I hate how “anti-war” has been hijacked by these people to mean, let imperialist countries invade whoever they want with no consequences. (in the case of tankies, any imperialist country that isn’t in NATO).

  • highduc
    1·
    4 hours ago

    I don’t think giving it away is a solution. It was already taken, by force. The question is, can it be taken back, and at what cost?

    In what way am I not caring about the victim in this case? I think you’re assuming I’m not taking this seriously, or that I think Ukrainians deserved it, or shit like that. But that’s not the case at all.

    And the analogy for the Palestinian genocide would be like so: should the west arm palestinians so they can defend themselves? And the answer imo would be no. They would still fail to defend themselves against such a strong adversary, and it would only aggravate the conflict.

      • highduc
        1·
        3 hours ago

        Nope. And Russia shouldn’t get to keep what they’ve taken by force either. But it’s not like we could give weapons to those palestinian children and they’d be able to turn this conflict around. That’s an extreme example of this problem. Ofc Ukraine is much more developed, and has trained soldiers and stuff…

        Anyway as I said before, the argument remains - are the west fueling a proxy war at Ukraine’s expense, or are they helping them win? Maybe one day we’ll find out.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          1·
          3 hours ago

          You’re simultaneously saying Russia should get to keep what it’s taken in Ukraine and that it shouldn’t. Which is it?

          • highduc
            1·
            3 hours ago

            I’m not saying they should get to keep it, I’m questioning whether prolonging the war will make a difference in the matter.