Again, you completely ignore why Ukraine has started training, arms supply and drills - because it has ALREADY been invaded and there was still ongoin...
Well, yes, the influence of Russia was diminished, because it has been previously increased by wars and occupation. Occupied countries do tend to dist...
Obviously by that I meant Ukraine as a region, not as a state. And yes, you do not understand what 'nation' is. When the Soviet Union fell apart, the ...
So we should ignore treaties from thirty years ago, because Russia has changed, but we should honor the treaties from two hundred years ago, even thou...
But that is exactly what I am writing about: it was never 'one nation', as you claim, it was a federation of republics ruled by Russians, often more l...
It does not load. I understand perfectly well how the Soviet Union worked - mostly Russians forced other nations under its boot, militarily, like with...
You should be aware that repeating the assertion does not prove it. Can you provide evidence that the treaties were forced? And the claim that Crimea ...
How exactly was the Budapest Memorandum 'forced'? Russia signed it, because it wanted to get rid of the Ukrainian nukes. Moreover Russia has also sign...
The issue is, as I have mentioned, that you select just a few facts that suit your theory that Russian intensification of the conflict was unlikely an...
But that was your claim! You wrote specifically: To which I have asked how do you know that. I am glad now that you do admit that you cannot know that...
No, you are supposed to argue to support your claim: that there would be no war without the talk of NATO expansion. That is essential if you also clai...
But that does not answer the question. You are supposed to argue that Russia would NOT attack Ukraine if not for NATO expansion. If Ukraine's increasi...
I have made up Zhirinovsky? Is that your poor attempt at masking your lack of knowledge on the subject? Here is an article covering Russian propaganda...
You have claimed that Nuland's conversation was before Euromaidan, which is factually incorrect. That the worst violence happened on 20th February doe...
No, on your theory there are no such explanations, as it is pretty obvious after your completely unsuccessful attempts to provide them. That is why yo...
Unsupported assertion. In 2002 Putin was perfectly aware that the Baltics will join NATO soon, as the process was started in 1999. In fact, the confer...
Yes, because militarily NATO in Ukraine is not much different than NATO in the Baltics. One might argue that losing 'friendly' access to Kaliningrad (...
The seven countries started admission in 1999, so in 2002 when Putin said that the expansion 'does not cloud the relations' he was fully aware of the ...
The bottomline is that Putin's declarations on Ukraine's joning NATO completely changed between 2002 and 2008. Given that it was only six years in bet...
No, it is not the most direct cause, as it was not a cause of war with Lithuania, Latvia or Estonia. And no, your explanations did not explain anythin...
But that is exactly the point: in 2002 the expansion with the seven was well underway and Putin did not declare it as a grave threat, on the contrary,...
Well, it was not a threat enough to draw any 'red lines' then. At the time he treated the expansion of NATO with Ukraine exactly as he then treated jo...
If in 2002 Russia clearly declared that they have some reservations, but in general they do not object to Ukraine's joining, then the West did not cro...
That they are not too happy about it, as they felt it does not contribute to the security in Europe. Still, the quote given above from the press relea...
Here is an article in Polish, but you can Google translate it: https://www.rmf24.pl/raporty/raport-wojna-z-rosja/news-rzecznik-rzadu-o-broni-dla-ukrai...
That is rather misleading. Poland has stopped providing weapons to Ukraine some time ago, as it has nothing left to give. It was a crucial donator in ...
But this just assumes that everything that is material is an effect. That is not logically necessary. There might be a first material cause that is no...
I am assuming that the treaty actually ends the war (i.e. Russia cannot continue it in a near future, at least not until Ukraine is in NATO). The popu...
Crimea is worth much more to Russians than to Ukraine. On the other hand, militarily it will be easier to take back Crimea than Donbass. So I would no...
Another detail missed is that Yanukovych was ousted by a parliamentary vote of 328-0. Sure, one can question the legality of the vote itself, but the ...
The supposed 'coup' was preceded by three months of protests with dozens of thousands of participants. Were those all CIA agents? On 12 April 2014 Igo...
Yes, I am happy to learn, just point me to the source that specifies that the portion of the Russian exports denominated in rubles is negligible. It s...
As I wrote, it is now impossible to determine how much Russia trades in rubles and how it is affected by the exchange rate, as that depends on the ter...
You have claimed that Russia could be threatened by missiles deployed in Ukraine and pointing at Russia. However, NATO has not deployed such missiles ...
If your answer to 'what missiles does NATO deploy regularly to NATO countries' are the missiles deployed lastly in the 1950s, then it clearly contradi...
Your link shows that they introduced nuclear weapons to new countries after 1950s? Which countries exactly? Your claim was that NATO regularly puts mi...
Well, you did write 'regularly'. And no, your link does not back that up. NATO stopped doing that in the 1950s, that is BEFORE the Cuban Missile Crisi...
Well, in your quote you say that NATO puts missiles in NATO countries 'regularly'. The last country that NATO put missiles in was Turkey in 1954. Of c...
Comments