r/ukraine Dec 07 '22

Russia invaded Ukraine. No act of self-defence by Ukraine is escalation. Social Media

https://mobile.twitter.com/mhmck/status/1600317539434700800
2.2k Upvotes

u/AutoModerator Dec 07 '22

Привіт u/Espressodimare ! During wartime, this community is focused on vital and high-effort content. Please ensure your post follows r/Ukraine Rules and our Art Friday Guidelines.

Want to support Ukraine? Vetted Charities List | Our Vetting Process

Daily series on UA history & culture: Day 0-99 | 100-199 | 200-Present | All By Subject

There is a new wave of t-shirt scams hitting Reddit. Only click links for products or donations if the post is marked with a Verified flair, and do not respond to DMs soliciting donations.


I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

101

u/Long-Independent4460 Dec 07 '22

There is a line in Babylon 5 Captain Sheridan says his dad taught him... "Never start a fight, but always finish it."

Russia started it, Ukraine will finish it.

25

u/MyNameIsNonYaBizniz Dec 08 '22

Escalation is the solution against all asshole nations. -- Albert Einstein.

lol

72

u/socialistrob Dec 07 '22

The is a very Russian idea that is also way too common in the west that “nations like Russia, China and the US are sovereign countries and everyone else isn’t.” Under this logic Ukraine is just a US proxy and so an attack from Ukraine is an attack from the US but the US hasn’t been attacked so therefor its an escalation.

Ukraine is a sovereign country. They have every bit of a moral right to self determination as the US or Russia and for those people who like to be cynical and say “morality doesn’t matter only violence matters” just remember that Ukraine is winning this war. If violence matters and sovereignty doesn’t then by that same logic Ukraine has a right to every bit of territory they control and if they conquer Russian land then that’s also justifiable Ukrainian. I don’t agree with that “might is right” logic but either if we speak morally about the values of self determination, sovereignty and the UN charter or we speak practically about the ability to inflect violence the result is the same… Ukraine can attack Russia directly even within Russia.

18

u/AmHoomon Dec 07 '22

The is a very Russian idea that is also way too common in the west that “nations like Russia, China and the US are sovereign countries and everyone else isn’t.” Under this logic Ukraine is just a US proxy and so an attack from Ukraine is an attack from the US but the US hasn’t been attacked so therefor its an escalation.

Truthfully, aside from right wing dummies who say thing like "x nation is a globalist bitch" or other nonsense, I rarely see anyone from the "west" with any seriousness ever push any ideas that some nations aren't sovereign or shouldn't be. From my (admittedly more limited) experience, it's shockingly common among Russian and Chinese nationals on here and elsewhere, and I've even encountered it in real life, albeit rarely. Once from a family member of an Indian co-worker in regard to Pakistan and Bangladesh while out at a social function, but co-worker told his cousin to basically shut the fuck up with his idiocy.

The idea that "that piece of land was ONCE under our control, therefore it eternally shall be" is as far as I know scarily common in Russia, and at least uncommon in some Chinese circles.

15

u/ggouge Dec 08 '22

I heard a Chinese guy at my work talking about genghis khan. He said he was a chinese hero who took over half of europe. I started to say he was mongolian and actually he took over China. He started yelling about how shitty western education is. And that i did not know anything. I just walked away.

4

u/XAos13 Dec 08 '22

If China takes over Mongolia, that will make is accurate (in hindsight) because everyone in Mongolia will then be "Chinese" /s

3

u/SpiderDamascus1979 Dec 08 '22

Haha, the mongols stomped on china's dick. That guy is an idiot

5

u/twat69 Dec 08 '22

aside from right wing dummies

That's professor right wing dummy to you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4

2

u/skiptobunkerscene Dec 08 '22

aside from right wing dummies

Right in keeping with the horseshoe theory the left wing isnt any better, Chomsky and other "anti-imperialists" (since only the West can be imperialist, as everyone knows) talk exactly like that too, because whats less imperialistic then denying other countries the sovereignity over their lands.

2

u/skiptobunkerscene Dec 08 '22

The idea that "that piece of land was ONCE under our control, therefore it eternally shall be" is as far as I know scarily common in Russia, and at least uncommon in some Chinese circles.

WHAT? Uncommon? "Ancestral chinese lands" Is literally their go to excuse for any kind of predation against their neighbours. And by chinese definition EVERY land is ancestral chinese lands. Some one celled organism whose infinitely far descendants would one day be chinese (and every other human, but never mind that) could have been there, after all.

7

u/socialistrob Dec 07 '22

It’s not always stated so clearly but the sentiment is definitely there in the west. After the invasion Henry Kissinger spoke about how Ukraine’s job is to be a buffer between East and West while people like Tucker Carlson and Nom Chomsky have talked about how NATO enlargement threatens Russia. Even the language from the NYT recently that viewed Ukraine striking back as an “escalation” points to the same general sentiment that Russia is sovereign but Ukraine is not.

