You should go back to twitter. It’s mostly adults here
Discussion
You had a chance to learn something from a person actually involved in this war but you choose to remain an ignorant retard.
Do you really think a continuously abusive approach to any response to people is productive? nostr:npub1cj8znuztfqkvq89pl8hceph0svvvqk0qay6nydgk9uyq7fhpfsgsqwrz4u was pointing out the most basic of truths that has been prevalent in a very obvious way throughout the 20th century. War and its associated suffering would not last as long without the constant flow of fiat money that also impoverishes nations. Not only is it destructive on the battlefield but it is destructive off it as well and should be avoided
Answer the question: do you think starving a defending side of funding and military equipment will make an invader stop the war?
Maybe we have different perspectives here. Am not really into flags. I mean the designs can be nice and all that but the Donbas is mainly ethnic Russians. If they wanted independence and it had been given rather than shelling, would this all not have been a big nothing burger? Allowing individuals to carry on their economising. Trading between all and simply not causing massive slaughter for the sake of a symbol of centralisation? It’s insanity
Answer the fucking question already.
I did. I’m afraid am too long in the tooth for these binary perspectives on geopolitics. There’s always much more grey I think the second terrorist bomb close to me did that. Funding and fuelling violence is counterproductive historically. It is better to sit at the table and have the parasites in charge make concessions so that normal individuals can go about their lives peacefully. All of this bullshit is unnecessary suffering. It is upon the individuals of warring nations to force their so called leaders to sit at the table.
So would more funding help? Maybe to prolong and cause more death. Not a huge fan myself mate