Invading Ukraine was never about f%$'ing NATO (PROOF)

[TheTexan]

Putin responds to the idea of Finland joining NATO.

Bolded certain parts for emphasis.

--------------------------------------

Vladimir Putin: I am aware of this premise, which is wrong and bears no relation to reality. Our position has always been, as I have already said during this conversation today, that NATO is a relic of the Cold War and is only being used as an instrument of US foreign policy designed to keep its client states in rein. This is its only mission. We have given them that opportunity, I understand that. They are using these arguments energetically and quite effectively to rally their so-called allies. This is the first point.

On the other hand, regarding Sweden and Finland, we do not have such problems with Sweden and Finland as we have, regrettably, with Ukraine. We do not have territorial issues or disputes with them. There is nothing that could inspire our concern regarding Finland and Sweden’s accession to NATO. If they want it, they can do it.

However, they should know that they did not face any threats before but, if military contingents and infrastructure are deployed in their territory now, we will have to take mirror-like actions and create the same threats for them that are created for us. This is obvious. Don’t they understand this? Everything was good between us before, but now there will be tension, which is obvious and certainly unavoidable if, as I have said, any threats are created for us.

As for the assumption that we were fighting against NATO approaching us through Ukraine but now have Sweden and Finland to deal with, there is no substance behind it at all, because Finland and Sweden’s NATO membership is not at all the same as the potential membership of Ukraine. These are two different things. They know this very well, but they are promoting this idea to show that Russia has received more of what it did not want to have. No, this is entirely different, and we are aware of that. And they are aware of that. They are trying to substitute these notions, to show that Russia has not attained its goals. But this will not deceive us.

If Sweden and Finland want to join NATO, let them do it. You know, there are rude jokes about stepping into unsavoury things. This is their business. Let them step into what they wish. But Ukraine is a totally different matter. They were turning Ukraine into an anti-Russia, a bridgehead for trying to stir up Russia itself. They began fighting Russian culture and the Russian language, they began to persecute those who regarded themselves part of the Russian world. There is nothing like that in Finland or Sweden; the situation is completely different. If they want to join [the bloc], they are free to do it.


http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/68783

 

[TheTexan]

When I die 90 years from now, people are probably still gonna be saying Putin invaded because he was afraid of NATO expansion

 

[dannno]

On the other hand, regarding Sweden and Finland, we do not have such problems with Sweden and Finland as we have, regrettably, with Ukraine. We do not have territorial issues or disputes with them. There is nothing that could inspire our concern regarding Finland and Sweden’s accession to NATO. If they want it, they can do it.

That does seem to be part of it, though I think the civil war in Donbas is probably the bigger issue, coupled with the west arming Ukraine offensively even though they are not a NATO country.

The problem with Ukraine becoming part of NATO, is that if Russia attacks any part of Ukraine, NATO would be forced to defend their borders due to these agreements.

 

[TheTexan]

The problem with Ukraine becoming part of NATO, is that if Russia attacks any part of Ukraine, NATO would be forced to defend their borders due to these agreements.

Yea but that just reinforces how irrelevant NATO was to the decision to invade Ukraine.

If Ukraine promised never to join NATO, Putin would have invaded Ukraine.

If Ukraine agreed to join NATO, Putin would have invaded Ukraine.

If NATO had ceased to have existed on February 23, Putin would have still invaded Ukraine on February 24

 

[GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged]

Seems like Ukraine is a pawn. They should make peace with Russia and tell everyone else to keep their weapons of war and stop helping them.

 

[vita3]

Anybody watch this?


https://rumble.com/vwxxi8-ukraine-on-fire.html

 

[Matt Collins]

​

 

[pcosmar]

​

That is the Propaganda version.
Leaves out US involvement in the Coup and Puppet Government,,and arming Radicals within the country.

No mention of Crooked Oil Deals or the Bio-Labs..

and no mention of the souped up Nazi Punks making real threats against Mainland Russia.

 

[pcosmar]

Anybody watch this?


https://rumble.com/vwxxi8-ukraine-on-fire.html

Can you give me the Cliff Notes?

I have been watching Live Streams since this started.. and most notably for what I am not seeing.

 

[Snowball]

Ukraine and NATO expansion are most certainly part and parcel of the same threat to Russia. Look up the historical expansion of NATO.
The US is now going to violate the military, not just geographic restrictions by permanently basing in Poland. Ukraine wants to be a NATO state.
They were on their way. It's all connected. Putin is right about Sweden and Finland, however he's not going to admit how much it really does bother him.

This is a big deal. If Russia has to make that move, our world as we know it is done for. Now Putin has to take the chance that the degenerate West can live with losing Ukraine, losing that pawn on the chessboard. Hopefully Odessa starts it, and Moscow moves on Kiev to end this nonsense with severe force.

 

[TheTexan]

Ukraine and NATO expansion are most certainly part and parcel of the same threat to Russia. Look up the historical expansion of NATO.
The US is now going to violate the military, not just geographic restrictions by permanently basing in Poland. Ukraine wants to be a NATO state.
They were on their way. It's all connected. Putin is right about Sweden and Finland, however he's not going to admit how much it really does bother him.

