The 3 great MYTHS of the UKRAINIAN WAR - VisualPolitik EN

[@VisualPolitikEN]

At minute 13:45 we erroneously stated that President Viktor Yanukovych gave the title of Hero of Ukraine to Stepan Bandera. In fact this title was awarded by Viktor Yushchenko and later withdrawn by an administrative court in Donetsk, a ruling that was also upheld by the High Administrative Court of Ukraine. We regret the error and apologize for it. We have received many comments and e-mails on this video. Our intention all along has been to dismantle some of the arguments most often used to justify the invasion of Ukraine. From the outset, we on VisualPolitik have made clear our strong condemnation of this unjustified aggression and our full support for the Ukrainian people, society and authorities.

[@stingyblue8189]

How do you feel about the “unjustified aggression” by the US and its allies against Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Niger, Nigeria, Yemen, Venezuela, Syria, and Honduras to name a few?

[@user-lt4zu5pl7c]

"to dismantle some of the arguments most often used to justify the invasion of Ukraine" what if it WAS justified? "BUT OH NO" you say, "PEOPLE DIED SO WE NEED TO BE MAD". Modern logic dictating that ALL war is wrong is just plain bullshit made up by generation of losers who have never known hardship, suffering or sacrifice. Arguments that VP raised against Russia's concerns were complete horse shit and not worth anybody listening to i.e. "tHeY WaNt 2 JoIn So It CaNt Be ExPaNsIoN". Russia was justified in A) invading at the behest of the donbass republics for help (this was made precedent by Kosovo so WELL DONE NATO) and B) because NATO was literally threatening them with nuclear missiles on the border. Pentagon analysts were wet with the idea that they would be so close that Russia couldn't defend itself against a first strike. Did you read any of that or nah just CNN and Zelensky's twitter? This channel has jumped on the Russiaphobia bandwagon for a while now which is why I unsubscribed. Zero nuance in the way you look at "geopolitics" and you literally only acknowledge the western point of view every single time. Unconscious bias or legitimate propaganda... I can't tell but either way its so tiring to hear the same CNN White House talking points. Do you only get western sources and points of view? Maybe try reading different sources and try to get a more rounded opinion of the world that has more than just white western countries in it.

[@zharkoo]

Before you talk about russian "unjust agression" talk about the genocides US has commited in Vietnam, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan... if you talk about Russia without addressing the hundred times bigger crimes that the US has commited then you are just shallow and cheap propaganda, not an informative channel.

[@conorwhite2066]

You need to check some other of your facts Azov was already incorporated into the Ukraine military before Feb 2022. Now after the battle of Mariupol where they were evacuated, they are incorporated into the Russian gulags NATO has been training the Ukraine army since 2015 The reluctance to supply weapons before Feb 2022 was due to the neo nazi elements in the military

[@ovwieogheneobie2998]

I agree with you that you are against aggression just as I am, but suggesting nato has little influence and this present Kiev regime is innocent is not correct. First there are clear indication that America has hands in the uprising in Ukraine 2014, with American officials and senators supporting the movement and even discussion of who to handle the government before it was overthrown not to talk about financial support both ngo and media to drive public opinion westward, what will you call that. Let’s imagine Ukraine becomes a NATO member and America decides to have a navy base in Crimea, do u see that’s not a very good idea. Let’s check the incident that happened in Odessa after the overthrowing of the government that lead to the death of pro Russian protesters in the union house and till date no investigation has been carried out, instead media laughed about it. Odessa is governed by a Georgian who schooled in America with close ties with western intelligence and was involved in the coup in Georgia, then became the president of Georgia and fleed back to America only to be seen in the uprise in Ukraine den made a governor of Odessa after the coup. You should be aware of this facts I am certain. Plz correct me if they are all propaganda or the ban of Russian language in Ukraine, or ban of communist party, pro Russian party or the arrest of people with pro Russian views, u re certainly aware of this. UN didn’t approve removal of Libya leader, second invasion of Iraq, invasion of Syria or multiple act of aggression by America and NATO that’s fact. I will end by saying that I do no support aggression by the fact is that when national Interest and international law clashes, national interest always comes first even for Americans and NATO countries

[@elgrandjefe4661]

I follow VP EN and enjoy a lot of the vids, but the bit on Cuba is either deceitful or ignorant. The Cuban missile crisis in 1962 was directly caused by the US positioning Hercules nuclear missiles right next to the USSR in Italy and Turkey, in 1959. The soviets returned the gift. The resolution of the crisis included the US taking its missiles off Turkey/italy as well as the USSR removing them from Cuba, though at the time the part about their having started the issue was kept off the public view. Also in 1961 - before the crisis - the US launched the bay of pigs invasion - which failed - and after 1962, for 60 years, kept Cuba under a blockade. So, if Cuba is the example, the conclusion is totally the reverse. We may also ask Grenada and the whole of Latin America whether they think the US would respect democracy and national determination. Or make up a lie for the world to justify an invasion like IRAQ.

[@tomasfontes3616]

Just commented about it

[@mauroferrao8857]

💯💯💯

[@JamesSmith-uw4nx]

This is why visual politik can be full of shit. Just morr western centrism, no neutral take

[@cryptofun6899]

Well said

[@caledorian]

Very well stated!

[@PatsFanGermany]

BTW: The part where you state that the USA has never invaded Cuba ist blatantly wrong. Infact the USA invaded Cuba twice. Once during the Spanish American war (that's why Guantanamo Bay belongs to the USA to this day). And then there wss the failed Bay of Pigs invasion.

[@jontalbot1]

Yes this is an important point to consider when discussing the shelling of civilians by Russia. The US is to blame

[@pogo1140]

The US did not invade Cuba because it was a threat to the US, it invaded simply because it was in a war with Spain and Cuba was the nearest Spanish territory, that and a US warship blew up in Cuba.

[@zolandia5262]

Well the 1898 invasion during the Spanish American war and Cuban war of independence against Spain was not because Cuba wanted to ally with another state. The Bay of Pigs invasion was in April '61 and the missile crisis in October '62. He said 'since then' (missile crisis), the US has not tried to invade Cuba again. Despite Cuba still continuing to be allied with the USSR then Russia.

[@PatsFanGermany]

@@jontalbot1 Not at all. I was merely pointing out an error in the video.

[@ianthesiow3013]

The (USA) United States call it "Liberation" instead of "Invasion". That was what US call it in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia and the list goes on... Why the double standard? Confused... Please enlighten. Genuine question... Instances of the United States "liberated" or overthrowing, or attempting to overthrow, a foreign government since the Second World War. (* indicates successful ouster of a government) China 1949 to early 1960s Albania 1949-53 East Germany 1950s Iran 1953 * Guatemala 1954 * Costa Rica mid-1950s Syria 1956-7 Egypt 1957 Indonesia 1957-8 British Guiana 1953-64 * Iraq 1963 * North Vietnam 1945-73 Cambodia 1955-70 * Laos 1958 *, 1959 *, 1960 * Ecuador 1960-63 * Congo 1960 * France 1965 Brazil 1962-64 * Dominican Republic 1963 * Cuba 1959 to present Bolivia 1964 * Indonesia 1965 * Ghana 1966 * Chile 1964-73 * Greece 1967 * Costa Rica 1970-71 Bolivia 1971 * Australia 1973-75 * Angola 1975, 1980s Zaire 1975 Portugal 1974-76 * Jamaica 1976-80 * Seychelles 1979-81 Chad 1981-82 * Grenada 1983 * South Yemen 1982-84 Suriname 1982-84 Fiji 1987 * Libya 1980s Nicaragua 1981-90 * Panama 1989 * Bulgaria 1990 * Albania 1991 * Iraq 1991 Afghanistan 1980s * Somalia 1993 Yugoslavia 1999-2000 * Ecuador 2000 * Afghanistan 2001 * Venezuela 2002 * Iraq 2003 * Haiti 2004 * Somalia 2007 to present Honduras 2009 * Libya 2011 * Syria 2012 Ukraine 2014 * 2014 - 2022 - 6 countries yet to verify. Pakistan 2022 *

[@davisjalappat1425]

I don't think the US Cuba issue was addressed properly . The bay of pigs invasion was literally financed and organised by the US so 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@tobiasbauer198]

You might be right, but USA nether tryed to annex large parts of foreign land (with the exception of texas, but this is really long time ago). Consider the difference, USA may finance a political war or separatist groups to overthrow one hostile government, but Putin doesn't care about the attitude of the government, as Selenskyj wanted peace talks with russia from the beginning of his presidency, but putin invaded anyway, because he doesn't accept any right off self-determination of Ukrainian people, infact he doesn't accept that same right on behalf of his own people too, so it can't be called really suprising.

[@Manikanta-hh7wp]

He is US simp, what do you expect from him?

[@sionbarzad5371]

Exactly, the USA never shied away from banging its chest to promote its own interests, I mean remember what it did to Iraq for a lie?

[@sowpur]

@@tobiasbauer198 Bingo! Most logical response I've seen to a completely illogical and provocative argument.

[@davisjalappat1425]

@@tobiasbauer198 I'm not Pro Putin with that being said, The US does not have to invade any of it's neighbours as they are on good terms, what is usually does is install puppet govt and cause insurgencies and separatist movement or use sanctions in places they don't like and control them. It's still violence and infringement on the sovereignty of other countries. Also the US did annex the Philippines from the Spanish if I'm not wrong?

[@John.McMillan]

4:33 That was in response to the US putting missiles in Turkey, and yes, The US did try to invade. The bay of pigs. But they chose to leave their allies to die and pulled back.

[@s.aladdin5593]

Those are small mistakes here and there. But don't worry about it. They all go in one direction.

[@renehernandez3053]

@@s.aladdin5593 but it completely changes what he is saying ir trying yo say

[@alfonstabz9741]

the americans send cubans to bay of pigs. russian sent their own army know the difference.

[@osvansalinas1141]

Bay of Pigs happened before the Missile Crisis. Also, it was a not a US invasion, it rather was a CIA-backed attempt by anti-communist Cubans to take back their country.

[@John.McMillan]

@@osvansalinas1141 There was supposed to be US air support and ground support for a backed rebel coup to take over Cuba amd over throw the Castro regime. Literally a invasion. Its even called "The Bay of Pigs invasion"

[@Cben9212]

You've got it wrong Im afraid, it was pro west Victor Yushenko who granted Stephan Bandera a hero of Ukraine status, pro Russia Victor Yanukovych revoked that status in 2011.

[@bigsmile9173]

You're right, I also find it strange that he didn't mention the numerous number of statues and streets named after Bandera. I can't blame him, if he said too much of the truth KZbin would ban the video/demonetise it.

[@MrMediator24]

@@bigsmile9173 so what? A lot of streets and statues in Russia are in honour of Lenin who in terms of pure casualties is way worse than Bandera. Plus it's not entirely certain if he was involved in nazi crimes. After all, he was in put in concentration camp. And also there is plenty of memorials in Russia of RLA figures

[@bigsmile9173]

@Geoffrey Uno I agree, when will Russia leave? No one's knows. The flags that keeps going up tells me they're here to stay and will destroy the statues themselves.

[@bigsmile9173]

@Geoffrey Uno My only worry is what will be left of Ukraine by the time the Russians get exhausted? They have a very large amount of bombs and weapons that's hardly been touched yet, in 3 months Ukraine lost 25% of its Territory forever just like Crimea. By the time the Russians, however slowly, progress, it could be 50% of territory and countless Ukrainians deaths (you have to remember that Eastern Ukrainians are also fighting against Western Ukrainians). The bulk of the deaths on Russian's side is mainly Eastern Ukrainians i.e. "separatist"

[@bigsmile9173]

@Geoffrey Uno Good point, I only disagree on one thing, I don't think it's an easy choice for Russia simply because if they pull out the Donetsk People and Lugansk Republics will call Putin a traitor for abandoning them and going back to Russia. To me the only solution is to negotiate for the Donbass to be independent as per the Minsk Agreements (which was agreed by both the West and Russia). Russia will not abandon the Donbass or Kherson, there's a plan referendum for Kherson very soon, as soon as that happens Kherson will be lost forever as did Crimea. The sooner both leaders come to the negotiation table the better. If not the Russia may start eyeing Odessa, the city of Catherine the Great, and other areas. Ukraine will be completely destroyed, it'll be another Afghanistan or Iraq if this war continues.

[@ТимофейМакаренко-н9ю]

correction: Stepan Bandera was given the “Hero of Ukraine” award by the pro-Western Yushenko. Not the pro-Russian Yanukovich as you said in the video.

[@jameshorton3692]

Literal Nazis. Putin has Nazis on his door step. Wtf is he supposed to do?

[@aon10003]

It makes it worse not better.

[@GUSCRAWF0RD]

He’s totally right they should just nuke Ukraine it’s obviously a nazi country. 🌬👂 💨

[@GUSCRAWF0RD]

It’s also objectively wrong I looked it up

[@louisecorchevolle9241]

true it means the silliness of this video

[@johngreen9371]

Bandera was awarded the title of Hero of Ukraine not by pro-Russian Viktor Yanukovych, but by pro-western Viktor Yushchenko. In fact, under Yanukovych this decision was repealed.

[@АртемМаркин-й5э]

Yes, serious mistake made by the author

[@jdilla9245]

Not a mistake.. it was by choice

[@reddixiecrat]

Also no mention about Right Sector or Svoboda

[@АртемМаркин-й5э]

@@reddixiecrat None of them is presented in parliament. Is there any sense to name all nationalistic communuties around the world?

[@PavelTavankov]

@@АртемМаркин-й5э That one is the argument against parliament, not against right sector power and influence.

[@Sogartar]

The whole point of Mearsheimer's argument is that antagonizing Russia is not a smart strategic move for the US while they are trying to contain China. In his view Russia should have been brought into alliance with the West against China. That ship has obviously sailed unless there is a radical regime change in Russia.

[@IBACb]

The problem with Mearsheimer's position is that its "unrealistic" to think that an authoritarian russia would ever align with the west against China. It would not be in their interests to do so.

[@williamwyllie7072]

China has not demonstrated any threat to the West, the only threat is the Putin Monster and his pro-war government.

[@brianh9358]

When Putin came to power that chance for Russia to build a relationship with the West ended. Although at first he was willing to talk with the U.S. and Europe his ingrained animosity towards the west overcame any desire to improve relationships. He was a former KGB man and his eventual plans to regain the former Soviet territories inevitably led to where we are today.

[@fh5926]

China is not ten feet tall and made of steel. It is a concern but is not engaged in a war of aggression with many tens of thousands of dead

[@cholaempire]

By the way at one point Russia applied for NATO membership and somehow this "we're accepting who ever applies" logic didn't apply to them.

[@anteeko]

It is naive to think a neutral Ukraine would have stopped Russia. Ukraine represent a huge competition for Russia, they have gas, oil and gigantic food reserve, a successful Ukraine would have strongly diminish Russia worldwide market dominance. Fully annexing Ukraine would have given Russia enormous leverage over all the world market (Imagine, Russia would own most of the food production.. scary)

[@frankrenda2519]

ukraine is no competition for russia your silly

[@anteeko]

@@frankrenda2519 "ukraine is no competition for russia your silly" In 2013 huge reserve of Gas and oil has been discovered in Ukraine.. this would have created huge competition for putin fossile fuel and reduce his control over EU.

[@neodym5809]

@@frankrenda2519 in Food Production, it is. Ukraine is actually able to produce wheat of a quality higher than animal feed, unlike Russia

[@sboinkthelegday3892]

US citizens are enjoying "the good guys" controlling fracking oil as we speak🤡 Nix on Keystone Xl, nix on nordstream2 Can't let competition ruin a good grip on control of supply. And food production... obviously you start growing wheat ELSEWHERE you dingus.

[@frankrenda2519]

@@neodym5809 not even close to russia you dont know what your talking abput

[@stanleyqc2244]

You are wrong about Cuba. The US mobilized their armed forces for an invasion. Army, Marines, Air Force and Navy. Kennedy convinced the Generals in the Pentagon to wait. The blockade was to be used as a stepping stone to invasion. Kennedy explicitly told Khruschev that he had less than 24 hours left to officially state that he'd remove the missiles. In the last few hours he did, and the officials RAN to the Moscow Radio station to broadcast it. Had they been late the invasion would have begun. Plenty of videos on YT about it. Verified historical facts. Your premise about the US-Mexico is built on a false narrative of history.

[@user-lt4zu5pl7c]

Amen, complete lies and awful, unintelligent analysis regarding the USA. I wonder why they are pushing these false narratives. On purpose or are they just ignorant? Seems weird. Maybe they should just make their videos a live feed of Ukrainian government twitter. Its pretty much where their information comes from anyways.

