Hi! Sorry, whenever I try to answer I get banned. Let me make it absolutely clear: I do not support Nazis in any way, no matter which country or which symbol they use, but I also do not reject the evidence of my eyes.
It would be simple if the answer didn’t get me banned twice. If you’re interested in helping me see your point of views you can PM me. If you just want me banned I’d ask you to leave me alone.
By the way the modlog is public and its clear to see you got banned for being a disingenuous troll trying to do debatelord bullshit talking in circles, and not for giving an answer that revealed you held the wrong opinion.
Maybe I’ve misunderstood the situation then, I’d be happy to be enlightened if you can see something I can’t.
Twice I’ve been banned for breaking the rule about bigotry, both times it happened directly after answering EmmiLime, and when asking the moderator what happened, I’ve been sent links about the SS and the Wolfsangel. At least once my answer was removed. It seems clear to me that the wrong answer to EmmiLime’s question constitutes bigotry.
That judgement is the prerogative of this community and the moderator, I am not complaining or trying to speak ill of the moderator, I am just trying to follow the rules and not rise to the bait.
I have zero sympathy for Nazis no matter what time and what country.
Sorry, davel. As I hope you can see, I’ve done my best not to do it again.
Don’t know if it makes a difference, but I wasn’t pretending, I was being earnest. And I’m not a fascist dog whistler, but a socialist fighting for international worker’s solidarity.
both times it happened directly after answering EmmiLime, and when asking the moderator what happened, I’ve been sent links about the SS and the Wolfsangel.
Probably because you refuse to call the “Ukrainian SS” Nazi symbols, you just keep dodging or saying it MIGHT look like it or that they look like 44???
At least once my answer was removed. It seems clear to me that the wrong answer to EmmiLime’s question constitutes bigotry.
AGAIN ARE THESE NAZI SYMBOLS YES??? OR NO???
IF you say yes, then you don’t get banned, but if you keep vagueposting instead and not even saying no, then you get banned like you described. Because that’s what your behaviour has been the entire time.
I’m not the type to go looking through a posters entire history, I looked through your modlog because it’s short and an easy click and I’m in class with a terrible professor right now, so anything to make the time pass I suppose.
You have these two comments removed and you seem to have been banned from the comm around the same time for breaking rule 1 “be civil and nice”
And THIS is the picture you’re talking about
First off, I’d like to say that declaring oneself something does not matter, it’s the actions most of all and then, quite far behind, the thoughts one has. Words are cheap.
You might say you have no sympathy for nazis, but in practice you’re running defense for them, trying to pretend an obvious wolfsangel (which is an SS symbol, it was used by a good couple of divisions) isn’t that. You’re like a guy saying “Oh come on maybe Adolph1488, the poster with a long history of posting nazi shit and doing nazi shit, is actually just a german guy who made this account when he was 14 and 8 is his lucky number!” You clearly have a lot of sympathy for nazis. That isn’t even a dogwhistle, it’s just straight up nazi shit.
Secondly I’d like to point out that “civility” isn’t just about using the right words. It’s a pretty common tactic for types like you to do this, where you are acting in obvious bad faith, being obtuse, talking in circles, moving goalposts, begging the question, doing motte-and-bailey shit and (though you have not done this so far, but I would not be surprised to see it) acting like your worldview is somehow both evident yet also so novel that noone has considered it, while being able to provide no proof, yet demanding proof for the proof of the proof for anything anyone else presents, if it is acknowledged at all. These things can be done while sounding incredibly reasonable, but to anyone with a couple of neurons they’re still obvious and they are incredibly uncivil.
In our interaction you have oscillated from being an uncivil asshole to just being an obvious debatebro at this point. That’s what’s getting you banned. Being uncivil.
If I post a picture of a swastika and you say “maybe it’s just a windmill!” Then it is entirely reasonable to assume you’re being an asshole, especially if that statement comes alongside the other poor rhetorics you’ve been pulling. Did you swear when you said “maybe it’s just a windmill!”? No, nor did you insult me. But goddamn that is uncivil, thinking other people will fall for that, assuming other people would take that seriously.
