6 ms·

> For example, try arguing that the USA should try to find a diplomatic solution to the conflict in Ukraine. You'll be immediately accused of being a "Putin pup

by mopsi 2y ago

> For example, try arguing that the USA should try to find a diplomatic solution to the conflict in Ukraine. You'll be immediately accused of being a "Putin puppet" when all you care about is that the war is ended with as few casualties as possible (as some say, winning the peace is more important than winning the war). You will fall under criticism for saying this because it is indeed ignorant and naive and will only kill more people. Peace at any cost will only give Russia a chance to focus on repressing internal dissent in occupied territories and murder people until they have no meaningful opposition left there. After that, they can renew their attack on Ukraine and widen it to the rest of Europe, forcibly conscripting people from occupied territories to fight for them. This already happened after the 2014 invasion. How many times do you want to repeat the mistake before learning from it? In this round, about half a million are dead and many Ukrainian cities look no different from Hiroshima and Nagasaki after nuclear bombing. How many people more will have to die? 10 million? Insisting on peace at any cost is purely emotional feel-good response that ignores the realities on the ground. Much of the discussion about Palestine and other hot topics is the same; uneducated virtue signaling fueled by social media narcissism.

brabel 2y ago
You call me ignorant, but you seem to have very little understanding at all. You say it will only kill more people. That's patently false. There's never been a peace settlement that ended up killing more people than war, because war kills people every single day. Ukraine losing some territory is NOT the end of the world, and I am not sure why some people are so convinced that it is. > After that, they can renew their attack on Ukraine and widen it to the rest of Europe There's literally no evidence that's the case, this is fear-mongering on a scale I've never seen before. To the contrary, the reaction of the world to this conflict has already made enough of an impression on any would-be invader that it's a really bad idea to enter a conflict where the West is on the opposing side, and I am very convinced that Putin won't try his hand again. Of course, I cannot prove that to you, but you can't prove anything either, you're using the same "emotional" argument you've accused me of using. Your argument goes down to "we must continue killing people in a war to prove a point". I find that argument abhorrent. > How many people more will have to die? 10 million? If you stop the war right now, zero. You're claiming a hypothetical future made up in your head where Russia will still continue attacking others. At least try to consider that that may not happen? Consider that Russia knows very well it will suffer for decades from mistrust by the West, by sanctions and by losing a huge market. It knows all that, why would it want to make things even worse? This argument by some of the Western media just doesn't make sense, try to think about it rationally! > Insisting on peace at any cost is purely emotional feel-good response This is always the same argument used most war-mongering people in history, it's the cause of the death of millions because every war in history started because of someone holding that view. We need to go back to a civilized dialog between nations. You can claim that Putin is the one who broke the peace, and I agree with that, but just trying to continue a big war to make him pay for that mistake seems pitty. In my opinion, fighting any war for any reason is not what a civilized mind would do. There are cases it's unavoidable, but this is NOT one of those. It's avoidable, Putin is open to dialog, don't believe the narrative you've been told. There is room for dialog, the war was almost ended with the peace talks in Belarus... have you forgotten that? Do you know why that didn't stop the war?? Read about it, it was NOT because of Russia.
- mopsi 2y ago
  > There's literally no evidence that's the case, this is fear-mongering on a scale I've never seen before. To the contrary, the reaction of the world to this conflict has already made enough of an impression on any would-be invader that it's a really bad idea to enter a conflict where the West is on the opposing side, and I am very convinced that Putin won't try his hand again. Russia is currently forming two new armies that have a larger size than the ground forces of most European countries combined, and preparing an extensive sabotage campaign across Europe, and chiefs of European military and intelligence agencies are issuing public warnings that this is a preparation for war against the rest of Europe. Your mistake is projecting western sensibilities upon Russians and expecting them to act within the confines of western culture. They don't care about "losing a huge market", because they are driven by ideology. The timid western response to the war has proven two very important things for them: (1) western sanctions are not enough to suffocate the ability to wage war, (2) western sanctions will not lead to unrest and instability in Russia, (3) war is a tenable (albeit slow) method of achieving their goals. Russian conclusions from the war so far are thus completely opposite of yours. The negative consequences have been much smaller than anyone expected: the economy has not collapsed, they have not run out of weapons and manpower, they have not seen mass protests, and they continue to make progress. They have learned that they can fire missiles into Europe and kill people every day and get away with it. They even have cheerleaders in the west who demand giving Russians whatever they want to make it stop. > If you stop the war right now, zero. You can rest assured that it will be nowhere near zero. Should fighting on the frontlines end, Russia will redeploy resources into weeding out any opposition to Russian occupation, which in practice means an extensive campaign of terror against civilian population, going as far as forced population transfers, mass executions and other crimes against humanity, as they have done everywhere else. This is their normal modus operandi. Russia already operates concentration camps and death squads in occupied territories, and peace on the frontline will allow them to allocate more manpower to internal security and make the campaign more intense. This is a key point that naive peace activists get wrong: peace on the frontline will not mean peace for civilians in occupied territories, instead, things will get worse. Many will perish in "filtration" camps and "cleaning" operations where squads go from house to house and kill all inhabitants. People arguing for peace without liberation of occupied territories don't understand what they are doing; it is a position held out sheer ignorance.

