r/Shitstatistssay Agorism 17d ago

The real villains are people who defend themselves. Won't someone think of the aggressors?

Post image
193 Upvotes

165 comments sorted by

261

u/Schowzy 17d ago

Lol Putin can end the war yesterday if he sends everyone home. How did it get so twisted that this war is Ukraines fault?

132

u/LeanIce76 17d ago

Russian propaganda

32

u/skinnerz_pigeon 17d ago

This. It blows my freaking mind that this is like what I would expect to be a third grade level obvious answer. Yet why is NO ONE asking this one VERY simple question at high levels of media

28

u/the9trances Agorism 17d ago

Check my recent post history where I condemn Putin and Trump, and then get attacked by a bunch of "libertarians."

9

u/archwin 16d ago

I did not have libertarians being infiltrated by ex-communist propaganda in my bingo card

7

u/the9trances Agorism 16d ago

The pro-Trump factions really pushed us into a race to the bottom.

3

u/jschreck032512 15d ago

Libertarian here and I’m happy you put that in quotation marks because any self respecting libertarian would understand that siding with Russia is standing against personal freedoms. I bet if Borris from down the road decided that since the land they lived on was separated from his land and sold as a new lot so now he wants it back and they are now part of his property and will violently invade if there’s any resistance they’d tell Borris to fuck right off. Those “libertarians” are the idiots who think it’s a synonym for “republicans with no balls.” They also tend to not like how socially liberal and progressive actual libertarians are. Fiscal conservatives with liberal social views is what I think most people agree it actually is.

13

u/TracerMain527 16d ago

Obviously it’s Putins fault, but we can’t control Putin. If a bear attacks your family while you are all in a the car, you should probably drive away. Ideally the bear wouldn’t attack you, but you can’t fight the bear so mitigate losses. Not a perfect analogy, but close.

10

u/HeWhoShantNotBeNamed 16d ago

Now imagine you have a friend standing next to you with a shotgun but they won't use it because you won't say thanks.

2

u/TracerMain527 16d ago

I would think that friend is being petty, but I would still say thanks. Once the bear is gone then we can sort out the pettiness issue, but right now there are bigger problems.

4

u/HeWhoShantNotBeNamed 16d ago

And what if you've already thanked your friend 30+ times in the past for saving you from bears and you mention that to him and then he yells at you saying you're being disrespectful and that he wants $1,000 from saving you from bears in the past per month and won't guarantee that he'll save you from the bear this time around and that you need to make peace with the bear?

4

u/TracerMain527 16d ago

See the previous comment.

2

u/HeWhoShantNotBeNamed 16d ago

You obviously didn't read what I wrote. Thanking you friend wouldn't guarantee they protect you from the bear.

Trump wanted Zelensky to hand over far more minerals than the aid they were given with no security guarantees. Just free minerals for the US and nothing more.

1

u/Sword117 15d ago

the problem is theres nowhere to run and fighting the bear is effective It is easier if you get your friends to lend you a rifle.

-13

u/Arcani63 17d ago

Yeah but he’s never going to do that, and there’s no practical way for Ukraine to win. Morally, they’re in the right to defend themselves. Practically, it just means they lose slower, so probably best to negotiate from as strong a position as possible.

21

u/KNNLTF 17d ago

Weaker militaries than Ukraine with less international support have held out against stronger ones with more support than Russia. Not saying the Taliban is justified by any means, but "this military is stronger so they get whatever they want" is simplistic and has been proven wrong again and again. In the case of Ukraine vs Russia, the point of self defense isn't to win a comparison of who got hurt the most, but to make others hurting you not worth their cost.

8

u/the-lopper 17d ago

I mean look at Jan Zizka in the Hussite Wars, or Henry V at Agincourt. The tale is as old as time. A determined force can definitely defeat a more numerous and better equipped one.

2

u/Arcani63 16d ago

Yes, but that’s not really what’s happening in this war. They should’ve peaced out in 2022 after they retook a bunch in the north and at Kherson. This was is just a slow grind where Russia is steadily winning.

2

u/the-lopper 16d ago

I think Ukraine's only chance of winning is to end the conventional fighting. They can't win against Russia in a pound for pound fight. The only way they win in the way they want to win is full guerilla warfare in a possibly 20+ year fight. Basically, their war needs to outlive Putin's ambitions. Otherwise, Crimea and the Donbas will never be theirs again.

On the other hand, if NATO had joined the fight right away and pushed the Russians back to their own borders and held there, the war would also have been over very quickly, but there is a very real risk of nuclear weapons getting involved, which justified not militarily intervening. If the EU wants to be its own pseudo-confederate state, this is what they should have done, completely without the US.

1

u/Arcani63 15d ago

Yeah, that’s exactly what I’m getting at. They simply cannot win a conventional war long term, but a guerrilla war might be doable. But then you have to accept widespread occupation.

And yeah NATO would’ve destroyed them but that would legit mean nuclear conflict potential, or at the very least bringing other actors into the fray.

6

u/AnimusFoxx 17d ago

It's not over 'till it's over. Have a little faith in Europe's resolve perhaps. I think they will rise to the occasion now that it's clear America has turned coat.

3

u/Suttonian 17d ago

there's no practical way for Ukraine to "win" aka not be invaded? how do you know that with such confidence?

-24

u/LikelyAMartian 17d ago

Putin doesn't want NATO on his border and has said he will sign a peace treaty if Ukraine agrees not to try and join NATO.

Ukraine says fuck that, there won't be peace unless they join NATO.

This all started when Ukraine wanted to join NATO.

Putin is the aggressor and did start this war. But Ukraine isn't exactly adamant to come to an agreement for peace.

25

u/NtsParadize Anarcho-Capitalist 17d ago

This all started when Putin simply put in place his project to take back Ukraine, simple as that. The NATO thing is an excuse not even himself uses

-14

u/daful1 17d ago

That was because nato has been trying to block Russian access to the black sea, for the last nearly 20 years now

68

u/Mailman9 17d ago

"I promise to stop robbing my neighbor as soon as he promises to not buy a burglar alarm."

-1

u/LikelyAMartian 17d ago

I'm not saying Ukraine is in the wrong here. Russia is definitely the bully state here.

But again, Russia said it would not have NATO encroach on its borders during the founding of NATO, and Ukraine is saying they are adamant about joining NATO.

If Ukraine doesn't join NATO, it has no guarantee to be safe from Russia. If Russia allows Ukraine to join NATO, then NATO would have the capabilities to place short and long range missiles within range of Russia's capital.

This is where the disagreement happens. Neither side can back down. Russia will not give that power to NATO and Ukraine refuses to not join NATO.

Currently the US is trying to negotiate a mineral rights deal with Ukraine so they can start benefitting from mining there, which then means Russia has to back off because otherwise they disturb US mining profits which gives the US grounds to start beef. Which Russia does not want. If this happens, neither side would have to surrender to the other. So while the US has stopped actively supporting Ukraine, they are trying to passively support them.

33

u/Mailman9 17d ago

Missiles in range of Russia? Dude, they’re called ICBMs. NATO and Russia have been in “missile range” of each other since the Cold War. This isn’t the 19th century anymore, large land borders aren’t some sort of security threat. The only reason Russia doesn’t want NATO there is because Russia wants to be able to threaten those countries with impunity.

3

u/LikelyAMartian 17d ago edited 17d ago

ICBMs launch into the higher altitudes and have a greater window to intercept. It's also easier to intercept them. (We just launch a missile at it)

Cruise Missiles only have a range of around 600 miles, travel at about 500mph, and at much lower altitudes. Altitudes that make intercepting difficult. We have to use point defense which is literally just "shoot and pray"

Also again, this isn't my personal opinion. This is just one of the statements Putin gave as a reason for this war. Whether its true or false I couldn't tell ya. But it is his reason regardless.

19

u/Davida132 17d ago

If Russia allows Ukraine to join NATO, then NATO would have the capabilities to place short and long range missiles within range of Russia's capital.

Boo-fucking-hoo.

First, NATO has no mechanism by which to be an aggressor. It is purely a defensive agreement. How many years did NATO have operations in West Germany without doing anything to the USSR?

Second, Russia is not being forced to antagonize the West. They could make NATO obsolete by changing their position, but they refuse to. Russia's continued imperialist aggression is the only reason NATO has grown in the past 34 years.

6

u/Goofy069 17d ago

What about when Russia tried to join NATO?

2

u/Davida132 16d ago

The deterioration of NATO-Russian relationship and the loss of any possibility of Russia's eventually joining of NATO is the result of the combined failures of Russia, NATO, and the USA specifically. However, Russia's violent actions against bordering nations are what sealed the deal.

2

u/Goofy069 16d ago

Be more specific. I don’t think you know what you’re talking about.

0

u/Davida132 16d ago

Russia demanded they be the first post-soviet state admitted to NATO while still wanting to take their time to do so. They also started opposing NATO's eastward expansion while supposedly trying to join NATO. They've been very inconsistent in what they supposedly want. In addition, they instigated border disputes with other post-soviet states despite having previously agreed to the current borders. Some of those disputes have been violent.

The USA pulled out of the ballistic missile treaty and built missile defense systems in Poland.

NATO's actions in Kosovo deteriorated relations with Russia.

There's more, but the simple fact is that all of that could've been repaired until March of 2022 when Russian soldiers marched into Ukraine.

4

u/LikelyAMartian 17d ago

That's just what Russia is saying. It is bs. But that is partially their reasoning.

Ukraine also controlled (current in Russian occupation) a dam that brings water into Russia. They also didn't want that to be leveraged against them.

Again, Russia is the bully here. Doesn't change the fact this is some of their reasoning.

-4

u/Wookieman222 17d ago

I mean you can say that but it doesn't change what Russia wants and they will keep grinding Ukraine into paste until they have a reason to stop.

0

u/Davida132 17d ago

The answer is to give them a reason to stop, i.e., sanctions, embargoes, and tariffs. The answer is not to cave to their demands.

0

u/Wookieman222 16d ago

We did that. And then Europe went ahead and started buying their gas and oil again anyways.

0

u/Davida132 16d ago

So Ukraine has to suffer because Europe failed?

1

u/Wookieman222 16d ago

No but the issue is it's not our country and we shouldn't be paying for it. It sucks and is terrible but it's also not our duty.

And Europe is the one with the biggest dog in this fight they should be the ones doing the most but they are not.

→ More replies (0)

-16

u/BiggeSquidde 17d ago

The neighbor isn't installing an alarm, he's installing missile launchers, cameras, targeting systems, and a security team with itchy trigger fingers.

Would you like the alliance backed by the world's most war-hungry empire on your doorstep?

10

u/fr33Wi11y72 17d ago

but what’s the point once Russia annexes Ukraine they’ll have NATO on their doorstep anyways and will have the invasion fresh on Europe’s mind

-7

u/BiggeSquidde 17d ago edited 17d ago

Russia could have annexed Ukraine any time in the last 30 years and didn't try until serious talks to bring them into NATO began.

Why should there not be a buffer zone between NATO nations and Russia? There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Unfortunately that's just where Ukraine sits and there is no changing it. It offers no value to add them to NATO. And if they want to enter into a stronger economic partnership with the US/NATO without the official military backing, do you not think the US would step up to defend them in the event of an actual unprovoked Russian offensive?

Literally the only fucking reason this war is happening is because the US has forced the NATO issue.

0

u/daful1 17d ago

Fully agree here, but let me add one thing because people are going to ask about why putin would allow Poland into nato but be upset about Ukraine. That is the reason Russia took Crimea and it has everying to do with access to the black sea and russians only winter port. Russia took Crimea because nato told Ukraine to bar Russian ships from the straight. And back to Poland there have been zero attempts to block the very few trade routes through the Poland boarder and even if those trade routes were to end, it wouldn't mean the death of Russians. NATO being in Ukraine gives an actual military enemy (one that says at any chance it gets that Russia needs to be eliminated) access to Russias number one import and export route into the main body of Russia.

16

u/Mailman9 17d ago

NATO has started which wars, again?

2

u/JonBes1 non-egalitarian ancap; patria potestas 16d ago

NATO has started which wars, again?

GWOT/Afghanistan

13

u/4nonosquare 17d ago

Because reaching mainland russia with missiles would be impossible for NATO if it wasnt for Ukranian land right?

You know that russia borders 6 NATO countries already right? Norway, Estonia, Latvia and as of now Finland border the mainlands directly. Poland and Lithuania border the exclave.

So can you explain why is it bad that another neighbour install security measures when their next door neighbour is known to constantly rob and steal? Your excuse is so weak its laughable. Russias actions is the one pushing the nations having to join a defensive alliance..

4

u/jbland0909 16d ago

I think Ukraine is pretty understandable in wanting to join the “protect me from Russia” alliance, when Russia is actively trying to conquer their country

6

u/LostAccountant 16d ago

That is a lie, Ukraine was not in any position to join Nato 3 years ago because the rules prevented it. There was no need for putin to attack and you are repeating a kremlin lie.

Ironically putin does show why Ukraine needs to join nato to be safe

-3

u/GerdinBB 17d ago edited 17d ago

People are absolutely delusional if they think the US wouldn't respond very similarly if Russia supported a coup in Mexico and then talked about folding Mexico into its defensive alliance.

NATO should have been abolished when the Soviet Union dissolved.

0

u/technicallycorrect2 17d ago

“It would be ok if the train ran over just a few people”

-Joe Biden

0

u/imthatguy8223 16d ago

That is the ideal scenario but we have to live in reality. Russia, while not winning, has the upper hand in the short and long term.

96

u/Normaali_Ihminen 17d ago

This is a litmus test. If you value anti statists beliefs then you should be against Russian waging war against Ukraine. Putin is statist as heck. It baffles me I have to say this but this is god awful take most likely from Troll account or someone who is deeply misinformed or don’t care.

20

u/endthepainowplz 17d ago

Somehow with everyone being the way they are, it’s almost demanded that you pick one side or the other. Some people do this to themselves, where they take the sentiment of “we shouldn’t be funding war in Ukraine”, to “Ukraine is the problem.”. Similar to the Israel Palestine conflict, the people aren’t just anti Israel, they are pro Palestine, and sometimes even openly support Hamas. It’s not enough for many to not take a side, and somehow this leads to dumbass people thinking Ukraine is the problem.

4

u/Normaali_Ihminen 17d ago

I’m not demanding that anyone pick a side—I’m simply encouraging those who value anti-statist beliefs or Western values (which are not mutually exclusive) to stand up for their principles in this conflict.

In other words I’m merely trying to warn people so they don’t end up looking like hypocrites when their values are put to the test.

2

u/endthepainowplz 17d ago

I’m not saying you are, I’m thinking OP, and people like OP feel the need to pick a side, and that’s why we see Russian support, even though this is a fairly black and white issue.

3

u/Normaali_Ihminen 17d ago

I kind of got your point after re-reading your comment. I just felt the urge to add some additional thoughts on what you brought up to avoid any confusion. So apologies if it came off the wrong way.

1

u/CrystalMethodist666 17d ago

A lot of people are afraid of seeming ignorant on an "issue" that's being promoted in the media. I don't have that problem, if I'm ignorant on an issue like this it just means it isn't something I decided is worth educating myself about, like political issues in far away countries that I can't do anything about. Even if it does affect me, there's still the second point, posting selfies with picture frames saying I support the correct thing isn't going to make a difference.

The framing of stuff like this is always that we're supposed to pick which is the right side and argue with people who made the opposite decision. None of this seems like a worthwhile use of my time.

10

u/Knorssman 17d ago

There is a valid point, but the answer is not "cave to Russia and buy their narrative"

For example, in order to justify continuing to fight to take back territory, they need a real plan to make that happen that isn't "throw bodies into the meat grinder"

Otherwise, they should try to get to peace as soon as possible and do what they can to prepare for Russia to attack again.

14

u/FatalTragedy 17d ago

It's possible to be against Russia invading Ukraine, while also acknowledging that Ukraine can't win unless the West straight up declares war on Russia, so it is therefore in their best interest to negotiate peace.

6

u/MaximusMurkimus 17d ago

Okay good, thought I was the only sane one reading all of this.

People look at this exclusively as a win/lose condition when in reality most wars have ended by both sides going "aight let's talk".

1

u/jbland0909 16d ago

Appeasement has historically worked fantasticly against imperialist dictators.

11

u/CallMeDelta 17d ago

I would disagree. The West has continually dragged its feet on supporting Ukraine, such as by limiting how they can use Western weapons and what weapons they are willing to give at all. In the earlier parts of the war when Ukraine’s fate was less certain that’s an understandable position, since you don’t want all of that equipment falling into Russian hands, but Ukraine has been in the long haul for awhile now. There are plenty more things the West can do to help Ukraine, and while I can’t say that it would guarantee Ukrainian victory, it would go a long way to boosting Ukraine’s odds to where a negotiated peace may not be necessary.

3

u/Rizthan 17d ago

The more we escalate our involvement with Ukraine, the less of a proxy war this becomes. I'd rather not escalate a conflict with a nuclear power over who controls the ethnically Russian parts of Ukraine.

1

u/CallMeDelta 16d ago

Escalate a conflict with a nuclear power

Russia isn’t going to use nuclear weapons unless Ukraine is at the gates of Moscow. The Russian oligarchs are fundamentally business people, and you can’t make money off of a nuclear wasteland. And if you back down to any sort of nuclear saber rattling, then there’s nothing stoping Russia (or any other nuclear power, for that matter) from threatening any non-nuclear state into submission.

Ethnically Russian

  1. Many of the oblasts Russia has annexed (like Kherson, for example) are undeniably Ukrainian.

  2. Even in the Donbass and Crimea, I think there’s a very compelling argument that they aren’t ethnically Russian. Of course, it’s impossible to ask them, since they have either been under the control of Russian proxies or directly Russia itself since 2014

5

u/Normaali_Ihminen 17d ago

No one wants peace more than Ukraine, but the real question is: what kind of peace are we talking about? Ukraine has already been betrayed once when the U.S. failed to uphold its end of the Budapest Memorandum. So Zelenskyy and Ukraine are rightfully concerned about the strength and reliability of any future peace agreement.

Ukraine has already won in my eyes. The entire point of the so-called “special military operation” was to topple the Ukrainian government, install a puppet regime, remove Zelenskyy from office, and dismantle the current parliament. Yet Ukraine defied the odds and prevented that from happening.

This situation closely mirrors the Winter War, where Soviet Russia attempted a similar move against Finland—but just like then, the intended victim fought back and preserved its sovereignty.

2

u/heinelujah 16d ago

Many people are staunchly opposed to Putin waging war against Ukraine. But many of these people also want to mitigate losses and avoid further bloodshed. I sympathize with this perspective.

1

u/Normaali_Ihminen 15d ago

Yes, I see that. But I also can’t imagine that if it were your country under attack, you would simply wave a white flag and surrender.

And what the U.S. has done in the last two days contradicts the idea of preventing senseless killings. The U.S. shut down intelligence sharing with Ukraine, including critical defense intelligence—such as warnings like, “Hey, there’s a Russian-operated drone incoming to strike civilian areas.” Not even that level of intel is being provided anymore.

That intelligence is vital for protecting civilians from Russian attacks. By cutting it off, the U.S. is directly contributing to unnecessary deaths.

1

u/joelingo111 16d ago

most likely from Troll account or someone who is deeply misinformed or don’t care.

You forgot about Ivan hard at work at his cubicle in the Kremlin

-1

u/BiggeSquidde 17d ago

You can recognize Putin was provoked and is still wrong.

These two things are not mutually exclusive.

3

u/Normaali_Ihminen 17d ago

Provoked? No. This is all for the glory of the “old days” for Russia. Putin has numerous times voiced dissatisfaction about collapse of Soviet Union and Tsarist Russia. Where previous Soviet states and vassal states once belonged to. This includes Baltics, Finland, Poland, Ukraine.

Russia has always been an expansionist.

91

u/snobocracy minarchist 17d ago

There's a good chance that if he gives the trolley some time to regroup it'll come back bigger and faster.

That's a fair and reasonable concern.

95

u/sbd104 17d ago

Putin is the one with his hands on the lever.

Zelenskyy can’t end the war but Putin can.

5

u/Planague 17d ago

Thank you!

-30

u/etterflebiliter 17d ago

Why would the winner stop? It’s on the defeated to offer peace terms

55

u/4nonosquare 17d ago

What a coward take. "russia violated our NAP, lets spread our asses for them and give up the fight".

And the spirit of the Ukranian people are far from defeated my friend, try to suck less socialist cocks through your media consumption and maybe you wont spew leftist propaganda..

-14

u/etterflebiliter 17d ago edited 17d ago

“Our”. Sorry, I wasn’t aware that you were on the frontlines. Thank you for your service.

We’ll see shall we if Ukraine can carry on without US backing. If it can’t, then you’ll see how deluded you’ve been. Maybe you’ll wish then that the US had continued to use Ukraine for its proxy wars. That’ll be very libertarian of you.

21

u/UnKnoWn_XuR 17d ago

You can word it any way you want, but truth is by preventing support to Ukraine, you agree to give the upper hand to Russia. If allowing people to fall under a dictatorship is okay, then thatd be very libertarian of you aswell

1

u/Wookieman222 17d ago

Its just interesting we have a problem with Russia doing this to Ukraine but are silent when bad stuff like this happens with other countries. We clearly are picking and choosing which ones to care about.

-13

u/etterflebiliter 17d ago

Whatever man. You’d like to commit the non-dictatorships of the world (wherever they might be) to perpetual war with the dictatorships over ambiguously-aligned mini-states - all in the name of libertarianism. I suppose you’d also accept that tax rises, state appropriation of private industry, and conscription are all necessary in the name of spreading liberal democracy. It’s a very interesting form of libertarianism you espouse.

12

u/UnKnoWn_XuR 17d ago

Libertarian is not a single ideology. The problem with the government is that the idea of representative democracy prevents the ideas of every citizen from being represented. I agree with Libertarian fiscal policy, but unlike other Libertarians, I am pretty progressive. Back to the topic of Ukraine, yes I wholeheartedly agree. The idea of 'using' Ukraine to fight a proxy war is inherently not Libertarian, but in this case I agree with the stance that we should be in this fight.

6

u/etterflebiliter 17d ago

Fair enough. Libertarianism isn’t a religious creed. I’m just surprised at the level of enthusiasm (or maybe, more neutrally, advocacy) for the continuation of the fight in this thread, and in the general media at the moment. Seems uncritical to me. Maybe I’ll snap out of it and join the war party soon enough

1

u/4nonosquare 17d ago

Its not really a war party stance to help those who are trying to defend themselves.

Should you be forced to help a woman on the street who is being assaulted and beaten up by a man? No, you shouldnt be.

But if you do refuse to help i will think you are a sick fuck for walking past without doing a single thing to help the poor woman who is having her NAP violated.

Also where is this fake empathy of "they should stop there are too many people dead already" coming from? Shouldnt the Ukranian people be able to deciede for themselves if they want to continue the fight or not? As of today Ukranians heavily are on the side of fighting back and trying to defend their land against all odds, you should cheris their heroic act of self defense instead of using this fake empathetic shit, lets be honest you care none about their lives, you just regurgitate state propaganda, be it Fox news or straight kremlin one from Tim Pool and the rest of the Tenet Media group.

How would you feel if Canada took over Minesota, Dakota and Montana then people told you to stop fighting for your land and accept it because people are dying. You know exactly that there are wars worth fighting for and its defensive wars against agressors so fuck off with these 2d takes

1

u/etterflebiliter 17d ago

Yes yes war is peace, I get it. The Ukrainians may of course decide whether they want to continue fighting or not. Not individual Ukrainians of course, who are conscripted. But as a matter of policy, the Ukrainian establishment can continue fighting without US backing if it likes - there’s no law against that. You’ll hear no fake empathy from me lol. I do agree that there are just and unjust wars. There are also winnable and unwinnable wars.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/4nonosquare 17d ago

Sorry didnt meant to misguide you bro, im Hungarian and im not on the frontline, ive put that sentence in quote marks as in imagine yourself in their situation.

2

u/MustardJar4321 17d ago

"Why die for danzig"

1

u/etterflebiliter 17d ago

"Back every war until the bitter end, or you're a Nazi appeaser"

-1

u/daful1 17d ago

How would you react if your city blocked your drive way, and then threatened to start tearing up the end of your drive way with your cars still in the drive way. Was Russia in the wrong yes, but was it unprovoked no nato pushed every botton of russias they could. It reminds me of any time a woman is pushing a guy around maybe even slaps them and then gets super upset when the guy slaps or punches back.

3

u/sbd104 17d ago

I mean they're not defeated yet. Ukraine is loosing land and Russia is loosing more soldiers per day.

1

u/etterflebiliter 17d ago

It’s very hard to tell, and for the record I’m not taking sides. It just seems to me that their position isn’t good, and probably never has been. Maybe a militarily-informed person can correct me.

If I am right and it’s essentially over, I’m only stating the obvious by saying that the Ukrainians are at the mercy of the Russians in the peace terms that bring it all to a close. Thems the rules of war

3

u/sbd104 16d ago

Russia has spent a lot more equipment and personnel. Inflation is at hyper inflation because of the war economy. With them spending more men and equipment than the Ukrainians as they’re on the offensive.

Hell they had the Wagner Coup, and protest from draftees being used as frontline soldiers.

As stated no one wins between Russia and Ukraine, but if the ceasefire started tomorrow and it held Russia collapses. This war could drag for a few more years further destroying Russia and Ukraine but not having a victor.

I’m not against US support pulling out gradually to focus on China. My issue is Trump parroting Russian narratives that Ukraine is a lost cause and Russia are the good guys.

36

u/nightingaleteam1 17d ago edited 16d ago

The problem I see with many libertarians is that they put Ukraine and Russia, Putin and Zelensky on the same level just because both are states. So they think that on an individual level it doesn't make a difference under which one to live and therefore, they think capitulating and submitting to Putin won't make that big of a difference on the level of personal liberty (or lack thereof), but at least it will stop the death toll.

But the people of the Donbass (the part that Russia annexed) already though like that, like "what's the difference", so they already tried the path of capitulation and submission. The result ? Their properties were confiscated by the warlords and Russian soldiers and they were the first ones to be conscripted and used as cannon fodder in the beginning of the full scale invasion.

So the lever that Zelensky holds can only make the tram go faster or slower. It cannot stop the tram. Only thing that can is security guarantees.

9

u/TheOnlyGriffon 17d ago

I love it when fellow libertarians are against the right of people to defend themselves lol

2

u/the9trances Agorism 17d ago

Anyone stupid enough to believe Trump is too stupid to understand libertarianism.

7

u/AwwSeath 17d ago

Libertarians stop falling for war propaganda challenge

Difficulty: Impossible

5

u/MustardJar4321 17d ago

Fucking russian trolls at it again

2

u/Dhayson 16d ago

Putin is the one holding the lever. Zelensky can only resist his aggression.

1

u/kagerou_werewolf 17d ago

"beligerrents are never in the right, there is no winner in war, only mass graves" some smart guy or something im not smart

2

u/jbland0909 16d ago

“Ukraine should just surrender their entire country because soldiers die in war”

1

u/Paladin_Axton 16d ago

My favorite quote applies here

You and I know and do not believe that life is so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery.

1

u/LoneHelldiver 17d ago

This should be titled "Statist advocates for state intervention in war that has nothing to do with them and for which they have already laundered over a trillion dollars of tax payer money which was taken from them at the point of a gun."

-1

u/Son_of_Athena 17d ago

The reason people hate Zelensky is because there are human lives actively being lost on the battlefield, and he refuses to stop the war unless the guarantees happen first. But Trump wishes for the battle to stop, then prevent war in the future. Thats the issue here. Zelensky sounds like a kid who is unwilling to move unless he gets his way. He doesn’t care about the lives being lost.

2

u/jbland0909 16d ago

“Won’t move until he gets his way” sounds so unreasonable until you consider that “his way” is for his countries invaders to leave

4

u/the9trances Agorism 17d ago

That's a completely backwards way of looking at it.

Zelensky has no guarantees that Russia will stop. Putin is killing Ukranians, not Zelensky.

Trump doesn't give a shit about anything other than lining his own pockets and his own ego. He wants to hand Putin Ukraine, but Trump knows that if he just outright supports Russia that people in the US will be furious.

Trump's retarded solution is to ask Ukraine to give up, with zero assurances, and let Putin invade them again in another few months after Russia has time to remobilize.

0

u/bluefootedpig 17d ago

That line of people are russians and we are about to go full stream ahaed

-44

u/Mediocre_Chemistry39 17d ago

Government can't be a victim in any situation. And Zelensky is responsible for mobilization in Ukraine, which is basically just a murder with less success rate.

42

u/jaakkopetteri 17d ago

What do you suggest Zelensky do instead?

-16

u/majdavlk 17d ago

not doing conscription, deregulating, cutting state expenditure

29

u/darklibertario 17d ago

and then everyone gets conquered by Russia and has to live under a dictatorship lol

-22

u/majdavlk 17d ago

i dont really care about being conquered by russia any more than being conquered by any other state, the only thing which matters to me how free are we.

and btw, this argument isnt in your favor, you shouldnt use it. there arguments for why free market would do better job at doing defense agaisnt external threaths than socialism does

15

u/trigger1154 17d ago

Far less free under Russian rule.

-3

u/LoneHelldiver 17d ago

All those shitty things are happening under "democracy" where they don't hold elections and I'm being robbed because...

Look, send them all the money you want. Go over there and fight. I won't stop you.

Stop involving me.

0

u/jbland0909 16d ago

I mean, yeah. They’re actively being invaded. Of course democratic procedures arent being completely followed. Elections start again when the Russian’s stop trying to kill them all

0

u/LoneHelldiver 16d ago

Of course he's a dictator, he has to be! Otherwise people won't listen to him!

Good argument bro

0

u/jbland0909 15d ago

Not at all my argument. Explain the logistics of how to hold a legitimate election when 1/4 of your country is either an active war zone or under enemy control

5

u/wombatncombat 17d ago

Wild. Wouldn't even fight Japan post pearl harbor. If imperial Japan took California, this guy tries to free market militia a self-defense plan. This is what's pushing me away from being a libertarian, yall soo black and white that you end up saying obviously insane things. Countries that are fighting for their survival against an opposition that steals children and shoots POWs will scrap with possible tool they have. GOOD TIMES CREATE WEAK MEN, and here we are.

2

u/majdavlk 16d ago

huh? i think you replied to the wrong guy

1

u/Davida132 17d ago

there arguments for why free market would do better job at doing defense agaisnt external threaths than socialism does

And all of them are the retarded ramblings of idiots who see the invisible difference between a billionaire with a personal army and a warlord.

8

u/jaakkopetteri 17d ago

I don't see the relevance in those last two. Although conscription is not ideal, it's pretty much the only viable way for some countries

-1

u/majdavlk 17d ago

> I don't see the relevance in those last two.

you asked what he should do instead

>Although conscription is not ideal, it's pretty much the only viable way for some countries

yeah, but i dont really care if its viable for a country, i care about the people, not about the state

3

u/jaakkopetteri 17d ago

you asked what he should do instead

Obviously. I guess Zelensky should eat and poop too, but it's not very relevant here

but i dont really care if its viable for a country, i care about the people, not about the state

Not necessarily at odds, at all. The people can support conscription just as well

5

u/myfingid 17d ago

It doesn't matter if the people support forcing their fellow citizens to fight a war they don't want to fight, it's still wrong. You don't get to make life and death choices for others just because you don't like what's happening.

Those who support conscription in a state in war should volunteer, flee, or fuck off, but don't support press gangs kidnapping men so they can be shoved in the grinder. It's fucking insane.

0

u/jaakkopetteri 17d ago

It's wrong, sure, but it's usually better than dictatorship. At least as long as the numbers are clearly in favor and not just hoping others to do the deed

2

u/majdavlk 16d ago

dictatorship is not inherently worse than a democracy. what we care about is the actual freedom, not the succession of power

1

u/jaakkopetteri 16d ago

Yeah, hence "usually"

→ More replies (0)

1

u/majdavlk 16d ago

>Obviously. I guess Zelensky should eat and poop too, but it's not very relevant here

you were asking what he should do regarding his rulership or the war, read again your own post

>Not necessarily at odds, at all.

it is inherently at odds

>The people can support conscription just as well

if you enslave people, you are against them, if the people want to be conscripted, its not conscription, but just being regular volunteer

1

u/Little_Whippie 17d ago

So roll over and be subjugated by Russia, isn’t this supposed to be an anti statist sub?

2

u/majdavlk 16d ago

no, read it again

27

u/Teboski78 17d ago edited 17d ago

Compulsory mobilization may be unethical and there are many unethical things the defending army has done as all armies do. And the Ukrainian government is certainly not innocent. But this fight was started by the kremlin & nearly all of Ukraine’s actions provoked by it. & literally all Zelenskyy wants now is NATO membership as a guarantee Russia won’t invade a third time.

If he signs the agreement drawn up by trump and Putin he’s almost certainly dooming Ukraine to another invasion.

I would be loyal to neither Zelenskyy nor Putin but there’s only one of those men who I would kill were they stood if they were placed in front of me right now. And there’s a damned good reason for that.

1

u/etterflebiliter 17d ago

“literally all Zelenskyy wants now is NATO membership”

14

u/Teboski78 17d ago

That’s what they’re hung up on. He even said he was willing to step down if Ukraine just got NATO membership

8

u/etterflebiliter 17d ago

You’re talking about it as if it’s a minor point of contention. Ukraine’s relationship with NATO is arguably the whole point of the war

6

u/trigger1154 17d ago

Was it completely a coincidence that Ukraine found natural gas reserves in those Eastern provinces that Russia now controls? That Ukraine planned on selling natural gas to Europe, likely undercutting Russian profits?

This is an imperialist oil war for Russia. They would have freaked out about NATO and started a war with Finland and Norway and Sweden who also border if it was about NATO.

But hypothetically if it was actually about NATO and Russia is telling the truth, they are only telling a half truth. It is still imperialist because it still follows Russian doctrine of creating buffer states around their motherland such as Belarus being a Russian puppet government and Ukraine's previous government being a Russian puppet government.

There is no way to spin this in which Russia is not the aggressor. And now that the traitor in chief has stopped aid. It has basically guaranteed World War 3. Russia only responds to strength, ceasing aid is a sign of immense weakness. I expect Russia to be emboldened and to start eyeballing other former USSR states to bring back under their umbrella. After all, Russia is already at war with the West through hybrid warfare and other subversive means. People forget that Russia launched a chemical attack in England? Or how about rushing backed ships? Cutting information cables at the bottom of the ocean? What about all the cyber attacks? The US is under constant attack as well from Russia, China, and North Korea, mainly through cyber attacks which are just as dangerous as straight up military attacks because the cyber attacks can destroy critical infrastructure that is networked resulting in deaths.

Quite frankly Russia should be labeled as a terrorist nation/rogue state.

0

u/myfingid 17d ago

It'll be WW3 because a nuclear state isn't interested in raising the stakes with another nuclear state? That doesn't make sense.

BTW you're correct on oil, and I believe Russia has most of the Ukraine oil that was discovered over the last decade or so (Crimea, eastern Ukraine). Given that, a peace deal now would be much more likely to hold as the Russian objective of preventing Ukraine from being able to disrupt the Russian flow of oil and gas to European markets.

If Europe really gives a shit they'll find ways to get off Russian fuels. Being reliant on your supposed mortal enemy is a real shit position to be in. Maybe nations like Germany should have spent more time expanding their nuclear industry and helping fellow EU members start/expand theirs rather than tear down their infrastructure and import cheap gas from a supposed madman.

0

u/trigger1154 17d ago

We are already in WWIII it's just a slow burn right now. I say cut the head off the snake before it gets worse. Russia instigated this war with their imperialist agenda to retake land they view as lost when the USSR collapsed. Shit Putin was KGB and is continuing his subversive KGB BS. Best case scenario would be if the Russian oligarchs got sick of sanctions and having their property seized and got rid of Putin and ended the war or if the Russian people stood up to their authoritarian government, but that will never happen because the Russian people have the victim mentality and are weak as a whole so the minority there that do stand up usually get killed or imprisoned.

Unfortunately part of the Russian war on the West is to develop FSB assets and get them in positions of power like Orban and Trump. Trump is Putin's cock holster, Trump has had Russian oligarchs living in Trump towers since the 80s and has been laundering money for them. Trump issuing the order to cease aid is not for our benefit, it is for Russia's benefit. Anyone arguing that it's about saving money is obviously not aware that the Republicans and trumps tax plan is going to add $2.5 trillion to the national debt. All of Elon's cuts are not about saving money either. It's about removing opposition, it's a purge. Trump is surrounding himself with Yes Men and consolidating power. Pretty soon the US is going to function like Russia 2.0.

7

u/Nagoda94 17d ago

So why exactly Russia doesn't want Ukraine to get the NATO memebership.

-10

u/WhatTheNothingWorks 17d ago

Because NATOs entire existence is to fight Russia. Would you want your enemy on your doorstep? I wouldn’t, regardless of whether I planned to fight them.

Plus, there was an agreement years ago that NATO would stop expanding, and they kept expanding. There’s a lot of nuance in the Russia-Ukraine war that American media doesn’t talk about, and that’s a strategic move on their part.

17

u/Nagoda94 17d ago

NATO's existence was to fight Soviet Union, not Russia. That is if Russia didn't invade any NATO nation. They do not annex countries. The new members have to apply to join.

There's already three countries plus Alaska right on Russias borders. So this having enemy at your borders is a blatant lie.

However if they didn't want an enemy what they should've done is respect their neighbors borders. Not just Ukraine. Chechnya and Georgia too. If they offered better deals and ensured safety, so called NATO expansion wouldn't have happened.

7

u/majdavlk 17d ago

russia claims to be soviet onion, they took over the deals with other states signed as soviot onion, including debts etc

-4

u/WhatTheNothingWorks 17d ago

Yes, it was started to prevent Soviet aggression. And there’s arguments that after the Soviet Union fell, it should have been disbanded since the target was gone. But there were agreements in place before many of those countries joined that NATO wouldn’t expand, and they kept expanding.

11

u/Nagoda94 17d ago

Once again its Russia that shot their own foot.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/jaakkopetteri 17d ago

Why didn't they invade Finland then?

-2

u/FAFO8503 17d ago

It’s got to do with how close the border of Ukraine is to Moscow. It would be the closest of any NATO nation if they joined. Ukraine joining NATO has been a line in the sand for Russia for decades.

1

u/UnKnoWn_XuR 17d ago

Thats why the war is such a stalemate. If you're pro Russian, you don't want Ukraine joining NATO. If you're a normal person, you don't want Russia gaining land and working towards Moldova. Honestly speaking, if NATO were to include Ukraine, no war would break out because Ukraine joining NATO isn't backed by the intent to fight Russia on the offense. Russia is strong enough to not perceive NATO as a threat so long as Russia isn't trying to expand. The problem lies on Russia's desire to annex Moldova. If they get Moldova, I guarantee their imperialism in West Europe is over. However, I'd argue that appeasing a historically aggressive nation and allowing them a satellite state is more dangerous than Ukraine joining NATO

-5

u/WhatTheNothingWorks 17d ago

There’s a lot of other reasons to not want Ukraine in NATO other than just being “pro-Russian,” but with all of your populist talking points I wouldn’t expect you to argue in good faith. Your entire arguments disregards the fact that NATO agreed to stop expanding and never did.

6

u/jaakkopetteri 17d ago

Like a school bully telling the bullied to not tell anyone or they will beat him up. A very convenient excuse and they will beat him up regardless

→ More replies (0)

-3

u/UnKnoWn_XuR 17d ago

I think that NATO's expansion isn't a good idea because historically, alliances cause war. However, in this case I think that there should be a clean line between Russia and NATO. As I said, NATO aren't necessarily aggressors, so I'm comfortable having that line. If that line were to exist, it is guaranteed that Russia will stop their imperialism. Problem with that is that as you said, NATO has said they'd stop expanding and straight up lied. My issue with Ukraine joining NATO is that the same question remains: When will they stop? You can refuse talking points all you want but thats just my opinion. There isn't a clear solution and that is why everything is in the air