And again, the person going “ITS JUST A WINDMILL” might announce they don’t like nazis, but it’s pretty clear by their actions that they do in fact hold them near and dear to their heart to such an extent they are, at the very best, willing to go far beyond reasonable doubt.
Now I suppose it might have been a genuine question, but in that case I gotta say it’s surprising to me you don’t understand your actions exist in the context of your other actions. Acting like an obvious debatebro combined with that makes any reasonable person assume you’re being disingenuous.
I don’t know the rules about relitigating mod decisions, so let me preface by saying that I am not complaining, not trying to undermine any authority of the mods here, and not trying to claim that any nazi groups are in fact not nazis.
First some corrections: When I asked the mod about the ban, they sent me back the message
No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
along with links to educational resources on nazi symbols and this Ukrainian brigade. So this is about rule 1 of lemmy.ml, not about civility, at least according to them. Second of all, I wasn’t saying anything about the Wolfsangel other than “that’s for sure a Wolfsangel symbol”, as your screenshot shows. I was instead confused about whether the shoulder patch of the 44th division was the number 44 written to look like an SS symbol, or the literal SS symbol. I thought it was the former, but have been corrected through banning and deletion.
Now you claim I am a nazi sympathizer (or an idiot). I don’t consider myself either, but I’m always happy to be corrected. I have no sympathy for Nazi’s, as I say, and I have never defended or supported this Ukrainian group or any other. My question about the symbol was a question about the literal symbol on the blurry picture, not because a 44 made to look like an SS logo means they’re not Nazis, but because it matters whether they have to at least have the thinnest fig leaf to hide that fact behind, or whether they’re full on wearing literal SS symbols. It was meant with good faith only.
In our interaction you have oscillated from being an uncivil asshole to just being an obvious debatebro at this point.
Acting like an obvious debatebro combined with that makes any reasonable person assume you’re being disingenuous.
I’m sorry you feel like that. I am here to learn, and have been curious about the leap from “Russia should withdraw” to “you should enlist” which was made earlier. My initial comment was maybe pointed, challenging you to clarify an apparent asymmetry in your argument, and you have. I hope that my restatement of your viewpoint have made it clear that I have been listening. If you could point out specifics of uncivil or bad faith behavior, I’d be happy to correct that in the future. Also I’m not sure what a debatebro is, sorry.
If you’re open to critique yourself, I do feel that calling me dense, dickhead and asshole aren’t peak civility, but I don’t really mind.
It’s not so much that we’re “on board” speficially with the government of the Russian Federeration, who are a bunch of capitalists. It’s more that we’ve looked at the possible ways this war can play out and concluded that a NATO defeat is the best result for everyone.
And I don’t think anyone here is onboard with the Russian government. They just see any opposition to western hegemony as a good thing, and I’m inclined to agree.
Walk me through your thought process: Why do you think “If you think the war in Ukraine is worth forcing Ukrainian children to die at the front lines, then you should go volunteer yourself, since you believe so strongly in it” somehow links to “I want people to fight to the death for Russia”?
Since I don’t think forcibly conscripting people to fight against their will is worth this war: No.
I am not donating money to either government, I am not advocating that my government should support either government, in fact I think all support should be withdrawn. I think providing weapons, money, Intel and logistical support to Nazis is bad. So, given that I don’t think the war is worth fighting at all and I dont think we should support it and I dont provide material support for it: Bigger no.
Furthermore considering the fact that Ukraine has almost reached a peace deal with Russia several times, only to be stopped at the finish line by meddling from NATO, I do not see what volunteering for Russia would gain. It is pretty clear volunteering for Russia would not advance my preferred goal: An end to the war; since that goal is kept out of reach for reasons other than manpower.
This would be obvious for anyone who doesn’t froth at the mouth at the mere suggestion we don’t drown ukrainians in a river of blood just so we can kill a few russians.
