Comments by "Dylan Vogler" (@dylanvogler2165) on "BBC News" channel.

  1. 5
  2. 5
  3. 5
  4. 5
  5. 5
  6. 5
  7. 5
  8. 5
  9. 5
  10. 5
  11. 5
  12.  @I_am_not_a_bot-s6i  you listen to much to Russian propaganda. First off if you mean the promises that were allegedly made to Gorbachev, there never has been a treaty signed with these promises in them. So we will never know if this is true or not. Anyone can say anything, so if the Soviets were right about this, they were naive in this situation. Secondly these promises, if they have ever even been made, were made to the USSR, not the Russian Federation (as it was still the RSFSR within the USSR at that point) and was about the former Warsaw pact Countries. The USSR collapsed so the situation changed. Russia is not the sole legal successor even, as Ukraine also claims to be its legal successor. An agreement that was actually reached with the Russian Federation was that NATO wouldn't move troops further east than Germany unless there would be a major shift in the security situation in Europe. NATO kept this promise as it was Russia's invasion of Crimea and instigation of the Ukrainian civil war in 2014, that caused a major change in the security situation. Only since then has NATO moved troops to the Eastern flank of the alliance. Another agreement that has actually been signed and so it can actually be proven, is the Budapest memorandum. In which Kazakhstan, Belarus and Ukraine would give up their nuclear weapons and declare themselves nuclear neutral states in exchange of their territorial integrity and independence being guaranteed by the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States. The countries pledged to never use military means against said countries, unless in self defence. Russia broke this agreement twice. In 2014 and now. With now claiming it to be self defense which is bullshit considering Ukraine would have never attacked Russia. Belarus itself has broken this agreement too with "referendum" in which it ended it's non nuclear status and allows it to host nuclear weapons again. Meanwhile Ukraine to this day is a neutral and non nuclear state. All it did wrong was trying to have a better future in the west and try to free itself from the Russian world. The coup thing is another of these Russian propaganda things. No my friend, the Ukrainian people ousted a president who only cared for himself instead of it's people. You're allowed to chose your own future as a people and oust a president who is clearly not acting for the good of his state and people.
    5
  13. 4
  14. 4
  15. 4
  16. 4
  17. 4
  18. 4
  19. 4
  20. 4
  21. 4
  22. 4
  23. 4
  24. 4
  25. 4
  26. 4
  27. 4
  28. 3
  29. 3
  30. 3
  31. 3
  32. 3
  33. 3
  34. 3
  35. 3
  36. 3
  37. 3
  38. 3
  39. 3
  40. 3
  41. 3
  42. 3
  43. 3
  44. 3
  45. @Харликвен  bro try to properly read next time. For the rest you just showed to be a vatnik. I it is spoken throughout Ukraine yeah, as I know as I lived there. However it was never a official language of Ukraine, it was considered a regional language. About the Ukrainian language, there are records of the Ukrainian language from the medieval age. Modern Ukrainian is actually closer to the language of the Rus' than Modern Russian is, as Modern Russian was heavily influenced by Church slavonic and thus the southern Slavic languages. So actually Ukrainian is not derived from Russian. Both are seperate languages decended from the old east slavic language spoken in the lands of the Rus'. Ukraine is indeed part of the ancient lands of the Rus' not Russia. Neither Ukraine or Russia is the continuation of the Rus' both decendents from it. If the Rus' is the parent, both Russia and Ukraine are the childs so to say. Claiming Russia is the Rus' is like claiming Italy is the Roman Empire. The part that shows you're a Vatnik and just believe whatever Führer Putin says is the part about Lenin. This is a myth, invented by Putin and none of it is actually based in history. Besides the fact that there were the West Ukrainian and Ukrainian people's republics during the period after ww1, there is also the Cossack Hetmenate of the 17th century which can be considered a Ukrainian state, as these peoples considered themselves different from the Moscovites. This Hetmenate came into existence before the Russians controlled even a single Ukrainian territory. Ukrainian statehood, therefore, therefore dates back to the 17th and not the 20th century. My advise as someone who has actually studied history and got a master's in it, don't listen to the "history" bs Putin says. He is an amateur historian and a very bad one at that. None of his claims are backed up by actual scientific or historic sources. If we lose his logic I can also make unbased claims and call it history. So try again. Hopefully this time you properly read my comment.
    3
  46. 3
  47. 3
  48. 3
  49. 3
  50. 3