Yuri, I hope you are right. The USA's betrayal of Ukraine and embrace of Putin are bad portents, not just for Ukraine but for the world.

Only someone steeped in the fantasy land of theology could write a fairy tale like this!

Russia has no ambitions beyond Ukraine's borders. There's no statement coming out of Russia anywhere which indicates it has any intention of militarily intervening in any other country. Russia has clear goals based on a long history of US and NATO provocation and attempted regime change, which the author here doesn't even mention ... it just wouldn't fit his fairy tale narrative. Russia has unambiguously stated its conditions for peace and security in Europe for many years. They are the demilitarisation, denazification and neutrality of Ukraine, the inclusion of the four Russian-speaking oblasts into the Russian Federation and treaties establishing a new security architecture in Europe. Russia has always been ready to negotiate a treaty. It's Ukraine which under the West's orders has refused to do so.

Russia is not rotting or crumbling from within. Considering the West's brutal and bullying sanctions against it, its economy is holding up well and its people are as united as they've ever been. The support of the global south is not falling away. BRICS is going from strength to strength with new countries applying to join all the time. The global south represents over 85% of the world's population. Most either remain supportive of Russia or claim neutrality. All want the war to end, as does Russia ... as does the whole world, apart from fools like Starmer, Macron and Von Der Leyen who are doing their best to keep it going indefinitely. The majority of African countries are more interested in forging closer ties with Russia and China than with the West who've exploited them for decades. They know the reason for the Ukrainian grain disruption was the West's refusal to keep its end of the agreement.

So many more lies in this fantasy piece ... hopefully, OLO can provide some counter balance ... written by someone who understands the history and the full circumstances of the current conflict, including the West's provocative role in initiating it.

Hi Bronwyn,
Very well said.
I thought I'd have to spend the whole afternoon and evening going through everything in this article point for point, and I just don't have the time today.
Every SINGLE thing I read in this article (as far as I read - halfway through point 2 of 5) is completely wrong.
I'm glad you fixed a few of them.

There isn't any victory plan.The deal you outlined above will soon expire.
All the Ukrainians are doing is deluding themselves and throwing away more lives and territory, and trying to sell us a pack of lies to extend the conflict, to it's inevitable end.

- Russian victory.

Browyn is on the ball. Is the conflict still going ? Because nothing's on the News about it these days.

Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, pro-Kremlin narratives have sought to justify Moscow’s aggression. These claims distort history and misrepresent geopolitical realities. A critical analysis exposes their falsehoods.

Russia’s assertion that it has no ambitions beyond Ukraine is demonstrably false. The Kremlin has a history of territorial aggression, including the 2008 invasion of Georgia and the long-standing occupation of Transnistria in Moldova. In 2014, it annexed Crimea and backed separatists in eastern Ukraine. High-ranking Russian officials have even questioned the sovereignty of former Soviet states, implying further expansionist goals.

Another common claim is that NATO provoked Russia. However, at the time of Russia’s invasion, Ukraine was not a NATO member and had no immediate path to join. NATO, a defensive alliance, has never invaded Russia or forced any country to join. Ukraine’s westward shift stems from Russia’s own hostile actions, particularly its illegal annexation of Crimea and interference in eastern Ukraine.

Moscow’s justification of "denazification" is entirely baseless. Ukraine is a democratic nation with a Jewish president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and no significant Nazi influence. Ironically, Russia harbors far-right elements, such as the Wagner Group, known for neo-Nazi ties. Likewise, calls for Ukraine’s "demilitarization" ignore that Ukraine, not Russia, is the victim of aggression.

Russia claims to favor diplomacy, yet it consistently violates international agreements. It broke the 1994 Budapest Memorandum by seizing Crimea, ignored the Minsk Agreements, and withdrew from the Black Sea Grain Deal, exacerbating global food insecurity.

Despite claims that Russia’s economy is strong, it faces severe labor shortages, currency devaluation, and increasing reliance on China. Its wartime economy is unsustainable. The notion that the Global South overwhelmingly supports Russia is also misleading—many nations, including India and Brazil, remain neutral, while African nations like Kenya and Ghana have condemned the invasion. UN votes overwhelmingly oppose Russia’s actions.

The idea that Russia is acting defensively is a fabrication. Its long history of aggression, violations of treaties, and economic decline contradict its claims. Understanding these distortions is crucial in countering pro-Kremlin propaganda and ensuring the truth prevails.

Ukraine doubles down on failure.
It's lost more men and equipment in its failed Kursk offensive as it did in its failed counteroffensive.

Ukraine broke the Budapest memorandum when they stopped being neutral and became a western vassal state.

Merkel, Hollande and Poroshenko stated they were only buying time to build up the military, Ukrainians were already being trained as a defacto member of NATO by the West while they were killing Russian-speaking Ukrainians in the Donbass.

Ukraine broke the Black Sea grain deal by using it as a pretext to bring in weapons, Erdogan turning a blind eye.

Ukraine has 31 NATO countries plus more who are trying to stave off bankruptcy by moving to Keynesian war economies which is also unsustainable.

'Pro-Kremlin propaganda', is what they say so people won't check facts.

All Ukraine has are narratives, behind this are weapons and manpower issues, and a delusional victory plan based on a imaginary ceasefire that's not going to happen and non existent security guarantees by U.S.

The EU couldn't produce the shells it promised years ago, and Russia and China control the supply chains for producing antimony needed to make them.

'The idea that Russia is acting defensively is a fabrication'
You can sell any narrative, Russia said no NATO on their doorstep back at the NATO conference Budapest 2008.
It's NATO that sought to march to Russia's border using Ukraine as it's proxy.
Stolteberg refused to roll back NATO.
Blinken refused to make any agreements on weapons stationed in Ukraine.
Ukraine foolishly bought into the Wests false promises, and now Ukraine can prolong the war as long as they like but they'll only lose more lives and territory if they don't accept Russian terms.

Trumps minerals deal means Ukraine loses more to the West than they ever did to Russia.

I'm truly sorry to tell you that I told you back in early 2022 Ukraine had jumped out of the frypan and into the fire.

Excellent work, AC! You’ve corrected many lies with minimum words! Not much for me to add, which is good, as it would have taken me many more words than you!

No, Yuri, Russia under Putin does not have a history of territorial aggression. The aggressor in Georgia was its own US-backed president sending troops into the breakaway region of South Ossetia. Russia merely came to the region’s defence. And likewise, Transnistria is another breakaway region which has voted for independence from Moldova. Russia will come to its defence too if necessary. This is not the act of an aggressor. Russia is not expansionist. It’s merely protecting its own security and that of its Russian-speaking neighbours.

And no, Ukraine was not a member of NATO, but it was being groomed to become one, and still is, as is Georgia and Moldova. And no, NATO doesn’t force states to become members. It courts them. NATO is not a defensive alliance at all. The reason for its very existence is to threaten and contain Russia. NATO will not stop until it has troops and missiles positioned along Russia’s borders. What Western country would put up with that? Why should Russia be expected to live with that level of intimidation?

Crimea voted overwhelmingly to rejoin Russia after the US-sponsored coup in Ukraine in 2014 and the new government’s persecution of its Russian speakers. And similarly, the so-called 'interference' in Eastern Ukraine was simply Russia finally being drawn into defending the breakaway Donbas, which since the coup had been heavily attacked by Kiev, devastating the once-prospering region and leaving 14000 dead.

Russia asked several times if it could join NATO. It was soundly rejected even though the idea made perfect sense and would have brought lasting peace to Europe. The US-led West needs an enemy. If it had no enemies there’d be no need for weapons and their trillion dollar defence industries would no longer prop up their economies. The problem the West has now is that its designated enemies, Russia and China, are rapidly moving into positions of strength.

The arguments offered by Bronwen and the Armchair critic are a clear example of pro-Russian propaganda, distorting facts to justify Russia’s aggression. Ukraine’s counteroffensive may not have achieved all its objectives, but it significantly weakened Russian forces, making it far from a failure. Claims about Ukraine violating the Budapest Memorandum are false — Russia broke it by invading Crimea in 2014 and launching a full-scale war in 2022. Ukraine’s alignment with the West is a sovereign decision, not a betrayal of any agreement.

The idea that Ukraine was “killing Russian-speaking Ukrainians in the Donbas” is a Kremlin myth. The war in Donbas began when Russia armed and funded separatists in 2014. Ukraine defended its sovereignty, and many Russian-speaking Ukrainians remain loyal to Kyiv. Similarly, accusations that Ukraine misused the Black Sea grain deal lack evidence—Russia, not Ukraine, violated the agreement, weaponizing food supplies.

Russia’s claim that NATO “marched to its borders” ignores the reality that countries voluntarily sought NATO protection due to Russian aggression. Ukraine was not a NATO member when Russia invaded, proving the war is about Moscow’s imperial ambitions, not defence. Meanwhile, assertions that the West is “exploiting” Ukraine through economic deals overlook the far greater destruction Russia has inflicted—stealing resources, destroying industries, and committing mass war crimes.

The argument that Ukraine should “accept Russian terms” is surrender propaganda. Russian occupation would mean further war crimes, oppression, and the end of Ukraine’s sovereignty. Ukraine fights not because of “Western false promises” but because the alternative is national destruction. The path to peace is not Ukrainian surrender but Russia’s withdrawal, accountability for its crimes, and justice for Ukraine.

'Pro-Russian propaganda'
You and Hillary would've made a fine pair, been there done that.
And since I don't get my info from western mainstream media, but by western independent media, you're barking up the wrong tree.

"Ukraine’s counteroffensive may not have achieved all its objectives, but it significantly weakened Russian forces, making it far from a failure."
- The 2023 counteroffensive was a failure. Ukrainians were going to cut the move down through Tokmak to to cut the 'land bridge' to Crimea, isolate the Russians there by blowing up the Crimean bridge and take back Crimea as well as the ZNPP.
The Kursk offensive planned to take the Kursk NPP and that also failed.
A point to note here is that earlier into the war, when Russia was overstretched in Kharkiv and on the right bank of the Dnieper in Kherson City, they adjusted their battle plan and tactically withdrew.
They retreated if you will and established the Surovikin line, well prepared defensive positions in preparation for Ukraines counteroffensive, those in the know regards the 2023 counteroffensive predicted it's failure before it even started.
In the cases of both of Ukraines counteroffensives above, it was clear within a few days that AFU were not able to make any headway on their objectives, and instead of withdrawing kept trying to reinforce the failure.

As for weakening Russian forces...
Russian army after war may be stronger than it is today – NATO top general
http://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2024/10/20/7480538/
"General Christopher Cavoli, Supreme Allied Commander Europe, believes that regardless of how the war in Ukraine ends, the Russian army will be stronger than it is now."

RE Budapest Memorandum, I heard Lavrov mention it a few weeks back, I'd have to dig up the video and I just don't have the time.

If you google 'Ukrainian Declaration of Neutrality', you'll find this:
The declaration also proclaimed that the republic has intent to become "a permanently neutral state that does not participate in military blocs," and that it would not accept, nor produce, nor procure nuclear weapons.
Here's a video prior to the Maidan in the Rada:

[Cont.]
Nov 2013 (Pre-Maidan!): Ukraine Deputy has proof of USA staging civil war in Ukraine".
http://youtu.be/y9hOl8TuBUM

Beyond that Russia tried to avoid a war was rebuffed by NATO in December 2021 (Stoltenberg has spoken publicly about it) then it recognised the independence of the LPR and DPR and 'invaded' under the pretext of collective self-defense.

>>Russia’s claim that NATO “marched to its borders” ignores the reality that countries voluntarily sought NATO protection due to Russian aggression.<<

I already told you the West spoke about Ukraine and Georgia's integration into NATO at he 2008 NATO conference in Budapest.
And if you wish to invoke 'reality' then the reality is nuclear superpowers don't want other nuclear superpowers weapons stationed along their borders.

'Nyet means nyet'
http://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/08MOSCOW265_a.html

"Ukraine was not a NATO member when Russia invaded, proving the war is about Moscow’s imperial ambitions, not defence."
I think you are the one promoting Western-Propaganda there.
Most people don't listen to what Russia says but rely on the lying western media to tell them. Unfortunately for you I'm not one of those people, I know what Rusia has been saying are terms for the end of the conflict. Demilitarisation, Denazification, acceptance of the lost territories including Crimea and a new security architecture.

Diplomacy is now dead, because Ukraine has continued to breach the ceasefire on energy infrastructure. There's no ceasefire coming to bring in foreign troops and to use them as a tripwire for US boots on the ground. Ukraine's plan is fantasy. Russia has stated foreign troops will be considered enemy combatants.

