US Senator Lindsay Graham has just tweeted an article titled “Greta Thunberg sets sail with Gaza flotilla that aims to break Israeli naval blockade,” adding the comment, “Hope Greta and her friends can swim!”
Australian Zionist think tanker Arsen Ostrovsky somehow outdid Graham, tweeting “Oh look, the little jihadi Greta Thunberg is trying to get into Gaza, to show solidarity with Hamas. It would be so sad if something were to happen to her flotilla…”
There’s not a lot that can shock me about Israel and its supporters these days. But if you’d traveled back in time a few years ago it would be hard to explain to someone how we got to a timeline that includes Israel supporters openly advocating the assassination of Greta Thunberg.
Who cares what Russia is “entitled” to? What matters is that placing hostile military bases on a long, geographically soft border is obviously going to be perceived by them as a threat to their national security, and so they acted to prevent that from becoming a reality. It is not about some moralist stance, but the simple realistic calculation that an encroaching enemy military alliance will be responded to if deemed necessary and possible.
So you accept that Russia is in the wrong in invading Ukraine?
Yes, but geopolitics is not about simple moralistic judgements. What matters is that US and NATO did everything they possibly could to provoke that reaction in order to a) damage Russia and b) seize control of Ukraine’s assets. The US wanted Russia to invade Ukraine. It wants the war to continue indefinitely, no matter how many Ukrainians are killed. The US’s objective is not a free, democratic, independent Ukraine, but a subservient, reactionary, militarized neocolony whose resources and labor are siphoned up by US capitalists. Arming Ukraine does nothing to protect the Ukrainian people - it prolongs their suffering with no real chance of liberation, because even if they win they will fall under the US’s absolute control.
To everything but your last sentence, possibly (though citation needed) but you forget the context of this conversation which is people dunking on Greta Thunberg for supporting Ukraine.
To your last sentence, do you think Russia will go home and return its stolen territory if Ukraine disarms?
There is simply no scenario where Ukraine gets back Crimea. Returning the eastern border oblasts is nearly as unlikely. It does not matter if Ukraine disarms or not. We cannot deal in fantastical outcomes - we need to focus on what the best path forward under the current circumstances is. For Ukraine, that’s an immediate end to the war, even at the cost of those territories. After that, the question is - what relationship does Ukraine have with the US/NATO and Russia? If they move closer to the US, they will be degraded to a pathetic rump state where the rights of the people are systematically trampled in service of American capitalism. Russia is by no means a global good guy, but they do tend to treat their partner states better than the US treats theirs, and so the sensible move would be to ditch the current (Nazi-infested) government and align more closely with Russia. It would be in Russia’s interest to have a relatively independent Ukraine with the economic strength not to rely on the US. That is, in fact, what the people of Ukraine voted for when electing Zelensky - but the US trampled that and successfully provoked Russia into war with Ukraine, sidelining Ukrainian agency entirely specifically because it didn’t align with US geostrategic priorities.
If we stop giving Ukraine weapons, Russia will just take more of Ukraine. They want conquest. You are literally yourself arguing for Ukraine to become a vassal state of Russia because you know that’s the only thing Russia would tolerate. You are basically agreeing with Russia that Russia is entitled to Ukraine.
The war started because Russia cannot tolerate an independent Ukraine. You are ignoring Ukraine’s agency. You claim that the US provoked Russia somehow (after Zelensky was elected?) but didn’t explain how.
Why do you people always care more about imaginary lines in the sand over actual people’s lives?
You are literally arguing for both Ukraine and Russia to be even less - completely subjugated colonies of NATO.
The war started after a coup against the Ukrainian government, because it was a blasts attempt to bring NATO military to Russia’s borders. The rest of the world has every right to defend itself against NATO.
“Why do you people always care more about imaginary lines in the sand over actual people’s lives?”
Russia can stop the war at any time but they have continually broken ceasefires.
Ukrainians are fighting this war willingly. Who are we to say that they shouldn’t?
There is a fascist dictatorship on one side of that line and a liberal state on the other.
Whenever that line advances in a certain direction, Ukrainian kids get abducted by Russia.
NATO (including Ukraine) can end this war and many other ones at any time, as well. They can stop their subjugation of Korea, Iraq, Syria, Palestine, etc. They can stop committing terrorist attacks and war crimes in Russia. They can stop doing coups.
Citation needed.
So ‘willingly’ that they fight military recruiters.
Even if what you claim here (very vaguely and with no citations) can be said to be true, that doesn’t override the fact that Russia is in the right to defend itself against NATO.
SS troops fought willingly. Who ate we to say they shouldn’t have? /s
Well, given that Ukraine is fond of swastikas and venerates Bandera - an enthusiastic nazi collaborator and Hitler’s pen pal, - and does stuff like collapse bridges onto civilian passenger trains and just in general, and has helped ISIS conquer Syria, and has participated in the invasion of Iraq, we can only conclude that you are knowingly supporting the fascist dictatorship (not that the word ‘dictatorship’ means anything).
‘Children should be forced to live in war zones instead of being evacuated’ is a very bizarre and fascist take.
Ukraine joining NATO is not independence. In fact you lose autonomy the second you join an exploitative organization like that.
Citation needed
Reddit
Turns out that most nation states only have the “agency” that is afforded to them by other more powerful states. Cuba is probably the perfect example of this.
We can sit here and say that’s bad as much as we like, but that’s not going to change actual reality.
The purpose of institutions like the EU is too stop this. NATO could become this too once the IA fucks off. To defend from both an imperialist Russia and an imperialist US.
Ah yes, and the purpose of the nazi Axis was to stop colonial subjugation of weaker countries, and not to carry out stuff like the Lebensraum. /s
The EU are literally some of the main perpetrators of this sort of subjugation.
Literally the main perpetrators of this stuff.
Hilarious.