[@stanleyqc2244]

@@user-lt4zu5pl7c You're right. Critical thinking seems to be absent from the general public. They just gulp down what is given to them!

[@sixmillionsilencedaccounts3517]

VisualPolitik=NATO/EU propaganda. It's easy to check on lies. That's why these they have to silence speech.

[@helmutzollner5496]

Allowing Russia to dictate Ukraine, it would be like Germany dictating France their politics.

[@Ryder2010G6]

Or France invading Belgium for having anti-French policies

[@antoine.fontanille9948]

France is a greater military power than Germany, if they dare cross the rhine again we will blast them with nukes.

[@deputykirsanov7314]

Uhhh they do. And yes, might is right in this world. America is allowed to bomb anyone they want, and the UN can cry all they want. Germany is allowed to dictate EU homosexual policies and force countries like Poland and Hungary to have gay parades. We live in such a world, deal with it

[@Ruder6163]

Kind of like of all the western nations are under the thumb of the US?

[@pogo1140]

@@TheFrmx Does France fly German aircraft? use German tanks? France does what France does.

[@reivax5742]

ca. 3:30 You seem to argue that nato has not undergone expansion, because its members have joined voluntarily. This is a non sequitur, as how the entity became greater is irrelevant to the fact that its growth is still expansion.

[@cmatthew2719]

I would call it semantics. When one uses such tactics you know in advance it's likely to be a weak argument one that cannot be taken seriously.

[@dranixrush3306]

@@cmatthew2719 Semantics matter. Just in this regard, not so much. Given the ultimate conclusion.

[@sixmillionsilencedaccounts3517]

VisualPolitik=NATO/EU propaganda. It's easy to check on lies. That's why these they have to silence speech. Remember, Soviet nuclear missiles didn't move to Cuba. Cuba moved to the missiles.

[@JeanLucCaptain]

yes using the fear of the big bad irredeemable Russia that has always been evil.

[@takix2007]

NATO has not *undergone* expansion, because that would suppose an active process on their part (which they did not). Had Russia not proved to be a bully state towards its neighbors again and again, new members would not have applied for membership to NATO, and NATO would have eventually stopped existing altogether.

[@AlexanderWeixelbaumer]

Putin wasn't afraid of NATO. He was afraid of the EU and pro-european thinking. Like democracy and free speech. This, right at his border would have encouraged his own russion people to abandon their leaders.

[@ilyap8453]

Democracy and free speech in Europe? Are you mad?

[@prodigiii712]

lol really that’s why EU wouldn’t support the results or referendum on Donbass. How is that “democracy and freedom” to go against the result of a referendum. Donbass residents speak Russian and Ukraine’s government banned Russian, give me a good reason why someone should vote to stay part of a state that bans his/her mother tongue.

[@abhilashpradhan7671]

@@prodigiii712 By that logic Chechnya wanted independence from Russia but what did the Russians do? Massacre them.

[@lordulberthellblaze6509]

@human being how's Navalny doing?

[@doradestroyer5821]

Exactly!! At least some of us remember Ukraine only wanted closer economic ties with the EU back in 2013

[@kostiantynsopiha3263]

Until Russian invasion in 2014 Ukraine had a law declaring itself a non-aligned state, meaning it by law could not have joined NATO. This was reflective of popular support: about 3:1 against vs. for NATO (51% mentioned here sounds like a random poll). The law of non-aligned state was repealed only in 2015, because "it was proven ineffective in providing Ukraine's security", obviously. The poll results also flipped to the opposite. So, if Russia was indeed driven by the desire to keep Ukraine out of NATO, it should not have invaded in the first place. Nato is just a pretext for Russian imperialist ambition, and everything thinking otherwise either does not know the fact or lies.

[@visiochannel2]

when clinton was in power one of his election "wins" was to direct the interest to ukraine and together with russia he was negotiaiting of things with russia , usa , and , ukrainien on the same table . At least his negotiation skills where so good that ukraine gave their old nukes away , so that clintons record in the office would be to reduse nuclear weapons in the world , and also archiewed those coals . Don´t know what else where in those negotions but there was somekind of understandings that if they would give nukes away russia would not invade . Maby the non-aligned state was somewhere on the table on those meetings . Then when russia broke those promises , i dont+ see why the other party of the promises should hold it´s own promises build on those mutual promises .

[@ArawnOfAnnwn]

You're forgetting that Russia invaded Crimea following the Maidan revolution. They didn't invade out of nowhere, they could already see the direction the country was turning. Leaving that out is disingenuous. NATO was also expected to not expand in the first place, yet it did, even before Russia invaded anyone. Russia had seen this already many times before. It didn't want to let it happen again.

[@Vlog-hu8gb]

@@ArawnOfAnnwn Russia had a base in Crimea, it didn't add a single soldier there besides what it already had. Crimes chose to merge with Russia via a referendum because there was a coup in Kiev

[@usapanda7303]

Russia trying to take Kiev right away should have been completely predictable. This channel and many others often say Russia and China are learning from USA. A quick drive to Baghdad and Kabul secured swift overthrow of the governments there. It’s reasonable to assume Russia would try that instead of slogging it out with fronts like WWI. Especially with the misunderstanding of Putin that the military was comparable to USA or France.

[@wojteks4712]

Sure, at face value m Maybe they believed their own propaganda and thought their military capabilities are comparable to one of US. Fortunately they aren't even close

[@TheDeanHaemel]

Uh… France? French military?? What? Are they going to beat you with a baguette? LMAO! Then again as poorly as the Russian military has performed, France could take them… 😂

[@Zankyo137]

@@TheDeanHaemel you realize that frence has among the strongest military of the EU, right?

[@TheDeanHaemel]

@@Zankyo137 Yes, totally kidding about the reputation of French "fighters"...😂

[@master_shifu4208]

@@TheDeanHaemel sure buddy, france is right behind britain in miliitary power, its image of surrender is old propaganda, made by the british during the napolonic wars, today france has one if the most powerfull armies, keep ur bs up krim bot

[@CarlosMartinsPT]

I see a lot of “historical perspective” being used to justify Russia’s invasion. But you’re right - history just gives the wrong perspective. Would it be acceptable for western countries to re-claim their African colonies, because they were there 500 years ago? No. It would not. Likewise, Ukraine invasion should not be “understood” as Russia taking back what’s hers. Russia’s invasion should be viewed by today’s perspective. An imoral assault on a fully sovereign country. Period.

[@stupifyingstupedity2112]

I second that period.

[@romeoromeo9487]

Tell that to Israel

[@greeker10]

That hit the spot

[@narcick1018]

europe invading africa and russia annexing a country which was part of her until 1991 with a very similar language , with a shared history dating back 1000 years , there was no concept of a distinct identity between russia and ukraine until mongols invaded and bruttaly split the russian realm , and its in ukraines best interest to join russia anyways , they already are poorer than the avarage russian and an almost completely ireelevant nation with only wheat going for it with a shitty industry.

[@tooltalk]

Nobody is "justifying" or defending Russia's invasion. You stir up a hornet's nest, then you get stung, who do you blame? Was it necessary to stir up hornets in the first place? Was it avoidable? Mearsheimer explains away the cause/consequence of the conflict largely escalated by the US/West over the past decade and why the hornets will fight back for their survival.

[@kazakhdoge1822]

Most Ukrainians fought in the Red Army.

[@andrewalderman101]

Most Ukrainians IN WORLD WAR 2 fought in the Red Army.

[@hanna8418]

And everybody hates Russia for what they did, while it might have been the Ukrainians actually doing the worst of it. I know that they massacred 100 thousand Poles in the most brutal ways. “Genocide of Poles in Vohlynia “

[@ThePandaKZ]

@@andrewalderman101 and AFGHANISTAN WAR aswell)))😉

[@joecurry382]

@@ThePandaKZ they did god's work with Afghanistan

[@ThePandaKZ]

@@joecurry382 and did pretty well)))

[@ЯрославМоца-э8э]

Spanish ambassador accuses Ukraine of being constituted by Nazi, lol. Perhaps he forgot what happened in his country at the same time.

[@bastiaanblom8503]

indeed, a civil war backed by nazis

[@quartermaster1976]

Azov Battalion

[@user-xr4bo3ln6f]

It's because he remembers what happened in his country that he sees the symptoms

[@Bee.Holder]

Ukraine wasn't constituted by Nazis but they played significant role in overthrowing the government in 2014. Later, Ukraine incorporated AZOV regiment into their legal military forces.

[@vandaminator1]

@@quartermaster1976 what do you know about them?

[@TheStobb50]

You can’t hide from bullies, you can’t appease bullies, Think of the schoolyard bully what was the only thing he understood, if you were scared he took advantage, if he saw weaknesses he took advantage, give him a bloody nose and he didn’t come back

[@dusanvukovic4529]

Talking about NATO, right

[@darkestkhan]

@@dusanvukovic4529 Russia is local bully. NATO is distant one.

[@avancalledrupert5130]

Talking about America yea ?

[@dusanvukovic4529]

@@darkestkhan Not to me, i felt Nato bombing Serbia in 99

[@darkestkhan]

@@dusanvukovic4529 Tough luck. Sadly you don't get to complain about bombing after what you have been doing in Bosnia.

[@petyrbaelish2000]

ONE CORRECTION: Greece DOES NOT have a Nazi party in the parliament since 2019. The leaders are in jail and the party voted out

[@zmajooov]

bro their entire production is a lump of badly researched and biased videos with numerous historical and factual errors, don't take them seriously.

[@petyrbaelish2000]

@@zmajooov you're right, their 1st aim is to push a narrative, not to educate thoroughly but still, they mention stuff that I know nothing about, and if the subject seems interesting I can find more info on my own

[@joecurry382]

Since 2019 no there still there

[@ananamu2248]

Yay ! ❤

[@danie1p]

FACT CHECK: Stepan Bandera was posthumously given the "Hero of Ukraine" award by Victor Yushchenko, a pro-EU president in 2010. Victor Yanuchovych, the pro-Russian president later on, rescinded that award. This has been an overall informative video but when you miss these details it really hurts the credibility of the channel. Lol they are both "Victor Y." Reasonable mistake but unacceptable for a channel intending to inform people. 13:39

[@jontalbot1]

Liar

[@FragLord]

Yes but Bandera saw about 5-10 million of his countrymen starve and that was before WW2. Doesn't really makes you believe in the Communist cause does it. Stalin alone is responsible for 20 million deaths during his reign, that's over 3 holocausts...

[@donaldsydney5416]

I agree

[@ibrahimmekonnen8259]

Furthermore, there have been entire german documentaries back in 2015 that talked about Nazis controlling the Ukrainian government. They even had a member of the german government criticizing German-Ukrainian co-operation as a result.

[@Cola_Dulz]

What's wrong about him, that he did took the side of Ukraine and was hated by both Nazis and the russians?

[@tito.senpai_]

With regards to Cuba, you disregard the Bay of Pigs Invasion as well as the crippling sanctions on Cuba

[@austurian55]

Sad part is that they never get over Cuba that despite 60 years ago sanctions still imposed on them.

[@josephlynn741]

Point taken, but the biggest difference is that the Bay of Pigs was lead by Cuban's with US support. It was not necessarily a US military operation.

[@alexanderblyakher5480]

The point is correct, US has never invaded Cuba. Period. No point of pivoting this to sanctions or bay of pigs.

[@tito.senpai_]

@@alexanderblyakher5480 it was funded by the US and US troops were a part of the invasion.

[@tito.senpai_]

@@josephlynn741 they were trained, armed, and funded by the US and US troops were involved in the Invasion.

[@brianwarburton4482]

Very interesting analysis. However, I find that sometimes in these debates the human dimension gets lost somehow. The fact is that nothing, absolutely nothing whether political or economic can justify the mass slaughter of thousands of civilians including women and helpless children, the mass destruction of civilian infrastructure, the displacement of millions of innocent people and the rape and torture that have been documented in previously occupied regions. NATO was, and still is a defensive alliance. If it wasn't, Russia would be under attack right now. In recent years it has been slowly falling apart and represented zero threat to Russia. This war is simply opportunistic expansionism at the cost of a sovereign country using the existence of NATO as a justification. The fact is that the only threat NATO represents to Putin is that it gets in the way of his expansionist ambitions. Now is the time for action to be taken against the bully. He must be stopped by the only thing that cowards understand, which is a stronger force.

[@stupifyingstupedity2112]

Economic interest weights as much in the people's mind than in politicians' calculus. Hypocrites, both. The human factor is the first one forgotten once their sympathy budget runs out. Low tolerance ceiling.

[@tooltalk]

NATO is a defense alliance, except when it's not. NATO has continued its expansion spite of the fact that the evil empire collapsed in 1990's and Russia remained disorganized and weak militarily until 6-7 years ago.

[@timmccarthy982]

That would be the impression from our corporate-owned warmonger media. However, after 4 months of conflict, the UN Commission on Human rights at the end of June reported 4,731 Ukraine civilian deaths at that time. Admittedly it's certainly some amount higher and an ongoing event, the US killed over 7,000 Iraqi civilians in just the first 2 months of Operation Shock and Awe in 2003. And over 10 million people have died in all the wars the US has fought since WW2, all the major wars being justified with lies and misrepresentation. And if that isn't enough Washington started this war in Ukraine in 2014 and between 2014-2022 over 14,000 people had already died in Ukraine. edit: the Russian intervention is meant to end that war in east Ukraine and protect the people who live there where the majority of ethnic Russians live. The fighting between the Russian military and Ukraine military, who has chosen to fight from within the towns and cities, is causing the deaths of more ethnic Russian Ukrainian citizens but it is the terrible price being paid to end the fighting with the goal to ultimately save more of their lives. In the occupied areas Russia is started to rebuild and they will rebuild all the towns and cities and life is returning to normal, Russia is doing things like paying Ukrainian citizens there their pensions again which the Kiev government stopped doing. If anyone wants to know what parts Ukraine will never get back track where the Russians are rebuilding, those areas will be defended as if they are part of Russia now.

[@sboinkthelegday3892]

So now you're IGNORING the political element, TO IGNORE the fact, that human element losses from gun violence in USA exceed those in Ukraine. Every death caused by the conscience of people, just like the conscience to join the Russian military. But Russia doesn't produce 12% of world's waste and landfills that catch on fire, under the foreigner children who are sorting them out for scraps. That activity is protected under the AMERICAN constitution, and its forces who secure the civilian right to KEEP producing those frozen meal trays and exploding batteries. This is human element WAR, waged by USA against developing countries. Places that do't accept US trade deals face sanctions that are prefectly comparabel to snactions levied on Russia. Sri Lanka is languishing because it fell for green energy propaganda from the west. When is it enough for the human element? Is it NOW, that Russia took a leaf from the US book on how to annex Texas, perfectly in alignemnt with the constitution?

[@zeissiez]

Chess Players = USA vs Russia Chess Pieces = European countries+Zelensky Chess Board = Ukraine Organizers = Western bankers + Military Industries + NSA

[@giovannipescemilano]

There are many inaccuracies. 1) Bandera was named a “Hero of Ukraine” by the President Viktor Yushchenko in 2010, a pro-western, not by Yanukovych 2) US did try and invade Cuba, in 1961, at the Bay of the Pigs. The US always sanctioned Cuba with embargo and blockades and always kept Cuba under constant attack by propaganda campaigns, often made of fabricated news. 3) Euromaidan, although impressive, was not the expression of a majority of Ukranians. According to indipendent survey in 2015, 42% of Ukranians supported Maidan, but 50% were anti-Maidan, mainly in the East. 4) The ousting of Yanucoych that started the Donbas War in 2014 was indeed technically a coup. 650 international observers were there at his elections and judged the elections valid. According to the Guardian, observers from the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) described the vote as an "impressive display of democracy”. So, if his elections were legitimate, why did we saluted his ousting and the occupation of government buildings (including by armed supremacist groups) as a “splendid democratic revolution”? Why did we support the government resulting from those episodes, who was an overtly nationalist government, suppressing civil liberties for russian speaking minorities? Aren't democracies meant to function through elections and parliamentary action? Aren’t democracies supposed to stand for linguistic minorities? Why all these double standards when Russians are involved? In UE we have over 30 autonomous regions, whose populations are allowed to use their own languages in public office, in the media and in schools. Many of those autonomous regions resulted from decades of conflicts and wars. Those conflicts ended when European democracies after WWII accepted the principle of language self-determination and respect of ethnic minorities, one of the founding principles of the European Union. So why since 1991 do we support governments in Kiev who do not accept that democratic principle and actively suppress the rights of Russian speaking Ukrainians and even promote ethnic hate speech on national media channels, as denounced by the Council of Europe? More in general the video whitewashes the presence of nationalist militias in Donbas (see the Soufan Center Report of 2019 on Ukraine having become a hotspot for white suprematists worldwide). The video ignores the heavy discrimination against Russian speakers and the continued violence against autonomist population perpetrated by nationalist Ukrainian militias, who killed 3500 civlians (500 more than 9/11, that led to the 20 years long War on Terror). Democracies safeguard the rights of linguistic minorities. Ukraine does not. So: Ukraine is far from being the splendid democracy we describe in our over-simplified villain/hero narratives. Ukraine is not a democracy under many other respects: no free press, widespread corruption, no judiciary power independent from executive power, and widespread presence of oligarchs with their own militias. Nationalist militias turned down three attempted peace agreements to end the Donbas war, last one in 2019, signed by Zelensky and rejected by the militias in the "No to Capitulation" revolt. Ukraine is kept captive by nationalist militias, who do not respond to executive power in Kyev. If we want to seek peace we should asses the full facts, aknowledge that Ukraine is a thorn country in the middle of an identity struggle. The country has been in a civil war for nine years now, with a divided population, some looking at the West, others feeling closer to Russia. We should look at both sides and try and make them talk and find democratic solutions (autonomous regions and linguistic freedom), instead of unilaterally support one of the two sides against the other.

