https://wsau.com/2023/07/14/biden-approves-pentagon-to-send-3000-reserve-u-s-troops-to-europe/
WASHINGTON DC (WSAU) - The Pentagon will be able to call up to 3,000 military reservists for deployment to Eur...
Man, the replies are shilled as hell. There's a war of aggresion in Europe, and nobody can afford to be a bystander. We have paid bitterly for inaction against dictators in the past, and we must not let history repeat itself. No amount of fake handwringing or nuclear sabre rattling will change the fact that Ukraine is a free and sovereign nation, and that Russia has no right to have any territorial pretensions towards it. As for the paid trolls and contrarians - history will not remember you kindly.
The less we push against Russia now the more aggressive it will become in the future. Playing nice has led the world to a global crisis and Ukraine to a bloodshed filled with war crimes.
Russia's government is evil and there's no middle ground between good and evil that isn't evil.
The less we push against Russia now the more aggressive it will become in the future.
There's this certain line of argument that says that the best thing to do for peace is to let Ukraine fall, or at least force them to cede occupied territory. That thinking is so ignorant of history. When a country gets expansionist and the response is timid, it just means that they're going to continue later.
May save some Ukrainians in the short term but they will just become front line meatshields in Russia's next war if not worse (e.g. imprisoned under false pretences and / or enslaved).
Ukraine knows this so they're essentially a cornered animal fighting its predator. Russia is taking a huge gamble and losing.
I'm very wary of Lemmy because of this. There's so much pro Russia / China going on here. Users who spam post propaganda that go unbanned.
It's not necessarily bad to have your views challenged now and again. It not only forces you to defend your own assumptions. If you look closely at someone who is in an echo chamber, you can start to identify areas where you are hobbled by being in an echo chamber.
Neither of these governments deserve a voice in Western society. Neither of them allow a Western voice in their society.
Wasn't it the West who always claimed to be more democratic and open? Now the evil governments don't "deserve a voice in Western society"?
"Yes, please censor the media and don't report truthfully on anything the non-Western govs do to ensure we remain free!"
lol
Yes, democratic and open to those with similar ideals. Go take your fascist ass back to your shithole.
"If you're not open to our evil ideals then you're not really open." What a weak argument lmao. Are you people even trying at this point?
It's bizarre how people instinctively seem to get foam around their mouths once you disagree with their assesment of this war and the Western simulation of liberal democracy. I'm an anarchist and antifascist. At least get your terminology in order before you recklessly give in to your lower instincts of insulting people without having any idea what you're talking about. Appreciated.
Not buying the Western "Ukraine doesn't have Nazis, this not a US-led proxy war, Maidan was a peaceful color-revolution" narrative doesn't make you pro-Russian. I'm neither a friend of Putin nor the Russian or Chinese empire. I just want to see US imperialist hegemony come to an end.
Absolutely rabid here mate.
The things you do is Russia / China tactics 101. Try to cast shade into what exactly you support while very clearly being against one side. I have said plenty of bad things about my own country here and in other places. And likewise about China, Russia and many others. Criticism is thankfully a freedom we still have here. How about you, wanna tell us a few things about China and Russia motherland?
I'm from Europe and I have no allegiance to China or Russia. I'm anti-imperialist and the only political label I can associate with that of anarchism. But yeah, sure, go on making me out to be some imperialist communist tankie fascist or whatever people throw around nowadays to discredit people they don't agree with without even knowing the political affiliations/leanings of someone.
Please explain "Russia / China tactics 101" and I'll take the time to counter what you consider to be (I'm paraphrasing) "imperialist aligned tactics" and that I have good reasons to have arrived at my conclusions (which you don't know about, even you read of all of my comments, because I haven't stated them anywhere in full detail, but please, give it a try, if you don't have anything better to do). I'm also open to being wrong and I tend to change my mind when presented with good data/evidence.
Since your posts in this thread are so utterly bereft of nuance ("Russia is evil!!11", "Censor what contradict's Western doctrine", "You have a dissenting opinion so I'll assume you're a fascist"), I'm really not sure why I even bother responding to you, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, hoping that you might be willing to engage in a meaningful debate.
The troll farms are very happy with the fediverse movement. It's much much easier to exploit and deceive compared to big regulated tech companies. The neckbeards behind Lemmy are also typical 'marketplace of ideas' naïve idiots, making it that much easier for groups to spread their misinformation unopposed.
