Personally I don't have a proof, neither we have an official acknowledgment from Putin. Otherwise we can rely on circumstential evidance:
- There has been reports from independent organizations about Russian equipment crossing the border.
- Ukrainian Government claims capturing Russian soldiers.
So did Russia invade Ukraine, yes or no?
- Satellite images show 100,000 Russian troops massed at the border, though there is no indication of Ukraine planning to attack Russia. Everybody knows it would be a suicidal mission.
This is not relevant since every country has the right to move it's troops wherever it wants within it's own territory. Especially if a huge neighbour country experiences a coup by hostile russophobes who start attacking their russiphile population, backed by a military organization which keeps breaking promises for 20 years.
Switzerland recently prepared it's army for a french attack, can you imagine.
So did these 100000 Russian troops invade Ukraine?
- US/Nato satellite photos showing Russian troops crossing border.
Actually no, they don't.
- Putin supports uprising, and if it collapses it would spoil his position. He has troops at the border to make sure it doesn't happen. Who is going to stop him?
I agree. How do we stop him? For the start, negotiating with the Rebels about federalization. Coincidentally it would be also the best solution for the whole people. West Ukrainians already start to ask questions why their sons have to go to war.
I know these pictures, this one in particular.
These pictures don't answer the most important question: whom these columns belong, the Ukrainian army, the Rebels or the Russian army. Some are moving west and some east.
Ask Russian rebels, it landed in their area, and they were first there to "inspect" it.
Don't need to ask the rebels, they handed it over already to Farnborough, England. The receivers confirmed that the box was intact and sealed. The recent dutch report did not mention in the slightest who shot. But the "community" knew already immediately after it happened that Russia has to be sanctioned. This is irresponsible. The media created pressure upon EU politicians to harm both, EU and Russia.
They think of themselves as Russians first, so why not wait this mess over in Russia.
Certainly, as usual during ethnic cleansing.
Once we start uncovering mass-ethnic graves I admit it was ethnic cleansing. Let's not exaggerate to prove one's point.
It's absolutely no exaggeration. Official estimated numbers of victims in Kosovo ranged between 3000 and 10000, and how many of them were Serbs is not known. Many were combattants.
Ukraine figures are 5100, but the report also says that the number is likely "much higher". The civilians are mostly Donbass-people, because that's where the fighting happens.
Whether there are mass graves or not is not relevant if the bodies lie around the streets and fields.
The number of one million refugees is much higher than any refugee number from Kosovo and Croatia (I don't have the numbers from Bosnia at hand).
Phosphoric bombs and ballistic missiles were used by Kiev against Donbass, but never during Yugoslavia wars, and I think ballistic missiles have never ever been used in such a way elsewhere.
As long as Russia is OK with it?
That's what was promised by Genscher 1990 in Germany. It was also common sense that there is no need of NATO expansion because the Soviet threat is gone. Read the article from foreign affairs which I posted. So why did NATO change it's mind? Expansionist ambitions perhaps?
It doesn't make it right. Are you trying to excuse Russia?
NATO approached Russia for 20 years and finally reached it's borders by creating a hostile russophobe coup.
You seriously expect Russia to stay calm? If yes, we can stop discussing.
Every move by Putin was entirely defensive.
Even Obama admitted in the CNN interview last Sunday that Putin had no ambitions about Crimea because he was totally surprised by the regime change which "we" (Obama) did, lol.
Now compare that to the narrative in western mainstream media. We have been fooled all the time, and I told you so.
I don't have a problem with it, as long as Ukrainians elect this choice themselves.
Again, where is the result of this choice? Me thinks at least east Ukrainians beg to differ. Yet NATO is meddling there, toppling a democratically elected government. Now who has expansionist ambitions?
Russia became fairly insignificant, so nobody really cared what is going on there,
You can't be serious. Biggest land mass with just 200000 inhabitants and a little bit oil, gas, uranium, palladium, gold.
Wages have increased ten-fold since Putin is in power, debt has decreased to 12% to GDB (compare that to western debt levels), foreign cash savings suffice to pay the debt multiple times, and finally in addition yet the resource wealth.
Russia has still many problems for sure, but claiming that it is less than a glittering jack pot is ridiculous.
Madeleine Albright: "It is unjust that Russia possesses all this oil and gas." Actually I agree with her, life is unjust. We can not make everyone equal, we are no communists.
till Russia started bullying all its neighbors around.
Now please explain which countries Russia bullied. Georgia attacked Russian troops in Abkhasia because Saakashvili thought NATO would help him. Chechnya war was bad, but it is inside Russia and was started by Yelsin.
Nope, it is reversed. If they join Russia, Putin will have not much use for them. As long as they stay in Ukraine, Putin will have "A Say" in Ukrainian politics, and perhaps influence in Nato and EU in the future, if Ukraine joins them. Other words, strategically, Donetsk is more important for Putin if it stays in Ukraine. Otherwise it would be acquired quickly by Putin like Crimea. From Putins perspective Crimean needed to belong to Russia because of strategic military installation in the center of Black Sea. If Crimean stayed in Ukraine and Ukraine joined Nato, all these installations would be in Nato hands and potentially could be used against Russia!
This is not reversed to what I said, it is supportive. As I said, Russia has no incentive to annex or even conquer east Ukraine, and you provide an additional argument. Russia needs this buffer to protect it's border. That's what Putin tried to express: he could take Kiev in two weeks, but he doesn't.
Having said that, Putin will have eventually to take stronger measures if the west provides lethal weapons to Kiev or more. Then I expect Russia to invade finally for self-defense, then he will be the "new Hitler" and NATO doesn't need to seek excuses for any actions anymore. Then Moldavia-Transnistria is next, or Baltic states with their Russian minorities, or Belarus. It is terrifying.
This is the path to WW3 because Russia has no room where to step back without losing and eventually breaking-up into small pieces, because it can not defend all it's borders anymore (see plan of Brzerzinki "Global Balkans", he is Obama's advisor). The ultimate defense are nukes, that's exactly purpose of having nukes (remember Cuba crisis). In Washington there are forces who willingly take this risk, hoping for a regime change in Russia. But this is too risky since Putin is too popular and Russians don't want a Shirinovski or a new Yeltsin, for good reasons.
I'm not supporting imperialism, also not the russian one. But Russia's actions are all defensive, even if the means are sometimes questionable.