[@feliche2292]

Where did you get the data from those 3500 Russian speaking Ukrainians killed by militia?

[@a.lerner8468]

The first casualty in any war is the "truth"... you have expressed facts which cannot be denied... the truth is subjective. Facts are not. Well done.

[@AL-lh2ht]

All those words but no mention of Russia invading Ukraine and proping up illegal breakaway nations, a tactic they have down a half dozen times now. To describe Russia invading Ukraine a civil war is Russian propaganda of a the highest order. Yea Ukraine has problems but compared to being invaded and attempts to annex Ukraine is so far removed from what you are talking about. We have entered genocide level problems now.

[@sabakag]

If russia wouldn't have used their special operation units and polite green men in Crimea and Donbas in 2014 there would not be any so called "civil war" in Ukraine.

[@a.lerner8468]

@@sabakag source and evidence please.

[@prfwrx2497]

1:30 The one single line of argument which entirely debunks Mearsheimer and other experts of his ilk is the following: Their theories make sense if you completely ignore the agentic will of the local population in their ability to influence policy and national strategy. Ukraine cannot by its definition be "the West's fault" if the pivot towards Western integration originated within, and is sustained by the independent thought, will, and action of Ukrainians and Ukrainian citizens. Ukraine *chose* to pivot Westward and risked everything in 2014 to do so. There's absolutely nothing NATO or the US could've done or not done (short of helping Putin crush the 2014 revolution) that'd prevent this war - since this war is effectively a kulturkampf. The sociopolitical culture of Ukraine is diametrically opposed to that of Putin and the Siloviki which rules Russia. The kulturkampf lies in the fact that Putin (and the Siloviki institutions of Russia) are afraid that a democratic Ukraine - with its many familial and linguistic ties to Russian constituents - would spread the contagion of the enlightenment and liberalism, and effectively end their rule over Russia, if end their very life through armed uprisings. Given that Ukraine independently chose to liberalize and embrace the Enlightenment by it's own accord, Putin will have to try to crush them eventually if he wishes to live like a King, or live at all for that matter.

[@focast1825]

Sweden Austria and Finland have been doing just fine being western oriented while trading and neutral with both sides, so your argument is disproven by the example of the status quo.

[@ashcarrier6606]

My only regret is that I can only up vote this once. It is my belief that this war is largely a function of Putin believing 2014 was a CIA operation, rather than a reflection of public will. And since it was an artificial construct, Russian troops would be greeted as they marched in to return Ukraine to the Kremlin's fold. No...Russia, the countries that live next door to you don't like you. Does that make them a threat? No. It just means they don't like you. Why would they like you? You aren't likeable.

[@prfwrx2497]

@@focast1825 Neither Sweden, Austria, nor Finland can threaten the Russian ruling class with the contagion of Liberalism and the Enlightenment, since none of these countries share the historically close-knitted linguistic, familial, nor media ties necessary for the contagion phenomenon to take place. Think about it. The Baltics pivoted hard West. And Putin did nothing. Why? Same reason. No sociocultural ties necessary to enable effective contagion. Good try, though. Also, Sweden, Austria, and Finland were neutral in name only. If we look at trade by cost volumes, and sociocultural alignment of the constituents, these nations are firmly Western nations. And when the shit hit the fan, Sweden and especially Finland pulled the trigger and shed the façade of neutrality, for that label was now useless to them. Austria has the luxury of being surrounded by friendly NATO nations, so they don't bother with the bureaucratic asshauling to legally relabel themselves. Plus, it gives them more options a few decades down the line if something changes for the worse around their hood.

[@blackmantis3130]

Neutrality could have prevented all this.

[@BOIOLA08]

@@focast1825 tottaly wrong on your part. Those countries by all means operate in a liberal environment and uphold western values (they are mostly western) but Ukraine could never aspire to that under russian influence. His argument is spot on.

[@donroussy5472]

There is no justification for war or murder regardless of the issues. Trade? Nato? just excuses to take resources that don't belong to you. its all about power and money, not security, of the ruling elite. The aggressors hold the burden of blame for any wars and murder. Again, regardless of the issues.

[@daniellarson3068]

Follow the money. There's gas and oil under all that wheat.

[@casimirkylian3703]

Putin’s ideal scenario: Beginning military operation, Ukrainian civilians dissatisfied with the corrupted clown president Zelensky, political and economic stagnation will happily greet Russian soldiers as they invade Ukraine. Most Ukrainian soldiers will give up, the donbas loyal core units will be encircled. Kiev would be taken, Zelensky killed, the pro Russian rebels in Kiev would actually do their job as FSB paid them throughout the years. Putin would gain control over all Ukrainian assets, even those owned by oligarchs, taking control over grain production and distribution as well. Countries still recovering from covid and lockdowns would not be united on the idea of sanctioning Russia, the invasion would be fast and least brutal. Russia along Belarus would become a powerful 200 million country. Reality: Russia ate 💩 💩 and it’s going to be worse for them. Total humiliation is inevitable

[@hanna8418]

What about Ukrainian aggressors in eastern Ukraine? They’ve terrorized and killed thousands of Ukrainian-Russian civilians in the last 8 years. Ukrainian- Russians have been living in basements . Children are growing up in basements, some of them never lived in a house. “Donbas, 8 years of war” and “ Ukrainian Agony, the Concealed War “

[@donroussy5472]

@@hanna8418 that is an issue inside the present issue, Ukraine has been dealing with them for years, they cant fight a two fronted war, the enemy of my enemy is my friend as they say. sad but real

[@Crashed131963]

Well said. All that matters is the here and now. It only about 40 million Ukrainian citizens not wanting to become 40 million Russian citizens forever. Yesterday counts for nothing when your house catches on fire.

[@bombheadgames9565]

As Putin once said during a military exercise.. What a sovereign nation chooses to do within its own borders is its own affair.. Exactly.. This by his own administration means there is no justification for invading Ukraine, provided Ukraine does not invade Russia.

[@daniellarson3068]

However, the crazy guy has stated that Ukraine is actually a part of Russia. He makes this claim through some total nonsense that a mistake was made when the Soviet Union was formed. The real bad part of this is that I think he believes his own bullshit.

[@wuodanstrasse5631]

Ukraine MUST invade Russia, totally the entire Kremlin, destroy at least 10 times of Russian cities and infrastructure, seize all oil and gas lines and fields, together with Finland (who had more than 100,000 men murdered by two Russian attacks previously) and permanently deprive Russia from any benefit of any kind as punishment for their utterly illegal and wholly unwarranted attacks on Ukraine, Finland, Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and ever so many others. Only via this means will the Russian public, soldiers and all government officials realize how profoundly evil they have been to countless millions of people and countries for so very long.

[@dant.3505]

Exactly, Ukraine have been forced to defend its sovereignty since 2014.

[@hanna8418]

Not true! Ukrainian nazis from western Ukraine have attacked Ukrainian Russians in Donbass and have been terrorizing and killing them for 8 years. They also burned Ukrainian Russian civilians alive in Odessa in 2014.

[@dant.3505]

@@hanna8418 that all happened inside the border of Ukraine. Therefore it was not any of Russia's business. As Putin once said what a nation chooses to do within its own borders is its own affair.

[@markaxworthy2508]

In 2015 Mearsheimer said this at the University of Chicago: ""What they are doing is not trying to conquer Ukraine....There are many people saying that the Russians are going to go on a rampage, going to restablish.... a Greater Russia..... He is not try to conquer Ukraine. That is not going to happen......Putin is much too smart for that." This is at (23:10) on the KZbin article mentioned here.

[@collintrytsman3353]

2022 Russia is attempting to annex as much land as possible right now, 2014 got a foothold, then hopefully ceasefire, and what ever is left they will gobble up in a few years down the line 2025 or later. They don't proclaim new republic unless they intend to stay, they are now creating new institutions in occupied territory handing out Russian passports by bribing desperate Ukrainians and introducing the rubble currency, you don't do this unless you are staying.

[@busterbiloxi3833]

And yet he is trying to destroy and conquer Ukraine. This video is Muscovite propaganda. The narrator will be arrested.

[@asfdafasdfwfrg4168]

he is the only person in the world advised Ukraine e NOT to give up Nukes. and look what happened. what happened to Budapest Memorandum??

[@muller2956]

@@asfdafasdfwfrg4168 This thing is true. Doesnt mean Mearsheimer is right at everything. He completely doesnt understand what happend 8 years ago

[@Morwenna1220]

@@muller2956 Well what do you think would have happened if Ukraine had not given up its nukes.

[@charalamposkaratsioras9375]

And Greece doesn’t have nazi a party in the parliament any more. They have lost all their seats in the 2019 elections and have been sentenced for being a criminal organization.

[@acommenterhere1000]

Greece didn't even have a real Nazi party, Golden dawn that gets labeled Nazi are more like western stereotype of Greeks than actual Nazi.

[@mongcj6400]

Visual Politik just gained another level of legitimacy with this one! Talk about balance!

[@buttert5091]

What balance, legitimacy these arguments are weak and misleading

[@mongcj6400]

@@buttert5091 Yes, I for one had certain issues with the delivery. However, we should give it to them, for at least trying to peek behind the facade the western media has built up around this crisis. Freedom begins when we start asking critical questions. I am not looking for perfection, it doesn't exist in the real world. Hence, I belive that it's safe to say that Visual Politik is on the right path.

[@buttert5091]

@@mongcj6400I agree with you on freedom and critical thinking, However the appear to be making arguments that justify a narrative: 1. Saying Nato did not expand but just opened up membership is a logical slight of hand, as the both archive the same result and we know who ultimately calls the shots in Nato and how these actions will be perceived as a treath Saying states are free to choose, he did not mention the massive Sanction package on Cuba, Venezuela, violence and regime change that occurs when you cross the US in LATAM and the world, but yea a free world, when you live near an elephant you better be careful Now saying it is hypothetical, well🤦🤦🤦. The US has a Monroe doctrine, so yea. Its narrative building, not proper counter arguments. Real Polik is alive and well, they are just pretending to offer counter arguments that hold no water under scrutiny

[@davidwolf8991]

@@buttert5091 NATO did not expand its nuclear forces around the states which surround Russia, but that is what Putin claims would happen, he said that NATO could bring nuclear weapons to Ukraine if it joins, why would NATO suddenly bring nuclear forces to Ukraine, if NATO did not put its nuclear arsenal closer to Russia beforehand. Did you know that Stalin did the same during his war on Finland in 1939, he said Finland was a security concern for the Soviet Union, therefore an invasion is justified. Not a single nation which joined NATO is threatening Russia, but Cuba did threaten the US during the Cuba crisis, that is why I would not equate the situations. Just compare the NATO exercises before the invasion in 2021 to the Russian exercises in 2021, the largest exercise was Europe defender-21 by NATO with around 30,000 troops, and Russia was doing exercises in 2021 called Zapad-21 (Zapad means West), with more than 200,000 troops, so who is threatening who? I think it has been pretty clear for many years, Russia, violates airspace, does exercises with vast amount of equipment and troops, wages a hybrid war on western society, and then claims the West is threatening it, because NATO expands. NATO expansion is justified and preventing further Russian aggression, I really don't see why NATO expansion is a bad thing.

[@buttert5091]

@@davidwolf8991 Nato puts forces in each country that joins, and not putting nuclear weapons today is no guarantee it won't be there tomorrow, thats bad strategy (and the US is still punishing Cuba till this day via sanctions for daring to go against its interests) Also having multiple forces makes it possible to increase vectors of attack. My point is when you live next to an elephant you tread carefully, Europe went along with US in poking the bear 🐻 and have seen the consequences and it aint winter yet, good luck Europe with that one, like Cuba and other unfortunates, consequences are real. Sanctions have not worked and are being circumvented openly. The key issue here is Unipolar moment is over and states are begining to regroup into blocks that maximize their interest and minimize risks. If you want US western order thats fine, poke the bear 🐻, fine, be ready for the consequnces which you were told about by Mershimer, intelligence for me would suggest an independent strategy. The are not saints at all though. US and Russia. In all this Europe looses the most(the markets are in Asia, the energy in russia, but Uncles says the cant have any, so new solutions are needed Bojo, Dragi, unrest are just the start and it aint winter yet) Thats the real issue, not some notion of freedom, which is just propaganda to keep simps sucked in and supporting the war, This is bad journalism, with weak arguments while still steering the you to a conclusion You dont like Russia thats fine, and you may have legitimate reasons, but real politik is real politik, Russia aint going nowhere. Europe is hurting itself

[@Przemy-fox227]

Your businesses will make you rich but your investments will make you wealthy. We all deserve to be rich and have financial freedom. I pray everyone here becomes extremely successful.

[@VerneCopeland]

Exactly!! The Rich gets Richer every day because the poor think every opportunity is a scam. Positive thinking brings positive results.

[@puppy.t2602]

Investment is the quickest path to financial freedom. The Rich Stay Rich by spending like the poor yet investing! While the poor stay poor by spending like the Rich yet not investing. Too bad.

[@SaadiaDiVladimir]

CRYPTO IS THE FUTURE 💯💪

[@georgeo.barton2967]

Most people venture into crypto to be millionaires, meanwhile I just want to be debt free

[@anthonysanchez9094]

Now is the best time to purchase and invest in bitcoin, stop procrastinating

[@adrianavalenzuela5068]

There is no justification to the atrocities committed by Putin. I am saddened for what is happening to Ukraine. I am afraid that by the time goes by help will diminish for Ukraine and Putin is so relentless. Thank you for your videos and I do agree with your position!

[@matpeci6558]

Well.. we experienced it before in Bali.. When the British, Spanish, Portugish, Dutch and the Japan destroyed our places.. over and over.. That’s a couple hundreds years.. Now.. they all are friends.. just other different enemies in their side.. But we are the Balinese.. We haven’t got no enemies.. Still got destroyed from those peoples greedy.. They’re like want to be running the world orders… Anyway today.. Balinese still welcoming those attacking us or friends country.. Because we’ve buried the past.. For great future our children 😀

[@opex9979]

There is no justification to the atrocities committed by Ukraine in Donbass.

[@jaybelle1909]

Rus warned ukr countless times but ukr kept provoking it... ukr from start uses its civilians as human shields to gain western mil aid yet sick ignorant ppl still blindly support it... who is for at fault rus who warns about attacking or ukr using its ppl? Ukr is a mini rus and deserves no support other than helping civilians who ukr hasn't gotten killed yet... lastly that is how wars have been fought for thousands of years; the US evolved to new tactics because it has the tech to reduce innocents getting harmed but just because the US has that capability doesn't mean the rest of the world is equally capable

[@exelsuremovers8889]

hope you felt this way about the US invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan and Syria

[@ephraimwolobah9152]

@@exelsuremovers8889 I assume you agree with him that Russia is doing terrible shit?

[@Potatoarmy12]

NATO expansion? its not like they marched its army's into ex soviet occupied countries after 1991 unlike russia has and is doing many times

[@AzizSMC]

Maybe you could download the Warsaw agreement and get urself educated on it

[@kormosmate2]

@@zeanu2015 None of those countries were ex soviet occupied countries, nor they forced them into NATO.

[@Potatoarmy12]

@@kormosmate2 thanks my point i guess some people don't know how to read properly

[@Potatoarmy12]

@@zeanu2015 i was talking in the context of countries being "forced" to JOIN! NATO not about wars NATO was involved in

[@Potatoarmy12]

@@AzizSMC the country's in the Warsaw pact didn't really have much of a choice. for example there was an uprising in Hungary and the soviet union sent its army and tanks to stop it.

