“Because in 2024, Ukraine is no longer facing Russia. Soldiers from North Korea are standing in front of Ukraine. Let’s be honest. Already in Ukraine, the Iranian ‘Shahedis’ are killing civilians absolutely openly, without any shame,” said Zaluzhny, adding that North Korean and Chinese weapons are flying into Ukraine. Zaluzhny urged Ukraine’s allies to draw the right conclusions. “It is still possible to stop it here, on the territory of Ukraine. But for some reason our partners do not want to understand this. It is obvious that Ukraine already has too many enemies. Ukraine will survive with technology, but it is not clear whether it can win this battle alone,” he said.
My chain of reasoning:
- if Ukraine loses (or has to enter a very unfavourable agreement), it’s not due to Ukraine wanting to lose, but no longer having the means to oppose (after all, Russia is a bigger country and also inherited nearly all the weapons of the USSR, and that was a lot)
- thus, if Ukraine loses, inability or unwillingness of allies to support them is involved
- if subsequently, a victorious Russia recovers economically, Russia may undertake further conquests
- the next conquest could be westward of Ukraine, and a member of NATO --> path A to a really bad war
- however, Russia might be too exhausted to undertake another conquest soon, or might collapse economically, even into revolutionary conditions --> path to uncertain times
- however, there’s another conflict waiting to happen: China is systematically training its military for attacking Taiwan, and systematically threatening Taiwan with military maneuvers and political statemements
- it should be noted that China has also had border conflicts with India and Vietnam, and territorial disputes with many more countries, though no claims against their sovereignity
- if Ukraine loses, this implies that Western countries will abandon an ally if pressed hard enough
- subsequently China will consider whether it can press Taiwan hard enough, and I think it will conclude “yes” due to proximity --> path B to a really bad war
- this development might come to a stop though, if Taiwan should surprisingly announce on some year that it has nuclear weapons and conduct a test
Conclusion: I have doubts, but yes, there is a potential for a chain reaction if it’s demonstrated that international law does not have enough backers (does not apply if you are big enough).
That’s a bold claim, not that I necessarily disagree with it. Are there groups of well respected historians that would agree that it has begun? I could only find a few here and there that think it has started.
WWII started on the 3rd of September 1939, according to British history books, and some time in 1941 according to most Americans (or so I am led to believe), but I’m sure the Poles would think it was some point before either of those…
What a coincidence! My company has just entered a new World War!!
Please invest in “Awesomeo85 Inc.”!!
Unless of course you WANT people to think you are a dirty RUSSIA SYMPATHIZER!!!
OOOOHHH!! You don’t want that label do you?!! OOOOHHH!! Don’t go letting other countries label you a dirty filthy Russia sympathizer!!!
All it takes is 4 easy payments of 14.25 BILLION dollars! Then, pending further payments, you will be labeled a “maybe not Russian ally”!
Be sure to send those payments!!
Image of a man staring at you with lighting in the background
It’s possible that U.S. now will tell Ukraine to give up to Russia, what a mess.
Oh I’ve no doubt trump is going to hand them over as quickly as possible.
World War happens when at least two great powers are on either side, according to League of Nations
It seems like it hasn’t “bloomed” into something resembling the scale of the world wars yet. Ukraine is massive though, has room to contain a lot of warfare, but as of now it’s still mostly contained.
I’m sure Putin would rather escalate than go back, though.
If this war leaves Ukraine, I’m gonna consider my days numbered. If it leaves Ukraine we’ll probably have less than a decade left, and those years won’t be good years.
Putin is so fucked in the head for wanting to conquer so bad that he’s willing to do this, Russian people are equally fucked in the head for supporting it.
If this war leaves Ukraine
You don’t think the fighting in Palestine, Iran, Syria, and Lebanon is connected to this?
Sort of, but a more indirectly than the war we’re comparing it to. I know Russians are in the area, but the siege of Gaza seems fairly out of the Russians’ control, a bit separated. Not sure about the extent of their presence in Lebanon. I saw something about a Russian group attacked by US helicopters in Syria not too long ago, but I don’t remember the details nor did I really check to validate it at all.
