Needs more blaming the West
yup, cuz remember russia haaaas to do this because nato keeps encroaching on them!!11!1!1
Here you go:
Honestly, it seems like everyone in that place wants to kill everyone else. You could swap the sides in that meme and it’d still make sense.
No. Most of the civilian populations don’t want it. They’re the victims caught in the middle between the fascist Netanyahu government and the Hamas terrorists.
The civilian population doesn’t deserve it, but I’m not convinced that they don’t want to murder the other side. Israeli polls on whether Palestinians should be treated as human beings often return… concerning percentages.
And if we had any trustable polls from Palestine about a similar thing… I think some people would be surprised.
It’s not clear to me that the civilian population of Israel doesn’t want what is happening.
They’re the only people on the planet who can simply decide that things should be some other way, and then they would be that other way.
At some level, the Israeli people want it support the destruction of the Palestinian people, otherwise this would end. They need to take some responsibility for the government they allow.
it seems like everyone in that place wants to kill everyone else.
Not a bad slogan for the Middle East as a whole. See? It works on multiple levels.
From the river to the sea…
The area previously known as Palestine and Israel will be human free
That would solve some issues. Not like piles of corpses that once were innocent living people are going to need an upkeep.
Sounds like a compromise
No one that I know of from the West has tried for compromise in Palestine since the 1990s. The sign should say “We stand with Israel! Here’s some weapons.” Biden putting sanctions on like 4 people somehow counts as this revolutionary sign of progress, and they’re still in the middle of blowing up the last of the medical facilities.
Don’t forget that Biden’s “targeting” Israeli settlers as if they give a fuck what some old guy in America thinks. The sanctions will make fuck all of a difference.
I love when people claiming to be communists defend the hyper capitalist modern Russia. I have my criticisms of the ussr, but it’s dead and buried and Russia is as much the Russian Soviet as the Russian Soviet was Czarist Russia.
Tankies don’t have anyone they can root for that’s coherently communist or socialist anyways. China isn’t really, Russia is just an oligopoly with one guy on top for life (if you substitute land ownership with ownership of sectors of the economy then Russia looks a lot like a feudal monarchy).
Their one immutable belief is the “US bad”. That’s it. That’s their speed of light. Everything else must twist to maintain that position. If Ukraine elected a pro-western leader, it MUST be a CIA coup. They couldn’t have possibly chosen that for themselves because “US bad”. If Russia starts an offensive war of conquest it can’t just be their fault, they must have been provoked.
Before Russia invaded Ukraine they could pretend like only evil capitalist countries invade others. The invasion broke them since they have to someone maintain that position while also justifying the invasion , again, because US bad. This is really all they have now.
So, here’s how US bad: the US for several years has been provoking Russia by inviting Ukraine into NATO with no actual intent on letting them in. We’ve used them to offload massive stockpiles of old military equipment and secured all rebuilding of Ukraine to US companies. As soon as the Ukrainians start advancing, the US begins to fail on its commitments.
It’s possible to center ones ideals around the US being bad while also believing that Russia is bad.
Akshually, Ukrainians want to join the EU, not NATO. If you don’t believe me, look up the survey prior to 2014/2015 on how many want to join NATO and EU. You will find that majority of Ukrainians do not want to join the alliance but it’s completely opposite for the latter. The yearning by Ukrainians to join NATO changed overnight after the Russian annexation of Crimea. Gee, I wonder why?
NATO=/= EU. They are two completely different things! That’s like Ireland being attacked by Russia for being in the EU even though majority of Irish abhor NATO! Equating the two organisations is part of Russian propaganda. Because for the Russians, a sovereign country not aligning to them economically is the same as opposing them militarily.
It’s a blindspot among Westerners to refuse seeing the Russian mindset. They have their own worldview that is alien to the West and vice versa. The Russians have Eurasianist worldview where the center of the world and power is Asia; and their country carving a huge piece of that pie. Even oppositions of ruling government-- from communist to Putin era-- are hard-core nationalists as well from Alexander Solzhenytsin to Alexey Navalny. They are poster boy of Russian opposition from their respective time and yet believe Russia should also go its own way. They might be more liberal minded Russians, but they are nationalist first and foremost, and Eurasianists at that.
