344
submitted 1 year ago by BrikoX@lemmy.zip to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] aaaaaaadjsf@hexbear.net 30 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

"Opposing military conscription is stupid" and other hot takes from westerners that have never had to fight a war at home.

How is it stupid to oppose Zelenskyy's suicidal conscription polices? It makes Russia's mobilisation/conscription look pacifist by comparison.

[-] WittyProfileName2@hexbear.net 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If you pop into that users history, you'll see that the interacting they're talking about is whining at me for a couple of days because I called them a racist.

[-] Murvel@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Not really. You just use the word 'racist' as a general insult to people who disagree with you. I don't really take it as an offense since it means nothing in that context, but using the word 'racist' ignoring its actual meaning is problematic.

[-] WittyProfileName2@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

How do you not understand how using a racial slur to insult someone is racist?

[-] Murvel@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Because mongrel is not a racial slur. You made it a racial slur. I could argue that the word Bastard is a racial slur by the same logic. And given enough time and effort, you would believe it if all you see is race.

[-] WittyProfileName2@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

There is a history of mongrel being used as a racial slur, you chose to ignore the evidence of that I showed you so you could pretend to be a victim.

[-] Murvel@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

All you need to know is that it was not used with a racist intent. The word itself was not even used in a context where it could be interpreted as racist. I mean, can you even answer which group of people the word was racist against based on your interpretation?

[-] sunbeam60@lemmy.one 3 points 1 year ago

What are you proposing should happen in Ukraine?

[-] aaaaaaadjsf@hexbear.net 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Negotiations? It's clear after the attempt at a "counter offensive" that Ukraine do not have the ability to gain any significant territory, and they are just throwing lives and equipment into a void of mines and trenches. And Ukraine is not going to gain the ability to break though these fortifications anytime soon, I cannot see western nations giving Ukraine the weaponry required (an air force is the main missing component needed for NATO style combined arms tactics to function).

Unless Ukraine can find a way to convince western nations to give them the equipment required to make breakthroughs (very unlikely), they are stuck in an attrition war with Russia. And I don't see any path to victory in an attrition war against Russia. The article we are commenting on is one of the major reasons why, they're having to fire people just to get more conscripts. At that point, negotiation is the best possible outcome.

[-] duderium@hexbear.net 18 points 1 year ago

Surrender. War crimes tribunals. Re-education. The rebirth of the USSR. We aren’t asking for much.

[-] sunbeam60@lemmy.one 0 points 1 year ago
[-] duderium@hexbear.net 7 points 1 year ago

The same will happen one day in the USA, just like in China and Vietnam 😉

[-] erik@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

Yeah, why not let ~~Hitler~~ Putler occupy us?

I mean: how bad can it be?

/s

[-] autismdragon@hexbear.net 8 points 1 year ago

Comparing Hilter to Putin is tantamount to holocaust denial.

Putin is a bad man but they aren't anywhere near to the same level.

this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
344 points (96.5% liked)

World News

32326 readers
477 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS