Comments by "Marcus Aurelius Antoninus" (@marcusaureliusantoninus2597) on "CRUX" channel.

  1. 44
  2. 38
  3. 18
  4. 16
  5.  @frankjarleb4719  1. The Ukraine was not some colony of Russia, but rather part of its core territories. Do you know any other example in history where a big country just gave up on a piece of its core territory without any war, armed rebellion, military threat from a third party and so on? Italy is a poor example. Italy is certainly not a Roman Empire successor state in any way — be it political, cultural, linguistic or any other save occupying the core territory of WRE and sharing its state religion. 2. Again, the Ukraine is not just a "border nation" of Russia. Such a country never existed before 1991. Unlike any other country bordering Russia, the Ukraine is a Frankenstein monster of a political entity sewn together from regions of different history, culture, mentality and even language by the Bolshevik tailors. Most Ukrainian citizens have a hard time answering the question of why such a state even exists. 3. Russia tried playing along with the current geopolitical rules in the 90s. There's hardly been any more pro-Western country right after the collapse of the USSR. Russian were enthusiastic about rejoining the European family from which we were separated back in 1917. However, it turned out that major Western players never ceased to see Russia as a threat that needs to be contained rather than an ally. All the attempts of both Yeltsin's and early Putin's government to get integrated into Western institutions such as the EU and NATO were shrugged off by the Western leaders, at the same time more and more countries along Russian western border were being integrated the alliance. So, if you guys in Europe are fine with having "the man" deciding for yourselves and accepting your role as minor parties in the game, have it your way. You showed us very clearly that we are not welcome in your playground, so it's all the more reason for us to break the post-91 geopolitical rules. 4. The kingdom of Norway existed before the Ukraine was first mentioned as a territory, my good man. You may want to learn your history.
    15
  6. 13
  7. 9
  8. 9
  9. ​ @frankjarleb4719  my good man, you've totally missed my point about any major country giving up their core territories WITHOUT A WAR. Imagine France giving up Aquitaine or England giving up Northumbria without any fight. I can't. When Cathalonia tried to secede from Spain not long ago, the separatist Cathalonian elites were persecuted by the Spanish crown court. Again, pre-1721 empires did not just give up their lands for the sake of helping the new Russian empire to emerge. Russians had to fight and spill blood — their own and their enemies' — for these lands. That's exactly the point. The Ukraine belonged to Poland-Lithuania and Turkic khanates. It was then taken over by the Russian empire's armies. The country that these lands never belonged to is... the Ukraine. You seem to stubbornly ignore the fact that I keep telling you, my mate: that the Ukraine for Russia is not the same as Mexico for Spain or Bulgaria for Turkey. It is a core Russian territory, part of the territory of the Ancient Rus where Russian people first appeared as a distinct ethnic group. Russian state saw the Ukraine as its own lost territories since in first re-emerged after the Mongol yoke. Which was supported by the nobility of this region who wanted to become united with their northern Orthodox brethren. Back in the days of the Russian Empire, Little Russians (Ukrainians) were never treated as in any way inferior to Great Russians (Russians proper). They were present in the very highest circles of the Empire. Moreover, pre-1917 Kiev was the capital of Russian nationalism with ethnic Ukrainians being the staunchest supporters of the all-Russian (Russian, Ukrainian and Byelorussian) unity. Donbass and Crimea were never separatist. Au contraire, they wanted to cease being part of the separatist state of the Ukraine and be reunited with the main country. It's caled irredentism, not separatism.
