this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2023
431 points (96.5% liked)
World News
32048 readers
1160 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 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No, we want Ukraine to stop trying to ethnically cleanse the Donbas and give the people there self determination. And we want the Ukrainian government to stop forcibly conscripting people to go die needlessly on the front in a clearly losing war. We want NATO to stop enabling all of that (it literally wouldn't be happening if they weren't demanding that it continue). That's what it is to be a peace activist. And I'm fairly sure I can speak for all of us, we are not pacifists, lol. But we are advocates for peace and the end to the horrible and needless loss of life.
Nice try to completely twist reality, and completely misrepresent us, as you war mongering dronies always do.
Edit: We actually give a shit about all the Ukrainian people being thrown into a fucking meat grinder. We care about their lives. The people who just say "more weapons to Ukraine!" do not give a shit about the lives of the people there. They're happy to just let the war keep dragging on until the last capable Ukrainian is dead. An example of how WE feel about the tragedy of the situation: https://hexbear.net/post/503747 (hexbear link to a lemmygrad news post)
So be fucking outraged then that Russia started, and is continuing this war. They're the ones killing Ukrainians in their homeland.
A comment from that link:
Russia is committing genocide. They've been raping and killing civilians since the start, this is where your anger and energy needs to be. Imagine being outraged at the nation defending itself from genocide, and those countries that are sending the tools that they're being asked for to help defend themselves.
You know this is not genocide, right?
You are describing war crimes. War crimes are horrible. Two rapes are two rapes too many. Every side in every war does them, which is a major reason war is so horrific. Genocide is much more than a series of war crimes, though. To believe otherwise is to declare all sides in all wars genocidal, rendering the word meaningless.
They're kidnapping Ukrainian children and trying to "re-educate" them, and given Russian soldiers have had specific orders to "kill everyone" from commanders, and video evidence of random civilians being targeted and killed, I can't really think what else is could be? Seems like they're trying to eradicate the Ukrainian people and their culture.
Let's start with a source for this one. I've seen nothing akin to the indigenous boarding schools ran by the U.S. and Canada in actual campaigns to destroy a people's collective identity. What I have seen are reports of children whose parents are not available/alive to take care of them (a fact of any war) and Russia putting them in school and/or up for adoption (something any state would do).
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/18/how-ukraine-kidnapped-children-led-to-vladimir-putins-arrest-warrant-russia
I mean it's a pretty well known enough to trigger an international arrest warrant.
Classic hexbear whataboutism response. Like I'm going to sit here and defend the horrendous crimes that happened in those boarding schools. Both things are wrong. You can be critical of Russia my man, you don't need to defend it so aggressively.
Your linked articles makes literally no fact-claims outside of what my comrade there said. It just ignored whatever reasons Russia have and assumed the worst or let you imagine/fill in the gaps. Edit: added "no" because it was missing
Your comrade just made an assumption that the Russians are merely looking after children who have lost their parents, as if they're playing the generous role of social services.
From the linked article:
In at least two of the camps, the children’s return date was delayed by weeks, while at two other camps, the return of some children was postponed indefinitely.
Videos published from the camps by the occupying regional authorities show children singing the Russian national anthem and carrying the Russian flag. In separate videos, teachers talk about the need to correct their understanding of Russian and Soviet history.
Simmons said: “All of it adds up to a story which is utterly horrendous. It’s horrendous on every conceivable level.
Ukrainian mothers trying to their their kids back.
UN report on kidnappings
https://www.google.com/amp/s/fortune.com/2023/07/07/why-is-russia-kidnapping-ukrainian-children-vladimir-putin-soviet-book-author/amp/
They literally took this girl, gave her a Russian passport and claimed her as an orphan.
The absolute fuck are you guys coming to the defence of Russia for?
Still literally none of that goes against what was said. There's s war, and when that happens and territory changes hands, there's always this problem (or the military let's the children just run around with parents gone and get themselves hurt). It's not unique and it's not something you have a better idea for. Its why we stand for bringing and end to wars generally while you stand for ending Russia (where the next war will just come at the next eastern border where this whole cycle will repeat). Can you not see how areas which have become Russian through referendum will have issues of parents being gone and wanting children back, but Russia can't just send em randomly across a border. They've gotta have checks for the parenthood and that the children are not also claimed by another parent that stayed (a case which often happens with divorces, and complicates it). All while trying to work with a government that very obviously is not willing to work with you. All the articles fit this narrative also, just with spin on top using specific wording and leaving out details.
International law is a joke. If you knew anything about it you wouldn't be screeching "whataboutism!" at even the most obvious of comparisons, because you'd know that a cornerstone of what passes as International law is looking at practices of other countries.
But let's see what your article says:
This article documents that (when it was written) Kherson was still an active war zone, but nevertheless adds scare quotes to "evacuation," as if there is no need to evacuate children from a war zone and this is all a Russian pretense. So early on we can see that no Russian explanation will be deemed credible, even when the explanation Russia gives (e.g., evacuation) is documented by the author himself.
Even Ukranians recognize the need for evacuating children, but nope, it's an evil plot when Russia does it! Note also that the immediate evidence we have here -- an in-person interview with a Ukranian working with kids, not a second- or third-hand story -- mentions exactly what I said: kids orphaned by the war who need to go somewhere, not Russians snatching kids from their parents.
What is more believable: Russians are trying to snatch any kid they can lay their hands on, for some reason the Ukrainians subjected to this believe fake medical records will prevent this, a driver tells them "hey here's five kids with fake documents," and the kids outwit a bunch of soldiers with some unexplained cunning? Or is it more likely that Russians consider kids in a war zone basically a nuisance, and aren't particularly invested if someone is trying to evacuate them?
So the Russians are stealing children by... taking them to a Ukranian orphanage?
I mean, just look this shit up? There's tonnes of articles, accounts from mothers trying to get their children back, UN reports on it, loads. Stop pretending like this isn't happening, it's absolutely ridiculous. Feels like I'm witnessing some kind of Russian information warfare in action here.
You know this is happening yet you're coming out in defence of Russia.
Lmao you can't even imagine how someone could possibly disagree with the liberal narrative -- even after someone goes line by line through a salacious article and highlights bias and inconsistencies.
Genocide is a crime. If you claim a crime occurred you have to provide evidence. What you are doing is equivalent to accusing someone of murder, then standing up in front of the judge and shouting "we all know he did it, just go out and find the evidence yourself, what, are you some kind of Russian plant for saying I need a witness???" Just a laughable response.
The only thing laughable is you trying to defend Russia and try to downplay or make excuses for Russia kidnapping children.
https://www.politico.eu/article/save-ukraine-children-abduction-russia-war-rescue-operation/
https://apnews.com/article/ukrainian-children-russia-7493cb22c9086c6293c1ac7986d85ef6
https://press.un.org/en/2023/sc15395.doc.htm
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/russias-mass-abduction-of-ukrainian-children-may-qualify-as-genocide/
You realize more fighting and more weapons doesn't magicly win territory? It's war, to continue fighting means killing more people and destroying more lives. The fighting needs to stop as soon as possible, one way or another or the whole country will end up like Bakmuht.
So your answer is to let an aggressor nation just happily steamroll through any country it pleases? Because down to this logic, any nation that decides to defend their homeland just cause needless bloodshed. No fighting = no deaths, but the aggressor can literally just waltz in and take whatever it wants.
Agreed. Every effort needs to make sure Russia leaves Ukraine ASAP. Ideally without any more deaths. But unfortunately as long as Russia continues this pointless act of imperialism, then the death toll will rise.
So your answer is to keep the meatgrinder running for as long as possible? Sure, countless Ukrainians and Russians are dying, but at least the lines on the map don't change.
No the real answer is these people somehow think their constant egging on escalation instead of some sort of diplomatic resolution, won't eventually lead inevitably to the war escaping its proxy status and evolve into a REAL inter-imperialist direct confrontation with all of what it implies (it implies nukes)
If Ukraine wants to remain a sovereign nation and retain its land, then what alternative does it have? I don't think any nation in their right mind would happily let an invader just attack without putting up a defence.
Russia themselves threw millions of men into the meat grinder to defeat the Nazis and so did the allies. So did the north Vietnamese against the US. It's tragic, but it's it's unfortunately the reality when there's bad actors that invade other nations.
You think nazis are in this case the good actors because the genocide they were busy with got interrupted by an invader invited by the people you wanted killed off to protect them?
You were happy enough to let Ukraine commit genocide until an 'aggressor' stopped it
So enlist. They're out of warm bodies to throw at minefields and artillery kill zones. Instead of being so bloodthirsty with other people's lives, put yours at risk.
Why do you deserve to live if you want other people to die for your cause? Go die for your own cause. Go die with the rest of your nazi comrades.
No? Let's not forget that Russia massively exaggerated the numbers this, whilst simultaneously also committing atrocities themselves, and then severely ramped it up in the invasion. It hasn't stopped, it's got significantly worse.
Why don't you go to Putin and ask him to pull out of Ukraine? Or go protest the war in Russia and build momentum to get the population to protest?
Of course, you see all Ukrainians as Nazis. Explains why you're so eager for Ukraine to roll over so Russia can come in take over the country and eradicate Ukraine and it's culture.
"we were only doing a little genocide"
cringe
Not after the invasion. After Ukraine reacted to its situation turning hopeless by turning to terrorist tactics like bombing civilian bridges during rush hour.
Because unlike you I don't wish for the genocide to continue until it's successful.
No. Just the ones who took power in 2014 and have since made it illegal to oppose them politically while making national holidays out of WW2 nazi heroes. The ones you keep photographing with their nazi tattoos because you somehow can't find all the good Ukrainians who aren't sporting them.
It's a nazi country. It's run by and run for nazis. You're defending them knowing this full well. You're covering for them. That's why I call them your comrades. You're a nazi by action.
Typical nazi rhetoric: either you let us purge anyone not like us or you're doing oppressing us.
To say nothing of how fucking ignorant you are of the entire geopolitics around the war to say something so fucking stupid as to not even know why Russia is fighting. Shut the fuck up if you don't know anything. Sophomoric linguistic punch-ups like 'whilst' do absolutely fucking nothing to mask the fact that you're talking out of your ass.
Gaddafi's troops are committing rape to children en masse, they have issued viagra to mass rape people since the start. this is where your anger and energy need to be. Imagine being outraged at the nation defending itself from mass rape, and those countries that are sending the tools that they're being asked for to help defend themselves.
Here is the UN mandate to intervene in Lybia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1973 a resolution drafted by Tunisia and supported by the African Union, the Arab League and allowed by all of the UNSC.
Where is russia's UN mandate to annex Crimea and to later bomb Kiev? Did they even try?
The Lybian war was started on lies and shattered the country so I don't care if it was "legal". Diplomatic routes in Ukraine were tried (e.g. the Minsk Agreements) but broken by Kiev. The Crimean people overwhelmingly supported the annexation.
honestly i appreciate you attempting to engage this - truthfully, i find the entire premise of appealing to morality in a war fruitless, and my intentions in making the statement above was to imitate that this is a effect that has been repeated for many generations (whether or not it is true).
ultimately people do things to advance their own goals & stamp out contradictions, not on the basis of morality.
this attempt to say this is moral and that isn't could go on until the next generation of soldiers is born - and it would be pointless because the narrative accepted will often be the media machine with the biggest wallet until some massive contradiction.
ultimately what are your goals here, what are the perspective of the shoes of the russians and the ukrainians, what is the context etc.
perhaps it's as simply resolved as the issue of the jupiter missles, or perhaps peace was never going to be a option(from your stance of the "russian imperialists" or my stance that the American west desire to remain a world power).
truthfully i am of the opinion the americans seeks to remain a world power [hence the 800 military bases around the world vs the russians 21], and will take advantage of any conflict to pose as the morally high ground in a "just war", or proxy war in this case.
i don't think peace was ever an option, russia most likely sees ukraine as a staging ground for nato as it did in operation Barbarossa, or napoleon, or seeks minerals, or believes the new government is too nationalist for their own taste (why does it have to be one point?)
all that matters is that is a war to extinguish contradictions that pose existential threats, another form of competition for capital.
I did not appeal to morality, I stated the fact that the decision to helping the rebels in Lybia took into account every regional player given what we knew at the time. And even in that case it was counterproductive in hindsight.
Following international law is not about morality, it's about being able to vaguely know what you can count on and possible consequences when you perform a military calculation or a geopolitical move.
If everyone just takes what they can get away with regardless of others' interests, the future will just be a series of Iraq and Ukraine wars all over the world, particularly in Africa, Europe and Asia.
Russia decided to help the rebels in Ukraine because they were being targeted for ethnic cleansing and asked for help explicitly
i acknowledge this, i have no desire to struggle for the trough.
to follow law and order for the sake of law and order, you will find these rules tend to favour the well established, powerful and often rich governments. just like it once was deemed that to attack kings was deem sinful for they conversed with god. the rich and powerful will write laws that benefit them, while maneuvering around them with ease to cripple/destroy their enemies/threats.
the material reality on ground matters immensely, and we the west seek to capitalize on this opportunity (in the ukraine) to liquidate our enemies where ever, whenever possible.
my friend, we will live to see many more wars, there are contradictions grander than this, (see ipcc report) - and i assure you, we will be portrayed as the good guys, with hollywood movies on how our soldiers going overseas to do these wars made us feel sad.
Libya today is a haven for islamic terrorism and slaver markets. Regardless of the "legality" of the NATO (mostly french and US led) intervention, it threw the entire region in outright chaos, and was enormously damaging to the working class of Lybia, but also of the entire fucking Sahel.
Yea, in hindsight it would have been better to just let him crack down on the population to keep stability in the region, but with the information we had at the time, most African and Arab neighbours agreed that helping the rebels with a no-fly zond would be better than not to, since the civil war was going to start anyway. You don't care about legality, but that is not the point. The point is that this was not unilateral, like Iraq, and even then military interventions can go terribly wrong.
its so weird that the day the tanks rolled over the border of Ukraine history magically just began, there was no material reality prior to this event, or any geopolitical events of consequence we could connect to this outcome, certainly none that had to do with openly threatening to expand a hostile military alliance with supersonic and nuclear missiles 5 minutes from the capital city of Moscow
i wonder if the US has ever done the exact same thing in the name of national security and what the NATO heads said about it then
every pro NATO take is certified baby brain shit that demonstrates nothing but a lack of understanding of material reality, history, geopolitics, on top of an absolute disregard for human life, gross hypocrisy and a level of false outrage that is always directly proportional to how loudly they're calling to escalate bloodshed
log off dude