It requires barely a moment of thought to realise this. If my end goal was a Ukrainian victory then it would make perfect sense to volunteer for Ukraine. If my morals dictated that sending a bunch of money to paramilitary nazi gangs was a worthwhile cause, only because those gangs might force some children to die in a list cause, then it would also follow that I volunteer, since I apparently think the cause is so worthy. But I don’t. I don’t think the cause is worth sending unwilling people to a meatshredder, so it equally follows I don’t think its worth dying for.
If you think it is worth forcing others to die for a cause you believe in, why do you not think its worth you fighting in it? Why is it only worth the death of others? This is a genuine question.
Walk me through your thought process: Why do you think “If you think the war in Ukraine is worth forcing Ukrainian children to die at the front lines, then you should go volunteer yourself, since you believe so strongly in it” somehow links to “I want people to fight to the death for Russia”?
Since that was your reaction to the idea that the war could end by Russia withdrawing from Ukraine. Your proposal that that idea constitutes support for forced child soldiers seems to indicate you think Russia shouldn’t withdraw from Ukraine. Which seems to indicate that you think people should fight to the death for Russia. But I’m glad that doesn’t seem to be your opinion.
This would be obvious for anyone who doesn’t froth at the mouth at the mere suggestion we don’t drown ukrainians in a river of blood just so we can kill a few russians.
It wasn’t obvious at all from the previous exchange, despite my mouth being unfrothed.
If you think it is worth forcing others to die for a cause you believe in, why do you not think its worth you fighting in it? Why is it only worth the death of others? This is a genuine question.
I do not think it is worth forcing anyone to die for anything.
I think the war needs to end to avoid further bloodshed, and it needs to end in a way that minimizes the chances of further aggression in the future. I can see how Russia withdrawing from Ukraine could arguably be a path to that goal, and that this could be proposed without supporting forced child soldiers. I assume you can see that as well?
Since that was your reaction to the idea that the war could end by Russia withdrawing from Ukraine
Oh sorry I didn’t know I was supposed to treat that like a serious suggestion lmao. Why don’t we give everyone a pony while we’re at it? If this is a serious proposition of yours, that a peace requires Russia to withdraw, then you are in fact demanding people fight to the death. So go do that. Go volunteer.
Buddy, I want the war to end. In the real world that happens with a peace treaty, which comes quite much faster if we’re not supplying arms to one side. I’m not for giving either side money or arms or lives, but you are.
But I gotta say, this doesn’t really seem like a cogent answer you’re giving me. Thinking that the war should end now is somehow demanding people fight to the death for Russia.
despite my mouth being unfrothed.
They said, while proposing an insane ultimatum that cannot be brought to fruition.
despite my mouth being unfrothed.
They said when met with the idea that Ukraine should be allowed the peace treaty it has already sought with Russia twice before, and they then reacted with imperious demands of something that will not happen, knowing that the alternative to peace is just forcing ukrainians to fight to the death.
Go volunteer dude.
despite my mouth being unfrothed
They said while arguing that wanting peace now instead of forcing people to fight to the death so they can feel like they’re winning a HOIV game is somehow the same as wanting people to fight to the death
I assume you can see that as well?
Well, no. Russia invaded after 8 years of breaches of treaties, 8 years of shelling and ethnic cleansing carried out by nazi paramilitaries supported by the ukrainian government. I actually think we should not go back to that status quo. I think ethnic cleansing and pogroms are bad, I think bloodshed is bad, so, you know, I would not want to do that.
And this is not even getting into the reality of what would happen if you somehow did manage to just have a population give up and go home after massive gains because some dumbass online thinks that’s how peace negotiations work. I think you understand such an action would likely lead to the collapse of the Russian Republic, leading to further bloodshed. Not to mention what would happen in a Ukraine if you suddenly just gave nazis free reign after arming and funding them for years, leaving them in a country that basically already is collapsed. Great recipe for yet more bloodshed. Lets get a ukrainian taleban up and running, sounds awesome dude.
I have a feeling you understand how ridiculous your suggestion is on every level and you don’t care about the lives of ukrainians or russians.
Ignoring that, your idea is also just… not realistic. If we’re playing pretend, why stop there. I say we give every eastern european their own castle and one billion dollars and one hundred puppies. Why do you think ukrainians shouldn’t have access to puppies? Why do you think eastern europeans don’t deserve to live in castles? Why do you hate life?
