Comments by "Heads Full Of Eyeballs" (@HeadsFullOfEyeballs) on "Ukraine and Russia are still far from real negotiations" video.

  1. Ukraine had """open borders""" with Russia because it was part of the Soviet Union. They were one country, there was no border. That's how Russians got to Ukraine, as with every other country that used to be part of the Soviet Union and/or the Russian Empire. There was no Russian immigration to Ukraine post-Soviet Union. In fact (again, as in the rest of the former Soviet Union) the Russian population declined sharply because many of them moved back to Russia. In summary, you were talking out of your entire ass in an attempt to wedge your pet culture war issue into this conversation.
    2
  2. You're talking about Donald Trump, I assume?
    2
  3. 1. Why on earth would an American law restraining the actions of the US government apply to the comments section of a video uploaded by a Danish guy to a privately-owned international internet platform? The 1st Amendment absolutely does not exist here, nor should it. 2. Comments get removed by YouTube's brainless filters if they contain too many "advertiser-unfriendly" keywords, regardless of context. Talking about war and violence or currently hot political topics is always risky in that regard.
    2
  4. Fortunately we don't rely on official Russian statements to figure out what Russia wants. They also said they had no intention of invading Ukraine about a week before they attacked.
    2
  5.  @murphy7801  Your talking point is about 2 years out of date. Germany (which is in Central Europe, not Western Europe, for the record) has committed far more resources to the confrontation with Russia than France or Spain or Italy.
    1
  6. Idunno. While I don't see Ukraine officially handing over Crimea any time soon, I can see them accepting its current unsettled status if Russia withdraws from the rest of the country in a ceasefire. That'd be a net victory.
    1
  7. There's a reason the US in particular choose their words very carefully when condemning stuff like this. They can't simply condemn invading a country to overthrow its government, for example, because they reserve the right to do that themselves. So they have to get real specific and condemn "changing internationally recognised borders by military force" or whatever. The US don't do that, because they don't steal chunks of territory from their neigbours, they steal whole countries overseas.
    1
  8.  @Princip666  Of course not. That would mean unilaterally kicking out countries which applied to join NATO of their own free will. You would never find a majority for it, and why would we betray our allies like that? NATO isn't a territorial empire, it's a voluntary alliance. If a country's government feels that it no longer benefits from membership, it can leave any time.
    1
  9.  @ragingmonk6080  "Tell me how Ukraine started this mess and I may take you seriously." "As long as your story doesn't match the lies I've been getting from my other propaganda sources, I won't take you seriously." Yup, congratulations, they've got you locked in. I believe in America you call this a "bubble"?
    1
  10. By this logic shouldn't Russia be closer to giving up? They asked to "bargain" first, after all.
    1
  11.  @alexbort3082  This isn't their first winter with power outages, though.
    1
  12. So you're in favour of massively increasing military support to Ukraine, so that they can drive back the Russians with minimal casualties, right?
    1
  13.  @AngloSupreme  Ah, must be a dosage issue then.
    1
  14. Ukraine has plenty of manpower, they have millions of "spare" fighting-age men. So does Russia. They're just reluctant to throw them into the war because paying them is expensive and it means removing them from the workforce.
    1