In what way I am clearly biased? The articles I post all contain clear analysis on the views they express. They are well founded and factual.

You started this

I am not a russophile. or a tankie whatever that means.

I hate putin’s Russia and believe he is a delusional dictator under whose rule I would personally suffer.

however, I am formulating a universal truth, that any country, doesnt get to dictate what their neighbors do, as long the neighbors don’t threaten its national interest.

ting any bells??

Indeed, being paid to accuse people of being paid must be one of the more shameful occupations someone could have.

This is evident when the accuser targets the person carrying the message and does not address the message itself.

meaning?

and this

https://lemmy.world/post/9047527

you may also want to check this out

Ignored Warnings: How NATO Expansion Led to the Current Ukraine Tragedy

https://lemmy.world/post/9047119

on top of that Sachs proposal you don’t even consider right? ney, he is just a putinist… f*** him, right.

your idea is way more brilliant.

well I agree with most of what you are saying, except the NATO part.

but at the end you close with a truly brilliant idea. if only it could become true.

any ideas on that?

literally just spouted US taking points on Russia.

funny how you make it sound as if murder and land grab are bad things that are universally condemned.

surely you could relate to some recent world events rights?

how about trying to compile a definitive list of the most fatal conflicts of the last 70 years?

hi,

I don’t follow regularly my social media accounts, due to busy daily schedule.

and thanks for the response obviously I am here for dialogue, so I will reply even after some time.

anyways, i made the point I consider is a crucial factor in the escalation and ultimate invasion.

you responded that the US being so successful has managed to encircle Russia and that this does not have any significance on how Russia shall respond. actually that it should not respond.

I such cases I believe it is not so clear which side is the aggressor and which is the defender. my opinion.

finally, I just came across this speak at the UN Security Council by Jeffrey Sachs, in which he address the route causes of all 4 ongoing wars. Russia Ukraine, Israel Palestine, Syria and shahel.

https://lemmy.world/post/8879480

take the time to get his perspective.

M.

hi, the onion is a satirical news outlet.

the article mimics the ways that mainstream media functions but makes the cynical aspect extremely profound so that to create a shock to the reader.

is that what you meant with your response?

Come again? could you share the news piece you are referring to?

sorry for late response.

well,is it not true that the entity who denies the right of existence to the other side has been Israel?

is it not true that Israel is a terrorist state by any definition of the word?

and is it not true that Hamad is truely something which if it did not exist, Israel would wish it existed?

and is it not true that that which Israel wishes for, Israel gets?

what are your thoughts on these?

well, high school essays often capture reality in more profound and direct way.

I regard this beginning as a truly an immensely powerful reminder of the true status of war.

an analogy would be to say that the worst crime a human can make is to take the life of another human.

M.

please take the time to view my responses on similar comments above.

M.

thanks for taking the time to respond. Also, apologies for the late response, I do not check up often the comments on my posts.

so yeah I totally agree that Putin is really and literally a fierce authoritarian and a murder. nor that he and Russian elites view Ukraine as a pure subjugated satellite state totally under itheir control, in essence as you say a non entity, that should not exist independent of Russia. typical imperialist stance.

while all this is true, it is also true that the US has similar national and imperialist interests in Ukraine and a clear interest in provoking an indirect confrontation with Moscow in order to weaken or even manage a regime change.

so, what is at stake here, is the meaning of the word hypocrisy, for the US and all those that see the role of the US as a natural order of things.

so say that the US does indeed care for evil leaders then could you not find a handful of criminals which the US supports wholeheartedly?

your thoughts?

M.

please refer to my response to a similar comment, just before yours.

https://lemmy.world/comment/5540353

M.

I would suggest you first explore the subject of the US imperialist status, sattelite states, number of military bases in every part of the world, endless manipulations of other countries internal politics including election engineering, support of brutal regimes.

then I would suggest you approach the subject of national security in general. what if means for a state to defend its security concerns to perseived threats.

then search for US diplomats explicitly warning in public statements that NATO expansion will certainly lead to conflict.

next is to confront the idea that it is not about saving Ukrainian democracy, that would a joke, but about weakening Russia and if possible to dismantle it as a federation altogether in order to encircle China.

and then wait to see how this ends…

Sincerely, M.