I hate how “anti-war” has been hijacked by these people to mean, let imperialist countries invade whoever they want with no consequences. (in the case of tankies, any imperialist country that isn’t in NATO).
Wait, why are tankies siding with magas? I’ve been intentionally away for a minute, what did I miss?
Did something major happen in the last three days? Or is this the usual redirection of hate after we’ve found something to rally around?
Maga-Communism is a thing for a while: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackson_Hinkle
Fash and red fash are basically the same thing loyal to different empires.
Removed by mod
Your description of the tankie position doesn’t explain why they call for Ukraine to surrender like Russia isn’t the aggressor. Leftists in general do realize it’s a proxy war like you said, but we call for the invader to stop invading. Because, you know… The victim of an invasion surrendering doesnt usually lead to good outcomes for the victim.
What an insulting interpretation that yet again ignores Russian responsibility for this war. It was ONLY their decision.
Removed by mod
What do you mean?
If you keep feeding the troll we’ll end up with troll shit all over the lawn.
multi-polar imperialism
It’s the American way.
deleted by creator
Similar to how libs view the genocide in palestine.
Removed by mod
Make more new accounts, that’ll convince people. Moron.
I don’t think the average American has that level of planning. It’s more likely people just don’t like Russia invading other countries willy nilly
Removed by mod
I didn’t realize America was a hive-mind purely driven to make money for defence contractors.
Removed by mod
It seems unlikely that all the people failing to understand international policy in obvious ways, would have stocks and shares in the armaments sector. It’s more likely that they’re clueless. :)
Removed by mod
Russia invading Ukraine is wrong. But the world is full of wrong things. And until America fixes its problems at home, it is deeply immoral to drain the economy and weapon reserves and put our citizenry at risk. Anyone who believes the politicians usual garbage about “protecting democracy” and “standing up to imperialism” is a moron.
Did you know that “own people first/eigen volk eerst” is the slogan of a Belgian far-right neo-nazi party?
There is nothing immoral about helping a people in need.
Removed by mod
You’re very naive to think the US war machine is “helping a people in need”. Even Boris Johnson admitted this is a proxy war. They’re sending ukrainians to die just to mess with Russia. They have no chance of winning anything.
Do you think we have no free will here in Ukraine or something? It’s so easy for you to dehumanize us as some puppets who have no agency and are “sent”, “made”, blah blah blah. Fuck off.
They don’t care about you, they care about the idea of you. Just like how so many idealists self-righteously “fighting” the genocide of Palestinians by being armchair warriors on the internet have never actually talked to any Palestinians. Or even tried to.
Stay safe, my friend. I am sorry America will likely not have your back much longer.
Just to offer you a perspective on what other people think, not that you asked for it but idk, don’t read if you’re not interested :) I’ll be brief.
America not having their back might bring about a truce treaty, which would stop the war, the bombs, the people getting killed. I think across the political spectrum from “tankies” to Trump supporters and everything in between, lots of people are hoping for a fast peaceful outcome.
Your willingness to give land that isn’t yours away is noted.
It’s not my land to give, it just seems to me that trying to take it back doesn’t work, and I question the motives of western states and if they genuinely believe in victory, or if they’re just fueling the war to weaken their enemy.
I think our free will is being manipulated by the media, manufacturing consent. This goes for people in Ukraine, Europe, the US, Russia, everywhere.
There are some good Youtube videos on the subject if you’re interested.
I think you would find that bombs being dropped at night on your city, country, your friends and loved ones, schools, theatres ans hospitals, by a “brotherly nation”, whose leader speaks a lot about your country being fake, over the pretence of fighting some “nazis” apparently, would do much more to directly influence your free will than Youtube.
Removed by mod
3 day operation that is now in its 3rd year…
Isn’t this idea that the conflict was intended to last only 3 days something the media says to portray the russians as weak and incompetent?
Afaik at this stage of the conflict they’re fighting so Ukraine can reclaim its lost territories. They’ve been at this stage for a long time and it doesn’t seem doable. This is why many lefties are against the war. Because if you know there’s no chance to win but you keep fueling the flames, you’re just sending those people to die just to weaken the enemy, which is a pretty shitty thing to do.
