This guy is single handedly leading a winning a war against russia.
A feat that escaped Napoleon and Hitler.
Gotta hand it to him, he did a great job.
Ukrainians have proven to be awesome.
Keep up the good work everyone!
In a few months this guy will be on the run and end up being one of the most hated leaders in Ukrainian history ... if there is still a Ukraine.
shareThat is quite the bullshit opinion right there. Sorry for your poor info.
shareI know you have contempt for facts, so I hope you remember to apologize when Ukraine is wrecked. This is the story of Ukraine wanting to ethnic cleanse the Donbas of ethnic Russians and thinking Russia would do nothing about it.
More people are starting to get this, and it has hurt the whole world badly. A massive mess and miscalculation on Ukraine, NATO and the US's part. And over-reaction on Russia's part, but NATO has been encroaching on Russia since the 90's and they were forced to react at some point.
👍
shareBullshit.
It was from the start a Russian interference to acquire the east territories.
This is the basic truth.
No it was not. Russia and Ukraine were allies until the U.S. sponsored a coup in 2014. Before 2014 Russia didn't want to acquire any land from Ukraine.
Simple logic tells you this is about American involvement in Ukraine.
Just make up stories as you go along. When from 1991 to 2014 did Russia interfere in any way with Ukrainian sovereignty?
And while you're at it explain why the Biden family has been in Ukraine since 2013, a year before the pro-American coup?
Ukraine was a puppet for Russia prior to 2014. Just like Belarus is now. There was no need for Russia to interfere when they controlled the government.
In 2014 the gained their independence from Russia and Russia didn’t want Ukraine to use their newly discovered resources, the same reason they annexed Crimea …
Biden family was in Ukraine to profit from corruption and load their bank accounts. Which they did.
Btw, there is no proof of any involvement of the US government in the Mandan.
You claimed the purpose of the Russian invasion was to annex territory. That's just not true. If that we're a fact Russia would have negotiated that when Ukraine was a "puppet" as you called them.
Russia never had territorial designs on Ukraine. They do not want NATO missiles in Ukraine. The U.S. doesn't want Russian missiles in Cuba. JFK made sure that didn't happen in 1962. To avoid World War III superpowers need to cooperate.
Yes, Ukraine is corrupt. And it's not worth 100 billion of our tax dollars to allow NATO to put missiles there. It's unnecessary provocation and the corrupt government of Ukraine is milking the American taxpayer.
Yes, the purpose NOW is to claim territory, but not for land but for resources. It’s proven by the fact that Russia already annexed Crimea and officially declared Donbas as Russian territory. And you still argue that they don’t want that area?
Are you that dumb as to deny the reality???
"Russia doesn't want territories, that's why they annexed Crimea and Donbas". No one can be THAT stupid, I swear.
And let me tell you why they suddenly need that area. 2013, gas and oil reserves are discovered in the Black Sea and Donbas basin. If Ukraine starts to exploit those resources Russia will instantly go bankrupt, it’s economy IS based on gas and oil exports to Europe.
Ukraine already has the pipelines and the infrastructure. Do the math.
So Russia needs to do whatever to stop Ukraine from exploiting those resources and best to conquer them. Plain and simple …
Yes he is that dumb apparently.
shareA leftist who supports Neo-Con wars? Really? I bet you were allover Iraq's weapons of mass destruction too! 🤣
If you want to support American meddling in every corner of the world, do it with your own money. I'll keep my 60 billion in tax dollars in the U.S., thank you very much.
whatever you have to tell yourself.
SO helping a democratic ally against a dictatorships invasion is a Neo-con war.
Haha. So we are to believe that this is not about the pro-American coup in 2014 and Ukraine's application for NATO, but it's about gas and oil?
Russia has oil and gas reserves. It has the whole expanse of Siberia and the Arctic Ocean for resources. Mysterious that it would choose 2022 as the date to decide to invade a neighboring country. It has invaded no other neighbor for oil.
Ukraine has been a major oil producer since 1959. Yet no Russian invasion until 2022!
Ukraine's gas reserves compare to only 3% of Russia's total. We all know that is not the reason for Russia's invasion.
This 3% will not bankrupt Russia. Hahah. Dude, that's hilarious.
Russia Does Not Seem to Be After Ukraine's Gas Reservesshare
Ukraine does indeed control Europe's second-largest known reserves of natural gas, almost 80 percent of which are located east of the Dnipro River. However, these reserves amount to less than 3 percent of Russia's total natural gas reserves (PDF). And though Ukraine theoretically might have considerable shale gas reserves, they remain largely unproven, and Russia currently has no experience or technology for shale gas production.
https://www.rand.org/blog/2022/04/russia-does-not-seem-to-be-after-ukraines-gas-reserves.html
That's a load of bullshit.
"Haha. So we are to believe that this is not about the pro-American coup in 2014 and Ukraine's application for NATO, but it's about gas and oil?"
Ukraine applied for NATO in 2008. Are you telling me that Russia didn't realize that until 2022 when they suddenly were like "aaaaa"? You are dumb indeed.
"Russia has oil and gas reserves. It has the whole expanse of Siberia and the Arctic Ocean for resources. Mysterious that it would choose 2022 as the date to decide to invade a neighboring country. It has invaded no other neighbor for oil."
Russia has oil and gas reserves that needs to sell. A competing country that can fulfil the European needs with the new discovered resources for 10 years it's a major problem, specialty when Ukraine has the delivery pipeline already built AND ALL the required infrastructure. But we decided that you are stupid and don't understand that.
"Ukraine's gas reserves compare to only 3% of Russia's total. We all know that is not the reason for Russia's invasion."
It doesn't matter how much more Russia has, what it matters that Ukraine has enough to supply Europe for 10 years, 100% of the needs.
"This 3% will not bankrupt Russia. Hahah. Dude, that's hilarious." again, you don't understand shit. That 3% is enough to bankrupt Russia when it has the possibility to stop any Russian export for 10 years.
"Mysterious that it would choose 2022 as the date to decide to invade a neighboring country."
Again, because you're dumb. The invasion didn't start in 2022 but in 2014 - that "rebellion" stopped Ukraine from making any steps toward accessing those resources. Russia occupied Crimea in 2014. In 2014 I predicted that they will fully invade and try to take East Ukraine for 2 major reasons: 1 Resources and 2 land access to Crimea.
" It has invaded no other neighbor for oil." It had invaded Georgia in 2008 with the same bullshit pretext of regions seceding and coincidentally was exactly after Georgia built a gas pipeline to connect the gas reserves in Azerbaijan to Europe.
"On 12 August 2008, the pipeline operator BP closed the pipeline for safety reasons because of the South Ossetia conflict."
Of course you would present some pro-Russian bullshit article.
Here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eo6w5R6Uo8Y
"Yes, the purpose NOW is to claim territory, but not for land but for resources. It’s proven by the fact that Russia already annexed Crimea and officially declared Donbas as Russian territory. And you still argue that they don’t want that area?"
He's saying Russia did not have designs on annexing that territory prior to the USA orchestrated coup in 2014 and intimations that Ukraine joining NATO was a possibility in the near future. Are you even aware of the United States's role in helping depose an elected ruler? Yanukovych may very well have been a bad guy, but he was elected. You endorse this sort of interference do you?
"He's saying Russia did not have designs on annexing that territory prior to the USA orchestrated coup in 2014"
Of course not, since they had a puppet installed as the president. But that was not was he was saying.
"intimations that Ukraine joining NATO was a possibility in the near future."
Again, Ukraine applied to join NATO in 2008 at the Bucharest convention.
"Yanukovych may very well have been a bad guy, but he was elected. You endorse this sort of interference do you?"
If he was elected like the referendums in Crimea and Donbas ...
What's the difference between orchestrating to install a Russian puppet or orchestrating to install an american puppet? None really.
"Are you even aware of the United States's role in helping depose an elected ruler?" Proof? And I don't mean some recording between 2 idiots making plans but real proof of the US troops being present and conducting a coup in Ukraine.
And even if they did, they didn't invade Ukraine to change the regime.
The NATO threat is a bullshit excuse, NATO is already at the Russian border.
Finland, which is as close to Russia and Moscow, just joined NATO. Why is the glorious Russian army NOT invading Finland and the Baltic states if NATO is the real threat???
That is just a lame justification, nothing more.
'Yanukovych may very well have been a bad guy, but he was elected. You endorse this sort of interference do you?"
Yes, I do. That's how we got rid of Ceausescu, thank god. And no, I'm not mad that USA finally decided to support coups in all East Europe, including my country, to get rid of the bad guys. And Ceausescu was "elected" as well.
"What's the difference between orchestrating to install a Russian puppet or orchestrating to install an american puppet? None really."
The idea is that the USA doesn't "orchestrate" anything in Ukraine's political affairs, Einstein.
what a load of nonsense. even if Ukraine lost tomorrow he'd die a hero and this would go down in history as one of the most embarrassing blunders of a large power vs a far smaller foe.
What a load of nonsense, right. It is basically Russia against the whole NATO. And this creepy idiot is no hero as long as you are not American and pretty lazy in defining one.
sharenot a single NATO troop is fighting. are they providing intel and training? sure. By that logic anytime china or a bigger country backs a smaller one then actually its the bigger one fighting. that is silly.
Despite arms and intel, there is no reason that a country of 40 million people, a gdp 200 billion and armed forces of 200k, should be fighting back a country with 146 million people, 1.8 trillion and army of 1 million. If it were not for the massive contributing factors of Russias sheer ineptitude militarily and Ukrainians willingness to defend themselves
"hes creepy" is not an argument.
the aggressive invaders are getting their asses kicked by a country 1/4 their size in terms of population and struggling to maintain supply chains with a country they border.
Ukraine is suffering because the West is fueling this unnecessary war. This could have been avoided in February if Zelensky had vowed not to seek admission to NATO.
There is no way nuclear Russia will lose this war. You fools are playing with fire and it ends when Russia nukes a Ukrainian city. I just hope it doesn't escalate into a World War.
This is a dangerous game we're playing.
I agree. Zelensky is a first class creep with organized crime connections. And he refuses to negotiate with Russia. And why should he? American tax payers have made him a billionaire.
when its over and Russia is forced to negotiate to save face you can apologize for your stupidity.
if it were up to spineless cowards like you we would just bow our necks to every upstart aggressive regime, lick their boots and say "thank you sir for invading. we wouldn't dare stand up to you"
yes why should a country who is kicking Russias ass go to the negotiation table? wha ta dumb thing to say. its the equivalent of a bully coming up to you and telling you to give you your 10$ you have for lunch money. you whoop his ass. then he says "okay lets negotiate ill settle for 5$". while spineless little twerps like you are on the sideline saying "you better take the 5$ deal or he will get really made and go nuclear!"33
So Russias going to save Ukraine by nuking Ukraine.. even Russias biggest allies are telling them not to use nukes. If you want to overnight become the next North Korea and world pariah, they will use nukes.
I'm not interested in saving Ukraine or Russia. I didn't wanna save Iraq, Afghanistan or Vietnam either. Sorry, these wars of American imperialism benefit me NADA.
The issue has always been to avoid a nuclear holocaust. Russia will not lose this war no matter how many billions the U.S. pours into Ukraine. It will end in nukes, you idiot. That's the only issue I care about. I don't have one iota of interest in my country policing the world.
