Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Sekhem
Feb 13, 2009

GreyjoyBastard posted:

Current American/NATO policy is that none of the weapons and suchnot we give the Ukrainian military can be distributed to the national guard elements that are Nazis. Compliance with that requirement seems... imperfect. But the distribution is basically on the Ukrainians afaik.
Do you have any source on active policy against military funding going to Azov? Afaik, a single bill in 2018 managed to include stipulations that its $620.7 million of military aid not be made available to Azov, but that was only regarding funds made available by that specific bill. There have been attempts at including similar stipulations in other spending bills, but to the extent of my knowledge, all of them except that one were removed (citing Pentagon pressure) prior to passing

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Probably Magic
Oct 9, 2012

Looking cute, feeling cute.
Kinda crazy how Western Media keeps finding the same 20% of the Ukrainian military to photograph over and over again then.

DeeplyConcerned
Apr 29, 2008

I can fit 3 whole bud light cans now, ask me how!
this is very unfair, I cant win! if I let Putin set up concentration camps to denazify Ukraine I'll get eviscerated by the liberal media. arm the Nazis and boom - I lose the radical left. What can i do?

Yinlock
Oct 22, 2008

Gumball Gumption posted:

You're right, they're just turning policy arguments into moral arguments because it's not enough to agree or disagree that this might be bad policy, it needs to be the correct moral choice. Like I said, that piece I posted has helped me better understand what's upsetting me with this, especially with the attacks the DSA has gotten for their statement.

War Brain is a serious social condition that I hope we have a not-stupid word for(nationalism is closest but War Brain is a weird temporary effect rather than all-the-time). Everything suddenly gets jammed into Us or Them and any kind of dissent is filed into one of two categories:

1) Fools. Idiot mouth-breathers who cannot see how regrettably necessary(we are assured, with no backing whatsoever) Our Side's actions are.

2) Traitors. They must secretly want Our Side to lose because they love The Enemy so much.

The idea that maybe Our Side are just being bumbling amoral dipshits as usual is dismissed entirely until the war fervor is over and critical thinking ability reasserts itself.

Bishyaler posted:

Its sure nifty how this conversation has pivoted from "There's Nazis everywhere and loads of them are hidden in American law enforcement and military" to "Well, on paper only a small percentage of Ukrainians are self-avowed Nazis. This is being blown out of proportion."

It's a good example of how something about war just makes the critical part of the brain shut the gently caress down.

idiotsavant
Jun 4, 2000

Probably Magic posted:

Kinda crazy how Western Media keeps finding the same 20% of the Ukrainian military to photograph over and over again then.

It's pretty wild. It's clear that Ukraine is heavily infested by Nazis, which is easy to see if you look at the reputable data provided by... uh. Well, I'm sure it's true anyways. I saw a picture on twitter.

BetterToRuleInHell
Jul 2, 2007

Touch my mask top
Get the chop chop
Wait, give me some slack here because I'm dumb as poo poo when it comes to Ukraineology, but are you guys saying Tucker Carlson and MTG actually might be right about Nazis?

I really don't want them to be given a inch of credit here.

Yinlock
Oct 22, 2008

GreyjoyBastard posted:

Current American/NATO policy is that none of the weapons and suchnot we give the Ukrainian military can be distributed to the national guard elements that are Nazis. Compliance with that requirement seems... imperfect. But the distribution is basically on the Ukrainians afaik.

Do you got anything to back this up? I'm genuinely asking because it would be a radical change from the U.S's usual M.O in these situations(usually "find the most psychotic group of right-wing freaks and give them guns").

Probably Magic
Oct 9, 2012

Looking cute, feeling cute.

idiotsavant posted:

It's pretty wild. It's clear that Ukraine is heavily infested by Nazis, which is easy to see if you look at the reputable data provided by... uh. Well, I'm sure it's true anyways. I saw a picture on twitter.

Specifically, a picture from NATO's twitter account. https://www.newsweek.com/nato-says-it-didnt-notice-ukraine-soldiers-apparent-nazi-symbol-tweet-1686523

TGLT
Aug 14, 2009

BetterToRuleInHell posted:

Wait, give me some slack here because I'm dumb as poo poo when it comes to Ukraineology, but are you guys saying Tucker Carlson and MTG actually might be right about Nazis?

I really don't want them to be given a inch of credit here.

Yes there are neo-nazis in Ukraine and yes they are fighting for the Ukranians.

There are also neo-nazis fighting for Russia, like the Wagner Group who are basically a Russian military unit with a few degrees of deniability, and Russia doesn't actually give a gently caress about the presence of nazis in Ukraine.

Angry_Ed
Mar 30, 2010




Grimey Drawer

TGLT posted:

Yes there are neo-nazis in Ukraine and yes they are fighting for the Ukranians.

There are also neo-nazis fighting for Russia, like the Wagner Group who are basically a Russian military unit with a few degrees of deniability, and Russia doesn't actually give a gently caress about the presence of nazis in Ukraine.

There's also groups like the Russian Imperial Movement who have been actively training neonazis from abroad, and of course they also sent troops to the Donbas

quote:

RIM is well known for its paramilitary training program known as “Partizan,” often referred to by the anglicized form “Partisan.” “Partizan” is the Russian word for “Guerilla.” The Partizan program as it currently exists began in 2014 with the goal of training Russians for the Ukrainian conflict.[37] Denis Valiullovich Gariyev, the head of RIM’s Imperial Legion, began training Russian foreign fighters to join pro-Russian separatist groups in combat against Ukrainian government forces.[38] Gariyev claims that RIM has trained over 300 volunteers for combat in Ukraine.[39] A researcher with the Counter Extremism Project describes RIM’s program as a “conveyor belt” for foreign fighters into the conflict theatre, adding that its combat experience gives the group “street cred” with other white supremacists.[40]

quote:

In late 2016 and early 2017, members of the Nordic Resistance Movement with ties to RIM conducted a series of attacks in Sweden. Anton Thulin and Viktor Melin traveled to St. Petersburg and participated RIM’s Partizan paramilitary training program in August 2016, receiving 11 days of instruction.[60] Between November 2016 and January 2017, the men, with an accomplice, bombed a left-wing bookstore-café, a refugee shelter, and a campground that housed asylum seekers.

