Comments by "Arty" (@arty5876) on "Ukrainians enter Demidovka/Belgorod | AFU attempts to counterattack on several fronts [24 March 25]" video.
-
34
-
@MegaEssin you know very little about what happened in Ukraine.
Ukraine as a state is oligarchy, which means that all political parties and media in Ukraine are oligarch paid, oligarch puppets. Just like Russia in the 90s, there were few oligarchs that controlled few political parties and few TV chanells. Ukraine never stood a chance of joining European Union, because of high corruption and poverty. European Union never wanted to allow this poor corrupted country to join. While Russia was a much better option for Ukraine. Russia and European Union were economically competing for influence over Ukraine. By 2013 statistics, 37% of Ukrainian population was pro-European, 32% was pro-Russian and others didn't cared. There were entire political parties and oligarchs in Ukraine that in terms of foreign policy were either pro-Western or pro-Russian. So, your whole point of view in invalid, because I believe that during a revolution all people have right of self determination, and pro-Russian part of Ukraine ALSO had right of self determination. Pro-Western Ukrainians have chosen their future in favour of Europe, then why they didn't allowed pro-Russian part to choose their future? I believe that Russian people from Crimea and Donbass regions had the SAME right to self determine themselves, as pro-Western Ukrainians in Kiev. And Ukraine didn't allowed them to do it, starting a war in the Donbass.
In 2013 American business have bought 99% share of Ukrainian state owned Novatek corporation. This is corporation that controlls Russian gas pipeline that goes to Europe. And in 2013 Americans became owners of Russian gas pipeline in Ukraine. In 2008 and 2004 Russia simply blocked previous American attempt to buy it by forgiving multi billion debts to Ukraine for stealing or not paying for gas. When Russians blocked this deal for the first time in 2004, Americans lobbied a coup during presidential election, where pro-Russian candidate won, but as a result of paid by oligarchs massive protests there was a third election round which is illegal. In 2013 Americans finally achieved this deal. Also, in 2013 Shell corporation made a few contracts about Ukrainian gas. Ukrainian president Yanukovich wasn't pro-Russian, like most people think, he was in fact neutral and he was trying to balance between Russia and European Union. When there was a meeting between Ukraine and European Union, Russia started to threat Ukraine with high trade tariffs, so president was simply forced to not make a deal with European Union, because trade with Russia and investments from Russia were higher than from EU. Yanukovich wasn't pro-Russian, Russia just used its economic influence to force Ukrainian president to act in Russian favour. In fact Yanukovich angered Ukrainian oligarchs long before this deal with European Union, because he was re-distributing oligarch property and assets in his favour. Ukrainian oligarchs just used this failure in deal with Europe to pay money to poor Ukrainian students to come to protests, and later oligarch controlled media started to escalate the protests.
Later American money, American media and even American politicians helped the protests - in december 2013 senator John McCain came to Kiev, he gave an inspiring speech in front of protestors. What American senator forgot in another country, thousands of kilometers from his homeland, giving an inspiring speech to protesters who want to overthrow the government and take power? Later, in january 2014 the head of American State Department, Victoria Nuland, came to Ukraine, she talked with Ukrainian politicians in charge of protests, also gave an inspiring speech to people, and gave famous cookies to protestors. And again a question rises - what American senator and head of state department were doing in Kiev during revolution? Just imagine a situation, that during a January 6th 2021 protests in USA, Russian foreign minister Lavrov comes to Washington, talks with Trump, gives a speech to protestors, gives them cookies, and later protestors storm Capitoli, Senate and White House and overthrow Biden. This is what happened in Ukraine. After 2025 Donald Trump closing the USAID funding and leaking the documents have proved, that America have spent 5 billion dollars on media, propaganda, parties and organizations inside Ukraine. It is still secret how much money Europe and Russia spent.
