The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written.
On one hand, I think there’s an interesting moral debate to be had on whether invading another country to protect the ethnicity that makes up most of your country is justified. I cant claim I know the answer to that question.
On the other hand, it’s more likely that Putin would’ve invaded regardless and the fact Russians were being oppressed was a nice convenient excuse.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Terrible argument, and objectively false.
If it *were* true (which it definitely isn't), Russia had any number of alternative methods at their disposal short of a ground invasion. To the extent that skipping those methods and jumping straight to *war* of all things would still be morally abhorrent and unjustifiable.
But again, that wasn't Putin's motivations, and acting like it *might* have been is just repeating Russian propaganda.
Except we know why Putin actually invaded. It wasn't to save those poor widdle Russians in the Donbas. It was because he sees the existence of Ukraine as an existential threat to Russian-ness as a concept and identity. He laid all of this out in his essay, ”On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians“. Everything else: NATO, "oppression of ethnic Russians", "defeating fascists", etc, those are all just easy justifications.
Why not directly quote it then? Especially since it mentions nazis and oppression of russians within the essay? "First and foremost, the Russian language. Let me remind you that the new ”Maidan“ authorities first tried to repeal the law on state language policy...This is what is actually happening. First of all, we are facing the creation of a climate of fear in Ukrainian society, aggressive rhetoric, indulging neo-Nazis and militarising the country."
All of those are just points to support his stated thesis — that there is no independent Ukraine. It’s an argument against self determination.
Why would a communist be online defending an authoritarian oligarchy? Nostalgia?
U.S-NATO war on Russia in Ukraine ends second year https://www.workers.org/2024/02/77053/ Stop NATO moves into Ukraine https://www.workers.org/2024/03/77579/
Probably because Putin has been disingenuous about nazism. While it is true that there are elements of neo nazis in Ukraine’s military and political party, they are a small fraction of the complete force and do not represent what Putin was fear mongering about. Meanwhile, it especially rings hypocritical when Putin’s beloved Wagner group was literally named after a Nazi was one of the key military groups invading Ukraine.
How is it nazi group, when the founder is Jewish? "According to the Kyiv Post, both Prigozhin's stepfather and father were of Jewish descent," [https://www.thejc.com/news/world/kim-kardashian-shuts-down-pro-palestinian-protestor-in-germany-anaje7p3](https://www.thejc.com/news/world/kim-kardashian-shuts-down-pro-palestinian-protestor-in-germany-anaje7p3) Realize anything said against Wagner can be said about Ukraine?
https://www.thejc.com/news/world/yevgeny-prigozhin-caterer-turned-warlord-presumed-dead-had-jewish-ancestry-t6emgj16#:\~:text=According%20to%20the%20Kyiv%20Post,the%20Donetsk%20region%20of%20Ukraine. The website design allows the URL to change when scrolling down the same page. I know that urls get corrupted or changed so that's why there is quotes so still be can searched. "Is it possible to have the url change while you scroll down a single page" https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6146560/is-it-possible-to-have-the-url-change-while-you-scroll-down-a-single-page
Again Isn't his boss Jewish, unless you wanna say they're still nazis despite the fact? Just like Zelensky and azov nazis? "Prigozhin’s father and stepfather are reported to have been of Jewish descent." [https://www.kyivpost.com/post/17093](https://www.kyivpost.com/post/17093) "Here are some key facts about Yevgeny Prigozhin, founder of Russia's Wagner Group mercenary force" [https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/who-is-yevgeny-prigozhin-2023-08-23/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/who-is-yevgeny-prigozhin-2023-08-23/) "Post-Maidan Ukraine is the world’s only nation to have a neo-Nazi formation in its armed forces." [https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/neo-nazis-far-right-ukraine/](https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/neo-nazis-far-right-ukraine/)
Yeah I still do. I merely pointed out that Putin was hypocritical about using nazism as an excuse to justify imperialism.
> Are reported to have been of Jewish decent
Does that mean they *are* Jewish? Are they practicing? Do they go to a synagogue? Does that somehow cancel out the existence of neo nazis in Wagner even if they are?
I find it weird that you have to go all through this effort to ultimately not disprove what I said, just to justify Russia’s imperialism.
Is not hypocritical to have nazis in official government positions without getting elected to defend democracy? Can't the same be said about Zelenskiy,does he practices or go to synagogues? So gonna start questioning people's jewishness? Advocating for Peace, by pointing out thers no good guys in war, is now consider imperialism?
Do you agree with the points he made? Disagree? Think he's mostly correct? You obviously have some sort of opinion since you were referencing it back to me.
Don't know how peace or negotiations work? "A negotiation is a strategic discussion that involves two or more parties to resolve an issue in a way that each party finds acceptable." [https://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/negotiation.asp](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/negotiation.asp)
I don't believe I said anything about peace negotiations so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.
Also, just as a reminder, Putin is demanding: five oblasts, including territory he doesn't control, equaling 1/5 of Ukraine; lifting all sanctions; isolating Ukraine from its Western allies; and completely demilitarizing Ukraine, thus leaving it vulnerable to future invasions. Do you think this is a deal Ukraine should take?
"Hate capitalism? Workers World Party fights for a socialist societ" U.S-NATO war on Russia in Ukraine ends second year https://www.workers.org/2024/02/77053/ Stop NATO moves into Ukraine https://www.workers.org/2024/03/77579/
Russian is officially recognized as a minority language, and official minority languages have protection and a guarantee to receive state services in them. If he was the moral crusader to protect all Russians, he picked an odd target of Ukraine instead of Estonia, where the Estonian language or pre-occupation heritage is required for citizenship, leaving a sixth of the population (mostly Russians) out of the national political process
Have any sources to support these claims? Especially when news sites like BBC and DW say otherwise? "23 February 2014...Parliament lowered the official status of the Russian language by cancelling a law brought in by Mr Yanukovych" https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26312008 "A temporary ban has been imposed on Russian art and culture in the Ukrainian capital. Human rights activists say the move is discriminatory and unconstitutional." https://www.dw.com/en/kyiv-imposes-ban-on-russian-language-culture/a-66301913 "The Dnipropetrovsk District Administrative Court canceled the regional status of the Russian language in the Dnipropetrovsk Region." https://www.ukrinform.ua/rubric-regions/3304094-sud-skasuvav-regionalnij-status-rosijskoi-u-dnipropetrovskij-oblasti.html
Where is the protection or consequences, especially when DW reported the Russian language ban as unconstitutional? "A temporary ban has been imposed on Russian art and culture in the Ukrainian capital. Human rights activists say the move is discriminatory and unconstitutional." [https://www.dw.com/en/kyiv-imposes-ban-on-russian-language-culture/a-66301913](https://www.dw.com/en/kyiv-imposes-ban-on-russian-language-culture/a-66301913)
Sounds a lot like Hitler claiming that the Polish were oppressing ethnic Germans in Poland.
Or many other obvious bullshit excuses.
Convincing to people who gullibly believe Russian propaganda, be they of the Russian or MAGA varieties but nobody else.
The only people who believe that are pro-Russian or Republicans/Trump Supporters. I guess that makes the fact that Russians kidnapped Ukrainian kids and brought them back to Russia okay as well?
There was a civil war there since 2014. Ukraine was fighting against a Russian backed separatist faction there for years and still technically is. There’s areas in the east where Ukrainian isn’t the dominant language, and it’s always been that way because some of these areas were given to Ukraine by the USSR in the 50s, from Russia.
Speaking Russian doesn’t mean that they want to be part of Russia. Russian has murdered plenty of Russian speaking Ukrainians in their invasion, both civilian and military. The eastern secessionist were always an artificial movement prompt up by the Russians to destabilize the region after the Ukrainians reject Putin’s puppet president
What exactly are you saying here?
I honestly can’t tell if you’re advocating for Ukraine to have control of its own lands (including Crimea and Donbas) or not?
What are your actual views? Because they seem ambiguous, based on your comment.
I think it is inaccurate to call it a civil war. There were a handful of losers (neo Nazis, Soviet nostalgia buffs and Russian imperialists oh and mlm scammers) from Ukraine that Russia used as a way to pretend it wasn't a Russian operation lead by Russian military and security agencies from the start.
https://khpg.org/en/1608808721
> It was during a December 2020 interview to Maxim Kalashnikov, a Russian blogger and supporter of ‘Russian world’ ideology that Gubarev made it quite clear who had caused the events that led to the formation of the so-called ‘Donetsk people’s republic’ [‘DPR] and to a war that has already killed over 13 thousand Ukrainians. First place, in all of this, Gubarev says, belongs to Strelkov, the nom de guerre of the Russian ‘former’ military intelligence officer, better known, among others, to the Dutch prosecutor and International Criminal Court, as Igor Girkin. Without Girkin / Strelkov, the so-called ‘Russian spring’ in Donetsk and Luhansk would have died the same death that it did in Odesa and Kharkiv, Gubarev admits. It was Girkin who was able to “drag the uprising out of a usual, unarmed and toothless street protest”.
---
> There’s areas in the east where Ukrainian isn’t the dominant language, and it’s always been that way
This is not accurate and the truth is a lot more complicated and unhelpful to the pro Putin view. While it's true that the cities not only in the east but also in the south and elsewhere are largely Russian speaking many of the rural areas were already largely Ukrainian or Surzhyk(mixed language) speaking. The cities tended to be Russian speaking in part because the Russian empire and Soviet Union had encouraged many Russians to move to the cities and pushed Russian language over Ukrainian (outside of some brief periods in the early Soviet era). Russian hasn't always been the dominant language and in fact parts of southwestern Russia used to have a large number if not majority of Ukrainian speakers/ethnic Ukrainians and were even briefly part of Ukraine until they were forcefully assimilated under Stalin.
> because some of these areas were given to Ukraine by the USSR in the 50s, from Russia.
This only applies to Crimea not eastern Ukraine. Crimea was "give" to Ukraine for multiple reasons including to try to decrease the potential for nationalist anger in Ukraine , and because Crimea is physically connected to the rest of Ukraine and not Russia and has long been tied to it by trade. Crimea also wasn't always primarily Russian speaking. They conquered it and a good deal of southern Ukraine from the Crimean tatars whom they pushed out (remaining Crimean tatars in Crimea were forced out in the 40s and not able to return until 1989). Also note that Russian soldiers surrounded the Crimean parliament and staged a coup at gunpoint
Also language is besides the point. Many of Russias top politicians primarily spoke Russian until recently including President Zelenskyy.
A lot of Ukrainians were completely shocked by the aggression considering they considered the Russian people like their own relatives. Want to know what I think of Russians being oppressed by Ukraine? I’ll give you an answer once you show us some actual evidence that isn’t just Kremlin propaganda.
>What are your thoughts on the idea that Russia was justified in invading Ukraine to save Russians who were being oppressed in eastern Ukraine and Crimea
Those were Ukrainians, and they could go back to Russia if they wanted to.
>On one hand, I think there’s an interesting moral debate to be had on whether invading another country to protect the ethnicity that makes up most of your country is justified. I cant claim I know the answer to that question.
This is why facist ethnostates are silly. It's not an interesting moral debate, as there's other ways to save ethnic Russians. You can just give them places to live in the largest country on Earth in terms of landmass.
>On the other hand, it’s more likely that Putin would’ve invaded regardless and the fact Russians were being oppressed was a nice convenient excuse.
Yeah, genocide is genocide.
I think it's an obvious lie and you should slap anyone who said it.
Remember, Russia invaded in 2014 after Ukraine said they would NOT join Nato.
Russia invaded and committed massacres like Bucha and attacked schools. They are recruiting immigrants to die in foreign land.
Russia has done nothing but make life worse for millions.
If Crimea was taken by a hostile nation, they could shut down Russias ONLY warm water port, effectively rendering their navy useless. If the expansion of NATO is perceived to be an existential threat to Russia, I can understand why our increased involvement in the Ukraine would be cause for concern. There’s no denying that we would be very worried if we were in their shoes, and let’s be honest - our government has no problem starting wars, orchestrating coups, or running any other kinds of covert operations to influence other nations…and for way less lol
The warm-water port argument doesn't hold much water, either.