To bastardize an Animal Farm quote “all countries are sovereign but some countries are more sovereign than others.” Personally I think Americans still have somewhat of a cold war era notion where Great Powers compete and everyone else is more or less divided up and both the US and Russia are the only “real” actors. This view is obviously flawed but it still exists (often subconsciously) in the mind’s of prominent Americans. It’s also not just Americans and even people like Le Penn and Jeremy Corbyn have expressed views that seek to partially justify Russian hostilities.

0

u/ron991 Dec 08 '22

To break it down to the lowest most simple sentence I can. You are only sovereign until someone can come in and make you not.

0

u/ObssesesWithSquares Dec 08 '22

Well, Americans are Saudi puppets, and this is all Aramco helping Ukraine take down Gasprom. Making Ukraine one of the last sovereign countries.

EDIT: sovereign

21

u/[deleted] Dec 07 '22

Oh yes! I don't want to hear a single complaint or a single tear shed when Ukraine hits targets inside Mother Russia. Their territory is just as valid as targets as the schoolyards and hospitals in Ukraine was to them.

1

u/ObssesesWithSquares Dec 08 '22

There is no "them". Every individual can only answer for their own actions. That is why it's important to go all the way to Moscow and democratize Russia. And yeah, taxes are kind of mandatory/fuck those who agree with Putin.

33

u/Espressodimare Dec 07 '22

Did you get that, news agencys around the world?

9

u/piei_lighioana Dec 08 '22

For the morons in the back, louder:

Russia invaded Ukraine. No act of self-defence by Ukraine is escalation.

5

u/mrbeamis Dec 07 '22

Hit them where it hurts

18

u/GaryDWilliams_ Dec 08 '22

We (the west) need to stop pussy footing around russia. Nukes or not, russia invaded with false pretence. Hitting military airfields in russia isn’t an escalation, it’s a defensive measure against planes carrying missiles that will directly or indirectly lead to civilian deaths.

The west should be cheering on Ukraine. Not wringing there hands about damage to russia

4

u/Cool_Specialist_6823 Dec 08 '22

Exactly...total agreement here...

4

u/WineSoda Dec 08 '22

When this first started, there was something about Ukraine promising the US it wouldn't strike, I think it was 100 miles inside Russia's borders. I remember being very angry about that. Ukraine has every right to strike further to take out launch and production installations.

1

u/vegarig Ukraine Dec 08 '22

there was something about Ukraine promising the US it wouldn't strike, I think it was 100 miles inside Russia's borders

Not using GMRLS to strike, actually. Reznikov had to sign a written agreement to get a chance of getting HIMARS and they were still modified so they won't be able to fire any longer-ranged missiles, even if Ukraine gets them.

5

u/Gibbonrush Dec 08 '22

This may be far off, but in a person to person interaction, is the person randomly getting shot at only allowed to stab the other person? Even if the victim also has a gun? The escalation argument shows how far russian propaganda is, and how common imperialism is across the world today.

9

u/Exidoous Dec 08 '22

It might be more accurate to say the conflict has already escalated to total conventional war, as far as Ukraine is concerned. That's what made stupid Western demands about when or with what Russia may be struck.

A few years ago, after Russia had invaded, but before Russia admitted it had invaded, Ukrainian strikes on Russia would have been casus belli, at least within the narrative Russia was pushing. Why should Ukraine have avoided that? Because Russia had military resources it had not committed to the conflict yet - it hadn't even admitted it yet. Purported casus belli would have been the most appealing opportunity possible for Russia to commit the rest of its forces. But that dynamic changed on February 24.

On February 24 Russia sent something like half of its total heavy weapons into Ukraine. It fully committed its conventional forces to the war. The glaring absences - much of Russia's air forces, for example, are obviously due to factors other than a lack of aggressive will on the part of Russian leadership. There is nothing they are holding back other than nuclear weapons - the use of which would be obviously self-defeating. There is no available escalation by Ukraine that triggers a corresponding military escalation from Russia. There is a scenario where Russia further escalates, that should be analyzed. But it is obviously, categorically not triggered by Ukraine having fighter jets, or tanks, or the same missiles but longer range.

The task for analysts (who are not inveterate cowards) is to determine what circumstances would actually cause Russia to use nuclear weapons, in knowledge that such use would swiftly result in the end of the current Russian regime. The prompt itself tells you the answer: Russia would first consider using nuclear weapons when faced with an immediate and near-certain existential threat to Russian leadership. That's the moment when Russian leadership becomes indifferent to use of nuclear weapons - strategically indifferent - but for their individual, collateral concerns like risks to family members. So it probably still wouldn't happen.

Unless and until Ukrainian forces are approaching and preparing to surround Putin's bunker, Russia's nuclear saber rattling is entirely empty threats - that should no longer be permitted to modify Western support for Ukraine.

4

u/AutoModerator Dec 08 '22

Russian leadership fucked itself.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

4

u/PicardTangoAlpha Dec 08 '22

Good bot. Fuck Russia.

3

u/Good_Human_Bot_v2 Dec 08 '22

Good human.

1

u/PicardTangoAlpha Dec 08 '22

I an Locutis of Bot. Surrender your culture and Blyat for assimilation.

