this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Ukraine
8230 readers
68 users here now
News and discussion related to Ukraine
*Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.
*No content depicting extreme violence or gore.
*Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title
*Combat videos containing any footage of a visible human must be flagged NSFW
Donate to support Ukraine's Defense
Donate to support Humanitarian Aid
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
NATO and the people behind it profit on war, they don't want peace they don't want justice they want money and power look at how they support the genocide in gaza. Fight for freedom, not for russia not for nato not for any corrupted government or dictator
That's some wild conspiracy you have there
They are backing israel who is committing a genocide right now, is this a conspiracy?
The US (and the West) support to Israel is despicable, everyone on lemmy with more than two braincells seems to agree.
That by itself does not mean that NATO is seeking war.
If you support a genocide you are evil, if they fuel the war there they indeed support war and not peace.
Look, I feel dirty defending what's going on but you can't just look at what is going on like a 13 years old and decide who is good and bad. Someone needs to explain some nuances. And nato has little to do with all of this.
Potus is stuck with Zionist organisations at home that hold a huge amount of power. In an election year. Is he an asshole? Absolutely, but he has little room for manuevering.
The whole world reacted to Oct 7 walking on egg shells. Say something bad against Israel and you are an antisemite. Of course head's of state and defence ministers all condemned what happened and dont want to be the bad guys saying something about poor Israel. It's slowly getting better, as it becomes more and more obvious that Israel are the bad psychopath guys, more and more UN countries are backing up a cease fire and resolutions against Israel.
What do nato and Ronald McDonald have to do with this? Fuck all. Are they evil and against peace? Only eggplants know
but you can’t just look at what is going on like a 13 years old and decide who is good and bad.
Oh yes you can and everyone should, 13 years old kids aren't brainwashed as much as adults and are still able to see things for what they are, borders and confines are invisible lines draw on a map all humans are equals. A 13 years old kid would never mass murder his peers.
It’s slowly getting better, as it becomes more and more obvious that Israel are the bad psychopath guys
If there's one thing 13 years old actually lack is a lot of history knowledge. Israel goverment has been doing this shit for decades with the full support of both the west and russia. You seem to be stuck in the idea that your rulers are good and care about you or other people, they don't, they care about profits and power look at what they do.
Edgy. Enough phone time for today, time to do your homework.
Not as edgy as someone defending evil
NATO and the people behind it profit on war
True.
they don’t want peace
False. Capitalism makes even more money during peace time.
they want money and power
True, but peace gives much more money and power than war. War gets in the way of making money and spreading influence. War is a dull knife. Peace is a scalpel. Both cut, but the amount of effort and resulting cut with the dull knife of war is a much worse result than an incredibly fine slice from a precision surgical instrument.
Fight for freedom, not for russia not for nato not for any corrupted government or dictator
Russia is almost as far away from Freedom as you can get these days.
True, but peace gives much more money and power than war.
You seem to not understand how profits works. They are not collective, politicians do not care if you or me get rich they care about their own wallet which get boosted the moment they can sign a deal and sell more weapons. Money are only a vehicle for wealth and power: if everyone has the same amount of money then nobody is rich anymore, people become richer when they have more than others. Wars empower states and politicians more than anything else, they make their authority raise during wars not during peace.
You seem to not understand how profits works. They are not collective, politicians do not care if you or me get rich they care about their own wallet which get boosted the moment they can sign a deal and sell more weapons.
I don't think you understand how it works. With war, you can only sell weapons and perhaps bare necessities of life like basic food, basic clothing, basic medicine, and basic shelter.
In peace you can sell luxury cars, exotic cuisine, movies, music, theater, art, Formula 1 tickets, cruise ship terminals, industrial gas infrastructure, cement, roads, boob jobs, gold watches, higher education services, ChatGPT, luxury houses, yachts, video games, coca-cola, porn, Disney world, high speed rail, anime, private jets, and so much more. If you're in war, you're not a customer for any of that stuff. You don't think politicians get rich of this stuff and they only do on weapons? They are much more creative than that for their graft.
If you think war is more profitable that peace for capitalism I'd recommend picking up some history and economics book. Look up the explosive growth during:
- Pax Romana
- Pax Britannica
- Pax Americana
You should recommend these reads to politicians and rulers waging war. Can you please name one USA or Russia ceo that didn't bomb another country?
Same of them are for sure but remember that ukrainian government is currently an authoritarian regime that won't let any male between 18 and 60 leave the country, this has been going on for over 2 years.
@index that's not what authoritarian means.
Males between 18 and 60 will get arrested and put in prison by authorities if they try to leave the country
@index It's a martial law. It sucks, but it just is what it is. Were you also this angry when flights were cut during the pandemic and people were not allowed to leave their house for 14 days when traveling?
Tell me rather how drafting and sending people to the frontline to die for Kremlin in foreign countries if they try to flee Russia is not authoritarianism.
It’s a martial law. It sucks, but it just is what it is.
Yes it is what it is: dictatorship. You can fight for freedom and still allow others to go where they want
Were you also this angry when flights were cut during the pandemic and people were not allowed to leave their house for 14 days when traveling?
Why wouldn't one be angry with it? Were you ok with china locking people inside their houses for months?
Tell me rather how drafting and sending people to the frontline to die for Kremlin in foreign countries if they try to flee Russia is not authoritarianism.
It is indeed authoritarianism now you tell me how russian and ukrainian martial law are different
Why wouldn't one be angry with it? Were you ok with china locking people inside their houses for months?
I see, other countries were not locking people and were free to pass the disease away
It is indeed authoritarianism now you tell me how russian and ukrainian martial law are different
Just take a look at each country's president, see how many terms each of them has got so far, see whose country attacked whose, and you'll figure out if that martial law is legally imposed due to an actual state of emergency, or if it's only a means to gain absolute power.
Just take a look at each country’s president
They are both corrupted and the ceos of a corrupted country, you can just take a look at wikipedia.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/25/world/europe/cia-ukraine-intelligence-russia-war.html
@index @petrescatraian
The same regulation was in place under Churchill during WW II. No elections took place. I suppose he was just another despot.
They probably were
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_Churchill#Imperialism_and_racial_views
Russia fought the nazi too during WWII under stalin totalitarism.
Rulers seek power and will use everything they can to get more
Ukraine has already been attacking strategic targets on Russian territory with its own drones and sabotage operations.
The only difference is being to use Western weaponry to do it.
Which can be a nice addition IMO !
Another small step towards WWIII
For all 3 days it would take to smash the russian federation into a fine paste.
you guys make this same brain-dead comment every time someone shows support for Ukraine defending itself from torture, murder, and genocide. what military intelligence and analysis do you have to base this conclusion on? if it's none, then stfu already
Yeah and to think all of this could stop instantly if the orcs would just go home and kill their dictator.
Russia isn't going to chuck a nuclear hissy fit over losing in Ukraine, they'd put a bag over Putin's head before that happened.
Yeah people forget that nuclear powers lost wars in the past. Soviets in Afghanistan, USA in Vietnam to provide some examples. It's not like lost war triggers nukes and armageddon. They just called it a win or tactical retreat or whatever they could sell at home and moved on.
Putin is scared shitless to even get anywhere near his own people. He's not going to touch the red button. He's barely able to call the invasion a "war".
*given the opportunity.
It's quite clear the Russian populace is also being cleverly manipulated to maintain the situation.
I think that the article is kind of blowing the statement a bit out of proportion.
Nobody has ever said that Ukraine -- which is at war -- does not have the legal right to hit targets inside Russia.
The issues are just diplomatic, not legal. Some countries don't want the weapons they supply being used to hit targets in Russia. Ukraine has been hitting targets in Russia for some time with her own weapons.
I don't think that this will change what Ukraine is doing, nor that it represents a change in the diplomatic positions of those countries.
The USA definitely doesn't want this happening, and I can understand their reluctance. Giving weapons to Ukraine to fire into Russia is a fine line between that and attacking them yourself.
Russia won't do anything to NATO regardless of what happens though. In an actual war with even just the US, Russia would crumple up, so as long as we aren't literally directly striking them, all they can do is make vague threats that they can't deliver on in hopes that western politicians who aren't knowledgable on the matter will take them seriously (which they often do unfortunately). They've been doing it all war and they keep moving the goalpoast against their own favor every time NATO calls their bluff. Honestly I've started to doubt that they even have functional nuclear warheads considering how much they say/imply they'll totally use them if NATO does X, right before NATO does X anyways... like they're compensating for not having any by pretending they have a bunch.
I think most people involved in these decisions in the US know that Russia is all bark no bite, and aren't against letting their weapons be put to use striking Russian military targets anymore. It's just putting Ukraine at a disadvantage to restrict them from using NATO weapons in Russian territory, it keeps almost all of the damage concentrated in Ukraine... obviously not very good for Ukraine.
Are you saying when the store clerk sells me condoms we are practically having sex? I need to be more careful about which check stand I use!
Yes, those two are definitely comparable.
Russia keeps drawing lines everywhere and the west is overstepping them all the time. Nothing ever happens. It's Putins version of https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%27s_final_warning
I know that, but it's still not a line they care to cross.
And it's bullshit because to Putin the occupied territories are russian territory. Didn't they annex these regions already? At least Crimea is Russia to them. Yet we still are fine with attacking Russian troops in these regions with western weapons. To Putin it shouldn't make any difference, if UA strikes there or other parts of Russia. But somehow it does.
So Crimea isn't russian territory after all or is that red line actually nothing more than another smoke screen?
Because it's an arbitrary line that has no legal, moral or historical ground. It's just Putin trying to bully other countries to not help Ukraine. And like any other bully, sometimes you just need to get past over empty threats
Trump not withstanding, the US is a huge part of NATO, and NATO wouldn't say something like this without US government backing, or at least consent.
I agree with your view on this.
This isn’t an explicit endorsement or recommendation by NATO to attack Russia