Guys, please. Trump proposed an unconditional ceasefire as a precondition for starting the negotiations. Putin responded: "I agree with the idea of a ceasefire in principle BUT WE HAVE TO WORK OUT A ZILLION DETAILS FIRST". This amounts to rejecting the ceasefire as proposed by Trump, and turning its logic on its head: first we work out a draft agreement and then we can think of a ceasefire.
Again, I disagree. Any ceasefire requires agreement on its implementation. The questions Putin posed were not questions regarding final status, but implementation of a ceasefire. What does it mean for the surrounded troops in Kursk? Will arms deliveries and mobilization continue? Will it be monitored and how? And so forth.
You obviously lack essential facts to understand why Putin is on the one hand, and on the other hand insists on the necessary solutions.
History and the breaking of commitments by the US and the entire West
Since 1945, the USSR / RF has submitted a request for membership in NATO 4 times - rejected, why do you think?
2.1989/90 no NATO eastward enlargement - and it happened, RF watched and did nothing
3.Minsk I never implemented by Ukraine let alone respected
4 Minsk II / UN Resolution 2202 by Poroshenko, Hollande and Merkel unmasked as a rearmament of Ukraine and never as a peace object
5th Istanbul - known to be sabotaged by GB
and in all considerations we should not forget Yugoslavia, this state has been through the NATO and its political arm the EU - not forgetting the bilateral treaties - torn and Serbia is now under very strong pressure from the EU and by means of threats attempts to integrate dictatorship into the EU.
The right of self-determination of the peoples known from the time of the League of Nations, the forerunner of the UN was then trampled by the Anglo-Saxons.
Why does RF not want peacekeepers from the west, eh? Then he could have saved himself the special operation.
Let’s not forget that since the beginning of 2008 plans by UK and USA existed to build ports for their military in Ukraine. The Russian fleet should be displaced from Crimea and thus put under pressure as now in the Baltic Sea (NATO already speaks of a NATO inland sea in the Baltic Sea)
Imagine Cuba, Nicaragua would be so armed and militarised by China and RF, remember the Cuban crisis and the Iran Contra scandal?
I am the first one who says Everyone should have his opinion and I respect it too, because the essential is there, I therefore do not have to agree.
George Kennan absolutely no friend of the RF and many other high-ranking experts from the military and diplomacy have warned against the eastward expansion of NATO, they have addressed exactly what will happen, what has now happened.
The US invaded Grenada, remember? Because allegedly a few US students were in danger. Later it was declared as a pretext just like the Gulf of Tonkin lie, the lie about the invasion of Iraq or Afghanistan and never has the world reacted with sanctions or such hysteria as now in Ukraine.
If I therefore approve of conflicts, no not a single conflict that is fought with weapons should be rejected in principle.
But the current catastrophe did not start in 2007/8, but in my view already in 1991.
But what was the reason for the RF’s invasion of Ukraine? Primarily a civil war following the Maidan. The European Court of Justice has now 11 years after the massacres in Odessa, the non-prosecution of these crimes.
Let us look at the justification of NATO for its intervention in Yugoslavia. Also a multi-ethnic state with ethnic problems, which were always kept under cover under Titov. Then the civil war broke out, and with all its problems.
Fact is that the West was successful with its PR propaganda at the beginning and so many in the West were not aware of what happened until today.
Why does nobody speak of the aggressor USA or NATO/EU in the other conflicts?
Again Yugoslavia - this country no longer exists today, why because the NATO has invaded in violation of international law without a UN mandate. Of course you can say that people should be protected, but why then the RF who wanted to end the civil war does not grant the same right? Nobody asked about the Yugoslav constitution in the West, but not even in the individual states of Yugoslavia.
Now many bring into play the "annexation" of Crimea. When we examine this fact, we must remember the right of self-determination of peoples already under the standard of the League of Nations.
"With the establishment of Ukraine as an independent post-Soviet state on 24 August 1991, Crimea remained part of Ukraine in the course of its legal succession."
"On 26 February 1992, the Supreme Soviet of the Autonomous Socialist Soviet Republic of Crimea decided to rename it the Republic of Crimea.". The Supreme Soviet declared the Republic of Crimea independent on 5 May 1992,."
