[OC] Ethnic Russians in the Russian Federation, 2021 CensusSubmitted by greensino t3_10iv5t3 in dataisbeautiful
Siggi_pop t1_j5h23h3 wrote
Can't find Crimea on the map /s
madrid987 t1_j5iblit wrote
In fact, the Crimean Peninsula is dominated by ethnic Russians.
Stalin banished Crimean Tatar and filled the place with 'great Russians'.
trisul-108 t1_j5ioqdj wrote
When you say "dominated" you really mean "majority". It is the only part of Ukraine where ethnic Russians had a majority in the last last census before Russia invaded.
mdog73 t1_j5ivxow wrote
Aren't Ukrainians and Russians essentially the same people?
Hakoi t1_j5iwi49 wrote
No. Different language, different culture, different history. For example, west Ukrainians became part of Russia only at the end of WW2.
canttouchmypingas t1_j5iz8hu wrote
And said territory was a part of Poland post WW1
trisul-108 t1_j5izecf wrote
No, not at all. Ukrainians don't feel this way, they have their own culture, language, outlooks and customs that differ. If Russians really considered them to be one people, they would never be targeting Ukrainian civilians as they are ... and the Russian public would be more upset about it than they are.
This is just a propaganda statement by Russia. It's like "we're brothers, so your house is my house, right?".
madrid987 t1_j5m1e1y wrote
It was until the days of the Russian Empire. The empire regarded the Ukrainians as a kind of Russian.
kyralfie t1_j5jgxzp wrote
While you are at it also don't forget to mention that Stalin banished Poles from Western Ukraine and filled it with 'great Ukrainians'.
EDIT: typo
canttouchmypingas t1_j5jh8qi wrote
Spoils of war after being conquered by the USSR during their co invasion with Nazi Germany, you are correct:
After the German-Soviet invasion of Poland in 1939, Lviv became part of the Soviet Union.
OccamsPlasticSpork t1_j5knivs wrote
I think the demographics will work against Ukraine taking the peninsula back.
feorh t1_j5iw9jm wrote
Funny thing about that banishment. Everybody mentions that but nobody remember the reasons. The "deportation" is the most humane punishment they deserved.
If you don't learn the history you're doomed to repear it.
leela_martell t1_j5iy567 wrote
Punishment, for what? For existing? Why does anyone let alone an entire group of people “deserve” to be punished for that?
Kimchi-slap t1_j5j0nzm wrote
Hard to google eh?
It was collective punishment for collaboration with nazi Germany during ww2. You will have to google for more info
leela_martell t1_j5j1md5 wrote
Okay, so after the Russian invasion of Ukraine is over we can deport the entirety of Moscow and St. Petersburg’s populations to the Antarctica as collective punishment and even Russians will think that’s “humane”? Or is collective responsibility something that applies to everyone but Russians?
Of course the ethnic cleansings (speaking more broadly than just Crimean Tatars) started years before WWII. You can Google “great purge” for more information. Many of the deported were kulaks then but “enemy ethnicities” especially Poles but also other people from countries surrounding the USSR both in Europe and Asia, were targeted as well.
Kimchi-slap t1_j5j2fsb wrote
Oh for love of fucking god, I am not here to debate politics or moral standards. You asked why and I answered. Form your own opinion on history and do whatever you wish. Maybe even learn from it.
leela_martell t1_j5j32ap wrote
If you’re not here for “moral standards” then you’re answering to the wrong person. The poster I replied to and was questioning used terms “humane” and “deserved”, those are inherently terms that comment on the morality of the action, not what its “legal” or otherwise claimed “justification” was.
Kimchi-slap t1_j5j43fp wrote
I don't even know why you bother with Crimean tatars at the first place. Bet you didn't even know they existed before Crimean annexation in 2014.
leela_martell t1_j5j4y23 wrote
You'd like to believe that everyone is that ignorant, I'm sure.
But yeah let's you and I stop bothering with this discussion here.