Also, Ukrainian oligarchs paid money for 24/7 toilets, 24/7 food, Molotov coktails, weapons and even military helmets to protestors, and one of Ukraine's oligarchs, Poroshenko, who became a president 2 months later, proudly was saying that he paid for all this. Ukrainian oligarchs and some American money have paid for 24/7 food and toilets with heating during winter, weapons and military helmets for protestors in Kiev. Later the first blood appeared, when Ukrainian policemen, who were used to brutally supress Crimea's Tatar and Russian protests for indepdendence from Ukraine (1994-2013), brutally supressed and murdered now Ukrainians themselves in Kiev. Yes, that's right, Ukrainian policemen who murdered people in Kiev, this exact special police unit, Berkut, were the same Ukrainian policemen who were brutally supressing Russian and Tatar protests in Crimea that occured in Crimea in 1994-2013. Also Ukrainian oligarchs paid money to naz%s, because in post Soviet countries naz%s are very healthy strong men who want a fight and they have this punk young preception, they want to fight police and government, and during this protests Ukrainian oligarchs paid money to naz%s, so naz% squads were also fighting police and murdering policemen. Later protestors just started to kill policemen with Molotov coktails, captured state buildings and president flee from Ukraine to only country he can flee - Russia.
After this Russian troops came to Crimea. Crimea is a region with MAJORITY of its citizens being Russians. It was originally Russian region with 60% of Russian and 15% of Ukrainian population, that was given to Ukraine by Soviets in 1954. Since 1991 Crimean population wanted indepdendence from Ukraine, Muslim Tatars wanted complete independence while Russians wanted to join Russia. And majority of Crimeans were in disagree with coup in Kiev.
5
-
@markmackan3274 Americans helped the protests and coup. Just like Russia later helped pro-Russian protestors in the Donbass. I am not saying like you that coup was foreign-artificial. No. It is IMPOSSIBLE to artificially immitate a coup. Coup in Kiev was a will of PART of Ukrainian people lead by pro-Western politicians lead by oligarchs, while pro-Russian population in the Donbass also had their opinion and will. If we will take a look into the war in the Donbass, the war in the Donbass started in april 2014. The first ever Russian troops came to Donbass in september 2014. So, 20 thousand of young men, local population from the Donbass, was fighting against Ukraine in a war in april, may, june, july, august - 5 months in total, before the first ever Russian soldier crossed the border to help them. What does it mean? It means that pro-Russian ideas were living among population and population in the Donbass supported Russia. Russia, using its money, media, FSB operatives just helped them to make a coup, just like America helped pro-Western Ukrainians in Kiev to make their coup.
Donetsk and Luhansk didn't had to follow Ukrainian constitution because government from Kiev itself came to power illegally. What are you saying is hypocrisy and double standards, government in Kiev came to power as a result of illegal coup supported by foreign powers, and you are saying that pro-Russian part of Ukraine should have respected Ukrainian law and constitution. No, they don't needed to follow Ukrainian laws after government from Kiev itself didn't followed Ukrainians laws. America and Europe supported coup in Kiev which was against Ukrainian law and constitution, and Russia supported coups in Crimea and Donbass that also were against Ukrainian law and constitution, because people from Crimea and Donbass supported Russia.
4
-
3
-
@ALEX_GEEK_CHANNEL I don't understand your hypocrisy and double standards. People of Crimea had a right to determine their future, just like Ukrainians from Kiev. There was no war before war in the Donbass, Russian troops just came and without a single shot, without a single death, liberated, returned Crimea back to Russia with full support of majority of the population of Crimea. Local people, Crimean residents themselves met Russian troops as liberators, because Crimea originally was part of Russia that was given to Ukraine by Soviets in 1954, and Crimean population wanted to rejoin Russia since the collapse of USSR, there was a separatism, there were massive protests. People of Crimea had the SAME right of self determination as Ukrainian protestors from Kiev. If Ukrainian people in Kiev made a coup and changed the government, changed the president, then Crimeans had the right to do the same, and they were happy when Russian forces came, they got what they wanted - reunification with their homeland, native harbor.
3
-
@MegaEssin about Crimea. Why are you even talking about history? You simply don't understand Russian point of view about this question. It is about people, it is about population who lives in it, it doesn't matter who was owner in the past - Roman Empire, Greece, Ottoman Empire, what is matters is that Russian territory with Russian population was given by the Soviets from Russia to Ukraine in 1954, while 60% of population, the wast majority, were Russians and only 15% of population were Ukrainians. This is what matters - Russian population that lived here for generations, this is their soil, soil of their ancestors, population that wanted to rejoin Russia, and since the collapse of USSR in 1991 there were massive protests and separatism in Crimea which Ukrainian police brutally supressed.
