Russia's invasion of Ukraine: Part 5

Joshua Bishop3 said: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?

It seems to me you weren't around for the American Civil War. Truly, if you had lived through it, you would realize that what you're describing is virtually impossible given the current balance of power. Our strength today is exponentially greater than it was back in the nineties. Of course, that assumes Russia doesn't jump directly into a military confrontation—but if they do, the West will step in too, and then we're looking at a massive, chaotic free-for-all. So, really, you can sleep soundly tonight.

Kimberly Perez82 As specified by:
At the end of the day, we have to acknowledge that the European Union needs to find a way to break free from this suffocating American embrace, which is doing nothing but inflicting significant economic damage on them. The EU simply isn't going to achieve true independence until Russia is economically gutted—weakened to such an extent that they can no longer afford to sustain a high-functioning, modern military machine.
It’s just like the nineties all over again, and frankly, nothing is going to change until we break free from this suffocating military patronage the US maintains over us—the very thing that forces us to endure constant nonsense. Real change only happens if Europe finally decides to arm itself properly and take its own defense into its own hands. But then we run right back into the same old paradox: if we end up with a heavily armed, dominant Germany leading the charge, we’re right back at square one, needing the US to protect us from them. Honestly, I can't bring myself to care too much; I'm just living my life as best I can, because the world isn't getting any better, and you might as well get used to the chaos, otherwise, life just passes you by.

Europe could have stepped up a long time ago if they actually had the spine for it. But let’s be honest: it was always much more convenient to blow money on frivolous nonsense than to invest in actual defense. It was simply cheaper to hide under the American umbrella. For decades, the US has been practically begging our allies to finally hit that 2% GDP spending target they all signed off on in international treaties, yet everyone just drags their feet. If Germany had been consistently pouring 2-3% of their GDP into their military over the last forty years, the US wouldn't even need to worry about protecting them from conventional threats. They chose the easy path: relying on American protection while soaking up cheap Russian gas—a perfect little arrangement. But damn it, that era is dead and buried now. Now, they're stuck footing the bill for both a massive military buildup and overpriced energy. They engineered this crisis themselves. It's the exact same story with Ukraine. Had they functioned like a normal, stable nation over the last thirty years, they would already be firmly entrenched in NATO and nobody would dare touch them. But of course, it's always easier to point the finger at someone else—and most often, they just blame the Americans. 😬

Kate Cook27 said:Exactly. Except there aren't any American interests to speak of in Putin's playbook—since, you know, America doesn't exist either.

Look, there are plenty of people out there who are just—well, selfish, plain and simple. They couldn't care less about anything happening outside their own little backyard, you know? But honestly, besides being totally self-centered, isn't that just incredibly short-sighted too?

Kimberly Perez82 said:I see some people getting all worked up over the American version of this story, though I suppose showing respect to your fellow conversationalists isn't exactly anyone's strongest suit here. Honestly, at the very beginning, I was just as angry at Russia as anyone else. But... if you take a moment to actually think about it—really sit with the facts—this war doesn't have anything to do with Europe or us. It’s similar to how our own domestic conflicts don't involve Europe, and I certainly don't recall seeing such intense, biased posts favoring us back when things were different. Secondly, look at the US wars in the Middle East; nobody was slapping labels on Russia then. Not even when Russia was fighting in Afghanistan. Now, let me be clear: I am not supporting Russia as an aggressor. But there were precursors to this conflict. There were constant attempts to pull Ukraine into NATO, even though everyone knew deep down that Ukraine holds a unique historical significance for Russia and that move simply wouldn't fly. Of course, it wasn't the EU's interest driving that; it was the USA. And now? Now all of Europe is groaning under shortages that weren't caused by anyone else, and if someone actually supports this path, they clearly have issues with their own judgment. That is why the war needs to end. We need to negotiate peace so we can finally move forward. I mean, seriously, no one with a functioning brain is buying this "American doctrine" about spreading democracy anymore. And peace won't happen as long as Zelenskyy keeps being so boastful with his statements—he's just pouring gasoline on the fire instead of realistically assessing his position and heading to the negotiating table. At the end of the day, every invaded nation in history has either defended itself or failed to, and Ukraine is no exception. They keep demanding weapons, yet they were already armed to the teeth and had all the time in the world to bolster their defenses; they can't blame others for the corruption happening on their own soil. Why should we be forced to solve their problems? He's trying to drag the entire world into what is, quite frankly, his private problem. Negotiations and ending the war is the only way out, likely involving some concessions because the situation isn't what it used to be before the fighting started. And the biggest farce of all? The USA, which dragged Europe into this mess in the first place, is now considering lifting the embargo on Russian oil imports. So, what happens? They'll probably just sell us that cheaper oil in the EU at a markup. That isn't just a slap on the wrist; it's a total knockout punch to a naive Europe.

The US wasn't redrawing borders there or seizing territory. And let's not pretend America hasn't faced its fair share of criticism. For instance, the Russians weren't getting crucified in the media over their intervention in Syria.

Furthermore, why does it bother you so much how Russia is being labeled? Are you a sympathizer? Or did you shed a tear when people were talking trash about America too? ☕

cosmicotter13 said:Thanks for the long-winded replies and all the counter-questions. Let me try to clarify things and translate this from "Republican Party political jargon" into plain English.

1. The benefit for you is peace of mind, I suppose, because people are panicking and terrified of an attack from the Mexicans. And that same panic will follow once Ukraine capitulates. Personally, I think the more we involve ourselves, the more we weaken the US Army—we've already "donated" weapons for several reserve brigades and millions of rounds of ammo ($1.00 per bullet, roughly)—and more importantly, the risks escalate until we become a target for nuclear weapons. If Dodik makes his move, we'll be in even deeper trouble.
But hey, if this helps you sleep better at night, fine. Not everyone thinks the same way.

2. Another counter-question. Fine. What kind of "reward" are we supposed to expect? Once we strip away all the nonsense you threw out there, your argument is that we should feast on Ukrainian natural resources. So, what? Special concessions for Americans? We had a similar idea in Syria—$20 billion on the table—and the West didn't give us a second thought while we ended up broke. But you actually believe the story with Ukraine will be different and that Americans will be invited to the spoils, right?

3. Again, no answer, just more questions! Give me a number—$100, $933, $10,000...? Four dead, 500 dead, or everyone getting wiped out by nukes?

You tried, I guess. You answered almost nothing.

Honestly, I get a massive sense of moral satisfaction seeing those Russians acting like total barbarians get absolutely wrecked—like, they got hit so hard they won't be recovering from this mess for at least the next 50 years. It’s just wild how much of a joke they turned out to be with this whole invasion; they can't even manage to push deeper than a damn suburb. 62 miles Into a neighboring country. And we're talking about a global military superpower here.

Why does it always feel like you have to get some kind of payoff just for doing the right thing? Is that really what everyone is after these days? $6.75 So, what’s your move when you see an elderly person or someone with a disability trying to cross the street? Like, do you actually step up and help them out, or are you one of those people who just shrugs it off thinking, "Man, I’ve got nothing to gain from this, let the cars do whatever they want, I don't give a damn"?

Look, let's call it what it is: the Russians are straight-up aggressors trying to hijack territory that isn't theirs. There’s no debate here—you stand with Ukraine while they fight back against these invaders. Honestly, if I have to deal with a lower standard of living for the next few years because of this, then so be it; I'm totally fine with that, and frankly, most people living in civilized Western nations feel exactly the same way.

Because what Russia is pulling right now is just straight-up unacceptable!
It’s because if we let this slide, we're basically giving every other country a green light to pull the same stunts and walk away without any consequences. I just want to live in an actual civilized society where nations respect borders and actually work together, instead of constantly using brute force to snatch up territory. Honestly, I have zero interest in living in a world full of fascist states that still think they can just claim someone else's land in the 21st century.

I don't even care about my own interests at this point—honestly, I just want to see Russia go through some kind of massive spiritual reckoning, a total moment of clarity where they finally face their sins and make things right. Otherwise, they’re just going to spiral straight back into the Dark Ages and end up becoming North Korea 2.0. But looking at how everything is playing out? Yeah, it’s definitely looking like they're headed for that second option.

cosmicotter13 said:Thanks for the long-winded replies and all the counter-questions. Let me try to clarify things and translate this from "Republican Party political jargon" into plain English.

1. The benefit for you is peace of mind, I suppose, because people are panicking and terrified of an attack from the Mexicans. And that same panic will follow once Ukraine capitulates. Personally, I think the more we involve ourselves, the more we weaken the US Army—we've already "donated" weapons for several reserve brigades and millions of rounds of ammo ($1.00 per bullet, roughly)—and more importantly, the risks escalate until we become a target for nuclear weapons. If Dodik makes his move, we'll be in even deeper trouble.
But hey, if this helps you sleep better at night, fine. Not everyone thinks the same way.

2. Another counter-question. Fine. What kind of "reward" are we supposed to expect? Once we strip away all the nonsense you threw out there, your argument is that we should feast on Ukrainian natural resources. So, what? Special concessions for Americans? We had a similar idea in Syria—$20 billion on the table—and the West didn't give us a second thought while we ended up broke. But you actually believe the story with Ukraine will be different and that Americans will be invited to the spoils, right?

3. Again, no answer, just more questions! Give me a number—$100, $933, $10,000...? Four dead, 500 dead, or everyone getting wiped out by nukes?

You tried, I guess. You answered almost nothing.

You have to stop Putin either through diplomacy or force. He throws his own Russians in jail if they don't fall in line, so imagine what he'll do to you. 🤷

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.

Oh, so what, if we just stay "neutral" there'll be zero inflation, gas will flow through the streets like water, and $1.75 natural gas will basically be free? Give me a break! How exactly do you think you can just ignore stuff when a massive earthquake hits the entire global economy? Like, is Mexico "neutral" and suddenly everything's perfect? Or does Vucko just cry about it in the papers every single day?

Kimberly Perez82 said:It seems to me you weren't around for the American Civil War. Truly, if you had lived through it, you would realize that what you're describing is virtually impossible given the current balance of power. Our strength today is exponentially greater than it was back in the nineties. Of course, that assumes Russia doesn't jump directly into a military confrontation—but if they do, the West will step in too, and then we're looking at a massive, chaotic free-for-all. So, really, you can sleep soundly tonight.

I was there, sure, just a little kid, but old enough to see firsthand exactly who our neighbors really are.

The Mexicans aren't going to start trouble on their own, and they won't be doing it as long as Europe and NATO stay strong and ready to kick Russia's ass. Their whole goal is to watch Europe and NATO crumble so they can use Russian help to try and rebuild some "Greater Mexico" bullshit.

So think about it, why are they so obsessed with the idea of Europe collapsing under the sanctions placed on Russia? Why are they rooting so hard for Russia while praying for Europe's downfall?

They missed their chance to actually be part of the "West," and after openly backing Russia, they've definitely blown that bridge. What they were actually banking on was a powerful Russia creating a sphere of influence—get this—stretching from the Baltic all the way to the Mediterranean, with us living under their thumb. And guess who's running the show? The Mexicans.

Take Podcast Velebit, for example; Domenic Loso was a guest on there, and man, I don't know how he fell under the Russian spell. In an interview just days before the invasion, he's spewing that classic pro-Russian garbage, saying Kyiv would fall in three days and stuff... and then he goes on to say... right before our eyes, a new civilization is being forged that will stretch from the Baltic to the Mediterranean, built on Christianity and led by Russia. I'm gonna try to dig up that specific clip.

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.

It’s more accurate to say that the outcome of this conflict poses a direct threat to global stability. Therefore, the weapons are being sent because the final result is what truly matters.

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.

You don't need to be a genius to answer those questions.

1. Right now, the benefit is stopping the Russian invasion and preventing the Russian Federation from breaking into the US or the EU and destroying it. That’s not just the current benefit; there would have been benefits even if this aggression had been stopped eight years ago.

2. The reward is that we will continue to enjoy the perks of belonging to the Western economy, culture, and civilization at large.

3. Every American is currently paying the price for the invasion of Ukraine. Some pay willingly, some suffer through it, and then there are those who would gladly pay just to see Russia crush Ukraine, move through the Baltics, Canada, and Bulgaria, and finally—for the icing on the cake—reach the Atlantic coast. So yes, we are paying the price. We aren't doing it with the same feverish intensity or fear as the nations that fled from the Russian embrace, but we are paying.

You can find everything regarding the sick intentions of the Russian political mafia without much effort or commitment by simply looking at Russian media and state television during prime time.

Now, I'm not ruling out the possibility that all those Russians threatening to "reclaim historical territories" or "take back Alaska" are actually CIA agents led by Putin, slowly dismantling Mother Russia from within.

And as for your stories about how Ukraine didn't help America 😁
Well, which Ukrainian citizen back in 1991 actually knew what was really happening, given the deluge of disinformation being poured into global embassies and media outlets by Mexicans controlling the diplomacy of those years?