Ukraine claimed the right to be independent, but subsequently did not accept the request of the majority of the Crimean inhabitants for independence from Ukraine, why no one asked Ukraine to respect this?
The first (transitional) president of Ukraine after 2014 Turchinov sent the army with tanks and fighter jets to eastern Ukraine, nobody from Kiev tried to solve the problem by political means. Reminds you of other countries. I am only saying the statements of the Vice President of the USA Vance at the Munich Security Conference to Germany and Europe, only that it has not yet degenerated into a civil war. When I look at Romania, I dread the future.
I think we can finally agree that conflicts should always be resolved by peaceful means on both sides.
I think that is the only way, and of course it takes two to make a quarrel.
However I am a bit baffled why the UK is getting involved in this rather obscure fight as there is not a penny in it for us, and Russia is a medium sized economy that is in no position to threaten anyone except its smaller neighbours who fail to toe the Putin Line. I would hate to think what might happen if Russia fragmented along the lines of say Yugoslavia or Libya - the Chinese would be landgrabbing like mad, as they have quite legitimate territorial claims in eastern Siberia.
Oh yes, you should look at the ceasefire efforts very closely, because GB despite all peace efforts already plans to undermine it, as several times in history.
No, the people who invade other countries are the problem. Imagine that we are neighbours, and disagree about a fence. Would I be right to sneak onto your property and move the fence: and then shoot you if you resisted?
I understand what you’re getting at, only that I see your thoughts a little shortened, sorry.
The problem began when the USSR disintegrated, in which 3 people played a role, acting against the constitution of the USSR, that was on 8 December 1991 with the Belowish agreements between the presidents of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus Boris Yeltsin, Leonid Kravchuk and Stanislaus Shushkevich.
All the other socialist Soviet republics were dragged into this chaos.
For your example, several large families share a large plot - let’s call it a village - 3 residents decide to dissolve the village, what do all the others?
This dissolution of the village splits parts of one or more families and they are stuck on another plot. The actual property owners do not want to, however, and harass or defame them. Instead of accepting them as a roommate and using them for something common, they exclude them. These themselves still see themselves as part of this new family just like after a wedding, then you can not choose the relatives.
Just a classic example of a neighborhood dispute that usually ends up in court. Now, however, several other families have interfered in this dispute, not to settle the dispute, but to take advantage of the supposed weakness of one against the other and profit themselves from it.
So what happened, instead of de-escalation was escalated.
In addition, we experience the same in the Baltic states, in the Caucasus etc. The supposed victory of the West over the East, the USSR, has increased the chaos in the world. Because the West not only interfered in a dispute but escalated it, to its supposed advantage.
Apart from this, the GB has always in the old style of the Empire warded the peoples against each other. Pakistan, India or how we now the problem that GB originally created in Palestine / Israel and the non-implementation of UN Resolution 181.
When the Germans joined NATO, founded in 1949, the British Lord Ismay was 1st Secretary General of NATO: According to him, the purpose of the alliance at that time was to keep the Americans inside (in Western Europe), the Russians out and the Germans down".
In this context, we recall the Munich Agreement of 29 September 30, 1938 signed by the heads of government Adolf Hitler, Neville Chamberlain, Édouard Daladier and Benito Mussolini in Munich. The Sudetengerman territories, which actually belonged to Czechoslovakia, were given over to the Third Reich in the hope that this empire would mash up against the young Soviet republic.
Let’s not forget the role a few years ago and by that I do not mean the 1st world war but the civil war in the young Soviet republic. On the side of the so-called White Guards many countries in Europe fought, again in the middle UK, the USA and Japan.
One can rightly say that for more than 100 years the "West" has been trying to drive Russia/USSR/RF into a war or to overturn it with war.
First, they wanted to defeat tsarist Russia by secretly bringing Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov with money and passport from Switzerland via Germany Finland to Saint Petersburg, I think the further story is known.
How long should the neighbor watch then, until he is "driven out" without defending himself or is he entitled to defend himself and say enough is enough?
It is also the present hysteria which prepares again the next war, by being preached that RF would attack the NATO. The German Defense Minister speaks of an unconditional war-ready Bundeswehr, it is as if you hear Göbbels' then-German propaganda leader.
