Quote (fender @ Jan 20 2023 11:51pm)

how many kremlin lies can you put into one post while still claiming to look at it from an unbiased perspective?

goon-shill: yes!

Quote (Goomshill @ Jan 21 2023 12:44am)

And what was Russia's alternative to invading Ukraine? Not invading Ukraine? Not supporting Ukraine's right to exist as a sovereign country, and abandoning the ethnic Russian majority to the ongoing NATO siege of the east? Ceding their geopolitical sphere to American aggression until they've got nothing beyond their own borders?

This kind of logic isn't circular and isn't morally relativistic, it has finite grounding. The facts are that in this conflict, America provoked an inevitable reaction, Russia responded. We pushed NATO right up to their borders and put them into a corner, we overthrew the democratic government in Ukraine to set up our own pro-NATO dictatorship, and Russia finally reached a breaking point. Then when they hit back, we turn around and accuse them of being the aggressors. We could have simply chosen to preserve status quo in Ukraine circa 2014, but Joe Biden micromanaged a color revolution instead and handpicked the new government of willing stooges to the CIA. And when Joe Biden became president and was faced with a Russian buildup on the border, and dithered and said we would not try to intervene to stop an invasion- we could have simply followed through and let Russia reclaim control of the country. Which might have given Ukraine less sovereignty than the status quo ante we had thrown out the window, but which obviously and undeniably was a better outcome for the Ukrainian people. Who had spent centuries or millenia under the Russian sphere save for these short few years of NATO meddling, and its not like they were facing daily horrors of nu-holodomors or cossacks again, they had their shitty peaceful lives.


From some moralizing lens, the war is clearly bad. We're giving heavy weaponry to nazi insurrectionists to get as many poor people killed as we can in hopes of killing some more russians. But I've always said that what matters is the pragmatic geopolitical lens, in which our intervention is still self-destructive because we're fracturing our relationships with the unaligned world and driving them into the Russian/Chinese camps, strengthening the bonds of our two greatest rivals, tanking our own economy and still going to come out of the whole thing with Russia holding onto the only valuable parts of Ukraine while we earn nothing but a bunch of hungry mouths to feed, except this time around they're not muslims but we don't have any food anyway because Russia holds the grain now lmao

Quote (Santara @ Jan 20 2023 02:43pm)

Do you have any idea how retarded you sound when you act like you're a messenger from God?

Quote (DizzyBusiness @ Jan 21 2023 02:32am)

This is one of the best breakdowns of the situation I've read, really well written.

Quote (Meanwhile @ 20 Jan 2023 22:11)

I think it's a good one:

Germany hasn’t made a decision to allow the sending of Leopard battle tanks to Ukraine, but will allow other countries to train Ukrainian soldiers on the vehicles.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/germany-allows-ukraine-preparatory-training-160539831.html

:bonk:

Quote (ofthevoid @ 20 Jan 2023 21:40)

It's not, as German polls have clearly showed that Germans are not in favor of sending tanks. This is what Democracy and following the will of your people looks like.

If you want more done go lobby your own government which has done a tiny fraction of what Germany has done when it comes to actually helping Ukrainians.

Quote (Goomshill @ Jan 21 2023 04:46am)

I mean we've gone over it a lot of times in this thread so its getting to be a sort of rote business to lay it out

It kind of reminds me of the George Floyd threads in a parallel thought process. Where the mainstream conversation has a canonical gospel that you cannot dare contradict, but doesn't hold up to basic logical scrutiny in the slightest. There's no real counterargument to people pointing out that the Ukraine had a free and fair democratic government representative of its people, which was overthrown by a CIA-backed coup where we allied with literal Nazis. There's no counterargument to pointing out that Ukrainians would be far better off in the status quo ante of a peaceful Russian sphere of influence, than the absolute destruction and humanitarian crisis this war brought them. The counterargument is to call them a Russian sympathizer. Hell, at least arguments over Iraq and Afghanistan opened more thoughtful discussions between legitimate concerns like world security vs self-determination vs personal liberties, even if they were drowned out by calling the other side pinko commie faggots. And I make that comparison because if you bring up Floyd's autopsy and all the physical evidence at the trial and illogic of disproving a negative ('chauvin's magic knee exerting the goldilocks amount of force that killed floyd without leaving a mark'), well then you're just a racist, say the same people who threw in their lot with literal nazi war criminals in the 21st century.

Longwinded point I'm making is that its narrative in the total absence of logic. Lots of people make great arguments for why our foreign policy is harming our national interests, why its immoral, etc etc. The only thing I hear against it is ooga booga me hate thing news tell me bad

Quote (Goomshill @ 21 Jan 2023 12:44)

And what was Russia's alternative to invading Ukraine? Not invading Ukraine? Not supporting Ukraine's right to exist as a sovereign country, and abandoning the ethnic Russian majority to the ongoing NATO siege of the east? Ceding their geopolitical sphere to American aggression until they've got nothing beyond their own borders?