As you have said Crimea had an autonomic status, and its own parlament, and also you have said that on referendum in 1991 57% of Crimeans voted for independence of Ukraine from USSR. Probably you were trying to justify that Crimeans supported Ukraine. No, the fact that they voted against Soviet Union doesn't mean that they voted for Ukraine. If Crimea was part of Russia in 1991, the same amount of 57% would have voted for independence of Russia from USSR. In 1994 Crimean parlament attempted to hold a referendum, because according to Soviet law in all autonomic regions of USSR there must have been held a referendum. Russia didn't violated the law, and in 1993 there were few referendums in all autonomic regions inside Russia, and for example Tatarstan became independent of Russia in 1993. Ukraine supressed with police 1994 attempt to hold a vote. And also you are wrong about Soviet period - Crimea wasn't given to Ukraine to boost its economy, because Ukraine itself was unprofitable and Russia paid money to Ukraine, because profits were lower then expenses in planning economy and only Russia, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan had resources. And under Ukraine in 1991-2013 Crimea became one of the poorest regions in Ukraine while Ukraine was more poor than Russia. So your whole point is just a Ukrainian propaganda, like "poor undeveloped Russians in 1954 gave Crimea to Ukraine to boost its economy", Ukrainians like to tell this fairy tale, while reality is opposite to this - inside Soviet Union Russia was paying for Ukraine and after USSR ended Ukraine became the most failed post Soviet country in terms of economy with Crimea being very poor. Crimea was given to Ukraine for burecratic reasons inside Soviet government, because peninsula had land connection only with Ukraine so all gas, water and electricity supply was from Ukraine, and there were burecratic reasons to give Crimea to Ukraine in 1954, also because Soviet elites in 1954 would have never thoight that USSR will collapse one day.
I don't know why you mentioned Crimean War of 1856 and that "Evil Russia violated treaty just 14 years after it was signed". Like you expect any country to respect a deal that was signed under the pressure. I don't know why, but when Russia multiple times tries to make a deal, West declines it, and West makes a deals with Russia only by putting Russia under the pressure and expect that we will not violate it in the future. What a stupid thinking. French and British army forced Russia to make a signature on some paper making some deal that Russia had no right to have navy in Crimea. 14 years later there was a Franco-Prussian War, so while French were s%cking d%cks we have returned our navy to Crimea because French and British can s%ck our d%cks too. None of deal that was made under pressure will work with us in the longterm, you just have to understand this, but it seems like Zelensky and Europran clowns don't understand this.
Also, you are wrong about Soviet policy and like you said "Russification". During Russian Empire there was NO such policy, and opposite - Russia was ruled by German dynasty and Germans were even invited to live on the Volga river, while Russians, Ukrainians and others didn't bothored this German dynasty and were equally slaves for them. Soviets also weren't russifying anyone. Soviets had a communist ideology and their national policy had a goal to actually destroy Russia and destroy Russian nation, culture and identity, and replace it with new built Soviet identity and make an entire new Soviet nation. The so called "Russification" allegedly done by the Soviets is part of Western and Ukrainian propaganda. Soviets were Sovetizing everyone, not Russifying, and Soviets had a goal of World Revolution, they had an ideology of making an entire World communist and Soviet. They weren't russifying anyone. In fact, Soviet propaganda, movies and policy was promoting national minorities. Ukrainian language, culture and history was highly promoted on Ukrainian territory by Soviets. Nearly half of people who lived on Ukrainian soil in 1917 called themselves Russians. Ukrainian national identity, language and culture barely existed in 1917. And it were the Soviets who promoted this. So, your whole point is incorrect and opposite to truth - Soviets weren't Russifying Ukraine, Soviets were making a policy of Ukrainization of Ukraine. In 1917 Lenin gave Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporojie and Kherson lands to Ukraine, after Russia lost a war to Germany and Germans occupied Ukraine, demanding these grain rich lands from Russia, because there was a hunger in Germany in 1917 because of British navy blocade. So, in 1917 Lenin gave to Ukraine Russian lands which Russian army now controls, and Soviet Union was promoting Ukrainian language, culture and history, there was a Ukrainization policy, not Russification. And in 1954 Soviets gave Russian Crimea to Ukraine and there was a 40 years long Ukrainization policy in Crimea. There was no Russification policy in USSR - Lenin was Jewish national and German paid revolutionarie, Stalin was Georgian national, Trotsky was Jewish, Kamenev and Zinoviev were Jewish. Russia as a result of illegal communist coup and bloody civil war was conquered and occupied by communist Jewish international bandit group, and their policy for 70 years was to destroy the core - destroy the Russian national identity, while promoting all other national identities - Soviets were promoting Ukrainian language, culture and history in Ukraine, like they did in Belarus, Kazakhstan and everywhere else except Russia itself. With regards to Stalin's crimes against Crimean Tatars and national minorities - Stalin was a Georgian national evil dictator who killed much more Russians than everyone else. You are wrong if you think that Georgian national Stalin did all these crimes in favour of Russia or to russify anyone, Stalin did all this crimes to protect Soviet Union from separatism and minorities who wanted independence. Its not about russification, it is about Sovietization.
With regards to referendum - yeah, it was made without vote standards. But unlike Ukraine, Russia at least held the referendum, while Ukraine in 1994 supressed it with police. And also - Ukrainian protestors from Kiev, that made a coup in 2014 didn't held any referendums also, they just forcefully changed the government. So, why are you expecting a fair election from Russia, while Ukrainians who made a coup in Kiev didn't held any election at all. Ukrainians from Kiev made a coup without asking everyone else's opinion, so the Russians did the same in Crimea. With regards to "Russian human right defender" who told that "turnout in Crimea was 30-50%". How do he know that from Moscow? Do you know that majority of such "journalists" or "human right defenders" in Russia were American paid foreign agents on USAID funding? It is silly to believe the personal opinion of one human rights defender when there is no real proof to his words at all. If you want to understand the truth, you should visit Crimea and talk with Crimean people itself. I have a few friends from Crimea in my university in Moscow, job, I have met Crimeans when I was in school. Majority of Russian population of Crimea supported reunification with Russia. 15% of Ukrainian population were against of course. Opinion of Crimean Tatars doesn't matter because Crimean Tatars want to be independent from BOTH Ukraine and Russia, so if we choos between Ukraine and Russia, opinion of Tatars doesn't matter and we have 60% of Russian and 15% of Ukrainian population. In 2014 Crimea returned to its native harbor after decades of foreign occupation and people of Crimea supported this.
3
-
1
-
1
-
@MegaEssin about what Ukrainian soverignty are you talking, when there was an American senator John McCain in Kiev in december 2013 and head of American state department Victoria Nuland in january 2014? About which soverignty you are talking? Ukraine is not a sovereign country since American backed coup in Kiev, and Russian POV is completely RELEVANT here, because pro-Russian part of Ukrainian population, in Crimea, in the Donbass, have the right of self determination, just like people from Kiev had theirs. I reccomend you to read my comment regarding Crimea, I pointed all your mistakes to you.
Just imagine that during January 6th 2021 protests in USA, Russian foreign minister Lavrov comes to USA, talks with Trump, gives an inspiring speech to protestors, gives them cookies and then protestors storm Capitoli, Senate and White House and Biden loses power. This is what happened in Ukraine - high ranking American officials came to lead the coup, and there were American money, media and support. Ukraine is NOT a sovereign state, and Russia have a right to do the same to Ukraine as what America did. America intervened inside Ukraine supporting a coup in Kiev, so Russia did the same, but in Crimea and Donbass, because there were pro-Russian people in Crimea and Donbass and pro-Western people in Kiev. What are you saying is complete arrogance, ignorance of other people's opinion, egoism, very typical for Westerner, very typical for Western ideology. But Russia is not a country you can mess, we are not submissive to anyone and our people will fight in a war for Russia's interests. What America was doing to Russia before Trump in 2024 was a so called by Americans themselves "containment policy". America is the World's greatest superpower, and World's greatest superpower wants to protect its hygemony and dominance in the World, and in order to do it America is trying to get rid of competitors. This is why America is waging an agressive economic and trade wars against China. What China did bad for America? China is a peaceful nation that didn't invaded anyone in last 50 years, while America invaded Iraq, Syria, Lybia, Kosovo. China didn't invaded anyone, China did nothing bad to the World. But America is waging a trade wars against China and portrayes China as a devil in media, and when Biden came to power in 2021, already in january 2021 Biden called China and Russia as strategic enemies and USA formed a military alliance against China, including Filliphines, South Korea, Japan and etc.. America is trying to get rid of that holy competition , about whicb pro-Western liberals were lying to us in Russia during the collapse of USSR. They were talking about democrasy and competition. So, where is this democrasy and fair competition? After the collapse of USSR, Russia had a dream of building a democrasy, of becoming part of Western World, even during first years of Putin, Russia wanted to join EU and NATO, Russia was open like never before in history. And what the West did? West tried to put pressure on us up to complete end. It was a mistake. Russia survived all economic sanctions, and adopted to them. Russian army wasn't defeated on battlefield with all Western help. You can't do anything to us now, you can't contain us now like you wanted, we are inevitable. So, Putin achieved the most important goal of building a strong and sovereign Russia - Russia can't be contained now, all means to contain Russia failed. It means that now we can do what we want without any consequences. You can't sanction us even more than now. America wanted to play a game with us, but they didn't knew that these game can be played from the other side too.