When it's over and Ukraine is in ruins, the only ones who benefit are the arms dealers.
a more stable Europe where every little former soviet statelet isn't in fear Russias going to decide they are the next one to get amalgamated into Russia does benefit everyone.
sure looks like they are losing.
again you clearly have no spine and think we should bow down just because they have nukes. If Ukraine is in ruins after the only one to blame is the Russians.
It's interesting the role reversal that leftists are now the worst warmongers in the world. Well, at the very least they're tied with the traditional neocons.
shareThat's actually not true ... there are about 40,000 NATO soldiers in Ukraine without the NATO flag - as independent contractors being paid huge amounts of money from our taxes.
> "hes creepy" is not an argument.
Neither is "it's silly".
The thing there is that the US is paying almost all the wages of Ukrainians during this war. A soldier is supposed to be paid from their local commander, but if that soldier is dead, and that death is not reported, the corruption Ukrainian military commanders to grab that money and send it offshore and keep it. That is why they say Ukraine is the most corruption country in Europe. They are even selling weapons the US gives them on the back market - and the US has not accounting on these weapons.
This is a total rip-off of Americans. Americans are so naive and gullible because we believe these absurd fantasies about us spreading democracy when most of what we spread is war and corruption.
Great we are supporting an ally against an aggressive dictatorship
Another thing is that there is a petition from about 320,000 wives in Ukraine asking what happened to their husbands? 320 thousand!
now you are just making crap up.
The thing there is that the US is paying almost all the wages of Ukrainians during this war. A soldier is supposed to be paid from their local commander, but if that soldier is dead, and that death is not reported, the corruption Ukrainian military commanders to grab that money and send it offshore and keep it. That is why they say Ukraine is the most corruption country in Europe. They are even selling weapons the US gives them on the back market - and the US has not accounting on these weapons.
This is a total rip-off of Americans. Americans are so naive and gullible because we believe these absurd fantasies about us spreading democracy when most of what we spread is war and corruption.
More than 7,000 Ukrainian soldiers reported as missing in action: Ukrainian officials
https://www.foxnews.com/world/ukrainian-soldiers-reported-missing-action-ukrainian-officials
It is a lot worse than that. But I was citing what Ritter said, and when I can find the link to that petition I will post it. I should not have posted that until I had the link. At least I can admit it - as I am searching for the truth as opposed to shilling for one side or the other. Honestly, I'd love if the US lived up to its arsenal of democracy stuff ... I was raised on it and took it very seriously. Then came Viet Nam, Laos, Cambodia, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Iraq, Yugoslavia, etc ...
Making things us is what the US has been doing.
And there are tons of pundits talking about Ukraine being a democracy that the US needed to nurture. I guess you can lie as well.
And bye the way Ukraine accused Russia of drafting young men, that was pure falsehood. Russia called up their reserves that were under retirement age. They were not grabbing Russian men and forcing them into the military - that was Western propaganda. In fact Ukraine is forbidding men over 18 from leaving the country. So more lies.
it went from a petition from 320K wives to now "well 7000 troops are MIA".
Wow you sure abandoned all your lies real quick when asked for sources. do I believe 7000 Ukrainians died and are MIA? sure
the issue is you've constructed this huge narrative around. single lie and have yet to prove your first claim, let alone all the other increasingly preposterous ones.. 320k men are missing, the wives don't know. and NOT ONLY THAT the US is paying their wages, and the commanders are pocketing the money. and NOT ONLY THAT all these women are starving and being sold into the sex trade.
this is some next level Russian propaganda. next up you will say Ukraine is using newborns as artillery ammunition.
im not shilling. I don't believe 99% of what the US and US media says and do know its a more complicated geopolitical struggle between NATO expansion and Russian aggression.. but what I do know is Ukraine wasn't going to join Nato and Russias been using the excuse of nazis since the begining.
"And there are tons of pundits talking about Ukraine being a democracy that the US needed to nurture. I guess you can lie as well."
1. who the hell said this as the main argument to defend Ukraine. name names
2. who ever said Ukraine wasn't preventing men leaving
3. there is literal video of Russians trying to get prisoners to sign up. Those who spoke out against the war are conveniently getting draft papers with 100% certainty. The Russian state is using it too send dissidents to fight and die and bully them
> 3. there is literal video of Russians trying to get prisoners to
> sign up. Those who spoke out against the war are conveniently
> getting draft papers with 100% certainty. The Russian state is
> using it too send dissidents to fight and die and bully them
Really? I never heard that, but I am sure you probably have a link to this video. Not that I doubt you, but can you share it?
1. https://youtu.be/ufOVEKwY2sw. known and confirmed
The Russian oligarch known as 'Putin's chef' has been filmed making an extraordinary appeal to convicts, promising them amnesty on their sentences if they sign up to fight in Ukraine - and a bullet in the head if they desert when they get there.
Yevgeniy Prigozhin, thought to the founder and financier of the Wagner group of mercenary fighters, gives hundreds of prisoners the bleak offer in secretly-filmed footage apparently in a penal colony in Mordovia.
Mr Prigozhin reveals that prisoners have already been fighting on the frontlines with Wagner, a shadowy private militia group, saying “in the first attack in Ukraine using 40 prisoners, three died and seven were injured”.
He informs them of Wagner’s rules: “No alcohol, and no sex with local women. No desertions or surrender - troops will be issued two hand grenades to blow themselves up if needed.”
