What is really happening in the Ukraine Conflict?

[Groo]

I see a lot of comments regarding NATO being the cause and the massive number of dead since 2014, carried out of course by those nasty Ukrainians. Mainly by those who state any western media reports are lies and propaganda at the same time swallowing anything anti-western, written by sources for the Kremlin hook, line and sinker, of course everything from these sources are 100% true.
 
I must admit I didn't know much about the origins of the internal conflict, but when I do read up, I see the origins are March 2012, when the EU and Ukraine initiated an Association Agreement, but the EU insisted it wouldn't be ratified until certain conditions were met, regarding fears of the deterioration of democracy and rule of law due to the imprisonment of opposition leaders.
 
Russia in 2013 stopped all goods from Ukraine, a form of sanction I would call that, because of the proposed signing of the agreement. Protests started in November 2013 when the President rejected the agreement in favour of getting closer to Russia, even though the overwhelming majority in Parliament had voted for the agreement.
 
Peaceful protests turned violent after government crackdowns on the protests. The protests increased and became more violent including in February, 2014, where police fired on 1000+ protesters, killing 100. After this with mediation from the EU and Russia an interim unity government was formed, the US actually supported the current President, Yanukovych, to remain as President, but he fled the next day.
 
So at the end of the day the Ukrainian people overthrew their government.
 
The Southern area of Ukraine, who have more Russian support and Russia invaded (sounds familiar) Crimea claiming Crimea is Russian. In Donetsk, pro-Russian militants take a government building, followed by pro-Russian militants taking buildings in other Cities, led by ex GRU officers and one of Putin's advisors. They murdered a number of government officials in this time too.
 
Since then there has been a civil war, which has included Russian involvement with supplying arms and troops to the rebels. So the fact this was has continued so long has to be heavily contributed by the Russian involvement in their neighbours affairs.
 
Between 2014 and 2021, there were just under 4000 civilian deaths, the majority in 2014 and the majority of the rest in 2015, a trickle since. These casualties have been victims of fire from both sides. All these deaths could and should have been avoided, in my mind Russian prompting contributed to this.
 
I wanted to write more but I'm about to leave on a 6 hour drive, below are some of the sources I have found info from.
 
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1293409/civilian-deaths-related-to-russia-ukraine-conflict/
 
https://www.rferl.org/a/death-toll-up-to-13-000-in-ukraine-conflict-says-un-rights-office/29791647.html
 
https://www.vox.com/2014/9/3/18088560/ukraine-everything-you-need-to-know
 
In short, there are two sides of every story, but I am sick and tired from the Russian sympathizers and British haters contributing all blame on the West and putting out blatant Russian lies as "The Truth"

[Thomas]

Don't worry Toots. Given that the vast majority of civilian casualties since 2014, have been Russian Speakers of Russian Ethnicity that identify as Russians, your wish has already been granted and done so in spades.

Aye sampan. People who haven't heard of Ukraine prior to a few weeks back also hadn't heard about the 14000 deaths ,many of them ethnic Russians who have been killed since 2014.


Don't worry though the yanks are going to fight till the last Ukrainian.

[Sheepy]

Don't worry Toots. Given that the vast majority of civilian casualties since 2014, have been Russian Speakers of Russian Ethnicity that identify as Russians, your wish has already been granted and done so in spades.

You haven't been partying while the plebs are locked up have you or being in charge of the treasury while having a stand by foreign nationality for when it goes bottom up. They are all hypocrites. Who think repercussions only go one way.

[Sampanviking]

I can't get beyond the fact that Russian women and children are not being buried under bombed rubble or killed in the street or abused. Only Ukrainian. Doesn't that count for anything?

Don't worry Toots. Given that the vast majority of civilian casualties since 2014, have been Russian Speakers of Russian Ethnicity that identify as Russians, your wish has already been granted and done so in spades.

[Sheepy]

Well I'll take it you you don't understand.

Yeah well, all credit to Boycey, he might be a Commie, but at least he is trying to get to grips with it, rather than just parrot the same old garbage. 

[Good old]

I can't even understand any of this. This is just the usual BS from you. But just to make it simple for you, the more US troops bordering Russia is a potential threat to them because they aren't there for no other reason but be used in any potential conflict with Russia. It is true that NATO is already bordering Russia but Estonia and Latvia joined when Russia was at it weakest and they are small nations near the Baltics anyway. Ukraine is different given it is significantly closer to Moscow and a much larger land mass. There is nothing Russia can really do about Estonia and Latvia given they are already members, but that doesn't mean they should just ignore NATO expansion especially given it is a broken promise.

