Minus Western propaganda what's the real story on the Ukraine?

[King Salvo]

At least we know who old mate is now. It's Big Dog.

Oh my Liber Paddo makes a rod for his back each and every time - who had a non aggression pact with Nazi Germany as well as the Joint invasion of Poland which started World War 2 plus the carve up of Europe pact - Nazi Germany Western Europe and Soviet Union Eastern Europe plus the Baltic States.

He always overlooks this fact.

It was two dictatorships fighting it out - Operation Barbarossa - As Stalin said without American Lend Lease the Soviets would have lost the war - Churchill was right though that Stalin could not be trusted as he knew full well of Stalin's intentions in Eastern Europe - US President Roosevelt made a mistake in allowing the Soviets to take Berlin. - The Start of the Cold War - Berlin Blockade etc

For a so called History Teacher Liber Paddo knowledge of history is very low and one has a doubt if any of his students actually passed that subject.

Liber Paddo is from old days when folk could fail their HSC and were still able to gain a place at Uni to undertake a Bachelor of Education or whatever it was called back then - 38% even was acceptable to enter such a course back then.

Stalin / Molotov and Nazi Germany Foreign Minister Ribbentrop at the signing of the The Nazi-Soviet Pact, also known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.

[Paddo Colt 61]

There is again, always playing the man except when posting those propaganda pics from right wing sites.

[Random Rooster]

Consider some inconvenient facts that the fawning media doesn’t want us to know.

The European Commission president\has said that the Ukrainian army has lost more than 100,000 troops in the eight months since the beginning of the war. Over the nine-year span of the Vietnam War, the U.S. with a population six times that of Ukraine, lost a total of 58,220 men. In other words, on a per capita basis, Ukraine is losing soldiers at a rate 141 TIMES that of U.S. losses in Vietnam. The U.S. lost the public on Vietnam when middle class white boys began coming home in body bags. Does anybody with half a brain believe such losses in Ukraine are sustainable? Does anybody have another plan to avert such slaughter?

In a matter of weeks, Russia, with its hypersonic missiles, destroyed half of Ukraine’s electrical power infrastructure. This, as winter is coming on. It can just as easily take out the other half, effectively bombing Ukraine back into the Stone Age. Is that what anybody wants?

The startling, indeed, terrifying part of this is that neither Ukraine nor the West have any defence against these hypersonic missiles. They travel so fast, and on variable trajectories, they cannot be shot down, even by the most advanced Western systems. They represent one of the greatest asymmetries in deliverable destructive power in the history of warfare. The Russians have them. The Ukrainians don’t. Game over. Can you understand why leaders in the West are beginning to wake up?

On the conventional weapon front, the Ukrainians are having trouble securing even conventional weapons to defend themselves. U.S. arms suppliers are working around the clock to replace their own stocks and the stocks that European countries have given to Ukraine. But the backlog is running into years.

Finally, the U.S. has committed $112 billion to Ukraine. That’s more than $10 billion per month since the war started in February. And that doesn’t even count the subsidies, both material and financial, from the EU which amount to billions of dollars more per month. Without such subsidies, Zelensky would not have lasted a month in the war. How long is he going last once that flow dries up as it surely is.

This is just one of your posts that has turned out to be bullshit- ironically April Fools Day 2022. Other posts back then include you stating Ukraines defeat was imminent, the army was low on numbers and was being decimated.You also said they were running out of back ups to replace the all manpower lost, which was also ironic because 18 months on and its North Korea who were supplying Russia backup. Kim J was happy to supply his buddy twelve thousand or so soldiers to jump into the meat grinder.... although you would probably say that was fake news and footage of Putin praising North Korean soldiers fighting along Russian forces was AI generated.

So here we are three years later and you’re still faithfully parroting the same nonsense you could scrape off the bottom of a far-right conspiracy forum or Tucker Carlson podcast. Consistency is a virtue, I suppose.

So before you go handing out awards for “sheepie" of the year and lecturing people about swallowing “Western propaganda,” you might want to give your own news diet a bit of a health check. Because judging by your posts in the last few years on this thread, you've been confidently, repeatedly, and impressively wrong. Like... Hall of Fame wrong.

[Paddo Colt 61]

Yeah….Big dog Colt Barron von Andy’s a country member’s fur coat. I think I may be in there somewhere too. Old mate has a very impressive cv.

I've wondered too. the sobriquet seems to vary depending on the context. Jax seems to have gotten the bug as well and now we've got two of 'em slurring "old mates" to the mystification of most of us.

