"NATO didn't sign our treaty so we just had to attack" is not a very convincing justification for a damn invasion at all. Russia chose to attack instead of dealing with an unfriendly government. Which is fucked up.

I wonder if people who think NATO expansion was a fine justification would be fine with the US invading countries to prevent them from joining military alliances they oppose. I know I wouldn't be.

Moving them goalposts when faced with the facts eh.

You literally wrote this: "Meanwhile, most Ukrainians aren’t even in Ukraine anymore". And I asked source for your claims.

I just want to see your source for this claim. I'm happy with the source for the other claim.

[–] derin@lemmy.beru.co 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (3 children)

You're arguing with a person driven by anti-Western/NATO viewpoints; you'll never get a fair response. Even if they find something to back up their claims, it'll be a biased source. Expect sputnik news or some other direct Russian propaganda source. Just gotta get used to that on Lemmy.

Edit: Removed the "t" word as apparently that's a slur now.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Even if they find something to back up their claims, it’ll be a biased source.

There is literally no such thing as an unbiased source, and the core bias of the corporate media is the bias of the capitalist class.

The whole concept of the “left” or ”right“ “bias” being inversely correlated with factualness is garbage. These kinds of graphs, which try to convince us that centrism equals factualness, are garbage:

The workings of corporate media were explained about forty years ago in Inventing Reality and Manufacturing Consent.
A five minute introduction: Noam Chomsky - The 5 Filters of the Mass Media Machine

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Sometimes I'm just curious where people got their numbers from. This time both for because the first argument seems unlikely and second I wanted to know if they count the occupied areas and those forcibly moved for example.

[–] derin@lemmy.beru.co 3 points 8 months ago

I completely understand, but remember that for some people this is just a matter of ideology. Any response will be filled with so many bullshit claims that you'll have to spend an hour digging through random articles, YouTube videos, and googling drive-by statements in order to refute them.

They argue by shooting dozens of points at you hoping that you'll just say "ah shit, this person is quoting X, Y, and Z so they must be correct", knowing that no reasonable person would spend the time required to refute each and every BS statement they've made. (gish galloping, for the uninitiated)

I did this once before, and it took much longer than expected to refute each bullshit source. When dealing with these people you either don't engage, or enjoy them feasting on your free time.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

“NATO didn’t sign our treaty so we just had to attack"

Weird way to say NATO has been expanding towards Russia since the 90s.

I wonder if people who think NATO expansion was a fine justification would be fine with the US invading countries to prevent them from joining military alliances they oppose. I know I wouldn’t be.

If you think US would be fine with countries that border it joining an alliance with Russia you're even more ignorant than I thought. Go read up on the Cuban missile crisis.

I just want to see your source for this claim. I’m happy with the source for the other claim.

I literally provided you with a source. Maybe work on that reading comprehension of yours?

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Weird way to say NATO has been expanding towards Russia since the 90s.

Governments aligning themselves differently to how you'd like is no justification for invading them and killing their people.

Would you be fine with the reverse, USA or Germany or someone invading if those countries had been joining CSTO for example? Would a military alliance aligned away from those countries be a justification enough for attacking them and killing their people? I wouldn't think so.

If you think US would be fine with countries that border it joining an alliance with Russia you're even more ignorant than I thought. Go read up on the Cuban missile crisis.

And tell me, are you fine with the US behaviour there? And I didn't say they'd be fine with it, I said I wouldn't be fine with them doing it.

I literally provided you with a source. Maybe work on that reading comprehension of yours?

Your source doesn't prove that "most Ukrainians aren't even in Ukraine anymore". If anything, based on all estimates of current Ukrainian population I could find compared to the refugee numbers you provided, it argues against that point.

What number are you using for Ukraine's current total population?

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Governments aligning themselves differently to how you’d like is no justification for invading them and killing their people.

Interesting way to describe the west overthrowing a democratically elected government in a violent coup.

Would you be fine with the reverse, USA or Germany or someone invading if those countries had been joining CSTO for example?

This isn't a hypothetical, we already know what the west does.

And tell me, are you fine with the US behaviour there? And I didn’t say they’d be fine with it, I said I wouldn’t be fine with them doing it.

Not being an utter imbecile, I understand that this would be the only possible outcome. Provoking such an outcome is either idiotic or intentionally malicious.

Your source doesn’t prove that “most Ukrainians aren’t even in Ukraine anymore”.

Go look up the population of Ukraine before and after the war. If you really can't figure out how google works then come back and I'll help you.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

This isn’t a hypothetical, we already know what the west does.

And how do you feel about that, do you think it is proper justification?

Not being an utter imbecile, I understand that this would be the only possible outcome. Provoking such an outcome is either idiotic or intentionally malicious.

Can you elaborate on what you mean by this?

Go look up the population of Ukraine before and after the war. If you really can’t figure out how google works then come back and I’ll help you.

You provided the figures for how many refugees there are and have claimed that proves that "most Ukrainians aren’t even in Ukraine anymore". But the total refugees from that source are nowhere near the estimates for current Ukrainian population, even on low end. So I'm not sure how that proves your point. Maybe you've misunderstood something but I have been googling this and the numbers I've found go against what you are saying.

So yes, please help me. It's kinda what I've been asking since the start but you've been pretty standoffish about it.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml -2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

And how do you feel about that, do you think it is proper justification?

I think that's how the world works, and feels have nothing to do with it. The reality is that no great power will allow another great power to surround it with its proxies. So, either you think that there should be constant war between great powers, or you accept boundaries.

Can you elaborate on what you mean by this?

See above.

So yes, please help me. It’s kinda what I’ve been asking since the start but you’ve been pretty standoffish about it.

Let me rephrase that, most fighting age males have fled Ukraine at this point

Those who remain are not interested in fighting either as even western media admits now https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/15/world/europe/ukraine-military-recruitment.html

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee -1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

I think that’s how the world works, and feels have nothing to do with it. The reality is that no great power will allow another great power to surround it with its proxies. So, either you think that there should be constant war between great powers, or you accept boundaries.

And do you feel like that is proper justification for invading and attacking countries, killing people?

https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/UKR/ukraine/population

But that shows that the current population is ≈37,9 million, pre-escalation (2021) ≈43,5 million, pre-war ≈45,1 million. (The total ever in 1992, ≈51,8 million.) Can you explain to me how your numbers prove that "most Ukrainians aren’t even in Ukraine anymore"?

E: Seems you've edited the comment

Let me rephrase that, most fighting age males have fled Ukraine at this point

Talk about moving the goalposts, eh. But anyway we can probably agree that "most Ukrainians aren’t even in Ukraine anymore" isn't true then?

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

And do you feel like that is proper justification for invading and attacking countries, killing people?

I've already explained that feels have nothing to do with anything. I do however think it's idiotic to provoke wars based on feels when the outcomes are obvious.

Talk about moving the goalposts, eh. But anyway we can probably agree that “most Ukrainians aren’t even in Ukraine anymore” isn’t true then?

Sure, I misspoke there.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I’ve already explained that feels have nothing to do with anything. I do however think it’s idiotic to provoke wars based on feels when the outcomes are obvious.

I was more thinking if you thought that Russia (or in other cases US) would be in the wrong in invading other countries in such situations and being against such wars.

misspoke

I mean, I did quote it back to you verbatim many times and we both made it amply clear that it was population we were talking about, you also talking about "population of Ukraine" and so on. So not sure I believe that instead of simply just having been wrong. But it's fine either way.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I was more thinking if you thought that Russia (or in other cases US) would be in the wrong in invading other countries in such situations and being against such wars.

You're just doing moralizing here which serve no practical purpose.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Do you really refrain from calling out such invasions and wars because that "serve no practical purpose"? I find that surprising.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Do you really not understand that provoking wars simply results in mass death and suffering? Or perhaps you enjoy other people dying and suffering, I'm begging to think the latter is actually the case here.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee -2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm just saying I'm against such wars. Aren't you?

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I am against wars, and NATO provoked this war by pushing past Russia's red lines. Russia responded the exact same way NATO would've responded if Russia was the one pushing into NATO. So, if you're against senseless wars then you should be against NATO expansion.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I'm just surprised you're against Russia's war in Ukraine. I didn't expect that.

Sometimes people get so hung up on their ideologies that they permit something for some people or side that they'd absolutely condemn for the other. It's all too common. But I shouldn't have assumed that was the case here.