Ukraine anyway could gain a lot by being a neutral country. Not only is it beneficial for the continent as it would act as an artificial border between Russia and NATO, it could also act as a country that is part of two markets. From my understanding Russia isn't against Ukraine joining the Single market and of course they will be more than happy to let them be part of their own especially when they move their market East. I think much of the problem here seems to stem from people not really understanding why things have happened the way they have. If the idea is NATO membership protects your nation, then you haven't been paying attention. All of Ukraines security concerns are better addressed as a neutral country as then they are not seen as a potential threat and as such not required to be attacked in the future.

Well I'll take it you you don't understand.

[B0ycey]

And by that logic Russia, has the right to invade every one of its neighbours that is in NATO. As every one is a potential threat.  No hang on ,they are an actual threat in his eyes? No hang on  you can become an actual threat for just considering joining NATO.
When do Russias neighbours stop being a threat then ? Oh yes when they bow to his threats and have him to control all foreign policy. And much of their domestic policy. And now the nasty threatening  West, doesn't have a potential threat to them.  He acts the threat out, and makes it absolutely clear he is not a potential threat, but an actual threat. Yet the actual NATO threat in his eyes still doesn't attack his homeland, the place all of his policy, and now actions,  says it is concerned for.

I can't even understand any of this. This is just the usual BS from you. But just to make it simple for you, the more US troops bordering Russia is a potential threat to them because they aren't there for no other reason but be used in any potential conflict with Russia. It is true that NATO is already bordering Russia but Estonia and Latvia joined when Russia was at it weakest and they are small nations near the Baltics anyway. Ukraine is different given it is significantly closer to Moscow and a much larger land mass. There is nothing Russia can really do about Estonia and Latvia given they are already members, but that doesn't mean they should just ignore NATO expansion especially given it is a broken promise. 

Ukraine anyway could gain a lot by being a neutral country. Not only is it beneficial for the continent as it would act as an artificial border between Russia and NATO, it could also act as a country that is part of two markets. From my understanding Russia isn't against Ukraine joining the Single market and of course they will be more than happy to let them be part of their own especially when they move their market East. I think much of the problem here seems to stem from people not really understanding why things have happened the way they have. If the idea is NATO membership protects your nation, then you haven't been paying attention. All of Ukraines security concerns are better addressed as a neutral country as then they are not seen as a potential threat and as such not required to be attacked in the future. 

[Sheepy]

I'm not insulting you. I am telling you that anyone with an IQ of 100 would understand why NATO is a security threat to Russia. If you can't then you clearly aren't smart enough but that isn't an insult but me just stating a truth. But just so you know NATO is an organisation that was set up to counter the Soviet Union, was promised not to expand eastwards and it sets up US troops in Europe. The idea of Russian troops in say Mexico would be met with the same skepticism I can promise you. But in any case, it should be said that failing to act over potential means that you cannot act when it is actual.

I don't think you are getting it Boycey, the people who you are trying to deal with are insane, they think they have the right to create all of this in everyone else's name. Their illusion of democracy is coming apart at the seams they are escalating it because they are undone. 

[Streetwalker]

I read that Finland wishes to join NATO and Russia is already threatening their destruction. Why does Russia imagine that they have that right?

Its pretty obvious now  if it wasnt already that being a member of NATO is the only  defence against Russian agression . Putin is a bully and issues threats when things dont go his way , the more NATO members the less room he has for expansion .

[T00ts]

I read that Finland wishes to join NATO and Russia is already threatening their destruction. Why does Russia imagine that they have that right?

[Streetwalker]

I can't get beyond the fact that Russian women and children are not being buried under bombed rubble or killed in the street or abused. Only Ukrainian. Doesn't that count for anything?

It counts for everything .

The what is really happening in the Ukraine thread has if it wasnt from the off has become what my government is telling me what is happening in the Ukraine . Its difficult to sort whats what but the facts remain people are dying in Ukraine not Russia and its Russia that invaded its nieghbour 

[Good old]

I'm not insulting you. I am telling you that anyone with an IQ of 100 would understand why NATO is a security threat to Russia. If you can't then you clearly aren't smart enough but that isn't an insult but me just stating a truth. But just so you know NATO is an organisation that was set up to counter the Soviet Union, was promised not to expand eastwards and it sets up US troops in Europe. The idea of Russian troops in say Mexico would be met with the same skepticism I can promise you. But in any case, it should be said that failing to act over potential means that you cannot act when it is actual.

