• CapgrasDelusion@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    102
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    As far as I can tell, this prolifically posting account has literally never posted an article that wasn’t negative on Ukraine, and posts about 90% negative on the West in general. For whatever that’s worth.

  • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    25
    ·
    1 year ago

    Unfortunately Russia’s strategy of mining the front so heavily it won’t be safe for a hundred years is proving pretty effect at slowing the Ukrainian advance. I hope the rest of the world never lets up on the sanctions. Russia is a fucked backwater that loves war crimes. They need to be punished.

    • Zippy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Excessive sanctions long after the reason for them can have a detrimental long term outcome. I am with you to sanction hard while they occupy even one square inch and I emotionally want then to pay for long after but in the name of stability, that is not the best option.

      The reality is that this conflict is only being driven by a relatively small number of people. Everyone else is along for the ride or being brainwashed. Punish those people for life but unfortunately that will never cover the economic cost much less that of life.

  • Quacksalber
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    And what is wrong with Ukraine not just bashing its head into russian defenses and instead go for a slow-and-steady approach? They still have reserves to spare, word is Ukraine is rotating its troops on the front regularly. So as long as Ukraine can keep up the pressure and russia not being able to stop their slow advance, they will be successful eventually. Would another Kharkiv thrunder-run be preferable? Surely.
    But russia is prepared this time. And instead of being all doom-and-gloom, the West could step up its commitment to see Ukraine win. Apart from artillery shell production, weapon manufacturers still see no increase in weapons procurement. It’s time for the West to let actions follow its words on support of Ukraine. As long as their words ring hollow, Putin only has to wait and eventually outpace dwindling western support.

  • Syldon@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Denys Davydov did video on these type of comments about a week ago. He dragged up a lot of newspaper front pages of the invasion of the Nazis in 1945. There was a ton of articles stating just how slow the move was going. An attacking force is always going to have a hard time against a very entrenched enemy. You also have to remember Ukraine does not have a good air force until they get those pilots trained up for the F-16. They are making gains and are knocking on the second defence line in two areas. Any gains Russia has made they loose 2 days later, with the exception of Bakhmut.

    • ElHexo [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ukraine will not receive F-16 fighter jets from its allies this year as hoped, a spokesman for the country’s Air Force said late Wednesday, confirming that, as expected, the advanced planes won’t play a role in the current counteroffensive.

      However, American officials have said that Ukraine has identified only eight combat pilots — less than a single squadron — who speak English well enough to start a period of training expected to last at least a year.

      If D-Day was reliant on eight fighters being operational in June 1945, I don’t think the chances of success would be very high.

      https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/17/world/europe/ukraine-f16-jets-nato.html

      • Syldon@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Precisely the point. The allies had air superiority. Ukraine does not, therefore you cannot expect the same gains.

        • ElHexo [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I would add that D-Day involved what, 200k soldiers? While the eastern offensive at that time involved 3.5 million soldiers.

          Ukraine has what, a couple hundred thousand Russian soldiers? Blunting the initial offensive and signing a peace treaty was always the best option for Ukraine itself.

          • Syldon@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It was because of the Russian offensive that the Germans were defeated. Anyone with an interest in history knows that. Without Russia there was no beating Germany.

            D-day landings were 175k men, the invasion force was a 3m strong multinational force.

            I disagree that Ukraine should defer to a peace treaty, while the west supports them. It is western hardware that is making the difference. Ukraine knows this. It states it publicly and often. Russia are not making any gains against Ukraine now the Wagner have left the field. What Wagner committed in Bakhmut was unsustainable, and arguably the limits of where it was going to get to. Since Russia is nothing more than a crumbling obstacle now, why would Ukraine give ground to Russia. The Ruble has collapsed. There is dissent at the top now with daggers out for scapegoats. The damage Prigozhin did is still making its mark. All the war is doing is making Russia more and more indebted to China. China is happy to sell Russia arms to watch it destroy itself.

            Russia’s best outcome right now would be to be able walk away without incurring reparations cost for the carnage they have reaped. However, I doubt this will be seen as acceptable.

