Come now I am trying to ask questions in an attempt to get them to question the shit they have been immersed in from birth. As excellent a use of that emoji as that is I think we have a miniscule chance to maybe reach this person if we can get the gears turning.

Nothing to do with me. I'm a programmer lol

Nothing to do with the US. I wouldn't support them invading a neighbor after a bogus vote they arranged. Whataboutism.

Independent monitors to make sure the vote is fair.

How does "the US is also bad" change anything about the argument? The argument was that Russia invading and annexing territory is not an expression of self-determination for the people whose homes are being annexed. The US also doing bad shit doesn't change anything about that because "the US annexes Donbas instead of Russia" isn't the alternative being presented here

until an ideal situation allows them to improve their lives in a way everyone finds acceptable?

Craziest part is that a lot of people that follow that line of thinking have also at least recognized the immediacy of police and prison abolition in the context of places like the US but can't seem to take the next step in applying the same logic to places outside the imperial core.

Large countries invading and annexing stuff is not a solution to any of those problems. It is a regression to an even worse system.

Answered your question clearly. You might not like or understand it but answered it was.

And I see you have another question. So 4chan style it is for you. For being bad faith poster I will now stop discussing with you as it is painfully obvious what you want to do here.

You talk about Russia being a “good world citizen” as though western powers have universally dealt with Russia in good faith. You posit that Russia should turn to means like diplomacy in order to alleviate the sanctions that have been placed upon them and to increase economic cooperation with countries with are subject to NATO influences like Ukraine, but this ignores the fact that western powers have attempted to undermine Russia’s economy for their own benefit since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, as well as the fact that measures such as the aforementioned sanctions placed upon Putin’s Russia have been put in place because of his refusal to completely open the country’s markets to predatory foreign interests.

If you’re interested, I suggest you read this article (which appears to be more sympathetic to NATO than myself and most other leftists on Lemmy), since it describes the economic devastation which occurred in Russia in the 1990s, the way in which Putin’s government has kept a complete catastrophe from happening again (although I wouldn’t say that Russia’s current right-wing, hyper nationalistic model for trade is ideal or that it’s anything to strive for, since inequality is still rampant in the country), and the way in which the United States and its allies pressure other countries into opening their markets to free trade only to exploit them once they do. If you don’t have the time to read it, just know that the west’s antagonizing of Russia is the cause of the latter’s lack of diplomatic cooperation with the former, and not the Russian government’s political or economic ambitions.

Well they were, for the most part, until the illegal dissolution of the USSR in 1991.

Apologists always want to go back to who really threw the first stone

Are you saying who started the war isn't relevant? Why would you not want to determine this to have a full picture of the situation?

What can I say? I cannot change the way you process information.

Perhaps you were wrong?