|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
United States42777 Posts
On June 04 2025 18:32 Jankisa wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2025 19:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 25 2025 16:06 Godwrath wrote:On April 25 2025 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 24 2025 18:29 Godwrath wrote:On April 24 2025 09:56 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 24 2025 08:57 Falling wrote:On April 24 2025 07:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 24 2025 07:09 Falling wrote:
Unless security guarantees/ NATO membership was a part of the package, I don't see in what world this can be seen as the 'lesser evil'. All this would be deferred evil, giving Russia a chance to consolidate their holdings, reconstitute their army, and stage into their conquered territories and finish the job in four or five years. They came back for Chechnya. Crimea was not enough to sate the Russian appetite but was simply used to stage into Ukraine at a later date. Why would this be any different? Europe has a way better chance of turning another Russian invasion of Ukraine in ~4-5 years into a better deal for Ukraine and Europe. Especially after also using that time to far outpace Russia's positional improvements to a degree they aren't dependent on the US, for their own, and Ukraine's benefit. "Deferring evil" is the lesser evil (typically is) than the current/immediate death and suffering deferring evil avoids. "Deferring evil" also provides the opportunity to avoid "the evil" in the future, by at least buying you time to change what happens several years down the road. Deferring evil is enough to make it the lesser evil to not deferring evil on its own, but also, there's a realpolitik rationale for it being Europe's best option (though arguably not Ukraine's if one is on the most optimistic side of the spectrum for Ukraine's current situation militarily speaking). Is it buying you time? Yes, it's literally buying the Ukrainians that will instead be dying today, tomorrow, and indefinitely until there is some sort of peace (however it comes about) their lives and millions more the end of constant bombardment under war and all the horrible things that come with that. It buys them years of negative peace by your own estimate. How many is less certain, but we all see how/why it's in Russia's interest to find a deal themselves now, as well as potentially violating that deal at a later point. That only assumes you'll be in a better position next time. + Show Spoiler +Whereas, we are as close as we've ever been to exhausting Russia's material. Would a push from a coalition of the willing tip the balance?
Western democracies are as close as they've been in a long while to rearming. Four to five years from now? If there is one consistency it has to be that democracies (except the USA) don't like to spend money on the military during peacetime whereas tyranny prioritize it always.
That's four to five years for all of us to draw down while Iran North Korea Russia and maybe China on the sly? ramp up, adapt to what they learn and come back stronger.
Russia isn't on its back foot yet but it can be made to be. A few years from now, I'm not sure.
Remember, Russia didn't do so hot in the first war in Chechnya but they aren't dumb and the second time it was lights out.
You are also making the biggest case for more land war and nuclear rearmament. He that is strong let him take it will signal to every country with dreams of empires. And he that has no nukes, let him surrender. The nuclear arms race begun again. We could speculate about what the situation might be years from now + Show Spoiler +(like who will be president of the US, whether the US will be in NATO, and whether it matters if Europe wants to give Ukraine a security guarantee of their own without the US) , but the fact of the matter is that accepting/formalizing a deal now saves lives immediately and dramatically improves the quality of life for millions of Ukrainians for years. Rejecting the deal means those years would instead be filled with their continued deaths and suffering. Arguing them rejecting the deal is the "lesser evil" is the position that requires a bunch of assumptions about western democracies choosing to use the time under negative peace to be wilfully neglectful and end up in a worse position in the future. This is so hypocritical I genuinely don’t even know where to begin. If Ukrainians want to fight for their freedom, I’m absolutely in favor of supporting them. I’m not going to be the condescending asshole who shrugs and says “yeah, it’s a shitty situation, maybe we’ll help... eventually.” + Show Spoiler +You’re supposed to know better. But in your crusade against Western society, you’ve completely lost the plot on this one.
Say it with me: Putin is a fascist, imperialist asshole.
And no — the enemy of my enemy isn’t automatically my friend.
But the people suffering under the boot of a fascist imperialist?
Yeah, they are. You guys are so goddamn close to getting it. You gotta at least see how close that is to being taken verbatim from MLK Jr.'s "white moderate", and/or the contradiction regarding Palestinians. Maybe it really is as simple as me not saying "Putin does horrible things" enough. Oh i don't get it. Explain it to me. Let's see how you contort yourself pretending you are not the "white moderate" in this thread. Also, do it, but don't take for granted my posture regarding Palestinians, which if you are able to read behind lines, it's very obvious. Here, everyone's a revolutionary. Doesn't matter that their democratically elected leader was violently removed. Doesn't matter it's been over a decade of their lives being objectively worse. Doesn't matter that Ukraine's " democracy score" is lower now than it was before their revolution. Doesn't matter that even after all this, failure is still quite likely, with the potential of reprisals and decades of it being worse than before their revolution. It's just not socialist. That's the only objection everyone has to socialist revolution + Show Spoiler +1. There's opposition to socialism itself.
2. There's the notion that the status quo is imperfectly optimal and just needs modifications within it's own parameters (this would include reformism with socialism/communism as it's ultimate goal/ideal).
3. There's fear of people losing their comfort, social status, livelihoods, lives, etc.
4. There's the uncertainty that a revolution would be successful in overcoming the existing system that comes with fears of the consequences of a failed revolution (like the sacrifices being made in vain/retaliation for insolence).
5. There's fear of a successful revolution that removes the existing power structure only to replace it with something similar/worse. that Ukraine has remotely satisfied. We've got an extremely bloody/violent revolution (spearheaded by their far-right) that's made Ukrainians lives worse for over a decade without a clear way out or any certainty the end won't be worse than what started it. Yet basically everyone here and generally in NA (save Republicans) is steadfastly committed to it. So much so, I'm pretty sure I've seen people here say they'd basically be willing to be sent as soldiers and Canada's Parliament mistakenly gave a literal Waffen-SS Nazi a standing ovation while calling him a hero + Show Spoiler +(I don't think Ukraine is all Nazis or that Putin cares about "denazifying" Ukraine btw.) . It's been bizarre af to witness. Oh, look, a bunch of nicely chained tankie talking points, neatly packaged. We have all the highlights, straight from Kremlin cookbook: - Ukrainians are far right nazis - this all started by bloody/violent revolution / coup - Canada is also Nazi (just like Ukraine) and they hosted a Nazi guy - Ukraine is extremely corrupt - Ukraine is worse off then before the Maidan - Ukraine should stop fighting and accept whatever Russians want
You're doing the thing that people with cheating and gaslighting spouses do where they think that if they somehow put together enough evidence and present it all then there will be a tv moment where they break down, admit that they've been gaslighting for years, admit that all the spouses suspicions were true and that they've been lying, and start weeping in shame.
That never happens. They just keep going. It doesn't even register, they just don't care and you're a fool for thinking they might.
You're never going to have your moment with GH where he admits that he's a tankie, that he mindlessly repeats Russian propaganda talking points, that he's a useful idiot to some of the worst people alive today. You could lay it out step by step and walk him through it but that perfect moment won't ever arrive and you'll realize that you've just been sucked in again.
There's a reason I post the way I do with GH.
|
Uh, oh, at the risk of sounding like GH I'd like to challenge you to point out at occurrences of me posting tankie like beliefs.
I am quite left, but far from being anti west, I'm not even anti-capitalist, I think China is an authoritarian nightmare, I think what they've been doing to Uyghurs is horrific, I was all for US intervention in Syria and was very disappointed when Obama didn't honor his "red line", I was overjoyed when Assad was removed from power and I hope he dies a slow, painful death from a weird Russian poison once he steps on Putin's toes.
I detest tankies, Serbia attacks Croatia, must be the west manipulating it, NATO bombs Serbia after 10 years of it attacking Croatia, Bosnia, Kosovo, NATO is war criming Serbians for no reason because they don't want to "join the west". Chomsky has been at the forefront of this, his writing on Ukraine is also fucking insane, after Bucha he published this wonderful piece:
https://www.newstatesman.com/the-weekend-interview/2023/04/noam-chomsky-interview-ukraine-free-actor-united-states-determines
If your whole personality is "west bad" and you can't even take the time to think that maybe, just maybe Ukraine is fighting for survival not at the behest of fucking Washington you are not a serious person and you should, with respect, shut the fuck up.
A rant, sorry about that, but this might be the first time someone tried to qualify me as a tankie and it's very grating.
|
On June 04 2025 22:29 Jankisa wrote:Uh, oh, at the risk of sounding like GH I'd like to challenge you to point out at occurrences of me posting tankie like beliefs. I am quite left, but far from being anti west, I'm not even anti-capitalist, I think China is an authoritarian nightmare, I think what they've been doing to Uyghurs is horrific, I was all for US intervention in Syria and was very disappointed when Obama didn't honor his "red line", I was overjoyed when Assad was removed from power and I hope he dies a slow, painful death from a weird Russian poison once he steps on Putin's toes. I detest tankies, Serbia attacks Croatia, must be the west manipulating it, NATO bombs Serbia after 10 years of it attacking Croatia, Bosnia, Kosovo, NATO is war criming Serbians for no reason because they don't want to "join the west". Chomsky has been at the forefront of this, his writing on Ukraine is also fucking insane, after Bucha he published this wonderful piece: https://www.newstatesman.com/the-weekend-interview/2023/04/noam-chomsky-interview-ukraine-free-actor-united-states-determinesIf your whole personality is "west bad" and you can't even take the time to think that maybe, just maybe Ukraine is fighting for survival not at the behest of fucking Washington you are not a serious person and you should, with respect, shut the fuck up. A rant, sorry about that, but this might be the first time someone tried to qualify me as a tankie and it's very grating.
