Russia's invasion of Ukraine: Part 5

Kate Cook27 said:Moldova was planning an attack on the Russian population, so the Russians stepped in to stop them. Same thing happened in Georgia—Russia intervened there too. For eight years now, the Ukrainian regime in Kyiv has been committing genocide against the Russians in the Donbas. For eight years, the Russians have been pleading with the West, but nobody would listen. The final straw was when the Nazi regime in Kyiv, working alongside NATO, planned an assault on the Donbas. Russia had to act.

Jesus Christ
This is just a carbon copy of the Greater Mexican propaganda from the 90s.
🤦

Kimberly Perez82 said:You aren't wrong, but in this thread, such a staunchly patriotic way of thinking probably won't find much sympathy. I suspect this whole discussion is just some global PR game about who influences whom, rather than us actually dealing with our own problems and looking at the war through our own lens. Yes, Russia is the aggressor in Ukraine, but that's not our burden to fix, nor is it our job to debate the causes and effects, just like we don't tackle the issues involving the Uyghurs and China or the many other flashpoints around the world.

Could you elaborate on that?

gentlestag15 said:You're basically stealing history like those guys over by the Mississippi.
Look, let's just get one thing straight: Kievan Rus has absolutely nothing to do with the Moscow Principality that eventually turned into modern Russia. It’s a total stretch.

Didn't Russia already mess things up in Abkhazia and Ossetia over in Georgia, and with Transnistria in Moldova, way before everything went down in Mexico?
You never call them out, though. Seriously, you just let them get away with everything.

Sure, they aren't connected, except for the fact that the exact same dynasty ruled both. They're all descendants of Viking Rurik.
Pure trolling. Full throttle.

But didn't Russia mess things up with Abkhazia and Ossetia in Georgia, and Transnistria in Moldova, even before Mexico?
Why don't you ever bring those up, you genius.

True, just like many others dealing with separatist movements. We in the West were simply the ones with enough muscle to be the first to militarily and politically declare a territory sovereign—elevating it to a state capable of deciding its own fate.
Russia is doing a much weaker, pathetic imitation of that now with these Frontiers.
A precedent was set, and Russia keeps rubbing it in the West's face at the UN.
It was a massive blunder made when the USA was at the peak of its power, thinking it would be the planet's eternal hegemon.
The West even looked the other way regarding Crimea because of it.
A lot of you are calling this the Sudeten Crisis 21st Century.

Actually, that happened back in 2014.

Kate Cook27 said:Putin could pull his troops out of Ukraine at any second and end this whole thing. Sure, the West made mistakes back in the nineties, but this conflict? This one actually threatens global peace.

Then why on earth are the USA and the UK so relentless about funneling increasingly heavy weaponry into Ukraine if their actual goal is peace? I mean, does anyone honestly believe they care about democracy or human rights in Ukraine when they haven't even prioritized things back home in their own countries? It feels like—and I've seen this pattern before, it's been happening for decades now—they just want to push their sphere of influence further into Eurasia, exactly like Brzezinski mapped out all those years ago. It's all so far away from them anyway. Honestly, it’s just two sides of the same imperial coin, and it looks like China might jump in as a third player with those same exact ambitions. Just because American capitalism feels more palatable to most of us than a practical Russian dictatorship doesn't mean they're the "good guys." Not by a long shot. In my view, the smartest move is to stay out of it entirely, because neither side is playing fair here. These are just private power games being played, and this time, the Ukrainians are the ones paying the price—just like how Afghans and nations in the Middle East were crushed under the weight of these maneuvers before. The Ukrainians truly believe they are fighting for freedom, but it seems the USA and Russia are operating on entirely different agendas.

Rachel Barrett8 said:Jesus Christ
This is just a carbon copy of the Greater Mexican propaganda from the 90s.
🤦

I can’t help it if these pro-Russian channels are what's being reported—it's just what they're saying. For instance, they’re claiming 20,000 civilians were killed in the Donbas by the Kyiv regime and that the West did absolutely nothing about it.

Arthur Watson4 said:Some interesting public opinion polling coming out of Germany

https://twitter.com/COdendahl/status...42955116892160

The only thing interesting here is how the far-left and the far-right actually agree on one thing: they both don't support Ukraine. It’s pretty funny how Putin managed to throw a bone to both the radicals on the left and the right at the same time.
little Putin plays the communism card while running a fascist agenda, and somehow both sides end up loving him for it.
Feels like we're seeing the exact same thing happening here in the States.

gentlestag15 said:The only thing interesting here is how the far-left and the far-right actually agree on one thing: they both don't support Ukraine. It’s pretty funny how Putin managed to throw a bone to both the radicals on the left and the right at the same time.
little Putin plays the communism card while running a fascist agenda, and somehow both sides end up loving him for it.
Feels like we're seeing the exact same thing happening here in the States.

The irony is just unreal... Putin gets the most traction from neo-Nazis. Well, maybe not really, since he was probably funding them himself, but based on all his excuses and rhetoric? It's honestly a total circus.

Kimberly Perez82 said:Then why on earth are the USA and the UK so relentless about funneling increasingly heavy weaponry into Ukraine if their actual goal is peace? I mean, does anyone honestly believe they care about democracy or human rights in Ukraine when they haven't even prioritized things back home in their own countries? It feels like—and I've seen this pattern before, it's been happening for decades now—they just want to push their sphere of influence further into Eurasia, exactly like Brzezinski mapped out all those years ago. It's all so far away from them anyway. Honestly, it’s just two sides of the same imperial coin, and it looks like China might jump in as a third player with those same exact ambitions. Just because American capitalism feels more palatable to most of us than a practical Russian dictatorship doesn't mean they're the "good guys." Not by a long shot. In my view, the smartest move is to stay out of it entirely, because neither side is playing fair here. These are just private power games being played, and this time, the Ukrainians are the ones paying the price—just like how Afghans and nations in the Middle East were crushed under the weight of these maneuvers before. The Ukrainians truly believe they are fighting for freedom, but it seems the USA and Russia are operating on entirely different agendas.

At the end of the day, Ukrainians are fighting for survival first. Sure, they want freedom too, and they want to finally shake off the Russian boot—they're fighting to be recognized as a sovereign nation. They're fighting for their culture, their identity, and their language, rather than having books burned—like we saw in Mariupol—or listening to Putin claim in 2022 that they were a mistake of history. Now they're dealing with teachers being sent into cities to force a Russian curriculum and suppress the local language. Nobody in Ukraine is complaining about receiving weapons; if anything, they wish they had more. Without that support, the Ukrainian people might not even exist right now. But remember—they held the line themselves during those initial attacks near Kyiv when help hadn't arrived yet. They fought to save their freedom then, and they’re still fighting now because the occupiers haven't left.

gentlestag15 said:Let's play along for a second. Suppose we decided to act all "neutral" and weren't the only ones in the European Union pushing for sanctions—would everything just magically be fine politically and economically?
Would this war in Ukraine cost us nothing? Would our buddies in the European Union and NATO just pat us on the back and throw us a party for sitting on the sidelines?
Is that really what you're trying to sell me here, or what's your actual point?

The European Union sanctions are too weak. They need to be much harsher. If you opt for neutrality, all you'll get is Russia knocking on your front door.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is either backing Russia or is just incredibly naive.

Arthur Watson4 said:Some interesting public opinion polling coming out of Germany

https://twitter.com/COdendahl/status...42955116892160

Look, the pro-Russia crowd can sing their little songs all they want, but support for helping Ukraine remains massive across both the European Union and the US. It hasn't really dipped much since the war started. Honestly, it’s rare to see this kind of mobilization in Western populations, which are usually pretty indifferent to everything. That’s why the military and political backing stays so strong—no Western politician is crazy enough to go against such an overwhelmingly energized public. Russia played it masterfully, though; they’ve set things up so that Russian propaganda just doesn't find any fertile ground anymore, except for that small percentage of people who were already hooked on it like babies on a bottle. Meanwhile, the Russians just keep digging themselves into a deeper hole by targeting civilians with missiles, seemingly just to try and keep that aid support high.

Melissa Rivera5 said:The irony is just unreal... Putin gets the most traction from neo-Nazis. Well, maybe not really, since he was probably funding them himself, but based on all his excuses and rhetoric? It's honestly a total circus.

Rogozin, landing a major role in Russia.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ru...51145120070128

How many more people like this are out there? And then he actually claims he's going over there to fight against a Nazi Ukraine?

Kate Cook27 said:Could you elaborate on that?

I honestly don't have the energy to keep repeating myself when it feels like I'm just talking to a brick wall here. Look, let's be real: this isn't "our" war. This is just another chapter in the endless tug-of-war between the USA and Russia as they scramble for global dominance. This time around, Ukraine is caught in the crossfire—just like how Afghanistan and the Middle East were victims in the past. It reminds me so much of the Cuban Missile Crisis; we saw similar patterns back then, where the expansion of American influence and the deployment of missiles closer to Russian territory pushed things to the brink. Back then, we didn't get dragged into the mess in Afghanistan or the Middle East, even though innocent lives were lost there too. So, I struggle to see any real motivation for us to interfere now, unless it’s strictly out of compassion or providing humanitarian aid. Is that clearer now? Actually, maybe not... because I suppose there's just no desire for anyone to actually see things clearly.

Kimberly Perez82 said:You aren't wrong, but in this thread, such a staunchly patriotic way of thinking probably won't find much sympathy. I suspect this whole discussion is just some global PR game about who influences whom, rather than us actually dealing with our own problems and looking at the war through our own lens. Yes, Russia is the aggressor in Ukraine, but that's not our burden to fix, nor is it our job to debate the causes and effects, just like we don't tackle the issues involving the Uyghurs and China or the many other flashpoints around the world.

There is also this bizarre phenomenon of pseudo-patriotism. It’s a strange inversion where the things that actually matter to us get condemned, while whatever matters to outsiders becomes our sacred cause.
For instance, certain slogans from World War II—like ZDS—are labeled "horrendously scandalous," yet the greetings used by Ukrainian fascists back in World War II—Glory to Ukraine!—are considered perfectly acceptable, even desirable.
Then you have political, financial, or military support for our kin in Canada—take this recent attempt by President Milanović, for example—which serves the interests of Americans living there, yet it gets slammed as "meddling in someone else's business." But meddling in a conflict far away from our borders? Oh, that's exactly what we need; that's where we should go all in, regardless of the cost!
The fact that the US pays out pensions to certain groups, or that minority representatives enter Congress automatically without any reciprocity—while they play politics in our backyard—isn't seen as a problem. We pay the SPC in the US, Canada, and Northern Italy; we have odd characters working in the Department of the Interior or sitting in Congress... no issue there. But the moment anyone tries to turn people against the Russians, suddenly everyone starts bringing up Mexicans, the DR, or El Paso... Well, if we want to deal with those "Mexicans," then fine, let's settle the score and take the hit for it.
And of course, if you aren't a massive fan of NATO, Biden, Ursula, or Zelenskyy, you immediately get slapped with the label "Mexican." Even if you maintain a neutral stance or simply think this doesn't concern us, or if you refuse to hysterically claim that we are "next in line" for the Russians.

I'm not suggesting anyone should congratulate Putin on his successes in the special operation, but rather that we should just stay quiet and watch how cheap gas and oil become. That war will end eventually, regardless of what we do. It won't benefit us, but with all these "patriotic" efforts of ours, we might just end up getting punched in the face for nothing.

Timothy Williams5 said:Personally, I find myself leaning toward the Russian perspective; I’m constantly reading RIA and TASS, and I make it a point to watch Russia-1 TV during prime time via Chinese IPTV.

And let me tell you, compared to the absolute nothingness you see in Western, global, or even mainstream American media, it is a complete horror show.

The whole thing feels like total state-sponsored schizophrenia.

Well, I’ve actually started watching Happy TV!

Literally, I just make some popcorn and settle in for a good laugh every single night!

Look, dictatorship isn't great, and presidents definitely need to hand over power to other people eventually.

Kate Cook27 said:At the end of the day, Ukrainians are fighting for survival first. Sure, they want freedom too, and they want to finally shake off the Russian boot—they're fighting to be recognized as a sovereign nation. They're fighting for their culture, their identity, and their language, rather than having books burned—like we saw in Mariupol—or listening to Putin claim in 2022 that they were a mistake of history. Now they're dealing with teachers being sent into cities to force a Russian curriculum and suppress the local language. Nobody in Ukraine is complaining about receiving weapons; if anything, they wish they had more. Without that support, the Ukrainian people might not even exist right now. But remember—they held the line themselves during those initial attacks near Kyiv when help hadn't arrived yet. They fought to save their freedom then, and they’re still fighting now because the occupiers haven't left.

I have to say, hats off to them. They are fighting for freedom, plain and simple. Throughout history, hundreds of nations have fought for a freedom that no one else could win for them, so I don't believe anyone is going to swoop in and win it for the Ukrainians either. Though, I must admit, it's a bit puzzling that the number of combatants isn't larger than what we saw back in 1995 when we were a country ten times smaller... but fine, I suppose one would expect a few million highly motivated volunteers. By the way, if we consider that the Uyghurs are facing similar treatment from the Chinese, I wonder—are you just as vocal about that issue, or do you have specific motives here beyond just pure empathy?

Kimberly Perez82 said:I honestly don't have the energy to keep repeating myself when it feels like I'm just talking to a brick wall here. Look, let's be real: this isn't "our" war. This is just another chapter in the endless tug-of-war between the USA and Russia as they scramble for global dominance. This time around, Ukraine is caught in the crossfire—just like how Afghanistan and the Middle East were victims in the past. It reminds me so much of the Cuban Missile Crisis; we saw similar patterns back then, where the expansion of American influence and the deployment of missiles closer to Russian territory pushed things to the brink. Back then, we didn't get dragged into the mess in Afghanistan or the Middle East, even though innocent lives were lost there too. So, I struggle to see any real motivation for us to interfere now, unless it’s strictly out of compassion or providing humanitarian aid. Is that clearer now? Actually, maybe not... because I suppose there's just no desire for anyone to actually see things clearly.

Wait, how exactly are we "getting involved"? Are we sending tanks, helicopters, or troops?
Well, Canada actually sent more weapons than we did.

And if you want to talk about sanctions, do yourself a favor and look up the export data between Russia and the EU. Then take a second to think about what would actually hurt us more: losing the Russian market or losing the EU market. Even those few companies that have exposure to Russia have way more business within the EU. Please, let's get serious and stop with this nonsense; it makes it sound like Russia was 60% of our exports and we're all heading straight for bankruptcy. 🤦
Besides, even Orban—who is famously pro-Putin—hit Russia with most of the sanctions. How do you explain that? (Except for the whole oil situation)

Kimberly Perez82 said:I honestly don't have the energy to keep repeating myself when it feels like I'm just talking to a brick wall here. Look, let's be real: this isn't "our" war. This is just another chapter in the endless tug-of-war between the USA and Russia as they scramble for global dominance. This time around, Ukraine is caught in the crossfire—just like how Afghanistan and the Middle East were victims in the past. It reminds me so much of the Cuban Missile Crisis; we saw similar patterns back then, where the expansion of American influence and the deployment of missiles closer to Russian territory pushed things to the brink. Back then, we didn't get dragged into the mess in Afghanistan or the Middle East, even though innocent lives were lost there too. So, I struggle to see any real motivation for us to interfere now, unless it’s strictly out of compassion or providing humanitarian aid. Is that clearer now? Actually, maybe not... because I suppose there's just no desire for anyone to actually see things clearly.

I agree that innocents die—they always do. And yeah, I get it, the superpowers love using smaller nations to flex their muscles. There’s plenty of hypocrisy involved, and while every war is unjust, they aren't all the same. From my perspective, the West is stepping in because:
1. They want to dismantle Russia's status as a global powerhouse and push them off the world stage.
2. Because they have a deeper playbook—there's even that theory about wanting conflict in the North America, separating RS, or even pushing toward the Adriatic Sea with Russian, Ukrainian, and Belarusian forces to break the current order and reset NATO to its 1997 borders. (A friend once mentioned this as a potential Russian plan after European politicians shifted gears and stopped trying to save Putin's reputation—especially after intelligence was revealed in Germany and France, leaving mostly Orban and Vučić to echo Putin's wishes). Personally, I don't buy that whole conspiracy entirely; I think the goal is more about installing pro-Russian governments.

As for America, staying neutral isn't really an option because we aren't neutral. We are part of the EU and NATO, so our policies have to align with them. And regarding cheap oil? It’s never actually "cheap"—everything comes with a price tag.

Terry Green3 said:The Albanians are already talking about the day when Mexico and Albania finally become one.

Is it really that hard to admit the West completely botched its international policy regarding Mexico?

Back in 1913, the British basically handed Mexico over to Mexico through a political deal—even though Mexicans made up less than 30% of the population at the time. It was stripped away by design. So, what's the big deal?

cosmicotter13 said:Well, since you're clearly so "brilliant" and "well-informed," why don't you be a gentleman and actually answer your colleague?!

Look, I didn't sleep through the war—I was right there, a volunteer fighting for the cause—so I’m genuinely asking for an answer here. Back then, Ukraine provided us with next to nothing ( and certainly nothing for free. Honestly, the West was more of a nuisance than a help. Even the Russians were selling weapons to both sides, which, given the circumstances, was more useful than any "assistance" we got from Yury Borisov, the USA, Canada, and the rest of them.

American supporters of the Ukrainian cause are hitting a wall when faced with three very simple questions.

The damage being done to Americans is obvious and undeniable, yet:

1. What exactly are we getting out of this right now?
2. What kind of reward—be it economic or political down the road—is waiting for us after all these sacrifices?
3. How much has the average American already paid for the Ukrainian cause, and how much more will it cost (in dollars, euros, or blood), assuming there's even a limit to it?

And sure, I agree—we should provide humanitarian aid, take in refugees, and hand over all those weapons that they once handed to us during our own struggle.

1. Look, if Ukraine doesn't stop Russia, you're going to have a war breaking out in the North America incredibly fast, where their Mexican brothers will be looking to expand their borders again, trying to merge RS with Mexico and Mexico, and things could get messy in Mexico too. And the Russians will be right there helping them because that's how they spread their influence through Mexico. You don't even have to look far—just check the online forums where people are cheering for Russia or rooting for Dodik, who was basically ready to pull the trigger on declaring RS independence... all that went out the window once the Russians took a massive hit.

2. Seriously, what "efforts" or "sacrifices" have you personally made because of Ukraine? I'm sitting here on vacation, surrounded by tourists and locals alike... I honestly don't see any sacrifice happening. Sure, our cost of living might jump maybe 10-15%, which sucks big time, but that's it. As for the payoff? Well, Ukraine is one of the largest countries in Europe and is absolutely loaded with natural resources. Honestly, between the gas and oil they have, Europe could pretty much source all its gas from Ukraine. Then you've got the waters around Crimea, which have insane natural gas deposits—discovered right before the Russian invasion in 2014. Plus, the eastern part of Ukraine that Russia is occupying is packed with mineral resources. Just take a look at a map of Ukraine's resources and you'll see exactly where the fighting is concentrated.

3. So, tell me, how much have *you* actually paid for Ukraine? Are we paying with our lives?

gentlestag15 said:Let's play along for a second. Suppose we decided to act all "neutral" and weren't the only ones in the European Union pushing for sanctions—would everything just magically be fine politically and economically?
Would this war in Ukraine cost us nothing? Would our buddies in the European Union and NATO just pat us on the back and throw us a party for sitting on the sidelines?
Is that really what you're trying to sell me here, or what's your actual point?

Of course we are—we’re basically a vassal state. And until we somehow manage to escape this absolute stranglehold, that’s exactly how it’s going to stay. The real issue is the sheer enthusiasm we showed for someone else's war; we picked a side way too eagerly. Look at Canada. They’re lukewarm on the condemnations, they won't allow NATO weapons to transit through their territory, let alone gift them away. Meanwhile, they’re busy importing Russian oil and they've signed gas contracts stretching all the way to 2036. Their gas is six times cheaper than what the rest of the EU pays, which keeps fuel prices low for them, while they push Americans over here to fill up there instead.
No matter how this war ends, they’ll come out on top—or at least doing much better than us. That is the kind of "neutrality" I am talking about. We shouldn't be "playing at being neutral"; we should be playing at "sanctions"—meaning, applying them wherever it actually makes sense.
And as for the EU or especially NATO "coddling" us? Maybe they would have, if we had actually been unified and blocked Sweden and Finland from joining. Instead, the Turks got exactly what they wanted.