There is a thing called “just war”. Ukraine has clearly been wronged by being attacked unprovoked. It is only right to support them. There have been instances when the West had been wrong for waging war or supporting another, except this one is different. Telling Ukraine to give up is like telling UK and Republic of China to give up as well, when Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were rampaging amd killing civilians wantonly. And mind you, there were uninformed peaceniks and isolationists back then doing the same as you’re doing now before the US entry into World War II. The naive and misinformed peaceniks and centrists somehow think they will not be affected in an increasingly globalised world. But then again, most people have tunnel vision.

The Russian invasion can be seen as interfering with one side in a civil war that is historically a part of their country and has little to do with the Ukraine, and it does not have many parallels to WWII, IMO... I think each conflict has to be treated differently.

You also use some example where the entire tide of battle is shifted by the entry of the US - of course, such a thing could also happen here, but it could just mean that the war goes nuclear.

Telling Ukraine to surrender is letting the UN Charter to respect national sovereignty be demolished, a cornerstone that kept world peace, for the most part, intact for the last 80 years. This enlightened centrism is only serving at the benefit of authoritarian countries that don’t respect basic human decency and rules. “Evil prevails when good men do nothing”, literally what this misinformed (or perhaps fake) centrist take on Russian invasion.

Here we are at the point where left wing progressives talk about how world peace has been maintained by the UN charter forgetting by the millions dead in Vietnam and Iraq at the hands of the US who blatantly could ignore these things.

As for Palestine, Biden himself is getting fed up with Israel. But political pressure keeps him from abstaining support.

I will not argue with someone who wants to believe that Biden has the right idea on this, but political pressure keeps him in the game of supporting a war abroad. This can be seen as part of my thesis: someone like Trump who is not beholden to the system has more ability to break from foreign policy norms.

I’m not saying all in all that the West and US is the best option for world order-- I prefer a multipolar world-- but that’s how it is right now. The West isn’t some moustache twirling villain concocting plans all the time in a backroom, but there is no unified policy in the West and their policies must be judged on their own merit. Invasion of Iraq: bad. Supporting Ukraine: good. The usurping of US-led Western hegemony, which is deeply flawed, is for another time.

Oddly enough, with the hundreds of billions in aid given to the Ukraine, the usurping of Western hegemony really isn't for another time. The multipolar world just arrived.

Ukraine is already a lost cause - the most recent declaration appears to make it so that Ukrainian women will now be drafted and sent to the front alongside their men since they are so starving for soldiers. It's unprecedented.

Truth be told, I am not really a progressive in any conventional sense of the word - but I am in many other ways and, more importantly, I remember the anti-war left. As I am a pacifist and the anti-war movement is close to my heart, I always feel that progressives who cheered on the Ukraine conflict were not really progressives...

And let me also point out: more people are killed and negatively impacted by US foreign policy than any border wall. Yes, of course, I will not ask any progressive to get on board with Trump's immigration policy, but let's also remember: even with the Republican congress, his policies were largely ineffective. There's also something to be said about immigration reform and coming up with a system where everyone who comes is legal and not exploitable.

I do not want to be too contentious because my goal here is to try to appeal to progressives to be more anti-war going forward and rethink their positions on the Ukraine war... But, more importantly, haven't we all just seen what the Biden administration is doing in regards to Palestine?

Establishment Democrats do not deserve your vote - displacing establishment democrats and replacing them with actual progressives should be the #1 priority of any US American progressives, right?

Let's even say that what you are saying is completely true - because it is, to some extent. Russia is not 100% well intentioned. I am not a Putinist by any stretch of the imagination...

What you are actually suggesting is that the Ukraine, the most corrupt & impoverished country in Europe at that moment, is being defended by the USA and NATO, because they are a bastion of liberty... and the USA, and NATO, who absolutely have not killed millions of people around the world exclusively to further their own geopolitical position and economic interests, who have absolutely never massacred actual progressives and leftists by the tens of thousands in places like Chile, Argentina, Brazil, El Salvador, are totally backing the Ukraine because they have the noblest of intentions in defending.... :::: puts on Zelenskyy's gravitas and accent ::: democracy and human rights.

Even if Putin is 100% in the wrong (which he isn't), it does not mean that the US and the Kiev regime are forces of democracy and progress. In fact, if history teaches us anything, the fact that the Kiev regime is working closely with the CIA and the USA means it is going to be a corrupt, backwards state... Or, as Zelenskyy stated it himself...

Ukraine wants to be Big Israel.

Imagine if the US lost the entire East Coast and being told to just give up retaking it instead of shedding more blood.

OK, but let's imagine that the entire East Coast is ethnically majority English, and they speak only English, and traditionally vote for English candidates that advance closer relations with England... And let's also imagine that they were actually assigned to be part of America by England herself in the middle of last century for administrative purposes when England used to rule the US...

... And then, after the English speaking, English descent President, who was elected popularly, with the East Coast as his predictable heartland of su pport, many English on the East Coast were completely pissed off. New York completely voted itself to be a part of England right away -- of course, English officers and pollsters were there to facilitate this and the numbers were wonky, but a lot of people generally accepted it at the time because it was reasonably explicable...

... And, like, we've now been fighting a civil war without the English for 7 years... the rest of America has agreed to take in tons of military support and training from China, and is lining itself up to become a threat towards not just the East Coast, but of course, England, and the English alliance system more broadly...

And the East Coast would be joining a comparatively 2, 3x more wealthy and less corrupt state that has its best interests at heart by joining England, as opposed to feeling like the neglected, actualy despised part of America, which is a rapidly failing state ruled by a series of corrupt oligarchs... Not entirely unlike England, but [i]measurably worst in terms of standard of living, at least..![/i]

It's pretty complicated, isn't it?

And thinking that globalisation will democratise Russia is wishing that China and Saudi Arabia will also be the same. People have thought about that to those countries but it hasn’t happened. Autocratic countries know how to insulate themselves from outside influence, precisely because they do not allow dissenting voices, especially from outside. They are autocratic after all.

I said prosperity and not globalization for a reason, though... Globalization is a front for global capital.

I also believe China & Saudi Arabia have become measurably more liberal places over the last few decades - I don't think you'd dispute that, either. The only issue is that China has incorporated its emerging bourgeoisie into a more jingoistic, confrontational foreign policy outlook, IMO.

They are still just ruled by oligarchs like the West.

A two hour old account parroting pro-Trump with Russian propaganda. You make an interesting spin I have to say.

Yeah man I'm a freshman but I think I am cut out for the team.

This is one of those things where you want to point out how stupid! the shooter is, but... the guy probably had crazy amounts of adrenaline coursing through him, absolutely can't think straight, and this is just the cunning of fate.

I disagree - Yanukovych was elected on he basis that he would be close to Russia. He won the popular election at one point. Of course a significant amount of Ukrainians were pissed that he pulled out of the deal, but it was predictable that a pro-Russian leader would take steps to try to at least maintain a balance between the West and Russia...

Maybe it is even the case that Yanukovych was heavy-handed in scuttling the EU deal, but the crazy violence that happened at the Odessa trade hall and the sweeping to power of these cartoon character super nationalists in the most corrupt country in Europe seems like a fair enough reason for places like Crimea and E. Ukraine to want to return to Russia...

Obviously, I would agree with the assessment that some amount of Russian intelligence operations and propagandists were invested in forcing the issue, but I've also heard interviews with pro-Kiev Ukrainians from the East conceding that their own home town in Luhansk/Donetsk is mostly pro-Russian.

Pushing for isolationism and apathy is precisely what Putin wants as it would mean leaving Ukraine on its own and time for Moscow to recover. The narrative of squarely blaming Ukraine for all the deaths in spite of Russia was the one who invaded unprovoked is suspiciously becoming more common. Usually peace advocates implore both sides, not blaming only one side and the aggrieved one at that.

I actually blame the West for all the deaths. Someone at some point convinced Zelenskyy that he would have enough support to turn back a Russian invasion - something he should have been far more skeptical about - and the results are absolutely catastrophic.

I am always anti-war, and thus I am against diplomatic maneuvers that fail to de-escalate hostile situations and create more friction.

Does it suck that the Ukraine is in such a difficult position? Of course. But the answer to this is not putting them in the boxing ring with the Russian bear. The results have been devastating and predictable.

BTW... No, i do not support Putin at all. The path forward for Russia is the same path forward for all nations: increasing wealth and insuring its equitable distribution so that the average persons enjoys a high standard of living and can together exert pressure for accountability & transparency of government...

But complaining that Russia, a country with so many issues after the collapse of the Soviet Union, is undemocratic all the while our own nations see civil rights never actualized or even eroded and control by capitalist oligarchs is... rich.

We also set up Russia to be that way - remember the Harvard Boys.

... Then what's the point of this law if Congress is full of brown shirt "traitors" who will give congressional approval for withdrawal from NATO?