(source)

Putin of course could wipe these guys out if he actually cared at all about fighting neonazis. But he doesn't.

El Mero Mero
Oct 13, 2001

I think the other thing that confuses issues here is that there are two uses of the word nazi in play in the discussion right now:


1) Rhetorically Russia's usage of "denazification" includes all non-russian speaking peoples, non-ethnic russians, and generally anybody at all that opposes the war and Russia's claim to Ukraine. This is bullshit rhetoric.

2) The narrower and factual understanding of "nazi" (violent ethno-nationalists). These exist, there are lots of them, and they're legitimately scary and hosed up.

People seem to think that pointing out #2 and pointing out that empowering, arming, and funding #2 is a loving whacko "arm the mujaheddin freedom fighters move" means you're supporting #1. (it's not)

Heck Yes! Loam!
Nov 15, 2004

a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

El Mero Mero posted:

I think the other thing that confuses issues here is that there are two uses of the word nazi in play in the discussion right now:


1) Rhetorically Russia's usage of "denazification" includes all non-russian speaking peoples, non-ethnic russians, and generally anybody at all that opposes the war and Russia's claim to Ukraine. This is bullshit rhetoric.

2) The narrower and factual understanding of "nazi" (violent ethno-nationalists). These exist, there are lots of them, and they're legitimately scary and hosed up.

People seem to think that pointing out #2 and pointing out that empowering, arming, and funding #2 is a loving whacko "arm the mujaheddin freedom fighters move" means you're supporting #1. (it's not)

I don't think people are saying that. They are acknowledging it, and saying that it sucks that Russia invaded (multiple times) and destabilized the country. Also that it's worth giving arms and supplies to Ukraine in general.

The Nazi talking point is a complete red herring to the overall subject at hand, which is Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

TGLT
Aug 14, 2009
Congress banned funding, training, and arming the Azov Battalion back in 2018, although to what extent that is enforced is I suppose up to you to figure out. I haven't found any stories more recent than 2018 about the Azov Battalion receiving arms or training.

If your goal is fewer nazis in Ukraine, then you only need to look how far right militant groups flourished during US occupations and coups in the Middle East to figure out that Russia occupying the country is likely to bolster their influence rather than reduce it - particularly when compared to the past few years where they had been losing members and political power. Especially when Russia happily employs its own nazis for conducting its own imperialist wars.

Sekhem
Feb 13, 2009

TGLT posted:

Congress banned funding, training, and arming the Azov Battalion back in 2018, although to what extent that is enforced is I suppose up to you to figure out. I haven't found any stories more recent than 2018 about the Azov Battalion receiving arms or training.
This is the bill I referred to upthread, it wasn't an active ban on "funding, training, and arming" the Azov Battalion but a stipulation that the funds made available by that specific spending package not be used to fund them. I'm not aware of any subsequent bills including similar restrictions

Gumball Gumption
Jan 7, 2012

Yinlock posted:

Do you got anything to back this up? I'm genuinely asking because it would be a radical change from the U.S's usual M.O in these situations(usually "find the most psychotic group of right-wing freaks and give them guns").

Like it was posted above Congress did ban giving them weapons in 2018 after dropping a previous ban in 2015. Part of what was allowed after 2015 was CIA training so that they, along with other Ukrainians, could serve as insergants if Russia invaded. Members of the Unite the Right movement, famous from Charlottesville have trained with Azov and been further radicalized according to the FBI in 2018. The Pentagon were the ones who put pressure on Congress to drop the ban in 2015 and did not want it back in 2018.

TGLT
Aug 14, 2009

Sekhem posted:

This is the bill I referred to upthread, it wasn't an active ban on "funding, training, and arming" the Azov Battalion but a stipulation that the funds made available by that specific spending package not be used to fund them. I'm not aware of any subsequent bills including similar restrictions

This is I think the 2022 omnibus as it was passed?

"Sec. 8141. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to provide arms, training, or other assistance to the Azov Battalion." (page 398)

edit: Yeah here it is on congress.gov as the enrolled bill

TGLT fucked around with this message at 05:00 on Mar 21, 2022

Gumball Gumption
Jan 7, 2012

Each time they pass it they have a provision applying to that specific bill. That's also what was missing from 2015-2018.

El Mero Mero
Oct 13, 2001

TGLT posted:

This is I think the 2022 omnibus as it was passed?

"Sec. 8141. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to provide arms, training, or other assistance to the Azov Battalion." (page 398)

edit: Yeah here's it on congress.gov as the enrolled bill

neat. You don't always get language that specific to an issue. Good to see.

Sekhem
Feb 13, 2009

TGLT posted:

This is I think the 2022 omnibus as it was passed?

"Sec. 8141. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to provide arms, training, or other assistance to the Azov Battalion." (page 398)

edit: Yeah here's it on congress.gov as the enrolled bill
Thanks, that is good to see! It is still short of what would be accomplished by something like the restriction of Azov under Leahy laws, which was the original reason given by the Pentagon that such stipulations were redundant (ignoring of course that no such designation was actually made)

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

GoutPatrol
Oct 17, 2009

*Stupid Babby*

New thread here: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3997306

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply