• Rakonat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    8 months ago

    Russia invaded Ukraine on false pretexts with the intent to use military action to overthrow a democratically elected government after their last attempt at coup/puppet government failed when their patsy fled the country after his failed attempt.

    After the US failed to act in 2014 despite evidence of Russia starting proxy wars against Ukraine and annexing land illegally, and further muddied by Trump’s attempts to withhold defense aid packages he was obligated by law to deliver.

    So yes, US involvement has been justified and Ukraine has not only been happy for the assistance but requested more to ensure their freedom and prosperity doesn’t vanish tomorrow with Putin’s intent to rape the entire country.

    • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      8 months ago

      How is the US justified to meddle in the politics of countries on the other side of the planet? What would the US do if china was giving money to Mexico or Cuba?

      • wieson@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        8 months ago

        Because Ukraine asked.

        What would be the problem with China giving money to Cuba and Mexico?

      • SteveXVII@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        Because they do the right thing this time. What is wrong with helping a country defend itself from an agressor? I know the US does and has done shitty things, that does not mean that everything the US does is bad.

          • SteveXVII@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            8 months ago

            What makes you think that’s the case? It looks like the ukrainians would rather fight russia instead of being conquered again.

            • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              8 months ago

              Because Ukraine is going to lose, and funding them only leads to a longer war and enables them not to negotiate.

              And its easy to say they would rather fight, but the question you should look up is; how many people are conscripted in their army?

              • kandoh@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                8 months ago

                I remember this episode of DS9. The genetically enhanced humans do the math and figure out by surrendering to the Dominion the Federation would save billions of lives not fighting a war they never had a hope of winning.

                But, spoilers, the Federation did win the war in the end. And the genetically enhanced super smart humans who mathematically proved surrender and submission was the best strategy were kept locked up like weird little freaks.

              • SteveXVII@pawb.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                8 months ago

                Ukraine has managed to do a lot in this war: they have repelled Russia’s attack on Kyiv, despite expectations and even pulled of two succesful counteroffensives. (I am talking about Charkiw and Kherson.) I know Ukraine is in a bad spot but that doesn’t mean that it’s over for them.

                If they don’t want to negotiate and would rather fight, then why should we tell them they shouldn’t and instead should negotiate with the agressor? And why should we believe that Russia won’t violate such a deal? Their track-record isn’t great in this regard.

                Wikipedia says that the Ukrainian armed forces consists of 1000000 armed personell. Compared to Russia’s 1320000. I don’t know the relevancy of this, but hey, I answered your question, now you answer mine.

                • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  And all those victories came at a cost and that cost being that their average soldier is in their 40s, and they had to increase their draft. We never know for certain the outcome of a peace deal, but reason russia invaded is well known, and if the west had not gotten involved in the situation the war would have never started, and they dont actually want to invade Ukraine.

                  My question was not how big their armies are, it was how many people are CONSCIRPTED in their army? Meaning how many war slaves are they using?

                  • SteveXVII@pawb.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    8 months ago

                    Victories coming at a cost is not something new and info on how severe they are is hard to come by due to the fog of war. So unless you have a decent source, this point is kind of useless.

                    What good reason does Russia have for it’s full scale invasion?

                    And next: I don’t know why I should be the one looking up how many conscripts Ukraine has when it is your argument. Why don’t you look it up yourself?

                    And what should the west do to protect themselves form Russian aggression in your eyes? If this is not the right way to do it.

          • EndlessApollo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            “What if it harms someone with an infection to give them antibiotics?” you’re a fucking joke xD go back to ruzzia cunt