Comment on Danish Forces Are Mandated to Fire Back if U.S. Attacks Greenland
arrow74@lemmy.zip 3 days agoYour argument is Russia must invade Ukraine because Ukraine would join an organization to protect them from Russia. This is the fault of the US.
That’s a nonsensical take so you get a nonsensical response
bennieandthez@lemmygrad.ml 3 days ago
My argument is that the US did meddle and is a reason the war started, don’t put words in my mouth.
arrow74@lemmy.zip 3 days ago
Not a single word was put in your mouth. Your arguement was taken to its conclusion
You fail to link “us meddling” to justification for a war. Or more accurately an invasion of a sovereign nation.
bennieandthez@lemmygrad.ml 2 days ago
That’s where you drifted, the point is that the US has been involved since the start, i am not trying to justify neither side actions, though im clearly biased towards Russia but that’s for another day. The US geopolitical games using Ukraine as a pawn directly led to Russia’s invasion, it’s really not that hard to see.
arrow74@lemmy.zip 2 days ago
If we are going back to the main point then, being involved is not starting the war. Russia started the war when it crossed the border. All these “geopolitical games” amount to is Russia believing that Ukraine should not be an autonomous state. It disliked the country’s move to the west and invaded.
Of course there are always influences and pulls between nations. Those factors may influence the decision to start a war, but the war is started when the aggressor attacks.
Objection@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
A bunch of armed men seized parliament and established a new government which banned opposition parties. Another bunch of armed men seized local government buildings and declared independence, after which they requested Russia send troops to come to their aid. Each side claims the other was foreign-backed while theirs was a legitimate expression of popular will.
Whether Russia invaded or responded to a request for aid depends on the legitimacy of the separatists and of the central government. When France sent troops to the British colonies in America, we don’t generally call that an invasion.
If the US meddled in overthrowing Ukraine’s previous government and picking out the new one (and there’s some evidence of that) then it calls into question whether the central government has more legitimacy than the separatists, and whether they really had the right to send tanks in to suppress the separatist rebellion.
arrow74@lemmy.zip 2 days ago
This would be a much better argument if Russia only occupied eastern areas that expressed wanting to join Russia. Although even then there is some strong evidence that Russia planted that movement, but I’m willing to ignore that for now.
That as an argument falls apart pretty quickly when you remember they made a blitz attack for Kiev on the first day into areas not expressing a desire to separate.
Your analogy of the American revolution fits well with this. 13 British colonies had decided to succeed from Britain. France did not attack London nor did it send troops to the other British colonies in the Americas. It sent support to the ones that asked for it and nothing more.
But let’s not pretend the French did it for the American colonies. They did it to weaken Britain. Not for the people of those areas, but specifically for their own geopolitical goals.
But also let’s get back on topic. This argument agrees with me anyway. I said the USA did not start this war, and you are saying it was started by local separatists. Which back to the Revolutionary war comparison that’s spot on again
zedcell@lemmygrad.ml 3 days ago
You have a complete lack of reading comprehension, and are clearly twisting what was said to make a point that wasn’t even claimed.
You reek of desperation.
arrow74@lemmy.zip 2 days ago
Yeah that didn’t clear anything up, but let’s just keep hurling insults around.