Was Ukraine a threat to Russia before start of Russian military operation?

[Stann]

Merkel's admission that Germany and other countries were not going to implement the Minsk Agreements became another nail in the coffin of Europe as a significant subject of international politics, where the same laws work as in human society.: If you keep your word, you are respected.
Germany and France must pay compensation to the residents of Donbass.

The current situation in Ukraine is a consequence of the false policy of the leaders of these states.
First in 2014.The Foreign Ministers of Germany and France signed a document between the Ukrainian authorities and the opposition as guarantors of the peaceful development of events.
It all ended with a coup d'etat in Kiev and the genocide of the 6 million population of Donbass.
Then Germany and France participated in the conclusion of the Minsk agreements.
But, as Merkel said, no one planned to fulfill them, calling it an attempt to give Ukraine time for its militarization.
A pre-planned failure to fulfill the obligations assumed as a result of signing an international agreement is not only a loss of trust, but also a crime for which the signatories of the Minsk agreements — Merkel, Hollande and Poroshenko must answer.
The people of Europe need to know to whom they are indebted: the lack of heat, electricity, huge inflation, closing businesses. Merkel's confessions Germany and France bear moral and material responsibility for what is happening in Ukraine.

The world is done with Russia's tactics, there are now recognized as the terrorist State they always have been. They have absolutely no credibility.

 

[Ringo]

What the hell do you think Russia or America or any other country would do if another country recognizes their sovereign territory as "independent republics"?

A normal country would never support an armed coup and the overthrow of a legitimately elected president, committed by nazi militants in the interests of the oligarchs.
And these same normal countries will support people, who wished to separate from the nazis, who seized power by force and with the support of not-normal states. Which, by the way, includes the United States, which, together with Ukraine, has repeatedly voted in UN against prohibition of glorification of nazism. You hypocritical bastard.

 

[ESay]

The question in the OP isn't relevant now. People on both sides have their views and reasoning and there is no point to bring them together.

But what reality says is that Ukraine should be a threat to Russia. Or more properly, its armed forces should be in such a shape that the Russians should think twice before starting similar silly war.

It is the only mean to ensure Ukraine's and Eastern Europe's security.

 

[AntonToo]

A normal country would never support an armed coup and the overthrow of a legitimately elected president, committed by nazi militants in the interests of the oligarchs.

Bullshit, Russia's blitz to Kiev was SPECIFICALLY to remove dully elected President Zelensky and behead Ukraine's leadership.

And internally to Russia do recall how many times a new party was elected by the people? ZERO times because there is no true democracy, THEY WERE ALL REMOVED or died while in office.

Maybe China should have declared Dagestan "independent" because Gorbachev or Yeltsin got removed?

Ukraine's internal matters don't give any right for Russia to any Ukrainian territories.

 

[Stann]

What the hell do you think Russia or America or any other country would do if another country recognizes their sovereign territory as "independent republics"?

They take their army if they have one and rightfully go reclaim their lands from invaders and separatists you dumb fucking idiot.

The oblivious nonsense Stalinist tools like you peddle makes my blood boil.

You are trying to talk sense into an insane, radicalized individual. And the way he tries to defend Russia's attack on the Ukraine is absolutely ridiculous and undefendable. He probably isn't even an American he's probably a Russian and if he is a Russian he's probably a cyber terrorist. At any rate the world can no longer trust the Russian state at all. They have absolutely no credibility. They promote terrorism and cyber terrorism, attempting to hold the whole world at Ransom. It's an absolutely ridiculous situation. I hope the Ukraine gets a lot more powerful and starts bombing Moscow and levels of the damn place. Then and only then the people of Russia rise up and get rid of these corrupt leaders.

 

[José]

Originally posted by Esay
But what reality says is that Ukraine should be a threat to Russia. Or more properly, its armed forces should be in such a shape that the Russians should think twice before starting similar silly war.

I'm all for countries with powerful neighbors like Mexico and Ukraine having powerful armies to protect themselves... provided they do it ON THEIR DIME.

If they decide to do it on the cheap, allowing foreign military alliances to use their territories to advance the geopolitical interests of foreign powers, they become fair targets for american and russian bombs.

