The invasion of Ukraine is such a historical evil that any explanation of it (outlawing of Russian in school and government documents, being worried about NATO expansion, etc.) is excusing the Putin Regime that does evil only because they like evil and have no other motivation than maximizing evil. So any Russian that isn’t currently attempting to overthrow the government is an evil orc that deserves death.

At what point did I say anything resembling that? The war is an evil war and I cheer any Russian fighting against it but I don’t believe it’s “such a historical evil” nor do I believe that Russians deserve death just because they aren’t fighting against it. Shit, if I believed that, I’d have to believe the same about a lot of people in the US, too, wouldn’t I?

But all of the wars of aggression and invasions the US made in the 21st century means that the US is slightly flawed

Did you not read what I wrote above or…?

wanting to overthrow the government is too far.

Yes, it is, but probably not for the reasons you think. Revolutions rarely are successful, even if you win. They’re usually coalitions of common enemies who rarely agree on what they want. They’re often led by opportunistic figureheads who want to take advantage of the position. There will be tens of millions who die. I can’t imagine any political belief can be worth that many lives.

The Declaration of Independence has been considered one of the most influential doctrines of all time for a good reason. There’s a single sentence in it which I find rather relevant: “Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.”

Would you not agree that there have been moments in the US history where, if progress continued, we’d be at a position that was acceptable to you? If so, you have to also believe that we can still get back to that place.

On top of all that… How much of the US do you think agree with your views? How are you going to experience long-term success with little buy-in?

We need to hold our nose and vote for Democrats because they might make the invasions slightly more limited and be more polite while funding the Israeli genocide.

Nah, that really does suck, I agree with you. But don’t you think that replacing our FPTP method of electing politicians, reducing the power of the Executive branch, and adding much stronger guardrails, oversight, and penalties against corruption might be a more effective method to achieving your goals? Most people are in favor of these policies. Why do you claim you’re willing to take up arms when you can’t even knock on your neighbor’s door?

Explaining that there are motivations beyond Putin being evil and that all of the US’s wars of aggression makes it the worst state in the current world, rather than a flawed and imperfect democracy that should still be the model for the world is what makes one a tankie.

I understand why Putin wants Ukraine. They have large mineral deposits which can help accelerate economic growth while their rich farmland can provide quite a bit of food for the people of Russia. I also know that these reasons aren’t much different than those that America has fought for in wars during the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. Again, you can agree that both things are fucked.

Funny thing, if Russia had just done nothing, they would be better off in every conceivable metric.

Eh lol maybe just end this stupid war! Where they are the unquestionable aggressor of…

This war is so stupid on many levels… But Puttler cannot back down anymore without loosing his face, kinda sad situation…

What I find so sad about you tankies is how you just put everything in categories, like “those evil liberals” (sure the propaganda in the USA is also plain stupid, like communism used as some term of scaring someone etc.)

That the world is more complex, and authoritarian means are not the solution to establish healthy socialism long term… Russia or Puttler is purely destructive on basically all scales (now unquestionably joined by USA with their entirely idiotic leader)

Do you think i save a link for every thing i see and interact with online?

Removed by mod

What should a state do when the most prolific invader in the world (i.e. NATO) starts amassing troops and weapons on its borders (or otherwise in position to attack, like with Iran), especially after a coup against a neighbouring state?

Maybe not invade a neighboring country yourself, and then keep investing material and manpower after the invasion has stalled for no discernible gain.

The one that hasn’t been substantiated, one which the NATO-dominated UN concluded to there being no evidence for, one which your masters have long since stopped pretending to believe to have happened?

What the UN conclude was that while there are reeducation camps and systemic discrimination, there is not sufficient evidence to say its a genocide. Which is like “We can prove that A killed B, but we can’t prove that it’s murder”.

And no, Adrian Zenz’ word is not proof.

Funnily enough, it’s only ever the deniers who bring up this guy.

Oh, hey, it’s the same people that sold you on Nayirah’s testimony. Do you believe that one, as well, since Amnesty said it was true?

That’s a quite deliberate misconstruction of the facts. Amnesty International initially promoted the story, then they issued a retraction once they found that it lacked supporting evidence. There’s no evidence of malpractice on their part.

The largest countries who all stand alone and refuse to truly tie themselves to the international community.

I think you’ve missed the point.

I mean, I agree that balkanization isn’t the most ideal scenario. I’d much rather see a socialist revolution take over the whole country. Much better outcomes for nearly everyone.

Are you suggesting that the only people who get to have an opinion about the US live within its borders?

That’s pretty out of line when the US is currently aggressing multiple other countries

Why does that matter to the argument at hand?

It has been the USA (& allies) invading, nobody denies that. For example the 2001 Afghanstan invasion was started by the USA, the UK, Australia and taleban, and most other countries got involved after the United Nations gave the permission to ISAF - other here including most other NATO countries, and at least 24 non-nato countries. At that point it was not an NATO invasion, it was UN trying to help clean up the mess that was Afghanstan civil war, which started in 1978 already. Did that succeed? No. Was it the entirety of NATO just randomly invading Afghanistan? Also no. In Iraq in 2003 USA plus the coalition of willing, was not the entitity of NATO either. The genocide of Palestine has been going on practically from the beginning of Israel, the latest whole huge mess has not been a NATO operation either.

The usual claims, that every time any NATO countries get involved with some unlawful USA invasions, is just part of Russian propaganda tactics, trying to pretend its bordering countries joining NATO, because of the risk of Russian invasion, is somehow NATO trying to attack Russia. Claiming all these wars are just “NATO invasions” is downplaying the complexity of these situations, in attempt of trying to justificate Russian invasions. The whole reason countries like the Baltics - and now Sweden and Finland - have joined NATO, is because Russia invades its neighbors the moment it wants, like it has done in Ukraine.

//Edit
(I did not realize it while writing this comment, but the account I answered seems to be just an ordinary Russian propagandist. They are doing the classic tactics, so I will just block and move on, but for any real person reading this, how to easily recognize them is:

• Blaming “the West” for everything, and defending what Russia does
• Bringing up the history of colonization in discussions, and using it to justify what Russia does
• Claiming everything the USA does is NATO doing it
• Making simplified claims about complicated things, like anything considering the middle-East
• Using the genocide of palestinians to justify what Russia does
• Claiming Ukraine has nazis, is controlled by NATO etc.
• Using any claims to justify Russia invading its neighbors
• Claiming NATO or European countries want to invade Russia
• Defending the invasion of Ukraine
• Lack of knowledge, or pretended lack of knowledge, of the situation, history and relationship with Russia, of the Russia’s border countries, like Ukraine, Baltics and Finland
• Writing longer and longer answers, trying to make you exhausted by misunderstanding arguments you make, and forcing you to individually correct their claims

Same logic applies to Chinese propagandists too, except they will also defend China genociding their minorities and use Chinese state sponsored sources. The best reaction is to point this behavior out, and move on. Taking part in further discussion just allows them to spout the propaganda more, and give visibility to it.)

//Edit2
(Oh, and ordinary russians are not the same, as Russia’s leadership. The problem is russian imperialism - as in the belief in the great Russian empire, that has the right to invade its neighbours or do anything - that cannot be eradicated by any other means, than Russia collapsing from the inside, and russians giving up on it. Putin does not care about russians, to Kreml they are just resources to throw into the meat grinder.)

I will just repeat what I wrote:

It has been the USA (& allies) invading, nobody denies that. For example the 2001 Afghanstan invasion was started by the USA, the UK, Australia and taleban, and most other countries got involved after the United Nations gave the permission to ISAF - other here including most other NATO countries, and at least 24 non-nato countries. At that point it was not an NATO invasion, it was UN trying to help clean up the mess that was Afghanstan civil war, which started in 1978 already. Did that succeed? No. Was it the entirety of NATO just randomly invading Afghanistan? Also no. In Iraq in 2003 USA plus the coalition of willing, was not the entitity of NATO either. The genocide of Palestine has been going on practically from the beginning of Israel, the latest whole huge mess has not been a NATO operation either.

The usual claims, that every time any NATO countries get involved with some unlawful USA invasions, is just part of Russian propaganda tactics, trying to pretend its bordering countries joining NATO, because of the risk of Russian invasion, is somehow NATO trying to attack Russia. Claiming all these wars are just “NATO invasions” is downplaying the complexity of these situations, in attempt of trying to justificate Russian invasions. The whole reason countries like the Baltics - and now Sweden and Finland - have joined NATO, is because Russia invades its neighbors the moment it wants, like it has done in Ukraine.