Is it some kind of code I wonder?

[King Salvo]

Slava Ukraini

Ukrainian Carpathian style

UKRAINIAN BORSCHT RECIPE – UKRAINE FOOD WITH

[Paddo Colt 61]

Slava Ukraini

Ukrainian Carpathian style

UKRAINIAN BORSCHT RECIPE – UKRAINE FOOD WITH

Does it feature mushrooms?

[Paddo Colt 61]

This is just one of your posts that has turned out to be bullshit- ironically April Fools Day 2022. Other posts back then include you stating Ukraines defeat was imminent, the army was low on numbers and was being decimated.You also said they were running out of back ups to replace the all manpower lost, which was also ironic because 18 months on and its North Korea who were supplying Russia backup. Kim J was happy to supply his buddy twelve thousand or so soldiers to jump into the meat grinder.... although you would probably say that was fake news and footage of Putin praising North Korean soldiers fighting along Russian forces was AI generated.

So here we are three years later and you’re still faithfully parroting the same nonsense you could scrape off the bottom of a far-right conspiracy forum or Tucker Carlson podcast. Consistency is a virtue, I suppose.

So before you go handing out awards for “sheepie" of the year and lecturing people about swallowing “Western propaganda,” you might want to give your own news diet a bit of a health check. Because judging by your posts in the last few years on this thread, you've been confidently, repeatedly, and impressively wrong. Like... Hall of Fame wrong.

I'm wrong about the progress of the war? What I've said in the past is still in train, the Ukes are out on their feet and this war would have been long over except for the US and the Euros' determination to keep fighting to the very last Uke. Surely you don't think otherwise? Last week the Russians returned 6000 Uke dead. The Western "allies" are clearly holding up the poor buggers.

Now the Euro political elites, who all have a long standing historical animus toward Russia, are, as a last resort, supplying drone technicians and weaponry in the same way that the US did to sink the Moskva and that could foreshadow a new risky chapter in the conflict but other than that it is over and what we are seeing is the West attempting to limit Russian conditions for a cease fire but a drone attack is nothing compared to the bombing of Hanoi during the Paris negotiations and, apart from propaganda, will have no effect. Another war, another time but no doubt you were on the wrong side in that one too.

What is disappointing is that a seemingly otherwise intelligent person can buy the proposition that the Uke "people" all wanted to turn to the West for a "better" future and all spontaneously "rose up" against a "puppet government" that "oppressed" them even though it had been recently elected by them. Luckily, or unluckily as it's tuned out, the US, a "disinterested by-stander" up to that point was outraged enough to selflessly get involved when Russia reacted. Of course the US concern was only about the assault on freedom. Give us a break! That is our msm's fatuous interpretation which you defiantly subscribe to as ever,

[mightyrooster]

I've wondered too. the sobriquet seems to vary depending on the context. Jax seems to have gotten the bug as well and now we've got two of 'em slurring "old mates" to the mystification of most of us.

Is it some kind of code I wonder?

Only a code ism could understand. I think it’s strange he has 80% of the thread participants on ignore yet is still fascinated by what they (the collective old mate) has to say.

[Random Rooster]

I'm wrong about the progress of the war? What I've said in the past is still in train, the Ukes are out on their feet and this war would have been long over except for the US and the Euros' determination to keep fighting to the very last Uke. Surely you don't think otherwise? Last week the Russians returned 6000 Uke dead. The Western "allies" are clearly holding up the poor buggers.

Now the Euro political elites, who all have a long standing historical animus toward Russia, are, as a last resort, supplying drone technicians and weaponry in the same way that the US did to sink the Moskva and that could foreshadow a new risky chapter in the conflict but other than that it is over and what we are seeing is the West attempting to limit Russian conditions for a cease fire but a drone attack is nothing compared to the bombing of Hanoi during the Paris negotiations and, apart from propaganda, will have no effect. Another war, another time but no doubt you were on the wrong side in that one too.

What is disappointing is that a seemingly otherwise intelligent person can buy the proposition that the Uke "people" all wanted to turn to the West for a "better" future and all spontaneously "rose up" against a "puppet government" that "oppressed" them even though it had been recently elected by them. Luckily, or unluckily as it's tuned out, the US, a "disinterested by-stander" up to that point was outraged enough to selflessly get involved when Russia reacted. Of course the US concern was only about the assault on freedom. Give us a break! That is our msm's fatuous interpretation which you defiantly subscribe to as ever,

Once again, you're confidently asserting conclusions that don't hold up under scrutiny, and it's clear that your chosen sources—likely the same ideologically-driven outlets you've relied on for the past three years—have misled you, again.