[@thefisherking78]

15:30 not to quibble, but NATO isn't supporting Ukraine at all. Specific member nations are supporting Ukraine to widely varying degrees based on their perception of self-interest in the matter. Poland truly believes that if Ukraine falls they are next in the crosshairs, so they have very little motive to limit the resources they expend now to avoid having to fight on their own soil later. That's why they have given more, as a proportion of what they have, than any other nation. They've been occupied, victimized, and ethnically cleansed (oops, "Russified") for centuries at a time and they're not fucking having it again if they can do anything about it. Others in different positions feel less urgency. I think for the US there's a real mix of idealism and cynical geopolitics at play. The fact is this is a relatively cheap way to weaken an aggressive adversary without much direct risk to us. But we're also fucking horrified by the absolutely needless brutality of this stupid war. The fact that they made a standup fight out of an expected mismatch has inspired a lot of basically pacifist Americans to lobby for unlimited support to achieve a just outcome.

[@renehernandez3053]

Poland has also been occupied and ethnically cleansed by germans

[@nilslarson7532]

Nato ...correction ANGLO nato have for many years supported Ukraine ,many years through Poland and the Baltic countries . Germany and France tried for years to defuse but the couldnt stand up to the pressure.

[@nilslarson7532]

@@renehernandez3053 its a lot more complicated . Jews ,Romans were hunted down and too often by "the real polish"...sad.

[@blinski1]

@@renehernandez3053 Yes, but Germans have changed drastically, and Russians haven't at all.

[@joescott8877]

The fact that this guy states the U.S. NEVER tried to invade Cuba, and doesn't even MENTION the U.S. backed, um, INVASION OF CUBA (the infamous Bay of Pigs, which directly led to Russia putting nukes IN Cuba) deflated my expectations for an intellectually honest portrayal of the argument landscape here. The fact that the invasion failed doesn't negate the fact that it was a CIA operation, which president Kennedy himself admitted. SO, yeah, pretty good presentation, BUT: Objectivity, dude!

[@michaziomek]

Calling Mearsheimer's arguments legitmate is a real strech.

[@462-x5n]

THANK YOU!!! PREACH!!! 🙌

[@ravenmoon5111]

He’s a paid mouthpiece for Putin.

[@lordulberthellblaze6509]

Mearshiemer is a priest branding his "sermons" as realist advice. You want realist assessment Henry Kissinger is still alive and well to give his advice.

[@gigacanno750]

Makes me think of someone trying to stand up for a wife beater. "Look at what you made me do"

[@DarkR3ignlol]

Ofcourse there are no justifications for the Russian invasion, but what you can take away from Mearsheimer is that you see the reality of the situation. The only way to avoid the invasion for the ukraine was to cave to Putin. But then you are a country pretty much controlled by Russia, wich obv sucks. The other option is to befriend the West and live with the consequences of that decision. They chose the 2nd Option and now live with the consequenze of a Russian invasion, without the help of active NATO Fighting forces, wich was clear from the begging due to two nuclear powers involved. Im not saying Mearsheimer is right, im just saying Ukraine had a choice and they chose the part where they get the beating and hopefully have a better future in a few decades then they would by chosing the "safe" option.

[@alessandrobenvenuti6551]

I saw an interview of that Mersheimer lad. It was bad. It’s bad when a 74 year old American still thinks things in Europe as if it was the Cold War. First: is proven that Americans usually don’t understand shit about europe and they can’t unstuck the American exceptionalism point of view. Second: if they do, they usually “understand” the parts that are in some weird way tangent to American politics (which is ludicrous). When he talked about western powers threatening Russia expanding NATO, I just saw Russian propaganda repeated and it was disgraceful from a respected academic.

[@zarathustra4649]

Whatever you wanna say he predicted it right that this was gonna happen.And it did happen. Just because his theory is tilted towards Russia doesn't make it less credible.

[@alessandrobenvenuti6551]

@@zarathustra4649 oh no, what he didn’t take into consideration is Russia’s actions. Listening to him it was like:”give Ukraine to him with some privileges over a democratic sovereign country, and no one will die.” He’s right when he says that the USA really don’t have any part in this, but he still says everything to blame “the west” for it. Kinda suspicious. We all know that predictions work well with the benefit of hindsight, but the reality is that Russia would have invaded Ukraine no matter what and this is his way of saying US bad (which they are), let Ukraine burn. It does not stand to scrutiny when you look into it, he’s contradictory and double standards invalidate his whole analysis. I can say whatever the fuck I want about Hitler invading Poland (which he would have done regardless of tensions with the liberal democracies) and he still wouldn’t have had to rape the country the way it happened, wiping out a third of the population, meanwhile I say “I predicted it because he should have had half of Europe”. It’s the same thing. He played the appeasement argument. Realism is a way of justifying unjustifiable worldviews and you saying to me “you butt hurting because he right” still doesn’t make his points true it true. This argument about NATO expansion is publicity for Russia, the real reasons are internal to the Putin’s regime and how it’s falling apart. They themselves changed the version quite often. By the way, your nickname offends both the prophet, both the philosopher.

[@zarathustra4649]

@@alessandrobenvenuti6551 if you can't stand in this world driven by "survival" and your liberal ass gets burnt everytime something like this happens boy you're a softie effiminate. Go back to your girl scouts. Hide behind them.

[@zarathustra4649]

@@alessandrobenvenuti6551 and I didn't even supported him all the way I just said he was correct in predicting it!! You don't wanna give him credit for that huh. Bet your ego won't let you do that.

[@alessandrobenvenuti6551]

@@zarathustra4649 ego you say. Not really. It’s not predicting if you say “if they ever invade it’s the west’s fault”. Ukraine also predicted to be invaded 2 years ago and they started to prepare faster. I don’t see the big deal with Mersheimer when 80% of what he said was garbage

[@XD-cr3du]

The U.S. did not invade Cuba because Russia pulled it's missiles from Cuba and gave the U.S. what they wanted. If you want to make a comparison to the current situation in Ukraine it would have been comparable to NATO agreeing to make Ukraine a neutral state when Putin had it's army on the border. NATO didn't agree on that. If Cuba would have kept its missiles on Cuba and THEN the U.S. would not have invaded, it would have been a good comparison, but that's not what happened. To be honest it's a very poor comparison.

[@danielhunter6059]

We still technically did with the bay of pigs invasion we were doing everything to get those missiles out including assassination attempts everything 😭

[@costinhalaicu2746]

Don't forget though that it was a quid pro quo: the USSR also obtained the withdrawal of US nuclear weapons from Turkey. Which makes the comparison stand, because it is unclear what Russia is offering today.

[@Morwenna1220]

Actually Zelensky proposed a neutral Ukraine before the last invasion and he was the only one who could really promise that. Putin was not really interested. He wanted to invade and destroy Ukraine all the time. At the end the whole tale about nato is just a Russian smoke curtain. Russia took Crimea and then Donbas knowing that nato would not accept a country with an ongoing war anyway. Thinking that a Russian invasion in Februari could have been stopped by promises of neutrality is nonsense. Putin wanted to conquer and he wanted the submission of what was left into a vassal state and he would call that neutrality because Putin would not accept a really neutral Ukraine. It is his code word for vassalage.

[@danielhunter6059]

@@Morwenna1220 No he didn’t Zelensky ran on peace with eastern Ukraine but was also pushing for EU and NATO membership. If Putin and Russia really wanted to destroy Ukraine they would’ve done it long before the US was involved with them what you are saying isn’t rooted in fact just rhetoric

[@user-lt4zu5pl7c]

Its a good comparison to show how much the USA no longer cares about any danger or other countries interests or concerns. They once were willing to compromise, this time they told the Russians to go fuck themselves and caused a war with a nuclear armed power instead of negotiating. I think its a perfect comparison to make. Ukraine would have been better off neutral than destroyed but its the equivalent of the soviets pushing ahead with the missiles and the USA invading before they arrived. Just because it ended better with better diplomacy doesn't mean its a bad comparison.

[@lawrence1318]

Interesting how the speaker in this clip chooses to wear a largely blue and yellow shirt.

[@joescott8877]

Ha!Right?

[@chasg5648]

Mearsheimer seems entirely sympathetic to all of Putin's fears and desires, and waves off damage to anyone else as inconsequential, while sad. Mearsheimer's essential position is "Anything to keep Putin happy".

[@aanasarbi1141]

I am disappointed with this video- factual mistakes and omission of important details. If you want to critique, please get things right. Also I don't think people remember, but United Stated entered World War 1 after Germans proposed to Mexico to enter war if US declared war and would help them with reconquering territories that US had taken from Mexico. US entered World War 1 due to this and increasing attacks on merchant ships. So, please research your hypothetical scenarios better.

[@FragLord]

Correct, same for WW2. It was actually Germany that declared war on the US. I still wonder why. I guess Hitler thought, they will focus on Japan first. He made a woopsie there ^^

[@jamice3986]

None of this matters when NATO has been training the Ukrainian army for the last 8 years. So, did they enter or not doesn't matter, because they are already a defacto a member.

[@Kenny-yl9pc]

yes you are absolutley right many try to hide/forget that fact.

[@miroslavdusin4325]

@@Kenny-yl9pc No they were not a member. And they practically did not have an army. What would you do if your big neighboor annexed one part of your area (Crimea) and attacked another (Donbass). Would you sit and pray for peace?

[@Kenny-yl9pc]

@@miroslavdusin4325 What member? What are you talking about brah I never mentioned any member??

[@miroslavdusin4325]

@@Kenny-yl9pc Sorry, the reaction should have been to the post above

[@Nostr00]

I think people dont realise, that Ukrainian state is older than what happend in 1940s. First ukrainian state can be dated to 1917, when German Empire (a Prussian Monarchy, federal, semi-democratic state) established it with Brest-Litovsk treaty. It was than fighting Soviets for its existance together with Poles. And if we decide to go radical, Kiev Rus would be first, proto-ukrainian stste

[@Inchaos42]

I think it would be more fair to mention Zaporizhian Host/Cossack Hetmanate, almost-modern Ukrainian national state which existed from mid 17 to mid 18 century and was dissolved by Russian empire, after creation of such. Arguably, Ukraine had national revolution before France and actually had Constitution in 1710, well before everyone else in Europe.

[@Nostr00]

@@Inchaos42 No. U are refering to cossacks uprising in PLC also our constitution was fist documented

[@Inchaos42]

@@Nostr00 Well, most people in Ukraine and academics see cossacks uprising in Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth as Ukrainian independence movement and Cossack Hetmanate as a Ukrainian state. I'm not sure what exactly is an issue here. Let's leave constitution question outside just not to overcomplicate.

[@Nostr00]

@@Inchaos42 Issue is that in XVI/XVII century there was no idea of nation nor nationality. Ppl lived under a king/quenn (or other title) so its hard to find any nation back than as a first state.

[@Inchaos42]

@@Nostr00 Indeed, such concepts was not articulated than, the term didn't existed and probably it would be not fair to use them. However, whole story is quite significant departure from monarchical struggle for land. Process was driven by and from Zaporozhian Sich, which was not a country, but not quite under the submission either. Population was participators of the process, not just mare subjects. Head of the state was not appointed, but chosen, which is very unusual for the time. This chapter in Ukrainian history has crucial role and should not be dismissed. There was more than 100 years of struggle to build a proper Ukrainian country and main reason why it fail is russian empire.

[@cholaempire]

The cuban missile crisis was not solved diplomatically. It was aggravated though force. Cuba was under naval blockade from all sides by the USA. Let's get the facts right.

[@casimirkylian3703]

US did the right thing. To communists all capitalists are automatically enemies, and Cuba was nothing but threat.

[@jimgaston9863]

When you start the video with the Cuban missile example and don’t mention the worldwide hysteria and the brinkmanship of nuclear war I’m skeptic all of everything that comes after. I just had to mention that,I’ll restart the show

[@ernestmilos7320]

As always poorly explained...in the end, it's always "West is good and Russia is bad"

[@ВячеславМуха-х1д]

What I think is true is that antagonizing Russia has helped to sell western arms to Europe. Which Chinese neighbours would buy more weapons than Europe that is close to Russia? It has nothing to do with Russian ambitions. That's my POV. And here's about the aggression in Ukraine. It's not nazis or things of that nature. The thing is that after collapse of the USSR there was a fight for the control of former parts of Soviet state economy. The most smart businessmen took over and formed oligarchy in Russia and Ukraine. That is where the curruption you talk about starts from (in it's modern form). Oligarchs had the huge influence on governments and still have on the both sides of the confluct. But here's the fact about the Russian side. When Putin took over he immediately began to get rid of the "old elite" and push people whom he trusted on the key positions of government and huge companies. These companies then merged in monopolies in key economic sectors. Those who were protesing against it were fired, put in jail or killed. President Yanukovich (obviously no stranger to corruption either) was the guy willing to do business the way Putin wanted. But influence groups switched around 2014. And all the mess started to happen. Look at the Soviet economy map. Look what remained in Ukraine. And look at the old Soviet gas transport infrastructure map. For Russian so called elite there is nothing to fight for in Russia. So they decided to rob "unloyal" Ukraine. Look how the gas transit infrastructure wasn't even damaged. It's a shame things got like that. TV is going to yell about nazis here and there, about liberation. All this is propaganda to make people support the elite. The truth is classified. In 20 years we will know. Maybe sooner. What I know is that they cannot being people back to life. My father is from Ukraine. I have relatives there. And I live in Russia. I hate this all. Stay safe people. Let there be peace.

[@UniquelyCritical]

51% is awfully close to 50/50. What's the margin of error on that??? The problem with making Ukraine a buffer state is that's not what Ukraine wants. The Ukrainians are simply geographically unfortunate. Unless a new world order is created, they will always be at the mercy of Russia just like the Belarussians.

[@kostiantynsopiha3263]

51% is a random poll, of which there were many. The ratio of pro/against NATO before 2014 in Ukraine was about 1/3. Here is a link to Wikipedia: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine%E2%80%93NATO_relations

[@friday6448]

Not unless they join the EU and NATO

[@tobiasbauer198]

If Russia annexes Ukraine and Putin would surely want so, Poland and Romania would be in the same geographical problem. The problem of Russia is, that it doesn't know where it ends. It's a colonial state.

[@dimitriosvelessiotis6808]

The question "Idealism vs Realpolitik" goes back to Ancient Greece, with Athens vs Milos. It will not be solved as politics is a matter of personal belief more than it is science. With that said, Russia is NOT justified to invade, BUT did it anyway, as grasp to Ukraine was lost. However, NATO's stance isn't driven by pure idealism either; yes, Heartland theory is not completely correct anymore, but the Germany-Russia energy alliance was very annoying to US. Finally, to say that US solved the Cuba issue diplomatically is half-true. Actually, US have tried to invade using proxies (see bay of Pigs invasion), just as Russia's innitial assault in 2014. Moreover, during the missile crisis, half of the US navy was ACTIVELLY blockading Cuba, and the...diplomacy was based on the MAD theory (too close to nuclear war). So... no things are not simple, they never are in politics. I just wish the best to the Ukranian people who is suffering because all this mess!

[@BossManShire]

He did preface the video with what was essentially a statement that the team couldn’t be unbiased. They have a preference and wanted us (the audience) to understand their preference and who how to stands up to criticism w/r/t mearsheimer’s stance

[@aniemgamaou6591]

Plus i want to.say that historically the jistification for actions are because of interests whatever they may be, it wasnt because of right and wrong and plus right and wrong have been changing throughout history it isnt static never changing. At some point 2000yrs ago the ancient wrld werent against slavery now we are. Right and wrong should not judge justifications but rather reality should whether that justification is petty it is still a justification an interest thats how natiins work

[@psychologianiestacjonarna6558]

🤣🤣🤣

[@paulybeefs8588]

We are way past the point of active blockades in the Ukraine situation. If Putin had done nothing more than blockade military equipment and complete a few "Bay of Pigs" type operations with his Wagner mercenaries, then Russia would still be considered a diplomatic player by the vast majority of the world. And more importantly, thousands upon thousands of lives would not be destroyed. It is not a stretch to say that the US responded to Cuba diplomatically compared to the militant reaction of Russia. NATO is a defensive alliance. The only reason the United States would be bothered by an alliance of Mexico and China or Canada and China is if the United States was planning on invading one of those nations. The optics and geopolitics is not something that the United States would want, but it would sort the issue diplomatically.

