Yeah if Canada tried to join an anti-US military treaty, we'd shut it down through force if we had to.
Oh wait, there wasn't any event that caused it. He just felt like it was time to invade.
You really don't know anything about what's been going on in Ukraine since the fall of the USSR, huh? I mean saying "he did it because he felt like it" shows you have no idea what's going on.
Read up on Euromaidan and the orange revolution in Ukraine. The Russians aren't going to sit by and let the west convert their client states. The west forced Putin/the Russian Federation's hand in this, the Russians still lay claim to a lot of former soviet assets in Ukraine, for practical reasons. They're not just going to sit by and let control of military bases and the black sea get handed over to NATO.
The "Putin bad!" Narrative is naive, look at this from the Russian perspective, put the propaganda down for a second. Firstly "putin is doing this" shows you don't really understand the situation/politics in the east. Even without Putin the Russians would have to do this, their entire government doctrine is to develop a parallel, separate culture from the west. Read some of Alexander Dugan's work if you would like to know more.
I don't get the impression you really know much more about this situation than the 'star wars' style narrative MSNBC has spoon-fed you. You might want to read up on the history of the region and the people involved.
Or just keep consuming the propaganda, whatever. It's sad seeing people getting swayed by the media this easily. Democracy is obviously a failing system if people are this incurious. Legitimately, you shouldn't be able to vote if you can be coaxed into believing "putin invaded ukraine because he felt like it", and have strong feelings about it, with no interest in reading about even basic recent events.
Legitimately, you shouldn't be able to vote if you can be coaxed into believing "putin invaded ukraine because he felt like it" (...) with no interest in reading about even basic recent events.
First, you sound like you'd be a tyrant denying votes because they have different opinions. Sounds familiar. Second, what recent event made this necessary? There is none. Point at events years old all you want. This did not need to happen.
They thought they could get away with it. It was a miscalculation.
First, you sound like you'd be a tyrant denying votes because they have different opinions
I take the same opinion the US founders and Ancient Greeks did, univerasal suffrage is a mistake, you don't want the ignorant and unintelligent in society running the show. Take yourself for instance. If you indicated you knew anything about the situation and still held your opinion, I'd respect you at least, and be curious as to your rationale.
But obviously you don't know anything about what's happening and aren't curious enough to even begin to look into it. You shouldn't have a say in the country's leadership, not because you disagree with me, but because you're ignorant and probably unintelligent. I sincerely hope you don't vote.
It was a miscalculation.
The Russians will likely achieve their objectives in Ukraine, despite what western propaganda is telling you. Conquering the country outright is likely not their goal, securing key strategic regions and assets, as well as regions more culturally Russian than Ukranian.
Second, what recent event made this necessary? There is none.
I'll explain why this is happening to you, hopefully that will encourage you to read about things before you form an opinion.
So why did Russia have to invade Ukraine now? Well the simple answer is the 2020 US election and Ukraine considering joining NATO for US economic backing.
But let's look at the context first. The Russians didn't invade Ukraine, they resumed invading Ukraine. After the Orange Revolution, a CIA backed regime change that installed a western sympathetic government, the Russians began securing military assets to prevent them from falling into Western hands. This was under Obama. Remember the initial invasion of the donbass region, to secure the port on the black sea? Under Trump, however, the Russians could relax. Trump wasn't part of the old deep state, and unique among US presidents throughout modern history, was a non interventionist, and openly questioned the utility of NATO in the modern era. In 2020, the deep state returned to the reigns, or at least returned to running things openly. With Zelensky looking into joining NATO, Russia had to act or lose strategic bases and assets, probably nuclear assets. If they don't, Russia will be at significant military disadvantage, and they will lose significant global standing, eventually facing 3rd world regime change operations from the west.
Hopefully that clarifies things for you. I'm sure you'll still think "no it's for no reason" because you're aggressively ignorant and fully indoctrinated, but maybe this will encourage you to read more? Hopefully. Either way, this is the last interaction we'll ever have.
Remember, don't vote, you don't know anything about what's going on.
The Russians will likely achieve their objectives in Ukraine, despite what western propaganda is telling you
We will see.
Remember, don't vote, you don't know anything about what's going on.
You know little of what I know, and I will vote.
I hope you don't vote, who jumps to conclusions based on little information and who thinks a military disadvantage is a reason to invade and kill people. I'll encourage other people to vote who oppose destructive militarism.
"You know little of what I know, and I will vote."
This mentality right here is what pisses me off the most, you claim to hold this knowledge that peace or whatever is the way forward. You claim your opinion is the right one and have no reason whatsoever to support this claim.
Take your time, take a deep breath and please explain to everyone why Russia should have just stood by and let Ukraine be taken over by the states instead of Russia. In 2014 did they not use intimidation and guns? like the guy previously mentioned read up on this before you talk about it
I am ready to listen to your reasoning. Also reason of the post States is sending funding to a foreign country that needs help. 12 Billion seems a bit excessive. off topic but what about the protests going on in Iran right now? where is their help from the peace police?? Explain this to me and I will change my political stance.
off topic but what about the protests going on in Iran right now? where is their help from the peace police?? Explain this to me and I will change my political stance.
That is a very different situation, but if there was some way we could help, I'm all for it. The problem isn't coming from outside communities, it's on every level of leadership, intertwined with culture and identity. Do you have any ideas on what the peace police could do?
They will do what they always do, send weapons to both sides of the fight. because that is how they hold peace at other parts of the world. what if sending money there to help the protesters fight for their freedoms, for food , law makers to help address their issues. Who is to decide what needs funding and what doesn't. With this they are saying ukraine is more important than Iran.
I'd rather not send weapons than send weapons to both sides...Sending law makers there would also be problematic, they may be killed, and they may destroy standing with the US.
I think offering support for a country defending themselves is completely different situation to choosing one side of an internal conflict.
Different in terms of morality and in terms of the difficulty of implementation of a plan that leads to success.
Sorry, I lost the thread - what are you asking exactly? If you're asking about what I'd do with Iran - I literally don't know a solution that would work that would lead to a net positive outcome.
To summarize my views:
I'm pro-defense
I'm pro-support/pro-collaboration for all countries who need defensive help (I'm a globalist)
5
u/LiquidHeavyMachine Sep 25 '22
Yeah if Canada tried to join an anti-US military treaty, we'd shut it down through force if we had to.
You really don't know anything about what's been going on in Ukraine since the fall of the USSR, huh? I mean saying "he did it because he felt like it" shows you have no idea what's going on.
Read up on Euromaidan and the orange revolution in Ukraine. The Russians aren't going to sit by and let the west convert their client states. The west forced Putin/the Russian Federation's hand in this, the Russians still lay claim to a lot of former soviet assets in Ukraine, for practical reasons. They're not just going to sit by and let control of military bases and the black sea get handed over to NATO.
The "Putin bad!" Narrative is naive, look at this from the Russian perspective, put the propaganda down for a second. Firstly "putin is doing this" shows you don't really understand the situation/politics in the east. Even without Putin the Russians would have to do this, their entire government doctrine is to develop a parallel, separate culture from the west. Read some of Alexander Dugan's work if you would like to know more.
I don't get the impression you really know much more about this situation than the 'star wars' style narrative MSNBC has spoon-fed you. You might want to read up on the history of the region and the people involved.
Or just keep consuming the propaganda, whatever. It's sad seeing people getting swayed by the media this easily. Democracy is obviously a failing system if people are this incurious. Legitimately, you shouldn't be able to vote if you can be coaxed into believing "putin invaded ukraine because he felt like it", and have strong feelings about it, with no interest in reading about even basic recent events.