Comments by "Arty" (@arty5876) on "Lavrov in Africa: Russia aiming for regime change in Ukraine | DW News" video.

Putin does not need to seize Ukraine in order for there to be a change of political power to one that will suit the Kremlin. Look at Georgia - when the war was going on in August 2008, the Western media called Saakashvili a hero, just like Zelensky is now. And when the war ended with Russia's victory, the European Union Commission recognized Georgia as the culprit of the war because of the conflict with the rebels from South Ossetia. And Saakashvili, who signed the peace and surrendered the territories to Russia, and also tried to use the war to strengthen his personal power, fell in the eyes of the Georgians. Zelensky, by the way, is also now strengthening his power, taking advantage of the war. After Saakashvili, neutral politicians came to power in Georgia. They provided Georgia with stagnation in the economy, freezing of reforms, NOT joining the European Union and NATO. And they also do business with Putin.
3
Terrorist nation? Are you talking about USA (Iraq, Yougoslavia, Lybia)?
3
You are mistaken - Putin does not need to seize Ukraine in order for there to be a change of political power to one that will suit the Kremlin. Look at Georgia - when the war was going on in August 2008, the Western media called Saakashvili a hero, just like Zelensky is now. And when the war ended with Russia's victory, the European Union Commission recognized Georgia as the culprit of the war because of the conflict with the rebels from South Ossetia. And Saakashvili, who signed the peace and surrendered the territories to Russia, and also tried to use the war to strengthen his personal power, fell in the eyes of the Georgians. Zelensky, by the way, is also now strengthening his power, taking advantage of the war. After Saakashvili, neutral politicians came to power in Georgia. They provided Georgia with stagnation in the economy, freezing of reforms, NOT joining the European Union and NATO. And they also do business with Putin.
3
"Defeated on the battlefield" - Russian forces captured Severodonetsk and Lysichansk, Russian forces recaptured land near Kharkiv and they are succesfully holding ground near Kherson, where the Ukrainian MOD is promising a counteroffensive for 2 months
2
@bg1616 but why Russia is terrorist, while USA isn't? Double standarts? Why Azerbaidjan isn't a terrorist nation after the agression against Armenia? Why Saudi Arabia isn't a terrorist because of war in Yemen?
2
@Scott Johnston the war in Georgia differs from the war in Ukraine only in scale - the population of Georgia is 3 million people, and the population of Ukraine is 40 million. Therefore, Russia defeated little Georgia in 5 days, the West did not particularly react to this - there were cosmetic ridiculous sanctions against specific individuals in the Kremlin. Russia for 5 days of the war lost about 300 soldiers killed, Georgia about the same. And in Ukraine, a massacre has been going on for the 6th month, and tough sanctions are being introduced. But in fact, everything was the same there - Putin spoke about the expansion of NATO and "a threat to Russia." There were also rebels in Georgia - Abkhazia and South Ossetia, an analogue of the DPR and LPR. Georgia, like Ukraine, was pumped up with NATO weapons - stingers, javelins, American rifles.
1
Why did Russia then make a grain deal at all if there was a shelling? What is the point of signing an agreement and breaking it in less than a day? It seems to me that this is not Putin's fault - it is important to understand here that power in Russia is not homogeneous, and Putin's line has opponents in the Kremlin. It is this tower of the Kremlin that sabotages any opportunity for negotiations. Putin cannot take over Ukraine without mobilization. However, he will not go to the mobilization either. That is why Putin wants to take away the eastern regions from Ukraine through negotiations, and end there. And apparently there are people in the Kremlin who want an escalation - to announce mobilization and seize all of Ukraine.
1
Why did Russia then make a grain deal at all if there was a shelling? What is the point of signing an agreement and breaking it in less than a day? It seems to me that this is not Putin's fault - it is important to understand here that power in Russia is not homogeneous, and Putin's line has opponents in the Kremlin. It is this tower of the Kremlin that sabotages any opportunity for negotiations. Putin cannot take over Ukraine without mobilization. However, he will not go to the mobilization either. That is why Putin wants to take away the eastern regions from Ukraine through negotiations, and end there. And apparently there are people in the Kremlin who want an escalation - to announce mobilization and seize all of Ukraine.
1
Why did Russia then make a grain deal at all if there was a shelling? What is the point of signing an agreement and breaking it in less than a day? It seems to me that this is not Putin's fault - it is important to understand here that power in Russia is not homogeneous, and Putin's line has opponents in the Kremlin. It is this tower of the Kremlin that sabotages any opportunity for negotiations. Putin cannot take over Ukraine without mobilization. However, he will not go to the mobilization either. That is why Putin wants to take away the eastern regions from Ukraine through negotiations, and end there. And apparently there are people in the Kremlin who want an escalation - to announce mobilization and seize all of Ukraine.
1