by mopsi 2y ago

brabel 2y ago

You call me ignorant, but you seem to have very little understanding at all. You say it will only kill more people. That's patently false. There's never been a peace settlement that ended up killing more people than war, because war kills people every single day. Ukraine losing some territory is NOT the end of the world, and I am not sure why some people are so convinced that it is. > After that, they can renew their attack on Ukraine and widen it to the rest of Europe There's literally no evidence that's the case, this is fear-mongering on a scale I've never seen before. To the contrary, the reaction of the world to this conflict has already made enough of an impression on any would-be invader that it's a really bad idea to enter a conflict where the West is on the opposing side, and I am very convinced that Putin won't try his hand again. Of course, I cannot prove that to you, but you can't prove anything either, you're using the same "emotional" argument you've accused me of using. Your argument goes down to "we must continue killing people in a war to prove a point". I find that argument abhorrent. > How many people more will have to die? 10 million? If you stop the war right now, zero. You're claiming a hypothetical future made up in your head where Russia will still continue attacking others. At least try to consider that that may not happen? Consider that Russia knows very well it will suffer for decades from mistrust by the West, by sanctions and by losing a huge market. It knows all that, why would it want to make things even worse? This argument by some of the Western media just doesn't make sense, try to think about it rationally! > Insisting on peace at any cost is purely emotional feel-good response This is always the same argument used most war-mongering people in history, it's the cause of the death of millions because every war in history started because of someone holding that view. We need to go back to a civilized dialog between nations. You can claim that Putin is the one who broke the peace, and I agree with that, but just trying to continue a big war to make him pay for that mistake seems pitty. In my opinion, fighting any war for any reason is not what a civilized mind would do. There are cases it's unavoidable, but this is NOT one of those. It's avoidable, Putin is open to dialog, don't believe the narrative you've been told. There is room for dialog, the war was almost ended with the peace talks in Belarus... have you forgotten that? Do you know why that didn't stop the war?? Read about it, it was NOT because of Russia.

mopsi 2y ago
> There's literally no evidence that's the case, this is fear-mongering on a scale I've never seen before. To the contrary, the reaction of the world to this conflict has already made enough of an impression on any would-be invader that it's a really bad idea to enter a conflict where the West is on the opposing side, and I am very convinced that Putin won't try his hand again. Russia is currently forming two new armies that have a larger size than the ground forces of most European countries combined, and preparing an extensive sabotage campaign across Europe, and chiefs of European military and intelligence agencies are issuing public warnings that this is a preparation for war against the rest of Europe. Your mistake is projecting western sensibilities upon Russians and expecting them to act within the confines of western culture. They don't care about "losing a huge market", because they are driven by ideology. The timid western response to the war has proven two very important things for them: (1) western sanctions are not enough to suffocate the ability to wage war, (2) western sanctions will not lead to unrest and instability in Russia, (3) war is a tenable (albeit slow) method of achieving their goals. Russian conclusions from the war so far are thus completely opposite of yours. The negative consequences have been much smaller than anyone expected: the economy has not collapsed, they have not run out of weapons and manpower, they have not seen mass protests, and they continue to make progress. They have learned that they can fire missiles into Europe and kill people every day and get away with it. They even have cheerleaders in the west who demand giving Russians whatever they want to make it stop. > If you stop the war right now, zero. You can rest assured that it will be nowhere near zero. Should fighting on the frontlines end, Russia will redeploy resources into weeding out any opposition to Russian occupation, which in practice means an extensive campaign of terror against civilian population, going as far as forced population transfers, mass executions and other crimes against humanity, as they have done everywhere else. This is their normal modus operandi. Russia already operates concentration camps and death squads in occupied territories, and peace on the frontline will allow them to allocate more manpower to internal security and make the campaign more intense. This is a key point that naive peace activists get wrong: peace on the frontline will not mean peace for civilians in occupied territories, instead, things will get worse. Many will perish in "filtration" camps and "cleaning" operations where squads go from house to house and kill all inhabitants. People arguing for peace without liberation of occupied territories don't understand what they are doing; it is a position held out sheer ignorance.