Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Neither, it was US and NATO that provoked the war. War has been brewing since the 90s when we started pushing NATO eastward with the 2014 coup being the tipping point. Russia didn't want NATO weapons on its border anymore than we didn't want Soviet missiles in Cuba. War could have been avoided if we didn't carry out a coup and didn't push Ukraine to join NATO and left them alone to be neutral which is what Russia wanted from the beginning. We pushed Ukraine to join NATO because it's profitable for defense contractors.
Yes, exactly correct
Effectively the US started this war. They just used Ukraine as a proxy.
And the US knew and didn't care Ukraine couldn't win, defense contractors got a paycheck was more important.
If you believe in sovereignty then you're not standing up for it.
If you believe a country has the right to decide how to run it's politics and defence how it sees fit in fair and true elections then you're not standing up for it.
If you believe one country can dictate policy to a neighbour then you're promoting fascism and anti democratic ideology.
You mention a coup like democracy wasn't happening that was ratified by all independent observers in Ukraine who then put it to the democratic process to seek membership of NATO and EU that matches the goals of that nation.
Should Russia have Alaska back since it's closer to that country than it is to Mainland US?
How about Hawai'i being given to Mexico since it's nearer to there than it is to US?
Countries have a right to decide their own political, military and social future, not corrupt criminals in neighbouring dictatorships.
The financial desires and demands of US defense contractors far supercede and political or humanitarian concerns. The government starts wars in order to appease them. Afghanistan lasted for 20 years to make them more profitable. The real purpose of Ukraine was to keep the money
Flowing to them. Gaza won't stop any time soon for the same reasons.
Isn't it nice to know that the weapons makers and the oil companies and banks literally OWN the government?
That's BS. When Russian troops first moved in Ukraine had pursued merely a trade deal with EU. Not even EU membership.
And guess what having a foreign army on your soil conducting various shenanigans like shooting down a passenger aircraft for shots and goggles does make joining a military alliance more appealing.
If Ukraine ever ends up a member of NATO then Russians can only blame themselves.
@Pohjolan The US was threatening Russia with Ukraine joining NATO long before that war started. Russia had no other reason to invade Ukraine.
@Pohjolan probably the same thing that happened to Iran Air Flight 655. Mistakes get made in war.
At the NATO enlargement summit in November 2002, the NATO–Ukraine commission adopted a NATO-Ukraine Action Plan. President Kuchma's declaration that Ukraine wanted to join NATO (also in 2002) and the sending of Ukrainian troops to Iraq in 2003. On 6 April 2004 the Verkhovna Rada adopted a law on the free access of NATO forces to the territory of Ukraine.
On 15 June 2004 in the second edition of the Military Doctrine of Ukraine, approved by the decree of Kuchma, a provision appeared on the implementation by Ukraine of a policy of Euro-Atlantic integration, the ultimate goal of which was to join NATO. However, already on 15 July 2004, following a meeting of the Ukraine-NATO commission, President Kuchma issued a decree stating that joining NATO was no longer the country's goal – only "a significant deepening of relations with NATO and the European Union as guarantors of security and stability in Europe."
After the Orange Revolution in 2004 Kuchma was replaced by President Viktor Yushchenko who is a keen supporter of Ukraine's NATO membership.
On 21 April 2005 in Vilnius, as part of an informal meeting of the Foreign Ministers of the NATO countries, a meeting of the Ukraine-NATO Commission was held, which opened a new stage in Ukraine's relations with the alliance – "intensive dialogue", which was intended to be the first step towards Ukraine's entry into NATO. During President Viktor Yushchenko's first official visit to the United States, President George W. Bush declared: "I am a supporter of the idea of Ukraine's membership in NATO." A joint official statement by the presidents of Ukraine and the United States said that Washington supported the proposal to start an intensified dialogue on Ukraine's accession to the NATO.