    8
  10. 8
  11. 7
  12.  @frankjarleb4719  nah, mate, this won't do if you are going to brand the views you don't like any kind of "propaganda". This is the last time I let something like that slip. Partitions of Poland occured when Poland was forced to cede its territory or face war that it could never win. It's the same as losing a territory in a war. The USSR in 1991 had the 2nd most capable army in the world and there were no demands for it to split made by any participants of the "war". And certainly there wasn't any war and no war ultimatum was ever given to the USSR by the Western bloc. In theory, I have no problem with Russia returning East Prussia back to Germany. However, it would hardly be appropriate since Germany lost the territory in a war. If Poland and Lithuania would cede their parts of East Prussia back to Germany within some sort of an agreement, I don't see any reason why Russia shouldn't join the said agreement. Of course, if Germany would have to offer something in return. The same goes for South Kuriles. The German Empire was never a victorious army against the Russian Empire since Russian army was not brought to facing defeat by the German Empire. It ceased to exist by the decree of the Bolshevik government that was clearly acting in German interests. I would remind you that Germany couldn't hold the said territory since it lost the war. Russia has all the right to celebrate victory over the Third Reich since it was Russian people and Russian territory and resources that was used by the USSR to defeat Germany. The goal of Germany was not to depose the Bolsheviks, but rather to kill most Russians and occupy Russian lands, so it was a true patriotic war.
    6
  13. 6
  14. 5
  15. 4
  16. 4
  17. 3
  18. 3
  19. 3
  20. 2
  21. 2
  22. 2
  23. 2
  24. 2
  25. 1
  26. 1
  27. 1
  28. 1
  29. 1
  30. 1
  31. ​ @Katoshi_Takagumi  Hey mate, quit changing the subject. If "any war crime is unacceptable" (which they are), then why paint pogroms as something "inherently Russian"? Why resort to despicable attempts to write off current Ukrainian xenophobia to it being "still too Russian"? Is there any reason (I wouldn't even mention if there is any proof - there clearly isn't) why the Russian army would bomb civilians intentionally? There is for the Ukrainian army (that showed very clearly how callous and ruthless it is to the "half-Russians" of the Eastern Ukraine over the last 8 years). And if you hint that Russians supposedly commit war crimes out of ethnic animosity, please advise why the alleged "war crimes" are all commited in the Eastern and Central Ukraine where ethnic Russians make from half to 3/4 of the population? Do Russians deliberately massacre their own Russian brothers? "Putin's Empire of Terror" my foot. You clearly fully adopt the image of Putin as promoted by the Western media: an evil Russian nationalist dictator. That's so much of a bull that I can't help laughing every time I hear the comparisons between Putin and Hitler or Stalin. Russian nationalism is THE most restricted and banned ideology in Russia. Most of prominent Russian nationalist leaders were either killed or imprisoned (or "unexpectedly died") under Putin. Official propaganda hardly ever even mentions the word "Russian", stipulating instead that Russia is a "multiethnic nation" (which is hardly true with ethnic Russians making about 80% of the entire Russian population). Big Russian cities are plagued with hordes of Central Asian illegal migrants that commit the majority of violent crimes (especially muggings and rapes) and steal most menial jobs. Putin, my good man, is a corrupt cowardly manlet whose (and whose clique's) only desire beyond the material wealth was to be accepted as equals among Western elites. It's entirely the West's fault — that is, the West as a political entity since culturally Russia IS "the West" (much more than the Ukraine, anyway) — that this war occured. As pro-Western as Russia was in the 90s and early 00s, it's a clear sign of degradation of the modern Western elites that Russia and the West ended up enemies. Hell, Russia even applied (twice!) for the EU and NATO membership — which applications were shrugged off, if not openly ridiculed, by the Western leaders of the time. Moreover, Putin is a fervent USSR legitimist, that is, he fully recognises the borders of so-called "Soviet Republics", which he stated multiple times since the Crimea crisis. Hence the Crimean referendum. Hence the republics of Donbass that not only were not incorporated into Russia, but not even officially recongnised until February 2022. Hence constant (to this very day!) affirmations that Russia "respects the territorial integrity of the Ukraine" and that "The Ukraine will stay Ukrainian".
    1
  32. 1
  33. 1
  34. 1
  35. 1
  36. 1
  37. 1
  38. 1
  39. 1
  40. 1
  41. 1
  42. 1
  43. 1
  44. 1
  45. 1
  46. 1
  47. 1
  48. 1
  49. 1
  50. 1