- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Arguably because it was not the goal to begin with
I do think they genuinely hoped to break Russia up at the start of this, but also agree that there are plenty of secondary goals. Making sure Europe doesn’t become economically integrated with the east, and funnelling money to the oligarchs who own the war industry are two obvious goals US is currently achieving.
Don’t forget to put a rosy-red Nord Stream cherry on top, sprinkle with sweet cash from threefold-priced LNG, add a pinch of Ukrainian blacksoil and a few drops of “Bleeding Russia” (stirred, not shaken) - there’s your “Freedom © and Democracytm” pie recipe. Serve hot-handed.
Honestly this is why it’s so funny, they keep saying how bad things will be if Russia wins, but they haven’t at all explained aside from “well Putin will attack NATO” despite them publicly saying numerous times that they have no intention or interest in attacking NATO.
Russia’s goals have been pretty clear since the beginning of the SMO, primarily to protect the citizens of the Donbass and to root out Nazism that permeates Ukrainian society. It’s never once been about land or resources, which the West actually invades for. Since they’re obviously projecting, they don’t know what to do because it’s not what Russia is actually doing.
but they haven’t at all explained aside from “well Putin will attack NATO” despite them publicly saying numerous times that they have no intention or interest in attacking NATO.
The argument that they would make is that because Putin is a saturday morning cartoon villain, that obviously he is lying and will be staging an invasion of the rest of the world as soon as the Last Bastion of Freedom, Ukraine, falls.
I have talked to people like this. Their understanding of the background of the war is so poor that they see it as nothing besides a land grab. Which would already make no sense. It’s impossible to have any kind of real discourse because they believe the only motivation is either more land (for the largest country in the world) or just that “Putin is Evil”.
Lmao, but how exactly do they account for all of the countries supporting them? I guess they’re all lumped in the same “bad” category. Honestly I truly think these people don’t bother doing any sort of thinking about what they’re supporting and why, because an actual interest would prompt you to go find out information for yourself.
Yup, all countries supporting them are lumped in as “bad/evil”. Honestly they don’t count any countries that aren’t predominantly white western powers to begin with. Anyone else is “misguided”/“taken advantage of”, like they aren’t capable of making their own decisions about those countries.
When your understanding of geopolitics is less nuanced than GI Joe, it doesn’t take a whole lot to persuade you. Which is exactly what they’ve been conditioned for. Critical thinking is the worst thing that could happen.
It always impresses me how hard the concept of countries acting in their own self-interest is for people to grasp. Instead they need “good guys” and “bad guys” in any kind conflict.
Somewhere between “balkanization of the entire country” and “elimination of every human being with any russian ancestry”.
EDIT: Sorry I also forgot. A huge vacuum in Ukraine that USian forces can drain the last remaining resources from as they make it a vassal state that only exists to house US military.
