3 ms·
>Yeah but. Why the USA? Because 1. It's an easy and the most glaring example of lecturing people to do one thing, but doing the opposite themselves. 2. It was
by selivanovp 2y ago
>Yeah but. Why the USA?
Because 1. It's an easy and the most glaring example of lecturing people to do one thing, but doing the opposite themselves. 2. It was actually the country, that Russia wanted to be like during 80s and 90s, USA was a role model, but turned out to be full of shit. And the waking call happened, when USA bombed and shred to pieces Yugoslavia.
>If I say "Russia invaded Ukraine", why do I always get the response "but the USA.."
Once again, reasons are obvious if you're aware of the history.
1. USA can't lecture anyone about invading or annexing other countries, as USA invades one country after another just in the last few decades, and right now occupies Eastern part of Syria that's full of oil, and publicly brags that it's their oil. BTW, not o hard to notice a recent rhetoric in USA mass media and among politicians, that it's all about Ukraine resources and who gonna get what depending on the outcome of the war.
2. The war in Ukraine is a direct result of USA meddling in their elections in 2004 and 2013-2014, and desire to bring their military bases after the puppet government was installed. Russia was fine with sovereign Ukraine, even with a puppet like Yushchenko we were able to negotiate and live more or less peacefully, but military bases idea, kicking Russia out of Sevastopol is what spiralled this into violence.
>A deep rooted sentiment of inferiority, that triggers every time you say something bad about their country, which they hate, and respond by attacking the country they admire but can't admit.
Russians do have some sentiment on inferiority, and that's why we actually really glad when some respected and knowledgeable foreigner arrives and intend to cooperate, even teach us. For centuries such people were getting really rich working in Russia, even if they were mediocre back in their countries. But you're totally misguided on the attack part. Attack or self defense phase initiated only in the case of demonstratively refusal to make any reasonable compromise and direct hostile actions. Russian history is full of wars, we do not enjoy violence and know very well the cost in lives.
Coming back to Ukraine, it's not so hard to remember, that Putin tried really hard to avoid this war. Crimea was peacefully annexed specifically to block any attempt to bring Ukraine into NATO legally, and secure our interests in the Black Sea, after it was obvious, that newly installed puppets gonna do exactly this (later Ukraine changed their constitution and replaced their intention to be a sovereign and neutral state to be a NATO member). Then Minsk agreements were introduced, for Ukraine government to get in touch with reality, but as we know now, from public admissions, USA, Germany and France intentionally sabotaged these agreements, pushing Ukraine into a military resolution (and at the same time they were introducing more and more sanctions towards Russia, lying that we do not respect our part of the deal). Then, Ukraine finally started to move their heavy equipment to Donbass in the early Autumn of 2021, and Zelensky publicly announced, that he won't respect Minsk agreements (it meant escalation in Donbass). Putin then spent several month in the Winter of 2021-2022 trying to make a deal with USA, to prevent direct war. But USA declared, that they can do whatever they want, build their bases wherever they can etc. So, we got an initial invasion of Feb 2022, when Russian army pushed to Kiev and Putin immediately proposed just another plan of how to stop all this. Ukraine government was ready to sign it, but Boris arrived and told them that they have to fight (also a public knowledge now, with multiple admissions of people involved in the process). It's not so hard to notice, that up to this day, Putin is ready to negotiate and stop this violence, it's Ukraine and the NATO countries behind their back are refusing to. And it's very easy to target USA and Western propaganda in general, that publicly lies up to this day, that "mad Vlad just woke up and invaded a sovereign country without any reason, because he's evil".
>Without looking at polls, what do you think is the percentage of the Russian population that answered Yes to the question: if given the chance to move to the USA, would you? If you believe what you're saying, you probably think this is a very small number.
I don't know if it's a very small number, small number or anything else. What I do know, is that there's still a myth in some countries, that Russia is some country that is behind an Iron Wall, that is hard to escape. Reality is different. Russia is open to the whole world, you can buy a ticket to fly to any country. We have millions of foreign tourists and migrants for decades. Anyone who really wanted to leave Russia did it already, or can do it today, for example. And a lot of people who did, returned already, because they learnt, that what they thought about some countries is not equal to how life there actually is. Reality is, that in the last 20 years Russia made a huge leap in quality of life in every sphere, and for me personally there's no desire to live in any other country, because I like it here.
- ethanwillis 2y agoIt's interesting to me how you say "war" here on an English speaking and mostly American website. But what is the official Russian position on it? Can it be called a war there? It can but with repercussions. Why don't you use the official terms for it or would that not play over so well when trying to drum up support for what this really is. Aggressive Russian expansion. The "peaceful" annexation of Crimea also came with Russian funding of separatist groups in eastern Ukraine and the shooting down of civilian aircraft. How peaceful is that?
- pydry 2y agoIve seen RT call it a war. When Russian propaganda calls it an "SMO" it's not because theyre allergic to the word "war" but because they legally didnt declare war. This is not unusual. The US, for instance, didnt declare war on Iraq when it launched its unprovoked invasion. >The "peaceful" annexation of Crimea also came with Russian funding of separatist groups in eastern Ukraine and the shooting down of civilian aircraft. How peaceful is that? Not very, but neither was the Andrey Parubiy led terrorist attack from Hotel Ukraina which kicked off this civil war. Kiev could have put him in prison for taking a sniper rifle to the top of the hotel and committing mass murder against peaceful protestors but instead he was elected to the Rada. The Ukrainian war hero Nadia Savchenko who identified him - she is still, ironically, the only person to be convicted and imprisoned in relation to the terrorist attack which kicked off this civil war.
- ethanwillis 2y agoRT is a propaganda organization. They say war because it's intended for an English speaking audience. Notice I haven't said anything about Ukraine being or not being "perfect." And the US didn't shy away from calling it a war in their media when talking to their own public. The topic being discussed is Russia's motives.
- pydry 2y ago>RT is a propaganda organization. Hence if they use the term war, that must mean it's probably not illegal to use the term war. >And the US didn't shy away from calling it a war in their media when talking to their own public. Putin is notorious for being a stickler for legalisms. As for why legally declaring war seems to have become passe in both Russia and the US, I encourage you to read this: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4hu7hc/the_us_congress_has_not_declared_war_since_1941/ https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4hu7hc/the_u...