this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2026
369 points (91.6% liked)
Fediverse
42490 readers
137 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, Mbin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
In no way shape or form Ukraine is a genocide. By using that term for both Palestine and Ukraine you are just demeaning the word, and actually helping the propaganda against Palestine.
Ukraine is defending its sovereignty, and it is experiencing a national aggression by Russia, but what Israel is doing to Gaza is in a different sphere.
What Russia is doing:
Definition of Genocide:
Russia is, in fact, enacting genocide in Ukraine.
What Russia is doing:
Definition of Genocide:
The ICC has an arrest warrant on Putin for these abductions.
Putin has used a ukaz/presidential decree to streamline the process of Ukrainian children being made Russian.
Here's your Independent Journalistic Report:
But sure, keep telling the world it's only Ukrainian propaganda. I'm ending this conversation here to log off, I've got better things to do than deal with a debatebro hexbear user trying to excuse genocide.
So the person who believes Soviet documentation, will turn around and not believe Ukrainian documentation. How convenient this makes your genocide denial.
You even mention the site showing where you can browse the tens of thousands of missing Ukrainian children, and see the ones who have been returned. You can go find testimonials from those returned children, but still you believe Russian war time propaganda over that.
The utter arrogance and hate to call these unjustified claims when they are backed up by evidence is astounding, but one should expect no less from someone so ideologically driven to manipulate and distort to fit their narrative.
"The source for the crime is, unsurprisingly, the victim, the criminal is denying any wrongdoing" hmmm
Who is invading who exactly?
"Burglar files counter-claim arguing that the owner of the house they're stealing from is actually stealing from the burglar"
Nice try but the USSR sided with the Nazis remember. They dont get any credit.
Jesus Christ. Westerners really are the most propagandized people on earth.
Meaningless coming from someone whos entire ideology is to support a uniparty with complete narrative control that executes anyone who thinks different.
????
Least incoherent shitlib
I love a wall of text as much as the next autist but im going to be a low effort in my response because I fucking hate having this conversation with tankies because its always so bad faith.
First of all I need to clear up that I dont think USSR sided with the Nazi's because they supported Nazi ideology. I'm saying they dont get any credit for joining the war or fighting against hilter because they choose to side with him and support his war effort and only joined because they were backstabbed.
Ok so to sum up you're point you're saying that the USSR did the most to fight against nazi germany because they sold weapons to the anti facists in the spanish civil war and one of their westernized diplomats proposed a collective security agreement and they offered to send 1 million troops to france(this would never happen) and said they would support chzek despite having no land border. Then you give 4 paragraphs coping about soviet invasions. No mention of the
You're ignoring historical context surrounding the USSR and then acting surprised at other countries reactions. I dont think any of what you've said really negates them signing an agreement with Hilter to divide up the east and provide support to Hitler's war effort.
The communists spent the decade prior to World War II trying to form an anti-Nazi coalition force, such as the Anglo-French-Soviet Alliance which was pitched by the communists and rejected by the British and French. The communists hated the Nazis from the beginning, as the Nazi party rose to prominence by killing communists and labor organizers, cemented bourgeois rule, and was violently racist and imperialist, while the communists opposed all of that.
When the many talks of alliances with the west all fell short, the Soviets reluctantly agreed to sign a non-agression pact, in order to delay the coming war that everyone knew was happening soon. Throughout the last decade, Britain, France, and other western countries had formed pacts with Nazi Germany, such as the Four-Power Pact, the German-French-Non-Agression Pact, and more. Molotov-Ribbentrop was unique among the non-agression pacts with Nazi Germany in that it was right on the eve of war, and was the first between the USSR and Nazi Germany. It was a last resort, when the west was content from the beginning with working alongside Hitler.
Harry Truman, in 1941 in front of the Senate, stated:
Not only that, but it was the Soviet Union that was responsible for 4/5ths of total Nazi deaths, and winning the war against the Nazis. The Soviet Union did not agree to invade Poland with the Nazis, it was about spheres of influence and red lines the Nazis should not cross in Poland. When the USSR went into Poland, it stayed mostly to areas Poland had invaded and annexed a few decades prior. Should the Soviets have let Poland get entirely taken over by the Nazis, standing idle? The West made it clear that they were never going to help anyone against the Nazis until it was their turn to be targeted.
The communists were responsible for 80% of the total Nazi casualties. The communists beat the Nazis.