5 ms·

The US and Russia are the biggest nuclear powers in the world. Positive relations here are good for absolutely everybody. Positive relations do not mean one has

The US and Russia are the biggest nuclear powers in the world. Positive relations here are good for absolutely everybody. Positive relations do not mean one has to approve of the political system, ideology, or whatever else of the other side. See: Saudi Arabia which remained a key ally for many decades in spite of being wayyyyyy further off the spectrum (relative to the US) than Russia could ever be. Overtly adversarial relationships trend towards violence, sooner or later, and that's not a path we ever want to go down.

rectang 2y ago
The US has turned towards enabling Russia’s imperialist war, and the Pentagon article explains how it will unilaterally disarm in the face of Russian cyberwarfare, leaving Russian criminal groups to run rampant in Europe and even the US. Abetting conquest and criminality is not the sort of collaboration we should cheer.
- somenameforme 2y ago
  Wars are largely started because of poor relations. The US overtly supported and encouraged an effort within Ukraine to overthrow a democratically elected president because he moving more towards Russia than the West. Russia then ended up invading Ukraine for fears of having NATO not only right on their doorstep, but right in their geographic Achille's Heel. If the US and Russia were on good relations none of this would have happened, Germany's economy would still be booming, and just about everybody would be so much better off today. And no, the article does not say the Pentagon will "unilaterally disarm." It ordered a halt to offensive operations against Russia - e.g. the Russian government which is certainly going to be reciprocated. Criminal elements are a different topic, but I do expect as relations between US and Russia warm, they will no longer be looking the other way when these groups target the West.
  - simion314 2y ago
    Bullshit, after Ruzzia invaded Ukraine in 2014 you still have the ability to pretend Ukrainians did not really want to join EU and NATO and USA, Israel and Illuminaty caused the Ukrainians to protest their president that promised the West and then betrayed the people by going East. Typical Zed propaganda where Eastern Europeans are all brainwashed to hate the good, kind Ruzzian empire. if you are USaians then go and fix your history and stop consuming MAGA and Zed propaganda.
    - somenameforme 2y ago
      You're having an anachronism. The events in Crimea only came after 'their president' was overthrown, and were directly and indisputably caused by it. The reason I say 'their president' is because Crimea is majority ethnic Russian and before them it was Tatars. It's never been Ukrainian in ethnicity or even close to such. And the event that was exploited into a crisis point was Yanukovych signing an economic agreement with Russia instead of the EU. The US wasn't just doings things behind the scenes. This [1] is John McCain at a rally in Kyiv. Imagine if during the BLM (or January 6th or whatever) protests/riots if China/Russia/etc had sent high level officials to overtly rally people to try to overthrow the government. It's a completely surreal sight if you really think about what you're seeing. The US is right there saying 'Yeah, we're gonna overthrow you in plain sight - try to do anything about it and you'll be wishing that's all that happened.' And if you think there was nothing going on behind the scenes on top of that stuff that overt in front of the cameras, then I'd say you're not arguing in good faith! In any case, none of this happens with good relations. A simple agreement