Why there war is not being reported in the Western media?

Why there war is not being reported in the Western media?
Is Ukraine finished like Yugoslavia in the '90s?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=SdGUDpORDgU
finanz.ru/novosti/aktsii/rossiya-bez-nefti-dlya-ekonomiki-nachinaetsya-obratny-otschet-1001862462
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainization
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heraldic_adoption
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremi_Wiśniowiecki
globalresearch.ca/washington-was-behind-ukraine-coup-obama-admits-that-us-brokered-a-deal-in-support-of-regime-change/5429142
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_Sector
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

That question has been on my mind as well. Obviously, it's not in the interests of the (((media)) to talk about it anymore.

No news usually means bad news for (((them))). But what I hope is that everybody is letting the situation cool off so that we can come to a diplomatic resolution later on without any side looking weak.

thats because most of what happens comes from ukrainian side breaking the cease fire if it was the other way around the media would be on fire

As a Lithuanian, I am really depressed seeing Ukraine torn apart and then betrayed by the West.

Our little country has supported Ukraine more than Brits and (((Washington))) combined.

Maybe our country support it unconsciously because it was a former territory of Grand Duchy of Lithuania and kinda we were a "benovelent occupant" (ie. we didn't genocided poor Ukies like Moscowians did).

I do not support Azov battalions as such because they remind me of Polish Ultranationalists, just on different magnetic Pole (oh, snap).

Currently, Putin is reviving old KGB destabilisation and desinformation techniques with a grain of Mongolic barbarism (aka. Eurasianism).

Is it worth making Ukraine Great Again or transforming it into various semi-independent "-grads" (aka federalization in Kremlin's vision).

>Why there war is not being reported in the Western media?
Becase liquidation of a nation in US sphere is not something anyone in the west will ever publicly admit outside fringe parties.
>Is Ukraine finished like Yugoslavia in the '90s?
Not exactly. Russia won't let it fracture further, nor join EU. But it won't annex it either. So it's stuck in a black hole of liquidation instead of disintegration. About 4 mil left for poland and russia each, about 6 were lost with Donbass and Crimea. And those are mostly workers and/or youth. And so you have a country that is being run by lunatics and thiefs pretending to be lunatics, populated by people who are either too patriotic or too retarded to bail. And plagued by enough problems that a russian invasion would probably improve the standard of living

But as I said - Russia can't be arsed. It would cost too much and Russia already got the parts it cares about most.

Ukrainians are redpilled.
youtube.com/watch?v=SdGUDpORDgU

>I am really depressed seeing Ukraine torn apart and then betrayed by the West.
Don't be, anyone with a brain saw it coming. The fact that so many Ukrainians gave up their soverignty for Nuland cookies and utopian promises, they only have themselves to blame.
>(aka federalization in Kremlin's vision).
that made sense when minsk was signed. Minsk is long dead since ukrainian political class can't do it with their jingoistic population convinced that they are "winning" the attrition war with Russia. Yeah I know, not the brightest bunch. And foreign powers, including russia, can't be arsed to push them towards it, and really there is nothing much left to push.

How sensible. The only problem is this leaves it open to being bought up by whoever has money, and the worst buyer would be the EU.

I wonder if at some point the thing to do would be joint funding of a rebuilding project manged by multiple parties including especially the US and Russia. Kind of a Marshall Plan thing. But these things always get subverted.

Syria is more important to (((them))) for now.

>Why there war is not being reported in the Western media?
Because there's not much going on. The frontline doesn't move, no breakthroughs. But exchange of fire happens almost everyday, and almost everyday there are wounded and dead.
>Is Ukraine finished like Yugoslavia in the '90s?
No, not really. There's no control over Crimea and Donbass, but that's it. And they are not recognized.

Because Ukraine does not have oil unlike Syria does, so USA put it on the side, their media can only push so many agendas without causing an overflow of shit on their consumers

Lost case. One simply cannot create a properly functioning country without any coherent political traditions especially on that scale, so Ukraine won't work as an example of successul western influence. Another aspct is that the Ukrainian authorities did everything they could to confirm major points of Russian propaganda - Russia says "we fight against a neo-nazi revolution", Ukraine says "we are proud of our nazi units during ww2" - it becomes really difficult to "sell" it as a coherent story to typical western liberals. There are many other aspects too - like Russia becoming a less important opponent - some information coming from thiis country sounds simply catastrophical, while nobody in the west is interested in creating a kind of political vacuum with nukes, especially having enough problems with growing China - one of latest examples:
finanz.ru/novosti/aktsii/rossiya-bez-nefti-dlya-ekonomiki-nachinaetsya-obratny-otschet-1001862462

Joe Biden's son was in on an oil deal that was supposed to work out as a result of the Orange Revolution 2.0. There are oil interests involved.

Because America is supporting the Neo-Nazis there, shhhh.

>bought up by whoever has money
You need law to work for investment to be practical. What's the point of dumping money into, say, farm if the locals are obstructionist as fuck and a day after purchase some assholes, be they pro-west or pro-east, will burn it down with a well placed molotov. The rule of law never came back to ukraine after 2014, and I for one think it won't untill some sort of another social collapse. It's still a functional society because there is still some semblance of social contract with gov where enough people buy into the lie that EU can afford to expand, but beyond that economy and demographics are taking a nose dive.
>and the worst buyer would be the EU.
Yeah, no. Those fuckers have their own problems to fix with brexit. So does US. And chinese have better investment venues.
>rebuilding project manged by multiple parties
I suspect the current russian plan is to go with old chinese proverb and wait for the corpse of thy enemy to float by the river. Than we will declare it a humanitarian crisis and resort to use of force against remaining resistance. Tho this will take a decade or so to occur. They might indeed recover if someone decides to unfuck it in meanwhile.

Fun fact. Oil interests were interested in regions under russian aegis.

>is Ukraine finished?

It never even started in the first place lol

This is funny since:
>Ukrainization (also spelled Ukrainisation or Ukrainianization) is a policy of increasing the usage and facilitating the development of the Ukrainian language and promoting other elements of Ukrainian culture, in various spheres of public life such as education, publishing, government and religion. The term is also used to describe a process by which non-Ukrainians or Russified Ukrainians come to accept Ukrainian culture and language as their own.

>The term is used, most prominently, for the Soviet indigenization policy of the 1920s (korenizatsiya, literally ‘putting down roots’), aimed at strengthening Soviet power in the territory of Soviet Ukraine and southern regions of the Russian SFSR. In various forms the Ukrainization policies were also carried in several different periods of the twentieth-century history of Ukraine, although with somewhat different goals and in different historical contexts.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainization

Just give it all to Russia, Belarus will also be reunited with Russia again.

Ukrainian history and identity specifically extends beyond Lenin though.

>As a Lithuanian, I am really depressed seeing Ukraine torn apart and then betrayed by the West.
How did the West betray Ukraine? Is it obliged to act in anyway? Is there some kind of alliance or a treaty?
No. There's just Budapest memorandum, which is just a non-binding agreement. And here's what it states:

>Respect Belarusian, Kazakh and Ukrainian independence and sovereignty and the existing borders.
>Refrain from the threat or use of force against Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine.
>Refrain from using economic pressure on Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine in order to influence its politics.
>Seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine, "if Belarus/Kazakhstan/Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used".
>Refrain from the use of nuclear arms against Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine.
>Consult with one another if questions arise regarding these commitments.

Well they did say that they respect Ukrainian sovereignty and borders - Crimea and Donbass are unrecognized. And they did call UN council.
So it's really Ukraine's fault for not asking for a real deal for giving up nukes.

>or transforming it into various semi-independent "-grads" (aka federalization in Kremlin's vision).
It was the only choice, really. Federalization and non-alignment status. How can such polarized country as Ukraine be a unitary state? How can it chose between Russia or EU and not alienate substantial part of population? But it's too late now, because people are too stubborn.

Ukraine, basically meaning Borderland, is trying to have a self identity rather than being a dividing line bread basket.

Best thing you can do is team up with Polska and get back your rightful clay. Polska can get Lvov again and border with Humgary, you Lithuanians can get some of Belaruse.

UKRAINE....

why are you limeys so butthurt about this? you always bring it up.

No, Ukrainian identity became widespread thanks to commies.

Which is why there was a Republic of Ukraine prior to the commie invasion? Do inform me on this as I am genuinely curious.

heh, that's an interesting seed of an idea.

With all this talk about V4 or intermarium or some such thing as a possible component of reforming the EU into something more workable, it would be at least interesting to contemplate if and how the remainder or some section of The Ukraine might join in as a way to maintain a workable buffer state instead of having to decide on a partition between Russia and Europe.

