[gljiva]

Ah, a time-wasting Russian bot spamming "questions".

https://theintercept.com/2022/03/17/russia-ukraine-bioweapon...

Ukraine needed to arm itself for protecting its borders and reclaiming its territory taken by Russian separatists. Decide whether you want to play the "Russia's captured territory" or "Lugansk and Donbas Republic" that were no Russian business card. Btw, you keep acting as if it all started in 2022. Since 2014. Russia has been the aggressor, and I won't waste any more time on your manipulative time-wasting, "both sides" rethoric that's frankly disgusting when I remember that you well know what it supports

[thatsamejew2]

The aggressors were the west and the Ukranian "nationalists" (I avoided using the right word) seeking to cancel the history of the people in Ukraine, replacing it with their own absurd version rehabilitating ukrainian nazi collaborationists, giving their imaginary version of the famine before the war (I heard a figure of "60 million killed" from one person), and seeking to cancel Russian language and Russian culture there. In particular in Crimea, where the absolute majority had no ties with Ukranian language or culture.

This is how "separatists" you are complaining about appeared in the first place. And then yes, Russia stepped in, while before it sought only economical and political influence. Just as your beloved west did. And tell me now who owns your land..

[nullorempty]

Right, the coup of 2014 ousted democratically elected president and part of a country disagreed. As far as russian vs ukranian... It's basically one nation. Many russians have ukranian blood in them, many ukranians have russian blood in them. There are million's of ukranians working in russia today. The divide was engineered from outside and it was well engineered. Divide and concur is an old strategy and the west is very-very good at it.

Russian and Ukranians are too gullible. Less so now, but in 2014 they were like children.

And Ukranians at Maidan were treated like children by Nuland who brought them cookies, quite fittingly.

[gljiva]

> Right, the coup of 2014 ousted democratically elected president

As I said earlier. Everything was fine while he was just "democratically" elected. And when he _started_ eroding democracy. But he took it too far going against the will of the people after being democratically elected, that he was democratically ousted.

> part of a country disagreed

A part of country, militarily supported by neighbouring Russia, took up arms. Started killing. Terrorist separatists.

> As far as russian vs ukranian... It's basically one nation.

I have already heard that kind of fantasy propaganda applied to a similar aggression. Your tricks are old. And the claim is inconsequential for the discussion tbh.

> The divide was engineered from outside and it was well engineered. Divide and concur is an old strategy and the west is very-very good at it.

I like how you, after all this, decided it's the west that is the only one to be named as the perpetrator of divide and conquer. I'd be surprised if "the west" didn't have its influence, but the fast deterioration happening under Yanukovych didn't really need outside influence to gain opposition because it's not at all logical Ukrainians would want it. Russians would because his policies were very pro-Russian. But they have Russia for that—killing Ukrainians to secede from Ukraine makes them wrong.

The rest isn't worth replying to.

[oneshtein]

> part of a country disagreed

and joined Russian forces, which makes them traitors.