to economically save Ukraine shouldn't have been an adversarial East vs West thing, but just another agreement to the benefit of Ukrainians. But that poor country's strategic positioning, and easily exploitable nationalist minority, means it was doomed to inevitably just end up as little more than a rope being tugged on by two giants. The giants will be fine regardless of what happens - it's just the rope that ends up in tatters. [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93eyhO8VTdg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93eyhO8VTdg
      - simion314 2y ago
        Fck what about Ukraine borders are recognized by Ruzzia but they invaded Ukraine then they signed peace and invaded again I don't give a shit what USA idiots said, if the people of Ukraine want in EU and NATO like their neighbors Poland, Romania, Hungary then why should a failed empire object. You imply that USA brainwashed the Ukrainians, they instigated this. Can't you use your brains? Can you see Ruzzians killing, raping, torturing their "brothers" ? It is obvious that for an ethnic Ruzzian genociding Polish, Romanians or Ukrainians is the same , they have no value for what we actually want. We all want EU and NATO to be free of USSR/Ruzzian empire the Ruzzians want their empire back, Ruzzia has nukes so the bullshit that NATO extens because they want to invade Ruzzia and steal their shit is stupid , use your brain EU bought shit from Ruzzia, EU tried to get peace with the empire by making bussiness relations, EU had not plants to invade and steal Ruzzian lands . There was ZERO risk for Ruzzia to get invaded, it is the same with the other wars Putin started, it is all geopolitics and many Zeds agree with it and make fun of us smaller country by claiming that this is how the world works, big empires screw the small countries.
  - mopsi 2y ago
    The US overtly supported and encouraged an effort within Ukraine to overthrow a democratically elected president because he moving more towards Russia than the West. Russia then ended up invading Ukraine for fears of having NATO not only right on their doorstep, but right in their geographic Achille's Heel. This war started when Ukraine's president Yanukovych, at the last minute and under Russian extortion, abandoned the EU-Ukraine trade agreement that would have opened up the EU for trade and other opportunities. This meant that Ukrainians could've easily seen their incomes grow by 3-4x in a short span of time, like other countries that entered deeper relations with the EU and eventually joined it saw. Naturally, Ukrainians responded with massive protests, to which Yanukovych replied with increasing violence, culminating in 100 protesters being killed by police snipers. At that moment, Yanukovych lost the support of even his own party, fled to Russia out of fear of imminent imprisonment, and the Ukrainian parliament announced snap elections to replace him. The elections were held a few months later. Not many people would call general elections a "CIA coup". NATO has nothing to do with it either, that's pure gaslighting. In the first few years after the initial invasion in 2014, Russia denied having any troops in Ukraine. According to Russia, the thousands of people equipped with Russian tanks, artillery, and air defense systems were merely local self-defense forces who had bought their equipment from military surplus stores. Russia claimed that Ukraine was in a civil war. The narrative started shifting to blaming NATO only in the run-up to the full-scale invasion in 2022, when Russia abandoned the story that Ukrainians were fighting each other and needed a new justification for its massive surprise attack on all of Ukraine.

