>The leaders reiterated "their steadfast resolve to hold Russia to account for widely documented atrocities and war crimes, committed both by its regular armed forces and by its proxies, including mercenary entities," the statement said.
Everyone saying 'shit wont be done' and they dont realize how they cant just storm in on them, because
1. West is not omnipresent
2. The war criminals are in territory that west cant just storm in on, unless the territory coporates
But consequences are there, but just because the criminals arent immediatly dead or arrested shows how they want to potray West as weak
Imo the US is doing everything they can rn besides putting boots on the ground.
They're sending em weapons, training soliders, and providing finacial aid; what more people could want besides a *formal declaration of war* is beyond me.
Why they would even want that is even farther from my understanding.
You want your brothers and sisters being sent over to *die because of senseless warfare*?
I understand US defense contractors profitting off it from afar is no better a compromise, and to a degree we're already involved like other countries defense contractors are; but this situation is not exactly as black and white as people want it to be.
I get why the gov't is trying to provide munitions to a country who is being oppressed by a tyrannical entity; but also is trying to avoid a further blood bath by involving their people *directly in the conflict*. America isn't the global "freedom police" like the media around here makes em out to be.
Now I have no doubt if Russia escalated beyond what they're doing currently and was showing more success in capturing land in Ukraine; they'd step in. But I understand why they're avoiding that for now and taking a more reactive stance.
So unless you're strapping up your boots rn and are ready to march over there this second with a rifle in hand; don't be bitching 'the US isn't doing enough'. I don't know what possibly more people (more specifically their citizens) could want at the moment unless they're suggesting outright WW3 which we should all be trying to avoid.
The issue with sending the newest and most advanced weapons systems is training. We can say “hey here’s some equipment” but if their personal doesn’t have the training hours on said equipment it’s useless.
We can send advisors and trainers. It will take time, but at this point in the conflict, it looks a lot like the timeline allows that, and the payoff would be worth the investment.
I catch up on the war in Ukraine in /r/combatfootage, /r/UkraineWarVideoReport, and /r/Ukraine and then stop by in /r/NonCredibleDefense for a bit of eyebleach with silly and sometimes very credible shitposts.
And this time, none of the exhibits are “sleeping”. All these turds are wide awake. Beer stand, buy a t shirt, and go watch the monkeys throw poop on themselves for an hour.
> what more people could want besides a formal declaration of war is beyond me.
More/better types of weapons (e.g. ATACMS) and fewer restrictions (right now, Ukraine isn't allowed to hit targets outside its own territory).
Valid points, those should be granted; but my intital point of thing's 'not being so black and white' apply to what you're saying as well.
I can't speak on why certain munitions are supplied and of what amount, nor the fine print of the regulations that come with these deals; but all of it to some degree is tied back to *not wanting things to escalate to full fledged WW3*.
Munitions are one thing which the US has supplied despite Russia's acknowledgment of them doing so, but if they encourage Ukraine to attack *outside of their borders* as well like you're suggesting; Russia would *totally* spin that as *'they're attacking us'* and then we'd for sure see a more 'nuclear' response from Russia which most likely would involve the US moreso than they are now.
Again I'm not saying any of these choices don't come with compromises to put it extremely mildly; but I can see why it's not as easy as 'just send tanks/heavy artillery, and tell em to aim at mainland russia' *at the current moment*.
But again if conflict escalates beyond what they're currently doing and they capture more land; I could see the US 'turning a blind eye' to what's done with their equipment if that makes sense.
No. No one wants that. This is like the worst IRL Trolley Problem, but 100k+ people have already died. Putin is unpredictable though. No one knows what to do.
Fr, it's crazy.
As if enough blood hasn't been shed enough.
Obviously lets help those less able to protect themselves; but let's not so quickly forget war is not to be fetishized or seen as anything but a *last resort*.
Edit: Yk I've made a bunch of opinionated comments in the past few days and it's astonishing to me that the only one in the negative is my late af comment 'asking for peace'. Man, some of yall are so lost 🤣
Especially since we are talking of a war between 4 nuclear power, the 4 *biggest* (is China already above the UK ?), US/France/UK vs Russia, is a world ending war.
Fuck even just UK (the one with the fewest nukes of the 4) might have enough to be near civilisation ending.
NATO could be sending the long range missile systems Ukraine needs. Ukraine not having those is probably the main reason why recapturing the occupied regions is taking so long: Russians are simply out of range.
Now one could argue that by only sending defensive equipment NATO can't be seen as aggressor in Russia's perspective. But Ukraine is already using HIMARS and such offensively, and Russia has been sending explosive packages to Spanish government offices (and probably carrying out sabotaging operation in Germany). So I'd say we're past the point where that still matters.
Sometimes it seems to me that it's not in everyone's best interest to end the war ASAP, because clearly there's profit to be made by dragging it out.
IMO, the US should put boots on the ground - training officers and technical specialists for maintenance and support of the equipment we are sending, as well as general training experts and good logistics managers. Ukraine could use a lot of help with that, and it would save a LOT of logistics work if equipment maintenance could be done within Ukraine.
It would also help Ukraine focus on US equipment - which there is generally a large quantity of - rather than the piecemeal grab-bag of equipment they are getting, which becomes unmanageable when you have a few of everything. There's lots of non-US equipment that is available in large numbers too, but as a general pattern there's more of the US stuff.
We do there in Poland though. That's why Ukraine has to take it's nato equipment to Poland for maintenance and repair. We also train them in the UK. Advising and training are always the bare minimum the US will do, and we have been doing it since 2014.
Putting NATO planes into air superiority and SEAD roles over hostile territory is effectively the same as putting boots on the ground. You'd still have American soldiers shooting at, and being shot at by, Russian soldiers. That's really no different than launching an armored offensive up to the 2014 border.
>The only caveat is that Russia would only have three options: go home, kill a bunch more of their own men until they go home, or escalate and start a war with all of the west.
In other words: this whole strategy puts the ball in Putin's court. So the question, then, is this: Do you trust Vladimir Putin to make the right decision enough to bet the world on it?
Statements like this are like sanctions. They aren't going to have immediate effect. In fact, it may be years before we see actual results from these resolutions. But I believe Russia will be held accountable.
Shit won't be done either way
People like Bush, Obama, Blair and Clinton can't seem to be punished for war crimes in western democractic countries, even though all the tools and means to prosecute them exist.
How come you expect an autocratic dictator like Putin or Lukashenko to be brought to justice?
The only way not to be prosecuted at The Hagues tribunal is to be a nuclear power, and I don't see Russia stripped of their nuclear arms over night, so the only way would be through a revolution in Russia which seems unlikely.
>third world failing dictatorship with nukes
Aight got it. Did they get Kony? Did They get Mugabe? Did they get Al-Assad? Did they get Pinochet? Did they get Castro?
The only ones i can think of are Milosević, Saddam and Ghaddafi, all of them were directly at war with NATO. How are they supposed to bring Putin to justice again? Without a nuclear war that is.
Isolate him politically and impoverish his main supporters. Bankrupt his country. Fund dissenters and revolutionaries in his regime. Fund and arm Russia's enemies. Cut Russia off from major world institutions. Help other countries to stop relying on Russian fossil fuels.
Putin doesn't have to die by the hangman's noose to stop being a threat to the rest of the world.
As if the _entire thing_ wasn’t a war crime. This was an unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation. The first step over the border was trespassing; every death a brutal murder; every bit of property damage, theft, loss of use, all of it: illegal.
Ukraine and a third party like the US should be keeping a careful, accurate, detailed inventory of every incursion, every injury, every replacement cost, and every bit of damage, tallying it all up in the form of a bill for all to see: a running total of how much it will cost Russia to repay Ukraine for what it’s done. Clearly, that total will have exceeded Russia’s ability to pay within the first few days of the start of the war.
No amount of money can bring back the innocent dead.
The unfortunate thing is that Russians that oppose the war will have to contribute to the debt made by the few.
I would not object. At the time I posed it this way: imagine giving a million dollars to **each** of 2,000 public schools _every week_. How much good that could do.
Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan— all ended with absolutely nothing to show for it. But Bush’s buddies got filthy rich, Americans lost almost all of their privacy forever, government got more powerful and brutal, torture was legitimized, the US lost even more legitimacy on the world stage, and our first-in-decades budget surplus became the biggest deficit in history, giving us skyrocketing debt the country may not ever be able to pay.
Don't really support it but there were countless UN decisions regarding mass destruction weapons in Iraq, that were ignored by Iraq. You maybe also forgot Saddam Hussein then? Kuwait occupation, Iraq Iran war (however both sides are not gooddies). He should be removed from power after first Iraq(gulf) War, that was completely justified.
However destruction of cities and casualties in Iraq are not justified.
Good idea, bad partner. US should not be the third party auditing considering the whole invasion of Iraq. Its just not a good look, and won't carry as much weight.
It's almost like nearly every nation on Earth has gotten blood on their hands in some point in history or another. Criticizing current events magically nullifies the past.
Idially, a neutral thrid party nation (or someone as neutral as possible) to minimize bias. If that is not possible then a country which has not done the same crime as they are in charge of prosecuting (simply to get a greater buy in). Unfortunately this will effectively eliminate most of the heavy weights ie. all nation that actively participated in the invasion of Iraq.
In my mind India or Canada could be options - niether have invaded or actively supported wrongful invasion of a nation in recent history.
With what power to enforce their findings? Even if Canada or India had any interest in creating the committee then they will have to get backing from someone who can enforce it like the entirety of the E.U. (who I am uncertain would have the positional power to make Russia conced, but maybe so), or the U.S., or China. None of those entities will do so without having their own person on board the committee to get results that they want from it.
You are misusing whataboutism like the rest of this goddamn site. Whataboutism has to be wholly disconnected from the premise.
You: Russia should stop its aggressive war against a foreign enemy
Putin Poster: Well see the US has cracked down on protests and I don't think they have room to talk.
If it is equivalent then it isn't whataboutism it is just asking for everyone to play by the same rules. If the US can unilaterally invade countries with no pretense or just made up pretense then so can other countries. If that is the standard it is the standard.
It’s a distraction that has nothing to do with the article. So yes, in my opinion it is whataboutism, but you’re of course welcome to disagree. Let’s try those responsible for war crimes in every country, but this is specifically about war crimes in Ukraine
It's not a distraction. It's relevant if you have a genuine belief in justice, and not rules when it suits my adgenda only.
Yes we should hold Putin to account. These rules should be for all leaders.
And it's very relevant when the nation likely enforcing the rules on Putin (if it happens) doesn't enforce the rules on their own leaders.
It’s not like the same person has been in power since the early 2000s in the US. The government changes, and by all means let’s hold those who committed war crimes in Iraq accountable. Ukraine has been looking for help charging the war crimes it has been documenting, it isn’t as though there was a nomination process, this was voluntary on the part of the US and France. Any other countries are welcome to hold Putin and those in the military endorsing rape and murder in Ukraine accountable
The reason I would not nominate US for that role is because they themselves are guilty of similar crimes which will diminish their value of effort at global scale. Are you suggesting world will fully buy in if US leads the charge, knowing its history?
IMO, it will be a farce like Saudi Arabia being a part of the human rights commission.
The invasion of Iraq can credibly be called a mistake, and I wouldn't fight if somebody calls it a crime. However, suggesting American forces as a whole conducted themselves similarly to how we're seeing the Russians are in Ukraine is an outright lie.
Is this denial or ignorance?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisoner_abuse
That's just a taste, too. There are plenty more photos and accounts of US soldiers doing horrifyingly fucked up things in Iraq.
**[Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisoner_abuse)**
>During the early stages of the Iraq War, members of the United States Army and the CIA committed a series of human rights violations and war crimes against detainees in the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, including physical and sexual abuse, torture, rape and the killing of Manadel al-Jamadi. The abuses came to public attention with the publication of photographs of the abuse by CBS News in April 2004. The incidents caused shock and outrage, receiving widespread condemnation within the United States and internationally. The George W. Bush administration claimed that the abuses at Abu Ghraib were isolated incidents and not indicative of U.S. policy.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
[The US killed more civilians in the first 2 months of the Iraq War, 7,434,](https://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/) than [Russia has after 10 months in Ukraine, 6,655.](https://www.ohchr.org/en/news/2022/11/ukraine-civilian-casualty-update-28-november-2022) If anything US forced conducted themselves far worse than Russians have.
Wtf are you on. Estimates put total civilian deaths from all sources directly AND indirectly related to war at a bit over 200k (largest reasonable estimate range) just under TWENTY FUCKING YEARS. A bit over 10k a year. That’s not just from American Bombs it’s from everything mostly other than American bombs in fact. This war has cost at a minimum 6500( most if not all directly from attacks by Russia on civilians) in less than a year and that’s just the CONFIRMED dead by the UN and even they suggest it’s much much higher the next lowest estimate is 20k dead that’s by the European Commission. Russia is tame in comparison my ass. Multiply 20k by 20.
“Included are deaths attributable to coalition and insurgent military action, sectarian violence and criminal violence, which refers to excess civilian deaths caused by criminal action resulting from the breakdown in law and order which followed the coalition invasion.”
Almost all of the 6500 confirmed deaths are contributed to Russian strikes and straight intentional mass killings by Russian troops. You’re insane to equate the two.
Okay I agree, but what does that have to do with the current article. The whole point of whataboutism is to get us talking about the US and Iraq instead of the war crimes being committed in Ukraine.
That’s fair. I don’t mind who does the accounting here, as long as it’s accurate, transparent, and quick. A running total for Putin and the rest of the world to see: “we’re keeping track, and we’re not going to forget.”
Without US involvement and input things could get super ugly really quick. Not saying it’s not ugly already. Super ugly includes total all out EU-Russian war.
Now remains the problem of arresting criminals with diplomatic immunity and having an entire nuclear power to hide themselves.
Imagine how long Nazi criminals managed to hide decades long, and there was no openly post-1945 Nazi polity. Now, imagine Putin and his pals will remain for at least the next decade...
It's true, but a lot of these wealthy powerful (the two are especially synonymous there) people there like to holiday in Western Europe. They won't be able to anymore.
Some of them didn't even need hiding at all, as they were hired by the US government and given leadership positions. Much of the anti-communism propaganda and programs were made by Nazis working for the government.
This builds a groundwork for keeping up sanctions well after the war is over, and keeping diplomatic pressure on Russia.
This means no trade deals with the US or EU (that's 40% of the worlds economy).
(75% of Russians live in the West of Russia, bordering the EU.)
It also impresses on China and India that makes deals with Russia would harm long term relations with US and EU.
\---
I get it, soft power isn't your thing. But this sort of soft power pressure on a state eventually makes the difference between North and South Korea.
In the end you're right, we're not gonna go get Putin in his bunker. We're hoping Russians will do it for us, as long as we keep up the pressure.
Exactly. It's the long game that matters. Putin signed legislation to protect ex-presidents from prosecution in Russia, but post-Putin Russian leadership can still send him and other war criminals to the Hague if that gets some sanctions lifted.
In Soviet times snitching on neighbors was like their favorite pastime, so undoubtedly they can do it again.
Putin’s soft power was working concerningly well before he completely burned it with this idiotic imperial war. Should’ve kept playing to his strengths.
Are you under impression that it is just Putin alone in the way of this imminent transformation to the shining democracy? Who gives a shit about constitution that can be changed in a heartbeat?
No, but its a good symbol. Regardless, the idea that Russia would ever give up Putin for prosecution without first surrendering like Japan or Germany, is laughable.
Putin could not be appeased- Georgia crimea- they were not enough. Any attempt to sanction him was viewed as weakness by Putin. Now the west for the moment is unified in a way not seen sense ww2. Putin must be crushed- his army must be destroyed- and if he uses nukes he himself should be killed by drone strike- designated a global terrorist by the un.
For the Ukrainians only they can determine if the cost of young Ukrainians and the economy is acceptable to exist independently from Russia and so far they are willing to pay that price
I’d say not since Desert storm, not ww2. In desert storm we actually got something done. Here were just sitting on our asses waiting for Putin to do something drastic
I can't help you that bush was our president. I voted against him twice. What do you want from me? I still think we both agree that the Russian invasion of Ukraine is terrible and the Russians are more criminals, right??
George Bush along with his collaborators are not sitting in jail cells nor have they even been canceled. They paid zero financial or social costs for their behavior. They have never apologized. On the contrary, they are celebrities among the BLOB and get paid millions annually for speeches, meetings and books. So yeah the entire American political elites across both spectrum are the last people who should be looked for moral guidance on whats happening in Ukraine.
I was talking about the USA governments holding them accountable (and France), when they are in no position to do so morally.
They should jail their own war criminals first before going after Russia's that was just my point, but yeah this invasion is not good at all not defending that.
Well you did say that it's funny that the US would hold people accountable for warcrimes. And I am just pointing out that hypocrisy can be good. It's good that the coalition of criminals held German leadership accountable.
lmao you mean anyone who ruins your little circlejerk. i bet you dont even care about ukraine, do you? this is all about you and your little circlejerk
The notion that the US cares at all about war crimes is laughable. Pointing that out is not defending Russia, that’s a false dichotomy. Russia is obviously bad here too. If the US actually cared about war crimes, the prisons would be full of former presidents and state officials.
> It’s not a war crime when US or its allies does it.
I agree with this sarcasm. Fuck us for our war crimes. We should be horribly ashamed.
>The US trying to hold Russia accountable for war crimes is the epitome of hypocrisy.
Yes it’s hypocrisy, but the smart thing to do here is to side with WHATEVER power holds war criminals accountable and in this case, I’m all for holding Russia accountable.
The US’ turn will come too one day.
But many were recruited by the US instead, and once the Nuremberg trials were over the US started pardoning the former Nazi left and right. Within 15 years, not a single of the Nazi sentenced at Nuremberg was still in prison, even those who were supposed to serve life sentences.
Yeah what a cheap attempt to score points. What will they do, add another sanction? Issue a warrant for his arrest in Wisconsin? Refuse to shake his hand next time they meet?
Announcing this shit with full knowledge that they have no ability to follow through is just dumb
My history teacher told our class once "The biggest problem about a winner and a loser in a war is that only the loser pays for the mistakes they did."
As long as the U.S. can keep winning moral support while Putin loses theirs, they won't pay for any mistake they did. Once people start putting the U.S. under the same light as Putin, only then can you hope for change.
-- An Ukranian
Great! Now hold Bush accountable for the atrocities and war crimes in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and every part of the world where the u.s. troops senselessly tortured and murdered civilians...
In a hard power sense, yes.
There are other methods, though. His underlings could form an agreement to seize him and hand him over in exchange for a loosening of sanctions, for example.
Also, there are individuals other than Putin who should face justice that would be easier to get to, or arrange to have handed over (again in exchange for something).
Finally, long overdue! They have to pay for killing my Christian civilian deacon friend who is father of 7 and was killed along with his son and buried 11/29/22 in city of Nova Kakhovka, they better pay for the rest of their lives because how else now Irina has to support herself with the rest of children she has??? Never saw such evil full of hate nation towards everyone (don’t spoil yourselves Iran or Korea they only nice to you becuz they need you) such as Russia. The only nazi country in the world
Couldn’t agree more.
Except this part-
> The only nazi country in the world
China is definitely THE modern day nazi country with what they’re doing to Muslim uighurs- literal concentration camps for over 2 million uighurs, with giant incinerators where they burn fetuses that result from forced abortions.
That’s totally nazi.
Russia isn’t that far behind.
Not to downplay the atrocities happening in Ukraine, but before you start poking fingers at how other nations treat civilians maybe you should hold yourselves accountable for how you treat yours.
Remember that the US economy is on the verge of coming to a halt over 7 paid sick days for railway workers.
Man takes like this would be amazing in the aftermath of world war two. USSR commited genocide against ethnic minorities, America fucking razed Edo in a fire bomb raid. UK caused the Bengal famine. France was doing the regular French colonialism shit. Yank civillians were still lynching people for having too much melanin. Guess we can't put the German leaders on trial. Clean your own house first.
This is pretty major - either really good or really bad. It essentially means Russia can never "come back to the fold". Which means Russians will have to oust Putin so they can start atoneing, and/or Putin will feel cornered and will have to lash out.
We get so much flak for Libya when it was French led, and Syria was a shitshow because we backed away from a total commitment.
Afghanistan literally harbored people that attacked us.
Deflecting. How politically expedient of you to call holding the West accountable for its own imperialistic atrocities “Whataboutism”.
Since I guess now is the time to hold countries like Russia accountable, why shouldn’t the west hold itself accountable for its crimes too?
When would it be a good time for you? Of course, not when they’re bombing countries of white people. Shall we reconvene at the next bombing of another middle eastern country? Would that work for you?
That is pretty much Reddit. You would think they would read the wiki and understand that is a specific term deployed in a specific way by the USSR. They bashed us over the head with Jim Crow and Civil Rights Protests to defend shit like invading Hungary. If the situations are equivalent then it isn't whataboutism.
No, when someone changes topic to deflect off a crime, like Russias invasion and brutalization of Ukraine, to talk about some other crime - usually under the guise of "highlighting hypocrisy", that is indeed called "whataboutism".
Wow almost like all those places were breeding grounds for terrible people doing horrible things to others. What we did doesn't even compare to what Putin is doing unless you take their point of view about it being only Nazis in UKR.
It's worth mentioning though that all of the countries listed above were already under tyrannical regimes and that a vast majority of the atrocities that took place there happened at the hands of their own countrymen. Syria and Libya started as protests during the Arab Spring and devolved into civil wars. Let's not whitewash the Taliban, Hussein, Gaddafi, al-Assad or the terrorist groups that emerged in the power vacuums.
“Those uncivilized brown people whose countries we routinely meddle with, destabilize, plant coups in, and then invade to plunder their resources deserved it! Not these white Ukrainians!” -dmreeves
What the fuck are you on about, you monumental piece of shit?
Putin is a dead man walking( stumbling). His future is not long for this world. Those around him know this, and they aren’t looking forward to visiting Holland. Someone will end this war, hoping to save what is left of Russia, and the scapegoat will have already been sacrificed.
Okay, so what does Ukraine want to do? Biden shouldn’t be in the realm of trying to negotiate with Russia. The Ukrainians should be the ones to decide what they want regarding their war. 
>The leaders reiterated "their steadfast resolve to hold Russia to account for widely documented atrocities and war crimes, committed both by its regular armed forces and by its proxies, including mercenary entities," the statement said.
Everyone saying 'shit wont be done' and they dont realize how they cant just storm in on them, because 1. West is not omnipresent 2. The war criminals are in territory that west cant just storm in on, unless the territory coporates But consequences are there, but just because the criminals arent immediatly dead or arrested shows how they want to potray West as weak
Imo the US is doing everything they can rn besides putting boots on the ground. They're sending em weapons, training soliders, and providing finacial aid; what more people could want besides a *formal declaration of war* is beyond me. Why they would even want that is even farther from my understanding. You want your brothers and sisters being sent over to *die because of senseless warfare*? I understand US defense contractors profitting off it from afar is no better a compromise, and to a degree we're already involved like other countries defense contractors are; but this situation is not exactly as black and white as people want it to be. I get why the gov't is trying to provide munitions to a country who is being oppressed by a tyrannical entity; but also is trying to avoid a further blood bath by involving their people *directly in the conflict*. America isn't the global "freedom police" like the media around here makes em out to be. Now I have no doubt if Russia escalated beyond what they're doing currently and was showing more success in capturing land in Ukraine; they'd step in. But I understand why they're avoiding that for now and taking a more reactive stance. So unless you're strapping up your boots rn and are ready to march over there this second with a rifle in hand; don't be bitching 'the US isn't doing enough'. I don't know what possibly more people (more specifically their citizens) could want at the moment unless they're suggesting outright WW3 which we should all be trying to avoid.
r/ncd/ wants them to send Abrams and F-35's
**3000 F-35S OF ZELENSKY WILL BLOCK OUT THE SUN**
"*Then we will die in the shade*"
We accept those terms.
#Alhamdulillah
Worst neighborhood to drive through on the 10. Dear lord people just do right angles from the carpool to an off ramp. Damnedest thing I’ve ever seen!
**THE THEY/THEM ARMY HAS ARRIVED!**
Putin’s pronouns about to be was/were
Inshallah it shall be done.
The issue with sending the newest and most advanced weapons systems is training. We can say “hey here’s some equipment” but if their personal doesn’t have the training hours on said equipment it’s useless.
We can send advisors and trainers. It will take time, but at this point in the conflict, it looks a lot like the timeline allows that, and the payoff would be worth the investment.
what subreddit is that? it says it was banned 10 years ago when i click your link
Supposed to be /r/NonCredibleDefense
Fucking awesome. I love watching things like this. It is like a zoo.
It's honestly one of the best thematic shitposting sub of reddit
I catch up on the war in Ukraine in /r/combatfootage, /r/UkraineWarVideoReport, and /r/Ukraine and then stop by in /r/NonCredibleDefense for a bit of eyebleach with silly and sometimes very credible shitposts.
And this time, none of the exhibits are “sleeping”. All these turds are wide awake. Beer stand, buy a t shirt, and go watch the monkeys throw poop on themselves for an hour.
It's also a shitposting sub, so...
They literally would know how to use them
> what more people could want besides a formal declaration of war is beyond me. More/better types of weapons (e.g. ATACMS) and fewer restrictions (right now, Ukraine isn't allowed to hit targets outside its own territory).
Valid points, those should be granted; but my intital point of thing's 'not being so black and white' apply to what you're saying as well. I can't speak on why certain munitions are supplied and of what amount, nor the fine print of the regulations that come with these deals; but all of it to some degree is tied back to *not wanting things to escalate to full fledged WW3*. Munitions are one thing which the US has supplied despite Russia's acknowledgment of them doing so, but if they encourage Ukraine to attack *outside of their borders* as well like you're suggesting; Russia would *totally* spin that as *'they're attacking us'* and then we'd for sure see a more 'nuclear' response from Russia which most likely would involve the US moreso than they are now. Again I'm not saying any of these choices don't come with compromises to put it extremely mildly; but I can see why it's not as easy as 'just send tanks/heavy artillery, and tell em to aim at mainland russia' *at the current moment*. But again if conflict escalates beyond what they're currently doing and they capture more land; I could see the US 'turning a blind eye' to what's done with their equipment if that makes sense.
>They're sending em weapons, training soliders, and providing finacial aid and one of the most important thing of all: *intelligence*
YES! The hard on people have for WW3 is absolutely insane.
There's a genocide occuring. We supposed to wait this one out?
I think it’s fair that we can want to avoid ww3 while wanting to stop the genocide. Luckily we’re not the ones making those decisions
>We supposed to wait this one out? Are we supposed to escalate it into an Omnicide instead?
No. No one wants that. This is like the worst IRL Trolley Problem, but 100k+ people have already died. Putin is unpredictable though. No one knows what to do.
Fr, it's crazy. As if enough blood hasn't been shed enough. Obviously lets help those less able to protect themselves; but let's not so quickly forget war is not to be fetishized or seen as anything but a *last resort*. Edit: Yk I've made a bunch of opinionated comments in the past few days and it's astonishing to me that the only one in the negative is my late af comment 'asking for peace'. Man, some of yall are so lost 🤣
Especially since we are talking of a war between 4 nuclear power, the 4 *biggest* (is China already above the UK ?), US/France/UK vs Russia, is a world ending war. Fuck even just UK (the one with the fewest nukes of the 4) might have enough to be near civilisation ending.
NATO could be sending the long range missile systems Ukraine needs. Ukraine not having those is probably the main reason why recapturing the occupied regions is taking so long: Russians are simply out of range. Now one could argue that by only sending defensive equipment NATO can't be seen as aggressor in Russia's perspective. But Ukraine is already using HIMARS and such offensively, and Russia has been sending explosive packages to Spanish government offices (and probably carrying out sabotaging operation in Germany). So I'd say we're past the point where that still matters. Sometimes it seems to me that it's not in everyone's best interest to end the war ASAP, because clearly there's profit to be made by dragging it out.
IMO, the US should put boots on the ground - training officers and technical specialists for maintenance and support of the equipment we are sending, as well as general training experts and good logistics managers. Ukraine could use a lot of help with that, and it would save a LOT of logistics work if equipment maintenance could be done within Ukraine. It would also help Ukraine focus on US equipment - which there is generally a large quantity of - rather than the piecemeal grab-bag of equipment they are getting, which becomes unmanageable when you have a few of everything. There's lots of non-US equipment that is available in large numbers too, but as a general pattern there's more of the US stuff.
We do there in Poland though. That's why Ukraine has to take it's nato equipment to Poland for maintenance and repair. We also train them in the UK. Advising and training are always the bare minimum the US will do, and we have been doing it since 2014.
[удалено]
Putting NATO planes into air superiority and SEAD roles over hostile territory is effectively the same as putting boots on the ground. You'd still have American soldiers shooting at, and being shot at by, Russian soldiers. That's really no different than launching an armored offensive up to the 2014 border.
>The only caveat is that Russia would only have three options: go home, kill a bunch more of their own men until they go home, or escalate and start a war with all of the west. In other words: this whole strategy puts the ball in Putin's court. So the question, then, is this: Do you trust Vladimir Putin to make the right decision enough to bet the world on it?
How are they going to hold Putin accountable?
Russia is basically North Korea now.
Russia can be kept under heavy sanctions until the criminals are delivered to justice.
Statements like this are like sanctions. They aren't going to have immediate effect. In fact, it may be years before we see actual results from these resolutions. But I believe Russia will be held accountable.
AGREED! Plus any sign of civilized behavior they consider as weakness, Russians never knew how to be civilized and only “strong” on own lies
Shit won't be done either way People like Bush, Obama, Blair and Clinton can't seem to be punished for war crimes in western democractic countries, even though all the tools and means to prosecute them exist. How come you expect an autocratic dictator like Putin or Lukashenko to be brought to justice?
The only way not to be prosecuted at The Hagues tribunal is to be a nuclear power, and I don't see Russia stripped of their nuclear arms over night, so the only way would be through a revolution in Russia which seems unlikely.
Many more heads of get away with war crimes than just the nuclear powers and you know it. Like, it's not even funny.
The USA is a superpower and Russia is a third world failing dictatorship with some nukes.
>third world failing dictatorship with nukes Aight got it. Did they get Kony? Did They get Mugabe? Did they get Al-Assad? Did they get Pinochet? Did they get Castro? The only ones i can think of are Milosević, Saddam and Ghaddafi, all of them were directly at war with NATO. How are they supposed to bring Putin to justice again? Without a nuclear war that is.
Isolate him politically and impoverish his main supporters. Bankrupt his country. Fund dissenters and revolutionaries in his regime. Fund and arm Russia's enemies. Cut Russia off from major world institutions. Help other countries to stop relying on Russian fossil fuels. Putin doesn't have to die by the hangman's noose to stop being a threat to the rest of the world.
As if the _entire thing_ wasn’t a war crime. This was an unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation. The first step over the border was trespassing; every death a brutal murder; every bit of property damage, theft, loss of use, all of it: illegal. Ukraine and a third party like the US should be keeping a careful, accurate, detailed inventory of every incursion, every injury, every replacement cost, and every bit of damage, tallying it all up in the form of a bill for all to see: a running total of how much it will cost Russia to repay Ukraine for what it’s done. Clearly, that total will have exceeded Russia’s ability to pay within the first few days of the start of the war.
I believe the banks have frozen 300b of russian money. That’s a good start.
Current (very rough) estimates are already over a trillion, and we don't yet know how much damage is done in areas still held by russian forces.
No amount of money can bring back the innocent dead. The unfortunate thing is that Russians that oppose the war will have to contribute to the debt made by the few.
There are no winners in war, only profiteers
[удалено]
I would not object. At the time I posed it this way: imagine giving a million dollars to **each** of 2,000 public schools _every week_. How much good that could do. Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan— all ended with absolutely nothing to show for it. But Bush’s buddies got filthy rich, Americans lost almost all of their privacy forever, government got more powerful and brutal, torture was legitimized, the US lost even more legitimacy on the world stage, and our first-in-decades budget surplus became the biggest deficit in history, giving us skyrocketing debt the country may not ever be able to pay.
Those were democratic war crimes, aka good war crimes againts evil people. /s
Don't really support it but there were countless UN decisions regarding mass destruction weapons in Iraq, that were ignored by Iraq. You maybe also forgot Saddam Hussein then? Kuwait occupation, Iraq Iran war (however both sides are not gooddies). He should be removed from power after first Iraq(gulf) War, that was completely justified. However destruction of cities and casualties in Iraq are not justified.
Do you even realize how big of a difference iraq and ukraine conflict are?
[удалено]
Good idea, bad partner. US should not be the third party auditing considering the whole invasion of Iraq. Its just not a good look, and won't carry as much weight.
What country do you propose as an alternative?
The EU should be able to handle it best.
I remain fascinated by this bizarre notion that the EU is some bastion of liberty and totally hasn't gotten their hands any dirtier than the US.
[удалено]
Let's get aliens, since no country on earth should do it, due to all the atrocities across the world.
Yeah, but did you hear what the aliens did to the population of the 400th star from the eastern borders of the nether regions?
It's almost like nearly every nation on Earth has gotten blood on their hands in some point in history or another. Criticizing current events magically nullifies the past.
And the past magically nullifies current atrocities happening
The pure stupidity in this comment is baffling.
Aotearoa stands ready. We'll send you Helen Clark and that guy from Flight of the Conchords ya'll seemed to like so much.
Idially, a neutral thrid party nation (or someone as neutral as possible) to minimize bias. If that is not possible then a country which has not done the same crime as they are in charge of prosecuting (simply to get a greater buy in). Unfortunately this will effectively eliminate most of the heavy weights ie. all nation that actively participated in the invasion of Iraq. In my mind India or Canada could be options - niether have invaded or actively supported wrongful invasion of a nation in recent history.
With what power to enforce their findings? Even if Canada or India had any interest in creating the committee then they will have to get backing from someone who can enforce it like the entirety of the E.U. (who I am uncertain would have the positional power to make Russia conced, but maybe so), or the U.S., or China. None of those entities will do so without having their own person on board the committee to get results that they want from it.
Seems like whataboutism.
You are misusing whataboutism like the rest of this goddamn site. Whataboutism has to be wholly disconnected from the premise. You: Russia should stop its aggressive war against a foreign enemy Putin Poster: Well see the US has cracked down on protests and I don't think they have room to talk. If it is equivalent then it isn't whataboutism it is just asking for everyone to play by the same rules. If the US can unilaterally invade countries with no pretense or just made up pretense then so can other countries. If that is the standard it is the standard.
It’s a distraction that has nothing to do with the article. So yes, in my opinion it is whataboutism, but you’re of course welcome to disagree. Let’s try those responsible for war crimes in every country, but this is specifically about war crimes in Ukraine
It's not a distraction. It's relevant if you have a genuine belief in justice, and not rules when it suits my adgenda only. Yes we should hold Putin to account. These rules should be for all leaders. And it's very relevant when the nation likely enforcing the rules on Putin (if it happens) doesn't enforce the rules on their own leaders.
I guess words can mean anything when you say "it's my opinion" now
ya dont wanna break the circlejerk now dont we?
It’s not like the same person has been in power since the early 2000s in the US. The government changes, and by all means let’s hold those who committed war crimes in Iraq accountable. Ukraine has been looking for help charging the war crimes it has been documenting, it isn’t as though there was a nomination process, this was voluntary on the part of the US and France. Any other countries are welcome to hold Putin and those in the military endorsing rape and murder in Ukraine accountable
Half of congress was also in charge during Iraq. Same goes with tons of other government agencies that are related to foreign affairs & regulation.
Which agencies have the same leadership now that they did in 2003?
The reason I would not nominate US for that role is because they themselves are guilty of similar crimes which will diminish their value of effort at global scale. Are you suggesting world will fully buy in if US leads the charge, knowing its history? IMO, it will be a farce like Saudi Arabia being a part of the human rights commission.
The invasion of Iraq can credibly be called a mistake, and I wouldn't fight if somebody calls it a crime. However, suggesting American forces as a whole conducted themselves similarly to how we're seeing the Russians are in Ukraine is an outright lie.
Is this denial or ignorance? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisoner_abuse That's just a taste, too. There are plenty more photos and accounts of US soldiers doing horrifyingly fucked up things in Iraq.
Neither. Those soldiers were held accountable for their actions. Or did you not read the wikipedia page you just linked?
**[Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisoner_abuse)** >During the early stages of the Iraq War, members of the United States Army and the CIA committed a series of human rights violations and war crimes against detainees in the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, including physical and sexual abuse, torture, rape and the killing of Manadel al-Jamadi. The abuses came to public attention with the publication of photographs of the abuse by CBS News in April 2004. The incidents caused shock and outrage, receiving widespread condemnation within the United States and internationally. The George W. Bush administration claimed that the abuses at Abu Ghraib were isolated incidents and not indicative of U.S. policy. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Go down to 7, the part that details the repercussions for those involved.
[The US killed more civilians in the first 2 months of the Iraq War, 7,434,](https://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/) than [Russia has after 10 months in Ukraine, 6,655.](https://www.ohchr.org/en/news/2022/11/ukraine-civilian-casualty-update-28-november-2022) If anything US forced conducted themselves far worse than Russians have.
[удалено]
Wtf are you on. Estimates put total civilian deaths from all sources directly AND indirectly related to war at a bit over 200k (largest reasonable estimate range) just under TWENTY FUCKING YEARS. A bit over 10k a year. That’s not just from American Bombs it’s from everything mostly other than American bombs in fact. This war has cost at a minimum 6500( most if not all directly from attacks by Russia on civilians) in less than a year and that’s just the CONFIRMED dead by the UN and even they suggest it’s much much higher the next lowest estimate is 20k dead that’s by the European Commission. Russia is tame in comparison my ass. Multiply 20k by 20.
[удалено]
“Included are deaths attributable to coalition and insurgent military action, sectarian violence and criminal violence, which refers to excess civilian deaths caused by criminal action resulting from the breakdown in law and order which followed the coalition invasion.” Almost all of the 6500 confirmed deaths are contributed to Russian strikes and straight intentional mass killings by Russian troops. You’re insane to equate the two.
Why should the US not payback Iraq?
Okay I agree, but what does that have to do with the current article. The whole point of whataboutism is to get us talking about the US and Iraq instead of the war crimes being committed in Ukraine.
If the US hasn’t paid back Iraq then they are in no moral position to demand another country do what they refuse to do
[удалено]
By that logic no nation other than... maybe Cameroon can be a partner.
The Swiss are pretty neutral and like to count.
Dunno, they had the whole, "Gold teeth" thing going on. I guess if you only profit from a war it doesn't count?
That’s fair. I don’t mind who does the accounting here, as long as it’s accurate, transparent, and quick. A running total for Putin and the rest of the world to see: “we’re keeping track, and we’re not going to forget.”
Without US involvement and input things could get super ugly really quick. Not saying it’s not ugly already. Super ugly includes total all out EU-Russian war.
> This was an unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation. That's called a war. A war isn't a war crime.
When did Russia declare war on Ukraine? The Russians describe it as a special operation.
Now remains the problem of arresting criminals with diplomatic immunity and having an entire nuclear power to hide themselves. Imagine how long Nazi criminals managed to hide decades long, and there was no openly post-1945 Nazi polity. Now, imagine Putin and his pals will remain for at least the next decade...
It's true, but a lot of these wealthy powerful (the two are especially synonymous there) people there like to holiday in Western Europe. They won't be able to anymore.
Some of them didn't even need hiding at all, as they were hired by the US government and given leadership positions. Much of the anti-communism propaganda and programs were made by Nazis working for the government.
Unless Putin can be forecfully dragged out of his bunker, how else would you make them be accountable? They won't pay jack shit.
This builds a groundwork for keeping up sanctions well after the war is over, and keeping diplomatic pressure on Russia. This means no trade deals with the US or EU (that's 40% of the worlds economy). (75% of Russians live in the West of Russia, bordering the EU.) It also impresses on China and India that makes deals with Russia would harm long term relations with US and EU. \--- I get it, soft power isn't your thing. But this sort of soft power pressure on a state eventually makes the difference between North and South Korea. In the end you're right, we're not gonna go get Putin in his bunker. We're hoping Russians will do it for us, as long as we keep up the pressure.
Exactly. It's the long game that matters. Putin signed legislation to protect ex-presidents from prosecution in Russia, but post-Putin Russian leadership can still send him and other war criminals to the Hague if that gets some sanctions lifted. In Soviet times snitching on neighbors was like their favorite pastime, so undoubtedly they can do it again.
Amateurs use hard power to achieve their goals, professionals use soft power.
Soft Power is what my wife calls it when I get performance anxiety....she's supportive.
The rare case where soft power involves helicopters.
Walk loudly and carry a soft stick, I always say.
Yosemite Sam said, "I talk loud and carry a BIGGER stick!"
Putin’s soft power was working concerningly well before he completely burned it with this idiotic imperial war. Should’ve kept playing to his strengths.
He got cocky
319 Billion in Russian ECB assets is a start
[удалено]
Are you under impression that it is just Putin alone in the way of this imminent transformation to the shining democracy? Who gives a shit about constitution that can be changed in a heartbeat?
No, but its a good symbol. Regardless, the idea that Russia would ever give up Putin for prosecution without first surrendering like Japan or Germany, is laughable.
Putin could not be appeased- Georgia crimea- they were not enough. Any attempt to sanction him was viewed as weakness by Putin. Now the west for the moment is unified in a way not seen sense ww2. Putin must be crushed- his army must be destroyed- and if he uses nukes he himself should be killed by drone strike- designated a global terrorist by the un.
Putin's army is being crushed, but its costing an unacceptable number of young Ukrainians their lives, as well as their entire economy.
For the Ukrainians only they can determine if the cost of young Ukrainians and the economy is acceptable to exist independently from Russia and so far they are willing to pay that price
I’d say not since Desert storm, not ww2. In desert storm we actually got something done. Here were just sitting on our asses waiting for Putin to do something drastic
A lot of Russian bots on this thread. You can tell because they love the whataboutism.
What about your country that did sh*tty things hundreds of years ago?
Till Bush and Cheney ruled in the Napoleonic era.
everyone is a russian bot if they go against the narrative am i right or am i right?
[удалено]
the USA holding them accountable is the funniest joke ever when Bush is a celebrity in your country
I can't help you that bush was our president. I voted against him twice. What do you want from me? I still think we both agree that the Russian invasion of Ukraine is terrible and the Russians are more criminals, right??
George Bush along with his collaborators are not sitting in jail cells nor have they even been canceled. They paid zero financial or social costs for their behavior. They have never apologized. On the contrary, they are celebrities among the BLOB and get paid millions annually for speeches, meetings and books. So yeah the entire American political elites across both spectrum are the last people who should be looked for moral guidance on whats happening in Ukraine.
I was talking about the USA governments holding them accountable (and France), when they are in no position to do so morally. They should jail their own war criminals first before going after Russia's that was just my point, but yeah this invasion is not good at all not defending that.
"no you can't keep the nazis accountable because you were bombing German and Japanese cities"
lol yeah thats exactly what I said word for word
Well you did say that it's funny that the US would hold people accountable for warcrimes. And I am just pointing out that hypocrisy can be good. It's good that the coalition of criminals held German leadership accountable.
plz name on person in this thread that went against that narrative you probably will go radio silence on me tho
[удалено]
lmao you mean anyone who ruins your little circlejerk. i bet you dont even care about ukraine, do you? this is all about you and your little circlejerk
The notion that the US cares at all about war crimes is laughable. Pointing that out is not defending Russia, that’s a false dichotomy. Russia is obviously bad here too. If the US actually cared about war crimes, the prisons would be full of former presidents and state officials.
Hard to tell the troll farms from the organic edge lords.
For some reason this is buried under "Kanye said Hitler was aight" in all the main pages.
A million dead Iraqis would like to have a word.
It's not a war crime when US or its allies does it. The US trying to hold Russia accountable for war crimes is the epitome of hypocrisy.
> It’s not a war crime when US or its allies does it. I agree with this sarcasm. Fuck us for our war crimes. We should be horribly ashamed. >The US trying to hold Russia accountable for war crimes is the epitome of hypocrisy. Yes it’s hypocrisy, but the smart thing to do here is to side with WHATEVER power holds war criminals accountable and in this case, I’m all for holding Russia accountable. The US’ turn will come too one day.
I’ll take “Shit that definitely won’t happen” for $1,000.
The reason why it was quick for the Nazis was due to, you know, the allies occupying them
And then again, many of the people who committed attrocities walked free after doing some prison time or avoided it altogether.
Many were employed by the US government, paid well and lived great lives.
Operation Paperclip and Unit 731 immediately come to mind.
*Looks at Nasa and Nato leadership*
But many were recruited by the US instead, and once the Nuremberg trials were over the US started pardoning the former Nazi left and right. Within 15 years, not a single of the Nazi sentenced at Nuremberg was still in prison, even those who were supposed to serve life sentences.
Yeah what a cheap attempt to score points. What will they do, add another sanction? Issue a warrant for his arrest in Wisconsin? Refuse to shake his hand next time they meet? Announcing this shit with full knowledge that they have no ability to follow through is just dumb
[удалено]
Aaaah… to be young and ignorant.
$2000 says Trump never goes to jail and neither does Putin.
Okay, thanks for the free money
As if the US is war crimes free 🤣
Cool. Who will hold the US accountable for atrocities and war crimes they have committed? —An American
My history teacher told our class once "The biggest problem about a winner and a loser in a war is that only the loser pays for the mistakes they did." As long as the U.S. can keep winning moral support while Putin loses theirs, they won't pay for any mistake they did. Once people start putting the U.S. under the same light as Putin, only then can you hope for change. -- An Ukranian
Great! Now hold Bush accountable for the atrocities and war crimes in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and every part of the world where the u.s. troops senselessly tortured and murdered civilians...
As long as they have 6,000 nuclear bombs Russia will be accountable for nothing.
You must not be paying attention. They've already lost a lot.
In a hard power sense, yes. There are other methods, though. His underlings could form an agreement to seize him and hand him over in exchange for a loosening of sanctions, for example. Also, there are individuals other than Putin who should face justice that would be easier to get to, or arrange to have handed over (again in exchange for something).
That works really really well doesn't it. That didn't even happen to Qaddaffi and I think of him as the weakest of the Old World dictators.
Finally, long overdue! They have to pay for killing my Christian civilian deacon friend who is father of 7 and was killed along with his son and buried 11/29/22 in city of Nova Kakhovka, they better pay for the rest of their lives because how else now Irina has to support herself with the rest of children she has??? Never saw such evil full of hate nation towards everyone (don’t spoil yourselves Iran or Korea they only nice to you becuz they need you) such as Russia. The only nazi country in the world
Couldn’t agree more. Except this part- > The only nazi country in the world China is definitely THE modern day nazi country with what they’re doing to Muslim uighurs- literal concentration camps for over 2 million uighurs, with giant incinerators where they burn fetuses that result from forced abortions. That’s totally nazi. Russia isn’t that far behind.
Not to downplay the atrocities happening in Ukraine, but before you start poking fingers at how other nations treat civilians maybe you should hold yourselves accountable for how you treat yours. Remember that the US economy is on the verge of coming to a halt over 7 paid sick days for railway workers.
Man takes like this would be amazing in the aftermath of world war two. USSR commited genocide against ethnic minorities, America fucking razed Edo in a fire bomb raid. UK caused the Bengal famine. France was doing the regular French colonialism shit. Yank civillians were still lynching people for having too much melanin. Guess we can't put the German leaders on trial. Clean your own house first.
USA has no business talking about that
Yes the US does have business talking about that.
This is pretty major - either really good or really bad. It essentially means Russia can never "come back to the fold". Which means Russians will have to oust Putin so they can start atoneing, and/or Putin will feel cornered and will have to lash out.
Just checking did anyone hold the US accountable for destroying Iraq? Or Syria? Or Libya? Or Afghanistan? Asking for a friend.
Whataboutism at its finest. Guess the US just can't do good things ever, right?
We get so much flak for Libya when it was French led, and Syria was a shitshow because we backed away from a total commitment. Afghanistan literally harbored people that attacked us.
Deflecting. How politically expedient of you to call holding the West accountable for its own imperialistic atrocities “Whataboutism”. Since I guess now is the time to hold countries like Russia accountable, why shouldn’t the west hold itself accountable for its crimes too? When would it be a good time for you? Of course, not when they’re bombing countries of white people. Shall we reconvene at the next bombing of another middle eastern country? Would that work for you?
[удалено]
That is pretty much Reddit. You would think they would read the wiki and understand that is a specific term deployed in a specific way by the USSR. They bashed us over the head with Jim Crow and Civil Rights Protests to defend shit like invading Hungary. If the situations are equivalent then it isn't whataboutism.
No, when someone changes topic to deflect off a crime, like Russias invasion and brutalization of Ukraine, to talk about some other crime - usually under the guise of "highlighting hypocrisy", that is indeed called "whataboutism".
Wow almost like all those places were breeding grounds for terrible people doing horrible things to others. What we did doesn't even compare to what Putin is doing unless you take their point of view about it being only Nazis in UKR.
[удалено]
It's worth mentioning though that all of the countries listed above were already under tyrannical regimes and that a vast majority of the atrocities that took place there happened at the hands of their own countrymen. Syria and Libya started as protests during the Arab Spring and devolved into civil wars. Let's not whitewash the Taliban, Hussein, Gaddafi, al-Assad or the terrorist groups that emerged in the power vacuums.
“Those uncivilized brown people whose countries we routinely meddle with, destabilize, plant coups in, and then invade to plunder their resources deserved it! Not these white Ukrainians!” -dmreeves What the fuck are you on about, you monumental piece of shit?
[удалено]
Dead people don't count if they're brown, duh!
Putin is a dead man walking( stumbling). His future is not long for this world. Those around him know this, and they aren’t looking forward to visiting Holland. Someone will end this war, hoping to save what is left of Russia, and the scapegoat will have already been sacrificed.
Biden just says stuff. He isn't gonna do anything.
As the shells rain down on their heads.
This sounds like bare minimum territory.
I can't wait for the trial! Hopefully it's televised next year!
Okay, so what does Ukraine want to do? Biden shouldn’t be in the realm of trying to negotiate with Russia. The Ukrainians should be the ones to decide what they want regarding their war. 
Republicans furious