jim hardy said:
I only know what i read in the newspapers..
So lect me run a simple fact check:
While the Putin regime’s actions are unfair to Ukraine and have shocked the West, they reflect Great Power sensitivity to borders and demand for respect.
For example - why should it be a
military threat? Do you imagine unprovoked NATO invading nuclear armed Russia?
Moreover NATO needing to open Ukrainian front and not being enough to attack from Baltic States, Alaska, Turkey, Japan or just from sea coast at Arctic ocean?
Ukraine is crucial in such highly probable scenario, isn't it?
NATO incorporated most of Moscow’s former allies which had provided a buffer to the traditional invasion route from Europe.
Allies? Author should either run a fact check or stop speaking misleading language.
It surprising to me, all my life, I thought that I lived in a formerly subjugated country
But Western attempts to dominate border territories historically part of Imperial Russia as well as Soviet Union looked particularly threatening to many Russians.
So local people are s****** for ever because were already conquered by Russian more than once and that makes new conquest justifiable?
I'm curious would a bandit that already robbed you a few times, be somewhat entitled to rob you once more? (following that logic, it would be less wrong than robbing a new guy)
Anyway, do you live in territory that was historically part of British empire? You don't feel obliged to pay some back taxes to British monarch, do you?
Worse, in Ukraine the West helped fund the “Orange Revolution” which brought to power Viktor Yushchenko, a virulent critic of Russia—which he accused (and later recanted) of trying to poison him—who wanted his nation to join NATO. The next president hailed from Ukraine’s pro-Russian east, but maintained Kiev’s distance from Moscow and won Russian subsidies for merely delaying his signature on a trade agreement with Europe. Then European states and America backed protestors demanding that the government accept an EU trade agreement that required painful reforms and placed Europe before Russia economically.
So many weasel words...
"helped to fund"? So it means anyway that it generally speaking financed locally? Does it mention that in the same time Russia was mending in Ukrainian affairs even more?
"who wanted his nation to join NATO"
Another weasel word. Was it part of any real political agenda, while this idea had microscopic support in Ukraine?
"backed protestors"
Orally - by making a few speeches and trying to mediate a resolution. Sounds impressive, comparing to dominating hypothesis that it was Russia who hired (a) sniper(s) to turn protest into a blood bath.
"painful reforms"
Like fighting corruption. Or stopping market distorting subsidies. Sounds quite sinister.
