esd wrote: ↑Wed, 4. Jan 23, 01:37
No, I regard it as the last gasp of a dying leader to make his mark on history before it is too late. Unfortunately, all his advisors are terrified to tell him the truth; the military is not as capable as they lead him to believe.
For the sake of a trace in history, they don’t put everything on the line. As for the abilities of the military... let's judge that a bit later. When it will be clear what broblems appeared, how they were solved (or not solved). An army that has not actually fought for decades (that is, with a change of generations) can afford to make a number of mistakes. But the point is not what mistakes there are, but how they were taken into account.
esd wrote: ↑Wed, 4. Jan 23, 01:37
Huh, I thought for a moment you were referring to Russia's "partial mobilisation" that sent Russian men racing to leave Russia.
You should listen to your propagandists less and communicate more with the Russians. First, yes, no one wants to fight. It's natural, no one wants to fight. Well, secondly, there are several opinions.
1) A person does not want to fight, but understands that this is necessary for the security of the Motherland.
2) A person does not want to fight, but does not run away anywhere, because. this is his home!
3) A person does not want to fight, is afraid and flees to another country. Most often, only problems await him there, but he runs. There are, but they are a MINORITY.
4) The elite, whose money is invested in Western assets and fearing their loss, they leave and say the most unpleasant things about Russia. As long as the assets are not blocked or taken away.
5) People who do not have any skills (and are not needed either in Europe or in the USA), but took advantage of the situation to get asylum there. They expect a good life, but they are unlikely to get it.
And yes, I was talking about the Ukrainians. And unlike you, I have the opportunity to communicate with Ukrainians. Believe me, the average Ukrainian is just interested in getting this all over. They hide as much as possible from mobilization, they do not want to fight. They are caught on the way to the store or for other vital needs. Most Ukrainians get to the front this way.
Well, although there are others, which again are a minority. Most often, these are people who have a distorted historical education and from whom the information that their country was previously part of something larger is generally hidden.
There are also sofa warriors, they will never go to war, but on the Internet they are so aggressive that doubts arise about their mental health (just what they write will never occur to a healthy person).
Well, in general, just try on yourself to try on the situation and you will understand a lot. I don't think you would be thrilled to have to go to war where your life could end very quickly. And by the way, think about whether the current situation will reach the point where you will have to go to war. Well think.
esd wrote: ↑Wed, 4. Jan 23, 01:37
Except that's not what we are watching, is it? They are not Russians you are killing. You can't make them Russian again by trying to invade them, like some spurned lover who can't take that it's over and kidnaps them because they are "meant to be".
It seems to me that you live in a completely different reality, carefully created for you by your media. From our side, the reality is:
Since the collapse of the USSR, many Western NGOs (most often the USA) have entered the entire post-Soviet space. There was a gradual, very smooth infusion into the educational process and the new generation received a different idea of the history of their state. The influx into the media has led to a different perception of the fraternal peoples or neighbors (well, it is logical that the West has a different perception). We can say that white has become black, and black has become white. However, the trouble with Ukraine is that a fifth of the population of Ukraine are ethnic Russians. And 80% of the population perceived Russian as their native language. Half of the population was in one way or another for close relations with Russia. However, the new generation was brought up in a different way. And again, the bez is that this is an active minority, very active. And in 2014, those who represent this minority came to power. In the Ukrainian media, a narrative of hatred towards Russians and Orthodoxy gradually began to be pushed through (and remember that a fifth of the country is generally ethnic Russians). If you look at the map, you will understand that ethnic Russians live just in the territories of eastern Ukraine. And from here the civil war began in these territories. Not because Russia wanted it, but because within one state there was a sharp change in relations. Are you from the UK? Think about what will happen in your country if the new generation of Scots hate the British. If they constantly repeat there that the British should be slaughtered and their houses burned. If it's massive. Sooner or later you will also get a civil war. Want to? I think no.
Now about Russia. The Russians (and I'm telling you exactly as a Russian) are generally resigned to the fact that they have a new country, while neighboring countries have become independent. And if you notice, we have no problems, for example, with Kazakhstan. But from the point of view of profit, Kazakhstan would be even more interesting. But no, everything is fine with this state, even though it is oriented towards the West. Here we are talking about the fact that Ukraine, starting in 2014, gradually began to pose a danger to Russia. It is because of the development of hatred and parallel armament. Well, of course, what happened in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions ... I think that your media does not say anything about this. I actually noticed an interesting fact. Your media always talk about what Russia is doing on the territory of Ukraine. But at the same time, they are silent about the shelling of absolutely civilian objects in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. And yes, I know what I'm talking about, it is the Ukrainian troops that are shelling these territories indiscriminately. I personally analyzed some cases and, using the available materials and maps, determined the place from which the shelling was carried out. Your media is silent about this, as they were silent until February 24, when 500-1000 shells flew at civilian targets a day. In the same way, they were silent about the shelling of Donetsk or Lugansk from "Gradov" and this is 40 shells from one car, which fly absolutely non-selectively. This is a square strike. Or about the shelling of Lugansk from an airplane, just to the city center, where people were walking in the park (a terrible sight). They didn't show you that, did they?
But there are not only photos, but also video evidence and there are many of them. You would be horrified to see what happened in those 8 years: 2014-2022. And I repeat, there is both photo and video evidence.
So... what I wanted to say. And that from our side it is seen as follows: "Western NGOs, through the corrupt government, the Ukrainian oligarchy and the media, have changed the minds of the young population of Ukraine (and not only ... because if a person is constantly told that he is a dog, he starts barking). It led first to a civil war, and later to what we have now. And yes ... let's forget the words of Merkel and Holland, who said in plain text that "The Minsk agreements were needed to prepare Ukraine for war." Prepare Ukraine for war with whom?
This is how it looks from our side. From those who do not sit somewhere far away, but live nearby. From the people who have relatives on both sides of the border. You see it in completely different colors, you are not here.
Could this have been avoided? Don't know! But what happened before that reduced the chances of a peaceful outcome.
esd wrote: ↑Wed, 4. Jan 23, 01:37
Ukraine left the USSR and is quite happy without Russia, else they'd not be fighting against Russia's invasion. It's over. They don't want you (Russia) any more.
The sooner Russia realises it should not be there, the more lives will be saved. It's not up to us to step back and let you bully a smaller country back into a relationship it doesn't want, it's not up to Ukraine to roll over and let you invade unopposed, no
I don't even want to comment on it. You really live in a different world. You do not communicate with Ukrainians, you do not have friendly relations with real people. You cannot understand what is happening here, because you are there, somewhere far away. You think exactly those flares that you are told.
esd wrote: ↑Wed, 4. Jan 23, 01:37
Then stop invading other countries.
Russia needs to stop attacking a sovereign nation. That will spare lives and let Ukraine determine its own future; in NATO, in the EU, in the Russian federation or something else entirely.
A very strange statement. But what about Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia? The list can be continued if desired. But what about them? Are they not sovereign? People there didn't want to live happily? They didn't want to determine their own fate? Why did the West decide everything for them? Why did the West kill so many people there, which is very far from what is happening in Ukraine? Shouldn't the West have stopped? Or "it's different"?
You pursued your interests in these countries and did not worry at all about what would happen to those people. You didn't care. And now these countries are in chaos. Compare with what is now in the Crimea ... go and compare, talk to people from there. Or are you afraid to see the truth? And even look at the destroyed Mariupol, where there is now a large construction site and entire blocks are being built. Has the West built something in the countries it has invaded? Or just destroy?
Maybe you shouldn't put on the role of a teacher when you yourself have caused so much trouble around the world?
-----
Well, here's what I'll tell you in the end. You are such an ardent defender of Ukrainians... people whose opinion you don't even know... you didn't ask them. All the media have brought you on a silver platter. Tell me, are you ready to fight? Are you sure it won't reach you personally?
Why am I asking this? Yes, because such a quantity of weapons that is being supplied to Ukraine (and more have already been delivered there than Ukraine had before February 24) is difficult to assess otherwise than direct participation in the war. And therefore, sooner or later, the war will flare up to such a level that it will affect you personally. Are you personally ready to fight? Do not look from afar, but with a machine gun to the front? I'm not even talking about a possible nuclear conflict, where everything will be much worse.
Think about it... think about whose interests you are willing to fight for. Think about who will benefit if you fight.
Many Western leaders (Germany in particular) say they will not act without regard to "allies", especially without reference to the US. Interesting ... maybe it's time to think with your own head, huh? After all, the United States is far away (much further than you are from the events in Ukraine), and the United States pursues only its own interests. They never act in strangers. They are only interested in their own future. But what makes you think that in their prosperous future there is a prosperous existence (or the existence in general) of such countries as Germany, France, Great Britain and so on?
Think about it at your leisure.
