Russians of pol: I've been reading Stratfor about Russia...

Russians of pol: I've been reading Stratfor about Russia. Is it reasonable to assume that the current war in eastern Ukraine is about pushing the russian border up to the riverlands of eastern Ukraine (Kharkiv and Lopan river if I'm getting this right) to establish something of a natural barrier to the southwest, making a hypothetical future invasion through Ukraine at least more preventable?

Other urls found in this thread:

pravdareport.com/news/society/stories/28-03-2017/137253-jews-0/
rt.com/news/382652-polish-consulate-ukraine-rocket/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

I don't think those big geopolitical ideas have a lot to do with actual reality. They way I see it, there are more realistic reasons for the war. 1) connect mainland Russia to Crimea through land 2) destabilise Ukraine and show our other allies what happens if they decide to switch sides 3) create a buffer area on our border where no US base will be built.

Objective is to conquer south half of Ukraine to connect to Crimea (port access for Russia) and Transnistria in Moldavia.

Than call it "Novorossyia". Possible they integrate it into russia's federation directly or as a buffer state.

Than North West ukraine can join EU, at worst (from putin's POV)

>pushing the russian border up to the riverlands of eastern Ukraine
haha what

if that was the plan they would have done it by now

The best thing to do is to hold the line more or less at the Dnieper. Russian political philosophy is based on geography, and the maintenance of defensible barriers. It cannot and will not attempt to hold land beyond what were essentially the old boundaries of the Russian Empire. Anything beyond that is unsustainable for Russia's social, economic, and military model. That's why Alaskans don't speak Russian.

Would love to make Russia good friend, Russia joining Europe !

Sadly, russian politicians prefer to play on xenophobia to divert their population from the problems the country is facing.

The whole ukrainian feud is pretty bold and a dangerous move. I understand Sebastopol's port is important for russia's interests, but that way of treating neighbors like pray and controlled slaves explains why eastern europe fucking hate and scared of Russia. And western europe can't support such a dick move.

In the end, the whole problem is russian still see anything west of them as the enemy. Therefor it must have buffer states in its west, it can't let its access to sea controlled by someone independent, and it see eastern europe contries joining EU as a threat rather than an opportunity to get closer to its best partner.
And russian politicians keep on fueling this fear and hate.

>1) connect mainland Russia to Crimea through land
makes a lot of sense
>2) destabilise Ukraine and show our other allies what happens if they decide to switch sides
also makes sense- a sphere of influence is established as a buffer, rather than conquering the surrounding countries, which for now is unrealistic.

it was a good read, it helped me understand a lot, I think. I mean- it's the only source I'm working with as far as geopolitics of Russia goes, so I haven't heard counter arguments, but it was at least interesting. Their case is that the central issue is that no geographical feature protects Moscow, so a buffer must be established, but then the only real agricultural region is in the south west and you can't efficiently support a big country, and at the same time it's a very multi ethnic country. Multi ethnic + barely enough food/the ability to distribute -> internal strife -> Oprichniki -> KGB. It seemed like a more or less unsolvable dilemma over time, and I must say I now completely understand why Russia is so worried about it's neighbours joining NATO. I didn't get it before, maybe that's on me.

tl;dr: I thought it was a good read.

Flag collected.

>In the end, the whole problem is russian still see anything west of them as the enemy.
Because obviously every western power that invaded Russia since Teutons has done so out of sheer benevolence.

you got that all wrong
just switch sides and there you go

-Ukraine indignant at 80% of Jews in power-
pravdareport.com/news/society/stories/28-03-2017/137253-jews-0/

There are couple of analysts that think that Russia looks at Ukraine as a multi decade long project. Chipping it off more and more every few years so their economy can sustain it.

They have spent 50 billion $ on Crimea. Just think how much they would have to spend on each Ukranian oblast they get to control.

Price tag for fixing up and modernizing entire Donbass will be over 200 billion $.

>current war in eastern Ukraine is about pushing the russian border

Its a civil war and a complete mess.
Putin said multiple times that he WONT take Novorossiya regions in RF and its very important for Ukraine to hold their word on the minsk agreement.

But Ukraine has not enough control over their own forces, or they do everything on purpouse, so there's no end in sight of this confilict.

while at the same time driving the rest of Ukraine further and further west politically, meaning the parts of the country left intact will happily invite western armed forces, and, being north of the carpathians, this will still be enough to pose a threat to the russian heartlands.

at least that's a big possibility in such a scenario

Leaving The Ukraine as an independent buffer state sounds like the more stable solution to me if possible. I've often thought about some sort of mutual investment and rebuilding pact as a possible vector for de-escalating, allowing Russia access to the port, and keeping EU/NATO expansionism and regime change at bay.

Problem is there's not a lot of extra money to go around.

If Russia wants to make a long term rebuilding investment in the East then maybe it wouldn't be too burdensome for the US to do the same in the West, and then we'll have the ability to balance each other's investment actions by having some largely independent national coalition doing the spending with e.g. veto power by the funders. Or something like that?

France was invaded by England and Germany so many times, we invaded Italia so many times.

Yet we don't build our future based on paranoia and fear. We don't invade Switzerland or Belgium because "muh french speaking minorities" / "we need to protect our interests"

You have to stop that way of thinking and seeing everyone either as a threat or an obedient slave.

Not gonna happen even if Putin want it. The problem is in logistic and resources. If we will start open big scale war, that will require shitload of resources, logistics, and TONNS OF MONEY. And because of that other parts of army would be weaken. That's pure common sence, only retatrds who don't know anything about military will fall for it.

>RUSSIA GONNA INVADE EUROPE
Ok, let's assume that. And what's next? We have enough resources to maintain army for several weeks, maybe month. And then our economy will collapse for sure, because you need or WWII-rates of production, or miracle. And nobody will work on factories for food like in 1941, there's no external threat to Motherland. So people would lynch Putin for that chimpout.

You know, "Steel wins battles, gold wins wars" We have more than enough steel, but after first battles we will fall apart.

I would contend several points here, but we live under completely opposing media hegemonies, so we'll probably always come into a discussion about this certain that completely opposing things are true and not willing to budge. So I'm guessing that a discussion won't be fruitful.

All that is done is to keep the Russian from supplying Iran with more high end weapons and gear that will make a american and Saudi invasion impossibel to extremely bloody.


You seem not to understand that Ukraine is only a small cog in a much larger picture.


Its Americas/Saudis push in to the middle east and a new set up for war. All will be done to stage a war with Iran and take its oil under Saudi control und under perto dollar currency.

>They have spent 50 billion $ on Crimea.
that seems like an (((exagerated))) number
do you have any source, im genuinelly interested
>Price tag for fixing up and modernizing entire Donbass will be over 200 billion $.
Donbass and the entire Southeast ukraine(NovoRussia) is industrialized core placed on of the most fertile soil in the world
any sum off money invested there will give the return of investment by the tenfold

stay out of my homeland ivan

>but we live under completely opposing media hegemonies
you mean propaganda hegemonies, in your country for sure
>So I'm guessing that a discussion won't be fruitful.
why make a thread then?

Pussy
whats your homeland?

And the same west won't lift a finger to help them. USA won't give them any lethal aid and Germany won't be helping with money.

This tactic also works in a way that Kiev elites are cornered and thus has to give in to far rigt more and more. Just look at the recent economic blocade of DNR/LPR. Poroshenko did appease nationalists so far but this has also ensured that they will never get to be part of Ukraine again.

And keep in mind that Russia is very good at picking their timing in escalating/de-escalating things.

In September of 2014 when encirclement of Mariupol was slowly happening USA was seriously on the verge of giving Ukies serious military hardware if that city fell. But Vlad knew when to stop.

>Leaving The Ukraine as an independent buffer state
they've been doing this since 1991, look how "succesfull" they became with the average sallary lower than in Moldavia
>Problem is there's not a lot of extra money to go around.
problems are the (((ukies)))

I asked for a yea/nay on a particular perspective.

I see you are on fire, and not here for civilized discussion.

I now wish to talk to you much less.

Cheap attempt to whitewash Soros/EU shilling.

Sage

>Than North West ukraine can join EU, at worst (from putin's POV)

Thats where you got it wrong. It is in our interest not to let even part of Ukraine join NATO and EU. Status quo is preferable, so Putin will do everything to keep that non-state whole.