 

[AntonToo]

I'm all for countries with powerful neighbors like Mexico and Ukraine having powerful armies to protect themselves... provided they do it ON THEIR DIME.

If they decide to do it on the cheap, allowing foreign military alliances to use their territories to advance the geopolitical interests of foreign powers, they become fair targets for american and russian bombs.

Wtf?

What army was Ukraine "given" before Russians started bombing them?

 

[José]

Originally posted by AntonToo
Wtf?

What army was Ukraine "given" before Russians started bombing them?

Ukraine is just the most recent episode of this geopolitical soap opera, Anton.

Russia already had a legitimate casus belli when NATO did move "one inch eastward" almost 25 years ago.

 

[Stann]

Wtf?

What army was Ukraine "given" before Russians started bombing them?

Russia started undermining the government of the Ukraine in 2014. Victor Yanukovych where's basically the Russian installed puppet government in the Ukraine and he gave away Crimea with no fight. That was also the year that the Russian government started arming separatist terroristic militia groups in the Donbass region. The Ukraine did not have an independent leader until Zelinsky was elected in 2019 by a Landslide victory,; 73% of the ukrainians voted for him. The former leader Petro Poroshenko only got 24% of the vote. Russia probably started this campaign against the Ukraine subvertly as soon as they became independent in 1991.

 

[Stann]

Ukraine is just the most recent episode of this geopolitical soap opera, Anton.

Russia already had a legitimate casus belli when NATO did move "one inch eastward" almost 25 years ago.

That wasn't Russia that was the Soviet Union.

 

[AntonToo]

Ukraine is just the most recent episode of this geopolitical soap opera, Anton.

Russia already had a legitimate casus belli when NATO did move "one inch eastward" almost 25 years ago.

So wtf were you talking about when you said Russia was justified to bomb Ukraine because supposedly someone paid for their army for them?

Something tells me your name is not Jose.

 

[toomuchtime_]

I'm all for countries with powerful neighbors like Mexico and Ukraine having powerful armies to protect themselves... provided they do it ON THEIR DIME.

If they decide to do it on the cheap, allowing foreign military alliances to use their territories to advance the geopolitical interests of foreign powers, they become fair targets for american and Russian bombs.

The only foreign military alliance that is trying to use the territories of Ukraine to advance their geopolitical ambitions is the Russian Federation.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Ukraine is just the most recent episode of this geopolitical soap opera, Anton.

Russia already had a legitimate casus belli when NATO did move "one inch eastward" almost 25 years ago.

Bullshit.

Gorbachev replied: “The topic of ‘NATO expansion’ was not discussed at all, and it wasn’t brought up in those years. … Another issue we brought up was discussed: making sure that NATO’s military structures would not advance and that additional armed forces would not be deployed on the territory of the then-GDR after German reunification. Baker’s statement was made in that context… Everything that could have been and needed to be done to solidify that political obligation was done. And fulfilled.”

Did NATO Promise Not to Enlarge? Gorbachev Says "No" | Brookings

Russian President Vladimir Putin has made it well known his antipathy towards NATO, claiming the Alliance took advantage of Russian weakness after the collapse of the Soviet Union in violation of promises allegedly made to Moscow by Western leaders. Steven Pifer argues that no such promises were...

www.brookings.edu

 

[Stann]

Bullshit.

Gorbachev replied: “The topic of ‘NATO expansion’ was not discussed at all, and it wasn’t brought up in those years. … Another issue we brought up was discussed: making sure that NATO’s military structures would not advance and that additional armed forces would not be deployed on the territory of the then-GDR after German reunification. Baker’s statement was made in that context… Everything that could have been and needed to be done to solidify that political obligation was done. And fulfilled.”

Did NATO Promise Not to Enlarge? Gorbachev Says "No" | Brookings

Russian President Vladimir Putin has made it well known his antipathy towards NATO, claiming the Alliance took advantage of Russian weakness after the collapse of the Soviet Union in violation of promises allegedly made to Moscow by Western leaders. Steven Pifer argues that no such promises were...

www.brookings.edu

When Russia dissolved the Soviet Union I even believe that nato and the United States gave Russia favored nation status in hopes that they would become a true democracy but unfortunately the Old guard KGB thugs and other wealthy Kremlin types had enough power to continue the old corrupt regime. So Russia never had a chance to truly become an independent democratic great nation.

 

[José]

Originally posted by AntonToo
So wtf were you talking about when you said Russia was justified to bomb Ukraine because supposedly someone paid for their army for them?

Something tells me your name is not Jose.

I was referring to eastern european countries as a whole.

Are you going to deny the historic fact that allowing their territories to serve as bases for foreign interests in exchange for security from Russia was/is the main geopolitical goal of almost all eastern european countries including Ukraine since at least 2002 when Kuchma explicitly said it was an ukrainian national priority (that was eventually enshrined in the constitution)?

NATO got away with 25 years of expansion not out of the kindness of Russia's heart nor its admirable patience, I give you that... but simply because the country was too weak to do anything but complain.

 

[José]

Originally posted by toomuchtime
Bullshit.

Gorbachev replied: “The topic of ‘NATO expansion’ was not discussed at all, and it wasn’t brought up in those years. …

Was this the same Gorbachev who in other interviews stated that Baker said exactly that line?

Seems like a russian politician terribly afraid to go down in History as what he really was, a weak leader.

You're right no documents were signed... That's why many staunchly anti-communist russians agree with Putin that the collapse of the Soviet Union was the greatest political catastrophe of the 20th century.

The problem was not the end of the country in and of itself but the fact that it collapsed instead of being methodically, orderly dismantled, leaving Russia without any written, formal security guarantees regarding NATO.

 

[toomuchtime_]

When Russia dissolved the Soviet Union I even believe that nato and the United States gave Russia favored nation status in hopes that they would become a true democracy but unfortunately the Old guard KGB thugs and other wealthy Kremlin types had enough power to continue the old corrupt regime. So Russia never had a chance to truly become an independent democratic great nation.

I disagree. When the USSR dissolved itself, Russia did have a democracy for several years, and despite the fact it had then one of the fastest growing economies in the world, in 1999 the Russian people elected Putin to be PM. I think they got the government they wanted, and so far, I don't see any evidence they would like to turn to western values.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Was this the same Gorbachev who in other interviews stated that Baker said exactly that line?

Seems like a russian politician terribly afraid to go down in History as what he really was, a weak leader.

You're right no documents were signed... That's why many staunchly anti-communist russians agree with Putin that the collapse of the Soviet Union was the greatest political catastrophe of the 20th century.

The problem was not the end of the country in and of itself but the fact that it collapsed instead of being methodically, orderly dismantled, leaving Russia without any written, formal security guarantees regarding NATO.

You continue to post nothing but lies. There were no Gorbachev interviews in which he said he said he received assurances NATO would not accept eastern European countries as members. What makes you want to post such lies?

 

[AntonToo]

In 1999 the Russian people elected Putin to be PM. I think they got the government they wanted

No they didn't. Yeltsin was forced out after coup and Putin was installed as the acting President.

 

[toomuchtime_]

I was referring to eastern european countries as a whole.

Are you going to deny the historic fact that allowing their territories to serve as bases for foreign interests in exchange for security from Russia was/is the main geopolitical goal of almost all eastern european countries including Ukraine since at least 2002 when Kuchma explicitly said it was an ukrainian national priority (that was eventually enshrined in the constitution)?

NATO got away with 25 years of expansion not out of the kindness of Russia's heart nor its admirable patience, I give you that... but simply because the country was too weak to do anything but complain.

What makes you want to post such nonsense? All members of NATO have one vote and all decisions must be unanimous, so your suggestion that European nations are dominated by the US is obviously false. The real question is why did the eastern European countries want to join NATO? The answer, as you know, is that these countries were conquered by Russia after WWI have held captive for nearly half a century and when finally released, they both hated and feared Russia.

Far from trying to weaken Russia, after the dissolution of the USSR, the US provided financial assistance to the new state of Russia in the amount of $24 billion ($50 billion in today's dollars) and Russia prospered so well from US and EU assistance that by 2001, it had one of the fastest growing economies in the world. If not for Putin's mismanagement, today Russia would be approaching European standards of living.

Since 1991, there has been no US/European effort to weaken Russia, but one to prevent Russian imperialism and that is what we are seeing now in Ukraine.