This kind of logic isn't circular and isn't morally relativistic, it has finite grounding. The facts are that in this conflict, America provoked an inevitable reaction, Russia responded. We pushed NATO right up to their borders and put them into a corner, we overthrew the democratic government in Ukraine to set up our own pro-NATO dictatorship, and Russia finally reached a breaking point. Then when they hit back, we turn around and accuse them of being the aggressors. We could have simply chosen to preserve status quo in Ukraine circa 2014, but Joe Biden micromanaged a color revolution instead and handpicked the new government of willing stooges to the CIA. And when Joe Biden became president and was faced with a Russian buildup on the border, and dithered and said we would not try to intervene to stop an invasion- we could have simply followed through and let Russia reclaim control of the country. Which might have given Ukraine less sovereignty than the status quo ante we had thrown out the window, but which obviously and undeniably was a better outcome for the Ukrainian people. Who had spent centuries or millenia under the Russian sphere save for these short few years of NATO meddling, and its not like they were facing daily horrors of nu-holodomors or cossacks again, they had their shitty peaceful lives.


From some moralizing lens, the war is clearly bad. We're giving heavy weaponry to nazi insurrectionists to get as many poor people killed as we can in hopes of killing some more russians. But I've always said that what matters is the pragmatic geopolitical lens, in which our intervention is still self-destructive because we're fracturing our relationships with the unaligned world and driving them into the Russian/Chinese camps, strengthening the bonds of our two greatest rivals, tanking our own economy and still going to come out of the whole thing with Russia holding onto the only valuable parts of Ukraine while we earn nothing but a bunch of hungry mouths to feed, except this time around they're not muslims but we don't have any food anyway because Russia holds the grain now lmao

Quote (Prox1m1ty @ Jan 21 2023 01:13am)

Wait. Merkel and Sarkozy blocked Ukraine because they foresaw the current situation?
That doesn't make sense

Quote (Goomshill @ Jan 21 2023 04:44am)

And what was Russia's alternative to invading Ukraine? Not invading Ukraine? Not supporting Ukraine's right to exist as a sovereign country, and abandoning the ethnic Russian majority to the ongoing NATO siege of the east? Ceding their geopolitical sphere to American aggression until they've got nothing beyond their own borders?

This kind of logic isn't circular and isn't morally relativistic, it has finite grounding. The facts are that in this conflict, America provoked an inevitable reaction, Russia responded. We pushed NATO right up to their borders and put them into a corner, we overthrew the democratic government in Ukraine to set up our own pro-NATO dictatorship, and Russia finally reached a breaking point. Then when they hit back, we turn around and accuse them of being the aggressors. We could have simply chosen to preserve status quo in Ukraine circa 2014, but Joe Biden micromanaged a color revolution instead and handpicked the new government of willing stooges to the CIA. And when Joe Biden became president and was faced with a Russian buildup on the border, and dithered and said we would not try to intervene to stop an invasion- we could have simply followed through and let Russia reclaim control of the country. Which might have given Ukraine less sovereignty than the status quo ante we had thrown out the window, but which obviously and undeniably was a better outcome for the Ukrainian people. Who had spent centuries or millenia under the Russian sphere save for these short few years of NATO meddling, and its not like they were facing daily horrors of nu-holodomors or cossacks again, they had their shitty peaceful lives.


From some moralizing lens, the war is clearly bad. We're giving heavy weaponry to nazi insurrectionists to get as many poor people killed as we can in hopes of killing some more russians. But I've always said that what matters is the pragmatic geopolitical lens, in which our intervention is still self-destructive because we're fracturing our relationships with the unaligned world and driving them into the Russian/Chinese camps, strengthening the bonds of our two greatest rivals, tanking our own economy and still going to come out of the whole thing with Russia holding onto the only valuable parts of Ukraine while we earn nothing but a bunch of hungry mouths to feed, except this time around they're not muslims but we don't have any food anyway because Russia holds the grain now lmao

Quote (Prox1m1ty @ Jan 20 2023 11:40pm)

I see what your implying.
So Russia will "win" when? Is it 2-3 months again?

Quote (Santara @ Jan 21 2023 12:16am)

Saying "heads are on the chopping block" is a well known euphemism for paying serious, personal consequences, not "some of their voters will be mad at them and not vote for them."

If Americans vote in a Republican in 2024, that doesn't mean that they get voted in because they opposed supporting Ukraine. There's plenty of reasons why people pull the lever for a candidate. So no, I don't foresee any real consequences for Western governments over supporting Ukraine defending themselves from Russian aggression.

Quote (fender @ Jan 21 2023 01:52am)

i'm not asking russia, i'm asking you. pootin sees it one way in 2003, and another way in 2014. i clearly see it the way pootin saw it in 2003: ukraine is a sovereign country, and it's up to their citizens if they want to ask NATO to join or not.

YOU, however, try to have it both ways: on the one hand you keep saying NATO "fucked up" by acknowledging ukraine's aspiration to join, but at the same time you act offended when someone draws the logical conclusion that you support pootin's current position, which is that the russian president should be able to tell if ukraine is allowed to join NATO or not. both can't be true at the same time, so grow a pair and tell us what YOU personally think.

spoiler alert: we all know where your heart REALLY is, that's why you keep dodging this question, that's why your first reaction to russia murdering ukrainian children is "b-b-but what about NATO and greta thunberg?!". so please spare us the fake outrage, pootin bootlicker.