And by that logic Russia, has the right to invade every one of its neighbours that is in NATO. As every one is a potential threat.  No hang on ,they are an actual threat in his eyes? No hang on  you can become an actual threat for just considering joining NATO.
 When do Russias neighbours stop being a threat then ? Oh yes when they bow to his threats and have him to control all foreign policy. And much of their domestic policy. And now the nasty threatening  West, doesn't have a potential threat to them.  He acts the threat out, and makes it absolutely clear he is not a potential threat, but an actual threat. Yet the actual NATO threat in his eyes still doesn't attack his homeland, the place all of his policy, and now actions,  says it is concerned for. 

[B0ycey]

Sad to to see you are down to insults. I wouldn't say you were qualified to judge an IQ if you can not see the vast difference between potential and actual.

I'm not insulting you. I am telling you that anyone with an IQ of 100 would understand why NATO is a security threat to Russia. If you can't then you clearly aren't smart enough but that isn't an insult but me just stating a truth. But just so you know NATO is an organisation that was set up to counter the Soviet Union, was promised not to expand eastwards and it sets up US troops in Europe. The idea of Russian troops in say Mexico would be met with the same skepticism I can promise you. But in any case, it should be said that failing to act over potential means that you cannot act when it is actual.

[Good old]

The bay of pigs was more than an adventure. It was a CIA operation to topple a government and replace it with exiles. It failed but that doesn't mean America ended their interest in Cuba. And yes I do want to compare. They're a lot of parallels in these conflicts but opinion on the outcomes depend on what side of the fence you sit on it seems.

Also yes, Poland did ask for nukes like two days ago if you didn't know. Why they need them I don't know. Once one is fired they all are fired and most of the ballistics will be coming from America anyway so a few extra in Poland isn't going to make much difference. But whatever, they asked for them and if they receive them we may have another conflict on our hands. But that is another story for another day I guess. But in terms of today, it is more evidence that at the very least NATO is indeed a security threat to Russia not that anyone with more than a 100IQ would need to have this spelt out to them I should say.

Sad to to see you are down to insults. I wouldn't say you were qualified to judge an IQ if you can not see the vast difference between potential and actual.

[B0ycey]

Unreal as ever. The bay of pigs  was an unofficial adventure by a few thousand adventurers
Putin turns up with 150,000 plus armed with his best gear , then proceeds to use heavy artillery from beyond the border to flatten everything in sight, and you want to compare. Can you prove Poland wants Nuks? And why would they need them. Do you really think Poland would attack Russia.?
NATO is at Russias door. Fact . Has NATO  attacked Russia. .No. is NATO rushing to attack Russia now, when being asked to ?No .Your  the drone that can't see or think beyond your nose. This war was predictable in so much as Putin , had made threats and had enough military hardware to carry the threat. Nothing to do with the right he had to do it. And no reason for Ukraine, or any other sovereign state to bow to his threats.
I suspect he would like the Ukrainians to give him everything he demands, if that brings what he calls peace he will take it. He is not the only one with objectives, the Ukrainians have one to defend Ukraine against his aggression , and western opinion is hardening to aiding their efforts with all means possible. So I would suggest the quicker he stops f**king around and realises if it's peace he wants , he has to stop trying to kill Ukrainians ,and get off their turf.
Never mind about Kosovo, as far as I'm concerned no comparison  will make his actions right. He does what he does for his own purpose. Nothing else, and all comparison is merely excuses.

The bay of pigs was more than an adventure. It was a CIA operation to topple a government and replace it with exiles. It failed but that doesn't mean America ended their interest in Cuba. And yes I do want to compare. They're a lot of parallels in these conflicts but opinion on the outcomes depend on what side of the fence you sit on it seems.

Also yes, Poland did ask for nukes like two days ago if you didn't know. Why they need them I don't know. Once one is fired they all are fired and most of the ballistics will be coming from America anyway so a few extra in Poland isn't going to make much difference. But whatever, they asked for them and if they receive them we may have another conflict on our hands. But that is another story for another day I guess. But in terms of today, it is more evidence that at the very least NATO is indeed a security threat to Russia not that anyone with more than a 100IQ would need to have this spelt out to them I should say.