You claim the war is essentially over, that Ukraine is collapsing, and that the only thing keeping it alive is Western support. That’s not a new claim from you. You've been saying this since 2022—and yet, here we are, in mid-2025, with Ukrainian resistance ongoing, Russia still unable to achieve its strategic objectives, and significant losses on both sides. If this is your definition of a "war long over," it’s a curious one.

Your statement that "the Russians returned 6,000 Uke dead last week" is either disinformation or unverified propaganda—yet you present it as a fact. As with many other confidently stated "facts" you've parroted, there’s no credible independent confirmation, and even Russian sources contradict each other constantly. If you're going to cite numbers, at least hold them to basic standards of verification.

As for your Cold War-style view of Western involvement: yes, the West is supporting Ukraine—openly and with purpose—because a sovereign state was invaded. That doesn’t make every Ukrainian a pawn, nor does it negate the reality that a large part of the Ukrainian population has consistently demonstrated its desire to align with Europe, not Moscow. This was clear in multiple elections and mass protests well before 2014. You can dismiss that as Western propaganda, but that ignores a mountain of primary evidence from Ukrainians themselves.

Your attempt to frame the entire conflict as a Western plot or an inevitable product of "Russophobic elites" misses the fundamental point: this is a war of aggression initiated by Russia, not a spontaneous uprising plotted by NATO. You reduce complex political agency to caricature and, in doing so, echo the very propaganda you claim to be resisting.

You’ve been consistently wrong about the war’s timeline, about Russian capabilities, about Ukrainian cohesion, and about Western resolve. That doesn’t seem to have slowed your confidence, but it certainly should give you pause. Maybe, just maybe, it's time to reconsider the sources that have fed you such a distorted picture.

[mightyrooster]

Once again, you're confidently asserting conclusions that don't hold up under scrutiny, and it's clear that your chosen sources—likely the same ideologically-driven outlets you've relied on for the past three years—have misled you, again.

You claim the war is essentially over, that Ukraine is collapsing, and that the only thing keeping it alive is Western support. That’s not a new claim from you. You've been saying this since 2022—and yet, here we are, in mid-2025, with Ukrainian resistance ongoing, Russia still unable to achieve its strategic objectives, and significant losses on both sides. If this is your definition of a "war long over," it’s a curious one.

Your statement that "the Russians returned 6,000 Uke dead last week" is either disinformation or unverified propaganda—yet you present it as a fact. As with many other confidently stated "facts" you've parroted, there’s no credible independent confirmation, and even Russian sources contradict each other constantly. If you're going to cite numbers, at least hold them to basic standards of verification.

As for your Cold War-style view of Western involvement: yes, the West is supporting Ukraine—openly and with purpose—because a sovereign state was invaded. That doesn’t make every Ukrainian a pawn, nor does it negate the reality that a large part of the Ukrainian population has consistently demonstrated its desire to align with Europe, not Moscow. This was clear in multiple elections and mass protests well before 2014. You can dismiss that as Western propaganda, but that ignores a mountain of primary evidence from Ukrainians themselves.

Your attempt to frame the entire conflict as a Western plot or an inevitable product of "Russophobic elites" misses the fundamental point: this is a war of aggression initiated by Russia, not a spontaneous uprising plotted by NATO. You reduce complex political agency to caricature and, in doing so, echo the very propaganda you claim to be resisting.

You’ve been consistently wrong about the war’s timeline, about Russian capabilities, about Ukrainian cohesion, and about Western resolve. That doesn’t seem to have slowed your confidence, but it certainly should give you pause. Maybe, just maybe, it's time to reconsider the sources that have fed you such a distorted picture.

Nice. I look forward to the response hehe.

[Andrew Walker]

Once again, you're confidently asserting conclusions that don't hold up under scrutiny, and it's clear that your chosen sources—likely the same ideologically-driven outlets you've relied on for the past three years—have misled you, again.

You claim the war is essentially over, that Ukraine is collapsing, and that the only thing keeping it alive is Western support. That’s not a new claim from you. You've been saying this since 2022—and yet, here we are, in mid-2025, with Ukrainian resistance ongoing, Russia still unable to achieve its strategic objectives, and significant losses on both sides. If this is your definition of a "war long over," it’s a curious one.

Your statement that "the Russians returned 6,000 Uke dead last week" is either disinformation or unverified propaganda—yet you present it as a fact. As with many other confidently stated "facts" you've parroted, there’s no credible independent confirmation, and even Russian sources contradict each other constantly. If you're going to cite numbers, at least hold them to basic standards of verification.

As for your Cold War-style view of Western involvement: yes, the West is supporting Ukraine—openly and with purpose—because a sovereign state was invaded. That doesn’t make every Ukrainian a pawn, nor does it negate the reality that a large part of the Ukrainian population has consistently demonstrated its desire to align with Europe, not Moscow. This was clear in multiple elections and mass protests well before 2014. You can dismiss that as Western propaganda, but that ignores a mountain of primary evidence from Ukrainians themselves.

Your attempt to frame the entire conflict as a Western plot or an inevitable product of "Russophobic elites" misses the fundamental point: this is a war of aggression initiated by Russia, not a spontaneous uprising plotted by NATO. You reduce complex political agency to caricature and, in doing so, echo the very propaganda you claim to be resisting.

You’ve been consistently wrong about the war’s timeline, about Russian capabilities, about Ukrainian cohesion, and about Western resolve. That doesn’t seem to have slowed your confidence, but it certainly should give you pause. Maybe, just maybe, it's time to reconsider the sources that have fed you such a distorted picture.

I’m interested to hear where do you think this war would be at or where Ukraine would now be without any assistance from Europe or the US

I await your response

[Random Rooster]

I’m interested to hear where do you think this war would be at or where Ukraine would now be without any assistance from Europe or the US

I await your response

Good question Andy. I think without support from Europe and the US, Ukraine would likely be in a much more vulnerable position—possibly even overrun. The military and financial aid has been crucial in helping them defend themselves and maintain any sense of sovereignty.

It’s also worth remembering that countries have allies for exactly this reason—to step in when one of them is under attack. These alliances aren’t just about helping the country being invaded; they’re also in the best interest of the allies themselves, especially when it comes to regional stability and upholding international norms. We’ve seen Russia do the same—calling on North Korea, an ally, to supply weapons and even personnel to support their efforts. War has its own rules.

NATO wasn't formed to invade Russia, it was formed to stop Russia from invading. 2014 it was Crimea, next it would be Kiev, do you really believe Putin would stop at that?

Do you think that it was NATO's intention to invade Russia? Which countries in NATO would want a piece of Russia and for what reason? You have to remember Russia has 5500 nuclear warheads, it would be suicide messing with them

[Paddo Colt 61]

Once again, you're confidently asserting conclusions that don't hold up under scrutiny, and it's clear that your chosen sources—likely the same ideologically-driven outlets you've relied on for the past three years—have misled you, again.

You claim the war is essentially over, that Ukraine is collapsing, and that the only thing keeping it alive is Western support. That’s not a new claim from you. You've been saying this since 2022—and yet, here we are, in mid-2025, with Ukrainian resistance ongoing, Russia still unable to achieve its strategic objectives, and significant losses on both sides. If this is your definition of a "war long over," it’s a curious one.

Your statement that "the Russians returned 6,000 Uke dead last week" is either disinformation or unverified propaganda—yet you present it as a fact. As with many other confidently stated "facts" you've parroted, there’s no credible independent confirmation, and even Russian sources contradict each other constantly. If you're going to cite numbers, at least hold them to basic standards of verification.

As for your Cold War-style view of Western involvement: yes, the West is supporting Ukraine—openly and with purpose—because a sovereign state was invaded. That doesn’t make every Ukrainian a pawn, nor does it negate the reality that a large part of the Ukrainian population has consistently demonstrated its desire to align with Europe, not Moscow. This was clear in multiple elections and mass protests well before 2014. You can dismiss that as Western propaganda, but that ignores a mountain of primary evidence from Ukrainians themselves.

Your attempt to frame the entire conflict as a Western plot or an inevitable product of "Russophobic elites" misses the fundamental point: this is a war of aggression initiated by Russia, not a spontaneous uprising plotted by NATO. You reduce complex political agency to caricature and, in doing so, echo the very propaganda you claim to be resisting.

You’ve been consistently wrong about the war’s timeline, about Russian capabilities, about Ukrainian cohesion, and about Western resolve. That doesn’t seem to have slowed your confidence, but it certainly should give you pause. Maybe, just maybe, it's time to reconsider the sources that have fed you such a distorted picture.

Let's go by paragraphs.

1. I doubt it, the msm is defeatist after the US quit.

2. What do you assume Russia's objectives are? Not the conquering of the whole country surely? This is a special military operation with limited objectives territorially - the eastern oblasts that were set upon by the Ultra Nationalists. Politically, they would want regime change for obvious reasons.

