Since the tankies seem to be coming out again, a reminder:
If Russia stops fighting, there will no longer be a war.
If Ukraine stops fighting, there will no longer be an Ukraine.
@rysiek
If Russia wins that war there will be a pause while they prepare to invade the next neighbour.
Georgia capitulated in 2008
Georgia still exists and is an independent country.
How can that be?
@liilliil @midgephoto you must have missed two things:
1. The last elections in Georgia.
2. In case of Georgia Kremlin never made claims that the aim is full military subjugation of the country; Kremlin made such claims in case of Ukraine, repeatedly.
@rysiek @midgephoto
1. What about them
2. They did! “Let's crush Tbilisi” they said a lota time
@liilliil @midgephoto Zhirinovskij is not Kremlin. I said Kremlin. Also, there was no actual attempt to take Tbilisi, whereas there was an actual attempt to take Kyiv.
About the Georgian elctions:
https://www.npr.org/2024/10/27/g-s1-30210/georgias-crucial-vote-was-marred-by-intimidation-european-monitors-say
People are protesting in the streets as we speak, because they don't want Georgia to become (again) a Russian client state.
Such processes take years and decades, But this is a process that continues since the Georgian-Russian war.
@rysiek @midgephoto
1. If the Kremlin is so eager to destroy Ukraine, why were the negotiations in the spring of 2022?
2. It was 30 kilometers to Tbilisi when it was said Safeword
1. Kremlin loves misdirection. So far there had not been any negotiations in good faith from Kremlin. And I am including the Minsk accords, which were negotiated and signed, and then ignored and broken by the Kremlin.
2. Look, we can split hairs all you want here. The aim of Kremlin is for Ukraine not to exist, and it's been shown time and again.
If you really want to engage with this topic, this set of lectures by Timothy Snyder is a must-watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLfFmYWjHtc&list=PLh9mgdi4rNewfxO7LhBoz_1Mx1MaO6sw_
@rysiek @midgephoto
The Kremlin was not a party to the Minsk agreements, it was their guarantor. The ceasefire agreement was signed between Ukraine and the eastern regions of Ukraine
@liilliil @midgephoto right and "such uniforms can be bought in any sports shop", I remember that as well.
Kremlin was also a signatory of Budapest Memorandum, where it guaranteed Ukraine's territorial sovereignty in return for Ukraine giving away post-Soviet nuclear weapons:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum
How did all that "guaranteeing" go, I wonder?
@rysiek @midgephoto
>such uniforms can be bought in any sports shop
I have no desire to argue with propaganda stamps, I want to understand the legal side of the issue and the real danger for Ukraine.
At the time of its creation as an independent country from a Soviet republic, Ukraine committed itself to neutrality and non-aligned status. This was the reason for their giving up nuclear weapons
@liilliil @midgephoto either we agree on basic facts, or we don't.
One of the basic facts is that in 2014 in Donbas and Crimea there were Russian military, and that Russian military actively supported, including by artillery fire from the territory of Russian Federation, amply documented by Bellingcat:
https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and-europe/2016/12/21/russian-artillery-strikes-against-ukraine/
If we don't agree on basic facts like these, I don't see why we should continue this conversation. If we agree on such basic facts, it's clear it's not Ukraine at fault.
@rysiek @midgephoto yes, Mike
I know they sent their troops there. Unfortunately, it's not the first time. However, we are deviating from the main topic: their maniacal desire to destroy Ukraine. Is it real or not
@liilliil @midgephoto so, Russia sent troops there in violation of the Budapest Memorandum, where it promised to guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty.
It then stirred up a conflict in Donbas, and then became a "neutral" guarantor of the Minks Agreements.
And then sent more troops into Donbas.
And then began a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, almost encircling Kyiv, and broadcasted rhetoric claiming Ukraine is not a real country, Ukrainians are not a real nation, and so on.
Dunno, difficult to say!
@liilliil @midgephoto seriously though, I don't care if it's "maniacal" or whatever else. Kremlin's goal in this war was to make Ukraine into a Russian client state again, one way or another. It's visible in their actions, their words, the narratives they push out into the world.
Again, you may disagree, but by your responses in this thread, you never really engaged with this topic honestly.
I provided plenty of receipts for what I was talking about. I think we're done here.
@liilliil @midgephoto also, no idea where you got the "Mike" from. My name and nickname are clearly spelled in my profile. Copy-paste is your friend.
@rysiek @midgephoto it’s the same name, innit?
Also today we’re celebrating St.Michael’s day here
St. Michael is also the saint patron of Kiev
@liilliil @midgephoto no, it's not the same name. Just as "Kiev" is not the same name as "Kyiv".
If a person tells you they prefer to be referred to in a particular way, instead of the way you referred to them before, you apologize and comply.
Same with a polity that tells you that they prefer to use their own spelling of their capital city, rather than that of their invader and colonizer.
But that, of course, requires some minimal amount of respect towards the person – or the polity.
The real ORIGINAL name of the city is "Кыѥвъ", and not “Kyiv” or “Київ"
This is to the question of “invaders and colonizers” and lecturing about spelling
@maxwainwright @rysiek it’s your mom
@maxwainwright @rysiek just fuck off, to dumb to talk with you, imp
@maxwainwright I said it’s your mom’s name
Go and make your experiments with that
@maxwainwright please don't call people names in my mentions. That's completely unnecessary and does not help at all.
@rysiek sure, sorry about that.
I was trying to make a point, not just be mean (if that is any consolation). It would have worked better (or: at all) if i had called him “Doug” or something .
@maxwainwright I don't think it would have worked at all, to be honest.
I understand, and to a large degree share, the frustration. But losing one's temper and calling people names is just not a good strategy of dealing with that kind of stuff.
@rysiek no, you’re completely right. Not sure if “dealing with” is a good descriptor of what I was trying to do though. Just expressing some rage.
But it’s better to redirect it into something productive, or at least destructive.
@maxwainwright I really appreciate you saying this.
@rysiek I’m glad you told me of honestly. I’ll try and keep my cool in the future, regardless of whose mentions I’m in.
But man, your post is a tankie magnet!