That’s a very stupid premise. You think Ukraine should surrender now only to be surely destroyed later. You think that is preferable to fighting for their freedom.
I don’t know what kind of coward thinks in such terms. No offense.
I have seen this account commenting on other posts relating to Ukraine / Russia war. Always the same premise that Ukraine back down, leave itself unprotected and it will be all good. Obviously totally ignoring prior history or the fact Russia can coexist with other fully armed NATO neighbours at it other borders without invading them.
You could drive yourself mad arguing with these nitwits so best to ignore and move on.
Don’t ignore them and move on. At least give them a private tag of “Russian shill” or similar so it is easy to identify and call them out next time so others don’t waste their time.
I am warning you now, if you insult me again we are done. I enjoy having conversations with people no matter if I agree with them or not but only as long as it remain civil.
Yes, surrendering now is better than losing more and more territories later.
Ukraine will not be destroyed later, it will be destroyed if it doesn’t make peace now.
If you’re so brave, why aren’t you at the front lines defending them?
I didn’t know I was insulting you. I was insulting a cowards premise. If you recognize yourself in this, it’s not an insult, but a recognition of your character.
If Ukraine surrenders with the concessions that Putin wants they are destroyed. If I attack you and tell you I will stop if you give me everything, plus you can’t call for help, then that means you are mine. You will retain nothing. You will be under my complete control. Now and in the future. You are finished.
You know, you can also support cancer research and not be a doctor, just like having a brain doesn’t require you to use it, apparently, unfortunately.
I don’t want to interact with people like yourself, bye.
Let’s be serious, if Mexico was about to join a Russia or China led alliance, would the U.S. not invade Mexico? The U.S. would impose neutrality to Mexico. You can also refer to the Cuba missile crisis.
Baltics have been in this alliance since 2004. What danger did that prove to pose to Russia?
Ukraine and all other post-Soviet countries rushed into NATO after being invaded, pillaged, and raped repeatedly by Russians for decades or centuries. You think this is comparable to Mexico/US? Russian aggression is a top reason for NATO’s growth, e.g. now thanks to the genius “special military operation”, Sweden and Finland joined and the border Russia shares with NATO doubled.
Those Baltic countries are further away from Moscow than Ukraine.
Besides, the US has a long, documented history of triggering regime change in foreign countries and installing leaders who serve their interests. They also have invaded countless counties, but I guess it’s only bad when Russia does it?
That wasn’t responsive to anything I said. You think the difference in range between Latvia to Moscow and Ukraine to Moscow is actually a factor? That range? In the 21st Century? Against the whole of NATO? Keep stretching.
only bad when Russia does it?
You’re the only one here carrying water for invaders mate. I don’t see the US invading and annexing territories.
Oh really? Were you not born yet when the US invaded Afghanistan & Iraq? Have you been closing your eyes when it has been bombing Lybia, Syria, Yemen & others?
I’m not carrying water for invaders by the way. I just don’t like hypocrites who deem Russia the devil and give a pass to The West while they are literally being an accomplice of genocide right now in Gaza.
I just don’t like hypocrites who deem Russia the devil and give a pass to The West while they are literally being an accomplice of genocide right now in Gaza.
Surrendering now is better than losing more and more territories later.
Gaza will not be destroyed later, it will be destroyed if it doesn’t make peace now.
If you’re so brave, why aren’t you at the front lines defending them?
My point was the difference in distance between Ukraine and Latvia (~150-200km). No it doesn’t matter and you won’t find any respected analyst who would argue otherwise.
Oh really? Were you not born yet when the US invaded Afghanistan & Iraq?
What territory was annexed? Were those just for imperialist conquest? Do you really think the reasoning behind all those conflicts are equal to Russia’s poor excuses for bullying neighbors? Do you have any more non-analogous examples that don’t force you to go back 20+ years? Because Russia has many more recent and current examples of actual imperial conquest.
I do not struggle with reading comprehension but I’m starting to struggle with your condescending tone.
Large portions of the West Bank have been annexed by Israel with the blessing of the West.
Besides, the fact the US didn’t annex territories and merely wreaked havoc in the region is really not the slam dunk you think it is; In terms of casualties the West surpasses Russia by a landslide.
If the US invaded Mexico and then asked it not to join any military alliance? I think you’d be hard pressed to find somebody who’d find those demands acceptable, even here
And Hitler only invaded France because France declared war on Germany.
There were no German ambitions in France beyond Alsace-Lorraine, had they not done anything in response to the German-Polish war then France would have been spared.
Therefore France is responsible for every war crime the nazis committed in France.
I really hope I don’t need explain why this logic is imperialist apologia.
The problem with your statements is that you’re putting your hypothetical dictator-led bullshit on the same level as NATO membership. They aren’t the same thing, they will never be the same thing. Putin is a spineless, cowardly, asswipe of a dictator whose word is worth fuck-all, as evidenced by lying about not invading Ukraine last time. Then Crimea happened. Then this invasion happened.
Shit, half the reason we have militaries to begin with is because of the existence of narcissists who claw their way into power by any means necessary, stepping on anyone and anything they can to do so.
There’s no need for a next invasion if the conditions specified above are met.
That’s a very stupid premise. You think Ukraine should surrender now only to be surely destroyed later. You think that is preferable to fighting for their freedom.
I don’t know what kind of coward thinks in such terms. No offense.
Troll or Russian bot I’d guess.
.ml
Thats all you need to read to know their comments are worthless.
I have seen this account commenting on other posts relating to Ukraine / Russia war. Always the same premise that Ukraine back down, leave itself unprotected and it will be all good. Obviously totally ignoring prior history or the fact Russia can coexist with other fully armed NATO neighbours at it other borders without invading them.
You could drive yourself mad arguing with these nitwits so best to ignore and move on.
Don’t ignore them and move on. At least give them a private tag of “Russian shill” or similar so it is easy to identify and call them out next time so others don’t waste their time.
I am warning you now, if you insult me again we are done. I enjoy having conversations with people no matter if I agree with them or not but only as long as it remain civil.
Yes, surrendering now is better than losing more and more territories later.
Ukraine will not be destroyed later, it will be destroyed if it doesn’t make peace now.
If you’re so brave, why aren’t you at the front lines defending them?
I didn’t know I was insulting you. I was insulting a cowards premise. If you recognize yourself in this, it’s not an insult, but a recognition of your character.
If Ukraine surrenders with the concessions that Putin wants they are destroyed. If I attack you and tell you I will stop if you give me everything, plus you can’t call for help, then that means you are mine. You will retain nothing. You will be under my complete control. Now and in the future. You are finished.
You know, you can also support cancer research and not be a doctor, just like having a brain doesn’t require you to use it, apparently, unfortunately.
I don’t want to interact with people like yourself, bye.
Removed by mod
“There’s no need for a greater invasion, they already have Crimea”
Crimea is a different conversation.
Let’s be serious, if Mexico was about to join a Russia or China led alliance, would the U.S. not invade Mexico? The U.S. would impose neutrality to Mexico. You can also refer to the Cuba missile crisis.
What right does Moscow have to impose its will on other sovereign nations? None.
Baltics have been in this alliance since 2004. What danger did that prove to pose to Russia?
Ukraine and all other post-Soviet countries rushed into NATO after being invaded, pillaged, and raped repeatedly by Russians for decades or centuries. You think this is comparable to Mexico/US? Russian aggression is a top reason for NATO’s growth, e.g. now thanks to the genius “special military operation”, Sweden and Finland joined and the border Russia shares with NATO doubled.
Get a clue vatnik
Those Baltic countries are further away from Moscow than Ukraine.
Besides, the US has a long, documented history of triggering regime change in foreign countries and installing leaders who serve their interests. They also have invaded countless counties, but I guess it’s only bad when Russia does it?
That wasn’t responsive to anything I said. You think the difference in range between Latvia to Moscow and Ukraine to Moscow is actually a factor? That range? In the 21st Century? Against the whole of NATO? Keep stretching.
You’re the only one here carrying water for invaders mate. I don’t see the US invading and annexing territories.
Yes, the distance to Moscow matters.
Oh really? Were you not born yet when the US invaded Afghanistan & Iraq? Have you been closing your eyes when it has been bombing Lybia, Syria, Yemen & others?
I’m not carrying water for invaders by the way. I just don’t like hypocrites who deem Russia the devil and give a pass to The West while they are literally being an accomplice of genocide right now in Gaza.
Surrendering now is better than losing more and more territories later.
Gaza will not be destroyed later, it will be destroyed if it doesn’t make peace now.
If you’re so brave, why aren’t you at the front lines defending them?
EDIT: Because I know people are going to miss the point, this is a copy paste of his own message.
Do you struggle with reading comprehension?
My point was the difference in distance between Ukraine and Latvia (~150-200km). No it doesn’t matter and you won’t find any respected analyst who would argue otherwise.
What territory was annexed? Were those just for imperialist conquest? Do you really think the reasoning behind all those conflicts are equal to Russia’s poor excuses for bullying neighbors? Do you have any more non-analogous examples that don’t force you to go back 20+ years? Because Russia has many more recent and current examples of actual imperial conquest.
I do not struggle with reading comprehension but I’m starting to struggle with your condescending tone.
Large portions of the West Bank have been annexed by Israel with the blessing of the West. Besides, the fact the US didn’t annex territories and merely wreaked havoc in the region is really not the slam dunk you think it is; In terms of casualties the West surpasses Russia by a landslide.
If the US invaded Mexico and then asked it not to join any military alliance? I think you’d be hard pressed to find somebody who’d find those demands acceptable, even here
The U.S. has a long, documented history of triggering regime change in foreign countries and installing leaders who serves the US interests.
And Hitler only invaded France because France declared war on Germany.
There were no German ambitions in France beyond Alsace-Lorraine, had they not done anything in response to the German-Polish war then France would have been spared.
Therefore France is responsible for every war crime the nazis committed in France.
I really hope I don’t need explain why this logic is imperialist apologia.
Never said anything remotely close to what you are describing.
The problem with your statements is that you’re putting your hypothetical dictator-led bullshit on the same level as NATO membership. They aren’t the same thing, they will never be the same thing. Putin is a spineless, cowardly, asswipe of a dictator whose word is worth fuck-all, as evidenced by lying about not invading Ukraine last time. Then Crimea happened. Then this invasion happened.
Shit, half the reason we have militaries to begin with is because of the existence of narcissists who claw their way into power by any means necessary, stepping on anyone and anything they can to do so.
What are you talking about? Is the Cuba missile crisis hypothetical?
That thing solved with NATO oversight?
I knew NATO was a good thing. They should get more countries involved in NATO