Russia invades Ukraine

[yorkie]

Again, this is a slanted view that the western media narrates. ....

Do you think that the pro-Russian media is more, less, or similarly slanted?

There are millions of Ukrainians citizens who have fled the war to Mainland Russia.

Do you think that the number who fled west is more, less, or similar in numbers to those who fled to Russia?

I know some Ukrainians (two of whom I am with for typically 5 hours in most weeks of the year) and also some people from the UK who have spent years living in Ukraine. I also have contacts with various people who are friends with Ukrainians. I am not suggesting this makes me an expert, however it does give me access to seek the views of a variety of Ukrainians, which can be useful when reading pro-Putin propaganda.

My understanding is that only a small minority of Ukrainians are pro-Putin or appear to sympathise with Putin. This appears to include yourself @doc7austin as part of this minority, is that correct?

I put various claims by both @RailWonderer and @doc7austin to Ukrainians, for their views on what has been said here, and they noted - unsurprisingly - that these claims are:

carefully selected

This is consistent with what I was thinking; it certainly reads to me as very selective, especially given the challenges that many forum members have provided, and the answers being very evasive and dismissive in nature. To be honest, it doesn't take much knowledge or intelligence to realise that the posts by yourselves are "carefully selected", but it was useful for to hear this confirmed, and I hope this is helpful to others.

I also received the following information, which challenges some of the claims posted above:

The refugees who have gone to Russia simply because they were behind the front line and have nowhere else to go, so wouldn't necessarily support Putin; Russia has intervened in Ukrainian affairs in a massive way multiple times since the start of the century and that - together with the fact that the EU and US are richer - has led to the move towards NATO; it is difficult to hold fair elections while being bombed ...) and the arguments in themselves don't justify an invasion.

In Russia, Ukraine is generally seen as forming part of the same cultural entity (like England, Scotland and Wales) and there is the idea that Russia cannot be complete without Ukraine, as Russia was founded in Kiev/Kyiv. So losing Ukraine to what is seen as a hostile block is a big threat to the Russian leadership. Putin is also responsible for several interventions propping up corrupt governments in Ukraine which turned people against him, and he doesn't want to go down as the president who "lost" Ukraine.

Those who appear to condone Putin may not accept this, and I appreciate not all Ukrainians will hold the views quoted above, however it is abundantly clear to almost anyone who is even vaguely aware of this conflict, that the proportion of Ukrainians who want Ukraine to be part of Russia and/or support/condone Putin, is very much a minority.

What really puzzles me is why someone who appears to come across as being pro-Russia, such as @doc7austin, is choosing to benefit from the freedoms the West can provide, while defending those who seek to oppose us? This is a genuine question, which I hope can be genuinely answered in an honest way, to help me understand what appears to be a very odd viewpoint. Perhaps there is some genuine explanation I am missing?

I am also proud to have played a small part of making some Ukrainians who have fled to the UK feel welcome here; I know one in particular who came here not knowing any English and I could hardly communicate with him when I first met him in 2022, but 3 years later, I can have a proper conversation with him.

I am therefore not going to allow anyone who states views that come across to me as sympathising with Putin to go unchallenged on this forum. I have tried to stay out of this thread as much as possible, and I am very pleased to see so many knowledgeable and sensible forum members challenge these dubious views, so well done the many members who have done so, you do the forum proud.

 

[DarloRich]

Personally, I find it a bit embarrassing how Zelenskyy tries to sneak into that summit. That is not a big sign of power and statesmanship.

god forbid the President of Ukraine should want to attend a summit about the future of, erm, Ukraine!

All Trump can do is to stop military and economic aid (remove the tariffs) to Ukraine.
Trump cannot carve up Ukraine.

come on - you are not that naïve. Hitler & Chamberlain could not carve up Czechoslovakia, but they did. Oddly, Benes wasn't invited to the Munich conference. This is simply a 21st century Sudetenland situation with, I fear, the same outcome for Ukraine.

 

[martin butler]

I suspect that some of the " pro Kremlin line " posters, are possibly bots, or not whom they claim to be, ie Russian, not Ukrainian,
There is an information war going on alongside the actual fighting, and both sides play that game,

I just can't see how any Ukrainian, even in the Russian controlled zones, would support an invasion of their homeland, unless its of course benefited them personally, financially, or politically, and even then, invaders will still treat them as a conquered people,

My own view is that under Putin, and his regeme, Europe is not safe from the threat Russia poses, to its former satellite nations, all of whom were given Independance when the Soviet Union broke up, they had the chance to join a Russian sphere of influence, but instead chose to turn westward, why was that,? Maybe life under russian Influence isn't that good? or free?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I suspect that some of the " pro Kremlin line " posters, are possibly bots, or not whom they claim to be, ie Russian, not Ukrainian

This is happening on some fora but I don't think the main ones on here are, they are long established posters, unless their accounts have been hacked, but I doubt it as they still post on railway matters.

 

[DarloRich]

I suspect that some of the " pro Kremlin line " posters, are possibly bots, or not whom they claim to be, ie Russian, not Ukrainian,
There is an information war going on alongside the actual fighting, and both sides play that game,

no - they are just so far down the conspiracy rabbit hole they have lost all sense of rational thought.