Nah you're fine it's just that I've been called a tankie a bunch of times for no reason at all and I would have expected you to get the same treatment and to hate the word for that reason. Maybe you escape that because you don't view yourself as anticapitalist (yet).
|
Oh, Kwark, I live under no such illusions.
I might have skipped over a decade or so of chats here but I've seen enough of GH's in the wild to know that those guys have 0 capacity for self reflection.
I just don't like letting blatantly false statements someone makes about themselves stand, my intent is not to get GH to admit he's a tankie, it's to make sure that someone who stumbles into this thread randomly doesn't think he "challenged" us to prove he is one and no one replied.
To me it's much less of a fool's errand then engaging with Razyda's provocations like "leftists can be nazis" or "Cory Booker did a nazi salute" because those seem like pretty obvious trolling attempts (to me) while GH likes to make these statements and pretend like he's right because no one takes the effort to point out he's full of shit.
|
On June 04 2025 22:32 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2025 22:29 Jankisa wrote:Uh, oh, at the risk of sounding like GH I'd like to challenge you to point out at occurrences of me posting tankie like beliefs. I am quite left, but far from being anti west, I'm not even anti-capitalist, I think China is an authoritarian nightmare, I think what they've been doing to Uyghurs is horrific, I was all for US intervention in Syria and was very disappointed when Obama didn't honor his "red line", I was overjoyed when Assad was removed from power and I hope he dies a slow, painful death from a weird Russian poison once he steps on Putin's toes. I detest tankies, Serbia attacks Croatia, must be the west manipulating it, NATO bombs Serbia after 10 years of it attacking Croatia, Bosnia, Kosovo, NATO is war criming Serbians for no reason because they don't want to "join the west". Chomsky has been at the forefront of this, his writing on Ukraine is also fucking insane, after Bucha he published this wonderful piece: https://www.newstatesman.com/the-weekend-interview/2023/04/noam-chomsky-interview-ukraine-free-actor-united-states-determinesIf your whole personality is "west bad" and you can't even take the time to think that maybe, just maybe Ukraine is fighting for survival not at the behest of fucking Washington you are not a serious person and you should, with respect, shut the fuck up. A rant, sorry about that, but this might be the first time someone tried to qualify me as a tankie and it's very grating. Nah you're fine it's just that I've been called a tankie a bunch of times for no reason at all and I would have expected you to get the same treatment and to hate the word for that reason. Maybe you escape that because you don't view yourself as anticapitalist (yet).
I don't find myself to be anticapitalist in the way of "I think that inherent human greed doesn't allow us to live in a system where we don't allow people to get obscenely rich", not in the way that I think that capitalism is actually good.
There are shades of it, I have a lot of issues with EU but I think it's doing capitalism way better then US ever did, so I'm a supporter of it as an institution despite the foundations of it being very capitalist.
|
On June 04 2025 23:13 Jankisa wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2025 22:32 Nebuchad wrote:On June 04 2025 22:29 Jankisa wrote:Uh, oh, at the risk of sounding like GH I'd like to challenge you to point out at occurrences of me posting tankie like beliefs. I am quite left, but far from being anti west, I'm not even anti-capitalist, I think China is an authoritarian nightmare, I think what they've been doing to Uyghurs is horrific, I was all for US intervention in Syria and was very disappointed when Obama didn't honor his "red line", I was overjoyed when Assad was removed from power and I hope he dies a slow, painful death from a weird Russian poison once he steps on Putin's toes. I detest tankies, Serbia attacks Croatia, must be the west manipulating it, NATO bombs Serbia after 10 years of it attacking Croatia, Bosnia, Kosovo, NATO is war criming Serbians for no reason because they don't want to "join the west". Chomsky has been at the forefront of this, his writing on Ukraine is also fucking insane, after Bucha he published this wonderful piece: https://www.newstatesman.com/the-weekend-interview/2023/04/noam-chomsky-interview-ukraine-free-actor-united-states-determinesIf your whole personality is "west bad" and you can't even take the time to think that maybe, just maybe Ukraine is fighting for survival not at the behest of fucking Washington you are not a serious person and you should, with respect, shut the fuck up. A rant, sorry about that, but this might be the first time someone tried to qualify me as a tankie and it's very grating. Nah you're fine it's just that I've been called a tankie a bunch of times for no reason at all and I would have expected you to get the same treatment and to hate the word for that reason. Maybe you escape that because you don't view yourself as anticapitalist (yet). I don't find myself to be anticapitalist in the way of "I think that inherent human greed doesn't allow us to live in a system where we don't allow people to get obscenely rich", not in the way that I think that capitalism is actually good. There are shades of it, I have a lot of issues with EU but I think it's doing capitalism way better then US ever did, so I'm a supporter of it as an institution despite the foundations of it being very capitalist.