Even so it's a net positive. The world just needs to get better at critical thinking. Hell, I had to take a whole class on it in college. I personally think it should be a high school class.
Has there been any proof from any Fediverse admin who could confirm that troll farms are active on Lemmy/Fediverse? I'd be interested to read more about that. Thanks!
Edit: Would've expected that it's too small in comparision to the big players.
It's not surprising-- this community's hosted on an instance run by known tankies, no wonder all the comments sections here are so toxic.
Which community? The post is from a user at fmhy.ml, you're on kbin.social, and I'm reading it on lemmy.ml.
Yeah, the shilling in these comments is insane.
Mods like to pick and choose what they remove, though.
We have paid bitterly for inaction against dictators in the past
We have paid, and are paying, for inaction against this particular dictator. Wars of expansion like this have to be met with defense from the entire global community. We tried appeasement, and they showed us that appeasement will be treated as weakness and a sign to continue expansion.
So by your logic the US should directly commit troops and provoke a declaration of war from Russia? You do realize that would bring all of NATO (nuclear powerful) into a hot war with Russia (also nuclear powerful) over a few regions they can't seem to hold in Ukraine?
Sorry, that's crazy.
You're right, Ukraine is a sovereign nation. They have every right to defend themselves and I am in no way defending Russia's invasion. That being said, other sovereign nations should not be expected to put their people's lives on the line so Ukraine can win in their conflict with Russia.
Everyone seems so concerned with the appeasement aspect of trying to contain Hitler in WW2 they forget the lessons of WW1 bringing the world into a pointless bloody and destructive war through alliances after the assassination of an archduke.
Not to mention the situation today is vastly different than the eve of WW2. Literally the only similarity is a territorial conflict which is true of the majority of the worlds conflicts. Let's compare
While Germany was invading the sudatenland, Chamberlain persued a policy of appeasement, trying to befriend Hitler. During Russia's invasion of Ukraine there was almost universal opposition with countries lending indirect aid to Ukraine instead of just standing by.
Part of German expansion was the systematic stripping and denial of personhood and rights to anyone deemed undesirable creating a crisis where refugees could not leave without proper papers they could never get. Compared with today where Ukrainian refugees get to use the fast pass lane to enter the US through Mexico.
Most importantly, Germany never developed the nuke. They tried, but didn't get there before the end of the war. There was zero nuclear consideration to worry about. Compared to Russia today which is a nuclear powerhouse on par with the US.
History will only remember if we don't nuke ourselves out of existence because of this. Too many people alive today don't know the fear of mutually assured destruction. Never thought that old cold war vestage actually served a useful purpose in the minds of the people.
And you like how this is escalating dangerously? What arms manufacturer do you own or are you working at the Pentagon?
yeah, but still, it's the US doing this
after offering to give Ukraine fucking cluster bombs (and after decades of the US doing the same warcrime shit during every invasion they do), I have zero confidence that they're not going to make the conflict so much worse
Wtf is this comment tree. I have a feeling some of the comments I read are made by russian bots trying to make 3k soldiers seem like a dramatic red line news when so many more notworthy things were done in the past years.
Wouldnt surprise me. Lemmy has no tools to prevent russian bots and propaganda at all. Lemmy doesnt even have Voting contest mode or multi account detection to prevent manipulation
Its also possible that normal users got confused and make drama out of it because they read russian bots
Or maybe some are by pentagon hawks looking to stoke the flames of war?
Seriously though, calling people who don't parrot your opinion bots is toxic rhetoric. You are more than welcome to examine who is making what votes, that information is all public. But if you were to take a close look at my account (and others whom I assume you are accusing of being bots) we are all organic Lemmy accounts.
3k is 3k. It's an increase. It's not war starting today but it's definitely not a step in the right direction. Calling attention to the likely scenarios of the US escalating their military presence in the region is most certainly not Russian propaganda just because it contradicts the American propaganda.
Why do you keep phrasing this as if a war didn't already start over a year ago after Russia invaded Ukraine?
Seems you'd rather see innocent Ukranians slaughtered than offer them any aid. Why is that?
it's not that; it's that it's the US doing it for a country halfway across the world, as if we're actually going there to help instead of taking advantage of the situation because Russia's involved
if we do go there, it's not gonna be for aid
Because the US is not involved directly. They are not at war here nor should they be. A direct intervention by the us will directly lead to an exchange of nuclear weapons.
I'd rather see nobody die, but seeing as we're in the situation were in I'd prefer if the whole world didn't go up in flames just to offer Ukrainians aid.
You keep seeming to think that the US is solely responsible for Ukraine, why is that?
We're in a post about the US sending troops to Europe which is why I'm talking about the US's involvement. I suppose when you work at a troll farm it's hard to keep all the separate posts straight, eh?
I suppose it's easier to attack than to actually read and comprehend what someone says. I'm fully aware of who I'm talking to and what post were in. You're the guy I triggered by not wanting the us to escalate the situation into WW3 by committing troops.
typical lemmy moment when you prefer to bash the US when Russian bots are on rampage?
I'm from Eastern Europe. I hate what Russia did to my country and my family in effect. Long history. I hate what they are doing to Ukraine. And this comment section feels weird, because for me more US soldiers in Europe mean more peace and stability.
I'm not disagreeing with you but assuming anyone online disagreeing with US policy is a "Russian bot" with absolutely no proof is a very typical reddit lib moment, which was my point. That can just be thrown around to shut down anything.
If you don't like Russia and are pro-US, I don't automatically assume you're a US bot.
You have a completely different outlook then. I'm sorry, but we are not your protector. The US is on the other side of the world.
We are criticizing the US. Nobody is trying to say the US is worse than Russia here. We are meetelt pointing out the fact that escalating troops in Europe is a bad baby step towards all out war. If the us commits troops on the ground on the side of Ukraine, Russia will declare ware and nato article 5 will be invoked. All sides are nuclear poweres. First it might start with tactical nukes on your side of the world. Then it will escalate to ICBMs. It will end when there are no countries or borders and most of the world is dead and in ruin with Eastern Europe being ground zero. Idk why you would want to escalate the situation with US military involvement when it literally would make your part of the world a nuclear wasteland.
But hey, if not wanting to see the world get nuked makes me a Russian bot so be it. Better that than a pentagon warhawk trying to profit off this whole thing.
You should know that this lemmy community is hosted on lemmy.ml, an instance founded by tankies after they got banned from reddit and still moderated by them.
Nah it's more like calling someone carrying water for Russia and blaming the US for a war that Russia started a year ago a Russian bot.
Nobody is blaming the US for starting this war. We are all literally saying that an escalation like committing troops would escalate quickly into nuclear war and we are criticizing the US for taking even baby steps in that direction.
Compare that with you trying to dive head first into a nuclear conflict we don't belong in. Which weapons manufacturer or military branch do you work for?
You have stated multiple times in your comments that the US is trying to start a war. Several other people have called you out on this.
Nobody is buying your nuclear war propaganda. You're just trying to give cover to Russian aggression in an attempt to allow them to capture control of Ukraine. What happens if they do capture Ukraine and then invade yet another country with all these new conscripts? Would you once again tell us to just sit around and watch because you're 'scared' that we might upset Russia? How long do you keep that up? This parallels Germany in the early 20th century. Those wars didn't end because people sat by and let them do what they want for fear of conflict.
It's no surprise; the Lemmy developers are literally tankies. This instance's name literally ends in .ml (Marxism-Leninism).
Wow that's so wrong it's funny.
.ml = Mali
The country of Mali allows free domain registration.
That's why it's used. Because it's free.
But by all means, keep buying into the tankie conspiracy instead of actually reading into things
Or, you know, because it's free and they're running this service for you out of the goodness of their hearts?
.ml is the country code for Mali... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.ml
Has nothing to do with Marxism-leninism.
The lead Lemmy developer (who also runs this instance) published his Marxism Study Plan online. In fact, it's on the same GitHub he uses to develop Lemmy.
The same devs also run Lemmygrad.ml, which is the more overt tankie instance of the two.
So yeah, I find it hard to believe that the .ml TLD was chosen for the devs' affinity with the country of Mali.
Thank you for making explicit something I was wondering about. I noticed the .ml instances have a pro-authoritarian bias and couldn't figure out what that stood for.
Why is it being done?
This is how things start. Just like with weapons assistance, first it's a little then it's billions on the regular. This is an increase to an already way oversized presence of a foreign continents military in a delicate situation.
It's not a delicate situation for Ukrainians, they're defending their freedom. Accusing the US of escalation here when Russia violently invaded it's peaceful neighbor?
