Ah, much better post, where you actually outline your agenda. Your stance appears to be that because others suffered from war, Ukrainians should suffer too, esp

Ah, much better post, where you actually outline your agenda. Your stance appears to be that because others suffered from war, Ukrainians should suffer too, especially if otherwise it means you have expensive gas. Do I have your position right? I can't find anything about a NATO deployment to Syria. Can you point me to something? NATO aligned countries in Syria <> NATO deployment in Syria. Like your definition of occupation you continue to blend facts and false claims to push your position. Again that is what is known as propaganda. Stretch the truth (NATO aligned countries in conflicts) to appear to have support for your false claims (NATO occupation/NATO deployments that don't exist). I have many Russian speaking friends in Ukraine. Before the war they identified themselves as 'Russians from Ukraine'. They were educated at Moscow University, speak Russian not Ukrainian, and carry Ukrainian and Russian passports. They now identify as Ukrainian. They are not being saved. But again you are not above using propaganda. In this case you present a false casus belli (that Russia is saving minorities in Ukraine) to sanitize your position of supporting (or at the least not opposing) Russia's war of aggression because bad things happened in the past and also gas prices. Yes, the USA sucks. Yes, the USA has done bad things. Yes, Russia's invasion of Ukraine has destabilized oil and food markets. I don't see how any of that justifies that Ukrainian should surrender their right to self determination or should prevent governments choosing to take actions to support Ukraine. You present classic 'What about'ism in order to prevent doing good now because bad has been done in the past. It is a form of propaganda not designed to get people to believe something, but to manipulate them into doing nothing, and leads to nothing but apathy. If you can get the good decent people paralyzed with your what aboutism (because oppressors don't care about past atrocities) only aggressors like Putin benefit because there is less resistance against them. You want to setup a world where aggressors go unchecked because we can't have our gas prices going up and bad things have always happened. That sounds like a horrific world, and one we suffered through in WW2. Should England not have fought in WW2 because they had a horrible record of repressive empire? That seems to be your argument.