Russia is bullying Ukraine, but can it really hold?

[Ozero]

Kingmaker indeed. And they use the media to announce false things. This Russia invading Ukraine is also a made-up invasion because it doesn't happen on the ground in fact the Ukraine president talked about it in the press that there is no Russian invasion. But this could be a plot to change the president of Ukraine to favor NATO expansion which Putin doesn't want to happen.

Putin emphasizes it clear that there is an agreement about NATO not expanding anymore to the east and pursuing Ukraine to join NATO is a violation. Call it a strategic move by Putin but this is also the proper way for them to protect their sovereignty. How will the US feel if Kremlin expands in CUBA or Mexico, they will also rally their tanks in their borders. That's GEOPOLITICS, countries will protect thier sovereignty.

If the US also deploys troops in Ukraine, Russia will gather more of its troops on its borders to protect thier sovereignty. And NOT JUST Russia but the rest of the countries nearby from Belarus, Poland, Romania, and even Bulgaria will also gather thier troops on their borders because they know, it's going to affect them. Who knows what else are the mission of the US or other countries because each of them still has geopolitics to take care of. Especially Belarus who always suspects the US. And one missile hitting anyone's border will cause chaos, there will be no time to say sorry they made a mistake by shooting someone else tank/plane.

Was there an invasion of Russian troops in Ukraine?
Firstly, it all started in the Donbass due to the fact that several groups of Russian military led by Colonel Girkin began to seize local departments and departments of various law enforcement agencies there, distribute seized weapons to criminal elements and thus expand their zone of influence, using symbols and ensign of Russia and promising the support of this state.
After that, when the few combat-ready troops of Ukraine with a significant part of the volunteers, who were armed only with small arms, began to push the pro-Russian elements to the border with Russia, Ukrainian troops were hit with Grads and artillery from the territory of Russia. After that, 5-8 battalion-tactical groups of Russia entered the territory of Ukraine with full armament, with the same Grads and tanks. Most of the volunteers and the Ukrainian military were then killed by the Russian military, after which, under the threat of further advancement of Russian tanks deep into the territory of Ukraine, the so-called Minsk agreements were imposed, which are unfavorable for Ukraine.
Numerous units of the Russian army with hundreds of the latest tanks and other modern military weapons are now in the Donbass, which is recorded by the OSCE. Where did it come from? This is the latest Russian technology, put into service with the Russian Federation in recent years. And where did the Buk air defense system come from, which shot down a civilian plane of Malaysian Airlines from the territory of Donbas back in 2014? But this has already been established by a Dutch court, and four, led by Girkin, have been sentenced to life imprisonment. Will we continue to deny it?

And what kind of agreement is that NATO will not expand its borders to the east? There has never been such an agreement. This is complete nonsense and fiction. The bandit and murderer Putin is only dreaming about this so far.

[Findingnemo]

China is the best example for modern day invasion, they invade most of the countries economically and make them to pay for their country forever by giving lucrative offers in the beginning, but later they will take control of everything with the puppet rulers so any country wants to dominate should follow them. Its immorally wrong but that's the strategy.

I agree. That's the debt trap.

It's a simple economic strategy, making friends with other countries, giving them as many loans as they can until they can no longer pay due to the interest rate that won't stop anytime soon.

And if the "friend" of theirs can no longer pay, they're going to pick some area of that country to invade a little by little and they'll inject their people on it, invade through their products until they make it almost as centralize as the main land.

China is doing it that's why I said its clever strategy than going to wars with the country, it will take time but due to the corrupted political leaders its possible for a super power country like China to trap the smaller countries which are in need of financial needs especially due to the pandemic effect.

[Mometaskers]

snip

Question - what, in your opinion, part of the territory of Russia is inhabited and used?
This is why I ask the question - new lands, theoretically, Japan or Bangladesh may be needed - where there is a huge number of people and a minimum area. In Russia, less than 25% of the territory is inhabited and used. No, not because somewhere there is permafrost. And because the Russian government does not care about people, money is invested only in 3 cities (Moscow, St. Petersburg, Grozny), and the rest - on populist-terrorist projects, to raise the rating of the Kremlin's under-fuhrer
Would you happen to recall the official, declared by the Kremlin, reasons for the invasion of Ukraine in 2014? Let me remind you - "protection of the Russian-speaking population"! Those. in Ukraine, where people lived so well, they decided to "save". No, not to raise the level of Russian speakers in Russia, no. And lower the standard of living of the occupied territories to the level of Russia!

That's a bullshit pretext but it's something that Moscow is likely to pull out more often in the future since they do have still have alot of Russians in former Soviet states.

I don't doubt the government there is quite corrupt and fund those "populist-terrorist projects" you are mentioning but I still believe they'd be more careful with something of this magnitude. They calculated the risk and it paid off for them. They'd need Crimea until we get to the point where the Arctic don't completely freeze over during winter.

[DrBeer]

Putin emphasizes it clear that there is an agreement about NATO not expanding anymore to the east and pursuing Ukraine to join NATO is a violation. Call it a strategic move by Putin but this is also the proper way for them to protect their sovereignty. How will the US feel if Kremlin expands in CUBA or Mexico, they will also rally their tanks in their borders. That's GEOPOLITICS, countries will protect thier sovereignty.

If the US also deploys troops in Ukraine, Russia will gather more of its troops on its borders to protect thier sovereignty. And NOT JUST Russia but the rest of the countries nearby from Belarus, Poland, Romania, and even Bulgaria will also gather thier troops on their borders because they know, it's going to affect them. Who knows what else are the mission of the US or other countries because each of them still has geopolitics to take care of. Especially Belarus who always suspects the US. And one missile hitting anyone's border will cause chaos, there will be no time to say sorry they made a mistake by shooting someone else tank/plane.

Can you clarify - what agreement exists on the non-expansion of NATO? Can you provide a link to the original document?
Or maybe you wanted to talk about the Budapest Memorandum, signed by Russia, which guaranteed and assumed the obligation to preserve the inviolability of Ukraine and the invariability of its borders? No, not about that?
And why was Russia not worried about the entry of the Baltic countries into NATO? From there, rockets do not fly?
The only reason for hatred for Ukraine is the FREE choice of the citizens of Ukraine, it is a demonstration that totalitarian power can be destroyed, which Putin is deathly afraid of. If you leave Ukraine alone, in a couple of years, Putin’s citizens will come to Putin, living poorer and poorer every year, and ask the question - why do we, the inhabitants of the richest country, live worse and poorer than Ukraine, which does not have such resources, gas, oil and so on? And what can Putin answer them? The truth that all the resources of Russia belong to his friends and the people, as always, "you need to be patient a little bit"?

[Gyfts]

Putin emphasizes it clear that there is an agreement about NATO not expanding anymore to the east and pursuing Ukraine to join NATO is a violation. Call it a strategic move by Putin but this is also the proper way for them to protect their sovereignty. How will the US feel if Kremlin expands in CUBA or Mexico, they will also rally their tanks in their borders. That's GEOPOLITICS, countries will protect thier sovereignty.

If the US also deploys troops in Ukraine, Russia will gather more of its troops on its borders to protect thier sovereignty. And NOT JUST Russia but the rest of the countries nearby from Belarus, Poland, Romania, and even Bulgaria will also gather thier troops on their borders because they know, it's going to affect them. Who knows what else are the mission of the US or other countries because each of them still has geopolitics to take care of. Especially Belarus who always suspects the US. And one missile hitting anyone's border will cause chaos, there will be no time to say sorry they made a mistake by shooting someone else tank/plane.

Can you clarify - what agreement exists on the non-expansion of NATO? Can you provide a link to the original document?
Or maybe you wanted to talk about the Budapest Memorandum, signed by Russia, which guaranteed and assumed the obligation to preserve the inviolability of Ukraine and the invariability of its borders? No, not about that?
And why was Russia not worried about the entry of the Baltic countries into NATO? From there, rockets do not fly?
The only reason for hatred for Ukraine is the FREE choice of the citizens of Ukraine, it is a demonstration that totalitarian power can be destroyed, which Putin is deathly afraid of. If you leave Ukraine alone, in a couple of years, Putin’s citizens will come to Putin, living poorer and poorer every year, and ask the question - why do we, the inhabitants of the richest country, live worse and poorer than Ukraine, which does not have such resources, gas, oil and so on? And what can Putin answer them? The truth that all the resources of Russia belong to his friends and the people, as always, "you need to be patient a little bit"?

The Baltic countries aren't as big as Ukraine, don't have the historical significance that Ukraine does (Ukraine was previously part of the USSR, after all). And Ukraine cooperates with the US intelligence communities, which is one of the things Putin contests.

Sure, missiles could fly from the Baltic countries, but they're not militarily active, and chances are they'd stay neutral in any sort of conflict. Ukraine is a justifiable target, a country like Estonia or Lithuania is not.

[LTU_btc]

The Baltic countries aren't as big as Ukraine, don't have the historical significance that Ukraine does (Ukraine was previously part of the USSR, after all). And Ukraine cooperates with the US intelligence communities, which is one of the things Putin contests.

Sure, missiles could fly from the Baltic countries, but they're not militarily active, and chances are they'd stay neutral in any sort of conflict. Ukraine is a justifiable target, a country like Estonia or Lithuania is not.

Actually, Baltic countries were occupied by USSR for 50 years too in case you missed it. But Putin considering Russia and Ukraine as same nation as he said such things multiple times. They don't like that Baltic countries joined NATO and they don't want to let Ukraine to do such thing. But it's not their deal, Ukraine should decide themselves what they want to do.
Lithuania or Estonia isn't Switzerland to stay neutral, especially when things in Ukraine may directly affect us. It's more likely that biggest NATO countries like France or especially Germany (because of NordStream) would stay neutral.

[MinMan]

That's a bullshit pretext but it's something that Moscow is likely to pull out more often in the future since they do have still have alot of Russians in former Soviet states.

I don't doubt the government there is quite corrupt and fund those "populist-terrorist projects" you are mentioning but I still believe they'd be more careful with something of this magnitude. They calculated the risk and it paid off for them. They'd need Crimea until we get to the point where the Arctic don't completely freeze over during winter.

That is the problem, it is a bullshit and yet they can get away with it which makes no sense. They do not hold too much power, specially when the world is growing so much bigger. The reality is that Russia is not as strong economically as they used to be, but they are a militarily huge nation, even if we leave everything else aside, we are talking about nuclear power and that is something serious to consider.

Not that I would expect them to use that power, but you can't really push them back to a corner too much neither. We could see Ukraine get into NATO and in that case attacking it would mean attacking Nato and that would be a problem for Russia and they probably wouldn't want that as we can see. But, that is not enough to launch a nuclear missile neither. That is good enough to assassinate some people at the very biggest possibility but not nuclear.

[DrBeer]

snip

Question - what, in your opinion, part of the territory of Russia is inhabited and used?
This is why I ask the question - new lands, theoretically, Japan or Bangladesh may be needed - where there is a huge number of people and a minimum area. In Russia, less than 25% of the territory is inhabited and used. No, not because somewhere there is permafrost. And because the Russian government does not care about people, money is invested only in 3 cities (Moscow, St. Petersburg, Grozny), and the rest - on populist-terrorist projects, to raise the rating of the Kremlin's under-fuhrer
Would you happen to recall the official, declared by the Kremlin, reasons for the invasion of Ukraine in 2014? Let me remind you - "protection of the Russian-speaking population"! Those. in Ukraine, where people lived so well, they decided to "save". No, not to raise the level of Russian speakers in Russia, no. And lower the standard of living of the occupied territories to the level of Russia!

That's a bullshit pretext but it's something that Moscow is likely to pull out more often in the future since they do have still have alot of Russians in former Soviet states.

I don't doubt the government there is quite corrupt and fund those "populist-terrorist projects" you are mentioning but I still believe they'd be more careful with something of this magnitude. They calculated the risk and it paid off for them. They'd need Crimea until we get to the point where the Arctic don't completely freeze over during winter.

I will tell you a secret - I myself am Russian by nationality! And yes - in Ukraine, Russians are the second largest nationality. BUT ! But, the inhabitants of Ukraine, Russians by nationality, do not want the "Russian world" or, to be honest, RASHISM in their own country! Do not confuse Russians with supporters of rashism or pro-Russian separatists, this is a huge difference, or rather, a complete lack of anything in common.

[D-law]

Have got no much idea about Russians and Ukraine, but then the world will always be a defer place if we can just let go of the past and embrace peace.
Bringing this up was as a result of the past, maybe how Ukraine treated them , I don't know, hopefully putin resolves this, it's been read that they Ukraine also fought for Russians alongside them in their various battles.
Good to see other countries, showing their support for Ukraine giving them strength and hope at the point in time
#Support for Ukraine.

[cabron]

snip

Question - what, in your opinion, part of the territory of Russia is inhabited and used?
This is why I ask the question - new lands, theoretically, Japan or Bangladesh may be needed - where there is a huge number of people and a minimum area. In Russia, less than 25% of the territory is inhabited and used. No, not because somewhere there is permafrost. And because the Russian government does not care about people, money is invested only in 3 cities (Moscow, St. Petersburg, Grozny), and the rest - on populist-terrorist projects, to raise the rating of the Kremlin's under-fuhrer
Would you happen to recall the official, declared by the Kremlin, reasons for the invasion of Ukraine in 2014? Let me remind you - "protection of the Russian-speaking population"! Those. in Ukraine, where people lived so well, they decided to "save". No, not to raise the level of Russian speakers in Russia, no. And lower the standard of living of the occupied territories to the level of Russia!

That's a bullshit pretext but it's something that Moscow is likely to pull out more often in the future since they do have still have alot of Russians in former Soviet states.

I don't doubt the government there is quite corrupt and fund those "populist-terrorist projects" you are mentioning but I still believe they'd be more careful with something of this magnitude. They calculated the risk and it paid off for them. They'd need Crimea until we get to the point where the Arctic don't completely freeze over during winter.

I will tell you a secret - I myself am Russian by nationality! And yes - in Ukraine, Russians are the second largest nationality. BUT ! But, the inhabitants of Ukraine, Russians by nationality, do not want the "Russian world" or, to be honest, RASHISM in their own country! Do not confuse Russians with supporters of rashism or pro-Russian separatists, this is a huge difference, or rather, a complete lack of anything in common.

Whatever they do in thier own country is thier right to do. If they just develop 3 cities, it's thier own, It's thier choice. Moscow won the safest city to live declared by the UN recently. As far as I know, there are other Russian ethnic groups in the outskirts of their cities which the government respects their beliefs. Russia is a Catholic country in which people have Christian traits and they respect other beliefs out there. Whatever they do in thier own country, it's their own thing.

Crimea is Russia. The surrounding countries do not complain to it. It's just the news outside who complains as if they knew better.

[DrBeer]

snip

Question - what, in your opinion, part of the territory of Russia is inhabited and used?
This is why I ask the question - new lands, theoretically, Japan or Bangladesh may be needed - where there is a huge number of people and a minimum area. In Russia, less than 25% of the territory is inhabited and used. No, not because somewhere there is permafrost. And because the Russian government does not care about people, money is invested only in 3 cities (Moscow, St. Petersburg, Grozny), and the rest - on populist-terrorist projects, to raise the rating of the Kremlin's under-fuhrer
Would you happen to recall the official, declared by the Kremlin, reasons for the invasion of Ukraine in 2014? Let me remind you - "protection of the Russian-speaking population"! Those. in Ukraine, where people lived so well, they decided to "save". No, not to raise the level of Russian speakers in Russia, no. And lower the standard of living of the occupied territories to the level of Russia!

That's a bullshit pretext but it's something that Moscow is likely to pull out more often in the future since they do have still have alot of Russians in former Soviet states.

I don't doubt the government there is quite corrupt and fund those "populist-terrorist projects" you are mentioning but I still believe they'd be more careful with something of this magnitude. They calculated the risk and it paid off for them. They'd need Crimea until we get to the point where the Arctic don't completely freeze over during winter.

I will tell you a secret - I myself am Russian by nationality! And yes - in Ukraine, Russians are the second largest nationality. BUT ! But, the inhabitants of Ukraine, Russians by nationality, do not want the "Russian world" or, to be honest, RASHISM in their own country! Do not confuse Russians with supporters of rashism or pro-Russian separatists, this is a huge difference, or rather, a complete lack of anything in common.

Whatever they do in thier own country is thier right to do. If they just develop 3 cities, it's thier own, It's thier choice. Moscow won the safest city to live declared by the UN recently. As far as I know, there are other Russian ethnic groups in the outskirts of their cities which the government respects their beliefs. Russia is a Catholic country in which people have Christian traits and they respect other beliefs out there. Whatever they do in thier own country, it's their own thing.

Crimea is Russia. The surrounding countries do not complain to it. It's just the news outside who complains as if they knew better.

So Ukraine has the right to do anything at home - join alliances, build defenses, defend its borders and its people, destroy terrorists. Or Ukraine does not have such rights?
As for Crimea, it is a temporarily occupied territory, more precisely, annexed. Moreover, Russia itself personally admitted that:
1. The territory of Ukraine has been inviolable since 191 and its borders, including the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, are single and indivisible.
2. In 2014, it was an operation planned by the President of Russia to seize the territory of a foreign territory.
verifying both facts is extremely simple. 1 - Read the Budapest Memorandum. 2 - watch the OFFICIAL speeches of the president of Russia, after 2015, including the official film "The Road Home", about the capture of Crimea, which the Russians call "return", although I can not explain what "return" has to do with it.

Let me remind you again - it was Russia that signed the treaty on ensuring the inviolability of Ukraine, as well as protecting its integrity, within the borders that were at the time of the signing of the Budapest Memorandum.

Siberia - should again be an independent, free republic, the Far East - historically belongs to China, the Kuril Islands - belong to Japan. Republics forcibly introduced into the Russian Federation - worthy of freedom!