'If you serve six months you are free'
Those who join must be between 22 and 50 years of age, although maybe older “if fit”.\
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, asked about reports that men detained were being given draft papers, said it was not against the law.
so bizarre you disappeared after spreading such massive claims and misinformation
shareNot really, I checked back and could not verify some information where I heard that. You're right, I should not have posted that until I understand it completely.
https://youtu.be/1SwxIaWlLcU?t=4598
So I removed it from my earlier comment until I can find out where that came from. But your replies are way over the top when you tell me what I am going to say, and you deny that Ukraine has been first, a whole operation years in the making, and that while it was in motion it was not reported on to Americans, or Europeans, and that Ukraine being a democracy was not used as a point of commonality with America to justify our support of Ukraine.
the issue isn't just you making one claim that 320k widows husbands missing. that alone is massive and bombastic and you had nothing to back it up
the ISSUE is compounded buy you going down this trail of even more and more bombastic and extreme claims you said followed from the first and were so patently absurd and crazy.
- commanders are pocketing that money
-commanders are hiding the money offshore
-and this is why the Ukrainian commanders are the most corrupt in Europe
-these same widows re so destitute they are being sold into the sex trade
-and these Ukrainians are selling all these weapons to the black market!
you didn't even have proof or your 320k claim, let alone all the ones that followed after! you literally spread unfounded misinformation and lies.
my reply isn't way over the top, its not even 10% as extreme as all these nuts claims you made and the reply you deserved. you may have deleted your comment but it still stands you actually posted all that nonsense and misinformation and are trying to put it on me for being "over the top".
you need to seriously look at yourself. grow a spine and stop trying to shift the blame to me. you are spreading nonsense misinformation and acting like the victim. seriously.
you deny that Ukraine has been first, a whole operation years in the making, and that while it was in motion it was not reported on to Americans, or Europeans, and that Ukraine being a democracy was not used as a point of commonality with America to justify our support of Ukraine.
> Ukraine shouldn't have the right to prepare against a dictatorship with a history of invading its small neighbors?
That's debatable ... but it is not really what happened is it?
I guess they were practicing going to war against their own people? Right. 14,000 deaths in Donbas shelling since 2014? I suppose you are going to contest that too?
> ya Ukraine is a democracy and ally,
And that is not true either. North Korea, Iran ... and plenty other nations have elections, but are not democracies.
All the story you cling to about Ukraine is impeachable because the government of Ukraine was taken over by the US/CIA when Victor Yushenko won the election against Victor Yanukovych thanks to the US covert action.
I did not delete my comment either. You are far more dishonest than I.
> Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov declined to deny reports that some protesters had been given draft papers, saying only: "This is not against the law."
Your link does not prove anything. Who knows where that is from or what it shows. The fact is that all the Western and Eastern news sources are likely to be lying since war broke out. A war that is needless except the US and Ukraine provoked it, and they gave Russia an excuse for invading. OSCE logs of artillery shelling in the days leading up to the way showed geometric increases in the number of artillery shots and an increase in troops on Donbas border.
This was a belligerent aggressive operation years in the making to confront Russia militarily. Russia would not have attacked had it not been given reasons to attack. I am not saying I am not Russia's side or that Russia is right, I am saying this war could have been easily averted by the US with a little negotiation - many times in many years, and it was not. That means it was what the West wanted.
I showed you think the link where that came from. Until you watch it you have nothing to say.
so your entire source is??????
one guy yelling and making claims on camera? that's it? I've tried to look it up. there's nothing. you seem to just believe whatever this man claims
> one guy yelling and making claims on camera?
See there, you do it again. You must have an irrepressible urge to be an asshole.
That is not some guy.
If you bothered to listen you would realize that, but instead you came just looking to shit all over the place.
I try to imagine what satisfaction you could get out of pretending to be such a know it all, and I can't think of anything. But then I am thinking about sane people who can have reasonable discussions. Guess that is not you.
I don't care if it's Albert Einstein. a claim without evidence is just that. nothing.
where's his sources? since you didn't provide shit, I went looking on my own. I can't find anything.
its not about being a know it all you idiot. its about you making massive bombastic claims you do not have evidence for. and nor does this guy apparently. and when I pointed that out, you tried to appeal to his notoriety as proof what he says is true.
please shut up. no one wants a conversation with a dishonest lying scumbag like you
"Great we are supporting an ally against an aggressive dictatorship"
Supporting??? Lol. Ukraine would've folded immediately without the ~100 billion dollar injection provided by the good ol proxy-war fightin' USA.
1. yes that would fall under the definition of supporting. why the question marks?
2. Ukraine also would have fallen if they didn't have a will to fight. they clearly do
3. russia has been shown to be incredibly inept and dropping the ball.
so what in my quote was wrong? is Ukraine an ally? are we supporting them? is Russia an aggressive dictatorship?
"yes that would fall under the definition of supporting. why the question marks?"
The USA has spent more on this war on Ukraine's behalf than Russia itself has. I'd say that "support" is thus a weaselly word of the sort media propagandists and apologists for war would use. We're basically funding the whole operation. And Ukraine would've fallen and folded immediately without the USA cash and weapon injections. They've been in a civil war for almost a decade. Of course they have people ready to fight. Lots of Nazis in Ukraine willing to continue squeezing the trigger, no doubt about that. Gotta support that don't we?
wrong again Bob.
russia has spent about 86 billion.
the us sent 68 billion.
but yes it makes sense that given the size of russia, that a huge amount off support would be needed
ha claims im a propagandists, then says its nazis largely fighting Russia.
simp for Putin harder
> wrong again Bob.
No, he's not wrong. You're wrong, and deliberately ignoring the point. Buying the country and the economy is not the same as supporting.
