Why Russia took Crimea first

[@fleekrushyt9410]

2:50 This wasnt anything that Yanukovych did. It was his predecessors who initiated it. He was the one who made Ukraine actually even MORE dependend on Russia for Energy resources.

[@maxk4471]

this is true. Yanukovich was backed by putin since early 2000s. It was literally the kremlin's puppet. He was not trying to gain any independence for Ukraine. Actually the opposite.

[@MrVasja46]

Bankrupt Ukraine could not even afford other energy resources, except for Russian ones, because Ukrainian tycoons and oligarchs robbed the country to the point of absurdity! Ukrainians didn't even pay for cheap Russian energy!

[@gabrielpalmones3980]

This is true to a point. But we also have to understand that when the Soviet Union fell a sort of “post-cold war fallout” ensued that affected former Soviet States. What is meant by this is that western countries remained reluctant to support and even economically assist newly formed independent former-Soviet States due to two reasons. 1) The Soviet successor state of Russia may attempt to reclaim these states and therefore assert its influence, and 2) The poor economic conditions left behind by the fall of the Soviet Union made it less appealing for capitalist-centric countries to invest and aid. So with this, the Ukraine Government until the administration of Petro Poroshenko had no choice but to rely on Russia to repair its damaged economy. So I dont think the past administrations of Ukraine are entirely to blame for what was actually imposed to them.

[@larrymorrison171]

What happened was that during those years Russian gas prices were unbearably high, leaving Ukraine without any choices. The video makes it sound like it was some kind of policy, but it was just pure economics.

[@thebenevolentsun6575]

​@@gabrielpalmones3980Yeah we saw the same exact thing with Post-Stalinist Poland. The stain of Communism was stil there for the west and they were reluctant to get involved.

[@ceemichel]

Russia was able to take Crimea first because the Russian military (army, Air Force and navy) already had bases on the peninsula under a 99 year lease with Ukraine agreed to between 1991 and 1994. They were able to deploy the so-called "little green men" from those bases and seize most of the peninsula in a matter of hours.

[@robertaurens5665]

Added to which the Yanks were pissed because they had been watering at the mouth to have a US naval base on the Black sea to continue to intimidate Russia

[@mutluolmaknedir]

​@@robertaurens5665Crimea or Bosphorus which important

[@mutluolmaknedir]

@WarriorRunner777 Turkey is jealous of Russia Crimea is more important than the Bosphorus.Russian politic said this

[@mutluolmaknedir]

@WarriorRunner777 Russia attaches great importance to Crimea

[@Ultra1036speed]

​@@robertaurens5665Oh well with every civilized country in the world hateing Russia NATO will have more than enough places to slaughter Russia from when the time comes ! NATO doesn't "annex" other countries land like the Hitler wannabe Putin!

[@peteryokahui]

check this out, the british can't even remember they attacked russia in crimea 1850

[@StephenSeabird]

Or choose not to. As a British citizen, what needs to be pointed out is the passing over of British Imperialism, when the B. Empire was on its last legs, right at the end of the C19th and early C20th, to America. Cecil Rhodes and Alfred Milner (an important strategist) formed their Round Table around 1900, which foresaw that the old colonial Empire would not last, and presided over decisions to 'move the capital of Empire from London to Washington'. Thus was born the trans-Atlantic Anglo-American 'special relationship'. In this, it could be said that America inherited a 'Russo-phobia' from Britain, always seeing it as a threat to their interests. This, British conservatives have never been able to let go of, in spite of most British people not thinking much about it - the Empire seemed utterly dead to them and part of history like all other European colonial empires. After WW2, it was evident the Empire was truly over, but even so there came a succession of very old aristocratic Prime Ministers right up to 1964 (one brief exception was the socialist Labour Party govt of 1945-51), whose birth, background and way of thinking was rooted in the early C20th and Empire - including the aged Churchill. In 1956, the same year as the Hungarian Uprising by chance, a British Prime Minister Antony Eden made a foolish and in the end embarrassing decision to intervene in Egypt over the possession of the Suez Canal. It all blew up in his face, with public protests against the outmoded imperialistic sabre rattling. It failed - but more importantly, the U.S.A. first made it absolutely clear that it would not support the British (to Britain's shock and chagrin), and then gave the signals to the British establishment that from now on, America would be Leader and Britain would follow its coat tails - not the other way round. The next Prime Minister, McMillan, is famous for the phrase, ''We'll just have to be the Greeks to their Romans'', meaning (and the aristocracy have always known their Classical history), that like the ancient Greeks, they had been superseded by the Romans. In a perfect reversal of 1956, PM Tony Blair followed President Bush with an invasion of Iraq in 2003. The similarity of these two incidents is absolutely striking - for both were founded on lies and cover-ups, and this time (Iraq, 2003) the public indignation was immense - the public demnstrations and protests against the war, actually the largest ever seen in London, with it is estimated, possibly as many as a million people involved. Even so - Tony Blair went ahead. His name is blackened, he dare not show his face on TV in Britain to this day. Thus, supposed British democracy - many of us feel - still thinks it has carte blanche when it comes to foreign policy, as indeed does Washington and its treatment of the American public opinion. I rest my case for the prosecution.

[@angrydoggy9170]

If Russia wants to keep its sphere of influence, they only need to make it an equally or better position to be in than joining the European side. As long as aligning with Russia means giving up sovereignty and signing on to a highly corrupt rather weak economy, people will want the better option.

[@brianbozo2447]

Absolutely TRue Russia only has itself to blame for becoming corrupt and none 5:17 entrepreneurial and lazy.

[@newcoatresurfacing5477]

So you think Ukraine is a better choice for Crimeans? By 2019 the economic output of Ukraine was half of what it was when the USSR collapsed. In the same period Russia had increased its output to ten times its 1990 level and restored its Great Power status after being on its knees and gasping for air. By any measure Ukraine is a failed state.

[@newcoatresurfacing5477]

And Ukraine gave up its sovereignty in 2014.

[@angrydoggy9170]

@@newcoatresurfacing5477 Sure buddy.

[@xelldincht4251]

This. Russia under Putin is corrupt and authoritarian. It has no "soft power". IF the Russian Federation survives this war; Russia will need to improve itself first (reduce corruption, become a Meritocracy) and maybe then it has a chance

[@FreshPrincce]

Why are you showing war footage of the August war in Georgia from 2008?

[@Cptnbond]

A bit skimpy in parts. For example, what choices were on the vote in Crimea? One: Independent Crimea, Two: Become part of Russian Federation. No other option given, like continue to be part of Ukraine. I guess it does not matter, since Russian would have made option two the winning option anyway.

[@pmayo7894]

​@@Mmjk_12 - which is debatable.

[@Silver_Prussian]

Post-referendum polls The results of a survey by the U.S. government Broadcasting Board of Governors agency, conducted April 21-29, 2014, showed that 83% of Crimeans felt that the results of the March 16 referendum on Crimea's status likely reflected the views of most people there, whereas this view is shared only by 30% in the rest of Ukraine.[153] According to the Gallup's survey performed on April 21-27, 82.8% of Crimean people consider the referendum results reflecting most Crimeans' views,[154] and 73.9% of Crimeans say Crimea's becoming part of Russia will make life better for themselves and their families, while 5.5% disagree.[154] According to survey carried out by Pew Research Center in April 2014, the majority of Crimean residents say they believed the referendum was free and fair (91%) and that the government in Kyiv ought to recognize the results of the vote (88%).[155] According to a poll of the Crimeans by the Ukrainian branch of Germany's biggest market research organization, GfK, on January 16-22, 2015: "Eighty-two percent of those polled said they fully supported Crimea's inclusion in Russia, and another 11 percent expressed partial support. Only 4 percent spoke out against it. ... Fifty-one percent reported their well-being had improved in the past year."[156] Bloomberg's Leonid Bershidsky noted that "The calls were made on Jan. 16-22 to people living in towns with a population of 20,000 or more, which probably led to the peninsula's native population, the Tatars, being underrepresented because many of them live in small villages. On the other hand, no calls were placed in Sevastopol, the most pro-Russian city in Crimea. Even with these limitations, it was the most representative independent poll taken on the peninsula since its annexation." Cry

[@williamthebonquerer9181]

​@@Mmjk_12 you lot believe maiden was a western colour revolution but Donbass and crimes was entirely organic

[@no1DdC]

@@Mmjk_12 Neither declared independence. That's a Russian propaganda line, not reality. Both these declarations of independence and the votes were orchestrated by Russian secret services.

