[jdcasale]

This assertion is sharply undercut by the facts. I have an incredibly hard time believing that you're engaging in good faith here.

There is literally zero evidence whatsoever that Russia cares about 'equality for ordinary people' and a mountain of conclusive proof that it does not.

Ukraine did not owe Russia anything at all, so these 'negotiations' were nothing more than theater. Russia gave Ukraine the choice between either surrendering their sovereignty (for literally zero benefit in exchange) or being invaded. That is not a negotiation, that's state-sponsored terrorism.

[NoOn3]

For example It is clearly that some Ukraine nationalist did bloody crimes before the war even if Russian media exegarates it. Even the European Court of Justice has acknowledged crimes on the side of Ukraine.

https://tass.com/world/1927493 https://www.echr.coe.int/w/judgment-concerning-ukraine-2

I'm Russian, but it is my real opinion. I don't get paid anything for it. And I understand that not all Russian(goverment) actions are good, some were incorrect or questionable. Russia just don't want NATO expansion to the East even without transparent referendums. It's all very complicated in reality, in war no side perfectly correct and right and clean... :(

[ethbr1]

Why does Russia have any right to say whether sovereign countries on its borders join NATO or not?

The only reason Russia cares is because it wants to continue controlling them -- not because it's worried about the mythical NATO invasion of Russia its news and leader trumpet.

And in contrast, the only reasons those countries want to join NATO is because they're scared of Russia invading them, which it historically has. (See: Finland and eastern Europe)

[NoOn3]

It's all complicated questions too.

Why US and EU worried about Nuclear Weapon in Iran?(I've exaggerated a bit here for an example). NATO has more troops and equipment than Russia, it does not need to be afraid of Russia and seeks to expand even more.

To be sure even about majority opinion in Finland about joining NATO, in such serios questions you need referendum data but there is no such referendum. Even supporters of the West are not always in favor of joining a purely military and not only defensive NATO Alliance.

Yes USSR invading Finland in Soviet-Finland war it's bad, the USSR offered Finland a territory in return before the war, but unfortunately, it did not seem very profitable, but then, during WW2 for most of the time, Finland fought on the side of the German Axis coalition. And Finland did not fight quite adequately and also committed crimes, created concentration camps to isolate peoples who were not ethnically related to Finns and ("non-indigenous peoples") to move out of the territories where these people lived all their lives and many people died in these camps and there is some evidence of crimes in these camps. If someone want to take away something from you, for example, a part of the territory, then would it be adequate to ask for help from a notorious bandit(Hitler) who burns people? Such question has no good answer.

I'm not oneside propagandist. I just want that more people try to see things from all sides and analyse more information. Maybe I'm wrong.

In countries where there is a very significant part of the Russian-speaking and sympathetic to the Russia population, Russia wants their opinion(russian speaking people) to be taken into account, they are not forbidden to speak and study Russian in schools. Yes, sometimes they exaggerate reasonable demands. But I recognize that such countries have the right to require that all official documents be in the main language and the officials need to know the main language. I think it's not that Russia want fully control of this Countries. Russia wants trade and interact economically with these countries, and not just to have all Russian goods blocked or subject to huge duties without reasons.

Sorry for lots of text. And I may be mistaken in some points.

[_djo_]

You need to rethink your information environment, you are repeating many false claims that I recognise from past propaganda.

For instance your view of NATO membership is fundamentally flawed as it assumes a NATO push to take on more members, when in reality even the most shallow research shows that it was actually based on a pull from countries who lobbied to be able to join NATO and had to jump through hoops to qualify.

Why did those countries want to join NATO? Because they recognised that, alone, they were vulnerable to what’s clearly a revanchist Russia looking to annex or otherwise control other countries in the region. By being part of a broad security alliance like NATO those countries made themselves safer from Russian attacks.

As for Russian speakers in Ukraine, I know many Ukrainians, most of whom from the east who learnt Russian as a first language. All but one of them absolutely detest Russia, have nothing good to say about Russians in general, who they see as complicit, and have become even more fiercely pro-Ukrainian and patriotic than they were before the war. Many have chosen to speak Ukrainian primarily, despite it being their second language.

And why wouldn’t they? Russia’s invasion destroyed their homes and their way of life, levelling entire cities, and killed tens of thousands of Ukrainians. The idea that all of this was done in their name or to their benefit is insulting.