Libs and reactionaries will constantly bring up the Wagner group in response to having the existence of the Azovites pointed out to them. This counterargument strikes me as lazy and equivocating, but I’ve always had trouble responding to it.
What would people here recommend I say to this point? Assuming I say anything at all.
Which is why even if Wagner are Nazis – and so far, there’s no real factual evidence for this – it still really doesn’t make any difference as to who is on the right the side of history in Ukraine. (Spoiler alert: it ain’t Zelensky and Azov).
I would push back just a tiny bit on America’s role in World War II. In Europe they absolutely took some pressure off of the Soviet Union, and led (as you’ve indicated) to a quicker victory. In the Pacific theatre they also liberated a whole lot of people who were undergoing genocide at the hands of Imperial Japan; but from the vantage point of history, we can see that it was a sort of prelude to the US stepping into Imperial Japan’s role within east Asia. The atrocities which the US committed in Korea, Vietnam, and Cambodia were, at best, only slightly less horrific than what Japan did in World War II. And unlike Japan, the US actually got away with it. This isn’t to say that there was “moral equivalence” between the US and Nazi Germany during World War II – I’d say there’s absolutely moral equivalence now – only that we should see them as the pragmatic and dangerous ally to Moscow that they were.
Oh, I agree with your Wagner sentiment, though I guess I will say that while I don’t believe they are an outright ideological Nazi outfit like Azov, its more then likely you’ll find a few right wing nuts among their ranks. (Because honestly, I don’t trust that most sane or ideologically leftist people would go and fight for money). That still doesn’t matter though, since they are a commercial mercenary outfit for hire, and not a government sanctioned entity.
I also absolutely agree with your statements on the United State’s role in WW2 preluding their Cold War actions, but I will still say that their entrance into the Allies was still the correct, necessary, and morally better option. In the long run, the destruction of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, and the saving of hundreds of millions of lives with the defeat of those countries, was the better course of history. As like you said, while the actions of the US military were admirable and many times pivotal during the conflict, they were at best “allies of convenience”.
Though the common US soldier did not view the Soviet Union that hostile way. They saw them as brothers in arms, and cheered on every step the Red Army took. It is sad that relations were perverted in they way they were for nothing more then the behest of capital.