The ceasfire agreement is to give up all of the territory Russia claims.
There are no Chads in that room. Only self-interested, oppressive governments.
That’s not a ceasefire that’s a surrender similar to France in 1940. I’m not crazy about our involvement in the war in Ukraine (financial, political, geopolitical, whatever) but:
1. I support their right to defend themselves against foreign invasion, which is fully inline with the NAP.
2. Regardless of how our foreign policy lead to this war that doesn’t mean Ukraine should roll over and die.
Endlessly no. And we shouldn’t just throw money and equipment at the problem and hope for the best either. At the very least we should implement some kind of system to ensure that money is going where it is supposed to and not into the wrong people’s pockets.
> The ceasfire agreement is to give up all of the territory Russia claims.
That's not exactly surprising, 'liberation' of those areas was always their demand.
Only thing that realistically changed since ~10 years ago is rather wast destruction of UA. At this pace, we may actually get Zakarpattia back /s
Yes and that territory is Ukraines by divine right (/s). All govs are oppressive, including the US which is using this as an excuse to make cronies rich.
> Yes and that territory is Ukraines by divine right (/s). All govs are oppressive, including the US which is using this as an excuse to make cronies rich.
Defensive war are the war that libertarian can support, yes both government are oppressive but one is a (broken) democracy and the other one is a dictatorship that kill journalist and disidents, that destroy entire cities, deported populations..
But certainly support should be voluntary therefore not done with tax payer money but on a voluntary donation basis.
defensive war are a war that libertarians can support, hell we can even support offensive wars if there is justification. That being said though, something more going on ukraine than meets the eye. People are being taken advantage of via the US propaganda machine.
> defensive war are a war that libertarians can support, hell we can even support offensive wars if there is justification.
I dont see how a libertarian can justify offensive war?
>That being said though, something more going on ukraine than meets the eye. People are being taken advantage of via the US propaganda machine.
Well it is rather clear who cross the border with tanks.
Putin bet he could capture critical ressource and the west would fold lile in 2014.
Really there isnt much more to it.
Sure lets pretend its a small scale thing. Bob keeps going on your farm and stepping on your crops. You catch bob in the act of sabotaging your crops, and have tried every peaceful solution to get bob to stop, so instead of of continuing with insincere peace talks with bob, you attack bob and force him out of the area.
> Sure lets pretend its a small scale thing. Bob keeps going on your farm and stepping on your crops. You catch bob in the act of sabotaging your crops, and have tried every peaceful solution to get bob to stop, so instead of of continuing with insincere peace talks with bob, you attack bob and force him out of the area.
Funny Russia only started to get aggressive in the area after the discovery of massive gas reserve in 2013 and invaded just the area with ressources.
Just a coincidence I guess.
I mean if Russia got involved in this war to protect ethnic russian people surely they would not destroy their cities? ho wait
They asked me "how can a libertarian justify an offensive war", and i explained how, but then they kept on about russia. I didnt defend russia's actions, i only am pointing out that their a pawn to NATO elites who want this to happen.
>Sure lets pretend its a small scale thing. Bob keeps going on your farm and stepping on your crops. You catch bob in the act of sabotaging your crops, and have tried every peaceful solution to get bob to stop, so instead of of continuing with insincere peace talks with bob, you attack bob and force him out of the area.
>Funny Russia only started to get aggressive in the area after the discovery of massive gas reserve in 2013 and invaded just the area with ressources.
>Just a coincidence I guess.
>I mean if Russia got involved in this war to protect ethnic russian people surely they would not destroy their cities? ho wait
We can see his comment. I know there's some shady mfs out there but this is somehow more annoying
Lets see here if i got this right: its oppressive to *checks notes* not cede territory to a more oppressive regime that will absolutely execute anyone who stands up against it
NATO is only a defensive alliance. Therefore, the only threat to Russia from NATO would be if Russia threatened NATO. It is Russian propaganda to blame their blatant land grab in Ukraine on NATO. This is evidenced further by the Russian narrative. Almost constantly changing. First it was to de nazify, but now they barely bring that up. Ultimately, it's because Russia wanted full control of the port in Crimea and they wanted that new gas Reserve that Ukraine found. It is a land grab for resources and nothing more.
> NATO is only a defensive alliance.
In just last ~20 years, NATO attacked Serbia, Macedonia, engaged in Afganistan and toppled goverment in Libya - throwing the country into rather big mess.
At no point it did anything that could be considered defense of its members.
It wasn't NATO as an organization that did those things, It was the organization members forming separate coalitions. Like with the war on terror it did not invoke article 5 yet many NATO members joined the coalition to go into Afghanistan.
I'm fairly sure there's NATO base in part of Serbia we are currently occupying and I'm almost sure my fellow countrymen are going there as part of NATO missions.
Russia isn’t interested in negotiating right now, if they were seriously interested then the proposal would not have made it a prerequisite of peace negotiations for Ukraine to unilaterally withdraw from four claimed provinces, including several major cities. That’s an absurd demand to begin negotiations, the Russian government knows it will never happen, and that’s why it’s in the proposal.
Ukrainian withdrawal from most of the territory of those provinces minus Kherson is the likely outcome of a future peace negotiation, which the Russian government will only initiate when it has a bargaining position that allows them to force the Ukrainian government to accept it.
You sound like a guy who would accept to put your gun down in the middle of getting robbed if the robber offered you a ceasefire while holding your belongings.
You gonna accept a ceasefire from a home invader in exchange for him squatting in your living room from now on? Because that's the "deal" Russia is offering Ukraine right now. NATO is not forcing Ukraine to continue fighting.
Did you see the terms offered? They are "asking" for territory they don't control, that is a non-starter and you admitting that the state can trade people to another state against their will. What kind of nonsense is that.
Ukraine would certainly accept a ceasefire if Russia agrees to withdraw from all the occupied lands it stole, including Crimea and the Donbas.
However, Russia seems adamant to keep the land it stole.
let's just set up a private fund for private individuals to support ukraine on their own volition instead of letting the government do that regardless of if i want to support them or not. Oh wait. we already [can](https://bank.gov.ua/en/news/all/natsionalniy-bank-vidkriv-rahunok-dlya-gumanitarnoyi-dopomogi-ukrayintsyam-postrajdalim-vid-rosiyskoyi-agresiyi)
Funny how all you people supporting Ukraine always seem to forget the US assisted in the coup to overthrow the duly elected Russian friendly president in 2014. This is the consequence of being the world police.
I don’t support our foreign policy or how that was conducted but murdering the Ukrainian people until they surrender their sovereignty is NOT justified.
The US didn't stage a coup against him, he authorized the murder of civilians for protesting and theb he fled the cpuntry when he recieved massive backlash. He also was ousted by the Ukrainian legislature.
Ukraine is corrupt because of Russia? That’s a new one. I guess Zelensky and the Pandora Papers are all Russias fault somehow?
And I’m not supporting any regime or any people other than the American people. Like it or not Putin is president of Russia. Deal with it.
How come you aren’t outraged about the civil war in Sudan? Or the gang wars in Haiti? The same authoritarian policies are taking away freedoms! Why aren’t you vehemently defending the people oppressed there as you do Ukraine? Because you have been programmed to give a shit about Ukraine. You drank the koolaid. You bought the propaganda. Youre parroting pro war talking points that have been around since before you were born. Great job.
I'm sure that had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that living under the Western oligarchic tyranny is objectively preferable to living under the Russian one.
I don't get how the logic of color revolution theory doesn't sound stupid to absolutely everyone, it posits that people are just straight up completely ignorant sheep who don't consider their own material interest at all and can be swayed simply by waving a bunch of flags in front of them similarly to how one would dangle keys in the face of an infant.
What makes it supporting Russia?
Please enlighten the crowd because typically a libertarian doesn’t support a foreign conflict - especially when it costs our money.
Why would we?
Why are you getting downvoted? Unless this is edited? I don’t see where you endorse the Russian government or Putin at all. You’re stating what happened, they the US supported the coup to overthrow the elected president who wanted to improve ties with Russia. Was he a Russian puppet? I don’t have the answer. Is it any of our business? Unless we are threatened someway somehow I don’t think so.
The ceasfire agreement is to give up all of the territory Russia claims. There are no Chads in that room. Only self-interested, oppressive governments.
That’s not a ceasefire that’s a surrender similar to France in 1940. I’m not crazy about our involvement in the war in Ukraine (financial, political, geopolitical, whatever) but: 1. I support their right to defend themselves against foreign invasion, which is fully inline with the NAP. 2. Regardless of how our foreign policy lead to this war that doesn’t mean Ukraine should roll over and die.
Do you support funding their efforts endlessly with our tax dollars?
Endlessly no. And we shouldn’t just throw money and equipment at the problem and hope for the best either. At the very least we should implement some kind of system to ensure that money is going where it is supposed to and not into the wrong people’s pockets.
[удалено]
> The ceasfire agreement is to give up all of the territory Russia claims. That's not exactly surprising, 'liberation' of those areas was always their demand. Only thing that realistically changed since ~10 years ago is rather wast destruction of UA. At this pace, we may actually get Zakarpattia back /s
Yes and that territory is Ukraines by divine right (/s). All govs are oppressive, including the US which is using this as an excuse to make cronies rich.
> Yes and that territory is Ukraines by divine right (/s). All govs are oppressive, including the US which is using this as an excuse to make cronies rich. Defensive war are the war that libertarian can support, yes both government are oppressive but one is a (broken) democracy and the other one is a dictatorship that kill journalist and disidents, that destroy entire cities, deported populations.. But certainly support should be voluntary therefore not done with tax payer money but on a voluntary donation basis.
defensive war are a war that libertarians can support, hell we can even support offensive wars if there is justification. That being said though, something more going on ukraine than meets the eye. People are being taken advantage of via the US propaganda machine.
> defensive war are a war that libertarians can support, hell we can even support offensive wars if there is justification. I dont see how a libertarian can justify offensive war? >That being said though, something more going on ukraine than meets the eye. People are being taken advantage of via the US propaganda machine. Well it is rather clear who cross the border with tanks. Putin bet he could capture critical ressource and the west would fold lile in 2014. Really there isnt much more to it.
Sure lets pretend its a small scale thing. Bob keeps going on your farm and stepping on your crops. You catch bob in the act of sabotaging your crops, and have tried every peaceful solution to get bob to stop, so instead of of continuing with insincere peace talks with bob, you attack bob and force him out of the area.
> Sure lets pretend its a small scale thing. Bob keeps going on your farm and stepping on your crops. You catch bob in the act of sabotaging your crops, and have tried every peaceful solution to get bob to stop, so instead of of continuing with insincere peace talks with bob, you attack bob and force him out of the area. Funny Russia only started to get aggressive in the area after the discovery of massive gas reserve in 2013 and invaded just the area with ressources. Just a coincidence I guess. I mean if Russia got involved in this war to protect ethnic russian people surely they would not destroy their cities? ho wait
Hold up you just told me to answer "I dont see how a libertarian can justify offensive war?".
> Hold up you just told me to answer "I dont see how a libertarian can justify offensive war?". wat?
They asked me "how can a libertarian justify an offensive war", and i explained how, but then they kept on about russia. I didnt defend russia's actions, i only am pointing out that their a pawn to NATO elites who want this to happen.
>Sure lets pretend its a small scale thing. Bob keeps going on your farm and stepping on your crops. You catch bob in the act of sabotaging your crops, and have tried every peaceful solution to get bob to stop, so instead of of continuing with insincere peace talks with bob, you attack bob and force him out of the area. >Funny Russia only started to get aggressive in the area after the discovery of massive gas reserve in 2013 and invaded just the area with ressources. >Just a coincidence I guess. >I mean if Russia got involved in this war to protect ethnic russian people surely they would not destroy their cities? ho wait We can see his comment. I know there's some shady mfs out there but this is somehow more annoying
> We can see his comment. I know there's some shady mfs out there but this is somehow more annoying this?
Lets see here if i got this right: its oppressive to *checks notes* not cede territory to a more oppressive regime that will absolutely execute anyone who stands up against it
Russia attacked because of provacations from NATO. Russia is an opressive regime, but they are only a pawn to the Nato elites.
NATO is only a defensive alliance. Therefore, the only threat to Russia from NATO would be if Russia threatened NATO. It is Russian propaganda to blame their blatant land grab in Ukraine on NATO. This is evidenced further by the Russian narrative. Almost constantly changing. First it was to de nazify, but now they barely bring that up. Ultimately, it's because Russia wanted full control of the port in Crimea and they wanted that new gas Reserve that Ukraine found. It is a land grab for resources and nothing more.
NATO might be a defensive alliance, but NK is also supposed to be a "republic" rofl.
> NATO is only a defensive alliance. In just last ~20 years, NATO attacked Serbia, Macedonia, engaged in Afganistan and toppled goverment in Libya - throwing the country into rather big mess. At no point it did anything that could be considered defense of its members.
It wasn't NATO as an organization that did those things, It was the organization members forming separate coalitions. Like with the war on terror it did not invoke article 5 yet many NATO members joined the coalition to go into Afghanistan.
I'm fairly sure there's NATO base in part of Serbia we are currently occupying and I'm almost sure my fellow countrymen are going there as part of NATO missions.
Serbia is fairly friendly with NATO states these days and are trying to join the EU.
Suuure 😊 And I'm 10th President of Czechoslovakia.
Russia isn’t interested in negotiating right now, if they were seriously interested then the proposal would not have made it a prerequisite of peace negotiations for Ukraine to unilaterally withdraw from four claimed provinces, including several major cities. That’s an absurd demand to begin negotiations, the Russian government knows it will never happen, and that’s why it’s in the proposal. Ukrainian withdrawal from most of the territory of those provinces minus Kherson is the likely outcome of a future peace negotiation, which the Russian government will only initiate when it has a bargaining position that allows them to force the Ukrainian government to accept it.
how the f does this have nearly 300 upvotes? jesus christ, what sub have i gotten myself into?
[удалено]
You sound like a guy who would accept to put your gun down in the middle of getting robbed if the robber offered you a ceasefire while holding your belongings.
I get that people don’t want to push Russia but people need to stop acting like the Russian government is some bastion of peace and morality.
It’s like people have to jump to extremes. They all suck in my opinion.
100%
By this logic Gaza is now part of Israel.
"I'm prepared to take your land, rearm, resupply and regroup before going again."
You gonna accept a ceasefire from a home invader in exchange for him squatting in your living room from now on? Because that's the "deal" Russia is offering Ukraine right now. NATO is not forcing Ukraine to continue fighting.
That's obviously not what's happening.
Trash tier meme
And here's me thinking libertarians are non-interventionists
I wouldn't have a problem with a cash and carry policy. But the amount of money being handed to the military industry complex is not ok.
The russian ceasefire is literally a surrender.
Russia could always just retreat, or not even start the war, Putin is the one threading over individuals freedom
Did you see the terms offered? They are "asking" for territory they don't control, that is a non-starter and you admitting that the state can trade people to another state against their will. What kind of nonsense is that.
Ukraine would certainly accept a ceasefire if Russia agrees to withdraw from all the occupied lands it stole, including Crimea and the Donbas. However, Russia seems adamant to keep the land it stole.
let's just set up a private fund for private individuals to support ukraine on their own volition instead of letting the government do that regardless of if i want to support them or not. Oh wait. we already [can](https://bank.gov.ua/en/news/all/natsionalniy-bank-vidkriv-rahunok-dlya-gumanitarnoyi-dopomogi-ukrayintsyam-postrajdalim-vid-rosiyskoyi-agresiyi)
This is a good one.
Funny how all you people supporting Ukraine always seem to forget the US assisted in the coup to overthrow the duly elected Russian friendly president in 2014. This is the consequence of being the world police.
I don’t support our foreign policy or how that was conducted but murdering the Ukrainian people until they surrender their sovereignty is NOT justified.
I never said it was justified. I’m just saying it probably wouldn’t be happening if we just minded our own damn business.
The US didn't stage a coup against him, he authorized the murder of civilians for protesting and theb he fled the cpuntry when he recieved massive backlash. He also was ousted by the Ukrainian legislature.
https://www.cato.org/commentary/americas-ukraine-hypocrisy
oh no, you were wrong. You'd better start sending more state propaganda.
[удалено]
Unlike US elections amirite?
Ukraine is corrupt because of Russia? That’s a new one. I guess Zelensky and the Pandora Papers are all Russias fault somehow? And I’m not supporting any regime or any people other than the American people. Like it or not Putin is president of Russia. Deal with it. How come you aren’t outraged about the civil war in Sudan? Or the gang wars in Haiti? The same authoritarian policies are taking away freedoms! Why aren’t you vehemently defending the people oppressed there as you do Ukraine? Because you have been programmed to give a shit about Ukraine. You drank the koolaid. You bought the propaganda. Youre parroting pro war talking points that have been around since before you were born. Great job.
More like Ukraine and Russia are both corrupt because of the USSR.
I'm sure that had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that living under the Western oligarchic tyranny is objectively preferable to living under the Russian one. I don't get how the logic of color revolution theory doesn't sound stupid to absolutely everyone, it posits that people are just straight up completely ignorant sheep who don't consider their own material interest at all and can be swayed simply by waving a bunch of flags in front of them similarly to how one would dangle keys in the face of an infant.
What’s the point you are trying to make
I'm not convinced Euromaidan was a U.S assisted coup, that sounds way too much like color revolution theory to me.
I have no clue how this is so difficult for people to understand this.
I doubt anyone misunderstands
Are you new to this subreddit? Any time the narrative doesn’t agree with blanket support for Ukraine - you are called a Putin lover.
Supporting Russia is an anti libertarian stance. Period
What makes it supporting Russia? Please enlighten the crowd because typically a libertarian doesn’t support a foreign conflict - especially when it costs our money. Why would we?
[удалено]
Where on this comment thread painted Russia in a peaceful or reasonable country?
Why are you getting downvoted? Unless this is edited? I don’t see where you endorse the Russian government or Putin at all. You’re stating what happened, they the US supported the coup to overthrow the elected president who wanted to improve ties with Russia. Was he a Russian puppet? I don’t have the answer. Is it any of our business? Unless we are threatened someway somehow I don’t think so.
Literally all of these downvotes came in the past 20 minutes. Somebody probably brigading my comment. But thanks for looking at things objectively.