Russia-Ukraine War (continuing)

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/kremlin-spox-speaks-after-general-killed-in-moscow-bomb_uk_67613240e4b06ea8a2b8d4ef

…in a statement on Telegram, the representative for the Russian foreign ministry, Maria Zakharova, unsurprisingly put a positive spin on his past.

“He met problems head on. For the Motherland, for the truth". "Bright be his memory, may he rest in peace.”…

Indeed!

😯

Not strange at all. A disgraced politician turned traitor runs away from his country to seek help from an aggressive neighboring country is a tale as old as the history itself.

Have you got a source for that claim ?

Yes, of course. For example :

[Invasion of Ireland by Anglo-Normans - Irish History of Ireland]

In 1166, Dermot was ousted from his kingdom by a coalition of Irish kings led by Turlough O'Connor and Rory O'Connor, the High King of Ireland. Desperate to regain power, Dermot sought help from King Henry II of England, who ruled a vast domain including England, Wales, and large parts of France.

Oh, you mean Arestovych? The one who is on the run from Ukrainian law? The one who wants to be the next Ukrainian president and calls for the collaboration with Putin against the West?

Expect Ukrainians to move sideways. They will pull another trick out of the bag shortly.

(I'm not talking literally in case you don't understand)

I agree with this totally, they have to do something big soon and they will without a doubt.

There are obvious questions about the trustworthiness of this opponent of Zelensky, so even if he had said what you claim he said, it would be dubious. But in his case it is a moot point.

But he didn't! The guy was who there didn't say the words you are falsely trying to put into their mouths.

If he had, you would be able to provide the quote. So you are left with vague references to interviews and embellishments.
I want you to provide a source which shows that Ukraine's sovereignty over the Donbas regions were agreed to by Russia, that it was recognised as the sovereign territory of Ukraine.
Otherwise any claims that you are making have no foundation.

And remember folks - Russia alerady agreed in Budapest to that, and violated Budapest multiple times!
So yes, it would be important in any real peace talks for Russia to really agree to that. For real like.

Now you are desperately trying the same misrepresentation tactic with vague allusions to an interview with Victoria Newland. Again, you can't find a single quote from her supporting your invented claim. I hesitated to use the word earlier, but these are typical vatnik tactics.

Your claim is evidently false, the more sources you cite, the further you get away from supporting it.

Doubtless readers of the thread can make up their own mind on the issue from the information presented, but if you keep repeating this false claim and misrepresenting sources to justify it, I will continue to challenge it.

Remember readers, this is the actual truth about the so-called Istanbul agreements.

These guys were in the room too:

New evidence has now come to light after the authors of the Foreign Policy article examined draft agreements exchanged between the two sides, some details of which have not been reported previously. We have also conducted interviews with several participants in the talks as well as with officials serving at the time in key Western governments, to whom we have granted anonymity in order to discuss sensitive matters…
The talks had deliberately skirted the question of borders and territory and the thorny issue of sovereignty over both the Crimea and the occupied Donbas regions were to be left to direct negotiations in a mooted summit between Putin and Zelenskiy at a later date.

https://www.intellinews.com/fresh-evidence-suggests-that-the-april-2022-istanbul-peace-deal-to-end-the-war-in-ukraine-was-stillborn-321468/

The moment I read Johnson using the word "proxy" and "war", it was immediately predictable how Ukraine critics and pro-Russian supporters would respond.

Their belief involves attempting to shift blame onto the collective West for Putin's invasion. As such when they see someone using the word "proxy war", they interpret that as an admittance of blame or fault on behalf of the West. That somehow Russia is "being attacked" by the West, which is their underlying belief.

The truth is that Europe is supplying Ukraine militarily, so technically those countries are fighting a "proxy war" (of supply). Proxy defence would be a more accurate term.

Here's the quote and context from Johnson:

'Mate, let's face it... We're waging a proxy war! We're waging a proxy war but we're not giving our proxies the ability to do the job. And for years and years we've been allowing them to fight with one hand tied behind their backs and it has been cruel. It has been cruel and moral...'

Whatever people think about Johnson, he's been rocksteady in his support of Ukraine - as such he's become a lightning rod for those who don't support Ukraine.

Ukraine never had to be invaded.

Why are you such an apologist for genocide?

another ship in trouble at the Kerch bridge.
a lot of pollution going on.

So what else is new with Putin? Be nice to him, and maybe he will show some mercy? Not going to happen! If anything, after a day or night of heavy Russian bombing, flood strategic targets, logistic centres, pipelines, bridges, etc, let Putin see that what ever he does now, will be answered in full.

China now pushing russia out of it's own back yard.

A lot of this argument depends on what you mean by 'proxy'.

1. Proxy by default: it just turned out that way because the west has always been Russia's nemesis.
2. A deliberate proxy: the west is deliberately using Ukraine.

If 1. it is Russia's fault for getting its head stuck in a trap. Don't blame the west for being happy about it.

If 2. where is your evidence?

Russia needs to invade Kazakhstan to protect the indigenous Russian speakers. Their leader is a Nazi and is operating bio labs right on Russia's border. Am I doing it right?

Your man's thing about this being a proxy war is based on "The West" using Ukraine to damage Russia. Firstly, it's an admission that this is damaging Russia despite him repeatedly posting links as if to show that everything is going swimmingly for Russia.

Secondly, it is Russia who invaded and could end all this any time by simply pulling out (after all, they have already bomded to shíte all the villages they supposedly want to liberate). If anyone is being used to damage Russia, it is Russia! If only there was some way for poor Russia to avoid this proxy war and not play into the hands of "The West" by hobbling itself militarily and economically but unfortunately there is absolutely no way at all for Russia to end the current situation...