"No, he's not wrong"
yes he is. he claimed
"The USA has spent more on this war on Ukraine's behalf than Russia itself has"
that is wrong. please shut up and stop spreading misinformation. you don't seem to be able to distinguish facts from fiction
You seem to be either pretty dumb or a Russian propaganda tool, paid shill.
shareYou sound like a western propaganda troll which is always dumber.
shareUnfortunately for you I'm from a country that suffered from Russian aggression for centuries and have direct experience with the savagery and stupidity of the Russians.
Guess what, idiot: NATO didn't invade Russia, Russia invaded an independent country.
These fake news believing russian stooges cannot understand even that most obvious fact:
NATO didn't invade Russia, Russia invaded an independent country.
I like Heisenbergs ports. I enjoy reading them but this time he is way fucking off. Volodymyr Zelenskyy is a God damn terrorist.
shareWell, thanks for the vote of confidence, but this post is right on the money.
Zelenskyy is fighting for his country against a big and nasty oppressor.
I wish him and Ukraine all the best.
Except that's false. Russia fought back against Ukraine because the Ukraine had been breaking the Minsk Agreements for 8 years straight constantly bombing Donetsk and Donbass regions, which are pro-Russia. Zelenskyy is one of the all-time villains and has done nothing at all respectable, including killing many of his own countrymen, selling out his country for US cash so that it could be used for nefarious purposes, posturing and being aggressive enough to start WWIII. He is to blame for the freezing Ukrainians, the fleeing Ukrainians etc. He's sucking the money that came from the brow of the US taxpayer and losing the war at the same time. Pushing 100 Billion dollars now, the US has thrown more money at him and this farce of a war than they do it's own citizens- we still have homeless vets and others, disabled with issues etc. I still want to think that you're joking and not this misinformed.
shareDo you believe exclusively fake news or is there anything real in your feed?
You forgot to mention the lizard people.
"You forgot to mention the lizard people." Heisenberg has gone off the rails! Low blow, lowbrow!
shareI could go on about your mother but I am armed with facts, so how about you attempt to refute my easily substantiated claims.
shareLike I already said, your claims are 100% based on fake news.
It's no use debating with a kid over the existence of Santa Claus.
Reality is only on one side, and it's not yours.
I don't think there are any good guys in this. Putin, Biden, Zelensky - plenty of corruption on all ends.
You are opting to close one eye, when singling one of them out as a hero in this affair. Open your eyes.
Fake news.
shareProve it, we have enough people just talking here. Prove it
share"Russia fought back against Ukraine"
Can you show me WHEN exactly Ukraine crossed in Russia???
Can you show me WHEN exactly did Ukraine bomb Crimea, forcing Russia to annex it???
Everything you're saying is nothing but Russian propaganda.
Actually I never made either claim. Go back and quote my my words and we'll talk.
share"Russia fought back against Ukraine"
These ARE your words. Which implies that Ukraine is the aggressor against Russia and Russia is just defending itself.
Are you not aware what you're saying???
What about this though?
"Can you show me WHEN exactly Ukraine crossed in Russia???
Can you show me WHEN exactly did Ukraine bomb Crimea, forcing Russia to annex it???"
That was your line of questioning. I never made these claims. Stick to my words please. And settle down- it's only a discussion.
I do stick to your words.
Do you know what "fighting back" means? It means it's a defensive position against the aggressor.
So, again, when did Ukraine attack Russia forcing it to "fight back"??
Can you at least answer this simple question based ON YOUR WORDS?
Then we can continue with the annexation of Crimea, what exactly did Russia the right to annex the territory of an independent country?
No one said they attacked Russia- that's why I asked you to quote my words. You seem to have comprehension issues. They attacked Donbass and Donetsk- Russian supporters. I said this.
"Russia fought back against Ukraine because the Ukraine had been breaking the Minsk Agreements for 8 years straight constantly bombing Donetsk and Donbass regions, which are pro-Russia."
See? It isn't really a debate when I have to hold your hand like this- it's a class.
Regarding Crimea- quote the words I posted abut it and we'll continue.
"Russia fought back against Ukraine"
Again: when you use "fought back" you imply that Ukraine was the one that attacked Russia first.
It's a cheap way to place the blame on Ukraine. No, Russia didn't "fight back" since it wasn't attacked, it invaded an independent country. Your choice of words is deeply dishonest.
"Then we can continue with the annexation of Crimea, what exactly did Russia the right to annex the territory of an independent country?"
I didn't say you said anything about it, but since you take side with Russia in this conflict and defend it's actions I'm asking you: against what did Russia fight back when annexed Crimea? What exactly give the right to Russia to annex it???
If your group of friends was attacked and you fought back then you'd prove yourself wrong.
You've been trying to get me to defend things I never said while showing comprehension issues. Take your interview elsewhere.
Nope, that's not fighting back. That's not how it works, logical or linguistic.
That would be joining the fight on their side. They would be fighting back, but not me.
Again, it's a lie and an attempt to somehow paint Russia the victim.
Specially since it's known that Russia had troops in Donbas since the start of the conflict and financed and armed the rebels.
Ya you better go take some time to get over my usage of that term there, it might take a while. Since those particular peoples identified more with Russians I used the term and I feel good about it. The problem lies in you. Good luck with it!
shareOf course you feel good about your lies and propaganda. I hope you're payed good to spread it. That's the only reason you used that term.
They are Ukrainian citizens, not Russian but if they identify to Russia they can move. Russia has no rights to invade Ukraine over them. If Russia wanted to help them they could have given them Russian citizenship and help them move over the border. That wasn't the plan, that was NEVER the plan.
That IS a fact.
Ukraine had no right to violate the Minsk agreements.
You seem to have to vilify whoever you debate which says much about the state of your mind. Don't ignore that- it's very telling, and not unlike a human version of a red car indicator light warning of issues. God bless
Ukraine was fighting back against the rebels and Russian forces that violated first the Minsk agreement. How does it sound to you?
