A state is comprised of more than just the people that got elected into office. When you have Azov formally integrated into the military, a president that was elected on the platform of uniting the country and ending a civil war getting laughed at when he tries to enact his mandate, diplomats and other officials that uphold bandera, a state forbidding minority languages, etc. It's not just "an extremist minority" but an insitutional problem.

And to support these forces in order to topple a perceived geopolitical enemy is just collaborating with fascist, especially when doing so created that enemy in the first place.

[–] Tosti@feddit.nl 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I think you are turning around cause and effect. Fringe political extremist where turned into "heroic defenders of Ukraine the day little green men showed up to separate Crimea and the Donbas from Ukraine. If anything the Russian invasion have them legitimacy. It clearly says so in the links you provided.

Edit: And Putin stated Ukraine was not a country as early as the 90's even though the USSR fell apart and countries that where autonomous before, became independent again.

[–] carl_marks_1312@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Fringe political extremist where turned into "heroic defenders of Ukraine the day little green men showed up to separate Crimea and the Donbas from Ukraine.

Turned by whom? When you have leaked phone calls where the US discussed regime change, or Biden already predicting in 97 a pissed off Russia when NATO expands even when Clinton and Yeltsin basically handpicked Putin, it's actually you that has cause and effect reversed.

My sources are western and are corroborating far right/Nazi Elements in Ukraine, but it's still slanted with western foreign policy so you should read it with a grain of salt..

[–] Tosti@feddit.nl -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Turned in the perception of Ukranians. The Azov movement was seen by many Ukranians for what they where.. right wing extremists they had no legitimacy. But when Russia invaded they fought the Russians tooth and nail, legitimizing them.

Biden articulated what Putin was saying himself. Joining NATO is the choice of a souverein nation and using that as an excuse for invasion is just that.. an excuse.

So no, I don't think I see it reversed. And what we are seeing unfold is clear. You claim to be anti imperialist but when Russia does it it's OK?

The war is horrible and can end with Russia withdrawing to within their own borders, but that won't happen as Putin will be punished by his "own" and replaced with someone else to do it.

[–] carl_marks_1312@lemmy.ml 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

After the dissolution of the SU, you had a friendly Russia and an expectations that NATO is going to disband especially since the Warsaw pact was a reaction to it. Why have NATO still? Who was the enemy? (No it's not a Defensive force and never was). The disbanding never happened. Even Putins Russia tried to join it 3-4 times. When you see former Warsaw pact members change regime and join NATO shortly afterwards you know what's up and what's coming for you. Invading Ukraine was preemptive and a reaction to NATO expansion. It's the causus belli. So yes you have it reversed. Even war hawks like Mearshheimer ane Kissinger are/were saying this

[–] Tosti@feddit.nl 0 points 10 months ago

Sure, if that's your take there is no use further discussing it.