Comments by "Stu McGoo" (@VanderlyndenJengold) on "NATO monitors Ukraine border for signs of Russian invasion | DW News" video.

Nato didn't promise the USSR nor Russia it would't expand. It's a myth.
8
@seggaeman Ukraine and Georgia wished to join Nato, both were denied, both were subsequently invaded by Russia.
8
@dmitryk2058 Putin has admitted the 'little green men' were Russian troops. The evidence of Russians and Russian equipment in Ukraine is overwhelming. Only Russians supportive of Putin believe his assertions. Who shot down Malaysia Airlines Flight 17? Faries?
8
@chrisviaegnatia4347 And when did Nato assure Russia it wouldn't expand?
7
@seggaeman Untrue. How on earth could they pledge not to expand into countries that were part of the Warsaw Pact. There is no evidence for any pledge. It's nonsense perpetuated by Russia to play the victim.
4
@belavekony8856 Last time I looked the USSR lost the cold war - time for Russia to remember that and try and act accordingly. Not much chance with Putin trying to stay in power.
4
Of course - whilst discussions revolve around whether Ukraine can join the EU or Nato (a decision for those three alone) no one bothers mentioning Russia's annexation of Crimea or that it has sent troops into Donbass, or that it is again massing troops on the border of Ukraine - which is what the video we're commentating on is about.
3
Just Putin attention-seeking as usual. Small man syndrome.
3
@dmitryk2058 2014
2
@seggaeman I've had a look at the archives - why do you think Western leaders may not trust the Soviet Union? Has the Soviet Union a history of acting in bad faith? Would even the citizens of the Soviet Union trust it's government? Did the Soviets install puppet governments in Eastern Europe and repress their peoples? Do you think Eastern Europe would like to have remained in the Soviet 'sphere of influence' with all that entailed? Or do you think it's wise to make sure an occupying power leaves a country that no longer wants it there. Like East Germany.
2
@tileng.5186 ... and this is what you determine is proof? Think about that. A totalitarian regime, whose fall was celebrated even by the majority of it's own people, was persuaded to peacefully allow hundreds of millions of people to have a chance in deciding how their countries might be governed. Just try and read what the USSR was like compared to other countries and you might find out why it was best that the USSR ended. Sadly, a member of the repressive KGB is now in charge of Russia and seems to be there for life. He's just lucky I guess.
2
@tileng.5186 Have you heard of the Hitchens Razor? To sum it up: "If something is asserted without evidence, then it can be dismissed without evidence". However, I've tried to justify what I wrote - and you don't think you need to. If you live in Russia and don't like how it is how could you change it? Obviously, it would be impossible on your own yet if there was enough people who felt the same way you could complain or vote. How succesful would that be in today's Russia? I have seen the evidence for the argument that Nato would not expand and there were things said in 1990 from western politicians, diplomats etc - yet do they fulfill the obligations of a promise or a treaty? Some say yes, many say no and they fall along political lines. However, was there a formal treaty? No. Did subsequent events occur that made a verbal promise neglibible? Yes. "The Nato - Russia Founding Act". Was there a reason to make promises and not to mean them? Yes, in this instance. In this case who would you trust and how would you work that out? I don't like my own current governent, I know they lie, I try to change it, I have voted and I have failed. I can still vote and complainI have disagreed with governments I supported in the past. I'm not blind to their errors. I can vote and complain. I can protest. The USSR can be said to have 'lost' the Cold War. Whenever has a loser been happy about losing? Yet can they ever get over it?
2