Osodecentx said:

---

Assassin said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

JUST IN: 🇷🇺🇺🇸 Russian President Putin slams US President Biden for trying to escalate the war before Donald Trump is inaugurated to prevent a peace deal.

"If president Biden thinks that by escalating the confrontation, he does anything to prevent the future administration from… pic.twitter.com/dXGoN1yLhW

— BRICS News (@BRICSinfo) November 28, 2024

---

wow! Sounds like the first step in a path to some sort of agreement with Russia over the Ukraine. I wonder what the end result will be?

---

No, Putin wants a cabinet position, kissing the ring is step one

---

Wrong party, he's much closer in policy to the one that was just soundly beaten.

If you claim that Ukraine is in a war for its survival, then you must, if you're intellectually honest, address the following points:

- 650,000 men left when the war began.

- the Biden regime is demanding that 18 years olds be kidnapped and forced to fight.

No elections. Opposition party members were murdered by the Zelensky regime. People who opposed the war were kidnapped by militias and tortured. The hierarchical Orthodox Christian church was banned. Russia and Ukraine is a BLOOD FEUD. Nothing more to it than that.

The war was never supposed to last 3 days. Ukraine is not winning. Hundreds of thousands of good Christian men were sent to slaughter. For what? Ethnically Russian enclaves, who were treated poorly by the Zelensky and prior regimes.

You guys support to spilling blood because you hate Russia and want to destroy it for the purposes of global US hegemony which will undoubtedly turn into a one world government or supranational tyrannical state, which based on your commentary, you'd undoubtedly support and kill hundreds of millions to achieve.

Gen. Keith Kellogg, Trump's new Ukraine/Russia envoy, hypothesizes that Mike Waltz coordinated with Jake Sullivan on Trump's behalf to authorize long-range missile strikes against Russia. Waltz has in fact confirmed contact with Sullivan, saying they are now on the "same team" pic.twitter.com/yHmR0G68CV

— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) November 27, 2024

sombear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

If you claim that Ukraine is in a war for its survival, then you must, if you're intellectually honest, address the following points:

- 650,000 men left when the war began.

- the Biden regime is demanding that 18 years olds be kidnapped and forced to fight.

No elections. Opposition party members were murdered by the Zelensky regime. People who opposed the war were kidnapped by militias and tortured. The hierarchical Orthodox Christian church was banned. Russia and Ukraine is a BLOOD FEUD. Nothing more to it than that.

The war was never supposed to last 3 days. Ukraine is not winning. Hundreds of thousands of good Christian men were sent to slaughter. For what? Ethnically Russian enclaves, who were treated poorly by the Zelensky and prior regimes.

You guys support to spilling blood because you hate Russia and want to destroy it for the purposes of global US hegemony which will undoubtedly turn into a one world government or supranational tyrannical state, which based on your commentary, you'd undoubtedly support and kill hundreds of millions to achieve.

---

99% of this is nonsense

---

White House pressing Ukraine to draft 18-year-old men to help fill manpower needs to battle Russia: https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-war-biden-draft-08e3bad195585b7c3d9662819cc5618f

BBC reports that 650,000 conscription-aged men have left Ukraine for Europe: https://www.yahoo.com/news/bbc-650-000-conscription-aged-055712780.html

I am pro-Ukraine. This war should have ended years ago. Ukraine's best men volunteered to fight, they died, hundreds of thousands of them. While 650,000 fled the country and post on the internet all day. I love Ukrainians, and it's tragic to see good men die for the corrupt.

The_barBEARian said:

---

whiterock said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

The United States has sent $211 BILLION of your tax dollars to Ukraine,

4X as much as the rest of the world COMBINED.

— Coach Tommy Tuberville (@SenTuberville) November 25, 2024

---

I've said it on here 1000 times, and now I'm going to give an analogy...

This simpleton level of statement by Tuberville is akin to this....


Your ex-wife getting mad at you because you decided to stop spending $100/month on a storage unit that contains $25000 worth of baby toys and clothes that you bought brand new years ago, and you gave the clothes and toys away to a family/families in need.

She's pissed because "you just gave that money away", and when you explain to her "I can take a full gift write-down for what it's worth currently, and not spend $1200/yr storing it" she continues to stomp her feet and say "well it was worth $25000".


Was, being the operative....


Just as your baby clothes were intended to cloth babies rather than sit in a storage unit, the stuff we sent Ukraine was built to destroy Russian military equipment....30 years ago....and we no longer have to spend big $$ on upkeep of it. No more storage unit... Full cost write down.




Yes, there's been actual monies sent for reconstruction, for utilities upkeep, and such, and for food/aide.

But the overwhelming level of that $$ you see in stupid, no context arguments like Tubs is making is 'military aide', which is nearly entirely in equipment we were mothballing and paying to keep in the storage unit. It's absolutely disingenuous.

---

So you admit Ukraine is the largest money laundering scheme in human history?

Bcs in no sane reality does transferring old army surplus cost $300 billion.

---

it doesn't "cost" you anything to donate that TV you bought 20 years ago for $500. It costs you nothing unless you decide to replace it. if you had already planned to replace it, of course, you didn't really spend any extra money. You just got rid of the cost & hassle of keeping it. You actually come out ahead, as you can write it off your taxes, and you lower costs of maintenance & storage, etc....

Every Bradley we own, for example, is on the DOD balance sheet. We have thousands of them in long-term storage - direct annual maintenance costs and known future demil costs. It it is donated to Ukraine, it has to be written off the balance sheet as an expense. But the expense is non-cash - it's just a deduction in assets. You didn't actually spend any extra money. The make-ready and freight to get it there is offset by the loss of annual maintenance costs. And, of course, the far more substantial demil expenses are avoided entirely. The only true out-of-pocket expense is the purchase of replacement equipment. And that was already planned & budgeted for.

We are saving cash outflows when we give Bradleys away. So the true "out of pocket" portion of that $300m is a small percentage of the total. And as Trey has explained, most of the actual cash expense is spent with American defense manufacturers on replacements.

DOD has been working for over a decade to replace the Bradley with the XM30, and has narrowed the competition down to two finalists. As we start bringing the new XM30 on-line, we can proceed at a faster pace to get rid of the 2800 we still have in storage before we proceed to replace the 4500 in active duty, most of which do not have enough powerplant to retrofit the Israeli "Iron Fist" active protection system. (This is, a by the way, a good example of the benefits of US aid to Israel, which in this instance results in the benefit of a battle tested active defense system better than anything we have developed.....to protect our own boys & girls in battle).

---

I dont believe you.

I think every last penny of the $300 million is new money printed by the US Treasury and spread around to various special interests.
Uh, no.
Majority of the spending on Ukraine goes to US defense contractors for replacement weapons. For example, it is well documented that ATACMS is an decades- old system and it's replacement has been selected & is being manufactured. We started off giving Ukraine the oldest, least-capable (i.e. never upgraded) ATACMS with shortest ranges. We're moving up from there. The only restriction on delivery of additional ATACMS is the pace at which the replacement system can be produced. That is a function of writing a large enough purchase order for contractors to expand production facilities. We LITERALLY were sending systems to Ukraine that were already scheduled for replacement, saving taxpayers money by avoiding the demil costs (which are substantial.) Same for the Bradley. The project to replace it is down to two finalists whose submissions are under eval as we speak. And on and on and on.....

If they were simply writing off old equipment they wouldnt require additional funds from Congress and the money allocated for Defense should have already accounted for any de-militarization costs.
The funds from Congress are for replacement systems.

I also think not one single penny of the $300 million has made my life or the lives of my family better.
How has it harmed them?
Spending on defense, intelligence, diplomacy, aid....that is called "insurance." You have to invest to deter aggression against your interests. If you fail to meet that minimum bar, you have to fight a hot war that costs 10,000x more money plus blood treasure.

We are in a cold Civil War where certain groups think its acceptable to screw over their fellow Americans in favor of corrupt politicians and the MIC. They are attempting to create a slave caste via inflation.
The CCW is against the woke, leftists who have seized a number of societal institutions to include the civil service in an attempt to pathologize normalcy. For sure, our adversaries abroad see that and it emboldens them. What part of seeing a US Army major making a TikTok in drag, or a General attending a conference in a women's uniform would elevate respect in the minds of Russian or Chinese policymakers that the US Military is a deadly capable institution not to be trifled with?

---

It's almost like you don't want to try to understand the nuts & bolts of what's happening so that you can believe what you want to believe to maintain a narrative that justifies stomping your feet in anger

boognish_bear said:

---

JUST IN: 🇺🇦🇷🇺 Ukrainian President Zelensky says he is willing to give up land to Russia in exchange for a 'Nato umbrella' over the territory Ukraine still holds. pic.twitter.com/poGvUfOJap

— BRICS News (@BRICSinfo) November 29, 2024

---

Trump starting to set the table: floating sanctions relief, Ukraine signalling willingness to trade, European allies talking tougher......ball is now in Putin's court.

Russia does not have an easy path forward from here. Their economy is starting to sputter (21% interest rates, etc.......) under the weight of mobilization and sanctions. Nobody is going to loan them money, and an increasing amount of their trade is barter (like NoKo soldiers for oil, etc.....) They're in an intractable stalemate (neither side can force a conclusion). Their mobilization has peaked and they can't afford to maintain the effort they have. They can't demobilize without severe disruptions (demobilizations almost always are followed by recessions) and political instability. International business will abstain from investment in Russia. And, of course, any peace will likely involve a pathway to Nato membership for Ukraine, something their invasion was intended to prevent.

But, to exit, all sides have to be able to walk out and claim some sort of victory..

(Zelensky has his own set of issues, too - the Ukrainian people want their land back. But he has the vastly greater resources of Nato behind him and international investment is chomping at the bit to get to work in Ukraine. )

whiterock said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

JUST IN: 🇺🇦🇷🇺 Ukrainian President Zelensky says he is willing to give up land to Russia in exchange for a 'Nato umbrella' over the territory Ukraine still holds. pic.twitter.com/poGvUfOJap

— BRICS News (@BRICSinfo) November 29, 2024

---

Trump starting to set the table: floating sanctions relief, Ukraine signalling willingness to trade, European allies talking tougher......ball is now in Putin's court.

Russia does not have an easy path forward from here. Their economy is starting to sputter (21% interest rates, etc.......) under the weight of mobilization and sanctions. Nobody is going to loan them money, and an increasing amount of their trade is barter (like NoKo soldiers for oil, etc.....) They're in an intractable stalemate (neither side can force a conclusion). Their mobilization has peaked and they can't afford to maintain the effort they have. They can't demobilize without severe disruptions (demobilizations almost always are followed by recessions) and political instability. International business will abstain from investment in Russia. And, of course, any peace will likely involve a pathway to Nato membership for Ukraine, something their invasion was intended to prevent.

But, to exit, all sides have to be able to walk out and claim some sort of victory..

(Zelensky has his own set of issues, too - the Ukrainian people want their land back. But he has the vastly greater resources of Nato behind him and international investment is chomping at the bit to get to work in Ukraine. )

---

Also can't help that they are having to sell resources and agricultural products to China at bargain basement prices

That does not seem sustainable long term for them

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

---

You mean the "Russians" who voted 85% to leave Russia? You mean the "Russia" that is majority ethnic Ukrainian?

---

He probably means the ones who voted to rejoin Russia after years of being attacked by Ukraine.

And yes, I know...no election with a pro-Russian result is ever valid no matter how many times it happens.

Doc Holliday said:

---

---

Unfortunately he didn't actually say that, even though it's being reported that way. He's basically calling for a truce and a NATO invitation so he can get the disputed territories back "diplomatically."

Alex de Tocqueville predicts that the Anglo-Americans and the Russians will become will become two great nations which impact the world, one in the direction of individualism, the other in the direction of obedience pic.twitter.com/brDxsHKIo2

— Auron MacIntyre (@AuronMacintyre) November 30, 2024

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

---

You mean the "Russians" who voted 85% to leave Russia? You mean the "Russia" that is majority ethnic Ukrainian?

---

Crimea is not majority ethnic Ukrainian..it's majority ethnic Russian. Donbas is Russian speaking majority so an good guess would be it's actually majority ethnic Russian as well

[Crimea, the region with the highest rate of people identifying itself as of Russian ethnicity, the figure for this demographic group was 58.3%]

And Crimea and the Donbas might not have voted in 1991 for a Ukrainian State if they thought it was not a going to be aligned with Russia

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

---

You mean the "Russians" who voted 85% to leave Russia? You mean the "Russia" that is majority ethnic Ukrainian?

---

Crimea is not majority ethnic Ukrainian..it's majority ethnic Russian. Donbas is Russian speaking majority so an good guess would be it's actually majority ethnic Russian as well

[Crimea, the region with the highest rate of people identifying itself as of Russian ethnicity, the figure for this demographic group was 58.3%]

And Crimea and the Donbas might not have voted in 1991 for a Ukrainian State if they thought it was not a going to be aligned with Russia

---

The pic says Donbas. Donbas has always been ethnic Ukr majority, and 85% voted for independence. Crimea is a totally different situation. Strong majority ethnic Russian but still noted to leave. Facts are stubborn things.

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

---

You mean the "Russians" who voted 85% to leave Russia? You mean the "Russia" that is majority ethnic Ukrainian?

---

Crimea is not majority ethnic Ukrainian..it's majority ethnic Russian. Donbas is Russian speaking majority so an good guess would be it's actually majority ethnic Russian as well

[Crimea, the region with the highest rate of people identifying itself as of Russian ethnicity, the figure for this demographic group was 58.3%]

And Crimea and the Donbas might not have voted in 1991 for a Ukrainian State if they thought it was not a going to be aligned with Russia

---

The pic says Donbas. Donbas has always been ethnic Ukr majority, and 85% voted for independence. Crimea is a totally different situation. Strong majority ethnic Russian but still noted to leave. Facts are stubborn things.

---

Well Donbas is Russian speaking and was always the strong hold of the party of regions (the more pro-Russian party)

Harder to determine exact ethnicity in the area

Since Belarusians, Ukrainians, and Russians are all eastern Slavs with strong similarities

In the similar way that Norwegians, Swedes, Danes are all Nordic people (but even more so since all 3 groups were all in the old Russian empire and USSR together)

Donbas always had a lot of people marking down "russian" in the pre-2014 census. Probably more than that today.

And those residents that considered themselves more "Ukrainian" have fled. Why the people who in Ukraine who considered themselves more "Russian" have fled to Donbas and Crimea

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

---

You mean the "Russians" who voted 85% to leave Russia? You mean the "Russia" that is majority ethnic Ukrainian?

---

Crimea is not majority ethnic Ukrainian..it's majority ethnic Russian. Donbas is Russian speaking majority so an good guess would be it's actually majority ethnic Russian as well

[Crimea, the region with the highest rate of people identifying itself as of Russian ethnicity, the figure for this demographic group was 58.3%]

And Crimea and the Donbas might not have voted in 1991 for a Ukrainian State if they thought it was not a going to be aligned with Russia

---

The pic says Donbas. Donbas has always been ethnic Ukr majority, and 85% voted for independence. Crimea is a totally different situation. Strong majority ethnic Russian but still noted to leave. Facts are stubborn things.

---

And none of it is worth one American city.

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

---

You mean the "Russians" who voted 85% to leave Russia? You mean the "Russia" that is majority ethnic Ukrainian?

---

Crimea is not majority ethnic Ukrainian..it's majority ethnic Russian. Donbas is Russian speaking majority so an good guess would be it's actually majority ethnic Russian as well

[Crimea, the region with the highest rate of people identifying itself as of Russian ethnicity, the figure for this demographic group was 58.3%]

And Crimea and the Donbas might not have voted in 1991 for a Ukrainian State if they thought it was not a going to be aligned with Russia

---

The pic says Donbas. Donbas has always been ethnic Ukr majority, and 85% voted for independence. Crimea is a totally different situation. Strong majority ethnic Russian but still noted to leave. Facts are stubborn things.

---

Well Donbas is Russian speaking and was always the strong hold of the party of regions (the more pro-Russian party)

Harder to determine exact ethnicity in the area

Since Belarusians, Ukrainians, and Russians are all eastern Slavs with strong similarities

In the similar way that Norwegians, Swedes, Danes are all Nordic people (but even more so since all 3 groups were all in the old Russian empire and USSR together)

Donbas always had a lot of people marking down "russian" in the pre-2014 census. Probably more than that today.

And those residents that considered themselves more "Ukrainian" have fled. Why the people who in Ukraine who considered themselves more "Russian" have fled to Donbas and Crimea

---

Just more gibberish. Seriously stick with your "we just can't afford it" argument. It's your strongest by far. The so-called "pro-Russian" parties never supported rejoining Russia. 85% voted to leave. I have no idea what Ukrainians write in a census or anywhere else. But a majority are ethnic Ukrainians. The original post/picture is wildly inaccurate no matter what else you want to argue.

Perhaps you're getting your info from Rogan.

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

---

You mean the "Russians" who voted 85% to leave Russia? You mean the "Russia" that is majority ethnic Ukrainian?

---

Crimea is not majority ethnic Ukrainian..it's majority ethnic Russian. Donbas is Russian speaking majority so an good guess would be it's actually majority ethnic Russian as well

[Crimea, the region with the highest rate of people identifying itself as of Russian ethnicity, the figure for this demographic group was 58.3%]

And Crimea and the Donbas might not have voted in 1991 for a Ukrainian State if they thought it was not a going to be aligned with Russia

---

The pic says Donbas. Donbas has always been ethnic Ukr majority, and 85% voted for independence. Crimea is a totally different situation. Strong majority ethnic Russian but still noted to leave. Facts are stubborn things.

---

Well Donbas is Russian speaking and was always the strong hold of the party of regions (the more pro-Russian party)

Harder to determine exact ethnicity in the area

Since Belarusians, Ukrainians, and Russians are all eastern Slavs with strong similarities

In the similar way that Norwegians, Swedes, Danes are all Nordic people (but even more so since all 3 groups were all in the old Russian empire and USSR together)

Donbas always had a lot of people marking down "russian" in the pre-2014 census. Probably more than that today.

And those residents that considered themselves more "Ukrainian" have fled. Why the people who in Ukraine who considered themselves more "Russian" have fled to Donbas and Crimea

---

Just more gibberish. Seriously stick with your "we just can't afford it" argument. It's your strongest by far. The so-called "pro-Russian" parties never supported rejoining Russia. 85% voted to leave. I have no idea what Ukrainians write in a census or anywhere else. But a majority are ethnic Ukrainians. The original post/picture is wildly inaccurate no matter what else you want to argue.

Perhaps you're getting your info from Rogan.

---

The pro-Moscow parties also never supported joining the EU or NATO either

Sorry facts often offend you

Donbas is majority Russian supporting…always has been….and probably more so now than ever before

Even if you got your dream and Kyiv could retake Donbas it would still face a long insurgency against a local population that does not want to be ruled from Kyiv

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

---

You mean the "Russians" who voted 85% to leave Russia? You mean the "Russia" that is majority ethnic Ukrainian?

---

Crimea is not majority ethnic Ukrainian..it's majority ethnic Russian. Donbas is Russian speaking majority so an good guess would be it's actually majority ethnic Russian as well

[Crimea, the region with the highest rate of people identifying itself as of Russian ethnicity, the figure for this demographic group was 58.3%]

And Crimea and the Donbas might not have voted in 1991 for a Ukrainian State if they thought it was not a going to be aligned with Russia

---

The pic says Donbas. Donbas has always been ethnic Ukr majority, and 85% voted for independence. Crimea is a totally different situation. Strong majority ethnic Russian but still noted to leave. Facts are stubborn things.

---

Well Donbas is Russian speaking and was always the strong hold of the party of regions (the more pro-Russian party)

Harder to determine exact ethnicity in the area

Since Belarusians, Ukrainians, and Russians are all eastern Slavs with strong similarities

In the similar way that Norwegians, Swedes, Danes are all Nordic people (but even more so since all 3 groups were all in the old Russian empire and USSR together)

Donbas always had a lot of people marking down "russian" in the pre-2014 census. Probably more than that today.

And those residents that considered themselves more "Ukrainian" have fled. Why the people who in Ukraine who considered themselves more "Russian" have fled to Donbas and Crimea

---

Just more gibberish. Seriously stick with your "we just can't afford it" argument. It's your strongest by far. The so-called "pro-Russian" parties never supported rejoining Russia. 85% voted to leave. I have no idea what Ukrainians write in a census or anywhere else. But a majority are ethnic Ukrainians. The original post/picture is wildly inaccurate no matter what else you want to argue.

Perhaps you're getting your info from Rogan.

---

The pro-Moscow parties also never supported joining the EU or NATO either

Sorry facts often offend you

Donbas is majority Russian supporting…always has been….and probably more so now than ever before

Even if you got your dream and Kyiv could retake Donbas it would still face a long insurgency against a local population that does not want to be ruled from Kyiv

---

You're changing the subject again. I responded to the stupid post/pic that said Donbas was Russia and Donbas residents were Russian. Both are false and have been since 1991.

It is highly unlikely whether through force or through a Trump negotiated deal that Ukraine gets the Donbas back. I accept that. Buts let's not rationalize or minimize it. Russia invaded and took over a significant region of a sovereign nation and people.

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

---

You mean the "Russians" who voted 85% to leave Russia? You mean the "Russia" that is majority ethnic Ukrainian?

---

Crimea is not majority ethnic Ukrainian..it's majority ethnic Russian. Donbas is Russian speaking majority so an good guess would be it's actually majority ethnic Russian as well

[Crimea, the region with the highest rate of people identifying itself as of Russian ethnicity, the figure for this demographic group was 58.3%]

And Crimea and the Donbas might not have voted in 1991 for a Ukrainian State if they thought it was not a going to be aligned with Russia

---

The pic says Donbas. Donbas has always been ethnic Ukr majority, and 85% voted for independence. Crimea is a totally different situation. Strong majority ethnic Russian but still noted to leave. Facts are stubborn things.

---

Well Donbas is Russian speaking and was always the strong hold of the party of regions (the more pro-Russian party)

Harder to determine exact ethnicity in the area

Since Belarusians, Ukrainians, and Russians are all eastern Slavs with strong similarities

In the similar way that Norwegians, Swedes, Danes are all Nordic people (but even more so since all 3 groups were all in the old Russian empire and USSR together)

Donbas always had a lot of people marking down "russian" in the pre-2014 census. Probably more than that today.

And those residents that considered themselves more "Ukrainian" have fled. Why the people who in Ukraine who considered themselves more "Russian" have fled to Donbas and Crimea

---

Just more gibberish. Seriously stick with your "we just can't afford it" argument. It's your strongest by far. The so-called "pro-Russian" parties never supported rejoining Russia. 85% voted to leave. I have no idea what Ukrainians write in a census or anywhere else. But a majority are ethnic Ukrainians. The original post/picture is wildly inaccurate no matter what else you want to argue.

Perhaps you're getting your info from Rogan.

---

The pro-Moscow parties also never supported joining the EU or NATO either

Sorry facts often offend you

Donbas is majority Russian supporting…always has been….and probably more so now than ever before

Even if you got your dream and Kyiv could retake Donbas it would still face a long insurgency against a local population that does not want to be ruled from Kyiv

---

You're changing the subject again. I responded to the stupid post/pic that said Donbas was Russia and Donbas residents were Russian. Both are false and have been since 1991.

---

And I responded that Donbas had a lot of Russians living there (probably the majority)

And they have been fighting a long conflict now from 2014 to break off from Ukraine

Things have changed since 1991

You think we should help Kyiv make war on them to deprive them of self determination?

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

---

You mean the "Russians" who voted 85% to leave Russia? You mean the "Russia" that is majority ethnic Ukrainian?

---

Crimea is not majority ethnic Ukrainian..it's majority ethnic Russian. Donbas is Russian speaking majority so an good guess would be it's actually majority ethnic Russian as well

[Crimea, the region with the highest rate of people identifying itself as of Russian ethnicity, the figure for this demographic group was 58.3%]

And Crimea and the Donbas might not have voted in 1991 for a Ukrainian State if they thought it was not a going to be aligned with Russia

---

The pic says Donbas. Donbas has always been ethnic Ukr majority, and 85% voted for independence. Crimea is a totally different situation. Strong majority ethnic Russian but still noted to leave. Facts are stubborn things.

---

Well Donbas is Russian speaking and was always the strong hold of the party of regions (the more pro-Russian party)

Harder to determine exact ethnicity in the area

Since Belarusians, Ukrainians, and Russians are all eastern Slavs with strong similarities

In the similar way that Norwegians, Swedes, Danes are all Nordic people (but even more so since all 3 groups were all in the old Russian empire and USSR together)

Donbas always had a lot of people marking down "russian" in the pre-2014 census. Probably more than that today.

And those residents that considered themselves more "Ukrainian" have fled. Why the people who in Ukraine who considered themselves more "Russian" have fled to Donbas and Crimea

---

Just more gibberish. Seriously stick with your "we just can't afford it" argument. It's your strongest by far. The so-called "pro-Russian" parties never supported rejoining Russia. 85% voted to leave. I have no idea what Ukrainians write in a census or anywhere else. But a majority are ethnic Ukrainians. The original post/picture is wildly inaccurate no matter what else you want to argue.

Perhaps you're getting your info from Rogan.

---

The pro-Moscow parties also never supported joining the EU or NATO either

Sorry facts often offend you

Donbas is majority Russian supporting…always has been….and probably more so now than ever before

Even if you got your dream and Kyiv could retake Donbas it would still face a long insurgency against a local population that does not want to be ruled from Kyiv

---

You're changing the subject again. I responded to the stupid post/pic that said Donbas was Russia and Donbas residents were Russian. Both are false and have been since 1991.

---

And I responded that Donbas had a lot of Russians living there (probably the majority)

And they have been fighting a long conflict now from 2014 to break off from Ukraine

Things have changed since 1991

You think we should help Kyiv make war on them to deprive them of self determination?

---

We've been over this. They never self-determined to leave Ukraine and join Russia. Before Russia invaded in 2014, Donbas and all of its sectors had 23 years to vote to leave. Not only did they not do it, the pro-Russia parties never even tried to raise the issue. Polls showed even the minority Russians opposed joining Russia.

Russia invaded in 2014. You and Putin believe that invasion and Russia's subsequent declaration of Donbas independence and inclusion in the Russian Fed was legitimate and should be recognized. The rest of the world disagrees.

---

Let's play it back

In 2014 there as a coup in Kyiv that overthrew the pro-Russian party

Right after that a popular uprising breaks out in Donbas protesting the coup in Kyiv

Vice did a nice job of covering this movement.

And for almost a decade the people in Donbas having been fighting to get free of Ukraine (10,000 plus have died fighting)

No proof the people of Donbas want to be ruled by a government from Kyiv again

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

---

You mean the "Russians" who voted 85% to leave Russia? You mean the "Russia" that is majority ethnic Ukrainian?

---

Crimea is not majority ethnic Ukrainian..it's majority ethnic Russian. Donbas is Russian speaking majority so an good guess would be it's actually majority ethnic Russian as well

[Crimea, the region with the highest rate of people identifying itself as of Russian ethnicity, the figure for this demographic group was 58.3%]

And Crimea and the Donbas might not have voted in 1991 for a Ukrainian State if they thought it was not a going to be aligned with Russia

---

The pic says Donbas. Donbas has always been ethnic Ukr majority, and 85% voted for independence. Crimea is a totally different situation. Strong majority ethnic Russian but still noted to leave. Facts are stubborn things.

---

Well Donbas is Russian speaking and was always the strong hold of the party of regions (the more pro-Russian party)

Harder to determine exact ethnicity in the area

Since Belarusians, Ukrainians, and Russians are all eastern Slavs with strong similarities

In the similar way that Norwegians, Swedes, Danes are all Nordic people (but even more so since all 3 groups were all in the old Russian empire and USSR together)

Donbas always had a lot of people marking down "russian" in the pre-2014 census. Probably more than that today.

And those residents that considered themselves more "Ukrainian" have fled. Why the people who in Ukraine who considered themselves more "Russian" have fled to Donbas and Crimea

---

Just more gibberish. Seriously stick with your "we just can't afford it" argument. It's your strongest by far. The so-called "pro-Russian" parties never supported rejoining Russia. 85% voted to leave. I have no idea what Ukrainians write in a census or anywhere else. But a majority are ethnic Ukrainians. The original post/picture is wildly inaccurate no matter what else you want to argue.

Perhaps you're getting your info from Rogan.

---

The pro-Moscow parties also never supported joining the EU or NATO either

Sorry facts often offend you

Donbas is majority Russian supporting…always has been….and probably more so now than ever before

Even if you got your dream and Kyiv could retake Donbas it would still face a long insurgency against a local population that does not want to be ruled from Kyiv

---

You're changing the subject again. I responded to the stupid post/pic that said Donbas was Russia and Donbas residents were Russian. Both are false and have been since 1991.

---

And I responded that Donbas had a lot of Russians living there (probably the majority)

And they have been fighting a long conflict now from 2014 to break off from Ukraine

Things have changed since 1991

You think we should help Kyiv make war on them to deprive them of self determination?

---

Russia invaded in 2014. You and Putin believe that invasion and Russia's subsequent declaration of Donbas independence and inclusion in the Russian Fed was legitimate and should be recognized. The rest of the world disagrees.

---

And you think DC bombing Serbia into submission so that Kosovo could be illegally separated from the Nation was fine

Both Moscow and DC violate international law when it pleases them

Personally I think the people of Donbas should be allowed to vote on it

Do you oppose the people of Donbas being able to vote who they want to be in a political union with?

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

---

You mean the "Russians" who voted 85% to leave Russia? You mean the "Russia" that is majority ethnic Ukrainian?

---

TBH, my focus was on the visuals. Especially since Biden has been so reckless in seemingly trying to escalate the conflict in Ukraine. There has been much talk of WWIII and Putin has threatened to use nukes. Personally, I don't think that will happen but the dangerous behavior of the fascists & our fake president are borderline war crimes.

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

---

You mean the "Russians" who voted 85% to leave Russia? You mean the "Russia" that is majority ethnic Ukrainian?

