Indeed, but then not surprising. Russia haven’t ever had developed a mature democracy, it merely had a very brief chance at taking long road of becoming one, and everything went off the rails in just a decade or so. Kind of a handicap when it comes to keeping bloodthirsty politicians and siloviki in check.
Actually, a lot would change. Each one of the Ukrainian lives destroyed is a whole life destroyed. A damaged car is a setback for a family. There are whole cities and villages razed in Ukraine, fields polluted or rigged with explosives. Countless lives lost; each person's story and potential ended by some Russian's "command-following" drone or missile strike.
No, Russia isn't the only one, but _is_ a cause of a lot of suffering and resources wasted.
I am considering the absolute impact on those affected, which is the most relevant for this discussion. Millions are not "a few". And it's absolutely unnecessary, the aggressor has always been in the position to pull back and leave (or not attack at all). Everyone but _a few_ war profiteers suffers from war, because it requires hours of work (weapons) diverted towards destroying other hours of work (cars, houses, infrastructure), occupying workers' time by ordering them to kill future workers, all of which could go towards increasing production instead of decreasing it, which does affect global markets and thus people globally.
Had? Ukraine still has the option to capitulate and give up its territory, what kind of argument is that? Separatists who take up arms are a fair target, they are the ones violently changing the status quo. When both sides kill civilians in a war started by one side, that side's further escalation is not at all justified by "killing ppl of donbass", so let's not manipulatively paint a "both sides" picture as if there isn't a huge difference
You can debate if the 'Revolution of Dignity' was a good thing or not, but some other country impeaching their leader for human rights violations and holding new elections is a poor reason to invade it. Obviously Putin thought Yanukovych was his guy and if the Ukranians dared to kick him out and have democracy he'd just have to invade and install a new puppet but is that really a coup? Google has:
>A popular uprising is not typically considered a coup. An uprising is a broad, public, and often spontaneous mass movement aimed at social or political change, while a coup (coup d'état) is a rapid seizure of power by a small, elite group, such as the military or political insiders.
Yeah like the famous French Coup. You never hear a Ukrainian say our country had a coup. It's a Russian propaganda lie so they can feel better about murdering their peaceful democratic neighbours to try to steal their stuff.
> 2014 coup ousted democratically elected president
..whose forces killed unarmed protestors, and who abandoned the country (after the forces under his chain of command killed protestors, so he can mostly thank himself and his goons for "fearing for his life", don't try that "argument" on me). After years of straying Ukraine away from democracy, after democratically elected parliament decided "enough is enough" and even broke ranks to oust him, you dare to speak about democracy?
Some people "disagreed"? They took up arms. Terrorists. I would say the same about the Euromaidan protestors who killed the police, had the police not killed first. Again pro-russians are the ones to escalate violence.
I already said what Minsk "agreement" is. A capitulation to Russia, not a just solution. Of course Ukraine would arm itself to reclaim its borders from the aggressor. You also missed a keyword here: _defensive_ war against Russia.
No. Foreign mercenaries killed the protestors. That's how revolutions are done, it's a ratchet event that doesn't allow the history to wind back.
Once there is blood spilled - full force ahead, no turning back.
Btw, you are forgetting that Ukranian police was torched by the protesters using molotov cocktails.
And that's weapons. According to your logic Police had the right to shoot, but they didn't.
They didn't because Yanukovich ordered not to shoot at the protesters.
You really need to do some reading pal.
Or try attacking police assuming you are in a USA - that will teach you a lesson about what happens in a real democracy when police is attacked. And I fully support such a response.
If Russia didn't want a war there wouldn't be one. I didn't make anything.
As someone living in a country with a hostile neighbour, I'm glad the governments currently continue to coexist, even if mine could get an economic advantage or "a safety buffer" by invading the other. NATO's peaceful expansion towards east is not just, but it isn't a sufficient cause of war either, far from it.
Ukraine needed to arm itself for protecting its borders and reclaiming its territory taken by Russian separatists. Decide whether you want to play the "Russia's captured territory" or "Lugansk and Donbas Republic" that were no Russian business card. Btw, you keep acting as if it all started in 2022. Since 2014. Russia has been the aggressor, and I won't waste any more time on your manipulative time-wasting, "both sides" rethoric that's frankly disgusting when I remember that you well know what it supports
The aggressors were the west and the Ukranian "nationalists" (I avoided using the right word) seeking to cancel the history of the people in Ukraine, replacing it with their own absurd version rehabilitating ukrainian nazi collaborationists, giving their imaginary version of the famine before the war (I heard a figure of "60 million killed" from one person), and seeking to cancel Russian language and Russian culture there. In particular in Crimea, where the absolute majority had no ties with Ukranian language or culture.
This is how "separatists" you are complaining about appeared in the first place. And then yes, Russia stepped in, while before it sought only economical and political influence. Just as your beloved west did. And tell me now who owns your land..
Right, the coup of 2014 ousted democratically elected president and part of a country disagreed. As far as russian vs ukranian... It's basically one nation. Many russians have ukranian blood in them, many ukranians have russian blood in them. There are million's of ukranians working in russia today. The divide was engineered from outside and it was well engineered. Divide and concur is an old strategy and the west is very-very good at it.
Russian and Ukranians are too gullible. Less so now, but in 2014 they were like children.
And Ukranians at Maidan were treated like children by Nuland who brought them cookies, quite fittingly.
> Right, the coup of 2014 ousted democratically elected president
As I said earlier. Everything was fine while he was just "democratically" elected. And when he _started_ eroding democracy. But he took it too far going against the will of the people after being democratically elected, that he was democratically ousted.
> part of a country disagreed
A part of country, militarily supported by neighbouring Russia, took up arms. Started killing. Terrorist separatists.
> As far as russian vs ukranian... It's basically one nation.
I have already heard that kind of fantasy propaganda applied to a similar aggression. Your tricks are old. And the claim is inconsequential for the discussion tbh.
> The divide was engineered from outside and it was well engineered. Divide and concur is an old strategy and the west is very-very good at it.
I like how you, after all this, decided it's the west that is the only one to be named as the perpetrator of divide and conquer. I'd be surprised if "the west" didn't have its influence, but the fast deterioration happening under Yanukovych didn't really need outside influence to gain opposition because it's not at all logical Ukrainians would want it. Russians would because his policies were very pro-Russian. But they have Russia for that—killing Ukrainians to secede from Ukraine makes them wrong.
ah, here comes whataboutism. And you are correct. It would be great if russia didn't destroy Afghanistan and Syria.
Also, equating conflicts is a very shallow and inadequate manipulation tool. For example, russians razed dozens of cities in Ukraine, establish torture and rape chambers, use rape, torture, execution of POW as policy today.
"all wars are bad" doesn't mean that whatever russia does is way worse.
Obviously something a bit more on the hyperbolic sensationalist side, but closer to the truth than the simplistic ignore-your-own-eyes contrarianism peddled by Russian propaganda. FWIW your comment is the type that makes me go back and upvote GP.