[@theantagonist2147]

Typical communist tactics

[@dariusz1031]

This video doesn't explain anything

[@therenschchild1]

yeah, not all idiots can understand

[@havareriksen1004]

A nice presentation, but it sounds like it supports russian claims that Krym had always been russian before Khrushchev gave it to Ukraina in 1954. In reality many cultures have lived on Crimea and dominated it, from the greeks, romans, kyivian rus, kossacks, mongols and tartars. Russia didn't arrive there before they annexed it in 1783, in violation with the Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca. This brought on a war with the Ottomans that Russia won, and the Ottomans ceded all claims to Krym in the Treaty of Jassy in 1792. Then Russia lost possession of Krym during the Crimean War, lost it again during the Revolution, when Ukraina first established itself as a republic and Krym was for a brief time part of the republic, and yet again lost it during WWII. So russian possession of Krym has neither been that long and has been interrupted several times. There is a majority of russian speaking peoples and ethinc russians there, but this is a result of the russification of the region, mass deportings of the Tatar population and moving ethinc russians in to fill all public roles. The same has happened in almost every other country Russia has invaded and conquered, thus there are russian minorities in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova etc. today. Even the Holodomor, Stalin's planned hunger in Ukraina, served this purpose. As millions of ukrainians died of starvation, ethinc russians from other parts of Russia was moved into the depopulated lands to farm the land. Thus the strong ethnic russian prescence in Donetsk and Luhansk.

[@Poliss95]

Couldn't have put it better myself.

[@michaeldelisieux5252]

Precisely!

[@jaykolinsky7103]

The statistical truth of it is, in the late 1700s and part of the 1800s, Russians made up a very small % (4.6) of the total population in Crimea. Tartars by far were the dominant ethnic group, consisting of over 80%. Then Stalin came along, and in a very bloody and brutal way, shifted that balance entirely in the other direction.

[@socrates6870]

Hopefully it will be Ukrainian in 2023...the year when the war ends...

[@skepticalbadger]

It doesn't support that at all. What it does is omit the earlier, non-Russian-influenced history of the region. It then says (0:46) "Incorporated into the Russian Empire in the late 18th Century, Ukraine briefly gained its independence in 1918, but three years later became part of the Soviet Republic."

[@Joaocruz30]

For anyone who wants the answer to the question posed in the title and for those who suffer from "attention span" I can give here the answer in summary form and the synopsis: Because Crimea has 90% of Russians and have military air and sea bases, fundamental to giving hegemony to the Russians in the Black Sea and consequently in the Mediterranean. basically this is it! EDIT: Don't forget that the special military operation started in 2022 (February) But the war started in 2013/2014 for several reasons, the Ukrainian government's coup d'etat, the Maidan, the ban on newspapers, radios and televisions that spoke in Russian , the destruction of the Orthodox Church, and the apartheid on the part of Ukrainians who began a campaign of hatred and violence against the population that expressed itself in the Russian language Mainly in; the Oblast of Lugansk, Odessa, Donetsk, Kherson and Zaporizhia and Crimea. In addition to starting to attack the Donbass area in 2014 and with the culmination of terror with the fire at the Chamber of Commerce in Odessa where, after setting fire to the building, they closed the doors from the outside, ending up burning 50 people to death... Fantastic huh? !?

[@marcopetrovski9762]

They haven’t mentioned that those 14000 dead people were Russians, many kids… they left that out conveniently…

[@mohammedqamar7942]

This is something the the western media fails to understand, that or deliberately hiding the truth to the wider audience i believe it to be the latter.

[@sidp5381]

Yeah, special military operation is a full out invasion you for if you think Russia has respect for any country sovereignty it’s obvious you know nothing about the history of the Russian empire you’re talking about a country that has committed genocide against not just millions of people but eradicated complete cultures from particular areas

[@ВикторАнтип]

@72badry в 2014 году на майдане произошло разрушение конституции Украины, поэтому Донбасс и встал на защиту конституции. Но народ Донбасса почему то назвали сепаратистами, хотя сепаратисты это были на майдане.

[@konackt]

You didn't mention who the snipers were!

[@YOURDADSDILDO]

Ukranian

[@BlutoandCo]

​@@YOURDADSDILDO ruSSian

[@RaveYoda]

Maybe at the time the snipers were pro Ukrainian but thought the protestors were illegally attacking Ukrainian federal buildings. Or, a pro Russian leader has his close guard be pro Russian snipers. What is your point?

[@YOURDADSDILDO]

@@BlutoandCo check your facts

[@havareriksen1004]

There is ample evidence that almost all shots were made from positions held by Berkuk. Photographic evidence, cartridge casings, tracing of the bullet paths etc. There is some evidence for a few shots coming from areas protesters held at the time, but it is inconclusive.

[@TotalWarVisegrad]

Crimea should be an independent state of Tatars

[@connormclernon26]

I'll bet Yanukovich isn't too thrilled that his mansion got turned into a museum

[@johnd2058]

I would be kinda proud, myself. Easy for me to say, though, I don't have a mansion.

[@Neoptolemus]

The video starts with the Russian involvement in Crimea without mentioning the 2014 coup with US involvement.

[@jonathandavx]

Nice try Iván, haven't you been drafted yet?

[@Neoptolemus]

@@jonathandavx Ivan? I am Boris from England.

[@amandapeluso4217]

Ukraine on Fire gives the truth on what happened in Ukraine. The CIA coup from 2014 has been reported on also BBC Newsnight had a video on the rise of Neo Nazism in Ukraine. The people in Crimea voted to stay with Russia as they didn't support the coup. Can't blame them

[@therenschchild1]

@@Neoptolemus the people voted on closer alignment with europe, which was ignored. dont blame the us, it was the will of the people that was ignored

[@PUARockstar]

No such thing happened

[@VajrahahaShunyata]

Not much mention of the Budapest memorandum treaty? Why?

[@0rcd0c]

She also failed to mention at 4:15 why Yanukovych didn't sign the agreement in his historic "pen breaking apology". These Western "development aid funds" had inhumane conditions attached to them which would result in the Ukrainian working population essentially becoming slaves to big cooperations for the forthcoming decades. Yanukovych 100% did the right decision for his country at the sacrifice at his own safety and future career.

[@natmaren989]

Important note. In Ukraine, Maidan 2014 is most often called not "Euromaidan", but "Revolution of Dignity". Yes, Euromaidan was the beginning of the protests. However, the number of protesters was decreasing and, most likely, they would have stopped taking to the streets. But the government made a mistake. They decided to intimidate the people by brutally beating the protesters. It was this incident that gave Maidan a new, more powerful turn. On the day after the students were beaten, the largest number of people took to the streets of Kyiv. They demanded to punish the officials responsible for the beating. This gave rise to a tough confrontation between the street and Yanukovych, who did not want to punish his entourage. Further, the brutality of the police only increased, reaching the kidnappings and murders. Along with this, the demands of the protesters became more stringent, turned into a demand for the impeachment of Yanukovych. Rejection of police brutality and its impunity gave the name to the protests - "Revolution of Dignity".

