433
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 04 Oct 2026
433 points (98.9% liked)
Leopards Ate My Face
10483 readers
50 users here now
Rules:
- The mods are fallible; if you've been banned or had a post/comment removed, please appeal.
- Off-topic posts will be removed. If you don't know what "Leopards ate my Face" is, try reading this post.
- If the reason your post meets Rule 1 isn't in the source, you must add a source in the post body (not the comments) to explain this. If the reason is in the source but is tedious to find (e.g. in a lengthy video), you must add an explanation for where it is.
- Posts should use high-quality sources (for a rough idea, check out this list), and posts should retain the title (if one exists) from works like news articles, videos, etc. You may (but need not) edit your post if the source changes the title. (If you're only using an excerpt from an article that's otherwise not about LAMF, you can use the quote in the title.) Other types of posts should have a title which accurately, relatively neutrally describes their contents.
- For accessibility reasons, an image of text must either have alt text or a transcription in the post body.
- Reposts within 1 year or the Top 100 of all time are subject to removal. Within moderator discretion, this doesn't just include reposts of the exact same media but also includes e.g. a secondary source telling basically the exact same story as another that was already posted.
- This is not exclusively a US politics community. You're encouraged to post stories about anyone from any place in the world at any point in history as long as you meet the other rules.
- All Lemmy.World Terms of Service apply.
Also feel free to check out:
Icon credit C. Brück on Wikimedia Commons.
_portrait.jpg){kind=link}
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
I would definitely prefer a situation where nobody is forcibly drafted or pressured to sign up for fighting.
There might well have been some legitimate support for certain regions of Ukraine to join Russia. I don't think that gives Russia the right to start invading Ukraine though. I don't think Russia would be happy if a country where to invade Russia to "liberate" Chechnya, a region which tried to become independent from Russia. The Russian government claims to care about the will of the people when some people are allegedly wanting to join Russia, but it clearly doesn't care about the will of the people in other cases.
Anyway, I hope the Ukrainian people can determine their own future, whether that's being close to Russia, or close to the EU, or neither, or splitting the country, or whatever. Also I think they should have the right to join NATO if they wish, regardless of what Russia wants. Would Russia willingly accept it if the US said to Russia "you can't join a military alliance"? Russia would surely not tolerate being lectured by the US.
The whole point of democracy is that it gives people a pathway to persue their political agendas without killing each other. But now you have a case where there's a bunch of people, with something they want politically, but they have no referendum, they have no ability to advance that agenda through a political party, what are they supposed to do? If you don't allow them a peaceful path towards secession, then don't be surprised when they take a violent path. It really seems that you're prioritizing the state and its territorial integrity above what the people actually want.
Two wrongs don't make a right.
Again, I don't live in Russia, I don't have any say in what the Russian government does. I don't want my government to start sending Russia military equipment either.
I agree. But I don't really see any future where that happens. It would be pretty odd if, say, Ukraine wins the war completely and then holds a referendum in the disputed territories and they vote to become part of Russia anyway. I think it's pretty obvious that that's not going to happen. That's kind of the whole point, isn't it?
I feel like people treat this like some kind of superhero movie, where the good guys have the purest of intentions, always win, and everything ends up wrapped up with a nice little bow at the end. But Superman isn't real. I don't believe the powers that be have pure intentions for really allowing Ukrainians to decide their own fate, and I also recognize that we have limited power and resources and have to be realistic about what is achievable. Both of those are lessons that Afghanistan taught us, plain as day, whether we accept the lesson or not.
I would definitely like a situation where everyone in Ukraine and everyone in Russia can decide their futures democratically but yes, that's not likely to happen soon, particularly because Russia seems to have very little democracy.
Zelenskyy apparently had an approval rating in Ukraine of over 50%, and sometimes over 60%, earlier this year, and also apparently 71% of Ukrainians think that new elections should only be held after the war ends.
Russia has no right to invade Ukraine to impose Russia's will on Ukraine, such as the demand that Ukraine can never join NATO. Any flaws Ukraine may have don't justify Russia's murderous aggression.
If you view things differently then okay, but I guess that's how I view it.
Do those polls include the occupied territories? I doubt it. Bit hard to collect data in a war zone.
Let's say, hypothetically, that 90% of people in Puerto Rico want to be independent from the US. But, 60% of the US as a whole (including territories) want it to stay. Isn't the opinion of the people who actually live there more relevant?
As I said, I don't have clear evidence of what the people in the disputed territories want, other than the fact that the government of Ukraine felt the need to politically suppress them because they expected unfavorable results.
If armed men seizing government buildings is a legitimate form of protest, then the DPR was a legitimate political entity, Ukraine had no authority to assert control over it, and Russia was responding to their request for military assistance.
If armed men seizing government buildings is not a legitimate form of protest, then the government of Ukraine is illegitimate. Propping up an illegitimate government isn't something I'm interested in.
The only way to maintain this narrative where Ukraine is a legitimate democracy and Russia a murderous invader is if you completely ignore the undemocratic things one side does while treating similar things on the other side as disqualifying. Either way, so long as you're consistent then it's not so black and white.
We're just going in circles and I don't see an answer to that point, so I see little point in continuing. I am grateful, though, you're the first person to make it anywhere near this far without just calling me a bot or propagandist.
We have different ways of looking at it, so no I don't think there's a lot of point in more discussion. Sometimes people have different views.