Time to setup that Norton Antivirus free trial.
What some are posting is merely how Russia sees this. And why.
Both Alaska and The French territories in North America were bought via our USA Treasury. We did not take them away by force.
To be a World Power requires a large Naval presence. Obviously having a warm water port(all US ports are) helps launch your fleet and keep it maintained.
These are points as Russia sees them. They also know that the NATO powers lied. Once they let go of Warsaw Pact Nations these same Nations evolved into NATO members. No more buffer zone for Russia. Next up? Russia sees Ukraine joining NATO.
These are facts on the ground. And this type of garbage has been going around since 1945. Keeps our Military-Industrial complex fat and happy and,yep, Russiaâs too.
2 Likes
Yeah, so?
Who is Russia to dictate Ukraineâs foreign policy to it? Every country has a right to choose its own alliances. The fact that Ukraine might align itself with other European countries is hardly a justification for invading it.
Ukraine was simply NOT a threat to attack Russia.
As we can seeâŠRussia was a threat to attack Ukraine, and did in fact attack Ukraine.
2 Likes
Russia can see what they want to see (and they are).
But they have no right to attack a sovereign country or tell that country what to do. Russia seems to think they can do that because they used to be part of Russia. Thatâs not how this works.
We donât let England tell us what to do. Plenty of other examples out there too. Some are buying into the Russian narrative. They arenât the good guys. In fact, they are among the worst.
3 Likes
Ohh cool, this is about letting Russia be the World Power they want to be. Super Cool
1 Like
To the contrary sukie. Make no mistakes. The ones that have wanted Ukraine to get into NATO are the same ones that are embedded with our Military-Industrial complex. What is the real purpose of NATO going eastward if not to piss off Russia? It does not matter what side you are on. The military-complex buy pâŠs no matter what side they are on. Reagan was against NATO moving Eastward and into Russiaâs footsteps. He made it clear. That did not seat well with our military-complex. The same military-complex have sold us, the world, that they were weapons of mass destruction in Irak. We all know that this was pure fabrication. Anyone denying it knows they are lying to their teeth.
poutin, p.o.s. had no rights to go after Ukraine we all agree on that. We also have no rights to have NATO on Russiaâs door step. poutine knows he has no chance to go after the old eastern blocks nations like Poland, Lithuania or Hungary.
When some in our military complex do not know history it becomes a National security issue. You canât look at Ukraine without Russia and vice-versa.
What does 1991 means? How many that debates this war even know the following:
History will tell you that Ukraine is Russia and Russia is Ukraine. They share the same historical origin. You can try to deny it all you want but you canât and should never ignore it. The best outcome for all parties is for Crimea to stay Russian. The rest of Ukraine to remain under Ukrainian power, not become a NATO member and with a clear understanding that poutine or whoever comes after canât invade Ukraine. If he does then we arm Ukraine to the level where they have never been armed. Critical point. We never armed Ukraine to push off the invaders. The previous administration never did what was necessary to push off poutin. Remember how long it took to get Ukrainian pilots trained? Even to this day the so called economic measures against Russia have been minimal. If they were so drastic poutin would have already been replaced within the Kremlin.
1 Like
They already are by the number of nukes that they have.
Most nukes is such a win. Love the Russia Propaganda on here. Sounds like The Soviet Union is justied in reclaiming all former territory from 1991. The Berlin Wall never fell.
3 Likes
Historically Russia also controlled Finland, the Baltic States, and much of Poland.
They donât have a valid claim on any of those countries following that sort of logicâŠand they donât on Ukraine either.
Historically, Mexico controlled Texas. HeyâŠSORRY!!!
Times change.
3 Likes
Wrong but more importantly you canât change history to fit your narratives.
Ohh the irony
2 Likes
Whaddya mean âwrong?â
Russia did indeed historically control Finland, the Baltic States, and much of Poland.
Doesnât give Russia a valid claim to any of those countries, and it doesnât give them a valid claim to Ukraine.
And Mexico controlled Texas.
Everything I said is correct.
You claiming that I am wrong on that are WRONG.
1 Like
You canât change history law.
Neither can you.
Everything I said is historically CORRECT.
So donât claim anything different.
Youâre WRONG if you doâŠand it sounds like you were.
2 Likes
Ukraine is where Russia originated. This is where you are wrong. Without Ukraine there is no Russia. The Ukrainian territory expanded east to what became Russia.
You want to go back and find out who founded Ukraine? Look no further than the Vikings like the Vikings conquered what is today Normandie. The same Normandie that birthed William the Conqueror that conquered what is today England.
Itâs also where Ukraine originated. Ukrainian and Russian are different languages and not entirely mutually intelligible.
Whatâs your point?
Ukraine is not Russia, and Russia has no valid claim on it.
The Mongols destroyed what existed previously.
The Tsardom of Russia in MOSCOW was established in 1547.
1 Like
There is no point of debating with you law. You ask Ukrainians if they can understand Russian or vice versa and what will they tell you?
Ukrainians can generally understand Russian simply because many of them either grew up with it, or learned it as a second language.
OTOHâŠdonât assume someone who has only learned Russian or Ukrainian can completely understand the other.
Linguistically, Ukrainian is closer to Belarusian and Polish than Russian.
Viktor Petrenko competed for the USSR and later competed for Ukraine. He is famous for only speaking Russian (the language he was raised with as the official Soviet lingua franca), and never learning to speak his countryâs own language.
I spoke to a Ukrainian-American lady one time at a church I attended years ago.
She told me should could understand about 90% of what a Pole says, but only about 75% of what a Russian says.
It is what it is.
They arenât the same.
Russia originated in what is today Ukraine. Are you going to deny that too? Seriously?
Yes, and no.
As I said, what was established in the 800s and 900s by the Kieven Rus was destroyed by the Mongols.
Russia as we now know it originated around the Grand Duchy of MoscovyâŠlater the Tsardom of Russia under Ivan the Terrible, and ultimately, the Russian Empire starting in 1721.
Are you going to deny that?
Seriously?
Youâll be wrong if you do.
1 Like