11 arrested in protest at Sen. Bernie Sanders’s office over war in Ukraine
11 arrested in protest at Sen. Bernie Sanders’s office over war in Ukraine
You're viewing a single thread.
THAT'S the war they choose to protest?
Turns out being anti-war protesters means they're ANTI WAR.
What do you want them to do? Raise funds to send some missles over?
I guess Ukraine could just use hopes and prayers to get Putin out of their front yard.
I'm pretty sure that most of the solid anti-war protestors would expect Ukraine to just accept Russian territorial demands, up to and including complete annexation.
It turns into a reductio ad absurdum pretty quickly though. Putin didn't seem to return Crimea or the occupied regions of Donbass and Luhansk when asked politely. Not even when asked sternly. Indeed, it would seem that when all he faced was stern disapproval he decided to come back for more.
There is no doubt in my mind that supporting Ukraine now is stopping more Russian aggression later. Besides, Putin can end this war any time. Just go back to the original borders. The only reason not to is his yearning for Imperial glory. The irony being that many of these anti-war protestors would probably proclaim themselves anti-colonialists.
Putin can end this war any time. Just go back to the original borders.
Exactly.
If these anti-war protesters want to yell at the people who can stop the war, they need to protest at the Russian embassy.
Then why are they protesting action that will end the war faster?
- WAR IS PEACE
- FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
- IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
You didn't answer the question.
You didn’t tell me what action will end the war faster, other going to the negotiating table. Ukraine is running out of bodies to throw into the meat grinder. This is a war of attrition, and the numbers are not in their favor.
Wouldn't providing Ukraine with more weapons extend the war? Their latest offensive shows they're running on fumes.
You're right, they should just roll over and accept Russian domination.
Their comment, of course, was overly simplistic. I'm sure what they meant was "then why are they protesting action that will end the war in Ukraine's favor faster".
If you only care about blindly ending war as soon as possible by any means necessary, you definitely have two major options. Either let the aggressor do whatever they want, or use overwhelming force to utterly destroy them.
Which is your preference?
If you only care about blindly ending war as soon as possible by any means necessary, you definitely have two major options. Either let the aggressor do whatever they want, or use overwhelming force to utterly destroy them.
Except this is assuming that the US is omnipotent. The US cannot use overwhelming force to defeat Russia in the conflict. That leaves only not supplying arms to reduce the length of the war and casualties.
So you prefer just letting aggressors do whatever they want, got it.
As anti-war as you or I may be, there's more than enough petty dictators who are more than happy to be pro-war and fuck up the world.
So you prefer just letting aggressors do whatever they want
I dont have that principle, I think there are cases when you should and when you shouldn't.
there’s more than enough petty dictators who are more than happy to be pro-war and fuck up the world.
I'm more concerned about the US. Why is biggest kid on the block when it comes to genocide and war so enthusiastic to supply Ukraine with arms?
Especially given operation AERODYNAMIC by the cia...
Ah, whataboutism, the first recourse of the desperate to appear neutral.
The US military industrial complex, and the politicians who serve it, have a lot to answer for. Keeping Ukrainians from being overrun by wannabe world dominators is not one of them.
Your principle seems to be pointing fingers at the big boys while you let the small fries die in trenches, begging for help that will never come because "It's just not right for the US to do things!"
Whataboutism isn't a logical fallacy(and claiming it is was first used to defend British colonial violence) also if it was what I was doing wasn't whataboutism, it was questioning the motives of the person providing aid.
Your principle seems to be pointing fingers at the big boys while you let the small fries die in trenches, begging for help that will never come because “It’s just not right for the US to do things!”
Continuing the war so more people die isn't helping. War is a racket, it is always a racket.
I dont have that principle, I think there are cases when you should and when you shouldn’t [let aggressors do whatever they want]
Personally I don't think there's any case where we should be telling other peoples to just accept their annexation or colonization. I'd be interested to hear the argument otherwise.
I’m more concerned about the US. Why is biggest kid on the block when it comes to genocide and war so enthusiastic to supply Ukraine with arms?
Because it defends American hegemony and weakens an anti-American state. It's not a hard question to answer. That doesn't mean it's not also the right thing to do regardless. Bad people can go good things for bad reasons. Unfortunately some seem to think the deaths of Ukrainians and pillaging of their land is a sacrifice worth making in order to geopolitically weaken America. I'm all for reducing America's global power, but I'm not so cruel as to choose other people's lives to trade for it against their will.