So, with that in mind, for the Russians, Ukraine and Georgia joining the EU-- a socio-economic bloc-- is unacceptable and tantamount to joining NATO; even though the fucking majority of Ukrainians and Georgians do not want to join NATO until further Russian provocations, brought by Russian siege mentality, pushed those countries to crave to join NATO. If Putin does not want NATO expansion, he certainly pushed two more countries to join, namely Finland and Sweden. Even Alexey Navalny-- Putin’s main presidential opponent-- said of the current president as the worst in geopolitics for having just provoked more countries to join NATO if the intention is to prevent its expansion. Those who says otherwise and keep harping about West provoking Ukraine to join NATO is Russian propaganda, because from the latter’s pov, either Ukraine signs a deal with them economically, or it means opposing them existentially too. Because Russia wants to carve their own sphere of influence.
What the people say in polls is not important. The US has been threatening to let Ukraine into NATO for years, the leadership in Ukraine wanted to be in NATO (cuz leaders in countries often don’t follow what the people want) and Russia used the threat of an application to NATO along with other reasons to constitute invasion. Which, btw, Ukraine applied for NATO status in September of 2022, so your feelings are invalid.
I’m well aware of how the Russian oligarch mindset is. But this is a war that both Russia and the US have wanted and instigated for a very very very long time. It’s also within the US’s best interest to keep this war going on as long as possible and turn it into the next Afghanistan if it yields enough profit. Not everything that paints the US as bad guys is Russian propaganda. Remember, US bad AND Russia bad.
What the people say in polls is not important. The US has been threatening to let Ukraine into NATO for years, the leadership in Ukraine wanted to be in NATO (cuz leaders in countries often don’t follow what the people want)
Do you have a source?
Why does public opinion not matter when the whole ordeal started when the Yanukovych reneged on the deal with the EU causing a revolution to overthrow him in 2014?
Convenient line you have tried to take haven’t you?
Which, btw, Ukraine applied for NATO status in September of 2022, so your feelings are invalid.
Why would Ukraine not apply after being invaded since 2015 after Crimean annexation? If you are not wilfully ignoring what I said said, Ukraine did not want to join NATO until Russia invaded Crimea with insignia-less “green men”.
And cut the crap with faux centrist bs about BoTh SiDeS BaD with respect to Ukraine. In spite of saying both sides are bad, it is very telling that much of your criticism seems to be more against Ukraine and West and almost zero criticism of what Russia did wrong. This is nothing but serving Russian propaganda.
No one could ever produce substantial evidence of Americans or the West goading Ukraine to join them when asked for proof. Recently declassified conversation from the Blair era were well aware that Ukraine joining the EU might “provoke” the Russians and questioned whether or not Ukrainians are “European” enough to join the EU. The West also were friendly with Putin before, to which the Ukrainian government at the time thought the West had “too rosy view” of Putin. It is very telling after all that countries not in NATO somehow have separatist movements aligned with Russia, namely in Georgia, Transnistria and Ukraine. Meanwhile, NATO-member Baltic states with significant Russian population somehow aren’t clamouring for Russian influence. Not very telling at all!
The blame is squarely on Kremlin with their own siege mentality and jingoism. If you actually know how Russian mindset works as you claim, you’d acknowledge that. There is no reason for Russia not to be friendly with the West while still pursuing their own geopolitical interests. France always go their own way despite being a NATO member. India plays both the West and Russia and China. Russia could do the same but instead, they’re stuck in the 19th century, dog eat dog, brute imperialist mindset and wants their way or no way at all.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine–NATO_relations
You should probably look this over. I think it’ll help clarify a lot.
India always has military exercises with NATO too. Does that mean they will join NATO? Conversely, India also conducts military exercises with China and Russia. Does that mean India and China and Russia are military allies?
Ireland also has relations with NATO, does that mean Ireland will join too? Should Russia invade Ireland if that happens?
Military exercises and talks do not always mean formal alliance. Sure, governments on many occasions do not follow the will of the people. But there are lines that they won’t cross if enough people do protests. It is political suicide in Ireland for any politicians to demand joining NATO. And as was the same case in Ukraine before until the Russian invasion.