I just checked again, and indeed there is no froth at my mouth. Is it important for your argument or the discussion that I am somehow frothing?
I feel like you didn’t quite understand what I have written so far. I was criticising your reaction that proposed Russia’s withdrawal is the same as supporting child soldiers. It’s not unreasonable to say that if Russia withdrew, soldiers would stop dying, peace would be a lot easier, and Eastern Europe would feel a lot safer. If a lasting peace can be established without Russia withdrawing, that would also be excellent.
I assume Russia is capable of withdrawing, and that the Federation will survive, although there might be a change of leadership. I also assume that scrutiny of Ukrainian leadership by international society would be a lot easier if they were not at war or could pull a sympathy card due to lost territory. But I am happy to be enlightened if you have more insight to share (ideally without the strawmanning and name calling).
I just checked again, and indeed there is no froth at my mouth. Is it important for your argument or the discussion that I am somehow frothing?
Lmao I thought you were being snide, but at this point it seems like you might just be dense
I was criticising your reaction that proposed Russia’s withdrawal is the same as supporting child soldiers.
If you think the war should continue until Russia leaves Ukraine, then you want the war to continue until the point of some specific ukrainian victory point. This means you are for the war, you are in support of it, you think the war is worth fighting, and you think it’s worth fighting for a country full of nazis that have torture dungeons for the children they will then go on to send to the front lines. If you believe that such means are worth this war continuing until Russia withdraws, then you are such an extreme supporter that it makes no sense that you should not likewise think the war is worth YOU going to fight.
These are not strawmen, they are the logical conclusions to the position of “this war should continue until Russia withdraws”.
It’s not unreasonable to say that if Russia withdrew, soldiers would stop dying, peace would be a lot easier, and Eastern Europe would feel a lot safer.
Sure and if my ass was a propeller plane then trips to Taiwan would be much cheaper.
And, again, it is unreasonable to say that. The only people that would be “a lot safer” would be the nazis who could go back to carrying out their ethnic cleansing “in peace”. You seem to continually brush over this fact, you seem to somehow go blank at the mention of Minsk I and Minsk II, you seem to think this war came out of nowhere. Going back to status quo is going back to ethnic cleansing. You call it a strawman when I point out how you are fine with death and destruction, yet you continually fail to touch on this, just like how you fail to touch on the many other faults in your logic which have been pointed out.
Lmao I thought you were being snide, but at this point it seems like you might just be dense
If there is something I’m saying which you don’t understand, you can just ask, you don’t have to call me snide or dense.
If you think the war should continue until Russia leaves Ukraine, then you want the war to continue until the point of some specific ukrainian victory point.
These are not strawmen, they are the logical conclusions to the position of “this war should continue until Russia withdraws”.
You’ve got it the wrong way around. The war shouldn’t continue until Russia is defeated. Rather, the war could end today if Russia withdrew.
Sure and if my ass was a propeller plane then trips to Taiwan would be much cheaper.
So we agree on the positives of Russia’s withdrawal, but disagree on the possibility of Russia doing it. Do you think Russia cannot, or simply will not withdraw?
you’ve got it the wrong way around. The war shouldn’t continue until Russia is defeated. Rather, the war could end today if Russia withdrew.
This combined with this
So we agree on the positives of Russia’s withdrawal
Makes me think you are straight up dense.
No, we don’t agree, as I’ve made it very clear.
You have also, conveniently, gone from “wanting an end to bloodshed” to wanting an end to “the war”. So while I do think you are dense, I think you are dense because you are making it much too obvious how you are being deliberately obtuse.
Do you think Russia cannot, or simply will not withdraw?
I think the position of “oh they should just pack up and leave” is a deeply unserious position to hold with regards to discussions of ending a war. If you want to sit in a drum circle, sing kumbaya and talk about how you could just hash this all out if you just got putin and zelensky in a room with a couple of joints, be my guest, but don’t act surprised when you are treated with derision for holding such notions.
I’ll just ignore your remarks about my density if that’s all right.
No, we don’t agree, as I’ve made it very clear.
So if we don’t agree about the positives of Russia’s withdrawal, what would be bad about a Russian withdrawal?
You have also, conveniently, gone from “wanting an end to bloodshed” to wanting an end to “the war”.
Sorry if that’s unclear. I want an end to the bloodshed. The war is a source of bloodshed, so I want an end to the war. If the war could continue without bloodshed that would be much better, and all bloodshed beyond the war should end as well.
I think the position of “oh they should just pack up and leave” is a deeply unserious position to hold with regards to discussions of ending a war.
I agree. That is not my position.
But you didn’t answer my question - do you think Russia cannot or will not withdraw?
If you think that’s how things should work, have you volunteered for Russia to denazify Ukraine and stop those atrocities?
Oh it’s you. Still think the Ukrainian nazi symbols are just two number “4” next to each other?
Hi! Sorry, whenever I try to answer I get banned. Let me make it absolutely clear: I do not support Nazis in any way, no matter which country or which symbol they use, but I also do not reject the evidence of my eyes.
Send me a PM if you’d like to discuss further.
It’s the SIMPLEST question, are these Nazi symbols? Yes or No?
It would be simple if the answer didn’t get me banned twice. If you’re interested in helping me see your point of views you can PM me. If you just want me banned I’d ask you to leave me alone.
YES or NO
Stop vagueposting like a democrat and answer the fucking question.
Yes or no
You get banned for acting like a dickhead like you are right now, you’re not getting banned for thoughtcrimes
By the way the modlog is public and its clear to see you got banned for being a disingenuous troll trying to do debatelord bullshit talking in circles, and not for giving an answer that revealed you held the wrong opinion.
Maybe I’ve misunderstood the situation then, I’d be happy to be enlightened if you can see something I can’t.
Twice I’ve been banned for breaking the rule about bigotry, both times it happened directly after answering EmmiLime, and when asking the moderator what happened, I’ve been sent links about the SS and the Wolfsangel. At least once my answer was removed. It seems clear to me that the wrong answer to EmmiLime’s question constitutes bigotry.
That judgement is the prerogative of this community and the moderator, I am not complaining or trying to speak ill of the moderator, I am just trying to follow the rules and not rise to the bait.
I have zero sympathy for Nazis no matter what time and what country.
Pretending that the SS symbol might actually be a 44 isn’t so smooth, operator. Fascist dog whistlers are seldom smooth.
Sorry, davel. As I hope you can see, I’ve done my best not to do it again.
Don’t know if it makes a difference, but I wasn’t pretending, I was being earnest. And I’m not a fascist dog whistler, but a socialist fighting for international worker’s solidarity.
Probably because you refuse to call the “Ukrainian SS” Nazi symbols, you just keep dodging or saying it MIGHT look like it or that they look like 44???
AGAIN ARE THESE NAZI SYMBOLS YES??? OR NO???
IF you say yes, then you don’t get banned, but if you keep vagueposting instead and not even saying no, then you get banned like you described. Because that’s what your behaviour has been the entire time.
I’m not the type to go looking through a posters entire history, I looked through your modlog because it’s short and an easy click and I’m in class with a terrible professor right now, so anything to make the time pass I suppose.
You have these two comments removed and you seem to have been banned from the comm around the same time for breaking rule 1 “be civil and nice”
And THIS is the picture you’re talking about
First off, I’d like to say that declaring oneself something does not matter, it’s the actions most of all and then, quite far behind, the thoughts one has. Words are cheap.
You might say you have no sympathy for nazis, but in practice you’re running defense for them, trying to pretend an obvious wolfsangel (which is an SS symbol, it was used by a good couple of divisions) isn’t that. You’re like a guy saying “Oh come on maybe Adolph1488, the poster with a long history of posting nazi shit and doing nazi shit, is actually just a german guy who made this account when he was 14 and 8 is his lucky number!” You clearly have a lot of sympathy for nazis. That isn’t even a dogwhistle, it’s just straight up nazi shit.