And the West knew what it was doing, it's in their policy documents.
http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR3000/RR3063/RAND_RR3063.pdf

I support Russia (against the US) Yuri, but I'm truly sorry about whats happened to your country because you trusted the West.
The best thing you can do is cut your losses and accept Russian terms before you lose even more.

Sorry, Armchair Critic! Your pro-Russian bias is blatant. Calling Ukraine’s counteroffensive a “failure” oversimplifies modern warfare. While Ukraine didn’t cut the land bridge to Crimea, it inflicted severe damage on Russian forces. The goal wasn’t just territorial gains but also attrition—degrading Russian logistics, manpower, and supply lines. Russia suffered immense losses, especially in Zaporizhzhia and Bakhmut. The so-called Surovikin Line wasn’t an impenetrable defense but a desperate attempt to hold ground, and Ukraine breached parts of it despite delayed Western aid. Claiming “everyone knew” Ukraine would fail ignores that military operations evolve dynamically. Meanwhile, Russia’s own human-wave attacks in Avdiivka and Bakhmut prove which side has truly been reinforcing failure.

Your argument on the Budapest Memorandum dodges Russia’s blatant violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty. Ukraine surrendered its nuclear weapons in exchange for security guarantees—yet Russia violated this in 2014 by annexing Crimea and again in 2022. Bringing up Ukraine’s 1990 Declaration of Neutrality is irrelevant; Russia made neutrality impossible through repeated aggression. Ukraine turned to NATO not because of Western manipulation, but because Russia made it clear it would never respect Ukraine’s sovereignty.

The myth that NATO expansion forced Russia’s hand falls apart under scrutiny. Ukraine wasn’t in NATO when Russia invaded—this war is about imperial ambitions, not defense. If Russia truly feared NATO on its borders, why did it place nuclear weapons in Belarus? If the 2008 NATO summit justified war, why did Russia wait 14 years to act? The reality is simple: when Ukraine moved westward after 2014, Moscow resorted to force.

Your framing of Russia’s invasion as "self-defense" through “denazification” is pure Kremlin propaganda. Russia itself harbors an extreme far-right movement, with groups like Wagner and figures like Igor Girkin shaping its military actions. Ukraine’s resistance proves Russia can’t achieve its maximalist goals. Calling for Ukraine to “cut its losses” is just a call for surrender. The reality is that Ukraine, with Western support, has humiliated what was once considered the world’s second most powerful military—and any future resolution will favor Kyiv, not Moscow.

And as for the Grain deal, it was never implemented properly in the first place, just another one of the Wests sly tactics.

The moment there was an agreement in place, the EU moved to block Russian payments in swift so the agreement was never really implemented and then you spread propaganda saying Russia broke it, when all it even was was a ruse to supply Ukraine more weapons.

"The idea that Ukraine was 'killing Russian-speaking Ukrainians in the Donbas' is a Kremlin myth."
Yes whatever, and the thought that I may have seen plenty of footage and watched first hand interviews from the Donbass may also be a myth in your eyes. I even watched interviews from people present in the Mariupol Drama Theatre who saw Ukrainian troops filling it with explosives to blow up and blame on Russia, Bucha was all lies, the Ukrainian SVU was on 'safari' killing Russian 'sympathizers' and Ukraine has committed heaps of war crimes against civilians in Kursk.
Pretty much spent the last 10+ years killing civilians to be honest.

http://x.com/ivan_8848/status/1892518749959332127
http://x.com/ricwe123/status/1898068016849424470

I just don't have the time to pick apart all the mistruths right now sorry.

The claim that the Black Sea Grain Initiative was a “Western ruse” is false. The deal allowed Ukrainian grain exports to prevent global food shortages while also accommodating Russian agricultural exports. The EU did not block Russian payments outright but offered alternative payment mechanisms, including through Russia’s Agricultural Bank. Russia unilaterally withdrew from the deal in July 2023, weaponizing food supplies for leverage.

The idea that Ukraine was “killing Russian-speaking Ukrainians in Donbas” is a debunked Kremlin myth. No credible international body has found evidence of genocide. In 2014, Russian-backed separatists, aided by Moscow, took up arms against Ukraine. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Russia’s justification for war under this pretext was baseless. If Russia cared about Russian-speaking Ukrainians, why did it obliterate cities like Mariupol and Kharkiv?

The Bucha massacre is one of Russia’s most well-documented war crimes. Satellite imagery, intercepted communications, and independent investigations confirm that Russian forces executed civilians. The claim that Ukraine staged it is pure disinformation. Similarly, the Mariupol Drama Theater bombing, where “CHILDREN” was visibly marked outside, was a Russian airstrike. No credible evidence suggests Ukraine planted explosives.

The assertion that Ukraine committed war crimes in Kursk is fabricated. Kursk is deep inside Russia, and no independent body has reported such crimes. Meanwhile, Russia has systematically targeted Ukrainian civilians, bombing Kharkiv, Odesa, and Mariupol. Many so-called "witness interviews" and "footage" spread by pro-Russian sources are staged, misattributed, or outright fakes, often using footage from other conflicts.

Lastly, the tactic of throwing out multiple falsehoods and then refusing to engage is a standard disinformation strategy. By flooding discussions with debunked claims and then saying, “I don’t have time to argue”, they seek to overwhelm rather than debate honestly. If they had real evidence, they’d cite independent investigations, not propaganda accounts.

"Sorry, Armchair Critic! Your pro-Russian bias is blatant."
- Damn right it is.

But not because I hate Ukraine, it's because *take note
I don't support U.S. sanctions and overthrows and their endless wars of imperialism.

You have pro Ukraine bias, what's the big deal?
What do you want to assassinate me like Ukraine has to Russian bloggers?

"Calling Ukraine’s counteroffensive a 'failure' oversimplifies modern warfare."
- No it's actually black and white.
The attacking force historically requires a 3 to 1 advantage to have any chance of success. Ukraine's aim was to break through Russias defensive lines, cut the land bridge or in the case of Kursk take control of the Kursk NPP, Ukraine failed in those goals, all the defender had to do to succeed in their goals was to prevent you achieving it. Both cases resulted in significant loss of Ukrainian men and equipment that would've been better used in defence, not offense.
Saying you downgraded the Russians fighting capacity is moot when they can still replace losses and are still gaining territory and slowly bring the AFU towards collapse. How much territory gained in those couter offenses does Ukraine still hold? None. Ukraine was focused solely of gaining territory, Russia was focuses on destroying Ukraine's capacity to fight.
And I didn't say everyone knew I said certain people who were paying attention predicted the outcome. Do you have any evidence of these human wave attacks? I never saw any. They hammered the Ukrainians with an 8 to 1 artillery advantage, then moved forward.
Who now holds Avdiivka and Bakhmut?

The Russians lead you into a fire-bag and you served them as a garbage compactor for NATO weapons and equipment.
You helped them demilitarise NATO.

"Your argument on the Budapest Memorandum dodges Russia’s blatant violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty."
Ukraine stopped being neutral before Russia invaded and you're not sovereign, but a western vassal state. Western bankers own more of Ukraine now should you successfully defend it.
Ukraine never had nukes, they were Soviet nukes stationed in Ukraine. Belarus does not control nukes Russia stations in Belarus either.

"Russia made neutrality impossible through repeated aggression."
- The aggression was a western sponsored coup by CIA, the National Endowment for Democracy, USAID funding and Soros' Open Society foundation. And it was Victoria Nuland who decided the leadership, not Ukrainians, i.e. 'F- the EU' phone call.
It's not a grassroots protest movement (Maidan) if it's extremists funded by lead by Western interests to create division and civil unrest, it's not sovereignty or independence for Ukraine if it's foreign interference and vassal status with a puppet government to be used as a proxy against a foreign nuclear superpower.
Russia took Crimea and Sevastopol to prevent that Naval base becoming a NATO base and losing dominance of the Black Sea to the West.
You played with fire, poked the bear and got burned.

"Calling for Ukraine to 'cut its losses' is just a call for surrender.
- That would be the sensible option, but Ukraine's not ready for it so it'll have to lose more men and territory.

"The reality is that Ukraine, with Western support, has humiliated what was once considered the world’s second most powerful military—and any future resolution will favor Kyiv, not Moscow."
- No, the reality is that Russia was made more stronger militarily, financially and more unified as a nation while Ukraine has been laid to waste.

"The claim that the Black Sea Grain Initiative was a “Western ruse” is false. The deal allowed Ukrainian grain exports to prevent global food shortages while also accommodating Russian agricultural exports."
- I've seen an account of where the grain went. it went to Europe, not the Global South. and it was the EU that blocks Russia's grain shipments to the global south, and is still doing so now.

"The idea that Ukraine was 'killing Russian-speaking Ukrainians in Donbas' is a debunked Kremlin myth."
- Saying that doesn't make it true.
Why don't you go and try and convince the Russia-Speaing Ukrainians in the Donbass themselves?
I've seen plenty of footage and interviews.

"Russian-backed separatists, aided by Moscow, took up arms against Ukraine."
"The Bucha massacre is one of Russia’s most well-documented war crimes."
- Well documented hoax. Like I said- 'Safari'.
Lavrov is still requesting the names of the claimed victims.
Ukraine won't give those details, because it might tell a story.

'Mariupol Drama Theater bombing' - I've seen and heard first hand witness testimony from 70+ year old women who were present at the time, as well as testimony from people in Donetsk and Luhansk who state the war was unavoidable, and the interviewer wasn't Russian, but a British ex-pat.

Kursk war crimes:
http://myanmar.mid.ru/upload/iblock/8f3/7mwf2s64u0mrh9gy02zi5kaip11by782.pdf
http://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=613130174910236

"Meanwhile, Russia has systematically targeted Ukrainian civilians, bombing Kharkiv, Odesa, and Mariupol."
- Only because Ukraine places its military or western handlers or western military suppliers amongst them using them as human shields, and when Russian missiles and Ukrainian / Western air defense interceptors 'fall out of the sky', that doesn't count, it's just unfortunate not a planned thing. It happens.

"Lastly, the tactic of throwing out multiple falsehoods and then refusing to engage is a standard disinformation strategy."
- It wouldn't matter what I said, you'd always fall back upon claims of 'Russian-propaganda' anyway.
Am I right or am I wrong?
I only get 4 comments a day on the main forum, and I don't have the time at the moment.
Plus, the more you speak, the more I have to refute.

If you post in the general forum, I'll get 8 comments a day, and I invite you to do so.
I'm sure I'll find the time to respond now and then when I'm not doing other things.

As for NAZIs and Zelensky.
I've seen the many pictures of Zuluzny and co posing in front of OUN flags and Bandera and the commemorations every year of his death, as well as Sbovoda and Right Sector.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/hundreds-of-ukrainian-nationalists-march-in-in-honor-of-nazi-collaborator/
http://x.com/KimDotcom/status/1753474199921070358
http://x.com/maxbiaggi30/status/1609912898679181314
http://x.com/timand2037/status/1579367301547454465
The NAZI friendly Banderites do the same in my country, and others.
http://cym.org/en/au/stepan-bandera-commemoration-2021/

I also know about the Hasidic immigrations, checkpoints and no-go-zones for non-Jewish Ukrainians, as well as Zelensky saying he wants Ukraine to become like Israel.
Kolomoisky, Zelensky, Shmyhal, Reznikov (no longer in government), Yermak.
Strange the Jewish / NAZI commonality, but true nonetheless.
Rule by the oligarchs and elite maybe?

If you still think Ukraine can win, obviously the Russians need to beat Ukraine further into submission?
And if you really want to fight to the last Ukrainian, rest assured the Russians will accommodate you in this.
They have 100 million more people than Ukraine, and if Ukraine can't win with U.S assistance then they surely can't win without it.
But who am I to try to convince you otherwise?
Good luck, you'll need it.

- You can always come back in a few more years and we can 'debate honestly' how it all went, if any of us are even still here.

Finally, Ukraine's will to win at any cost risks nuclear confrontation and my country is paying for the weapons to keep it going and giving those amongst the Ukrainians who wish to flee a safe haven.

Somehow you 'believe' that Ukraine can sustain the weapons and manpower to win; (whilst the EU 'begs' for a ceasefire)
Undermine Russia financially leading to Putin's ousting or assassination leading to a favourable outcome.
Really all Ukraine's doing is doing helping destroy the global economy, needlessly sending people to die and risking a nuclear war.

Do you really think you'll have independence, sovereignty and democracy when ruled by Brussels and NATO?
EU is petrified of 'populists', i.e. anti-nationalist, governed by unelected bureaucrats that are authoritarian in nature, who support and foster regime changes and remove leaders undesirable to them with lawfare, denying citizens the right to be represented, great democracy.

Neither Ukrainians or the Europeans are smart enough to comprehend a policy of neutrality is the safest thing possible for each of you.

You'd probably be happy if Lukashenko and Georgia Dream were overthrown so their citizens could be conscripted kicking and screaming and used as cannon fodder against Russia too.

Bravo, AC !!

I hope OLO members can take the time to read your comments and can be similarly inspired to think beyond the fictional narrative fed to us by Western mainstream media.

There's several reasons why the 2023 counter offensive failed.

Number 1. Is because Ukraine lacked air support to defend the boots on the ground.
Number 2. Is because the help you got from the USA also included them making the war plans for you from Ramstein, and once they gathered all the men and equipment (which were inadequately trained for combined arms warfare) they send you in without adequate air support, and did not stop the counteroffensive when it was clear within the first week you wouldn't achieve the objectives
Number 3. Is because the West advertised your war plans to the Russians and gave them time to prepare a defense that would neutralise your attempt.

I'm not saying it to be mean Yuri.
I support Russia, but I am truly sorry for what's happened to your country.
I blame the West for their policy of sanctions and overthrows.
For Boris Johnson convincing you to exit negotiations in April 2022 and to take up arms against Russia and that they would support you 'as long as it takes'.
For the U.S. those promises had limits.
They don't want to waste the weapons and ammunition on you, they made Ukraine Europe's problem, because they're looking at the bigger picture, i.e 'War with China', because the Wests real aims are to maintain global primacy, and defend the Unipolar world order where America makes the rules against the multipolar world order.

Wolfowitz Doctrine
The Wolfowitz Doctrine, articulated in a 1992 document, outlines the United States' aspirations to maintain its superpower status following the Cold War. Central to this doctrine is the PREVENTION OF ANY RIVAL POWERS EMERGING and establishing dominance over critical regions, particularly in Eurasia. It emphasizes U.S. leadership in promoting global stability and reaffirms strategic interests, particularly regarding oil in the Middle East and the security of Israel, while also reflecting a shift toward a diplomatic approach concerning relations with Russia and former Soviet states.

* PREVENTION OF ANY RIVAL POWERS EMERGING

This war was never even about Ukraine.
It was about using you as a battering ram to harm Russia.

Just came across this thread on X in my feed, good timing.

Bucha Unmasked: A Web of Doubt
http://x.com/TaranQ/status/1907188399716647405

I didn't really go through the content, readers can look and judge for themselves - but I was looking for something specific...
I scrolled down, and down and down some more till I actually found what I was hoping to find, in this response comment:

http://x.com/marc__adler/status/1907456940688412841
'Safari'

http://en.lb.ua/news/2022/04/02/12441_special_forces_regiment_safari.html

>>Special forces have begun a clearing operation in the city of Bucha in the Kyiv region, which has been liberated by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The city is being cleared from saboteurs and accomplices of Russian forces.

This has been reported by the National Police.

“At the moment, the combatants of the organised special forces regiment of the National Police, Safari, which includes the representatives of subdivisions of the Special Tasks Police, the Rapid Operational Response Unit, the Tactical Operational Response Police, and explosive ordnance disposal experts, is working in the city,” the office reports.<<

What does the word 'Safari' mean?
It means exactly what it is, i.e. 'Safari Hunt'.
What do you think 'cleared from saboteurs and accomplices of Russian forces' means...

Yes, a timely reminder, AC ... the third anniversary of the Bucha massacre is indeed an ideal opportunity for any fellow truth seekers out there to read and reflect on the truth of what occurred ...

“Lies, truth, and forensics in Ukraine.” The case of Bucha. - April 2022
https://thefloutist.substack.com/p/lies-truth-and-forensics-in-ukraine

Remember the Maine: The Alleged Russian Atrocity at Bucha Looks Like Another in a Long Line of False Pretexts for War - May 2022
https://covertactionmagazine.com/2022/05/13/remember-the-maine-the-alleged-russian-atrocity-at-bucha-looks-like-another-in-a-long-line-of-false-pretexts-for-war

What really happened in Bucha? The questions Western media won’t ask - April 2025
https://www.rt.com/russia/614967-what-really-happened-in-bucha

Statement by First Deputy Permanent Representative Dmitry Polyanskiy at a UNSC Arria-Formula Meeting on Disinformation and Sabotage of Peace in Ukraine - April 2025
https://russiaun.ru/en/news/arria_02042025

Understanding the roots of Russian hatred and dehumanization of Ukrainians is not merely an intellectual exercise—it is essential to grasping the core causes of Russia’s genocidal war against Ukraine. This war did not begin in 2022, nor in 2014, nor even in the Soviet era. It is the outgrowth of centuries of imperial domination and a pathological refusal to allow Ukraine—and others like it—to exist on its own terms.

