Comments by "LancesArmorStriking" (@LancesArmorStriking) on "Tensions soar over Russian troops near Ukraine | DW News" video.

@pindot787 They aren;t in NATO. Google is a click away. Fun fact: Finland took the neutral route (refused to be in NATO) and Russia has had 0 problems with them for decades. Russia's request is simple: don't point rockets at my capital, and I won't do it back to you.
2
@pindot787 The difference between Ukraine and Finland is that one is actively seeking American troops on their border with Russia. Being in NATO would necessitate wargames, likely also on the border. Ukraine and the west do not seem to understand, Russia cannot be forced into submission. It will gladly make compromises, but trying to justify an arms race with Russia's buildup (itself a reaction to the arms race) will lead to nothing.
2
@leonchervez5969 The "Treaty" is a Memorandum, the two hold different statuses and the second is not legally binding. Crimea's Parliament had tried, months before the Memorandum was signed, to declare independence, but Ukraine's Parliament declared it illegal. Here, I cannot say that Russia acted well. It should have brought up the issue then, and it did violate the 1st point of the Memorandum, But, as it was not a treaty, it did not become a signatory to any such treaty or law.
2
@account-369 Are you forgetting the 1994 independence declaration?
1
@account-369 then you understand there was a genuine desire, and referendum held, for crimea to return to the russian federation.
1
@majorrgeek Actually, it is, and it does. Ukraine's stated reason for joining NATO is Russia. So "it has nothing to do with Russia" is a full lie. You do not understand- Ukraine says it wants to join NATO because of Russia aggression, but Russia is being aggressive because Ukraine wants to join NATO. Chicken and egg.
1
@pindot787 As I've mentioned before, Crimea has already (even if we humor your assumption that the referendum was 100% rigged and no one wanted to rejoin a Russian state) independently vying for autonomy from Ukraine and a dual citizenship program with Russia, in 1994. The Ukrainian Parliament declared this illegal. If the West was unwilling to hold referendums from then until 2013, only offering to send observers after the 2nd referendum started, why should its impartiality be trusted? And, unlike Ukraine, there aren't millions of Russians in Finland living in what had been Russian land for hundreds of years.
1
@pindot787 "lets say NATO create their own little blue man" ...They did. The US and NATO sent countless spies into the country, and did their damndest to encircle the USSR, and Balkanize it. It succeeded. Imagine the Norteños and Mexicans of California and New Mexico were given their own separate country after the collapse of the US, following a failed Cold War with China. Would Americans take that lying down? You tried to pose the question like it is "gotchya" moment, when it already happened to Russia. So my answer is no, of course not. Never again.
1
@pindot787 "Russia need to get over it" You would love that, wouldnt you? Americas actions led to enormous suffering, not just for russians but for Soviet republics (because they convinced the leaders, 1 by 1, to go quickly into capitalism with no deep knowledge. Destroyed them). Russia will not forget that, and as you can see, it is taking steps to prevent anything like that from happening again. You can comment all you want, but I think you need to get over it. It's happening.
1
@pindot787 The US interfered in Russian election in 1994. Yet you now say what no country should never be allowed to make a decision on other countries referendum. Where was this sentiment when Yeltsin was elected with fraud in southern Russia? What about Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Bolivia?? and they tried in Veenzuela but failed (lol) If America can do it, you cannot tell me that other countries cant do it too. America cant even follow it's own rules, so nobody else will. We got you back for meddling in our elections in 2017, the fun will continue)))
1
@BrokenBackMountains Your need to patronize reveals how little confidence you have in your ideas. I find it humorous that you think this is 'suffering'. For the collapse of what many people see as a lengthening of the rus empire, a few dozen people killed, following the official dissolution (no bloody riots), is very peaceful. Compare to France, USA, even previous russian civil wars. And I have. Baltics are nice, Poland social services has been declining since 2010s, ukraine is about same as it was. I cannot believe you think you could get away with an obvious bluffing. You go there, tell me why EU is about to cut off poland and hungary! There are many things to admire, but I am not jealous)
1
...Really. Sure. Official laws mean nothing to the US. They got Turkey accepted into NATO, for god's sake. They will do anything that is geopolitically convenient to them. An opportunity to further encircle Russia, they would have happily taken. The scheme you have laid out is false: Europe always saw reason to give NATO membership (to spite Russia), they just couldn't legally do it yet.
1
@mrplease66 Ironically, Germany could have gotten away with Austria. It was when it invaded Poland that it crossed the red line, So far, Russia has not doe this- Crimea is ethnically Russian, as are Donbas and Luhansk. But time well tell.
1
@mrplease66 Well, so far, as I said, even by your standards, Russia has only taken in areas which had already been happy to be a part of Russia (as evidenced by Crimea's independence declaration of 1994, along with a 80%+ vote for dual citizenship with Russia). And you lack a depth of understanding of Belarus and Russia. The protests are not anti-Russia, they are anti-Lukashenko. If your first reaction is "well they're allied, so a protest against one means they also dislike the other", then you are not as smart as you assume yourself. The 'straw that broke the camel's back' was not the rigging of elections (those happened many times before) but the poor approach to coronavirus- which not even Russia treated so badly. Under a more Putin-eque leader, the protests likely would not have started.
1
@mrplease66 That is fine. I think most Russians also gripe with the vast corruption present in their own country. The reason we oppose the 'majority' opinion, though, is because it comes attached with the influence of a foreign power right on our door. Belarus wants better governance, fine. But there is no world in which that is done without putting American power projection kilometres away from Russian heartland. Joining NATO or even the EU does not happen in a political vacuum: both are funded/dominated by, and trade policy heavily informed by, US. Their intentions simply cannot be trusted. Russia tried that once under Yeltsin, and he paid dearly for it, with average people's lives. Research the QoL indicators during his tenure. Clinton personally helped him commit election fraud to win re-election, and extended my family suffering. If it were not for that, I do not feel Russians would have any issues.
1
@josfur1977 'put a nuke' There aren't any such weapons in crimea. Power plants, yes, but not weapons. Not to mention, Russia already has nukes within its own borders... it borders NATO countries (because NATO expanded east, contrary to its promise), so no matter where they are put, they will always technically be "right on the doorsteps of nato countries".
1
@account-369 "aRe You ForgeTTiNg tHe BudApEsT MemORaNdUm??" You claim that Russia has to keep its promises, but say that America is free to play tricks (breaking its promises)?? If you support America lying to Russia about NATO, then you have no reason to complain about Russia breaking its promises to Ukraine. You're a hypocrite. But what could I expect from an usa supporter
1
@leonchervez5969 If established agreements (security guarantees, non-aggression pacts, etc) legally mean nothing, then how is "aggressor" is meaningful term? Might makes right, fine. But if that is true, then fighting wars is not an outstanding occurence or something to be viewed with surprise. Aggressor is a word created during a time of peace, but if no legal bindings matter, then why emphasize it? War is always happening. Digital, economic, psychological.
1
@Spaceballz123 "Thriving" "successful" You are not familiar with polish politics, I see! It is neither of those things, it is threatening the stability of the eu))
1