What Offense Did the Ukrainian People Commit That Caused Them to Be Bombed into Oblivion by The Russian Military at the Command of Putin?

[Lesh]

So Russia is pristine and blameless?

Are you forgetting who Putin is and all that he’s done?

 

[TruthNotBS]

It just strikes me as odd that the corrupt politicians are whining about the constitution not being followed to the letter.

I don’t know what planet you’re on, but starting a war causing the deaths of many thousands of people is far from “the right thing”.

Don't orchestrate coups on Russia's doorstep or deploy NATO, a Cold War dinosaur in Eastern Europe. The US wouldn't allow Russia to deploy its military in Mexico or Canada, it's called the "Monroe Doctrine", read about it. The US government will never allow a foreign power, to deploy its military assets in the Western Hemisphere. Our response to those who whine about that is "Too Bad", they can gripe and bark all they want. We just take out our violin and start playing, while they're complaining. We don't give a fuck. Russia doesn't give a fuck either. No NATO in Ukraine, don't like it? Too bad, listen to the violin.

You (yes assholes that "think" like you), took advantage of Russia when it was weak and vulnerable after the collapse of the USSR, expanding NATO into Eastern Europe. and Putin a strong leader, who saved Russia from the catastrophic looting and economic rape it suffered in the 1990s at the hands of wealthy capitalist jackals, drew the red line for Russia, in Ukraine, informing the US and EU that NATO will not turn Ukraine into a military base and launching pad. Ukraine is the last straw and you didn't listen. So now suffer the consequences of your heedless, stupid NATO expansionist policies.

 

[TruthNotBS]

So Russia is pristine and blameless?

Are you forgetting who Putin is and all that he’s done?

Enlighten us.

 

[Lesh]

Enlighten us.

Invaded Chechnya twice. Invaded Georgia, Crimea, and Ukraine.

Cyber attacks on Estonia

Tried to asasinate the President of Ukraine

Used weapons of mass destruction to carry out assassination attempts in Britain twice

Interfered with our elections several times

Putin scrambled the Russian election system in order to maintain power for going on 30 years

Killed and jailed dissidents and opponents and writers

 

[TruthNotBS]

Invaded Chechnya twice. Invaded Georgia, Crimea, and Ukraine.

Cyber attacks on Estonia

Tried to asasinate the President of Ukraine

Used weapons of mass destruction to carry out assassination attempts in Britain twice

Interfered with our elections several times

Putin scrambled the Russian election system in order to maintain power for going on 30 years

Killed and jailed dissidents and opponents and writers

Let’s examine Leshe’s claims point by point:

1. Chechnya: The Chechen wars were internal conflicts within Russia’s own borders. The first war in 1994-1996 was about stopping Chechnya’s attempted secession from Russia, and the second in 1999 was to deal with Islamic militants and separatists who had turned the region into a hotbed of terrorism. This wasn’t about imperialism, this was about maintaining territorial integrity, something every country would do if a region tried to break away violently.
2. Georgia: The 2008 Russo-Georgian War was initiated when Georgia’s president Mikheil Saakashvili launched an offensive against the breakaway region of South Ossetia, which had a significant Russian-speaking population. Russia intervened to protect these people and maintain the peacekeeping agreements in place since the 1990s. The EU-commissioned Tagliavini Report even admitted that Georgia fired the first shot, making the claim of Russian aggression more complex.
3. Crimea: Crimea held a referendum in 2014 after the Western-backed coup in Kyiv, with the majority of the population voting to join Russia. This wasn’t an “invasion”, it was a case of self-determination, where Crimeans overwhelmingly chose to reunite with Russia. It’s the same principle the West applied to Kosovo, but I guess it’s only "self-determination" when it suits NATO.
4. Cyber Attacks on Estonia: This claim is based on the 2007 Estonian cyber attack, which has never been definitively proven to be a Russian state action. It’s speculation, often exaggerated without concrete evidence. Estonia blamed Russia, but cybersecurity experts have never reached a firm conclusion on state involvement.
5. Assassination Attempts on Ukraine's President: There’s no credible evidence of Russia attempting to assassinate Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy before the war or any other president. These kinds of claims are often inflated by sensationalist media and war propaganda with no actual proof to back them up.
6. Assassinations in Britain with Weapons of Mass Destruction: Referring to the Skripal poisoning (and Litvinenko before that), it’s important to note that the evidence of direct Kremlin involvement is still circumstantial at best. The Novichok case has raised more questions than answers, and much of the media coverage has relied on political posturing rather than verified facts. Without definitive proof, it’s reckless to simply claim "Russia did it" every time.
7. Election Interference: This is another overhyped claim. The Mueller Report couldn’t find evidence of direct collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign. The so-called "Russian interference" in U.S. elections has largely been about a few trolls on social media. Meanwhile, the U.S. has interfered in elections all over the world for decades—Ukraine in 2014, Latin America, the Middle East—the list goes on. So let’s not pretend the U.S. is innocent when it comes to election meddling.
8. Putin Scrambled the Election System: Putin has won multiple elections in Russia, and yes, his tenure has been long, but let's not forget Angela Merkel was in power for 16 years, and nobody screamed about dictatorship. Russia has its own political system, and Putin remains popular in the country. To suggest he’s clinging to power with no public support is just wishful thinking from the West. Saudi Arabia has a ryrant king and yet the US still tries to maintain good relations with that non-democratic government. So why should Russia adopt Jeffersonian democracy before we can peacefully co-exist with it? The US even supports right-wing genocidal, apartheid states like Israel. So, that says it all.
9. Killing and Jailing Dissidents: Every country has its dissidents and controversies. The U.S. jails whistleblowers, uses drones to kill alleged terrorists (and plenty of civilians), and has a long list of questionable actions when it comes to political opposition. Is Russia tough on opposition? Sure, but this narrative of Russia as the only country that silences dissent is laughable when you look at the Western hypocrisy in handling protests, censorship, and political crackdowns.

Leshe’s points are just a regurgitation of Western propaganda, completely ignoring context, hypocrisy, and the fact that Russia is far from the only country with a controversial record. The West plays by the same rules, it just likes to pretend otherwise.

 

[g5000]

As I understand it, it was because Ukraine was making a bid to join NATO. On the one hand it’s a legitimate concern for Russia to have NATO at their back door but on the other, it’s hardly justification for starting a war.

There may be more to it than that but as I said, it’s my understanding of the situation.

And now Putin has two new NATO members on his doorstep!

Putin's motive is simple. He's trying to reconstitute the USSR.

 

[g5000]

Anton, you’re claiming Russia's actions forced Ukraine into NATO's arms? Let’s look at the facts.

The idea that Ukraine only turned to NATO after Russia’s actions in 2014 or 2022 is complete revisionist history. Ukraine had been actively seeking to join NATO long before the full-scale Russian invasion in 2022. This wasn’t some sudden reaction to "Russian aggression", it was part of a long-standing strategy by Kyiv to align itself with NATO and the West, which only further provoked tensions with Russia.

1. NATO Aspiration since 2008: Let’s not forget that back in 2008, Ukraine formally expressed its desire to join NATO during the Bucharest Summit. NATO even issued a statement saying that Ukraine would eventually become a member. This wasn’t some last-minute idea.
2. Closer Military Cooperation: Between 2014 and 2022, Ukraine intensified its military cooperation with NATO. There were joint military exercises, arms supplies, and increasing integration of Ukraine's military into NATO standards. Kyiv signed deals and agreements that moved it closer and closer to NATO, all while NATO forces trained Ukrainian soldiers and strengthened their military capacity.
3. Constitutional Change in 2019: In 2019, Ukraine amended its constitution to include the goal of NATO membership. This wasn’t a reaction to some recent threat, this was Ukraine openly stating its intention to join NATO, despite knowing it would further inflame tensions with Russia.

Ukraine is a sovereign nation, dipshit. If they want to join NATO, they are entitled to join NATO.

And who can blame them since Putin invaded Georgia and Ossetia.

Who can blame them when Putin had their 2004 presidential candidate poisoned with dioxin.

You want to talk about constitutional changes? Putin has been in power for 25 years, and he had the Russian constitution changed so he could be dictator for life, asshole.

Apparently you need an education about Putin.

25 years. Think about that, quisling.

Anyone who speaks out against Putin ends up poisoned or dead or imprisoned. They have a bad habit of falling out of windows or off boats.

Putin sold off pieces of the Russian economy to thieves with the requirement he get a piece of the action. This corruption has made him the wealthiest person on Earth.

WE ARE NOW ON THE BRINK OF FIGHTING WW3, PERHAPS EVEN A NUCLEAR WAR WITH RUSSIA DUE TO ASSHOLE IMPERIALISTS LIKE YOU.

Oh, wow.

Wow wow wow.

Putin is the imperialist, you stupid stupid stupid fuck.

Are you being paid by the FSB?

You sound EXACTLY like the limp-wristed commie faggots during the Reagan administration who said Reagan was going to start WWIII when he put MX missiles in Europe.

Useful idiot. You are a useful idiot.

When it comes to strongmen, the kind Trump fellates with gusto, the only thing they understand is strength. Not some pussy marxist like you.

 

[TruthNotBS]

Ukraine is a sovereign nation, dipshit. If they want to join NATO, they are entitled to join NATO.

And who can blame them since Putin invaded Georgia and Ossetia.

Who can blame them when Putin had their 2004 presidential candidate poisoned with dioxin.

You want to talk about constitutional changes? Putin has been in power for 25 years, and he had the Russian constitution changed so he could be dictator for life, asshole.

Apparently you need an education about Putin.

25 years. Think about that, quisling.

Anyone who speaks out against Putin ends up poisoned or dead or imprisoned. They have a bad habit of falling out of windows or off boats.

Putin sold off pieces of the Russian economy to thieves with the requirement he get a piece of the action. This corruption has made him the wealthiest person on Earth.




Oh, wow.

Wow wow wow.

Putin is the imperialist, you stupid stupid stupid fuck.

Are you being paid by the FSB?

You sound EXACTLY like the limp-wristed commie faggots during the Reagan administration who said Reagan was going to start WWIII when he put MX missiles in Europe.

Useful idiot. You are a useful idiot.

When it comes to strongmen, the kind Trump fellates with gusto, the only thing they understand is strength. Not some pussy marxist like you.

Ukraine joining NATO isn’t just about Ukraine’s sovereignty, it's about Russia’s security. The idea that NATO can creep closer and closer to Russia’s borders and Russia should just “accept it” is laughable. Would the U.S. sit back and relax if Russia started setting up military bases in Mexico or Canada? Absolutely not. You want to bring up Ukraine’s “right” to join NATO, but that’s ignoring the fact that NATO’s very purpose has always been to contain and threaten Russia. Russia has red lines, just like the U.S. has its Monroe Doctrine and Ukraine crossing them by joining NATO is an existential threat. It's not about some “dipshit” idea of sovereignty; it’s about geopolitics and survival.

As for your nonsense about Putin invading Georgia and Ossetia, let’s set the record straight. In 2008, Georgia launched an offensive against South Ossetia, a region with a Russian-speaking population that had been under Russian protection. Russia didn’t just invade out of nowhere; they intervened after Georgia attacked civilians. The EU report confirmed that Georgia fired the first shot, but of course, you conveniently leave that part out. As for Ossetia, it’s another example of Russia protecting its people from Western-backed aggression.

Now, this whole conspiracy about dioxin poisoning in 2004? That’s just another unproven Western propaganda piece that’s been debunked over and over. No actual evidence ties Putin or the Russian government to the Yushchenko poisoning. But the West loves a good “evil Russian” story, so it gets repeated as fact despite a total lack of proof. But sure, let’s ignore all the false flag operations the U.S. and its allies have pulled to justify their wars and coups around the world.

You want to talk about constitutional changes? Let’s take a look at the U.S. system. You’ve got politicians like Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell who have been in power for decades, backed by an oligarchy of corporate interests that own Washington. Putin changing the constitution? That’s nothing new in global politics, and he’s still popular in Russia. And don’t forget that Angela Merkel ruled Germany for 16 years, and nobody accused her of being a dictator. But when Putin maintains stability in Russia, oh, suddenly it’s a crime.

As for your tired line about dissidents “falling out of windows,” this is nothing more than a tired Western narrative. The U.S. locks up whistleblowers like Edward Snowden and Julian Assange, and let’s not forget the extrajudicial drone strikes that kill civilians every day. You think the U.S. doesn’t silence its critics? Get real. When you criticize Putin for jailing the opposition, maybe take a look at how the West censors independent media and cracks down on dissent when it’s politically inconvenient.

