Yet Chomsky’s world-view does not leave space for Ukrainian agency. It is the “US and Britain” who have “refused” peace negotiations in Ukraine, Chomsky tells me, in order to further their own national interests, even as the country is being “battered, devastated”. That negotiations with Russia would mean de facto abandoning millions of Ukrainians to the whims of an aggressor that has shown itself capable of extraordinary brutality, such as in Bucha and Izyum, is dismissed. “Ukraine is not a free actor; they’re dependent on what the US determines,” he says, adding that the US is supplying Kyiv with weapons simply to weaken Russia. “For the US, this is a bargain. For a fraction of the colossal military budget, the US is able to severely degrade the military forces of its only real military adversary.”
According to Chomsky, Russia is acting with restraint and moderation. He compares Russia’s way of fighting with the US’s during the 2003 invasion of Iraq, arguing that large-scale destruction of infrastructure seen in that conflict “hasn’t happened in Ukraine”. He adds: “Undoubtedly Russia could do it, presumably with conventional weapons. [Russia] could make Kyiv as unliveable as Baghdad was, could move in to attacking supply lines in western Ukraine.”
Chomsky is constantly beating the drum “Amerikkka Bad!”, and now the one fucking time we’re on the right side of an issue, he still only has one note. And all edgy little contrarians hang off his every word so they can feel like an intellectual. So yeah, I think Chomsky and all his fanclub are shitheads, and it disgusts me how much traction they get online.
Having an actual view over what events are currently happening in the world, and being interested in war and the history of wars is not licking boots. It’s also not licking boots to recognize that bad things happen to good people and the bad guys sometimes win, especially if they have the manpower and resource advantage.
Rejecting facts you don’t like is something the right does. It also doesn’t change the reality of the situation. It is useful only for Ad hominem attacks when you want to deny what the other person is saying.
Avdiivka is the key to holding the Donbas region, and specifically Donetsk.
Explain to me how a country that used up most of its fighting age men wins? The average age of a soldier in Ukraine is in the high 40’s. Who do you think will manage and use the weapons we supply?
But, I’m guessing your knowledge of the war is simply “Russia Bad, Ukraine Win!” and any actual material analysis of the war is just propaganda. Do yourself a favor. Read up on the war, look at a fucking map, and think critically on the facts and come up with your own opinions rather than just sucking yours from someone elses tit.
Literally have commented on the conflict between Zelenskyy and Zaluzhni before. But you keep licking those boots and pretending that “Lack of currently trained infantry in a sector” is “Literally no more men left to recruit”.
Fucking lmao.
Either stop swallowing Chomskyite propaganda or go lick boots elsewhere.
That is unintentionally hilarious.
Chomsky is constantly beating the drum “Amerikkka Bad!”, and now the one fucking time we’re on the right side of an issue, he still only has one note. And all edgy little contrarians hang off his every word so they can feel like an intellectual. So yeah, I think Chomsky and all his fanclub are shitheads, and it disgusts me how much traction they get online.
Having an actual view over what events are currently happening in the world, and being interested in war and the history of wars is not licking boots. It’s also not licking boots to recognize that bad things happen to good people and the bad guys sometimes win, especially if they have the manpower and resource advantage.
Rejecting facts you don’t like is something the right does. It also doesn’t change the reality of the situation. It is useful only for Ad hominem attacks when you want to deny what the other person is saying.
https://www.newsweek.com/russia-ukraine-avdiivka-fall-donetsk-1866925
Avdiivka is the key to holding the Donbas region, and specifically Donetsk.
Explain to me how a country that used up most of its fighting age men wins? The average age of a soldier in Ukraine is in the high 40’s. Who do you think will manage and use the weapons we supply?
But, I’m guessing your knowledge of the war is simply “Russia Bad, Ukraine Win!” and any actual material analysis of the war is just propaganda. Do yourself a favor. Read up on the war, look at a fucking map, and think critically on the facts and come up with your own opinions rather than just sucking yours from someone elses tit.
Because mobilization age is 27, dumbass.
“Ukraine, having lost 100,000 casualties out of a population of 38 million, is now out of men!!!”
Keep licking those boots.
deleted by creator
Adviivka fell.
And so that means the Donbass is under Russian control.
Also, I should have pointed out:
That’s not how averages work. Please take a remedial statistics course.
Also, it’s 25.
I’m sure this is propaganda, too, right? The Washington post being that bastion of leftist thought.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/02/08/ukraine-soldiers-shortage-infantry-russia/
Also, who do you think is going to be the leader of Ukraine tomorrow, Zelensky or Zaluzhny?
I’m curious, did you even know who the second name is? Or are you literally just “Ukraine good! I know nothing else, but Ukraine good!”
Literally have commented on the conflict between Zelenskyy and Zaluzhni before. But you keep licking those boots and pretending that “Lack of currently trained infantry in a sector” is “Literally no more men left to recruit”.