Yeah, and it was called Malorus. I.E. Small Russia. But don't use that word in front of ukrainians. It's about ten times worth than calling black guy a nigger. Before than Ruthenia, which is greek for Russia.

So yeh they have a long and storied history of being russia which they vehemently deny, and a new and shiny one of being ukraine, created by USSR, which they call an occupation force nowdays. Thanks to all the poles and balts for giving them the idea that that's how you get EU gibs.

>How did the West betray Ukraine?
You are responsible for those you domesticate. And like it or not west domesticated Ukrainian population while Russia was domesticating ukrainian elites. Which I still think was Putin's biggest mistake, ever.
>Budapest memorandum
Please, that peace of paper was null and void the moment Nuland went on maidan to give out cookies.

What are Ukrainians ethnically? Are they Russians? Poles?

They are slavs. Details depend entirely on who you ask. The east and center are more russian the west are more poles.

they're edgy russian rebels

t. my grandma is ukrainian and my grandpa is russian and they fucking hate each other kek

For how long this republic existed? How much support did it have among people? Kiev changed hands like 10 times during Civil Wars. It was controlled by all kinds of forces, not just UNR.
And How widespread was Ukrainian identity among people? And I mean the identity, not just language. Many people in Kuban are descendants of Zaporozhian cossacks and they speak something similar to Ukrainian in rural areas. But guess what, they don't consider themselves Ukrainians. Because Kuban became part of RSFSR and not UkrSSR. And they weren't ukrainized.

Ever heard of Brest-Litovsk treaty? Oh I guess you are 'British historian'

Which war? Minsk agreement keeps relative peace for several months already, putinbot.

Bs. Western ukies are Russians, colonized by poles without mixing. They hate each other since like 15-something.

we have no reason to help them

they're not in NATO

The U.S. has no interests in the region

Why the fuck should we help, because we get to take Russia down a notch? That's not worth it

>Minsk agreement

As I said, it depends entirely on who you ask. Genetic differences are non-existent.

>That's not worth it
Obama, Hilary and Biden disagreed.

As something bad.

I see you are well read and non-confrontational user from Russia (even with Ukrainians).

I have a kinda weird question/request.

How do you view Dugin's views on Ukrainian question? Do Russians really need Ukraine to remain an empire?

Or. Maybe it's just economical pragmatism to prevent Ukraine and EU from exploiting gas shale resources in Donbas region?

what the sanctions?

You deserve the sanctions because you broke international law

I'm talking about military intervention. The U.S. has no reason to send troops to Ukraine. It'd just make it worse.

>Please, that peace of paper was null and void the moment Nuland went on maidan to give out cookies.
Do you have trouble with reading comprehension? Yeah, that's what I said - it means nothing. And not because of Nuland, it's by definition a meaningless agreement.

> Genetic differences are non-existent.
What's about cultural ones? They at least don't seem to be the nation of slaves like you.
NATO should make sure that countries like North Korea and Russia are as weak as possible.

ukraine is the belgium of the east. pretty much a non country.

They're already weak to the point that fucking Poland could beat them.

>You deserve the sanctions because you broke international law
Technically, the ukrainian president was kicked from power in a coup and then asked help from russians.

First, not Russians but Ruthenians. Second, there were many instances when Ruthenians, especially their nobles were polonised:
>Heraldic adoption (Polish: Adopcja herbowa, "adoption under the coat of arms") was, since the 14th-century, a procedure of ennoblement in Poland of a family by including it into the heraldic family or clan of a particular coat of arms. This allowed the "adopted" family to bear the coat of arms.

>A notable case of heraldic adoption was the integration of the boyars of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania into the ranks of the Polish szlachta during the early history of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (Polish–Lithuanian unions) under the provisions of the Union of Horodło. Forty-seven selected Lithuanian/Ruthenian nobles were adopted by Poland's nobility and granted Polish coats-of-arms.[1]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heraldic_adoption

There is a reason why the main opponent of the Cossack uprising in the middle of the 17th century was a Ruthenian prince, his son was later elected as the king:
>Jeremi Wiśniowiecki (Ukrainian: Яpeмa Bишнeвeцький - Yarema Vyshnevetsky; August 17, 1612 – August 20, 1651) nicknamed Hammer on the Cossacks or Iron Hand, was a notable member of the aristocracy of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Prince of Wiśniowiec, Łubnie and Chorol in the Crown of the Kingdom of Poland and the father of the future King of Poland, Michael I.