 

[yorkie]

I suspect that some of the " pro Kremlin line " posters, are possibly bots, or not whom they claim to be, ie Russian, not Ukrainian,
There is an information war going on alongside the actual fighting, and both sides play that game,

I just can't see how any Ukrainian, even in the Russian controlled zones, would support an invasion of their homeland, unless its of course benefited them personally, financially, or politically, and even then, invaders will still treat them as a conquered people,

My own view is that under Putin, and his regeme, Europe is not safe from the threat Russia poses, to its former satellite nations, all of whom were given Independance when the Soviet Union broke up, they had the chance to join a Russian sphere of influence, but instead chose to turn westward, why was that,? Maybe life under russian Influence isn't that good? or free?

There are indeed pro-Russian bots spamming various websites, however @doc7austin and @RailWonderer are absolutely not bots.

A huge amount of work takes place behind the scenes to avoid this forum being taken over by bots, and to keep the content relevant, understandable and accessible to all (including blind people, for example); bots sometimes do briefly get posts published, however we are fortunate to have a lot of members who use the report button to alert the content to the volunteer moderation team.

 

[357]

Do you think that the pro-Russian media is more, less, or similarly slanted?

Do you think that the number who fled west is more, less, or similar in numbers to those who fled to Russia?

I know some Ukrainians (two of whom I am with for typically 5 hours in most weeks of the year) and also some people from the UK who have spent years living in Ukraine. I also have contacts with various people who are friends with Ukrainians. I am not suggesting this makes me an expert, however it does give me access to seek the views of a variety of Ukrainians, which can be useful when reading pro-Putin propaganda.

My understanding is that only a small minority of Ukrainians are pro-Putin or appear to sympathise with Putin. This appears to include yourself @doc7austin as part of this minority, is that correct?

I put various claims by both @RailWonderer and @doc7austin to Ukrainians, for their views on what has been said here, and they noted - unsurprisingly - that these claims are:

This is consistent with what I was thinking; it certainly reads to me as very selective, especially given the challenges that many forum members have provided, and the answers being very evasive and dismissive in nature. To be honest, it doesn't take much knowledge or intelligence to realise that the posts by yourselves are "carefully selected", but it was useful for to hear this confirmed, and I hope this is helpful to others.

I also received the following information, which challenges some of the claims posted above:

Those who appear to condone Putin may not accept this, and I appreciate not all Ukrainians will hold the views quoted above, however it is abundantly clear to almost anyone who is even vaguely aware of this conflict, that the proportion of Ukrainians who want Ukraine to be part of Russia and/or support/condone Putin, is very much a minority.

What really puzzles me is why someone who appears to come across as being pro-Russia, such as @doc7austin, is choosing to benefit from the freedoms the West can provide, while defending those who seek to oppose us? This is a genuine question, which I hope can be genuinely answered in an honest way, to help me understand what appears to be a very odd viewpoint. Perhaps there is some genuine explanation I am missing?

I am also proud to have played a small part of making some Ukrainians who have fled to the UK feel welcome here; I know one in particular who came here not knowing any English and I could hardly communicate with him when I first met him in 2022, but 3 years later, I can have a proper conversation with him.

I am therefore not going to allow anyone who states views that come across to me as sympathising with Putin to go unchallenged on this forum. I have tried to stay out of this thread as much as possible, and I am very pleased to see so many knowledgeable and sensible forum members challenge these dubious views, so well done the many members who have done so, you do the forum proud.

For what is possibly the first time since joining the forum, I find myself in complete agreement with you!

I have stayed largely out of this thread for personal reasons, those who know me will know why, but you'll remember that I had a Ukrainian train as my avatar before it became cool

 

[doc7austin]

So, what many people may not realize, I actually lived in Ukraine for large parts of my life. At no point did I praise Putin in my posts.

But, yes, I do not like Zelenskyy. But Zelenskyy IS NOT Ukraine. I share that sentiment with many other Ukrainians.

Changing my residency to Russia it out of the question. It is simply a political system, where I don't want to live in.
Ukraine on its part has made massive strides since the early 2000's to open up and become more liberal (freeing itself from Soviet control culture).

Ukraine is characterized by 5 big problems (yes, Putin invaded, but these 5 problems contributed to the current desaster):

1. Ukraine's economy had collapsed in the 1990's and hasn't recovered ever since. Poland's and Russia's economies also collapsed, but have recovered ever since.

2. Ukraine has been governed by different gangs for the last 3 decades (the Kuchma gang, the Yushchenko clan, the Timochenko clan, the Yanukovich clan, the Poroshenko clan, the Zelenskyy clan). Election come and go, but the corruption stays.

3. Ukraine is a bilingual country (Ukrainian language in the West; Russian language in the East). Unfortunately, the use of the native language of tens of millions of Ukrainians is "discouraged" by the government. That creates massive resentments. Russian propaganda builds on that.

4. Western Ukraine is plagued by these Bandera cult, and esp. young people (out of economic depression) fall for this Neo-Nazi garbage. Russian-speaking Ukrainians are very much afraid of these Bandera cult people. In addition, this Bandera cult is damaging Polish/Ukrainian relations. Many Poles hate the Bandera cult, as well. Of course, Russia's propaganda is playing heavily with that, but is exaggerating. However, the Bandera cult is poisoning the society.

5. Ukrainian governments made an ill-fated choice in the 2000's to become part of NATO and rely on US-American protection. The truth is: USA would never set boots on the grounds in Ukraine for a combat mission (even Biden confirmed that). Ukraine is just too unimportant for USA. Russia's knows this and that sealed the fate of Ukraine.

I love the Ukrainian people. However, the Ukrainian government all s****. And despite all kind promises during his 2019 election campaign, Zelenskyy has done everything to worsen the 5 aforementioned problems.

One other about the refugee numbers to Russia. The pensions in Russia - on average - are 3 times higher in terms of purchasing power parity than in Ukraine. Moreover, refugees don't need to learn a new language. These two reasons explain a big part of the numbers.

 

[edwin_m]

5. Ukrainian governments made an ill-fated choice in the 2000's to become part of NATO and rely on US-American protection. The truth is: USA would never set boots on the grounds in Ukraine for a combat mission (even Biden confirmed that). Ukraine is just too unimportant for USA. Russia's knows this and that sealed the fate of Ukraine.

What was the alternative for them? I can only think you are suggesting they kept their nuclear weapons (there is some doubt about whether this was viable) to deter interference by either side. Depending which way things swung, this might have resulted in another pro-Russia nuclear state.

1. Ukraine's economy had collapsed in the 1990's and hasn't recovered ever since. Poland's and Russia's economies also collapsed, but have recovered ever since.

Poland successfully joined NATO and the EU and has done relatively well economically despite some setbacks to their democratic development. It's likely that if Ukraine had succeeded in doing so they would have developed similarly. Russia's economic development was probably unsustainable, being increasingly reliant on oligarchy and corruption.

3. Ukraine is a bilingual country (Ukrainian language in the West; Russian language in the East). Unfortunately, the use of the native language of tens of millions of Ukrainians is "discouraged" by the government. That creates massive resentments. Russian propaganda builds on that.

Zelensky is a native Russian speaker. Do you consider him responsible for suppressing his own community?

I love the Ukrainian people. However, the Ukrainian government all s****. And despite all kind promises during his 2019 election campaign, Zelenskyy has done everything to worsen the 5 aforementioned problems.

Noted that you are patriotic but, as is your right in a democracy, opposed to the current government. Do you believe there is some other credible power bloc in Ukraine that would have done things better?

 

[RailWonderer]

Do you think that the pro-Russian media is more, less, or similarly slanted?

Yes, Russian state TV is far more biased and hysterical, while their presenters travel to the west on lavish holidays as they ridicule and berate us and talk about flattening this little damp island to nothing (quoting the former Russian president and Putin puppet there). The hatred is all for show and entertainment.

Our news media opinion is more driven by wishful thinking and democratic ideals which do not reflect the realities of combat and force. Case in point Sky's Michael Clarke (even though I like his segments) like most of the media was saying Ukraine would win and that was the assumption which arguably guided Boris Johnson to push Zelensky not to negotiate with Russia in Istanbul in April 2022. The reality was Russia's initial offensive was a short term mishap but they were overwhelmingly the more powerful side.

In Russia, Ukraine is generally seen as forming part of the same cultural entity (like England, Scotland and Wales) and there is the idea that Russia cannot be complete without Ukraine, as Russia was founded in Kiev/Kyiv. So losing Ukraine to what is seen as a hostile block is a big threat to the Russian leadership. Putin is also responsible for several interventions propping up corrupt governments in Ukraine which turned people against him, and he doesn't want to go down as the president who "lost" Ukraine.

I'd agree with this. It's a major source of national pride to both integrate east Ukraine into Russia and to oppose the west, because Russia since 1991 has always seen the west as bullying it, which given NATO interventions in Kosovo, Bosnia and Libya, they have full reason to believe the west will come for them next (as they did Sadaam Hussein and Gadaffi) since Putin is very good at angering the west.

Many Russians, even if not hostile to the west, do not want to be allied to the west and want to be independant of its influence, and losing Ukraine to the western fold is inconcievable, it has a special status in their hearts and minds. Does Ukraine mean that much to us in the west? Yes, Putin uses corruption to control both in his own country, and Ukrainian candidates which is why Ukrainians resent Russian backed leaders, they have every right to want better things for their country, but we have seen in Syria and Afghanistan that you can't prop up a dead horse for long. We have to defend NATO boundaries as they are now and leave it at that.

Boris Johnson (a malicious provoker in my view) told Zelensky not to negotiate in Istanbul back in April 2022 when they were in a far stronger position to do so. Then trying to incorporate Georgia into NATO and the EU when it's in Asia is seen as a provocation, using influence and diplomatic pressure to rub salt in Russia's wounds. There needs to be a balance of power for world peace, we should be defending our sphere of influence and that's it - unless of course Russia tried to take central Asia back by force as well.

