niceboysummer

Did that change who would or would not vote for him?

I am confused by that quote. It could just as easily be read from a pro-Russian-invasion stance as not. I am not pro-Russian invasion btw) The US abandoned the intermediate nuclear missile treaty with Russia unilaterally, which changed the security architecture of eastern Europe. Then they began to pour arms into Ukraine, while encouraging Ukraine to make a bid to join NATO... which was something that Russia had told the US was a red line for their security interests in 2008. "War is the remedy that our enemies have chosen, and I say let us give them all they want. - William Tecumseh Sherman"

There was a discontinuity in Ukraine's government in 2014, which was been acknowledged by many international organizations, like the EU, and which Ukraine used as a pretext to ignore other old treaties and agreements... so idk how it really applies. It would be cool if countries that militarily occupy other countries or bomb other countries would stop. Like it would be cool if the US got out of Syria too, but i bet a majority of US citizens would agree, but US "democracy" doesn't really allow them much of a say in those sorts of decisions

Could you explain how his election was not free or fair?

Would you say that the events during the Euromaidan in 2014 were a free and fair election?

Ukraine had been fighting a civil war for almost a decade... how was it a peaceful nation?

Israel and Turkey both said a peace deal had been reached (or nearly had been reached) before the UK/US intervened.

It's okay. Reading comprehension isn't everyone's strength.

Define Tankie. You could replace Tankie with communist in nearly any sentence it is uttered, and it just sounds like a republican right-winger (talking about nearly anything they don't like)

Any NATO member can veto a new country from being admitted to NATO. If the USA wanted to avoid the carnage unleashed by this devastating war, why not make assurances that Ukraine will not join NATO? That would have saved so many lives and so much human misery. Instead, they armed Ukraine to the teeth and are willing to fight to the last Ukrainian.

This is an article written by an American journalist, how is it "bullshit Russian propaganda?" Could you provide some evidence that what this journalist wrote is factually incorrect?

Have you ever entertained that there is a possibility that people disagree with you on this, who might not be Russian propagandists? Maybe people exist who don't think Russia is good, but also see that there is a lot more to this conflict than as presented by corporate media in the anglosphere? If you so easily dismiss everything as untrustworthy and propaganda simply because. you disagree with it, then it sounds like you aren't thinking critically... you are just completely indoctrinated with another sort of propaganda.

I am also confused by your statement. Did NATO respect the sovereignty of Yugoslavia? How about Afghanistan or Iraq? Libya or Syria? The United States and the militia's it is backing illegally occupies about 30% of Syria right now, the part with 90% of Syria's oil... How is that not exactly the same as what Russia is doing to Ukraine? Before you claim this is whataboutism you should consider that history also matters, and when people from NATO countries claim that what Russia or China does X, while ignoring the current (and long history) of their own country doing X, it just sounds very disingenuous. Most likely because it is.

If Ukraine had honored the Minsk agreements, or followed through with the peace agreement they signed at the beginning of the invasion (that Boris Johnson and the UK/US intervened to quash), then maybe Russia would have already gotten the fuck out of Ukraine?

This article explicitly calls the invasion a war crime. Did you read it? Pretending that history began when the Russian army stepped foot in Donbas doesn't erase the actions the provoked the war on the part of the NATO-aligned countries. If you think that Putin is the singular reason this war occurred, then you should admit your understanding of the conflict is shallow and uninformed.