694
submitted 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) by PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat to c/microblogmemes@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Embargo@lemm.ee 186 points 6 days ago
[-] brygphilomena@lemmy.dbzer0.com 96 points 5 days ago

As an American, yea. We deserve that. I'm sorry. We've failed Ukraine and the world.

[-] shittydwarf@lemmy.dbzer0.com 62 points 6 days ago

Yeah but you see Putin has some very special tapes of Trump so...

[-] sommerset@thelemmy.club 19 points 5 days ago

In the age of deep fakes noone cares, even if that is true

[-] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 18 points 5 days ago

The cult wouldn't care if he admitted to it, post-leak, and the fascist ruling party would simply refuse to hold him accountable.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 44 points 5 days ago

Congratulations protest non-voters!

[-] SatyrSack@feddit.org 43 points 6 days ago

Does this post title contain zero-width characters or something? It slipped past my app's filters.

[-] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 68 points 6 days ago

I was setting a little trap for any AI response bots. I don't think that any exist, but I was curious. I apologize if it broke your filters, it was just a one-off experiment.

[-] peoplebeproblems@midwest.social 6 points 5 days ago

That's crazy, I never thought about that kind of trap before

[-] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 28 points 6 days ago

Do you have a way to check if it's still breaking filters? That wasn't the intent, since it's affecting normal users I've now edited to remove the sketchy characters.

[-] remotelove@lemmy.ca 29 points 6 days ago

Your fix worked, and the post is not visible in my normal feed now.

Still, all the client devs probably just collectively emitted an audible eye roll.

[-] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 25 points 6 days ago

That's me: Always breakin' stuff. Sorry about that.

[-] SatyrSack@feddit.org 13 points 6 days ago

Yes, that seems to have fixed it for me. If I remove the keyword from my filter list and visit the community, the post shows up. But once I add that keyword back to the filter and visit the community, the post is gone.

[-] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 12 points 6 days ago

Sounds good. Apologies again, it just didn't occur to me that that would happen.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] remotelove@lemmy.ca 25 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Good call out. I am using Connect and it broke my filter as well.

Edit: yes.

[-] adarza@lemmy.ca 30 points 5 days ago

russian agents in the white house, go fuck yourself!

[-] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 24 points 6 days ago

Is this the official plan now, and was it the same one that Russian propaganda channels were leaking?

[-] doctortofu@reddthat.com 15 points 5 days ago

I was half expecting a "deal" along the lines of "all Ukrainians fuck off somewhere else and don't ever come back, and me and my ~~boss~~ pal Vlad are going to turn Ukraine into a luxury riviera" - this shit is pretty close...

[-] logos@sh.itjust.works 14 points 5 days ago

You’re thinking of Palestine.

[-] Garibaldee@lemm.ee 11 points 6 days ago

If you think it would have panned out differently under Harris, I have a bridge to sell you. She would have not have had the influence to get Ukraine into NATO even if she wanted to, what is she going to do? Kick out Hungary? The only thing Trump has done that Harris wouldn't have is this minerals for protection deal. The US was never an honest ally to Ukraine, they were only interested in offloading weapons onto them and bogging down Russia, they were never prepared to help in a way that would actually lead to Ukraine getting it's lost territory back. Ukraine should have never given up their nukes, promises are only words, they never should have trusted western countries promising them security to begin with, Ukraine having nukes might be the only scenario where an independent Ukraine doesn't end up losing territory to Russia.

[-] Tja@programming.dev 99 points 6 days ago

So we went from "no, trump would never do that" to "Harris would have done it anyway"?

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 10 points 6 days ago

So we went from “no, trump would never do that”

Did anyone around here actually say that?

[-] takeda@lemm.ee 41 points 6 days ago

Yes, I saw it frequently from people who supported trump and Ukraine before the election.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 8 points 6 days ago

Do you have a link or a username?

[-] takeda@lemm.ee 12 points 6 days ago

Look at Jake Broe channel before the election, as it also has many pro Ukraine trump supporters. He even mentioned multiple times about those claims.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 6 points 6 days ago

Allow me to reiterate: Did anyone around here actually say that?

I have no doubt you can find people saying whatever on other platforms, but it's not really relevant if nobody here agrees with them.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 54 points 6 days ago

Dude... bravo, man, for making the effort, I guess. This is actually pretty impressive.

The US was never an honest ally to Ukraine, they were only interested in offloading weapons onto them and bogging down Russia

Absolutely correct.

they were never prepared to help in a way that would actually lead to Ukraine getting it’s lost territory back

All the blue is Ukraine's lost territory they got back with the West's help. There's also Kursk.

Ukraine should have never given up their nukes, promises are only words

Probably true.

they never should have trusted western countries promising them security to begin with

Did Western countries promise them security? That's the whole controversy about them joining NATO. For some reason, it is a globe-spanning crisis for Russia if NATO does offer them security, were they to be invaded, instead of just no-strings-attached weapons and a hearty pat on the back for good luck. Wonder why that's a big issue.

I feel like this phrasing is, maybe, an incredibly artful dodge, inserted into the middle of talking about the Budapest Memorandum to make it sound like any part whatsoever of the betrayal of that agreement came from any source other than Russia, Russia, Russia. Maybe I'm reading too much in, though.

Ukraine having nukes might be the only scenario where an independent Ukraine doesn’t end up losing territory to Russia

Probably true. They're working on it. Doesn't that kind of thing bother you? Wouldn't it be better to give them conventional assistance to the extent they actually need, and allow them to counterattack without all this nail-biting about how it would be ever so rude and we don't really care to that extent about dead Ukrainian soldiers and civilians? So they can win the fucking war and we can all go back to our lives?

The only thing Trump has done that Harris wouldn’t have is this minerals for protection deal.

I saved this one for last. I'm going to just sit and ponder at it, in silent contemplation.

Like I say, it's pretty impressive. You've combined true statements that are sort of in the neighborhood of what you're trying to prove, unrelated assertions, and absolute bald-faced earnest fabrications, into a pretty passable imitation of something that makes sense.

[-] BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one 12 points 5 days ago

This is an excellent and thoughtful comment. Everything you said is true.

[-] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 11 points 6 days ago

I have to applaud you. This is a work of art.

[-] Madison420@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Yes 1991(?) Ukraine agreed to give Russia the nuclear weapons in Ukraine in exchange for protection from the US, it's very well known.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum

[-] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 21 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Yes 1991(?) Ukraine agreed to give Russia the nuclear weapons in Ukraine in exchange for Russia agreeing not to unilaterally attack them, it’s very well known.

Fixed it for you! You already provided the citation, so I don't need to. There was no NATO-style protection in the memorandum, otherwise Russia would have no reason to freak out about them joining NATO now, and getting security guarantees.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (20 replies)
[-] NotForYourStereo@lemmy.world 16 points 6 days ago

"I have a bridge to sell you."

Is it the one you yourself were conned into buying? You know, because you're clearly so fucking stupid.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Tyrangle@lemmy.world 15 points 6 days ago

Harris's approach presumably would have been a continuation of Biden's, waging an economic war of attrition against Russia for as long as Ukraine was willing to hold their ground. The whole endgame here, under the Biden/Harris strategy, was going to come down to which side blinked first. Putin must have gambled that he'd win if Trump won, which is exactly what's playing out now. If Harris won, it'd be a continued stalemate, which of course benefits the western coalition - not Russia.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] sommerset@thelemmy.club 5 points 5 days ago

This wouldn't be different under Harris.
Ukraine is toast.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2025
694 points (100.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

6617 readers
2741 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS