[eyelidlessness]

They are literally doing total war without provocation. The theoretical threat of NATO has not been a part of this conflict at all. Treating that imagined threat as if it’s equivalent to the very real war is navel gazing excuse for a mass murdering fascist.

[eru]

First, yes, Putin's Russia has started a war of conquest.

Second, no, it is definitely _not_ a total war. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_war for background.

Third, the theoretical threat of NATO is not so much to Russia: I agree that NATO is not a threat to Russia. However I do also see that NATO and EU are a threat to Putin's long term vision for a renewed Russian Empire.

To be clear, I agree that this vision is bogus and that a threat to a bogus vision is not a valid excuse for a war.

Please also be careful with accusing people of being fascists or Nazis. Putin and his predecessors in the USSR employed the same tactic. And whether anyone does or does not fulfill the textbook definition of a fascist is besides the point here.

[drran]

This is total war. RF targets infrastructure and kills civilians on purpose. More than 2000 civilians are killed by RF in one week on territory controlled by Ukraine. RF uses weapons of mass(1) destruction freely, to force humanitarian crisis, then ask for tactical pause, to let civilians escape, while using reinforces to fortify captured land. They are shutting at hospitals, gas pipes, power lines, humanitarian convoys, to make situation desperate for civilians, to force tactical pauses. We learned this tactic very well.

(1) Not WMD like chlorine, or nuclear, of course, nor biological weapons except coronavirus released by accident from Vector lab in Siberia on Sep 16, 2019, just conventional weapons designed to maximize damage to civilian infrastructure.

[eru]

You realize that Russia would kill way more than 2,000 civilians in a week in a total war?

[eyelidlessness]

The same sentiment was said about US wars since 2000 and we can’t even agree on how to count the number dead, and more or less stopped trying.

[eru]

The US has not run any 'total wars'.

[eyelidlessness]

> First, yes, Putin's Russia has started a war of conquest.

Glad we agree.

> Second, no, it is definitely _not_ a total war. See

It’s a total war.

> Third, the theoretical threat of NATO is not so much to Russia: I agree that NATO is not a threat to Russia. However I do also see that NATO and EU are a threat to Putin's long term vision for a renewed Russian Empire.

By this logic all conflicts are both sided. England is equally justified in bombing India because they “threatened” the British empire by rejecting being under its power.

> Please also be careful with accusing people of being fascists or Nazis. Putin and his predecessors in the USSR employed the same tactic. And whether anyone does or does not fulfill the textbook definition of a fascist is besides the point here.

I’m well aware of the importance of being precise and cautious with this term and I chose it carefully.