[rustybelt]

Unless the entire narrative you laid out is the result of a propaganda campaign. I don't think it is in this case, but the presence of this quantity of bots pushing a certain perspective does make me question my assumptions and worry how I'm being influenced in cases that are not nearly as black and white as Ukraine vs Russia.

[tut-urut-utut]

If you see Ukraine vs Russia as black and white, it means you are already manipulated. The conflict didn't start on 24th of February this year. Even if the press pretends it's all clear, there's a long history of events full of nuances going back hundreds of years that can paint the current events in one or other colour.

[dvfjsdhgfv]

Yes, the story is long. Yes, there are many Russians in Ukraine, especially in the East. Yes, there were some alt-right people in Ukraine, too. No, none of these justifies starting a full-scale war, killing thousands of people.

[tut-urut-utut]

> No, none of these justifies starting a full-scale war, killing thousands of people.

That's the problem with conflicts that have a long history. You can conveniently choose a point it time, like you choose 24.02.2022 and make a case for the side you already support.

For example, if you pick a date in 1944 or 1945 and ignore everything that happened before, you can come to the conclusion that Soviet Union did a full-scale aggression on Germany killing thousands of people. Those bastards, how dared they attach a country of poets and thinkers.

[dvfjsdhgfv]

Yes, in his speeches Putin likes to go back to the 16th century and so on. But the truth is very simple: Ukraine was living in peace for several decades. I was there many times and I met happy people, Ukrainians and Russians. Both were very nice, hospitable, and I saw no problems between them. They had different kinds of problems: poverty, corruption and so on.

Putin attacked Ukraine in 2014 because of Euromaidan - because he saw that Ukraine ceases to be under Russian influence. And yet, we decided it is more convenient to trade with him and pretend the shelling doesn't exist and people don't die in Donbas. This emboldened him to start the war in 2022, take over KIev and install his own puppet government. This didn't work well and now Russia is in a very dark place. I hope you can get out of there somehow.

[byt1e]

> because he saw that Ukraine ceases to be under Russian influence

This is not true. Ukraine was willing to get nuclear weapons, and use them along with biological weaponry stations all over the border. see «Carribean crysis»

[dvfjsdhgfv]

Do you really believe this? NATO refused to consider Ukraine's membership. We were very careful with what we should and shouldn't do in order not to make Putin angry. Now nothing of this matters. We got to the point when Armenia is asking Putin's help and he doesn't have any meaningful force to send anymore.

[canadiantim]

I think the point he was making is it's tough to pinpoint who start the war, considering ukraine has been a pretty intense proxy battlefield for almost a decade and beyond

[notahacker]

Still fairly easy tbh. Ukraine didn't invade Russia in 2014 either...

[Mikeb85]

One country moved their soldiers across the border, the other didn't...

Tell me, when did Ukraine EVER attack Russia?

[confidantlake]

No it isn't. Russia started the war.

[dvfjsdhgfv]

You must be kidding, right? Ukraine didn't invade Russia, neither in 2014 nor in 2022.

[Fatnino]

Clearly he thinks that when the Ukrainian people threw out the russian puppet head of state that was an aggressive attack against Russia so everything done since then is in self defence.

[tut-urut-utut]

This fits the bias hypotheses. Facts gets twisted in the way that confirms your bias that already exists.

If the population elects a head of state you don't like, it's a pro-Russian puppet. If the person is pro-USA, it's an expressed democratic will.

If government gets changed on the streets, it's not a coup, it's a pinnacle of democracy, as long as you don't like the former head of state.

If people you don't like start a rebellion, they are terrorists who need to be crushed. Or a democratic liberation army, if you like them.

If the regular army of a state is sent to crush a rebellion, it's either a genocide and the country needs to be bombed to oblivion, or a legal action where any atrocity is allowed because you are fighting an evil terrorist organization.

Seen thousands of times on any of the mainstream TV in any "western" country. (in "eastern" countries too).

You just have to put a "correct" frame based on your pre-existing knowledge who's your friend and who's your enemy, and the whole narrative fits perfectly.

[hendersoon]

Can you go into any detail on historical events which a reasonable person might feel justify the Russian invasion of Ukraine?

[p1peridine]

Understanding Russian Strategic Behavior - Imperial Strategic Culture and Putin’s Operational Code (2022) by Professor Graeme P. Herd.

https://www.routledge.com/Understanding-Russian-Strategic-Be...

This book is useful for understanding (not justifying).

[rustybelt]

Trust me, I see your point. I was trying to be diplomatic considering the dominant perspective.

[Mikeb85]

> hundreds of years

Yes hundreds of years of Ukraine being oppressed by Russia (also western powers at times)... Meanwhile when did Ukraine EVER attack Russia?