That all being said, why is it Russia’s business whom Ukraine chooses to have close military relationship with? Since India have closer military relationship with Russia, with India being the biggest buyer of Russian arms and regular partner in joint exercises, would you say that the United States have the right to antagonise India because of this, in the same way that Ukraine has close military relationship with NATO?
The problem is that people think in the socially constructed current paradigm of nation state model and great power game. Why is it any business of the bigger neighbours what the small country choose to be friendly with? But I suppose no one really cares about small countries having innate sovereign right to exercise their agency. The concerns of a bigger power like Russia’s is always more important, am I right?
So, capitalism good now?
“Critical support”, they’ll say, with an absolute lack of criticism.
That shit kills me. I was reading something on hexbear about some recent anti-gay stuff in Russia. It was all about critical support, and not just Russia. They also talked about critical support for Nigeria, despite them having the death penalty for gay people, because they’re “anti-imperialist.”
Why doesn’t it go the other way? Why can’t you give “critical support” to countries making strides in human rights while criticizing their economic policy?
To me, their priorities seem pretty fucked up. Between exploitative economic policy and killing or imprisoning people for existing as themselves, I know which one I’m going to be “critical” of and which one will cause me to refuse support for a country in any way.
Worst part is, it’s not “or”. For the countries they ‘critically support’, it’s exploitative economic policy AND killing or imprisoning people for existing.
Being anti-imperialist is usually the determining factor of tankie (“critical”) support. Being against the US is apparently how you are anti-imperialist, so if you decide to conquer an American ally to grow an empire, you are apparently anti-imperialist. I guess that’s where you “critically” support them by cheering.
I don’t get it.
In Germany the Left has been divided into Antiimps (Antiimperialists) and Antideutsche (Antigermans) since the 90s. Antiimps being pro Palestine, Anti-USA, western Imperialism, NATO etc… and Antideutsche being pro Israel, pro USA and against a united (or any kind of) Germany.
Of course those positions developed over the years, but they still explain where and how those ‘new’ perspectives came to be. Worth to read into it.
Putin be unironically
It’s hard to avoid a “no true scottsman” with the current state of bots and propaganda accounts.
But as far as I can tell, there are hardly any lefties, or even tankies, who unironically support Russia or even a middle ground position. Despite their hate of the west, Russia is clearly the greatest evil here.
Most of the middle ground positions I see come from fox news.
That’s because your instance has blocked hexbear and lemmygrad.
Maybe. But previously when I engaged with people making this same claim, when they provided their evidence (a link to a hexbear post) and I actually spent the effort to verify it, it was trivially clear that their evidence was wrong, and when I showed that to them, they blew up and blocked me from the entire community (they were a mod).
Since then I’ve been pretty skeptical of people making this claim.
Don’t take my word for it. Even though your instance is defederated from them you can still go to hexbear.net and search locally for posts about Ukraine.
If you want context: Hexbear is largely a fanbase of Chapo Trap House. Most people who report on Hexbear usually are unaware of this.
Sorry, what’s the context that this provides? I’m honestly not that familiar with the podcast other than it being far left
I often see hexbear users referred to as far-right by those that tend to antagonize.
I’ve seen many an essayist talk about hexbear and never mention it, so I thought I’d bring it up.
Cool, thank you
Ah, thank you.
The context is that, like the alt-right, they retreat into “H-ha ha, I w-was just trolling” whenever too many eyes are on them.
Try engaging with the tankie communities more, though I suspect your instance has them defederated if you get an impression this distorted.
I see you misspelled Putin twice.
But as far as I can tell, there are hardly any lefties, or even tankies, who unironically support Putin or even a middle ground position. Despite their hate of the west, Putin is clearly the greatest evil here.
Here you go
But as far as I can tell, there are hardly any lefties, or even tankies, who unironically support Russia or even a middle ground position. Despite their hate of the west, Russia is clearly the greatest evil here.
Unfortunately, I can attest to a great many tankies who unironically support Russia or a ‘middle ground’ position. I could post examples all day long and not run out. At least, not run out of examples. I’d run out of will to live pretty quickly.
