Here I answer some questions from a supporter of Ukraine who hates Russia. His comments are in quotes.
So you believe that the vast majority of ethnic Ukrainians in Crimea wanted to be under the boot of Putin?
There are hardly any ethnic Ukrainians in Crimea. Polls showed at the time and continue to show that 85-90
Anyways the UN didn’t buy into the LPR/DPR referendum and voted against the annexations 143-5. Then they were given a fake vote on if they wanted to join Russia or not.
Doesn’t matter. A lot of those countries voted no because they have their own separatist issues, and they don’t want to light a fire under them. They’re legal according to the UN’s own principle of self-determination. Polls done before the election showed that 85-90
In Zaporozhye, Kherson, and Dnepropetrovsk, the figures were lower, around 75
It never made sense anyways since Putin in March declared them to be independent Republics. Then they were given a fake vote on if they wanted to join Russia or not.
He only said Donetsk and Lugansk were independent republics because they had been saying that for years. He didn’t mention the three other oblasts.
They never had a vote on if they wanted to be independent.
They don’t want to be independent. They’d rather join Russia.
The LPR/DPR militias were actually marched off to the front early in the war.
They had already been fighting since 2014.
This is what happens when you align with an angry dwarf dictator who has no care about your hopes or goals.
Putin’s not a dictator. In the last election, the opposition got 30
Putin aligned completely with the hopes and goals on the republics. In fact, for a very long time, he didn’t even support them much and wanted them to stay a part of Ukraine. Russia never wanted this. It was forced on them.
And how would you describe the failed invasion of Kiev along with Putin’s leaked plans to take all of Ukraine?
There was never any intention to conquer Kiev in the first place. They only had 30,000 troops there. They needed 200,000 to take that city. He wanted to conquer the country, yes, do a regime change, demilitarize and denazify it, and put in a pro-Russian leader with a neutral status and no NATO membership. Then he would just take off but surely remain in the newly annexed republics.
The US and the Allies invaded and conquered all sort of countries in WW2. Just because you invade and conquer a place doesn’t make you an imperialist. Russia never wanted to occupy all of Ukraine. They didn’t even like holding that area around Kiev because most Ukrainians in that region really hate Russia. I’d say 5
Every 30-50 years since the 17th century Russia has tried to expand into a neighboring country.
What “neighboring countries?” There weren’t even countries back then, just empires. Many countries were expansionist and colonialist in that time period. It was a normal thing. The places incorporated into the Russian Empire and hence now Russia are happy to be there. There are no serious separatist movements in any of those places because Russia gives them a lot of freedom.
But even during the USSR they continued that pattern (Poland+Baltics, Finland, WW2 wins, Afghanistan
The Baltics had been part of Russia or the Russian Empire since the 1700’s. The USSR had to take them over because they’d gone over to the Nazis, and the USSR had to put a stop to that.
The USSR never tried to conquer or annex Finland.
Lots of countries lost or gained territory in Europe after WW2. They were not imperialist for doing so.
Russia never tried to conquer Afghanistan and make it a part of Russia. Anyway they were invited in by the government, so it was legit.
The Leninist definition of imperialism in Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, is the concept I am referring to here.