• ex10n@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    11 months ago

    1997 was 26 years ago, much can change in this timeframe. However, It’s also a blink of an eye on the geologic timeline.

    • Krause [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      11 months ago

      1997 was 26 years ago, much can change in this timeframe

      yet it didn’t, curious

      • ex10n@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        I mean history show otherwise, so that’s a strange conclusion to draw.

    • carl_marks_1312 [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yes and I asked you what changed and if you can contextualize. You yourself understand that historical context is important. After all ignoring historical context would rob this conflict of it’s meaning, no? Or are you one of those rubes that believes Putin ordered an attack out of his own volition?

      • ex10n@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        There’s plenty of historical context to cover. Like how Ukraine became the breadbasket feeding the Soviets in the USSR at the expense of their own population.

        • carl_marks_1312 [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          11 months ago

          Sure but you’re ignoring that the Soviet Union got dissolved and had a friendly western handpicked succesor at that point. So no more threat to UA, no? NATOs purpose was also a reaction to the creation of Soviet Russia, but what was it’s purpose after the dissolution of the SU? Why join and expand NATO when everyones friendly now?

          • ex10n@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            If everyone was friendly, why did Ukraine not give Russia their soverign land? The people of Ukraine voted for Zelensky fighting Russian influence for this exact reason. NATO continues to exist to promote stability and peace in the EU full stop. They’re a defensive pact to deter outside aggression. Ukraine believes joining this pact will protect them from Russian aggression. Much like Finland and Sweden. Come on now, even Switzerland has chosen the side of Ukraine here.

            • carl_marks_1312 [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              14
              ·
              11 months ago

              If everyone was friendly, why did Ukraine not give Russia their soverign land?

              Everyone was friendly right after the dissolution of the SU. With the prospect of NATO expansion and initially friendly Russia getting declined 3 times into the alliance they added 1 and 1 together.

              The people of Ukraine voted for Zelensky fighting Russian influence for this exact reason.

              Zelenski got voted for because he promised an end to the civil war in donbas https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30414955 https://www.france24.com/en/20190416-russian-speakers-ukraine-candidate-talking-language

              a defensive pact

              Like in Yugoslavia?

              • ex10n@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                11 months ago

                Zelensky was voted for many reasons, this is surely a component of it! His charismatic effect and desire for sovereign governance are others.

                • carl_marks_1312 [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  12
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Yeah but the protection of the Russian minority was a key mandate.

                  You want to talk about historical context yet fail to contextualize anything shown to you. Your “spurring debate” is actually just bad propaganda

                  • ex10n@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    6
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    Exactly! Ukraine’s goals aim to unify a diverse population! Majority and minority alike. It’s a beautiful resistance movement towards outside Russian aggression negatively impacting the lives of the Russian minority in Eastern Ukraine!