>I asked for a yea/nay on a particular perspective.
It was clearly a no.
>I see you are on fire, and not here for civilized discussion.
Im not here for your muh little princess shit
I gave you my perspective, you didnt want the discussion
said it yourself
>I now wish to talk to you much less.
suck a dick then

Articles of Mark Adomanis & Anatoly Karlin, can't remember them excatly. They are months old now.

That money went mostly on bringing up Crimea to russian standard of living, fixing infrastructure any increasing gibs. I

>It was clearly a no.
aight I'll settle for that seemingly completely shilled up and entirely uneducated perspective from you. that's a count of one russian saying "no, Putin does not want to annex more land". Thank you.

No innovation by Soros shills since 2013. Sad, really really sad

>get in proxy war with Ukraine
>Ukraine lets USA build military base in Kharkov rent free just to spite you

Great thinking, Ivan.

>Yet we don't build our future based on paranoia and fear.
Bombing Serbia, expanding NATO eastwards, placing US missiles in Europe, supporting Chechen separatism and instigating color revolutions on Russian periphery might have given me the wrong impression.

>shilled up and entirely uneducated perspective from you.

fuck off CTR
>no, Putin does not want to annex more land"
No he doesnt.
Crimea wouldnt be Russian if the rightful president of ukraine wouldnt have been overthrown in a coup.

Heres your answer.
Suck a dick also

what's so interesting about the Stratfor article is it puts this back and forth in perspective.

from a Russian perspective a defensive perimeter needs to be established and maintained. This is a need, not just a wish.

However, you have to admit that by running back and forth, back and forth over eastern europe, it is understandable that the countries there might want some insurance in preparation for the next, inevidable, Russian expansion.

It seems there's no way for Russia to exist without there being tension along its borders. If anything I would guess that infrastructure investment would be the one thing that could help (again making Arkhangelsk a big port for trade and perhaps making another track on the Trans Siberian Railway for moving goods to Vladivostok and trading in Asia, as well as developing agriculture and possibly (although this might be suicide) developing a railway line to India to buy produce and get it sent more directly to the Asian parts of the country). This will need money though, money that so far goes into military and social control as far as I've gaathered after about 2 hours of research.

You`ve been reading shit, because you are confused about the main factor in your equation - Russia is not at war with Ukraine (despite Ukraine wanting to pretend it is).

And for the separatists regions and big part of Ukraine populace wanting them to succeed its cultural war - current Ukrainian goverment pretty much attempts cultural genocide of Russian heritage: culture, language, books, movies, education, identity.

It`ll not work, since despite everything - the "true hohols" are minority. Ukraine will reformat itself eventually either spliting apart or electing new goverment that will be dominated by opposite parties - same way as it happened when Yushenko became president after first Maidan, and disappointed in him after people elected Yanukovich.

So "Russia" just waits for Ukraine to collapse even further to support the eastern Ukraine regions and populace - in political and worst case military way. Currently "russian" participation is at best humanitarian aid to separatists, possibly financial and probably SOME covert arms shipment - nothing of a likes of "200% of Russian army already slaugthered by Brave Ukrainian Cyborgs in donbass! But they moved 300% more!"

If we wanted to capture the country militarily - we could, in a days. If we really cared about it politically - we could pressure on Ukraine very hard so that already next election president would be Pro Russian.

What we do is stand and watch them dig their graves, so that they go through all the mistakes and issues themselves getting disappointed in pro-western and ukr-nationalist politics.

the day when u.s. troops will be deployed in kharkov is the day when said u.s. troops and ukraine will cease to physically exist

spoken like a proper globalist shill, you could be a western politician

YOU live. Because you dont speak russian nor ukrainian to follow the conflict from the start and get info from first hand sources from both sides.

If you or someone else want to say do country X want to annex Ukraine, the answer is: would your country wish to annex, say, a run-down sub-Saharan African country? and would your taxpayers be fine with essentially dealing with its economic recovery?

We took back Crimea because it was absolutely necessary, just look at the greater geography, not the water superiority, but the missile range potential, NATO missiles on Crimea would've been devastating from a logistics standpoint. It was worth doing all this just for that strip of land alone.

