• Lemminary@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    I meant something more substantial like a link that expands on this instead of some name drop.

      • ajoebyanyothername@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        5 days ago

        “NATO expansion was legal but predictably provocative. Russia’s response was entirely predictable, if illegal, and has proven very costly to it. Ukraine’s de facto military integration into NATO has resulted in its devastation.”

        From your suggested reading, this stood out to me. The crux of any argument in Russia’s favour seems to be that they were unhappy at the prospect of Ukraine joining NATO, and thus felt justified acting preemptively. But ultimately, that was never a demand Russia was in a position to make, so any aggression on their part is not defensible on those grounds, in my opinion.

        • AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          But ultimately, that was never a demand Russia was in a position to make

          Literally what are you smoking. Look at reality. Tell me they weren’t in a position to make that demand now that they’ve asserted themselves.

          It’s fucking amazing the shit people from your instance will say.

          • ajoebyanyothername@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            Firstly, basing your opinion of someone on the instance they signed up with is…interesting.

            Secondly, I didn’t mean that in the sense of they literally couldn’t make the demand, but that Russia demanded Ukraine not join NATO, despite having no standing to make such a demand. Ukraine is a sovereign nation that can make its own decisions, they didn’t need permission from Russia. Even the quoted article acknowledges that Russia had no grounds for an invasion, and it’s generally in support of Russia’s position.

      • Lemminary@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        And which one would you say touches the heart of the matter of what you say? My time is limited. I think a direct quote would be a great place to start.

        • fallowseed@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          30
          ·
          edit-2
          5 days ago

          i guess the many lessons one is a good start and broad edit: again someone is cycling through alt accounts and downvoting everything i’ve posted… lol, let’s hope its a bot and someone isn’t wasting their actual time to totally own me with downvotes.

          • Lemminary@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            5 days ago

            Sorry to hear you’re being targeted like that. Not cool. On the bright side, the points are made up and don’t matter here.

            I’ve have read through the essay and I think that the article lends itself to confusion but help me out. Kyiv does want a military resolution but only to rule its dissenting territories, which is arguably a sovereign right when you have your insecure neighbor fueling dissidents, right? This is what was giving me trouble before, because Zelenskyy has been actively calling for peace plans for a few years now. You’re almost suggesting that he wants to continue fighting Russia on behalf of the UN. That’s one hell of a noble sacrifice that’s not quite in their best interest. If anything, the author suggests Zelenskyy has been played like a fiddle. Or am I missing something?

            E: Nevertheless, thanks for the link. It was very interesting and I took my time to go through it. I’m tempted to read the other essays when I have more time.