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

[Litwin]

Putin was NOT defending Russia, or retaliating for an attack against the country and its people. This wholesale slaughter of innocent people seems to be based on ideology?

the leading expert Yale University historian Timothy Snyder speaks :

 

[Litwin]

Ukraine has been in a civil war since 2014.

RT crap

 

[Litwin]

The Ukrainian dictator never attempted to forge a peace agreement with Putin.

said a Muscovite, genocidal whore

 

[Litwin]

View attachment 1014743

 

[AntonToo]

Minsk which the Ukrainians and Merkel admitted was to buy time,

Buying time to protect themselves from you Russian twats.

Merkel didn’t say that. What she said was that Minsk agreements bought time for Ukraine to build up their army (a statement of fact), not that it wasn’t negotiated in good faith as a resolution to the conflict.

 

[AntonToo]

Donbass woke up one morning to find out the President most voted for had been overthrown, when they protested they were attacked by the Ukrainian army.

No one ever protested for Yankovich in Donbass.

You are full of bullshit.

 

[TruthNotBS]

Merkel didn’t say that. What she said was that Minsk agreements bought time for Ukraine to build up their army (a statement of fact), not that it wasn’t negotiated in good faith as a resolution to the conflict.

In her exact words, Merkel stated that the Minsk Agreements were "an attempt to give Ukraine time" and that "Ukraine used this time to become stronger, as you can see today."

This is a clear acknowledgment that the West did not approach the Minsk process in good faith. The agreements were supposed to offer a path to peace by securing a ceasefire and promoting dialogue between Ukraine and the separatists in Donetsk and Luhansk. However, according to Merkel, the real purpose was to buy time so that Ukraine could rearm and prepare for future conflict. In the years that followed, the West poured weapons and money into Ukraine.

The Minsk Agreements were part of a broader strategy to outmaneuver Russia, not a sincere effort to resolve the conflict diplomatically.

 

[TruthNotBS]

said a Muscovite, genocidal whore

View attachment 1015477

If Putin really wanted to, he could completely delete, or erase, Ukraine's vital infrastructure, leaving the whole country in the dark, without the basics. The Russian Air Force could bomb Ukraine to the Stone Age if they wanted to.

 

[TruthNotBS]

the leading expert Yale University historian Timothy Snyder speaks :

1. Snyder’s Claim: Russia's war is colonial, with Putin denying that Ukraine is a real state or that Ukrainians are a real people.​

Snyder attempts to frame Putin’s perspective as purely colonial, but this ignores the geopolitical and historical context. Putin has made clear that Ukraine’s current government, installed after the 2014 coup, does not represent the interests of all Ukrainians, particularly those in the east and Crimea, many of whom are ethnically Russian and opposed the coup. The conflict stems from Russia’s concerns over NATO's expansion and Ukraine’s increasing alignment with Western military powers, not from a denial of Ukrainian identity. Putin himself has stated that Ukrainians and Russians share historical ties, but he has never advocated for Ukraine’s eradication as a state.

2. Snyder’s Claim: Russian colonialism is evident through their attempts to decapitate Ukrainian society and subordinate it to a larger Russian empire.​

Russia’s actions in Ukraine are not driven by colonial ambitions but by legitimate security concerns. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, NATO has expanded aggressively toward Russia’s borders, despite promises to the contrary. Putin’s intervention is a response to Western attempts to pull Ukraine into NATO. The notion that Russia seeks to dominate Ukraine as a colony is misleading, as Moscow has repeatedly called for Ukraine to remain neutral and to avoid aligning with hostile Western military alliances.

3. Snyder’s Claim: Ukraine has a long history of being colonized by Russia, dating back to the 17th century.​

While there have been historical conflicts between Russia and Ukraine, framing Russia's relationship with Ukraine as purely colonial oversimplifies the complex historical ties between the two countries. Ukraine has been part of various empires throughout its history, including the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The relationship between Ukraine and Russia is also deeply intertwined through centuries of shared culture, language, and Orthodox Christianity. Additionally, many Ukrainians fought on the side of the Red Army during World War II against Nazi occupation, reinforcing the historical bonds between Ukraine and Russia.

4. Snyder’s Claim: Russia does not recognize Ukraine’s sovereignty and views it as a vassal state.​

Russia has not denied Ukraine’s sovereignty in principle but has serious concerns about Ukraine’s post-2014 government and its close ties to NATO. Putin has consistently stated that Ukraine should be independent but neutral, meaning it should not join NATO or become a base for Western military forces. The claim that Russia treats Ukraine as a vassal state is a misrepresentation of the reality that Russia sees Ukraine as a buffer state between itself and NATO, a vital part of Russia’s national security strategy.

5. Snyder’s Claim: The only way for peace is for Ukraine to win the war against Russia.​

This notion is dangerous and ignores the need for diplomacy. Suggesting that peace can only come through Ukraine’s military victory over Russia overlooks the massive human cost and the risk of further escalation, potentially drawing in NATO and leading to WW3r. A peaceful resolution would involve addressing Russia’s legitimate security concerns, particularly regarding NATO expansion and the protection of ethnic Russians in Ukraine, rather than pushing for a military solution.

6. Snyder’s Claim: Ukraine’s nationalist history, including collaboration with Nazi Germany, was a minor movement that has no significant influence today.​

While Snyder downplays Ukrainian nationalism, particularly the legacy of figures like Stepan Bandera, the reality is that far-right nationalist groups played a prominent role in the 2014 Maidan protests and continue to exert influence in Ukraine. Militant groups like the Azov Battalion, which have been linked to neo-Nazi ideologies, have been integrated into Ukraine’s National Guard and received Western military aid. The resurgence of such nationalist sentiments is not a fringe issue but a significant factor in the current conflict, particularly in the way it affects the ethnic Russian population in Ukraine.

7. Snyder’s Claim: American military aid to Ukraine is not colonial because Ukraine is fighting for its existence.​

The provision of billions in U.S. military aid to Ukraine fits within a broader pattern of U.S. imperialism and interventionism. As noted in the works of authors like Dan Kovalik and William Blum, the U.S. has a long history of supporting proxy wars and regime changes that align with its strategic interests. The U.S. is not supporting Ukraine purely out of concern for its sovereignty but because Ukraine is seen as a pawn in the broader geopolitical struggle against Russia. This is evidenced by the way the U.S. and NATO ignored Russian security concerns for years, pushing Ukraine towards conflict rather than diplomacy.

8. Snyder’s Claim: Russia is committing acts of genocide by relocating Ukrainian civilians and executing local leaders in occupied areas.​

The situation on the ground is far more complex than Snyder portrays. While there have been reports of abuses by Russian forces, there have also been numerous documented cases of Ukrainian forces, including nationalist militias, committing atrocities in the Donbas region. Furthermore, Russia’s actions in Ukraine are primarily motivated by military and strategic objectives, not by an intent to commit genocide. The use of terms like "genocide" is highly charged and often misused in conflicts like these, where both sides have committed violations. Snyder's narrative downplays Ukrainian aggression and repression of Russo-Ukrainians in the Donbas, where thousands have died since 2014.

Snyder's framing of the conflict in Ukraine as a colonial war driven by Russia's desire to subjugate Ukraine is a misrepresentation. The true drivers of the conflict are NATO's expansionist policies, Ukraine’s post-2014 alignment with the West, and the protection of ethnic Russians in Ukraine.

 

[TruthNotBS]

​

 

[ESay]

Who controls the flow of information?

Who controls what I’m telling you here or what people post on Facebook or Insta

Who controls what Trump or Harris or Kennedy or any other candidate says?

Who controls American support for sovereign, democratic Ukraine that you so hate?

Who tells Trump to run on ending Ukraine war in 24 hours ( presumably by giving up to Putin whatever he is demanding) ?

You know, dude, this your post reminds me of arguments of one Russian here when we had a similar discussion about censorship in Russia some time ago. All his arguments were exactly the same - no one directly controlled what he wrote, he had access to any Western news sites and social platforms etc etc; and hence Russia has a freedom of speech and expression.

You don't understand or play a fool here about how state propaganda works now. No one directly controls you and what you write or read, and no one directly prohibits you from news sites and platforms (or, more exactly, they do, but in an era of global Internet it is a quite silly endeavour).

What state propaganda do is creating narratives and a certain way of thinking of the audience through de facto controlled media and social platforms. Through a half-truth technique it creates a parallel reality a person lives in and defends this reality as only one possible. Those ones who live in other reality are labeled agents, traitors, nuts, crazies etc. You are a shining example of it.

I love a democratic Ukraine, too bad I have never seen it.

 

[Deadstick]

No one ever protested for Yankovich in Donbass.

You are full of bullshit.

They protested for the rule of law and what they got in return were bullets, check the voting pattern in Donbass in 2010 the lst real democratic vote in Ukraine it was for Yanukovych so YOU are full of Bullshit.

 

[TruthNotBS]

You know, dude, this your post reminds me of arguments of one Russian here when we had a similar discussion about censorship in Russia some time ago. All his arguments were exactly the same - no one directly controlled what he wrote, he had access to any Western news sites and social platforms etc etc; and hence Russia has a freedom of speech and expression.

You don't understand or play a fool here about how state propaganda works now. No one directly controls you and what you write or read, and no one directly prohibits you from news sites and platforms (or, more exactly, they do, but in an era of global Internet it is a quite silly endeavour).

What state propaganda do is creating narratives and a certain way of thinking of the audience through de facto controlled media and social platforms. Through a half-truth technique it creates a parallel reality a person lives in and defends this reality as only one possible. Those ones who live in other reality are labeled agents, traitors, nuts, crazies etc. You are a shining example of it.

I love a democratic Ukraine, too bad I have never seen it.

We're not democratic here in the US either. If a person is in line with "the narrative", then they're doing great, if they're not, they're ostracized, canceled, and their career is in jeopardy, they lose their voice by being de-platformed, they're restricted or even banned, fired..etc. In some cases, they're even surveilled or paid a visit by a government acronym like the FBI, DHS, DEA, ATF, NYPD, etc. In a worst-case scenario, you get criminally prosecuted, convicted, and imprisoned, for some bullshit charge or something you didn't even do. If the government wants to charge you with a crime to get rid of you, they'll find something or they'll turn you into a criminal by framing you, tempting you to break the law..etc.

What I just described is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to repression in our country. I have a family member, who likes to save her money, in cash, and hardly uses her bank for savings. All the money that she has in cash is reported to the government when she files her taxes. She has all of the documentation, showing how she pays her taxes, and yet when she went on vacation with her husband and children to Las Vegas from Arizona, the highway patrol stopped her husband and ordered them out of the car. They then asked (demanded) to search their car, and asked her husband if he had a large sum of cash with him, and he said no, but his wife, was carrying 12 thousand dollars in cash, and said "I have 12K, in my purse". She admitted it, she doesn't want any trouble with the law. She left her purse in the car.

They ended up confiscating, (i.e. seizing/asset forfeiture), all of her hard-earned money, even though they knew, they weren't drug dealers, just a family going on vacation to Las Vegas. They took her money and she had to spend thousands of dollars in attorney fees, to get her money back. She had to go to court. Is this a "liberal democracy"? You do something that is 100% legal, and the government still takes your property, under the mere pretext, of suspicion that you're a criminal. In my cousin's case, a housewife who has a home-based business makes good money, and she's suspected of being a drug dealer because she has 12K in her purse. Are we living in a democracy? No.

If this shit happens in Russia, the Putin-haters, are the first ones, to crap on Putin, Russia, "look at how oppressive the Russian state is, robbing people's hard-earned money"..etc. But if it's here in the USA, you say "Meh, that's just the way it is, that's the price we have to pay to live in the best country in the universe"...etc. The hypocrisy is amazing.

 

[AntonToo]

You know, dude, this your post reminds me of arguments of one Russian here when we had a similar discussion about censorship in Russia some time ago. All his arguments were exactly the same - no one directly controlled what he wrote, he had access to any Western news sites and social platforms etc etc; and hence Russia has a freedom of speech and expression.

Well then you were simply too ignorant to apreciate the stark difference let alone be able to explain it.


Russia has effectively destroyed any independent journalism. State TV, an extension of Kremlin propaganda machinery is just about all that is left.

Russia has effectively banned the right to protest.

Russia has specific laws that would be unconstitutional in United States and a direct violation of 1st Amendment that guarantees the freedom of speech.

Russian Discredetation of Army Law for example - a law so vague that anyone publicly contradicting Russian Deparment of Defense (some irony there) re. the war can be sent to jail for 15 years.

Russia also has no real independent court system to protect people's rights, if Kremlin wants someone convicted, they get convicted, it's as simple as that.

Finally, Russia has banned from participation, jailed or killed off any real opposition. There are no elections in Russia, there are elections of Putin.


If you don't understand these HUGE differences between America and Russia then you obviously don't understand a basic difference between a totalitarian state and an open democracy.

 

[ESay]

We're not democratic here in the US either. If a person is in line with "the narrative", then they're doing great, if they're not, they're ostracized, canceled, and their career is in jeopardy, they lose their voice by being de-platformed, they're restricted or even banned, fired..etc. In some cases, they're even surveilled or paid a visit by a government acronym like the FBI, DHS, DEA, ATF, NYPD, etc. In a worst-case scenario, you get criminally prosecuted, convicted, and imprisoned, for some bullshit charge or something you didn't even do. If the government wants to charge you with a crime to get rid of you, they'll find something or they'll turn you into a criminal by framing you, tempting you to break the law..etc.

What I just described is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to repression in our country. I have a family member, who likes to save her money, in cash, and hardly uses her bank for savings. All the money that she has in cash is reported to the government when she files her taxes. She has all of the documentation, showing how she pays her taxes, and yet when she went on vacation with her husband and children to Las Vegas from Arizona, the highway patrol stopped her husband and ordered them out of the car. They then asked (demanded) to search their car, and asked her husband if he had a large sum of cash with him, and he said no, but his wife, was carrying 12 thousand dollars in cash, and said "I have 12K, in my purse". She admitted it, she doesn't want any trouble with the law. She left her purse in the car.

They ended up confiscating, (i.e. seizing/asset forfeiture), all of her hard-earned money, even though they knew, they weren't drug dealers, just a family going on vacation to Las Vegas. They took her money and she had to spend thousands of dollars in attorney fees, to get her money back. She had to go to court. Is this a "liberal democracy"? You do something that is 100% legal, and the government still takes your property, under the mere pretext, of suspicion that you're a criminal. In my cousin's case, a housewife who has a home-based business makes good money, and she's suspected of being a drug dealer because she has 12K in her purse. Are we living in a democracy? No.

If this shit happens in Russia, you're the first one, to crap on Putin, Russia, "look at how oppressive the Russian state is"..etc. But if it's here in the USA, you say "Meh, that's just the way it is, that's the price we have to pay to live in the best country in the universe"...etc. The hypocrisy is amazing.

What happened to your relative is just insanity in my view. My country has a lot of stupid regulations, but there is no one that would allow the cops to 'confiscate' money being based on some suspicions.

 

[AntonToo]

What happened to your relative is just insanity in my view. My country has a lot of stupid regulations, but there is no one that would allow the cops to 'confiscate' money being based on some suspicions.

You are reading ignorant ramblings from a nutbag and are nodding along because you don't know better.


Las Vegas from Arizona, the highway patrol stopped her husband and ordered them out of the car.

A traffic stop without any reasonable suspicion is illegal, story is missing key explanation why the car was pulled over and why they were ordered out of the car.

They ended up confiscating, (i.e. seizing/asset forfeiture), all of her hard-earned money, even though they knew, they weren't drug dealers, just a family going on vacation to Las Vegas. They took her money and she had to spend thousands of dollars in attorney fees, to get her money back. She had to go to court.

Again the story doesn't add up. How would they possibly "know" without an investigation?

So she went to court, argued her case and got her money back....what about any of that sounds like a repressive state?

 

[ESay]

Well then you were simply too ignorant to apreciate the stark difference let alone be able to explain it.


Russia has effectively destroyed any independent journalism. State TV, an extension of Kremlin propaganda machinery is just about all that is left.

Russia has effectively banned the right to protest.

Russia has specific laws that would be unconstitutional in United States and a direct violation of 1st Amendment that guarantees the freedom of speech.

Russian Discredetation of Army Law for example - a law so vague that anyone publicly contradicting Russian Deparment of Defense (some irony there) re. the war can be sent to jail for 15 years.

Russia also has no real independent court system to protect people's rights, if Kremlin wants someone convicted, they get convicted, it's as simple as that.

Finally, Russia has banned from participation, jailed or killed off any real opposition. There are no elections in Russia, there are elections of Putin.


If you don't understand these HUGE differences between America and Russia then you obviously don't understand a basic difference between a totalitarian state and an open democracy.

You seem a bit slow in understanding. Above I wrote about a parallel reality you guys live (that Russian in Russia, and you Russian in America). There is not any point to try to change your minds, because you will always resort to state sponsored narratives.

 

[ESay]

You are reading ignorant ramblings from a nutbag and are nodding along because you don't know better.

You think he is lying? Maybe, I really don't know. But try to address what he wrote, rather him personally.

 

[TruthNotBS]

What happened to your relative is just insanity in my view. My country has a lot of stupid regulations, but there is no one that would allow the cops to 'confiscate' money being based on some suspicions.

In the last part of what I said, I said that "you" would be hating on Putin and Russia if this happened in Russia. I wasn't referring to you personally but in general. The Putin-haters would be crapping on Russia, if the Russian police were doing this, but if it happens here in the USA, the Putin-haters, say nothing. America is a "liberal democracy", despite all of the evidence to the contrary.

 

[TruthNotBS]

You are reading ignorant ramblings from a nutbag and are nodding along because you don't know better.

If I'm a "nutbag", you're a sack of shit. That's an even worse "bag" to be. A pathetic, punk, shit-bag, that's what you are.