156
Ukraine's Zelenskyy says he wants to end war with Russia through diplomacy next year
(www.cbsnews.com)
this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
156 points (94.3% liked)
World News
32363 readers
348 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Wtf is with you people claiming you know what's best for these countries? Its like you're larping as the us state dept.
I'm not sure who "you people" are, but at no point did I claim to know what's best, but I sure as fuck know, from knowing history and paying attention, that tyranny doesn't go away by asking nicely. Never has, never will.
So a better question would be wtf is with you claiming you know anything at all about global conflict or fascism? Its like you’re ~~larping as~~ a wilfully ignorant and overly confident centrist who is happy to lay others lives on the line and let war rage on as long as we aren't mean to a dictator. 🙄
People who say "I know from history" oftentimes have the historical knowledge of a gamer.
Yes we know Zelensky is an unelected dictator. You don't need to project.
Lmfao, where did I even imply that? Talk about projecting.. 😂😂😂
So I don't know how the Russian/Ukrainian war is going to go. I mean Trump is such a wild card it's hard to say. But I want to point out that your comment:
Is very wrong. The weirdest thing is you state if you're paying attention. Well, if you're paying any attention what so ever, you'll see that tyranny regularly gets displaced by asking nicely. In fact, in recent history we have South Korea with a peaceful democratic transfer, Taiwan which also had a peaceful democratic transfer, Singapore and many others. And that's just recent history. Let alone all the Kingdoms that were displaced by democracy in history such as the UK. Heck, the UK still has a monarch and yet run in a democracy because of how peaceful the transfer was. Thailand as well. I could go on, but I think you get the point. In fact one of the MOST COMMON ways to go from Monarchy/Dictatorship to democracy is a peaceful transfer. Obviously that doesn't always happen, but it's quite common to simply ask nicely.
*Edit: Actually Ukraine ITSELF was a peaceful transfer from tyranny to democracy. That's the REASON Putin is angry and jealous of them. I mean you don't even have to look outside of the combatants to see a peaceful transfer. Which is gone now, but that doesn't take away that it happened.
All I can say to this bizarre reply is that the whitewashed version of history (never mind current events, since some of those conflicts are still ongoing, violently, today) you were taught at school, or hear about in the msm isn't the reality, and that none of those conflicts were fucking peaceful, or came to a conclusion because those in power just decided to give it up.
Pick up a fucking book (or watch a video, or listen to a podcast, however you take information in, go and do that, but only if you can cope with challenging your bias, otherwise it becomes a completely pointless exercise)
E: Like, honestly, do you seriously believe there is any point in talking to Putin? Do you think an open and proud totalitarian known for throwing his opponents out of windows is a trustworthy person who will have good faith and stay true to his word? Do you fucking hear yourself???
When you don't know any history perhaps you should read first then comment.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_Democratic_Struggle
As I said, S.Korea is just one example where peaceful protests brought democracy.
Ah yes, peaceful, if you erase the Gwang-ju Massacre and other atrocities committed by "The Butcher" Chun Doo-Hwan.
The rights enjoyed by South Koreans were fought for with the blood of workers and students spilled by their own government and Capitalists. Don't erase them.
Nice try but you don't get to argue that a protest over 7 years ago and is unrelated caused the peaceful transfer.
I mean you might as well argue that the blood of Americans were spilled for their freedoms in BLM, Kansas State Massacre, the Chicago fire. Oh wait, those protests massacres happened AFTER USA was a democracy. It's almost like they're not related to being a democracy or not and the June protests weren't part of that massacre because it's a 7 YEAR gap.
The Gwang-Ju protests were a pro-democracy protest against the dictator Chun Doo-Hwan. You have no idea what you're talking about and are erasing the very real historical impact of the massacre.
And those protests were like the American protests didn't get anything done. It wasn't until 7 years later when they simply asked nicely. If anything, you're proving violence doesn't work and the best option is to literally simply ask nicely.
Thus, my point about the violent protest being unrelated. It did NOT cause the regime change. I'm not talking about what it's about, I'm talking about what actually switches the government.
I never said nations don't have problem. My list of violent massacres in USA proves that. I'm saying violent protests does not lead to regime change as often as a peaceful transition. Your Korean argument proves that as the violent protest did nothing, vs the peaceful one.
*Edit: To be clear, if we study history we find peaceful regime change far more likely than violent ones. BUT people like YOU keep creating violent situations that do not help the situation. If people like YOU stop being violent, maybe we could work towards actually beneficial transitions.
They had already asked peacefully, and were slaughtered for doing so. The change was a cumulative effort with deep contextual history, and didn't happen in a vacuum.
You have *no idea" what you're talking about.
The Koreans were not slaughtered in 1987 and they transitioned peacefully. You don't know what you are talking about you violent war monger.
Like I said, you have no concept of time, everything is a static event for you, devoid of context. 1987 wasn't the first time South Koreans fought against a dictatorship, and had been slaughtered for peaceful protests. Just because eventually the government conceded doesn't mean it wasn't paid for in civilian blood.
You have no idea what you're talking about, and insult the Korean people who gave their lives, and insult the families of those who died.
No, again you've shown their constant and repeating violent protests were not successful. Instead they had to have a peaceful one for change. As long as people like you don't understand that. There will be bodies that keep piling up. Unless you can explain why "democracies" also have violent protests that end with bodies in bags. The violence is pointless, and people like you perpetuate it.
Gwang-Ju was peaceful, and the government slaughtered them. You keep pretending violence was the first choice, when peace was. Like I said, you have no idea what you're talking about, and spit on the graves of schoolchildren murdered by Chun Doo-Hwan.
1987 only happened because the years preceding 1987 happened, and you insult the Korean people by lying about their history.
Always so peaceful preparing molotov cocktails and throwing rocks at soldier's heads.
https://www.koreasociety.org/images/pdf/KoreanStudies/Curriculum_Materials/LessonsbyTopic/History/The_Gwangju_Uprising.pdf
Yes, after it was peaceful, it escalated. Peace was the first option, and then the dictator started murdering people. Pretending "just asking" gets dramatic change is horrible, especially when your own referenced article said it was "terribly one-sided."
There's no use talking to someone who supports slaughter of schoolchildren like you.
Lol, yes yes it's always so peaceful when you prepare weapons and arms. Molotovs as simple as they are are still something you have to prep. If you're prepping bombs, you're not going there peacefully. You are the one promoting school children deaths by telling them to attack people with weapons.