---

Crimea is not majority ethnic Ukrainian..it's majority ethnic Russian. Donbas is Russian speaking majority so an good guess would be it's actually majority ethnic Russian as well

[Crimea, the region with the highest rate of people identifying itself as of Russian ethnicity, the figure for this demographic group was 58.3%]

And Crimea and the Donbas might not have voted in 1991 for a Ukrainian State if they thought it was not a going to be aligned with Russia

---

The pic says Donbas. Donbas has always been ethnic Ukr majority, and 85% voted for independence. Crimea is a totally different situation. Strong majority ethnic Russian but still noted to leave. Facts are stubborn things.

---

Well Donbas is Russian speaking and was always the strong hold of the party of regions (the more pro-Russian party)

Harder to determine exact ethnicity in the area

Since Belarusians, Ukrainians, and Russians are all eastern Slavs with strong similarities

In the similar way that Norwegians, Swedes, Danes are all Nordic people (but even more so since all 3 groups were all in the old Russian empire and USSR together)

Donbas always had a lot of people marking down "russian" in the pre-2014 census. Probably more than that today.

And those residents that considered themselves more "Ukrainian" have fled. Why the people who in Ukraine who considered themselves more "Russian" have fled to Donbas and Crimea

---

Just more gibberish. Seriously stick with your "we just can't afford it" argument. It's your strongest by far. The so-called "pro-Russian" parties never supported rejoining Russia. 85% voted to leave. I have no idea what Ukrainians write in a census or anywhere else. But a majority are ethnic Ukrainians. The original post/picture is wildly inaccurate no matter what else you want to argue.

Perhaps you're getting your info from Rogan.

---

The pro-Moscow parties also never supported joining the EU or NATO either

Sorry facts often offend you

Donbas is majority Russian supporting…always has been….and probably more so now than ever before

Even if you got your dream and Kyiv could retake Donbas it would still face a long insurgency against a local population that does not want to be ruled from Kyiv

---

You're changing the subject again. I responded to the stupid post/pic that said Donbas was Russia and Donbas residents were Russian. Both are false and have been since 1991.

---

And I responded that Donbas had a lot of Russians living there (probably the majority)

And they have been fighting a long conflict now from 2014 to break off from Ukraine

Things have changed since 1991

You think we should help Kyiv make war on them to deprive them of self determination?

---

Russia invaded in 2014. You and Putin believe that invasion and Russia's subsequent declaration of Donbas independence and inclusion in the Russian Fed was legitimate and should be recognized. The rest of the world disagrees.

---

And you think DC bombing Serbia into submission so that Kosovo could be illegally separated from the Nation was fine

Both Moscow and DC violate international law when it pleases them

Personally I think the people of Donbas should be allowed to vote on it

Do you oppose the people of Donbas being able to vote who they want to be in a political union with?

---

Of course I oppose it now. A vote after invasion, takeover, and murder/expulsion of people is not a vote at all. And nothing like Spetsnaz voting observers!

I would not have opposed it pre-2014

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

---

You mean the "Russians" who voted 85% to leave Russia? You mean the "Russia" that is majority ethnic Ukrainian?

---

Crimea is not majority ethnic Ukrainian..it's majority ethnic Russian. Donbas is Russian speaking majority so an good guess would be it's actually majority ethnic Russian as well

[Crimea, the region with the highest rate of people identifying itself as of Russian ethnicity, the figure for this demographic group was 58.3%]

And Crimea and the Donbas might not have voted in 1991 for a Ukrainian State if they thought it was not a going to be aligned with Russia

---

The pic says Donbas. Donbas has always been ethnic Ukr majority, and 85% voted for independence. Crimea is a totally different situation. Strong majority ethnic Russian but still noted to leave. Facts are stubborn things.

---

Well Donbas is Russian speaking and was always the strong hold of the party of regions (the more pro-Russian party)

Harder to determine exact ethnicity in the area

Since Belarusians, Ukrainians, and Russians are all eastern Slavs with strong similarities

In the similar way that Norwegians, Swedes, Danes are all Nordic people (but even more so since all 3 groups were all in the old Russian empire and USSR together)

Donbas always had a lot of people marking down "russian" in the pre-2014 census. Probably more than that today.

And those residents that considered themselves more "Ukrainian" have fled. Why the people who in Ukraine who considered themselves more "Russian" have fled to Donbas and Crimea

---

Just more gibberish. Seriously stick with your "we just can't afford it" argument. It's your strongest by far. The so-called "pro-Russian" parties never supported rejoining Russia. 85% voted to leave. I have no idea what Ukrainians write in a census or anywhere else. But a majority are ethnic Ukrainians. The original post/picture is wildly inaccurate no matter what else you want to argue.

Perhaps you're getting your info from Rogan.

---

The pro-Moscow parties also never supported joining the EU or NATO either

Sorry facts often offend you

Donbas is majority Russian supporting…always has been….and probably more so now than ever before

Even if you got your dream and Kyiv could retake Donbas it would still face a long insurgency against a local population that does not want to be ruled from Kyiv

---

You're changing the subject again. I responded to the stupid post/pic that said Donbas was Russia and Donbas residents were Russian. Both are false and have been since 1991.

---

And I responded that Donbas had a lot of Russians living there (probably the majority)

And they have been fighting a long conflict now from 2014 to break off from Ukraine

Things have changed since 1991

You think we should help Kyiv make war on them to deprive them of self determination?

---

Russia invaded in 2014. You and Putin believe that invasion and Russia's subsequent declaration of Donbas independence and inclusion in the Russian Fed was legitimate and should be recognized. The rest of the world disagrees.

---

And you think DC bombing Serbia into submission so that Kosovo could be illegally separated from the Nation was fine

Both Moscow and DC violate international law when it pleases them

Personally I think the people of Donbas should be allowed to vote on it

Do you oppose the people of Donbas being able to vote who they want to be in a political union with?

---

Of course I oppose it now. A vote after invasion, takeover, and murder/expulsion of people is not a vote at all. And nothing like Spetsnaz voting observers!

I would not have opposed it pre-2014

---

So what is the plan?

Zelensky keeps making war trying to retake the Donbas? (Been going on now for 10 years)

Kyiv does somehow retake it and then has to deal with a long term Russian backed rebel/insurgency movement?

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

---

You mean the "Russians" who voted 85% to leave Russia? You mean the "Russia" that is majority ethnic Ukrainian?

---

Crimea is not majority ethnic Ukrainian..it's majority ethnic Russian. Donbas is Russian speaking majority so an good guess would be it's actually majority ethnic Russian as well

[Crimea, the region with the highest rate of people identifying itself as of Russian ethnicity, the figure for this demographic group was 58.3%]

And Crimea and the Donbas might not have voted in 1991 for a Ukrainian State if they thought it was not a going to be aligned with Russia

---

The pic says Donbas. Donbas has always been ethnic Ukr majority, and 85% voted for independence. Crimea is a totally different situation. Strong majority ethnic Russian but still noted to leave. Facts are stubborn things.

---

Well Donbas is Russian speaking and was always the strong hold of the party of regions (the more pro-Russian party)

Harder to determine exact ethnicity in the area

Since Belarusians, Ukrainians, and Russians are all eastern Slavs with strong similarities

In the similar way that Norwegians, Swedes, Danes are all Nordic people (but even more so since all 3 groups were all in the old Russian empire and USSR together)

Donbas always had a lot of people marking down "russian" in the pre-2014 census. Probably more than that today.

And those residents that considered themselves more "Ukrainian" have fled. Why the people who in Ukraine who considered themselves more "Russian" have fled to Donbas and Crimea

---

Just more gibberish. Seriously stick with your "we just can't afford it" argument. It's your strongest by far. The so-called "pro-Russian" parties never supported rejoining Russia. 85% voted to leave. I have no idea what Ukrainians write in a census or anywhere else. But a majority are ethnic Ukrainians. The original post/picture is wildly inaccurate no matter what else you want to argue.

Perhaps you're getting your info from Rogan.

---

The pro-Moscow parties also never supported joining the EU or NATO either

Sorry facts often offend you

Donbas is majority Russian supporting…always has been….and probably more so now than ever before

Even if you got your dream and Kyiv could retake Donbas it would still face a long insurgency against a local population that does not want to be ruled from Kyiv

---

You're changing the subject again. I responded to the stupid post/pic that said Donbas was Russia and Donbas residents were Russian. Both are false and have been since 1991.

---

And I responded that Donbas had a lot of Russians living there (probably the majority)

And they have been fighting a long conflict now from 2014 to break off from Ukraine

Things have changed since 1991

You think we should help Kyiv make war on them to deprive them of self determination?

---

Russia invaded in 2014. You and Putin believe that invasion and Russia's subsequent declaration of Donbas independence and inclusion in the Russian Fed was legitimate and should be recognized. The rest of the world disagrees.

---

And you think DC bombing Serbia into submission so that Kosovo could be illegally separated from the Nation was fine

Both Moscow and DC violate international law when it pleases them

Personally I think the people of Donbas should be allowed to vote on it

Do you oppose the people of Donbas being able to vote who they want to be in a political union with?

---

Of course I oppose it now. A vote after invasion, takeover, and murder/expulsion of people is not a vote at all. And nothing like Spetsnaz voting observers!

I would not have opposed it pre-2014

---

So what is the plan?

Zelensky keeps making war trying to retake the Donbas? (Been going on now for 10 years)

Kyiv does somehow retake it and then has to deal with a long term Russian backed rebel/insurgency movement?

---

A few posts back I said I accept that Ukraine will have to give up the Donbas. That does not mean it's right, and certainly does not mean "it's always been Russia anyway."

Redbrickbear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

JUST IN: 🇺🇦🇷🇺 Ukrainian President Zelensky says he is willing to give up land to Russia in exchange for a 'Nato umbrella' over the territory Ukraine still holds. pic.twitter.com/poGvUfOJap

— BRICS News (@BRICSinfo) November 29, 2024

---

Trump starting to set the table: floating sanctions relief, Ukraine signalling willingness to trade, European allies talking tougher......ball is now in Putin's court.

Russia does not have an easy path forward from here. Their economy is starting to sputter (21% interest rates, etc.......) under the weight of mobilization and sanctions. Nobody is going to loan them money, and an increasing amount of their trade is barter (like NoKo soldiers for oil, etc.....) They're in an intractable stalemate (neither side can force a conclusion). Their mobilization has peaked and they can't afford to maintain the effort they have. They can't demobilize without severe disruptions (demobilizations almost always are followed by recessions) and political instability. International business will abstain from investment in Russia. And, of course, any peace will likely involve a pathway to Nato membership for Ukraine, something their invasion was intended to prevent.

But, to exit, all sides have to be able to walk out and claim some sort of victory..

(Zelensky has his own set of issues, too - the Ukrainian people want their land back. But he has the vastly greater resources of Nato behind him and international investment is chomping at the bit to get to work in Ukraine. )

---

Also can't help that they are having to sell resources and agricultural products to China at bargain basement prices

That does not seem sustainable long term for them

---

Wars of attrition are not sustainable for either side. Everything is redirected to flow to the battlefield, which effectively transfers the supply problems elsewhere in the economy. It's hard to "grow' wealth as a war drags on. Yes, you can deficit spend and make the GDP numbers look positive, but you're not creating wealth. You're redirecting wealth to be consumed on the battlefield, either destroyed outright or worn out from overuse. And what's left over has limited use for rebuilding the country. Same for consumers and laborers.

Now that it's a war of attrition, it really is about the Russian economy (the size of Italy or Texas) vs the entirety of Nato. Will China step up to match Nato? So far, the answer is no. That leaves Russia hopelessly outmatched >>>>> as long as Nato support continues. The Russian economy cannot continue to maintain this level of war effort. They will start to wane next summer/fall. Downhill from there.....

Russian interest rates are at 21% and are about to rise again. That is a great big flashing yellow light.

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

---

You mean the "Russians" who voted 85% to leave Russia? You mean the "Russia" that is majority ethnic Ukrainian?

---

Crimea is not majority ethnic Ukrainian..it's majority ethnic Russian. Donbas is Russian speaking majority so an good guess would be it's actually majority ethnic Russian as well

[Crimea, the region with the highest rate of people identifying itself as of Russian ethnicity, the figure for this demographic group was 58.3%]

And Crimea and the Donbas might not have voted in 1991 for a Ukrainian State if they thought it was not a going to be aligned with Russia

---

The pic says Donbas. Donbas has always been ethnic Ukr majority, and 85% voted for independence. Crimea is a totally different situation. Strong majority ethnic Russian but still noted to leave. Facts are stubborn things.

