German chancellor Olaf Scholz's governing coalition has agreed in principle to double the country's military aid for Ukraine next year to 8 billion euros ($8.5 billion), a political source in Berlin said on Sunday.
I treat Russia as an ordinary liberal democratic state led by ordinary human people with rational self-interested motives
It means I judge them by the same standards I’d use to judge any similar state with a similar political and economic system in similar circumstances.
Do you? So let’s say the UK decided to funnel weapons in to Ireland to restart the Troubles and then sent tanks in to annex Donegal. Would you be similarly opposed to arming Ireland against a much larger and better-armed neighbour? After all it’d hugely expand the UK’s exclusive economic zone at sea and significantly reduce the length of the border to defend against Ireland, it seems beneficial for Britain. I don’t know about you, but I’d hope someone would back Ireland up in that situation.
If you’re an American as I am
I’m not
the 2014 coup of Ukraine
Good job Ukraine has had two elections since then huh
the ongoing war on Donetsk and Luhansk
It is interesting how so many of Russia’s neighbours have pro-Russian separatist movements that always seem to have Russian backing
prohibiting a negotiated end to the ongoing conflict
What leverage do you think Ukraine’s supporters actually have to prevent a peace? They’d stop supplying it weapons? Well you apparently want them to do that anyway. Presumably that’s because you think Ukraine can negotiate peace without being armed enough to fight Russia. In which case these peace-blocking supporters have no leverage with which to block peace.
Of course they have even less leverage over Russia, which could end this war tomorrow by literally just fucking going home
You’re not some unbiased neutral observer
I didn’t claim to be unbiased in the slightest. I am openly pro-Ukraine here. Because I’m generally against countries invading their neighbours and killing hundreds of thousands in order to annex territory, no matter how beneficial it might be to the invader.
Absent continuous US intervention for over a decade, this war never happens.
This is literally just American exceptionalism for people that don’t like America. Other countries also do things. Russia has a track record of exactly this kind of thing.
Do you? So let’s say the UK decided to funnel weapons in to Ireland to restart the Troubles and then sent tanks in to annex Donegal. Would you be similarly opposed to arming Ireland against a much larger and better-armed neighbour? After all it’d hugely expand the UK’s exclusive economic zone at sea and significantly reduce the length of the border to defend against Ireland, it seems beneficial for Britain. I don’t know about you, but I’d hope someone would back Ireland up in that situation.
I’m not
Good job Ukraine has had two elections since then huh
It is interesting how so many of Russia’s neighbours have pro-Russian separatist movements that always seem to have Russian backing
What leverage do you think Ukraine’s supporters actually have to prevent a peace? They’d stop supplying it weapons? Well you apparently want them to do that anyway. Presumably that’s because you think Ukraine can negotiate peace without being armed enough to fight Russia. In which case these peace-blocking supporters have no leverage with which to block peace.
Of course they have even less leverage over Russia, which could end this war tomorrow by literally just fucking going home
I didn’t claim to be unbiased in the slightest. I am openly pro-Ukraine here. Because I’m generally against countries invading their neighbours and killing hundreds of thousands in order to annex territory, no matter how beneficial it might be to the invader.
This is literally just American exceptionalism for people that don’t like America. Other countries also do things. Russia has a track record of exactly this kind of thing.