions routinely hurt Palestine in a number of ways. Plus, supporting terrorist organizations (like Hamas) with arms/training/etc has worked out poorly for the US in the past.
So, unfortunately, I think there are no “good guys” here (besides the civilians caught up in this who want peace). I think both Israel and Hamas steered into this conflict when alternative course of actions existed. Conflict between these groups has been ongoing for decades and has no good or simple solution.
I was wondering how the media was going to explain the collapse in Ukraine when it finally becomes impossible to hide it, and now we know. The whole thing is going to be blamed on republicans holding up money in congress, as if pouring another 61 billion after all the untold billions that were already poured into this was going to make any difference. The fact that people genuinely believe this is frankly depressing. It shows just how utterly credulous and mentally deficient western public is.