[@doniehurley9396]

there was a hell of a lot of brutality on the barricades led by ultra-right hoods who were not going to let this best chance of power slip and most likely killed a lot of kids and ordinary citizens to escalate and blame the regime. the investigation into the killings was dropped like a hot potato by the interim government when it took over

[@Silver_Prussian]

This so called revolution was used as a smoke cover to instigate a coup and put friendly politicians in charge

[@darkopavlic6592]

ask CIA

[@catalincarceanu7991]

@@natmaren989 how is to organise a Maidan in your country?

[@zlo333]

a year later people are taken forcefully to front lines, i knew back then that maidan was a fluke, u literealy get people freedoms taken away, and no maidan anymore, u try to to protest now , u'll see the democratic country, i won't even talk about males can't leave the country, looks like the concentration camp then democratic country

[@mishaknopkin2199]

Russia took Crimea first, then, second, took Donbas, Zaporoje and Herson. The next step, third, Odessa will be Russian too.

[@sepxviii731]

What an unbelievable pile of half truths, skipped history, wrong maps and general shallowness

[@12mickeyd12]

Why was Crimea taken so easily? Was the title question answered? This video is informative, don't get me wrong, but you didn't answer the title question, or was it simply, "Russia sent little green men into Crimea, held a referendum and then annexed the region"? Nothing on the Ukrainian Navy defecting or genuine popular support for Russia at that time?

[@andyontheinternet5777]

They can't tell you that the vast majority of the people in Crimea see themselves as Russians and want nothing to do with the kleptocracy of Ukraine. That would ruin the narrative.

[@louisecorchevolle9241]

taking Crimea :2 died by accident 20.000 ukrainian on 22.000 went over to Russia

[@louisecorchevolle9241]

@@andyontheinternet5777 exactly was there under Ukrainian occupation

[@torehaaland6921]

​@@andyontheinternet5777 reported as false information.

[@andyontheinternet5777]

@@torehaaland6921 Im not making this up. I know people from Ukraine. Crimea voted to leave Ukraine in a huge landslide. Crimea was part of Russia for a LONG time before it was assigned to the soviet state of Ukraine. The people there are not Ukrainians, they are mostly Russians.

[@RichardBejtlich]

Great video, but the invasion started 24 Feb, not 22 Feb as stated at 11:24.

[@juancho1663]

You're incorrect. The invasion started in 22 Feb when Putin declared the independence of Donetsk and Lugansk. Just hours after that there were a lot of russian troops, tanks and everything crossing ukranian borders. Before 24 Feb 50% of Kherson region was already taken. 24 Feb was just Putin's speech confirming that he was ordered what we all already were seeing was happening

[@gediminaskucinskas6952]

Not entirely correct. You see in 24 Feb was Putins speech confirming special military operations but actions started in Feb 22.

[@carlos1232]

@@juancho1663 the special military operation was announced at roughly 3:30am on 24th February 2022 and shortly after that troops began to cross the border. I watched this unfold live.

[@Vsack9yolo09]

Shows how unprofessional they are , this source can't be trusted

[@alphaclot302]

@@juancho1663 lie

[@republicofhandball8815]

First of all, Crimea was the only autonomous oblast of Ukraine. From 2014(since its annexation to Russia) until 2022(when the full invasion started) Ukraine didn't shoot a single a bullet in Crimea. Probably, if it was just Crimea, we wouldn't had any war at all between Russia and Ukraine.

[@georgesaggers208]

I went to the photo exhibition couple of weeks back.. well done IWM

[@jshepard152]

Russia denied involvement, but promptly annexed Crimea once the war was over. Yeah, they definitely were not involved.

[@Grunty1289]

Anyone looked into who those snipers were?

[@doniehurley9396]

That got the same sort of investigation that Nord Stream got

[@alphaclot302]

Ukraine never was a country, don't lie about "ukre russian relations for centuries". There were no such.

[@ButtThuck]

In 1991, Russia acknowledged that Ukraine, Crimea included, was a sovereign nation. This is codified in Russian federal law.

[@ВикторАнтип]

​​@@ButtThuckвы не договариваете. Договор включает себя вне блоковый статус Украины, договор военной базы в Крыму. Там многое еще что есть. Украина рацифицировала этот договор.

[@ivan7453]

How does anyone trust Putin and Russia to honour an agreement? No-one can.

[@ILoveBees]

Good summary of the events of the last decade, but does not answer the question in the title.

[@Poliss95]

I'll answer it. it's because Putin is a completely and totally insane megalomaniac who thinks he's Peter the Great.

[@tidbit1877]

Russia annexed Crimea, that's the answer.

[@tomnewham1269]

To have access to the oil and gas fields off the coast of Crimea which if Ukraine used would be able to supply the EU therefore Ukraine would not be dependent on Russia for their energy needs plus Ukraine could export the oil and gas to the EU.

[@maryanchabursky9148]

1:45 including in Crimea and Sevastopol.

[@cuthomas4664]

A prosperity Ukraine with strong democracy is a threat to any dictatorship regime in Russia. The same problem is happening to countries neighbouring China, be weak or be dependent to China or a Chinese invasion is imminent.

[@arnoldshmitt4969]

BOLD of you to assume usa is not a dictatorship with sham elections , where industry lobby to make laws they want and the common man voice is often silenced no matter the intensity of protest , usa seems more of an oligarchy with democracy as a shield to keep public from doing violent protest

[@alphaclot302]

Democracy, haha. I wonder why are there american soldiers near the countries you named? Maybe it's about american interventions, but not democracy?

[@allseeingirene]

@@alphaclot302 The irony is that America is slightly more moral, technically, however the result is the same. The aggression of these superpowers prompts common yet not guaranteed pleas to the west for aid which leads to a dependency on the US. Better than being put under the CCP but it's still a thing. Russian doctrine nowadays is meant to mirror actual fascism in all but name btw, so I'd rather be an Imperialist than a Imperialist and a fascist dictatorship.

[@alphaclot302]

@@allseeingirene nice excuses for your personal invasions

[@Dennis-nc3vw]

@@arnoldshmitt4969 If the US was a dictatorship, how did Trump come to power? Everyone in the elite, both politically and economically, hated him, yet he still became President.

[@thesceptic1018]

I vote for Emily Ferris; a scholar and commentator who has successfully expunged all traces of “er, you know, like, sort of” and other rubbish from her discourse. Chapeau.

[@neolexiousneolexian6079]

1. *Every* part of Ukraine, including Crimea, voted in the majority for independence from the USSR. 2. The use of Russian as a language and the demographics of ethnic Russians in Ukraine are a direct result of deliberate and genocidal Russian/Soviet policies of artificial famine, language suppression, forced displacement.

[@DaveSCameron]

Straight up dishonesty, 2014 elections were overwhelming for Russia! I you tell lies you'll lose any credibility...

[@imtiazakand3174]

Criemia was populated by criemian tatars. When russian empire captured it in 1783,it was populated by ethnic russian.

[@ThePeterispas]

Just check the maps for the results of those votes. A minority in Crimea voted for anything separating it from Russia. The video fails to explain the long Hystoric connection of Crimea with Russia and no connection with today's Ukraine that it si only a product of USSR. Nothing else. There is no common Ukrainian History as each region had its own history and connection to Russia.