I am also proud to have played a small part of making some Ukrainians who have fled to the UK feel welcome here; I know one in particular who came here not knowing any English and I could hardly communicate with him when I first met him in 2022, but 3 years later, I can have a proper conversation with him.

I am therefore not going to allow anyone who states views that come across to me as sympathising with Putin to go unchallenged on this forum. I have tried to stay out of this thread as much as possible, and I am very pleased to see so many knowledgeable and sensible forum members challenge these dubious views, so well done the many members who have done so, you do the forum proud.

I didn't intend to be such a frequent poster in this thread but one statement led to another after opening a can of worms many pages back. Given your personal connection to Ukranians I'll try not to make further comments on this thread, unless you befriend some Russians as well!

 

[doc7austin]

What was the alternative for them? I can only think you are suggesting they kept their nuclear weapons (there is some doubt about whether this was viable) to deter interference by either side. Depending which way things swung, this might have resulted in another pro-Russia nuclear state.

The Ukrainian government from 1991 was never able to launch these nuclear weapons. The control solely lie in Moscow. The Soviet Union was not the most stable state, one thing for sure, all nuclear weapons were designed in a way that only one place (Moscow) could control them.

Let's go back to the year 2000.
There are countless of countries in the world, that are somewhere stuck between or next to great powers (I could list Mongolia, Kazakhstan, Mexico).
If you look at the foreign policy strategy of the three mentioned states, they all try to run a balanced approach towards its neighbours.

In the 2000's there was no need for Ukraine to participate in the illegal war of aggression against Iraq.
Also there was no need to try to join NATO.
Where was Russia a threat then ?

This push for NATO (from the Yushchenko government) was done to tilt the domestic politics in favour of the Western Ukrainian-speaking population - with desastrous consequences for Ukraine. Merkel said several times that the majority of Ukrainians were not in favour of joining NATO either (in the late 2000's). The Ukrainian population reacted and thrown Yuchchenko out of office in the 2009 elections.

And it is the sovereign decision of Germany and France whether to invite Ukraine to NATO or not. If Merkel/Zarkozy came to the conclusion that the Ukrainian does not support NATO membership, then it is their sovereign decision to block the invitation/MEP process.

 

[brad465]

I think it's time to remind everyone why supporting Ukraine against Russia is important for not just Ukraine, but all of Europe. Since the turn of the century the Russian regime has authorised/allowed the following:

- Two state-authorised poisonings on UK soil, especially in 2018 leading to the death of an innocent citizen and serious health problems for other British citizens.
- Weaponised refugee movements into Europe from Syria and North Africa to destabilise the continent.
- Shot down MH17, killing over 200 innocent civilians, with some British amongst the dead.
- Interfered in elections in several democracies, including through social media and bankrolling particular politicians/parties.
- Annexed part of Georgia.

This is not to say the UK is squeaky clean on the international stage, but plenty of the ordinary population will disapprove of our own misgivings (governments and citizens are very different entities). What is clear though from the above is that the Russian regime is not one than should be allowed to freely dictate matters beyond its borders.

 

[OhNoAPacer]

In 2008 Russia invaded Georgia, presumably that is somehow the fault of the west as well.
There is a very good reason former soviet states, such as Latvia, wanted to join NATO, and Putin's illegal invasion of Ukraine shows why they are right to have done so. Ukraine was trying to obtain the same protection.

 

[Cloud Strife]

The fact Hungary can balance the EU and Russia proves my point. The EU could quite easily invade Hungary and install a new regime but they haven't. They've used soft power measures rather than force to try influence Hungary. Belarus, Moldova, Serbia all have Russian influence.

It's worth pointing out that all four of those countries are incredibly weak in terms of military capability. Belarus and Serbia are pretty much an army for show, Hungary has the benefit of NATO but with a small army, and Moldova just doesn't have the money. Having said that, it's become clear in the past 12 months or so that Moldova is perfectly capable of kicking out the Russian "peacekeepers", but there's still a lot of doubt over that massive ammo dump in Transnistria.

through organisations like Progressive Slovakia which PM Robert Fico accused the UK of using to meddle in their 2023 elections

Fico says all sorts of rubbish, and the reason he said that about Progressive Slovakia is that he knows his grip on power is very, very loose. He's struggling to keep the government coalition together, he's having terrible problems with the SNS and particularly the Minister of Culture Šimkovičová, and the latest polls show that he's headed for a huge loss to the opposition. For all his attempts at recreating Fidesz in Slovakia, it's quite obvious that the ruling coalition can't stand each other and so he's getting nowhere.

Boris Johnson (a malicious provoker in my view) told Zelensky not to negotiate in Istanbul back in April 2022 when they were in a far stronger position to do so.

There was absolutely no reason to negotiate back then. Russia had just lost the Battle of Kyiv in humiliating fashion, and as we now know, they couldn't even keep hold of Kherson after relentless Ukrainian attacks. The only thing that saved them in 2023 was that Ukraine didn't have the air power to break through the defensive lines, and now they're facing substantial drone attacks on their critical infrastructure. Russia is by no means winning this war, and Ukraine is not exhausted by any means.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Aug 2025 ==

The Ukrainian population reacted and thrown Yuchchenko out of office in the 2009 elections.