3. Reported on SBS news. SBS is stridently pro Uke. Are you saying don't believe the MSM? You do.

4. Not Cold War. The machinations of the US worldwide as the only Superpower, is plain to see. No, it's not rounding up bad guys and putting things right as we all used to naively believe, it's aggressive and has been at war for 93% of its history. It has 800 bases around the world! It wasn't goading Russia you think? I have more to say on your benign view of Nation States later.

5. No, you miss the point. You completely discount the events leading up - the CIA assisted coup (it's not at issue, it happened. The installation of a neo fascist government (again, not at issue). The broken US promises in the 90s re eastern expansion of NATO. This invasion didn't occur in a vacuum my friend. It is facile to think that it's all down to evil Russia as you seem to. Where was your outrage re Iraq, Serbia, even Vietnam. You were probably all for them, naturally, because you'd drunk the Cool Aid like most of us but these days the benign USA mask is off.

6. Consistently wrong only if you believe Western propaganda. You're disappointed because the end is in sight and it's not the result that you've invested a lot of emotion in. I see a level of emotion in the idea that governments and people are similar - the "We're outraged and determined to defend democracy!" lumping government and people as one. States aren't concerned neighbours wanting to do right, they're cunning ruthless hypocrites fo the most part. Their motives are light years away from the hopes and aspirations of the sheeple.

[King Salvo]

Once again, you're confidently asserting conclusions that don't hold up under scrutiny, and it's clear that your chosen sources—likely the same ideologically-driven outlets you've relied on for the past three years—have misled you, again.

You claim the war is essentially over, that Ukraine is collapsing, and that the only thing keeping it alive is Western support. That’s not a new claim from you. You've been saying this since 2022—and yet, here we are, in mid-2025, with Ukrainian resistance ongoing, Russia still unable to achieve its strategic objectives, and significant losses on both sides. If this is your definition of a "war long over," it’s a curious one.

Your statement that "the Russians returned 6,000 Uke dead last week" is either disinformation or unverified propaganda—yet you present it as a fact. As with many other confidently stated "facts" you've parroted, there’s no credible independent confirmation, and even Russian sources contradict each other constantly. If you're going to cite numbers, at least hold them to basic standards of verification.

As for your Cold War-style view of Western involvement: yes, the West is supporting Ukraine—openly and with purpose—because a sovereign state was invaded. That doesn’t make every Ukrainian a pawn, nor does it negate the reality that a large part of the Ukrainian population has consistently demonstrated its desire to align with Europe, not Moscow. This was clear in multiple elections and mass protests well before 2014. You can dismiss that as Western propaganda, but that ignores a mountain of primary evidence from Ukrainians themselves.

Your attempt to frame the entire conflict as a Western plot or an inevitable product of "Russophobic elites" misses the fundamental point: this is a war of aggression initiated by Russia, not a spontaneous uprising plotted by NATO. You reduce complex political agency to caricature and, in doing so, echo the very propaganda you claim to be resisting.

You’ve been consistently wrong about the war’s timeline, about Russian capabilities, about Ukrainian cohesion, and about Western resolve. That doesn’t seem to have slowed your confidence, but it certainly should give you pause. Maybe, just maybe, it's time to reconsider the sources that have fed you such a distorted picture.

It's a land grab by Putin's regime as anyone can see - Ukraine are mineral . gas and oil resources rich and for whatever reason have the most fertile soil and well known as the breadbasket of Europe for that very reason.

The Crimea is where the Russian Black Sea Fleet is stationed - HQ in Sevastopol - A deep warm water port of some 2.2 km's in depth which doesn't freeze over enabling year round Naval operations.

Putin backed the Donbas pro Russian Militias by sending in the little green men ( Wagner Group) as Ukraine Voters and Parliament ( Verkhovna Rada) voted for the European Union Association Agreement i.e EU Membership and closer ties with Europe - Ukraine President at the time Yanukovych under pressure from Moscow didn't sign it hence the Revolution of Dignity/ Maidan Revolution.

All smoke and Mirrors from the Putin Regime - Nazi's and NATO bollocks - Ukraine would have to go through an exhaustive process to gain NATO status - All NATO Countries would have to agree as well.

