2 ms·

Or maybe he actually doesn't want to kill the civilians but wants to overthrow the government that he believes is targeting Russians in Eastern Ukraine and wish

Or maybe he actually doesn't want to kill the civilians but wants to overthrow the government that he believes is targeting Russians in Eastern Ukraine and wishes to deploy US missiles on Russian borders? I don't think we can find a diplomatic solution unless we truly try to understand the enemy. Saying he did this with no reason doesn't help this. There's always a reason for any war. Bush had a reason to invade Iraq after all, didn't he? What was the real reason? Putin views this as a proxy war between US and Russia. Cuban missile crisis was similar: US placed nukes in Turkey, too close for Russia's liking. Russia said they'd place nukes in Cuba. After US threatened WW3 a deal was reached and both sides pulled their nukes. We could have achieved a similar deal and saved countless lived. But for whatever reason nobody wanted to negotiate with Putin. That would be fine if NATO would actually protect Ukraine instead of leaving them to fight on their own.

drran 5y ago
You are saying that Pooking kills civilians because he don't want to kill civilians. It's looks like you are as crazy or rational as Pooking, so you can reason like him. However, normal people cannot think like crazy people, so they just declare a crazy person as «crazy» and try to isolate them instead of understanding them. Actually, I tried to understand Pooking by inducing paranoia in myself. When I did that, all his actions become quite logical. He sees RF as victim of evil NATO. Any action of NATO is a step in evil plan to destroy RF. RF is so smart, so they see the evil plan of NATO, while others are blind, or pretend that they doesn't understand, or are playing their roles in the evil plan. Your text is quite logical when I'm switching to «paranoia» mode.
- NicoJuicy 5y ago
  If you add the variable of the gas supplies found in Crimea, it makes even more sense. He wants to keep control over Europe and that would have been an instant loss as soon as production went live. I believe the takeover over Crimea was primarily for this. The rest was a result of what he thought "preparation" to cement commodities/gas within his influence. He's a bit jealous of China too. Russia has all this territory and doesn't even remotely gets the respect he screams for, at least he isn't getting it from the west. It's a tiny man with a big ego.
Etherlord87 5y ago
I can agree on many issues regarding the Iraq war, I think we all heard about the "weapons of mass destruction" that turned out to be false (well, never proven at least). It wasn't the only reason, though [1]. A very important quote from there: > UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan described the war as illegal, saying in a September 2004 interview that it was "not in conformity with the Security Council" However, I find comparing Ukraine to Iraq simply unconvincing. The latter had a recent history of aggression [2], which largely fueled the suspicion about the "weapons of mass destruction". Comparing saddam husein [3] to Volodymyr Zelenskyy also fails spectacularly. The comparison to the Cuban Missile Crisis is a miss too: in Ukraine the opposite happened, the nuclear weaponry was removed which was the Ukraine's part of the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances [4]. However russia doesn't respect its part: > 1. The Russian Federation [...] respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine. That's why I call it symmetrism: on one side there's an aggressive country, run by a tyrant with proven crimes against humanity, on the other a democratic country that wants to be free and independent and choose its allies. But putin considers it aggression. It's one thing if it's a valid casus belli - people thinking so I consider to be unreasonable. Another thing is, that putin calls a lot of things an aggression against russia. Recently he called sanctions such aggression. So now pretty much the entire world, in this madman's mind, has attacked russia and *IF* we accept the casus belli used against Ukraine, we have to accept a cassus belli against any other country putin attacks next. In other words, the idea behind cassus belli corrupted to the point where it's useless. It's like defining "cold" as colder that a quadrillion °C - now everything is cold, even the center of the Sun. The word became useless. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationale_for_the_Iraq_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationale_for_the_Iraq_War [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Kuwait https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Kuwait [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_Saddam_Hussein https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_Saddam_Hussein [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Securit...
- akrymski 5y ago
  Copy-paste of a comment from here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfArW6zppYw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfArW6zppYw Here’s the situation and the order of events that led to this invasion: Pro-Russian government was in power pre-2014. Violent coup overthrew the government in 2014 and installed a pro western, anti Russian government. This caused the mostly ethnic Russian region of Donbass to declare independence and break away from Ukraine, resulting in war. Russia tacitly supported them, but did not recognise them. The Minsk Accords was supposed to end the fighting in 2015, but Ukraine has not lived up to the agreement. Ukraine has been shelling and bombing the region on and off for 8 years now. Putin finally decided enough is enough and recognised the region as independent. He sent troops into the area to protect it and his invasion of Ukraine is meant to destroy the Ukrainian military to prevent them from attacking Donbass. Now its up to you whether you think Putin is sincere or he's just using it as an excuse to grab Ukrainian territory. Geopolitics is complicated and believing anyone is innocent in geopolitics is ludicrous at best.