>A notable magnate and military commander with Ruthenian and Moldavian[1][2][3] origin,
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremi_Wiśniowiecki

Thought they still somehow find money to maintain the occupation of parts of Ucraine and Georgia, support Asad and have one of the strongest military in the world.

the country was never recognized by the UN.

even still iternational law is really messy, so it is debateable if they actually broke any law.

Maintaining a base in a country that is significantly weaker than you is easy. Just look at the U.S.

don't destroy burger education

Technically Russia confirmed Ukrainian borders, eg. by signing the Budapest memorandum, yet still they invaded Crimea, and?

The Hillary Clinton state department started a coup of a pro-russian Ukrainian president, armed neo-nazi groups and led to the ousting of the democratically electected government. Outraged by this Putin invaded Crimea in retaliation.

globalresearch.ca/washington-was-behind-ukraine-coup-obama-admits-that-us-brokered-a-deal-in-support-of-regime-change/5429142

>the country was never recognized by the UN
I was speaking of Ukraine.
It all started because some rebels kicked the president.
>First, not Russians but Ruthenians
The term "Ruthenia" came from Rus'

>How do you view Dugin's views
He is an irrelevant lunatic overrated in the West and flip flops more often than Trump. We are talking about a guy fired from MSU for being a nutjob.
>Do Russians really need Ukraine to remain an empire?
No, but Kremlin will start WW3 to retain it if that's it what it takes. Because of the good all title "Autocrat of all Russia" which is Putin's or any half competent Kremlin ruler goal in life post 1991. It's a difference between being am independent empire and a rival empire (to EU/US/China)
>Maybe it's just economical pragmatism to prevent Ukraine and EU from exploiting gas shale resources in Donbas region?
Geopolitics is a multi-layered fare, that's one of the layers, yes. Tho it's pretty much worthless after what Saudis did to oil prices.

>They at least don't seem to be the nation of slaves like you
Which is why they were willing to kill their kin and shit on their own constitution for a couple of cookies from the white lady Nuland and a promise of paradise from frau Merkel.

>And not because of Nuland,
That's where I disagree with you. BM technically protects your integrity, implied in "protect sovereignty", but when Nuland, and orangists before her, undermined it, they were in violation. Hence why russia saw no need to honor it, nor anyone saw any reason to follow it when russia interveined.

The ukrainian government lost legitimacy when they decide to revolt agains't Yanukovych

>what the sanctions?
Nah, the taxdollars Hilldog, Soros and Biden spend promoting democracy and developing civil society, aka teaching them to worship EU and training neonazies.

>Which is why they were willing to kill their kin and shit on their own constitution for a couple of cookies from the white lady Nuland and a promise of paradise from frau Merkel.
Yet they got their visa-free travel with eu, and you got sanctions, millions thrown out into millitary or simply stolen and prolonged kgb dictatorship.

>visa-free travel with eu
and lost country hahahahahahaha

The Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic was one of the funding states of the UN, together with its Russian and Belarusian counterparts. Todays Ukraine is a de facto and de iure descendant of this soviet republic, just like todays Russia is a descendant of its Soviet ancestor. Moreover - the independent Ukraine was recognised de facto and de iure by many states, starting from Poland. By signing various treaties with Ukraine Russia confirmed its existence as a legitimate subject of international law, too.

What do you mean by "owning a country"?
> implying people didn't want it

Crimea is already annexed, no fighting there and Donbas is pretty calm

more believe bbc dumb

Ukraine civil war is so boring. Just a consistent amount of shelling from both sides.

>Yet they got their visa-free travel with eu
Congratulations, brave ukrainians. You can now all abandon the country and run into EU. Oh wait, the visa-free visits are 3 month long only. But what could possibly better express the depth of failure ukrainian statehood than the fact that right to abandon that sinking ship is the grand reward for turning on russia.

>sanctions
Good, less excuses for kremlin not to divesify the economy.

>millions thrown out into millitary
Good, if you can't pay price in dollars, you have to pay it in blood nowdays. Sad but true.

>simply stolen and prolonged kgb dictatorship
Putin owns russia. What is the point of stealing from himself? What an extra overpriced watch? After a certain point money is power, I'm glad kremlin can collect enough to stand up to economies 10 times it's size.

Ehh, early one /ug/ generated plenty amusing memes about kotli and "deeply concerned" UN

user, this doesn't make any sense. You are talking about an internal Ukrainian matter. Argentina cannot nullify its treaties with Brazil saying that they don't recognise Dilma's imeachment, even though many leftists in your country say that she lost her post illegaly.

When do you think the ukraine civil war is gonna pick back up? I want those days back.

>expecting anglos to liberate you from russians
will eastern europeans ever learn?

If Ukraine loses Odessa then it's finished as a nation-state. Odessa is the port from where Ukraine exports it's grain to the Middle East for consumption. Without this export hub there is no Ukrainian economy.

Prove me wrong. And again, what does you mean by "owning a country". I only see that kgb lost a useful asset near Russian borders, what Ukrainians. lost exactly?

>The term "Ruthenia" came from Rus'
And?

>internal Ukrainian matter
Man, there hasn't been a civil war in human history that didn't have outsiders put their dicks on scales to protect their own interest.

It wont neither side wants escalation as both believe that they are winning the attrition/informaition war.

imagine living next to russia

and you give up.your nukes

wtf?

>and you give up.your nukes
Nukes require a framework to run and operate. There are also very few countries allowed nukes. Ukraine was neither capable of keeping them, nor would it be allowed to. BM was more or less a fig leaf to cover the indignity of giving them up.

So you think people should be locked up in their countries like in ussr or north korea? Freedom to abandon your country s also a freedom, but russian brains seem to be incapable of this concept.
> can't pay price in dollars,
Price of what? Has it improved anything in russia except Putin ratings?
> stealing from himself
Stealing from russians to himself and his friends.

Odessa seems to be relatively safe.

Why aren't you in NATO through?

>Man, there hasn't been a civil war in human history that didn't have outsiders put their dicks on scales to protect their own interest.
And? It's a fact that Russia, as a stronger country, intervenes in Ukrainian politics, but it doesn't mean that Russia does or did it according to rules of international law. Of course a stronger country may always use the formula "rebus sic stantibus", but other countries still may legitimately see it as an invasion etc. Just don't be surprised if in 50 years China does the same thing with some Eastern Russian territories.

For the moment it seems to be safe. But the word is that Russia is working to foment rebellion and insurrection in several portions of Ukraine where there's a sizable Russian demographic. And Odessa has that sizable demographic.

>Freedom to abandon your country s also a freedom
Yeah, but when you see it as a primary goal of your nation, there is clearly something equally wrong with your nation as when it doesn't allow you to leave.

>Price of what?
Empire
>Putin ratings
That alone, is good enough. You can't buy national unity, just look at amerika and how their society is at it's own throat over Trump election
>Stealing from russians to himself and his friends.
Stealing implies taking something and running away. Otherwise it's redistribution of wealth, and it follows the same pattern in russia that it does in oh-so-democratic Great Britain. Economics and human nature dictate this, not government form. You are free to look it up. We at least get a likable government in return.

Russia can take the entire east cost at a drop of a hat, militarily. Practically tho - it's not worth it.

>Russia does or did it according to rules of international law
Cardinal rule of international law is reciprocity. US interfered in Ukraine using violence, before we did. As the joke goes in ukraine nowdays "US will fight RF to the last Ukrainian patriot"
>Eastern Russian territories
Also known as frozen hell that chinese are running from towards coastal cities, like pretty much every other nation with a big coast.

They already tried and failed, patriotic Ukrainians literally burned Russian ""protestors" in some building for it.

>Do Russians really need Ukraine to remain an empire?
Not a matter of being an empire, it's a matter of survival. Russia needs a deep buffer between Moscow and the West, preferably Poland and everything Eastward. Otherwise, the terrain is indefensible.
It's a question of warm water ports also, Russia needs Crimea for this reason, to have a solid foothold in the Black Sea.

What do you mean by "Empire"? Land? Emperor in charge?
Why is national unity valuable?
> We at least get a likable government in return.
But we are like five times rich in return.
Russia can take the coast, but it may lead to consequences Putin doesn't want.

Because we have a good thing going and nobody wants to upset the delicate balance. Finland managed to survive through the Cold War being neutral, if ain't broke, don't fix it.

> matter of survival
You mean survival of kgb?

>give up.your nukes
Those nukes were never theirs, Ukraine didn't have the ability to use them

What? It's been Russia's concern since its inception, centuries before KGB was founded. Doesn't matter who is in charge of the country, the geopolitical goals like this never change.