And about Putin being the “wealthiest person on Earth,” where’s your proof? Oh, right—just more unsubstantiated rumors pushed by the same media that sold us WMDs in Iraq. The real thieves are in Wall Street and Silicon Valley, with oligarchs in the U.S. getting even richer while the working class struggles to get by. If you’re worried about corruption, maybe start at home where corporate lobbying runs the show and democracy is for sale to the highest bidder.

Finally, let’s address the most ridiculous claim: Putin as an “imperialist.” Really? Putin is defending Russia’s sphere of influence from NATO encroachment. Meanwhile, the U.S. has been running an empire of 700+ military bases across the globe, waging war in countries like Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and more. The U.S. meddles in elections, orchestrates coups, funds death squads, and backs dictatorships from Saudi Arabia to Israel.

 

[TruthNotBS]

And now Putin has two new NATO members on his doorstep!

Putin's motive is simple. He's trying to reconstitute the USSR.

Putin isn't a communist you idiot.

 

[g5000]

Let’s examine Leshe’s claims point by point:

1. Crimea: Crimea held a referendum in 2014 after the Western-backed coup in Kyiv, with the majority of the population voting to join Russia. This wasn’t an “invasion”, it was a case of self-determination, where Crimeans overwhelmingly chose to reunite with Russia. It’s the same principle the West applied to Kosovo, but I guess it’s only "self-determination" when it suits NATO.

What a sack of bullshit. This is the exact same rationale Hitler used to invade the Sudetenland. And once he got away with invading Sudetenland, he invaded and captured the rest of Czechoslavkia.

Sound familar?

1. 
   
2. Cyber Attacks on Estonia: This claim is based on the 2007 Estonian cyber attack, which has never been definitively proven to be a Russian state action. It’s speculation, often exaggerated without concrete evidence. Estonia blamed Russia, but cybersecurity experts have never reached a firm conclusion on state involvement.
3. Assassination Attempts on Ukraine's President: There’s no credible evidence of Russia attempting to assassinate Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy before the war or any other president.

Wrong. Putin poisoned Yushchenko with dioxin. Fortunately, Yushchenko survived and went on to win the presidency. How do you think that made Ukrainians feel toward Russia after that?

1. These kinds of claims are often inflated by sensationalist media and war propaganda with no actual proof to back them up.
2. Assassinations in Britain with Weapons of Mass Destruction: Referring to the Skripal poisoning (and Litvinenko before that), it’s important to note that the evidence of direct Kremlin involvement is still circumstantial at best. The Novichok case has raised more questions than answers, and much of the media coverage has relied on political posturing rather than verified facts. Without definitive proof, it’s reckless to simply claim "Russia did it" every time.

It is not reckless at all. It is OBVIOUS.

1. Election Interference: This is another overhyped claim. The Mueller Report couldn’t find evidence of direct collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign.

You clearly didn't read the report. Members of Trump's campaign fed internal polling data to Russia. You are parroting a lie.

What's more Trump Jr. attempted to collude, but he was too stupid to pull it off.

The Thursday before the meeting with the Russians, Trump Sr. said he was going to hold a very important press conference the following Monday with some dirt on Hillary Clinton.

When Junior fucked up and didn't get that dirt, Senior never held that press conference.

It's obvious Trump Sr. was in the loop about the collusion meeting.

Traitor Trump Jr. promised the Russians his dad would weaken or cancel the sanctions under the Magnitsky Act.

You know who Magnitsky was?

He was a lawyer who tried to expose the corruption in the Putin regime, and for his trouble Putin had him beaten and tortured for A YEAR and then killed. The US responded with sanctions against corrupt Russians.

Trump was going to "review' those sanctions in exchange for dirt on Hillary Clinton.

1. Putin Scrambled the Election System: Putin has won multiple elections in Russia,

Because he does not allow anyone to opposed him, asshole.

1. and yes, his tenure has been long, but let's not forget Angela Merkel was in power for 16 years, and nobody screamed about dictatorship.

Merkel was re-elected in free and fair elections.

Big difference, comrade.

1. Killing and Jailing Dissidents: Every country has its dissidents and controversies. The U.S. jails whistleblowers, uses drones to kill alleged terrorists (and plenty of civilians), and has a long list of questionable actions when it comes to political opposition. Is Russia tough on opposition? Sure, but this narrative of Russia as the only country that silences dissent is laughable when you look at the Western hypocrisy in handling protests, censorship, and political crackdowns.

See? You are just like the Blame America First commie symps of the 70s and 80s.

Exactly like them.

Are you posting from an office that has the Russian federation flag out front?

 

[ESay]

And who can blame them since Putin invaded Georgia and Ossetia

He did so when your puppet Saakashvili began bombing Tshinvali.

Who can blame them when Putin had their 2004 presidential candidate poisoned with dioxin

Yushchenko was the president for 5 years; his close ally and friend Poroshenko was for another 5 years. Where the results of investigation, where the guilty ones, how did the poison get to the food?

You want to talk about constitutional changes? Putin has been in power for 25 years, and he had the Russian constitution changed so he could be dictator for life, asshole.

Apparently you need an education about Putin.

25 years. Think about that, quisling

Your government supported dictators in the Middle East and Latin America for decades. You are nowhere near to talk about dictators.

 

[ESay]

He's suffering from a bad case of cognitive dissonance.

Definitely.

 

[g5000]

It's a simple fact KBG Putin is a mass murdering war criminal. He does not discriminate between civilians and soldiers. He executes POWs. He has kidnapped thousands of Ukrainian children and brought them to Russia to be indoctrinated and brainwashed as Russians. Many of those children have been raped by Russian soldiers.

He now has two more formidable NATO countries on his border. Using the illogic of his apologists, is he going to invade Finland and Sweden, too?

It makes me sick to see little marxist wannabe's excusing Putin's imperialist war.

 

[TruthNotBS]

What a sack of bullshit. This is the exact same rationale Hitler used to invade the Sudetenland. And once he got away with invading Sudetenland, he invaded and captured the rest of Czechoslavkia.

Sound familar?



Wrong. Putin poisoned Yushchenko with dioxin. Fortunately, Yushchenko survived and went on to win the presidency. How do you think that made Ukrainians feel toward Russia after that?



It is not reckless at all. It is OBVIOUS.



You clearly didn't read the report. Members of Trump's campaign fed internal polling data to Russia. You are parroting a lie.

What's more Trump Jr. attempted to collude, but he was too stupid to pull it off.

The Thursday before the meeting with the Russians, Trump Sr. said he was going to hold a very important press conference the following Monday with some dirt on Hillary Clinton.

When Junior fucked up and didn't get that dirt, Senior never held that press conference.

It's obvious Trump Sr. was in the loop about the collusion meeting.

Traitor Trump Jr. promised the Russians his dad would weaken or cancel the sanctions under the Magnitsky Act.

You know who Magnitsky was?

He was a lawyer who tried to expose the corruption in the Putin regime, and for his trouble Putin had him beaten and tortured for A YEAR and then killed. The US responded with sanctions against corrupt Russians.

Trump was going to "review' those sanctions in exchange for dirt on Hillary Clinton.



Because he does not allow anyone to opposed him, asshole.



Merkel was re-elected in free and fair elections.

Big difference, comrade.



See? You are just like the Blame America First commie symps of the 70s and 80s.

Exactly like them.

Are you posting from an office that has the Russian federation flag out front?

G5000's:
“This is the exact same rationale Hitler used to invade the Sudetenland. And once he got away with invading Sudetenland, he invaded and captured the rest of Czechoslovakia. Sound familiar?”

No, this comparison is ridiculous and historically ignorant. The Sudetenland was part of a territorial grab by Hitler, rooted in an expansionist ideology aimed at creating a Greater Germany. What’s happening in Ukraine and Crimea is entirely different. In Crimea, the population voted in a referendum to join Russia after the 2014 coup in Ukraine, and the situation in Donbas is the result of civil war and a Western-backed Ukrainian government attacking its own Russian-speaking population.

---

G5000's:
“Wrong. Putin poisoned Yushchenko with dioxin. Fortunately, Yushchenko survived and went on to win the presidency. How do you think that made Ukrainians feel toward Russia after that?”

