Anonymous #1 1d

I’m talking after USSR. There were debates when the Soviet Union fell if NATO was necessary anymore. Then Russia did a Putin

4

Anonymous OP 1d

If you genuinely think Russia invaded Ukraine for the goofs your an idiot

-4

“Good relations” as in puppet governments. Ask the actual people

3

Anonymous #2 1d

Careful. Same excuse Zionist use for what’s happening in Gaza

1

Anonymous OP 1d

Not puppet government you are again wrong, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, China have excellent relations with Russia, Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014 due to a coup that flipped its government to a nationalist regime, thus why Russia annexed crimea as it is mostly Russian, the people themselves actually prefer to be part of Russia

-1

Anonymous OP 1d

I think the US missed a huge opportunity in not being as open to Russia post Soviet collapse. Like idt they should’ve been in nato but like imagine we created an economic bloc to counter China w them? Could’ve used that as leverage to limit their territorial expansions

1

Anonymous #2 1d

Russia didn’t care about the citizens. They care about the deep water ports in crimea and the mineral resources in the Donbas. The civilians wanting to be a part of Russia are just an excuse to them.

8

Anonymous OP 1d

Russia is not the Israel of this situation Ukraine has killed large amounts of Russians in the Donbas and even shelled civilians, meanwhile Russia has killed 250,000+ Ukrainian combatants and 12000 civilians, Russia has a civilian to combatant ratio of 1:20, Israel has one of 4:1, no comparison

-3

Anonymous #2 1d

The 2014 invasion was from the coup, but it was a coup against the Russian puppet government lol

6

Anonymous #2 1d

Now ask Georgia, Belarus, the baltics, and did you literally just say Kazakhstan?! 😭😂 What Ukraine decides for itself is up to Ukraine, that’s the whole point of sovereignty. You don’t see the U.S. invading Canada even wotb anti-American gov. You know why? Cause Canada has the right to choose for itself, doesn’t matter what the U.S. wants

3

Anonymous #1 1d

No otherwise they would have occupied odessa, crimea is actually 90% Russian

-1

Anonymous #1 1d

It wasn’t a Russian puppet government, it is far more independent than the current western puppet Zelenskyy, who literally said he wanted to make Ukraine a big Israel

0

Anonymous #2 1d

There’s only like 8,000 Russian civilian deaths. Ukraine has killed like 450,000 Russian combatants. Much better ratio than Russia

6

Anonymous #2 1d

Here’s an idea then- Russia stops invading so Ukrainians can have an election.

3

Anonymous #2 1d

But i agree this is far more of a conventional war than the state sponsored genocidal terrorism of Israel

6

Anonymous #2 1d

They tried taking odessa but couldn’t. I’m aware both crimea and the Donbas identify as like 90%+ Russian.

6

Anonymous OP 1d

Baltics are in nato so no shit, also Belarus loves Russia and Belarusians have a very high opinion of Russia, and if Canada had a pro china government, than yes we likely would invade for sure, Georgia doesn’t like Russia because of the 2008 invasion because of a large Russian population of the north who wanted to form new countries, therefore Russia protected their right to self determination

-1

Anonymous #1 1d

That’s because the war is in Ukraine so no shit more Ukrainians will die than Russians

0

Anonymous #2 1d

Brother Belarus is famously a Russian puppet lol

6

Anonymous #2 1d

A lot of Americans move to Yucatán, Mexico. Some even outnumbering the Mexican population. Is Yucatán now part of the U.S.?

1

Anonymous #2 1d

Invading sovereign states is not protecting self determination. Russia is free to do as it wish within its own borders- it has no right to determine another country’s sovereignty.

0

Anonymous #1 1d

We can somewhat agree. Yes the U.S. was hard- but Putin and his past actions within and out of Russia aren’t helping that

3

Anonymous OP 1d

It is allowed to liberate people of a region who are disenfranchised

-1

Anonymous OP 1d

Than again this was kinda expected think of it like the Qing collapse and how China fractured into a bunch of warlord states that all fought each other

1

Anonymous #2 1d

No it literally is not. Because those people aren’t even disenfranchised to begin with. Listen to yourself- take Georgia for an example: foreigners are coming in and wanting to form another entity against your sovereignty. Yeah, no shit Georgia wouldn’t want that. I don’t come into your house and say that this part of your house is mine now. Brother you’re literally describing Israel! Foreigners enforcing against a native population’s sovereignty

0

Anonymous OP 1d

No Donbas and crimea have always been Russian

-1

Anonymous OP 1d

They were there pre Soviet collapse so not foreigners you are wrong once again

0

Anonymous #2 1d

And Jews were colonizing into Palestine before the declaration of Israel, your point?

1

Anonymous OP 1d

Russians were the main populations of those regions before the USSR even formed

-1

Anonymous #2 1d

And part of Canada was in the Louisiana purchase making it American. Yet you don’t see that. Ethnicities don’t determine nationalities.

1

Anonymous #2 1d

Ethnicities. Do. Not. Determine. Nationalities.

3

Anonymous OP 1d

Russians were in Crimea before Ukrainians and Russians were the majority of the population of Crimea and the Donbas and northern Georgia for centuries, and they themselves openly state they want to be either part of Russia or their own independent government, which is why so many separatists are in Ukraine

0

Anonymous OP 1d

Also very often ethnicity does determine nationality, look at the origin for the term nation

-1

Anonymous OP 1d

Yes they very often do, look at where the word nation comes from, if the population is native, Russian, speaks Russian, wants to be part of Russia, they should be part of Russia

0

Anonymous #2 1d

You’re seriously going to defend ethno-states now 🫩

1

Anonymous OP 1d

No I am not defending ethno states, I am stating basic etymology which you would understand if you didn’t have the reading comprehension of a 3rd grader

-1

Anonymous #2 1d

Then you admit ethnicity doesn’t determine nationality

1

Anonymous #2 1d

I’m ethically scottish and speak English- us should be part of the uk then

1

Anonymous #2 1d

And no. They’re not native you pos

0

Anonymous OP 1d

No an ethnostate means that being a citizen of a country requires to be a certain ethnicity, not that those of a certain ethnicity are of a certain nation,

0

Anonymous OP 1d

You originate from the uk however you have no connection as you have never been there, and yes Russians have been in Crimea for centuries, you are clearly too stupid to comprehend this stick to TikTok from now on

0

Anonymous OP 1d

Us should not be part of the uk as USA is not populated by majority Anglo Saxons who wish to be part of the uk and the USA has been separate from the uk for 250 years

0

Anonymous OP 1d

Also notice I said “very often” and not always you fucking idiot

0

Anonymous #2 1d

Holy shit bro you do not see your own hypocrisy it’s crazy! You don’t support ethno states yet argue about Russian ethnicity determining Russian sovereignty

6

Anonymous #2 1d

Dude stop with the etymological argument.does awful mean “full of awe”? Does clue mean “ball of thread”? When something is manufactured is it solely “made by hands”? Argue the etymology of “nation” all you want doesn’t mean shit. And Russia isn’t a nation, it’s a state. Learn geopolitics

1

Anonymous OP 1d

No I’m arguing the combination of language, culture, Ethnicity, historic diaspora, and near universal desire to be part of Russia is what makes the land they are majority of in rightfully part of Russia, though you lack the mental capacity to comprehend the meaning of an ethnostate

0

Anonymous #2 1d

They can practice their culture and acknowledge background while being another nationality. That is extremely common. You don’t need to invade and annex other state’s sovereignty to do that. The arguments you’re using are arguments Mexico could use to invade the U.S.. Ethnic Mexicans are being marginalized in the U.S. particularly the southern part that border Mexico. Would you support Mexico annexing the south? Didn’t think so.

1

Anonymous OP 1d

Russia is a state but you were saying nationality which is very often determined by ethnicity, and the word nationality comes directly from nation and has nation in its definition, also Russia is what is considered a multinational state, Russians can mean 2 things, those of that nation of peoples, and citizens of that state. Which is why Russia has Siberians fully integrated as citizens. Thus making it not an ethnostate, eliminating that as a reason for it attempting to retake core regions.

0

Anonymous #2 1d

If you’re arguing nationality can be determined by ethnicity. Then you are supporting ethno-states. Ethnic French have lived in Spain. They’re considering Spaniards. Ethnic Mexicans live in the U.S.. They’re considered Americans.

0

Anonymous #2 1d

You’re literally making the same arguments Zionist make holy shit 😭

0

Anonymous OP 1d

Yes but are mostly not themselves from that land and nobody alive was around when it was part of Mexico, also unlike those regions who have been majority non Mexican citizens since 1848 Crimea and the donbas never had a point where it was majority Ukrainians

0

Anonymous OP 1d

No I’m not that’s a false equivalency Zionist’s in reality have no origin to the land of Israel and Palestinians are the native majority, Russians are the native majority in Donbas, or at least more native than Ukrainians to that region

0

Anonymous #2 1d

That’s exactly what Zionist about Palestinians! “Jews are the native majority” LISTEN TO YOURSELF! If you want to argue that Ukraine should’ve treated people of different ethnic background, like Russian, better- that’s justified. Arguing that Ukraine deserves to be invaded is not cause, let’s be frank- that’s not why Russia is invading. It’s invading solely for imperialism. Russians move in create a Russian present. Russia invades. It’s a classic playbook they’ve been doing since the Middle Ages

0

Anonymous OP 1d

No I am not, also no look at an ethnic map of Europe in 1936, it shows that it very well is shown as ethnicity, saying nationality can be determined by ethnicity is not supporting ethnostate as it does not indicate supporting a policy that only allows one ethnicity to be citizens it, you are simply too stupid to understand history and basic vocabulary and clearly don’t know what an ethnostate entails.

1

Anonymous OP 1d

Jews are not the native majority of Palestine that’s the thing tho, Palestinians are the natives who used to be the majority until they were displaced. Also the people of the regions have a right to self determination and they clearly want to be part of Russia.

0

Anonymous OP 1d

Russians moved in to those regions many centuries ago and have been living in them since then and still do today and speak Russian and want to be part of Russia

0

Anonymous #2 1d

“never had a point where it was majority Ukrainian”. So? Ethnicities don’t determine nationality. Ethnicities also don’t determine borders. There’s ethnic German regions in Poland that have always been ethnically German. It’s still part of Poland.

1

Anonymous #2 1d

If they want to be part of Russia then move to Russia. If not, then they still practice and acknowledge their Russian background while being another nationality. Stop the bs- you and I know that’s not why Russia is invading.

0

Anonymous OP 1d

Yes and they still aren’t Ukrainian while actually all of Poland is ethnically majority polish as ethnic Germans were expelled in 1945 by the Soviets, and the Russians were still the majority group at the time, and there descendent live their today and want to be part of Russia, people have a right to self determination, you are still confusing nation state with ethnostate, people of a nation have a right to determine their country they are a part of

1

Anonymous #2 1d

Now place modern borders on that ethnic map of Europe and tell me all ethnicities fit perfectly in their respective borders. They won’t. And that’s ok. Being another nationality doesn’t erase your ethnicity

0

Anonymous OP 1d

No because that is their homes and their land, and they want to be part of a certain country and do not have any responsibly to ethnically cleanse themselves from a region, also Russia is invading for another reason to demilitarize Ukraine and topple its hyper nationalistic government, for one who criticizes ethnostates you sure are silent about that

0

Anonymous OP 1d

They do actually look it up

0

Anonymous _orangutan 1d

and really, NATO and the EU just want Ukraine so they can invest into the natural gas reserves off the coast of Crimea. it turns out the fossil fuel imperialists don’t have a plan to shift away from our collective extinction, so they’re just going to invest in the world’s remaining deposits, in markets still semi-isolated from western imperialism. enter the former Soviet states and Russia, Venezuela, and Iran

-1

Anonymous #2 1d

What’s dangerous about your argument is that any country can use that same argument to invade any of its neighbors. Iraq used it on Kuwait. Somolia used it on Ethiopia. Fucking H!tler used it for the Sudetenland! The truth is that is not how geopolitics works. And it rarely is the true reason so stop using it and just be honest and say you support Russian imperialism

1

Anonymous #2 1d

And it can still be their home and their land under another nationality. And are you seriously using a debunked argument? If anyone is the nationalistic one it’s Russia

1

Anonymous _orangutan 1d

Russia has an actual strategic concern having an American proxy on its border. people are so deluded to think Russia, the nation struggling in Ukraine, would start world conflict, meanwhile Amerikkka and ‘israel’ are committing genocide, kidnapping and assassinating heads of state, and are blockading one of the busiest shipping routes on the planet

-1

Anonymous _orangutan 1d

Russia should’ve treated its neighbors better. Countries aren’t forced to join. They apply to join. Now ask why those states applied

1

Anonymous #2 1d

Yeah they fits so perfectly don’t they 😂

1

Anonymous _orangutan 1d

Two things can be true. America practices imperialism. That is objectively evil and bad. Russia practices imperialism. That too is also evil and objectively bad

5

Anonymous OP 1d

the US aided in the collapse of the Soviet Union, dumping billions of dollars into Yeltsin, who then ordered tanks to fire upon the state legislature and then illegally dissolved the union. this was orchestrated by the US with the intent of 1) destroying its only opposition, and 2) opening new markets. instead ask yourself, who gains from a dictatorship and a forever war? imperialists, or the people fighting and producing for said war?

1

Anonymous _orangutan 1d

Again, two things can be true at once. The U.S. has done plenty of questionable and outright evil and illegal activities. That doesn’t mean Russia is free from criticism itself. You’re falling into campism mind set. NATO expands. Why? Countries keep applying to join. Why? They feel threatened and need protection. From who? Russia. It be pretty ignorant to think only the U.S. practices imperialism

4

Anonymous OP 1d

imperialism is a defined term. 1) it consists of capitalist monopolies, 2) the concentration of finance capital and banks, 3) the fusion between finance and industrial capitalists, 4) the export of capital, and 5) the division of the world into economic spheres

0

Anonymous _orangutan 1d

You’re describing Leninist imperialism, not imperialism generally. Imperialism predates capitalism by centuries, and academic definitions include political and military domination as well as economic control. Even your list isn’t quite Lenin’s original five features. Historians and political theorists use imperialism much more broadly for political, economic, or military domination by one state over another. Otherwise we’d have to claim pre-capitalist empires weren’t imperialist

4

Anonymous _orangutan 1d

the Russian economy is not concentrated in capitalist monopolies, unlike the US, rather large segments of it survived shock treatment unscathed, remaining under state control. this leads to the second point, the bank in Russia is a central one, owned by the Russian state, unlike American private banks which export themselves all over the globe (including 🇺🇦), we’ll talk ab that more in a bit. the fusion bit can’t really happen because of the functions of the Russian economy

0

Anonymous _orangutan 1d

as for the export of capital, the central Russian bank does not really deviate far from Russia, unlike J.p. morgan, whose seed capital has made its way over to Ukraine to ‘aid’ (acquire) in its reconstruction. finally, the last bit, the division of the world… well there’s NATO, the obvious one, and then dozens of multilateral alliances, half of which held with nations the US has bombed, invaded, or couped. Russia i suppose has its rather precarious defensive alliance, if we count that

0

Anonymous OP 1d

we live in the era of capitalism, not antiquity, and not feudalism. i will use an analysis that centers this era, not previous ones

0

Anonymous _orangutan 1d

You’re still defining imperialism exclusively through Lenin’s economic model and then treating failure to perfectly satisfy that model as proof Russia can’t be imperialist. But even on those terms Russia exports substantial capital and has highly concentrated state/private corporate power. More importantly, imperialism isn’t limited to private banks. Russia invaded a sovereign neighbor, occupies its territory and attempted to annex four Ukrainian regions, acts the UN General Assembly condemned

3

Anonymous _orangutan 1d

State capitalism doesn’t immunize a country from imperialism. Russia exports capital too, but more importantly it invaded Ukraine, occupies Ukrainian territory and attempted to annex it. That’s imperialism. The UN condemned those annexations. Criticizing NATO or JPMorgan doesn’t make conquering your neighbor “defensive”

3

Anonymous _orangutan 1d

That still doesn’t solve the problem. Even in the modern capitalist era, Russia exports capital, concentrates economic power, invades neighbors, occupies territory, and attempts annexation. UNCTAD recorded $11.7B in Russian outward FDI in 2024, and the UN condemned Russia’s attempted annexation of four Ukrainian regions 143–5. You can use Lenin’s framework, but you can’t define imperialism so narrowly that conquest somehow stops counting.

4

Anonymous _orangutan 1d

Using a Leninist lens is fine. Using it to define away invasion, occupation, and annexation isn’t

5

Anonymous OP 1d

False look up azov battalion and Ukrainian militias

-1

Anonymous OP 1d

Furthermore, if eastern European countries want to join NATO to protect themselves from Russian imperialism, that’s the result of Russian imperialism, not US imperialism

0

Anonymous OP 1d

Arguably, every European monarchy was much closer to state capitalism than the lasseiz-faire capitalism of the 20th century. One of the reasons lasseiz-faire capitalism is associated with freedom is because it was associated with countries that weren’t absolutist monarchies with total state control of industry and politics.

0

Anonymous #2 1d

Actually, Russia comes from the Kievan Rus, so really Russia should be Ukrainian.

1

Anonymous #4 23h

Nope not how it works

-1

Anonymous #4 23h

This is the core territory btw

0

Anonymous #2 22h

So clearly Russia should be broken up into multiple countries when Ukraine wins the war. Mongolia can have Siberia and we can make a Novogorod Republic for the north of the country and there’ll be a small Moscow rump state and Ukraine will get the rest

1

Anonymous #4 21h

No because they clearly want to be part of Russia also Kievan Rus was not Ukraine nor Russia it was a distinct group

0

Anonymous #4 21h

Which are the ancestors of Ukrainians Belorussians and Russians

0

Anonymous #2 21h

they were scandinavians that ruled over the territories in the east slav lands. i don’t really like tracing history back to the Kievan Rus, but ik Russia and Ukraine both claim it as herritage so who tf am i

1

Anonymous _orangutan 20h

I think it’s kinda similar to a Bulgaria situation - there Turkic peoples migrated and became the ruling class while the common people still remained Slavic. I think Russia was like that where the ruling class were Scandinavian but the people themselves were still Slavs

1