To this day, the murder of Olaf Palme has not been solved, THE SWEDISH PEACE PRIME MINISTER, who was it and whom did he stand in the way with his initiative?
This not the first war in Europe has a long history and one should be open to all sides
Orc feces. War was caused by putino-fascist neo-czar imperialism and putin's lust for internal power. If what you say is true, then putin would not be moving troops from the nato border to non-nato border. ://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/banality-putin-s-evil
Putin did not rejetect the ceasefire proposal. He said that its conditions must be negociated and that it should lead an enduring conclusion of the conflitct. He is saying the same thing as Trump.
I think you're mistaken in saying Russia rejected the ceasefire offer, as some London newspapers insist. Rather, Putin's answer to a journalist yesterday laid out some issues to be addressed in ceasefire discussions. This statement by Lavrov explains some of their reasoning: https://x.com/rusembusa/status/1900309810911801428?s=51
there is winning and there is grinding. This is not 'winning' as we know it - this is scorched earth. Putin might be gaining a few metres, but the war is destroying Russia for a few trivial gains.
At the moment, however, it looks more like this than if the countries of the EU not only economically - keyword deindustrialization, but also socio-politically keyword LBG... Gendern etc., go down the creek.
The debt of countries like France, UK, Italy and now also Germany is growing at a frightening scale.
Of course, the RF is also damaged, but at the same time it is able to advance its own economy in many areas through the western sanctions.
Not too long ago, the West had already speculated on China - not only Germany has brought everything that went with what result. Today, they are trying to contain China economically again.
Remember George Friedman and his statement at the Chicago Council 2015 "we have been fighting for over 100 years against a cooperation between Germany and Russia because they are the only power that could become dangerous to us (the USA)"
Now the US and the EU have brought all kinds of economic technologies to China in order to produce cheaper and thus increase profits. Greed eats brains, they say, and now China and Russia are working together instead of Germany and Russia.
The West has never been concerned with human rights, but always with mining rights ?
! First comes the eating and drinking and then the morality - another one of these things you can use here.
We must oppose putino-fascism and Kremlin propaganda that promotes it with lies. United russia is a far right putino-fascist neo-czarist party. Putin promotes ruZcism. https://youtu.be/XQc6mJ7u8gQ?si=SwdnyEsZY0hyE8fJ
Guys, please. Trump proposed an unconditional ceasefire as a precondition for starting the negotiations. Putin responded: "I agree with the idea of a ceasefire in principle BUT WE HAVE TO WORK OUT A ZILLION DETAILS FIRST". This amounts to rejecting the ceasefire as proposed by Trump, and turning its logic on its head: first we work out a draft agreement and then we can think of a ceasefire.
Again, I disagree. Any ceasefire requires agreement on its implementation. The questions Putin posed were not questions regarding final status, but implementation of a ceasefire. What does it mean for the surrounded troops in Kursk? Will arms deliveries and mobilization continue? Will it be monitored and how? And so forth.
THERE ARE NO SURROUNDING OR TROOPS IN KURSK. IT IS PULL BACK IN GOOD ORDER!!! even putinistani ruZcist neo-czarist milbloggers are not saying it is a SURROUNDING. This is propaganda from the legacy Gazprom media industirial kgb complex. https://nypost.com/2025/03/20/world-news/ukraine-troops-not-encircled-in-kursk-intelligence-reports-say/
You obviously lack essential facts to understand why Putin is on the one hand, and on the other hand insists on the necessary solutions.
History and the breaking of commitments by the US and the entire West
Since 1945, the USSR / RF has submitted a request for membership in NATO 4 times - rejected, why do you think?
2.1989/90 no NATO eastward enlargement - and it happened, RF watched and did nothing
3.Minsk I never implemented by Ukraine let alone respected
4 Minsk II / UN Resolution 2202 by Poroshenko, Hollande and Merkel unmasked as a rearmament of Ukraine and never as a peace object
5th Istanbul - known to be sabotaged by GB
and in all considerations we should not forget Yugoslavia, this state has been through the NATO and its political arm the EU - not forgetting the bilateral treaties - torn and Serbia is now under very strong pressure from the EU and by means of threats attempts to integrate dictatorship into the EU.
