As title, if you have post or link any useful resource you have

  • john89@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I think it’s more fruitful to look at who benefits from the Ukrainian war.

    Life for the average Ukrainian will not be radically different under Russian rule. Most of them will get up, go to work the same job they always have and funnel as much money as possible to those who already have it.

    It just so happens that under Russian rule, Russian rulers will be making profit instead of Ukrainian rulers. The people actually fighting the wars never benefit and the ones who benefit never fight.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s pretty obvious that the only country that benefits from the war is the US. Don’t take my word for it though, RAND wrote a whole study explaining how in detail https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR3063.html

      It’s also absolutely phenomenal that people think Russia needs Ukraine to make profit when it’s already the largest country in the world with plenty of undeveloped resources. If you think countries benefit from having to fight a war, then you might wan to learn a bit of history.

      • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Then why would Russia attack Ukraine? Especially since they had already agreed to let go of their nukes and not join NATO. Just let them be then.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          If you bother reading the paper I linked, it explains it in great detail. But if you don’t believe RAND, then here’s the head of NATO explaining it in black and white

          The background was that President Putin declared in the autumn of 2021, and actually sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign, to promise no more NATO enlargement. That was what he sent us. And was a pre-condition for not invade Ukraine. Of course we didn’t sign that.

          The opposite happened. He wanted us to sign that promise, never to enlarge NATO. He wanted us to remove our military infrastructure in all Allies that have joined NATO since 1997, meaning half of NATO, all the Central and Eastern Europe, we should remove NATO from that part of our Alliance, introducing some kind of B, or second class membership. We rejected that.

          So he went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to his borders. He has got the exact opposite.

          https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_218172.htm

          The sheer intellectual dishonesty of pretending that this was about anything other than NATO expanding to Russia’s border even when top NATO officials openly admit this to be the case is truly astonishing.

          • vintageballs@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            Deutsch
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            You seem to misunderstand your own sources. What you cited only proves how utterly insane Russia’s conditions were / are. Of course NATO won’t let Pootin blackmail them into giving up their stations etc.

            Russia and brainwashed tankies like yourself always seem to reject the notion that former Soviet nations are actually sovereign and might have an interest in increasing their defensive strength in light of, wait for it, HISTORY.