• justastranger@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    It’s like every time there’s a war everybody forgets how fucking long they take. WW2 took six years. The Vietnam War took almost 20 years, same with the Afghanistan War. Anybody expecting anything solid within the next couple years is delusional. Ukraine is in it for the long haul.

      • OKRainbowKid@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        “We shouldn’t help the rape victim and they should hope that it’s over quickly. Also, it’s actually not rape, it’s a special sexual operation and they deserved it.” - Tankies

  • Rapidcreek@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    Somewhere in the Pentagon there surely must be a series of rooms isolated for this war. In them intelligence is gathered, counterparts in Ukraine can be in instant contact, resources from both armies are tracked, tactics are formulated, simulations are run. How do I know this? Because this would be too good of a learning opportunity to pass up.

    And those folks ain’t talking.

        • robot_dog_with_gun [they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          two sentences is hardly a rant and there are plenty of quotes from american officials and armchair generals about how this war is great because it’s degrading “our enemy” without costing american lives.

          • Rapidcreek@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months ago

            I believe that degrading the army of one of the US greatest geopolitical world rivals at the cost of roughly 3% of the DoD budget is money well spent. In that there is no US blood is an added advantage. The Ukrainians are fighting this war for their own purpose, to reject tyrannical rule. That’s something that’s happened for a millennium, including the American revolution.

            The US didn’t impose this war, 100,000 Russians invading did. As France helped the US during the revolution, the US helps Ukraine.

            • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              I believe that degrading the army of one of the US greatest geopolitical world rivals at the cost of roughly 3% of the DoD budget is money well spent.

              They’re not gonna let you into the club just because you lick the boot leather. I believe the 100.000s of dead ukrainians are more important than some vague US geopolitical goal.

              The Ukrainians are fighting this war for their own purpose, to reject tyrannical rule.

              The ukrainians are forcibly conscripted and banned from leaving their country. They do not want to fight.

              The US didn’t impose this war, 100,000 Russians invading did

              Yeah one day putler just woke up and felt like invading, that’s what happened.

              If you think this is such a good war, go volunteer.

              • Rapidcreek@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                11 months ago

                The Ukrainians could stop this war anytime they want, as could Putin.

                Reality is the Russians invaded. They rejected world order.

                • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  The Ukrainians could stop this war anytime they want

                  The Ukrainian government could, the same government that banned every political party that wasn’t sufficiently anti-Russia. And the last time the people got to vote, they elected Zelensky who ran as a peace candidate. So no, the people of Ukraine, the ones being drafted and sent to the front lines, have very little say over whether Ukraine negotiates for peace.

          • Babs [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months ago

            Do you think it is realistic that Russia will unilaterally pull out? The war will end when Russia leaves, but Russia isn’t going to leave until they are pushed out, negotiations are had, or Ukraine is destroyed. The first possibility is becoming increasingly more unlikely, and the last is something that nobody should want

            That leaves negotiations. I think Ukraine should come to the table while they still have some leverage, which is decreasing every week that they throw their men into the meat grinder without meaningful gains.

            • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              11 months ago

              It doesn’t leave only negotiations. Russia tried for 10+ years in Afghanistan. The US the same, there and in Vietnam. There is such as giving up and going home. That’s the “win” a small state can inflict on a large one. I don’t think that’s where Ukraine and Russia is headed, but there’s a quick for Ukraine and a slow “win” for Ukraine.

                • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  For sure there’s a real risk Ukraine isn’t winning this war. But there’s never been a war where there’s absolute certainty one side will win, until we get to the “downfall” times.

    • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      Are the Hexbear users who are saying Ukraine is being ungrateful repeating Kremlin propaganda or are the Hexbear users who are saying Ukraine has a point repeating Kremlin propaganda?

      Is Kremlin propaganda just ontologically what a Hexbear user says?

      • 𝔊𝔦𝔫𝔧𝔲𝔱𝔰𝔲@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        I’m referring to the concerning number of users from your instance who seem obsessed with parroting what has been confirmed to be Kremlin propaganda and lies spread through deliberate misinformation campaigns. Obviously, this isn’t all HexBear users, but you guys clearly have a general problem with this kind of stuff.

  • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    You know what? I never thought I’d say this but I’m with Ukraine on this one.

    This whole counter offensive insanity is so militarily nonsensical that it had to have been mounted to please the West with a “win” so that they’d stay in the war. Real Chiang Kai Shek committing the best of the KMT army to Shanghai to impress the Westerners energy.

    The West is standing on the sidelines, supplying just enough equipment to keep the embers going and judging the ordinary Ukrainians going to their deaths by their hundreds.

    Fuck the clowns in charge in Kiev and fuck the Nazi militias obviously. But at this point the men being sent to the front are old men and boys dragged off the street against their will. Sending them to die to appease the West is fucking sick.

    • LeFantome@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      This got an upvote?

      Are you open to proposing your master plan?

      Ukraine has been invaded. Are you suggesting they do not fight back?

      NATO is not war. No NATO country has been attacked. Engaging against Russia directly would put NATO at war with a nuclear power. I cannot imagine that this is your plan.

      Not just “the West”, but everybody is on the sidelines as far as direct engagement goes. Most countries are assisting Ukraine where they can. Some to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars. Most have imposed crippling sanctions. So. “sidelines” is a bit misleading from that perspective.

      Even Russia’s allies are “on the sidelines”. You certainly do not see much overt support from China. They have even maintained ( in fact stepped-up ) diplomatic relation with Ukraine.

      Or are you trying to imply that the underlying cause of everything here is something other than Russia’s continued invasion? Everybody could truly go back to the sidelines if Russia just left.

      The only other path is for Ukraine to win. Are you supporting that or not?

      • rubpoll [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        If your goal is to prevent deaths, surrendering would have been the ideal yeah.

        Zelenksy tried to surrender to prevent further deaths, and Boris Johnson refused to let that meeting happen because NATO isn’t finished using Ukranians as crash test dummies.

        • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Zelenskyy tried to surrender and Boris Johnson stopped him?! Ooooookay… He maaaybe (all “unnamed” sources) expressed an opinion, which the U.K. learnt the hard way, that you cannot negotiate with dictators. There can be no “peace in our time” with dictators hellbent on destruction.

          To cast that as “Ukraine was stopped from surrendering” is just obscene … and yet another Kremlin talking point.

          • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months ago

            which the U.K. learnt the hard way, that you cannot negotiate with dictators. There can be no “peace in our time” with dictators hellbent on destruction.

            If the UK is convinced that you can’t negotiate with dictators, how does the UK keep entering into arms sales agreements with Saudi Arabia? Do the contracts just appear out of thin air at BAE?

            • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Sigh.

              I am referencing to a dictator that is hellbent on invasion of other countries. We had plenty of relations with Russia before they decided to invade Ukraine and they were a dictatorship before. We have plenty of relationships with China now and they are a de facto dictatorship.

              • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                11 months ago

                The Saudis used their British weapons to bomb Yemen and create one of the worst humanitarian catastrophes in recent memory. The UK sold weapons to Saudi before, during, and after the Saudi involvement in Yemen.

                Perhaps Russia should have merely bombed Ukraine to the point of starvation. Then they’d be a good dictatorship that the UK would be happy to carry out business negotiations with.

                • Adkml [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Don’t be ridiculous

                  Ukrainians are white

                  That’s only acceptable when it’s brown, asian, or south american people who’s country you’re destroying.

          • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months ago

            Russia and Ukraine may have agreed on a tentative deal to end the war in April, according to a recent piece in Foreign Affairs.

            “Russian and Ukrainian negotiators appeared to have tentatively agreed on the outlines of a negotiated interim settlement,” wrote Fiona Hill and Angela Stent. “Russia would withdraw to its position on February 23, when it controlled part of the Donbas region and all of Crimea, and in exchange, Ukraine would promise not to seek NATO membership and instead receive security guarantees from a number of countries.”

            The news highlights the impact of former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s efforts to stop negotiations, as journalist Branko Marcetic noted on Twitter. The decision to scuttle the deal coincided with Johnson’s April visit to Kyiv, during which he reportedly urged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to break off talks with Russia for two key reasons: Putin cannot be negotiated with, and the West isn’t ready for the war to end.

            Foreign Affairs is a Kremlin propaganda outlet now?