Yushchenko was thrown out after getting involved in political trench warfare with Tymoshenko, while also getting involved in endless parliamentary squabbles. He was a weak leader, including illegally dismissing members of the Constitutional Court. It was nothing to do with his NATO stance, and everything to do with the fact that he was useless.

 

[Annetts key]

I suspect that some of the " pro Kremlin line " posters, are possibly bots, or not whom they claim to be, ie Russian, not Ukrainian.

Or are being paid by directly or indirectly someone or some organisation, no guesses as to where this money is coming from...

(Note, for clarity, I'm not saying that any member in this topic is being paid, just that in some other places this may be occurring.)

I just can't see how any Ukrainian, even in the Russian controlled zones, would support an invasion of their homeland, unless its of course benefited them personally, financially, or politically, and even then, invaders will still treat them as a conquered people,

My own view is that under Putin, and his regeme, Europe is not safe from the threat Russia poses, to its former satellite nations, all of whom were given Independance when the Soviet Union broke up, they had the chance to join a Russian sphere of influence, but instead chose to turn westward, why was that,? Maybe life under russian Influence isn't that good? or free?

If you go looking, there are videos showing (apparently) how bad life is in occupied Ukrainian territory. Damaged buildings, intermittent and poor quality running water, intermittent mains electricity are just some of the things.

There are also videos showing how life in parts of Russia is worse than in a typical Western country. Earlier this year I watched a Russian women in a shop (a small "supermarket type place) showing how they had empty shelves. Then when she went back the following week (I think), the shop had been rearranged to hide the empty space by moving the counters / shelving to block off this empty area. The variety of available products was less than before and the prices were higher. I don't have any links to hand, as I say, I watched this some time ago.

And there are various reports coming out saying how the high interest rates are causing problems. Sorry, I don't have a link for this.

So, if you had a free choice, where would you go? Live in Russia or live in a Western democratic country? Heck, millions of Russians left Russia when they thought Putin was going to conscript them.

 

[RailWonderer]

Russia is by no means winning this war, and Ukraine is not exhausted by any means.

They're winning, take it from the most pro-Ukrainian sources.

Why divided Ukrainians are refusing to fight

Russian gains in the east are undermining morale while casting Kyiv’s manpower problems in stark relief

www.telegraph.co.uk

Krotevhych wrote: “This chaos has been growing for a long time, worsening with each passing day. A stable line of combat, as such, effectively doesn’t exist.”

Ukraine is “visibly losing the war”, says Konrad Muzkya, a Polish military analyst, largely because of the manpower crisis. So why won’t men like Pavlo, 35 and a new father, enlist?

“Probably because I am afraid,” he says, with disarming honesty.

“Afraid to die or, worse, lose my mind and become a burden to my family. Afraid to leave my family in poverty. Afraid that my daughter will grow up an orphan. Afraid of being captured and tortured for months.

Outnumbering the invading Russians, Ukraine recaptured 5,800 square miles of territory by the end of the year.

Those days are gone. Mobilising reservists, recruiting prisoners and offering financial inducements to men in the country’s left-behind villages, Russia – with a far larger population – regained numerical supremacy by late 2023.

Until recently however, Ukraine compensated with superior drone power. But Russia has caught up, deploying more drones and better counter-measures, as well as becoming better at neutralising Ukraine’s.

Also check ISW. The prognosis for Ukraine, is terrible and this is the reality. We need peace to prevent more needless deaths, and anybody who wants this war to go on is as guilty as Russian leadership.

 

[OhNoAPacer]

They're winning, take it from the most pro-Ukrainian sources.

Why divided Ukrainians are refusing to fight

Russian gains in the east are undermining morale while casting Kyiv’s manpower problems in stark relief

www.telegraph.co.uk

Also check ISW. The prognosis for Ukraine, is terrible and this is the reality. We need peace to prevent more needless deaths, and anybody who wants this war to go on is as guilty as Russian leadership.

Nobody wants the war to go on except Putin, he could stop it today if he so wished.

 

[najaB]

The Ukrainian government from 1991 was never able to launch these nuclear weapons. The control solely lie in Moscow. The Soviet Union was not the most stable state, one thing for sure, all nuclear weapons were designed in a way that only one place (Moscow) could control them.

Given that many of the weapons systems were made in Ukraine, and the sophistication of the Ukrainian aerospace industry that was unlikely to remain true for long.

 

[doc7austin]

In 2008 Russia invaded Georgia, presumably that is somehow the fault of the west as well.

The Georgian President Mikael Sakashvili started the hostilities - and his troops starting shooting at people in South Ossetia - in 2008.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Aug 2025 ==

There is a very good reason former soviet states, such as Latvia, wanted to join NATO, and Putin's illegal invasion of Ukraine shows why they are right to have done so. Ukraine was trying to obtain the same protection.