            • duderium [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              Sacking all of your recruitment officials (as Zelensky did days ago) is always a sign of imminent victory and definitely not a sign of desperate exhaustion. The Russians are (probably) waiting for the Ukrainians to destroy what remains of their armed forces on those impossible fortifications. Once this is done, Russia will retake whatever territory it has lost and snap up any land with a Russian-speaking population (Odessa for instance).

              • Syldon@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                A bit of a stark difference between the belligerents isn’t it. One has a corrupt army that cannot fight due to the restrictions that corruption that has caused. The other stamped on corruption when it was revealed. The only win Russia will see from this travesty is if they decide en masse to remove the corrupt blight that infects their country.

                • duderium [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  The only win Russia will see from this travesty is if they decide en masse to remove the corrupt blight that infects their country.

                  The Russian Federation and the government of Ukraine are both creations of the USA. Are you saying that we should bring back the USSR? Before you answer with the usual liberal nonsense, please google the terms “yanks to the rescue” and “Siberian intervention.”

          • FaceDeer@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            They’d have lost Kharkiv and Kherson if they’d done that. So clearly in hindsight that was not the best option.

    • FaceDeer@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      And another important thing to bear in mind is that the start of the advance is the hardest part of the advance. Russia has built up a thick crust of defensive lines. At some point the advance penetrates that crust, and then the gooey center goes much more quickly.

    • Flaps [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      What invasion of the nazis in 1945 are you talking about?

      You mean Allied advances into Germany?

      Also can’t deny that denys guy is far from an impartial source lol

      • Syldon@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        OFC he is not impartial. The media articles he linked were partisan towards the allies mentioned in them. Even in their own press the allies were referred to as being slow. This was not seen as a criticism. Germany were seen as a formidable force to be reckoned with. The fact they were even moving in the right direction at all was to be commended. There was an understanding that the task was difficult, much like Ukraine removing Russia is now.

        • Flaps [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Not impartial as in, a Ukrainian propagandist. I purposfully avoid headlines like 'Russia DESTROYS recruits with LANDMINES. How would you trust a guy like that, right?

          The reality on the ground is totally different than the situation in 1945, too. German industrial capacity, manpower, air force,… Were pretty much out of the picture. Showing headlines from the times back then only shows you how it was being reported on.

  • diffuselight@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ukraine is fighting for their existence, russia is fighting for the oligarchs. Ukraine will prevail.

    • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      It will just take the Great Men of History to rise up, show how destined they are as Main Characters (such as yourself) and then after an epic boss battle with Putler and his secret lover Drumpf, they, and you, will be shown to be the Adults In The Room that Made The Hard Decisions and saved the Rules-Based Order. congratulations

    • ElHexo [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      The oligarchs declared war on the oligarchs, but rest assured the oligarchs will win.

      Actor Volodymyr Zelensky stormed to the Ukrainian presidency in 2019 on a wave of public anger against the country’s political class, including previous leaders who used secret companies to stash their wealth overseas.

      Now, leaked documents prove that Zelensky and his inner circle have had their own network of offshore companies. Two belonging to the president’s partners were used to buy expensive property in London.

      The revelations come from documents in the Pandora Papers, millions of files from 14 offshore service providers leaked to the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists and shared with partners around the world including OCCRP.

      The documents show that Zelensky and his partners in a television production company, Kvartal 95, set up a network of offshore firms dating back to at least 2012, the year the company began making regular content for TV stations owned by Ihor Kolomoisky, an oligarch dogged by allegations of multi-billion-dollar fraud. The offshores were also used by Zelensky associates to purchase and own three prime properties in the center of London.

      https://www.occrp.org/en/the-pandora-papers/pandora-papers-reveal-offshore-holdings-of-ukrainian-president-and-his-inner-circle

    • CascadeOfLight [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      To also be absolutely clear, no Ukraine is not fighting for its existence. Russia’s interest in territorial gain extends only to the areas of majority Russian-speaking, ethnically Russian populations.

