609
Ukraine tells critics of slow counteroffensive to 'shut up'
(www.reuters.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2023
609 points (94.2% liked)
World News
32285 readers
819 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
What are some specific examples of "confirmed Kremlin propaganda" are being posted by Hexbear users in this thread?
They never respond with actual examples.
Edit: Lmao they've responded with a post that points out Ukraine has been killing people in the Donbas before the war started and a post that highlights the many offramps to the current conflict
This is why nobody likes you guys and wants to defederate with you. Really great job everyone.
Lol! You're wrong because...
I think you forgot half of the sentence.
Ceding land to a foreign aggressor is not a viable off-ramp. Get real.
Allright, I guess we'll just wait until all the able-bodied ukrainians have been killed (despite themselves not wanting to fight) and then the land will be ceded. I'm sure its much better if thousands more die first!
So Ukraine should just lay down their arms and let an authoritarian, borderline oligarchy like Russia have their way with the country?
Great logic bro. Can't argue with that.
Lots of assumptions on what would happen to Ukraine, and you are also implying that Ukraine is not an "authoritarian" (a word with no meaning) borderline oligarchy, so that's fascinating.
But yeah, even if these assumptions were true, then yeah I think it's better for people not to die in an unwinnable war, than for people to die and then for the same thing to happen. I'm a big fan of people Not Dying actually.
Great. Tell that to the Russians who occupied Bucha.
What's their @?
I'm glad you can make light of a tragic situation.
Good thing the bucha was debunked, but if it hadn't been I'd probably have urged you to look inward since you're the one who tried to use the tragedy as a way to score a cheap point, despite it not detracting from my overall arguement
This is nationalist rhetoric. Claiming to be a socialist and yet obsessing over the borders of one bourgeois state over another bourgeois state is one of the reasons you are being called a liberal here. You are a nationalist cheerleading for one group of billionaires to rule over the people instead of another group of billionaires, all while hundreds of thousands of people get killed in the name of that. Meanwhile socialists are out here saying we don't want people dying and do not give a fuck what borders exist as long as people aren't dying, the best solution is the quickest and fastest way to minimise death.
You are defending the state, not people's lives. You are sacrificing people for states and borders. You are a bourgeois nationalist, and you would have advocated for the same thing in every past conflict. You're not even a social chauvinist and they were shitbags, you're just straight up nationalist.
Ironic when liberals act how they claim communists act. I mean I know it makes sense logically, that it's all projection with scratched libs, but it's still so weird to see in practice
I mean the Ukranians are doing suicidal infantry attacks against entranched positions with conscripts ffs, it's just too on the nose
In the post-ww2 period we had a long period of people being anti-nationalist as a result of experience of what nationalism and this obsession with borders instead of people causes.
The current crop of liberals have no experience or connection to this and are incredibly easily led by the ultranationalists into supporting them, because nationalists share a priority with ultranationalists.
The primary issue here is nationalism. We need an absolutely massive anti-nationalism movement. Anti-nationalism is anti-fascism.
Ok so why don't you teach all us damn talkies a lesson and explain to us how you stop the war then other than libs usual line of Russia just gives up and goes home for no apparent reason.
Because currently either land changes hands at some point or everybody on one side dies and libs keep insisting the first option is a no go.
So please, inform us. We're all very excited to hear what you have to say.
it's an extremely viable off-ramp in fact that's how the majority of wars have ended
as Ukraine have tried military force and it didn't work then an outcome that doesn't relly on the Russians just deciding to give up on the whole idea for no reason might be better alligned with reality
Worked for the Taliban twice.
Who is running Afghanistan right now?
The same group that did when the USSR invaded. The same group that did when the US invaded. They're terrible people, but you can't argue their strategy wasn't effective.
That's what Lenin did and it saved countless lives. The Tsar kept feeding people into a meat grinder and the communists took power of the promise that they'd end the war, and they had to accept heavy concessions but they did it. Which position do you agree with, Lenin's or the Tsar's?
Do you seriously have to ask?
This post wasn't difficult to find.
Acting as if ending the war is Ukraine's responsibility, rather than one of the country engaging in a literal invasion.
Anyone who doesn't take the 2014 referendum with an extreme grain of salt is slotting nicely into Russia's current playbook.
I seriously don't understand why so many of you dickride Russia, other than "west bad". The current Russian government is antithetical to so many of the values you claim to champion.
https://hexbear.net/comment/3865920
Here's another for the road.
EDIT:
Numerous comments people claiming that the Maidan Revolution was actually a US backed coup, with zero evidence provided outside of Kremlin and state operated mouthpieces of course.
Possibly the most egregious yet: apparently the Bucha massacre was a hoax. Remember all those videos we saw of Russian soldiers gunning down unarmed civilians? Apparently they all must have been doctored, or were actually Ukrainian soldiers dressed up as Russian soldiers gunning down their own people.
One of my close friends is a Ukrainian photographer/videographer who was among the first on the scene after the Russians left Bucha. You've very likely seen some of his photos before. I can only imagine the rage he'd feel if he were to read some of the bullshit that these comments are attempting to spread.
Honestly, my opinion of HexBear has reached a new low after this thread. I used to be against defederation, but now I can at least understand why people don't want to be associated at all with your instance.
EDIT 2: This post was locally removed on HexBear. I think that says enough on its own.
So a post that highlights the many offramps to the current conflict, and describes how Ukraine can no longer "win" is Kremlin propaganda?
The other is a post that describes that Ukraine has killed civilians in the Donbass under Zelensky, do you dispute this?
You claim that these are examples of "confirmed Kremlin propaganda". What sources and/or authorities confirm the opinions contained in these posts as Kremlin propaganda?
Here's one. It's a business insider article disputing the Russian line on the Bucha massacre.
Neither of the posts linked to in the removed post talked about the Bucha massacre though.
It's in the post from the person above that we're all replying to.
https://lemmy.zip/comment/2294680
There is no video evidence of the Bucha massacre though? It is based on Ukrainian investigation and an Amnesty investigation. Granted I tend to believe it happened, or at least I disbelieve the counter narrative that the UAF did it, but I don't know what videos you're talking about
See, this is what everyone is talking about. At lest you believe it, but so many others only believe the Russian propaganda and when someone disproves it, they just say it's western propaganda, which is apparently not true but Russian propaganda is?
There's tons of photos, videos, satellite images, and accounts by locals. It's been investigated by the UN Commissioner of Human Rights and numerous news agencies who published their proof. Most of the footage was of the aftermath but it's still proof, especially when combined with drone and satellite footage from before the reporters got there. Or you think the bodies were faked (been disapproved) and reporters from CNN, BBC, AFP, and more didn't see what they saw when they entered the area? They saw a bunch of fake Halloween corpses and couldn't tell the difference between that and real dead civilians, who had been raped, burned, and murdered? Or actors? Some of The Russian lies are unbelievable so it's incredible to me that people keep buying into them.
Here's some videos from CNN and BBC and the New York Times.
Yeah I've seen a lot of the evidence, journalistic investigations, which were pretty compelling I just noted there's no direct video evidence. But I do also believe UAF committed severe damage retaking the territory. There is a lot of evidence of civilian murders in UAF retreats in Mariupol as well. AFRF executing prisoners like in the NYT video, or the indiscriminate front line fire against civilians, the Kyiv corridor and southern campaign were a guerilla mindfuck. Civilian casualties are a lot lower now, but the urban conflict at its height was just incredibly brutal and indiscriminate.
It's possible to believe both at the same time and I applaud you for being able to hold both thoughts in your head. I'm not even being sarcastic, I've never seen a hexbear user criticize Russia or say they've ever possibly done something wrong in the war or it's lead up. So just by admitting the possibility that they could've done it, even if the UAF have done terrible things too, you've made me feel a little better. It's nice to see some nuance finally lol. And ya, war is hell.
I see this one a lot.
Seriously, who? Who is "dickriding Russia because west bad"? The current state of Russia is the result of the USSR's undemocratic dissolution and the subsequent shock doctrine, obviously it's antithetical to our values. Everyone knows that. People aren't being blinded by "west bad" - because they generally aren't literal children who can only understand the world in terms of good guys and bad guys. What they're doing is critically analyzing media and history.
Hate to employ the dreaded whataboutism, but it seems to me this critique applies more to the opposite side. You say people are "Slotting nicely into Russia's playbook", "parroting Kremlin propaganda". On their own, these are empty thought-terminators. You're not concerned about understanding reality, just about making absolutely sure you're 100% not on "Russia's side" of this issue, because they're the bad guys in this dichotomy.
I seriously don't understand why so many of you dickride the west, other than "Russia bad". The current western governments are antithetical to so many of the values you claim to champion.