> It's been Russia's concern since its inception
Funny that since its inception Russia only had dictatorships in power.
> the geopolitical goals
Whose goals? If you are going to say Russian, explain what do you mean by it.

We tried to join in 1954, 1991, 2001. We are not welcome. Given that it's alliance designed to "Keep americans in Russians out and germans down" no shit we aren't.

>What do you mean by "Empire"? Land? Emperor in charge?
Guarantee that you are a subject of geopolitics and not an object. We were an object in the 90s for a decade. Moscow starved. Never again.

>Why is national unity valuable?
Because it allows to overcome any hardship or adversity a nation faces. Those sanctions that hit us made russians happier. Good luck explaining that to a libieral social scientist.
>But we are like five times rich in return.
We had a government obsessed with ideology for the most of the last century running this country into the ground trough incompetence, corruption and stagnation. No shit you are ahead. Commies weren't fun most of the time, and given that only 2 worth any respect are lentin and stalin, both of whom did great things for industrialisation but ruined nation in other ways. As to how good Putin is at running russia, see pic related, he got into power around 2000.

>Russia can take the coast, but it may lead to consequences Putin doesn't want.
Precisely my point.

Are you bait or are you really this deluded. Fun fact, we have been invaded by europe a dozen times in last millenium. Last message from Hitler to Stalin? "We will finish it next time". "It" being Extermination of Russians (~20 mil) . And no it doesn't matter if nato is "defensive" to allow even a chance of it is insanity of the highest order.

I know the blue and yellow flag is Ukraine, but what is the red and black flag?

The cardinal rule of international law is pacta sunt servanda. Factually, the cardinal rule of international relationships (as a wider category than international law) is simply the rule of the stronger, but the law is not about factual proportion of strenght, but about legal norms. Of course any stronger country may always say "fuck norms", but this doesn't mean that this country acts according to law, just like a South American drug lord who owns local police may have an actual power, but not any kind of legal legitimacy.

>pacta sunt servanda
It is not. but if it was, may I remind you that nato broke that one when it expanded to germany. And then again when it prepared and launched a coup against Kiev.

>ukraine

no such thing

It's Right Sector, I believe.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_Sector

>Funny that since its inception Russia only had dictatorships in power
Just like pretty much every other country. The recent emergence of democracy in the West is a time period negligible in the context of history of human civilization.
>Whose goals? If you are going to say Russian, explain what do you mean by it.
Russian state, isn't it obvious? Crony state, commie state, monarchist state - doesn't matter, the ports are still freezing in the winter, and the terrain is still shit.

>As to how good Putin is at running russia, see pic related, he got into power around 2000.
Doing a great job of ensuring Russia is on course to its demise. It will be China's bottom bitch in our lifetime.

But what's the worth of the Black Sea when Bosphorus is controlled by the Turks (a NATO member).

I think Putin played an "Ukrainian gambit" - he seeked temporary goals stealing Crimea and waging hybrid war while losing Ukraine and the Western "trust" in the long run

Seriously, to think all the Russians needed to do was to just wait out another colour Revolution and wait for the situation to stabilize (like an Orange One).

I have visited Russia after my country becoming a NATO and EU member, and honestly Russians, Belorussians and Ukrainians (I want seriously to visit Ukraine and see how things are there) are so much closer culturally to us than Brits, Germans or Americans.

is this an extremist right wing party to further separate Ukraine from Russia ideologically

Yes

That's a very pretty picture that doesn't show PPP, aka production capacity of a nation.

>prepared and launched a coup against Kiev
proofs?
>nato broke that one when it expanded to germany
remind me, which legal act related to the post-Soviet Ukrainian state was related to Germany not being a member of NATO? This doesn't make any sense chronologicaly

Generally speaking, I'm not surprised that someone from Russia has serious problems with differentiating between the rule of law and the rule of the strongest, but you shouldn't be surprised that it also works this way in your private life, eg. when some corrupted polician/politician or simply some thug will steal your money. It's the rule of the strongest, after all.

> Guarantee that you are a subject of geopolitics and not an object.
Who is "you"? Current Russian ruler?
Almost every European country was invaded several times, but somehow only you have to attack your peaceful neighbours to survive.

> Because it allows to overcome any hardship or adversity a nation faces
Which are created by your gov.
I am always entertained by how putinbots don't include the part after sanctions and oil price drop in their charts.

> history of human civilization. .
One year in medieval ages != one year in modern days

What is a "state"? People who are in charge?