[@TheBottlenose33]

How have the people of Crimea voted in similar referendums?

[@DaveSCameron]

@@ThePeterispas Lughansk and Donetsk tho? Don't forget that the EU Verified that election...

[@gordion1]

Who were the snipers?

[@StephenSeabird]

That's been a much disputed issue, as far as I can tell, because some accuse extreme right-wing Ukrainian nationalists with links to the Azov Brigade, which has a very dark history. Others dispute that.

[@Rus88292]

Потому что Крым всегда принадлежал России, пока Хрущев не отписал Украине. Вот Путин и вернул что принадлежало российскому народу😅

[@jamesvioleen]

0:00 you mean early 2014

[@jmccallion2394]

What a great series from the IWM this is! It is very similar to the style of Prof Mike Clarke, the resident Sky News military analyst: an ability to make politico/military terms easy to understand and an informative style that reinforces that understanding! Thank you and keep up the good work!

[@oliverlister1029]

I very much agree with you!

[@TheRealBillBob]

Interesting that you mentioned this with Clarke. Clarke is a known clown who spouts similar false and disinformation realities about Russia and Ukraine.

[@OfficiallyPG]

The little green men was Wagner forces

[@merc340sr]

Interesting video. Russia has access to the Black Sea in areas other than Crimea. Why don't the Russians develop these areas(Sochi, Novorossiysk)?

[@ДаданДаданский]

What do you mean "don`t develop"? Most of those areas are sand beaches and resorts. Very well developed and growing.

[@merc340sr]

@@ДаданДаданский I meant develop those areas in order to locate a naval base, as an alternative to using Crimea as naval base. That's what I meant.

[@Bjonnet55]

@@merc340sr Russia took Crimea and would still take Odessa because historically they are part of Russia ; the Russia empire developed those places not Ukraine and majority of the populations are Russian majority; Ukraine Is a red alert for Russia that’s why it won’t allow it to join nato that will automatically put USA and nato infrastructure in Crimea close to Russia ; so Russia had a lot of reason to take back those strategic port its was always been Russian cities and port not Ukraine

[@merc340sr]

@@Bjonnet55 fair enough, but can you recapture a country after it acquired its independence (i.e.Ukraine)?Using military power and war to conquer territory is becoming less acceptable in this day and age.Would Russia not be better off if it became part of the West?

[@yorrickloooper9398]

​@@merc340srYes ofcourse, but.... Russia is the enemy...

[@dpt6849]

Crimea is founded by acient Greeks. So it belongs Greece. And then. Persia, Rome, Byzantium/Ottoman. Not to a Jewish president who dances around in a skirt and wears high heels. You see. They didn't have high heels in ancient times...

[@nopasaran453]

Such nonsense can only be heard from Western "journalists"

[@kjp76]

Wikipedia: 2007 Munich speech of Vladimir Putin That was the moment when he revealed his plans to the whole world, and nobody said enough!

[@Infernal460]

It wasn't "current thing".

[@amandapeluso4217]

Perhaps you didn't pay attention to his Munich speech from 2007. Putin discussed NATO expansion and American imperialism which is happening today. You can spin it to suit your narrative. The truth is in Putin's speech in 2007 on how America wants to control Europe through NATO expansion. Too bad America didn't listen as they think they can do whatever they want and have military infrastructure and missiles in every country. The European countries which are in NATO lost their sovereignty which was also in Putin's speech yet you want to twist around to suit your pathetic narrative.😂😂😂 Wikipedia is not a reliable source. You probably never even listened to Putin's speech 😂

[@Harbringe]

Losing Crimea puts at risk the whole of southern Russia to the caucasus mountains . It's similar to Hawaii for the Americans.

[@colinobrien3806]

that makes no sense considering it was never russias in the first place , what risk ? ukraine getting its rightful border back ? what are you talking about a risk of what ? ukraine take back crimea blow the kerch bridge then set up a really good and solid air and land defense on the coast and stick their middle finger up at russia across the water .. what risk to who ? losing crimea ? you do know that happened 8 years ago lol ........ crimea will be won back not lost , do you know whats going on in the ukraine you do ?

[@Poliss95]

No. It's not similar to the Hawaiian islands in any way.

[@mutluolmaknedir]

Why is crimea so important for russia

[@Stand663]

We take democracy here for granted ie the vote actually means something and cannot be overturned etc etc. Unfortunately places in the east have never experienced real democracy only dictatorship in one form or another.

[@DaveSCameron]

Define Democracy?

[@Stand663]

@@DaveSCameron You can change your government

[@DaveSCameron]

@@Stand663 Didn't we witness Ukraine *change its Government back in 2013/4...

[@cattraknoff]

Democracy has its own perils. Chief among them is this: There is no one in power who has not sought power. Most who seek power do so for selfish reasons. Power is the most addictive thing in the world: more addictive than every drug combined. We entrust people with power who are addicts to power. Democracies have a tendency to decay over time and become more and more corrupt for this reason. Soon enough these addicts to power start conspiring together, making deals with hand shakes privately. Some are little conspiracies, while others are more grand in scale. These things have always happened. Conspiracy has always been an integral part of politics. In no democracy has everything been decided publicly. Most things are decided privately before they ever even become a subject for public debate. Politicians make deals. They have always made deals. The older a democracy, the more corrupt these dealings become.

[@jamesng7320]

Are you implying that democracy is somehow better? Many countries and have been undemocratic for their entire existence and still turned out to be very great nations.

[@tanderson596]

Thank you IWM for this analysis; the truth is a gift to the world.

[@alphaclot302]

"truth"

[@denisdemin81]

Why are you sure this is the truth?

[@amandeis]

@@denisdemin81 Because we don't believe any poisoner who even forbids using the word war. The people who are so manipulable that they have remained loyal for over 20 years despite every outrage. They believe all the stupid lies that this man spreads in the Kremlin. Anyone who eats everything they vomit can confidently also be called such. Dumb.

[@TheByrd]

If it was illegitimate like you said then why does your Ukrainian map reflect the Russian annexation of Crimea? Contradictory.

[@ishkel]

The most propoganda-like and distorted history representation I ever heard.

[@Grendel650]

Sometimes, evidence based description can upset the useful idiots supporting russian narratives. 😂 Stop whining. Read more.

[@LusoPatriot77]

I appreciate the very balanced view presented in the video.

[@Neoptolemus]

Do you know anything about the 2014 coup backed by US?

[@LusoPatriot77]

@@Neoptolemus I understand that the government of Yanukovitch broke a promised deal with the EU, but I also understand that US backed Svoboda in creating riots to overthrow the government. Am i correct?

[@vamsikrishna3855]

@@LusoPatriot77 yes.. and that’s why this report is biased.

[@Poliss95]

@@LusoPatriot77 I understand you're posting from a bunker underneath the Kremlin.

[@douglasmcginity3327]

@@Poliss95just reality why is it oblivious to you that NATO is the side CONSTANTLY for decades purposefully creeping onto Russia’s border? Russia at peace just being Russia. NATO wanted a war for the money laundering it makes the ruling class.

[@DSAK55]

Mid-Life crisis. He should have bought a Lamborghini

[@havareriksen1004]

He probably have several already. The worlds richest man.

[@Chinunit22]

Losing Crimea to NATO would be end to Putin's Navy and security of Russia

[@B1G_Brother]

He actually looks out for his country’s interests I wish we had a leader that did that

[@therenschchild1]

@@Chinunit22 security against what exactly?

[@stuckp1stuckp122]

A succinct summary that ended with how important Crimea is

[@ekesandras1481]

it is an unsinkable aircraft carrier, that controls the Black Sea.

[@mishasmirnov9988]

a lot of misinformation, especially in the beginning. To make impression that Ukraine was always occupied by Russia during imperial or soviet periods. Crimea belonged to Russia more than 300 years, and it was a part of Ukraine for 20 years. Now it is 10th year coming when Crimea is in Russia. Where is annexation? It was not mentioned that Crimea was an autonomous republic in Ukraine with its own parliament and constitution. So they decided to quit from Ukraine during the absence of legal power in Ukraine in 2014, it is a fact. And funny thing that the EU didn't recognize a referendum with voting. But it recognized the armed overthrow of power. Very democratic way.

[@eugenes9620]

ruzzky, follow your warship Maaskva 🤣🤣

[@Cubs3344]

How poor this report could be? stated that an unknown armed force occupied Crimea "Despite their Russian equipment". Did the reporters know that Ukraine also possesses a lot of Russian equipment as well?

[@ameerhamid89]

Nice try. They mean very modern russian equipment such as body armour and rifles specific to Russian federation. Not soviet equipment

[@jjoei1345]

The Russo Ukraine War began with the Maidan Protests

[@Cottam89]

Which were directed and pushed by the west

[@ogposter8086]

@@Cottam89 delusional

[@MacTac141]

@@Cottam89 Only when the government gave orders to start using live ammunition on protesters. Turns out killing dozens of people in your capital city is a great way to drive your population from protest to revolution. Particularly picking off civilians in the streets with snipers was a stupid thing to do

[@martijnstam6186]

@@Cottam89 Ukraine is a democratic country and in 2014 they ousted a corrupt Putin cronie.

[@KilroyishereYT]

1:01 🤬! No serious university course accepts the definition of holodomor. The British are experts in the field of revisionism. I read several correspondences between Soviet officials about ten years ago and I observed no intention to create a famine. It was a famine due to an unexpected drought accompanied by landlord behavior that convinced small farmers to ally themselves to their causes and the inability of Soviet leaders to manage the problem.

[@interpl6089]

Crimea was Always Russian.

[@jeffreybabor2585]

Does anyone else wonder if there is a Crimea river?

[@thornil2231]

Crimea is part of Russia, always has been.

[@mutluolmaknedir]

Only from 1783

[@thornil2231]

@@mutluolmaknedir before the french republic, Italy, Germany, all the central and eastern european countries existed...

[@mutluolmaknedir]

@@thornil2231 why is crimea so important for russia

[@thornil2231]

Why is California so important for the US?@@mutluolmaknedir

[@Jo-re2ye]

12:21 in the transcript has a factual error

[@mitchellanderson3960]

Pretty good video, fairly unbiased. A little more on the Minsk Agreements and Ukraine and Germany purposefully not allowing elections to move forward would be a nice add.

[@obsidianjane4413]

It would also be nice to note that it was because Russia had totally corrupted the election process. Oh wait, they did mention that.

[@tomkent4656]

The Minsk Agreements were never ratified by either party.

[@maryanchabursky9148]

Elections didn’t work out because russia refused to give refugees a vote.

[@TheAlien729]

​@@tomkent4656 Ukraine and Donbass were parties to the agreement. The rest were the guarantors of fulfillment. Considering that more than one politician from Ukraine and the West has already spoken out that all these negotiations were needed only to stall for time to create an army...

[@TheAlien729]

Ukraine and Donbass were parties to the agreement. The rest were the guarantors of fulfillment. Considering that more than one politician from Ukraine and the West has already spoken out that all these negotiations were needed only to stall for time to create an army...

[@IusedtohaveausernameIliked]

Speaking Russian doesn't make you Russian any more than speaking English makes you English. Borders are decided by laws not by languages. Slava Ukraini!

[@eugenes9620]

100%, half country speaks ruzzians

[@54mgtf22]

Love your work 👍

[@LifeDL]

What I’d like to know is, I’ve heard the military force was firing into Donbass region. Some say it’s the Ukrainian military forces wiring into the Donbass region because they’re pro Russian. Others as this video describes the little green men were the ones to do the plague take over the Donbass region with what I just saw a Toronto they have little green men that swept to Toronto, without a shot of bullets in anyway and pushed all the truckers that were protesting the vaccination by mandate . It was believed the little green men were actually United Nations why the United Nations would help. Canada is clear what would be unclear is why would the UN, potentially little green men, will be firing into the Donbass region from the west. I know this is long but I appreciate any response. Thank you.

[@lc5945]

Napoleonic wars. Switzerland. The "language affinity" card, and it's outcome...

[@Marcel-ct9wq]

Russia just wanted Ukraine to stay a neutral buffer between Russia and Nato .. but the US had to keep creeping up to their borders ...

[@stc3145]

Russia tried to colonize Ukraine that is why there are so many Russian speaking people there. Also in the Baltic states

[@TheEvertw]

That, and it did genocide on the original population.

[@RaveYoda]

Exactly. Additionally, why should it matter? In the US we have a lot of Spanish speaking people but does that make that part of Mexico or Spain? No- of course not. This line of thought that Putin peddles distracts fuzzy thinking people from his atrocities and it's depressing.

[@brianmarshall1762]

No that is not correct. The original Ukraine state that went into the Russian empire in about 1654 or so, was much much smaller. (This was afternoon asking Russia to join it for protection after wars with Poland). The expansion of what is modern day Ukraine came about when the territory was added to the Russian empire. Odessa on the south coast was all Russian. The northern part of modern day Ukraine was conquered from the Polish Lithuanian commonwealth. The western most part was taken from Poland after WWII. The Donbas region, Odessa and coast all along to the Crimea went into Ukraine during Soviet times. It is wrong to describe the Russians living there in those areas as colonising Ukraine. During Soviet times, the leadership moved people around for political reasons. Many of the Crimean Tartars we sent to Siberia for example. Later on many had moved back. In fact it would be more accurate to state that Ukrainians were colonising areas that the Russian empire and later Soviet Union conquered. The western bit had the Poles moved to what is modern day Poland after the great border changes at the end of WWII.

[@brianmarshall1762]

@@TheEvertw if you are referring to the Holodomor, that was a Soviet Union thing not a Russian thing. The leader of the Soviet Union at the time was a Georgian who we know today as Stalin. In regards to the famine, it was not directed against the Ukrainian Kulaks, it was against the kulaks in general. Somewhere between 7-8 million farmers in the Soviet Union died. Ukraine lost around 3 and a half million people, but to describe it as an attack on Ukrainians belies it’s communist origins and the deaths of others at its hands.

[@patternrecon5271]

Keith Woods: "russian" oligarchs. Igor Kolomoisky. Great russian famine, Holodomor, Famine in Khazakhstan, Lazar Kaganovich, Genrikh Yagoda, Aron Solts, Filipp Goloshchyokin, Yakov Yurovsky, Lazar Kogan, Matvei Berman, Naftaly Frenkel, Salomon Morel, Helena Brus. You must understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. The October Revolution was not what you call in America the "Russian Revolution." It was an invasion and conquest over the Russian people. More of my countrymen suffered horrific crimes at their bloodstained hands than any people or nation ever suffered in the entirety of human history. It cannot be understated. Bolshevism was the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant of this reality is proof that the global media itself is in the hands of the perpetrators." Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

[@joshm3484]

It wasn't taken easily. Not really. Russia took months, failed at their objective to take larger portions of Ukraine, failed to topple the government, and took ridiculous casualties in what should have been a week long cake walk for any competent military. While bloggers and _analysts_ were all echoing "Russia Stronk" actual experts were watching the Russian military flail and fail with concern.

[@timmccarthy982]

Ukraine is the size of Texas anybody think that takes weeks and not years is clueless and also doesn't look at the amount of territory taken in the Russian Donbas, surrounding important port Mariupol, captured Crimean canal that supplies all the fresh water to Russian Crimea in the south things Russia wants in the month Ukraine defended Ukrainian city Kiev with Ukrainian citizens Russia didn't and still doesn't want. Or that no hostile city over a million has every been captured in modern war (unless you count completely shatterred and almost flattened Berlin at the end of WW2) it's something that's not done and the Russians remember more than anybody trying to take Grozny in 1994 and taking huge losses against 10,000 Chechens.

[@charliebarton]

They went in with less than 200k troops. The idea that they were aiming to conquer the entire country is absurd. Which is probably why our leaders keep repeating that point. And speaking of blunders - how did those sanctions work out? From the brains that brought us the Iraq and Afghanistan wars: it's a forever war that will have the Hillary Clinton for president crowd cheering for blood and death till the end of time.

[@nigellawson8610]

Of course that does not excuse Putin's aggression against a country that posed no danger to his own. One has to remember that Putin, like the Americans, has his own imperial agenda which includes incorporating Ukraine into the Russian Federation, as well as annexing the Baltic states and other parts of the old Soviet Block. He has also stated in numerous writings that Ukraine doesn't exist outside of Russia. And I have no doubt that if he had been able to capture Kiev in the first days of his invasion, he would have instituted a wholesale radical purge of Ukrainian society, which could have led to the murder and disappearance of tens of thousands of people. So I don't blame the Ukrainians for wanting to fight the Russians tooth and nail to maintain their nation and national identity.

[@timmccarthy982]

"Putin's aggression against a country that posed no danger to his own" If Ukraine joined NATO then US hypersonic nuclear missiles are on Russia's border 300 miles from Moscow and could strike in less then 3 minutes. After US put nuclear missiles in Turkey Russia put nuclear missiles in Cuba causing Cuban Missile crises. For Cuba's part in doing that the US gov't 70 years later is still punishing that country and people with crushing economic sanctions most of the people not even alive back then.

[@giselameunier4788]

That 's the reason Ukraine should stay Nutral, than no war

[@MacTac141]

@@timmccarthy982 What stupid reasoning😂 1) There are only 5 NATO countries who have American nukes on their territory, and all of them have had American nukes there for decades. None of them have American ICBMs or “hypersonic nuclear missiles”, only small yield tactical gravity bombs 2) If the US wanted nukes close to Russia, Latvia is closer to Moscow than Ukraine and Estonia is only 300km from St. Petersburg. It would be easier, smarter and closer to put nukes in the Baltics rather than Ukraine. Logistically it makes a LOT more sense as well. Since the U.S. made no effort to move nukes into the Baltics or Poland prior to the invasion, why is Ukraine any different? 3) The US government isn’t stupid and knows Russia has second strike capability. Taking out the Russian capital and second largest city faster doesn’t help the US avoid a nuclear response from Russia. Russia couldn’t stop the barrage on Moscow anyway so why would it matter to the US if it’s a base in Ukraine/the Baltics or a nuclear sub in the Atlantic that launches the reentry vehicle? Answer is they don’t, this isn’t the 1960’s anymore. It’s why they didn’t worry about building missile silos in NATO nations Ukraine joining NATO never represented a nuclear threat to Russia unless Russia was planning on nuking Ukraine to begin with, forcing an American or European response

[@sadako8559]

I lived in Crimea for my whole life. We wanted to become part od Russia. If only you all saw what a dumpster fire was our infrastructure before Russia actually funneled money here. Was it a good choice in the end? I don't know, but the fact that the whole peninsula (well, like 85% give or take) voted for Russia, remains.

[@lourdesbastida9203]

So dissapointing to see that once again only a partial thruth is mentioned and thought this was a great channel..

[@danarzechula3769]

Americans are not taught geography. Honestly they had no idea how important Crimes and its assets were

[@betterdonotanswer]

0:45 Muscovy is not Russia, historically. Ukraine, more known as Rus since 839 AD, had no complex and antagonistic relation with Muscovy until 1502 because such country simply did not exist. Crimea belonged to Rus since 968 AD, until it was invaded by Mongols on 1239. Whereas the Muscovite army has reached Crimea only on 1736 just to die in there. And managed to occupy it on 1776, or 808 years after Ukraine.

[@betterdonotanswer]

Q: Kievan Rus / Kyivan Rus'... A: Is a false name fabricated by Muscovite propaganda in order to introduce derivative frauds such as «North-Eastern Rus», «Vladimir-Suzdalian Rus» or «Muscovite Rus» that never existed in reality and were intended to support groundless Muscovite claims for the legacy of Rus (849-1434).

[@betterdonotanswer]

Q: the Soviet era... A: Was a period of Muscovite occupation (1921-1991) during which about twelve million of Muscovite migrants have been shipped to Ukraine and settled into the homes of Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars murdered in the genocides of 1921, 1932, 1944 and 1946.

[@betterdonotanswer]

Q: The steppes of Ukraine were home to many different people... A: Starting from the Sarmatians, Alanians, Huns or Goths who became Ukrainians and ending up with the Cumans who became the Crimean Tatars. None of them were related to the Muscovites in any way.

[@betterdonotanswer]

Q: Russian, rather than an Ukrainian... A: Ukrainians are the only historical Rus, Russians or Ruthenians on this planet. Whatever identity the Muscovite migrants have received as a result of brainwashing, it was forcibly imposed on them. They are sentient beings capable to decide themselves by using the historical knowledge.

[@betterdonotanswer]

Q: You forgot the Poles... A: In 1918 Ukraine was invaded from all direction by the RSFSR, VSUR, Poland and Romania, resulting in the Polish occupation of western Ukraine. Where the Poles perpetrated multiple war crimes, including ethnic persecutions, pogroms, deportations and the genocide of Ukrainians in 1942-1947.

[@PavelAVasilevich]

8:52 this part of the clip has nothing to do with Ukraine, because it's in film location Abkhazia of the Georgian conflict....they show tanks in mountainous terrain, which eastern Ukraine has non of..and as for Holodomor wasn't a genocide of Ukrainians, Rusdians, Kazakh s also died, because Stalin was selling the wheat grain under market value to US in order to pay off the dept US of help in industrializing Soviet Union. He took everything from the the farmer's all of it..

[@LLlap]

Stalin did multiple genocides. And they were all calculated. Before Stalin, Lenin did the same. It kills of rebellious populations who think they're nations and not soviet, who are relugious and not soviet, it effectively strips the population of any valuables as gold becomes cheaper than bread, and later you can bring in deep soviet vatniks to repopulate the now desolate regions and make sure they stay in the Empire.

[@4i4ofester72]

Because they are Russians living there. It's more than obvious.

[@GabGotti3]

This is my favorite military news channel. I’m American.

[@caynair1002]

ami go home ! out of rammsein ! NOW !

[@Alhambrasheff]

The gas fields of off shore Crimea, the Donbas rift and eastern Carpathians would have made Ukraine potentially the second largest world supplier. Combined with extensive storage facilities this was of interest to the EU and a major threat to Putins plan to create an energy dependent Europe. But a resources war would have not gained much support from friends so this has been carefully wrapped up in historical justification. Oil supplies will be next.

[@DevilbyMoonlight]

Very true.. war usually follows black gold..

[@TheAlien729]

Let me remind you that Russia stood for a peaceful solution to the Donbass. And in the course of the agreements, Russia offered Donbass to remain part of Ukraine (on the rights of republics, with their own laws). So apparently it wasn't so critical.

[@rizz1042]

And where there is oil, there is usa

[@Alhambrasheff]

The Donbas is part of Ukraine, how generous of Russia to offer it could remain

[@TheAlien729]

@@Alhambrasheff Meanwhile, the residents of Donbass, who held a referendum on joining Russia in 2014 and were refused, apparently did not think so and will not think so anymore. They wanted to break away, and Russia persuaded them to stay and pushed through the Minsk Agreements to recognize them as republics with their own laws. So that they remain within the borders of Ukraine, but can live without those laws that they did not like.

[@mrbeltr5833]

Sucks that Russia is stuck in a cycle. Hope they break it soon

[@CharliMorganMusic]

Slava Ukraini! 🇺🇲❤️ Take back your land. We support you.

[@__Gw]

We dont

[@mxmis1225]

​@@__Gw Who doesnt?

[@__Gw]

@@mxmis1225 most U.S. citizens!

[@andyontheinternet5777]

They are lying to you about the war. We provoked this mess. Imagine if Russia set up a puppet state in Canada to antagonize the US. That is basically what NATO did here.

[@ogposter8086]

@@__Gw republicans*

[@torinjones3221]

But Ukraine isn't in the EU so why does the crimea vote concern them?

[@Hatebackgroundnoise]

Vladimir Putin visits a primary school one day And he gives a lecture about how great the government is, and how Russia is the best country in the world. At the end of the lecture he invites people to ask questions and one kid stands up and says “Hello my name is Sasha and I have two questions” Putin: “go ahead” Sasha: “Why did Russia sent troops to Ukraine and why did Russia annex Crimea? ” At that moment the bell rang and everyone went to lunch. At the end of lunch the Q&A continued and another kid stood up “My name is boris and I have four questions” Putin: “Yes?” Boris: “Why did Russia sent troops to Ukraine, why did Russia annex Crimea, why was the bell 20 minutes early and where is Sasha?”

[@angrydoggy9170]

@@filce1232 You don’t know what an analogy is. Let’s start by learning about that. Once you get that down, let’s work on understanding humour.

[@angrydoggy9170]

@@filce1232 There’s no obligation to consider it funny, just the ability to recognise it as an attempt at humour will do.

[@jackieclan815]

@@Hatebackgroundnoise lol funny

[@spike5911]

Do you really think russia invaded ukraine for no reason?

[@MrMountain707]

No mention of the US-funded coupe in 2014?

[@jonathandavx]

Source of that absurd clam?

[@MrMountain707]

@Jonathan alava it's widely publicized. The US funds a foreign coupe roughly every 10 years. Read a history book

[@jonathandavx]

@@MrMountain707 could you suggest me a source where I could read about that or are you another crazy Ivan spreading misinformation?

[@martijnstam6186]

Ukraine ousted a Putin cronie.

[@jrjer7760]

Negosiations 10:28

[@tomkent4656]

A rather simplistic analysis.

[@straighttalking2090]

What do you expect in 12 minutes. I came here because it was short.

[@ameerhamid89]

Looking forward to the 1200 page book on the topic by "tom kent"

[@timmccarthy982]

@@ameerhamid89 I got Tom's back.

[@ameerhamid89]

@@timmccarthy982 that's nice, you gonna write the foreword to that book?

[@giselameunier4788]

the facts were iold

[@bikenavbm1229]

thank you good overview that.

[@didutasev4427]

Became a soviet republic or became a part of the Soviet Union, but not "became the soviet republic".

[@johnnyenglish583]

Crimea was Russian for only a relatively short time. If one nation were to lay claim to it, it would be the Crimean Tartars, who had their own state there until Russia conquered Crimea (late 1700s) and then carried out ethnic cleansing. So basically Russia's claim rests on genocide. After the Russian invasion, Crimea was annexed for about 130 years. It was then a separate republic after the revolution, then it was made Russian in 1944 again, and ten years later it was transferred to the Ukrainian republic. So all in all, Crimea belonged to Russia for about 140 years. The Tartars had their state there for something like 400 years.

[@Imprudentman]

The Russian Tmutarakan principality existed in the Crimea in the 10th-11th centuries. So the Crimea has long belonged to the Russians. Did you know about it? 😉

[@johnnyenglish583]

@@Imprudentman the Russian nation didn't exist in 11th century... Moscow didn't exist. Kyiv existed and the Ruthenian state was already there. Volodymyr/Suzdal only became a thing about 300 years later. There were people from central asia in Crimea among other things. But if you're saying they were "Russian" (which is a complete anachronism) you're basically admitting that Russians aren't European, they're Asian+Mongol. It's that what you're saying?

[@raulmelo5881]

So Americas claim to the west coast of America is based of genocide of the natives .. are u in favor of us giving it back or do u only care when it’s Russia ?

[@patternrecon5271]

Blood tax Ottoman slave owners Tartar slave owners

[@Poliss95]

@@Imprudentman Nobody knows that because it's rubbish.

[@geoffhunter7704]

pootin's Russia invaded Ukraine at 04.am on Thursday 24th Feb 2022 not the 22nd that you stated in fact we now know that pootin intended to invade on Sunday 20th Feb but Jianping of China advised pootin to wait a few days as it was too close to the finale of the Beijing Winter Olympic's and the CCP did not want their Olympic's tied too the UA Invasion,it is remiss that a respected organisation like the IWM could get the invasion date sooo wrong.

[@michaelthompson9548]

Great effort!

[@Therealist679]

Probably because there are 2 million ethnic Russians living there, and the had absolutely no intention of allowing the putch government in Ukraine to hand over Sevastopol naval base to the USA, which would have been a loaded gun pointed at the Russian heartland.

[@TheByrd]

You're listening to too much Russian propaganda

[@max45623]

Crimea is Ukraine!!!

[@briant5685]

Even the Tartars became the natives because their ottoman empire conquered the peninsula before then it belonged to Mongols

[@MgpCars]

Full scale invasion was 24th Feb, not 22nd.

[@sst701]

She said: "In the early hours of the 22nd of February Russian tanks rolled across the Ukrainian border." Not: "The full scale invasion began on 22nd of Feb". You need to pay more attention to what you hear.

[@evgendoktor-TA]

It is interesting!:) But there is not rational cosation of stealing Crimea semi-peninsula by Russia. It was only due to putin's desire to be an eternal ruler.

[@robertdlucas7418]

Russia was right to annex Crimea. Crimea was always Russian. America and NATO wanted to use Crimea as a naval base.

[@mxmis1225]

No. At that time Ukraine was not even an ally with "nato and usa". Plus crimea was Russian in Russian empire. But always when Ukraine was independent, it was Ukrainian. So no. Plus 45% of people in crimea are crimean tatars which say that it was better when there were Ukrainians. So your comment is not valid.

[@endlessgaslight]

whoever has the most money and guns can do anything, no one has the true 'right' to anything

[@doniehurley9396]

@@endlessgaslight and who has the most money and guns

[@mutluolmaknedir]

Crimea can not be more important than the Bosphorus Strait

[@robertdlucas7418]

@@mutluolmaknedir In this day of drones and missiles,the Bosphorus Strait is not that important.

[@wrolsa394]

to open front from 3 sides

[@madzihove]

There was no political entity known as Ukraine before its formation under the Soviets. Ukraine in Russian means the borderlands which is where it gets it's name from.

[@ogposter8086]

Learn history from reliable sources, not russia today

[@kjellg6532]

What is the purpose of the noise in the background? Makes it easier to comprehend what is being said, or just useless noise-polution?

[@SeptikAvenger]

Crimea is about as Ukrainian as Kosovo is Serbian. Having been born in Ukraine I can't fault them for not wanting to be a part of that country.

[@mxmis1225]

One thing is wrong here. This referendum in crimea was fake.

[@SeptikAvenger]

@@mxmis1225 Just because you disagree with it it's fake? The vast majority of the people there want nothing to do with Ukraine. Before you say Crimean Tatars they were like 15% of the population max even before 2014. Crimea wanted greater autonomy back in the early 90's before Ukraine abolished the Crimean constitution in 1995.

[@andruhakrutchenko2523]

@@SeptikAvenger that is absolutely false. How do you know Crimeans wanted to be in Russia, considering that Russian didn't even let international observers to overlook the voting to be fair? Russian so-called "referendums" cannot be trusted. Last fall russia also said that more than 90% of people in Donbass and Kherson voted to be in Russia, without even fully controlling those territories! How can you say Ukrainians in Donbass region want to be russian, of you don't even ask people their choice (because you are not there). This is a bullshit farse.

[@SeptikAvenger]

@@andruhakrutchenko2523 Чувак иди на хуй. Мы ненавидим вас и не хотим иметь с вами ничего общего. Россия это ваша проблема, а не наша.

[@andruhakrutchenko2523]

@@SeptikAvenger speak normal language please, I won't read the language of the rashists

[@liamwarren7590]

Walk past the IWM in Manchester everyday and im absolutely gutted i didnt go in to these portraits.

[@petergardner760]

I'm not a Putin acolyte or supporter but this is an uncharacteristically biassed account by the IWM. Of course militias were armed with Russian weapons. Ukraine's enitre military inventory was Russian. In the build up to the annexation of Crimea nothing was said of the role of Angela Merkel who told Yanukovich that the neutral independence he wanted for Ukraine was not an option and, with complete disregard for Ukraine's treaties with Russia, told him he must choose either the EU or Russia exclusively. Nor is there any mention of EU finance for the Maidan rioters and the support and presence of meddling US Democrat politicians. Public understanding depends on hearing a balanced account from bodies such as the IWM. The IWM has fallen short and the public have every right to expect better. NATO expansion is highly relevant but is not mentioned. Russia was badly and deceitfully treated in the negotiations in the 1990s as recounted fairly and comprehensively by ME Sarotte in "Not One Inch" and NATO's recent overtures to Ukraine were, let's be honest, an attempt to do a reverse Cuba, to park nuclear weapons right up close to Russia's borders. Russia has much right to resist as the US did in 1962. Going back further you might like to talk about the brutal occupations of Ukraine by Germany in both WW1 and WW2. The latter involved the enslavement of Ukrainians to work in German factories and the fact is that Ukraine had its own National Socialist movement - still active in 2014 - that gladly helped the German National Socialists by murdering Ukrainian jews. Kasputin Yar is a dark stain on a Europe that now pretends to be entirely virtuous. Putin's propaganda contains some uncomfortable truths that the West refuses to acknowledge. that does not justify Russia's invasion but the West blunders on because it refuses to acknowledge the causes and fails to understand them. And what are Germany's and the EU's aims today? Not in the slightest altruistic as those of the UK are. They want control of Ukraine's vast deposits of rare earths and lithium valued at up to US$12 trillion plus a bonus in the form of gas, agriculture and, whisper it, oil. That is why Germany reversed its previous policy not to supply weapons, as a condition of Zelensky signing over the future governance of Ukraine to the EU in a Faustian deal on 27 February 2022, just three days after the Russian invasion. Germany has learned very well from its dependence on Russian gas. Control of Ukraine's resources by the German dominated EU will greatly enhance its Green Energy supply independently of China. It also makes respectable Scholz's drive to massively re-arm Germany to make it the most powerful miltary power in Europe, to lead European 'defence', and to make Germany the undisputed top power in Europe militarily, economically and politically. Third time lucky. Russia may be today's problem. A militarised EU totally dominated by Germany is tomorrow's.

[@johnnyenglish583]

Germany's political position became significantly weaker now. Poland's got bigger (and better) army than Germany at the moment. Even France is paying more attention to the Eastern Flank. And Germany won't become militarised because the Germans got used to easy living and won't give it up to spend money on the army. Also, you mention the extreme right movement in Ukraine in 2014 but you conveniently choose not to say what happened to it later. In the previous term, the extreme right had four seats (of a total of 450 seats) in the Ukrainian parliament. In the current term, they have ONE seat. That's a quarter of a percent. I wish all countries only had such small support for the extreme right.

[@Poliss95]

Yes you are a Putin acolyte and supporter. NATO expansion is irrelevant. If independent countries want to join a defensive alliance they are perfectly entitled to do it. There was never any agreement not to expand NATO. That's something else you've got wrong. Putin's propaganda contains NO truth. I notice you haven't said one word about the genocide Stalin perpetrated on all the subject states of the USSR. Why is that I wonder? Green energy doesn't rely on imports either. You're wrong on all counts.

[@petergardner760]

@@Poliss95 that is the kind of blinkered wilfully ignorant attitude that causes misunderstandings, confrontation and war. Don't they say war is a failure of diplomacy. Certainly in your case it is.

[@thorkushari4027]

This would explain Germany's sheepish complicity in the Nordstream pipelines destruction, even though it helped to make life even harder for German workers by removing cheap energy and replacing it with expensive LNG. And coal. !!

[@petergardner760]

@@thorkushari4027 I don't know the truth about Nordstream 2's sabotage. But since this thread started what I said earlier has become even clearer in the case of Germany. Von der Leyen has already boasted about Europe, meaning the EU, having its own lithium and rare earths, ie. Ukraine's, and Sholz has already claimed the mantle of leading Eiuropean defence. Diplomacy in the Indo-Pacific is heating up with Britosh, Fr and Ge naval deployments and the EU designating it an area of interest - along with the Gulf of Guinea. It is all so obvious I sometimes think the UK's political elite, despite being hyperactive in wolery and other inward looking issues is utterly blind to what is going on in the wider world. By 2030 Germany will dominate the EU economically, militarily and politically and it will have Ukraine under its control again. Third time lucky for Germany's place in the sun.

[@tomas7313]

Eh? why would you start the history of a country like Ukraine from the IXX century?

[@thomasjefferson1111]

No one mentions US involvement in the uprisings and civil war, yet it’s a crucial piece.

[@asinine9ben]

What exactly?

[@obsidianjane4413]

@@asinine9ben He's invoking the myth that the US CIA staged everything in 2014 etc.

[@havareriksen1004]

No one mentions it because it didn't happen. Easy as that. Proof of such involvement hasn't surfaced anywhere.

[@thomasjefferson1111]

@@havareriksen1004 You can find the phone calls between Victoria Nuland and other US officials working in Ukraine talking about the elections in Ukraine and the results thereafter and what outcome they will and won’t allow in terms of US interests. Public knowledge easily discovered with a modicum of interest. The war is wrong, but not surprising in the slightest.

[@Summoningz]

Where is the evidence of this US involvement?

[@skyrider2002]

Too much words about prorussian corrupt pigeon of peace - zelensky, and not a single word about Poroshenko and how minsky agreements gave so much time for Ukraine.

[@larsrons7937]

Ukrainian soldiers: _"Mr. president, we took _*_Cremlin_*_ just like you asked us to."_ President Zelenskyy: _"Crimea, Mykola, I said _*_Crimea."_*

[@charliebarton]

How's that working out?

[@ВикторАнтип]

Украинские солдаты даже за Крым не стали бороться, а просто сказали забирай он нам не нужен. За Крым не было ни одного боя. Так что это называется не аннексия.