You guys say that but I've never seen a hexbear criticizing Russia or their side of the story, only accept it as gospel. You say you don't do that but then blindly accept their time line for the Bucha massacre or pretend their reasons for attacking a sovereign nation are real or ignore a bunch of irregularities in their 2014 referendum voting. Russia leaving is apparently never an option when they talk about possible solutions, only Ukraine giving up territory. You say the world isn't only good guys and bad guys but because when the things you guys say are actually analyzed, it's obvious that it's a lie. The west is bad, everyone else is less bad. Therefore in any thread with Ukraine, because the west is on their side, they are the bad guys. Even though Russia also has a corruption problem and Nazi problem and has a history of invading their numbers for decades. But they have the bigger military, so I guess all their neighbors have to give up their best territory to Russia for free and their citizens shouldn't expect to do anything about it and the the rest of the world has to let them.
Meanwhile, many of the people who criticize Russia in this attack don't dickride the West at all and hate plenty of things about it and will say it in the same thread or tons of others. Like they should definitely decide whether they'll fully support Ukraine or not, but we all know that to do that they'd have to get more support from their voters, which is often more difficult said than done, especially since Ukraine isn't actually in NATO.
Yes.. it isn't. Thats how reality works. Russia isn't going to just up and leave. They aren't going to have thousands of their own people killed and then just... nothing. They have goals, they want to meet them, and if not then at least get somewhat of a victory. The people in Russia aren't going to like "oh, we just left". I don't fucking understand how people can say "the war ends when russia [just up and leaves]". This isn't fantasy land, that isn't how it works. Russia will leave, if Ukraine negotiates a peace with them. If Russia wants land then UK has to negotiate for that not to happen.
A ton of people in Russia don't care that much about the war. They've had protestors and even people who report their news and propaganda speak out about it. There's no reason they should be there. They can easily leave, it's very much an option. Now the Ukrainians are fighting for their homeland, so they have just as much a motivation to not give up either. But they also have support from the strongest military in the world.
I do hope they come to some sort of negotiation soon, but saying it never would have been this bad if Russia got everything they want from the beginning and the world stayed out is appeasement and we already know how that ends with the Nazis.
spoiler
love how liberals manage to weave in casual homophobia whenever geopolitics comes up, you people make me sick
It's not because of blind allegiance to Russia or anything like that, people have positions counter to your narrative as the result of actually paying attention to events, as they've unfolded, over years.
Impressive how mad you babies get when people don't swallow the lies you're peddling, expecting them to be taken as implicitly true or something.
Talk about swallowing lies after regurgitating Russian propaganda? You are all blinded yourself by your hate for the US that you are willing to deny massacres or genocides.
What Russian propaganda? I live in the US, I have more of a problem with my government than a government on the other side of the planet, no matter how scary the liberals try to make them sound.
Are you serious? We just went through a ton of examples in the post above that we're all replying to.
And it's not even an exhaustive list. I've seen others parrot the idea that Ukraine was doing a genocide in Donbas, a Russian accusation without proof, for example. This is what I mean about you guys skeptical about every side of the story except for Russia's.
Also, which side do you think the Russians are supporting in the US? Because it's not the left...
I frankly don't care who the Russians are supporting politically in the US because their propaganda capacity is near insignificant. Also, the Democrats are a right wing political formation, they will fight to protect landlords and break strikes.
Apparently their propaganda is not that insignificant considering how many people on the right, and you all, are falling for it.
If they're spending their time messaging to a bunch of powerless leftists on their own closed off server they're wasting their time, what does that even accomplish?
Already read the post you linked with casual homophobia/misogyny in it, it's wild how libs just let that rip as soon as it's about a state enemy.
The Donbass has been getting shelled for almost a decade, and until recently it was pretty much entirely the work of the Ukrainian government.
The US is a world historic force of evil, can you blame us for not taking their propagandists at their word?
Just because they used the word "dick" doesn't mean it's homophobic/mysognist. Also it doesn't detract from their other points.
The insurgents had been shooting people and using bombs or mortars and artillery since at least 2014. They even shot down airplanes back then. It wasn't just the Ukrainian government.
OK, but why take the Russian propaganda for their word? And at some point you have to take some evidence of historical accounts or you're just going going by conspiracy theories.
I had to circle back to this one because the comment in question was not just misogynist for using " dick", but because of the implication that dickriding bad, why else use it in that context if it was intended to read as a positive connotation?
As soon as libs feel like it's a "safe" target they just let loose with the misogyny and homophobia.
I didn't address the threads they presented as evidence because I didn't see anything wrong.
Yes, since the coup shit has been absolutely fucked, and all diplomatic solutions have been derailed.
I don't take Russian propaganda at their word, I also have decades of history to reference, all the rabid-ass Ukrainian propaganda, plus literally paying attention to shit going on in the last decade