this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2023
414 points (90.4% liked)

World News

32363 readers
500 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Mitch McConell says the quiet part out loud.

Exact full quote from CNN:

“People think, increasingly it appears, that we shouldn’t be doing this. Well, let me start by saying we haven’t lost a single American in this war,” McConnell said. “Most of the money that we spend related to Ukraine is actually spent in the US, replenishing weapons, more modern weapons. So it’s actually employing people here and improving our own military for what may lie ahead.”

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/4085063

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Maoo@hexbear.net -1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

If you war goal is denazification and you are crawling with nazies it's quite relevant. Should start with that at home instead of invading your neighbour.

You're not listening. I've already told you, explicitly, twice why RF is making that demand, and neither time was it, "well they just don't like Nazis".

Right sector has zero political power in Ukraine, Wagner is way more influencial.

Right sector and its offshoots are very powerful in the military and the military is calling a lot of the shots.

Also, have you noticed how hard it is to find pictures of UA soldiers without either a Wolfangel or a Right Sector reference? Probably not because I am not convinced you read anything about this topic, but.. it's surprisingly difficult.

And again, it doesn't matter if Russia did it too or does it more or whatever impetus is making you try to find these facile gotcha moments. I'm not the Russian state and I don't care if a nation-state are hypocrites in rhetoric or whatever (though RF didn't incorporate a Nazi regiment into their armed forces, so there's that).

In terms of negotiation demands being reasonable, all that matters is whether the material ask is directly addressing the grievance and would support peace. This does both.

Also Azov batallion is mostly dead about a year ago. They died defending one of the locations that I think Ukraine took back during the previous counteroffensive.

Azov was significantly weakened in Mariupol and UA didn't retake that city. They still have a large presence, as an official part of the UA armed forces, in Lviv, Kyiv, Odessa, and distributed near the front. They still appear in an inordinate number of press photos and stories, which speaks to their privileged status.

Any survivors were integrated into the actual military now, yea.

You got the order wrong.

The only threat involved when joining NATO was the threat of Russia. Here in Estonia Russia constantly postures with military exercises and airspace violations, more before we joined NATO.

Given your comfort with saying things you don't know, I won't take your word for it on the exact frequency of military exercises. But I will point out that NATO itself has carried out more and greater aggressions, and ceased to have any ostensible purpose after the fall of the USSR. Mask off, it continued under its actual goal of furthering the interests of US imperialism, which Baltic countries happily oblige.

If by NATO launching a war of aggression I can only assume you mean Serbia because there arent others.

Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, and Libya are the most notable.

You know they were doing a genocide? Like full on Hitler level genocide. I find that like a pretty acceptable one.

This comparison trivializes the holocaust, which us not out of character for a NATO fan from the Baltics. In addition, this is again a piece of propaganda, a thin pretense for the actual goal of Balkanizing Yugoslavia. The NATO bombings were brutal and targeted civilian infrastructure.

This is already an essay and arguing about points only Russian state media argues for seems like a loss no matter if you are right or wrong.

You have been wrong about nearly everything you've said, even just simple facts. Now you want an excuse to leave rather than just doing it - ah, my information is just "Russian" (nearly everything I've said comes from Western and Ukrainian sources).

How pitiful.

[–] Frank@hexbear.net 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They're Estonian. It's pointless.

[–] FluffyPotato@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Like half your points are either insane or just provably wrong and there's an essay for each point. Going over each one separately only to find out the only source is Russian state media is more than a little demotivating, especially on my phone, when arguing with people like you.

Like the NATO offensive war part: the only one that would be an offensive war is the Serbian one and all the others listed are definitely not offensive wars initiated by NATO.

And then there's the insane claims like Russia could win if they just wanted to, Russia has total air superiority since the start of the war, Ukraine military is run by nazies, NATO members join by being threatened by NATO. There are probably others I'm forgetting. The only people saying something that batshit is Russian state media and their strategy has been to overwhelm you with bullshit to debunk so either you are get all your bullshit there or you are a professional and I'm not going to waste my time with playing whack the Russian propaganda.

[–] Maoo@hexbear.net -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Like half your points are either insane or just provably wrong and there's an essay for each point.

Interesting that you proved none of them wrong and just said made-up nonsense in response then, isn't it?

Going over each one separately only to find out the only source is Russian state media is more than a little demotivating, especially on my phone, when arguing with people like you.

And now you're just lying. So pitiful.

Like the NATO offensive war part: the only one that would be an offensive war is the Serbian one and all the others listed are definitely not offensive wars initiated by NATO.

You are 100% incorrect and I invite you to spend literally any amount of time learning about NATO's involvement in both Libya and Afghanistan. If you were a student I'd having a talk with your parents because you keep making things up rather than reading and learning.

Maybe you don't know how to find information? Put the words "Libya" "NATO" and "bomb", read the results, ask yourself if NATO was defending lol.

And then there's the insane claims like Russia could win if they just wanted to

Yes obviously. Only gullible people think otherwise. Military folks expected RF to immediately curbstomp Ukraine because they thought RF would use the tactics of, dare I say, NATO countries and just bomb everything war crimes style. RF chose a very different tactic. I know you don't know why they did that, but you should do yourself a favor and read about it.

Russia has total air superiority since the start of the war

A basic fact. RF bombed UA airfields right off the bat and UA has had very little air presence while RF does basically whatever it wants outside of manpad resustence. You are free to go spend any amount of time learning these basic facts.

Ukraine military is run by nazies

Actually I didn't say that, though you csn tell the military is run by people in that neighborhood based on their statements. Remember when the UA MoD endorsed calling Chechens orcs and dipping bullets in lard? Of course you don't, you haven't paid attention. But you are free to review the extent to which Nazis have been incorporated into UA's military both formally and informally.

NATO members join by being threatened by NATO.

I didn't say that either. In UA's case it was less a threat than a coup, though UA isn't joining NATO soon anyways.

There are probably others I'm forgetting. The only people saying something that batshit is Russian state media and their strategy has been to overwhelm you with bullshit to debunk so either you are get all your bullshit there or you are a professional and I'm not going to waste my time with playing whack the Russian propaganda.

And now we return to your habit of, "everything I don't know is Russian propaganda". Like I said before, my sources are Western and Ukrainian. At no point in this conversation have you asked a question, sought information, or demonstrated knowledge of anything I'm talking about. But you have repeated some confused poorly-remembered talking points and seem to be very comfortable with lying when you don't know something.

Work on that, buddy. I don't think I should have to tell you that lying is bad.

[–] FluffyPotato@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Just another essay straight from RT. I'm as interested of learning about Russia from tankies as I am about learning of the holocaust from neonazies.

[–] Frank@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago

Baltic double-Holocaust! Bingo!

[–] Maoo@hexbear.net -2 points 1 year ago

Ask your mommy if lying is bad

[–] freagle@lemmygrad.ml -1 points 1 year ago

This comparison trivializes the holocaust, which us not out of character for a NATO fan from the Baltics. In addition, this is again a piece of propaganda, a thin pretense for the actual goal of Balkanizing Yugoslavia. The NATO bombings were brutal and targeted civilian infrastructure

With depleted uranium bombs, no less!