Okay, so 86% of the people voted and 99,23% of this people wanted to join russia. And vote was absolutely fair, and for example the transparent voteboxes are real? Ist there a reason for the transparency?


To other Point:
When the war started (it is now allowed in the free press of russia, to call it war? Or you still have to call it special operation otherwise you get severe punishment?) you said, that russia only conduct a "special operation". And that there ist no planning of annexion(this annexionplans we're only a lie of Western medias, you said), only to free the people of the current Ukraine government, which is according to you full of nazis and then go home.

Now russia annexed several Ukraine regions and you say, this was the Plan in the beginning since 2014. Also you say that further regions will follow ... Only east ukraine regions ? Or is it russias plan now to annex the whole ukraine?

Just asking

justask wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 13, 2022 10:53 am

Okay, so 86% of the people voted and 99,23% of this people wanted to join russia. And vote was absolutely fair, and for example the transparent voteboxes are real? Ist there a reason for the transparency?

Look, sometimes I think people who ask questions are just too lazy to read and dig into the answer.
I gave you all the details of the process, how it happens, under what conditions, what people vote, and what their motivation is. What is not clear? I see that you do not understand anything, since you are asking me such a question, or have not tried to understand. I have already told you that even if there were those who were against it (which I doubt), they simply did not vote and their vote was not counted. What's not to understand? No one was forced to vote, there was no need for that, given the super-motivation of people wanting to vote. I just threw you a bunch of videos, well, analyze, if you really want to be objective, and not just want any way to prove your personal version of events. I will not help you in this.

justask wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 13, 2022 10:53 am

To other Point:
When the war started (it is now allowed in the free press of russia, to call it war? Or you still have to call it special operation otherwise you get severe punishment?) you said, that russia only conduct a "special operation". And that there ist no planning of annexion(this annexionplans we're only a lie of Western medias, you said), only to free the people of the current Ukraine government, which is according to you full of nazis and then go home.

Now russia annexed several Ukraine regions and you say, this was the Plan in the beginning since 2014. Also you say that further regions will follow ... Only east ukraine regions ? Or is it russias plan now to annex the whole ukraine?

Just asking

I never said that Russia's plans were to annex the entire territory of Ukraine! Especially since I don't put the question that way for myself personally. In my opinion, Russia is not annexing, but liberating its ancestral territories. Well, that's not the main thing.
First, the original plans may change, depending on the circumstances, the emerging situation. Russia's original plans in this special operation were to liberate the Dombass Republics and, if possible, demilitarize and denazify Ukraine. Most of these plans are now being carried out without modification. Russia needed to destroy the obstacle erected by the Nazi Ukrainian regime near Novaya Kakhovka (Kherson Oblast), which prevented the flow of water from the Dnieper to the Crimea through the North Crimean Canal. Consequently, the Russian Army liberated the Kherson region. Incidentally, back in the spring the Ukrainian regime, asked for negotiations with the Russian leadership and Russia agreed and even withdrew troops from Kiev. These talks began, and then at the direction of the U.S., the Ukrainian regime refused any negotiations and does not want them now. This is understandable, the U.S. benefits from a war between Russia and Ukraine to the last Ukrainian, and it makes no secret of this.
Further, the Russian leadership, during the special operation, saw how the Ukrainian Nazis treat their own inhabitants: they are constantly bombing their former cities. On those territories that they temporarily managed to seize after the Russian army, they conduct total cleansing operations, terrorizing the population, accusing everyone indiscriminately of cooperation with Russia. The Russian leadership simply cannot afford to do this to the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions now, just to leave their Russian people at the mercy of the Nazis. That's why they were included in Russia. I don't know if the Russian leadership had such a plan from the beginning, they don't report to me. And further, I also don't know how the situation will develop, because the Ukrainian Army is already oversaturated with foreign and NATO mercenaries and NATO military equipment. I could only predict that Russia will start to fight much harder, which it is already doing.

If you want to know my personal point of view, it is this. I am in favor of Russia liberating and incorporating all of the original Russian territories, except for Western Ukraine, the main breeding ground for Bandera and Nazism, which is muddying all the water in the rest of Ukraine.

MVitaly5 wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 30, 2022 3:38 pm

Today 4 more native Russian territories have returned home to their historic homeland!

To the powerless envy of fools, the beginning was laid in 2014, the return of Crimea, now 4 more territories, and then the rest will be returned!

And you, stupid trolls, keep envying, tear the hair out of your ass, and bang your stupid heads against the wall in powerless anger until your stupid forehead is broken!

Russia cannot be stopped, not by the Nazi political regimes, not by the stinking gay faggots from NATO in Russia's quest to regain what is hers by historical right!

Okay, but to be fair you have to decide, why they annexed that regions:
1) because in the beginning they only wanted to free the people (annexion was not the original plan) and then saw: oh no the "nazis" are to bad. To save the people we include these region into russia(so russia was just the victim of the circumstances).
OR!!!!!!!!
2) they planned it from the beginning to annex regions, because of their "historical" right.


Both can not be true, because if 2) ist true the nazis doesnt matter, because russia was annexing this regions anyway! (Then the western media were right, because they said in the beginning that annexions are the objective of Putin. Which you declared as Fake News a few month ago!)

If 1) is true, your celebrating post after the annexion makes absolutely no sense: why are you talking about "historic homeland" and "russia quest to regain what ist hers by historical right"? I thought it was about to free people and defeat the nazis? And russia didnt wanted to annex that regions but had no choice.


Do you see the contradictory?

justask wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 13, 2022 2:45 pm

Okay, but to be fair you have to decide, why they annexed that regions:
1) because in the beginning they only wanted to free the people (annexion was not the original plan) and then saw: oh no the "nazis" are to bad. To save the people we include these region into russia(so russia was just the victim of the circumstances).
OR!!!!!!!!
2) they planned it from the beginning to annex regions, because of their "historical" right.


Both can not be true, because if 2) ist true the nazis doesnt matter, because russia was annexing this regions anyway! (Then the western media were right, because they said in the beginning that annexions are the objective of Putin. Which you declared as Fake News a few month ago!)

If 1) is true, your celebrating post after the annexion makes absolutely no sense: why are you talking about "historic homeland" and "russia quest to regain what ist hers by historical right"? I thought it was about to free people and defeat the nazis? And russia didnt wanted to annex that regions but had no choice.


Do you see the contradictory?

Honestly, I don't understand what the fuck you wrote and what "cunning" intent, you want to "expose" and actually, what you want from me...))

1). My, as you put it, celebratory post, it merely expressed my personal attitude to it. In my opinion, only very few territories have been liberated and incorporated into Russia so far, but "it's not yet evening".
2). I do not remember what news from the Western media you are referring to, but they are in any case fake, because they cannot know the true plans of the Russian leadership, but can only speculate and guess, so their possible statements before the time is just an idea, not a statement of the truth.

And most importantly!
I don't care at all who planned what there, who told the truth or untruth, for any contradictions. For me, the main thing is that there are native and historical Russian territories, which, I do not know why, during the Soviet Union were transferred to the Ukrainian Soviet Republic, and respectively after the collapse of the USSR, through inconsideration, became part of another state. On these territories there are cities that were built by Russian emperors and on these territories live Russian people, my brothers, and I will not allow them to be non-Russian and even more so Nazi!

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba in a conversation with pranksters Vovan and Lexus admitted that Kiev was behind the explosions in Belgorod and Crimea.
Pranksters spoke to the Ukrainian Foreign Minister on behalf of former U.S. Ambassador to Moscow Michael McFaul.
"But if you ask me who is blowing something up in Crimea or Belgorod, I will tell you in private that yes, it's us," the minister said.
In addition, he said the Ukrainian authorities were preparing a counteroffensive in the south "in close cooperation with partners," primarily Britain and the United States.
https://vk.com/theprankvideo?z=clip-373 ... _-37359595

MVitaly5 wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 13, 2022 3:25 pm

justask wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 13, 2022 2:45 pm

Okay, but to be fair you have to decide, why they annexed that regions:
1) because in the beginning they only wanted to free the people (annexion was not the original plan) and then saw: oh no the "nazis" are to bad. To save the people we include these region into russia(so russia was just the victim of the circumstances).
OR!!!!!!!!
2) they planned it from the beginning to annex regions, because of their "historical" right.


Both can not be true, because if 2) ist true the nazis doesnt matter, because russia was annexing this regions anyway! (Then the western media were right, because they said in the beginning that annexions are the objective of Putin. Which you declared as Fake News a few month ago!)

If 1) is true, your celebrating post after the annexion makes absolutely no sense: why are you talking about "historic homeland" and "russia quest to regain what ist hers by historical right"? I thought it was about to free people and defeat the nazis? And russia didnt wanted to annex that regions but had no choice.


Do you see the contradictory?

Honestly, I don't understand what the fuck you wrote and what "cunning" intent, you want to "expose" and actually, what you want from me...))

1). My, as you put it, celebratory post, it merely expressed my personal attitude to it. In my opinion, only very few territories have been liberated and incorporated into Russia so far, but "it's not yet evening".
2). I do not remember what news from the Western media you are referring to, but they are in any case fake, because they cannot know the true plans of the Russian leadership, but can only speculate and guess, so their possible statements before the time is just an idea, not a statement of the truth.

And most importantly!
I don't care at all who planned what there, who told the truth or untruth, for any contradictions. For me, the main thing is that there are native and historical Russian territories, which, I do not know why, during the Soviet Union were transferred to the Ukrainian Soviet Republic, and respectively after the collapse of the USSR, through inconsideration, became part of another state. On these territories there are cities that were built by Russian emperors and on these territories live Russian people, my brothers, and I will not allow them to be non-Russian and even more so Nazi!

To the First: The western media(the majority) never said, Putin will definitely annex ukrain regions. They just guessed, that he will do it(what he now did).

They also guessed, that russia ist not to fight nazis(the existence of nazis is not declined in Western Media, they just say russia ist exaggerating the role of nazis in ukraine), they want primarily gain her "land back". What you now also confirm? Because you will not allow them to be non-russia. The nazi thing only make it even "better". So now the nazi thing is only secondarily(i thought the main point of this war is to defeat the nazis?) Would you even think the annexion would be fine if there lived peaceful people of the indian state(because they would be also non-russia)

Last:
You say we western people are only "eating the western media and lies" and dont use our brain to get to the truth.
Now you tell openly "i dont care about who told the truth". So for russia media would lying be fine for you?

PS:
But how could russia know about the true plan of the Nato and Ukraine and almost every other Leadership of the world? Or they also just speculating and guessing?

justask wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 13, 2022 4:56 pm

To the First: The western media(the majority) never said, Putin will definitely annex ukrain regions. They just guessed, that he will do it(what he now did).

You can assume a lot of things, no one is forbidden to fantasize, even if such fantasies sometimes come true. This just proves that people who fantasize have no responsibility for their fantasies and think they can say whatever they want. That is, in fact, what any media outlet does. Responsible political leaders should choose their words and they rarely talk about their real plans, and sometimes they just act according to the current situation and situation.

justask wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 13, 2022 4:56 pm

They also guessed, that russia ist not to fight nazis(the existence of nazis is not declined in Western Media, they just say russia ist exaggerating the role of nazis in ukraine),

Is the role of the Nazis in Ukraine exaggerated?
Here, just the latest photos:
This is Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Zaluzhny.

Does the swastika on the bracelet remind you of anything?

And here, the surrender of Azov servicemen in Mariupol. They are the only ones the Ukrainian regime agrees to trade prisoners of war for, they are so important to them.
https://youtu.be/ArXr8UqAEgA
Do you like the tattoos?

Zelensky is constantly surrounded by servicemen with "Dead Head" chevrons. Does this chevron remind you of anything?



These are the kinds of parades supported by the authorities that take place regularly in Ukraine.
https://youtu.be/kFaJq7hirkA
I hope you know who Bandera, Shukhevich, the UPA units of the UNSO of the OUN army are.

Streets in Ukrainian cities are renamed after the Nazi collaborators. Open Google Maps and look it up. Bandera is recognized as a hero of Ukraine. Shukhevich, who served as a Hauptmann in Hitler's army, is recognized as a hero of Ukraine.

Support of Nazism by the Ukrainian political regime has long been proven and even in the West many authoritative persons and publications admit it.

justask wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 13, 2022 4:56 pm

Last:
You say we western people are only "eating the western media and lies" and dont use our brain to get to the truth.
Now you tell openly "i dont care about who told the truth". So for russia media would lying be fine for you?

PS:
But how could russia know about the true plan of the Nato and Ukraine and almost every other Leadership of the world? Or they also just speculating and guessing?

I was talking about it in a different context. Understand, it is of course important for anyone to know the truth, but in politics the concepts of truth and lies do not apply. In politics, there are notions of interests and international treaties.
All Western leaders, and even Clinton, now admit that they swore an oath to the Russian leaders, Gorbachev and then Yeltsin, not to expand NATO eastward, but they also openly admit now that they simply lied. We can see the result of this deception. NATO at Russia's borders. The Americans regularly violate even international treaties and no one tells them anything. Don't compare these concepts.
My personal truth, it is in something else, namely my beliefs and correcting the mistakes of history and preventing them in the future.

In the NATO charter, Russia is explicitly named as an enemy!
And you are saying that the inclusion of Ukraine in NATO does not pose a threat to Russia? Think about it. What does this have to do with speculation? It is elementary logic.

It is a shame that the Russian Federation is in such isolation...

MVitaly5 wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 13, 2022 5:48 pm

You can assume a lot of things, no one is forbidden to fantasize, even if such fantasies sometimes come true. This just proves that people who fantasize have no responsibility for their fantasies and think they can say whatever they want. That is, in fact, what any media outlet does. Responsible political leaders should choose their words and they rarely talk about their real plans, and sometimes they just act according to the current situation and situation.

So you prefer if political leaders dont say the truth or their real intention? What should they then say, lies? Or mysterys, so that know ones understand their real intention?
Or should they not talk at all?

Please say what is the alternative to say their real plan?

About your photos i did also my research:

1.
https://observers.france24.com/en/europ ... t-debunked

Its not a swastika...

2.
Only because its a skull their is no connection to nazis. (only german source)

3. Yeah you are right, there seems to be connection to nazi symbol (only german source)



I already said, that the west is aware of Nazi in Ukraine. But there are also Nazis in the russia military (or are you denying that?) and no other country conquer it because of that.

In germany are also nazis in the military, now we have to be also afraid?


Again, why are we talking about nazis again? You said by yourself, that you are proud that russia conquered these territoies, because the people we're non-russia. You said that....not me!!! So you think russia should have conquered these regions anyway, right(that there are nazis is secondarily)? Or i am wrong? Please answer to that question, finally.

In politics there is no concepts of truth and lies?? So Putin is also not telling the truth?


No, i dont think russia has to be afraid of the NATO. They will not act, if russia dont attack them.

But what i see is country which attack another country and annex regions of this country , because they think it is their historical right. Or is the sentence wrong? Because you said it today, not me.

justask wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 13, 2022 8:18 pm

So you prefer if political leaders dont say the truth or their real intention? What should they then say, lies? Or mysterys, so that know ones understand their real intention?
Or should they not talk at all?

Please say what is the alternative to say their real plan?

I'm not saying they have to tell lies, but politicians are almost all hypocrites. And hypocrisy is a kind of intermediate line that can border between truth and lies. In politics, sometimes true intentions have to be hidden so as not to get countermeasures. The explanation is usually that it is in the interest of the state. There is such a thing as state secrets and state interests. The latter may not always coincide with some private interests of individuals who may not consider it just.
And most importantly.
In politics, everyone has his own truth and interests, and so do ordinary people, because the concept of truth is very relative. For someone it will be true, for another a lie. Even any fact, outwardly irrefutable, can be trivialized, distorted or disproved, if you want to, if you set yourself the goal. In fact, this is often what media resources do.

Goebbels: "Any lie repeated constantly becomes the truth."

And as for Western politicians, they lie and hypocritical all the time, including to their own people. So let's not make a competition among politicians, believe me there are no saints among them. The main thing for me is that the politician who represents Russia's interests should act in those interests. The United States and the collective West have long since failed to choose methods to achieve their goals.

justask wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 13, 2022 8:18 pm

About your photos i did also my research:

1.
https://observers.france24.com/en/europ ... t-debunked

Its not a swastika...

2.
Only because its a skull their is no connection to nazis. (only german source)

3. Yeah you are right, there seems to be connection to nazi symbol (only german source)

I already said, that the west is aware of Nazi in Ukraine. But there are also Nazis in the russia military (or are you denying that?) and no other country conquer it because of that.

In germany are also nazis in the military, now we have to be also afraid?
[/quote]

I see a swastika there, and your link is an attempt to justify this scumbag.
This is my opinion, and let's not discuss it anymore, because to me it's disgusting. Zelensky himself posted a bunch of pictures of himself on social media, where people with Nazi and SS symbols were among him. After this was reported to him, he would delete the photos.
Further, it is enough for me that there are regular marches and parades of Nazis, supported by the authorities, honoring outright Nazi scum: Bandera, Shukhevich, Konovalts, etc. Support for the Nazi Azov.

You correctly said that there are Nazi movements in any country, including Russia. The only difference is that in Russia they are persecuted under the law, while in Ukraine they are honored by the authorities as heroes and the Bandera ideology is imposed on the educational and cultural level in Ukraine.

And let's not discuss the issue of Nazism in modern Ukraine anymore, you won't change my mind in this aspect. For me, whose entire family fought with the Nazis and the Banderites during the Great Patriotic War, this question has no doubts whatsoever.

justask wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 13, 2022 8:18 pm

Again, why are we talking about nazis again? You said by yourself, that you are proud that russia conquered these territoies, because the people we're non-russia. You said that....not me!!! So you think russia should have conquered these regions anyway, right(that there are nazis is secondarily)? Or i am wrong? Please answer to that question, finally.

In politics there is no concepts of truth and lies?? So Putin is also not telling the truth?

I did not say that the people in the territories liberated by Russia were non-Russian! Do not distort my words!
I said that I don't want non-Russians, instead of Russians, to live in these ancestral Russian territories in the future! And I'm not against non-Russians living there, I don't want them to replace the Russians. Don't misunderstand me. There are Russian people living there now, and I want it to be like that. Given the policy of the Ukrainian regime in recent years, they banned the Russian language, Russian culture, all ties with Russia. They wanted to join NATO. There will be no NATO boot on these lands, this is my opinion.

justask wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 13, 2022 8:18 pm

No, i dont think russia has to be afraid of the NATO. They will not act, if russia dont attack them.

And I am sure of it!
In the NATO charter, Russia is the enemy! And NATO would have already attacked and pillaged Russia if Russia did not have one of the best armies in the world with the best and most technologically advanced arsenal of nuclear weapons. To me this is absolutely obvious. And why is that?
Because, suffice it to recall the fate of Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan. I've written in this thread a list of where the US has invaded militarily since the end of World War II. Look it up interestingly. The list is very impressive.
For that matter, don't make me laugh about "nice" NATO. It is a brazen, cavalier, absolutely sure of its impunity aggressive organization, which, contrary to any international law, has already destroyed more than one country.

justask wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 13, 2022 8:18 pm

But what i see is country which attack another country and annex regions of this country , because they think it is their historical right. Or is the sentence wrong? Because you said it today, not me.

Look, as for the background, the motives of this conflict, I have already written extensively in this thread many times. At least from my own point of view. Take a look at the forum thread. You're newly registered, but you're too lazy to read the whole branch, but I'm too lazy to individually write the same thing a hundred times. My opinion has not changed over time, this is the only thing I can tell you. Take the forum thread and read the whole thing.