General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

Dale Crocker
Times Radio
comments

Comments by "Dale Crocker" (@dalecrocker3213) on "Putin insider: Russia is ready to end Ukraine war" video.

@devirama1 All Ukrainians speak Russian - many as a first language. And many of them ARE Russian by ethnicity and culture.
13
What makes a country though? A signature on a bit of paper or centuries of history? Crimea and much of Eastern Ukraine is Russian.
10
He spoke a great deal of sense. We in the West have little idea how much we are the victims of propaganda.
9
Not exactly a basis for negotiation, is it?
6
@DanFromMerdo Most countries could claim bits of other countries if you go back far enough. In this case though the history is far more recent. Ukraine was made a country by a flawed treaty.
5
@mikedon5205 Practically everything. The attempts to crush Russian culture and language for a start and the fact that NATO advances over the last 30 years are deliberately intimidating. The idea that the Russian Federation wants to recapture the old Russian Empire is ludicrous. It's just bogeyman designed to support warmongering capitalism, which needs such threats to justify its existence and keep the economy going.
2
Restore Minsk accords for a start.
2
@ronin8926 In what sense?
1
@stevesonnaquesta I am English. It really does show how weak your arguments are if you believe that only "Russian trolls" can disagree with them. I doubt these creatures even exist.
1
@bonnie7898 I know Russia is a capitalist country. What has THAT got to do with it? Putin is quite right when he says Ukraine has never had true statehood . It is the creation of the Russian empire and latterly the Soviet Empire. But in the essay from which that quote was taken, Putin goes on to say that as romantically desirable as it may be to take modern Ukraine back into the Russian fold, it is not practicable nor even desirable. He concludes, however regretfully, that the country may look now to the West. But it can't take Donbass and Crimea with it. They belong too much to Russia, both in terms of population and the vast about of money invested by Russia in their mining and steel production facilities. There is an estimated $14trillion of oil, gas, coal and rare earth minerals beneath the soil in these areas. Putin believes that it is wrong for Ukrainian oligarchs to hand these over to America and other Western countries, as is planned. He was prepared to offer compromises but these have been rejected in favour of war - a war not of Russia's choosing.
1
@melon-cl That was then and this is now. The situation has changed and no treaty last forever. In fact 30 years is a pretty good run.
1
@mikedon5205 Far less than the Ukrainians and their chums did. Instead of using them as a basis for peace they simply bought time for NATO to spend billions of dollars on arming Ukraine. They completely ignored the provisions intended to allow regional autonomy to the Donbass republics. Russia helped the separatists certainly, but not officially. It was how the Wagner Group was formed.
1
@mikedon5205 I'm afraid it is you who are clueless. NATO archives and US Department of State archives have details of the many billions of dollars spent on arming and training the Ukrainians after 2016. It's no secret. It is not in dispute. As I said, Minsk failed, but it failed because of bad faith by the Ukrainians and their allies. Russia responded by forming a private army to defend the Russians living in Donbass from the Azov Brigades and the like, but the treaty had already been broken by the other side.
1
@melon-cl It certainly did. The amounts involved are a matter of public record and amount to a sum exceeding $25billion.
1
@mikedon5205 I'm afraid it is you who don't have much of a clue, which is hardly surprising since America and its NATO allies aren't all that keen on publicising the fact that between them they spent something over $25billion on arming Ukraine after 2014. Nonetheless the sums involved are, for the most part, a matter of public record and can be found on both NATO and US State Department websites.
1
@melon-cl Who says what constitutes a Sovereign State? What does the term even MEAN?
1
@melon-cl Now you are being merely obtuse. NATO and America facilitated the colossal growth of the Ukrainian army post 2014. The billions passed over to their chums in the arms trade came from American and European coffers. What arrangements were made for Ukraine to pay the money back I don't know, but since Russia now seems set to keep control of the vast mineral wealth of Crimea and Donbass the chances are they won't be getting it anytime soon. Damned good job too, say I.
1
@melon-cl NATO countries, predominantly America, facilitated the re-armament of Ukraine either by lending its government money, or by donating equipment and training . None of this was done for nothing. I don't know what arrangements were made for reimbursement, but since the Russians now seem likely to retain a hold on the mineral riches of Donbass and Crimea I doubt that the debt will be repaid any time soon. Good job too.
1
@mikedon5205 I don't see it as propaganda as such. I merely think it is important that people should be aware of the full dimensions of the situation instead of unquestioningly believing the genuine propaganda served up by the Western media. Russia has a genuine grievance and genuine reasons for taking the actions it has, whether you agree with them or not.
1
It attacked Ukraine to prevent Russian resources being syphoned off by Western interests and from Ukraine becoming a heavily-armed outlier of those selfsame interests. Between them Ukraine and Russia can sort this out - as they could have done in the first place had the West not interfered.
1
It attacked Ukraine as a result of severe provocation. If the West hadn't bankrolled Ukraine in order to get hold of its mineral riches, this war would never have happened.
1
Russia has always been ready to talk - but interference from the West has prevented it.
1
@JimTimber A myth designed to encourage war fever among the ignorant. Russia has no wish to expand beyond its traditional borders. The Soviet Union collapsed because it was over extended. Why should the Russian Federation make the same mistake?
1
@JimTimber A myth designed to promote war fever in the West. Russia shows no signs of doing anything but protecting its existing interests.
1
@petefrys545 They will become accepted pretty soon, I predict.
1
@petefrys545 They will become acceptable pretty soon, I predict.
1
@sidgarrett7247 Not strictly true. The Rus - the people who founded Kiev, and thought to be Vikings, did sail further upriver and then built Moscow and create the country named after them but to say Russia was a province of Ukraine is laying it on a bit thick. If you read Vladimir Putin's essay on the subject you will learn that the ruling families of what eventually became the two countries were closely linked. Since then the territory of what is modern Ukraine has had many owners - Lithuanians, Poles, Swedes among others. But modern Ukraine has the same borders as the Soviet Socialist Republic of Ukraine which was created by the Russian Bolsheviks.
1
@frederikzinn6568 Those damned drones are changing the face of naval warfare, no doubt of that. But on land the Russians are slowly advancing, which is the important thing.
1
@TheBarnestah The Mongol Empire no longer exists. As an expert of history you should know this. Russia, however, does exist and it wants land mistakenly given to Ukraine in 1991 to be returned.
1
@stream2watch The Russia which recognised these areas as part of Ukraine is not the Russia of today. They contain trillions of dollars of mineral wealth which the Russians don't want to see transferred into Western hands. The populations of these areas are largely Russian in the industrial and mining areas, because they were developed by Russia using Russian capital and labour. This factors outweigh "International recognition" which generally means recognition by America and its allies.
1
@petefrys545 The country called Ukraine, which indeed had periods of independence in the past, did not occupy the same land mass as the present Ukraine, which occupies the area of the Soviet Socialist Republic of Ukraine, created , as you say, by the Russian Bolsheviks. Even then that area was added to in subsequent years by Lenin, Stalin and Krushchev. The Ukrainian National Republic was one of, I think, around three forms of government which laid claim to the territory during that troubled period following the Revolution. The Russians saw them all off making the area, as I say, Russian.
1
@bonnie7898 I'm not overly emotional on the topic of Russia. I'm very emotional on the topic of needless wars. Your definition is just trite lawyerspeak and merely reflects the colonisation of language by a people bent on colonising the world following World War II. Your analogy is ridiculous. A war created by a poor treaty signed by a drunkard thirty years ago bears no comparison with the complexities of the collapse of the Roman empire.
1
@TheBarnestah I never said that. And Russia doesn't want that. All it wants is to prevent Ukrainian oligarchs handing over Donbass and Crimea to their American counterparts. These territories contain an estimated $14 trillion of gas, oil, coal and rare earth minerals and have been part of Russia since Russia took them from the Ottomans - not the Ukrainians - centuries ago. Allowing the modern state of Ukraine to hand them over to the West is just not on in Putin's book - and I can't say I blame him.
1
@lilymay7171 The contents of our cans should be sufficient to alarm you. Much information about the origins of this war are withheld from people ion Western countries. Since Russia seems set to win this needles conflict, perhaps you should take time to educate yourselves.
1
@tomstorey986 This term "sovereign country" has been much misused. It is just lawyerspeak - and American lawyerspeak at that. Basically it is meaningless. A country is what its people make of it, not what lawyers from another country say it is.
1
@danielmaddox2734 Nonsense. The two countries came from the same source and the same people, but Russia never belonged to Ukraine. Ukraine, as a name, didn't exist until Russia was firmly established as a country.
1
@Deathadder90 Because Russia conquered them, I suppose. But the Russians remaining in these countries don't hate Russians.
1
@stevefrompolaca2403 Soviet Russia - not the Russian Federatiopn.
1
@thegoat11111 The Kiev empire had nothing at all to do with present-day Ukraine. The word just means something like "the borderlands" - in Russian. These ancient ownerships bear no relevance to the present-day arguments concerning the disputed areas in modern Ukraine.
1
@iAnasazi Who doesn't want what? The Russians in Crimea and the Donbass (and there are many) want to return to Russian control.
1
@stream2watch So what happens when they take Russian passports again, as many have?
1
@bonnie7898 Russia doesn't want the whole of Ukraine, just Crimea and Donbass, which are Russianised and rich in mineral wealth. Ukraine was a semi-autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic. Note the term "semi-autonomous" like all Soviet Republics it was ultimately subservient to Moscow. The ill-treatment of Russians by the Ukrainian authorities is, of course, pretty much of an excuse for the military action - as is America's usual bleating on about "democracy" as an excuse for its part in spending billions on arming Ukraine to the teeth. It's all about the money in the end. That $14 trillion of oil, gas coal and rare earth minerals are what's at stake. Personally I believe Russia is far more entitled to them than America and its allies.
1
@Deathadder90 Different stories. Different times.
1
@lilymay7171 You are quite charmingly naive. The greed comes from our side, where for at least a decade Western agencies have been plotting with Ukrainian oligarchs to lay hands on the immense reserves of gas, oil, coal and rare earth minerals which lie beneath the soil in Donbass and Crimea. These resources have been developed and are still operated by Russia and by Russians. The people of Donbass have been fighting for ten years to prevent the takeover. They have had to defend their families against Ukrainian tanks and Ukrainian death squads. Freedom of the Press? Don't make me laugh. Western mainstream media sings from the same hymn-sheet, and it is one dictated by financial interests
1
@lilymay7171 Perhaps you should educate yourself a little on the background to this conflict. It is not as black and white as you seem to think. There is greed and envy on both sides, and families having to be defended too. You should look at the Amnesty International report on the situation in Donbass after 2014 when Ukraine sent the tanks in. As for freedom of the press - that is a total myth. I should know, I was a journalist for many years and have witnessed the gradual erosion of liberties in the British media as the money-men take over. YouTube isn't free of this either. This is the fourth attempt I have made to get past their censorship algorithm and I have had to leave out much that could be said.
1
@lilymay7171 There is no freedom of the press -not on YouTube. I have tried five times to reply to you in an attempt to widen your horizons on the background to this conflict and all my replies have been deleted.
1
@lilymay7171 I think you're the one who might need educating. This war is far more complex than you seem to think.
1
@lilymay7171 I generally don't do abuse unless provoked. My go-to quote regarding the invasion is that Putin may not have had an excuse for doing it, but he had plenty of reasons. He did too. He invaded Ukraine to prevent Ukraine from trying to take back Donbass and Crimea. In war that's called a pre-emptive strike and is both sensible and justifiable. I don't buy the legality/illegality argument. There is no such thing when it comes to geopolitics. America attempted to set up some sort of worldwide judicial system after WW II, but is is clearly geared towards American interests. (Apologies for the numerous replies, by the way. I'm fighting YT's new fascist algorithm and they appear to be taking my heresies away to be scrutinised by a higher and possibly human authority. Every now and again they pass the censor and magically re-appear, as in your case.)
1
@darlingdear2687 Obviously borders have not been permanently drawn - because many are disputed. You can't simply say that because a group of people agreed on something decades ago that is it. Situations change. New maps have to be drawn. Modern Ukraine is a case in point. There has never been a Ukraine filling these lines on the map before - apart from the Soviet Socialist Republic of Ukraine which was to all extents and purposes a creation of the Soviet Union and subservient to Moscow. Ukraines in the past have filled all sorts of areas on the map. Much of Western Ukraine was part of Poland once, for example. And Crimea and much of Eastern Ukraine were parts of the Ottoman Empire. Crimea and Donbass have been developed as mining and industrial areas by Russia and by Russians for well over a century and Russia does not want to see the fruits of their labours and investment handed over to foreigners. This is quite understandable, so now a new map must be drawn. It could have been done peacefully but those foreign interests vetoed this plan and have plunged the country into a destructive and needless war.
1
@darlingdear2687 I agree with you to some extent. Putin wrote an essay on the subject. Broadly speaking the people of Ukraine and the people of Russia come from the same stock - but I'm afraid I used the word ethnicity in a narrower sense, I suppose to refer to people who identify themselves as Russian, rather than Ukrainian. Many Russian Ukrainians do want to live in Russia, it seems. That is where they have fled to to escape the war. Russia is no longer a gulag. You can live a decent and comfortable life there, by all accounts.
1
@axavidesign1670 Some Ukrainian citizens do regard themselves as Russian though. Up to 70% in Crimea and the industrial centres of Eastern Ukraine, for example. They have not be allowed to decide their fate. In fact the Ukrainians have attempted to crush their culture completely.
1