Ahh, now it gets interesting. Would you say the same for Crimea? In the West they call it "annexed". They never tell you there was a vote by the people of Crimea before it joined Russia. Was this vote meddled with to make a "No" into a "Yes"? I mean, they did vote to choose their own destiny, didn't they?

I did say the same for Crimea after it happened. While I did not approve of how Russia did it. The people of Crimea should get to choose. They probably would have voted to go with Russia. (I don't trust the vote for 2 reasons. There was a lot of reporting about Russian army interfering with allowing Ukrainians to vote and when generally polled by outside forces a little over 60% said they preferred Russia. Not almost 100%. When you get almost 100% I get very suspicious.)But, let's say they would vote to go to Russia, because even in a fair election I think they probably would based on multiple independent polls. This doesn't mean what Russia is doing now isn't wrong. They already took the one majority Russian province from Ukraine. Now they are invading the rest of Ukraine which is majority Ukrainian.

Note also how the west generally didn't have a huge reaction to the taking of Crimea like they are now. Which shows that they generally thought Putin at least had some justification for being there even if they didn't agree with his methods. The difference now is he has pretty much no justification for taking the rest of Ukraine.


The missile was an old version not used anymore by Russia, if I remember correctly. I grant that I could be wrong on that, but I am curious about your source that the missile was delivered the day before into Ukraine. I never heard that.

The leader of the Dunbass rebellion took credit for shooting down the airline right after it happened thinking it was a Ukrainian aircraft they shot down. He retracted this statement later once he realized his forces shot down a passenger airline. This missile was provided by Russian forces. Not Ukrainian forces. Even Russian news agencies reported that Dunbass separatists had shot down a Ukrainian plane. It was only after they realized they had not shot down a Ukrainian fighter aircraft, but instead was a passenger plane that the story changed.

I don't know, since I don't have a neutral source on the ground there to tell me. I'm glad you seem to believe you have one. In any case, it is not unheard of to hide among civilians for propaganda purposes against a stronger opponent. The Palestinians do it all the time. Do not take that to mean I take sides on that other conflict. I am merely stating a fact. It's what they do.

Just because some cultures do it does not mean everyone is doing it. If sources that have generally been very positive toward Russia in the past due to Russia's anti west stance such as Al Jezeera are reporting that Russia is targeting civilians. I will tend to believe it. Nor has any pro Russia or neutral source been able to say all the social media posts by Ukrainians and other journalists showing bombed hospitals, schools, etc. are faked or being used by the Ukrainian army for cover. There are hundreds of journalists there. Someone would have said something. You can't cover up a conspiracy that big. Nor have all the journalists been 100% positive toward Ukraine. If a journalist is not afraid to say Ukraine is violating the Geneva convention by having Russian military units give interviews favoring Ukraine. I doubt they would also not note that Ukraine is using hospitals, schools, etc. for cover.

Would that include the Yanukovych election? We have Victoria Nuland speaking on the phone discussing who takes over after his ouster. You think John McCain gave a crap about the Ukrainian people? Why was he over there handing out loaves of bread?

What John McCain or others were doing over there doesn't matter now. Nor will I just assume that people just hate life and only want money unless they have been proven to be like that.

Russia has invaded Ukraine with close to zero justification. If John McCain did a corrupt deal years ago or any of this supposed corruption even if true does not change that Ukrainians have a right to defend themselves. Whether true or not it does not change this position.

So you're saying Crimea rightly chose its fate to go with Russia. Thank you.

Once again, they probably would choose to be with Russia. Still doesn't give justification for what is going on in the rest of Ukraine. In fact it gives less as Russia are got their one territory that they can legitimately claim wanted to be part of Russia.

Mind you, we are still in the middle of this conflict as we make this exchange. People are already making conclusions about the outcome like they know.

They don't.

We all have to make our opinions based on limited information as we are almost never the people directly involved. This goes for almost everything not just Ukraine. Nothing, has come up that gives me any indication that Russia has any good reason to be invading right now.