gnuhaut

Haha, funny colonies, wanting reparations! Where are MY reparations, amiright? Seriously, don't you think the shit that the British empire has stolen, and which you actually still benefit from, already more than make up for it?

These situations aren't the fucking same:

The current wealth of the British royal family is obviously derived in no small part to slave trading and colonial crimes. The current poverty in the Caribbean can easily be tied to this same history. You can also prove that the ancestors of many people living there were definitely trafficked.

How is this in any way comparable to the Roman occupation? Do you still feel the negative effects of the Roman occupation? Can you find some wealthy family or institution that actually made their money during the Roman occupation? How many of current British citizens can even make somewhat plausible claim that their ancestors suffered under the Roman occupation? And even if they can, this affects them how?

Just tried this again. Kitty takes like maybe half a second to start on my machine (maybe yours is faster?). Not sure how to measure this. xterm starts almost instantly. I can type "Super+Enter ls" and it'll work. Doesn't work with kitty, the keystrokes just disappear. Is this actually important? Probably not, but it feels annoying. Like slow internet.

I might have imagined the typing latency, since it feels the same as xterm now. Maybe I'm remembering wrong. I was on the old Debian when I last tried this though, so something could have changed.

you’re simply asserting the sources are wrong and that the generals mean exactly the opposite of what they’re saying.

I implore you to read this again, seriously. Nobody can be this bad at reading comprehension. Do you actually think he's referring to Russia when he says "I think all kinds of ideologists and instigators of this war will not stop here.". He does not think Russia instigated the war! Are you just utterly incapable of assuming someone else's perspective? Because that would explain a lot.

This does not describe an extermination camp at all. I guess you're referring to this (I have to guess since you failed to point out exactly what you're referring to):

Russian soldiers used physical force against civilians, sometimes resulting in death, according to Ukraine 5 AM Coalition

This isn't even part of that eyewitness account. This is just an NGO alleging this, without pointing to the exact source document. An NGO that doesn't disclose its funding on its website as far as I can see. This isn't even describing a death camp, which is what you were confidently stating is a thing. What am I supposed to do with this?

The quote says literally exactly what the article is saying

No it doesn't. He alleges that instigators of the war (meaning not Russia, since he doesn't believe Russia instigated the war), will not stop in Ukraine. He's not referring to Russia, clearly. Given how he answers the "stepping stone" question like that, he obviously thinks that Ukraine is a stepping stone for those western instigators to attack Russia.

I'll paraphrase: Is Ukraine a stepping stone? – Yes, the western warmongers won't stop at Ukraine.

This is obviously what he means.

This is two examples of you misrepresenting sources in one comment. How am I supposed to take you seriously?

adults are being moved to death camps

Can you point out exactly where it says that? This is the first time I'm hearing of death camps.

Literally today a Russian general said Ukraine is simply the first stop to an invasion of Europe.

I just debunked this in another thread, let me quote myself:

The article links to this tweet here as a source.

I don't speak Russian, but I'm transcribing the English subtitles:

Interviewer: How long will the war last?

Mordvichev: I think there is plenty of time to spend. It is pointless to talk about a specified period. If we are talking about Eastern Europe, which we will have to... of course, then it will be longer.

Interviewer: Ukraine is only a stepping stone?

Mordichev: Yes, absolutely. It is only the beginning. I think all kinds of ideologists and instigators of this war will not stop here.

Since he's a Russian general, I assume that by "instigators and ideologists of this war" he means someone higher up in the US or NATO. Certainly he's not referring to Putin or the Kremlin. And he's saying they will not stop here.

This btw, is totally consistent with what I said before. Russia thinks they are being provoked and that the next step after NATO encirclement is them getting attacked.

I'm not saying they're not committing war crimes. I'm saying the goal of the war is not extermination, since an extermination war would look very different. The war crimes are very similar to what the US did in their recent wars, like Iraq. So unless you think those were extermination campaigns, then that's not good evidence. You'd have to compare it to e.g. the Nazi's eastern campaign, which, again, looked very different. Where are the extermination camps? Where are the ghettos? Where are the death squads? Did the Nazis try to make every Pole get a regular German passport? The rhetoric of liberating their quasi-Russian brothers and sisters from Banderite ideology and Western vassaldom is also very different from the Nazi "Untermenschen" crap.

Whether or not "anxiety" justifies the war isn't important. We were talking about why they invaded, and they did this in the sincere belief that this was necessary to protect against a hostile military encirclement. This is not an unreasonable belief. The US would react similarly to such an encirclement, even if the other side repeatedly insists they don't have hostile intent. Even if there is actually no hostile intent (I doubt it), that's still not great, since plan and intent are subject to change. Who's going to guarantee that some future administration doesn't want to leverage the strategic advantage gained by parking an army and/or nukes near Moscow?

So this is what's called a provocation, and it suggests that the Russians aren't "mad" or irrational. They're behaving as expected by the theory of realpolitik. This would mean that this war could be deescalated by backing off and agreeing to a neutral Ukraine.

Edit: Russia invading Ukraine has therefore two main goals:

• Prevent Ukraine from becoming a NATO member. So long as Ukraine is in a war (or just a territorial dispute) with Russia, most NATO members will not want to admit Ukraine into NATO, since that could drag them into war with a nuclear power.

• Drive back the anti-Russian NATO-equipped Ukrainian army (quite a large force actually) from their core territories. This would give Russia a buffer to better absorb an attack from the territory of Ukraine (which is btw the direction both Hitler and Napoleon used to attack Russia). This also suggest that Russia is probably going to try to expand the buffer zone unless Ukraine gets demilitarized and neutralized (as in become neutral), if they can.

The goal is not to murder Ukrainians. And the primary goal is not to take territory, that just follows from the primary goal of creating a security buffer.

The article links to this tweet here as a source.

I don't speak Russian, but I'm transcribing the English subtitles:

Interviewer: How long will the war last?

Mordvichev: I think there is plenty of time to spend. It is pointless to talk about a specified period. If we are talking about Eastern Europe, which we will have to... of course, then it will be longer.

Interviewer: Ukraine is only a stepping stone?

Mordichev: Yes, absolutely. It is only the beginning. I think all kinds of ideologists and instigators of this war will not stop here.

Since he's a Russian general, I assume that by "instigators and ideologists of this war" he means someone higher up in the US or NATO. Certainly he's not referring to Putin or the Kremlin. And he's saying they will not stop here.

Germany and Italy literally did not get rid fascism willingly, they were defeated and this was imposed on them. And being from Germany, I assure you denazification was incredibly half-assed.

Look at it for yourself: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/SlCLSBr9sW0

They're doing the salute and everything. That salute was introduced by the fascist OUN.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/SlCLSBr9sW0

See what they are doing while chanting "Slava Ukraini"? Notice the salutes? That's the context of this becoming popular in Ukraine (again).