And why was the Minsk accord signed? Because Russia was already involved with the separatists in the East Ukraine, basically starting the conflict.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_war_in_Donbas_(2014)
Russia had troops in Ukraine BEFORE the Minsk accord.
"In response to the deteriorating situation, Russia abandoned its hybrid approach, and began a conventional invasion on 25 August 2014. On the following day, the Russian Defence Ministry said these soldiers had crossed the border "by accident". According to Nikolai Mitrokhin's estimates, by mid-August 2014 during the Battle of Ilovaisk, between 20,000 and 25,000 troops were fighting in the Donbas on the separatist side, and only 40-45% were "locals"."
https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-crisis-what-are-the-minsk-agreements-and-why-they-could-help-avert-a-russian-invasion-12541427
Russia is the one that broke the Minsk agreement in the first place, they never redraw their troops out of Ukraine after the agreement.
"US and international officials continued to report the active presence of Russian military in eastern Ukraine, including in the Debaltseve area In 2015, Russian separatist forces were estimated to number around 36,000 troops (compared to 34,000 Ukrainian), of whom 8,500–10,000 were Russian soldiers. Additionally, around 1,000 GRU troops were operating in the area."
"In August 2016, the Ukrainian intelligence service, the SBU, published telephone intercepts from 2014 of Sergey Glazyev (Russian presidential adviser), Konstantin Zatulin, and other people in which they discussed covert funding of pro-Russian activists in Eastern Ukraine, the occupation of administration buildings and other actions that triggered the conflict. As early as February 2014, Glazyev gave direct instructions to various pro-Russian parties on how to take over local administration offices, what to do afterwards, how to formulate demands, and promised support from Russia, including "sending our guys"."
It's obvious that you are nothing but a propaganda tool. Stating the obvious facts is not "vilifying you". It's just ... stating the facts.
While all you have are jut lies.
Why would Russia need to support those regions if Ukraine was not fighting with those peoples? Think about it.
shareI already told you why:
Because Russia was threatened by the huge reserves of oil and natural gas discovered, surprise, in the Black Sea in the Crimean continental shores and in Donbas.
When were those discovered? Wait for it: in 2013. Rings a bell???
And while someone like you (a propagandist) would say "wait but those reserves are small compared to what Russia already has" the idea is simple:
Those reserves are enough to cover the natural gas needs of Europe for almost 10 years.
Ukraine already has the infrastructure in place to store and deliver the gas to Europe (the original pipeline from Russia still runs through Ukraine).
If Ukraine starts to exploit and deliver those resources to Europe then Russia is bankrupt. Russia and the gas oligarchs that support Putin. At least 20% of Russia's GDP comes from gas exports.
Russia CANNOT afford to allow Ukraine to exploit those resources. PERIOD.
And that's a fact.
As you said: think about it.
Russia doesn't care about those people but about controlling the resources and Crimea has a huge strategical role as well, beside the oil on the shores. And they need a land route to Crimea, not just the bridge.
Then why does the population there primarily support Russia? How and why does that fit in? Whatever the surrounding circumstances this fact can't be glossed over- the population there does not consider it's self to be Ukrainian. The speak Russian and consider themselves to be Russian.
shareRead about the history of USSR. About the forced Russification of different areas, including Crimea (moving the Tatar population to Siberia and replacing it with Russians) and East Ukraine.
Maybe you will start to understand.
Educate yourself in those points.
https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/crimean-tatars-and-russification
And then understand that the rebellion IS Russian backed and orchestrated.
Again when the US is not even more guilty of this then I will get involved in correcting other countries.
You say that the Ukrainians would have bankrupted Russia. Has this potential ever not started a war? What would you have had them do? Just go quietly into that good night? It's just not realistic.
"Again when the US is not even more guilty of this then I will get involved in correcting other countries."
But here you are SUPPORTING the aggression by Russia.
Can you see it? Your dishonesty??
"What would you have had them do? Just go quietly into that good night? It's just not realistic."
There's a huge difference between understanding why Russia is going to war and SUPPORTING that war.
Do you understand it??
Do you support crime/murder when the criminal has no other choice?
There's always a choice.
You see it as undue Russian aggression, then casually mention that their entire future is on the line over it. These things should have trouble meeting peacefully in your mind.
shareIMO a country going bankrupt allowing for the populations there to starve etc will always be a reason for a country to go to war. We may not like it, and feel too superior to understand it, but it does make good sense.
shareYeah, but that doesn't change the FACT that they are the aggressor. That doesn't change the fact that Russia IS the bad guy.
And somehow that means that the attacked country should lie down and die??? Cease the land and do nothing???
Are you for real?
So a bully is justified to bully because he has self interests????
Survival is and always will be a reason for war. History is rife with it.
shareAgain: yes, but there's a difference between "survival is the reason for war" and "I think Russia is doing the right thing and I support that war".
Guess what: Ukraine is fighting a war for survival as well. And it's a defensive war so you should start supporting them instead of supporting the bully, if that's your reasoning.
There does not have to be a separation of those two POVs. Pursuit of survival is as good as any reason for supporting a country.
shareUkraine is fighting anything but a fight of survival. They constantly are the aggressors of this skirmish and their hands are anything but clean.
shareHere you have it, again your propaganda and lies.
Blatant lies. You cannot call this "honesty" or "opinions".
When Russia invading army is in Ukraine and Ukraine is defending it's territory here you are calling Ukraine "the aggressor". Justifying every Russian action and vilifying Ukraine for defending itself.
It's clear. Paid propaganda.
If that's what you want to see- I don't really care what your opinion is of me. It seems your own native culture is one of black and white, not human, which contains both.