This is a big deal. If Russia has to make that move, our world as we know it is done for. Now Putin has to take the chance that the degenerate West can live with losing Ukraine, losing that pawn on the chessboard. Hopefully Odessa starts it, and Moscow moves on Kiev to end this nonsense with severe force.

It's a "big deal" but it's never been a "big deal" enough for Putin to invade a country over it. See Latvia, Estonia, and now Finland.

You can call it a "contributing factor" to Putin's invasion of Ukraine if you want, but the simple fact of the matter is, Putin would have invaded Ukraine on Feb 24 even if NATO had ceased to exist on Feb 23.

NATO was simply not relevant to his decision to invade Ukraine.

 

[TheTexan]

Putin is fully capable of handling NATO on his border. It already is on his border.

This idea, that Putin is shaking in his boots at the idea of NATO expansion, is western propaganda.

 

[vita3]

Can you give me the Cliff Notes?

I have been watching Live Streams since this started.. and most notably for what I am not seeing.

Pretty much the history of Ukraine/Russia conflict up until 2016.

Gets into Stephan Bandera & details of Ukrs far right National groups

Large focus on 2014 Coup & who was really behind it

Olive Stone's slant aside... I learned quite a bit. Worth watching pcosmar

 

[pcosmar]

Pretty much the history of Ukraine/Russia conflict up until 2016.

Gets into Stephan Bandera & details of Ukrs far right National groups

Large focus on 2014 Coup & who was really behind it

Olive Stone's slant aside... I learned quite a bit. Worth watching pcosmar

Thanks,, didn't want any more Sean Penn, Wag the Dog production.

Seen plenty of that.

 

[jmdrake]

Putin responds to the idea of Finland joining NATO.

Bolded certain parts for emphasis.

--------------------------------------

Vladimir Putin: I am aware of this premise, which is wrong and bears no relation to reality. Our position has always been, as I have already said during this conversation today, that NATO is a relic of the Cold War and is only being used as an instrument of US foreign policy designed to keep its client states in rein. This is its only mission. We have given them that opportunity, I understand that. They are using these arguments energetically and quite effectively to rally their so-called allies. This is the first point.

On the other hand, regarding Sweden and Finland, we do not have such problems with Sweden and Finland as we have, regrettably, with Ukraine. We do not have territorial issues or disputes with them. There is nothing that could inspire our concern regarding Finland and Sweden’s accession to NATO. If they want it, they can do it.

However, they should know that they did not face any threats before but, if military contingents and infrastructure are deployed in their territory now, we will have to take mirror-like actions and create the same threats for them that are created for us. This is obvious. Don’t they understand this? Everything was good between us before, but now there will be tension, which is obvious and certainly unavoidable if, as I have said, any threats are created for us.

As for the assumption that we were fighting against NATO approaching us through Ukraine but now have Sweden and Finland to deal with, there is no substance behind it at all, because Finland and Sweden’s NATO membership is not at all the same as the potential membership of Ukraine. These are two different things. They know this very well, but they are promoting this idea to show that Russia has received more of what it did not want to have. No, this is entirely different, and we are aware of that. And they are aware of that. They are trying to substitute these notions, to show that Russia has not attained its goals. But this will not deceive us.

If Sweden and Finland want to join NATO, let them do it. You know, there are rude jokes about stepping into unsavoury things. This is their business. Let them step into what they wish. But Ukraine is a totally different matter. They were turning Ukraine into an anti-Russia, a bridgehead for trying to stir up Russia itself. They began fighting Russian culture and the Russian language, they began to persecute those who regarded themselves part of the Russian world. There is nothing like that in Finland or Sweden; the situation is completely different. If they want to join [the bloc], they are free to do it.


http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/68783

Putin says right there that he had a problem with Ukraine joining NATO that he doesn't have with Finland and Sweden. I'm not sure why you're even arguing about that. Yes the Ukrainians started the fighting. And yes Russia does have legitimate territorial claims. Parts of Ukraine had been part of Russia since the 1600s. (The MSM has been pushing the narrative that Ukraine was only part of the Soviet Union and not part of Russia). But I can't go along with pretending that NATO expansions into Ukraine had nothing to do with Putin invading when Putin comes right out and says that it was a factor.

 

[jmdrake]

Putin is fully capable of handling NATO on his border. It already is on his border.

This idea, that Putin is shaking in his boots at the idea of NATO expansion, is western propaganda.

As is the idea that Putin was "shaking in his boots" from some neo Nazi militias that they alone would cause him to invade all of Ukraine and not just the Donbass. War game it out. If Putin just took the Donbass, and NATO expanded to the rest of Ukraine, what would happen as those neo Nazis kept shelling the Donbass from inside the rest of Ukraine? Why Putin would eventually respond of course. And that response would risk hitting NATO troops. And hitting NATO troops would risk WW III. I don't expect Sweden or Finland to start shelling any areas with large Russian speaking populations.

 

[Snowball]

Putin is fully capable of handling NATO on his border. It already is on his border.

This idea, that Putin is shaking in his boots at the idea of NATO expansion, is western propaganda.