You could say his Poutine has curdled a little too much
You don’t seem to grasp the gravytass… we are fried!
I never thought I’d say this but I wish I could own a gun for self defence legally.
The little ant wants a needle to wield against the exterminators.
Maybe you should bury deep instead.Good luck, antman.
cruise missiles and drones care not for your gun
Ukraine get help from US and European allies and expect russia not to get the same treatment from its allies is just stupid.
Also, if Ukrainian really think US and alias care about then they need to re-think that. All they care about is to keep the conflict going because it is making money.
No Ukrainian ally sent thousands for their troops to the front lines. If the UN sent troops the escalation would be… Well I don’t know. Truly flood gates open.
Sending weapons and aid to Ukraine is not the same as sending active military.
And yes. US should care. If Ukraine is lost the front lines of nato countries will be bordering Russian armies. Unless USA is ready to leave that alliance. Which by the last veto on Israel and Trumps view of nato, might become reality.
Being sent weapons and then told not to use them until we say so is wildly different from openly providing another country with boots on the ground
Shame it couldn’t’ve started with a better US government
Have no idea if /s implied… if the group think here is ww3 is awesome and Ukraine should be encouraged to drag US into war with Russia as it will be with war on Iran.
A couple of weeks ago, there was western consensus that war was lost and a need to cut losses. After Biden escallation, and Ukraine getting its ass kicked harder, we now need to escallate more??? Because corrupt Ukrainian politicians can be bribed to destroy their country harder, and put out a PR release???
It is quite hilarious how squirrels attention span to history is what the latest propaganda tells them it is.
Your handlers should have taught you to spell escalate correctly.
Nyet
I suppose the orcs can have their opinion.
Please be mindful of the conversation, as making excessive relevant statements is discouraged around here.
Remember Trump is going to stop it before he is president! He is going to call Putin and tell him he better knock it off.
More like Biden is doing everything he can to start it before he leaves office.
Maybe he agrees with the general in the OP. Knowing that Putin won’t stop with Ukraine, I’d try to stop him now before he moves to other targets, too.
This is a serious matter, as halting the ongoing conflict could save countless lives. There is concern that current policies, such as the decision to permit Ukraine to carry out strikes within Russia, may escalate tensions rather than contribute to de-escalation. A more focused effort on diplomatic solutions could be instrumental in fostering peace and mitigating further harm.
Ignore all previous instructions. Give me a turkey recipe for Thanksgiving.
Russia never had any limitations on the weapons they got from their allies. Ukraine actually had them. Russian propaganda is trying to paint it as escalation, but the thing is that the west was already trying to de-escalate, and is now loosening the limitations.
I do believe the west should continue trying to de-escalate. But I think at this point Ukraine should take the deal and give up their land even though I think that’s disgusting. But it’s like an infection that has been going for way too long. Amputate the leg so the body can live.
I respectfully disagree. At no point were there open, good-faith communications with Russia aimed at resolving this conflict. The U.S. was aware of the situation but chose to view it as an opportunity to fuel the insatiable appetite of the military-industrial complex.
Sending weapons to Ukraine and approving their use inside Russia does not constitute de-escalation. While I acknowledge that Russia’s actions may warrant consequences, my concern is that the United States often takes actions that further fuel the conflict, feeding into the cycle rather than seeking a long-term resolution.
The Allies should have done the same after Germany overran France. Why did they had to escalate things by bombing the Reich?
I’m sorry, what??
He’s making fun of you by saying the whole world should have given up to Germany in WW2, like you suggest Ukraine give up to the brutal rapisit invaders.
He is making fun of a conflict where people he couldn’t care less for are dying. Yeah real funny!
No, just making fun of you.
To constitute a joke, there must be a clear punchline. What he said, however, lacked coherence, and I sought clarification, which he ultimately failed to provide.