The Times article I posted said the evidence was Ukraine was using banned weaponry on those two regions. More dishonesty from you on this. How else can you maintain your good vs evil theme?
Paid eh? Evidence? Please attach a check stub of mine. lol
shareAlso are you from the US? Whatever country you're from take a good look at the acts of war it is involved in. Looking elsewhere for issues may be your way to escape being active in your own land. No doubt it's a case of the pot calling the kettle black. I live in the US who on a global level willingly take the role of primary aggressor and top bully- I call them out regularly and do my part to rectify that, which is what I am doing in this thread.
shareNo, I'm NOT from US but I live now in the US.
I'm from an Eastern European country that used to be under the USSR boots so I know how it is to live with that threat so I'm a bit more than a simple US couch potato discussing things that he doesn't know about ... .
"I live in the US who on a global level willingly take the role of primary aggressor and top bully" - I disagree, as a non-US citizen, to this.
Have USA been involved in a lot of aggressive actions? Yes. But not invading other countries. And it's debatable how much is self interest or genuine good will.
Would you argue that letting ISIS taking control over Middle East would had been a good idea?
I mean we can take a look at all their actions in the last 100 years and see what's good and what's bad, but this is NOT about USA but about Russia.
Are you basically saying that Russia is ok to do shitty things because USA did some shitty things and you fight USA doing shitty things but support Russia doing shitty things??
WHAT KIND OF FUCKED UP LOGIC IS THAT???
I never said that. You're trying to twist my words- why? If you feel so empowered with fact then why the rest of this?
You do not know US history if you don't think it has invaded other countries. They primarily utilize economic and cultural methods to accomplish this these days but it's still all the same.
"You do not know US history" I bet I know it better than you. I bet you cannot name a territory that USA annexed in the last 150 years through invasion ...
But again: this is NOT about USA but about Russia.
Stick on the topic.
Then why lie about the the US's guilt?
share"Stick on the topic." Said the person using ad hominem for the entire discussion.
share"No, I'm NOT from US but I live now in the US.
I'm from an Eastern European country that used to be under the USSR boots so I know how it is to live with that threat..."
This would explain your inability to approach the discussion without identifying the other side as evil. It is still an indicator of issues though. Facts are facts, opinions are opinions. Getting bent out of shape because someone else sees things differently works against you and your argument.
"It's obvious that you are nothing but a propaganda tool. Stating the obvious facts is not "vilifying you". It's just ... stating the facts.
While all you have are jut lies."
The discussion is about the ongoing issues with Ukraine and Russia though. Your feelings about me are not the topic here and are a logical fallacy that you use to justify your negativity. The way I try to approach it is when I'm perfect then I'll help you to become so as well, and many good men have found that it makes for not only a more honest life but a healthier one.
"Your feelings about me are not the topic here"
They are not feelings. I'm just telling you that what you present are lies.
Don't want that? Stop telling lies and propaganda.
" The way I try to approach it is when I'm perfect then I'll help you to become so as well, and many good men have found that it makes for not only a more honest life but a healthier one."
You are not perfect. And don't talk about honesty please when you don't provide it.
It's called a debate, not a lying contest. We have a difference of opinion, and one side seeing themselves as the de facto arbiter of honesty then they are not being honest with themselves.
shareIn a debate you either bring facts or you don't.
I only brought facts, not opinions. I usually try to keep bias out of what I say (I know it's close to impossible but still).
I usually try to get a bit educated about the topic and not just spew bullshit. I don't know everything about this conflict (obviously) but I do know a lot and about USSR/Russian history and tactics, comes with the territory
I can see that you had some trauma and I am sorry for that. War brings out the worst in people and it can creates wounds that can never be healed in some.
In this vein I am shocked at how well Germany and England get along along with the rest of Europe after WWII.
Opinion comes as a result examination of fact. For instance you feel like fight for survival makes one wrong, I do not.
BTW if what you're asking for is main stream media coverage of it here is the New York Times reporting on it when it began in 2014.
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/21/world/ukraine-used-cluster-bombs-report-charges.html
Did Ukraine use those bombs against Russia???
Yes? No? Maybe?
What does the article say? Read it.
sharePaywall buddy, paywall.
If you want me to read articles don't send ones that I have to pay to read ...
But you can quote the paragraph that says that Ukraine used any kind of bombs in Russian territory. Again, against Russia.
If you are referring to this (different source) "Cluster munitions were used in the east of Ukraine in 2014–2015. Ukraine Government forces and Russian-backed rebel forces used cluster munitions in the east of Ukraine in January and February 2015, according to in-depth research by Human Rights Watch made public on 19 March 2015." then as you can see:
1. Russia was already present in Ukraine (they were the aggressor even then)
2. The bombs were used in East Ukraine and NOT in Russia.
Capisci???
No paywall on that Times article. Here's words from it:
"The Ukrainian Army appears to have fired cluster munitions on several occasions into the heart of Donetsk, unleashing a weapon banned in much of the world into a rebel-held city with a peacetime population of more than one million, according to physical evidence and interviews with witnesses and victims.
Sites where rockets fell in the city on Oct. 2 and Oct. 5 showed clear signs that cluster munitions had been fired from the direction of army-held territory, where misfired artillery rockets still containing cluster bomblets were found by villagers in farm fields. "
You're still lost- East Ukraine is what I've been talking about this whole time. Witness:
"Russia fought back against Ukraine because the Ukraine had been breaking the Minsk Agreements for 8 years straight constantly bombing Donetsk and Donbass regions, which are pro-Russia."
Now go put medicine on the hemorrhoids you've developed from getting so excited.
"The Ukrainian Army appears to have fired cluster munitions on several occasions into the heart of Donetsk, unleashing a weapon banned in much of the world into a rebel-held city with a peacetime population of more than one million, according to physical evidence and interviews with witnesses and victims."
Good, so we agree, the bombs were NOT dropped on Russia.
And no, we weren't talking about East Ukraine, I specifically asked you when did Ukraine bomb Russia, not East Ukraine. Can you read? Can you focus?
So, NO, Russia DIDN'T "fight back" but straight up invaded an independent country without being attacked.
Let me teach you some english:
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/fight-back
fight back
phrasal verb with fight verb
US /faɪt/ UK /faɪt/
fought | fought
to defend yourself when someone attacks you physically.
So you using "Russia fought back" implies that Ukraine actually attacked Russia first. So there you have it, your statement that Ukraine attacked Russia first - stop asking for it or are you too dumb to understand the meaning of your own words?.
Which is a blatant lie or at least a very dishonest attempt to control the narrative.
LOL. You get so excited. They fought back because Donbass and Donetsk are their allies. Go work on trying to absorb that.
sharethey are their allies because they claimed it as such. how can part of another country "be their allies". pretty convenient any country can just claim a rebel group in another is "their allies" and launch a full scale invasion to take the whole country.
it'd be like the USA allying with the separatist FLQ movement in Quebec, the Canadian government fighting against the FLQ. and the US using that as a pretence to invade and take over all of Canada. that is utter nonsense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SwxIaWlLcU&t=3538s
See TQ's post below.
Z is a US puppet for money - a whore who has destroyed his country and collaborated with Nazis to try to ethnically cleanse the Donbas of Russians and genocide the rest.
They have been shelling the Donbas for 8 solid years and have killed 14,000 people.
Rest assured Zelensky will end up living in a mansion in Florida where he will spend his billions of dollars in his overseas accounts.
Why do you keep broadcasting Putin's fake news?
How much are YOU gtting?
Firstly, facts are not partisan, so reality does not support Russia, sadly and certainly not the US.
How much are "YOU gtting"?
That's the only retort you can make, false claims that I am giving out fake news?
I am right along with a lot of Americans, as I have posted previously.
They cannot all be working for Russia.
And what is it you think the US is doing in Ukraine and where is your evidence for it?
US National Security Strategy |
Scott Ritter,
Jeffrey Sachs,
John Mearsheimer
& Douglas Macgregor
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQo697Gk6gw
Yes, but most Presidents are, but most of them do not wreck multiple countries' economies.
shareNo they're not. They were not when you started this thread, and they are not now.
Learn what "burn rate" means.
Listen to some history of Ukraine;
- from WWII,
- recent,
- from 2014,
- and from February 2022,
- and since then.
Curious if you know what the OSCE is, and what their data indicates?
These are both very good talks by a guy who has been through the wringer - like anyone who has tried to argue with or oppose the US warmongering propaganda narratives.
Scott Ritter: Remarks and Book Signing in Ann Arbor, Michigan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SwxIaWlLcU
Scott Ritter: Remarks and Book Signing in Ann Arbor, Michigan, 12/3/22
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKJ7D97UeIY
Cutting to the chase: ( what were the Minsk accords, and why didn't they work )
https://youtu.be/1SwxIaWlLcU?t=1605
I think Scott Ritter is a good source of information, but Ritter is also problematic in that he is always attacked for his legal problems and called names like pedophile, etc. Somehow he is going to need to deal with that openly. Still, it does not discount his vast experience with war, intelligence and politics. Not to mention he is articulate and willing to meet and take on anyone's argument, and even admit he is wrong when he is wrong. I think the good thing about Scott Ritter is he reveals his thinking process, and the facts it is based on. We only seem to get that from the contrarians in this war ... him and MacGregor, Black, and recently even Jeffrey Sachs who again - knows so much more than the average pundits about the inner workings of the World Bank and Western strategy. It is really clear that these guys are willing to face a lot of adversity to testify to the truth, or at least honestly add what they can to it.
share
A feat that escaped Napoleon and Hitler.
Yes I agree, but in a broad term it is comparable.
Ukraine is a small economy and army, so comparatively their eventual win is a feat on the same level as a big important country like France or Germany conquering Russia.
Why do you think it is that he is floating negotiations with Russia?
I'll tell you why.
Only 25% of the world supports this war.
Europe is sick of the war and demonstrations are getting loud.
Europe economy is in the dumps, and they are bringing the UK to its knees because people cannot pay their energy bills ... $6,000 a year.
Ukraine is shivering the dark.
The US's lies are catching up with us and out meddling in Ukraine and Georgia is now being reported on and understood, though there are still tons of fake trolls like you to push the false US narrative.
The US blew the Nord Stream pipeline and Europe is pissed.
We are running out of money and weapons to send to Ukraine, and there is no interest in either the US or Europe going to war and dragging this out.
And most of all, Russia has half a million freshly trained soldiers ready to deploy to Ukraine and take over the whole Donbas stretching out to Odessa. Russia feels it has to do that because the US has broken so many treaties and cannot be trusted. Much of the rest of the world feels that way as well after us ditching the Kurds, and Afghanis and the Iraqis.
Now Putin has just said this war is going to drag on for a year - a message to Ukraine that you are going to be miserable for another year. Sources say Ukraine has lost over 100,000 soldiers, and destroyed its own country by being puppeteered by the US to self-destruction.
It is Western weapons and Western contractors that are keeping Ukraine in the action - to the detriment of Ukraine. If Russia has to enter Ukraine with its massive forces, that country will be either completely destroyed or taken over by Russia and rebuilt. Dems the facts.
Jeffrey Sachs: A Negotiated End to Fighting in Ukraine Is the Only Real Way to End the Bloodshed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrmWpI_s7rc