reminder that killing conscription officers is self defense
46 comments 🤣
Damn. This could have been avoided if Ukraine had instead chose to bow down, kiss the rings, and unconditionally submit in perpetuity to Vladimir Putin, our handsome and beloved lord and savior.
All the more reason russia needs to fuck off eh?
Libs love projecting responsibility for the crimes of their fascist allies
If this is Russia’s fault for attacking, then that means that Russia attacking is Ukraine’s fault for doing all that ethnic cleansing in the Donbas and refusing to just let them go, like they voted for. Not very wholesome 100 democracy of them.
Removed by mod
Red fascism is when you oppose ethnic cleansing and aren’t rooting for these guys
Removed by mod
Let me know when they’re running the government
And hey, so you admit you’re just straight up rooting for swastika-waving, seig-heiling nazis?
So Ukraine can send more soldiers to defend Israel?
Removed by mod
Signing a last minute non-aggression pact to buy time after having your proposed antifascist alliance shot down for ten years by countries that all signed pacts with the fascists next door to you years earlier is actually not the same thing as providing military aid to an ethnostate currently committing genocide thousands of miles away and explicitly saying you want to be like them.
Liberal ideology can only survive in ignorance of the facts.
They said the alliance had been shot down for ten years. Then that they signed pacts years earlier.
3·4 days agoSo, was the Soviet Union proposing an anti-fascist alliance in 1929?
True it was 1933 you’re right.
You’ll also remember that the UK and France broke these pacts and declared war when the Nazis invaded Poland, right? Whereas the pact with the USSR included clauses to divide the east between the Nazis and the Soviets, ceding eastern Poland and the Baltics to the USSR?
The capitalists weren’t going to ally with the Soviets, who had seized power after a bloody civil war, and whose ideology sought to destroy their own (and vice-versa I should add). Meanwhile, most of Hitler’s indefensible and horrific crimes were still mostly in the future. Only once the war broke out an alliance of convenience was forged.
Removed by mod
Your entire output and psychological makeup could be replicated by an LLM trained on reddit comments. You retreat to cringe cliches because you’re scared to engage with anything actually being said. You feel a small spike of anxiety when you see a new reply in your inbox and see that it’s longer than one sentence.
Removed by mod
Your entire output and psychological makeup could be replicated by an LLM trained on reddit comments.
I do not recall anyone excusing any country sending soldiers to defend the Nazis during the height of the Holocaust.
Well lots of libs are big fans of the Finn’s siding with the Nazis against the USSR. But leftists tend not to take that position as it’s really indefensible.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Is that the one where Stalin defended Hilter against the Allies during the Holocaust?
Removed by mod
Nice historical revisionism fashie
You said they defended Hitler militarily like Ukraine is doing for Israel now
Having a temporary truce (after all attempts to rally against them were rejected) to build up the strength necessary to destroy the fascists in the inevitable war against them is different to being best friends with the fascist and helping them destroy entire regions of the world.
Removed by mod
Wow reality is Eastern propaganda? That doesn’t bode well for you or your worldview.
Removed by mod
“Stalinism” isn’t an ideology. The term was coined by Trotskyists as a polemical weapon. Using it as if it were a self-identified doctrine misrepresents the historical record to serve a political narrative of discontinuity.
“Maoism” as a distinct -ism separate from Marxism-Leninism was created later by the Communist Party of Peru (Shining Path). Chairman Mao consistently framed his contributions as Marxism-Leninism applied to Chinese conditions.
Your “both sides” stance isn’t principled skepticism. Condemning the oppressed and the oppressor with equal moral weight objectively strengthens the hegemon. Imperialism doesn’t require your active support to benefit from your neutrality; it only requires that you deny the oppressed the right to defend themselves.
Think concretely: if you condemn both the SS and the Warsaw Ghetto fighters as “violent extremists,” you aren’t above the fray. You are functionally aligning with the side that holds state power, industrial capacity, and the monopoly on legitimized violence. The same dialectic applies when socialist states, forged in anti-fascist war and under permanent siege, take measures to survive. Abstract moralizing that ignores the material conditions of blockade, invasion threat, and subversion serves the side that imposes those conditions.
Liberalism’s “condemn everyone” posture is simply abdication. It mistakes the symmetry of moral judgment for the asymmetry of class power. History isn’t judged by who shouted “violence is bad” the loudest, but by which side advanced the material interests of the oppressed.
Also all this is irrelevant to the main point anyway (smuglord shitlibs like yourself would call what you did a whataboutism I believe (can I declare victory now?)), that a nonaggression pact formed after every attempt to rally against the fascists was rejected in order to buy time to destroy them is materially different to siding with them with glee to destroy an entire region of the world with no plans of ever fighting the fascists.
Hell yeah fuck the world everything sucks, you’re 12
Nobody would criticise Ukraine for having ceasefire deal with Israel. It would imply they are enemies, for one.