Anyway this is just one point of view, might be a very stupid one, but I think it’s worth taking into consideration.
Russia clearly stated at the start it would only take them 3 days. Russian officers had pre-booked tables in Kyiv restaurants on the 4th day. They were that confident it was going to be over that quickly.
Boris Johnson is well known for being an idiot. Ukrainians are fighting for their land and their freedom, they’re not being sent by americans.
yup. this.
If Russia stops fighting there would be no war. If Ukraine stops fighting there would be no Ukraine.
Well said.
At this stage, since they have fought so well, I’d guess there would just be a much smaller, much weaker Ukraine.
We will likely see this happen now Trump is president. He is too egotistical to not take revenge on them for not playing along with his quid pro quo back in 2019.
The Ukrainian flags in republican yards never meant a thing… They sold Ukraine out at the polls.
That includes only battlefield context. Truth is Russia will at the very best economically and politically fall into a 3rd world country level the moment it loses the war. More probably dissolve into smaller states = there would be no Russia as we know it today anymore.
Good. After what they’ve done, they don’t deserve to exist as a nation anymore.
Yeah. Let US the saint be world’s boss. Never killed a fly anyway.
Literally repeating US State Dept. talking points.
This guy floating up to the sky when US State Department says that gravity is real
… and the WMD’s will be found any day now in Iraq General Powell.
I don’t think you understood the joke. Do you know the saying about a broken clock?
Do you do anything besides shitpost and deliberately misinterpret people?
Kicking the dogs passes the time.
And? The saying was popular before Blinken’s speech btw.
I can’t find an earlier source. And it’s not accurate:
Boris Johnson Pressured Zelenskyy to Ditch Peace Talks With Russia: Ukrainian Paper
In the weeks ahead of Johnson’s April 9 visit, high-level diplomatic talks held in Belarus and Turkey had failed to yield a diplomatic breakthrough, though reports in mid-March indicated that Russian and Ukrainian delegations “made significant progress” toward a 15-point peace deal that would involve Ukraine renouncing its NATO ambitions in exchange for the withdrawal of Moscow’s troops.
Remember that the original Canadian intent of the UN Peacekeepers was that they would forcibly create and enforce peace.
It was the USSR and the USA that objected to the concept.
Similarly if most countries have a mutual defence pact, no one country will be able to invade another without being at war with literally the whole world.
I’m afraid that mutual defense isn’t as iron clad as you think. If Article 5 of NATO ever gets triggered you’ll get a masterclass on weaseling out of obligations. It’s ironic because Ukraine may already be receiving the kind of support a full NATO member is entitled to.
Article 5 was triggered by 9/11 and is the reason everyone followed America into Afghanistan
Unfortunately with Trump the US will try to weasel their way out. Europe knows too well what happens.
This does seem likely with Trump… but he’s also in bed with the military-industrial complex, which never misses a chance to get contracts.
It only works if you actually commit to it.
But imagine the implications if a country did not commit to it (bar an obvious one like Hungary or Turkey). They’ll likely get sanctioned, probably will have trouble entering any useful alliances for the next decade or so because no one trusts them anymore.
If one didn’t, sure. But what happens when NATO as a whole doesn’t defend Poland? What’s Poland going to do? Or even just Trump’s US?
The trick is that (Eastern) Europe is filled with NATO troops and material from all countries. You would need an extremely nasty retreat of these troops if you do not support (say) Poland. Also at the moment (officially) the US has stationed nuclear weapons in 6 European countries, and there are very likely more also in the form of submarines that are not known to the public. Retreating means leaving those weapons in Russian hands. Then again, maybe Trump does not care about that.
Well ideally if you don’t want to be a part of an agreement, you just tell the people you made the agreement with that you are no longer a part of it.
If you do so amicably, parties may be fine with it it may not have bad effects. If you wait till one of those counties is being invaded and back out, it likely would not end amicably, and with them having to switch over to a wartime economy, they may cut all trade moving forward with the member who screwed them over. Could cost the U.S. trillions in trade annually.