The last time someone said that to me, they sent me a post from hexbear that was clearly a joke, and when I showed them where it said it was a joke, they blocked me.
… okay?
In my admittedly limited experience, 100% of the people I’ve talked to who have made the accusation you’re making have lied about it.
And in my admittedly limited experience, 100% of the lefties accused of saying what you’re accusing them of saying, were explicitly not saying it.
And in my slighy more experience, 100% of the people I’ve seen saying the things that you’re accusing lefties of saying have been right wingers.
So… 🤷
How many genuine examples would it take for you to cede the point?
- To cede that some tankies are like this? None
- To cede that this is representative of tankie culture? Quite a few, plus evidence that it’s not an inside joke or satire
- To cede that this is representative of communist culture? Same as the above, but more.
- To cede that this is representative of leftie culture? I’d have a difficult time believing it wouldn’t be buried by counter examples.
Let’s start with, let’s say 5 posts from prominent communist communities that: a) are clearly mainly about this, b) are clearly not a joke, and c) clearly have broad support from within the community.
Those examples will give me a starting place to look around myself.
Fuck it, I’ll bite. I don’t usually indulge this kind of sealion stuff but I’m bored and waiting for my hair to dry before going to sleep.
- Support for compromise (Hexbear)
- NATO is winning, and that is bad
- NATO is losing, and that is good
- “By abandoning neutrality, Ukraine essentially violated the basis for its independence.”
- Literally a post about how redditors can’t believe they are real people who really believe this stuff. Number 5 top all time post in the sub.
All of these posts were gathered from the “top all time” posts in communities about Ukraine in hexbear and lemmygrad.
Those examples will give me a starting place to look around myself.
Yeah, gonna have to go with a ‘no’ for a mealy-mouthed dodge like this.
I think any argument for peace and negotiations and compromise with Russia is met with overwhelming downvotes. Worse on reddit, pacifism is seen only in controversial now. The above meme is clearly pro-war propaganda too, as to prevent any rational discussion. It’s total victory or death.
If you’re a pacifist, you’re treated as a communist-nazi.
If you’re a pacifist, you’re treated as a communist-nazi.
If you’re advocating that Ukraine should lay down its arms before clear security guarantees are in place, or at the loss of its territory you may as well be a “communist-nazi”.
This was Russias final offer - which I’m not advocating for but it does contain some perfectly reasonable demands to protect themselves from US aggression. Of course Russia wants to keep using Sevastopol and doesn’t want offensive weapons on their boarders.
Putin highlighted the fact that it was “NATO that was undertaking dangerous attempts to develop Ukrainian territory and increase its potential along [Russia’s] borders”. He demanded “reliable, legal guarantees” that would preclude NATO from expanding its territory toward Russia or deploying its strike weapon systems in countries bordering Russia.
Of course, if you’re denying that the US is a terrorist regime that has killed millions of innocent civilians and ruined many countries in the last decades then you may well be a fascist.
I’m certainly not denying that Russia is an authoritarian far-right regime that suppressed Ukraine and that Ukraine absolutely has a right to be free. But if you’re bordering on Russia, you’ll have to make accommodations and be smart. Total war is not smart.
You perfectly distilled this entire thread.
The historical experience of the USSR was a brainrot on communists. Having a bias for Soviet nationalism is already bad enough, but imagine letting that evolve into Russian nationalism. Defend the same right of self-determination for Ukraine you would have defended for Vietnam 60 years ago.
I was under the impression that Vietnam didn’t want to join the capitalist west. Is that what Ukraine wants?
Vietnam mostly didn’t want to be occupied by a foreign army. They resisted the occupation by Japan after WWII and when that war ended and the Japanese left they liked not being ruled over by foreigners.
But then when France got a military together they returned to Vietnam to resume where they left off with the colonialism thing they did before the war.
The Vietnamese didn’t like that. They asked for US support in resisting French colonialism, because the US resisted British colonialism in the past. US wasn’t going to go against France, interests in Europe took priority over interests in Asia.
So Vietnam needed an outside backer. So who do they go to.
Remember that the last foreign power Vietnam has fought against was not the US. They had a war in Cambodia and a war with China after the US left. I’m not an expert on Vietnam, but there’s a whole lot more going on there than the US-Vietnam war and the propaganda around communist domino theory would have you to believe. Yeah they invaded Cambodia, but that was because Pol Pot was an insane psychopath. After the Khmer Rouge was defeated they left. Turns out Vietnam wasn’t really all about spreading their version of their communist ideal, they kinda just did’t want people from elsewhere telling them how to run things. Not Japan, not France, not the US, and no not even China.
The analogy between Vietnam and Ukraine is an apt one. A lot of people going around talking about domino theories and spheres of influence and talking like you’re stupid if you don’t understand the things coming from the brilliant mind of Henry Kissinger. Trying to make it fit into an ideological framework. It seems the people of Vietnam were too “stupid” to understand the brilliant analysis coming from people elsewhere. Ukrainians seem like they may be the same kind of “stupid” as the Vietnamese were. While everyone else is talking ideology and spheres of influence, they just go on shooting at foreign invaders. But in the end, who are the ones being stupid? The Vietnamese didn’t seem very stupid from my perspective and the Ukrainians don’t seem stupid either. Simple non-ideological motives are way more powerful than ideological motives.
In 1954, France gave up its colonial claims on Vietnam. But even as France prepared to leave the region, the United States and other democratic nations continued to assert influence on the internal affairs of the country. Specifically, they forced Ho Chi Minh’s Vietnamese Communists to accept a treaty that divided Vietnam in half. Source
So, we want we want Ukraine to be independent and free from American and Russian interference, like we would have wanted Vietnam free from American and USSR involvement?
There’s a romantic ideal of a resistance movement that needs no outside support. But the reality is the US needed support from France to gain independence from Britain, Vietnam needed support from Russia and China to get independence from France and the US, Afghanistan needed support from the US and Saudi Arabia to get independence from the Soviet Union. And on and on the list goes. So yes Ukraine needs support from other countries to maintain their independence from an invader.
In geopolitics the rules are fairly consistent but the players may take on different roles in different scenarios. Sometimes the US is invading a country (bad) sometimes the US is supporting a country defending themselves from an invasion (good). Of course even that’s an oversimplification, but try to break free of the nationalist idea that certain countries are always the good guys while other countries are always the bad guys. Think more on what a country is doing rather than feelings about whether a country is good or bad and you’ll have a better understanding of geopolitics.
The Soviet Union died long before the people fighting in this conflict were even born. It’s an odd form of colonialism to for someone from the outside to think that imposing a solution to a conflict that involves two countries going back to a life that neither country wants all because it fits with their ideal on what these countries should be.
The sad truth is how brained washed and suppressed the people are in Russia. Things could be much better if that was not the case. Any idea on how to let them free?
deleted by creator
It appears the meme is saying there are tankies advocating for a compromise.
What would a compromise bring about…?
One person want you dead, you would like to be alive and healthy, so I guess a compromise is half dead.
1 HP and two levels of exhaustion with the poisoned condition.
Genocide in areas ‘compromised’ on, what do you think
As a Ukraine supporter since the beginning, it’s Biden and congress who deserve criticism. They should have given Ukraine all the tools to win. They also should have protected Ukrainian airspace and her coast along the Black Sea. With full support, I think Ukraine had good shot of expelling the Russian invaders but that window is over. US leaders are now saying it was about hurting Russia, it wasn’t about Ukraine winning. That tells me meaningful US support is over.
The West is a failing system unable to reverse it’s inequities. It’s supporters can only attack critics for pointing out the warning signs. What a sad ass meme.
Yes, what a sad meme for criticizing the idea of compromise between genocidaires and their victims. How horrible.
The meme is a strawman and there isn’t a contingent of leftist leaders shaping NATO’s Ukraine policy.
If you care about Ukranians, why not focus on the actual power dynamics in the region?
The meme is a strawman
How many examples of leftists on the Fediverse saying shit about how Ukraine has to give in to Russia and its Legitimate Concerns™ would it take to convince you otherwise?
Or are you just arguing in bad faith?
‘’‘How many examples of…’‘’ Bro this is the Internet. You will find examples of everything and anything. So what?
There are a lot of dumb takes online, and it’s easy to misunderstood users on social media platforms. So if you are serious, and want to have a good faith conversation with me about geopolitical events, debating about what fediverse randos are or aren’t saying isn’t a good starting place.
So the meme isn’t a strawman, you just don’t like discussing what online randos say.
Forgive me for being wary of letting online randos run amuk and uncontested after the events of [checks notes] 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023.
Then why are you bringing that up to me? I wanted Ukraine to win, I wanted Russia expelled!
The meme is fucking stupid, the US military has been leaking to the press for while now. Ukraine will have to give up territory, aka compromise. And all users like you can do is complain about other users on our social media platform.
The meme is fucking stupid, the US military has been leaking to the press for while now. Ukraine will have to give up territory, aka compromise.
“I totally want Ukraine to win, but they have to face facts.” - Very Concerned People™ Since Late January 2022
And all users like you can do is complain about other users on our social media platform.
… as opposed to… complaining about users complaining about other users?
The West is a failing system unable to reverse it’s inequities.
Yep. Can’t repair her own issues and can’t do the right thing even when it is easy.
*sees putin’s swastika on russian flag*
Looks like another piece of putin’s propaganda that wants to create illusion of pro-war majority.
Yah, that went great the last time, didn’t it?
See: Holomodor
Exactly how I’m thinking. If something like the Holomodor is your compromise position, you might be an insane tankie.
Yeah, it turns out when a small group of people own all the grain and cattle for an entire country, they’ll probably demand more and more money until you can’t afford to feed people anymore. Then, if you try to cease the grain and cattle to give to the people, the few rich farm owners will probably burn all the grain and slaughter all the cattle because if they can’t make a profit, then people should starve. Rough times.
Removed by mod
It should make sense for Russian communist to make this compromise no? Destroying the Ukrainian state and having it assimilate to theirs should be harking back to the old USSR days.
The compromise: Russia gets international recognition of its claims on Crimea and the Dombas, Ukraine get admitted into NATO and enough nukes to glass Moscow should Russia try to take 1 cm more of Ukrainian soil.
Congratulations Putin, you killed 300000 of your own people for a bunch of mined farms and a warm water port that gets blocked by Turkey the second war is declared - and you are too big a coward to go up against any nuclear country, so I guess go pick on Geogia?
Any compromise that gives Russia even an inch of ukranian soil should be deemed unacceptable. Fucking armchair geopolitical experts trading off a sovereign nation’s territory.
There are cases when cession of territory should be considered as a means of obtaining a lasting peace.
1/6th of the country to an aggressor state trying to commit genocide that has done this twice before and gone back on its word both times is, obviously, not a reasonable option.
I can’t think of an examples of countries wanting peace but can’t have it because they can’t share. I also can’t think of any countries that swapped some land and everything was cool and grovy later.
US and the UK in the 19th century comes to mind. Or the US and Canada, if you prefer to think of it that way.
You don’t think it has to do with the complex trade relationships, a shared language, related cultures, and geopolitical similar goals?
Nah it must be because the US and Canada made sure some piece of East Jahunga Island with 1000x as many beavers as people border was perfectly defined.
Legit, we came close several times during the 19th century to outright war (other than the War of 1812, naturally). One of our presidents was elected with a “Pro-War with Britain if they don’t give us the land we think is our’s” platform. Land swaps were an integral part of avoiding that.
The only reason they did it again was that they got away with it. A war with NATO and nukes the next time around is not “getting away with it”. If Ukraine had not given up its nukes in the first place, the first time would not have happened.
(Plus, I want to know what will happen when peace is called and +1 million unhappy soldiers return to Russia. Might be a faster way of returning Crimea if Russia devolves into civil war)
I appreciate the intentions, but I don’t know that it would work out that way in practice.
deleted by creator
What point is it missing?
People of donbass: we rather wouldnt live with the terror of right wing death squads.
So we prefer full scale invasion, execution in the street, total destruction of our cities and abduction of our children
Setting aside the validity of the “death squad” propaganda, do you really believe that those people would prefer total war conditions?
On second thought, don’t answer that. There’s no good faith from people like you who gloss over the horrors of war.
“Its either fascist terrorism or total war” you do know who you sound like right?
“Either a fantasy I made up or a reality that’s objectively worse and happening right now as a result of an actual fascist waging a personal war, but the second one is better because at least we aren’t right wing amiright?”
Zero good faith from you, as predicted
Nice straw man but that’s not even remotely close to what was said
I’ve asked this a few different times, and if you’re willing to answer, you’d be the first. How many people died to these death squads, in what year(s)?
I suspect a particular reason for the unwillingness to give a precise answer, but let’s see what you say.
Edit: No answer. I am not surprised.
No answer because I was busy with other shit lol. It’s not terribly hard to find either, here is a good overview of ukrainian fascism. CW for dead bodies, gruesome heartbreaking stuff.
Edit:
Actually just look through these reports: https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents-listing?field_content_category_target_id[180]=180&field_content_category_target_id[182]=182&field_geolocation_target_id[1136]=1136&field_entity_target_id[1349]=1349&field_entity_target_id[1350]=1350&field_published_date_value[min]=&field_published_date_value[max]=&sort_bef_combine=field_published_date_value_DESC&page=1
in particular this one
Yes, I’ve seen people send me this type of thing before. You didn’t answer the question. How many, in what years? There’s a reason I am asking for specifics from you, so that then you’ll need to defend your own claim.
Irrelevant question. The point is about whether there are right wing death squads terrorising the people in east ukraine. There are my sources proving they exist. If you want to make up some weird statistic so you can have measure of how bad these nazis are in order to be able to dismiss them then you’re looking for nazi apologia. In which case you can fuck off.
The reason I’m asking is that, if it had actually happened, there would be a specific answer. That’s a hallmark of factual information; it might be true or false, but it’s specific and unchanging. You can compare it against other facts, and if it’s true, it lines up. For the most part all the different pieces fit together. Propaganda information changes wildly, or contradicts itself, and the conversation keeps coming back to emotional appeals or angry hostility, and away from simple factual questions.
When I first started asking this question, I was genuinely taking it pretty seriously. It was part of an extensive conversation with some people where I was looking up UN death and incident figures, watching Youtube videos like the ones you sent me, asking questions about what was being presented or looking things up for myself. I actually spent a whole bunch of time on it. So the original reason I asked was that I wanted to see if it was true or false, and the best way I know to do that is to dig for a lot of details, then compare them against other stuff, make sure they’re at least internally consistent, etc.
Every single conversation I’ve had about these supposed death squads went this way though.
- Hey, how many people have died in Gaza during this war? “About 27,000 so far”
- Hey, how many people died on Kristallnacht? “Early estimates were 91 on that particular night; modern estimates are in the range of hundreds”
- Hey, how many people died to Ukrainian death squads in Donbas? “You fuck off watch this Youtube video dead children you’re obviously a Western idiot how dare you say there weren’t death squads fuck you fuck you fuck you Russia’s the best”
- Hey, how many Japanese civilians died in Hiroshima? “Somewhere from 100,000 to 150,000”
See if you can spot the outlier. Again, I was originally asking about it expecting a specific answer and some kind of elaboration so I could compare it against other stuff to start to piece together whether it’s true, but it was a little hard to ignore the pattern once it started happening.
If what had actually happened? Nazis in donbass? Why dont you interact with what I said. I dont know what youtube video you’re talking about. What I linked is a three part series going into extreme detail about nazism in ukraine from WWII on as well as UN reports about missing persons in the region. Unless you interact with what I actually said I see no reason to continue this “conversation”
Obediently watching your videos while you absolutely refuse to answer simple questions about your position is not “interacting,” and I’m not interested in doing it.
I spent hours watching videos the last time I did this. If I decide I want to do it again, I’ll let you know. How many people died to these death squads in Donbas, in what year?
If even remotely true: then feel free to go back to Russia.
That’s like a chunk of New Jersey saying they want to go back to England lmao.
Besides, the referendum was illegimate and conducted at the point of a gun.
That’s like a chunk of New Jersey saying they want to go back to England lmao.
We have decided that this is going to happen, but only for Camden. Also we get Manhattan.
They always have an account on hexbear, every single time, they could at least use a different username
You’ll note that this account is older. My hexbear account is an alt of this one, not the other way around.