But greater Ukraine doesn't have much use, it's piss poor farmers all the way across, even if we did take some land, it would only a bit off the east flank where we had our manufacturing complex, but even that doesn't seem especially worth it.

Russia can't take Ukraine for economic reasons, but we can also ensure others don't as well, that's all it is.

There never were russian invasion in Europe. We just liberated them and decided to stay.

>Russia is not at war with Ukraine
the fact that arms are provided by Russia to the separatists is what I would call being at war, although by proxy but it's really a technicality.

really I need to know more about the internal politics of Ukraine. If it splits into several parts, what do you think those parts would be?

The argument is that with Romania and the baltics in NATO, Russia could face a very effective two pronged attack from the west. The idea is to make that more difficult by at least making fortifications along rivers. Nuclear arms make all of this more complicated, but, either way, that's the argument.

Of course you could capture Ukraine militarily or politically, but you would never get out from under the sanctions then, and afaik they are doing a lot of damage even as they are.

Intellectual discussion is rare in these parts, you should know that Sven. If you find it, treasure it like that hot female that happens to love you.

yea that's true. However it appears that some don't consider Russia involved in the conflict, meanwhile it is known that Russia provides arms. as far as I am concerned that means involvement.

There is reason to "annex" Ukraine - millions of russian/russian language populace.

Russia is only 142 million people and despite hosting dozens of natinalities and status of federation still is pretty much solidly based around russian culture and language.

The conflict in Ukraine and getting the Crimea already is a blessing to us as we got few millions more russian speaking populace - as crimea people as well million or so refugees and work migrants from Ukraine.

Getting Russian part of Ukraine is the only way we really can expand - since even taking in ex-USSR countries that do not speak russian would be counter productive. There really are only two regions vital to us - Ukraine (east of it) and Belarus. Even Kazahstan that is strategically important, we`d not be interested to invade for all its gains.

Same reason i laugth every time Europeans seriously discuss possibility of Russia "invading" Baltics, Finland or even lol Sweden. What the hell will we do with those territories and foreign populace? Even Baltics despite having some are not interesting to us, since getting hostile foreign populace will negate gains from loyal russian.

The only true way for "Russia" to expand is through culture and language. And they are also worth fighting for.

>How dare Ukraine want to station us troops in Kharkov? Russia din do nuffin, we will fuckin nuke you for inviting foreign troops after annexing part of your country.

This is exactly why Ukraine will offer the USA a rent free military base in Kharkov At a time when Putin in a vulnerable position, to spite you, because you are fucking mongoloids that deny every country around you exists and it makes your neighbors want a bunch of mud blood Americans on their soil because it's a better alternative to the psychopathic moskal sadists.

It will happen and you won't shit, just like what happened with the Baltic, because the only thing that apparently makes Russians recognize their neighboring countries is US troops on the Russian border.

Are you a civilian? How can you clam you get objective news in that case. You must be a retard then. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that all MSM (regardless) is heavily colored, and in some cases out right false.

I bet you are one of those putin trolls, slaving away in a cum stained basement.

>the fact that arms are provided by Russia to the separatists

The US gives arms to Ukraine

No. We don't fucking want any more Ukrainian territories directly annexed in the foreseeable future, because the experience of Crimea suggests that restoring them to civilization is on par with bringing an African country up to semi-European standars. And we don't fear a ground invasion. The only possible scenario is all of NATO vs. Russia, and this war will inevitably go nuclear in any case.

What we want, as far as I can tell, is to remove any direct military threat to Russia, while keeping disintegration of Ukraine gradual and controllable, so we won't have Mad Max: Hohol Edition on our border. I can't guess what the long-term plan is.

>it's piss poor farmers all the way across
as far as I've gathered agriculture is a significant problem for Russia. I'm not saying that automatically makes it worthwhile, but Ukrainian soil is the best in, if not the world, then definitely the region. Between that, the industry that is there and the more defensible border it doesn't seem unreasonable. I'd be very happy to learn about alternatives for a Russian food supply, that seems to be a central issue for the country so I'd like to learn more.

ask them what they think about that. both the Czech and the Hungarians explicitly asked to leave and were met by tanks. You conquered them militarily, that's the only reasonable way to look at it.

the USA and Russia both formally obligated themself to help Ukraine defend it's sovereignty. Sure it's shady but it is in accordance with old agreements. The Russian involvement is in violation of those agreements.

i now know russians are the niggers of europe. Hitler did nothing wrong

If you remove Moscow and Petrograd from Russia the remaining cities have economic parity with Ukraine, many Russian cities being worse. You fucking niggers think Omsk is a nicer city than Lviv and that is some serious denial.

fugg man I'm tired now. I'll keep reading if anything interesting comes up, but basically I'm in formatting mode. there is/was real discussion here and there, I like that very much. Thank you to all Russians who helped a poor soul make some sense of the world

>The argument is that with Romania and the baltics in NATO, Russia could face a very effective two pronged attack from the west. The idea is to make that more difficult by at least making fortifications along rivers. Nuclear arms make all of this more complicated, but, either way, that's the argument.
No one seriously cares or is scared of "NATO attack" from west. We are against NATO expansion, but per se possibility of ground conflict is non existent. Crimea was exceptional case since strategically important. Ukraine we`d not want in NATO, but in reality woudnt care still much - the potential threat is not existentional because any real conflict will be answered with nukes - and our doctrine is very clear about it.

And yes we could capture Ukraine and not care about Sanctions for simple reason - removing current ukrainian goverment and nationalists, we`d have after few years loyal to us Russian populace and any sanctions would be exposure of Western hypocrisity - as right now sanctions against Crimea essentially punish its populace. You think too much of important of EU and US - world is not that simple and conflict is played by two side.s

A for question about internalpolitics in Ukraine - its irrelevant. They pretty much banned most popular party after Maidan, and banned 2nd most popular - communists. Now opressing the opposition and not letting opposing voices be present at all in a political dictature labeling everyone opposig as traitor. So current "internal politics" in ukraine is trash that will be elected away, run abroad or hanged on gallows in few years. That also applies to "Opposition block", remained of past nomenclature that adapted to stay in machine after Maidan. If anything, the only logical explanation of current Ukrainian internal politics is that they are all agents of Putin/West with a task of ruining the country - and they are very proffessional and consequent about it.

I suppose there is some hope then as long as we stop sending neocon agitators, the EU has more to worry about internally after brexit, and the future of NATO changes focus away from encircling Russia and toward anti-terrorism.

Then again I'm an eternal optimist.

>And yes we could capture Ukraine and not care about Sanctions for simple reason - removing current ukrainian goverment and nationalists

Ukraine remembers the last time you did that with deportations to Siberia, random murders, and the holodomor. If you don't remember, non Russian Ukrainians murdered every Russian man woman and child they could in the west and joined with the nazis because of it. You literally cannot instill loyalty without murdering everyone and replacing them with Russians. Every former eastern bloc nation in Europe would sign off on Russian genocide if you didn't have nuclear weapons.

When you get your information from MSM, i followed the events live as they unfounded - from Maidan to Slavyansk and later.

I`ve seen in livestreams as things unfolded in Odessa, seeing the fist conflicts and then airing LIVE as the House was stormed and burned down - the infamous visuals of nationalists going around burning bodies that you MAY BE seen, or them shooting at the house, and beating up injured people jumping from windows not letting sanitars bring them to infirmary that you likely didint seen.

You read about Ukrainian conflict from media thinking what Russia tells you is "propaganda" yet you never visited facebook of Ukr nationalists to read what they write, forums of their parties or let alone even listen to the Ukrainian politicians speak.

You do not follow UKRAINIAN media to see the extend of hatred and self aware lies from all levels - from politicians to media and bloggers streamed all the time so that they already forgot how to have shame about it and dont care about confusions of own lies.

I`ve seen the violence in Maidan live and seen the PEACEFULL and happy streams of people in Luhansk and Donezk, while in west Ukraine nationalists stormed buildings. I`ve seen people gathering for "referendums" as well seen from their own point Right Sector and nationalists roll around pressuring people trying to prevent it. I`ve tracked the events in Slavyansk, as Ukraine shelled it mercilesly. I`ve seen live and recordings artillery bombardments of Donezk and was on ZELLO radio streams which locals used to communicate during time.

I could discuss Ukraine nationalist side following same events - as despite all the conflicts in perception, i could present facts and he possible some i dont know that would shed light differentl for me.

