Avatar

SixSidedUrsine [comrade/them]

SixSidedUrsine@hexbear.net
Joined
1 posts • 47 comments
Direct message

“lol, you actually care about innocent people? What a rube! What a LIB!”

And no, I don’t give a shit what you clutch pearls about - I mean, I would have thought someone interested in liberation would give a shit about human beings, but maybe that was naive of me - I’m said the “former comrades” thing because I expect the people I consider comrades not to support murdering the children simply because those children were born to their (and my) class enemies.

And get the fuck out of here with your “ooooooooh, but that’s ReVoLuTiOnN!!” schtick. You’re like the fucking reactionaries talking about those woke tankies for being upset by the “collateral damage” of all those Iraqi civilians. Oh boo hoo, innocent people. Who gives a shit about them, right? That’s just WAR. Yeah, no shit people die in war, but you pretending that that’s the same as there being innocent people who are your prisoners and are defenseless, literally children who at your mercy and then choosing to shoot them… That kind of false equivalency and gross disregard for innocent people truly is beyond the pale.

Kill the reactionary chud in YOUR head.

So yes, fuck you. You are no comrade of mine, just as no apologists for bigotry, SA, fascism, or in this case, child murder, are. It’s like that Che quote “if you tremble with indignation at every injustice, then you are a comrade of mine.” Well, you clearly aren’t because you clearly don’t give a shit about injustice, so long as it’s perpetrated by those you deem to be on your side.

permalink
report
parent
reply

I don’t know, if the marxists or anarchists I work with irl ever said that kind of shit, I wouldn’t work with them anymore (and we have discussed the topic). Simple as a that. Personally, I’m an atheist and haven’t come up against any contradictions between my leftism and my morality or humanism. But if religion is what it takes for people to recognize that killing kids because of some hypothetical future scenario is wrong and will never be justified, then I say keep the churches full.

permalink
report
parent
reply

I’m just making sure we’re all on the same page about not machine gunning children.

I’m honestly shocked that this even has to be said here, let alone that apparently so many really aren’t on the same page that machine-gunning children is both wrong and unjustifiable.

permalink
report
parent
reply

And again, that’s exactly what the fascist apologists for the dropping of nuclear bombs on innocent Japanese civilians say.

“I can’t imagine getting upset over something like child murder.” I almost put in one of the disgust emojis here but it felt like it was too light-hearted for the disgust I’m actually feeling right now for people I used to think of as comrades.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Fuck you. Killing children is never necessary. If you can’t understand that, I don’t know what else to say.

the enforcement of authority of the proletariat must be carried out agaisnt the former oppressors.

Children were never the oppressors you fucking ghoul! You remind me of the goddamned apologists for the US nuking Japan “anything done in the name of furthering the goals of my side, even deliberately to innocent people born in the wrong place at the wrong time, may seem icky but thems the way it is. I’m just being practical.” Not only does the argument rest entirely on a possibility of what might happen, it’s completely unjustified regardless.

permalink
report
parent
reply

but you shouldn’t be hoping for something that prolongs the war./

lol, what do you think I’m “hoping” for? Stating the fact that Russia can easily do what it has been doing indefinitely (but Ukraine cannot) has nothing to do with my hopes.

So is using a map of the countries supporting Ukraine to insinuate that the all the other countries must therefore be on Russia’s side.

No one ever did any such thing, just noted that support comes in many forms other than military equipment, which Russia has mostly already covered for itself, even if it buys drone parts from Iran. Unlike Ukraine which now relies wholly and entirely on outside help for all of its material need. You changed the goalposts for what “support” means to make it sound like only military equipment counts as support, which is foolish because it isn’t what Russia needs. You’re just trying to move the goalposts all over the place to make it seem like you have some kind of valid point, but you don’t. Even if countries are not sending unneeded tanks, Russia still has plenty of support all over the world, mostly from countries who rightly recognize this as a struggle against the imperialism of the US and NATO which is beneficial to any anti-imperialists (including any actual leftists, even though so many western “leftists” drink deeply of their overlord’s propaganda).

permalink
report
parent
reply

but Russia hasn’t been able to get the kind of [material] support from its allies that Ukraine has

It hasn’t needed to. Ukraine wouldn’t be a functional state at all by this point were it not for the tens of billions of dollars in aid as well as all the military equipment slowly depleting the west. Russia on the other hand, has been doing quite well in holding it’s own economically despite the sanctions and in holding the literal defensive line against all the NATO weaponry. It’s a nonsensical comparison to make.

permalink
report
parent
reply

It’s so fucking funny when the geopolitics understanders who have been drip-fed NATO propaganda state the clear opposite of reality and think they made an insightful comment.

Russia has all but won the military conflict, as has been made clear by this utter failure of a “counteroffensive.” Russia is doing better economically than before the SMO, despite the supposed economic wunderwaffen sanctions that only backfired and hurt NATO countries. Russia has only gained support by most of the rest of the world and has showed the global south that the US/NATO are indeed paper tigers. Russia has all the leverage now. So yes, for Russia to compromise right now would be bad for them because they don’t need to compromise, they can keep going as they have been and eventually have their demands met, or Ukraine/NATO can recognize they’ve lost and make a bid for peace by acquiescing to Russia’s demands before more lives are needlessly lost.

Ukraine on the other hand will be crippled for decades regardless of how things pan out. Ukraine is now deeply indebted to Western countries, has already had all national assets sold off, has had a major chunk of its working-age population killed or maimed, and is beholden to a fascist, nazi-worshipping government.

As for Germany, yeah they have been working to the end of hobbling themselves for decades too by allowing their remaining industrial capacity to be completely gutted, kowtowing to their US masters that bombed their infrastructure to prevent them ever again getting oil from ‘The Bad Country,’ they have irreparably removed nuclear power as an option even as they’re facing an impending energy crisis (in large part because of aforementioned no-oil-from-bad-country), and are right now also sliding towards right wing populism.

permalink
report
parent
reply

definitely using the isle of man flag as a cowardly substitute for the Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging flag

So basically neo-nazi? Why am I not surprised.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Though I will say, targeting infrastructure is part of war, not a warcrime.

It depends on the specifics of the infrastructure, really. Bombing rail lines carrying weapons to the front? Not a war crime. Blowing up a dam and deliberately drowning hundreds of thousands of civilians? War crime.

Either way, Russia has been extremely restrained in their destruction of Ukrainian infrastructure, especially in the first year of the war. It’s downright shocking when you compare the infrastructure left intact compared to what was left intact after only the first few weeks of the US invasion of Iraq.

permalink
report
parent
reply