60
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2023
60 points (100.0% liked)
askchapo
22749 readers
427 users here now
Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.
Rules:
-
Posts must ask a question.
-
If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.
-
Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.
-
Try !feedback@hexbear.net if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
You've summed this up really well, agree 100%. I would just emphasize the suffering by the eastern regions under the post-Euromaiden government - The only major demand of Ukraine in the Minsk agreements was to give these regions self-determination and protections for minorities. Ukraine agreed to these terms, twice, then just admitted they would never implement them (explicitly admitting these regions would never vote to be part of Ukraine again).
So even without (the very important) wider political context, Russia spent 8 years trying to broker protection for these regions from war and discrimination, but Ukraine refused and instead pursued endless militarization. If Ukraine got into NATO, the west gave 0 shits, so the only way to protect those regions would've been starting a World War. So what options were left to protect the Donbass and Luhansk populations from being shelled into oblivion?
Ironically libs start salivating at the mere thought of regions splintering off as independent states based on linguistic characteristics (Tibet, Xinjiang, Hong Kong) but when the rare situation arises where it would make some sense to do this they shut off their ears and live in an alternate reality.