But you are just an ignorant foreigner that gets digest telling him how to think. I might have as little idea about REAL events in Iraq and Syria for example, but Ukraine events are happening HERE.

>They pretty much banned most popular party after Maidan, and banned 2nd most popular - communists.

>Oh vey they banned the rigged Russian parties, why do they persecute me so?

You are literally the charicature of Jewish Bolshevist Russian nationalism.

>lviv

You're hohol, arent you?

When?

In the West, Lviv is Lviv, only Russian say Lvov.
But the West also use Kiev instead of Kyiv.

No need to be butthurt.

>Russian nationalism since the October revolution

I don't know why havent Poland start invasion from west? They tried to btfo you embassy, they've killed gorrilions of polaks in WWII, and your goverment still telling that Ukraine dindu nuffin.

also
rt.com/news/382652-polish-consulate-ukraine-rocket/

Today lvov is a shithole on a level of bangladesh by level of gdp.

Western part is a burden to the country, government supports unitary state because peasants from west ad poor and uneducated and vote for jews and morons every fucking elections. then jews make manipulations with monetary policy and government spendings to fuck kiev and east.

>Bombing Serbia
>instigating color revolutions
Necessary. Helped us overthrow commie Milosevic.

>expanding NATO eastwards
NATO can, should and will expand to every country that fears the aggression.

>placing US missiles in Europe
This is Russia's fault for attacking Ukraine.

>supporting Chechen separatism
Again, Russia's fault for various reasons.

No, m8, I know that. My point is that every fucking time they compare cities to Lvov. It's like Mecca for hohols.

>t. filthy albo

Nice larping cockhole, you fool nobody. You can invite Trump and we'll see how well thats going to go for you.

There are certain things that aren't done. Understand, that that act would provoke an actual war rather than that joke of a conflict we are currently running in there to humiliate Ukraine.

I know, senpai..... it bugs the hell out of me.

Hmmm, maybe start a referendum? western Ukraine goes back to Polska. We already got 2 million of you guys as immigrants, and it seems to be working OK, for now.

EU has its destiny toi became a playground and social experiments and the only who is guilty in such happenings are themselves. Neither we, US or cyrptojews.
Cuckoldary is conscious choice.

>while waiting for the bull I read ((((stratfor)))

Stopped reading there, Tom Clancy died you know?

>openly set to move missiles systems to our borders in 2007
>somehow its in response for Ukraine which happened in 2014
Truly niggers of Europe.

>The Russian involvement is in violation of those agreements.
Not if you accept that unconstitutional coup was a violation of sovereignty of ukraine. If you accept that all actions past that were justified and in fact understated, compared to possible response.

Again, to think that russia is engaged in a true military campaign in ukraine overlooks few important issue, for example that we are still their top trade partner and their president owns factories in Russia.

This is a geopolitical conflict, military part is very small, all things considered.

Maybe it has something to do with your aggressions in Georgia or Azerbaijan or something.

They praise UPA and shit and will vote no.
More realistic is movement of more workers and refugees from western ukraine to poland.

They attacked your embassy with RPG couple days ago because they want to go to poland and to transfer more money home lol

what's up with the sovietboos in transnistria and novorossiya? did they not get the memo?

Georgian conflict was in 2008, and we're cool with Azers.

>They praise UPA and shit and will vote no.

What's up with that?
Why are so many of you going full-retard mode worshipping bandera and UPA?

You know very well that it was expected to happen years earlier.

>Why are so many of you going full-retard mode worshipping bandera and UPA?
Same reason you have russians suddenly being religious - filing vacuum left by soviet fall.

Soviet man was an identity to be proud of, no matter nationality or origin. A lot of people scoff at this but it is true, first man in space was soviet, Nazis were stopped by the soviets, on and on.

And now all you have is Ukrainian man. What's Ukraine most famous for? Being a border. So you have people clinging on to w/e scraps of identity they can scrounge together, no matter how ludicrous or retarded.

That makes sense....

I was always saying Ukraine is a fake country..... i have no idea why Russia willingly cut such a huge swath of your own land and gave it to "Ukrainians"?

Most ukrainians dont even know who they are.