At the NATO summit in Bucharest in April 2008, NATO decided it would not yet offer membership to Georgia and Ukraine; nevertheless, NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said that Georgia and Ukraine would eventually become members. Even though it was a powerful statement, one person cannot guarantee membership, especially before a country has applied for membership. Each existing member must approve an applicant country before NATO membership can be attained, in addition, conditions can be set on applicant countries before joining the organization. Resistance was reportedly met from France and Germany; Russia invaded Georgia less than four months later in August 2008.
@Gwendoline
"probably the same thing that happened to Iran Air Flight 655. Mistakes get made in war."
Situational awareness has grown since then. Nowadays any fool with a internet connection can track any plane with a transponder on.
Also nothing you wrote doesn't change that there wasn't enough popular support to join NATO before 2014 or that Russian actions actually led to Sweden and Finland joining.
Ukraine's potential NATO membership was as related to Russia beginning this conflict as protecting Russian speakers.
The Uppsala Conflict Data Program estimates of the total death toll resulting from just the Mariupol siege range from 27,000 to 88,000 fatalities, most of them civilians.
u Everyone sane, including most people in the GOP know that Russia is the villain here.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/19/gop-hawks-reactions-trump-anti-ukraine-00204985
https://www.nj.com/politics/2025/02/gop-lawmaker-slams-trump-for-being-wrong-its-a-shame.html
Being designated the "villain" is meaningless. What matters most is implementing peace and stopping the slaughter.
If Mexico announced it was joining a military and economic alliance with China and Russia with Chinese and Russian military bases being set up in Mexico and Chinese and Russian nuclear missiles in Mexico what do you think the US response would be?
That's right the us military would invade tomorrow.
This is the situation Russia was in when it invaded.
So, is Russia attacking the directly bordering new Nato member Finland next?
@DryGermanGuy Ukraine is a lot closer to Russians capital plus every invasion throughout Russia's history have been through Ukraine.
@CaptainObivous
Russia has two important cities - Moscow and St. Petersburg. The latter is not even 150 km from the Finish border. The same goes for Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, which are Nato member for years and have actual Nato bases. Finland to Moscow is 300 km more than Ukraine to Moscow, in other words nothing relevant for modern rockets and cruise missiles.
@DryGermanGuy see you are arguing the right or wrong of it. What is the difference between Ukraine joining Nato and Finland and Sweden joining NATO?
The Swedes and Finns didn't join NATO for 60 years because they knew that if they tried Russia/soviet union would invade. They only joined in 2023 because firstly Russia was too occupied in Ukraine to stop them. Secondly they have very well equipped and trained militaries having had decades to plan for an invasion coming from Russia. Thirdly they have a well developed arms industries, especially Sweden. Fourthly Finland and Sweden are part of the Nordic alliance so say a Russian invasion of Finland might bring Sweden, Norway and Denmark to their defence and taken as a whole in that region those four very powerful militaries capable of standing up to Russia. Norway and Denmark being NATO members might bring NATO in to defend Finland and Russia don't want the smoke. Now Ukraine b4 the Ukraine war started wasn't in a strong position like Finland was but unlike Finland who were in the same position years ago Ukraine lacked good leadership.
@Shiprex exactly and very true. The big difference between Finland and Sweden is that they are part of NATO and Ukraine never was, so Russia invading Finland means a NATO response. Not Russia was ever capable of invading Sweden or Finland, they don't have the power of the old Soviet union anymore
@Shiprex yes. They would wipe the Russian airforce from the sky in the first day. They've 300 leopard tanks with well trained crews who know how to use them.
There is no win situation for Putin in any Norther Europe confrontation. They try something with minor Baltic States, the Swedes, Finns, Danes and Norwegians would rock on into St Petersburg and destroy tf out of Killiningrad scuppering their baltic access and you KNOW the Poles would be right on in their too. It only takes a coordinated action from those fronts and the Russians would be kaput. Problem is Putin is getting desperate and Chump in Washington is keeping his boat floating as a good pet. If the Americans can derail the Chump and Musk from doing their vandalism of USA then Putin is next to go.
