Posted on 10/22/2025 2:39:32 AM PDT by ganeemead
Not sure what the claim of a new war is about....
lol we always know where he is “going”😎
Nice reveal! Ganeemead’s as dishonest as ever!
everything they have is given to them.
Phoenix8 “Why in the world would Putin go in and genocide the people in Eastern Ukraine who liked him and wanted to secede TO Russia”
Most of the people in eastern Ukraine didn’t want to join the Russian federation. Why? Because Ukraine gave more freedom (and cash) to its regions than Muscowy does - outside Moscow and Sankt Petarsburg life can be pretty bleak in the vast hinterlands.
Putin’s goal was to conquer lands and establish himself as a great Ruski hero. Muscowy’s leaders have never really cared if ordinary Russians die for them.
PJ-Comix “2022. They had a peace deal worked out and then Boris Johnson told Ukraine to nix the deal because NATO would supply them with all the weapons they need”
That is a misleading narrative at best.
There was no near-finalized peace deal in early 2022 that was derailed by Boris Johnson.
While there were indeed EXPLORATORY talks in Istanbul from March to april 2022, YOUR CLAIM DISTORTS FACTs.
Talks began in Belarus in late Feb 2022 and shifted to Istanbul on March 29, 2022, producing the Istanbul communique - a FRAMEWORK OUTLINE, not a binging agreement. What did this include?
- Ukraine to have caps on military size, limits on weapons and demilitarization of certain areas - to allow Muscowy to walk in unopposed at a later date
- Russian concessions? Withdrawal to Feb 2022 lines, but retaining Crimea and Donbas
Note that this was a communique not any kind of agreement.
As for Boris, he pledged NATO commitment to arm Ukraine if Putin kept up his aggressive attack. This was encouragement amid Russian battle gains - it still seemed iin April that Russia would overrun Odessa etc.
Ukrainian negotiators were not going to sign away their military and alliances as Putin wanted - he wanted them utterly disarmed so he could walk in a few years later and grab all of Ukraine.
The terms would have not only left Ukraine vulnerable with a tiny army, no alliance, no deterraence weapons, but it would have rewarded Putin’s aggression (retaining Crimea and the Donbas) and there would have been an open invitation for future invasions.
Putin later admited the Feb 2022 invasion was aimed at regime change AND territorial seizure - the famed Soviet salami tactics.
SINCE THEN Ukraine has reclaimed HALF of the land that the Russian forces occupied in April 2022.
So, your claims don’t stand up to the light of day
1. why not a real multi-national effort? —> The Ukrainians wouldn’t mind having peacekeeping forces from say Japan or Brazil or India in the Donbas. As long as there is some way to guarantee that Putin won’t come back for more.
What are your thinking of?
2. “involved open, monitored elections in the disputed oblasts. “ —> that would work, but 1. it must be only people who can prove they lived there before 2014, not recent people moved from the Russian federation AND 2. it must include the Donbas residents who had to flee to other parts of Ukraine (or the world). however, Putin doesn’t want this
3. “Commit to rebuilding Ukraine” — that doesn’t need to be in the conditions. companies would vie to rebuild in a build-and-lease fashion
4. Both of these suggestions were made to Putin by Macron and by Modi if not by others. He does not want this
5. “from Europe to b the h out of Russia” - really? Who? when?
“Heck, hold in Warsaw”
hmm... you really don’t know the history of the region, do you? :) that is a funny suggestion that would be rejected by Moscow immediately. I can explain why this is funny if you wish, or the following books can help (I can distill it if you would like)
I would suggest reading the following books by Timothy Snyder:
1. The Reconstruction of nations - Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania, Belarus 1569-1999
2. Bloodlands
and this book by Norman Davies: God’s playground - A History of Poland
and Adam Zamoyskis’
1. Warsaw 1920 Lenin’s failed conquest of Europe
2. The Polish Way: A Thousand-Year History of the Poles and Their Culture (this one is optional, but still a good read)
In short (ok, I can’t help pontificating)
- Kyivan Rus was a mobocracy of city states that fought each other.
- The Mongols came and crushed them all and inaugurated 200 years of the Mongol “yoke”
- But the city-state (well village at the outset) of Moscow did pretty well out of it. It started as tributary of Vladimir-Suzdal (one of the many city states of Kyivan Rus). But the DuKe of Muscowy promoted himself to Grand-Duke and became the tax collector for the Great Khan.
- Later, as the Mongol Khaganate splintered, the Grand-Duke of Muscowy remained tax collector, but now to the Islamicized Golden Horde (of Batu Khan, grandson of Chingisz and the first Mongol to convert to Islam) and remained that way for 2 centuries.
- As the Golden horde itself splintered into the blue, white hordes and then into the khanates of Crimea, Kazan, Astrakhan, Siberia etc., the Grand Duke of Muscowy became one of the competitors - so yes, Moscow is a rebirth of the Mongol Khaganate
- At the same time (13th century) - the pagan Lithuanians conquered the western Kyivan Rus states (most of what is now Belarus and western Ukraine) - the state had pagan Lithuanian rulers, but the Lords and the bureaucracy were all eastern Orthodox and Byelorussian speaking (more related to Old Church Slavonic than present day Russian or Ukrainian).
- so the Grand Duke of the Lithuanians and the Grand Duke of Muscowy were competitors to “regather the Rus”.
- the Grand Duke Jagiełło of Lithuania was courted by the Polish magnates to marry the queen-apparent Jadwiga (she was of the Angevin dynasty - yes, related to the Angevin dynasty of England). This was after he converted of course.
- this started the 400 year Poland-Lithuania commonwealth (union) ruled by the same ruler
- Krakow (later Warsaw) then vied with Moscow for the lands between them.
So that’s why the suggestion of Warsaw is kinda funny :)
Welcome back, the only true Russia supporter on this forum.
I don’t care who’s winning, it changes weekly and it’s a European problem not America’s.
Anything else is irrelevant to me.
I said above that no one is winninh
I forgot to include this link.
https://cdn.ceps.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/WD2017-08%20The%20Donbas%20blockade.pdf
If you look at the facts of pre 2014 polling you will see that it is far from Ukrainian propaganda.
“
The Donbass civilians were living and suffered extremely harsh conditions, due to the “legal, political, economic and ideological barriers isolating Ukrainian citizens in rebel-held territories” constructed by Kiev”
You really think Kyiv created those rebel held territories? Those were created by Moscow.
And those were Muscowite occupied territories so of the people were suffering it was because Moscow was making them suffer.
Or do you think Seoul is to blame for the suffering of North Koreans?
Anke69,it’s clear you’re drawing from narratives that portray Ukraine as the aggressor in Donbas, but the reality is that Russia’s hybrid war since 2014 created the humanitarian crisis in Donbas, not Ukrainian policy. Ukraine sought peace through diplomacy (e.g., Minsk agreements), but Russia armed and directed separatists, leading to over 14,000 deaths by 2022—mostly from Russian-backed shelling.
Let’s start by focusing on facts about living conditions, violence, fighters’ identities, Zelenskyy’s efforts, and the 2021 buildup. My original point stands: Pre-2014, Donbas thrived under Ukraine’s decentralized system with more regional freedoms and funds than Russia’s unequal “hinterlands,” where poverty outside Moscow/St. Petersburg exceeds 20% in many areas.
Living Conditions in Donbas: Not a “Crippling Blockade” by Kyiv, But War and Separatist/Russian Mismanagement
You claim Kyiv’s 2017 blockade caused a “humanitarian crisis” with denied pensions/welfare, quoting a minister’s “no pity” remark. This misrepresents the facts:
1. The crisis stemmed from Russia’s 2014 invasion and separatist seizures, not Ukrainian malice.
2. Pre-2014, Donbas was Ukraine’s industrial hub (15-20% of GDP), with higher wages and autonomy than Russia’s depressed regions (e.g., North Caucasus poverty at 40%).
3. Post-2014 war destroyed infrastructure, but separatist areas fared worse due to “nationalization” (seizure) of factories, corruption, and Russian dependency.
The 2017 Blockade: It started as a vigilante action by Ukrainian veterans against separatist “raiders” stealing coal via fake trade schemes, not a Kyiv plot.
Kyiv formalized it to stop funding separatists (who diverted 20-30% of coal profits to arms like Hamas).
Exceptions for humanitarian aid were allowed, but separatists blocked convoys (e.g., UN aid declined 50% due to L/DPR restrictions).
What was the Impact? Separatist GDP fell 60-70% by 2017 (vs. Ukraine’s 2-3% growth); pensions halted because separatists seized banks, forcing 1.5M to cross lines for Ukrainian payments.
Russia propped up separatists with $1-2B/year, but locals faced shortages (e.g., 70% unemployment, hyperinflation).
Your “No Pity” Quote: This is a distorted 2017 remark by Finance Minister Oleksandr Danyliuk about not pitying separatist “terrorists” disrupting trade—not civilians.
As I said,In Russian hinterlands (e.g., Ingushetia), poverty hit 40% in 2021, with wages 1/3 of Moscow’s.
Ukraine saw a GDP drop 30% in 2014-15 but recovered to 3% growth by 2019; separatist areas stagnated at 20-30% of pre-war levels.
Freedom? Ukraine’s decentralization (post-2014) gave regions €1B+ in local budgets; separatists imposed martial law, suppressing dissent.
2. **Violence and Azov: Not “Neo-Nazis Killing Their Own,” But Russian Shelling and Atrocities**
You accuse Azov of mass civilian killings and claim separatists fought “to the death” fearing Ukrainian “supremacists.” This inverts reality: 90% of civilian deaths (3,400 total) came from separatist/Russian shelling of Ukrainian-held areas.
Azov (integrated into National Guard in 2014) had early abuses (UN: ~20 cases of looting/torture in 2014-15), but no “mass killings”—your claims rely on Russian propaganda (e.g., DPR’s unverified Mariupol figures).
Russian forces/separatists committed 80% of documented war crimes (e.g., MH17 downing, torture).
- Why Fight? Separatists (35,000 by 2021) were coerced: Forced conscription, Russian “advisors,” and threats of execution for deserters.