Though, the American government would never set US boots on the ground for a combat mission in Ukraine. I could have told you that already in the 2000's.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Aug 2025 ==

Having said that, it's become clear in the past 12 months or so that Moldova is perfectly capable of kicking out the Russian "peacekeepers", but there's still a lot of doubt over that massive ammo dump in Transnistria.

Where has this become clear ?
Transnistria was never a part of independent Moldova. Moreover, there is a binding treaty between all involved parties confirming that.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Aug 2025 ==

There was absolutely no reason to negotiate back then. Russia had just lost the Battle of Kyiv in humiliating fashion, and as we now know, they couldn't even keep hold of Kherson after relentless Ukrainian attacks.

In 2022 Russia won the Battles of Luhansk Oblast, the Battle of Mariupol, the Battle of Tokmak, the Battle for the Zap NPP.

The Kherson retreat - there is much speculation that a deal was made between USA and Russia to let the Russian soldiers retreat without any casualties. The same Russian soldiers then defeated Ukrainian troops in the much touted Ukrainian Counteroffensive of June 2023.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Aug 2025 ==

If you go looking, there are videos showing (apparently) how bad life is in occupied Ukrainian territory. Damaged buildings, intermittent and poor quality running water, intermittent mains electricity are just some of the things.

I'd recommend you to watch the Youtube channel "Videos from Mariupol". The content creator is certainly not paid by the Russian government.

Videos from Mariupol

Share your videos with friends, family and the world

www.youtube.com

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Aug 2025 ==

Nobody wants the war to go on except Putin, he could stop it today if he so wished.

And how does Zelenskyy wants to fullfill his promise to take back Crimea - without war ?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Aug 2025 ==

Given that many of the weapons systems were made in Ukraine, and the sophistication of the Ukrainian aerospace industry that was unlikely to remain true for long.

Probably, Bill Clinton and his national security staff thought the same way.

 

[Cloud Strife]

The Georgian President Mikael Sakashvili started the hostilities - and his troops starting shooting at people in South Ossetia - in 2008.

I'm honestly wondering what agenda you have here, because this is factually incorrect. The war started on 1st August 2008 after numerous attacks by South Ossentian forces against Georgian forces. Georgia didn't start it, but they entered South Ossetia after the attacks intensified. Russian troops had already entered South Ossetia before Georgian ones did as well.

Where has this become clear ?

The simple fact that Moldova has been increasingly applying pressure to Transnistria without any response from Russia. We're observing the same thing as happened in Nagorno-Karabakh, where Russian "peacekeepers" were/are completely unable to respond. The Russian forces aren't even at their maximum in Transnistria, and it's pretty obvious that they only exist there because Moldova allows them to at this point. Transnistria was even included into the Moldovan customs system at the beginning of last year, and they were pretty much helpless.

Transnistria was never a part of independent Moldova. Moreover, there is a binding treaty between all involved parties confirming that.

More strange comments, but:

Transnistria was an integral part of the Moldavian SSR, and the territory didn't have any sort of autonomy during the existence of the Soviet Union. There was no Transnistrian government, no Transnistrian assembly, and what became Transnistria was formed from local councils and governments elected in 1990. These councils/governments created a legislative assembly with no legal force, and it was that assembly that declared the Pridnestrovian Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic in 1990. However, this assembly was by no means representative of the whole of Transnistria, as particularly in rural areas, there was opposition to this attempt at secession.

But let's look at the facts on the ground: in 1990 and 1991, the Moldovan state was very much present in what became Transnistria, including police. Moldova itself declared independence in August 1991, but going backwards, Gorbachev also declared the decrees of the self-declared "Pridnestrovian Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic" to be annulled in December 1990. While the exact date of Moldova's independence is a matter of legal theory, it's undeniable that they had it by December 25th, when Transnistria was still very much part of now-independent Moldova.

Anyway, let's go forwards. There's the military action that took place in 1992, before the eventual ceasefire in July 1992. After the ceasefire, while the Joint Control Commission oversees the ceasefire in the security zone (which mostly covers territory administered by the Transnistrian authorities, but also some villages under Moldovan administration), there was never a binding treaty that recognised anything regarding Transnistria's existence. Even Russia doesn't recognise Transnistria as an independent state, and it doesn't have an embassy in Tiraspol. As far as international law is concerned, as well as the facts on the ground, today's Transnistria is very much legally part of Moldova.

In 2022 Russia won the Battles of Luhansk Oblast, the Battle of Mariupol, the Battle of Tokmak, the Battle for the Zap NPP.

They did. They still failed miserably with their key objectives, and lost Kherson quite quickly. They expected a quick win, and ended up in a war that they can't win.

The Kherson retreat - there is much speculation that a deal was made between USA and Russia to let the Russian soldiers retreat without any casualties. The same Russian soldiers then defeated Ukrainian troops in the much touted Ukrainian Counteroffensive of June 2023.

Such speculation is just that, speculation. It's not a secret that Ukraine was hammering them non-stop in Kherson, and that they were finding it incredibly hard to deal with a hostile local population that could easily use the Ukrainian phone network to inform the Ukrainian forces about the location of Russian forces. They had very little choice but to withdraw and blow the dam at Nova Kakhovka, and it's likely that those forces were then put to work in fortifying the southern front.

It's also worth saying that the counteroffensive failed not because of Russian forces, but because of the defences. The minefields themselves are incredibly dense and difficult to break through, and without air support, they simply fought to a stalemate. It's also very obvious that Ukraine didn't commit anywhere near the numbers or weapons needed to break through, because they understood that it was futile without air support. If Russia hadn't built those fortified lines, it's likely that the war would be over by now.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Aug 2025 ==

I'd recommend you to watch the Youtube channel "Videos from Mariupol". The content creator is certainly not paid by the Russian government.

Videos from Mariupol

Share your videos with friends, family and the world

www.youtube.com

Russia is pouring money into Mariupol because they want to turn it into a second Sochi. It's pretty much a Potemkin city at this point, with expensive flats being sold to outsiders who don't even want them, but who are expected to buy them as part of 'the cause'. The locals have been pushed into the suburbs into the damaged apartments, and well, this story tells how it really is there: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cq6912mqp1go

"Water flows for a day or two, then it doesn't come for three days. We keep buckets and cans of water at home. The colour of the water is so yellow that even after boiling it, it's scary to drink it,"

It's not exactly a big secret that Mariupol is like Donetsk today.

 

[najaB]

And how does Zelenskyy wants to fullfill his promise to take back Crimea - without war ?

Easy: Russia leaves. Done.

 

[doc7austin]

Transnistria was an integral part of the Moldavian SSR, and the territory didn't have any sort of autonomy during the existence of the Soviet Union. There was no Transnistrian government, no Transnistrian assembly, and what became Transnistria was formed from local councils and governments elected in 1990. These councils/governments created a legislative assembly with no legal force, and it was that assembly that declared the Pridnestrovian Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic in 1990. However, this assembly was by no means representative of the whole of Transnistria, as particularly in rural areas, there was opposition to this attempt at secession.

But let's look at the facts on the ground: in 1990 and 1991, the Moldovan state was very much present in what became Transnistria, including police. Moldova itself declared independence in August 1991, but going backwards, Gorbachev also declared the decrees of the self-declared "Pridnestrovian Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic" to be annulled in December 1990.

I think you are referring to some internal struggles within the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union (together with the territory of the Moldavian SSR) was recognized as sovereign state by USA, UK, Germany until the end of 1991.

While the exact date of Moldova's independence is a matter of legal theory, it's undeniable that they had it by December 25th, when Transnistria was still very much part of now-independent Moldova.

Says who ? Pridnestrovia/Transnistria was never a part of a the new independent Moldova.

Anyway, let's go forwards. There's the military action that took place in 1992, before the eventual ceasefire in July 1992. After the ceasefire, while the Joint Control Commission oversees the ceasefire in the security zone (which mostly covers territory administered by the Transnistrian authorities, but also some villages under Moldovan administration), there was never a binding treaty that recognised anything regarding Transnistria's existence. Even Russia doesn't recognise Transnistria as an independent state, and it doesn't have an embassy in Tiraspol. As far as international law is concerned,

The governments in Chisinau and Moscow signed a peace treaty in 1992, ending the armed conflict.
Let's see which side is going to break that peace treaty ?

as well as the facts on the ground, today's Transnistria is very much legally part of Moldova.

Which facts on the ground prove that Transnistria is very much legally a part of Moldova ?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Aug 2025 ==

Easy: Russia leaves. Done.

which is not going to happen.
What other option than war would Zelenskyy have to capture Crimea instead ?

 

[ainsworth74]

which is not going to happen.

Almost as if Russia is the aggressor conducting a brutal war of conquest against a sovereign independent nation or something.

What other option than war would Zelenskyy have to capture Crimea instead ?

The word you're looking for is liberate, not capture. Crimea is occupied Ukrainian territory.

If Russia hadn't built those fortified lines, it's likely that the war would be over by now.

Yes the irony is that, whilst he was deposed not long after, the one thing that Surovikin did do for the Russians is help establish defence in depth which allowed them to absorb the Ukrainian assault. His reward for this forward planning which may well have saved the Russians in Ukraine appears to have been being disappeared into a dark hole somewhere since the Wagner Rebellion in summer 2023 though apparently has resurfaced since but in a role not related to the war anymore. Good news for Ukraine and the West though as he seemed uncommonly competent as Russian senior leaders went.

 

[Cloud Strife]

Says who ? Pridnestrovia/Transnistria was never a part of a the new independent Moldova.

Of course it was. This is revisionist history at best, but factually, it's wrong. For instance, in Dubasari, it was very much under control of the Molodovan police until March 1992. The attack on the Dubasari police station was what turned the skirmishes into war, and during the war itself, neither side controlled the whole of what became Transnistria. The ceasefire led to Moldova withdrawing their forces from Transnistria, but that wasn't until July 1992, long after independence was formally recognised by the internaitonal community.

The governments in Chisinau and Moscow signed a peace treaty in 1992, ending the armed conflict.

This wasn't a peace treaty. It was/is a ceasefire agreement that established a joint security zone, nothing more.

Which facts on the ground prove that Transnistria is very much legally a part of Moldova ?

Plenty of them. The first is that Transnistria is under the Moldovan customs system and has to pay Moldova for everything that is imported, including VAT. Then there's the reality that the border is wide open between the two, and that locals cross rather freely between the two without control. Now, with the war in Ukraine, they're also very heavily dependent on Moldova after Moldova stopped buying gas from Russia and Ukraine stopped gas transit to Transnistria, and they're going to be even more dependent on Moldova once the electricity line is connected to Romania. In fact, once Moldova stops buying electricity from Cuciurgan, Transnistria is in a terrible situation because they'll have to finance the entire electricity system by themselves, including paying for the import of coal to fuel the station (which is also used to produce gas used for district heating).

Unlike other breakaway republics, Transnistria has never been fully independent of Moldova and things are getting more, not less dependent on Moldova there.

 

[martin butler]

As regards Crimea, and the pro -Russian areas, all Ukraine has to do is to rebuild, and leave those bits to the Russians, an very soon, the people will see their neighbours enjoying better standards of living as part of the EU, than a forgotten waste ground, Russia never invests in anything other than its centres of population, St Petersburgh, and Moscow, and very soon, the pro Russian voices will fade,

One thing that can no be hidden by any Kremlin PR, is that once given independence from Moscow, and the Russian system, countries have always, opted to turn towards western democracy and to expand links with western, not the, Russian sphere of influence,

 

[ainsworth74]

As regards Crimea, and the pro -Russian areas, all Ukraine has to do is to rebuild, and leave those bits to the Russians, an very soon, the people will see their neighbours enjoying better standards of living as part of the EU, than a forgotten waste ground, Russia never invests in anything other than its centres of population, St Petersburgh, and Moscow, and very soon, the pro Russian voices will fade,

Whilst I agree with the sentiment, it is worth noting that "pro-Russian" is perhaps overselling it. Particularly now but even before the war started in 2014 and escalated in 2022. Those areas were perhaps more sympathetic to Russia but it's always worth recalling that whilst Crimea voted to join Russia after the invasion I'm not sure anyone could really describe that as a "free and fair" vote. Whilst there may well have been some discontent with Kyiv in the Donbas most of the fighting done by the separatists was heavily supported by and indeed a lot of it was done by Russians.

Of course though that's one of the reasons why Russia and Putin needs countries like Ukraine to fail (and so Russia will make sure they fail) because otherwise their own population might start to wonder "If those Ukrainians/Belarussians/Georgians/etc etc who are our brother people are prosperous and successful why aren't we?".

One thing that can no be hidden by any Kremlin PR, is that once given independence from Moscow, and the Russian system, countries have always, opted to turn towards western democracy and to expand links with western, not the, Russian sphere of influence,

Ah the classic mistake! All those countries are really being forced against their will to look to the West and away from Russia by CIA/MI5 influence operations!

 

[357]

As regards Crimea, and the pro -Russian areas,

My family in Crimea would very much disagree with you about your description here.

 

[brad465]

As regards Crimea, and the pro -Russian areas, all Ukraine has to do is to rebuild, and leave those bits to the Russians, an very soon, the people will see their neighbours enjoying better standards of living as part of the EU, than a forgotten waste ground, Russia never invests in anything other than its centres of population, St Petersburgh, and Moscow, and very soon, the pro Russian voices will fade,

One thing that can no be hidden by any Kremlin PR, is that once given independence from Moscow, and the Russian system, countries have always, opted to turn towards western democracy and to expand links with western, not the, Russian sphere of influence,

This is one of the lesser-talked about reasons behind Russia invading Ukraine: Putin needs a buffer zone to stop Russian citizens living next door to a world much better than their own. The Baltic states were very sensible in joining NATO during Russia's quiet period in the 90s, as if they hadn't he'd absolutely have tried to subjugate those too, in the way he has done to Belarus and Georgia.

 

[doc7austin]

As regards Crimea, and the pro -Russian areas, all Ukraine has to do is to rebuild, and leave those bits to the Russians, an very soon, the people will see their neighbours enjoying better standards of living as part of the EU, than a forgotten waste ground,

Have you compared Crimea of 1991 (under Moscow's rule) with Crimea of 2013 (under Kiev's rule) ? Nothing has changed, except the infrastructure became more rotten.

 

[martin butler]

This is one of the lesser-talked about reasons behind Russia invading Ukraine: Putin needs a buffer zone to stop Russian citizens living next door to a world much better than their own. The Baltic states were very sensible in joining NATO during Russia's quiet period in the 90s, as if they hadn't he'd absolutely have tried to subjugate those too, in the way he has done to Belarus and Georgia.

Thats where Russia has really messed up, When the USSR collapsed, Had Russia, not elected a drunk, then a KGB officer, and actually modernised in a way that made life better, and not just for the criminal elite, then I think normal Russians would be living better lives, have more freedoms to travel, and not wanted to emigrate, the natural wealth, would have made Russia a rich country, and its populations could have had living standards that matched the west, across all of Russia, not just in the bits with the most populations,