      Such as may be discerned from any one of these maps here

      Yanukovych was the president illegally deposed in a coup in 2014, with the area voting >80% for him matching almost exactly the territory still held by separatists at the start of 2022

      This one’s really interesting: Zelensky ran on a platform of peace in the Donbass and reversing the ban on Russian as an official language, which he immediately reneged on after becoming president

      Land currently held by Russia. If they try to take any more, it will most likely be towards Odessa, both to cut off Ukraine from the sea and because it’s a firmly Russian-speaking area.


      This is for the very simple reason that it’s literally not possible, in the modern world, to hold territory in which the native population does not want you to remain. Trying to do so will only result in a very long, very costly anti-insurgency campaign and your eventual defeat. This is exactly what NATO was hoping for when they baited Russia into attacking, that they would try to occupy and hold the whole of Ukraine. Instead, Russia only bit off as much as it could chew and is now allowing the Ukrainians to waste all their soldiers and equipment by attacking into impenetrable fortifications. When that’s done, they’ll counter-counterattack, grab some more Russian speaking land, and then let the limping Kiev rump state collapse under neoliberal austerity shock doctrine privatization administered by their ‘allies’ in the West. Ukraine could have avoided all this by upholding either of the two Minsk agreements that were painstakingly worked out by diplomats from both sides, but unfortunately the hand of their masters in Washington was too strong.

      • amplifier@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re deluding yourself trying to explain russian millitary failure as some sort of advanced move. Remember the intense fighting at Hostomel airport? The huge column stuck on the road to Kyiv? They totaly thought Ukraine leadership would flee and they’d be able to take the capital.

        russian speaking land

        what makes you think russian speaking people support Putin’s regime? They don’t. That’s like assuming Zelenskyi supports Putin’s regime because he’s a native russian speaker.

        • CascadeOfLight [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          They support Russia because the Kiev regime has been trying to genocide them for the last nine years! After the coup against the president that the Russian speaking areas voted for the new coup government immediately banned Russian as an official language. They made it illegal to teach it in schools! They attacked and persecuted people across the Russian speaking area, especially the Donbass. For instance in Mariupol, Kiev sent the overtly fascist Azov battalion to attack and break up a march in celebration of the 69th anniversary of the Soviet victory in WW2, using APCs and live ammunition. Now why would they attack on Victory Day, the day of symbolic victory over the Nazis? The officers of the Mariupol police station refused to go out and beat up marchers, so they were quietly murdered. Here are the events depicted even by western empire media, back before they’d had the ‘Slava Ukraini’ chip installed.

          As for the early days of the war, here I go posting it again:

          I assume you don’t consider the Marine Corps Gazette to be Russian propaganda.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Ukraine appears to be running out of options in a counteroffensive that officials originally framed as Kyiv’s crucial operation to retake significant territory from occupying Russian forces this year.

    Meanwhile, a war weary Ukrainian public is eager for leaders in Kyiv to secure victory and in Washington, calls to cut back on aid to Ukraine are expected to be amplified in the run up to the 2024 U.S. presidential election.

    “The question here is which of the two sides is going to be worn out sooner,” said Franz-Stefan Gady, a senior fellow with the International Institute for Strategic Studies and the Center for a New American Security, who visited Ukraine in July.

    Sak, the adviser to the defense minister, said the slow progress clearing extensive mine fields along the front is preventing Kyiv from engaging the majority of its Western-trained reserve forces.

    Ukrainian forces have retaken roughly 81 square miles of occupied territory since the counteroffensive began in June, with the greatest gains occurring near Bakhmut in the east and in the Zaporizhzhia region south of Orikhiv.

    The Biden administration has “very successfully” managed risk of a direct conflict with Russia by gradually providing Kyiv with more advanced weapons systems and longer-range munitions, said Kelly Grieco, who researches air power operations as a senior fellow at the Stimson Center, a D.C.-based policy group.


    The original article contains 1,338 words, the summary contains 223 words. Saved 83%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Wouldn’t munitions like the HIMARS with tungsten balls set off these mines they’ve used?

    Why not make smaller versions to shot gun blast a path?

