this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
1105 points (96.5% liked)

Political Memes

5456 readers
3526 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] NutWrench@lemmy.ml 18 points 2 days ago

And by "neutral buffer state" they mean a Russian territory, that can't elect its own leaders, has no control over its resources and lives under a permanent Russian occupation.

[–] vga@sopuli.xyz 15 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I still remember a short period of time in the first half of 2022 where even the most tankiest of people clearly felt unease from the war Russia started. The sheer evil of it broke through the propaganda they had integested, and for like 3 months they weren't sure if they should support it or not.

But eventually they got around to supporting it somehow. The mind can explain black to be white or perhaps some of them got actual instructions how to communicate. 1968 Czechoslovakia all over again.

[–] Stalinwolf@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

The pro-Russian propoganda on social media clawed them right back. The climate went from "How can we help stop the atrocities in Ukraine?" to "Why are we sending so much to Ukraine when our own country/veterans need help at home?" and other such bullshit they've never truly cared about or contributed toward.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 114 points 3 days ago (30 children)

Are people actually arguing that NATO membership is the reason for Russian attacks on neighboring nations?

Putin literally said he wants to restore the old Russian Empire. What the fuck was thay suppose to mean, then? A joke?

Jfc the number of people who don't believe the terrible things Dictators say they are going to do is too damn high.

[–] theMacerena@lemmings.world 42 points 3 days ago

Tankies need to toe the party line.

load more comments (29 replies)
[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Indeed and Putin's Sock Puppet will green light the next Russian invasion of Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland.

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 115 points 3 days ago (3 children)

This is a weird comma, usage.

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 45 points 3 days ago (4 children)

It's a goose, man. Can't you just be proud of him for spelling and stuff?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ReCursing@lemmings.world 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Why do the Russians think they need a buffer between themselves and NATO anyway? Are they planning on doing things that would make them seem like a threat to NATO, and don't believe NATO have supersonic planes or something?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] wpb@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

Russia is the bad guy in this conflict. 110%. But there's no reason to start making up reasons why. Ukraine was not a neutral non-NATO buffer state after the euromaidan coup, and it doesn't need to be for the annexation of Crimea and the ongoing invasion to be wrong, which they are. All made up reasons do is give your opponents ammunition.

[–] BMTea@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This meme seems to undercut its own argument. No one can honestly argue that post-Euromaidan Ukraine was intent on remaining a buffer between Russia and NATO. In 2014 Ukraine made it clear that it was resolved to go to the Western camp and was sick of Russian influence. So what exactly is the argument here?

[–] GoodEye8@lemm.ee 14 points 2 days ago (10 children)

I'm not going to entertain the thought of what "neutrality" would mean, because the entire "neutral buffer" argument is just Russian propaganda. Ukraine wasn't neutral before 2014, it was squarely within the Russian sphere of influence since the collapse of the union. Let's reverse the situation. Let's say Russia wins, dismantles the current Ukrainian government and sets up the "legitimate" Ukrainian government, would Ukraine become a "neutral buffer"? No. It would become a vassal state of Russia because Russia can't give Ukraine the autonomy to make their own decisions, otherwise they might decide to turn westward again.

Maybe that's the hypocrisy the meme is pointing to, that the neutrality argument in its entirety is bullshit because Ukraine was never neutral to begin with.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] FourPacketsOfPeanuts@lemmy.world 40 points 3 days ago (33 children)

While Russia is the belligerent actor and it is their fault, pre-2014 Ukraine was hardly "neutral", having mulled both NATO and EU ascension discussions. The latter being the actual provocation rather than the former. (This isn't at all to say any of this is Ukraine's "fault", only to point out they were not "neutral")

In early 2013 the Ukrainian parliament agreed to make legal steps towards EU ascension (source 2014 pro Russia unrest in Ukraine)

Which is what Lord Robertson, the former Secretary General of Nato, has stated was the start of the crisis:

"One theory, propounded by realists such as the academic John Mearsheimer, is that Nato expansion in eastern Europe was the reason that Putin invaded Ukraine. Robertson dismissed the idea. “I met Putin nine times during my time at Nato. He never mentioned Nato enlargement once.” What Robertson said next was interesting: “He’s not bothered about Nato, or Nato enlargement. He’s bothered by the European Union. The whole Ukraine crisis started with the offer of an EU accession agreement to Ukraine in 2014.

Putin fears countries on Russia’s border being “fundamentally and permanently” changed by EU accession. “Every aspect [of society is affected] – they woke up very late to it… I don’t think they ever fully understood the EU,” Robertson said, adding the caveat that the EU was not at fault because accession was what Ukraine, as a sovereign nation, wanted." [end quote]

Source: https://www.newstatesman.com/encounter/2024/05/george-robertson-nato-why-russia-fears-european-union

[–] socsa@piefed.social 23 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Ukraine is a sovereign nation. It is allowed to make treaties with other sovereign nations.

Or do you believe the US should invade Brazil because it is part of BRICS?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] GoodEye8@lemm.ee 16 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I guess its worth mentioning that Ukraine was never "neutral" to begin with. Since the fall of the union Ukraine had been in the Russian sphere of influence and they were neutral only to the extent where it wouldn't undermine Russian control over Ukraine. That's why the EU accession agreement started this, because it undermined Russian power and Russia was not okay with losing that power. Russia never wanted neutral buffer states, Russia wanted countries that they could control.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (31 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›