drran 5y ago

You are saying that Pooking kills civilians because he don't want to kill civilians. It's looks like you are as crazy or rational as Pooking, so you can reason like him. However, normal people cannot think like crazy people, so they just declare a crazy person as «crazy» and try to isolate them instead of understanding them. Actually, I tried to understand Pooking by inducing paranoia in myself. When I did that, all his actions become quite logical. He sees RF as victim of evil NATO. Any action of NATO is a step in evil plan to destroy RF. RF is so smart, so they see the evil plan of NATO, while others are blind, or pretend that they doesn't understand, or are playing their roles in the evil plan. Your text is quite logical when I'm switching to «paranoia» mode.

NicoJuicy 5y ago
If you add the variable of the gas supplies found in Crimea, it makes even more sense. He wants to keep control over Europe and that would have been an instant loss as soon as production went live. I believe the takeover over Crimea was primarily for this. The rest was a result of what he thought "preparation" to cement commodities/gas within his influence. He's a bit jealous of China too. Russia has all this territory and doesn't even remotely gets the respect he screams for, at least he isn't getting it from the west. It's a tiny man with a big ego.

Etherlord87 5y ago

I can agree on many issues regarding the Iraq war, I think we all heard about the "weapons of mass destruction" that turned out to be false (well, never proven at least). It wasn't the only reason, though [1]. A very important quote from there: > UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan described the war as illegal, saying in a September 2004 interview that it was "not in conformity with the Security Council" However, I find comparing Ukraine to Iraq simply unconvincing. The latter had a recent history of aggression [2], which largely fueled the suspicion about the "weapons of mass destruction". Comparing saddam husein [3] to Volodymyr Zelenskyy also fails spectacularly. The comparison to the Cuban Missile Crisis is a miss too: in Ukraine the opposite happened, the nuclear weaponry was removed which was the Ukraine's part of the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances [4]. However russia doesn't respect its part: > 1. The Russian Federation [...] respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine. That's why I call it symmetrism: on one side there's an aggressive country, run by a tyrant with proven crimes against humanity, on the other a democratic country that wants to be free and independent and choose its allies. But putin considers it aggression. It's one thing if it's a valid casus belli - people thinking so I consider to be unreasonable. Another thing is, that putin calls a lot of things an aggression against russia. Recently he called sanctions such aggression. So now pretty much the entire world, in this madman's mind, has attacked russia and *IF* we accept the casus belli used against Ukraine, we have to accept a cassus belli against any other country putin attacks next. In other words, the idea behind cassus belli corrupted to the point where it's useless. It's like defining "cold" as colder that a quadrillion °C - now everything is cold, even the center of the Sun. The word became useless. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationale_for_the_Iraq_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationale_for_the_Iraq_War [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Kuwait https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Kuwait [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_Saddam_Hussein https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_Saddam_Hussein [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Securit...

akrymski 5y ago
Copy-paste of a comment from here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfArW6zppYw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfArW6zppYw Here’s the situation and the order of events that led to this invasion: Pro-Russian government was in power pre-2014. Violent coup overthrew the government in 2014 and installed a pro western, anti Russian government. This caused the mostly ethnic Russian region of Donbass to declare independence and break away from Ukraine, resulting in war. Russia tacitly supported them, but did not recognise them. The Minsk Accords was supposed to end the fighting in 2015, but Ukraine has not lived up to the agreement. Ukraine has been shelling and bombing the region on and off for 8 years now. Putin finally decided enough is enough and recognised the region as independent. He sent troops into the area to protect it and his invasion of Ukraine is meant to destroy the Ukrainian military to prevent them from attacking Donbass. Now its up to you whether you think Putin is sincere or he's just using it as an excuse to grab Ukrainian territory. Geopolitics is complicated and believing anyone is innocent in geopolitics is ludicrous at best.