• CableMonster@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    3 days ago

    Thats true, but what if we had listened to them and prevented hundreds of thousands of dead people? Why would that have been bad?

      • Mirshe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Moreover, surrendering whatever Russia sticks a flag in is appeasement nonsense. We’ve already seen this strategy before WWII: *oh, Germany will be OK if we just cede Czechoslovakia. Oh, Germany won’t attack if we cede Alsace-Lorraine…" An aggressive power like Russia, who already tried to annex large portions of another sovereign nation in 2008 (they invaded Georgia and got their shit kicked in because they tried the whole “three day thunder run” strategy), almost certainly will not stop if you just “give them what they want”. Eventually, they’ll want more, and more, and more, and you wind up surrendering slice after slice after slice of your country.

      • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        3 days ago

        So then nato gets to constantly aggress on them and they cant do anything? And then you are shocked that they invaded.

        • MentallyExhausted@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          “Aggress on them” by existing on their border? This is apologist and appeasement nonsense. Russia’s rights end at their borders.

          • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            3 days ago

            Except that the cuban missle crises shows the US completely disagrees (unless it is convenient at that moment). Do you not see how this war was 100% avoidable if nato did not cross the directly drawn line?

            • MentallyExhausted@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              3 days ago

              Comparing them to our imperialist actions isn’t the brilliant argument that you think it is.

              At any rate, NATO has never offered membership to Ukraine — they’ve been explicitly told their corruption issues were a non-starter.

              And, of course, Ukraine only started those talks following Russia invading Crimea in 2014. Again, Russia is the clear aggressor here. Get real.

              • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                3 days ago

                You are correct that they didnt offer it yet, but it was on the table, and NATO knew that was the reddest of red lines. You also do even know why russia took over Crimea in the first place.

                And yes, how america would react is imporant because it shows how we really feel, not just propaganda about how they can do what they please.