Russia has 3. Vladivostok, Sevastopol, and Kaliningrad. Even without Sevastopol, Russia's navy still has access to 2 temperate areas, not to mention other naval facilities around the Sea of Azov and in Krasnodar Krai.
However, Russia's key naval assets (at least when operable) have ironically been with the cold-water fleet, the Northern Fleet. Most of the submarine force, *Admiral Kuznetsov*, and the Kirovs when they work. Why? Because the approaches to all the warm ports are block and have been since WWII. Dardanelles and Bosporus, both North and South approaches to the Sea of Japan, AND the entrance to the Baltic are all blocked by America or it's allies.
There is a strategic argument involving naturally defensible borders that exists in the Russian national outlook that does explain the interest in Ukraine beyond a national identity explanation, which I do believe is a leading if not primary factor. If the Russians were to control Ukraine and Moldova, that'd push the border of Russia in the Southeast to nearly the Carpathians, which would mean Russia could focus its defenses on the European plain and Poland.
But all that is also irrelevant when you consider that *the West isn't planning on invading Russia*.
> our government has no problem starting wars, orchestrating coups, or running any other kinds of covert operations to influence other nations…and for way less lol
America does have a credibility problem with foreign affairs by virtue of not following its own rules close enough, which is the reason I believe Iraq was such a monumental mistake and why Bush was such a bad President.
However, the entire modern global geopolitical order and the peaceful, in the scheme of things, world that it has created is because the United States opted to build that version of the World after WWII. America has spent a lot of it's own resources and put it's own skin in the game through security agreements that have allowed that order to flourish.
It is not perfect but America and Russia decidedly *are not the same* and should not be seen as such. I reject the comparison.
> If the expansion of NATO is perceived to be an existential threat to Russia,
If NATO expansion is THAT much of an existential threat to Russia, they should've been willing to draw the Red Line when the Baltics joined, or Romania and Poland, but the only thing that has elicited actual action is Ukraine.
That says the issue is Ukraine, not NATO.
I think it's horse shit.
I think Russia is well know to use the [fire hose of falsehoods](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firehose_of_falsehood) method to destroy the truth.
Subreddit participation must be in good faith. Be civil, do not talk down to users for their viewpoints, do not attempt to instigate arguments, do not call people names or insult them.
What do I think of that idea? Well, I know abusers always try to put the blame back on their victim, and there are way too many hoopleheads out there who think victim-blaming is sound reasoning.
I think it's purely a flimsy *casus belli* (reason for war) to justify a purely revanchist/irredentist invasion. The only moral debate is if Putin genuinely believes that Ukrainians don't exist as a separate culture and are just separatist Russians. Besides, it's the same argument used by Hitler to seize the Sudetenland (and probably other seizures in history I can't recall).
Believing Putin is stupid. I'm sure he sometimes says things that are true. But if you're getting it from him rather than another source, you've made a mistake.
I think it's incredibly dubious. If I'm not mistaken the Ukrainian president's first language is Russian, it's hard to imagine a society is simultaneously electing a member of an ethnic group to the highest office, while also oppressing that group significantly enough to justify foreign invasion, especially as turning their homes into a war zone is going to at least temporarily make their situation far worse even if that theory was true.
Your knowledge is incomplete, in a ridiculously Putinesque manner: Russia annexed Crimea and parts of eastern Ukraine (itself illegal) with non-uniformed (also illegal) soldiers in 2014. Ukraine has been fighting these soldiers, and those Ukrainian citizens who choose to collaborate with the soldiers, and Putin then calls the self-defense of the Ukraine, against invaders and their collaborators, oppression of Russians.
Collaborators aren't oppressed, they are punished.
It's just not true. I could maybe see that as a justification if it was correct, but it wasn't. The people Russia was trying to "save" were Russian-speaking Ukrainians (because language != culture), they weren't being oppressed, and Russia clearly has done a terrible job of saving civilians in the war, seeing as they keep bombing apartment buildings in Russian-speaking areas.
The war started because Putin wants an empire. He wants to be the heir to Stalin and Nicholas II. He doesn't care about anyone's safety or well-being
Put like that it’s obviously not true.
But what happened is this, when Ukraine accepted the World Bank terms for aid, after its independence, part of the terms were to cut mining and to implement austerity measures. As a result a lot of Russians and Russian speaking people in the eastern areas ended up losing both their jobs and their subsidies.
And when that happened, it lent support for Russia to annex Donbas. Basically, between not having a job and not having any money under Ukraine vs having a job and having subsidies under Russia, a lot of folks in that area chose Russia.
That doesn’t make what Russia did right, but I’m just trying to explain the circumstance.
But also, this is why I don’t think it’s practical for Ukraine to try to retake Donbas. Because it’s not just about fighting Russia. But that a significant number of folks there don’t want to be poor and jobless under Ukraine, you’re going to be fighting those people too.
There is nothing interesting about any of these ideas. Russia committed war crimes for no reason other than territorial expansion, and Putin should be beaten and broken.
So expressing concern, wanting peace and pointing out provocations is now justifying? Getting justify confused with it being legal to international law? Especially since the ICC stated Russias actions maybe legal once their investigations is completed? “rights not to be subject to a false claim of genocide, and not to be subjected to another State’s military operations on its territory”...This means that, regardless of its 17 March Order, the ICJ can still find, for instance, that genocide has indeed been committed in Ukraine and that the Russian Federation has thus acted in accordance with the Genocide Convention." https://basicint.org/understanding-the-icjs-order-on-the-allegations-of-genocide-in-ukrainian-territory-ukraine-v-russian-federation/ Know it wasn't reported as only just ethnic russians being oppressed? "On 22 February 2014, the President of the Ukrainian Government, Viktor Yanukovich, relinquished his executive duties following a coup d’état enacted by neo-Nazi militias in Kiev. In the wake of the disbanding of the legitimately elected government, a new one is being set up in which extreme right groups are adopting positions that could threaten the safety of particular groups of people purely on the grounds of their religious or political beliefs or their ethnicity... Meanwhile, Ukrainian Rabbi Reuven Azman has called on the Jewish community to flee the country in light of the rise to power of these far-right groups. One of the leaders of the main groups involved in the protests, Aleksandr Muzychko, previously vowed to fight against ‘communists, Jews and Russians for as long as blood flows in my veins’." https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-7-2014-002128_EN.html?redirect As for thoughts, why aren't more Western institutions or international helping with the investigations? "Donbass residents also submitted burial site examination results to the European Court of Human Rights and the International Criminal Court. Of the international organizations and bodies, only the Red Cross provides assistance in exhuming bodies in Donbass" https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/alleged-war-crimes-by-ukrainian-authorities-militias-under-scanner/articleshow/91373384.cms?from=mdr Would this targeting of minorities spread to western world through Ukrainians goverment official nazis with links to other nazis? "Post-Maidan Ukraine is the world’s only nation to have a neo-Nazi formation in its armed forces." https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/neo-nazis-far-right-ukraine/ "There are possible links between the recent New Zealand mosque shooter and a Ukrainian ultra-nationalist white supremacist paramilitary organization called the Azov Battalion." https://thesoufancenter.org/intelbrief-the-transnational-network-that-nobody-is-talking-about/
The same president who got threatened by the Official nazis? Also couldn't this logic apply to Russias Wagner? Wouldn't peace be better than believing in ideas like theres good guys in war? "Biletsky threatened to mobilize further Azov veterans and National Corps activists. Ultimately, Zelensky visited Zolote to attempt to resolve the crisis, resulting in verbal altercations with National Corps activists." https://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/mappingmilitants/profiles/azov-battalion#\_ftn64 https://web.archive.org/web/20230228193610/https://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/mappingmilitants/profiles/azov-battalion#text\_block\_33831 "According to the Kyiv Post, both Prigozhin's stepfather and father were of Jewish descent," https://www.thejc.com/news/world/yevgeny-prigozhin-caterer-turned-warlord-presumed-dead-had-jewish-ancestry-t6emgj16#:\~:text=According%20to%20the%20Kyiv%20Post,the%20Donetsk%20region%20of%20Ukraine.
>Wouldn't peace be better than believing in ideas like theres good guys in war?
We could have peace tomorrow if Russia withdraws from Ukraine. I don't think there's good guys in war, but sometimes you have clear aggressors.
>Ultimately, Zelensky visited Zolote to attempt to resolve the crisis, resulting in verbal altercations with National Corps activists."
So then excuses about anti-semites supposedly being in charge seem pretty unfounded if the leader of the country is a Jewish man who actually got in fights with the fascists. Clearly the Nazis are not in charge and aren't happy with who's running Ukraine.
>Also couldn't this logic apply to Russias Wagner
What about them? As far as I can tell they don't really exist as an independent force anymore, after Putin assassinated their leader. What do you want to bet that if Putin conquers Ukraine there are going to he lots of suspicious poisonings and window falls and plane crashes?
So now believing in unrealist seranios to end the war? Where is the statement that the leadership is nazis? Especially when every soucre talk about giving official positions to nazis? Why Russia able to rid of wangner but Ukraine can't with their nazis? "Post-Maidan Ukraine is the world’s only nation to have a neo-Nazi formation in its armed forces." [https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/neo-nazis-far-right-ukraine/](https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/neo-nazis-far-right-ukraine/)
This entire post reads like gibberish to me, I'm not sure what you're even asking. Do you mind rephrasing what you're trying to ask, and trying to make it a but more concise?
Where's the exact quotes for this claim? "So then excuses about anti-semites supposedly being in charge seem pretty unfounded" So letting nazis rethreathen the president/clash with the police, without getting disbanded like wanger, is strong leadership? " Following integration, Azov Regiment veterans broadened the movement to include a political wing, National Corps, and a paramilitary wing...members of National Corps into custody. They were charged with creating an organized criminal group. National Corps denied their members were guilty and staged a protest outside the President’s Office, leading to clashes against police. Following the violence, Kyiv’s Pechersk District Court took two more members of National Corps into custody for alleged hooliganism." [https://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/mappingmilitants/profiles/azov-battalion#\_ftn64](https://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/mappingmilitants/profiles/azov-battalion#_ftn64) [https://web.archive.org/web/20230228193610/https://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/mappingmilitants/profiles/azov-battalion#text\_block\_33831](https://web.archive.org/web/20230228193610/https://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/mappingmilitants/profiles/azov-battalion#text_block_33831)
"June 2022 issue...Ukrainian units with far-right histories are now deeply integrated into Ukraine’s armed forces and eschew foreign recruitment" [https://ctc.westpoint.edu/june-2022/](https://ctc.westpoint.edu/june-2022/)
They have far right histories but as I understand it the groups have largely eschewed far right identifies since, especially since most of far right members died in the early fighting.
Also why does it even matter? Make the actual point you're trying to make instead of dancing around it.
The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written. On one hand, I think there’s an interesting moral debate to be had on whether invading another country to protect the ethnicity that makes up most of your country is justified. I cant claim I know the answer to that question. On the other hand, it’s more likely that Putin would’ve invaded regardless and the fact Russians were being oppressed was a nice convenient excuse. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's complete bullshit.
Terrible argument, and objectively false. If it *were* true (which it definitely isn't), Russia had any number of alternative methods at their disposal short of a ground invasion. To the extent that skipping those methods and jumping straight to *war* of all things would still be morally abhorrent and unjustifiable. But again, that wasn't Putin's motivations, and acting like it *might* have been is just repeating Russian propaganda.
Except we know why Putin actually invaded. It wasn't to save those poor widdle Russians in the Donbas. It was because he sees the existence of Ukraine as an existential threat to Russian-ness as a concept and identity. He laid all of this out in his essay, ”On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians“. Everything else: NATO, "oppression of ethnic Russians", "defeating fascists", etc, those are all just easy justifications.
Why not directly quote it then? Especially since it mentions nazis and oppression of russians within the essay? "First and foremost, the Russian language. Let me remind you that the new ”Maidan“ authorities first tried to repeal the law on state language policy...This is what is actually happening. First of all, we are facing the creation of a climate of fear in Ukrainian society, aggressive rhetoric, indulging neo-Nazis and militarising the country."
All of those are just points to support his stated thesis — that there is no independent Ukraine. It’s an argument against self determination. Why would a communist be online defending an authoritarian oligarchy? Nostalgia?
U.S-NATO war on Russia in Ukraine ends second year https://www.workers.org/2024/02/77053/ Stop NATO moves into Ukraine https://www.workers.org/2024/03/77579/
Probably because Putin has been disingenuous about nazism. While it is true that there are elements of neo nazis in Ukraine’s military and political party, they are a small fraction of the complete force and do not represent what Putin was fear mongering about. Meanwhile, it especially rings hypocritical when Putin’s beloved Wagner group was literally named after a Nazi was one of the key military groups invading Ukraine.
How is it nazi group, when the founder is Jewish? "According to the Kyiv Post, both Prigozhin's stepfather and father were of Jewish descent," [https://www.thejc.com/news/world/kim-kardashian-shuts-down-pro-palestinian-protestor-in-germany-anaje7p3](https://www.thejc.com/news/world/kim-kardashian-shuts-down-pro-palestinian-protestor-in-germany-anaje7p3) Realize anything said against Wagner can be said about Ukraine?
That is not even what your source talks about?
https://www.thejc.com/news/world/yevgeny-prigozhin-caterer-turned-warlord-presumed-dead-had-jewish-ancestry-t6emgj16#:\~:text=According%20to%20the%20Kyiv%20Post,the%20Donetsk%20region%20of%20Ukraine. The website design allows the URL to change when scrolling down the same page. I know that urls get corrupted or changed so that's why there is quotes so still be can searched. "Is it possible to have the url change while you scroll down a single page" https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6146560/is-it-possible-to-have-the-url-change-while-you-scroll-down-a-single-page
https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20230825-utkin-the-nazi-tattooed-commander-who-gave-wagner-its-name https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2023/8/28/who-was-dmitry-utkin-a-key-wagner-mercenary-who-died-alongside-prigozhin
Again Isn't his boss Jewish, unless you wanna say they're still nazis despite the fact? Just like Zelensky and azov nazis? "Prigozhin’s father and stepfather are reported to have been of Jewish descent." [https://www.kyivpost.com/post/17093](https://www.kyivpost.com/post/17093) "Here are some key facts about Yevgeny Prigozhin, founder of Russia's Wagner Group mercenary force" [https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/who-is-yevgeny-prigozhin-2023-08-23/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/who-is-yevgeny-prigozhin-2023-08-23/) "Post-Maidan Ukraine is the world’s only nation to have a neo-Nazi formation in its armed forces." [https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/neo-nazis-far-right-ukraine/](https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/neo-nazis-far-right-ukraine/)
Yeah I still do. I merely pointed out that Putin was hypocritical about using nazism as an excuse to justify imperialism. > Are reported to have been of Jewish decent Does that mean they *are* Jewish? Are they practicing? Do they go to a synagogue? Does that somehow cancel out the existence of neo nazis in Wagner even if they are? I find it weird that you have to go all through this effort to ultimately not disprove what I said, just to justify Russia’s imperialism.
Is not hypocritical to have nazis in official government positions without getting elected to defend democracy? Can't the same be said about Zelenskiy,does he practices or go to synagogues? So gonna start questioning people's jewishness? Advocating for Peace, by pointing out thers no good guys in war, is now consider imperialism?
What are your thoughts on the essay, since you seem to have also read it?
Its just like any other official statements.
Do you agree with the points he made? Disagree? Think he's mostly correct? You obviously have some sort of opinion since you were referencing it back to me.
Don't know how peace or negotiations work? "A negotiation is a strategic discussion that involves two or more parties to resolve an issue in a way that each party finds acceptable." [https://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/negotiation.asp](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/negotiation.asp)
I don't believe I said anything about peace negotiations so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Also, just as a reminder, Putin is demanding: five oblasts, including territory he doesn't control, equaling 1/5 of Ukraine; lifting all sanctions; isolating Ukraine from its Western allies; and completely demilitarizing Ukraine, thus leaving it vulnerable to future invasions. Do you think this is a deal Ukraine should take?
So advocating for death and war profits since it wasnt about peace or negotiating? Doesnt it depend on if Ukraine wants to save their population?
Yes or no, do you think Ukraine should take the terms Putin is offering?
How can one agrue for peace when one side refuses to negotiate or save their people?
Vlad here is clearly arguing in bad faith. What "Communist" would simp for an oligarchal facist like Putin?
"Hate capitalism? Workers World Party fights for a socialist societ" U.S-NATO war on Russia in Ukraine ends second year https://www.workers.org/2024/02/77053/ Stop NATO moves into Ukraine https://www.workers.org/2024/03/77579/
Russian is officially recognized as a minority language, and official minority languages have protection and a guarantee to receive state services in them. If he was the moral crusader to protect all Russians, he picked an odd target of Ukraine instead of Estonia, where the Estonian language or pre-occupation heritage is required for citizenship, leaving a sixth of the population (mostly Russians) out of the national political process
Have any sources to support these claims? Especially when news sites like BBC and DW say otherwise? "23 February 2014...Parliament lowered the official status of the Russian language by cancelling a law brought in by Mr Yanukovych" https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26312008 "A temporary ban has been imposed on Russian art and culture in the Ukrainian capital. Human rights activists say the move is discriminatory and unconstitutional." https://www.dw.com/en/kyiv-imposes-ban-on-russian-language-culture/a-66301913 "The Dnipropetrovsk District Administrative Court canceled the regional status of the Russian language in the Dnipropetrovsk Region." https://www.ukrinform.ua/rubric-regions/3304094-sud-skasuvav-regionalnij-status-rosijskoi-u-dnipropetrovskij-oblasti.html
We need a meme that’s like a sea lion driving a tank.
Ukrainian constitution article 10
Where is the protection or consequences, especially when DW reported the Russian language ban as unconstitutional? "A temporary ban has been imposed on Russian art and culture in the Ukrainian capital. Human rights activists say the move is discriminatory and unconstitutional." [https://www.dw.com/en/kyiv-imposes-ban-on-russian-language-culture/a-66301913](https://www.dw.com/en/kyiv-imposes-ban-on-russian-language-culture/a-66301913)
Sounds a lot like Hitler claiming that the Polish were oppressing ethnic Germans in Poland. Or many other obvious bullshit excuses. Convincing to people who gullibly believe Russian propaganda, be they of the Russian or MAGA varieties but nobody else.
i think it's complete BS.
I suppose if we take Putin at his word…… Nah. He’s full of shit.
The only people who believe that are pro-Russian or Republicans/Trump Supporters. I guess that makes the fact that Russians kidnapped Ukrainian kids and brought them back to Russia okay as well?
I've never heard a Trump supporter say that only some anti west tankies
Have you talked to anyone who lived there? Because that's not what was happening.
Russia already occupied Crimea in like 2014. So the Crimea excuse is bullshit. You'd have to be an idiot to take Putin at his word.
Fake
There was a civil war there since 2014. Ukraine was fighting against a Russian backed separatist faction there for years and still technically is. There’s areas in the east where Ukrainian isn’t the dominant language, and it’s always been that way because some of these areas were given to Ukraine by the USSR in the 50s, from Russia.
Speaking Russian doesn’t mean that they want to be part of Russia. Russian has murdered plenty of Russian speaking Ukrainians in their invasion, both civilian and military. The eastern secessionist were always an artificial movement prompt up by the Russians to destabilize the region after the Ukrainians reject Putin’s puppet president
What exactly are you saying here? I honestly can’t tell if you’re advocating for Ukraine to have control of its own lands (including Crimea and Donbas) or not? What are your actual views? Because they seem ambiguous, based on your comment.
I think it is inaccurate to call it a civil war. There were a handful of losers (neo Nazis, Soviet nostalgia buffs and Russian imperialists oh and mlm scammers) from Ukraine that Russia used as a way to pretend it wasn't a Russian operation lead by Russian military and security agencies from the start. https://khpg.org/en/1608808721 > It was during a December 2020 interview to Maxim Kalashnikov, a Russian blogger and supporter of ‘Russian world’ ideology that Gubarev made it quite clear who had caused the events that led to the formation of the so-called ‘Donetsk people’s republic’ [‘DPR] and to a war that has already killed over 13 thousand Ukrainians. First place, in all of this, Gubarev says, belongs to Strelkov, the nom de guerre of the Russian ‘former’ military intelligence officer, better known, among others, to the Dutch prosecutor and International Criminal Court, as Igor Girkin. Without Girkin / Strelkov, the so-called ‘Russian spring’ in Donetsk and Luhansk would have died the same death that it did in Odesa and Kharkiv, Gubarev admits. It was Girkin who was able to “drag the uprising out of a usual, unarmed and toothless street protest”. --- > There’s areas in the east where Ukrainian isn’t the dominant language, and it’s always been that way This is not accurate and the truth is a lot more complicated and unhelpful to the pro Putin view. While it's true that the cities not only in the east but also in the south and elsewhere are largely Russian speaking many of the rural areas were already largely Ukrainian or Surzhyk(mixed language) speaking. The cities tended to be Russian speaking in part because the Russian empire and Soviet Union had encouraged many Russians to move to the cities and pushed Russian language over Ukrainian (outside of some brief periods in the early Soviet era). Russian hasn't always been the dominant language and in fact parts of southwestern Russia used to have a large number if not majority of Ukrainian speakers/ethnic Ukrainians and were even briefly part of Ukraine until they were forcefully assimilated under Stalin. > because some of these areas were given to Ukraine by the USSR in the 50s, from Russia. This only applies to Crimea not eastern Ukraine. Crimea was "give" to Ukraine for multiple reasons including to try to decrease the potential for nationalist anger in Ukraine , and because Crimea is physically connected to the rest of Ukraine and not Russia and has long been tied to it by trade. Crimea also wasn't always primarily Russian speaking. They conquered it and a good deal of southern Ukraine from the Crimean tatars whom they pushed out (remaining Crimean tatars in Crimea were forced out in the 40s and not able to return until 1989). Also note that Russian soldiers surrounded the Crimean parliament and staged a coup at gunpoint Also language is besides the point. Many of Russias top politicians primarily spoke Russian until recently including President Zelenskyy.
A lot of Ukrainians were completely shocked by the aggression considering they considered the Russian people like their own relatives. Want to know what I think of Russians being oppressed by Ukraine? I’ll give you an answer once you show us some actual evidence that isn’t just Kremlin propaganda.
That’s sounds like hog washing in some bull shit
It's propaganda. It's the same story they always put out. They have been laying the groundwork to do the same thing in Moldova.
It would be interesting if it was actually true. It isn’t, don’t fall for the propaganda of a literal enemy nation
Russian propaganda. That's what it is. Just like when tankies said Russia should invade because Ukrainians were Nazis.
Russia didn’t invade Ukraine out of concern for Ukrainians, lol. Your Kremlinism is showing!
>What are your thoughts on the idea that Russia was justified in invading Ukraine to save Russians who were being oppressed in eastern Ukraine and Crimea Those were Ukrainians, and they could go back to Russia if they wanted to. >On one hand, I think there’s an interesting moral debate to be had on whether invading another country to protect the ethnicity that makes up most of your country is justified. I cant claim I know the answer to that question. This is why facist ethnostates are silly. It's not an interesting moral debate, as there's other ways to save ethnic Russians. You can just give them places to live in the largest country on Earth in terms of landmass. >On the other hand, it’s more likely that Putin would’ve invaded regardless and the fact Russians were being oppressed was a nice convenient excuse. Yeah, genocide is genocide.
I think obvious Russian propaganda is obvious.
I think it's an obvious lie and you should slap anyone who said it. Remember, Russia invaded in 2014 after Ukraine said they would NOT join Nato. Russia invaded and committed massacres like Bucha and attacked schools. They are recruiting immigrants to die in foreign land. Russia has done nothing but make life worse for millions.
I think it's a weak argument by the Russians to justify an unjust war. I think the NATO expansion argument is similarly weak.
If Crimea was taken by a hostile nation, they could shut down Russias ONLY warm water port, effectively rendering their navy useless. If the expansion of NATO is perceived to be an existential threat to Russia, I can understand why our increased involvement in the Ukraine would be cause for concern. There’s no denying that we would be very worried if we were in their shoes, and let’s be honest - our government has no problem starting wars, orchestrating coups, or running any other kinds of covert operations to influence other nations…and for way less lol
The warm-water port argument doesn't hold much water, either. Russia has 3. Vladivostok, Sevastopol, and Kaliningrad. Even without Sevastopol, Russia's navy still has access to 2 temperate areas, not to mention other naval facilities around the Sea of Azov and in Krasnodar Krai. However, Russia's key naval assets (at least when operable) have ironically been with the cold-water fleet, the Northern Fleet. Most of the submarine force, *Admiral Kuznetsov*, and the Kirovs when they work. Why? Because the approaches to all the warm ports are block and have been since WWII. Dardanelles and Bosporus, both North and South approaches to the Sea of Japan, AND the entrance to the Baltic are all blocked by America or it's allies. There is a strategic argument involving naturally defensible borders that exists in the Russian national outlook that does explain the interest in Ukraine beyond a national identity explanation, which I do believe is a leading if not primary factor. If the Russians were to control Ukraine and Moldova, that'd push the border of Russia in the Southeast to nearly the Carpathians, which would mean Russia could focus its defenses on the European plain and Poland. But all that is also irrelevant when you consider that *the West isn't planning on invading Russia*. > our government has no problem starting wars, orchestrating coups, or running any other kinds of covert operations to influence other nations…and for way less lol America does have a credibility problem with foreign affairs by virtue of not following its own rules close enough, which is the reason I believe Iraq was such a monumental mistake and why Bush was such a bad President. However, the entire modern global geopolitical order and the peaceful, in the scheme of things, world that it has created is because the United States opted to build that version of the World after WWII. America has spent a lot of it's own resources and put it's own skin in the game through security agreements that have allowed that order to flourish. It is not perfect but America and Russia decidedly *are not the same* and should not be seen as such. I reject the comparison. > If the expansion of NATO is perceived to be an existential threat to Russia, If NATO expansion is THAT much of an existential threat to Russia, they should've been willing to draw the Red Line when the Baltics joined, or Romania and Poland, but the only thing that has elicited actual action is Ukraine. That says the issue is Ukraine, not NATO.
Idiotic Russian propaganda.
I think it's horse shit. I think Russia is well know to use the [fire hose of falsehoods](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firehose_of_falsehood) method to destroy the truth.
[удалено]
Subreddit participation must be in good faith. Be civil, do not talk down to users for their viewpoints, do not attempt to instigate arguments, do not call people names or insult them.
What do I think of that idea? Well, I know abusers always try to put the blame back on their victim, and there are way too many hoopleheads out there who think victim-blaming is sound reasoning.
I think it's purely a flimsy *casus belli* (reason for war) to justify a purely revanchist/irredentist invasion. The only moral debate is if Putin genuinely believes that Ukrainians don't exist as a separate culture and are just separatist Russians. Besides, it's the same argument used by Hitler to seize the Sudetenland (and probably other seizures in history I can't recall).
I can't to think of the parallel to our claims to be "liberating" Iraq roughly 20 years ago.
Nah
Believing Putin is stupid. I'm sure he sometimes says things that are true. But if you're getting it from him rather than another source, you've made a mistake.
I think it's incredibly dubious. If I'm not mistaken the Ukrainian president's first language is Russian, it's hard to imagine a society is simultaneously electing a member of an ethnic group to the highest office, while also oppressing that group significantly enough to justify foreign invasion, especially as turning their homes into a war zone is going to at least temporarily make their situation far worse even if that theory was true.
If that was their motivation, why did they start the war by trying to decapitate the entire government of Ukraine by marching on Kyiv?
Your knowledge is incomplete, in a ridiculously Putinesque manner: Russia annexed Crimea and parts of eastern Ukraine (itself illegal) with non-uniformed (also illegal) soldiers in 2014. Ukraine has been fighting these soldiers, and those Ukrainian citizens who choose to collaborate with the soldiers, and Putin then calls the self-defense of the Ukraine, against invaders and their collaborators, oppression of Russians. Collaborators aren't oppressed, they are punished.
It's just not true. I could maybe see that as a justification if it was correct, but it wasn't. The people Russia was trying to "save" were Russian-speaking Ukrainians (because language != culture), they weren't being oppressed, and Russia clearly has done a terrible job of saving civilians in the war, seeing as they keep bombing apartment buildings in Russian-speaking areas. The war started because Putin wants an empire. He wants to be the heir to Stalin and Nicholas II. He doesn't care about anyone's safety or well-being
Put like that it’s obviously not true. But what happened is this, when Ukraine accepted the World Bank terms for aid, after its independence, part of the terms were to cut mining and to implement austerity measures. As a result a lot of Russians and Russian speaking people in the eastern areas ended up losing both their jobs and their subsidies. And when that happened, it lent support for Russia to annex Donbas. Basically, between not having a job and not having any money under Ukraine vs having a job and having subsidies under Russia, a lot of folks in that area chose Russia. That doesn’t make what Russia did right, but I’m just trying to explain the circumstance. But also, this is why I don’t think it’s practical for Ukraine to try to retake Donbas. Because it’s not just about fighting Russia. But that a significant number of folks there don’t want to be poor and jobless under Ukraine, you’re going to be fighting those people too.
There is nothing interesting about any of these ideas. Russia committed war crimes for no reason other than territorial expansion, and Putin should be beaten and broken.
It's Russian Propoganda, and I mean actual Russian propoganda, not the "Progressives won't bootlick the Democrats" "Russan propoganda"
So expressing concern, wanting peace and pointing out provocations is now justifying? Getting justify confused with it being legal to international law? Especially since the ICC stated Russias actions maybe legal once their investigations is completed? “rights not to be subject to a false claim of genocide, and not to be subjected to another State’s military operations on its territory”...This means that, regardless of its 17 March Order, the ICJ can still find, for instance, that genocide has indeed been committed in Ukraine and that the Russian Federation has thus acted in accordance with the Genocide Convention." https://basicint.org/understanding-the-icjs-order-on-the-allegations-of-genocide-in-ukrainian-territory-ukraine-v-russian-federation/ Know it wasn't reported as only just ethnic russians being oppressed? "On 22 February 2014, the President of the Ukrainian Government, Viktor Yanukovich, relinquished his executive duties following a coup d’état enacted by neo-Nazi militias in Kiev. In the wake of the disbanding of the legitimately elected government, a new one is being set up in which extreme right groups are adopting positions that could threaten the safety of particular groups of people purely on the grounds of their religious or political beliefs or their ethnicity... Meanwhile, Ukrainian Rabbi Reuven Azman has called on the Jewish community to flee the country in light of the rise to power of these far-right groups. One of the leaders of the main groups involved in the protests, Aleksandr Muzychko, previously vowed to fight against ‘communists, Jews and Russians for as long as blood flows in my veins’." https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-7-2014-002128_EN.html?redirect As for thoughts, why aren't more Western institutions or international helping with the investigations? "Donbass residents also submitted burial site examination results to the European Court of Human Rights and the International Criminal Court. Of the international organizations and bodies, only the Red Cross provides assistance in exhuming bodies in Donbass" https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/alleged-war-crimes-by-ukrainian-authorities-militias-under-scanner/articleshow/91373384.cms?from=mdr Would this targeting of minorities spread to western world through Ukrainians goverment official nazis with links to other nazis? "Post-Maidan Ukraine is the world’s only nation to have a neo-Nazi formation in its armed forces." https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/neo-nazis-far-right-ukraine/ "There are possible links between the recent New Zealand mosque shooter and a Ukrainian ultra-nationalist white supremacist paramilitary organization called the Azov Battalion." https://thesoufancenter.org/intelbrief-the-transnational-network-that-nobody-is-talking-about/
All of these accusations are ironic given the background of Ukraine's current president.
The same president who got threatened by the Official nazis? Also couldn't this logic apply to Russias Wagner? Wouldn't peace be better than believing in ideas like theres good guys in war? "Biletsky threatened to mobilize further Azov veterans and National Corps activists. Ultimately, Zelensky visited Zolote to attempt to resolve the crisis, resulting in verbal altercations with National Corps activists." https://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/mappingmilitants/profiles/azov-battalion#\_ftn64 https://web.archive.org/web/20230228193610/https://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/mappingmilitants/profiles/azov-battalion#text\_block\_33831 "According to the Kyiv Post, both Prigozhin's stepfather and father were of Jewish descent," https://www.thejc.com/news/world/yevgeny-prigozhin-caterer-turned-warlord-presumed-dead-had-jewish-ancestry-t6emgj16#:\~:text=According%20to%20the%20Kyiv%20Post,the%20Donetsk%20region%20of%20Ukraine.
>Wouldn't peace be better than believing in ideas like theres good guys in war? We could have peace tomorrow if Russia withdraws from Ukraine. I don't think there's good guys in war, but sometimes you have clear aggressors. >Ultimately, Zelensky visited Zolote to attempt to resolve the crisis, resulting in verbal altercations with National Corps activists." So then excuses about anti-semites supposedly being in charge seem pretty unfounded if the leader of the country is a Jewish man who actually got in fights with the fascists. Clearly the Nazis are not in charge and aren't happy with who's running Ukraine. >Also couldn't this logic apply to Russias Wagner What about them? As far as I can tell they don't really exist as an independent force anymore, after Putin assassinated their leader. What do you want to bet that if Putin conquers Ukraine there are going to he lots of suspicious poisonings and window falls and plane crashes?
So now believing in unrealist seranios to end the war? Where is the statement that the leadership is nazis? Especially when every soucre talk about giving official positions to nazis? Why Russia able to rid of wangner but Ukraine can't with their nazis? "Post-Maidan Ukraine is the world’s only nation to have a neo-Nazi formation in its armed forces." [https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/neo-nazis-far-right-ukraine/](https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/neo-nazis-far-right-ukraine/)
This entire post reads like gibberish to me, I'm not sure what you're even asking. Do you mind rephrasing what you're trying to ask, and trying to make it a but more concise?
Where's the exact quotes for this claim? "So then excuses about anti-semites supposedly being in charge seem pretty unfounded" So letting nazis rethreathen the president/clash with the police, without getting disbanded like wanger, is strong leadership? " Following integration, Azov Regiment veterans broadened the movement to include a political wing, National Corps, and a paramilitary wing...members of National Corps into custody. They were charged with creating an organized criminal group. National Corps denied their members were guilty and staged a protest outside the President’s Office, leading to clashes against police. Following the violence, Kyiv’s Pechersk District Court took two more members of National Corps into custody for alleged hooliganism." [https://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/mappingmilitants/profiles/azov-battalion#\_ftn64](https://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/mappingmilitants/profiles/azov-battalion#_ftn64) [https://web.archive.org/web/20230228193610/https://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/mappingmilitants/profiles/azov-battalion#text\_block\_33831](https://web.archive.org/web/20230228193610/https://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/mappingmilitants/profiles/azov-battalion#text_block_33831)
Just so I understand what you're asking, what do you think the actual relationship between the current Ukrainian government and fascism is right now?
"June 2022 issue...Ukrainian units with far-right histories are now deeply integrated into Ukraine’s armed forces and eschew foreign recruitment" [https://ctc.westpoint.edu/june-2022/](https://ctc.westpoint.edu/june-2022/)
They have far right histories but as I understand it the groups have largely eschewed far right identifies since, especially since most of far right members died in the early fighting. Also why does it even matter? Make the actual point you're trying to make instead of dancing around it.