Yeah I won't go much further because Excludos will be annoyed but when we build a society it doesn't really matter what's inherent to human nature and what isn't. There are a bunch of things that humans will always do and that we've decided society should stand against. You'll never get a society where nobody does drugs, but we've still decided (many) drugs should be illegal. You'll never get a society where no rape happens, but we've still decided rape should be illegal. If we believe that greed is inherent to humans and we think that greed is bad for society, the logical thing to do is not to create an economic system that promotes greed, that doesn't follow at all.
|
OK, I'll indulge in one more.
I do agree with your assessment, I also just have a gut feeling that the reason that we had a relatively prosperous and world war free environment after WW2 is because of capitalism, states became too reliant on each other and everyone benefited too much from it for too long for nationalism to prosper and become problematic enough that we start killing each other at a mass scale again, and I ascribe that to money.
To bring it at least a bit back on topic, the Russo Ukrainian war is definitely something that goes against this theory, EU and Germany in particular counted on economic reliance with Russia to be enough for them to reign in their imperialistic and nationalistic instincts and unfortunately their assumption was wrong, but as others in this thread noted recently, the biggest reason why China hasn't invaded Taiwan is basically money, so I do think it kind of still holds, at least a bit.
|
United States42777 Posts
Capitalism has been very publicly failing to address the biggest global issue of our time, environmental collapse. You tell a capitalist that the agricultural sector is built upon pollinators that are currently not costed into the system but that if they die off then the replacement cost would be in the hundreds of billions and they want to know if they can buy a pollination as a service company. Before you get a word in edgeways they've bought a bee themed AI startup for a billion and that is just 700 Indians wearing yellow and black striped shirts and humming.
You explain to them that the pollinators are being devastated by pesticide use and that none of this would be necessary if we just cut down on pesticides and they hear that the potential pollination as a service upside could be huge but that pesticide regulation is a big threat to it. Before you know it they've started DDTing Mexico because they noticed the migratory pattern of butterflies leads them across the border and the regulatory framework there is looser.
We just can't seem to get capitalists to understand why we shouldn't destroy the world. It doesn't make sense to them.
But the USSR is responsible for the Aral Sea and Chernobyl so we're probably just fucked.
|
On June 05 2025 00:09 KwarK wrote:
Capitalism has been very publicly failing to address the biggest global issue of our time, environmental collapse. You tell a capitalist that the agricultural sector is built upon pollinators that are currently not costed into the system but that if they die off then the replacement cost would be in the hundreds of billions and they want to know if they can buy a pollination as a service company. Before you get a word in edgeways they've bought a bee themed AI startup for a billion and that is just 700 Indians wearing yellow and black striped shirts and humming.
You explain to them that the pollinators are being devastated by pesticide use and that none of this would be necessary if we just cut down on pesticides and they hear that the potential pollination as a service upside could be huge but that pesticide regulation is a big threat to it. Before you know it they've started DDTing Mexico because they noticed the migratory pattern of butterflies leads them across the border and the regulatory framework there is looser.
We just can't seem to get capitalists to understand why we shouldn't destroy the world. It doesn't make sense to them.
But the USSR is responsible for the Aral Sea and Chernobyl so we're probably just fucked.
This is a strange aside but I talk to very religious people on a daily basis and one of them gave me an argument so plain and simple that I had not heard before. He said he is not interested in the environment because he does believe it will exist that much longer. Meaning the rupture or whatever. I am not sure how you would ever combat that reasoning that is built on faith.
|
On June 04 2025 18:32 Jankisa wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2025 19:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 25 2025 16:06 Godwrath wrote:On April 25 2025 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 24 2025 18:29 Godwrath wrote:On April 24 2025 09:56 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 24 2025 08:57 Falling wrote:On April 24 2025 07:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 24 2025 07:09 Falling wrote:
Unless security guarantees/ NATO membership was a part of the package, I don't see in what world this can be seen as the 'lesser evil'. All this would be deferred evil, giving Russia a chance to consolidate their holdings, reconstitute their army, and stage into their conquered territories and finish the job in four or five years. They came back for Chechnya. Crimea was not enough to sate the Russian appetite but was simply used to stage into Ukraine at a later date. Why would this be any different? Europe has a way better chance of turning another Russian invasion of Ukraine in ~4-5 years into a better deal for Ukraine and Europe. Especially after also using that time to far outpace Russia's positional improvements to a degree they aren't dependent on the US, for their own, and Ukraine's benefit. "Deferring evil" is the lesser evil (typically is) than the current/immediate death and suffering deferring evil avoids. "Deferring evil" also provides the opportunity to avoid "the evil" in the future, by at least buying you time to change what happens several years down the road. Deferring evil is enough to make it the lesser evil to not deferring evil on its own, but also, there's a realpolitik rationale for it being Europe's best option (though arguably not Ukraine's if one is on the most optimistic side of the spectrum for Ukraine's current situation militarily speaking). Is it buying you time? Yes, it's literally buying the Ukrainians that will instead be dying today, tomorrow, and indefinitely until there is some sort of peace (however it comes about) their lives and millions more the end of constant bombardment under war and all the horrible things that come with that. It buys them years of negative peace by your own estimate. How many is less certain, but we all see how/why it's in Russia's interest to find a deal themselves now, as well as potentially violating that deal at a later point. That only assumes you'll be in a better position next time. + Show Spoiler +Whereas, we are as close as we've ever been to exhausting Russia's material. Would a push from a coalition of the willing tip the balance?