This response doesn’t even address your Estonia point, it’s a blatant deflection. As for the Yushchenko poisoning, there’s no definitive proof that Putin or the Kremlin were behind it. This claim has been peddled by the media, but like many of these "blame Russia" stories, it’s based more on speculation than hard evidence. Ukraine’s own investigative committees could never conclusively link the poisoning to Russia. So, trying to use this as a rhetorical tool to demonize Russia is intellectually dishonest.


G5000's response:
“It is not reckless at all. It is OBVIOUS.”

“Obvious”? That’s a non-argument. Saying something is “obvious” doesn’t make it true. In the case of the Skripal poisoning, the evidence remains circumstantial at best, and the same applies to Litvinenko. Much of what the West calls “proof” is based on political motives, not concrete forensic evidence. Russia “obviously” did it is not an argument, it’s a lazy cop-out that avoids discussing the facts.

G5000's response:
“You clearly didn't read the report. Members of Trump's campaign fed internal polling data to Russia. You are parroting a lie.”

The Mueller Report itself couldn’t establish a criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia. The “collusion” narrative was pushed hard in the media, but the final findings were inconclusive at best. Sure, there were some shady meetings, but no one from the Trump campaign was charged with colluding with Russia. Feeding polling data is shady, but it’s not some grand conspiracy. And let’s not forget that the U.S. meddles in elections worldwide, so the outrage over Russia’s alleged interference is hypocrisy at its finest.

---

G5000's:
“Because he does not allow anyone to oppose him, asshole.”

Putin is popular in Russia because he restored order after the chaos of the 1990s, when Western-backed oligarchs nearly destroyed the country. It’s easy to say he “scrambled” the election system, but Russia’s political system is no more manipulated than Western democracies, where corporate interests and lobbyists run the show. The opposition in Russia isn’t imprisoned en masse—they just don’t get the votes. The West acts like Russia’s elections are a sham, but let’s talk about the two-party system in the U.S., where voters are constantly given a “lesser of two evils” choice.



G5000's response:
“Merkel was re-elected in free and fair elections. Big difference, comrade.”

Merkel was in power for 16 years because of Germany’s political system, and no one accused her of being a dictator because she played by the Western rules. Putin’s extended tenure is based on Russia’s political realities, and while Western media loves to paint his elections as fraudulent, the fact is, he remains genuinely popular in Russia. Russia’s system allows for longer terms, so what? The West prefers to ignore that Putin’s governance brought stability after the oligarch-driven chaos of the 1990s.

Does the US government only maintain relations with democracies? Be careful how you answer that question. Think.



G5000's response:
“See? You are just like the Blame America First commie symps of the 70s and 80s. Exactly like them. Are you posting from an office that has the Russian federation flag out front?”


Nice try, but throwing out the old “Blame America First” insult doesn’t refute the point. The U.S. does silence dissent. Edward Snowden lives in exile, and Julian Assange was up to recently rotting in a prison for exposing U.S. war crimes. When the U.S. claims to be a beacon of free speech, yet jails whistleblowers, censors independent media, and crushes protests with militarized police, the hypocrisy is crystal clear. Russia is tough on opposition, but so are Western governments when their interests are threatened. The idea that the West is a pure defender of free speech is laughable when it’s obvious they silence voices inconvenient to their agendas.

Does the United States only maintain good relations with governments that aren't tough on dissidents or never crack down on them? Think before you answer that question.

---

Your emotional arguments, name-calling, and shallow historical comparisons without providing any solid facts, amount to nothing. Poop. You just deflect with tired propaganda and ad hominem attacks. It’s clear that they’re not engaging with your points but instead parroting mainstream narratives without substance.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

If Russia has always been one of the Allies during both WWI & WWII when and how did they end up at odds with the United States? All I can remember from grade school when first learning about Russia is that they were the "bad guys" in the scenario because they were communist, practiced "propaganda", and that most of the people were poor, miserable and cold and had to stand in bread lines.

I know that's pathetic but that's what I remember from what was probably 4th grade history.

Because Stalin was a bad guy too and Socialism and Capitalism were at odds

 

[ESay]

He now has two more formidable NATO countries on his border. Using the illogic of his apologists, is he going to invade Finland and Sweden, too

No. Sweden and Finland were stupid enough to scrap their decades long (or even centuries long, in case of Sweden) neutrality and became tools of American expansionist policy.

