4 ms·

It'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 ca

It'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 ago
Ive 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 ago
  RT 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...
    - ethanwillis 2y ago
      > I encourage you to read this More whataboutism telling me the US is bad which is supposed to distract me from what Russia is doing. It's probably illegal or is illegal? Be honest, does the Russian government arrest people for holding a sign that says "No War" or even signs that are blank? Pieces of paper that are blank? RT using the term war for English speaking audiences is allowed because it is state sanctioned propaganda so you can come here and point to how they say it. Well, they also come here and pay people like Tim Pool to say things too that they won't say in Russia.
      - pydry 2y ago
        >It's probably illegal or is illegal? Not illegal in the slightest. >Russian government arrest people for holding a sign that says "No War" or even signs that are blank? Yep, but coz theyre protesting against the war not coz theyre calling it a war. It's exactly like that time British police threatened protestors in London with arrest for holding up a blank sign. They were threatened with arrest for the expression of their implied beliefs as well, at precisely a time that the government was feeling overly sensitive. There are certain specific things that can happen in most countries that really bring out the authoritatian side of the government.
        ethanwillis 2y ago
        How can you protest something that's not officially happening? It's just an SMO after all. Honestly you and all your bot account friends should just go crawl back into whatever kremlin gutter you came out of. Maybe one day you'll learn to get off your knees.
  - selivanovp 2y ago
    >RT is a propaganda organization. RT is no more propaganda than CNN or any other Western mainstream media. It's just different people who set the narratives. >And the US didn't shy away from calling it a war in their media when talking to their own public. Once again, so called SMO is called war in Russia, just not in official documents and announcements, because juridically it's not a war, at least up to this day.
selivanovp 2y ago
>But what is the official Russian position on it? Can it be called a war there? Of course it can and is called war in Russia. You just missing the point: war is a juridical term. Technically neither Russia nor Ukraine are in war with each other. That's why officially it's called "Special Military Operation", and in Ukraine it was for years "Antiterrorists Operation", and recently rebranded as "armed aggression of Russian Federation against Ukraine sovereignty". >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? Your should learn some history and geography. Crimea is a peninsula in Black Sea, majority of population are ethnic Russians. Russian special forces entered Crimea after the coup in Kiev, and peacefully blocked Ukrainian military there and let referendum happen, so it was annexed. Most of Ukrainian soldiers stayed in Crimea and were from Crimea, got Russian citizenship just like all the other population. Those who refused were peacefully allowed to return to Ukrainian territory. Donbas is an Eastern region of Ukraine. First of all, how coup in Kiev happened? Ukrainian nationalists, driven by the idea of Ukraine dropping sovereignty and joining EU and NATO, attacked multiple military and police headquarters, got armed, entered Kiev, and after several weeks of riots in the capital that ended with mass shooting there, managed to force elected President of Ukraine and his government to flee. If you're unaware, this president was installed mostly by people in the Eastern Ukraine, opposing to previous one, that was voted in by Western part of Ukraine. So, basically, Western oligarchs (Ukraine during its 30+ years of independence was ruled by several oligarch clans originating from either Western (agricultural) or Eastern (industrial) part of Ukraine), their nationalists backed by USA embassy and Viki Nuland herself seized power in Ukraine. So Donbas with some help from remaining Eastern oligarchs started the uprising in Donetsk and Lughansk, and declared, that they want their rights for their language, religion etc be preserved (Most of Eastern Ukraine population are ethnic Russians and basically was part of Russia until 1922 or so, when Lenin gifted this territory and people to Ukrainian SSR). These people also started to raid police and military bases, got armed. So, coup government in Ukraine, instead of talking to these people, announced "antiterrorists operation" and moved army to get Donbass under control, and they started from bombing Lughansk. That's basically how it turned to war. As to civilian plane, it was shot down many weeks after direct confrontation started, and it's up to this day very arguable who actually shot it down, as the court in Netherlands turned this case into the same farce as investigation of Nord Stream sabotage, where they were using only facts that suits their version, and ignored everything, that didn't fit the picture.