>are we russian? polish? belarussian? who knows? lets go cut bayonette some toddlers for fun!!
>Ukraine

-CIA and west funded them since 1960s.
-Commies closed gulags after death of stalin and let many of them to return home
-Today Jews and ex-commies in ukraine promote UPA ideology to get votes. because they cant find anything else.
- Western ukrainians have complex of inferiority so they like bullshit ideologies. why turks vote for erdogan lol?

Lord Walder shall never retake the Riverlands

I know very well that you're retard who got all his arguments destroyed and has nothing to say.

>ignore the post
>hurrrr ura retard
Just admit that NATO is in its essence, a reaction to Russian imperialism.

>i have no idea why Russia willingly cut such a huge swath of your own land and gave it to "Ukrainians"?
Because Lenin really did believe the shit he was selling and Stalin was too busy fighthing nazies and, later, being a paranoid pshychopat to fix it. And after that we didn't have leader strong or skilled enough to fix it until after the union fell.

Take Belorussia for example. There is still a piece of paper solely responsible for existence of their language as anything more than Russian accent. Because corenizatsya was a schizophrenic idea based in Marxism which itself is a shizophrenic ideology

Trump wants better relationship with Russia, so this won't happen.

Maybe they should have asked hitler to leave instead of giving him troops to fight us in ww2
Their opinions are irrelevant, they were our meatshield and we will use them again given the chance

>-CIA and west funded them since 1960s.

Oh no no no, dont even try to blame americans for that, that was pure ukrainian barbarism.

The biggest massacres occured in Wolyn, 1933-1944, CIA had jack shit to do with it.

>Today Jews and ex-commies in ukraine promote UPA ideology to get votes. because they cant find anything else.
>Western ukrainians have complex of inferiority so they like bullshit ideologies. why turks vote for erdogan lol?

Agreed to these, but for the love of God, dont shift the blame on the evil-american-empire.
This shit is all on you.

>You have to stop that way of thinking and seeing everyone either as a threat or an obedient slave
We'll stop doing that the moment the rest of the world stops doing that. When Europe looks at Russia, do you think it wants to help Russia grow stonger and more powerful? I guess "they have to stop that way of thinking and seeing everyone either as a threat or an obedient slave". Obviously, if they stop thinking that way, we'll fuck them up. Just like the moment we let our guard down when USSR collapsed, NATO expanded to our border. That's the relationship we have with Europe, that's established.

unless you meant UPA worshippers today, for which im sorry because i totally misunderstood you post. my bad.

Whatever Stratfor is writing is closer to truth than whatever "muh nazi Putin" west mass media or "muh nazi ukras" russian mass media is pushing.

How do Russians deal with their soviet legacy? How is it discussed in history class?

yay quads.

>You have to stop that way of thinking and seeing everyone either as a threat or an obedient slave.
We tried that in the 90s. Took west on it's word and all. 10 years of deindustrialization, starvation, marginalization and economic colonisation later, Putin came to power.

Go figure.

I know some russians irl (like 10 dudes), some of them think Soviet Russia was the best thing that happened to the human race, and some would like to take a shit on Stalins/Lenins graves.
I guess it depends if a russian decides to learn history by himself or just listen to what the school has to say.

It varies, a lot. If you want perspective of average russian Lenin was an honest man following an ideotic and disfunctional ideology. Stalin was a dishonest man but a decent leader untill Hitler turned on him, his wife died and Trotsky tried to take power at which point he became a paranoid bastard and did more damage than productive shit. But he did defeat the nazies, and that sort of thing gives man a lot of lee way. The rest are incompetent fools increasingly naive, corrupt and self serving, untill we hit the event horizon of stupidity and Naivite that is Gorbachev and corruption, which is Yeltsin, and don't misunderstand me here they were both man of their time, symptoms more than causes.

We take pride in USSR's achievements and acknowledge it's many, many failings. One is not exclusive from the other.

Still, realise, that we only got to the standarts of living that were norm before 90s in 2010s, so no shit a lot of people are nostalgic.

Sp since neither fucking side of this goddamn argument can get along, here is a question. If pic related is somehow implemented (not all that hard at this point in our history considering of this land is flat as fuck), is world peace suddenly achieved?

>ignore that everything he said is a proven lie
>proved to make baseless assumptions like he has some credibility
kys