Kimchi-slap t1_j5j6kav wrote
Of course I believe that. Because it's true. Most Russians don't even know that crimean tatars are not the same as tatars from Tatarstan. What can one expect from westerners? I know about them because I am citizen of Uzbekistan and had a friend who is descended of those said tatars in school. Otherwise I would have been just as ignorant as most.
Wanna stop this discussion, fine by me. I am too biased for that anyway.
leela_martell t1_j5j8csk wrote
I'm not Russian. There are a sizable Tatar minority in my country (Finland) but you're right, many people don't know the difference between Crimean Tatars and other tatars.
My grandmother is Ingrian, her people too were targeted by Stalin's forced deportations so I have done some personal research on this issue. Not to victimise myself cause for Russia's neighbors Finns have had it better than many on the past century or to say I'm some expert but I'm not completely ignorant. But as I said I wasn't arguing about what the reason Kremlin gave for the deportations was.
Kimchi-slap t1_j5jbmmi wrote
Well here I am on the receiving end of my own stick. Had to google about Ingrians. Realised that I heard about them but didn't know how they are called in English. We call them Ижорцы, but beside that my knowledge was limited. Haven't realised that population was that small though or that they were victims of repressions, not that I am surprised though.
I am myself is kore-saram (Soviet Korean), my people had some history with USSR "relocation" history. And just like crimean tatars we happened to be in Uzbekistan. That's why I am kinda biased at this topic. I just thought you are another white knight who heard about injustice, quickly googled it and went on moral spree to defend the downthrodden. I apologize for misjudging you and for my indecent behaviour towards your person.
leela_martell t1_j5jjodv wrote
Sometimes it's easy to assume people on places like Reddit are Americans or Brits or something like that, just going by probability haha. No offense taken on my part, sorry for being snappy as well.
But thank you for telling me, I in turn don't know much about Korean people in the USSR, besides having seen mentioned that they existed. I'll definitely look more into their history! Izhorians and Ingrians are slightly different people, though Izhorians also lived in Ingria (Leningrad oblast now) even before Ingrian Finns migrated there.
Kimchi-slap t1_j5jqbvg wrote
Well I for one glad that we could broaden each other's views a bit more. Any opportunity to learn a new thing is a blessing of some sort.
It's a bit hard to find sources on Ingrians, google always drops me either to finnish Ingrians if I search in English or to Izhorians if I search in Russian. If you have any credible sources, I would love to read them.
Info on Soviet koreans are obtainable quite easy, although it varies as well from source to source. Much of it is biased of course but mostly accurate. It also varies which Soviet koreans they are. There are migrants (voluntary) in Far East who had their own diaspora and those who were forcefully moved like crimean tatars with same "benefits" of being untrustworthy people during Stalin reign to Central Asia, Uzbekistan becoming our new home for 4 generations. Must also mention the generosity and hospitality of uzbek people which became legendary in USSR and officially recognized by crimean tatars and my people.
leela_martell t1_j5nkmle wrote
Likewise!
As for sources about things on Ingrians, it’s a bit difficult. I don’t know anything in English, all I know is based on Finnish articles, books, one TV documentary and some stuff my grandma told me. Maybe there is something in Russian but I don’t speak it so I wouldn’t know where to start looking.
I’ve never been to Uzbekistan, but it sounds lovely. I just read a book last week that took place partly in Tashkent (is Tashkent or Toshkent the right name? In Finnish it’s Taškent but don’t know if that comes through Russian.) Incidentally it’s about this same subject as the writer is a Russian-Finnish author (Anna Soudakova) whose grandfather was displaced to Uzbekistan from the Leningrad region in the 1930s when his parents were executed as “enemies of the people” and she wrote the book based on his life. I don’t think the grandfather was Ingrian though, as far as I’ve understood one of his parents was a Finnish migrant to Canada, from where they moved to the USSR.