50% casualty rates by 2022; many were locals manipulated by Kremlin propaganda, not “cash-rich” fighters fearing Kyiv.
Ukraine investigated Azov abuses (e.g., 2015 prosecutions); separatists executed dissenters.
3. Separatist Fighters yes, they were Mostly Local Ukrainians, But Heavily Backed by Russian Mercenaries and Troops
You cite “Ukrainian nationalist fighters” data showing separatists as “overwhelmingly” Ukrainians, contradicting Kyiv’s “mercenary” claims. True—~70% were locals (2014-2022), but Russia supplied 30,000+ troops/mercenaries (e.g., Wagner from 2014) and 90% of weapons.
4. Zelenskyy’s Diplomacy: He Pushed for Peace, But Nationalists and Russia Blocked It
You say Zelenskyy tried a 2019 referendum but was rebuffed by Azov, then chose “hot war” in 2021. Half-true: He pursued Minsk II (ceasefires, swaps), reducing deaths 80% by 2021.
2019 Zolote: Veterans (not just Azov) protested disengagement as “surrender”; Zelenskyy confronted them emotionally but proceeded elsewhere (e.g., 3/4 pilots disengaged).
- the 2021 Decree was for *Crimea* de-occupation (diplomatic/humanitarian focus), not the “hot war” on Donbas
Zelenskyy: Prisoner swaps (300+ in 2019), ceasefires (deaths fell 90%). Russia violated Minsk 100x more.
Ukraine Offered More Than Russia Ever Could
Pre-2014 Donbas had autonomy, EU ties, and growth; Russia’s “hinterlands” suffer 20-40% poverty, crumbling infrastructure (e.g., 22% no plumbing).
War wrecked it—Russia’s fault, not Kyiv’s. Peace? Ukraine begged for it; Putin chose invasion. Sources: UN OHCHR, OSCE, Crisis Group, World Bank. What do you think caused the 2014 spike in shelling—Kyiv or Girkin’s mercenaries?
---- "...avoids posting the actual name of his sources for his threads." I again checked, and the title of the thread is the title of the video. As to your concern about "actual name," all sorts of Freepers are doing this, including the pro-Ukrainian alongside the pro-Russian. Lots of OPs post very large graphics, also, which are not adequately sourced, many coming from someone's Facebook. And some Freepers are busy flogging their blogs, and only their blogs. All in all, skepticism in so much is warranted.
As to "Not exactly America friendly," the whole of Democrat Party and Democratic Socialists of America, and much of the "globalist-interventionist" crowd seem to me also "not exactly America friendly."
America, to me, is most gravely threatened by the massive increase in national debt these last twenty five years. Paying out trillions for globalist and internationalist projects and aims.
Your participation in the very long thread "Attack on Europe" shows you have a foot in the camp of 'spend more money,' which parallels 'bipartisanship' when it aligns with your geopolitical aims, though of course not when it aligns with others' geopolitical aims.
My view: stop much, much more than is being curtailed today. Out of the UN, and out of NATO (an alliance with Turkey) and great caution when dealing with the EU as with China.
Ok thanks. You are absolutely correct, I am ignorant about the history of the region. Just wishful thinking because I would like to see the war over.
Oh no worries. I was pretty ignorant of this place history before I moved here in 2010.
If you do get a chance to read the books, do, they are really good reads.
The shortest and easiest to get through is Warsaw 1920 by Zamoyski. Maybe 100 pages and easy to get through. I highly recommend it
One thing that drives me crazy is an oft quoted opinion in the Midwest.
“I will go hunt, the city folk will starve but we will be ok if civilization falls apart”.
I would guess in the first season nearly every deer, rabbit and squirrel will be eaten and the rest so terrified they will be hiding in the worst swamps, briar patches there are. It’s a , at best, band aid.
For example in the 5 counties below Bloomington Indiana there are an estimated 17,000 Deer and 270,000 people.
That works out to about 18 people per deer and IF that deer has 100 pounds of meat each person would get about 6 pounds. Enough to go 3-4 days after which they would start consuming their own fat reserves…in other words start starving after 4 days.
And that area of the state has more deer than I would guess most areas of the country.
There is a reason civilization was impossible to start until agriculture developed.
I agree with most if your stats but think you are going a little to easy on the Ukranian military killing of civilians pre-current war.
Estimates show about 40-45% of civilians were killed by the Ukrainian army in indiscriminate shelling. 55%-60% by Russian Army/separatists doing the same.
Now if that is what you meant by saying “most” then again I agree. But 45-55% in my book is equal.
“ High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and Amnesty International do not always disaggregate by perpetrator, intent, or method in aggregate totals. OHCHR’s comprehensive tracking focuses on verified conflict-related civilian deaths in Donetsk and Luhansk regions (totaling at least 3,404 from April 2014 to December 2021, excluding the MH17 crash which added 298), but attributes roughly 40–50% to Ukrainian forces overall—primarily from shelling and artillery—without a precise “indiscriminate” breakdown”—GROK
Amnesty International actually complained several times about the Ukr army careless use of area bombardment in towns filled with civilians, especially by using those big rockets that spray bomblets all over an area (cluster munitions?).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.