Russian soldiers who occupy Ukrainian towns and villages often come not from Moscow or St. Petersburg, but from Buryatia, Dagestan, Bashkortostan, Chechnya—regions on the fringes of the so-called Russian Federation. These are not “Russians” in any meaningful ethnic or cultural sense. They are the forcibly assimilated peoples of a broken empire that survives by devouring the identities of those it colonizes. Russia is not a nation; it is an empire masquerading as one, and it has never figured out how to be anything else.
This is the key to understanding the strange structure of Russian identity. In a healthy nation-state, diversity becomes strength through synthesis—a melting pot in which languages, cultures, and traditions interact to form something greater. But the Russian imperial model is no melting pot. It is a grinder. It demands that constituent peoples forget who they are, erase their languages, abandon their heritage, and become “Russians”—not as an inclusive civic identity, but as a hollow, imperial label. This is not integration. It is enforced amnesia.

The Soviet Union perfected this system. The “Soviet person” was not a proud citizen of a diverse and egalitarian republic; he was a nameless, cultureless, obedient unit of production and control. The USSR’s collapse did not change this mindset. The so-called “Russian Federation” merely inherited the bones of empire and continued the project: a state that cannot exist without erasing others.
Nowhere is this more evident than in Russia’s relationship with Ukraine.

Despite centuries of Russian domination—Tsarist censorship, Soviet famines, cultural repression, deportations, and political assassinations—Ukrainians persisted. More than that, they built a nation. A real one.

2/ A nation with a sense of shared identity that arises from memory, language, culture, religion, and civic life. A nation that produces new political elites, challenges them, replaces them, and grows. A nation with a living memory of suffering and survival—and a clear vision of freedom.
This is what Russia hates. Ukraine is the mirror that exposes Russia’s failure. Ukraine is the Slavic nation that succeeded where Russia failed: it built something real, bottom-up, resilient, and self-critical. In contrast, the “Russian nation” remains barely coherent, held together by propaganda, fear, and myth. And so, instead of reckoning with its own hollowness, the Russian regime and its ideologues must destroy the mirror. Ukraine must be crushed—not for threatening Russia militarily, but for threatening its imperial mythos.

That is why Russian rhetoric is so hysterical. Kremlin ideologues scramble for grand metaphors—Russia as “civilization,” Russia as “Third Rome,” Russia as the last bastion against Western decadence. They speak of “spiritual bonds,” “eternal Russia,” and “anti-Nazism,” but all these slogans are designed to conceal the gaping void at the heart of their identity: there is no Russian nation. There is only the empire. And empire demands conquest or collapse.

To the imperial mind, Ukrainians are doubly intolerable. First, they are traitors—they refuse to disappear into the Russian identity. Second, they are rivals—proof that another Eastern Slavic nation can thrive without empire. That is why Russia must erase Ukraine: not merely to regain territory, but to deny an existential threat. Ukraine is the living alternative to Russian imperialism.

This logic is genocidal. It is not merely comparable to Nazism—it is a sibling to it. The Nazi regime feared the Jews not only as “the Other” but as a reflection of what Germany might be without fascism: cosmopolitan, intellectual, ethically rooted. Similarly, Russia fears Ukrainians not because they are foreign, but because they are familiar—too familiar. Ukrainians are “like us,” but they chose to be different. They chose democracy, identity, and freedom. That is unforgivable.

3/
And so, in Russia’s eyes, Ukrainians must not only be defeated—they must be annihilated, humiliated, and erased. This is why Russian media speaks of “de-Ukrainization.” This is why Russian missiles target maternity hospitals, churches, and museums. This is why the very word “Ukraine” must be wiped off the map. Not for security, but for identity.
This is not a war for land. This is a war for the right to exist outside the shadow of a failed empire.
The truth is simple: Ukraine is a nation. Russia is not. And in that truth lies both the reason for Russia’s hatred—and Ukraine’s victory.