Secondly I’d like to point out that “civility” isn’t just about using the right words. It’s a pretty common tactic for types like you to do this, where you are acting in obvious bad faith, being obtuse, talking in circles, moving goalposts, begging the question, doing motte-and-bailey shit and (though you have not done this so far, but I would not be surprised to see it) acting like your worldview is somehow both evident yet also so novel that noone has considered it, while being able to provide no proof, yet demanding proof for the proof of the proof for anything anyone else presents, if it is acknowledged at all. These things can be done while sounding incredibly reasonable, but to anyone with a couple of neurons they’re still obvious and they are incredibly uncivil.
In our interaction you have oscillated from being an uncivil asshole to just being an obvious debatebro at this point. That’s what’s getting you banned. Being uncivil.
If I post a picture of a swastika and you say “maybe it’s just a windmill!” Then it is entirely reasonable to assume you’re being an asshole, especially if that statement comes alongside the other poor rhetorics you’ve been pulling. Did you swear when you said “maybe it’s just a windmill!”? No, nor did you insult me. But goddamn that is uncivil, thinking other people will fall for that, assuming other people would take that seriously.
And again, the person going “ITS JUST A WINDMILL” might announce they don’t like nazis, but it’s pretty clear by their actions that they do in fact hold them near and dear to their heart to such an extent they are, at the very best, willing to go far beyond reasonable doubt.
Now I suppose it might have been a genuine question, but in that case I gotta say it’s surprising to me you don’t understand your actions exist in the context of your other actions. Acting like an obvious debatebro combined with that makes any reasonable person assume you’re being disingenuous.
Haha, hope your next class is better!
I don’t know the rules about relitigating mod decisions, so let me preface by saying that I am not complaining, not trying to undermine any authority of the mods here, and not trying to claim that any nazi groups are in fact not nazis.
First some corrections: When I asked the mod about the ban, they sent me back the message
along with links to educational resources on nazi symbols and this Ukrainian brigade. So this is about rule 1 of lemmy.ml, not about civility, at least according to them. Second of all, I wasn’t saying anything about the Wolfsangel other than “that’s for sure a Wolfsangel symbol”, as your screenshot shows. I was instead confused about whether the shoulder patch of the 44th division was the number 44 written to look like an SS symbol, or the literal SS symbol. I thought it was the former, but have been corrected through banning and deletion.
Now you claim I am a nazi sympathizer (or an idiot). I don’t consider myself either, but I’m always happy to be corrected. I have no sympathy for Nazi’s, as I say, and I have never defended or supported this Ukrainian group or any other. My question about the symbol was a question about the literal symbol on the blurry picture, not because a 44 made to look like an SS logo means they’re not Nazis, but because it matters whether they have to at least have the thinnest fig leaf to hide that fact behind, or whether they’re full on wearing literal SS symbols. It was meant with good faith only.
I’m sorry you feel like that. I am here to learn, and have been curious about the leap from “Russia should withdraw” to “you should enlist” which was made earlier. My initial comment was maybe pointed, challenging you to clarify an apparent asymmetry in your argument, and you have. I hope that my restatement of your viewpoint have made it clear that I have been listening. If you could point out specifics of uncivil or bad faith behavior, I’d be happy to correct that in the future. Also I’m not sure what a debatebro is, sorry.
If you’re open to critique yourself, I do feel that calling me dense, dickhead and asshole aren’t peak civility, but I don’t really mind.
Lol, you are but going to get banned for saying a Nazi symbol is a nazi symbol
Yet you support the American and Ukrainian governments? Something’s not adding up here, sailor.
I wouldn’t say I support the American or Ukrainian governments, what gave you that idea?
I admit that I’m not as onboard with the Russian government as many here are.
It’s not so much that we’re “on board” speficially with the government of the Russian Federeration, who are a bunch of capitalists. It’s more that we’ve looked at the possible ways this war can play out and concluded that a NATO defeat is the best result for everyone.
Just an assumption, my bad!
And I don’t think anyone here is onboard with the Russian government. They just see any opposition to western hegemony as a good thing, and I’m inclined to agree.
Walk me through your thought process: Why do you think “If you think the war in Ukraine is worth forcing Ukrainian children to die at the front lines, then you should go volunteer yourself, since you believe so strongly in it” somehow links to “I want people to fight to the death for Russia”?
Since I don’t think forcibly conscripting people to fight against their will is worth this war: No.
I am not donating money to either government, I am not advocating that my government should support either government, in fact I think all support should be withdrawn. I think providing weapons, money, Intel and logistical support to Nazis is bad. So, given that I don’t think the war is worth fighting at all and I dont think we should support it and I dont provide material support for it: Bigger no.
Furthermore considering the fact that Ukraine has almost reached a peace deal with Russia several times, only to be stopped at the finish line by meddling from NATO, I do not see what volunteering for Russia would gain. It is pretty clear volunteering for Russia would not advance my preferred goal: An end to the war; since that goal is kept out of reach for reasons other than manpower.
This would be obvious for anyone who doesn’t froth at the mouth at the mere suggestion we don’t drown ukrainians in a river of blood just so we can kill a few russians.
It requires barely a moment of thought to realise this. If my end goal was a Ukrainian victory then it would make perfect sense to volunteer for Ukraine. If my morals dictated that sending a bunch of money to paramilitary nazi gangs was a worthwhile cause, only because those gangs might force some children to die in a list cause, then it would also follow that I volunteer, since I apparently think the cause is so worthy. But I don’t. I don’t think the cause is worth sending unwilling people to a meatshredder, so it equally follows I don’t think its worth dying for.
If you think it is worth forcing others to die for a cause you believe in, why do you not think its worth you fighting in it? Why is it only worth the death of others? This is a genuine question.
Since that was your reaction to the idea that the war could end by Russia withdrawing from Ukraine. Your proposal that that idea constitutes support for forced child soldiers seems to indicate you think Russia shouldn’t withdraw from Ukraine. Which seems to indicate that you think people should fight to the death for Russia. But I’m glad that doesn’t seem to be your opinion.
It wasn’t obvious at all from the previous exchange, despite my mouth being unfrothed.
I do not think it is worth forcing anyone to die for anything.
I think the war needs to end to avoid further bloodshed, and it needs to end in a way that minimizes the chances of further aggression in the future. I can see how Russia withdrawing from Ukraine could arguably be a path to that goal, and that this could be proposed without supporting forced child soldiers. I assume you can see that as well?
Oh sorry I didn’t know I was supposed to treat that like a serious suggestion lmao. Why don’t we give everyone a pony while we’re at it? If this is a serious proposition of yours, that a peace requires Russia to withdraw, then you are in fact demanding people fight to the death. So go do that. Go volunteer.
Buddy, I want the war to end. In the real world that happens with a peace treaty, which comes quite much faster if we’re not supplying arms to one side. I’m not for giving either side money or arms or lives, but you are.
But I gotta say, this doesn’t really seem like a cogent answer you’re giving me. Thinking that the war should end now is somehow demanding people fight to the death for Russia.
They said, while proposing an insane ultimatum that cannot be brought to fruition.
They said when met with the idea that Ukraine should be allowed the peace treaty it has already sought with Russia twice before, and they then reacted with imperious demands of something that will not happen, knowing that the alternative to peace is just forcing ukrainians to fight to the death.
Go volunteer dude.
They said while arguing that wanting peace now instead of forcing people to fight to the death so they can feel like they’re winning a HOIV game is somehow the same as wanting people to fight to the death
Well, no. Russia invaded after 8 years of breaches of treaties, 8 years of shelling and ethnic cleansing carried out by nazi paramilitaries supported by the ukrainian government. I actually think we should not go back to that status quo. I think ethnic cleansing and pogroms are bad, I think bloodshed is bad, so, you know, I would not want to do that.
And this is not even getting into the reality of what would happen if you somehow did manage to just have a population give up and go home after massive gains because some dumbass online thinks that’s how peace negotiations work. I think you understand such an action would likely lead to the collapse of the Russian Republic, leading to further bloodshed. Not to mention what would happen in a Ukraine if you suddenly just gave nazis free reign after arming and funding them for years, leaving them in a country that basically already is collapsed. Great recipe for yet more bloodshed. Lets get a ukrainian taleban up and running, sounds awesome dude.
I have a feeling you understand how ridiculous your suggestion is on every level and you don’t care about the lives of ukrainians or russians.
Ignoring that, your idea is also just… not realistic. If we’re playing pretend, why stop there. I say we give every eastern european their own castle and one billion dollars and one hundred puppies. Why do you think ukrainians shouldn’t have access to puppies? Why do you think eastern europeans don’t deserve to live in castles? Why do you hate life?
I just checked again, and indeed there is no froth at my mouth. Is it important for your argument or the discussion that I am somehow frothing?
I feel like you didn’t quite understand what I have written so far. I was criticising your reaction that proposed Russia’s withdrawal is the same as supporting child soldiers. It’s not unreasonable to say that if Russia withdrew, soldiers would stop dying, peace would be a lot easier, and Eastern Europe would feel a lot safer. If a lasting peace can be established without Russia withdrawing, that would also be excellent.
I assume Russia is capable of withdrawing, and that the Federation will survive, although there might be a change of leadership. I also assume that scrutiny of Ukrainian leadership by international society would be a lot easier if they were not at war or could pull a sympathy card due to lost territory. But I am happy to be enlightened if you have more insight to share (ideally without the strawmanning and name calling).
Lmao I thought you were being snide, but at this point it seems like you might just be dense
If you think the war should continue until Russia leaves Ukraine, then you want the war to continue until the point of some specific ukrainian victory point. This means you are for the war, you are in support of it, you think the war is worth fighting, and you think it’s worth fighting for a country full of nazis that have torture dungeons for the children they will then go on to send to the front lines. If you believe that such means are worth this war continuing until Russia withdraws, then you are such an extreme supporter that it makes no sense that you should not likewise think the war is worth YOU going to fight.
These are not strawmen, they are the logical conclusions to the position of “this war should continue until Russia withdraws”.
Sure and if my ass was a propeller plane then trips to Taiwan would be much cheaper.
And, again, it is unreasonable to say that. The only people that would be “a lot safer” would be the nazis who could go back to carrying out their ethnic cleansing “in peace”. You seem to continually brush over this fact, you seem to somehow go blank at the mention of Minsk I and Minsk II, you seem to think this war came out of nowhere. Going back to status quo is going back to ethnic cleansing. You call it a strawman when I point out how you are fine with death and destruction, yet you continually fail to touch on this, just like how you fail to touch on the many other faults in your logic which have been pointed out.
If there is something I’m saying which you don’t understand, you can just ask, you don’t have to call me snide or dense.
You’ve got it the wrong way around. The war shouldn’t continue until Russia is defeated. Rather, the war could end today if Russia withdrew.
So we agree on the positives of Russia’s withdrawal, but disagree on the possibility of Russia doing it. Do you think Russia cannot, or simply will not withdraw?
This combined with this
Makes me think you are straight up dense.
No, we don’t agree, as I’ve made it very clear.
You have also, conveniently, gone from “wanting an end to bloodshed” to wanting an end to “the war”. So while I do think you are dense, I think you are dense because you are making it much too obvious how you are being deliberately obtuse.
I think the position of “oh they should just pack up and leave” is a deeply unserious position to hold with regards to discussions of ending a war. If you want to sit in a drum circle, sing kumbaya and talk about how you could just hash this all out if you just got putin and zelensky in a room with a couple of joints, be my guest, but don’t act surprised when you are treated with derision for holding such notions.
I’ll just ignore your remarks about my density if that’s all right.
So if we don’t agree about the positives of Russia’s withdrawal, what would be bad about a Russian withdrawal?
Sorry if that’s unclear. I want an end to the bloodshed. The war is a source of bloodshed, so I want an end to the war. If the war could continue without bloodshed that would be much better, and all bloodshed beyond the war should end as well.
I agree. That is not my position.
But you didn’t answer my question - do you think Russia cannot or will not withdraw?