• lightnsfw@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    120
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 days ago

    What is there to negotiate? If all the russians leave ukraine, ukranians will probably stop shooting them…

    • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      72
      ·
      5 days ago

      Russia has always firmly opposed expansion of NATO, including the missiles and NATO troops that were lined up at their border with Ukraine’s participation.

      • DicJacobus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        45
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 days ago

        All those countries that joined NATO, Their sovereignty doesn’t end where hurt russian fee-fees begin

        if Russia doesnt like it, then maybe they should reflect on how they acted like savage barbarians to those people throughout history. Maybe they should reflect that they aren’t entiteld to an “Empire” or a “Sphere of Influence” or whatever they want to call it. Reflect on the fact that Eastern and Central europe are not pawns and slaves to a larger power. but nations with agency, hopes, dreams and goals.

        but they wont, Imperialism, Warmongering, and Genocide are married to the current excuse of “Russian Culture”

        • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          Yeah like, instead of taking a hard look into the mirror why countries kept wanting to join NATO, or why the russian-bloc equivalent failed so much, LULZ WE JUST GONNA WALTZ IN NO NATO PLOX.

          Ah, nevermind, they did discover why so many countries wanted to join NATO. 😂

        • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          44
          ·
          5 days ago

          If it was about their sovereignty, it’s weird that you don’t mind NATO attacking their sovereignty to install pro-western politicians through corruption or straight up coups. “Sovereignty” only seems to matter when it’s anti-Russian.

          It’s not about feelings. There were many agreements for NATO not to expand. They did it anyway. There are consequences for that.

          • DicJacobus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            27
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            5 days ago

            Please educate me. Which countries had pro-western politicians “Installed”

            And if you’re already typing Ukraine, boy do I have a bridge to sell you.

            With maybe the exception of Serbia, Russia has been antagonistic and Imperialistic towards Europe for CENTURIES. Theres a reason Russia finds itself fighting against most/all of Europe every century. You need only ask the butchered populations of Eastern Europe who found themselves as Russian subjects at any point in history. The only reason they were ever friendly with Serbia, was because the Serbs are like a microchasm of the same thing the Russians did. Mini-mes, if you will.

            you want to scream America bad, NATO bad, fine. but remove both of them from the equation, it wouldnt change the fact that the continent distrusts Russia for a reason.

              • DicJacobus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                30
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                5 days ago

                Oh boy

                So if they installed pro-western politicians in Ukraine, Why was the president of Ukraine at the time of Euromaidan checks notes Viktor Yanukovitch? the Pro-Russian fraudster who was once removed from the presidency after having cheated in the elections. and even afterward, managed to ratfuck his way into a term later on in 2010. Only to get Impeached and removed from power By his own government after he ordered the Berkut and Internal Troops to use lethal force against protestors.

                this tired argument of western coups against these ex soviet countries always forgets to address the fact that a couple of suspicious phonecalls in embassies doesn’t hold the same power as millions of people taking to the streets over a government doing something that is widely unpopular.

                if the CIA and all these other groups people accuse of toppling governments were as competent as fiction made them out to be, Joe Biden would still be President, Putin would be dead, Russia would be a balkanized state, and the Ukraine war would probably never have happened, and if it did, it would have been over by now with a Ukrainian victory.

              • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                5 days ago

                😂 Geezus some people are so far down the disinformation hole there’s fuck all ways to dig them back out, ever…

          • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 days ago

            There were many agreements for NATO not to expand.

            Oh were there?

            That’s interesting, considering how controversial it still is whether oral agreements ever existed in the first place. What isn’t controversial is of course that being oral-only, they can hardly be binding or transactionary. That is to say, the failure was to never transfer these agreements - if they even existed - into writing, bilaterally as that’s how you’d have to do it.

          • uienia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            Complete horseshit. They literally invaded and installed a puppet regime in Chechnia, and there were zero NATO “expansion efforts” there. And that is just one example out of many.

          • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            5 days ago

            They’ve only ever threatened their neighbors during NATO expansion efforts.

            This is abuser logic. “If you would quit misbehaving, then I wouldn’t have to hit you!”

      • NotLemming@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        I’ve always plainly stated that if anyone comes within 2 metres of me, I’m going to stab them. What do you mean, I’m going to prison??!! You knew my rule. I’ve been telling everyone my rule for 20 years.

      • ReluctantMuskrat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        5 days ago

        Except Ukraine was on their border and not part of NATO and other countries on their border are. NATO Then Russia invaded and took the Crimean peninsula unprovoked. Not a surprise that Ukraine wants NATO membership, and now Finland joined NATO because of Russia’s attack on Ukraine, doubling the NATO/Russia border.

        • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          40
          ·
          5 days ago

          Incorrect. The Crimea invasion followed a soft coup of Ukraine by the US, wherein they installed a far-right puppet regime. The following years, Ukraine allowed a torrent of NATO & US troops and missile deployments to be installed at their border with Russia.

        • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          The primary mission of NATO is aggression with the Soviet Union/Russia. That’s the only reason it exists.

        • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          I’m pretty sure every country on earth would respond to a hostile force amassing troops & missiles at their border.

          • TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            The fundamental difference here is between a sovereign nation pursuing defensive alliances versus an aggressive invasion violating international law. Ukraine wasn’t “amassing troops & missiles” at Russia’s border as an hostile threat - it was seeking security guarantees after Russia had already annexed Crimea in 2014 and fomented separatist movements in eastern Ukraine. National sovereignty means countries get to determine their own security arrangements, and Russia’s “security concerns” don’t justify violating Ukraine’s territorial integrity or dictating its foreign policy choices.

            • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              It’s not a sovereign nation. The US installed a far-right puppet regime in the 2014 Maidan Coup, which triggered the Crimea invasion.

              Funny that folks who claim to support Ukrainian sovereignty don’t give a shit about them being under a western thumb.