Aka it would be more profitable to support your allies, or get out of the agreement early, but that doesn’t guarantee counties don’t say… Why should we trade with someone who would hang us out to dry? And it hurts our economy anyway.
Ww1
Ireland has peacekeepers between Israel and Lebanon right now. They wouldn’t be there if “create peace” was one of the missions.
Peace must exist, however briefly, and then the peacekeepers place themselves in harm’s way to keep the peace.
Extend the mission to militarily “create peace” and suddenly you are just NATO/USA. How can either side trust a peace that was enforced upon them and not call it a defeat, whose borders are disputed for eternity? Every nationalist who wants to stir sentiment can just say “look what the British/Americans/UN imposed on us”. Outside forces drawing borders is pretty much the cause of 90% of warfare, civil and otherwise, for the last 80 years.
A Canadian was also the principal author of the UN declaration on human rights, and another was the reason NATO is a political as well as military alliance. We just keep winning!
I’m really curious how or why it works. Do they hate US so much that anyone against the US seems a hero to them, despite being off the same kind but pretending to be a communist/socialist?
I am curious about this as well. At least in some cases, it seems to be due to “alternate facts”, e.g., https://lemmy.ca/comment/13198294
Are they saying that the U.S. was preparing Ukraine for war in 2014… Which Russia had started moving their forces in 2013 and started the invasion in February of 2014. It’s like how people try to say “well Russia wouldn’t have invaded Ukraine if Trump had still been president”… When Russia mobilized their troops and equipment and marched them there for the invasion while Trump was still President.
That was an… interesting read 😅
Damn, that’s alternate as fuck 🤢
That’s exactly the reason (even if they don’t 100% admit it) for the communist parties in my country.
A surprising portion of people in the northern hemisphere think that a person having lots of money is literally exactly the same thing as a person having lots of blessings from [deity]. They see that Russia is run by oligarchs, and that since those oligarchs command lots of currency, they are inherently chosen by [diety] to always be correct.
Who thinks that? Are we talking about the old Pharaoh’s of Egypt?
I’d say these two probably think something along those lines…
Okay… so this makes me wonder where the artwork came from before they put words over it. That donkey is jacked and has a very bright smile for a farm animal. Do you think the person who did the artwork had no idea what they were going to write over it, or just that they’ve got some closeted desires they haven’t figured out how to discuss openly yet?
Maybe it’s a Divine Donkey lol
I’m guessing it’s clip art.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosperity_theology
I notice this to be most prevalent amongst the Russian Orthodox people I know as well as Evangelical Christians, but it’s not limited to those.
There is rarely, if ever, support for Putin. What is more typical is a recognition the USSR was a better entity than both what it replaced and what replaced it. So there is usually the connection that the US is the reason Russia is the way it is, which is usually lauded as ‘USA bad’.
So even though America was the global superpower after the fall of the USSR: Putin, (or at least someone like him), was wanted in power. ‘Keep rootin for Putin’ wasn’t just a pundit book 20 years ago.
All in all when the goal is eradicating communism at all costs, you wind up with war mongering right wingers in their stead: and that’s the perspective every communist I have interacted with has come from.
It’s like their version of STOP RESISTING.
My Mom said Russia had to attack Ukraine, because they were trying to join NATO. I asked why she thinks Ukraine was trying to join NATO. I’m still digging for a bedrock of logic.
Part of the problem with game theory and finding a “bedrock of logic” is that game theoretical analysis is often recursive. It’s not a stack of prepositions and conclusions; it’s often a loop. Sort of like a resonance structure. I’ve got my gun aimed at you because your gun is aimed at me because my gun is aimed at you … recursively forever.
My understanding is that the US/NATO and the USSR/Russia, ie the two sides of the Cold War, have maintained a sense of peace and security by maintaining a buffer between the two sides. A buffer of distance, which is relevant because it relates to the time it takes nuclear weapons to travel from one adversarial territory to the other.
The Cuban Missile Crisis was basically caused because Cuba was too close to the USA for nuclear missiles to be stored in a way that the balance of MAD could be maintained.
The public declaration (by Kamala Harris, incidentally) that Ukraine would join NATO is a violation of a promise made by Reagan that NATO would not extend to the border of Russia.
It’s similar to the USSR’s attempt to install nuclear missiles in Cuba, in the sense that it’s simply too close.
That’s my understanding of the motivation behind Russia’s invasion. I’m quite new to all this though.
So it’s less like “Stop resisting!” and more like “Drop the gun!”
My suspicion is that MAD overall is diminishing in its power to stabilize the world militarily, as a result of new military technologies coming into play (space-based weapons, drones, AI, hypersonic missiles, iron dome scenarios) as well as more and more nuclear powers coming online, and the increasing probability of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of non-state actors.
And finally there’s China’s overall rise toward the role of hegemonic power.
The Cold War basically organized itself (and hence organized the influences that minimized military action) around two major powers. Now there’s a third major power that’s rapidly accelerating toward becoming the major power. It’s changing all the equations that balanced out in the 1970s, 80s, etc.
The reason Ukraine wanted to join NATO is that Russia already had occupied Crimea and part of Georgia before. All that after Ukraine gave up all the nukes they still had from USSR times. Ukraine was not a threat to Russia before the occupation of Crimea.
Distance is really not much of a factor any more, and hasn’t been for a long time. Kaliningrad and St. Petersburg can already be reached by submarine launched cruise missiles in less than 15 minutes (conservative estimate). And let’s face it, with MAD being a thing, any kind of nuclear strike is likely to escalate into all-out nuclear annihilation, anyway. This makes any attempt at overwhelming the opponent a losing proposition. So in that sense nothing has changed since, oh, the mid-1970s?
Then there is the argument that Russia doesn’t want a long shared border with NATO. Guess what, their aggression has caused Finland and Sweden to join NATO, which has only added to their shared border with NATO. That they already had with Poland and the Baltic states (there is no treaty nor official document prohibiting NATO expansion).
And finally, how hard is it to understand that NATO is a defensive alliance? It is neither politically geared to nor militarily capable of mounting a conquest of Russia. The fact that so many of Russia’s neighbors are eager to join the alliance should be a pretty strong hint as to why it needs to exist in the first place. It is Russia that cannot be trusted, not NATO. And you can’t make your neighbor “drop the gun” in their own house. The Ukrainians were stupid enough already to return their nuclear arsenal to Russia in return for explicit security guarantees. What a mistake that was.
Don’t even get me started on how China is criminally underrated as a manifest threat to world peace…
The Cuban Missile Crisis was basically caused because Cuba was too close to the USA for nuclear missiles to be stored in a way that the balance of MAD could be maintained.
The so-called Cuban Missile Crisis was caused by Kennedy moving nuclear missiles into Turkey, within striking range of the USSR. It never would have happened if Kennedy hadn’t decided to start swinging his dick around.
I don’t even know what they (western tankies) get from this. Average dumbass Russian only cares about his ass, and the pretended “glory”. There is no “Conservative brotherhood which spans across the ocean”. They don’t speak your language, they don’t have the same problem, and they hate YOU with passion, because on average, they are racist and dumb.
So my only hypothesis is that tankies think (??) that by going “contrarian” they show how smart they are, and that “did the research” lol.
I’m not a tankie, but I probably am what everyone in this thread is calling a “tankie”, so here’s my answer:
Yes, it is extremely bad that Russia invaded Ukraine. The ideal scenario would have been Ukraine quickly repelling the invasion when it happened. But we don’t live in magic fantasy world where everyone gets what they deserve. We live in the real world, where Ukraine cannot possibly defeat Russia in a war. The option which saves the most Ukrainian lives is a negotiated peace, with Russia getting much more of what they want than we would like.
All that is achieved by pouring more weapons into Ukraine is prolonging the meatgrinder for years, wiping out an entire generation of Ukrainians and risking a global nuclear war.
Ukraine had a negotiated peace before the 2022 invasion, after the 2014 invasion. Why would a 2025 negotiated peace be any more reliable?
No, it’s because “America bad”. There’s a lot of reasons to hate America, and the drip feeding of munitions to Ukraine is one of them. I think we should have been sending everything from the start with the only restriction being no hitting civilian targets. A million 155 shells a week. Tomahawks. Predator drones. Hell, even F-15s. I agree, end the war, but end it in a Ukrainian victory with their borders restored.
The best way to minimize the overall violence of a fight is to use enough force in the first moments to end the fight.
Generally speaking. Maybe.
There was never any chance of Ukrainian victory. Russia is not that weak and everyone knew it from the start.
But arming ukrainians and sending them to die weakens Russia, so the US likes that. It’s all a game, and none of it was ever in the interest of Ukraine nor its people.
Kyiv in three days!
I had a reply for a similar comment; trying to link it here, to avoid copy-pasting: https://lemmy.ml/post/23582488/15569369
I’m sure you’ll just dismiss this all as Western Imperialist propaganda since it disagrees with your worldview, but:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Kyiv_convoy#Three_day_war_plan
Of course, in public, Putin was much more pragmatic.
He said it would be two weeks.
https://time.com/3259699/putin-boast-kiev-2-weeks/
So would you prefer, “Kyiv in two weeks?” I’ll go with that. Exactly the same stupid idea.
Seems to me that Ukraine still exists as a country and that wouldn’t be the case if not for international support.
Are you hoping for a restoration of the Soviet Union? Any other countries on your list that don’t deserve to exist?
Russia has a long and proud history of losing to "smaller, weaker " countries. Russo Japanese war, WW1, Polish Soviet war of 1919, the winter war, Afghanistan, Chechen war until they paid homage to the Kadyrovs. there’s no reason to think there was never a chance at Ukrainian victory. Russia fumbles the bag plenty. But I get it. America bad so Russia stonk and good.
America bad so Russia stonk and good.
I think this kinda reductionist bs abolishes any kind of discussion. What does this have to do with anything? Where did I say such things?
But arming ukrainians and sending them to die weakens Russia, so the US likes that.
Right there. You said it right there And you’re changing the subject. Russian victory was never a forgone conclusion. History has shown us that.
Yet 3 years later Russia still has not completed its objectives, took its eye off Syria, and needs troops & ammo from North Korea.
And all it took was 1,000,000 dead Ukrainians!
Murdered by Russian. So tell me, in this peace of yours, who gets what and why?
You’re blaming them for defending themselves???
It’s even worse than that. It’s “America bad, therefore Russia good.” As if there has to be some sort of cosmic balance.
as if there has to be some sort of cosmic balance
Got me laughing, very true observation
Would have been nice to send a message to Vlad on day 1.
“Turnabout is fair play”
Tankies entire world view is formed around hating the US.
They will glorify terrible regimes that literally commit genocides and straight up murder thousands of innocents just because that regime is in opposition to US influence.
They use left wing language, but they do not care about leftist issues. They do not care about disabled people getting focibly euthanised, about anyone who dares critique the regime being forcibly silenced, about minorities being genocided (unless the US or NATO does it), that their “socialist states” literally have billionaires while others starve. They think it’s all US propaganda. (Alternatively, they’ll admit part of it and say it’s for the greater good).
A much simpler way of putting that second picture is: " . . . but that doesn’t mean you have to support another empire."
Removed by mod
They want power, over others, forever.
Removed by mod
Do you wish someone supported Iraq against America?
By the usual tankie logic, Iraq should have just given up. They had no chance to win the war.
You lack nuance.
You can’t see your own hypocrisy here at all and it’s rich af.
Just „take your land“?
Looks to me also like „destroy your culture“ and „torture, maim, rape and kill your friends and family“.
Well, they did say “Destroy you and take your land”.
Though I agree that “destroy” is doing some heavy lifting in this sentence.
I wonder how these people would feel if there were individuals that would argue for thieves to break into their homes and take it over.
“I don’t want anything of mine stolen! they broke in!”
“But sir, why don’t you want people to have a place to live in? Make peace with it!”
Don’t forget… They broke into your house, took over your living room, killed 2 of your family members in there and said “Let’s make an election”. Surprisingly, they won the election in your living room, because dead people can’t vote and they were allowed to vote, too.
It’s more like you fight your roommate and his friends come over to bully you. You get some weapon once in a while through the window. Still you are on your own vs 10. Also from outside they instruct you to use your young children to fight.