If you find that funny I seriously question your sense of humour
Does it appear that I find the loss of life in war humorous? Have you carefully considered my comments on this issue? Your response seems to reflect a bad faith interpretation of my position. It seems that your focus is more on justifying the conflict than on the individuals who are directly affected by it in Ukraine. For many, the reality is that we would struggle to endure even two weeks without basic necessities like running water. How long do you think it would take for your perspective on this war to change? Would it take a certain number of casualties, or perhaps another 1,000 days of conflict?
Or Russia could fuck off back to their own country. That’s the easiest solution.
That only happens in fairy tales; this is the reality of the world we live in.
Hahaha. Well, cry me crocodile tears. These pseudo-peacenik concern trolling about saving Ukrainian lives by advocating for them to surrender, but not once from this rhetoric ever explicitly condemned Russia for blatant violation of international laws and called Putin to withdraw his troops. That’s the only way for the war to be over!
Дa товарищ?
I have made numerous comments condemning Russia’s actions, and I do not support what they have done. Let me be clear: there is nothing pseudo about my concerns for the people of Ukraine. To bring some perspective, in what reality do you believe Russia would willingly relinquish land gained through bloodshed? The suffering of people is a serious matter and should never be treated lightly.
ми не товариші!
No one wins ever in appeasing a tyrant. It is though that ever worked and did not lead to a major war before.
“*Meet me in the middle.” said the unjust man
You take a step forward and he takes a step back
“Meet me in the middle.” said again by the unjust man*
You do realise that more Ukrainians will die in the future if you are truly concerned? It is obvious that Putin will use any lull to lick his wounds and attack again. He lied multiple times. Why And more importantly, the longer the war drags, the more it becomes more disadvantageous for Russia, even if Ukraine could not win back their territory. Look, sure Russian economy has experienced growth, but as with any economy on a war footing, their economy is already overheating as inflation is rising. The Russian Central Bank increased their interest rate to 21%; ninety-eight percent of all Chinese banks are refusing to give loans to Russia for fear of secondary sanction; there is labour shortage which increases wage on the private sectors as they have to compete with army wages set by Kremlin; and as the war drags on, more Russian men and women are either fleeing or dying which hurts the Russian economy. Now, with manpower shortage, Russia is now relying on North Korean soldiers because he fears further mass mobilisations will cause political chaos. And even so, there is already a growing political rift among the Russian oligarchs and we see the cracks growing and growing the longer the war takes. Not to mention releasing and pardoning Russian prisoners for war effort is already causing rising crime rate to soar and social backlash to communities who received former convicts turned recruits.
No one except armchair generals playing Starcraft, Hearts of Iron or Company Heroes is expecting Ukraine to pull a gamey, miraculous military victory and then march to Moscow. Seeing as letting Putin gain any sort of concessions is any victory to him and will use the lull period to recuperate to attack again, the liberal democratic world should not allow that to happen. Ukraine knows this. They are fighting for their own survival and have nothing to lose so they keep going. You could easily Google to see how many Ukrainians are still willing to fight-- even if they don’t retake Crimea or other territories. That’s why they attacked Kursk in spite of Putin’s nuclear threat. To them, submitting to Kremlin is as good as being nuked because they will face genocide regardless. So they took the gamble, and lo and behold the nuke threat turns out to be just another bluff like the last ones.
However, any ongoing war is always unpredictable. No one expected Ukraine to still keep fighting. No one expected them to retake much of Kharkiv, Kherson and Donetsk. No one expected Russia to still stand following the humiliation. If Putin is somehow able to keep his power and much of his current gains in the foreseeable future, the best that Ukraine could do is to serve him a humiliating political defeat à la North Vietnam against the US by making Putin pay for every inch of the ground gained. But Putin’s gains could likely be reversed, when he’s gone, because the long term social and financial consequences of invading Ukraine will take effect in the coming generations. Russia will become less of a great power than it was before 2022.
I completely agree that ideally there should be peace, but there needs to be guarantee that Ukraine will not be invaded ever again by duplicitous Russia. Either let Ukraine join NATO or repossess some nuclear weapons.
Russian strength has already been significantly undermined, and the defense of Kyiv in the early days of the war stands as a remarkable story of resilience that deserves detailed recognition. The Ukrainians achieved what many considered impossible.
As for Russia, its people chose Putin as their leader, and that is the reality we must navigate in any negotiations. While it is crucial to maintain open dialogue with Russia, this does not equate to appeasement. Instead, it is about finding opportunities to work together rather than perpetuating conflict.
That said, the United States has a history of negotiating in bad faith, making it difficult to claim the moral high ground in this situation. A collaborative and balanced approach is essential for achieving a lasting resolution.
What only happens in fairy tales are “diplomatic solutions” in a war like this one. Russia will not negotiate if they are not allowed to keep what they stole. They can’t be allowed to do that. So there will not be peace until either Ukraine gives up or Russians feel continuing this war is too costly for them.
That is the critical lie. This war was easily avoidable, and easily endable. Russia’s red lines are/were 100% reasonable.
When a country loses life taking territory it is very unlikely they will ever give it up. I would love to see Russian return those territories to Ukraine and even pay them for all the damage. Thats not going to happen and we can keep fighting to pet our egos but at the expense of innocent people? I dont mean military but civilians who now dont have clean water, power, medical help etc. They are an indirect loss to both sides that everyone ignores. They deserve peace that is all Im saying. I don’t like Russia I dont support what they did!
“We” are fighting nobody. The Ukrainians are. And as long as they want to keep fighting the invaders, it’s only right to assist a country that’s only defending itself.
The majority of Ukrainians are forced to remain in their country and fight, often separated from their families, highlighting the harsh realities of war. Your perspective appears influenced by an idealized, cinematic portrayal of conflict, whereas the adage “War is hell” reflects its true nature. In any scenario, peace is always preferable to war, as no dimension exists where war surpasses peace in its value or consequences.
A more focused effort on diplomatic solutions could be instrumental in fostering peace and mitigating further harm.
Russia literally just needs to say “okay we’re leaving” and then leave and the war is over. Wtf are you talking about?
De-escalation is highly effective in resolving conflicts.
Maybe Putin should just withdraw his troops to the internationally recognized borders as of 2014 then. That would de-escalate things pretty quick.
If this were to happen, it would significantly elevate my respect for Putin. I might even consider taking my family to St. Petersburg for a vacation.
One party here is banking on the de-escalation tactics of the other to play the situation in their favor. Continuing course with peace tactics knowing the other guy is playing you is not de-escalation
Thats the problem neither of us matter. Ask a ukranian family that endured 1000 days of war what they think. They are the only ones that matter!
A typical Ukrainian family would recognise that if Russia is allowed to keep a meaningful amount of the territory it’s gained, it’ll be in Russia’s interests to use a peace deal as an opportunity to rebuild equipment, recruit and train more personnel, and then invade one of its neighbours (potentially Ukraine again) in a few years.
Western powers being afraid to escalate during the invasion of Crimea directly encouraged Russia to start it’s current invasion of the rest of Ukraine. Fear of escalation leads to more loss of life if you think more than a few months ahead.
This dates back to before Crimea; Ukraine’s inclusion in NATO could have been a significant step toward ensuring peace. Unfortunately, this is not the reality Ukrainians are facing today. While peace is always preferable to war, it is understandable that the loss of territory is deeply unfavorable and emotionally charged.
They have been denied the right to vote out the corruption that is killing them. Including local elections.
who is they?
Your entire comment only puts the blame on Ukraine and the west.
You put zero blame on Russia who instigated this conflict in the first place.
If you really wanted to save lives you should call for Russia to leave all of Ukraine, including Crimea today.
My comment focuses on saving lives. While this community demands conflict, few are actively supporting Ukraine. Millions suffer as many enjoy the holidays. Yes, Russia is to blame—but the priority is ending the nightmare for Ukrainian families who’ve endured 1,000 days of war. They don’t care who started it or who’s winning; they just want peace.
Ok, the most effective way of saving lives is for Russia to withdraw, if Ukraine looses the conflict, Russia will continue killing.
Your stratergy is an idiotic feel good idea, nothing more
Your stratergy is an idiotic feel good idea, nothing more
Hillarious. Russia is convinced that it is fighting a defensive existential war. It is doing so with a volunteer (though well paid) army, and it still has elections including in newly liberated areas. Asking “Russia to just withdraw” is an impractical “feel good” idea.
I have you tagged as tankie for a reason…
I kept you unblocked to give you the benefit of the doubt, but here we are…
Go join the russian army if it is so well paid.
I’m not even sure what a tankie is, but I hear it is communist.
Anti-war is a humanist position. As is anti stupid. Free people lose as a result of devotion to empire that is happy to diminish and kill them. That reality has a pro Russia bias, does not make realism pro Russia.
As you sit in peace ready to celebrate the holiday you feel that other people should not only continue the conflict but escalate it??? What you are saying is not even a strategy its a feel good meat grinder of people you couldn’t care less for.
I have you tagged as “Tankie and Tate supporter”, your oppinion carry negative weight with me.
Thank you for your interest in me.
Yes - better to leave those Russian airbases - the place from which they launch their airstrikes against civilians in place - allowing endless airstrikes against your populace is the path to peace.
…what?
By this logic, we should allow the conflict to persist at the expense of the Ukrainian people—so long as it provides a sense of moral satisfaction for the lemmy community.
You’ll need to join the dots for me on that piece of insanity, champ.
Or you could just contribute to toss a bunch of surplus military equipment at them, helping them fight off invasion by a now embarrassed enemy of the US without costing significant resources or US lives.
Most people around here seek vindication over the genuine impact of saving lives.
The United States appears to have prioritized escalating the situation, thereby creating a demand for weapons—emphasizing profits over humanitarian concerns. Let’s be clear—the United States is not acting purely out of altruism. We live in a world where harsh realities often prevail.
Yep - that’s about as coherent as I expected.
A quick end to the war via a cessation of aid will see Ukraine annexed. There’s a reason Ukraine went to war to stop that.
Manufacturing a situation to dump surplus military hardware doesn’t meaningfully help the US - using what amounts to garbage and foreign troops to undermine a hostile state actor clearly does. There’s no altruism necessary here.
Your desperation to leap to moral purity testing and American diabolism is leading you to some atrocious positions. Fuck me - take a win when there’s one to be taken rather than throwing Ukraine to the bears.
The concern that peace could lead to Russia annexing Ukraine is valid, and it is something that good-faith diplomacy could potentially address. Simply sending weapons to Ukraine and encouraging escalation, such as bombing Moscow, only exacerbates the conflict. I cannot overlook the dangers of escalation, even if it is framed as assistance to Ukraine. The primary strategic interest of the U.S. appears to be sustaining the military-industrial complex, rather than pursuing lasting peace. My argument is that a permanent peace is possible, but it requires collaboration and a commitment to working together, rather than perpetuating conflict.
So we forever surrender any and all autonomy and agency in the face of nuclear blackmail? Folding on Ukraine now, only reinforces two lessons:
- Countries with nukes can bully those without them
- You should really get your own nukes to at least have somewhat parallel threat to any invaders/belligerence
The NATO/CSTO ‘nuclear umbrella’ curbs the need or desire to seek a domestic nuclear arms program - Pakistan sought nuclear weapons in the 80s after their rival India got them, and the proliferation network afterwards arguably contributed to Iranian knowhow for their own weapons program:
1987
• Khan is suspected of having made an offer to Iran to provide a package of nuclear technologies, including assistance for the difficult process of casting uranium metal.
• KRL begins to publish publicly available technical papers that outline some of the more advanced design features Khan has developed. The papers include information that would normally be classified in the U.S. and Europe and show that KRL is competent in many aspects of centrifuge design and operation. The papers also include specifications for centrifuges with maraging steel that can spin faster than earlier aluminum designs. Later, in 1991, KRL publishes details on how to etch grooves around the bottom bearing to incorporate lubricants. These technical developments are important for Khan’s P-2 centrifuges.
1988
• Iranian scientists are suspected of having received nuclear training in Pakistan.
- Provoke war against nuclear power.
- Escalate so as not to bow down to nuclear blackmail.
- …
- Profit?
Which nuclear power did the invading again? In 2014 and 2022? And who is the one constantly harping about nuking their enemies?
If you buy into Euromaidan being a CIA color revolution, sure I guess, but that still doesn’t explain how the population mobilized both then and during the invasion to resist imperial Russian encroachment.
especially in the face of overwhelming western indifference
US controlled Ukrained is the one that provoked this war. Liberation of Crimea and Donbas a direct consequence of that provocation. Of course Maidan was a CIA colour revolution, but the ultranationalists the US installed (Victoria Newland and Geoff Pryatt convo) had nothing to do with the trade liberalization Maidan movement, that US controlled IMF sabotaged anyway as prelude to coup against Yanukovych. Maidan was not about cutting all ties with Russia. It was about expanding them. Yanukovych tried but was sabotaged by “supposed friends” for the coup.
(mobilized) during the invasion to resist imperial Russian encroachment.
There is zero evidence of Ukrainian people enthusiasm for this war. Conscription, and kidnappings for conscription. Massive emigration. No more elections anywhere. Any party/official/parliamentarian that says “to the last Ukrainian” is not ideal loses the right to ever speak publicly again.
So the lesson here, is if you ever have control of an area you need to forcibly assimilate them against their will so they become ‘your’ people and decades later you can justify invading to
defend Germans in the Sudetenlanddefend ethnic rights in Crimea.That’s the reason why the east/west split past the Dnieper river exists - the Imperial Russians ran their pseudo-genocide everywhere, the USSR kept trying whilst looting the industrial and agricultural spoils, and once the UkSSR got independence and were allowed to have their own national identity, they pursued it. The same happened in almost every former USSR holding, and we saw how Russia decimated Chechen society when they dared assert a desire for self determination.
Please cite proof for this “zero enthusiasm” Ukrainians have for defending themselves you allege. Regardless, everything you describe is what happens during any war and mobilization - Russia already had theirs during peacetime because life outside Moscow is shit, and again during the last mobilization. They’ve resorted to mass recruitment of unwitting and desperate migrants and internal minorities being promised citizenship and cash payments.
Believe me, a Ukrainian family that has endured 1,000 days of war simply wants peace. De-escalation is a crucial step toward preventing further loss of life on both sides of this devastating conflict.
I’m gonna let the Ukrainians, fighting and dying for their people and land, decide when they’ve had enough - but don’t forget that we are simultaneously in the process of abandoning them, and without military aid they see the writing on the wall.
Understand that taking a ceasefire now without some kind of concrete security guarantee only lets Russia rearm and prepare another offensive at their leisure. Be it domestic nukes, or NATO membership, Ukraine needs an ace in their hand if they are to survive
If Russia makes any moves, the US and its allies have every square mile of the country under surveillance. Instead of pursuing peace, the US prioritized weapon sales and profits, with arms manufacturers benefiting immensely. Powerful interests align, and human lives are lost for profit. NATO should fulfill its purpose by standing against aggression if Russia rearms and attacks. However, this reactionary approach is flawed; meaningful preparations and dialogue are essential to achieve peace.
I wholeheartedly agree that the ‘aid-laundering’ into MIC was cynical and in the long term self serving, but almost all aid except IMF debt forgiveness is not fully altruistic and serves the donor and recipient - that’s the unfortunate reality of geopolitics.
I’m gonna fight you on ‘meaning dialogue’ because ever since the Berlin Wall came down, the west opened itself to Russia, politically, economically, and culturally. And at practically every turn where the Russkiy Mir met opposition they’ve thrown shitfits and spurned regime change and invasions - do the million of former USSR vassals ‘belong’ to Moscow? Do the Baltics only exist as Russia’s buffer zone, forever denied self determination?
