• Sirosky@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      52
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Unnecessarily reductionist/antagonistic. If you had read the article, you would’ve known that the Ukrainians themselves agree with the point. And despite what the title says, the U.S. isn’t the only of Ukrainian’s western partners that thinks a change of strategy in order. This war might be fought primarily by the Ukrainians, but it’s also very clearly a collective responsibility of the western world order.

      • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        66
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        The truth will never be reductionist.

        collective responsibility of the western world order.

        ie- capitalist imperialism.

        • Sirosky@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          40
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Such a bog-standard whataboutism that I couldn’t even be bothered to roll my eyes anymore. Thanks for showing your true colors.

            • yata@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              11 months ago

              Those colours doesn’t seem to go all the way through though. Scratch them for a moment and you will see the colours of the Russian flag appearing.

              • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                cake
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                11 months ago

                Yep. I’m against all capitalist imperialism, even China’s. It’s almost like those supporting NATO aren’t really socialists.

                • boredtortoise@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  I’ve read those people have a thought called “critical support” where they’re critical against NATO but it’s the only logical lifeline for Ukraine and Europe to end the war some day and prevent similar situations.

                  Personally; I guess that’s a theory, who knows 🤷

                  • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                    cake
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    10 months ago

                    I’m gonna do my best to communicate my reasoning.

                    1. Socialists are anti capitalist.
                    2. NATO is an arm to preserve capitalism.
                    3. Socialists cannot support NATO. Despite what Vaush says.

                    The “critical support” theory is based on the assumption that nations wouldn’t come to Ukraine’s aid if NATO didn’t exist. Some believe that America and by extension NATO, created the conditions that preceded the conflict. Capitalism tends to create problems that it then has to solve. There was no salient reason for NATO to continue its existence after the fall of the Soviet Union, other than to maintain US hegemony.

          • mihor@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            11 months ago

            They would get dealt with just as Russia dealt with the western-trained 47th mechanized brigade full of NATO hardware using stupid western tactics. They got shredded to pieces together with their commander.

            • lntl@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Fortunately or unfortunately, a destabilized Russia would not be safer for the world than a stable Russia.

            • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Well, to be precise, it could lead to war with Russia. I doubt that would spill over to the whole world.

              That prospect is terrifying enough given Russia’s nuclear weapons, so I’m definitely not arguing that “this is fine”.

              I just think we need to be precise. Russia is not the Soviet Union - they don’t have 50 proxy states around the world.

            • InvertedParallax@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              11 months ago

              That could lead to WW3.

              Only very briefly.

              You have to leave the precedent that the peace of Europe will be preserved, that’s how we made it the last 80 years without a world war.