Kimchi-slap t1_j5numg2 wrote
Ah, that's a shame. But I will keep an eye out from now on. If my trip to Karelia this spring will be possible, it will be a great opportunity to check out local culture besides gorgeous views.
Uzbekistan is a lovely country. Quite harsh climate though. Insanely hot summer (+45°C easily) and quite cold winters (-15°C this winter, which may not sound too much for Finland, but thats feels like -30 in Siberia). Tashkent or Toshkent depends on which language you speak, uzbeks say Toshkent (Tosh - stone, Kent - city), but again those who speak Russian do call it Tashkent so both ways are appropriate. It's the capital and very beautiful at that with more then 2000 years of history. But the real troves of history are big old cities like Bukhara Khiva and Samarkand. They are even older with carefully preserved historic buildings going way back to glorious days of Amir Temur. The most impressive display is the paint which still hold its original colour. It's quite amazing to see contrast of nearby desert and cloudless sky with buildings that sport blue and green colours. The secret of that paint sadly is lost but most popular theory is that valuable gems were grinded to dust and used for that purpose, which I believe myself to be true, as that was created at peak of Timurid Empire and it had resources for that kind of showoff. Tashkent hovewer have much less of those historic building left as it was devastated by earthquake which leveled most of the city in 1966. It's quite a historic event and one of the reason why many uzbeks remember USSR fondly, as the call was made to rebuild Tashkent and it was answered. In 3 years city was complely rebuilt and modernized, many of those who helped later stayed as well and formed new local intelligence which is never bad to have young blood with knowledge.
The book you mentioned is from memories of much darker times. Uzbeks themselves don't really like to remember those. Even history books in schools were quite short on that subject.
leela_martell t1_j5nyav3 wrote
Oh cool, where in Karelia are you planning to go? My grandma is from Petrozavodsk and my grandpa is from Koivisto (Primorsk) (they evacuated during WWII). I always wanted to visit there, unfortunately I never got around to it and now travelling to Russia is out of the question. Koivisto especially sounds so pretty to me and there are these big islands on its shore, I’m from a coastal town myself (Turku, which lost its own oldest buildings in a massive fire in the 1800s so my sympathies for Toshkent for the earthquake) so archipelagos always call to me.
I googled and Samarkand looks absolutely stunning, wow! Thanks for the description, those blue buildings especially are so beautiful. There’s no architecture like that here in Finland.
And yes, the book was definitely from dark times.
Kimchi-slap t1_j5o95dz wrote
Oh yeah, Putin sure did wonders to international tourism, although Russia didnt really banned any countries from visiting, it's unadvisable to do so while war is waging. Whether I travel myself is highly debatable, as I plan to do so with my best friends on their car and they always laugh how I am such a city boy and will not survive the trip. Primorsk is surely to be one of the destinations as I do like idea of having an access to big water. Also fish... I am a sucker for a fresh fish.
That earthquake was indeed horrible, but it also shaped Tashkent to its current state of modern city. You have my sympathy for that fire as well. It's always a great shame to lose historic buildings.
You should definitely try visiting Uzbekistan as tourist. Well maybe not now as prices went up thanks to all the Russians who hide from mobilization there, but it is a great experience nevertheless. Well unless you are vegetarian or vegan. Local food is unfriendly to vegetarians and completely incompatible to vegans. Although there are adaptations but they are not the same obviously. One good demonstration of uzbek food are easily found on YouTube as our tourism ministry finally realised that power of food bloggers is considerable one and invited every big shot like Mark Wiens and Sonny from Best Ever Food review show. They filmed excellent high quality production videos, interest to Uzbekistan finally plummeted and BAAAM. CORONOVIRUS In all its glory. Timing was so bad that I literally cried.
LandirL t1_j5ij0h8 wrote
Which is interesting, because they annexed it in 2014 and this census is from 2021
BubblyForce8229 t1_j5iwxbo wrote
>c groups in the SW parts of Russia, which border other former USSR countries.