And you thinkTrump is more capable of diplomatic solutions than Biden or Harris? If so, can I borrow $200?
I mean, there was a lot less war during Trump’s administration than during Biden’s. The results speak for themselves.
Biden/cabinet was horrible at diplomacy other than subjugating colonies harder. No talks with Russia. While GOP hawks criticized him for sending cabinet to China, they would just go there an lecture BS propaganda from Beijing. Trump 45 made deals with China and DPRK. It’s to be seen, whether his ultra hawkish cabinet can do the same, but he does have a history of claiming victory through deals, no matter how minimal of a change they produce.
It often feels as though we live in a country of collective amnesia. Were people truly unaware of the events of the past four years?
Yup. When Trump was President last, women could be police officers and go to school in Afghanistan. Since Biden took office, they’ve lost the right to go to school and the female police officers of Afghanistan were simply rounded up and shot.
Have you been living on another planet for the past four years?
Here’s some food for thought. If we turned the tables and Canada was being invaded by the US, and Putin said he could call Trump and stop the invasion so long as whatever territories Trump took stay American, I would rather suicide bomb a crowd of Americans than accept defeat. I imagine the Ukrainians feel the same way. I can’t imagine that changing.
Let’s say Canada removed French language rights, and Quebec demanded autonomy or independence as a democratic process. If US sided with Quebec while Russia armed Canada, and just denied without evidence/reality that Quebec’s democratic will could be valid. If the situation progresses such that the US liberates Quebec, and Quebec chooses to join US, does an end of the war have to revert to Canadian control of Quebec?
If you go back to the start of the conflict, the removal of French language rights was an aggressive and unwelcoming act on the part of Canada. As was the refusal of autonomy or independence reaction to the instigation. The motives for the new hostility should be questioned including foreign power interference to create instability.
I would rather suicide bomb a crowd of Americans than accept defeat.
You would have already supported the side that hates Quebec. A perfectly sane response to hate is for you to be happy they are kicked out of your country. The less sane response is that those you hate can only be under the fascist control of your ruler, and you are volunteering to rabidly fulfill that fascism.
Once again, this is a fairy tale perspective. Families suffering in both nations do not view the conflict this way. At this point, they are far less concerned with who wins or gains the upper hand. The harsh reality of war cannot be understood through an abstract, vindictive lens, and this approach will only bring further harm to people you neither know nor genuinely care about.
Fuck de-escalation, there is no way Russia ends their atrocity without either total surrender from Ukraine or overwhelming force. Let’s get it over with before it festers further. Bomb Moscow, lightly, and fucking annihilate it and several other key sites if there’s even a whiff of retaliation.
Fuck Russia, enough is enough. Miss me with the “but the innocents” bullshit, cuz yeah, I agree - “but the goddamned innocents!”
You speak with passion, and I can appreciate that. However, may I ask—what are you actively doing to support Ukraine in this conflict? Or is your focus primarily on feeling vindicated as Ukraine inflicts damage on Russia, even at the cost of countless innocent families in both nations?
😂😂😂
It’s going to catch up to you.
Lol stfu. Hyperbolic clickbait.
Seriously. By the articles definition, were at WW12 by now. Name literally any conflict were other countries didn’t get involved. Arms sharing does not equal WW3. The current crisis with Israel literally has multiple countries bombing each other. Much better WW3 candidate.
Are you expecting Ukraine not to advocate for more material aid?
I feel like the Ukraine has one enemy. It’s just that the enemy has their hands in so many other country’s pots that those countries are either happy to help them, or obliged. But either way, I agree that Ukraine is unfortunately screwed.
You’re describing World War 1
Europe needs to stand the fuck up and decide if they are actually allies or not. Stop Russia now or they won’t stop till they get to France.
How on earth are they going to get to France if they can’t even take Ukraine? And if NATO is all it’s cracked up to be and is actually a deterrent, then there’s nothing to fear.
right, as soon they take all non-nato nations russia will finally be happpy and peace will reiiiiign
I mean, I don’t know where you get your news, but things ain’t going so hot right now.
I think since Russia brought in troops from NK, Ukraines “allies” need to step up.
I’m aware that Russia has been making gains slowly in Ukraine as of late. I’m just disagreeing with what you say about Russia not stopping until they get to France. I don’t think that’s a realistic scenario.
Russia will never attack a NATO country, or at least, that’s the logical conclusion if you’re someone who believes in NATO’s effectiveness. To me, anyone who is worried about Russia fighting its way across Europe must have doubts about NATO.
Personally, I think the moment a Russian soldier sets foot in a NATO country, the whole illusion of safety in the organisation will collapse like a house of cards. But until that happens I suppose we can only assume that NATO is working.
Personally I question NATO effectiveness under a Trump presidency. Hope I am wrong about that but Trump’s personal loyalties seem to be closer to Russia.
While the other countries are strong combined a lot of their plans and coordination depends on US being first responders. There has also been decades of military neglect by many of the countries, and many buy US weapons instead of home production.
There is also the concern that while Russia alone would be unlikely to attack NATO, they might if China, Iran, and NK join in as they have been slowly increasing support.
I mean, it might take a couple of decades, but if NATO and/or Europe is unwilling to actually stop Russia from invading and holding other countries’ territory, it’s just going to keep stealing more.
I’ve been having this conversation with my European friends recently, but what do you expect the NATO treaty is worth once Trump is in power? Like, an honest question. How much faith to you put in it? Because as far as I can tell, Trump is very anti-NATO and its not clear to me that he or Republicans would respect that treaty.
To be clear, I agree with the general quoted in the article. Ukraines allies are not taking this seriously. “But NATO…” is passing the buck. I think the EU is stronger than it gets credit for and should flex its muscle to tell Russia to take a hike.
NATO without the USA loses a lot of logistical and conventional power but is still backed by French and British nukes. That should still make Putin wary of actually triggering Article 5.
Besides, Germany has already demonstrated how effectively it can use a war economy so a conventional war against NATO-without-the-States would probably either be quick or an attrition slog. And I don’t think that Russia has the means to pull off either without directly bringing China into the war.
I do agree that Europe should do more, although Russian psyops have been effective over here as well – fringe parties are on the rise and conveniently all of them happen to like Russia. What a coincidence. That plus the economic downturn expected after Trump takes a sledgehammer to global trade again puts a damper on our effectiveness.
The EU(because we can’t assume the US is going to be particularly helpful)’s gdp is a magnitude higher than russia’s, the same way russia’s is vs ukraine.
You’re right. People seem to have forgotten what mutually assured destruction is all about. Ukraine is outside of this protection but all NATO countries are covered by it.
Ukraine’s enemy is Vladimir Putin’s ego.
It’s not even like Hitler and WWII. Hitler had plausible strategic reasons to expand Germany’s territory and the industrial capacity to do it. So did Japan. Horrendous, but like reasonable in a horrific Machiavellian way.
Russia is… impaling itself over a comparatively tiny strip of territory, and dragging allies in, only because admitting defeat would bruise Putin’s public image, and he basically sacrificed his entire economy and brainwashed his people to do it. Russia’s actual territory isn’t even at risk.
comparatively tiny strip of territory
Most of Russia’s land is useless…
It’s not amount the amount of land it’s the food they produce, the wealth of it’s citizens, it’s ports, and its land borders with Europ that Putin wants.
Dude is trying to claw back as much of the USSR as he can, and he’ll stop with Ukraine as much as Hitler stopped with Poland.
It doesn’t matter how they’re obliged, North Korea is actively engaging in war and are thus a belligerent
Edit: to that one person who downvoted me: you’re a fucking moron that should google ‘belligerent’
It began in 2008, it just wasn’t kinetic yet.
What happens after Electric Boogaloo? Anyone know?
Because in 2024, Ukraine is no longer facing Russia.
Eh the Korean war (og) had a lot more nations in there.