I mean the first issue here is that you think the US government actually gives a shit about humanitarian things; they're doing this because it'll be beneficial to them, not out of the goodness of their heart
you really need to understand that you can't take the US at its word when it says it's sending soldiers to another country for moral reasons
I despise the size of the US military, the size of the military budget, the corruption in the military-industrial complex, and so on. But it's disingenuous to ignore how often, and how many places the military does show up to provide help to areas hit by things like national disasters. It's one of the few things I do like about the military. I'm not even saying that it outweighs the damage done by US policy, just saying.
No country on the planet is any different. Just so happens the us is aligned with the global west in deciding to support Ukraine. That's just how it is.
At the same time NATO is consolidating membership, again, for geopolitical gain, not charity.
Welcome to reality. Declaring the US a sane geopolitical operator is not the hot take you think it is.
Accusing the US of escalation here when Russia violently invaded it’s peaceful neighbor?
Do you understand what escalation means? Escalation doesn't have anything to do with who started it. It's a relative action: it escalates from some state. The USA is committing troops where it previously hadn't (or, more pedantically, is increasing the number of committed troops). This is escalation.
You can complain about Russia starting this, but you should also complain about the USA escalating the situation.
The US is DIRECTLY responsible for this by FORCING innocent Russian soldiers to into Crimea and TRAPPING them there with absolutely no recourse or way to escape!
If only the US didn't force the entire country of Ukraine to toss the Russian puppet out on his ass as they watched their neighbor countries lose their sovereignty to the exact same scheme. (Belarus, Georgia)
And the US was being a real dick when they started setting boundaries around election meddling and cyber security intrusions.
And exactly what business did the US have pulling back relationships after only a mere few decades of egregious human rights abuses?!?!? (Magnitsky)
And who could have foreseen all of those political opponents who went and poisoned themselves with polonium tea in sovereign nations for the sole and exclusive purpose of making Russia look bad.
Or was it the DEFENSIVE alliance that Russian neighbors so rudely wanted to join after decades of abuse by Russia?
You revisionist puppet.
You're a fascist and a Nazi and unwelcome in civilized society.
Go away.
Wtf does this have to do with the US escalating their military presence? You do realize that once the us officially get involved it's WW3 with literal nukes, right? You don't seriously think a territorial conflict between Russia and Ukraine is worth nuking the world over, do you?
Remember how WW1 escalated? Treaties calling everyone into a pointless war over someone else's conflict.
The US already has 80k troops there, 3k more isn’t some kind of escalation.
Is 83K more than 80K? Yes? Then it's an escalation.
It's OK guys, America isn't provoking a war or anything like that.
Just tell, has a war EVER started because America was sending troops and building military bases where they shouldn't?
I want to see your reaction when China puts 83k troops in Cuba.
Nah, I know exactly what you're going to say.
And is that worth the US involvement going hot and dragging the whole world into nuclear warfare?
Did you know that Russia invaded Ukraine? Did you know Russia invaded Georgia? Did you know Russia invaded Crimea?
You and your questions, playing some fantasy game of Risk, but in the future........can get bent.
So you are personally prepared to die over a few regions in Ukraine that want to be Russian? Do your friends and family know you'd like them to die or suffer a nuclear apocalypse so some insignificant corner of the world can finally be free from Russia, Ukraine, and Modern Civilization?
Sounds like you didn't pay attention to 20th century history so here's the cliff items:
Nuclear war = very bad. No winners. Most die. Civilization collapses. Mad max ensues
If defending Ukraine from Russia will lead to nuclear warfare then failure to defend Ukraine will lead defending the US, which will lead to nuclear warfare. Putin has demonstrated that nothing will ever be enough for him. Remember when we tried letting him have what he wanted? That's how we ended up here.
failure to defend Ukraine will lead defending the US, which will lead to nuclear warfare
What? That makes zero sense. You do realize that when the US, a nuclear power, enters troops into the Ukrainian conflict backing Ukraine, Russia, another nuclear power, will directly declare war on the us and that war will very quickly escalate into a nuclear exchange.
I think you're trying to say in some deranged way that if the us does nothing Russia will somehow decide to keep going (even though it's proven they are having difficulty in Ukraine) and pick up more countries until they get to the us and decide to nuke it?
You seem to think this is exactly like WW2 and Hitler but only superficially. Like you heard the WW2 talking points and distilled them into perfectly fitting here. Which yes, one country invading another is a similarity. However it's a similarity with almost literally every conflict in the world.
The US has been building military bases and positioning troops all over Russia for a veeery long time now, friend.
Oh really? Can you name some of these US military bases within Russia?
Aren't you the guy that claimed you lived in the US and then claimed you live in Brazil just minutes later in a different post yesterday?
I never claimed I live in the USA.
You made the mistake of misunderstanding that, then I clarified and you're here AGAIN making the same mistake. Completely on purpose. -- I've made it clear in multiple posts that I live in Brazil, I've made no effort to hide that, I mention Brazil often and how you Americans should take a cue from us since we've actually made our Trump ineligible and we'll send him to prison soon.
But sadly we are strongly affected by all the mistakes you idiots do.
Link me to your clarification post because I never saw it. All I saw from you was a link to globalization on Wikipedia.
If China sent 3k troops to Cuba I wouldn't care. 83k would be alarming because a sudden change from 0 presence to a demographic group would make me worry China was invading Cuba.
83k is a lot more than 3k. But you knew what when you started arguing in bad faith.
The only people upset about this are those that want Putin to win.
would make me worry China was invading Cuba.
LOL
something something you were being malicious
Ok, so China puts 3k troops on Cuba every month, is that fine now?
It also makes a deal with Canada and starts building military bases all around the US.
Provoking war with whom. Russia is already at war with Ukraine lmao. Maybe dont start a war if you dont want war provoking bla bla
A guy walks into my house and stabs my wife. He starts eating the food out of my refrigerator. I don't call the police, because I wouldn't want to provoke him.
Fuck entirely off shill.
Thanks for reducing the complexity of international politics to something I'd expect from a late night TV bizarre true crime documentary. You've certainly elevated the debate!
sometimes an invasion by a genocidal foreign power is just an invasion by a genocidal foreign power
"where they shouldn't" it's not like they land in Germany and demand to build a fucking base. It's a mutual contract between the two nations dumb ass
You say that but if China established some "mutual contracts" with Cuba or Canada and started placing thousands of troops there and even moving nukes near the US, you guys would start an all out war.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSbx352cn8A
The continuation of the screenshot you guys like so much
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=vSbx352cn8A
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.
There were protests, undeniable. Initially there were peaceful protests from people who had reservations about Deng's policies, that the CPC openly engaged with. Li Peng met with these protestors in April. However, the CIA saw the opportunity to forment an uprising and so pushed several student "leaders" into more aggressive actions. "Leaders" who expressed motivations such as wanting China to be controlled by the West.
Even western sources at the time, including ones such as the NYT and Reuters, said that there wasn't much happening. In the Square itself, there were no casulities. In the entirety of Beijing there were casulties among the PLA, police, and protestors alike. PLA soldiers were unarmed until they were attacked by protestors.
In the square itself the tank (which was leaving the square, not entering) stopped for the infamous tank man, who then...walked away unharmed. Do you think that would happen in many other countries? Considering we see US police charging full speed through protestors, I certainly don't.
Your are poorly mistaken. There are plenty of gorey pictures and videos of lots of dead and dying protesters in Tiennemen Square from that day. Thousands were killed according to many witnesses.
Out of curiosity, are you referring to that black and white photo of the "bodies" that gets passed around a lot? The one that is actually just a bunch of bicycles?
If you need an eyewitness account from a non-Chinese source, by all means: https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/89BEIJING18828_a.html Some beatings, which obviously criticism could be levied at, by otherwise unarmed riot police, but not much more than that.
I've seen more photos somewhere, but #12 shows a students brains and a Chinese army helmet. https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/g36621881/tiananmen-square-massacre-photos/
There definitely was violence on both sides, even the official counts put the casulties around 200 last I checked. Which were sadly probably preventable had the PLA been equipped with nonlethal control measures rather than...nothing.
I do credit your link as it surprisingly shows the violence both ways, a lot of modern sources like to paint it as being very one-sided. One thing I did notice even in the Esquire article you linked, they explicitly never mention Tiananmen in any of the pictures showing violence. Because, like in the account I linked, there was no violence in Tiananmen Square. Now if you said "Hey, there were outbreaks of violence around Beijing on June 4th" yes, that would be true. Even the CPC official accounts don't deny that.
Yes it was the dirty dirty CIA who FORCED those protesters to speak their minds! Don't you see how glorious, innocent China had no choice but to murder all those savage protestors?????
