I don't know why you think the US would send it's military to Ukraine for peacful reasons, and not to kill as many Russians as is necessary for the Russians to leave.

I don't know why you think the US sending troops to help a sovereign nation protect itself from an invader is not benevolent.

[–] klieg2323@lemmy.piperservers.net -5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

And that still doesn't answer my question. You are stating facts. I'm not arguing that. What I'm simply asking is if this is worth the US getting into a hot war with Russia using nukes over? It very literally would bring WW3 and nuclear Armageddon. That is the plain and simple fact when the US commits troops to this quagmire. Are you personally prepared to die in a nuclear explosion in the name of protecting Ukraine's sovereignty?

But by all means, keep deflecting with irrelevant facts. It's the sort of thing someone does when they have nothing intelligent to say

[–] thallamabond@lemmy.world -4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Do you think its worth dying by nuclear annihilation because......Russia invaded Ukraine?

[–] klieg2323@lemmy.piperservers.net 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No I do not. And it's why I don't want the US provoking that exchange by engaging their own military in a war with Russia in some attempt to protect Ukraine's sovereignty

[–] CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You'd be that kid that runs away while bullies beat your friend to a pulp, only here you're also trying to talk other kids out of going to help your friend too.

What a strange take.

Imagine if nobody stepped in to fight Germany during WWII, but I suspect you'd be okay with that.

[–] klieg2323@lemmy.piperservers.net 3 points 1 year ago

Never thought not wanting to die in a nuclear exchange would be considered a strange take but here we are.

Sorry, I don't want to die because some areas of Ukraine wanted to be part of Russia and Ukraine said no but Russia said yes. That's nothing like the eve of WW2 where the Nazis were not only claiming entire countries without any interference (much unlike the ammunition support being given today) but they were also systematically denying groups of people personhood under legislation being imposed in conquered territories. The US only got involved after the Germans declared war on the US. That only happened after Americans declared war on Japan after pearl harbor.

I get your point, a policy of appeasement by Chamberlain didn't work as intended, but he was also trying to buddy up with Hitler while he was invading the sudatenland. Apples and oranges buddy

[–] kmkz_ninja@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I mean if the US got involved in WW2, who knows what would have happened? It might have escalated to a full blown war!

[–] DreamerOfImprobableDreams@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes. Do you think it's worth leaving 44 million people to be conquered by a fascist, genocidal regime because you're scared some limp-dick dictator might follow through on his threats that have proven to be empty over and over again?

[–] 133arc585@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Do you think its worth dying by nuclear annihilation

Yes.

Do you mean what you say or do you do it to be contrarian?

I can't think of a single way in which anyone who has even heard of the concept of nuclear weapons, much less seen aftermath of real use and hopefully put some individual thought into considering the consequences of their use, could say that it's worth it to die, taking the rest of humanity along.

I'm just going to block you because I do not wish to interact with (or see the postings of) someone who genuinely wants nuclear war. I'm not going to scramble my brain trying to comprehend how someone could be so delusional.

[–] DreamerOfImprobableDreams@kbin.social -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Do you mean what you say or do you do it to be contrarian?

I fucking mean it. I've risked my life to stand up to abusers before. And Vladdy boy is the biggest abuser of them all. So fuck him and his rinky-dink nukes, nuclear annihilation is a preferable alternative to fascism spreading unopposed.

[–] klieg2323@lemmy.piperservers.net 3 points 1 year ago

Gotcha, so you'd rather die than let Ukraine and Russia naturally resolve their conflict. I forgot how well Russia was doing in Ukraine right now

For real though, I get your argument is rooted in the "appeasement didn't work" aspect of WW2. It's important to note that Chamberlain's appeasement strategy was going on while Hitler was invading the sudatenland. Today we have a unified response from Europe to support Ukraine indirectly. Nobody is appeasing Russia like they were nazi Germany. Not to mention Russia literally has been exhausted by this. If they can't hold the border territory they're trying to keep, what makes you think they'd make a Nazi war path across Europe?

Literally wishing for the end of the world because two countries are fighting over a border territory is insane. Most world conflicts have been fought over territory. Yes it's similar to how WW2 started because it's literally how most wars start.

If you're suicidal like that, maybe go volunteer yourself for Ukraine instead of taking the rest of us down with you.