I've been saying for over a year now that you base your morality purely based on which side USA supports, thanks for finally admitting it.

It's not about whether or not one of the countries is defending themselves against imperialist aggression and genocide, or even morality at all, the bar for condemnation from Victor is:


For Ukraine this isn't even true fwiw. A "ton of money" isn't being sent and never was sent.

If you continue to be a proponent of Russia propaganda for their imperialist conquests, then you will continue to be called out for supporting Russia, because that is objectively what you're doing even if you only view it from your own bizarre standpoint of condemning whatever USA does.

The problem isn't the reading comprehension of just about everyone who converses with you. Act better and stop lying.

I live in the USA so I care where my money goes more than where I dunno, Australian money goes.

like, that is an awful twisting of words on your part. liars lie so keep lying.

Do you think Ukraine has the moral high ground in defending themselves from Russian imperialism and Putin's genocide?

I get a lot of propaganda from both sides on my "X" stream.

One side continually shows Russia allegedly losing large numbers of men and war machines and insists they are fairing poorly. And there other allegedly shows Ukraine losing battles, land and Western support and insists they are losing poorly. It really is quite the dichotomy.

eh...about 5050. and lol genocide. its actually offensive to refer to it as such given whats going on in Gaza.

It's a war, of course both side has lots of propaganda regarding how the war is going. I'm referring specifically to the propaganda regarding whether or not Russia is justified in invading.



Gross. And this objectively is support for Russia, imperialism, torture, kidnapping and brainwashing, sexual violence etc. (the genocide stuff)

LOL. They are literally shipping native Ukranians to Siberia never to be seen or heard from again, and replacing them with Russian speaking sympathizers. It actually is the textbook definition of genocide.

I wasn't responding to your question. I was just making a general comment. And of course we already know Victor thinks Putin is just undertaking a noble mission to rid the world of Ukranian, Jewish Nazis.

liars lie. keep lying.

oh look, the lying liar is lying again. keep lying liar.

also, look up the meaning of the word objective ffs

It gets far worse than that. It's also a top down policy coming from their highest authorities which state it constantly:











Victor: I know what objective means, you need to look it up. The stuff above isn't something you get to be "meh I'm 50/50" on it. You support it or you don't, and you support it. That's objective.

If you think Ukraine "kinda 50/50" has the moral high ground for defending against imperialism then you support imperialism under the right circumstances. That's objective.

If you think Ukraine "kinda 50/50" has the moral high ground for defending against what you say isn't genocide then you support the actions above (genocide or not) as being legitimate under the right circumstances. That's objective.

You are in here constantly posting Russian propaganda. That's objective.

You are constantly dehumanizing Ukrainians. That's objective.

These actions combine to show support overwhelming for Russia's invasion. That's objective.

the guy who has been calling for a cease fire and negotiations from day one somehow supports the invasion. Orwell would be proud of you guys.

Strawman which ignores everything I just mentioned, but sure let's knock that strawman down too. Here is the peace deal you support:


Cripple Ukraine's ability to defend itself, and give Russia veto power on allowing aid to Ukraine if Russia decides to invade again. It's a ceasefire which guarantees Ukraine is destroyed after Putin reconstitutes and invades again. I've listed the times he's done this before yet you seem to think he will honor it this time for some reason. Only the most naive would think that this cease fire leads to long term peace.

I dont think it guarantees that. but this war is going to guarantee the destruction of Ukraine. it already has. coulda ended in April and here we are with Ukraine in a war of attrition with Russia while running out of men. its not gonna end well. even the Pope agrees but he proly just loves Russia and Putin or something.

Right, let's focus on the strawman and not the main argument. I wonder why.

Sure nothing is guaranteed. Aliens could land between when Ukraine signed that peace treaty and the next time Putin invades and solve war for example. What do you think the likelihood of Putin invading again if Ukraine signed that cease fire is? I doubt you'll answer that question because it's so devastating to your argument.

Russia just spent 6 months, hundreds of armored vehicles, and tens of thousands of casualties to take a town with a pre-war population of 30k. They didn't achieve a breakthrough. This was during what is likely to be the low point of the war for Ukraine: USA aid completely stalled, EU's ammunition production completely inadequate, and Ukraine's own production just ramping up. Russia's production has peaked, North Korea provided millions of shells, and Iran (quite the axis of the free there) sending as many of their missiles and shadeds as they're likely to.

Meanwhile a million artillery shells were just purchased for Ukraine, EU and Ukraine are both ramping up production and sending more high tech capabilities like F-16s. Russia isn't taking Kyiv. It doesn't matter what the Pope (lol) says.

what strawman?

anyway, if they signed a peace deal in April then I dont think Russia would have invaded again.

The "I supported a peace deal that crippled Ukraine's military and opened them up to further invasions while outlawing the means which Ukraine used to fight back this invasion therefore I can't support Russia" strawman. This is despite the fact that Russia wants the cease fire, and not Ukraine. It is absolutely benefitting Russia to end the war at that point when they still hold Kharkiv and Kherson, and they could use the pause to reconstitute and try again the way they did several other times.

This was all a diversion by you to look away from the fact that you objectively (look it up) back Russian imperialism and war crimes. Instead of addressing those you want to look at the ultimatum Russia sent under the guise of peace which only the most naive could actually believe is going to result in long term peace.




Lol I don't believe you actually believe this. Why do you think this?

I dont think you understand what a strawman is.

I do.

You've now moved from your own strawman to an outright refusal to even defend your own strawman, or address the original argument.

Feel free to address anything from the arguments before your strawman, or the srawman itself. Your denial to do so suggests to me that you recognize how ridiculous your own positions are.

a strawman is when someone attributes an argument to another person and then argues against it. I havent attributed any arguments to you on this page.

I pointed out how you objectively back Russia. After fighting it for awhile you realized you lost that argument. You instead tried to focus on your strawman: you supported (Russia's, not Ukraine's) ceasefire therefore you could not possibly back Russia even despite the previous arguments which prove that you do. This was an attempt to move away from the previous arguments because you could not disprove them. Now you are moving away from your own strawman because it is equally weak.

victor why don't you consider the Russians pure monsters for the occupation of the Ukraine they are enacting? why don't you ask for their unconditional leaving?

I dont back Russia.

I support any ceasefire.

but none of these are strawmans. I am not misrepresenting your arguments. I am directly answering your arguments with my opinions. you dont like those opinions so you make a bunch of accusations and lies.