That's A Crimea in Russia
Allgoodonesaretaken9 t1_j5icy4r wrote
It would be green. Do you not support democracy?
RedditUser91805 t1_j5igly8 wrote
Why are you presuming ethnic Russians want to be part of the Russian state? What type of blood and soil fascist apologia is this? This is the type of rhetoric and framing that gets immigrants all across the world attacked over accusations of dual loyalty.
Allgoodonesaretaken9 t1_j5j9guy wrote
Just based on referendums. They want independence because they want to be allowed to speak their own language and not be shelled by the actual blood and soil fascists from Western Ukraine. The ones that declared Bandera a national hero in 2010 and still honor his statue. Maybe look in to who that was.
BrotherM t1_j5iguf6 wrote
I went to the Crimea when it was occupied by the Ukraine...the people there, by and large, from all the conversations I had, definitely wanted to be part of the Russian State (that's why people in the Crimea voted to join the RF when the Soviet Union collapsed...they were only kept in the Ukraine by threats of force by Kiev).
madrid987 t1_j5ipbeo wrote
Frankly, it was true that the Russians in Crimea were quite anti-Ukraine. The same is true of Donbas's Russians. In fact, Donbas has more ethnic ukrainians, but the Russians tried to incite them into pro-Russia. There are numerous Russian diasporas in the world, but Russians in Ukraine are particularly severe.
The Russians in Kazakhstan don't have that inclination.
Allgoodonesaretaken9 t1_j5j8wpz wrote
Maybe because the Kazakhs aren’t Nazi’s that consider them racially inferior.
BrotherM t1_j5kuos2 wrote
There isn't really any ethnic difference between Russians and Ukrainians, just cultural.
Allgoodonesaretaken9 t1_j5lby4u wrote
Explain that to the people in Western Ukraine. The ones that honor Nazi-leader Bandera still.
BrotherM t1_j5lgekq wrote
Oh I would :-)
Those Jew-murdering-Nazi worshipping fucks.
Ain't a damn thing good about Banderites.
Allgoodonesaretaken9 t1_j5m1od1 wrote
Sorry, I’m not used to people actually knowing anything about Ukraine on here.
BrotherM t1_j5na0vf wrote
Great to meet another one! :-)
RedditUser91805 t1_j5ih6du wrote
That's an interesting bending of history. Please remind me, is the current year 1994?
BrotherM t1_j5kv63o wrote
No, and people in the Crimea still prefer to be part of Russia. They always have! They were just stuck in the Ukraine because when they tried to separate, peacefully, from the Soviet Union (as did the Ukraine itself), then join Russia, the Ukraine threatened to roll in tanks.
kertnik t1_j5io1zv wrote
Your words aren't supported by any electoral or statustical data
canttouchmypingas t1_j5izdf8 wrote
They are, people just don't agree with the data as they believe it's manipulated
kertnik t1_j5j29r1 wrote
Well, Ukraine wasn't ever as repressive as Russia, and in no elections those parties that supported uniting with Russia (note that this is not the same as pro-Russian parties) never had more than 7% of votes.
canttouchmypingas t1_j5j2mi2 wrote
You replied to someone talking about Crimea, there was a referendum and most of the west doesn't accept it. This is the evidence to my counterclaim that his words are indeed supported by data, people just don't agree with it as they believe it's manipulated:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Crimean_status_referendum
kertnik t1_j5j3ao2 wrote
Well, this 'referendum' can't in any way be more evidential than Ukrainian elections, just because it was contucted with military in polling places, under occupation (albeit peaceful), with no equal treatment of the opposing side (no pro-Ukraine narrative was allowed). And moreover, there are lots of discrepancies that implies those numbers were just written without even counting the ballots
canttouchmypingas t1_j5j5zgp wrote
You seem to be debating the data and are elaborating on why you think it's manipulative, that's not the point. You made a claim that there's no statistical data to back it up. I said there was, it was just contested, and provided a link. The only point is that there is data, contrary to your initial claim
kertnik t1_j5j7n2e wrote
It isn't data, I can myself create same thing that '96% Canadians are in favour of joining to the UK'.
Data becomes data when it is real, not just made up.
canttouchmypingas t1_j5jazik wrote
Just because you don't accept it doesn't make it real, you're getting a bit ahead of the point on why you disagree with it. I noted as such in my initial counterpoint where I said that data exists, people just believe it's manipulated. You believe it's manipulated and thus won't accept it, but that does not mean that it does not exist. You claimed that there was no data, I showed you the data. You cannot write it off either as its being used as one of the main claims by Russia. To them its very real and not manipulated. We cannot pretend it doesn't exist because we don't like it. That is the only point I have to make, that your original claim of no data existing is inaccurate. It does exist, it's simply not accepted by the west. There is a difference between nonexistence and nonacceptance.
trisul-108 t1_j5iov56 wrote
There is no democracy in Crimea and Russia had no right whatsoever to annex Crimea as they signed an international declaration promising never to do so and filed it with the UN.
canttouchmypingas t1_j5izb1t wrote
Many nations involved have broken international agreements signed in the 90s
trisul-108 t1_j5j4wbv wrote
We can discuss each example on its own merit. This is Russia doing it and it makes the annexation completely illegal.
Allgoodonesaretaken9 t1_j5j980o wrote
Like NATO not expanding one inch beyond Germany? Like the Minsk accords Porochenko, Merkel and Hollande admitted were a farce to buy time?
trisul-108 t1_j5jaq29 wrote
>Like NATO not expanding one inch beyond Germany?
I've read all the documents, there is no mention anywhere in the agreements NATO promising not to expand. It was a request that did not make it into the final documents that where signed by Russia. And Russia knew all about this when they signed promising never to attack Ukraine.
There is nothing that can justify Russia breaking the terms of the UN Charter. Nothing.
Edit: The timeline goes like this:
- Russian signs the German Unification agreement which contains nothing about NATO expansion.
- Russian signs promising never to attack Ukraine.
- Russia attacks Ukraine.
- Minsk Accords try to stop the bloodshed.
So, now you invent that in 1. there was something about NATO not expanding, which is untrue. And then you claim not honouring 4. is as bad or worse than actually invading a country Russia promised never to invade.
And then you talk about double standards, while applying a double standard that screams to the skies.
Come on!
canttouchmypingas t1_j5jgbpf wrote
Please don't mislead the public with disinformation:
The documents reinforce former CIA Director Robert Gates’s criticism of “pressing ahead with expansion of NATO eastward [in the 1990s], when Gorbachev and others were led to believe that wouldn’t happen.”[1] The key phrase, buttressed by the documents, is “led to believe.”
...
This latter idea of special status for the GDR territory was codified in the final German unification treaty signed on September 12, 1990, by the Two-Plus-Four foreign ministers (see Document 25).
...
The documents show that Gorbachev agreed to German unification in NATO as the result of this cascade of assurance
...
According to the Russian memorandum of conversation, “Woerner stressed that the NATO Council and he are against the expansion of NATO (13 of 16 NATO members support this point of view).” (See Document 30)
Thus, Gorbachev went to the end of the Soviet Union assured that the West was not threatening his security and was not expanding NATO
...
NATO’s expansion was years in the future, when these disputes would erupt again, and more assurances would come to Russian leader Boris Yeltsin.
trisul-108 t1_j5jo46d wrote
There is nothing about it in the signed documents. These documents are public, I have read them. Please show me a signed document that promises Russia not to spread.
What happened is that Russia requested that NATO not spread to Eastern Germany and when Germany consulted with NATO, they found out that this cannot be guaranteed. Germany went back to Russia and Russia said OK and signed the document without this clause.
Now, if someone promised something to Russia while drinking whiskey or coffee, that is not an agreement. The agreement is what was signed.
Again, Russia signed its promise not to invade Ukraine a long time after NATO expanded. This is just a ridiculous KGB excuse for the invasion of a sovereign nation. This invasion is entirely illegal and nothing can justify it.
canttouchmypingas t1_j5kpp37 wrote
Your claim:
So, now you invent that in 1. there was something about NATO not expanding, which is untrue.
Is 100% false.
Allgoodonesaretaken9 t1_j5t6nfr wrote
Merkel, Hollande and Porochenko admitted that they signed the Minsk accords only to keep the Russians at bay and build up the Ukrainian army and build fortifications in the East. The shelling of civilians continued. They never meant to live up to it. Putin was naive. They had them encircled and could have beaten them in days. Now after 8 years and billions of dollars in equipment and training (all out of altruism and for democracy if course), it’s going to take years and hundreds of thousands of lives. All to prevent a region from getting the independence the majority of people want. I guess the democracy argument only holds for enemies of the empire like Kosovo with Serbia.
trisul-108 t1_j5tgp86 wrote
But that was after Russia broke its commitments and annexed part of a country it promised never to attack. Ukraine could not defend itself and negotiations provided it with a needed breather. The Minsk accords were already in contradiction of the the UN Charter and the territorial integrity of Ukraine.
You can blow smoke all you like, but you cannot get around the fact that Russia had no right to the Donbas, had no right Crimea, all of it was illegal, done in bad faith in contravention of the UN Charter.
Allgoodonesaretaken9 t1_j5tji8r wrote
Crimea has been Russian for centuries. The vast majority of people there want to be part of Russia, which explains why your brave Ukrainians didn’t fight back during the annexation and there hasn’t been a militia like in Donetsk and Lugansk to fight ‘the oppressor’. Maybe they didn’t want to be burned alive by Nazi’s, like what happened in Odessa.
trisul-108 t1_j5tz6bt wrote
This is completely irrelevant. Ukraine is a sovereign nation, member of the UN, recognised as such by Russia and entitled to its territorial integrity. Russia has also signed a formal agreement never to move militarily against Ukraine and filed it with the UN.
The annexations and invasions are all illegal. There is no way around this.
Allgoodonesaretaken9 t1_j5uhg9a wrote
So was the Soviet Union, so was Yugoslavia, Sudan, etc. Good to hear that at least you consider Taiwan part of China, so no need to get involved there, right?
trisul-108 t1_j5ulrff wrote
Who annexed the Soviet Union, who annexed Yugoslavia, who annexed Sudan? There is no comparison.
As to Taiwan, it is a very complicated issue as both China and Taiwan claim to be the rightful ruler of all China. When you show the intellectual ability and honesty to grasp simple cases like Crimea, we can proceed to an analysis of complicated issues like Taiwan. Before that, judging on what you have said, I feel it is way above your head.
Allgoodonesaretaken9 t1_j5ur8z2 wrote
Isn’t it interesting how things are always ‘complicated’ when it involves enemies of the empire but never when it involves nato-countries. The democracy argument only works when it suits you. So Catalunya can not be independent but Tibet can. Crimea can not be independent (outcome if the first of many referenda, where the overwhelming majority voted to break away from Ukraine, none of which you’ll accept because it doesn’t feed into your corporate media narrative) but Kosovo can. Just admit you don’t allow Russia and China a seat at the table because they pose a threat to your coveted Western mono-polar hegemony. That’s what this is all about, silly. You want another Jeltsin in the Kremlin but it ain’t happening. Cry about it, empire fanboi/girl/both/neither/back and forth.
trisul-108 t1_j5v3h5a wrote
>Isn’t it interesting how things are always ‘complicated’ when it involves enemies of the empire but never when it involves nato-countries.
All of these stories are complicated, because they involve two competing rights, the right of peoples to self-determination competing against the right to territorial integrity. Ideally, both would be satisfied. The details matter and they vary.
You mention Catalonia. The Catalan and Spanish parliaments negotiated how to align these two rights and reached an agreement satisfactory to both parliaments, an agreement the involved a higher level of autonomy for Catalonia. The Constitutional Court of Spain found this to be counter to the constitution. Instead of amending the Constitution, the right-wing government of the time pushed for conflict. If not for the right-wingers, this would have been solved. I have never said this was OK. What would be right would be to honour the agreement between the parliaments.
With Tibet, it was just a land grab by China with elements of genocide. Just as they are doing genocide on the Uyghurs.
Crimea was also a land grab, there was no serious attempt to negotiate an agreement, the referendums were complete sham and unrecognised by observers. In fact, Russia used its power in the Security Council to veto any attempt by the international community to protect minorities or mediate an agreement because Russia always wanted to grab that land.
With Kosovo, instead of negotiating as Spain and Catalonia initially did and granting more autonomy, Serbia took away the autonomy Kosovo already had. Furthermore, other peoples in Yugoslavia used their right to self-determination, but Serbia denied that right to Kosovars. Serb leaders publicly proclaimed that Serbia wins in war and loses in negotiations and decided to use force, sure in the power of the Yugoslav army. They miscalculated, just as Putin has miscalculated. By deciding to use force instead of negotiation, they caused the right to self-determination to trump the right to territorial integrity.
Civilised nations, such as Czechs and Slovaks did it all peacefully, joined the EU and no harm done to anyone. Life proceeds normally between Czechs and Slovaks. Serbia, China and Russia are violent and insist on resolving these matters using force. That is the key difference. These countries think themselves powerful and that they can have attached slave-nations. Serbia failed immediately. Russia failed in Ukraine and China will also fail eventually.
Allgoodonesaretaken9 t1_j5v7v4w wrote
The only thing Putin miscalculated was the Russophobia and the Empire devotion in Europe as exemplified by him signing the Minsk accords, whereas they (he’s not a dictator contrary to what your empire sources tell you) could have annihilated the Ukro army in weeks if not days. Of course neither Ukraine, Germany or France were ever planning on adhering to it, as they have admitted to recently, but he was naive enough to let NATO build up the Ukrainian army and continue to shell civilians in Donetsk for 8 years. Now it’s gonna take them years and thousands of lives (mostly Ukrainian) to liberate the Donbass. It will happen though, sorry. The gloves haven’t even come off yet.
The ‘civilized’ countries (aka the ones that are bowing down to US hegemony) tried twice before. Napoleon lost, the Nazi’s lost and NATO will lose too. Send yourself a remindme to rub it in if you want to.
Remindme! 1year
trisul-108 t1_j5v98zx wrote
He miscalculated when he decided to go to war. He miscalculated badly. He was prepared to win in 5 days and thought that the West would not support Ukraine, that Zelenskyy would run, that NATO would be weakened and the EU would be weakened.
In reality, Ukraine beat the first wave of Russian attacks and pushed them back, he never expected this. The Russian army is shown to be ineffective. NATO is much strengthened and is now expanding. The West is increasing military spending. The EU is strengthened. Russia is failing.
Putin badly miscalculated everything that could be calculated ... He has no way back and is forced to continue a losing war.
Allgoodonesaretaken9 t1_j5vom9h wrote
Oh boy are you in for a surprise. Remindme 6 months!
trisul-108 t1_j5vr6dt wrote
Exactly, we shall see.
I suspect you were also telling Europeans 6 months back how we will all freeze when Russia shuts off our gas. It turned out to be just another bit of GRU propaganda.
We will see how $1.3tn GDP Russia will fare against the $55tn economy of the West that it wants to destroy. The West has a stronger economy, finances, military, diplomacy, social cohesion, education, media ... any aspect you can name. Russia only has parity in nuclear weapons which it cannot use because of MAD. But, we'll see.
[deleted] t1_j5wbsh2 wrote
[removed]
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments