So you support Russia going to war on the territory of another country ~“because other countries did not leave it any choice” or so? The NATO that was mostly forgotten and dormant before Russian’s invasion and received a small fraction of its attention and funding now, that same NATO, just did not leave Russia any choice but to attack at all? And Russia absolutely could not avoid invading Ukraine, it just had to do it, in attempts to fix internal Ukranian problems, as perceived by Russia. Oh and the poor populations of Donetsk, legally and otherwise belonging to Ukraine, had to be invaded too and their lives are now improving?
What you’re saying is shameful. You’re not even giving Ukraine autonomy in your explanation of the “geopolitical struggle”. You’re saying “US” and “Russia”, but not “Ukranian people chose to _”.
You’re not even giving Ukraine autonomy in your explanation
Correct, they don’t have autonomy. We, the collective west, took that from them in 2014, and now they’re government we installed is trafficking the people of Ukraine like meat.
The NATO that was mostly forgotten and dormant before Russian’s invasion
???
Did you miss things like the invasions of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Iran, the genocide of Palestine - things that have been very high-profile and happening this century.
And Russia absolutely could not avoid invading Ukraine
Okay, suggest an alternative course of action for a state whom the most prolific invader is gathering forces on the border of, or nearby, especially after subjugating nearby countries.
You’re not even giving Ukraine autonomy in your explanation
Why do you care about the autonomy of states (i.e. the freedom of rulers of those states to do whatever they want), rather than the well-being of the vast majority of people in the world?
I very specifically did not declare support or condemnation. Subjective moralizing is irrelevant to analyzing historical reality. Explaining the material causes of an event is not the same as endorsing it. My point was that Russia’s actions were a logical and foreseeable reaction to objective conditions, not that they operated with some metaphysical lack of choice.
Your claim that NATO was dormant or forgotten is historically illiterate. In the decade preceding this conflict, that same alliance bombed and destabilized multiple sovereign nations, including Libya and Afghanistan. It is not a defensive pact that suddenly woke up. It is an expanding military bloc.
Any state would perceive a foreign-backed coup and a hostile military buildup on its border as a direct threat. This is basic geopolitical reality, exactly as it was during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Expecting a major power to passively accept its border being turned into a staging ground for a rival hegemon is naive.
You speak of Ukrainian self-determination while offering blatant apologetics for the eight-year shelling of the Donbas and the suppression of Crimea. True autonomy was discarded in 2014. The majority of the Ukrainian population did not choose the current path of perpetual war and subordination to Western interests. That is precisely why a forceful coup was required to install the current regime, sparking the civil war that escalated into the current conflict.
Analyzing how and why events happen requires looking at material reality, not retreating into abstract ravings about street bullies and metaphysical musts.
So you support Russia going to war on the territory of another country ~“because other countries did not leave it any choice” or so? The NATO that was mostly forgotten and dormant before Russian’s invasion and received a small fraction of its attention and funding now, that same NATO, just did not leave Russia any choice but to attack at all? And Russia absolutely could not avoid invading Ukraine, it just had to do it, in attempts to fix internal Ukranian problems, as perceived by Russia. Oh and the poor populations of Donetsk, legally and otherwise belonging to Ukraine, had to be invaded too and their lives are now improving?
What you’re saying is shameful. You’re not even giving Ukraine autonomy in your explanation of the “geopolitical struggle”. You’re saying “US” and “Russia”, but not “Ukranian people chose to _”.
Correct, they don’t have autonomy. We, the collective west, took that from them in 2014, and now they’re government we installed is trafficking the people of Ukraine like meat.
???
Did you miss things like the invasions of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Iran, the genocide of Palestine - things that have been very high-profile and happening this century.
Okay, suggest an alternative course of action for a state whom the most prolific invader is gathering forces on the border of, or nearby, especially after subjugating nearby countries.
Why do you care about the autonomy of states (i.e. the freedom of rulers of those states to do whatever they want), rather than the well-being of the vast majority of people in the world?
I very specifically did not declare support or condemnation. Subjective moralizing is irrelevant to analyzing historical reality. Explaining the material causes of an event is not the same as endorsing it. My point was that Russia’s actions were a logical and foreseeable reaction to objective conditions, not that they operated with some metaphysical lack of choice.
Your claim that NATO was dormant or forgotten is historically illiterate. In the decade preceding this conflict, that same alliance bombed and destabilized multiple sovereign nations, including Libya and Afghanistan. It is not a defensive pact that suddenly woke up. It is an expanding military bloc.
Any state would perceive a foreign-backed coup and a hostile military buildup on its border as a direct threat. This is basic geopolitical reality, exactly as it was during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Expecting a major power to passively accept its border being turned into a staging ground for a rival hegemon is naive.
You speak of Ukrainian self-determination while offering blatant apologetics for the eight-year shelling of the Donbas and the suppression of Crimea. True autonomy was discarded in 2014. The majority of the Ukrainian population did not choose the current path of perpetual war and subordination to Western interests. That is precisely why a forceful coup was required to install the current regime, sparking the civil war that escalated into the current conflict.
Analyzing how and why events happen requires looking at material reality, not retreating into abstract ravings about street bullies and metaphysical musts.