Western democracies are as close as they've been in a long while to rearming. Four to five years from now? If there is one consistency it has to be that democracies (except the USA) don't like to spend money on the military during peacetime whereas tyranny prioritize it always.
That's four to five years for all of us to draw down while Iran North Korea Russia and maybe China on the sly? ramp up, adapt to what they learn and come back stronger.
Russia isn't on its back foot yet but it can be made to be. A few years from now, I'm not sure.
Remember, Russia didn't do so hot in the first war in Chechnya but they aren't dumb and the second time it was lights out.
You are also making the biggest case for more land war and nuclear rearmament. He that is strong let him take it will signal to every country with dreams of empires. And he that has no nukes, let him surrender. The nuclear arms race begun again. We could speculate about what the situation might be years from now + Show Spoiler +(like who will be president of the US, whether the US will be in NATO, and whether it matters if Europe wants to give Ukraine a security guarantee of their own without the US) , but the fact of the matter is that accepting/formalizing a deal now saves lives immediately and dramatically improves the quality of life for millions of Ukrainians for years. Rejecting the deal means those years would instead be filled with their continued deaths and suffering. Arguing them rejecting the deal is the "lesser evil" is the position that requires a bunch of assumptions about western democracies choosing to use the time under negative peace to be wilfully neglectful and end up in a worse position in the future. This is so hypocritical I genuinely don’t even know where to begin. If Ukrainians want to fight for their freedom, I’m absolutely in favor of supporting them. I’m not going to be the condescending asshole who shrugs and says “yeah, it’s a shitty situation, maybe we’ll help... eventually.” + Show Spoiler +You’re supposed to know better. But in your crusade against Western society, you’ve completely lost the plot on this one.
Say it with me: Putin is a fascist, imperialist asshole.
And no — the enemy of my enemy isn’t automatically my friend.
But the people suffering under the boot of a fascist imperialist?
Yeah, they are. You guys are so goddamn close to getting it. You gotta at least see how close that is to being taken verbatim from MLK Jr.'s "white moderate", and/or the contradiction regarding Palestinians. Maybe it really is as simple as me not saying "Putin does horrible things" enough. Oh i don't get it. Explain it to me. Let's see how you contort yourself pretending you are not the "white moderate" in this thread. Also, do it, but don't take for granted my posture regarding Palestinians, which if you are able to read behind lines, it's very obvious. Here, everyone's a revolutionary. Doesn't matter that their democratically elected leader was violently removed. Doesn't matter it's been over a decade of their lives being objectively worse. Doesn't matter that Ukraine's " democracy score" is lower now than it was before their revolution. Doesn't matter that even after all this, failure is still quite likely, with the potential of reprisals and decades of it being worse than before their revolution. It's just not socialist. That's the only objection everyone has to socialist revolution + Show Spoiler +1. There's opposition to socialism itself.
2. There's the notion that the status quo is imperfectly optimal and just needs modifications within it's own parameters (this would include reformism with socialism/communism as it's ultimate goal/ideal).
3. There's fear of people losing their comfort, social status, livelihoods, lives, etc.
4. There's the uncertainty that a revolution would be successful in overcoming the existing system that comes with fears of the consequences of a failed revolution (like the sacrifices being made in vain/retaliation for insolence).
