this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2023
-7 points (45.2% liked)

World News

32146 readers
909 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And zoom, wow those goalposts can move!

Russia invaded the Donbas in 2014. If they had simply sat there and kept just that, I suspect things would have stabilized in the long run. But Russia doesn't actually care about the "self-determination" of the people in the land it attempts to conquer, that's just a convenient excuse it used.

[–] Aria@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But they didn't? They invaded Crimea. If you've conflated the Donbas and Crimea on a map you will have a very skewed understanding of this conflict.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not, Russia invaded both Crimea and the Donbas in 2014. Here's an article on the Donbas invasion. The guy I was responding to didn't mention Crimea and neither did I, we weren't talking about that.

[–] Aria@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Could you be more specific? This is a 7000 word article that doesn't appear to support your claim from a skim reading, other than possibly the August 25 entry. Though there the claim is also preceded by stating it's a fabricated lie.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The article starts with the sentence "This is a timeline of the war in Donbas for the year 2014." The first item on the timeline is from April 7.

I said above that Russia invaded the Donbas in 2014. This article describes the Russian invasion of the Donbas starting in 2014. The specific details of what happened after that are not particularly relevant.

Or are you still following Russia's narrative that it was all just troops "on vacation" who were "volunteering" to go to the Donbas and fight Ukraine? With borrowed and stolen tanks and whatnot? Nobody believed that.

[–] Aria@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago

These aren't Russian soldiers. This article is about the civil war in Ukraine. These are people with Ukrainian passports. The article uses the phrasing "Pro-Russian" because the separatists wanted economic integration with Russia after gaining independence. This is pragmatic, they would naturally be cut off from the west, and their existing economic integration with Russia was an asset to them. There's no invasion detailed in this article, other than by the AFU if you consider the break away republics to have been legitimate.