Anon is the wrong messenger
(midwest.social)
> Greentexttook me a while to see the pisraeli flag
I forgot 4chan has country tags
It's only enabled on some boards.
Ah, interesting. Never really used it so I have to guess through screenshots lol, this would explain why they aren't always there
The irony of that coming from an Israeli IP lmao
Fake: the question is not legitimate as it’s meant to be a joke (first layer)
Gay: secretly (second layer) anon is not interested in the woman (as he’s gay) and wants to proliferate russian propaganda
okay but why is doing a nazi salute
/pol/
There's only one reason anybody ever does that.
Because she’s pro-Nazi? Wtf you mean why?
Had to check 3 times to be sure.
absolutely stacked tho
Only after Ukraine started massacring people that didn't want to be part of an American puppet state
How very Sudetenland of an explanation.
And why exactly hasn't Russia intervened to prevent this massacre? Why did Russia let it happen?
Source?
Clearly refers to War in Donbas.
Eastern Ukraine is full of ethnic Russians (38%) and Russia-aligned eastern Ukrainians, and so when the central Ukrainian government went through the coup in 2014 and practically severed ties with Russia, many were genuinely unhappy with the government, so much so that they wanted to leave the country.
Seizing the opportunity, Russian paramilitary entered Crimea first (with Russians being the majority on the peninsula, people's support was practically guaranteed), and then tried to do the same on Donbas.
Ukrainian government was obviously not happy about this, and already knew what inaction leads to (total Russian annexation) and launched a military campaign to maintain control of Donbas. To many people of Donbas, however, this was seen not as a unification of a country, but as a brutal suppression of people's will, and so locals commonly sided with the local and Russian paramilitary groups in search of independence or ascension into Russia.
As such, many pro-Russian folks cite this as an act of aggression on the side of Ukraine, one that Russia merely responded to in full in 2022. This sentiment is often supported by Donbas locals, who suffered through severe civilian losses during the 2014-2022 phase of the conflict, many fleeing their home to find refuge in Russia.
This sentiment is not, however, so enthusiastically shared by the rest of the Ukrainians, who suddenly had this war come to their doorstep, escalating the conflict to an all-out war with 40 million Ukrainians in the crosshairs. And then Russia took the mask off, adding layer upon layer of bullshit explanations as to why the whole of Ukraine should lose statehood and become occupied.
What started as "we defend these 6 million people, including over 2 million Russians, from an unjustified act of aggression" turned to "we deny 40 million people independence and statehood, and we're ready to destroy everything to have it our way".
Russia's proposal for UN peacekeeping forces in the UN was quite informative.
On September 5, 2017, the Russian Federation submitted a draft resolution to the UN Security Council (Document S/2017/754) proposing the establishment of a UN support mission.
The details of the motion and its ultimate failure centered around where the peacekeepers would be stationed:
The Russian Proposal: Russia proposed that UN peacekeepers be deployed strictly along the "line of contact" (the frontline) separating Ukrainian government forces and Russian-backed separatists. The stated goal of the resolution was to protect the unarmed observers from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) who were monitoring the conflict.
The Backlash: Ukraine, the United States, and several European nations rejected the terms of the Russian draft. They argued that placing peacekeepers only on the frontline would effectively freeze the conflict and solidify the borders of the separatist-controlled territories.
Ukraine's Counter-Demand: Ukraine and its allies insisted that any UN peacekeeping force must be deployed throughout the entire Donbas region—most importantly, along the international border between Ukraine and Russia. Monitoring the international border was viewed as critical to stopping the undetected flow of Russian troops, weapons, and supplies to the separatists.
Because of this fundamental disagreement over the scope and location of the mandate, the Russian motion stalled in the Security Council and no UN peacekeeping mission was ever deployed to the Donbas.
You explained it very neutrally and objectively, hats off.
I was in Ukraine in 2016,in the Donbas. I didn't get a full inside into everyone's opinion, obviously, but the sentiment I heard was "there are so many differing opinions within families and friend groups. We avoid talking about it to keep the peace."
They were unhappy that the roads were in disrepair and that the coal of the Donbas wasn't distributed in the whole of Ukraine anymore and their standing as the energy heart of Ukraine was gone.
Just to give a bit of a padding to your explanation. Not everyone was welcoming the "little green men" that stoked the spirit of "independence" (/annexation)
Thanks for this! Yes, while I meant to focus on a particular perspective, it should absolutely be mentioned that the topic is divisive among the people in the region.
Some are extremely pro-Russia and pro-war and want to blow Ukraine to smithereens (I knew one who really enjoyed the thought of nuking Kyiv), some hope they could once again become a peaceful part of Ukraine, some want to stop choosing sides all the time, and some simply want peace on any terms already. I've met all kinds of people coming from there.
What started as “we defend these 6 million people, including over 2 million Russians, from an unjustified act of aggression” turned to “we deny 40 million people independence and statehood, and we’re ready to destroy everything to have it our way”.
you say this like russia has already annexed the whole of ukraine. you cannot be certain of what russia wants until a peace deal is signed. and more accurately, the war was started by the west, and the west benefits most from the continuance of the war. in fact, the ukrainians would have a higher standard of living under russia simply because the west has made ukraine so in debt that the taxes on locals have been onerous, ukraine has been depopulating since. and fun fact, the creditor debt holiday ends in 2027 which will force ukraine to begin paying lavish amounts to the west. we'll see how long the war continues...
?? this is all living memory shit. are you 12?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Crimean_status_referendum
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Donbas_status_referendums
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euromaidan
they voted to leave after the euromaidan coup. now, the west is pillaging ukraine and making them indebted to the west for possibly hundreds of years. ukrainian citizens will never again have a say in their own country barring an anti-western revolution. also remember that wikipedia on this is very biased towards the western side. you should also consider that for the longest time, donbas and crimea were fighting with only their manpower against ukraine, you have to get all of those people willing to die for a cause somewhere, and it is likely the people that voted for secession in the first place. the ukrainians themselves know the writing is on the wall and have abandoned the country en masse, ukraine now has a population similar to belgium
and before anyone says these elections were a farce, remember that the demographics of each of these areas are majority russian. is it really so hard to imagine that they would vote to join russia? even before the russian-ukraine war and russia's direct involvement, ukraine outlawed the speaking and teaching of russian, belarusian, and yiddish in its schools, whereas before the coup, russian was granted a minority status. since the war, russian speakers are legally second class citizens. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_policy_in_Ukraine
I am much older than 12 but wanted to invite a learning experience rather than blindly following or dismissing.
If the Americans do that, it's different because god told them to do it, or something.
No, that's bad too
Maybe it’s also bad when Americans do it.
Maybe it’s bad when anybody does it.
Yeah, that was my point.
Now make another unrelated point.
Oh dear oh dear. Posted on .ml again by mistake. Went about as expected.
So many people do not understand that you were being sarcastic. I don't get it.
No, we get it. We're just tired because not everything is about America. Nobody in this post was bringing America into it until they did.
It's a post about an American proxy war.
Uh huh, sure