5. There's fear of a successful revolution that removes the existing power structure only to replace it with something similar/worse. that Ukraine has remotely satisfied. We've got an extremely bloody/violent revolution (spearheaded by their far-right) that's made Ukrainians lives worse for over a decade without a clear way out or any certainty the end won't be worse than what started it. Yet basically everyone here and generally in NA (save Republicans) is steadfastly committed to it. So much so, I'm pretty sure I've seen people here say they'd basically be willing to be sent as soldiers and Canada's Parliament mistakenly gave a literal Waffen-SS Nazi a standing ovation while calling him a hero + Show Spoiler +(I don't think Ukraine is all Nazis or that Putin cares about "denazifying" Ukraine btw.) . It's been bizarre af to witness. Oh, look, a bunch of nicely chained tankie talking points, neatly packaged. We have all the highlights, straight from Kremlin cookbook: - Ukrainians are far right nazis - this all started by bloody/violent revolution / coup - Canada is also Nazi (just like Ukraine) and they hosted a Nazi guy - Ukraine is extremely corrupt - Ukraine is worse off then before the Maidan - Ukraine should stop fighting and accept whatever Russians want
-Not all Ukrainians, but surely the ones in Nazi regalia + Show Spoiler +generally qualify, as well as the literal Nazis
-"It all started" is loaded, but there was undoubtedly a bloody/violent revolution.
- No, their parliament is just so rabidly anti-Russian that they inadvertently celebrated a literal Nazi because he killed Russians.
- Ukraine is/has been one of the most corrupt in Europe (other than Russia).
- Ukrainians, especially in the east, have a worse quality of life than before Maidan. The Russian military is obviously the biggest contributor to that.
- Ukrainians should do what they determine is in their best interests.
That's basically what I mean about facts and reasonable statements being recast as "tankie talking points". When I said "I find "tankies do X" is often a combination of liberal imagination, exaggeration, misinterpretation, dishonesty, etc." this is an example of that
AFAICT the "bunch of Tankies insist that Russia would never do what they’ve done a dozen times before and say they’re definitely going to do again." are just figments of Kwark's imagination.
|
On June 05 2025 01:05 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2025 18:32 Jankisa wrote:On April 25 2025 19:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 25 2025 16:06 Godwrath wrote:On April 25 2025 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 24 2025 18:29 Godwrath wrote:On April 24 2025 09:56 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 24 2025 08:57 Falling wrote:On April 24 2025 07:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 24 2025 07:09 Falling wrote:
Unless security guarantees/ NATO membership was a part of the package, I don't see in what world this can be seen as the 'lesser evil'. All this would be deferred evil, giving Russia a chance to consolidate their holdings, reconstitute their army, and stage into their conquered territories and finish the job in four or five years. They came back for Chechnya. Crimea was not enough to sate the Russian appetite but was simply used to stage into Ukraine at a later date. Why would this be any different? Europe has a way better chance of turning another Russian invasion of Ukraine in ~4-5 years into a better deal for Ukraine and Europe. Especially after also using that time to far outpace Russia's positional improvements to a degree they aren't dependent on the US, for their own, and Ukraine's benefit. "Deferring evil" is the lesser evil (typically is) than the current/immediate death and suffering deferring evil avoids. "Deferring evil" also provides the opportunity to avoid "the evil" in the future, by at least buying you time to change what happens several years down the road. Deferring evil is enough to make it the lesser evil to not deferring evil on its own, but also, there's a realpolitik rationale for it being Europe's best option (though arguably not Ukraine's if one is on the most optimistic side of the spectrum for Ukraine's current situation militarily speaking). Is it buying you time? Yes, it's literally buying the Ukrainians that will instead be dying today, tomorrow, and indefinitely until there is some sort of peace (however it comes about) their lives and millions more the end of constant bombardment under war and all the horrible things that come with that. It buys them years of negative peace by your own estimate. How many is less certain, but we all see how/why it's in Russia's interest to find a deal themselves now, as well as potentially violating that deal at a later point. That only assumes you'll be in a better position next time. + Show Spoiler +Whereas, we are as close as we've ever been to exhausting Russia's material. Would a push from a coalition of the willing tip the balance?
Western democracies are as close as they've been in a long while to rearming. Four to five years from now? If there is one consistency it has to be that democracies (except the USA) don't like to spend money on the military during peacetime whereas tyranny prioritize it always.
That's four to five years for all of us to draw down while Iran North Korea Russia and maybe China on the sly? ramp up, adapt to what they learn and come back stronger.
Russia isn't on its back foot yet but it can be made to be. A few years from now, I'm not sure.
Remember, Russia didn't do so hot in the first war in Chechnya but they aren't dumb and the second time it was lights out.
You are also making the biggest case for more land war and nuclear rearmament. He that is strong let him take it will signal to every country with dreams of empires. And he that has no nukes, let him surrender. The nuclear arms race begun again. We could speculate about what the situation might be years from now + Show Spoiler +(like who will be president of the US, whether the US will be in NATO, and whether it matters if Europe wants to give Ukraine a security guarantee of their own without the US) , but the fact of the matter is that accepting/formalizing a deal now saves lives immediately and dramatically improves the quality of life for millions of Ukrainians for years. Rejecting the deal means those years would instead be filled with their continued deaths and suffering. Arguing them rejecting the deal is the "lesser evil" is the position that requires a bunch of assumptions about western democracies choosing to use the time under negative peace to be wilfully neglectful and end up in a worse position in the future. This is so hypocritical I genuinely don’t even know where to begin. If Ukrainians want to fight for their freedom, I’m absolutely in favor of supporting them. I’m not going to be the condescending asshole who shrugs and says “yeah, it’s a shitty situation, maybe we’ll help... eventually.” + Show Spoiler +You’re supposed to know better. But in your crusade against Western society, you’ve completely lost the plot on this one.