1
-
@MegaEssin about what Ukrainian soverignty are you talking, when there was an American senator John McCain in Kiev in december 2013 and head of American state department Victoria Nuland in january 2014? About which soverignty you are talking? Ukraine is not a sovereign country since American backed coup in Kiev, and Russian POV is completely RELEVANT here, because pro-Russian part of Ukrainian population, in Crimea, in the Donbass, have the right of self determination, just like people from Kiev had theirs. I reccomend you to read my comment regarding Crimea, I pointed all your mistakes to you.
Just imagine that during January 6th 2021 protests in USA, Russian foreign minister Lavrov comes to USA, talks with Trump, gives an inspiring speech to protestors, gives them cookies and then protestors storm Capitoli, Senate and White House and Biden loses power. This is what happened in Ukraine - high ranking American officials came to lead the coup, and there were American money, media and support. Ukraine is NOT a sovereign state, and Russia have a right to do the same in Ukraine as what America did. America intervened inside Ukraine supporting a coup in Kiev, so Russia did the same, but in Crimea and Donbass, because there were pro-Russian people in Crimea and Donbass and pro-Western people in Kiev. What are you saying is complete arrogance, ignorance of other people's opinion, egoism, very typical for Westerner, very typical for Western ideology. But Russia is not a country you can mess.
What America was doing to Russia before 2025 was a so called by Americans themselves "containment policy". America is the World's greatest superpower, and World's greatest superpower wants to protect its hygemony and dominance in the World, and in order to do it America is trying to get rid of competitors. This is why America is waging an agressive economic and trade wars against China. What China did bad for America? China is a peaceful nation that didn't invaded anyone in last 50 years, while America invaded Iraq, Syria, Lybia, Kosovo. China didn't invaded anyone, China did nothing bad to the World. But America is waging a trade wars against China and portrayes China as a devil in media, and when Biden came to power in 2021, already in january 2021 Biden called China and Russia as USA's strategic enemies and USA formed a military alliance against China, including Filliphines, South Korea, Japan and etc.. America is trying to get rid of that holy competition , about which pro-Westerners were lying to us in Russia during the collapse of USSR and 90s. They were talking about democrasy and competition, about the "World, that is built on rules". So, where is this democrasy and fair competition? Where were these rules when Iraq war happened? After the collapse of USSR, Russia had a dream of building a democrasy, of becoming part of Western World, even during first years of Putin, Russia wanted to join EU and NATO, Russia was open like never before in history. And what the West did? West tried to put pressure on us up to complete end. It was a mistake. Russia survived all economic sanctions, and adopted to them. Russian army wasn't defeated on battlefield with all Western help. You can't do anything to us now, you can't contain us now like you wanted, we are inevitable. So, Putin achieved the most important goal of building a strong and sovereign state - Russia can't be contained now, all means to contain Russia failed. It means that now we can do what we want without any consequences. You can't sanction us even more than now. America wanted to play a game with us, but they didn't knew that these game can be played from the other side against them. A 140 million nuclear power rich of resources and with strong military which can do anything it wants in international stage, West have no containment against us now. This is what you got after your deeds. We were like that in all of history and will be like that. The history of Russia started from Moscow's rebellion against Mongols, against Golden Horde. We have defeated all great powers that were putting pressure on us, invading us - Poland, Sweden, Turkey, Tatars, and now they hate us calling us an "occupiers", "colonizators", while being proud of capturing Moscow in 1612. They don't see anything after them, just like you.
1