this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2024
419 points (100.0% liked)
World News
1017 readers
880 users here now
Rules:
- Be a decent person
- No spam
- Add the byline, or write a line or two in the body about the article.
Other communities of interest:
founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Russia never had any limitations on the weapons they got from their allies. Ukraine actually had them. Russian propaganda is trying to paint it as escalation, but the thing is that the west was already trying to de-escalate, and is now loosening the limitations.
I do believe the west should continue trying to de-escalate. But I think at this point Ukraine should take the deal and give up their land even though I think that's disgusting. But it's like an infection that has been going for way too long. Amputate the leg so the body can live.
I respectfully disagree. At no point were there open, good-faith communications with Russia aimed at resolving this conflict. The U.S. was aware of the situation but chose to view it as an opportunity to fuel the insatiable appetite of the military-industrial complex.
Sending weapons to Ukraine and approving their use inside Russia does not constitute de-escalation. While I acknowledge that Russia's actions may warrant consequences, my concern is that the United States often takes actions that further fuel the conflict, feeding into the cycle rather than seeking a long-term resolution.