@Shiprex it's too late for putin to stop Finland and Sweden from joining NATO. Poland on its own is more than a match for Russia as the Ukraine war shows. The Russian military attacking would be wiped out by a dug in finish military with prepared and sighted anti tank postions, artillery and minefields. Russian airpower would be useless over Finland with the Finns air defense systems and that's without taking into account finish airpower which would reign supreme over Finnish airspace.
Putin is far from getting desperate. He's dug in around Donbass and crimea. The Ukrainians can send in wave after wave of the latest western tanks only to see them destroyed with sighted antitank weapons and masses of artillery. Without stealth aircraft the Ukrainians can't us air attacks.
Truth is the war is over in Ukraine. To keep supporting them is to waste taxpayer money and Ukrainian lives. Peace is the best option, putin will die in the next ten years and the new guy in will give Ukrainian territory back. Might even give Ukraine a chance to build their military up again.
The Ukrainians only need to make further incursions into sovereign Russia to get that place sorted and if NATO or independently the British, Poles, Germans, Swedes, Finns and others unilaterally said fuck off to DonJon and Elon and did the Ukrainians a favour and Putin a warning that there will be none of that dictatorship bollox on European soil any more, then the message to both dictators and emperor wannabes would be clear. Demolish not only Putins airforce but also the navy and see how that pans out
@Shiprex Russia is a big country and the Ukrainian military can't support any real military incursions into Russia. It's already cost them too much.
The British, Germans, france, Swedes, Finland and Poland aren't going to go to war with Russia over Ukraine and the US as the main backer of Ukraine are stopping money going there. The British for instance are facing economic trouble so their support will soon end. The Germans are having economic trouble related to energy because they just shut down their nuclear power plants and coal power plants for more green energy and oil/gas hasn't gotten more expensive since they can't get it from Russia.
Putin doesn't really have a navy and the airforce is from pre 1989. The Russian army has shown itself to be weak in the field.
The situation is very clear, it's stalemate. The only option is peace as no amount of money or Ukrainian attacks will ever drive Russia out of territory captured in Ukraine. Britsins military is in shambles. The only countries other than the US than can actually attack Russia to hrlp ukraine are poland and france. The only way for putin to get kicked out of Ukraine is for the NATO to do it but NATO is not going to start a war with a nuclear power.
The Europeans forces could all unilaterally offer support to forces in Ukraine as allies and each send a brigade or so there with the Polish land mass as a staging ground and work their way through to provide back up and support the front line Ukrainian forces so they can be bolstered. As soon as European air power achieves dominance the Russians in Ukraine will be decimated and have only one option to quit the incursion. US doesn't need to be involved but Trumplestiltskin thinks he can decide with his hero what the outcome of the Putin invasion of a sovereign nation ends in.
@Shiprex that's a push towards WW2. The European public are not willing to support a government that will deploy its troops to fight WW1 style battles. Just look at the international brigades in Ukraine, they are exactly getting huge numbers especially surprising given that after the 20 year war on terror that there millions of ex vetreans in the US & UK yet the numbers going to Ukraine is tiny. Let's be honest Europe talks a big game but always wants America to do the heavy lifting.
@OfDeath it was very much the situation. If Ukraine hadn't tried to join nato Russia wouldn't have invaded.
America has always SOUGHT to do the interfering in other conflicts because they then put in the exploitation businesses to rebuild and get money from the places they destroy and access to those resources that are of profitable. Europeans have no qualms about sending troops in to deter tyranny. They've engaged in every military endeavour the US has felt it necessary to been in and send troops to support all UN motions. What they don't want to do is have a war in the first place.
Sovereignty of nations sets out that NO nation has the right to engage in interference in another's political decisions. Ukraine chose a regime that WANTED to set economic and defence policy with the European Union and NATO BECAUSE of the illegal interference and corruption being caused by Russia in it's country's politics.
It is WRONG for a country to deny neighbours their DEMOCRATIC RIGHT and if you think otherwise you are not entitled to democracy for yourself and you are thus a fascist
Nope, a deal wasn’t even close and Russia was on board with it when the idea was first floated. The war started because of Zelenskyy’s progressive and anti-corruption stance. Russia feared their citizens would be influenced by that and would start to resent the majorly corrupt Putin.