 

[g5000]

G5000's:
“This is the exact same rationale Hitler used to invade the Sudetenland. And once he got away with invading Sudetenland, he invaded and captured the rest of Czechoslovakia. Sound familiar?”

No, this comparison is ridiculous and historically ignorant. The Sudetenland was part of a territorial grab by Hitler, rooted in an expansionist ideology aimed at creating a Greater Germany.

Exactly.

Just like Putin is doing now, comrade BS.

What’s happening in Ukraine and Crimea is entirely different. In Crimea, the population voted in a referendum to join Russia

Only after they were invaded, dipshit.

Just like Sudetenland.

after the 2014 coup in Ukraine,

There was no coup.

Well, there was a kind of coup. By a Russian puppet, and the Ukrainian people rose up and ran his ass off to Russia and Putin's arms where he belonged.


Look, if you are so madly in love with a dictator who has held an iron grip on power for a quarter of a century, that's your business. You clearly hate America, so you should go back home to your FSB office in Moscow where you came from.

 

[AntonToo]

Anton, you’re claiming Russia's actions forced Ukraine into NATO's arms? Let’s look at the facts.

The idea that Ukraine only turned to NATO after Russia’s actions in 2014 or 2022 is complete revisionist history. Ukraine had been actively seeking to join NATO long before the full-scale Russian invasion in 2022. This wasn’t some sudden reaction to "Russian aggression", it was part of a long-standing strategy by Kyiv to align itself with NATO and the West, which only further provoked tensions with Russia.

Bullshit, all prior aspirations and official efforts to joining NATO were scraped by Yanukovych in 2010 as soon as he got in.

Ukranians generally had a negative view of NATO at that time.

However all that changed in 2014 when Russians invaded.


But even IF put all that aside, even if Ukraine had NATO aspirations, there was nothing immediate about them. By all acounts coutry was at least a decade way from being able to qualify for NATO membership.

Nothing you say adds up to any sort fo justification for invasion.

 

[TruthNotBS]

It's a simple fact KBG Putin is a mass murdering war criminal. He does not discriminate between civilians and soldiers. He executes POWs. He has kidnapped thousands of Ukrainian children and brought them to Russia to be indoctrinated and brainwashed as Russians. Many of those children have been raped by Russian soldiers.

He now has two more formidable NATO countries on his border. Using the illogic of his apologists, is he going to invade Finland and Sweden, too?

It makes me sick to see little marxist wannabe's excusing Putin's imperialist war.

First off, calling Putin a "mass-murdering war criminal" is nothing more than regurgitated Western propaganda. If we’re going to throw out accusations of war crimes, let’s be consistent. Where’s the outrage over the U.S. bombing of Iraq, where hundreds of thousands of civilians were killed in an illegal war based on lies about WMDs? Or how about the drone strikes that have killed countless civilians in Yemen, Afghanistan, and Pakistan? The double standard is crystal clear, if the U.S. or its allies commit atrocities, it’s conveniently ignored, but when it’s Russia, suddenly everyone’s an expert on war crimes.

Now, the claim that Putin doesn’t discriminate between civilians and soldiers, is another tired talking point with no basis in fact. Civilian casualties happen in every war, and yes, they are tragic, but Russia has not been deliberately targeting civilians. Contrast that with U.S. military campaigns that have bombed wedding parties, hospitals, and schools in the Middle East. How about Gaza, where Israel, a nation that we strongly support with money and arms, is committing what amounts to a genocidal bombing campaign, killing tens of thousands of civilians? If you want to talk about indiscriminate killing, start there.

As for the Ukrainian children being kidnapped and brainwashed, that’s pure speculation with no solid evidence. This narrative has been pushed by Ukrainian and Western media to demonize Russia, but it conveniently ignores the fact that refugees including children, have been displaced on both sides of the conflict. And let’s be real, if Russia were systematically kidnapping and raping children, where’s the hard evidence? Wild claims with no backing are just that, wild claims.

​

The US government and assholes like you, support all of the above. You're for funding and arming it. You empower it.

Let’s get something straight: Russia’s actions in Ukraine have been about stopping NATO expansion, not conquering Europe. Finland and Sweden deciding to join NATO only makes the security situation worse, pushing Europe closer to confrontation. NATO’s presence is what escalates tensions, not Russia. NATO is a Cold War dinosaur, that is inherently hostile to Russia, operationally, doctrinally and historically and by deploying it on Russia's border, you create unnecessary tension, and increase the likelihood of a military confrontation.

