19
Time: Ukraine Can't Win the War
(time.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 24 Feb 2024
19 points (57.9% liked)
World News
32326 readers
757 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
If Russia comes out of this conflict with any gains at all that could be construed as "worth it" for their side it will be an open invitation to keep invasions on the table as a method to apply again in the near future.
Russia is literally the biggest country in the world with massive natural resources and very low population density. The idea that Russia will sacrifice its relatively small population for the sake of additional territorial gains is preposterous.
They're literally doing that right now, though
They're fighting against NATO expansion to Russia's border which they have been warning against for over a decade now. Even Stoltenberg admits this now:
Yet the main reason countries at Russia's border want to join NATO is to not get attacked by Russia.
Nah, the main reason is that their political systems have been captured by US, while propaganda groups like the NED have poured billions into trying to shape public opinion. Yet, despite all that we're now starting to see a huge backlash against all that from the public. The massive farmer protests are just the start of that.
Oh wow, it's the tankie version of US exceptionalism where the US controls everything and is all powerful.
The US had like zero influence in the baltics when they joined, same for Georgia when they wanted to join.
Not sure how farmer protests are involved but I hope you know that the vast majority of farmers in those protests are just people who own the farm. They don't actually work those farms and the protests so far have been against climate regulations that cut into their profit margin.
Image believing that US had zero influence in the Baltics despite all the evidence to the contrary.
Imagine not knowing the history of the baltics
looks like you don't have to imagine
Sounds pretty inflammatory, your a nasty one
learn to spell kid
Ouch, what a pain, kid
Nope, not true, but provide no facts
This is publicly available information. Spend a bit of time learning how google works instead of trolling here.
Your talking about the bits which don't support your 'facts'. Unless your looking at what's publicly available in Russia. Troll off, troll
get a better script π
I thought Putin said it was because "Ukraine is a neo-nazi regime"?
No, wait, he said it was because the west were using Ukraine to base their weapons
Oh, nevermind, I forgot that there is no such thing as Ukraine, it's all part of Russia
Oh, or is it because the west are gay paedophilic gender-neutral-god-worshipping heathens
Or was it because Ukraine was planning to pretend Russia nuked them first so that they could actually declare war on Russia
Ah, was it to defend Donetsk and Luhansk's independence? Or are they part of Russia?
Or is it that Ukraine has a government with no control, where the streets of Kiev are a lawless purge?
I seem to have lost track of why he's invading. Could you clarify for me?
Ukraine being a neo-nazi regime doing ethnic cleansing in Donbas and planning to host NATO weapons that can strike within Russia are precisely in line with the problem of NATO expansion. Incredible that you're unable to understand how a single overarching problem can have multiple aspects to it. Hope that clarified things for you.
Piss off putin
this you π https://lemmy.ml/comment/8653212
Dead link? Link to the current article? Doesn't work for me, but do you want to go history game russian troll?
it's a link to your own comment, you're so bad at trolling π
And how do the gay paedophile heretics fit into your overarching problem?
Wait till you find out what the banderite stance on gay pedophile heretics is.
It's pretty hilarious how nearly everything you listed as if they're contradictory points actually come together rather comprehensively to support the thesis that Russia is having to fight a belligerent NATO. And the one item that doesn't fit wasn't ever claimed by Russia to be a reason for the conflict.
I don't know what anyone can do for you to cure your confusion when you can't even connect the dots between the very things you are linking.
Maybe when they are using the exact line if putin, they may be a human, but essentially a bot
or maybe they just don't have any actual point to make and run around smearing people instead, which always seems to be the case with liberals
Everything you've written in this thread is a smear. Also, not a lib, but I'm not precious.
do be specific what you're claiming I've written that's a smear
Go first, answer one thing I've sent
You haven't answered a single thing, you just made childish personal attacks. Thanks for providing ample evidence to support my point though.
Not true, but that's the truth of the Russian arguments.
this you? https://lemmy.ml/comment/8677732
My fucking god. And that's why I shouldn't social media drunk. Sorry. I was wrong.
I misread so hard.
Also good work mods!
The same reason US would be against Russia turning Mexico into a battering ram against US. Meanwhile, the idea that Russia wants to take back former Soviet states is so utterly laughable. It already took Russia two years just to take on the NATO proxy in Ukraine. It's pretty clear that it would be a far bigger effort to actually take on NATO directly. Anybody with a functioning brain can see that the whole idea is absurd. Yet, here you are...
You're deluded. Attack the opponent to win the argument, that's how logic works. You can't think for yourself, but you call that freedom.
I've made clear arguments and even provided supporting sources, if you have trouble understanding them that's not my problem.
Okay, I disagree with that. Lol
We've already established that you lack basic reading comprehension lol, but thinks for confirming that again.
Yeah, I re-read it now. You are correct, fml. I misread the comment you made, and fucking was annoying. Sorry.