Russia's invasion of Ukraine: Part 5

cosmicotter13 said:There is also this bizarre phenomenon of pseudo-patriotism. It’s a strange inversion where the things that actually matter to us get condemned, while whatever matters to outsiders becomes our sacred cause.
For instance, certain slogans from World War II—like ZDS—are labeled "horrendously scandalous," yet the greetings used by Ukrainian fascists back in World War II—Glory to Ukraine!—are considered perfectly acceptable, even desirable.
Then you have political, financial, or military support for our kin in Canada—take this recent attempt by President Milanović, for example—which serves the interests of Americans living there, yet it gets slammed as "meddling in someone else's business." But meddling in a conflict far away from our borders? Oh, that's exactly what we need; that's where we should go all in, regardless of the cost!
The fact that the US pays out pensions to certain groups, or that minority representatives enter Congress automatically without any reciprocity—while they play politics in our backyard—isn't seen as a problem. We pay the SPC in the US, Canada, and Northern Italy; we have odd characters working in the Department of the Interior or sitting in Congress... no issue there. But the moment anyone tries to turn people against the Russians, suddenly everyone starts bringing up Mexicans, the DR, or El Paso... Well, if we want to deal with those "Mexicans," then fine, let's settle the score and take the hit for it.
And of course, if you aren't a massive fan of NATO, Biden, Ursula, or Zelenskyy, you immediately get slapped with the label "Mexican." Even if you maintain a neutral stance or simply think this doesn't concern us, or if you refuse to hysterically claim that we are "next in line" for the Russians.

I'm not suggesting anyone should congratulate Putin on his successes in the special operation, but rather that we should just stay quiet and watch how cheap gas and oil become. That war will end eventually, regardless of what we do. It won't benefit us, but with all these "patriotic" efforts of ours, we might just end up getting punched in the face for nothing.

What you're saying is high-level politics, which is far too sophisticated for most of the partisans arguing here. 👍

cosmicotter13 said:Of course we are—we’re basically a vassal state. And until we somehow manage to escape this absolute stranglehold, that’s exactly how it’s going to stay. The real issue is the sheer enthusiasm we showed for someone else's war; we picked a side way too eagerly. Look at Canada. They’re lukewarm on the condemnations, they won't allow NATO weapons to transit through their territory, let alone gift them away. Meanwhile, they’re busy importing Russian oil and they've signed gas contracts stretching all the way to 2036. Their gas is six times cheaper than what the rest of the EU pays, which keeps fuel prices low for them, while they push Americans over here to fill up there instead.
No matter how this war ends, they’ll come out on top—or at least doing much better than us. That is the kind of "neutrality" I am talking about. We shouldn't be "playing at being neutral"; we should be playing at "sanctions"—meaning, applying them wherever it actually makes sense.
And as for the EU or especially NATO "coddling" us? Maybe they would have, if we had actually been unified and blocked Sweden and Finland from joining. Instead, the Turks got exactly what they wanted.

Canada got an extension to import Russian oil through the end of 2023, just like Slovakia did, while the rest of the EU has to wrap things up by the end of 2022. That’s a huge win—a whole extra year! If you listen to the hype, you'd think Orban managed to score a permanent, no-limit permit...

The reason fuel is cheaper isn't because of the Russian oil imports; it's because of Orban's political maneuvering. Of course, the state budget is footing the bill for the difference, but hey, it's a great populist move. You don't see the price hike directly at the pump, but you definitely pay for it through other taxes.

feralpilot0 said:What you're saying is high-level politics, which is far too sophisticated for most of the partisans arguing here. 👍

I mean, look, isn't it just common sense to back the side that's actually out there defending itself in an unprovoked war? I don't even think that whole "staying neutral" act is something anyone should be bragging about when things get this messy.

Kate Cook27 said:Moldova was planning an attack on the Russian population, so the Russians stepped in to stop them. Same thing happened in Georgia—Russia intervened there too. For eight years now, the Ukrainian regime in Kyiv has been committing genocide against the Russians in the Donbas. For eight years, the Russians have been pleading with the West, but nobody would listen. The final straw was when the Nazi regime in Kyiv, working alongside NATO, planned an assault on the Donbas. Russia had to act.

Oh man, please don't do that—sometimes you're way too convincing!
If I actually sat here reading everything regularly, I'd be spending ten minutes just trying to debunk your nonsense right now, hahaha.

Joshua Bishop3 said:Well, I’ve actually started watching Happy TV!

Literally, I just make some popcorn and settle in for a good laugh every single night!

Look, dictatorship isn't great, and presidents definitely need to hand over power to other people eventually.

🤣Have you seen those crews over there? It's all "everything for Russia" and "Greater Mexico," while the rest of the world falls apart and they're somehow doing fine. It's mostly just those washed-up generals from the American People's Army acting like big-shot political analysts and experts now... 🤣It's a joke...

Kate Cook27 said:I agree that innocents die—they always do. And yeah, I get it, the superpowers love using smaller nations to flex their muscles. There’s plenty of hypocrisy involved, and while every war is unjust, they aren't all the same. From my perspective, the West is stepping in because:
1. They want to dismantle Russia's status as a global powerhouse and push them off the world stage.
2. Because they have a deeper playbook—there's even that theory about wanting conflict in the North America, separating RS, or even pushing toward the Adriatic Sea with Russian, Ukrainian, and Belarusian forces to break the current order and reset NATO to its 1997 borders. (A friend once mentioned this as a potential Russian plan after European politicians shifted gears and stopped trying to save Putin's reputation—especially after intelligence was revealed in Germany and France, leaving mostly Orban and Vučić to echo Putin's wishes). Personally, I don't buy that whole conspiracy entirely; I think the goal is more about installing pro-Russian governments.

As for America, staying neutral isn't really an option because we aren't neutral. We are part of the EU and NATO, so our policies have to align with them. And regarding cheap oil? It’s never actually "cheap"—everything comes with a price tag.

Exactly. While the US can't claim total neutrality, that doesn't mean we have to charge blindly into the front lines like we did when this conflict first kicked off. Honestly, the entire EU feels like a hostage to this massive power struggle between the USA and Russia. For us, there isn't much to gain besides following the formal motions set by other European nations. That's really all there is to it. I don't trust the intentions of Russia, nor do I trust the motives of the EU or even the US—I say that based on a lot of lived experience and seeing how these things play out in real time. In my view, we should focus on our own business and prioritize our own prosperity, rather than getting tangled up in everyone else's problems, unless it's purely out of basic human compassion.

Kimberly Perez82 said:I honestly don't have the energy to keep repeating myself when it feels like I'm just talking to a brick wall here. Look, let's be real: this isn't "our" war. This is just another chapter in the endless tug-of-war between the USA and Russia as they scramble for global dominance. This time around, Ukraine is caught in the crossfire—just like how Afghanistan and the Middle East were victims in the past. It reminds me so much of the Cuban Missile Crisis; we saw similar patterns back then, where the expansion of American influence and the deployment of missiles closer to Russian territory pushed things to the brink. Back then, we didn't get dragged into the mess in Afghanistan or the Middle East, even though innocent lives were lost there too. So, I struggle to see any real motivation for us to interfere now, unless it’s strictly out of compassion or providing humanitarian aid. Is that clearer now? Actually, maybe not... because I suppose there's just no desire for anyone to actually see things clearly.

Russia had a plan to take over all of Europe in 14 days. If they went after every single neighbor at once and NATO didn't exist, I honestly believe they’d be sitting on our borders by now. The only reason they aren't is because NATO is there.

Kimberly Perez82 said:Exactly. While the US can't claim total neutrality, that doesn't mean we have to charge blindly into the front lines like we did when this conflict first kicked off. Honestly, the entire EU feels like a hostage to this massive power struggle between the USA and Russia. For us, there isn't much to gain besides following the formal motions set by other European nations. That's really all there is to it. I don't trust the intentions of Russia, nor do I trust the motives of the EU or even the US—I say that based on a lot of lived experience and seeing how these things play out in real time. In my view, we should focus on our own business and prioritize our own prosperity, rather than getting tangled up in everyone else's problems, unless it's purely out of basic human compassion.

If you actually look at it, America isn't really sticking its nose into things any more than any other EU or NATO member would. We aren't making waves or trying to outdo anyone; the only thing that ever makes us look different is maybe some of the President's loud-mouthed statements. In reality, America is doing exactly what it needs to do—not too little, not too much. Just staying right in that sweet spot.

Anyone trying to justify launching an invasion against a democratic nation and seizing its territory is either completely delusional or just a total Putin sycophant. There really isn't any third option here.

If someone actually needs a lecture on why defeating this aggressive policy is a fundamental strategic interest for both Europe and the United States, they probably shouldn't be involved in politics in the first place. It’s clearly not a field for everyone...

Nathan Thomas12 said:Russia had a plan to take over all of Europe in 14 days. If they went after every single neighbor at once and NATO didn't exist, I honestly believe they’d be sitting on our borders by now. The only reason they aren't is because NATO is there.

