• orizuru@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Russian pacifists want Russia to stop invading Ukraine.

      Lemmygrad / Hexbear pacifists want Ukraine to appease Russia and give up territory.

      They are not the same.

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

        Russian pacifists want Russia to stop invading Ukraine.

        Western “pacifists” want to send NATO tanks to Ukraine.

        They are not the same.

        Russian anti-war activists have a correct position.

        But an important consideration should be whether one’s actions actually contribute to Russia withdrawing sooner, or if they instead help justify further, equally self-interested NATO involvement in the war.

        Unless you are Russian, it’s most likely the latter.

        There are two imperialist blocs involved in the conflict, and it doesn’t matter which one of them technically started it.

        • orizuru@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          There are two imperialist blocs involved in the conflict, and it doesn’t matter which one of them technically started it.

          I’m sorry, but when it involves one imperialist bloc invading a smaller country, then it does matter.

          Do you have the same position regarding the Vietnam war, Palestine, Iraq, and Afghanistan? Or do you only support whichever side is not aligned with the US?

          • trot [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            I literally said that

            Russian anti-war activists have a correct position.

            Are you aware that it’s possible to want neither NATO tanks nor Russian tanks in Ukraine?

            You can even make sure you are consistent with both things in action 100% of the time - it’s a neat little trick called “opposing the position of your own government”.

            • orizuru@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              10 months ago

              Are you aware that it’s possible to want neither NATO tanks nor Russian tanks in Ukraine?

              I am.

              But do you believe Ukraine is able to maintain their territory protected from Russia without NATO’s weapon supply?

              • Sphere [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                He most likely doesn’t believe Ukraine is able to maintain their territory protected from Russia with NATO’s weapon supply, and for good reason, given how clearly this is demonstrated by the utter failure of the vaunted counter-offensive. The only thing your position is really advocating is the useless deaths of vast numbers of Ukrainians (and Russians, for that matter).

                • teichflamme@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  The mere fact that they are in the act of a counter offensive after Russia tried to blitz then shows that it’s not even close to what you’re describing.

                  Ukraine is holding their current territory pretty easily and gaining the upper hand very clearly.

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

    I don’t doubt this as it’s happened to others, but Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty is a literal CIA mouthpeice and tends to make stuff up.

    • socsa@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      It literally isn’t. RFE is definitely a US propaganda platform, but it objectively has nothing to do with the CIA these days. But you should probably check under your bed one more time just to make sure.

      • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        RFE also “objectively” had nothing to do with the CIA for nearly 20 years after it was created, at which point it turned out the CIA had been funding it all along. But now we know they’ve stopped because they said they did, and anyone suggesting that they’re not editorially independent is a paranoid loon, just as they would’ve been in the 50’s and 60’s.

        Some of us don’t believe that the people whose job it is to lie stopped lying because they said they did. Suggesting that the CIA is still doing things that they did regularly and successfully kept hidden in the past is not a conspiracy theory.