-8
submitted 1 month ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] RootBeerGuy@discuss.tchncs.de 17 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

A prolonged incursion into Russia could escalate the conflict, drawing in other nations and potentially leading to a catastrophic global confrontation.

Bit of a joke to write this, isn't it. The one country that is escalating things is Russia. They could have always moved back and have given up and this would all be over. Maybe Ukraine would leave the Russian territory if Russia leaves Ukrainian territory? Not sure that's on the table.

Edit: coming back to all the reactions. Just wow, hilarious.

Edit2: haha, they even come back to monitor edits. Fun times.

[-] davel@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 month ago


[-] SovietReporter@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 5 days ago

Do you have a source of the genocide that happened in Donbas?

[-] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago

Why would the Murican give such assurance to a failing empire? What would the Russians do ? Not collapse ? Kill a bunch of people as they retreat ?

[-] anachronist@midwest.social 0 points 1 month ago

Russia is so terrified of Nato encroachment that they stripped their defenses along the Finnish boarder shortly after Finland joined Nato, and they've moved all the defenses at this point (first weapons, now troops) out of Kaliningrad.

[-] davel@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 month ago
  1. Invading via Finland isn’t a thing. Ask Bonaparte or Hitler. There’s nothing up there but lakes, mud, and mosquitos.
  2. Where were Russian speakers being killed by government-backed neo-Nazis for the last decade? In eastern Norway? No, in eastern Ukraine.
  3. The US doesn’t have nuclear weapons deployed in Finland, and no known plans to. NATO Ally [Poland] 'Ready' to Station Nuclear Weapons on Its Territory

.

[-] anachronist@midwest.social -3 points 1 month ago

There’s nothing up there but lakes, mud, and mosquitos

That's a rude way to describe Saint Petersburg.

[-] freagle@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 1 month ago

Do you know what escalation means? Russia hasn't escalated shit since it launched the invasion. Each thing Russia has done since the invasion is part of the invasion. They haven't attacked other nations, they haven't embargoed or disrupted trade beyond their own borders, they haven't introduced new weapons platforms, they haven't made attempts to decapitate Ukrainian leadership.

Ukraine and the West are escalating. They've been escalating literally since the end of the Cold War. Each country on the border of Russia that got NATO nuclear sites was an escalation. Each color revolution was an escalation. Each sanction was an escalation. Each call for a no fly zone was an escalation. Each new weapons platform sent to Ukraine was an escalation. Each use of Western military intelligence to coordinate Ukrainian strikes was an escalation. Each time Ukraine struck civilian infrastructure inside Russia was an escalation.

You are using words you hear people say but you don't understand them.

Russia has had one demand since the USSR was dismantled - no NATO operations in Ukraine. When the USA escalated and supported the coup in 2014, Russia escalated and took Crimea. When the fascists in Ukraine escalated and sent paramilitary forces to terrorize and mass murder ethnic Russians, Russia escalated with paramilitary of its own in the region. When Ukraine escalated by pursuing NATO operations in its country and NATO made noise like it might, like when Trump escalated and approved the first weapons shipment to Ukraine in US history, Russia escalated by invading the border region. That's all of Russia's escalatory moves - 1 every 5 years or so. It's Ukraine and the West that have escalated since then. Sanctioning Russia was an escalation. Seizing Russian assets in violation of international law was an escalation. Sending lethal aid each year totalling more than the entire Russian military budget was an escalation. Sending Western intelligence, trainers, and even combatants to harm Russia are all escalatory moves.

[-] LemmyHead@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago

They're out there watching you 👀

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 month ago
[-] MarxMadness@lemmygrad.ml 10 points 1 month ago

"The winning side could simply surrender and give everything back"

I am a geopolitical mastermind

[-] Atomic@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 month ago

It's a .ml community. What did you expect?

[-] snugglesthefalse@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 month ago

Yeah I'm on the verge of blocking ml as well as hexbear, it's insane the level of mental gymnastics that's happening. Like what do they think Russia is going to do any less damage to the world than America if they get the chance?

[-] davel@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago

do they think Russia is going to do any less damage to the world than America if they get the chance

Very probably, yes.

Around 20 years ago Russia—at the time lead by Putin—wanted to join the imperialism club, but the US rejected them. Ex-Nato head says Putin wanted to join alliance early on in his rule. Since then Russia, rejected by the Global North, has had no choice but to join with the Global South as allies instead of neocolonizers. Hence BRICS+ and the larger developing multipolar bloc that’s going its own way, ignoring the US’ “rules-based international order” sanctions, developing its own international balance of payments outside of US dollar hegemony, and working to get out from under the boot of the IMF’s & World Bank’s debt traps.

Why did the US reject Russia from joining NATO? Because the US doesn’t want Europe and Russia to develop closer ties, because it doesn’t want the “Eurasian landmass” to ever cohere, because then it would become too self-sufficient and powerful for the US to control. Zbigniew Brzezinski laid this theory out when the Soviet Union fell. That’s why the US tried to convince Europe not to build Nord Stream 2 and then later not to turn it on, why Biden said he would “bring an end to it” if Russia invaded, and why they ultimately did bring an end to it.

The US also very much wants regime change or balkanization in Russia so it can resume its neocolonial “shock therapy” plundering of it, which started under Yeltsin and ended under Putin. That’s why the US has a special hate-on for Putin.

Compare what Russia has done in the last 80 years to the US:

As for the US’ actions against post-Soviet Russia in particular:
The US has wanted to break up or otherwise weaken/isolate Russia ever since almost immediately after the break-up of the USSR. That’s why it’s been expanding NATO ever-closer to Russia despite originally having sworn up & down never to move one inch eastward. The US couldn’t allow a Ukrainian government to stand that was friendly with Russia. That’s why it couped Ukraine’s government in 2014.

[-] Atomic@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 month ago

Not about that. They have some misguided notion that Russia stands for some imaginary form of communism that is the answer to everything.

And everything bad in the world is because of Capitalism. And also, everything west of Russia is "The west" and the entire "the west" is one entity.

[-] davel@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 month ago

That’s a shit strawman. Literally no one thinks that.

[-] Atomic@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 month ago

Unfortunately, I've had plenty of conversations here with people who think exactly this.

So yes, there are people who literally think this.

[-] davel@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 month ago

Show me a Lemmy conversation where someone thought that Russia stands for communism in any way. Only right-wing doofuses ever make such claims.

[-] AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 month ago

No, that's just what you put in their mouths because you're stupid and intransigent

this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2024
-8 points (44.1% liked)

World News

32212 readers
752 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS