Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky has said the death of Yevgeny Prigozhin – the Russian mercenary leader whose plane crashed weeks after he led a mutiny against Moscow’s military leadership – shows what happens when people make deals with Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

As Ukraine’s counteroffensive moves into a fourth month, with only modest gains to show so far, Zelensky told CNN’s Fareed Zakaria he rejected suggestions it was time to negotiate peace with the Kremlin.

“When you want to have a compromise or a dialogue with somebody, you cannot do it with a liar,” Volodymyr Zelensky said.

  • tomatopathe@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    So from having had a few exchanges with pro Russian accounts on Lemmy (which seems to be infested with a few very active ones) this is a summary of their arguments:

    • "Ukraine is Nazi"
    • "Well far right parties got a total of under 6% of the vote, and they elected a Jewish man president"
    • "yeah but Bandera and whatabout America"

    • "Ukraine killed ethnic Russians"
    • "A huge percentage of their population are ethnic Russians, including in government, and they are fine, and were until the Russian invasion. And now it's Russia that has killed, maimed and raped more ethnic Russians, including civilians, than Ukraine every did or even could. Including their own people thorough incompetence and corruption".
    • "Yeah but Bandera, and whatabout America"

    • "Ukraine is fighting because they are forced to by their colonial masters, the USA and NATO, and Ukrainians will keep dying so long as they keep being armed"
    • "Actually > 90% of the population wants to continue fighting for their country back, so what you're basically saying is you think Ukrainians should be abandoned to Russian enslavement"
    • "Yeah but Bandera, and whatabout America"

    • "NATO and USA are colonialists and this is just more colonialism"
    • "Actually both Russia and China are actual, bone fide land empires, with ethnic minorities that are forced to live like colonized people - including doing the fighting for Russia while their families back home live in misery and squalor and Putin's Mafia collect mansions, private jets and yachts"
    • "Yeah but Bandera, and whatabout America"
    • zephyreks@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      There's a reason Western Europe focuses on the Nazis in the context of the Holocaust: the Nazis never saw the Western Europeans as a stain on the Earth like they did the Jews and the Slavs. Russians don't need to point to Jews to claim Nazism: they can point directly to the treatment of ethnically Russian Slavs during WW2 and the plans that Nazi Germany had for the eradication of Slavs.

      Russia doesn't need to point at how Ukraine treats Jews because to Russia, the Holocaust is dwarfed in societal impact by the issues that motivated Operation Barbarossa. The Russians lost 19 million Russian civilians in the war, why would they care about the Jews?

      Nevermind that minorities in China get so many advantages it's actually silly how much affirmative action goes on. Provinces dominated by minorities get significantly more funding per capita and even get loss-leading infrastructure projects like the Tibet and Xinjiang railways. Students from minorities get additional bonuses on gaokao (basically SAT, but imagine if schools didn't look at anything else). Minorities are exempt from family planning policies and get massive interest-free loans for starting businesses. They get proportional representation in government. Hell, there are 55 minority groups in China making up 8% of the population.

      In the army? The prevalence of rural populations in the army has been observed AROUND THE WORLD. It's a function of rural communities being rather poor and underserved by governments in general, as well as the lack of economic opportunities that living on a farm provides. In fact, the entire notion of the underserved countryside is what allowed communism to rise in Russia and China.

      • tomatopathe@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        25% ish of the Russian population live in huts and shit in holes in outhouses for a lack of plumbing (mostly ethnic minorities), all while the ruling Mafia collects yachts and private jets, and launches wars.

        I'm not saying there isn't wealth inequality elsewhere, but how about a bit of perspective here. Russia cannot actually conscript too many ethnic Russians or use them as cannon fodder, since that is the only ethnicity in Russia that matters politically, since they are the middle class. Instead they send the colonized people, who happen to be those who shit in holes for a lack of plumbing.

      • Gyoza Power@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        The Russians lost 19 million Russian civilians in the war, why would they care about the Jews?

        Nevermind the fact that it was Russia itself that treated (and keeps treating) its soldiers as cannon fodder

        • zephyreks@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I'd recommend that you read a more insightful commentary on Red Army practices during WW2 rather than following Nazi propaganda from that period. David Glantz' work is particularly insightful.

          Either way, those are 19 million civilians. That isn't military dead, that's civilians.

          • tomatopathe@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            One thing they always forget to mention is the USSR was allied to Nazi Germany in order to partition Poland.

            No doubt the Soviets suffered greatly in WW2, and contributed greatly to the allied victory. On the other hand they did not do it alone, and they certainly did not expect to have to fight the Germans at all, at least not at that point.

            • zephyreks@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              So? The Great Powers had decided on a policy of appeasement against Nazi Germany. What exactly would you have proposed the USSR do? They signed the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact prior to the war for a reason.

              Without the Eastern Front, Europe was lost. Hitler only launched Operation Barbarossa because he thought the Western Front was all but won. Continental Europe was under German control and the UBoats were locking down most of the Atlantic, meanwhile imports of Russian materials was sustaining the German war economy (similarly, imports of American materials was sustaining Japan's war in China and the Pacific)… Of course, it turns out that dividing your forces and taking on Russia in the winter aren't the best ideas, but at the time Germany wanted energy independence and the Caucasus was seen as an easier target than the Middle East (which at the time out produced Romania but wasn't yet the oil superpower it is today).

              • tomatopathe@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                That's all well and good, but that's never taught at all to Russians and ignored by tankies.

                And if you actually read your dumb narrative, your first paragraph is contradicted by your second. You really need to work on your story.

                Here's the truth: the USSR, like Nazi Germany, was an authoritarian expansionist nightmare that was happy to get Poland for free. They only fight the Nazis because they had to. And Stalin was a shit strategist.

    • roastpotatothief@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      That all sounds like brigading emotional nonsense. In fact, there were strong reasons for Russia to invade. It is probably true that Russia was manipulated into invading, it had no choice because of strategic decisions made by Ukraine. It's a shame none of the people you talked to were able to argue the issues sensibly.

      • tomatopathe@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why should Russia strategically be required to invade exactly?

        I've never heard a cogent argument on this point.

        • drathvedro@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It's because Russia sees NATO as a threat and wants to take control of Ukraine to keep buffer states on the west side. Also, to keep it'sblack sea fleet safe. Why it happened now and not sooner or later - nobody knows. The official reasoning, of course, is bullshit, just like with any other war. Not the worst one, though.

    • bodgeit@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      "whatabout America" - "nooo you can't just call me out on hypocrisy, it makes me look bad"

        • kd637_mi@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Dismissing something for being a fallacy is also a fallacy. There are historical, political, social, and economic reasons things happen, and sometimes it pays to put things in context. Limiting the discussion to the thing happening NOW and only NOW doesn't allow for a better understanding of the events.

          Also, someone pointing out hypocrisy of other nations shouldn't be seen as a bad thing, especially if it's pointing out the hypocrisy of the most powerful and influential nation to ever exist. You can see based on past events such as the war on terror and endless drone striking of civilians how governments could expect that to be the standard way of operating. That doesn't make it right, only that military intervention has been and continues to be legitimised politically by the international community.

          • tomatopathe@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Dismissing something for being a fallacy is also a fallacy

            Lol

            Also, someone pointing out hypocrisy of other nations shouldn't be seen as a bad thing, especially if it's pointing out the hypocrisy of the most powerful and influential nation to ever exist.

            I didn't realize Ukraine was the most powerful nation to ever exist.

            • kd637_mi@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Bruh are you being willfully ignorant about that last point or do you legitimately believe I was saying Ukraine is the most powerful nation to ever exist?

              • tomatopathe@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                You are implying that this war is somehow orchestrated by the United States, since you are whatabouting that way.

                The United States is not a belligerent here. Ukraine is the one getting invaded, and Russia is doing the invading - that is the situation. Every time you whatabout to the US you imply that Ukrainians have no agency and no rights to decide for themselves or defend themselves, or are somehow under the control of Joe Biden or some shit (hint: they aren't - polling in Ukraine is very clear that a large majority want to keep fighting until Russia is gone from their country).

                So yeah, "bruh", I'm pointing out that when we talk about Russia and Ukraine, let's talk about Russia and Ukraine. If you want to talk about the wider geostrategic implications of the USA, Europe, NATO, and various other nations providing aid to Ukraine, let's dance:

                I suppose your moral grounds aren't shaken by Russia seeking help in North Korea and Iran to continue killing Ukrainian civilians? That is an actual whatabout.

                Or perhaps that NATO and the EU are voluntary alliances that nations are free to leave at any moment (and don't want in the case of NATO because of Russian aggression). Very nice, "bruh".

                You trolls are so predictable.

                • kd637_mi@lemmy.sdf.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The person you replied to, saying whataboutism is a literal fallacy, brought up the fact that whenever anyone criticises the US in relation to current events it gets dismissed as whataboutism. I was making a point that hypocrisy in regards to the US, which is the most powerful nation in the world, helps no one, and only hinders the ability for governments to operate.

                  I'm not saying Ukrainians have no agency, although they are indebted to the west now, I am saying that the US is using Ukraine and spinning it as a moral good. The fact that it aligns with what the Ukrainian government wants is not necessary.

                  I don't support killing civilians. I don't support killing conscripted people. I don't support killing volunteers who joined because they were struggling in a system that is designed to entice the poor to fight. I don't even support killing those who joined because their mind is warped to hyper patriotism by propaganda due to the system they live in. I would rather see peace talks, collaboration in demining and rebuilding, and genuine interest in what the people of the region want. That Russia is seeking support is not surprising seeing the west supporting Ukraine, that doesn't make it right, that just makes it predictable.

                  • tomatopathe@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    I am saying that the US is using Ukraine and spinning it as a moral good.

                    Using Ukraine how? Spinning it how? As far as I can tell Ukrainians are the ones begging for help. And fighting off an aggressor such as Russia is a moral good as far as I can tell. The thing I'm curious about is the constant "fear of escalation" which means we have been providing aid too slowly.

                    I don't support killing civilians. I don't support killing conscripted people. I don't support killing volunteers who joined because they were struggling in a system that is designed to entice the poor to fight. I don't even support killing those who joined because their mind is warped to hyper patriotism by propaganda due to the system they live in.

                    Of course not. I don't want anyone to die for the ego of a sociopathic cunt. I also want everyone to be happy, live long and prosper, and I also wish we could all ride magic flying unicorns to the infinite ice cream parlor in the Bahamas and never gain weight. There are wishes and there is reality.

                    I would rather see peace talks, collaboration in demining and rebuilding, and genuine interest in what the people of the region want.

                    This is all nice, except you have to contend with Russia. The people of the region who are not Russia want security and they can't have it with Russia as a neighbor, unless they join an alliance such as NATO, or accept Russian enslavement.

                    There are precisely two countries who are Russian "allies" in the region - Belorus which is occupied, and Hungary which is run by a similar Mafia, but it's also protected from Russia by NATO and the EU (I really wish they weren't).