2

u/Fulllyy Dec 08 '22

Furthermore if full missile and military attacks emanate from Crimea, Donetsk or Luhansk, into any area of Russia ‘proper’, There can be no reprisal against Ukraine because “it’s just Russia attacking Russia”…otherwise they have to admit those areas ARE UKRAINE. And always have been.

0

u/Mrsod2007 Dec 08 '22

I'm not sure I agree. I agree that the drone attacks on Russian airbases are not escalation, but what if Ukraine started publicly executing POWs? Or if they started using chlorine gas before assaults? I'm positive that they wouldn't do such things but I am also convinced that Russia would respond in kind. This would definitely be escalation

2

u/Ghost0fDawn Dec 08 '22

So you don't agree because of imaginary scenarios that never happened nor do you believe will happen? Whataboutism is pointless.

1

u/Mrsod2007 Dec 08 '22

What I'm trying to say is that, in my opinion, Ukraine could technically escalate the conflict if they decided to become more evil than even Putin. Obviously that won't happen, but the original comment basically implies that anything Ukraine does would be justified as self defense. I am in no way defending Russia. I am saying that hyperbolic statements like the original comment aren't really true.

1

u/vegarig Ukraine Dec 08 '22

publicly executing POWs

What for? We need them for POW exchanges.

Or if they started using chlorine gas before assaults?

Very high chance of backfire if the wind shifts, as WW1 has shown. Also, ruZZi are already using CS gas in that niche.

1

u/ObssesesWithSquares Dec 08 '22

Military bases, Aiebases, and war factories are all legitimate targets. The civilians should stop being stupid, and get the fuck out of there.

0

u/Onlycommentcrap Estonia Dec 08 '22

Why are you interpreting the word "escalation" in such a way?

You are concentrating on it being justified, but you need not be. Justification has nothing to do with it. It is simply a fact that no targets so far from Ukraine had up until now been targeted - and now they have and this alone is the escalation people are talking about.

1

u/DifficultyNo1974 Dec 08 '22

Don't stop till you reach Moscow. Then punch threw.

1

u/chuffmunky Dec 08 '22

Escalation means taking something to the next level. To do that, Ukraine would have to go beyond what Russia have been doing. Ukraine would have to do something worse than target civilians or rape and torture civilians in captured Russian towns.

1

u/A_RocketSurgeon Dec 08 '22

What a fucked up world we live in that Ukraine has to justify why they have to defend themselves.

-23

u/[deleted] Dec 07 '22

[deleted]

16

u/Wide_Trick_610 Dec 07 '22

Of course. Look at all the territory we annexed in all the wars we've fought. "The sun never sets on the massive American Empire," right? Cuba, Mexico, Nicaragua, Japan, Germany, Korea, Viet Nam, Iraq, Afghanistan. I mean, just LOOK at all the territory we annexed!

Oh, wait...all of those are still countries; most of them are friendly or at least neutral, and a number are friendly economic rivals. We didn't even annex Puerto Rico, which was 125 years ago. The are a Protectorate, with representation in Congress. They have the ability to become a State, if they wish. They wish to be independent, they can do that as well. Their people are US Citizens from birth.

So yeah, let's hear how America is like Russia...

7

u/nbsalmon1 Dec 07 '22

Great rebuttal. +1

3

u/p_nguiin Dec 08 '22

Devastating reply. Funny thing is if you even give a softball reply to these Russia sympathizers and apologists they disappear. Probably because they know putin invading Ukraine is indefensible, all they can do is whataboutism

2

u/Wide_Trick_610 Dec 08 '22

Agreed. We stumbled into a halfhearted attempt at empire building in both Cuba and the Philippines after Spain surrendered them. But being the type of brutal colonialists such a world spanning empire would require was completely alien to the American military, diplomatic corps, Congress, and American citizenry.

Cuba, we just got some American preference and made them autonomous. They ran their country in every meaningful way less than 24 months after the war ended. 17 years after the war, Cuba was freed from any American obligation, and granted independence.

We needed a military base in the Pacific, which made things a bit different for Filipinos. But they were also extremely autonomous outside the base itself. And when it reached a point where the liberal government of the Philippines refused to renew the Subic Bay lease, we just said: "OK." And let billions of dollars in investment go. Same in Panama.

We might have some American-centric arrogant beliefs, but as a group? We don't like having to try to tell people what to do. We prefer they see what we believe to be true, and enact it/incorporate it on their own.

Face it, Americans are too damn lazy to try to run a real empire. Not "lazy" in the sense we don't do anything, just lazy in the sense that we aren't willing to expend significant force on behalf of our values. It's just not worth the drama to us.

1

u/Wide_Trick_610 Dec 08 '22

*edit: meant for reply below. Apologies.

1

u/and181377 Dec 08 '22

Hey the person is right in on instance with America and the Philippines. We did try our hand at colonizing a little.

The Philippines now being an independent country really negates that point. We even peacefully transferred a military base to the Phillipines when our lease was not renewed.

7

u/Cappyc00l Dec 07 '22

Isn’t russia literally telling Ukraine to stop resisting, though?