rectang 2y ago

The US has turned towards enabling Russia’s imperialist war, and the Pentagon article explains how it will unilaterally disarm in the face of Russian cyberwarfare, leaving Russian criminal groups to run rampant in Europe and even the US. Abetting conquest and criminality is not the sort of collaboration we should cheer.

somenameforme 2y ago
Wars are largely started because of poor relations. The US overtly supported and encouraged an effort within Ukraine to overthrow a democratically elected president because he moving more towards Russia than the West. Russia then ended up invading Ukraine for fears of having NATO not only right on their doorstep, but right in their geographic Achille's Heel. If the US and Russia were on good relations none of this would have happened, Germany's economy would still be booming, and just about everybody would be so much better off today. And no, the article does not say the Pentagon will "unilaterally disarm." It ordered a halt to offensive operations against Russia - e.g. the Russian government which is certainly going to be reciprocated. Criminal elements are a different topic, but I do expect as relations between US and Russia warm, they will no longer be looking the other way when these groups target the West.
- simion314 2y ago
  Bullshit, after Ruzzia invaded Ukraine in 2014 you still have the ability to pretend Ukrainians did not really want to join EU and NATO and USA, Israel and Illuminaty caused the Ukrainians to protest their president that promised the West and then betrayed the people by going East. Typical Zed propaganda where Eastern Europeans are all brainwashed to hate the good, kind Ruzzian empire. if you are USaians then go and fix your history and stop consuming MAGA and Zed propaganda.
  - somenameforme 2y ago
    You're having an anachronism. The events in Crimea only came after 'their president' was overthrown, and were directly and indisputably caused by it. The reason I say 'their president' is because Crimea is majority ethnic Russian and before them it was Tatars. It's never been Ukrainian in ethnicity or even close to such. And the event that was exploited into a crisis point was Yanukovych signing an economic agreement with Russia instead of the EU. The US wasn't just doings things behind the scenes. This [1] is John McCain at a rally in Kyiv. Imagine if during the BLM (or January 6th or whatever) protests/riots if China/Russia/etc had sent high level officials to overtly rally people to try to overthrow the government. It's a completely surreal sight if you really think about what you're seeing. The US is right there saying 'Yeah, we're gonna overthrow you in plain sight - try to do anything about it and you'll be wishing that's all that happened.' And if you think there was nothing going on behind the scenes on top of that stuff that overt in front of the cameras, then I'd say you're not arguing in good faith! In any case, none of this happens with good relations. A simple agreement to economically save Ukraine shouldn't have been an adversarial East vs West thing, but just another agreement to the benefit of Ukrainians. But that poor country's strategic positioning, and easily exploitable nationalist minority, means it was doomed to inevitably just end up as little more than a rope being tugged on by two giants. The giants will be fine regardless of what happens - it's just the rope that ends up in tatters. [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93eyhO8VTdg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93eyhO8VTdg
    - simion314 2y ago
      Fck what about Ukraine borders are recognized by Ruzzia but they invaded Ukraine then they signed peace and invaded again I don't give a shit what USA idiots said, if the people of Ukraine want in EU and NATO like their neighbors Poland, Romania, Hungary then why should a failed empire object. You imply that USA brainwashed the Ukrainians, they instigated this. Can't you use your brains? Can you see Ruzzians killing, raping, torturing their "brothers" ? It is obvious that for an ethnic Ruzzian genociding Polish, Romanians or Ukrainians is the same , they have no value for what we actually want. We all want EU and NATO to be free of USSR/Ruzzian empire the Ruzzians want their empire back, Ruzzia has nukes so the bullshit that NATO extens because they want to invade Ruzzia and steal their shit is stupid , use your brain EU bought shit from Ruzzia, EU tried to get peace with the empire by making bussiness relations, EU had not plants to invade and steal Ruzzian lands . There was ZERO risk for Ruzzia to get invaded, it is the same with the other wars Putin started, it is all geopolitics and many Zeds agree with it and make fun of us smaller country by claiming that this is how the world works, big empires screw the small countries.
- mopsi 2y ago
  The US overtly supported and encouraged an effort within Ukraine to overthrow a democratically elected president because he moving more towards Russia than the West. Russia then ended up invading Ukraine for fears of having NATO not only right on their doorstep, but right in their geographic Achille's Heel. This war started when Ukraine's president Yanukovych, at the last minute and under Russian extortion, abandoned the EU-Ukraine trade agreement that would have opened up the EU for trade and other opportunities. This meant that Ukrainians could've easily seen their incomes grow by 3-4x in a short span of time, like other countries that entered deeper relations with the EU and eventually joined it saw. Naturally, Ukrainians responded with massive protests, to which Yanukovych replied with increasing violence, culminating in 100 protesters being killed by police snipers. At that moment, Yanukovych lost the support of even his own party, fled to Russia out of fear of imminent imprisonment, and the Ukrainian parliament announced snap elections to replace him. The elections were held a few months later. Not many people would call general elections a "CIA coup". NATO has nothing to do with it either, that's pure gaslighting. In the first few years after the initial invasion in 2014, Russia denied having any troops in Ukraine. According to Russia, the thousands of people equipped with Russian tanks, artillery, and air defense systems were merely local self-defense forces who had bought their equipment from military surplus stores. Russia claimed that Ukraine was in a civil war. The narrative started shifting to blaming NATO only in the run-up to the full-scale invasion in 2022, when Russia abandoned the story that Ukrainians were fighting each other and needed a new justification for its massive surprise attack on all of Ukraine.