Say it with me: Putin is a fascist, imperialist asshole.
And no — the enemy of my enemy isn’t automatically my friend.
But the people suffering under the boot of a fascist imperialist?
Yeah, they are. You guys are so goddamn close to getting it. You gotta at least see how close that is to being taken verbatim from MLK Jr.'s "white moderate", and/or the contradiction regarding Palestinians. Maybe it really is as simple as me not saying "Putin does horrible things" enough. Oh i don't get it. Explain it to me. Let's see how you contort yourself pretending you are not the "white moderate" in this thread. Also, do it, but don't take for granted my posture regarding Palestinians, which if you are able to read behind lines, it's very obvious. Here, everyone's a revolutionary. Doesn't matter that their democratically elected leader was violently removed. Doesn't matter it's been over a decade of their lives being objectively worse. Doesn't matter that Ukraine's " democracy score" is lower now than it was before their revolution. Doesn't matter that even after all this, failure is still quite likely, with the potential of reprisals and decades of it being worse than before their revolution. It's just not socialist. That's the only objection everyone has to socialist revolution + Show Spoiler +1. There's opposition to socialism itself.
2. There's the notion that the status quo is imperfectly optimal and just needs modifications within it's own parameters (this would include reformism with socialism/communism as it's ultimate goal/ideal).
3. There's fear of people losing their comfort, social status, livelihoods, lives, etc.
4. There's the uncertainty that a revolution would be successful in overcoming the existing system that comes with fears of the consequences of a failed revolution (like the sacrifices being made in vain/retaliation for insolence).
5. There's fear of a successful revolution that removes the existing power structure only to replace it with something similar/worse. that Ukraine has remotely satisfied. We've got an extremely bloody/violent revolution (spearheaded by their far-right) that's made Ukrainians lives worse for over a decade without a clear way out or any certainty the end won't be worse than what started it. Yet basically everyone here and generally in NA (save Republicans) is steadfastly committed to it. So much so, I'm pretty sure I've seen people here say they'd basically be willing to be sent as soldiers and Canada's Parliament mistakenly gave a literal Waffen-SS Nazi a standing ovation while calling him a hero + Show Spoiler +(I don't think Ukraine is all Nazis or that Putin cares about "denazifying" Ukraine btw.) . It's been bizarre af to witness. Oh, look, a bunch of nicely chained tankie talking points, neatly packaged. We have all the highlights, straight from Kremlin cookbook: - Ukrainians are far right nazis - this all started by bloody/violent revolution / coup - Canada is also Nazi (just like Ukraine) and they hosted a Nazi guy - Ukraine is extremely corrupt - Ukraine is worse off then before the Maidan - Ukraine should stop fighting and accept whatever Russians want -Not all Ukrainians, but surely the ones in Nazi regalia + Show Spoiler +generally qualify, as well as the literal Nazis-"It all started" is loaded, but there was undoubtedly a bloody/violent revolution. - No, their parliament is just so rabidly anti-Russian that they inadvertently celebrated a literal Nazi because he killed Russians. - Ukraine is/has been one of the most corrupt in Europe (other than Russia). - Ukrainians, especially in the east, have a worse quality of life than before Maidan. The Russian military is obviously the biggest contributor to that. - Ukrainians should do what they determine is in their best interests. That's basically what I mean about facts and reasonable statements being recast as "tankie talking points". When I said "I find "tankies do X" is often a combination of liberal imagination, exaggeration, misinterpretation, dishonesty, etc." this is an example of that AFAICT the "bunch of Tankies insist that Russia would never do what they’ve done a dozen times before and say they’re definitely going to do again." are just figments of Kwark's imagination.
There are neo nazis in every country in the world. The only reason Ukraines got noticed and prominence is because of the Russian invasion.
Yes the west supported the fall of Russian backed puppet government, it is doing that everywhere and Russia is doing the same (youre proof!)
Our parliament is not rabbidly anything, which is one of the common criticisms. What happened is what happened to JT a bunch, he tried for a cool photo op without doing any back ground or using common sense and it backfired.
No one anywhere gets rid of corruption quickly, everyone knows Ukraine was corrupt and still has corruption. Rooting it out might take a generation or longer.