Like I said, from april to the beginning of june, initial protests were fairly peaceful and the CPC engaged with them, PLA on site had no weapons initially. Which is definitely an area they messed up, as they may have been able to further limit casulties if they could have responded faster.
The fact that CIA had embedded agents in the protestors and collaborated with the mafia is not exactly a secret, Operation Yellowbird is fairly well known, and that is basically their MO to begin with.
it kind of tends to be a pattern in retrospect
US sends troops to other country saying that they're doing it for good and benevolent reasons -> a decade later we find out that they did war crimes there
Sending 3000 reservists to Europe?
Shit, I'm going there on vacation in a few weeks, that's definitely provocative.
I wish they'd try something, they need to learn a lesson about screwing around in Europe.
Surprised russia sending troops "on vacation" to Crimea wasn't a reason for nato to bomb half of Russia to shit.
Crimea was Ukrainian territory... It's not in NATO. Thus not protected by NATO treaty.
So wait, your argument is invading another sovereign country isn't a provocation, but sending reservists into an allied country that welcomes them is?
Man, Russian logic is complex.
Russia is getting it's ass kicked by NATO toys delivered via slow roll. They really aren't stupid enough to actually attack NATO.
Oh I completely agree... But you can be the biggest baddest dude on the planet... Backing a honey badger into the corner isn't a good idea.
I doubt Russia could ever "win". But it can sure fuck shit up on it's way out. And if it feels that NATO is a threat, then that might be the direction the munitions go. I'd rather not see any war at all. I just simply don't see what 3000 more soldiers will accomplish EXCEPT to act as a threat to Russia, which is just shoving them further into a corner.
Yes, more senseless war! Ukraine is in the right to protect their territory. But outright wishing for senseless war is stupid as hell.
You do realize there's like 80,000 troops already there in europe? We have bases around the world. I'm not sure how these 3,000 national guard make a difference in your mind, but okay.
This is just the start. It's the exact same way the "weapons assistance" went. First small, then billions of dollars worth of weapons being sent on the regular. It's to get us used to the idea of even more troops being sent over. The fact that there's 80k US troops on a foreign continent already doesn't make it any better. If anything, it provides the context for why Russia is acting irrationally as it is being surrounded by an adversaries military
No offense but you sound like an idiot.
I have just as much a right not to die fighting a foreign war as a Ukrainian has to die fighting for their country.
Advocating for an increase in US military involvement in a foreign war sounds like someone hasn't studied the great 20th century conflicts. If you'd like, I am a practicing historian and I can give you a reading list at your literacy level to give you some context for current world events.
So "I have the right to safety and the Ukranians have the right to die" sums up your position?
If you want the conflict to end then why aren't you advocating for Russia to cease their hostility and invasion of a sovereign nation? You seem to only be concerned with people opposing this Russian aggression and the war that they started.
but I mean, we did basically that already
like relatively recently
in the middle east
In the middle east, we invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. Here, Russia is the invader. The two situations aren't comparable.
No offense but you sound blue-eyed and idealistic when history has shown this to be a typical outcome.
Actually the typical outcome was letting hitler take the sudatenland while doing nothing.
This is us stopping the typical outcome.
To me, the issue is that it increased. Whether by a small amount or not is rather meaningless if your complaint is that troops are being committed at all. It could have increased by 30 troops and (although it wouldn't have made news) it would bother me.
People are mean to me that I'm advocating for a senseless war with a nuclear element. Since obviously I can't be wrong I'm taking my ball and hiding in my echo chamber
"I'm happy that Russia invaded Ukraine and I want nothing to do with it, I'm sure they'll be fine".
LMFAO Like this is a valid excuse. Only 2 people in this comments section is from Lemmy.ml. Everyone else is commenting here from different servers.
What a truly stupid take.
For real, I had to do a double take when I read that. Buddy probably thinks this is lemmygrad
lemmy.ml is federated with lemmygrad.ml, and both are old instances (also run by the same people but that's less relevant here). Point being is that all the people on tankie central are subscribed to !worldnews@lemmy.ml for their worldnews community and thus you get a certain voting pattern you don't see in other worldnews communities even if you don't see any lemmygrad.ml users commenting.
I'm guessing you are in voluntary reserves then, right? Because to advocate for sending others to die in a needless war, when you yourself aren't volunteering to do exactly that, is hypocritical and frankly ghoulish.