The right of self-determination of the peoples known from the time of the League of Nations, the forerunner of the UN was then trampled by the Anglo-Saxons.
Why does RF not want peacekeepers from the west, eh? Then he could have saved himself the special operation.
Let’s not forget that since the beginning of 2008 plans by UK and USA existed to build ports for their military in Ukraine. The Russian fleet should be displaced from Crimea and thus put under pressure as now in the Baltic Sea (NATO already speaks of a NATO inland sea in the Baltic Sea)
Imagine Cuba, Nicaragua would be so armed and militarised by China and RF, remember the Cuban crisis and the Iran Contra scandal?
Yes yes and yes. The West is also evil.
But the facts here are different: Russia is the aggressor, and Ukrainians are fighting like lions.
I am the first one who says Everyone should have his opinion and I respect it too, because the essential is there, I therefore do not have to agree.
George Kennan absolutely no friend of the RF and many other high-ranking experts from the military and diplomacy have warned against the eastward expansion of NATO, they have addressed exactly what will happen, what has now happened.
The US invaded Grenada, remember? Because allegedly a few US students were in danger. Later it was declared as a pretext just like the Gulf of Tonkin lie, the lie about the invasion of Iraq or Afghanistan and never has the world reacted with sanctions or such hysteria as now in Ukraine.
If I therefore approve of conflicts, no not a single conflict that is fought with weapons should be rejected in principle.
But the current catastrophe did not start in 2007/8, but in my view already in 1991.
But what was the reason for the RF’s invasion of Ukraine? Primarily a civil war following the Maidan. The European Court of Justice has now 11 years after the massacres in Odessa, the non-prosecution of these crimes.
Let us look at the justification of NATO for its intervention in Yugoslavia. Also a multi-ethnic state with ethnic problems, which were always kept under cover under Titov. Then the civil war broke out, and with all its problems.
Fact is that the West was successful with its PR propaganda at the beginning and so many in the West were not aware of what happened until today.
Why does nobody speak of the aggressor USA or NATO/EU in the other conflicts?
Again Yugoslavia - this country no longer exists today, why because the NATO has invaded in violation of international law without a UN mandate. Of course you can say that people should be protected, but why then the RF who wanted to end the civil war does not grant the same right? Nobody asked about the Yugoslav constitution in the West, but not even in the individual states of Yugoslavia.
Now many bring into play the "annexation" of Crimea. When we examine this fact, we must remember the right of self-determination of peoples already under the standard of the League of Nations.
"With the establishment of Ukraine as an independent post-Soviet state on 24 August 1991, Crimea remained part of Ukraine in the course of its legal succession."
"On 26 February 1992, the Supreme Soviet of the Autonomous Socialist Soviet Republic of Crimea decided to rename it the Republic of Crimea.". The Supreme Soviet declared the Republic of Crimea independent on 5 May 1992,."
Ukraine claimed the right to be independent, but subsequently did not accept the request of the majority of the Crimean inhabitants for independence from Ukraine, why no one asked Ukraine to respect this?
The first (transitional) president of Ukraine after 2014 Turchinov sent the army with tanks and fighter jets to eastern Ukraine, nobody from Kiev tried to solve the problem by political means. Reminds you of other countries. I am only saying the statements of the Vice President of the USA Vance at the Munich Security Conference to Germany and Europe, only that it has not yet degenerated into a civil war. When I look at Romania, I dread the future.
I think we can finally agree that conflicts should always be resolved by peaceful means on both sides.
I think that is the only way, and of course it takes two to make a quarrel.
However I am a bit baffled why the UK is getting involved in this rather obscure fight as there is not a penny in it for us, and Russia is a medium sized economy that is in no position to threaten anyone except its smaller neighbours who fail to toe the Putin Line. I would hate to think what might happen if Russia fragmented along the lines of say Yugoslavia or Libya - the Chinese would be landgrabbing like mad, as they have quite legitimate territorial claims in eastern Siberia.
Here is a slightly older article that fits the topic https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/nov/26/ukraine.usa
and then I recommend
https://petraerler.substack.com/p/der-russe-steht-nicht-vor-der-tur?publication_id=580267&post_id=159242201&isFreemail=true&r=22vp36&triedRedirect=true
Oh yes, you should look at the ceasefire efforts very closely, because GB despite all peace efforts already plans to undermine it, as several times in history.
https://www.defencenet.gr/asfaleia/diethnis-asfaleia/ta-paizei-ola-gia-ola-o-v-zelenski-dinei-8-limania-tis-odissou-sti-vretania-gia-30-dis-lires/
Probably GB need the Belgorod to slowly understand that the time of the Empire is over, because this is not how you create peace.
The West, Europe especially, persists in its delusion that it can tell - ie command - Russia what to do.
It is obvious to all - except the Western elite, it would seem - that it can't.
And as sanctions have harmed Western Europe more than Russia, it would be well for the European economy if our leaders outgrow the delusion.
The "collective West" is a bunch of non-agreement capable imperialist/hegemonist thugs. Case closed!
I just posted ukrain lies YouTube video.
This whole war responsibility lies at door of ukrain and nato .
Putin thought I ain’t his fan I sympathise with his position
No, the people who invade other countries are the problem. Imagine that we are neighbours, and disagree about a fence. Would I be right to sneak onto your property and move the fence: and then shoot you if you resisted?
I understand what you’re getting at, only that I see your thoughts a little shortened, sorry.
The problem began when the USSR disintegrated, in which 3 people played a role, acting against the constitution of the USSR, that was on 8 December 1991 with the Belowish agreements between the presidents of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus Boris Yeltsin, Leonid Kravchuk and Stanislaus Shushkevich.
All the other socialist Soviet republics were dragged into this chaos.
For your example, several large families share a large plot - let’s call it a village - 3 residents decide to dissolve the village, what do all the others?
This dissolution of the village splits parts of one or more families and they are stuck on another plot. The actual property owners do not want to, however, and harass or defame them. Instead of accepting them as a roommate and using them for something common, they exclude them. These themselves still see themselves as part of this new family just like after a wedding, then you can not choose the relatives.
Just a classic example of a neighborhood dispute that usually ends up in court. Now, however, several other families have interfered in this dispute, not to settle the dispute, but to take advantage of the supposed weakness of one against the other and profit themselves from it.
So what happened, instead of de-escalation was escalated.
In addition, we experience the same in the Baltic states, in the Caucasus etc. The supposed victory of the West over the East, the USSR, has increased the chaos in the world. Because the West not only interfered in a dispute but escalated it, to its supposed advantage.
Apart from this, the GB has always in the old style of the Empire warded the peoples against each other. Pakistan, India or how we now the problem that GB originally created in Palestine / Israel and the non-implementation of UN Resolution 181.
When the Germans joined NATO, founded in 1949, the British Lord Ismay was 1st Secretary General of NATO: According to him, the purpose of the alliance at that time was to keep the Americans inside (in Western Europe), the Russians out and the Germans down".
In this context, we recall the Munich Agreement of 29 September 30, 1938 signed by the heads of government Adolf Hitler, Neville Chamberlain, Édouard Daladier and Benito Mussolini in Munich. The Sudetengerman territories, which actually belonged to Czechoslovakia, were given over to the Third Reich in the hope that this empire would mash up against the young Soviet republic.
Let’s not forget the role a few years ago and by that I do not mean the 1st world war but the civil war in the young Soviet republic. On the side of the so-called White Guards many countries in Europe fought, again in the middle UK, the USA and Japan.
One can rightly say that for more than 100 years the "West" has been trying to drive Russia/USSR/RF into a war or to overturn it with war.
First, they wanted to defeat tsarist Russia by secretly bringing Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov with money and passport from Switzerland via Germany Finland to Saint Petersburg, I think the further story is known.
How long should the neighbor watch then, until he is "driven out" without defending himself or is he entitled to defend himself and say enough is enough?
It is also the present hysteria which prepares again the next war, by being preached that RF would attack the NATO. The German Defense Minister speaks of an unconditional war-ready Bundeswehr, it is as if you hear Göbbels' then-German propaganda leader.
To this day, the murder of Olaf Palme has not been solved, THE SWEDISH PEACE PRIME MINISTER, who was it and whom did he stand in the way with his initiative?
This not the first war in Europe has a long history and one should be open to all sides
Orc feces. War was caused by putino-fascist neo-czar imperialism and putin's lust for internal power. If what you say is true, then putin would not be moving troops from the nato border to non-nato border. ://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/banality-putin-s-evil
Putin did not rejetect the ceasefire proposal. He said that its conditions must be negociated and that it should lead an enduring conclusion of the conflitct. He is saying the same thing as Trump.
I think you're mistaken in saying Russia rejected the ceasefire offer, as some London newspapers insist. Rather, Putin's answer to a journalist yesterday laid out some issues to be addressed in ceasefire discussions. This statement by Lavrov explains some of their reasoning: https://x.com/rusembusa/status/1900309810911801428?s=51
Who on earth would trust Trump and the West.
I don't believe for a moment that Trump will out manoeuvre Putin.
Russia has nothing to lose even with more sanctions.
Putin did not reject the ceasefire.
Putin is winning on the battlefield. Ukraine has a decade long history of breaking deals, to just arm and regroup.
They broke Minks, Istanbul and the ceasefire during the civil war and shelled the Donbaz.
there is winning and there is grinding. This is not 'winning' as we know it - this is scorched earth. Putin might be gaining a few metres, but the war is destroying Russia for a few trivial gains.
At the moment, however, it looks more like this than if the countries of the EU not only economically - keyword deindustrialization, but also socio-politically keyword LBG... Gendern etc., go down the creek.
The debt of countries like France, UK, Italy and now also Germany is growing at a frightening scale.
Of course, the RF is also damaged, but at the same time it is able to advance its own economy in many areas through the western sanctions.
Not too long ago, the West had already speculated on China - not only Germany has brought everything that went with what result. Today, they are trying to contain China economically again.
Remember George Friedman and his statement at the Chicago Council 2015 "we have been fighting for over 100 years against a cooperation between Germany and Russia because they are the only power that could become dangerous to us (the USA)"
Now the US and the EU have brought all kinds of economic technologies to China in order to produce cheaper and thus increase profits. Greed eats brains, they say, and now China and Russia are working together instead of Germany and Russia.
The West has never been concerned with human rights, but always with mining rights ?
! First comes the eating and drinking and then the morality - another one of these things you can use here.
" West operates through threats and force rather than diplomacy. This will only hardens Russia’s position."
Both Trump's and Netanyahu words ate nothing but baby babble: sounds with no meaning.
People
Planet
Peace
dear comrades
Refuse Fascism
Oppose Oppression
Oppose putino-fascist neo-czar imperialism. https://www-aljazeera-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.aljazeera.com/amp/opinions/2023/1/24/how-western-scholars-overlooked-russian-imperialism?amp_gsa=1&_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=17426638150205&csi=1&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.aljazeera.com%2Fopinions%2F2023%2F1%2F24%2Fhow-western-scholars-overlooked-russian-imperialism
"I can end this war in 24 hours" was a great line to start his 2024 presidential campaign with.
If us won't tolerate Mexico joining csto, why should poland or ukraine accept Belarus joining csto?
This brave babushka stands for peace. Tankies will deride her as a cia asset as they are blinded with anti west hate and oppose freedom. https://youtu.be/XQc6mJ7u8gQ?si=SwdnyEsZY0hyE8fJ
We must oppose putino-fascism and Kremlin propaganda that promotes it with lies. United russia is a far right putino-fascist neo-czarist party. Putin promotes ruZcism. https://youtu.be/XQc6mJ7u8gQ?si=SwdnyEsZY0hyE8fJ
Neo-czarism is far worse than neo-cons. Neo-czarism is imperialist. Neo-czarism makes nuclear threats and kidnaps children. Neo-czars bomb hospitals. I disagree with neo-cons but Neo-czarism must be eradicated. https://www-aljazeera-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.aljazeera.com/amp/opinions/2023/1/24/how-western-scholars-overlooked-russian-imperialism?amp_gsa=1&_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=17426638150205&csi=1&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.aljazeera.com%2Fopinions%2F2023%2F1%2F24%2Fhow-western-scholars-overlooked-russian-imperialism
If nato expansion was the problem surely putin can withdraw from ukraine for neutrality. He won't do it.