“Some of you may be willing to die, but that’s a sacrifice I’m willing to make” but unironically

Edit: The user has since apologised https://hexbear.net/comment/3848285

  • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.netOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Ahahaha yes of course appeasement is when you acknowledge that either they can get a decent treaty now, or unconditionally surrender after their entire able bodied population has died.

    Why do you think Russia would want to annex the entirety of Ukraine? Because Putin is evil? Because they’re just horrible villains over there, for our GI Joe heroes to fight the good fight against?
    Be real. Be realistic. Putin is a leader of a country with many factions. He’s not so e irrational James Bond Saturday Morning BreakFast Cereal Cobra Commander, doing stuff because he hates the world or whatever, if he were he wouldn’t have been stable enough to hold power for this long. If he were Prigozhin would actually have had support for his coup.
    What would Russia gain from occupying the entirety of Ukraine? Massive unrest, constant resistance, territorial issues en masse. What base do you have to assume that the Russian government would want this?

    • Vncredleader [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s funny how appeasement is the word liberals drool over. It is their ONLY historical anecdote and used to defend opposing any movement towards peace, ag Korea. The reality is Chamberlain’s big crime was no the act of appeasement, it was knowingly stringing along the French and Soviets only to bail officially when there was no means of changing plans for the USSR and Czechoslovakia.

      Beyond that the comparison also doesn’t work because peace talks had occurred multiple times without excluding relevant parties. Minsk was a thing that happened.

    • lesseva96@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      You are still operating on the assumption that Russia can somehow win this war? Despite its best soldiers and equipment already being spent while the Ukies bathe in the latest NATO gear? Sure, they may be having trouble with their counteroffensive, but that don’t mean that the Russians can mount one of their own. The best case scenario for Russia is a ceasefire and a North/South Korea situation, with a backwards, authoritarian North (Russia) and a prosperous, democratic South (Ukraine).

      • Vncredleader [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        10 months ago

        Democracy is when you have streets named after literal fascists leading to the sites of the Holocaust.

        Also that equipment is not winning Ukraine any territory back. That’s like saying the Soviets couldn’t win WW2 in late 1944 because Germany was developing a jet fighter at that time.

      • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.netOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        The assumption? Russia is winning, where are you getting your news from, reddit?

        Despite its best soldiers and equipment already being spent.

        :doubt: I thought the narrative was that Russia had thrown poorly equipped penal battalions at the Ukrainians, and it is only just now that we’re seeing a change in their troops and equipment? Now it apparently reversed? They started off with well-equpped and trained soldiers?

        Ukies bathe in the latest NATO gear?

        Ah yes the wunderwaffe. The leopards that are getting owned by unique technology like “landmines” will surely turn the war in Ukraines favour. Do you play a lot of HOI IV? You must, because it seems you have a completely wrong understanding of how equipping works. Do you think you just click the “upgrade” button? They’re not trained to use the myriad of different equipment they’re receiving, and even when they can use it, they’re trained with NATO doctrine, which laughably assumes constant air superiority. Of course the equipment is better than russias, because uhh… Because russias is worse! The T-72s have no chance against the leopard! The F16s are coming any day now, and the will definitely own the Russian jets!

        Sure, they may be having trouble with their counteroffensive.

        That’s putting it mildly.

        that don’t mean that the Russians can mount one of their own.

        Not constantly attacking doesn’t mean you’re somehow the losing side. Russia controls the territory it wants to claim and then some. It is in a war of attrition against Ukraine and NATO equipment, and you have far less casualties on the defensive. Why would Russia abandon a strong position, when Ukraine is throwing itself into the meatgrinder?

        The best case scenario for Russia is a ceasefire and a North/South Korea situation, with a backwards, authoritarian North (Russia) and a prosperous, democratic South (Ukraine).

        susie-laugh okay this must be a bit. You got me, thanks for making me laugh. I should’ve read to the end before responding, sorry for taking you so seriously

      • SeventyTwoTrillion [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        You are still operating on the assumption that Russia can somehow win this war?

        Yeah, it’s so stupid to believe this, I mean, look at who’s doing all the conscriptions. Oh. Fuck. Uh, okay, look who has doesn’t have a functional air force and is chronically short on ammunition, as admitted by the actual president of the actual United States (who, I hope you agree, is not a puppet of Putin). Hm. Well, look at all the territory that Russia still has in Ukraine! They must be just down a few villages by now considering that Russia is completely out of missiles, is fighting with shovels, is out of artillery, has no ammo, their soldiers are completely demoralized and also all dead! Fuck. Shit.

        Look, if Russia’s army is so awful, so utterly and completely imcompetent, so out of ammunition, so demoralized, and Ukraine still can’t make a sizable dent in their defences after two months, then holy shit, Ukraine’s army must be fucking terrible. Like, holy shit it must be bad.

        • JuneFall [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          The people having lost are the people being dead, the families separated and people traumatized. Like in all wars. The victims are mostly the working class.

          That said, there are plenty of ways to spin winning and losing for both Ukraine and Russia. Of course for NATO this war war somewhat good, but there can be a couple of things be found that are bad, will not focus on that though.

          Having secured the Krim, having secured a Krim land bridge, having ensured a close alignment of Donbas and Luhansk, having secured control over the Sea of Azov and in addition relevant parts of the North Western section of the Black Sea (and with that ensured access to gas and other resources while denying it to Ukraine), having the river as border in the South between the occupied territories and Ukraine, with mined and defended territory near Donetsk Oblast reduced the open flank of Russia (and its Krim) somewhat. This means millions of people who are effectively living on territory controlled by Russia. This also means a propaganda victory for Putin and thus support from some circles of nationalist society in Russia (for which the education in military basics adds something, too).

          Hard to call all those things failures. That said during a war of attrition and position war is slow till it isn’t anymore. I am not on the side of Russia, but I can see how stuff could be spun.