---

Well Donbas is Russian speaking and was always the strong hold of the party of regions (the more pro-Russian party)

Harder to determine exact ethnicity in the area

Since Belarusians, Ukrainians, and Russians are all eastern Slavs with strong similarities

In the similar way that Norwegians, Swedes, Danes are all Nordic people (but even more so since all 3 groups were all in the old Russian empire and USSR together)

Donbas always had a lot of people marking down "russian" in the pre-2014 census. Probably more than that today.

And those residents that considered themselves more "Ukrainian" have fled. Why the people who in Ukraine who considered themselves more "Russian" have fled to Donbas and Crimea

---

Just more gibberish. Seriously stick with your "we just can't afford it" argument. It's your strongest by far. The so-called "pro-Russian" parties never supported rejoining Russia. 85% voted to leave. I have no idea what Ukrainians write in a census or anywhere else. But a majority are ethnic Ukrainians. The original post/picture is wildly inaccurate no matter what else you want to argue.

Perhaps you're getting your info from Rogan.

---

The pro-Moscow parties also never supported joining the EU or NATO either

Sorry facts often offend you

Donbas is majority Russian supporting…always has been….and probably more so now than ever before

Even if you got your dream and Kyiv could retake Donbas it would still face a long insurgency against a local population that does not want to be ruled from Kyiv

---

You're changing the subject again. I responded to the stupid post/pic that said Donbas was Russia and Donbas residents were Russian. Both are false and have been since 1991.

---

And I responded that Donbas had a lot of Russians living there (probably the majority)

And they have been fighting a long conflict now from 2014 to break off from Ukraine

Things have changed since 1991

You think we should help Kyiv make war on them to deprive them of self determination?

---

We've been over this. They never self-determined to leave Ukraine and join Russia. Before Russia invaded in 2014, Donbas and all of its sectors had 23 years to vote to leave. Not only did they not do it, the pro-Russia parties never even tried to raise the issue. Polls showed even the minority Russians opposed joining Russia.

Russia invaded in 2014. You and Putin believe that invasion and Russia's subsequent declaration of Donbas independence and inclusion in the Russian Fed was legitimate and should be recognized. The rest of the world disagrees.

And you're wrong, pro-Russia parties did support the EU deal while still generally wanting neutrality with Russia. They ran on that very platform.

---

The Donbas declared its own independence in 2014. As with Crimea, Western polls showed that a strong majority of the people agreed (94% of likely voters and 65% of the overall population).

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

historian said:

---

---

You mean the "Russians" who voted 85% to leave Russia? You mean the "Russia" that is majority ethnic Ukrainian?

---

Crimea is not majority ethnic Ukrainian..it's majority ethnic Russian. Donbas is Russian speaking majority so an good guess would be it's actually majority ethnic Russian as well

[Crimea, the region with the highest rate of people identifying itself as of Russian ethnicity, the figure for this demographic group was 58.3%]

And Crimea and the Donbas might not have voted in 1991 for a Ukrainian State if they thought it was not a going to be aligned with Russia

---

The pic says Donbas. Donbas has always been ethnic Ukr majority, and 85% voted for independence. Crimea is a totally different situation. Strong majority ethnic Russian but still noted to leave. Facts are stubborn things.

---

Well Donbas is Russian speaking and was always the strong hold of the party of regions (the more pro-Russian party)

Harder to determine exact ethnicity in the area

Since Belarusians, Ukrainians, and Russians are all eastern Slavs with strong similarities

In the similar way that Norwegians, Swedes, Danes are all Nordic people (but even more so since all 3 groups were all in the old Russian empire and USSR together)

Donbas always had a lot of people marking down "russian" in the pre-2014 census. Probably more than that today.

And those residents that considered themselves more "Ukrainian" have fled. Why the people who in Ukraine who considered themselves more "Russian" have fled to Donbas and Crimea

---

Just more gibberish. Seriously stick with your "we just can't afford it" argument. It's your strongest by far. The so-called "pro-Russian" parties never supported rejoining Russia. 85% voted to leave. I have no idea what Ukrainians write in a census or anywhere else. But a majority are ethnic Ukrainians. The original post/picture is wildly inaccurate no matter what else you want to argue.

Perhaps you're getting your info from Rogan.

---

The pro-Moscow parties also never supported joining the EU or NATO either

Sorry facts often offend you

Donbas is majority Russian supporting…always has been….and probably more so now than ever before

Even if you got your dream and Kyiv could retake Donbas it would still face a long insurgency against a local population that does not want to be ruled from Kyiv

---

You're changing the subject again. I responded to the stupid post/pic that said Donbas was Russia and Donbas residents were Russian. Both are false and have been since 1991.

---

And I responded that Donbas had a lot of Russians living there (probably the majority)

And they have been fighting a long conflict now from 2014 to break off from Ukraine

Things have changed since 1991

You think we should help Kyiv make war on them to deprive them of self determination?

---

Russia invaded in 2014. You and Putin believe that invasion and Russia's subsequent declaration of Donbas independence and inclusion in the Russian Fed was legitimate and should be recognized. The rest of the world disagrees.

---

And you think DC bombing Serbia into submission so that Kosovo could be illegally separated from the Nation was fine

Both Moscow and DC violate international law when it pleases them

Personally I think the people of Donbas should be allowed to vote on it

Do you oppose the people of Donbas being able to vote who they want to be in a political union with?

---

Of course I oppose it now. A vote after invasion, takeover, and murder/expulsion of people is not a vote at all. And nothing like Spetsnaz voting observers!

I would not have opposed it pre-2014

---

So what is the plan?

Zelensky keeps making war trying to retake the Donbas? (Been going on now for 10 years)

Kyiv does somehow retake it and then has to deal with a long term Russian backed rebel/insurgency movement?

---

A few posts back I said I accept that Ukraine will have to give up the Donbas. That does not mean it's right, and certainly does not mean "it's always been Russia anyway."

---

The Donbas was part of the Russian Empire for hundreds of years

It was part of the USSR for 70 years

It was part of a independent Ukrainian State for 23 years before hostilities broken out (1991-2014)

Letting the people of the Donbas vote is the only logical way to solve the problem of "who owns the Donbas"