[Cont.]
Mate if you can't be honest about a document presented to you, and everyone else here can see it themselves, then would would anyone listen to a word you say, unless it reinforces their own biases / preferences.

Basically, well you're a bunch of idiots.

And fyi, USAID and National Endowment for Democracy, are US fifth columns used for overthrows, may as well BE a front for the CIA, but you wouldn't know that, because you're both a weasel and an idiot.

The majority of your arguments are just crap anyway.
NATO had to create a new 'baddy' to justify it's existence, otherwise it risked becoming completely irrelevant after the fall of the Berlin wall.
So don't carry on with all of this feelgood bs.

"They looked forward to knew thinking, a freer market, opening to the west and an end to the Afghan adventure. By this time Russians, at least those in Moscow, were aware of the massive difference in standards of living in the west as compared to the motherland, and believed that Gorbachev's new broom would shrink that difference."

They tried to embrace the West, the west only wanted to keep a foot on their throat.

Russia Warns Ukraine & West; Says War Goals Non-negotiable | 'NATO's Mask Of Unanimity...'
http://youtu.be/TN7AdXLYdYk

The collective west's leaders are like canine butt sniffers.
Russia is not backing down, and Ukraine and the West are having their asses handed to them.

There's no military victory coming to them, no economic victory, no ousting of Putin, and the Russian people largely hate and do not trust the West at all now.

Foxy,
"Thank You for the information and for reminding us that:
'What history does show is that lack of alliances means
powerful states ride roughshot over the powerless'."

- You're so consumed with your cold war hangover mentality, that you couldn't possibly see anything related to this topic for what it actually is.

So were you talking about Russia or the US there?
- It's the US that rides 'roughshot over the powerless'
Russia is just defending it's security interests that western warmongers decided didn't matter.

People like yourself have indirectly gotten a million Ukrainians killed and maimed.
- But this is the US aim, to create that much carnage, that these people will never be friends again.
- Because that's how the US rolls, and you defend them Lil Miss (I'm better than you) 'San Francisco'.

Yawn... what a load of crap.
Par for the course in 2023.

Do your best send in your woke armies.
Poloand, NATO whoever, won't change a thing except more bodybags.

Hi Paul,

QUOTE FOXY "For that reason a strong Ukraine needs to be given the
opportunity to be a member of the EU and NATO."

QUOTE YOU "Ukraine's immediate membership of NATO would trigger WWIII, of which the consequences of are too terrifying to contemplate. Please agree."

These morons are so (blinkers-on) pro-west / hateful of Russia they'd see WWIII as a good thing.
I doubt any of these blood thirsty commenters (hiding behind their hateful biases) would ever agree with you.

In any case, Ukraine is probably not going to become a part of NATO now anyway, and it's just as likely that NATO itself will crumble.

The Ukraine 'project' by the West has been to the Wests own demise, militarily and economically, and western citizens are becoming increasingly distrustful of their own leaders, who care more about their weasel international mates in Washington, London and Brussels than they do their own citizens.
- All they've done is bring harm to and polarise their own nations.

The Kremlin's full scale invasion of Ukraine is widely
recognized as Europe's largest armed conflict since WWII.
However, it did not appear out of thin air. The international
community's failure to punish Putin for the earlier invasions
of Georgia, Crimea, and Eastern Europe, fueled a sense of
impunity that set the stage for the horrors of the current war.

Unless Putin is decisively defeated in 2023 this crisis will
escalate further and reach new levels. It should now be obvious
to all but the willfully blind that any talk of compromise with
Putin only serves to encourage further Kremlin aggression.

Instead the West must speak to Putin in the only language that
he understands - the language of strength.

The big lesson thus far is that failure to counter international
aggression inevitably leads to further aggression.

Timidity about what the Kremlin might do with their
nuclear weapons will allow Putin and his military
high command to forget that in a full-scale
confrontation with NATO Putin would lose.

If Putin intended to pursue a scorched earth policy in
Ukraine - the West would not stand by indecisively.
The leaders of NATO and the West would not lose. They
know only too well the cost nationally and internationally
of what it would mean if Putin prevailed in Ukraine.

Defeating Putin for NATO and the EU means taking action
meaningfully and with a long-term commitment against his
aggression. There is no other choice - unless Putin sees
sense.

Oh dear, AC, this is becoming quite the embarrassment for you. Do you know about the old saying that when in a hole you should stop digging?

But I think I've gotten to the nub of the problem here and why you so misunderstand your survey.

You wrote: "Prior to the Maidan (Under the claimed 'Pro-Russian' leader Victor Yanukovych -
53% of Crimeans - wanted to become Autonomous region in Ukraine
2% of Crimeans - wanted to be a normal region in Ukraine."

But that is wrong. They didn't want "to become Autonomous region in Ukraine" because (sit down for this) they ALREADY WERE an autonomous region of Ukraine. Crimea had been a autonomous republic within the state of Ukraine since the mid 1990's. I don't know how you missed this since it's right there in the survey when they say that 53% of Crimeans want to be "Autonomy in Ukraine (as today)"...repeat (AS TODAY). If I need to spell it out further for you, this means more than half of the Crimean people wanted things to remain the same. To make it even easier for you to understand, 2% wanted to cease to be autonomous and just be a normal oblast within Ukraine and a further 12% wanted the autonomous republic to remain in Ukraine but become more Tatar in its constitution. So all up 67% wanted to remain within Ukraine. A mere 23% wanted to re-join mother Russia (down from 33% two years earlier).

So I don't know what you think you found here. But clearly if you thought they wanted to BECOME an autonomous republic you've utterly got it wrong because they already were an autonomous republic and wanted to stay that way.

Like I said....please stop digging.

You wrote: "You ignore the part where the US itself calls the document "Public Opinion Survey Residents of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea'"

I didn't ignore it. What else were they going to call it? It was a survey of the citizens of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. Again I think you've shown you don't know what's what.

/tbc