• queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    8 months ago

    I love how mad this is making people.

    He’s the Pope. Obviously he’s going to want peace. What the hell do people expect? He doesn’t care if land is Russian or Ukrainian as long as people stop dying. The geopolitics of the situation are simply not part of his ideology.

    • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      8 months ago

      Interesting that he chooses to say the people having a genocide done on them need to surrender (which they’ve literally done and been shot anyway btw) and not the perpetrators of said genocide needing to stop.

      Probably because the Pope is and always has been a piece of shit

      • Nobilmantis@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        Interesting that he chooses to say the people having a genocide done on them need to surrender

        Huh he didnt say this about the people in Gaza, what are you talking about?

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        War crimes like the forcible transfer of children (i.e. genocide) are for the ICJ to deal with. As a religious leader his prerogative is to reduce suffering and death, by whatever means necessary.

        More importantly, Russia can keep this up far longer than Ukraine and he doesn’t want us to fight to the last Ukrainian.

        • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          I remember when they said they said they were going to charge Russia with war crimes and then when they investigated they found Russia wasn’t doing any war crimes, but in the process discovered they themselves were actually doing quite a few of their own. Every right wing accusation is a confession.

        • Aidinthel@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          8 months ago

          Right, a smaller country can never successfully resist a larger one. That’s why Vietnam has been under US occupation (or was it French? I can never remember for some reason) all these years since Ho Cho Minh wisely surrendered to spare his people’s lives.

          • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            A smaller neighbor is vastly different. Vietnam was on the other side of the planet for America and halfway for France. You can’t ignore that.

      • pelikan@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        8 months ago

        Well, if Pope is called “piece of shit” for calling to negotiations to prevent more people dying, then who are you, who’s ok with war going on? Entire shit?

    • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      8 months ago

      This only makes sense under the assumption that if the land becomes Russian, the dying will stop. And that’s not guaranteed. Dropping down from dying to violence - that’s probably guaranteed to occur for a while if the land becomes Russian.

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Why wouldn’t the dying stop? Russia is going to need as many workers as possible to rebuild and make up for military losses, on top of the preexisting population stagnation that was already dwindling their workforce. The worst case scenario imo is population transfer, and that’s not good, but I don’t see Russia being able or willing to waste a population boost from Ukraine.

          • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            There has to be an independent UN investigation report into the mass graves. Ukrainian investigators have a strong national interest in fabricating atrocity propaganda, just like the bullshit “investigations” getting churned out by Israel. We can’t just blindly trust either side of the war. The UN is looking into it but I’m not seeing any conclusions.

            • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              The sending of own working population into the meat grinder is the more interesting part of their comment. It serves as a counterexample for the claim that Russia’s need for workers would prevent them from killing more workers. If that were true, they could have stopped throwing people into the meat grinder at any point in time.

          • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            Precisely. Even if the active war stops with Russia taking over Ukraine as a whole or in part, there would need to be repression against the non-conformant Ukrainian population. The fact that the Ukranians haven’t folded a long time ago and keep fighting means there’s a lot of people that would not be happy with Russian government and therefore they should be expected to resist if that happens anyway. Therefore the obvious need for repression. Therefore the continuation of dying and violence under hose conditions.

            • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              8 months ago

              Yip. Russia would not stop until total control of occupied regions and surroundings was obtained.

    • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      The moral compass of your average liberal is so fucked up the idea that people should die in large quantities for property is normal to them.

  • gomp@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    Yeah, he’s old and didn’t use the happiest words… but the Vatican clarified he didn’t mean “unconditional surrender” and instead only meant “negotiate a peace deal”.

    AFAIU (and also AFAIC - “as far as I care”) It’s not entirely clear yet if the Pope suggests that Ukraine should give up territory in exchange for peace (and what about reparations?) or if he just means “be good people and make peace” (which would be much more in line with how he usually talks). I don’t think whatever the Pope thinks will really be of much consequence given how geopolitically relevant this war is (“The Pope? How many divisions has he got?”)

    This whole news/argument serves as great marketing for the TV program where the the interview will be broadcasted (which I’d assume is not unintentional)

  • Spyder@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    8 months ago

    I wonder if he would say the same thing if Russia attacked the Vatican.

      • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        8 months ago

        Of course not, he’s trying to make the point that it’s easy to tell someone to surrender and give their enemy everything if it’s not your thing.

        Would you surrender half your country to Russia?

        • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          The alternative is fight a battle you have no chance of winning, all the while the area gets completely fucked up pretty much permanently.

          There was opportunity for a peaceful resolution and they turned it down because they thought they could win, then the west (which had been egging them on up to that point) suddenly fucked off to do a genocide in the middle east leaving them high and dry.

          At that point you would have no choice but to admit you fucked up and would have to accept worse peace terms. This isn’t a video game where winning is the only thing that matters; people’s lives are on the line. The longer you fight the more people that die, and for what?