“We believe the prerequisite for meaningful diplomacy and real peace is a stronger Ukraine, capable of deterring and defending against any future aggression,” Blinken said in a speech in Finland, which recently became NATO’s newest member and shares a long border with Russia.

  • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ah, so you’re finally admitting that what we’re seeing is a proxy war between the regime US installed in Ukraine after a coup in 2014 and Russia. We’re finally getting somewhere.

    • FlowVoid@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      This war was instigated by Russia. It is not a proxy war, by definition. Just a regular war.

        • FlowVoid@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Russia instigated the war regardless of any “provocation”.

          By your definition, the Great Patriotic War was a “proxy war”, since the US sent weapons to the USSR in order to help them defeat a common threat.

          • Red Army Dog Cooper
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            First the difference is that in the Great Patrotic War the US was a party to the war, as of right now the US is not a party to the war and fighting through someone else

            Second, how exactly did Russia instigate the war, when it was Ukraine not Russia who violated the Minsk Accords?

            • FlowVoid@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              The US was not at war until the end of 1941, so by your definition Operation Barbarossa was part of a proxy war between the US and Germany.

              Russia instigated the war by sending hostile troops into Ukraine, which is an act of war. Violating a treaty is not an act of war. If it were, the US would now be at war with Russia after they violated the New START treaty.

              • Red Army Dog Cooper
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                First treaty violations have different outcomes, tye new START treaty was a renegotation and surplanted the previous one, a treaty that said “Hey maybe dont shell donotesk and luhonsk” that was violated and attempt to peacefully remind Ukraine of their treaty obligations for 8 years calls for a little more

                • FlowVoid@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Regardless of what the treaty said, a violation cannot justify war. Sovereign nations have the right to enter and leave treaties as they see fit. That’s what sovereign means: complete authority over what takes place within its borders.

                  When a sovereign nation will not abide by any treaties, the ultimate consequence is international isolation not invasion.

                  • Red Army Dog Cooper
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    You are correct but because this acted as a defacto peace agreement, Ukraine Violating it is tantimount to breaking the peace, that is what happens when you break a peace treaty. Actions have consiquinces.