If Ukraine wants to defend itself, I think it's a good thing to air them in that; I also think making such invasions as difficult and expensive as possible is the anti-war position.
Personally I don’t think there’s any case where we should be telling other peoples to just accept their annexation or colonization. I’d be interested to hear the argument otherwise.
Idk I'm pretty anti-nationalist. People's material conditions and also not being dead matter more than imaginary lines on a map.
Because it defends American hegemony and weakens an anti-American state. It’s not a hard question to answer. That doesn’t mean it’s not also the right thing to do regardless.
I mean that really should factor into it.
Unfortunately some seem to think the deaths of Ukrainians and pillaging of their land is a sacrifice worth making in order to geopolitically weaken America. I’m all for reducing America’s global power, but I’m not so cruel as to choose other people’s lives to trade for it against their will.
Fighting to the last Ukrainian kills more Ukrainians than allowing their government to sign a peace deal, or at least allowing their government to lose more quickly.
If Ukraine wants to defend itself, I think it’s a good thing to air them in that;
What do you mean by ukraine? Do you mean the government? The ukrainian population? Part of the ukrainian population?
People's material conditions and also not being dead matter more than imaginary lines on a map.
This is unbelievably dishonest. You think the only material change is a redrawing of borders? C'mon now.
Fighting to the last Ukrainian kills more Ukrainians than allowing their government to sign a peace deal, or at least allowing their government to lose more quickly.
Not your choice to make. If they want to defend their land against unwarranted invasion, that's their choice. You don't get to decide what somebody else's life is worth.
What do you mean by ukraine? Do you mean the government? The ukrainian population? Part of the ukrainian population?
Available information indicates a strong support of the defense effort among the Ukrainian populace.
Except this is assuming that the US is omnipotent. The US cannot use overwhelming force to defeat Russia in the conflict.
Good thing pretty much every western country is supporting Ukraine's defensive war effort.
Nobody expects the US to be the sole support for Ukraine.
Good thing pretty much every western country is supporting Ukraine’s defensive war effort.
How is that going?
We've sent billions to Ukraine, seems to only have ended in more dead people and little progress.
I can respect the desire for a policy of complete non-intervention.
cringe. It's actually good to take action to reduce harm.
Is it actually reducing harm to fight to the last Ukrainian though? There were multiple attempts at peace that were sabotaged by either nazi paramilitaries or nato-member politicians. Remember when Zelensky traveled to the front to tell them to respect the ceasefire during Minsk 2 and they didn't? Maybe the people sabotaging peace would be less bold knowing the US isn't going to keep supplying arms.
Is it actually reducing harm to fight to the last Ukrainian though?
When Russia is trying to commit genocide against Ukraine? Yes.
Do you have a source for Russia doing genocide or are you just referring to the war?
It's been widely reported by numerous nations and organizations. Search for "Russian genocide Ukraine" and you'll see plenty of credible sources
So no then? Did you learn to critically read the news in school?
I'm wondering if you just posted the link without reading any results and are just doubling down to sound correct.
One of the first articles is AP news reporting UN backed human rights groups calling it genocide
https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-human-rights-663b3a4ba24499d93f3f889e98f8b652
And an article by Time reporting the kidnapping of children being investigated as genocide, and that there is already enough evidence for the allegations
https://time.com/6262903/russia-ukraine-genocide-war-crimes/
And there we have it.
multiple attempts at peace
What were the terms of this peace? Do you have sources to back up your claims?
Are you not aware of Minsk 1 or Minsk 2? There are more but those are the big ones
No I am not. Would you kindly explain and provide sources for this and all your other claims?
No, I think it is reasonable for you to go out and research two well known and easily researchable treaties. I am not your secretary.
I think it is reasonable for me to expect the burden of proof to be on the person making the claims.
I have never thought of the usa helping ukraine because they are interested in ukranian peoples lives. I see them fighting because gaining an ally with great resources and an excellent geographic position is important to maintain power.
They are also testing the new way of running a war between first world armies.
Perhaps I'm wrong but this war benefits american interests beyond being world police.
Or, and stay with me here, we have a blueprint from about a hundred years ago of what happens when you just let a powerful county annex surrounding countries. Spoiler Alert, they don't just stop at 1.
Presumably, antiwar protestors protest every war. Basically, a return to WW2 America's policy of non-intervention.
That's not the best way to sell it, me thinks lol
Code Pink is a coopted sci-ops campaign at this point. Don't work with them
Psy-ops.