It’s a liberal cesspool full of people who refuse to listen when you speak. I explained how the SMO in Russia was justified going all the way back to fucking WWII and Stepan Bandera to Russia not wanting Ukraine in NATO and some dickhead told me to “tOuCH gRaSS”. Didn’t even address any of my points, just that “dEnAziFIcaTioN iSnT a gOoD rEasOn, iT’s aS bAd aS wMDs”.

Fucking moron. I hate that fucking place so fucking much.

  • andrewta@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Russia didn’t want Ukraine in NATO but invades Ukraine and effectively kicks the door open to basically force NATO to let Ukraine into NATO.

    Law of unintended consequences?

      • hitwright@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, but it brings the whole NATO to war by default. Since that is an escalation no one wants to play, so the Ukraine continues to suffer alone.

        • redtea@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          So if the war means Ukraine cannot practically join NATO, and if Russia is unlikely to leave Ukraine in a state where it could join NATO after the war, is it likely that invading Ukraine will lead to Ukraine joining NATO?

      • andrewta@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Once the war is over they will be. The invasion of Ukraine basically created a situation where NATO said enough is enough and has agreed that Ukraine can join. Had Russia not invaded this would most likely not have happened.

        • redtea@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Were they not on the cusp of joining before Russia invaded? I thought that was one of the reasons for the invasion, to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO?

          • andrewta@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            There has been talk for years. But it never went anywhere and was never going to. I don’t remember right off hand why ( I just woke up and my brain is still foggy) but I do know it was never going to happen. Putin just wanted more land and believed that since NATO was never going to vote to have Ukraine join, it was going to be a quick conflict and the thing would be over. He took Crimea and the world did nothing. If it worked once why wouldn’t it work again?

            Man was he wrong.

              • andrewta@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Because if Ukraine is part of NATO and Ukraine is being invaded then NATO basically has to directly join in the fight. Which means direct conflict between NATO and Russia. That is never a good idea.

                And there is no civil war. Well no more then there is in the US. There are certain groups in the US that want to break away. Obviously that won’t happen. They never gain any real traction.

                In Ukraine they wouldn’t have gained traction either , but Russia decided to back and also arm the separatists. That was done for the sole purpose of giving Russia an excuse to invade and annex Crimea.

                • redtea@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You’re missing some facts here. There was a civil war. 14,000 people killed. 30,000 injured. 1.3+million displaced. All reported by the UN.

                • CriticalResist8@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  In Ukraine they wouldn’t have gained traction either , but Russia decided to back and also arm the separatists

                  So it’s okay for NATO to arm Ukraine, but it’s not okay for Russia to arm people who are being killed by their own government?

        • Red Wizard 🪄@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Lol this isn’t a marvel movie kiddo and this war isn’t going to be “over” where the “good guys” win and the credits roll. It’s going to end the same way the Iraq war ended. 20 years of bloodshed, every Ukrainian killed, irreparably traumatized, or radicalized, with Azov insurgencies armed to the gills with NATO and US assets with a deep hatred of all three parties involved.

          It’s natural landscape raped for it’s resources, it’s “reconstruction” privatized by Global Financial Capital, it’s people’s “identity” will be nothing but a shallow husk of its former self.

          Don’t forget what Iraq looked like prior to the deathgrip of imperialism:

          In 20 years, the then 20 year olds born around the time of the war won’t even know why we were aiding them, or why we would bother to help a “dirty” “under developed” nation like Ukraine. Just be ready to show them photos of what it looked like before NATO and the US wrapped their filthy, oily hands around their throats and choked them blind.

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          “When the war ends, Ukraine will join NATO.” + “Russia can not allow NATO on its borders.” = “Russia has zero incentive to ever end the war and has every incentive to fight the war indefinitely.”

          By promising to admit they have actually made Ukraine into a permanent warzone, turning what was a regional dispute into an existential threat to Russia’s national security. And that was the point. Maybe they actually would let Ukraine join after the war, but that’s why they don’t want the war to end. Ukraine has now become a pit where they can throw in money in exchange for Russian blood and treasure.

    • loathsome dongeater@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      to basically force NATO to let Ukraine into NATO

      If NATO is being forced to let in Ukraine, then why is Ukraine still not a part of NATO after all this time?

      If you said this about Sweden I could understand. But everything about Ukraine joining NATO has been speculative saber rattling. As I see it they will never allow Ukraine to join.

      • andrewta@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The vote will happen once the war is over that has already been publicly stated. The only reason it won’t happen while the war is happening is it would create a situation that put NATO in direct conflict with Russia. Right now it’s just handing the arms to Ukraine.

        Had Russia not invaded this most likely wouldn’t have happened.

        • CriticalResist8@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          NATO has said 4 times Ukraine won’t get to join, and has been dismissive of any timeline, and you still believe them when they say “yeah it will totally happen after the war trust us guys just hold on and eventually it’ll happen pinky promise”