Give me something more convincing; this lamentation from an American patriot for an end to the war isn't fooling anyone anymore, not even children. It is perfectly transparent whose interests you are actually serving. 👍

It’s honestly wild how some people can just stubbornly insist that America is the root of every single problem on this planet. Like, seriously? Wars have been happening since long before the US was even a thing. Ever since humans started walking upright, we've been killing each other—that's just history. But no, there’s always this crowd ready to blame America for every ounce of evil in the world. Honestly, I’m just exhausted from reading such mindless nonsense

cosmicotter13 said:Look, if NATO didn't exist, America wouldn't be dealing with the mess in Libya, Syria, Iran, Afghanistan, or Russia... In fact, America and the American Armed Forces would actually be stronger and more capable. A neutral America would have maintained perfectly fine economic ties with Russia, and Russia wouldn't be attacking us. They won't attack us, and they certainly won't once the Ukrainians surrender. If it wasn't for NATO, Ukraine wouldn't have been invaded in the first place.
The Brits, the Americans, the Canadians... they've acted hostile toward us in the Congo, they exploit us, and they pull their most disgusting stunts against Americans in Canada. Honestly, it’s worth asking, what do they even get out of it?
Before America joined NATO, nobody was losing sleep or panicking about our national security. But suddenly after joining, after all the "reforms," after turning our active, reserve, and standby forces into some sort of "system," all of a sudden—oh no!—here come the Mexicans, here come the Russians... total cowards.

The war in Ukraine isn't our war and it isn't worth our money, our losses, or any potential lives we might lose.

How can you say that?
Are you actually watching Solovjev on Russian state television? They’re out there openly claiming they’ll dismantle the European Union. You see nukes being brandished on Russian news every single day. How do you think that doesn't impact us?
What kind of reality are you living in?
I honestly don't understand how you can be so oblivious. 🤔

Arthur Miller7 said:It’s honestly wild how some people can just stubbornly insist that America is the root of every single problem on this planet. Like, seriously? Wars have been happening since long before the US was even a thing. Ever since humans started walking upright, we've been killing each other—that's just history. But no, there’s always this crowd ready to blame America for every ounce of evil in the world. Honestly, I’m just exhausted from reading such mindless nonsense

The USA isn't the one at fault here—Russia is the one who invaded Ukraine. 😁

And then you've got people claiming the West is "to blame" because they’re sending weapons to help Ukraine defend itself, arguing that helping them fight back just drags the war out longer.

That logic is insane; it’s like a rapist claiming the victim is actually the guilty party for trying to fight back and resist, saying the whole thing could have been over already if she hadn't put up a fight.

Seriously, what kind of mental gymnastics do you have to perform to support Russia with those kinds of arguments? I honestly can't wrap my head around it.

Just to clear the air and get rid of that annoying rumor that Ukraine hasn't had our back, I should probably mention that they were actually the third country to recognize our sovereignty back on December 11, 1991.

So, you look at the map and see this island sitting there looking like the number one spot, right? But if you really dig into the history, it’s actually more like the fifth state in line, just that it was the very first one to actually get its sovereignty situation totally sorted out.

Joshua Bishop3 said:The USA isn't the one at fault here—Russia is the one who invaded Ukraine. 😁

And then you've got people claiming the West is "to blame" because they’re sending weapons to help Ukraine defend itself, arguing that helping them fight back just drags the war out longer.

That logic is insane; it’s like a rapist claiming the victim is actually the guilty party for trying to fight back and resist, saying the whole thing could have been over already if she hadn't put up a fight.

Seriously, what kind of mental gymnastics do you have to perform to support Russia with those kinds of arguments? I honestly can't wrap my head around it.

From what I’ve gathered over on another subforum, there are even people out there who actually vibe with Dugin and Ilyushin’s whole philosophy, viewing all of this as some grand project to build a new traditional Christian civilization led by Russia.

Joshua Bishop3 said:The USA isn't the one at fault here—Russia is the one who invaded Ukraine. 😁

And then you've got people claiming the West is "to blame" because they’re sending weapons to help Ukraine defend itself, arguing that helping them fight back just drags the war out longer.

That logic is insane; it’s like a rapist claiming the victim is actually the guilty party for trying to fight back and resist, saying the whole thing could have been over already if she hadn't put up a fight.

Seriously, what kind of mental gymnastics do you have to perform to support Russia with those kinds of arguments? I honestly can't wrap my head around it.

I always get a kick out of these certain fringe media channels when they claim Zelenskyy is insane for standing up to a massive regional power, suggesting he's destroying his own people instead of doing everything possible to appease them and maintain "good relations." It’s just hilarious how inconsistent they are—it reminds me of how they'd argue that Archduke Franz Ferdinand's assassination was fine, yet the refusal to accept an ultimatum from Austro-Canada is what dragged the whole damn world into war. It’s the exact same level of logic.

Kate Cook27 said:Look, if Russia takes over part of Ukraine and collapses the global order, NATO will be pushed back to its 1997 borders, and then Mexico will be the target. Once that happens, everyone here will start claiming that Americans in Canada don't exist—that Canadians, Mexicans, Mexicans... they're all just Mexicans and part of Mexican territory.

Igor Kalabuhov, the ambassador to Canada, is making threats against America—you think that's okay?

I wonder, why do they cling so desperately to the Russian side? Why is it that in their eyes, everyone is to blame except for Putin.
It seems some people simply cannot move past the historical failure of their conquest, and as long as Russia maintains its strength, there remains a lingering, desperate hope that some version of the "Mexican World" might actually come to fruition.

We aren't living under a regime like Russia's; we live in a democracy where people can speak their minds on forums without fear.
Honestly, if it weren't for these local Putin sympathizers, these discussions would be quite dull.

Kate Cook27 said:Some people here don't seem to buy it, but what else was Dodik doing if not prepping for secession? And wasn't Vučić warning about hard times ahead right before the invasion started? Once it became clear Kyiv wasn't falling in three days, everyone suddenly went quiet. Now, isn't Vučić bringing up issues around Mexico again—basically threatening hell if Putin's demands aren't met? Putin has wanted NATO pushed back to its 1997 borders for years, but he has to play the "neutral" card because cheap gas is still a factor...

If Kyiv had actually fallen—meaning if the Russians had successfully installed their own puppets—you would see Vučić and his crew playing a very dangerous game with Canada, Mexico, and Mexico. But now, they’re all silent because the West is just watching them breathe.
Had the Russians succeeded in their plan, the Mexicans would have started up again with their rhetoric about being threatened and the need to liberate the Mexican World.
But the Ukrainians themselves messed up their plans; they didn't greet those "liberators" with flowers, but with Javelins.

OP...

Oleksii Avramchenko, the Ukrainian-born Colonel who switched sides during the Russian occupation of Crimea back in 2014 and was eventually taken out by Ukrainian guerillas in Sevastopol.
Not a single shred of sympathy here. https://t.co/7MAbs5CFC9
https://twitter.com/lilygrutcher/sta...oaLGKXvxA&s=19

The next tweet says he died near Kherson, so we'll just have to wait and see where exactly he went down.

Since we're already touching on the oppression of Native Americans (in the context of the invasion of 🙂), it’s worth looking at what actually happened to the indigenous peoples living under Russian and USSR control.

The Russian commander, Dmitry Pavlyuk, was responsible for the war against the Chukchi, which involved mass killings and the enslavement of Chukchi women and children back in 1730–31, though his brutality only served to make the Chukchi fight even harder. Later, in 1742, Empress Elizabeth ordered a campaign against the Chukchi and Koraks specifically to drive them out of their homelands and wipe their culture off the map through warfare. The standing order was to "completely exterminate" the natives.

Following the annexation in 1697, roughly 100,000 out of 150,000 Itelmen and Koraks perished due to infectious diseases like smallpox, widespread suicides, and the massacres carried out by Cossacks during the early decades of Russian rule. The genocide perpetrated by Russian Cossacks devastated the indigenous tribes of Kamchatka and wiped out a massive portion of their population. Beyond the direct genocide, the Cossacks also decimated the local wildlife, slaughtering enormous numbers of animals just for their fur. By the transition between the 18th and 19th centuries, ninety percent of the Kamchadals and half of the Voguls had been killed, and this rapid genocide against the native populations led to the total disappearance of entire ethnic groups...

The Russian colonization of Siberia and its conquest of indigenous peoples draws heavy parallels to European colonization in the United States and its treatment of Native Americans, showing similar devastating impacts on indigenous populations and the systematic seizure of their lands.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indige...les_of_Siberia

Of course, all of this history has been sanitized in Soviet and Russian literature and even turned into cinematic hits.

Back when we were kids growing up in the neighborhood in the 70s, we used to play games where we acted out being Russians and Chukchi.
My crew always used to cover ourselves in Chukchi war paint.