Comments by "" (@RedXlV) on "NATO is collapsing like the Soviet Union, by the same mistake." video.

  1.  @amylee2405  What Russia could've done to keep good relations with Europe would've been to peacefully coexist with your neighbors instead of waging wars of conquest against them.
    24
  2.  @Andyground11  There is nothing peaceful about Russia.
    14
  3.  @ningzhang3282  How? By invading Ukraine in 2014.
    6
  4. No it doesn't. Russia is the aggressor, not the defender.
    6
  5. In the same way that Ivan the Terrible and Joseph Stalin were "great men".
    5
  6.  @ningzhang3282  And was also one of the worst mass murderers in history.
    5
  7. Russia started all of this.
    5
  8.  @bozo5632  That's exactly what happened. Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2014, seizing Ukraine's sovereign territory of Crimea.
    5
  9.  @bozo5632  It wasn't just in Sevastopol that there were Russian troops in Crimea. Russia invaded the entire peninsula in 2014. It was the literal definition of an invasion.
    5
  10.  @Dudush90  No, it is not Russia's business. Ukrainian neutrality is what made it possible for Russia to invade in the first place. And Russia did not offer to withdraw in March/April 2022. Quite the opposite, they demanded that Ukraine accept a "peace deal" that would involve Russia staying in Donbas and Crimea permanently. It is 100% Russia that's the aggressor.
    5
  11.  @Dudush90  Russia doesn't own Ukraine. It's none of their business if Ukraine joins NATO.
    4
  12.  @lilacer6841  And like Russia is committing genocide right now. Also, Stalin was fully assimilated into Russian culture. He spoke Russian, adopted a Russian name, and considered himself Russian.
    3
  13.  @QualityPen  Ukraine did not "almost sign" any deal with Russia in April 2022. Neutrality and territorial concessions were both thing Ukraine adamantly refused. And claiming those territories are "historically Russian" is a blatant lie. And NATO told Russia to get lost in December 2021, because Russia's demands were completely insane. Russia's idea of "a sustainable security framework in Europe" was for all former Warsaw Pact members to be kicked out of NATO and consigned to Russia's "sphere of influence". Which was obviously never going to happen. NATO would rather go to war with Russia than agree to such a thing. And rightly so.
    2
  14.  @RichD1  That's the thing, none of that is true. There never was any "massacre in Donbass". Nor did NATO ever promise not to expand to include former Warsaw Pact members. And claiming that NATO is on the brink of collapse is utterly comical. And Russia gave Crimea back to Ukraine in 1953, after having stolen Crimea from Ukraine in 1922.
    2
  15.  @axelhopfinger533  "The Maidan color revolution" meaning that the Ukrainian people refused to accept then-president Yanukovych selling them out to Russian rule. And the Minsk accords were an illegitimate infringement on Ukrainian sovereignty, imposed at gunpoint by Russia.
    2
  16. Russia has acted like a modern-day Mongol horde. And Jacques Baud is a Kremlin propagandist.
    1
  17.  @amandapeluso4217  Putin is evil incarnate.
    1
  18. But the current Russian empire is completely insane.
    1
  19. Meanwhile, Russia is spending over 30% of their GDP on their military. And you claim that it's the West that's militarizing itself to death.
    1
  20.  @mikejohn2999  Russia thinks they have the God-given right to invade their neighbors any time they see fit, and to use the threat of invasion to dominate those neighbors. That is why Russia hates NATO so much. Because NATO has put so many of Russia's neighbors off-limits for invasion, and thus Russia can no longer use such threats to extract concessions.
    1
  21.  @amylee2405  Why are "NATO military bases" a problem for Russia? We both know the answer to that: because Russia wants to be able to invade their neighbors any time they see fit.
    1
  22.  @L98fiero  Georgia was another war of conquest by Russia. The bullshit claim of "protecting ethnic Russians" is just an excuse Russia uses to seize any territories that have ethnic Russians living in them. It's the same nonsense they used to justify invading Ukraine. If not for NATO, Russia would be doing the same to Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. And that's the real reason Russia is so angry about "NATO expansion": it's put the Baltic states off limits for Russian invasion.
    1
  23.  @jameslum8822  With neighbors like who? The last time Russia was attacked by any of their neighbors was 80 years ago.
    1
  24.  @CRISTI_5  LMAO, nobody watches CNN. And you seem to be getting your news from RT and TASS.
    1
  25.  @markp.thickou6707  Yes, Afghanistan did attack the US. What do you think 9/11 was? And the US never attacked Korea, the US defended Korea from an invasion. And likewise, the US defended Bosnia from a Serbian invasion ("Yugoslavia" had already ceased to exist). And tell me, when did Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Iran, Yugoslavia, Korea, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, China, Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Moldova, and Ukraine attack Russia? Those are all nations that they've invaded in the last 80 years.
    1
  26.  @BocaoZ  Utter nonsense. Russia refused to be peaceful. NATO never did anything to Russia.
    1
  27.  @georgewong1837  The root cause of the Ukraine/Russia conflict is that Ukraine wants to be a independent nation, and Russia doesn't want them to be an independent nation.
    1
  28.  @robinhood5935  Yes, that's right. Russia should be indifferent to the prospect of Ukraine and Georgia becoming NATO members. Because the only reason that would be a problem to Russia is if Russia wants to be able to invade Georgia and Ukraine whenever they please. Which is of course exactly what Russia wants. And no, contrary to what tankies and vatniks keep claiming, the US would not invade Mexico if Mexico joined a military alliance with China.
    1
  29.  @TwoBassed  No, that was not part of any "dissolution agreement". Because there never was any "dissolution agreement". NATO has never even recognized the existence of "the Russian sphere of influence". And rightly so, because the very concept of "spheres of influence" is fundamentally evil.
    1
  30.  @robinhood5935  No, I think so because of my knowledge about Russia.
    1
  31.  @partoems9376  Are you trying to push the false narrative of a coup d'etat in Ukraine here? Because there wasn't one. And yes, the US did impose sanctions on South Africa. The Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act.
    1
  32.  @alyan2573  Quite a display of deranged Moskal idiocy there. Cuba did enter in an alliance with the USSR, and the US didn't invade them. And Russia's entire goal it to seize territories.
    1
  33.  @robinhood5935  That's the literal opposite of what actually happened. No nations has ever been "dragged into NATO". Nations join NATO for protection against Russian colonialism. This war is all about Russia trying to (re-)colonize Ukraine.
    1
  34.  @Valentin_126  The only thing NATO ever "threatened" was Russia's ability to invade its neighbors. It's Russian aggression that causes NATO to exist.
    1
  35.  @AlbertKarhuFilms  How so? By existing and thus not allowing Russia to invade the Baltic states?
    1
  36. Russia is a despotic empire. Russia has always believed that despotism is strength.
    1
  37.  @MariaTrollip  So Spanish, then? Because that's the language all those South American immigrants to the US speak.
    1
  38.  @kwanmike9993  Nobody was putting any military bases in Ukraine. Russia invaded Ukraine because they want to loot Ukraine.
    1
  39.  @Dudush90 Those "referendums" were blatant shams, in which the majority of the population couldn't even vote. And I know exactly why Russia invaded Ukraine: they want to conquer Ukraine.
    1
  40.  @Conserpov And the people of Ukraine vehemently oppose "belonging to the Russian state".
    1
  41.  @MarosiMate-sq2wm  What you're failing to grasp is that the vast majority of Europeans don't want to trade with Russia.
    1
  42.  @cristinabutasimon9159  No, I did not "forget" any of that. It's simply not true. There were not 14,000 Russians killed in Donbas. That was the total death toll on both sides of the conflict from 2014-2022. You're literally counting the Ukrainian soldiers who died fighting Russian invaders as "Russians killed by Ukraine". Along with claiming that everyone killed in Donbas were Russians, even though only 1/3 of the population there is ethnically Russian. What you described as a "constant advance eastward" was a matter of nations that had previously been enslaved by Russia begging for membership in NATO, so that they would be protected against future Russian aggression. And contrary to Putin's frequent claims, NATO had never in any way promised not to admit new members from Eastern Europe. NATO "invited Ukraine" in the sense that all European nations are invited to apply for membership in NATO. Once such an application is made, a new member can only join by unanimous consent of the current members. It turns out that Ukraine's government in 2008 was foolish to not submit an application, because if Ukraine had already been a NATO member, it would've been impossible for Russia to invade them in 2014. Nobody was ever even contemplating putting missiles in Ukraine to aim at Russia. The Cuban Missile Crisis comparisons are completely nonsensical. Also, you might have forgotten this, but the US didn't invade Cuba in the Cuban Missile Crisis, and Cuba remained a Soviet ally afterward. And Cuba's Cienfuegos naval base even continued to host nuclear-armed Soviet Navy warships afterward.
    1
  43.  user-wj6dt5bq3w Yes, that's right. It would be none of our business if Mexico wanted an alliance with Iran or North Korea. Crimea is Ukrainian property. And yes, Ukraine clearly would prefer to "belong" to the US than Russia. Not because the US is richer, but because Russia is committing genocide against Ukraine.
    1
  44.  @archimandritegregory7730  It's Russia that refuses to ever be faithful to the agreements it makes.
    1
  45.  @axelhopfinger533  And that's the case with Russia right now. They never negotiate in good faith. They never hold up their end of any agreement. And they refuse to make any concessions.
    1
  46.  @axelhopfinger533  Your entire narrative that it was NATO "encroachment" suggests that you think the solution would've been appeasment. Just let Russia claim Europe as their "sphere of influence" to do as they please with. The reality is that NATO was correct to never trust Russia. Appeasing Putin is just like appeasing Hitler. That's what was actually like the prelude to WW2. Not enough was done to stop Russia before this point. That said, a war between NATO and Russia would not in any way be a "world war". It would be a war that Russia very quickly loses. Russia's narrative that their economy is resilient is all smoke and mirrors, and their military would be completely defeated in a matter of days at most.
    1
  47. The forces of evil are Russia and its allies.
    1
  48.  @chisangamumba2961  No, he didn't "conveniently leave out" that part. Because that part is a blatant lie. There was no coup, and Russia didn't "secure" Crimea, they stole it. Russians and pro-Russia commentators love to talk about how Khrushchev "gave" Crimea to Ukraine in 1953 (often falsely claiming that Khrushchev was himself Ukrainian, despite the fact that he was born in Kursk). But you guys always forget about how before that, Lenin stole Crimea from Ukraine in 1922, after the Red Army conquered them and forced them to join the Soviet Union. Kuban was also removed from Ukraine and assigned to Russia in 1922, and until the Holodomor there was a significant Ukrainian majority in Kuban (modern-day Rostov Oblast, Krasnodar Krai, Stavropol Krai, and Republic of Adygea). And regardless of what you think about the wisdom of returning Crimea to Ukraine in 1953, the fact remains that Russia had no valid claim on the territory in 2014. It doesn't matter if they were worried that NATO would gain access to Crimea.
    1
  49. It's Russia that's the arrogant warmonger.
    1
  50. Imagine that, despotic kingdoms in the Middle East have more affinity with the despotic regimes in Russia and China than with the democratic West.
    1