The idea that anyone who criticizes Western imperialism or defends Russia’s legitimate security concerns is a "little Marxist wannabe" is a lazy ad hominem attack. The U.S. is the world's biggest imperialist power, with 700+ military bases around the world and a track record of overthrowing governments and backing dictators when it suits their interests. This isn’t about excusing Russia, it’s about calling out the blatant hypocrisy in pretending that the West is some benevolent force for good when, in reality, it’s been the driving force behind countless wars and destabilization

​

 

[TruthNotBS]

Bullshit, all prior aspirations and official efforts to joining NATO were scraped by Yanukovych in 2010 as soon as he got in.

Ukranians generally had a negative view of NATO at that time.

However all that changed in 2014 when Russians invaded.


But even IF put all that aside, even if Ukraine had NATO aspirations, there was nothing immediate about them. By all acounts coutry was at least a decade way from being able to qualify for NATO membership.

Nothing you say adds up to any sort fo justification for invasion.

First off, yes, Yanukovych did pause Ukraine’s NATO aspirations in 2010, but that doesn’t mean NATO interest magically disappeared. Ukraine’s NATO ambitions were never fully scrapped—NATO cooperation and military exercises continued throughout Yanukovych's term. In fact, NATO’s presence in Ukraine increased even during his presidency, and Ukraine's interest in joining the alliance didn’t just vanish. It was Yanukovych’s pro-Russian stance that put NATO on hold temporarily, but the desire for NATO membership never went away entirely, especially in Western Ukraine.

Second, you claim that Ukrainians had a negative view of NATO, this is only partially true and ignores the regional divide in Ukraine. Sure, parts of Eastern Ukraine weren’t pro-NATO, but Western Ukraine, which aligns more with the EU and NATO, consistently supported closer ties with the West. To suggest that Ukraine had no NATO ambitions until Russia’s actions in 2014 or 2022 is misleading. The pro-Western factions in Ukraine were pushing for NATO integration well before 2014, and after the Western-backed Maidan coup, the pro-NATO agenda surged back to the forefront.

And then you say that "everything changed" in 2014 when Russia "invaded." Let’s be honest about why 2014 happened. The Euromaidan coup, backed by the U.S. and EU, overthrew a democratically elected president, which sparked a massive civil conflict. Crimea held a referendum to rejoin Russia, and the people of Donbas rose up against the new nationalist government in Kyiv, which then started a war against its own people. Russia didn’t "invade" or get involved in Ukraine, out of nowhere, they reacted to a coup that threatened Russian-speaking Ukrainians and NATO’s creeping presence on their doorstep.

Now, you say Ukraine was at least a decade away from NATO membership. Maybe, maybe not, but that’s irrelevant. The very fact that Ukraine had NATO ambitions, formalized in constitutional changes in 2019, was enough of a threat to Russia’s security. The West was arming and training Ukrainian forces long before 2022, and Ukraine’s gradual NATO integration was well underway. Russia’s red line was NATO expansion, period. The fact that Ukraine was even on the path to NATO membership was a direct security threat to Russia, and they made that clear repeatedly.

The US government was arming Ukraine's government and indirectly, the nationalist paramilitary groups terrorizing the Russo-Ukrainians of the Donbas. So Russia had to take action, it's that simple and if you don't like it, so what?

And let’s address your final point: that nothing justifies Russia’s actions. That’s rich, coming from someone defending NATO’s constant expansion eastward despite promises made to Gorbachev in the 1990s that NATO would not move "one inch east." NATO has violated those promises for decades, installing military bases all around Russia’s borders, and you expect Russia to just sit back? If Russia were setting up military alliances with Mexico or Canada, you can bet the U.S. would respond militarily. But when Russia defends its security interests, it’s suddenly “unjustified”? You're a fucking hypocrite.

Your argument doesn’t hold water. Ukraine’s NATO ambitions were a clear and growing threat to Russia’s security, and the West’s meddling in Ukraine is what provoked the conflict in the first place. If anyone is responsible for the war, it’s NATO and the Western powers who kept pushing the boundaries. Poking poking poking the bear. OK, well, the bear attacked.