We support Ukraine

[enterisys]

Why then is so much military aid and money poured in now, if everything was locally produced?

Ah yes the good ol NATO tanks/APCs/artillery/jets/helicopters/ammunition/people

But in fact these are two countries with the same Russian mentality and almost the same level of corruption.

Level you mean in USD? Cos im sure russia has more USD

[makrom]

Right, and the separatists are a Ukrainian movement with no Russian involvement at all, and MH-17 was shot down by the evil West, and so on. Why would there be any reason not to trust Russian news sources...
Please just go ahead, keep trusting Kremlin media, build up your centrally planned economy 2.0 and feel sorry for yourself because civilized Russia is treated so badly by the rest of the world.

Can I trust my friend, who fled from Ukrainian peaceful shelling of Donetsk to Russia?

Was that before or after Russia reacted to their buddy Yanukovych's disposal by starting to fund an insurrection in Donbass? And are we considering the scores who fled from the separatists to the western parts of Ukraine?
Oh wait, I forgot, that never happened. It was all just western propaganda, and Russia backing Yanukovych, who wasn't the least bit corrupt, was purely because they are so interested in maintaining democracy...

[enterisys]

I'm gonna repeat this again cos some people have short memory

Donetsk after "8 years of Ukrainian bombing"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGcQWQuqSCo

Kharkiv after 1 week of "denazification"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1xFSCDy8Jo

[tuhe]

I'm gonna repeat this again cos some people have short memory

Donetsk after "8 years of Ukrainian bombing"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGcQWQuqSCo

Kharkiv after 1 week of "denazification"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1xFSCDy8Jo

Russia approximately 5 minutes after the peace treaty is eventually signed: Our mission had a high human cost but was a success, even the Global West agrees there are no longer any nazis in Ukraine.

[mmmPI]

Russia approximately 5 minutes after the peace treaty is eventually signed: Our mission had a high human cost but was a success, even the Global West agrees there are no longer any nazis in Ukraine.

or "it was all Putin"

[Djmixxx]

Kharkiv after 1 week of "denazification"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1xFSCDy8Jo

Melitopol after of "denazification"
https://youtu.be/AYMYt6AxFzY


This seems to be a special strategy for the defense of cities by Ukrainian soldiers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1xFSCDy8Jo

[jodokus31]

- USA/Canada -> Big yes, because of enhanced economies, exporting gas/arms

Neutral. How exactly economies are enhanced when business are being closed in russia due to sanctions. Also buying oil from Venezuela is cringe when you were the first to sanction them.

- Other oil/gas countries -> Yes

Neutral, gas and especially oil prices are already back to "normal".

The economical relations USA to Europe will likely increase (CETA/TTIP) long-term, because you need to cut the relations to Russia. Same with energy supply, when Russia should be avoided.

- Europe -> Medium to big no, due to economics, forced rearmament, energy shortage, risk of bigger war

I consider it a big win for Europe, since they finally got their wake up call at a relatively low price. After all, those daft politicians didn't see a problem in maintaining ties (and therefore dependencies) with Russia even after Crimea.

It's a big loss for europe, because the relations (including economic) to Russia were not bad. There is also much lost of trust on both sides. The whole peaceful attitude and disarmament, which was present with Russia since the 90's, is gone. And it's not only Russia's or Putin's fault. f.e. The NATO east extension is/was a big problem IMO.

I wonder what they’d say about the theater with the words “children” written outside being bombed.

Why is the Global West not talking about how Ukraine is using child soldiers like Hitler?

Let me guess, this is according to some Russian source?

I must admit it was a joke, I don't know what the trollfarms has churned out on the subject yet.

Are we here to make ultra bad jokes?

[enterisys]

Melitopol after of "denazification"
https://youtu.be/AYMYt6AxFzY

This seems to be a special strategy for the defense of cities by Ukrainian soldiers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1xFSCDy8Jo

And that is relevant to "8 years of bombing of Donetsk" how exactly?

[makrom]

Kharkiv after 1 week of "denazification"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1xFSCDy8Jo

Melitopol after of "denazification"
https://youtu.be/AYMYt6AxFzY

Oh, they haven't destroyed absolutely everything they invaded? This clearly proves that they must be the good guys.

This seems to be a special strategy for the defense of cities by Ukrainian soldiers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1xFSCDy8Jo

Yes those evil Ukrainian Nazis, destroying their own cities just because they don't want their people to be freed by the peace loving Russians.

[makrom]

- Europe -> Medium to big no, due to economics, forced rearmament, energy shortage, risk of bigger war

I consider it a big win for Europe, since they finally got their wake up call at a relatively low price. After all, those daft politicians didn't see a problem in maintaining ties (and therefore dependencies) with Russia even after Crimea.

It's a big loss for europe, because the relations (including economic) to Russia were not bad. There is also much lost of trust on both sides. The whole peaceful attitude and disarmament, which was present with Russia since the 90's, is gone. And it's not only Russia's or Putin's fault. f.e. The NATO east extension is/was a big problem IMO.

The economic relations were indeed not that bad. Europe digging its own grave for some short term gains. The "whole peaceful attitude and disarmament" worked out really well in Georgia, Syria, Crimea, Donbass... The economic relevance of Benelux, but power mongering like a superpower.
As for Nato expansion:

[jodokus31]

Disclaimer: The next is my own perception, probably not 100% accurate

It's interesting who is profiting and who is not profiting from this war:
- Ukrain -> Ultra big no
- Russia -> Big no, economics, sanctions, lost of reputation
- Europe -> Medium to big no, due to economics, forced rearmament, energy shortage, risk of bigger war
- China/India -> Neutral?
- 3rd world -> Big no, due to food crisis
- USA/Canada -> Big yes, because of enhanced economies, exporting gas/arms
- Other oil/gas countries -> Yes

Interesting also, that suddenly CETA is back into consideration. I wonder, when TTIP, or how they will call it, will be discussed.

That is where the faming occurs, i'm not sure the concept of "3rd wold" is still relevant today, when you consider brasil or turkey, for example they have very different perception, turkey being in NATO and very close to Russia, selling weapon to Ukraine compared to Brazil that is far away from Russia, associated in the BRICS, and dependant on fertilizer from Russia.

I think China is not welcoming ecomic instability due to them being very successful when no disruption occurs. I think India is at risk too due to their economy being less robust, the consequences of food shortages at world level would impact them more.

For USA i'm more aware of the different opinions inside the society so i do not share the same idea that it's all a big yes. There are big companies there that are globalist and division of society in cold war style block limit their ability to expand their marketshare it has some political influence and is not only oil-related.

For Europe its even more fragmented because each countries has different political scene and then you have coalition in the EU parliament. Same are for the interest, not every economy in europe share the same level of involvment with russian economy, between Spain that has a lot of solar enegy and whose gas come from Algeria and Hungary that is reliant on Russian gas and has a leader anti-EU but is also very close to Russia geographically and is a formet soviet state the perception and interests are not the same. as you say medium to very big nope.


[Edit] I'm not accusing you of framing, i'm just trying to point out where the framing acts in one's perception that is this schematic you wrote describing your own perpection that framing is aimed at establishing/modifying at large scale

I agree, there's a lot more details to consider and my analysis f.e. also does not distinguish between the country's population, the big companies and the government. With 3rd world I have mostly Africa in mind. Europe is of course very different, I probably have mainly germany in mind.

[tuhe]

DJMixxx: Look guys, we need to talk about how I claim my buddy claims he fled Donbas as a result of Ukraine's actions and what that means

(Any random war crime, for instance, this blown-up art school used as a shelter for 400 people: https://twitter.com/cnnbrk/status/1505505189050077187)

Probably also DJMixxx: Nothing to see here. This is after all just so-called 'reporting' with so-called 'pictures' and so-called 'eye-witnesses'. There are two sides to every story, and we need to maintain our critical and objective view of the world!

[Djmixxx]

Oh, they haven't destroyed absolutely everything they invaded? This clearly proves that they must be the good guys.

But what about the information that Russia is destroying cities? Or not all cities? what then? maybe not destroying?

Yes those evil Ukrainian Nazis, destroying their own cities just because they don't want their people to be freed by the peace loving Russians.

There is a big difference between unmotivated shelling of cities and shelling in battle for me.

[Djmixxx]

Probably also DJMixxx: Nothing to see here. This is after all just so-called 'reporting' with so-called 'pictures' and so-called 'eye-witnesses'. There are two sides to every story, and we need to maintain our critical and objective view of the world!

where did you find the pictures? Even in the telegram channel only text.

[jodokus31]

- Europe -> Medium to big no, due to economics, forced rearmament, energy shortage, risk of bigger war

I consider it a big win for Europe, since they finally got their wake up call at a relatively low price. After all, those daft politicians didn't see a problem in maintaining ties (and therefore dependencies) with Russia even after Crimea.

It's a big loss for europe, because the relations (including economic) to Russia were not bad. There is also much lost of trust on both sides. The whole peaceful attitude and disarmament, which was present with Russia since the 90's, is gone. And it's not only Russia's or Putin's fault. f.e. The NATO east extension is/was a big problem IMO.

The economic relations were indeed not that bad. Europe digging its own grave for some short term gains. The "whole peaceful attitude and disarmament" worked out really well in Georgia, Syria, Crimea, Donbass... The economic relevance of Benelux, but power mongering like a superpower.
As for Nato expansion:

It sounds, that Europe was so naive. Probably yes. But it doesn't answer the question, why it failed and who exactly spreaded the fatal sparks. All in all, i wouldn't call it a big win for Europe.

Regarding NATO expansion:
1962 Cuba also agreed to install sovjet missiles. It did not happen in end, because both sides (Sovjet and USA) made a compromise, which likely prevented the 3rd WW. Currently I miss those types of compromise efforts.

[enterisys]

Regarding NATO expansion:
1962 Cuba also agreed to install sovjet missiles. It did not happen in end, because both sides (Sovjet and USA) made a compromise, which likely prevented the 3rd WW. Currently I miss those types of compromise efforts.

And how is that relevant to Ukraine?
Latvia (NATO member btw) is 500km from moscow and can easily set up NATO nukes.

[Djmixxx]

And how is that relevant to Ukraine?
Latvia (NATO member btw) is 500km from moscow and can easily set up NATO nukes.

Maybe because he behaves like normal EU country's and does not overthrow the government every 10 years , and does not inform everyone that she is ready to regain her nuclear weapons?

[jodokus31]

Regarding NATO expansion:
1962 Cuba also agreed to install sovjet missiles. It did not happen in end, because both sides (Sovjet and USA) made a compromise, which likely prevented the 3rd WW. Currently I miss those types of compromise efforts.

And how is that relevant to Ukraine?
Latvia (NATO member btw) is 500km from moscow and can easily set up NATO nukes.

That's a very similar situation. Putin wanted assurance, that Ukraine doesn't enter the NATO and it seems, he didn't get it. That was obviously the red line.
Why it is not such a big problem in Latvia, i don't know.
However, many countries, starting with eastern part of germany, poland, etc. entered the NATO. The agreement with the sovjets in 90's, that NATO shall not expand further to the east, was not fulfilled. (Some say, there was no such agreement or that the agreement was with sovjets, which decomposed and not with russia.)
I already linked this for background info, which doesn't seem too biased: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X7Ng75e5gQ

[Djmixxx]

Since 2005, the frontal attack on the Russian language has commenced in all areas of social life, first of all in education and the media. The process continued but was slowed down after Yanukovych came to power in 2010. In 2012, as a preparation for another electoral cycle, the team of Yanukovych had backed the Kivalov-Kolesnichenko Language Law (K-K) that elevated the status of the Russian language in those regions where it has been used by the majority of population, however, without imposing it where the apparent region majority would oppose that elevation. That law was in full accordance with the norms of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages and, as surveys demonstrated, such a compromise was supported by the explicit majority of the society and had entirely met the recommendations by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe from 7 July 2010 on providing languages with more rights, particularly in higher education, electronic media, and local government bodies (Council of Europe, 2010). Nevertheless, both public support (albeit unspoken) and recommendations by European experts did not hinder the opposition from launching a campaign against the K-K law. All opposition parties in the Verkhovna Rada soon had a common language bill advanced that, in fact, presupposed total Ukrainisation.

[enterisys]

Maybe because he behaves like normal EU country's and does not overthrow the government every 10 years , and does not inform everyone that she is ready to regain her nuclear weapons?

Luckily this normal EU country did not overthrow any government since its independence or claim it is ready to reclaim its nuclear weapons.
Or you have some proofs?