[@emanarroyo7143]

Do not tell history. We're not interested in that. Putin started to attacked and killed civilians. That's the worse thing there. He will pay for that.

[@lauriew3517]

NATO had been training and supplying Ukraine with some weapons since 2014

[@neodym5809]

So? Ukraine is a sovereign country that can work with whosever pleases them.

[@Bee.Holder]

@@neodym5809 Being sovereign is a privilege but also carries a responsibility. If we say that freedom of individual is bound by the freedom of others then it's understandable why Ukraine should have been more careful. They shouldn't ban the Russian language and conduct 8 year long military conflict with separatists that resulted in more than 8.000 civilian deaths.

[@worldserpent731]

Yes, Ukraine should just go back to being under control of Putin! Like the good old days before the people of Ukraine realized how their government was greedy and corrupt! Tip my hat for corruption!

[@neodym5809]

@@Bee.Holder Sovereignty is no privilege, it is the right of every country. Furthermore, why are you repeating lies? The Russian language is not banned in Ukraine. The Ukrainian president is a native Russian speaker. And separatists? They are Russian proxy forces, with many Russians leading them. It is the right of any sovereign country to defend against outside forces, like the so called separatists in the Donbas.

[@Bee.Holder]

@@neodym5809 Yeah, you have your "truths", I expected that. I said that sovereignty is a privilege because many generations in every country fought for it. Some succeeded, some didn't. Not only that, they've banned Russian language but also raised monuments to Nazi ideologist, Nazi Germany collaborator and antisemite Stepan Bandera whose party killed over 30.000 Poles, mostly women and children. In 2018, the Ukrainian Parliament designated January 1st, Bandera's birthday, as a national holiday. It's true that Zelensky's native language is Russian but he took classes to learn Ukrainian. Even that vast number of people there are speaking Russian, they have to remove it because Ukraine is never meant to be a true democratic country but only anti-Russia. The argument is weak, same as the one that he can't support Nazis because he has partly Jewish blood. There are antisemites that are - Jews. The people in Donbass were undoubtedly supported by Russia but the Ukrainians have their mercenaries and volunteers from all over the world, too. Interestingly, whenever it suits U.S. needs, rebels are called "freedom fighters." If that's not the case they are "so called separatists" even if they are born there.

[@sylvesterdefoe]

Context matters. Why do so many people ignore history when it suits. Russia placed missiles on Cuba because the US placed missiles in Turkey and refused to remove them after Soviet request. In fact the Cuban missiles crisis ended with the US accepting that it must remove the missiles from Turkey. Same as is happening now in Ukraine. Context matters. Get it right.

[@smithdog4770]

He starts right out misrepresenting the realistic position, they are not "Zero Sum" game at all, that would actually be the people who think this war has only ONE side and one possible good outcome (the defeat of Russia). At no time do realists ever say that cooperation isn't the best way to go or that diplomacy doesn't work or shouldn't work to benefit of BOTH sides. They simply state that you can't assume that nations will line up to accept positions forced upon them that work directly Against their own best interests. The Realists clearly say it would be better for Both Ukraine and Russia, if they would work out their differences and that NATO is getting in the way. It's NATO who views this conflict as a Zero Sum game, not Realists who simply point out that in the end great powers have their own sphere's of influence which must be respected, Not at the Cost of other nations, but to the benefit of everyone. If you are going to critique the oppositions point of view, try to be honest about it. It's NATO and the West that has shown they have a zero sum game, their With us or Against us attitude is famous. Realists say this is madness and that nations must cooperate and compromise. NATO is the one not compromising, the realists oppose this lack of compromise.

[@puraLusa]

With us or against us was in modernity a usa position and in relation to afganistan post 9-11 not a nato position. The one who resorted to an armed conflict (including transforming discontent into separatism and arm it - an old playbook) was russia in this parricular case, their stand against diplomatic solution not nato's (who has been a mediator/influencer but not a decider, decision was ultimately ukraine and russia). In conclusion, it was russia who found itself in a zero sum game: if there is a war there are always 2 loosers the civilian society and whoever looses said war - a very much atitude of zero sum. Either ur against imposed by force colonialism or u consider countries by hierarquy and accept ur own inferiority - can't have it both ways. If ur next going into whataboutism ull be identified as a troll or a bot or a whatever but not a person with sound arguments.

[@aniemgamaou6591]

@@puraLusa well the first comment was just about explaing what realist mean it just siimply means well i have observed the world and this is how it works

[@puraLusa]

@@aniemgamaou6591 so have a lot of dictators and a lot of them where proven wrong making ur observation an extremely subjective bias opinion. Just because u claim doesn't make it so, u need sound arguments and I proven ur arguments wrong.

[@johnkrneta5627]

It’s not just “the middle of an invasion”. Neo-nazi battalions were tolerated in The Ukraine over the past eight years.

[@julianbiggs2220]

Yes. When Crimea was invaded and rebels in the Dombas were supported by Moscow. True... Ukraine had little other military capacity. So when they were invaded, Ukraine was not in a position to say no to Azov as they had little else to defend the country. Since 2014 the situation has changed.

[@delveling]

You are being either "ignorant or deceitful" about the situation. You have conveniently forgotten that at the stage feb 2014 (8 years ago) , russia "invaded" and annexed the peninsula... with "little green men" who also were appearing in donbass and Luhansk. At that point Ukraine was desperate for _anyone_ to help defend against this russian invasion of 3 of their regions...

[@joshualieberman1059]

They were tolerated…but are there any evidence they committed some atrocities? Having nationalistic ideology and Nazi-like symbols is not enough. All this Nazi BS is just a pretext for the “sheeple” and obviously doesn’t have anything in common with Putin’s decision, you don’t invade a country because some organisations like KKK are legal there.

[@ravenz24]

@@delveling How about another point of view? Because, I never heard or saw crimean people fighting against "little green man" I mean, those on Crimea must seen themselves as Ukrainian so why they let these "little green man" occupy crimea? Even in the case in Palestine, sometime Palestinian (even civilian) had fought bravely with israeli police and military because they believe Israel is occupy their homes. But I never seen such scene in crimea so the question is why? Also it seems they doing so neatly that the city is fine, like there's no battle or whatsoever in the region. These can be use for assumption that people on crimea is kinda not really care about it maybe? Since I saw in some reference that crimea actually wanted to leaves Ukraine several time in the past.

[@ThePuppyman12]

Ukraine was in no position to deny armed groups of nazi factions at the time. So Ukraine was in no position to follow the minsk peace plan at the time too since it's national security and therefore foreign policy was in the hands of nazis as they successfully pressured the government. Ukraine even legitimized the nazis into the national guard. But it's totally different and not nazis you guys. Just because a small group of armed militant nazis are slowly taking control of various sectors of the government doesn't mean that its nazi you vatniks. Okay Mayne we elevated a nazi collaborator to hero of Ukraine but we had to make difficult alliances in the past so therefore we are obliged to make them heroes today! Every country has a few nazis here or there. I'm sure the Russians have made Vlasov hero of Russia and putin posted a picrure of a totenkopf wearing soldier on May 9th victory day toOkay? Im sure united states has a military regiment that had nazi symbols on its coat of arms somewhere. Okay we also had to stop celebrating May 9th victory over nazism but it's not related to nazis gaining power okay? We all were sad when some russians burned in Odessa but just because there are all these videos or photos available doesn't mean it was easy to investigate the crime and that's why we didn't charge a single person. We only had 8 years be reasonable.

[@occif2023]

John Mearsemer is wrong. He is leaving out info and intentionally misleading. I disagree with him and his theory.

[@freeingtone]

you have to come up with evidence to make a disagreement first

[@occif2023]

@@freeingtone I dont have time to rehash all 248 minutes of his fortune cookie ramblings but if you wanted to listen yourself and then do a reality check , you will agree that he intentionally looks past facts and ignores reality. Sorry, not going to delve further into his tarot card readings to argue in the comment section.

[@freeingtone]

@@occif2023 That is why you do not understand anything about realist politics. Listen Prof. first then come up with argument later

[@antonsavidi]

Bandera was not proclaimed by Yanukovich, it was one of the last decisions of previous president Yushchenko. Everything else is pretty accurate

[@urbansenicar81]

You can't really argue with a man that has been proven right by the events.

[@sk-sm9sh]

Being one time right doesn't mean you can't be 10 times wrong. And this is pretty much the case with Mearsheimer.

[@bunk1860]

The problem I have with Mearsheimer's views is that he uses realpolitik to justify the russian invasion of Ukraine. Realpolitik merely explains why nation states act they way they do, but does not justify what they do as right. By its definition Realpolitik is policies based on practicality without morals or ideology. If realpolitik is justification of the invasion of Ukraine then it is also a valid justification for Nato oppose or hinder Russia's ambitions. Mearsheimer seems to suggest that realpolitik is only valid to Russian ambitions and goals. The NATO aid to Ukraine hinders and hurts Russian goals and weakens them militarily, thus realpolitik explains why Russia invaded and why NATO is assisting Ukraine. The morality and ideology behind the invasion and the military aid is upto people to decide, but realpolitik explains why Russia and NATO are doing what they are doing.

[@Crashed131963]

It's not the first time. When Russia invaded Afghanistan in 1979-1989 the US supplied weapons to Afghanistan fighters. USSR went belly up after that failure.

[@Arag0n]

The problem is most countries do take action based on real politics

[@aleksabenovic6046]

There are two countries in which the democratic procedure on joining NATO was abolished. Montenegro and Macedonia.

[@SamuelMwangi-i7d]

What in specific?remember NATO had nothing much to gain from this two states ...like how Finland and Sweden did using polls instead of referendum

[@williamthebonquerer9181]

@Yeah-Nah they don't have official border disputes

[@SeanHall-s6w]

Yes we should it's not our problem

[@MissKae_85]

FACT CHECK: Regarding the Cuba Missile Crisis. The Cuban Missile Crisis was a 35-day confrontation in 1962 between the United States and the Soviet Union. America deployed missiles in Italy and Turkey as a threat to the soviet union. The Soviet Union in response to this matched the move by deploying similar ballistic missiles in Cuba. The Cuban Missile Crisis should actually be called the Turkey-Italy-Cuba missile crisis. Cause just terming it a Cuba missile crisis and not acknowledging the US cause of the crisis makes the Soviet Union seem like it was an aggressor when in fact the US was the aggressor.

[@ztop5469]

FACTUAL ERROR: 13:40 the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko awarded Bandera the posthumous title of Hero of Ukraine. The European Parliament condemned the award, as did Russia, Poland and Jewish politicians and organizations. President Viktor Yanukovych declared the award illegal.--wiki Stepan Bandera.

[@artcurious807]

sadly because of western propaganda and the continued lie that the Ukraine invasion by Russia was "unprovoked" millions of people are being deceived into thinking that Russia has no legitimate security concerns and that Ukraine is a helpless democracy needing billions in weapons sales. Ukraine is a corrupt nation with corrupt leaders who obey Washington DC. sad but true.

[@glenfordburrell2133]

The US still occupies parts of Cuba and has done so for over a 100 years. Guantanamo Bay is an enclave that is over 120 Square miles - it is an area of outstanding beauty. The US also took the island of Navassa which was originally a coaling station owned by the British which strategically lies at the centre of the Greater Antilles. Both areas were seized by the American gun ship USS Maine.

[@rikulappi9664]

And what exactly have US occupation or land capture to do with Ukraine?

[@DJ1573]

Why does nobody talk about pigs bay?

[@terencekwong3033]

Like he said, things were resolved diplomatically 🙄

[@willthecat3861]

@@DJ1573 It's ... at least in English... "The Bay of Pigs." And, it was a CIA operation, supported by the American military, mostly the U.S. Air Force. The boots on the ground were Cubans, or Cuban exiles (Those born in Cuba.) These Cubans were trained by the American military. Most people in Cuba think the 'pigs,' on the ground, were American; but, they were almost all Cubans, not Americans.

[@aniemgamaou6591]

@@terencekwong3033 well gunpoint is a diplomatic strategy

[@miniskyweb]

Soviets didn't try to put missiles in Cube out of the blue. It was their response to the US placing their missiles in Turkey. The agreement was reached that American weapons would be removed from Turkey. Is it lying by only telling half the story? Get the facts right to start with.

[@donaldmcronald2331]

I don't believe that the war can ever be justified. As you stated, claiming that countries like Russia are owed their own sphere of influence, which can even be achieved by force, would undermine the very concept of sovereignty. International law is the foundation of modern diplomacy. It doesn't matter what you bring up as a reason since any argument for it would defy diplomacy.

[@fernandostaejak3705]

Yeah the USA is the biggest violator of internacional law just put some words about spreading freedom and democracy and you can go cause mayhem in Iraq, Lybia and Afganistan.

[@jeremygardner1225]

I agree completely. I only wish the West behaved in accordance with that sentiment. The terror campaigns, forced regime change and neo-colonial policies in the middle east, Latin America and the Caribbean set a precedent. America and Russia act and have historically acted ruthlessly in their own interest. The real politik argument carries here. Putin's actions are entirely historically predictable. He even told the west ahead of time what would happen. No, it cannot be justified, but as long as the other major powers are behaving in the same way, Putin would be in a ring with one hand tied behind his back if he didn't attack to protect his interests.

[@hanna8418]

@Donald McRonald, What do you think USA would do if Mexico or Canada began getting involved with Russia in a way that USA has been actively involved in Ukraine since 2014?

[@gigacanno750]

You can make the argument that the US has it's own, rather large, sphere of influence, but it does so without undermining sovereignty. Why did the US become the top super-power after the Soviet Union collapse? Because it was the only country that wasn't utterly destroyed by WW2. Why is it safe for shipping? Because the US Navy polices the ocean's shipping routes. Why are there hundreds of US military bases all over the globe? Because, as I repeat: The US was the only major nation not demolished by WW2. Now, I don't want this to sound like Pro-American propaganda. The wars in Vietnam and across the Middle East and East Asia are prime examples that the US is hardly a paragon, but at least it doesn't go around threatening to nuke everyone that didn't agree with them. And if anyone brings up the nuke thing, imagine how many people on both sides would've died if the US decided to try to invade Japan by landing troops on it.

[@avancalledrupert5130]

America invades sovereign nations . So that's the standard nobody can argue otherwise.

[@stephenbuck1280]

Could you please do a video on what happened to Ukraine during the Russian revolution and during the Second World War. I know a little about this and I think it explains why so many in Ukraine do not want to be subjugated by Russia.

[@jamesrey3221]

13% (4 million) of the population died from famine in Stalin's brutal collectivization the "Ukrainian famine" -known as the Holodomor (“starvation”). Stalin’s secret police further deported 50,000 Ukrainian farm families to Siberia This has generated so much hatred and resentment that it solidified Ukrainian nationalism. Stalin’s policies resulted in the deaths of millions, but it failed to crush Ukrainian aspirations for autonomy. * Red Famine Stalin's War on Ukraine by Anne Applebaum*

[@hanna8418]

What happened to Ukraine? More like what did Ukraine do during WW2.

[@stephenbuck1280]

@@hanna8418 I am not sure there is a difference between the two questions. I know there were those that collaborated with the Nazi German occupiers and there were those that fought against them. It was very complicated but I would like to understand more about why so many in Ukraine wanted to free themselves from Stalin so much. I think the mass murder and deportation probably had something to do with it.

[@marvinegreen]

I recalled being shocked by Henry Kissinger when he asserted that Russia was the last colonial empire. "Tsar Ivan III (1492-1505) laid the groundwork for the empire that later emerged". - Wikipedia. Just as other colonial empires have faded, Russia's turn at empire is coming to an end. Russia's employment of contract soldiers evokes the recollection of the Ottoman and Roman empires use of mercenaries in their final phases, prior to breakup. Russia's apparent weakness is blood in the water and the feeding frenzy is underway.

[@lordulberthellblaze6509]

Kissinger is a good example of "real realist" not this Mearshiemer hack

[@dragonflydreamer7658]

The Demons in the West will not stop until they fulfill there Destiny. Do any of you really know anything about Russia that didn't come through a mind that was brainwashed with made up ideals of the western media. I am not saying who is right only that we are just a bunch of blind and dumb dupes. kzbin.info/www/bejne/a4TVoqyabadsnac&ab_channel=KingsofHorror

[@daniellarson3068]

Good use of history. However, it does take some empires a long time to collapse once it starts,

[@augustinearthur4561]

Yeahh and Zelensky and the West has to go down and real Ukrainians recreate their country again.

[@zeissiez]

My big conspiracy theory: The Maidan coup in 2014 in Kyiv was orchestrated and funded by America. US senator John McCain was present on stage giving a public speech at Maidan Square in Kyiv on 15 Dec 2013, cheering the crowd in the campaign to overthrow president Yanukovych, who was not pro-Western. Standing at McCain’s left side was neo-Nazi Svoboda Party leader, Oleg Tyahnybok, who was armed with neo-Nazi groups like the Right Sector and C14, who set fire at Maidan Square for three months from Nov 2013 to Feb 2014. After 200 people died at Maidan, President Yanukovych was forced to resign. This was exactly the same classic regime change modus operandi from the CIA playbook as used in Hong Kong in 2019 and Kazakhstan in 2022. After the Maidan coup, Victoria Nuland was recorded over a telephone conversation in handpicking Yatsenyuk as the new prime minister of Ukraine, with Klitschko and Tyahnybok arranged to receive orders directly from Washington and both to work with Yatsenyuk in the background. There’s also a video showing her giving a public speech saying that the USA spent 5 billion dollars to switch Ukraine to being pro-Western. This has been a government that represents Washington’s interests rather than the Ukrainian people’s interests. Russia and Ukraine were at peace under Yanukovych. The new government banned Russian language and TV channels in Donbas, protests escalated to arm conflicts. It was after the Maidan coup that Putin realized NATO had effectively landed at its doorstep, and the Russian naval base in Crimea would become a NATO naval base. Putin signed the Crimea Referendum and annexed Crimea to Russia. If we see two people fighting in the street, the best way to stop the fight is to calm them down. If we want them to escalate the fight, we give weapons. This is what America has been doing since 2014, shipping arms to Ukraine and training the Ukrainian army and the Azov Batallion as documented by the Panama Paper. This war did not start in 2022, it started in 2014. If Zelensky really cares about his people, make peace with Russia, and all his people can return home. Russia’s three demands are reasonable and a bargain, compared to millions of Ukrainians becoming refugees. But instead, he dispatched guns to the people to engage in street battles, asked for the West’s military support and requested for no-fly zone which means extending the war to other European countries. A few days into the last peace talk, Zelensky manufactured a horror story at Bucha to snub the peace talk in March. Washington just want a prolonged war to benefit its arm sales. Just a couple of years ago, Alexei Navalny was being funded by the NED and Mi6 to topple Putin. And in Jan 2022, a coup attempt took place in Russia’s neighbor Kazakhstan. This war is all along the USA’s attempt to take on Putin and Russia. It’s a re-creation of the American proxy war in Afghanistan in the 1980s, when the Afghanistan Mujaheddin was armed by the USA to fight the USSR, which helped draining the USSR economy. The main reason is Putin has become the forerunner in de-dollarization. For the record, USA had no mercy on anyone threatening the dollars: ** In 2000 Saddam Hussein said he would start selling oil in Euros not Dollars. >Saddam was hanged by the US. ** In 2009 Gaddafi suggested pan-African trades to use Gold Dinars instead of the dollar or CFA Franc. >Libya was bombed by NATO and Gaddafi was killed by US-backed NTC. ** Syria had an independent Central Bank NOT under the Federal Reserve controlled Bank of International Settlements (like Iraq and Libya once had before US regime change). >Obama attempted to overthrow Bashar al-Assad. ** Iran has been trading oil in currencies other than US dollars since 2011. >Iran was being sanctioned by the US. ** In 2011, Russia started ditching dollars in oil trades. And now it’s the forerunner in de-dollarization. >Russia was sanctioned since 2011. Navalny was supported to topple Putin. ** China introduced the Belt and Road Initiatives in 2013, used non-dollar in oil trades and introduced the CIPS which is an alternative to the West’s SWIFT system. >America got China into a new Cold War. Putin already sold all US treasury bills. He and China proposed to use Euro for oil trades in Eurasia. Eurasia has 70% of world’s population, it’s the center of the world, and America has just 4% of world’s population and it is isolated from Eurasia. Therefore Euro is a serious threat to the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. That’s why America would suppress any rising economy in Eurasia, for example Japan in the 1980s. Former American NSA chief Zbignew Brzezinski once put it: “It is IMPERATIVE that no Eurasian challenger emerges capable of dominating Eurasia and thus of also challenging America”. Now, 40% of dollar bills in existence in America was printed in the last 12 months during the pandemic. The USA debt has amounted to 30 Trillion, and there’s less and less takers of US treasury, because whenever the USA prints a lot of money, these countries’ foreign reserves devalue. And since the USA imposed sanctions on 39 countries, the world is afraid of the weaponized dollar. Today, the dollar is in a creditability crisis. If Euro or another currency replaces the dollars as the world’s reserve currency, America will be in deep deep trouble. Wars in Europe would strengthen the dollar. Remember after WW II, Europe, Russia, Japan and China were devastated, but America emerged as the world leader. This could be a repeat of that. The USA can’t have a direct war with nuclear armed countries like Russia and China. Proxy wars put the battlefields outside of America. A hidden objective of NATO was to allow America to indirectly control Europe, as the first NATO chief Lionel Ismay put it: To keep America IN, to keep Russia OUT and to keep Germany (Europe) DOWN. Additionally, NATO allows American missiles to be stationed in Europe. So when a war breakout with Russia, missiles will be flying anywhere between Moscow and Lisbon, while America is safe across the Atlantic. That’s why after the dissolution of the USSR in 1991, NATO instead of being abolished, it was expanded to broaden the grip on Europe. When America withdrew troops from Afghanistan, those people familiar with America already started to analyze where would be the next battlefield. America has a war economy. That’s why America has been in wars for 230 years in its 246 years history. Lockheed Martin alone has an annual turn over of 60 billion, the same as the GDP of a country like Bulgaria. And Lockheed Martin is just 1/13 of America’s military budget. Wars stop, payrolls stop. Then there’s the Nord Stream II gas pipeline. The USA warned Germany and Russia that the construction of the pipeline must be stopped, but it was completely nevertheless. This is the USA’s reaction. Why the USA allowed a gas pipeline from Russia to Germany which passed through Ukraine, but not allowed Nord Stream II pipeline which directly runs from Russia to Germany? Because Nord Stream II avoids the USA’s proxy state Ukraine, and the control of energy supply to Europe change hand from USA to Russia. Also, Biden is heading to the mid-term election with a low support rate. Domestically there’s little could be done. If America could reap benefits from the war in Europe and the Far East, then Biden could gain more support. So far what have we seen? Europe signed up more expensive gas from America. Europe energy price soared. Refugees flocked to Europe. More American weapons shipped to Europe. Euro dropped, dollar rose. Investments flew out of Europe. The longer and the bigger the conflict gets, the better it is for America. As you read, another conflict is already in the making. American weapons already being shipped to Taiwan, and Mike Pompeo visited Taiwan on 4th Mar 2022. China has a clear redline: The One-China policy. Just like in Russia’s case, where Putin’s redline was used by America to push Russia into a war, America will get Tsai and other puppet states to push across China’s redline and trigger a war. The million dollar question is: will China bite after seeing what happened to Russia?

[@jaytsecan]

Well said. Thank you for your comment. I completely agree with you. Unfortunately, most people are so brainwashed by propaganda from mainstream media that they will not be able to understand/comprehend the nuances of the current situation, even if one were to throw facts straight to their face. It is disheartening to see how easily most people are manipulated by US propaganda and groupthink. Few corrections: (1) Nordstream 1 does NOT go through Ukraine (2) The probability of the Russia being responsible for the Bucha massacre is much higher than it being Ukraine.

[@jonathancurran5366]

Samuel P Huntington forecast the dilemma in Ukraine back in the 1990s in his Clash of Civilisations. Ukraine was a cleft society torn between the West and the East.

[@stevesayewich8594]

Thanks for referencing Huntington pointing out that the Ukraine is "doomed," to be in a conflict zone between east and west. Sad but apparently true. The US is just using the Ukraine as a proxy war with the big bad Bear.

[@lordulberthellblaze6509]

I find it funny that people still call Mearshiermers current argument "realist" when even cursory analysis tells you its a moral argument in favor of Russian interest. It argues for NATO to not anger Russia any further over Ukraine, because of Russian interest. In the anarchic view of realism, Russia acting in its interest is no more moral than NATO's own action of supporting Ukraine. Both are acting in their own interest against each other. Mearshiemers argument is like playing chess and not playing certain moves because the opponent is asking you not play them for fear of losing. If Russia wants to play this game, NATO is under no obligation to pull punches if it can help it.

[@JohnNoZ35]

If the player on the other side of the board is willing to use the worlds largest nuclear arsenal, if you use those moves, that might change you calculus. We are pulling punches, because we want to avoid a war, which we are almost certain to win, right up until the time that it becomes a global nuclear exchange.

[@lordulberthellblaze6509]

Precisely, thats one of the limiting factors that needs to be taken into account by both sides. Because NATO also has the combined total of the 2nd, 4th and 5th largest national nuke arsenals. I don't want anyone playing brinkmanship or DEFCON in real life. But that is simply a matter of planning around previously known and visible road hazards and not an excuse to cancel the whole roadtrip.

[@martanoconghaile]

Hmm, forgot about Nicaragua 🇳🇮, Grant. What about Iran/Contra? The Monroe Doctrine? Yes, the US never invaded Cuba 🇨🇺, but has kept it under embargo for decades and intimidated its neighbours to comply, or else. No, the US would topple any Latin American government that stationed Chinese nuclear missiles on its territory, no question, whether by coup, or direct action. The US invaded Panama 🇵🇦 in 1989, would certainly do so again if threatened

[@FragLord]

Nicaragua was sponsored by the USSR. Forgetting that the USSR also invaded Afghanistan AND Iran?! How shortsighted are you! Every proxy war the US was part of, the USSR was on the other side of the border. Also those were radically different times. Stalin alone was responsible for 20 million deaths during his reign. There isn't one American president or not even the entire history of all wars of the USA since WW2 are responsible for that many deaths. Be real here. The USSR was a machine of death and destruction.

[@dswynne]

No, the US didn't "invade" Panama. They only sent Special Operators to get Noreiga, and then turned the government immediately back to the locals.

[@martanoconghaile]

@@dswynne yeah, they invaded

[@manayesh]

Russia never disapproved the joining of EU by Ukraine. Russia entered the fray in 2014 when the people of Donbas rejected the unelected gvt overthrew the democratically elected president and the new illegitimate gvt opposed the self determination of DPR and LPR by constantly shelling them. I thought this guy is genuine. But I've wasted my time listening to him.

[@JMM33RanMA]

With all due respect, calling Mearsheimer's pro-Russian Empire stance realism is like calling "The Peoples Democratic Republic of Choson" [N.Korea 조선민주주의인민공화국 ] a democracy [hey it's in the name so it must be real!]. The Ukrainians revolted against the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth because of repeated oppression. That they would ally themselves with Nazi Germany to escape from USSR oppression is understandable and unfortunate. Poles, in general, hate Russia and distrust Germany, for sound historical reasons. That they, like South Korea, have made a clear-eyed geopolitical decision to ally with a strong country unlikely to eat them as a defense against nearby countries who have done precisely that numerous times, is quite understandable. As far as Mearsheimer's thesis, it can be argued about in political science or philosophy classes, but in the real world I prefer what was written in 1776 by some very well-read revolutionaries whose revolution was not only successful but still exists, "... Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,-That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness...." I regard this as a universal moral principle, and it applies to Ukraine, Belarus, Russia and every other nation without exception. As this applies to the Ukrainian people, their right to govern themselves is, and should be, for them to decide not Russia, and not Russia's Neo-Mongol Great Khan Putin. If Mearsheimer were serious he would approve of the US invading Cuba, Canada and Mexico and running them in the US interest while ignoring the interests of the people of those countries. Excluding morality from theories like Mearsheimer's is responsible for many problems in the world.

[@linusgallitzin]

So you would agree when Crimea, the LPR, and DPR chose to leave Ukraine?

[@JMM33RanMA]

@@linusgallitzin If it was really their choice in free and fair elections. Their so-called elections were typical Comintern fakes, like the last Belarus election.

[@FragLord]

@@linusgallitzin sham referendums aren't democracy, even the UN aka the entire world doesn't recognize them...

[@linusgallitzin]

@@FragLord The US would be afraid to let an unbiased 3rd party audit of a referendum. Let the Swiss run it. I bet Crimea would still vote to leave Ukraine by massive margins. Ukraine never had Crimea until gifted Crimea by the USSR in recent history. The gift turned sour when Ukraine wanted to give the US navy a home base and cut the water supply.

[@FragLord]

@@linusgallitzin Do you really think the US cared? They do now. Also the UN rejected the referendum, it wasn't legal. Like any referendum they hold in this regard. Why didn't Russia let the UN send their observers? That is the question you should ask... If it was such a done and clear deal, then what were they afraid of. One of the key functions of the UN is to oversee and control that elections are fair. To give this mandate to a one country is the opposite of what you should do. What you just said was the biggest nonsense I've ever heard. The UN has rules and observers to run it and they come from all over the world. There already is an organization that runs and observes referendums. It's called the United Nations you dumbass... In what metaverse do you think you live? By a vote of 100 in favor to 11 against, with 58 abstentions, the 193-member Assembly called on all States, international organizations and specialized agencies not to recognize any alteration of the status of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol on the basis of the 16 March referendum “and to refrain from any action or dealing that might be interpreted as recognizing any such altered status.” Finally, the Assembly resolution makes explicit reference to the primacy of the UN Charter’s call for the preservation of the unity and territorial integrity of all UN Member States, and also recalls the 1994 Memorandum on Security Assurances in Connection with Ukraine’s Accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, the 1997 Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership between Ukraine and Russian, and other bilateral agreements between Ukraine and Russia. And recent history is 1956, that's not recent in my book...

[@grahamrandle6458]

I think Gandhi summed it up when he said that our problems will be our problems and we don’t need anyone else to sort them out. Ukraine doesn’t need the jackboots of Russia trampling all over it and Ukrainians are well on the way to freedom of spirit and thought.

[@nomatusi7514]

Ukraine have been killing Russian speaking people in the eastern part of the country since 2014. Munsk Agreement was thrown in the trash can.

[@pavlozalevskyi]

#WeaponsForUkraine Please give us more weapons. Thanks for all, but our security is your’s also. 🇺🇦 Tartar (urks) will not stop on us, on Poland, Baltic. If they can they’ll march to Gibraltar and La Manche, as they say it every day, as they said it during last 8 years. Love u all: 🇵🇱🇱🇹🇱🇻🇪🇪 🇬🇧🇺🇸 🇨🇿🇸🇰 Not so much: 🇩🇪🇫🇷🇮🇹 Hm-hm: 🇭🇺

[@martalukaszjastrzab760]

at least you know who's on your side now. Btw PT-91 Twardy tanks are on their way or already in UA on top of t72s.

[@MacrossFaltenmeyer]

Here in Poland we also have people who believe Russian propaganda because they watch too much Tik Tok and have low IQ. I don't know how much % of people in Poland believe that,but i sincerely i hope not that many. Glory to Free Ukraine !

[@joelmccoy9969]

Russia is a gas station masquerading as a Nation-State(quote:John McCain). Russia's Monopoly on Pipeline gas to Germany is under threat by offshore oil development in the Azov Sea and Crimea and on-shore fracking gas development in the Donbas and Kharkiv. Russia's economy collapses even as does it's Petrochemical production. Monopolies are good to have and hard to maintain when they are profitable. Russia produces 25% of world wheat exports, Ukraine 8% of world wheat, and 49% of sunflower oil exports. If Russia controls Ukraine, they then control a lot more of the UN votes based just on that fact alone. That development would make for a much naughtier Putin. Putin is a pirate on a rampage.

[@forthrightgambitia1032]

10:30 Dima Vorobiev (who was a previous Krelim propogandist) on Quora made this point. Realism cuts both ways, and excessive prudence can be interpreted in an anarchical world order as weakness.

[@lostdaze1145]

weakness Honestly you are still watching something about Mary .... World Order place your Advertisement here. Leave your guns & your fragmented imagination 'from kissing my hairy bean sack'

[@88Oleksiy]

Here is the misconception that I think is important-when someone says "NATO expenssion" it means responsibility of NATO. However, it's also a choice of the country who decides to join NATO which means the country who joins thinks it will benefit them. And maybe instead of trying to stop expansion on NATO by war Russia needs to give those countries an alternative and to think how they can make their own alliance. But fortunately no one will join that alliance since poor Russian economy and military conditions. Then Russia will need to improve their economics which means cut off corruption. Which means no one in Russian elite does not want that. Which leads to shift a blame on NATO instead of trying to fix its own problems

[@Dumpsteret1]

Partagraph 8 of the 1999 OSCE Istanbul Agreement on Europe's Security Architecture clearly states they do have that right, BUT NOT IF IT'S AT THE EXPENSE OF THE SECURITY OF ANOTHER. Russia has been claiming for 25 years that Nato expansion is unacceptable, Ukraine the last straw, drawing a bright red line and ultimatum. But out of hubris and phony moral posturing of our criminally negligent Diplomatic Corps, or Macheavellian Evil parading as Liberal Righteousness, we crossed that line anyway, and set Ukraine on fire.

[@88Oleksiy]

@@Dumpsteret1 OSCE and Nato are 2 separate entities. Also there are only 7 paragraphs in that declaration :)

[@Dumpsteret1]

@@88Oleksiy Not the table of contents 😉

[@88Oleksiy]

@@Dumpsteret1 still not s NATO document

[@Dumpsteret1]

@@88Oleksiy No, it's the OSCE rules of Europe's new Security Architecture all sides agreed to, to guarantee peaceful relations. Rules the U.S., insisting Ukraine had the right to join Nato, broke. What don't you understand? Nato is precisely the kind of military alliance Paragraph 8 of the OSCE Agreement forbid countries to join if it threatened the security of another signatory. Not rocket science.

[@0Praetor0]

What always amazes me is that Western leaders, and Western commentors, who have glaringly made their bias and anti Russian sentiments quite clear always seem to think that they are in a position to condensendingly lecture Russia on what their security concerns and strategies should be.

[@andrewalderman101]

When Putin acts like bully, we have every right to call out his murderous behavior.

[@0Praetor0]

@@andrewalderman101 Then he has the right to call out western hypocracy. The West should be the last to speak about murderous behavior. They have killed countless millions in their colonial endeavors and hegemonic ambitions.

[@waltertodd4479]

Bullies need to be beat down everytime!

[@nomatusi7514]

@@andrewalderman101 The collective West are the worst murderers in the world. They have killed over 6 million people in middle east through unnecessary wars. Margaret Al-bright killed half a million children in Iraq through sanctions.

[@99thTuesday]

Russian anti-West sentiment is significantly more prevalent than any Western anti-Russian sentiment.

[@gaguy1967]

For Ukrainians this is about Ukraine. For the USA this is about expanding American hegemony into Eastern Europe and the Middle East by removing Russia as a competitor

[@thefisherking78]

Hahahaha. No. It's about protecting the global security order from deliberate disruption by lawless c{}nts who like to rape and murder their neighbors and lie about why they're doing it.

[@gaguy1967]

@@thefisherking78 That isnt what this is about. It is about expanding US power

[@PseudoProphet]

Russia would've already won by now if they stopped the gas supply to Europe. What do you think Europe would've done if the Russia was so dependent on Europe for its energy needs? 🙄🙄

[@rajiburrahman8176]

Europe first cut the gas. The fact is USA Europe don’t need to be good guy face, where rest of the world need to save themself from western media.

[@arnoldshmitt4969]

russia earns big moolah from europe for gas it is not free

[@friday6448]

Then why didn't they? Because Russia is incredibly dependent on the money from selling gas to Europe, money which Russia is using to keep their economy afloat and to fund their war. The problem is, Europe is capable of finding other suppliers, while Russia needs that money, especially with the sanctions, and cannot replace Europe as their primary buyer for at least another ten years due to the need to build new infrastructure and restarting the drilling at the siberian oil fields. The war has convinced the EU to diversify its supplier of oil and gas, many countries implementing plants to reduce or eliminate their dependency on Russian gas by next year. Meanwhile, the war and the sanctions has made it more difficult for Russia to find countries comfortable to buy their oil and gas, forcing Russia to sell it at a discount, which has started driving down the prices from their peak earlier this year, and reducing the profit they have for their economy and war.

[@tobiasbauer198]

We would have intervened by our military. Problem solved. Putin removed out of office.

[@prfwrx2497]

Two words: Coal gasification. Russian gas ain't the ace up Putin's sleeve people make it out to be.

[@srdjandedic8051]

CUBA missile crisis almost led to WW3 + the disaster at the Bay of Pigs, so this argument is absolutely valid. Talking about democratic right of a nation to join military organization in expense of security of bordering nation is more or less what caused WW1. USA would absolutely not allow Mexico or any Caribbean state joining any military alliance with Russia or China. Plus since 2014 Russian large minority is scrutinized, russian language forbidden + nobody denies existing pro nazi elements in Ukraine military and even parliament (more or less all elite units). Ukraine neutrality + neutrality of Baltic states all part of EU might have been a mid ground comprimise. And let's be honest after dissolution of USSR USA and Britain did all they could to prevent partnership between EU and Russia

[@rikulappi9664]

The Ukrainian president Zelensky speaks Russian language in television every other day. Russia is his language!

[@ShubhamMishrabro]

Russian language isn't forbidden.

[@Cola_Dulz]

I wonder how this professor feels about NATO especially after Putin himself told that he wants to conquer all neighboring countries and NATO has nothing to do with this. This professor was one of the most vocal critics of NATO.

[@sirrcharles1869]

Putin doesn't want to conquer all neighboring countries, but they will when USA tries to manipulate them.

[@larcm3]

But why was NATO expanding even before Putin came to power?

[@dandondera2618]

@@larcm3 you didn't watched the video. You're just trolling, aren't you?

[@wyukigurumi]

To be honest, i do not like NATO. it is because USA is now using it to threaten China in asia. NATO is not just a counter balance to russia. Like it or not, it is a tool that is being used, at the expense of Europe, to the detriment for what I consider as everyone other than USA. So unless you're American, everyone, including the european allies are just suckers to whatever mess the presence of NATO causes. Fk that they now want a NATO in Asia... its so unfair to asians and so single mindedly militaristic. No I do not like NATO cos Im not American who are the only party spared from its devastation (or not, the devastation seems to have repercussions back to USA now). In Hindsight, its not such a bad idea if all we had to sacrifice was Ukraine in return stable fuel prices, no food crisis and no Ukraine death and destruction isnt it. But nooo, we worship independence, heroes, nice sounding things... its not worth it.

[@dandondera2618]

@@wyukigurumi "One day they came after the socialists, and I did nothing. Some other day they came for the Catholics, and I did nothing. Then they came for the Democrats and I did nothing. Then they came for the Jews, and still, I did nothing. Then they came for me and there was noone to do anything to help me". Extrapolate this to countries, and you might understand why countries ally themselves against other countries like Russia or China.

[@wespeakforthetrees]

I love your fast concise delivery. I'm American, liberal, and I like to think a realist. As a realist I understand America is like an empire. Worlds largest economy, military etc. We have competition, China, Russia, North Korea etc. So yeah, we kinda boxed Russia in but that in no way justified Russia invading Ukraine. And left to it's own devices Russia would have prudently continued economic development rather than start an unwinnable war. But Putin got control and went all out to secure his place in history. Ironically he succeeded, just not in the way he was planning. Just my opinion.

[@gigacanno750]

That's a nice way of summing things up. An empire of sorts with it's own interests and allies

[@wespeakforthetrees]

Thanks

[@gigacanno750]

@@wespeakforthetrees And while, yes, the Us has gotten behind a lot of wars, most were to do with its own interests. Does that justify some of them? No.

[@wespeakforthetrees]

@@gigacanno750 I agree completely. Thanks for commenting on my comment.

[@gigacanno750]

@@wespeakforthetrees It's one thing to acknowledge when you do something wrong. It's else for someone to use someone else's wrong doing to justify their own. "They did it, why can't I?" Sounds more like Mearsheimer's argument. More like justifying a wife beater

[@jeffbetts9420]

An interesting analysis of Mearsheimers position is given by Professor Alexander Stubb. As a former Finnish leader he undoubtedly has insights into Russia that many defenders of Mearsheimers position would not. Certainly worth a look. Another person with a deep understanding of Russian literature and culture, Vlad Vexler, makes it very clear those people who support the 'West is at fault' view simply do not understand Putin or Russia. Thanks also for your interesting contribution.

[@mattsmith4027]

That Vexler guy has started popping up on my feed, who is he? What are his credentials I can't find anything outside of KZbin about him.

[@jeffbetts9420]

@@mattsmith4027 You need time to listen to him because he is a philosopher and takes his time getting to the point. But patience becomes a virtue and I find his nuanced and very sensitive views a lesson in many ways. But I am getting old and enjoy his thoughtful insights on his health, literature, music, philosophy and politics. Hopefully you also have the time.

[@tooltalk]

I thought Stubb's analysis was all but interesting. He was rehashing what neocons have been saying about the greatness of spreading "liberal democracy" everywhere at any cost (apparently including civilian deaths and destruction which is also what Z believes in). We already know how well it worked out in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Egypt (aka, the Arab Spring) -- now it's apparently Eastern Europe.

[@jeffbetts9420]

@@tooltalk Perhaps you need to focus on the issue at hand. Suggesting Putin has legitimacy because of misplaced actions of the West is rather feeble. Can Putin's motives be compared to US motives when invading Iraq, which is the only valid comparison, and are the objectives the same? Also the West was free to protest the war in Iraq but even the mention of War in Russia is illegal. Sorry, but the moral compass will always swing the way of the West despite its many faults.

[@Bee.Holder]

@@jeffbetts9420 When the US and NATO bombarded Serbia in 1999. without approval by the UN, they created precedent for what consequences we're seeing today in Ukraine.

[@ianthesiow3013]

The (USA) United States call it "Liberation" instead of "Invasion". That was what US call it in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia and the list goes on... Why the double standard? Confused... Please enlighten. Genuine question... Instances of the United States "liberated" or overthrowing, or attempting to overthrow, a foreign government since the Second World War. (* indicates successful ouster of a government) China 1949 to early 1960s Albania 1949-53 East Germany 1950s Iran 1953 * Guatemala 1954 * Costa Rica mid-1950s Syria 1956-7 Egypt 1957 Indonesia 1957-8 British Guiana 1953-64 * Iraq 1963 * North Vietnam 1945-73 Cambodia 1955-70 * Laos 1958 *, 1959 *, 1960 * Ecuador 1960-63 * Congo 1960 * France 1965 Brazil 1962-64 * Dominican Republic 1963 * Cuba 1959 to present Bolivia 1964 * Indonesia 1965 * Ghana 1966 * Chile 1964-73 * Greece 1967 * Costa Rica 1970-71 Bolivia 1971 * Australia 1973-75 * Angola 1975, 1980s Zaire 1975 Portugal 1974-76 * Jamaica 1976-80 * Seychelles 1979-81 Chad 1981-82 * Grenada 1983 * South Yemen 1982-84 Suriname 1982-84 Fiji 1987 * Libya 1980s Nicaragua 1981-90 * Panama 1989 * Bulgaria 1990 * Albania 1991 * Iraq 1991 Afghanistan 1980s * Somalia 1993 Yugoslavia 1999-2000 * Ecuador 2000 * Afghanistan 2001 * Venezuela 2002 * Iraq 2003 * Haiti 2004 * Somalia 2007 to present Honduras 2009 * Libya 2011 * Syria 2012 Ukraine 2014 * 2014 - 2022 - 6 countries yet to verify. Pakistan 2022 *

[@cpscott15]

Rome and Mongolia would like a word with someone about getting all of their land back

[@FragLord]

1 Most of those wars were proxy wars, aka wars where the USSR also was active in or funding counter revolutionaries. Both were at fault. 2 You are naming alot of countries where the united states were involved with internal affairs, not going to war. 3 The Russian list is also pretty impressive: 1944-1956 Guerrilla war in the Baltic states 1944-1953 Guerrilla war in Ukraine 1944-1953 Anti-communist resistance in Poland 1945 Soviet-Japanese War (Part of World War II) 1946-1954 First Indochina War 1950-1953 Korean War North Korea 1955-1975 Vietnam War North Vietnam 1953 East German Uprising Soviet Union 1956 Hungarian Revolution Soviet Union 1968 Invasion of Czechoslovakia Soviet Union 1969 Zhenbao Island Incident 1969-1970 War of Attrition Egypt 1974-1991 Eritrean War of Independence Ethiopia Ethiopia 1975-1991 Angolan Civil War MPLA 1977-1978 Ethio-Somali War Ethiopia 1979-1989 Soviet-Afghan War Soviet Union Russian Federation (1991-present) 1991-1993 Georgian Civil War 1991-1993 War in Abkhazia Abkhazia 1992 Transnistria War 1992 East Prigorodny Conflict North Ossetia-Alania 1992-1997 Tajikistani Civil War 1993 Russian spillover into Azerbaijan Azerbaijan Russia 1994-1996 First Chechen War 1999 War of Dagestan 1999-2009 Second Chechen War 2008 Russo-Georgian War 2009-2017 Insurgency in the North Caucasus 2014-present Russo-Ukrainian War 2015-present Russian military intervention in the Syrian Civil War 2018-present Central African Republic Civil War Not to mention that Stalin is responsible for the death of 20 million people during his reign. That's over 3 holocausts... And then we aren't counting any other USSR dictators. All of the US wars combined don't reach 20 million people.

[@thejourney6712]

If you don't fully understand geopolitics or history you just might think this guy is being unbiased. But if your knowledgeable you can see through the bs.

[@georgejamesducas9602]

In 60 AD Apostle Saint Andrew traveled to the area of Kiev, preached, and said, one day a great city would be built here with many churches to the glory of God. Today there is a church to Saint Andrew in Kiev. The peoples in the area were Slavic. Kyi, Shchek and Khoryv, three brothers and the sister Lybid founded Kiev in 482 AD, Kiev was named after the older brother Kyi. Kiev the older brother was King. Herodotus wrote that Hercules had founded this land. The Rus were Viking tribes that settled peacefully in Kiev as far back as 750 AD with the Slavs there, 400 years before Moskva existed. The name Russia, coming from the city Moskva, has no connection to the RUS. Russia coming from Moskva started with Batu Kahn much later as a vasal under Mongolian rule. All the early Czars were Mongolian and of no connection to the RUS. The Rus were with the Slavs to the south in Kiev. Moskva were Finnish Urgic Tribes; Mosk means cow and Va water, which are Finnish names. There was no RUS there. The ethnic background of Moskva is Finnish-Urgic and Mongolian. The Rus developed the religion, city Kiev, alphabet, churches, and had its saints. The founder of Kievian Rus (800) or the Rus was a Viking named Askold or Oskold (Norse) from Sweden; not Oleg as in the Russian story. Kievian Rus exists long Before Novgorod and Oleg’s arrival there. Askold is the Slavic name. Oskold, the first King of Kievian Rus was in Kiev before Oleg in Novgorod. Oskold had 200 ships and 20,000 warriors. Oskold was baptized in Constantinople (128 years before Volodymyr) and sent the first bishop back to Kiev. Oskold and Dir were the first Dynasty of Kievian Rus. Askold rules from the 40-60s and Dir to the 80s. Askold is buried in Kiev and the first Kievian Christian King & Dynasty. Oleg followed coming from Sweden through Novgorod and was a pagan. Russia as named today started in the city of Moskva over 400 years later after Kievian Rus or Rus. From Kiev, the capitol of Rus, Kievian culture was spread, much like the Greeks Hellenized the known world, or like the British anglicized the world by the English language. This process does not make Moskva to become RUS in as much as Persian are not Greek. How we are misled by a name; Russia. The capitol of the RUS has always been Kiev. There is no other RUS and no RUS in Moskva. Many say Ukraine began recently; but the culture of the RUS is Kievian RUS, both culture and ethnic background. Ukraine is a name given by Poland meaning outer lands. The land of the RUS before the Mongolian invasion was very large. The name RUS is a Norse name which means men that row; there are no men that row in Moskva. So Moskva adopted the name Russia while being a Mongolian vassal, essentially traitor to the RUS; and all the Czars were Mongolian-Finnish. The Culture of the Mongolian was centralized power, and that cultural imprint was passed on to present day Russia. Ukraine’s real name should be Kievian RUS, or Kievskarus! Russia began in Moskva by Batu Kahn and Novgorod conquered much later, still no connection to the Rus. Putin & Lavrov should be ashamed of themselves, the USSR was an occupation; it never had the status of a sovereign state and due process of law that would be associated with a free society. Even today the mentality of the gulag exists. There is no freedom of press and speech, people are arrested for speech, there is no due process of law, and the religion is state run making it a totalitarian theocracy. As such, it did not deserve to exist in a free world; and history has shown such totalitarian organizations fail over time and author in many gulags. The true culture of Russia is Finno-Ugric and Mongolian, having nothing to do with the RUS (Kievian), expect borrowed as in the sense of Hellenized or Anglicized "forms" as a comparative reference. The centralized form of Russian politics is a very Mongolian imprint on culture. The actions of Putin seem to be another Mongolian invasion of Kiev; here I suggest as to the correct metaphor. I believe so. Putin & Lavrov insistence to have purview over eastern Europe also seems like paying tribute to the Mongolian Horde. Moskva started as an agglomeration of Finnish tribes, combining a Finnish name meaning cows water and developed by Mongolian culture. Mosk means cow and Va means water. The RUS are men that row, Vikings, Norse, established Kiev 400 years before (750 AD) Moskva even thought to exist. The name Russia for current nation is totally inappropriate. The current Russia started in Moskva; how misleading is the name Russia coming from Moskva that has no connection to the RUS. All the lands should be returned to Kiev; the West of Russia to Finland, and the East to Mongolia. Russia’s place on the globe appears as a temporary aberration in my view. To use threats of Nukes publicly strikes at the heart as adolescent behaviour; surely any nation or person that issues such threats and being an ally to such while not even having war imposed on them is not fit to rule. This would include allies of Russia. Oh yes, I remember, Russia didn't invent the bomb, they stole it in the 1940's and gave it to Kurchatov. Russia struggles with an identity crisis since its beginnings unoriginal to the ethnic groups. Its errors are numerous, 50 million killed by Stalin in WW2, allied to the Nazis to kill the Poles for their defeat in WW2, Holodomor where millions of Ukrainians were killed and grain stolen, and constant antagonist with Europe. We even have the Holy Mother announcing Russia’s errors at Fatima. Russia is a Mongolian culture and all the first Czars were Mongolian and Batu Kahn is the author. Oskold was the grandson of Ragnar the king of Sweden, his name is old Norse and spoke old Norse, the name Rus is old Norse, he settled peacefully in Kiev and the Slavs made him king, he brought Christianity to Kiev with his son dir...his burial mound is where St Nicholas church is built, Oleg wasn’t even in Novgorod when this happened, and Oleg is not a Rus nor old Norse name. The Slavs called Oskold the name Askold. After came Dir, Oleg was a pagan who assassinated Dir, Oskold becomes the first dynasty...later when the line of kings get to Vladimir, he is captured at a trading post by the Mongols, the post is called Moskva, and the king killed. Moskva as a city was a Mongolian invention, and Novgorod becomes a part of that Russia by conquest, although having nothing to do with the Rus. Oskold line is Ragnar, ironside, Oskold from the King of Sweden Ragnar. Oleg is via Rurik coming much later. The accounts of Oskold are within the time, Al Mamun an Arab writer of the time wrote of Oskold, the Russian chronicles come hundreds of years later. In much the same way accounts of relevant history are better understood by those of the times, much like the Bible, dating to the original times makes the account authentic. The Russian chronicles are merely a tale and inaccurate. Kiev was a city over 1000 years before Russia even existed. Kiev was Kievian Rus before Novgorod and when Oleg arrived. Putin is kidding himself if he thinks any part of Ukraine belongs to Russia. We can see that Israel belongs to the Jews, similarly all the lands around Kiev of Kievian Rus belong to Kiev as a single nation and city state. Russia's beginnings are a wanting child begun as a captive insurgency having nothing of its own; a captive state that was reeking in servitude to Mongolia and invented by Mongolia. The entire culture of Russia from Moscow is Mongolian centralized power, a pagan culture of no empathy and Christianity. The Christianity is tainted as a state religion or theocracy and politicized. History is often obscured by being written by the ones in charge. The history of Ukraine has been obscured by the Soviet Occupation and cultural appropriations. Moscow in an attempt to appropriate a history not its own, rewrote the narrative of history to cover up its compromised origins; Kiev and Ukraine is a history much older and more civilized; making contributions to civilization. Russian despotism becomes the blueprint, foundation & model for every despot nation, look at its allies; the error of its ways has spread throughout the globe; much like the message from the Holy Mother at Fatima. Those that are sympathetic to Russian atrocities can find similarities in their own histories. Ukraine has a democracy at a local level Moscow never had and fears. Russian boundless ignorance is a type often found in the poorest of nations, and usually the poorest have a history of the hardest tyrants over them that also inflict poverty, physical and spiritual, on others they attempt to subjugate, a reflection of their own lives, an abomination of desolation. Askold was in Constantinople in 860 and Oleg arrived in Novgorod not until 862. The Arabs referred to Askold as the Slavic King or King of the Slavs which he had been for a while. Pontius says Askold brings Christianity to Kiev from Constantinople and a bishop. Ragnar the Norse King of Sweden was born in 767 AD, his son Bjorn ironside was born in 796 AD, and grandson Oskold (Askold) was born in 820 AD. Askold arrived in Kiev in 840 and had a son Dir, Both become King and the first Christian dynasty. Askold dies and gets a burial mound in a park in Kiev. Dir follows as King. Dir is assassinated by Oleg who is a pagan. Nobody knows who Rurik is or who the father is . Oleg is a generation away from Askold. Olga of Kiev builds a church on Askold’ s burial grounds. Pontius of Constantinople says Askold brings a Bishop and Christianity to Kiev. Russia much later is a Mongolian invention...........

[@haraldnilsen6253]

All he said about Russia could be equally attributed to the USA, just ten thousand times over.

[@user-lt4zu5pl7c]

Exactly! The USA has done way worse in my lifetime, just to middle eastern and Asian people so I guess it's ok? They do care way too much about race in that country. Funny how it plays out in geopolitics.

[@rafaelcristaldo5191]

I'm glad that visualpolitik has the reverse intact haha.

[@johannsebastian2681]

NATO aggression towards Russia did make sense prior to 2014 invasion of Crimea. Now Russia is talking about speeding unification process with Belarus. The whole argument that constitute the national security of Russia is guaranty by Ukraine being a colony or a buffer state falls apart when you consider that Belarus is already a buffer state, yet Kremlin speaks of unification. NATO's aggression seems baseless when unifying Belarus effectively borders Greater Russia by more NATO countries. This war is not one base on existential threat is purely economics.

[@renanvinicius6036]

Of course they will do it, Belarus is another dictatorship, the process of integration it's to return to the west the disconfort Russia has and to keep the western influence away from Belarus when Lukashenko get off the power.

[@enguruco9640]

On 22 January 2010, the then President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko awarded Bandera the posthumous title of Hero of Ukraine. Viktor Yanukovych didn't give Bandera any title . It was his predecessor Yushchenko who gave that.

[@FreedomFox1]

In 2014 Ukrainian President (Yanukovych) was violently removed from power. Ukrainians were behind the coup, but the US was also VERY public in its support. Even if Yanukovych made the wrong decision about EU membership (which he withdrew from when it became clear just how economically costly it would be for the Ukrainian people) there was no reason he couldn’t have been voted out at the next election. Indeed some Ukrainians protested the coup, especially in Russian-speaking parts of the country. Ukrainian nationalists responded with violence (including an incident in Odessa where several dozen protesters against the coup were burned alive). Under the circumstances, it’s easy to see why Crimeans accepted Russian occupation and residents of Donbas picked up arms… they were afraid. Moreover the use of violence had become the new method for establishing political legitimacy in Ukraine. The US made a BIG mistake in supporting the violent overthrow of a democracy. It’s strange to see channels like this, which typically support the values of liberal democracy, ignore this blunder (makes me wonder who funds and produces this channel). The US backed the coup because it was an irresistible opportunity to weaken our geopolitical rivals in Russia. Following the coup, the US began training Ukrainian forces (and under Trump, began supplying them with missile systems that Obama had refused to give them). Even if France and Germany continued to block NATO membership, Ukraine had been given much of what membership entails. Most importantly from Russia’s perspective, Ukraine had become a client state of the US. The US goal was to weaken Russia by forcing her to expend resources to deal with the threat posed by Ukraine (see the 2019 Rand paper “Overextending and Unbalancing Russia”). As the Rand paper indicates, we knew that war was a risk, but thought we could avoid it. We thought wrong, and now we’re using the war itself to weaken Russia (and hopefully weaken Russia to the point where it can no longer wage war at all, as Loyd Austin and Blinken have stated). Conscripts killing conscripts, all to serve US policy goals. Had we stayed true to our Democratic principles, this entire nightmare could have been avoided. But at this point, things have spiraled so out of control in Ukraine, it’s impossible to simply wind back the clock. We can start with simple diplomacy, hopefully with a Secretary or State who actually believes is diplomacy (in all these months of war, Blinken hasn’t even tried to talk to Lavrov).

[@Crashed131963]

All that matters is the here and now. Its only about 40 million Ukrainian citizens not wanting to become 40 million Russian citizens forever now. The past mean nothing when the house catches on fire.

[@FreedomFox1]

@@Crashed131963 We should be moving heaven and earth to stop the fighting.

[@ashamohamoud5054]

@@Crashed131963 Those 40 million mostly are Russians. Now Ukraine speakers are refugees in West Europe and never coming back.

[@FragLord]

Yanukovych ran away and the parliament unanimously voted him out of power. After that they had elections...

[@Crashed131963]

@@ashamohamoud5054 The majority of Ukraine are pro-Russians? Good grief. 99% of Irish speak english and kicked England out of Ireland. what does language have to do with anything? The US spoke english when they knocked England out of America. Kazakhstan speak Russian and sure will not be part of Russia again.

[@KyleMontanaro]

Mearsheimer's argument is a logical fallacy. First of all, the "buffer nation" he want is what's known as Finlandisation. The Finns will tell you themselves, it's absurd to the point of being offensive because they have to be there stuck between 2 powers with no benefits that alliances bring to speak of. In essence, he wants to decide for Ukrainians how to rule their country which is what Russia is trying to do. Secondly, there's always going to be other countries on the borders with Russia, that's how borders work. Every time they would annex a country, another even-less friendlier country is going to be on the next border, and the story goes on like this. Of course Russian propagandists and attention-seekers will use this to say that Russia's surrounded (which is also inevitable given Russia's size). But most importantly of all, even though we live in a mostly Darwinian world, and the majority of our history has been Darwinian, it does not mean it is right. If the Darwinian system ruled supreme, then countries like Malta, San Marino, Lichtenstein, Luxembourg, and so on, would not exist. The fact that smaller countries with a significant lack of firepower exist, is a testament of how with a little bit of effort, we leave "might is right" in the history books. Of course at the same time it's better to be a warrior in a garden than a gardener in a war so there's a balance to be struck somewhere. Also, it's not just about Russia, the US also has a lot to answer for, but 'whataboutism' is not going to fix anything or alleviate the war crimes perpetrated by Russian troops. The main difference here is that this is Putler's (and his cronies') war and the sooner a way can be found to cut their control over the Russian military, the more death and suffering we can avoid. Every time the Russians proudly remind everyone how they defeated Nazi Germany, they forget the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, among other things.

[@sirperybLakeney]

No, it's not a logical fallacy. Elements of your argument are fallacious though. If Ukraine became a buffer state then Russia's borders would not expand. That's the point of a buffer state. It would be neutral and independent. Also, your argument regarding Finland is meaningless. Yes, being stuck between two superpowers is a crap place to be. Saying 'oh what a shame' doesn't change the fact that it is a crap place to be. It is unfortunate but that doesn't mean that it can't happen or that other solutions are realistic. Saying that Mearsheimer is 'trying to decide for Ukraine' is nonsense. He has no power over the situation but was weighing up the best tactical scenarios. The other ones likely being conventional warfare (which has now taken place) with the threat of nuclear war. Saying 'this is Putin and his cronies war' is ignoring the history and failing to recognise the other side's viewpoint. Putin, and many others in Russia, have been making very clear how seriously they object to the expansion of NATO (and the EU) since before Putin was even President. Frtom their prespective the behavious of NATO, the EU and even Ukraine are provocative on an issue they have been deadly serious about for the l;ast 25 years -but no one's been listening. We aren't going to find a lasting solution to this unless we recognize Russia's political red lines rather than promoting fantasies about Uncle Adolf being reborn.

[@KyleMontanaro]

​@@sirperybLakeney Which "Other side's viewpoint"? The Russian viewpoint, at least for most people I know of is that they don't need this shit, they have their own lives to lead, not to mention a lot of them have relatives in each others' countries since the USSR. Also, there's a clear divide for the most part between youngsters with free access to the internet and the older generation who are used to watching Russian TV (which is of course state-controlled). Also, NATO and the EU are not countries. They are clubs of countries which they join volountarily, and actually have to get the approval of all the other countries to join. So no, justifying Russia's actions because of "NATO & EU expansion" is not a valid excuse. And it's because of Russia's actions that provoked Finland and Sweden to try and join NATO (and for Georgia to try and join the EU), thereby doubling the border between NATO countries and Russia. Not surprising at all, if a big country starts acting like a bully, other smaller countries around it will team up to counter that threat. As a sidenote, there were much less US troops stationed in Europe before 2014, the "Threat" from NATO towards Russia is overblown, and everyone knows that. And this "history" thing is yet another excuse. What would you say if Britain decided to reclaim all the lands that were once its own? Isn't that also history after all? What if the Royal Army seized Malta, or Cyprus, or South Africa tomorrow? Would you still say "it's because of the history"? That's not how any of this works in a civilised world. It's been over 30 years since the USSR collapsed, and Russia was a signatory and a Guaranteur of Ukrainian sovereignty, when Ukraine gave up its Soviet nukes in 1994. So Putin is actually going back on his country's word (as he has done so many other times before). You can't take Russia's "red line" seriously, when they're constantly moving the red line towards you. Also, many have been listening, you forgot the good relations Germany used to have with Russia, even under Putin for the first few years of his government. It's bloody ironic how most of those who fantasize about Hitler, are the ones who support Putin's Fascism.

[@WChocoleta]

I agree with your points for the most part, and thank you for offering alternative views while condemning Russia has become a sort of political correctness. But has 'NATO expansion' really posed an existential threat to Russia? From Russia's standpoint I would say yes. If anyone thinks that NATO is merely a "defensive military alliance", think twice. Think about the airstrikes of Yugoslavia in the 1990s. NATO claimed that the airstrike was to stop the Serbians from ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, and that the airstrikes were legitimate and of benign intentions. Was there a racial cleansing? Maybe. But this operation has set an alarming precedent that NATO could carry out military operations outside of the territory of its member states, while no member-state was facing a security threat. The operation was purely OFFENSIVE. Following such precendent, NATO could in theory leverage any controversial domestic affair of other countries to legalize an offensive military operation in its own interest. How is that different from Russia's blatant invasion in Ukraine in the name of "liberating the ethnic Russians from suppression by the Ukrainians"? After the precedent of military intervention in Kosovo, Russia just does not believe that this is a purely defensive military apparatus when it extends its reach all the way to Russia's doorstep.

[@Inchaos42]

Difference here is next: Was there [in Yugoslavia] a racial cleansing? not maybe, yes, there were, let's be clear. Was there (and is) suppression of Russians in Ukraine? actually there is no proof of that. russia invaded in 2014, we are in 2022. 8 years and still no evidence or proof that russians was under oppressions in Ukraine. There is no court case, left alone decision. Russia is in UN security council, they were more than able to press for investigation , why this didn't happen? maybe because this is casus belli for russians and they don't even plan to prove it?

[@Bobochee]

Bingo!

[@ernstholm8070]

what about the Bay of pigs invasion? It was the same reaction as Russian invasion of Ukraine

[@meta4101]

Whatever the virtues of realpolitik, attacking Ukraine was, in fact, unrealistic and is leading to the defacto disarmament of Russia.

[@puraLusa]

It can also be seen as a very stupid falling for a trap. Either u are capable of reaching an objective or u are trying to climb a mountain after breaking ur own leg. Most stupid ass invasion!

[@oliverschmid605]

Few hundred years ago nobody gave a penny for scotland to be free of english regiment. And militarilly everybody told the scotish they can't win without heavy cavallery. But they did and they gained their FREEDOM. So keep going Ukrainian Bravehearts and get your FREEDOM!

[@hanna8418]

Makes you wonder what motivates them to help some countries and not others...

[@nikolasvenetidis9608]

I think people of the Western World have this imagination about Ukraine. As a Pontic Greek with family from Ukraine, a large portion of Eastern and somewhat southern Ukraine are heavy influenced by Russia and majority of the areas support Russia, and don’t feel attachment to Ukraine. At the start of this invasion, I disagreed with Putin striking Kyiv, but if the battle is in the East and South the areas currently controlled by Russia are majority of Russian speakers that are happy to live within Russia which I don’t see a problem. I think western media has put this image that Putin is horrible, this invasion is the worse thing since WW2 and while there is no winners here, as with every war, there is purpose. Half my family supports Russian control and the other half does not. And that opinion is supported within Ukraine in the East and South.

[@fredking5448]

In this case might and right are on the same side. And that side is not Russia