You need to learn more of the backstory. You’re simply spouting off misinformation and conspiracy thinking.
@OfDeath Zelenskyy is corrupt. The deal was the same as Georgia was offered when they tried to join NATO in 2008, don't join NATO of Russia would invade. 3 months after NATO promised Georgia eventual membership Russia invaded. Ukraine was offered the same deal.
@Shiprex you are talking about the rights and morality of it not the reality of it. As a leader of a country you must do what's in the best intrest of your people, zelensky did not do what was in the best intrest of his people.
Will give you an example. After WW2 Finland who had fought the Russians in ww2 and allied with the nazis for a time did not join NATO, the Finnish leaders did not join NATO because they did not want the Soviet Union to invade Finland, Sweden was the same. Theh both remained neutral to avoid war with the Soviet Union and he death of hundreds of thousands of their people, knowing theh could not win against the Soviets.
No he isn’t and no they weren’t. That’s misinformation. Putin is corrupt and was corrupt before he was ever president of Russia. Zelenskyy is an anti corruption advocate and that is why Russia are scared of him.
Learn the real story and stop believing ridiculous pro Russia propaganda.
It’s quite sad that we now live in a world where people such as yourself are so easily influenced by nefarious disinformation.
What’s worse is even if what you think was true (which it isn’t) you seem to believe that somehow justifies Russia to invade. Despicable.
No leaders care about rights or morality. Capitalism finished that...
@OfDeath putin is corruot but also an anti corruption advocate just like Zelensky, just like Weinstein was a woman's right advocate.
Justification? Morality? This is the real world. Morality in war is little comfort when your family is lying under a collapsed concrete building in Ukraine all because the Ukrainian leader thought being a member of a super club and getting money from the us military industrial complexwas more important than the lives of his people.
@asker capitalism? When the communists were starving Ukraine or wiping out the green faction, anarchists and others.
In what sense is Vladimir Putin an anti-corruption advocate? You are talking about a guy who laundered money from his own government, shoots journalists and poisons political opponents or sends them to the Gulag.
Comparing Zelenskyy to to Harvey Weinstein is nothing but an ignominious deflection tactic, a straw man and a false equivalence fallacy. They are nothing alike and there is zero connection even in a metaphorical sense. You can’t just blurt out bullshit like that to win an argument, it won’t work.
This is the fact about Zelenskyy - he is a democratically elected leader who vowed to weed out long standing corruption in Ukraine caused by a succession of pro Russian leaders and he is fighting for the sovereign integrity of his country against a dictator who is breaking international law by invading Ukraine.
Sorry but Putin does not command the moral high ground here. The only just and moral way for this to end is for Russia to withdraw and leave Ukraine alone which is what they promised to do under the Budapest Memorandum in exchange for Ukraine giving up its nuclear capabilities.
@OfDeath putin is also a democratically elected leader but unlike zelensky had no foreign backing. Putin also held elections in 2024.
https://youtu.be/48Kk7kobMQY?si=tON5xtteUbanCvJl
@OfDeath Ukraine also promised not to join NATO and have us bases and nukes on Russia's boarder.
The only thing Ukraine can do now is to accept that they've lost the war, accept the loss of donbass and that Russia has taken back itd territory in crimea, accept that it will never join NATO and that zelensky was an idiot for trying and that it should tackle the huge nazi problem in Ukraine.
No. I already told you that is disinformation. There was never any plan to build US air bases in Ukraine. There is also not a “huge nazi problem” in Ukraine. You have been beguiled by Russian propaganda. The Russian government defines nazis as anyone who opposes them. The way you’re replying is what I would expect an actual Russian government official to say it is that disinformative.
Ukraine never should’ve been invaded at all. Russia is meant to respect their sovereignty under the Budapest Memorandum. That is the fact of the situation. Russia are led my a corrupt megalomaniac and the Ukrainian people don’t deserve what is happening to them. The world should not stand for this flagrant violation of International law. The war is not over.
The Finns were enemies of the Allies for good reason because they KNEW the nature of the Soviets. That nature has not changed and expansionism is their underlying policy. Just look at the interference in Hungary, Romania, Germany as well as how they were involved in US as well as UK elections as well as the Scottish independence referendum. The Soviets are the Putin's of today. They want a greater soviet state and satellites that adhere and support them NOT independent free nations with their own sovereignty. THAT is where the values of Europe and the west in general differ. Freedom and democracy or corrupt plutocracy and authoritarianism are at stake here. Ukrainians WANTED to be European just like the Baltic states, former Warsaw pact countries and Nordics. They see the benefits and freedoms denied those under the soviets. They deserve to be allowed to choose that despite the soviet demand to adherence to their influence.
@OfDeath the nazi problem in Ukraine was well documented b4 the war.
https://youtu.be/BKnFSzMefIY?si=9rrcrfnVYiGZd0_w
@Shiprex no you need to look up history. The Finns weren't enemies of the allies but we're enemies of the Soviet Union after the Soviets invade 3 months after the join nazi-soviet invasion of Poland in 1939.
The French and British allies were actually supporting Finland as much as they could with plans to even intercede on behalf of Finland against the Soviets but there lies the problem, they'd not only be at war with Germany but war with the Soviets.
The Russians have done no different than the us or China with electoral interference.
The US has been expanding NATO wanting spheres of influence and more military bases to project their military power around the globe. The US has 800-900 foreign military bases around the world.
Ukrainians did not want war with Russia and see Zelensky as a terrible leader for leading them into such a bloody war.
By being allied with the Nazis the Finns had no choice to do so just as Sweden did not stop them from moving through Sweden.
The reason the Ukrainians want to be part of EU and NATO is because the corrupt dictator in Moscow had his eyes on their national resources and greater access to the Black Sea as well as an easy route to get into Europe when his puppet Trump screws things with NATO.
Ukrainians absolutely see Zelensky as a solid courageous leader as do all free thinking Europeans not like Putin's Poodle the Chump in Chief of America. Even in his own insurrection he failed to turn up to support his riot even though he said he would.
NATO is a force for spreading the rule of law and democratic principles around the world but especially around Europe not placate tyrants and despots in corrupt oligarch states
@OfDeath NATO is a tool of empire. Ukraine doesn't want to be part of NATO but it's corrupt leaders want to be on that gravy train.
Time for America to look after itself
Once again, Ukraine is currently led by a democratically elected leader who strongly opposes corruption and is defending his country against invasion by Russia which is led by a despotic megalomaniac who fixes elections, shoots journalists, has political opponents poisoned, murdered, tortured and imprisoned. Ukraine is meant to be safe under the Budapest Memorandum. This is not about America. This is about standing up for the integrity of international law, democracy and human rights.
Stop trying to spread disinformation and pro Russian propaganda. The current president of USA is an incompetent Russian sycophant who poses a danger to the world including America.
America has done nothing BUT look after itself. Using threats to human rights as excuses to access the Afghan poppy fields while millions in other developing nations are under far greater ideological and economic struggles is out there as evidence they're selective when there are resources. At least Chump has been obvious that he'd help IF HE and his mates get access to the rare earth materials Ukraine has.
Ukraine saw Europe and NATO as an economic opportunity as it's clear and obvious how the other former soviet satellite nations have succeeded with EU membership while the others (Serbia, Belorussia et al) have continued with shitty authoritarian and corrupt regimes keeping hard working ambitious people poor.
How is this confusing? If it sounds like bullsh*t it's probably bullsh*t.
Opinion
11Opinion
I really cannot believe all the nonsense that is going on in this thread. The U. S. has tried to keep Ukraine out of NATO to prevent Russia using that as an excuse for its war on Ukraine. Yet CaptainObvious is saying we pushed Ukraine to Join NATO. Kelly6 said that NATO had an agreement with Russia to not move its bases in Ukraine near the Russian border. DryGermanGuy pointed out that there have never been NATO bases or NATO troops in Ukraine, and Kelly6 responded to DryGermanGuy saying "exactly , Ukraine is not a member, but nato used them to start this." So she believes that NATO moved its non-existent bases in Ukraine and its troops that have never been in Ukraine to start the war that Russia started by invading Ukraine. If you really want to know who started that war, consider what country moved its troops and weapons in there (Russia), bombed the shit out of the schools and hospitals (Russia), attempted to destroy its electrical power system (Russia), and is now making deals with the first criminal president of the USA to destroy Ukraine (Russia).
I've never heard or seen a compelling argument that Ukraine unilaterally started the war. Everything I've ever seen from this point of view would actually point the finger at the US and other western countries who instigated a coup in Ukraine back during the Obama administration, which created a domino effect culminating with US and British politicians openly stating a desire for Ukraine to join NATO (then denying it). The entire time while this was happening, it was assumed/believed that the CIA was engineering preparations for a war, but it has recently been revealed that it was actually USAID.
All of that really just gives Russia a sense of justification; not actually deflecting from the fact they were the ones who invaded Ukraine.
In regards to Trump's statements, this is probably part of his usual negotiating antics of opening up with wild claims in order to bully someone into cooperating (in this case Zelenskyy), because I doubt he has suddenly been shown some classified Intel pinning the war on Ukraine itself, especially in light of USAID's aforementioned involvement. Right now, Zelenskyy is the main reason negotiations are stalling. It's not really a secret that Trump (rightly) thinks Zelenskyy is a piece of sh*t weasel dictator, but he wants the war to end, and he wants Ukraine (and Europe) to start repaying the US, which is hard to do when it's left unresolved, and he doesn't want a repeat of Iraq where the US contributes everything and gets nothing out of it.
Yessir! 💯
Russia started it. Anyone saying otherwise is wrong.
After the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, Ukraine became an independent nation and was recognised as such by Russia. In 1994 they signed a deal under the Budapest Memorandum to give up their nuclear weapons in exchange for Russia, USA and UK to respect their sovereignty.
In 2014 when Russia invaded Crimea, Russia broke that deal. In 2022 Russia started a full scale invasion into Ukraine and expected to take the entire country in about 6 weeks. Ukraine and the world fought back.
The reason for the invasion was not really Ukraine’s desire to join NATO. They expressed that desire a long time ago and Russia was actually on board with it because they had heavy influence over the former Ukrainian government. In 2020, Ukraine elected a more progressive leader (Volodymyr Zelenskyy) who vowed to weed out corruption. The outgoing president was very pro Russian and willingly turned a blind eye to Russian oligarchs illegally funnelling money into Russia through Ukrainian channels.
Russia and Ukraine share close proximity, have marriages between citizens and shared a circle of influence. Under Putin who gained wealth and power through corruption, Russia currently has one of the most corrupt governments in world history and they feared a progressive, anti-corruption Ukraine would influence Russian citizens to start wanting the same.
That is why they invaded Ukraine. Not because Trump wasn’t president or because Ukraine wanted to join NATO. In fact, the likelihood of Ukraine joining NATO is higher now as a result of the war.
The claim that USA started the war because they planned to build air bases in Ukraine is false. There were no plans made to build air bases and Ukraine was far from being accepted into NATO.
That idea is just one example of the large scale misinformation campaign used by Russia as an attempt to justify the invasion.
Thats a very definitional thing. If we mean hot conflict then obviously Russia there is no debate. If we include provocation Russia was certainly provoked by the west into an evasion. Both for historical reasons as they consider it an attempt to turn russians into another civilization (I do not agree with this point, but they do), but much more importantly military reasons. There was a lot of wuhan style biolab research being done in Ukraine, among western militarization and talks of them joining Nato so Russia felt threatened.
So if you include all those factors you can make a reasonable argument that Ukraine started it and that's the argument Russia is making and I don't think that's unwarranted from their view. If you view it from the Ukrainian viewpoint then everything was fine and suddenly Russia invaded with actual forces and you can make a reasonable argument that Russia was the one who started it.
All a matter of perspective.
Finally a reasonable analysis
Suggesting that it was Ukraine that attacked Russia first being unaware of it falls into flat earth territory.
And OP, no one is knocking on the gates of Moscow and irradiating the land you're trying to conquer makes the whole invasion a moot point.
The losing scenario for Russia here is the same as in Afghanistan.
Packing their loot and going home.
Probably the CIA provoking Russia by promoting the idea of Ukraine joining NATO. Which is supported by the fact that Biden sent Boris Johnson to scuttle the peace deal between Russia and Ukraine early in the war.
I'm not sure where people are getting their information from. Russia moved into Ukraine they made the first move by killing the first people.
I mean, Russia wouldn't have had cause to invade in Zelensky hadn't behaved in the manner which he did, so Ukraine DID sort of start it
@KostasKouvalis
Crimea and the war in the East that begun in 2014. Both were part of the same Russian military campaign.
@KostasKouvalis
You could argue the invasion which escalated in 2022 was a continuation (there was a shaky ceasefire but no peace treaty) war but its not like they had more cause to grab land then than in 2014.
So no Ukraine did not start it. This conflict and all the blood that is spilled is entirely on Russia and the Russian people.
It's hilarious how many cult members are voting for Ukraine lol
If King Trump said that Ukraine started it then it must be true
NATO started the war by using Ukraine.
There have never been Nato bases or Nato troops in Ukraine. Why would there be any? Ukraine is not a member.
@DryGermanGuy exactly , Ukraine is not a member, but nato used them to start this
@DryGermanGuy nato even over throw the recent president of Ukraine because he didn’t agree with nato’s idea.
Plus when the Soviet Union collapsed, in exchange for unifying Germany we gave our word we wouldn't move NATO to the east, which we've been doing since the 90s. So many lives could have been saved if we had let Ukraine alone to remain neutral but it was too profitable for defense contractors so we didn't.
@CaptainObivous exactly.
FYI don't be surprised if your smeared as MAGA for not supporting the Ukraine proxy war.
None of this is even remotely true. Nato even rejected Ukraine's suggestion of becoming a member in 2005. Every internal turmoil that Ukraine had in their history happened because of Russia. From the 1930s Holodomor to the 2020s invasion, Russia shows time and time again, that they view other nations as their underlings to be subjugated, pushed around or invaded. Ask Georgia. Ask Poland. Ask the Baltics.
@DryGermanGuy in 1992 or so, Russia wanted to join NATO. But US denied it, I guess all because to run military industrial complex they need an enemy type party as Middle East to sell weapons.
Ask a question: how many wars did Russia or China or Middle East had since WW2, without US back help?
And how many wars US and NATO had?
@DryGermanGuy did you even do research why Ukraine is such an issue since long time? And since when?
@DryGermanGuy
I won’t argue more, because it’s not my behavior, anyone is open to do their own research and untitle to their opinion
@Kelly6 Probably not, most of the people supporting the Ukraine proxy war, bought into government and media lies that Russia woke up one morning and decided to invade. In 2022, Russia started withdrawing troops when there was a peace deal being mediated by Turkey, but we sent Boris Johnson to sabotage it because peace isn't profitable.
I know of exactly one Nato-led war: 2001 in Afghanistan.
Ukraine WANTED by DEMOCRACY to join NATO because Russian aggression was interfering in it's DEMOCRACY. So it did DEMOCRACY the way democracy was being done in the free world.
Just admit you want criminal oligarchs and tyrants running the world because the US has installed one in their own government. The rest of the world still believes in freedom in spite of the Crook In Chief of the US
@CaptainObivous Democracy isn't a one off thing. Countries evolved. Ukraine handed over all of the nukes it had to Russia and that's all it should have been required to do. IF it chooses to go it's own way Russia has fuck all say in the matter
@CaptainObivous It started before 2022 when they invaded Crimea.
Russia started it Trump is trying to end it.
Trump is trying to end it so he can take financial advantage of Ukraine by ending up owning half of their mineral wealth. Ukraine's not going to go for this obviously.
B, clearly.
You can also add your opinion below!
Most Helpful Opinions