Talk about the understatement of the year. It is like you are so underwater with Russian propaganda but are trying to make it less obvious. The ONLY!! reason it is worse is the Russians.
They are doing what is best for them, resisting Russia. Time to wake up and join reality.
The good news is you did not bring up the made up genocide of Russian speakers in eastern Ukraine and stuff like that. But based on your lack of directness and what you have said that you actually believe it and other shit that you are just not saying because you do not think we are ready for the next levels of truth you know seems fairly likely.
The good news is that your influences have been laid bare even as you try to hide them. Hopefully people will take everything you say unsourced with the truckloads of salt it has always deserved.
|
I will happily cheer for any nazi going off to die to defend my country from a hostile invader.
2 birds with 1 stone and all that.
|
On June 05 2025 03:02 Gorsameth wrote:
I will happily cheer for any nazi going off to die to defend my country from a hostile invader.
2 birds with 1 stone and all that.
Sometimes they don't die, and they become "heroes" instead
|
On June 05 2025 03:02 Gorsameth wrote:
I will happily cheer for any nazi going off to die to defend my country from a hostile invader.
2 birds with 1 stone and all that.
Even if it didn't appear they were going to die, I'd gladly let a Nazi save my life. If I'm hanging off a cliff or something I'm not gonna be like "BETTER TO DIE THAN HAVE MY LIFE SAVED BY A NAZI!! FOR HONOR!!!!" or some dumb ass shit lol
|
I'll be damned, GH posting Times of fucking Israel, literally the biggest source of hasbara propaganda on the internet, just to try to really, really drive his "point" that akshually Ukrainians are nazis and it's a huge thing.
The ends you will go to paint this picture that no one except Russians buys any more is insane.
Again, a breathtaking lack of self awareness.
|
United States42777 Posts
Ukrainian Nazi thing also lacks a whole lot of context. Stalin was genociding the Ukrainians and the Nazis showed up fighting the USSR. If the Soviets are forcing parents to eat the corpses of their children and the Nazis give you guns and tell them to shoot the Soviets then I get it. I don’t like any of it, but I get it.
|
Northern Ireland25461 Posts
What percentage of a country need be Nazis for that to override a legitimate case to aid it in asserting self-determination anyway?
Anything above 0%? 50%?
|
Ukrainian nationalists originated from what used to be eastern Poland. Most of them did not experience the Holodomor. They sided with the Nazis because they deluded themselves that Hitler would grant them an independent Ukrainian state. They fought the USSR because they saw it as an obstacle to achieving that goal. As for their complicity in the Holocaust, that was due to their deep-seated anti-Semitism, it wasn't a way to win favor with Hitler. Nowadays, their collaboration with the Nazis is swept under the rug. They are celebrated for their resistance against the Soviet Union, not for killing Jews.
That said, all this talking about some Ukrainian Nazis is a red herring. It's completely immaterial as regards the Russian war against Ukraine. It's very telling that GH keeps bringing this up but hasn't had a single word of criticism regarding Russia's Nazi problem or Russia being an actual fascist dictatorship committing genocide.
|
On June 05 2025 04:35 WombaT wrote:
What percentage of a country need be Nazis for that to override a legitimate case to aid it in asserting self-determination anyway?
Anything above 0%? 50%?
Not an insignificant number of Palestinians have a fond view of Hitler, so maybe GH would endorse the Israeli invasion of Gaza if it was framed in that way.
|
On June 04 2025 20:05 Jankisa wrote:
Ukrainians are inspiring motherfuckers, I have a feeling when this is all said and done they'll be like Mandalorians, sending military instructors and spies to train armies and saboteurs all across the globe, I hope they find a good way to monetize all this know how and use the money to rebuild what the senseless Russian destruction did, they as a people and a country deserve it.
Right from the get-go, demolishing the armored column, stopping the Hostomel airport takeover, doing insane gains around Kharkiv and Kherson, sinking Moskva, these are some tough and inventive people.
I mean, credit where it's due, Russians had their own share of smart tactics and moves, the crawling through the pipeline to get behind Ukrainians in Kursk was fiendish and very smart, the FPV drones with optic cables were also very smart and a crafty invention.
If all of these people weren't dying for the ego of the fucking imperialist midget Putin this conflict would be a wonder to behold, unfortunately, every time one of these inventions works people die, so it's kind of hard to observe it without feeling depressed.
Yeah, Ukraine had no right to fare any better than Afghanistan. They were supposed to strip the bearings, siphon the gas, and have the last person out turn the lights off.
No one expected this kind of return of investment on the pre-invasion defense aid to Ukraine. It was 'oh, take this rusty bent nail to fight off the wyvern if it comes this way, good luck'. It wasn't supposed to work so well. I question the literacy of people that aren't in awe of how Ukraine managed this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
