Comments by "Dale Crocker" (@dalecrocker3213) on "Putin under fire for terror attack in Moscow | Gabriel Gavin" video.

No it doesn't. Russia has never deliberately targeted civilians. Those who get killed are simply in the way of military activity.
15
@iTautra There is a difference between accepting civilian deaths as a consequence of military activity and deliberately targeting them in order to terrorise. The latter is a sign of weakness, and this is why Islamic extremists and Ukrainians do it. Russia has no need to.
3
@strangeke7750 Go on then. Ukraine has been shelling Donetsk for ten years, aiming artillery and missiles at purely civilian targets, such as street markets. It seems clear to me that Russia is targeting infrastructure and military positions, civilian deaths are collateral damage. The same cannot be said for Ukraine.
2
@oasis67 Give me one example.
2
@thomasnyangala2424 Who knows? He was certainly a man of mystery.
1
@kugelblitz5812 Bucha was very likely a put-up job, many of the victims appear to have been wearing white armbands, signifying they were Russian sympathisers. These people were probably killed by the Ukrainians in reprisal after the Russians left. The Russians undoubtedly killed and tortured many Ukrainians during their occupation. You will remember that Zelensky called upon civilians to arm themselves at this point, making all civilians potential threats. The corpses littering the streets had clearly been positioned for publicity purposes. They showed no signs of animal predation, despite the fact that the Russians had left several days earlier.
1
@michaellindqvist5288 .. which happened just after Zelensky called upon all civilians to arm themselves against the Russians, making each one of them a potential threat. In any case Bucha shows many signs of being a staged event.
1
@joelturley4847 Take off your blinkers.
1
@boogiewoogie9770 Russia is not a terrorist state. It is merely defending itself against Western military and commercial aggression.
1
@kugelblitz5812 If they were armed, as Zelensky ordered them to be.
1
@michaellindqvist5288 A highly disputable incident.
1
@thomasnyangala2424 If he was opposed to the war, then obviously.
1
@1domcouk You counted them all yourself, did you?
1
@1domcouk You've counted them personally, have you? There is no evidence that Russia deliberately targets civilians, unlike the Ukrainians and, of course, Islamic extremists.
1
@Mark13091961 Countless incidents?? In any case the insurmountable objection to these claims is that there would be no advantage to Russia in deliberately killing civilians. As for the hospital in Mariupol it is quite clear that the Ukrainians - like Hamas - deliberately quarter troops and munitions in hospitals etc so that when they are taken out they can make a great fuss about it, and get all the bleeding hearts in the West to believe their BS.
1
@Mark13091961 Why would Russia waste munitions on civilians? And why do certain countries station troops and store armaments in hospitals and schools? Answer these questions before blindly believing propaganda.
1
@michaeljohnston980 These are battle zones. The reason they are flattened is because Ukrainian armed forces were stationed there. All civilians with any sense will have left them.
1
@geelangfordo3272 Careful. Your brainwashing is showing.
1
@michaeljohnston980 I do. I weigh up available information and come to rational conclusions. This is more grown-up than simply believing unquestioningly the propaganda fed to you by clearly biased sources.
1
@michaeljohnston980 Well, both NATO and the Islamists have encroached upon Russia and its interests pretty consistently since the Russian Federation was formed just over 30 years ago. The Islamists tried to take over Chechnya, and NATO and the US are trying to take over Ukraine right now.
1
@boogiewoogie9770 Russia is the victim of Western interests arming Ukraine in order to take over control of the mineral wealth of Crimea and Eastern Ukraine. These resources have been exploited by Russia and by Russians for centuries. Putin put forward compromise solutions aimed at preventing Ukrainian oligarchs selling off these resources to foreign, mainly American, companies with the collusion of American and EU governments. Instead of working on these compromises, as outlined in the Minsk agreements of 2015/16, America and other NATO countries spent billions of dollars on creating a new Ukrainian army. Putin believed, with some justification, that this army would attempt to take Crimea and those areas of Eastern Ukraine held by Russian-backed separatists. Discussions having failed to bear fruit, he ordered the invasion of Ukraine in order to crush this army and ensure these valuable mineral resources remain under Russian control. In this he appears to be successful. Tragically Ukraine lies in ruins and tens of thousands have needlessly died to achieve a result which was always available through mediation and discussion.
1
@michaeljohnston980 Unfortunately YouTube's biased algorithm prevent me from replying in full. But, yes.
1
@boogiewoogie9770 American imperialist aggression.
1
@boogiewoogie9770 Since the collapse of the Soviet Union the Russian Federation has done nothing other than attempt to protect its existing interests. Putin knows only too well the perils of extending them too far. It was, after all, this which ultimately caused the collapse of the SU.
1
@michaeljohnston980 There's no denying that Putin is tough and ruthless. he has to be. Russia is a very difficult country to run at the best of times, and the years following the collapse of the Soviet Union certainly weren't the best of times. His achievements have been remarkable. He has exercised control over the oligarchs who took over power from the Commissars (though in fact many of them WERE the Commissars!) and has transformed his country into something which , for most, is a thoroughly decent place to live in. But he is an Eastern potentate - not some Democratic pen-pusher or front man for unseen forces, as so many Western leaders are. You have merely trotted out cheap propaganda. Most of these stories aren't true, and when they are it is simply that they have been used to dispose of people who are rocking the boat and who, in Putin's expert opinion, are likely to push Mother Russia into the state of anarchy which is an ever-present threat to its well-being. We should just leave Putin alone to get on with it. By what right do we interfere in his affairs?
1
Just goes to show how much Russia is under threat - Islamic fanatics on one side, NATO warmongers on the other.
1