    • Commiejones [comrade/them, he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You are stupid for saying this or even having the thought in your head.

      A HIMARS blast is a few meters wide at best. Each rocket is about $240,000. There are probably dozens of km of mine fields between the front line and the sea of azov and Russia can deploy mines remotely to fill any gaps that Ukraine makes.

      • TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The blast from the ones using the tungsten balls literally covers a massive area.

        It uses AoE by a blast up in the air that scatters 180000 balls over 85 meters.

        That’s about the size of an American football field.

        That’s a bit more than a few meters, you inbred Tankie.

        • Commiejones [comrade/them, he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          85 meters That’s about the size of an American football field. That’s a bit more than a few meters, you inbred Tankie.

          American education system really showing its worth here. An american football field is over 100 m if you are working with a margin of error of +/-15% at the start of your calculations your results will be dog shit. Do you know how many meters are in a KM? Do you know how many KM there are between the front line and the sea of azov? 85 is a few meters and in this context it is a drop in a bucket.

          You’d need like 300 million dollars worth of missiles provided 1) a Tungsten BB is big enough to set off a Anti-Tank mine 2) they all work correctly and hit their target, 3) none of them get shot down by Anti Air defence, 4) the mines don’t get redeployed and 5) USA has stock/makes that many of a specialty missile

          Then once that is all done you have a single path that is 85 m wide to drive down and Russia knows exactly where to aim its artillery.

          Its a stupid idea. Ukraine has the best minds the west can come up with. they don’t need your smooth brain to come up with ways to send more Ukrainians to a sure death. They are doing fine without you coming up with multi million dollar flops like this one. Go back to losing at HOI 4 on easy while using cheats.

    • ArbitraryValue
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think a mine-clearing line charge does something similar to what you have in mind.

    • trompete [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Oh god I actually watched half of this. He says the left (apparently Jeffrey Sachs is left now?) just bought Putin’s argument about security concerns, but (big reveal about halfway in, choir music swells), Putin is actually driven by mystical thinking and megalomania.

      So Putin is lying when he talks about realpolitik or says anything that makes any sense. But when he speaks of history or the motherland or whatever, then he’s telling the truth. He’s definitely not just doing a bit of story telling to hit on those emotions. No Sir! That’s a window right into his soul. And apparently his personal feelings are enough to move whole armies.

      Maybe, just maybe, there are actual material reasons for why stuff happens, and it’s not just ideas in the minds of individual “great men”.

    • Quacksalber
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The problem is that Ukraine is given enough not to lose, but not enough to win. At this rate, Ukraine will depend on western hand-outs much longer than if the West fully committed to see Ukraine restore its borders.

      • Bantha@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        What do you think “winning” looks like tho? Absolutely annihilating Russia?

        • Quacksalber
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Forcing Russia to stop and reverse its invasion. If you think that it will take the total annihilation of russia, so be it.

          • Bantha@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            No. I don’t think that’s “winning”. First of all Russia is more than just Putin. Actual people live there. As much as in Ukraine. They wouldn’t be that much better than Russia if Ukraine “invaded” Russia back. Also for that to happen the west would need to support Ukraine so dramatically that it most certainly would come to a nuclear Supergau. This “total annihilation of Russia” would mean in return the total annihilation of the human race.

            I don’t think Ukraine can “win” against Russia with sheer military might. No matter how much they are supported. That’s an archaic view of politics and war. The only real solution to bring piece is a peace contract. It isn’t the 11th century anymore where two armies would clash against each other and the one coming out victorious is the winning party of the war. I’m not one of those “stop giving Ukraine weapons and military aid und jUsT tAlK wItH pUtIn” guys but in the end there has to be a treaty. And you can’t do that by just bombing the shit out of Russia cuz that’d mean the end of the fucking world.

        • Quacksalber
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Then it’s up to the people to demand more support from Ukraine.

          • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            42
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Absurd. America has already given $75 billion in “assistance” to keep this war going, imagine if that had been spent on people who need it in America? And you want to spend even more than that??? Every bomb is food stolen from the mouth of a hungry child.

            • Skua@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              20
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              About 24 billion is non-military financial aid and 4 billion more is humanitarian, so that’s a big chunk not being spent on bombs. Slightly more than half of the remainder is the estimated value of old stock being sent over and therefore could not be “spent” on assistance for Americans anyway. The remaining 23 billion that is actually money spent on equipment and training is less than half of one percent of annual federal government expenditure. Weapons for Ukraine are not the reason money isn’t being spent on what you want it to be spent on.

                • Skua@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  15
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Depends on what the countries sending it can afford and what it would take for Russia to stop invading. That’s not the point I’m making. The point is that the none of the countries aiding Ukraine are currently spending anything anywhere close to enough of their budgets to significantly affect any other spending they do. If you’re unhappy with how your government directs the other 99.6% of its budget, yeah, I get that. I am at mine too. But helping Ukraine is not the problem there.

            • Pons_Aelius@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              19
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              What is your plan than?

              What should the west do?

              Let me guess, you have no alternative that does not boil down to “Let Putin and people like him do what they want.”

              • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                26
                ·
                1 year ago

                Negotiate an end to the war. I’d support a UN monitored vote in the Donbass region and Crimea (and any other contested area) on whether they want to join Russia or stay with Ukraine.

                • Pons_Aelius@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  18
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Negotiate an end to the war.

                  Russia refuses to give back the lands seized.

                  Now what to you do?

                  I’d support a UN monitored vote in the Donbass region and Crimea (and any other contested area) on whether they want to join Russia or stay with Ukraine.

                  Not an option the Ukrainian gov will accept. Nor should they.
                  When parts of the USA wanted to leave that was not response from the USA.

                • Spzi@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  20
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Let’s assume a peace is negotiated, in which each party assures it respects the aggreed-upon borders. Similar to the Budapest Memorandum, signed and broken by Russia. How could Ukraine trust them this time?

                  I’d support a UN monitored vote in the Donbass region and Crimea (and any other contested area) on whether they want to join Russia or stay with Ukraine.

                  That sounds good at first glance. But given Russia has the opportunity to persecute any opposition in the contested areas, and bring in loyal settlers, the results are likely skewed even if the vote itself is fair and transparent.

                  Fundamentally, I still don’t understand why one should negotiate with a burglar how much they get to keep.

                • Quacksalber
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  15
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Sorry, but as if. Russia is a UN veto power. And Russia would never accept UN troops sent by the West to oversee anything. And african nations won’t want to piss off Putin by agreeing to this. Putin wants his anti-NATO back and this war will only end with Putin thuroughly defeated.
                  Not to mention that such a vote would be a farce anyway. Russia has had enough time to kill, torture, intimidate or disappear enough people that such a vote could never be fair.
                  And as for the money spent on Ukraine, it’s but a cheap talking point to suggest that supporting Ukraine and supporting your own population are mutually exclusive. Not to mention believing that if the money wouldn’t have been spent on Ukraine, that your own people would’ve seen that money is pretty delusional. For starters, most of the support sent by the US is hardware. And the given value for that support is the replacement cost for the kit sent. However, most of the kit sent was due to be replaced anyways, so the actual cost for the US is much lower than the figure being thrown around.

            • diffuselight@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              You know full well we do not spend food on horn children in America for they come from sin. We only care about the unborn. Ask clearly you are fake american.

    • diffuselight@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s good use for the money, this way it’s not used to buy Russian fossil fuel or help billionaires commit suicide in expensive vanity submarines.

      • SexMachineStalin [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        this way it’s not used to buy Russian fossil fuel or help billionaires commit suicide in expensive vanity submarines

        This is actually a much better way to use the money,lmao. Also _elenskyy should have just stuck to playing the piano with his knob.

        Haha, pianist :submarine:

        • diffuselight@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sure makes you tankies mad that a comedian has been destroying the legend of the glorious red army and their special operation 😂

          • huf [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            27
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            what red army? there hasnt been a red army in ~30 years and back when there was, ukrainians were part of it…

            do you think russia is communist? do you think we think russia is communist? please wash your brain, it’s dirty.