pydry 2y ago

Ive 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 ago
RT 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...
  - ethanwillis 2y ago
    > I encourage you to read this More whataboutism telling me the US is bad which is supposed to distract me from what Russia is doing. It's probably illegal or is illegal? Be honest, does the Russian government arrest people for holding a sign that says "No War" or even signs that are blank? Pieces of paper that are blank? RT using the term war for English speaking audiences is allowed because it is state sanctioned propaganda so you can come here and point to how they say it. Well, they also come here and pay people like Tim Pool to say things too that they won't say in Russia.
    - pydry 2y ago
      >It's probably illegal or is illegal? Not illegal in the slightest. >Russian government arrest people for holding a sign that says "No War" or even signs that are blank? Yep, but coz theyre protesting against the war not coz theyre calling it a war. It's exactly like that time British police threatened protestors in London with arrest for holding up a blank sign. They were threatened with arrest for the expression of their implied beliefs as well, at precisely a time that the government was feeling overly sensitive. There are certain specific things that can happen in most countries that really bring out the authoritatian side of the government.
      - ethanwillis 2y ago
        How can you protest something that's not officially happening? It's just an SMO after all. Honestly you and all your bot account friends should just go crawl back into whatever kremlin gutter you came out of. Maybe one day you'll learn to get off your knees.
- selivanovp 2y ago
  >RT is a propaganda organization. RT is no more propaganda than CNN or any other Western mainstream media. It's just different people who set the narratives. >And the US didn't shy away from calling it a war in their media when talking to their own public. Once again, so called SMO is called war in Russia, just not in official documents and announcements, because juridically it's not a war, at least up to this day.

selivanovp 2y ago

>But what is the official Russian position on it? Can it be called a war there? Of course it can and is called war in Russia. You just missing the point: war is a juridical term. Technically neither Russia nor Ukraine are in war with each other. That's why officially it's called "Special Military Operation", and in Ukraine it was for years "Antiterrorists Operation", and recently rebranded as "armed aggression of Russian Federation against Ukraine sovereignty". >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? Your should learn some history and geography. Crimea is a peninsula in Black Sea, majority of population are ethnic Russians. Russian special forces entered Crimea after the coup in Kiev, and peacefully blocked Ukrainian military there and let referendum happen, so it was annexed. Most of Ukrainian soldiers stayed in Crimea and were from Crimea, got Russian citizenship just like all the other population. Those who refused were peacefully allowed to return to Ukrainian territory. Donbas is an Eastern region of Ukraine. First of all, how coup in Kiev happened? Ukrainian nationalists, driven by the idea of Ukraine dropping sovereignty and joining EU and NATO, attacked multiple military and police headquarters, got armed, entered Kiev, and after several weeks of riots in the capital that ended with mass shooting there, managed to force elected President of Ukraine and his government to flee. If you're unaware, this president was installed mostly by people in the Eastern Ukraine, opposing to previous one, that was voted in by Western part of Ukraine. So, basically, Western oligarchs (Ukraine during its 30+ years of independence was ruled by several oligarch clans originating from either Western (agricultural) or Eastern (industrial) part of Ukraine), their nationalists backed by USA embassy and Viki Nuland herself seized power in Ukraine. So Donbas with some help from remaining Eastern oligarchs started the uprising in Donetsk and Lughansk, and declared, that they want their rights for their language, religion etc be preserved (Most of Eastern Ukraine population are ethnic Russians and basically was part of Russia until 1922 or so, when Lenin gifted this territory and people to Ukrainian SSR). These people also started to raid police and military bases, got armed. So, coup government in Ukraine, instead of talking to these people, announced "antiterrorists operation" and moved army to get Donbass under control, and they started from bombing Lughansk. That's basically how it turned to war. As to civilian plane, it was shot down many weeks after direct confrontation started, and it's up to this day very arguable who actually shot it down, as the court in Netherlands turned this case into the same farce as investigation of Nord Stream sabotage, where they were using only facts that suits their version, and ignored everything, that didn't fit the picture.