If Putin was worried about Ukraine applying to Join NATO then why didn't the Russian's invade Finland who also signalled their intention to apply for NATO membership - Now in NATO

Finland has the 5th largest border with Russia and Ukraine the 4th - Finland is the closest Country to Russia's Borders and St Petersburg a major Russian City

Finnish (blue–white) and Russian (red–green) boundary marks at the easternmost point of Finland

[Random Rooster]

Let's go by paragraphs.

1. I doubt it, the msm is defeatist after the US quit.

2. What do you assume Russia's objectives are? Not the conquering of the whole country surely? This is a special military operation with limited objectives territorially - the eastern oblasts that were set upon by the Ultra Nationalists. Politically, they would want regime change for obvious reasons.

3. Reported on SBS news. SBS is stridently pro Uke. Are you saying don't believe the MSM? You do.

4. Not Cold War. The machinations of the US worldwide as the only Superpower, is plain to see. No, it's not rounding up bad guys and putting things right as we all used to naively believe, it's aggressive and has been at war for 93% of its history. It has 800 bases around the world! It wasn't goading Russia you think? I have more to say on your benign view of Nation States later.

5. No, you miss the point. You completely discount the events leading up - the CIA assisted coup (it's not at issue, it happened. The installation of a neo fascist government (again, not at issue). The broken US promises in the 90s re eastern expansion of NATO. This invasion didn't occur in a vacuum my friend. It is facile to think that it's all down to evil Russia as you seem to. Where was your outrage re Iraq, Serbia, even Vietnam. You were probably all for them, naturally, because you'd drunk the Cool Aid like most of us but these days the benign USA mask is off.

6. Consistently wrong only if you believe Western propaganda. You're disappointed because the end is in sight and it's not the result that you've invested a lot of emotion in. I see a level of emotion in the idea that governments and people are similar - the "We're outraged and determined to defend democracy!" lumping government and people as one. States aren't concerned neighbours wanting to do right, they're cunning ruthless hypocrites fo the most part. Their motives are light years away from the hopes and aspirations of the sheeple.

Let's go through all that point by point:

1. You say “MSM is defeatist after the US quit.” Yet even the outlets you’re likely to dismiss—like The Economist, ISW, or various European defence think tanks—report setbacks, yes, but also show Ukraine maintaining defensive lines, inflicting heavy losses, and Russia still failing to achieve clear political or military goals. You can’t just call everything you don’t like “defeatist” and expect it to be dismissed.

2. You claim Russia only wanted the eastern oblasts? That’s a rewrite of history. In February 2022, Putin’s speeches, early Russian advances toward Kyiv, and decapitation-strike strategies made it very clear this wasn’t about just Donbas—it was about regime change and reabsorbing Ukraine into Russia’s orbit. The “limited objectives” line only emerged after Russia failed spectacularly in its opening gambit.

3. You cite SBS as your source but then argue against trusting MSM in general. So which is it? You want to dismiss “mainstream media” when it contradicts your views, but treat it as gospel when it seems to support your position. That’s not critical thinking—it’s confirmation bias.

4. Yes, the US has a long, flawed foreign policy record. No argument there. But Russia invading Ukraine doesn’t suddenly become “understandable” or “justified” because of America’s sins. You seem unable to criticise both powers at once—as if one’s wrongdoing excuses the other’s. It doesn’t.

5. You invoke the “CIA coup” narrative about 2014. But you ignore the fact that Yanukovych fled after ordering his security forces to open fire on protesters. Ukrainians took to the streets en masse—this wasn't a top-down regime change, it was a bottom-up revolt. As for the "neo-fascist government" claim: Ukraine has held multiple elections since then. Far-right parties haven’t even cracked double-digit percentages. You're echoing old Kremlin talking points that don't reflect Ukrainian political reality.

And yes, broken NATO promises in the ‘90s are part of the story—but again, not a justification for full-scale invasion. Lots of countries feel betrayed diplomatically. Very few use that as a reason to flatten cities and abduct children.

6. You're saying I'm emotional because I point out Russia hasn't achieved its goals? It’s not emotion—it’s observable fact. Russian casualties are massive, sanctions have bitten deeply, and even Russian military bloggers are openly critical. This doesn’t mean Ukraine is “winning”—it means Russia is not. You want this war to prove something grand about the West’s hypocrisy, but all you’re proving is that you’ve picked a side and you're rationalising whatever it does.

You talk like nation-states are all equally cynical and it’s naive to believe otherwise. That’s a convenient excuse to wave away aggressive invasions, mass displacements, and war crimes—as long as they’re committed by someone you think is “balancing” the evil West.

But here’s the thing: cynicism isn't wisdom. It’s just despair dressed up as insight.