Ah I'm sorry man, it really was honestly not my intent to cast you as some Putin shill but I guess it is bound to appear that way regardless of whether I includ

Ah I'm sorry man, it really was honestly not my intent to cast you as some Putin shill but I guess it is bound to appear that way regardless of whether I included the disclaimer :) But I didn't include it flippantly, there was a reason behind why I raised this, I just didn't articulate it very well. The reason I mentioned it is that I've seen this line so many times in the context of these pro-Putin/Z guys and the stuff they copy-paste every time that it nearly lost all meaning to me - it's just line noise that is the same as all the other Putin propaganda. The only way it could be elevated beyond that is if it was validated by Russia also invading Finland (which they definitely won't ... I hope). Because that right there is very real NATO expansion on Russia's doorstep, a massive new NATO border and two very militarily-capable nations joining, in Putin's eyes, an organization hellbent on your destruction. Remember that Ukraine's accession was certainly not guaranteed prior to 2014, was definitely not going to happen while Luhansk, Donetsk and Crimea were occupied (since that would mean NATO was suddenly and willingly at war with Russia) and is now a near-certainty if Ukraine succeed in driving Russia out. So it just seems so self-defeating - if the intent is to reduce conflict with NATO and discourage any countries from joining then why do something that demonstrates the value of being a NATO member in a country that was not in the position to become a NATO member? I cannot stress enough how much of a profoundly bone-headed own goal it is, if that was the intent. Sorry I'm maybe just repeating myself at this point. But it just seems more insane a reason to me than a quick patriotic land-grab or some "regime change" does, regardless of what we anyone in the Kremlin says.