Poland was an independent state for hundreds of years before the Soviet Union. Finland left Russia after the fall of the Empire and is, like Baltic states culturally distinct from Russia. Also, Belarus, Transnistria, and Ukraine have a significant Russian-speaking and identifying population. Personally, I absolutely think that Estonians have it coming if Russia ever invades them. Banning the Russian language in schools and in official use despite having a considerable Russian population is more than enough reason for Russians to invade them.
So you deny big and kind russia would invade anyone else "just this one time bro, trust me", while simultanously already justifying why Russia should invade the baltics lmao.
SerbBIPOCs like this are the exact same breed as russians, both of you deserve another 100 years of toiling under your local chinovniks while even the ottoman r*pebabies get richer than you.
>Finland left Russia after the fall of the Empire
So like Ukraine, until they failed to defend themselves in 1921, unlike the poles who managed to defeat them.
I'm justifying that Russia should invade any country that's hostile to its Russian population. Ukraine and Estonia are currently the only countries that fit that description.
As I said, Trianon didn't go far enough. And the Soviets should have run over way more of you with their tanks. It just proves how kind they are towards you. At least they prevented your country from becoming libtarded.
So like Ukraine, until they failed to defend themselves in 1921, unlike the poles who managed to defeat them.
The Soviet Union is not the Russian Federation, Eastern Eurotards should really stop being r-slurred in that regard.
Szia_uramhung/aryan
Lois, democracy and liberalism is non-negotiable
DahvieVanityFan 9mo ago#5933990
Edited 9mo ago
spent 0 currency on pings
Then why use Poland and Finland as an example, all 3 declared independence in 1917, the only reason Ukraine didn't follow the path of Finland and Poland, was that they couldn't defeat the red army, unlike Poland and Finland, then all 3 had to fight their war of independence, often multiple times. Surely this time Russia will act benelovent, trust him and if you don't, you are russophobic so deserve to get invaded anyways
>I'm justifying that Russia should invade any country that's hostile to its Russian population. Ukraine and Estonia are currently the only countries that fit that description.
And of course not wanting to be a russian vasal instantly qualifies as such, therefore they can justify it against whomever they want.
Maybe try convince some gullible westoids about how innocent russias intentions are or how misunderstood she is by nazi butthurt belters, nobody with a double digit IQ east of the Oder will believe it anyways, you yourself don't believe it either, you just hope Russia can get away with it so that later you might get away with a little trolling in Kosovo too.
Ukraine was always a part of Russia. Poland, Finland, and the Baltic states for only about a hundred years. Not enough to call it a historical Russian land, which is why Russia never cared about Finland's and Baltic states' independence as much as Ukrainian. And even then, the parts of Ukraine that Russia currently occupies were not a part of the Ukrainian Republic while it was independent. They were given to them by the Soviet Union. If Ukrainians want to "decommunize" Ukraine, then they should return the territories they got from a communist government.
And of course not wanting to be a russian vasal instantly qualifies as such, therefore they can justify it against whomever they want.
No, actively repressing your Russian-speaking population qualifies as such. Of which both Ukraine and Estonia are guilty. They both banned pro-Russian parties, Estonia banned the Russian language in an official capacity, and Ukraine committed torture, kidnapping, and mass murder of the Russian-speaking population in Donbas (this was done almost exclusively by the SBU and the volunteer battalions). Are Russians innocent of those crimes? Not really. But Putin's job is to protect the Russian population.
And if Ukraine wants to join NATO (which is the main reason for this war) then they can't be that concerned about killing civilians, or they would never join an organization that intentionally targeted civilian targets and supported a terrorist organization that killed Albanians and non-Albanians indiscriminately.
>Ukraine was always a part of Russia. Poland, Finland, and the Baltic states for only about a hundred years.
Ah so we are moving the goalposts as usual, "it might have declared independence at the same time as other countries, but the russians opressed them for a few more centuries, therefore they have ancestral rights to supress them indefinitely".
Maybe let Ukrainians self-determine? What is the exact amount of years after which one country is indefenitely entitled to a territory against the wish of the native population? Vojvodina was also never part of Serbia prior to 1920, would Hungary bombing it senselessly therefore justified?
>And if Ukraine wants to join NATO (which is the main reason for this war)
No it was not
>then they can't be that concerned about killing civilians, or they would never join an organization that intentionally targeted civilian targets and supported a terrorist organization that killed Albanians and non-Albanians indiscriminately.
"Not allowing me to commit wholesale genocide by bombing my army means you are pro-genocide"
I'm guessing you don't hold the current russian army to the same standards.
But like I said,
Maybe try convince some gullible westoids about how innocent russias intentions are or how misunderstood she is by nazi butthurt belters, nobody with a double digit IQ east of the Oder will believe it anyways, you yourself don't believe it either, you just hope Russia can get away with it so that later you might get away with a little trolling in Kosovo too.
Ah so we are moving the goalposts as usual, "it might have declared independence at the same time as other countries, but the russians opressed them for a few more centuries, therefore they have ancestral rights to supress them indefinitely".
Maybe let Ukrainians self-determine? What is the exact amount of years after which one country is indefenitely entitled to a territory against the wish of the native population? Vojvodina was also never part of Serbia prior to 1920, would Hungary bombing it senselessly therefore justified?
Fine, maybe let Russians in Ukraine self-determine? As they did? You should respect the self-determination of Russians.
Honestly, I'm fine with both the majority Hungarian territory in Vojvodina going to Hungaria. That's not even half the region. We can get the Lorev village in return out of principle. I'm also fine with the majority Albanian part of Kosovo going to Albanians. Even the Presevo Valley can go to them. The problem is that a good part of Northern Kosovo rightfully belongs to Serbian citizens who were banished from there by Albanians during WW2 and then after the Kosovo War in 2004. After that land is returned to its rightful owners, then we can split Kosovo based on demographics. Self-determination is and has always been a good thing.
"Not allowing me to commit wholesale genocide by bombing my army means you are pro-genocide"
I specifically took issue with the bombing of civilians and supporting a terrorist organization that committed genocide against civilians. I fail to see how you got that from my comment.
I'm guessing you don't hold the current russian army to the same standards.
If Ukraine doesn't hold NATO to those standards, why should I hold Russia to those standards?
Szia_uramhung/aryan
Lois, democracy and liberalism is non-negotiable
DahvieVanityFan 9mo ago#5935296
Edited 9mo ago
spent 0 currency on pings
Ah, finally we agree that the NATO bombing of Serbia was justified to help albanians self-determine.
See? It wasn't that hard.
>Honestly, I'm fine with both the majority Hungarian territory in Vojvodina going to Hungaria. That's not even half the region. We can get the Lorev village in return out of principle. I'm also fine with the majority Albanian part of Kosovo going to Albanians.
Which is why you supported a war that aimed at displacing all of the albanians out of Kosovo, while serbians weren't even after they lost their war.
>I'm also fine with the majority Albanian part of Kosovo going to Albanians. Even the Presevo Valley can go to them. The problem is that a good part of Northern Kosovo rightfully belongs to Serbian citizens who were banished from there by Albanians during WW2
Once again, I see you don't hold russians to the same standards.
>I specifically took issue with the bombing of civilians and supporting a terrorist organization that committed genocide against civilians
Bombing your military to prevent you from committing wholesale genocide of albanians doesn't count as a genocide, no matter how hard you want to believe it.
>If Ukraine doesn't hold NATO to those standards, why should I hold Russia to those standards?
Because NATO didn't wage a aggressive war against anyone? Sorry they bombed the genocidal dreams of greater serbia onto the history books, supporting another genocidal aggressor will just isolate it further.
"You need to have Russian citizenship to live in Russia, news at eleven."
Bombing your military to prevent you from committing wholesale genocide of albanians doesn't count as a genocide, no matter how hard you want to believe it.
Yes, but bombing civilians does count as genocide. Which is what NATO did.
Because NATO didn't wage a aggressive war against anyone? Sorry they bombed the genocidal dreams of greater serbia onto the history books, supporting another genocidal aggressor will just isolate it further.
They attacked a sovereign territory of a non-NATO state that did not attack a NATO state. How is that not an aggressive war? Just because you don't like the person aggression is being committed to, doesn't mean that there was no aggression.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Poland was an independent state for hundreds of years before the Soviet Union. Finland left Russia after the fall of the Empire and is, like Baltic states culturally distinct from Russia. Also, Belarus, Transnistria, and Ukraine have a significant Russian-speaking and identifying population. Personally, I absolutely think that Estonians have it coming if Russia ever invades them. Banning the Russian language in schools and in official use despite having a considerable Russian population is more than enough reason for Russians to invade them.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
So you deny big and kind russia would invade anyone else "just this one time bro, trust me", while simultanously already justifying why Russia should invade the baltics lmao.
SerbBIPOCs like this are the exact same breed as russians, both of you deserve another 100 years of toiling under your local chinovniks while even the ottoman r*pebabies get richer than you.
So like Ukraine, until they failed to defend themselves in 1921, unlike the poles who managed to defeat them.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I'm justifying that Russia should invade any country that's hostile to its Russian population. Ukraine and Estonia are currently the only countries that fit that description.
As I said, Trianon didn't go far enough. And the Soviets should have run over way more of you with their tanks. It just proves how kind they are towards you. At least they prevented your country from becoming libtarded.
The Soviet Union is not the Russian Federation, Eastern Eurotards should really stop being r-slurred in that regard.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Then why use Poland and Finland as an example, all 3 declared independence in 1917, the only reason Ukraine didn't follow the path of Finland and Poland, was that they couldn't defeat the red army, unlike Poland and Finland, then all 3 had to fight their war of independence, often multiple times. Surely this time Russia will act benelovent, trust him and if you don't, you are russophobic so deserve to get invaded anyways
And of course not wanting to be a russian vasal instantly qualifies as such, therefore they can justify it against whomever they want.
Maybe try convince some gullible westoids about how innocent russias intentions are or how misunderstood she is by nazi butthurt belters, nobody with a double digit IQ east of the Oder will believe it anyways, you yourself don't believe it either, you just hope Russia can get away with it so that later you might get away with a little trolling in Kosovo too.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Ukraine was always a part of Russia. Poland, Finland, and the Baltic states for only about a hundred years. Not enough to call it a historical Russian land, which is why Russia never cared about Finland's and Baltic states' independence as much as Ukrainian. And even then, the parts of Ukraine that Russia currently occupies were not a part of the Ukrainian Republic while it was independent. They were given to them by the Soviet Union. If Ukrainians want to "decommunize" Ukraine, then they should return the territories they got from a communist government.
No, actively repressing your Russian-speaking population qualifies as such. Of which both Ukraine and Estonia are guilty. They both banned pro-Russian parties, Estonia banned the Russian language in an official capacity, and Ukraine committed torture, kidnapping, and mass murder of the Russian-speaking population in Donbas (this was done almost exclusively by the SBU and the volunteer battalions). Are Russians innocent of those crimes? Not really. But Putin's job is to protect the Russian population.
And if Ukraine wants to join NATO (which is the main reason for this war) then they can't be that concerned about killing civilians, or they would never join an organization that intentionally targeted civilian targets and supported a terrorist organization that killed Albanians and non-Albanians indiscriminately.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Ah so we are moving the goalposts as usual, "it might have declared independence at the same time as other countries, but the russians opressed them for a few more centuries, therefore they have ancestral rights to supress them indefinitely".
Maybe let Ukrainians self-determine? What is the exact amount of years after which one country is indefenitely entitled to a territory against the wish of the native population? Vojvodina was also never part of Serbia prior to 1920, would Hungary bombing it senselessly therefore justified?
No it was not
"Not allowing me to commit wholesale genocide by bombing my army means you are pro-genocide"
I'm guessing you don't hold the current russian army to the same standards.
But like I said,
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Fine, maybe let Russians in Ukraine self-determine? As they did? You should respect the self-determination of Russians.
Honestly, I'm fine with both the majority Hungarian territory in Vojvodina going to Hungaria. That's not even half the region. We can get the Lorev village in return out of principle. I'm also fine with the majority Albanian part of Kosovo going to Albanians. Even the Presevo Valley can go to them. The problem is that a good part of Northern Kosovo rightfully belongs to Serbian citizens who were banished from there by Albanians during WW2 and then after the Kosovo War in 2004. After that land is returned to its rightful owners, then we can split Kosovo based on demographics. Self-determination is and has always been a good thing.
I specifically took issue with the bombing of civilians and supporting a terrorist organization that committed genocide against civilians. I fail to see how you got that from my comment.
If Ukraine doesn't hold NATO to those standards, why should I hold Russia to those standards?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Ah, finally we agree that the NATO bombing of Serbia was justified to help albanians self-determine.
See? It wasn't that hard.
Which is why you supported a war that aimed at displacing all of the albanians out of Kosovo, while serbians weren't even after they lost their war.
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2023/04/29/putin-threatens-to-deport-ukrainians-from-regions-annexed-by-russia_6024766_4.html
Once again, I see you don't hold russians to the same standards.
Bombing your military to prevent you from committing wholesale genocide of albanians doesn't count as a genocide, no matter how hard you want to believe it.
Because NATO didn't wage a aggressive war against anyone? Sorry they bombed the genocidal dreams of greater serbia onto the history books, supporting another genocidal aggressor will just isolate it further.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
But letting Kosovo Serbs self-determine is not justified apparently. KLA attacked the majority Serb area.
I supported an anti-terrorist operation against an organization that wanted to ethnically cleanse Kosovo of non-Albanians.
"You need to have Russian citizenship to live in Russia, news at eleven."
Yes, but bombing civilians does count as genocide. Which is what NATO did.
They attacked a sovereign territory of a non-NATO state that did not attack a NATO state. How is that not an aggressive war? Just because you don't like the person aggression is being committed to, doesn't mean that there was no aggression.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context