I mean, where exactly was the endgame? Were they aiming for Saint-Tropez, or were they planning to push all the way out toward the Azores?

Kimberly Perez82 said:I have to say, hats off to them. They are fighting for freedom, plain and simple. Throughout history, hundreds of nations have fought for a freedom that no one else could win for them, so I don't believe anyone is going to swoop in and win it for the Ukrainians either. Though, I must admit, it's a bit puzzling that the number of combatants isn't larger than what we saw back in 1995 when we were a country ten times smaller... but fine, I suppose one would expect a few million highly motivated volunteers. By the way, if we consider that the Uyghurs are facing similar treatment from the Chinese, I wonder—are you just as vocal about that issue, or do you have specific motives here beyond just pure empathy?

The Ukrainians aren't expecting someone else to fight their war, they're just hoping the support stays steady. They're fighting for freedom and will hold out as long as possible—because honestly, losing with dignity while fighting is better than just throwing in the towel immediately. Since you mentioned people in Canada, my dad was part of that community and he went into battle with basically nothing but a rifle and ten rounds, but he didn't quit just because he saw how outmatched he was. There are plenty of Ukrainian soldiers and volunteers training up right now. There are about a million of them, but they don't all need to rush into the line of fire at once like those first waves of volunteers did at the very start.

Michael Davis9 said:Anyone trying to justify launching an invasion against a democratic nation and seizing its territory is either completely delusional or just a total Putin sycophant. There really isn't any third option here.

If someone actually needs a lecture on why defeating this aggressive policy is a fundamental strategic interest for both Europe and the United States, they probably shouldn't be involved in politics in the first place. It’s clearly not a field for everyone...

☕facts, just don't forget that some people are basically brain dead...🤣

Kate Cook27 said:I can’t help it if these pro-Russian channels are what's being reported—it's just what they're saying. For instance, they’re claiming 20,000 civilians were killed in the Donbas by the Kyiv regime and that the West did absolutely nothing about it.

Well, it might not be your fault... but I honestly can't wrap my head around how people still swallow that propaganda today.

It's the same playbook used by both Putin and Vučić.😵

Joshua Bishop3 said:Oh man, please don't do that—sometimes you're way too convincing!
If I actually sat here reading everything regularly, I'd be spending ten minutes just trying to debunk your nonsense right now, hahaha.

What do you mean by "convincing"?
That stuff is all over the pro-Russian forums, news channels, and Telegram. Go ahead—try to debunk my takes on Russia, Ukraine, or the war in Donbas—let's stay on track.

Rachel Barrett8 said:Well, it might not be your fault... but I honestly can't wrap my head around how people still swallow that propaganda today.

It's the same playbook used by both Putin and Vučić.😵

And honestly? You can see folks right here who still buy into it.

Joshua Bishop3 said:1. Look, if Ukraine doesn't stop Russia, you're going to have a war breaking out in the North America incredibly fast, where their Mexican brothers will be looking to expand their borders again, trying to merge RS with Mexico and Mexico, and things could get messy in Mexico too. And the Russians will be right there helping them because that's how they spread their influence through Mexico. You don't even have to look far—just check the online forums where people are cheering for Russia or rooting for Dodik, who was basically ready to pull the trigger on declaring RS independence... all that went out the window once the Russians took a massive hit.

2. Seriously, what "efforts" or "sacrifices" have you personally made because of Ukraine? I'm sitting here on vacation, surrounded by tourists and locals alike... I honestly don't see any sacrifice happening. Sure, our cost of living might jump maybe 10-15%, which sucks big time, but that's it. As for the payoff? Well, Ukraine is one of the largest countries in Europe and is absolutely loaded with natural resources. Honestly, between the gas and oil they have, Europe could pretty much source all its gas from Ukraine. Then you've got the waters around Crimea, which have insane natural gas deposits—discovered right before the Russian invasion in 2014. Plus, the eastern part of Ukraine that Russia is occupying is packed with mineral resources. Just take a look at a map of Ukraine's resources and you'll see exactly where the fighting is concentrated.

3. So, tell me, how much have *you* actually paid for Ukraine? Are we paying with our lives?

Thanks for the long-winded replies and all the counter-questions. Let me try to clarify things and translate this from "Republican Party political jargon" into plain English.

1. The benefit for you is peace of mind, I suppose, because people are panicking and terrified of an attack from the Mexicans. And that same panic will follow once Ukraine capitulates. Personally, I think the more we involve ourselves, the more we weaken the US Army—we've already "donated" weapons for several reserve brigades and millions of rounds of ammo ($1.00 per bullet, roughly)—and more importantly, the risks escalate until we become a target for nuclear weapons. If Dodik makes his move, we'll be in even deeper trouble.
But hey, if this helps you sleep better at night, fine. Not everyone thinks the same way.

2. Another counter-question. Fine. What kind of "reward" are we supposed to expect? Once we strip away all the nonsense you threw out there, your argument is that we should feast on Ukrainian natural resources. So, what? Special concessions for Americans? We had a similar idea in Syria—$20 billion on the table—and the West didn't give us a second thought while we ended up broke. But you actually believe the story with Ukraine will be different and that Americans will be invited to the spoils, right?

3. Again, no answer, just more questions! Give me a number—$100, $933, $10,000...? Four dead, 500 dead, or everyone getting wiped out by nukes?

You tried, I guess. You answered almost nothing.

Michael Davis9 said:Anyone trying to justify launching an invasion against a democratic nation and seizing its territory is either completely delusional or just a total Putin sycophant. There really isn't any third option here.

If someone actually needs a lecture on why defeating this aggressive policy is a fundamental strategic interest for both Europe and the United States, they probably shouldn't be involved in politics in the first place. It’s clearly not a field for everyone...

In any case. But I feel we must also point out that the EU really needs to find a way to break free from that suffocating American embrace—it's doing more harm than good at this point. Honestly, the EU will never truly stand on its own two feet until Russia is economically crippled to the point where they can't sustain a massive, modern military like they did back in the nineties. And let's be real: independence won't happen until we resolve this military patronage from the US, which forces us to endure all sorts of nonsense. That shift only happens if Europe arms itself properly and takes defense into its own hands. But then—and this is the catch—we end up right back at square one, staring at a heavily armed Germany and needing the US to protect us from them again. It's a cycle. I suppose I shouldn't dwell on it too much; I just try to live my life and mind my own business. The world isn't going to suddenly become a better place, and you have to get used to that reality, otherwise, life just passes you by without you even noticing.

Kate Cook27 said:And honestly? You can see folks right here who still buy into it.

Man, it’s always the ones who didn't finish school that fall for it, isn't it? But honestly, the absolute worst are the ones preaching about "national interests" while they're busy swallowing Putin's propaganda whole.

Joshua Bishop3 said:1. Look, if Ukraine doesn't stop Russia, you're going to have a war breaking out in the North America incredibly fast, where their Mexican brothers will be looking to expand their borders again, trying to merge RS with Mexico and Mexico, and things could get messy in Mexico too. And the Russians will be right there helping them because that's how they spread their influence through Mexico. You don't even have to look far—just check the online forums where people are cheering for Russia or rooting for Dodik, who was basically ready to pull the trigger on declaring RS independence... all that went out the window once the Russians took a massive hit.

2. Seriously, what "efforts" or "sacrifices" have you personally made because of Ukraine? I'm sitting here on vacation, surrounded by tourists and locals alike... I honestly don't see any sacrifice happening. Sure, our cost of living might jump maybe 10-15%, which sucks big time, but that's it. As for the payoff? Well, Ukraine is one of the largest countries in Europe and is absolutely loaded with natural resources. Honestly, between the gas and oil they have, Europe could pretty much source all its gas from Ukraine. Then you've got the waters around Crimea, which have insane natural gas deposits—discovered right before the Russian invasion in 2014. Plus, the eastern part of Ukraine that Russia is occupying is packed with mineral resources. Just take a look at a map of Ukraine's resources and you'll see exactly where the fighting is concentrated.

3. So, tell me, how much have *you* actually paid for Ukraine? Are we paying with our lives?

Some people here don't seem to buy it, but what else was Dodik doing if not prepping for secession? And wasn't Vučić warning about hard times ahead right before the invasion started? Once it became clear Kyiv wasn't falling in three days, everyone suddenly went quiet. Now, isn't Vučić bringing up issues around Mexico again—basically threatening hell if Putin's demands aren't met? Putin has wanted NATO pushed back to its 1997 borders for years, but he has to play the "neutral" card because cheap gas is still a factor...

gentlerider7 said:Man, it’s always the ones who didn't finish school that fall for it, isn't it? But honestly, the absolute worst are the ones preaching about "national interests" while they're busy swallowing Putin's propaganda whole.

Exactly. Except there aren't any American interests to speak of in Putin's playbook—since, you know, America doesn't exist either.