Surprised pikachu What? Ukraine did not trust Russia to not attack them again, after being attacked by Russia?
Russia has a trust-problem. If they are serious about wanting peace they should work on it.
They are working on it by eliminating the fighting capacity of the AFU. At this point the only peace Ukraine will see is one where it unconditionally surrenders.
I’m sure the tens of thousand of dead russian troops and all those displaced russian families prefer that to just gaining trust with others, resulting in the end of support for Ukraine and a quick surrender. Appatently getting people killed is better than doing everything you can to end end the conflict.
Russia literally did everything possible to try and avoid this conflict for 8 years prior. Ending the conflict without achieving the objectives would be sheer idiocy as anybody who is not a complete imbecile would understand.
Everything except building trust, it seems.
And who said anything about not achieving objectives? Unless the objective is to get people, both Russians and Ukrainians killed, I guess.
Building trust from whom, pretty much everybody outside west is on Russia’s side:
- https://ecfr.eu/publication/united-west-divided-from-the-rest-global-public-opinion-one-year-into-russias-war-on-ukraine/
- https://usrussiaaccord.org/acura-viewpoint-krishen-mehta-the-ukraine-war-viewed-from-the-global-south/
- https://archive.is/2023.02.23-211202/https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/02/23/world/russia-ukraine-geopolitics.html
- https://archive.ph/4kbWG
- https://www.eiu.com/n/russias-pockets-of-support-are-growing-in-the-developing-world/
The global majority understands why this war happened and the role the west played in creating the conditions for the war, as well as the role it plays in perpetuating it today.
The objective is to ensure that Ukraine never becomes a threat to Russia and that NATO expansion stops. that’s the objective that is being achieved.
that NATO expansion stops. that’s the objective that is being achieved.
Remind me again how many member states NATO had before the invasion, and how many it has now?
The question is which states, but having no clue regarding the subject you’re opining on it’s not surprising that you wouldn’t understand that. Maybe if you spent your time actually learning things instead of trolling then you’d understand the strategic importance of Ukraine. Maybe go read up on WW2 sometime and see which path the nazis took to Russia then.
Sweden and Finnland, both already being de facto NATO members beforehand… You’re not too informed baout this international politic thingy, aren’t you?
Quite a lot of non-western countries on that list, including the global south.
And yet as links I provided clearly show vast majority of the global south supports Russia. You keep on coping though.
Removed by mod
Sorry @yogthos@lemmy.ml, but I’m with @twinnie@feddit.uk on this one.
He clearly intellectually bested you with his superior, meritocratic, totally sound and valid argument of you being a Russian bot.
Yeah, sure NATO expanded altruistically to protect Russia’s neighbours. Imagine actually believing that.
“Building trust” is an abstraction that covers many many activities. The fact that Russia did many things that could have built trust but didn’t is completely lost on you, so you have no ability to question WHY trust wasn’t built as a result of the actions taken. Because if you DID question why, you would see that Ukraine’s transition to a right-wing Euro-centric government entailed it being Russophobic and part of the European project to dominate Russia.
Russia was building trust for years beforehand. Putin spoke twice in the Bundestag for example, the goal was a free trade zone from Lisabon to Wladiwostok. Russia also asked to join NATO. It got declined both times. Even when the coup happened in Ukraine, Russia attempted multiple diplomatic initiatives to deescalate the situation.
Do you know who always escalated? Who was always pushing for conflict? Hint: It wasn’t Russia.
Russia literally did everything possible to try and avoid this conflict for 8 years prior.
War is a business for everyone not just for the US. World leaders seek money and wealth and war grants it
The difference is that the military industrial complex in the west is privately owned, which creates the perverse incentive for profit from war. Meanwhile, Russian military industry is predominantly state owned and operating it is a cost for the state.
cost for the s̶t̶a̶t̶e̶ people
Rich people get richer peasants get poorer, i don’t see much difference.
The difference is pretty clear from the number of wars US and Russia have been involved in actually.
Although true. The root is that no super power likes another super power or its proxies on their borders. Russia does not and stated as such for decades. Hell, China literally helps fund the NK government and puts up with it, so it does not have SK, and its American bases on its south border. The USA put an embargo on Cuba for over 60 years because they put Russian weapons 90kms from Florida and Cuba would not capitulate. So much for the Cubans and the USA’s hypocrisy to memory hole this fact.
Yet somehow many Americans are so blind to not understand that Russia does not want Ukraine as an USA puppet next to them, which they would be. They see it as a clear and present danger --whether others see it or care, does not matter-- just like how the USA saw Cuba. I think we can all agree that Putin is a despot but to not see and understand of just how obvious Super power Geopolitics works or only see the one side of the issue because it is convinient is quite the statement on USA propaganda and the ongoing push for expanding of the Monroe Doctrine as status quo. Operation Condor comes to mind.
Super powers actually care little about smaller countries if they so not fit or push their specific geopolitical interests. No exceptions. Despite the real loses of human life, to the American government the Russia/Ukraine conflict is a but proxy war meant to weaken Russia for its own geopolitical goals. Some politicians stated as such already, despite the previous humanitarian PR. Calling any of this so-called Russia propanda as a way of side stepping by some, does not make it any less correct. Sadly.
Apparently getting people killed is better than doing everything you can to end end the conflict.
Apparently in the mind of the west, Ukraine and Zelensky in particular it is…
Those talking points don’t feel humiliating to say in the context of the interview you’re replying under?
Do you have human feelings?
Russia literally never entered any war without serious provocation beforehand.
It took Georgia killing peacekeeping forces for Russia to march in. It took 8 years of ethnic cleansing in Dinbas before Russia intervened in Ukraine.
8 years? Ethnic cleansing in Donbas started in 2008? Do you have some source for that? I don’t remember even Russia claiming such a thing. Why did Russia support Yanukovych if he did such things?
2014, escalation into war started 2022. By that point, one million people had fled to Russia.
If you then remember the rethoric of the Ukr government and soldiers in Donbas how they want to get rid of the russians… ethnic cleansing is the term that fits.
You claimed:
It took 8 years of ethnic cleansing in Dinbas before Russia intervened in Ukraine.
Russia intervened in Ukraine in 2014. 2014 - 8 = 2008, so ethnic cleansing must have happened between 2008 and 2014 according to you.
This smirking troll shit you’re doing right now where you pretend not to know what people are talking about to make a point is doing the opposite of what you want it to.
To your knowledge, what was the reason Russia invaded Ukraine?
How is that relevant? Maybe it was because Ukraine is a nazi-fascist-baby-eating-puppy-kicking nation? It would make it even crazier for them to trust Russia not to attack them again, and even more important for Russia to build trust with others.
It’s relevant because understanding the root cause of the war is critical to defending your mind from the propaganda you’re being constantly subjected to.
Up to a week before the invasion Ukraine was threatening to install nukes and minimise Russia’s response time. This is a security threat that no state can tolerate. You know full well that the USA wouldn’t tolerate anything remotely similar.
This war was started by the USA overthrowing Ukraine’s democracy in 2014 and installing a puppet Banderite Nazi government designed to be a proxy for NATO to threaten Russia. The US believed they could take over Russia again and loot and pillage it like they did in the 90s. They lost control of it with the Iraq war, when Putin refused to help them murder a million plus Iraqis. He was supposed to be their tame, controlled dictator of the place that they were selling off to their oligarchs for pennies.
This was all well understood and known before the massive propaganda avalanche after the 2022 invasion (that Russia tried to avoid for the 8 years prior). Absurd repetition of the “Unprovoked” invasion, reinventing history to spin a yarn about Russia just deciding to invade to steal land etc.
- Former German Chancellor Merkel Admits that Minsk Peace Agreements Were Part of Scheme for Ukraine to Buy Time to Prepare for War With Russia
- Zelensky admits he never intended to implement Minsk agreements
Most people think they’re immune to propaganda, or that it’s just not happening to them, it happens to people in foreign countries.
Here’s the news before the invasion:
Forbes - Ukraine Deradicalized Its Extremist Troops. Now They Might Be Preparing A Counteroffensive
The Hill - Congress bans arms to Ukraine militia linked to neo-Nazis
Years of the Western (BBC) Media Admitting to Extremism Among Azov Military Units:
BBC - Outside Source, (March 23, 2022)
BBC - Torch-lit march in Kiev by Ukraine’s far-right Svoboda Party (2014)
BBC - Neo-Nazi threat in new Ukraine: NEWSNIGHT (2014)
BBC - Ukraine conflict: ‘White power’ warrior from Sweden (2014)
BBC - Ukraine underplays role of far right in conflict (2014)
BBC - Ukraine’s most-feared volunteers (2015)
BBC - The far-right group threatening to overthrow Ukraine’s government - Newsnight (2015)
BBC - Ukraine: On patrol with the far-right National Militia - BBC Newsnight (2018)
BBC - Ukraine coat of arms in UK anti-terror list furore (2020)
BBC - Behind Belarusian ‘far-right mercenary’ claims (2021)
Al Jazeera - Ukrainian fighters grease bullets against Chechens with pig fat (2022)
The Hill - The reality of neo-Nazis in Ukraine is far from Kremlin propaganda (2017)
These are all western sources. This was real reporting. I think the question you have to answer is were they lying then? Or are they lying now?
No, that is disinformation. Show me the original interview where Merkel said that.
Show me the original interview where Merkel said that.
“Hatten Sie gedacht, ich komme mit Pferdeschwanz?”
Die Zeit
7. Dezember 2022
Merkel: Das setzt aber voraus, auch zu sagen, was genau die Alternativen damals waren. Die 2008 diskutierte Einleitung eines Nato-Beitritts der Ukraine und Georgiens hielt ich für falsch. Weder brachten die Länder die nötigen Voraussetzungen dafür mit, noch war zu Ende gedacht, welche Folgen ein solcher Beschluss gehabt hätte, sowohl mit Blick auf Russlands Handeln gegen Georgien und die Ukraine als auch auf die Nato und ihre Beistandsregeln. Und das Minsker Abkommen 2014 war der Versuch, der Ukraine Zeit zu geben. Anm. d. Red.: Unter dem Minsker Abkommen versteht man eine Reihe von Vereinbarungen für die selbst ernannten Republiken Donezk und Luhansk, die sich unter russischem Einfluss von der Ukraine losgesagt hatten. Ziel war, über einen Waffenstillstand Zeit zu gewinnen, um später zu einem Frieden zwischen Russland und der Ukraine zu kommen. Sie hat diese Zeit hat auch genutzt, um stärker zu werden, wie man heute sieht.
(Translated): Merkel: But that requires saying what exactly the alternatives were at the time. I thought the idea of Ukraine and Georgia joining NATO, which was discussed in 2008, was wrong. The countries did not have the necessary prerequisites for this, nor had the consequences of such a decision been fully considered, both with regard to Russia’s actions against Georgia and Ukraine and to NATO and its mutual assistance rules. And the Minsk Agreement in 2014 was an attempt to give Ukraine time. Editor’s note: The Minsk Agreement is a series of agreements for the self-proclaimed republics of Donetsk and Luhansk, which had broken away from Ukraine under Russian influence. The aim was to gain time through a ceasefire in order to later achieve peace between Russia and Ukraine. It also used this time to become stronger, as we can see today.
Exactly. She said to give Ukraine time to mature for an entry to NATO. Not to prepare for war with Russia. That is disinformation.
time to mature
You mean “time to become stronger” i.e. prepare for war and not implement minsk II (why would you want to “become stronger” if not prepare for war; it’s in contradiction with implementing minsk)
Ziel war, über einen Waffenstillstand Zeit zu gewinnen, um später zu einem Frieden zwischen Russland und der Ukraine zu kommen. Sie hat diese Zeit hat auch genutzt, um stärker zu werden, wie man heute sieht.
Maybe read the rest. Macht deine Position weniger peinlich.
I’m german, let me translate: “The goal was to achieve peace between Russia and Ukraine via a ceasefire. She (Ukraine is meant here) also used this time to get stronger (considering the context here being military conflict, it means stronger in the military sense.), as can be seen today.”
You’re just splitting hairs. They used the Minsk peace negotiations to buy time to prepare for war, “to become stronger”… and not for actual peace. This is a fact that you have to accept.
Later Hollande corroborated the admission.
“Yes, Angela Merkel is right on this point. Since 2014, Ukraine has strengthened its military posture. Indeed, the Ukrainian army was completely different from that of 2014. It was better trained and equipped. It is the merit of the Minsk agreements to have given the Ukrainian army this opportunity.”
The “merit” of peace agreements to prepare for war.
what does this reply have to do with the article or the admission contained therein besides having vaguely associated topic metadata tags, you bot?
Really, the takeaway here is: “who gives a shit?”
When they say “undermined peace talks” they mean “supported Ukraine so they had an option other than unconditional surrender.”
We’re supposed to believe that after Putin got what he wanted in 2014 that he’ll just stop after he gets what he wants this time?
No.
Fuck Russia, fuck Putin, and fuck these bootlickers trying to frame Russia as anything other than authoritarian.
The most annoying thing is that the peace accords back then where known to be derailed by the USA and UK, like it was 100% not a secret, absolutely public knowledge if you actually cared about the actual geopolitical region and were paying attention to what was going on outside general news media. Academics were saying the same as well.
The Western media utterly, and seemingly in conjunction decided to under report this to well, mostly to Americans. So your average Americans were kept in the dark of how instrumental they were in escalating this war. And painted anyone who stated actual reality as merely Putin puppets. The manipulation was strong since it seems to have worked wonders.
I fail to see how the USA and by extension the UK are any different when playing the disinformation and misinformation game. Everyone blames everyone else and claims they do not do any of it.
Nuland is just a war criminal but one that has the approval of the American military and political complex. I trust people have listensed to the leaked phone call from years ago where she cherry picks Ukrainian politicians to exalt into office? Go democracy.
Removed by mod
I guess nobody ever accused libs of being smart or original.
Agreed, and neither are fascists.
Oh I’m sorry I didn’t realize you were an open fascist. Usually libs try to hide that.
Zinger! 🙄
Seriously tho get me a job, i would be way less obvious about it.
Coming from a troll who just keeps regurgitating the same line like a bot.
Give me new material to troll you about and I’ll come up with new material too.
You did get new material which is a fresh interview that Nuland gave. The only thing old here is your childish reaction when faced with facts that don’t fit your infantile world view.
says the shill for a country that spends orders of magnitude more on propaganda and bots
Compare the variety of things I comment on to the variety you do and ask yourself “who’s the shill?”
I’m just some dude 🤷♂️
Well, considering we’re replying to you being an obvious shill pushing the propaganda line that ‘anyone who provides any information uncomfortable to my paymasters is a shill so don’t listen to them’ I would say that it’s pretty obvious to anyone that you are the shill.
“NO U!”
-you
Okay?
You accused someone of being a shill and I pointed out how much more likely (a lot) it is that you are a literal shill.
Congratulations on your toddler-esque ability to identify what was said. Thoughts?
I love that you continue to argue with someone that clearly doesn’t give a fuck what you think. In two threads no less. Anyway, see ya!
Projection. Why would I care what you think? Do you care what I think? Is that why YOU’RE continuing to engage?
I’m replying to you because you’re a dumb piece of shit and you shouldn’t be allowed to troll an otherwise worthwhile discussion without being made to look like what you are. And good news: you look like a dumb piece of shit!
Watched the whole interview. This person seem to still live up in the reagan anti-communist rhetoric. She reminds me of these teachers who vent their frustrations on kids and act authoritarian on them as to compensate the lack of something.
Watched the whole interview. This person seem to still live up in the reagan anti-communist rhetoric.
Nuland started her carrer under Bill Clinton.
they started working before that and they are married to robert kagan
Fair, though Kagan also left the GOP to endorse Hilary. One big incestuous murder family! Slay! 💅
Who is Nuland? Haven’t heard of this guy before now
Nuland is the architect of the 2014 coup in Ukraine
Maybe you should… She’s been a high ranking figure of the US foreign policy since the mid 90s.
