I see you are totally incapable to answer all the detailed arguments I just put forward.
When a man has nothing left than just utter an insulting word after having been proved blatantly wrong after a flow of detailed arguments... then I confidently know I won the debate! :)
Now on to your latest nonsensical comment:
I previously said:
No excuse in the world can give any country the right to just take an annexe others peoples lands and territories, period. Confiscating others belongings and lands is called SOCIALISM. What Putin has done is a policy exclusively based on a socialist doctrine called “LEBENSRAUM”. Can you imagine if America had decided to do the same in Iraq or Afghanistan?? Just annexing those countries and saying: “It’s American land now !”, from now on exclusively the American flag will be allowed to wave all over Iraq and Afghanistan!”. Can you imagine the outcry that would have caused in the world??
To that you responded:
So, you hate Israel right? You also hate the U.S. too, correct?
My answer:
Israel was ATTACKED by warmongering Arabs.
They managed to win the war and occupied some areas after that war. That’s it! The occupied territories will one day be given back, once Israel has the security guarantees it will not be attacked and invaded once again!
Ukraine has NEVER tried to invade Russia! Right?
So Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a pure act of LEBENSRAUM policies. It’s a crime.
Then you said this:
Should we give back the majority of the U.S.?
My answer:
I’m talking about the modern era post world war II for God’s sake. I’m not talking about how countries were shaping up centuries ago. I’m not talking about when Napoleon momentarily held large parts of Europe either, or what happened between countries before Jesus Christ was born!
In this post WWII era no coutries are supposed to take others countries anymore. WWII ended that warmongering.
Only the Soviet-Union / Russia have maintained a hysterical warmongering agenda alive. Even to this very day !
Contrary to your woke defeatist attitude, and your childish insults against me, I will again say to you :
“The only thing needed for evil to succeed, is for good men to do nothing.”
You have decided to not denounce Russia’s criminal LEBENSRAUM policies, that makes you an approver of that policy.
Well, it just so happens that before that time in our country this was transpiring in Ukraine:
During the 14th and 15th centuries, present-day Ukrainian territories came under the rule of four external powers: the Golden Horde, the Crimean Khanate, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Crown of the Kingdom of Poland. The latter two would then merge into the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth following the Union of Krewo and Union of Lublin. Meanwhile, the Ottoman Empire emerged as a major regional power in and around the Black Sea, through protectorates like the Crimean Khanate, as well as directly-administered territory.
After a 1648 rebellion of the Cossacks against the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, Hetman Bohdan Khmelnytsky agreed to the Treaty of Pereyaslav in January 1654. The exact nature of the relationship established by this treaty between the Cossack Hetmanate and Russia remains a matter of scholarly controversy. The agreement precipitated the Russo-Polish War of 1654–67 and the failed Treaty of Hadiach, which would have formed a Polish–Lithuanian–Ruthenian Commonwealth. In consequence, by the Treaty of Perpetual Peace, signed in 1686, the eastern portion of Ukraine (east of the Dnieper River) was to come under Russian rule, 146,000 rubles were to be paid to Poland as compensation for the loss of right-bank Ukraine, and the parties agreed not to sign a separate treaty with the Ottoman Empire. The treaty was strongly opposed in Poland and was not ratified by the Polish–Lithuanian Sejm until 1710. The legal legitimacy of its ratification has been disputed. According to Jacek Staszewski, the treaty was not confirmed by a resolution of the Sejm until its 1764 session.
During the Great Northern War, Hetman Ivan Mazepa allied with Charles XII of Sweden in 1708. However, the Great Frost of 1709 greatly weakened the Swedish army. Following the Battle of Poltava later in 1709, there was a diminishment in Hetmanate power, culminating with the disestablishment of the Cossack Hetmanate in the 1760s and the destruction of the Zaporozhian Sich in the 1770s. Following the Partitions of Poland (1772–1795) and the Russian conquest of the Crimean Khanate, the Russian Empire and Habsburg Austria were in control of all the territories that constitute present-day Ukraine for over a hundred years. Ukrainian nationalism developed in the 19th century.
So, Russia's acquisition of Ukraine didn't occur in modern time either.
Russia was seized, just like the U.S. is being seized, by the same communist that created the USSR. I suspect the communist seizing the US have similar designs.
Now, when the USSR Russia could not stop Ukraine from leaving in 1991, claimed claimed land that had been Russian land. The land had been inhabited for generations by Russian speaking peoples who saw themselves as Ukrainians.
All was good, and Russia left them alone until 2014, when they got upset because the people had felt they were betrayed. They were betrayed alright, but not by Russia, it was by the EU. Yanukovych had every intention of signing both trade agreements, which was the best option for Ukraine.
When the EU found out what Yanukovych intended to do they told him unequivocally that if he signed Russian's trade agreement their trade agreement offer was off the table.
Yanukovych had agreed to calling an early election so that the people could elect a new president. But then violence broke out and several protestors were killed which quickly escalated into a coup d'état. That is when Putin decided to take back the Crimean that Khrushchev had given to Ukraine in 1954, in what I suspect was an offering for amends to the Holodomor famine that killed millions of Ukrainians in the 1932-1933 time period, even though the famine also affected Russia itself form the period of 1930-1933.
As a result of the coup d'état is when Putin decided to take it back The Crimea. For 8 long yeas Putin tried to get the international community involved in a peaceful resolution of the ongoing hostilities in eastern Ukraine. Not only were they not interested, they were intentionally lying as they schemed to expand the conflict to include ousting Putin.
So, your claim that Putin illegally invaded is BS. They threatened Russia with a coup d'état. Which is similar to what the Arabs did to Israel, but their intentions were to commit genocide.
This is what I mean though, you selectively choose what is legitimate, and what is aggression. There was definitely aggression aimed at Putin, & Russia. Putin was forced into acting.
But you are an idiot who really doesn't know or understand the entire story. Instead all you do is spew forth propaganda intended to sway the useful idiots, of which you number in that category.
If some country had the same intentions for the the US, we would have invaded with or without the UN's blessing. Putin also didn't have the influence over the UN, that the US has, so that was not a route available to Putin.
Perhaps now you understand why I can't address all of the ignorant details you put forth. There is no short answer.