this post was submitted on 02 Jun 2023
33 points (88.4% liked)

World News

32072 readers
1239 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

“We believe the prerequisite for meaningful diplomacy and real peace is a stronger Ukraine, capable of deterring and defending against any future aggression,” Blinken said in a speech in Finland, which recently became NATO’s newest member and shares a long border with Russia.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I'm confused. Do you think Russia taking Ukraine by force is what's best for Ukraine? Do you think their people are volunteering to fight because they just don't know what's best for them? Even if Ukrainians wanted to maintain independence out of some misguided patriotism, isn't it their right as a sovereign nation to decide that?

From the US perspective, Ukraine wanted to join NATO, aligning themselves with us. Then Russia invaded. If the US didn't support Ukraine, the world would know they can prevent a weaker country from joining NATO by invading. After Iraq and Afghanistan, there's no desire to send US troops but we can provide weapons and intelligence.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

I personally don't think it's going to matter much for the average Ukrainian, as far as who controls their resources. I think it's a tragedy that they're fighting or dying over whether it's Russian oligarchs or western oligarchs who will get to control their lives

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Weapons, intelligence and Ukrainian bodies are an extremely cheap deal to weaken an adversary, don't you think?

When it comes to wanting oil though, US and Iraqi bodies aren't so important. As long as you can dupe your own citizens into believing there's WMD's, it doesn't matter.

And of course Ukraine knows what's best for them. That's why they keep asking for a roadmap to NATO but the US is like "Nah" - https://www.ft.com/content/c37ed22d-e0e4-4b03-972e-c56af8a36d2e

So of course they're left to negotiate. Again, the US Government doesn't care but their citizens think they do.

The US is against peace if it doesn't get more money to the military–industrial complex or if it doesn't weaken an adversary, like in this case.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

The US is against 'any' attempt by any country to use its resources for its own purposes. America behaves like any other imperial power has, throughout history. If Russia or China had the power the US currently does, they'd be doing the same thing. It's why 'Empire' as a concept can coexist just as easily with 'democracy' as a framework as it does in autocracies. Because every State out there wants to maximize it's share of power in the world. And this includes the US. That's why fundamentally things don't change all that much, regardless of who gets into power.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 year ago

By volunteered to fight you mean being abducted on the street, beaten, and sent to die?