Texan, you're not accounting for the advancements in missile technology, satellite technology, and AI defense systems. Putin has made it perfectly clear how dire the threat to Russia and the world is, and yes - when NATO expands directly to the Russian border, it changes the millitary posture that Russia must assume for its own preservation. That is because the U.S. still will not denounce the first-strike nuclear option, and the U.S. under every president since Obama has let expire every nuclear agreement that was in place. Moreover, the U.S. has been consistent in application of sanctions and opposed Russia on the world stage at every instance.

When Putin says that it is an unacceptabe threat to Russia and the world to place NATO missiles close enough to Russia that they can hit Moscow in under 5-7 minutes, he's talking about geographic proximity and the upcoming high-speed systems that the U.S. is working on and will have in its arsenal, probably within 2-3 years. Russia already has these systems, and can obliterate all European capitals in less than 2 minutes. It would take about 15-20 minutes for Russia to vaporize American cities. Why does this matter? He told us why. It matters because the only way retaliatory strike decisions can be made with accuracy, fully confident not to decide in error, or to talk on a line between the Pentagon and the RMD is to try and get that flight time back where it was for all the Cold War years that kept our hides alive. There were a number of false alarms and tense times when cool heads prevailed, and communication facilitated the confidence that ICBMs should not be fired.

If this avenue is lost, as is happening due to NATO geographic expansion and supersonic missile technology, Russia will implement its Artificial Intelligence analytical, automatic response programs. Putin said when the launch-to-impact time is under a certain timeframe, which is where the U.S. is hell-bent on going, Russian A.I. is going to make the choice to respond IN FULL to any incoming missile, without any human decision, military or civilian. The A.I. response will end Western Civilisation. In response to this, the U.S. does not act sensibly. It does not denounce first strike. It does not seek nuclear disarmament or freeze, and it has violated its own treaties with Russia and the world in regards to NATO, nuclear, and space. The Pentagon via Milley and others has made it clear its intent is to advance its AI capabilities, its high-speed capabilities, and to win a war against Russia and China concurrently. Given this situation, NATO expansion is extremely relevant. The American coup d'etat of Ukraine, and its attempted coup in Kazakhstan are examples of NATO expansion efforts, as is the US intentionally working against peace in Ukraine so that NATO can expand along another frontier of Russia. The U.S. is hoping that its NATO expansion, space force advances, laser/microwave advances, etc. will make the war winnable for the entity, altbeit with a greaty reduced population (acceptable to Washington, our deaths are), and then they can finally achieve total hegemony over mankind. Our country's government and our apparent leadership are only a facade meant to fool us into compliance. That is not the case in Russia or China. They are not globalists.

This is why - back to your NATO opinion, that Russia cannot merely accept the independence of Lugansk and Donetsk anymore. Russia gave that option but has been rejected by the U.S. because the U.S. goals is to expand NATO, spend much more on war, draw the Iron Curtain and isolate Russia. You understand, the U.S. is a controlled entity seeking the destruction of Russia. It would rather incorporate China, India, and the others into its New World Order, the One World Government, but it has correctly ascertained the Chinese aren't going along with it, so they must go down also. The U.S. has been placing all the pressures it can on the European leaders, most of them installed puppets, or otherwise not strong enough to resist it. The window the U.S. wants is 2-5 years. It takes the chance that Russia and China won't go to war before that, while they can win. But Russia and China know all this, so if they decide they have to do it now, to increase their chance of victory, they have all the reasons to do so. They don't want war, but since there is nothing they can do to stop it, they won't wait until they are disadvantaged.

 

[donnay]

Ukraine is a money laundering country for all the rich politicians. The thing that struck me is, that the politicians in the USA, on Jan. 6, curled-up in fetal position when the people were invited into the capitol, but Pelosi, McConnell, Romney and the usual suspects all went over to war-torn Ukraine to see if everything was alright and to make sure that Zelensky had the proper equipment he needed to fight Putin. They went in-person to pick up their bags of money, they don't give a rat's ass about the Ukrainian people.

 

[TheTexan]

Putin says right there that he had a problem with Ukraine joining NATO that he doesn't have with Finland and Sweden. I'm not sure why you're even arguing about that. Yes the Ukrainians started the fighting. And yes Russia does have legitimate territorial claims. Parts of Ukraine had been part of Russia since the 1600s. (The MSM has been pushing the narrative that Ukraine was only part of the Soviet Union and not part of Russia). But I can't go along with pretending that NATO expansions into Ukraine had nothing to do with Putin invading when Putin comes right out and says that it was a factor.

Your reading comprehension is bad.

Read and process the below quote.

"As for the assumption that we were fighting against NATO approaching us through Ukraine but now have Sweden and Finland to deal with, there is no substance behind it at all"

He is explicitly saying here that there is no substance at all to the idea that he invaded Ukraine over NATO expansion.

He goes on to list the real reasons below -

But Ukraine is a totally different matter. They were turning Ukraine into an anti-Russia, a bridgehead for trying to stir up Russia itself. They began fighting Russian culture and the Russian language, they began to persecute those who regarded themselves part of the Russian world.

You can make an argument that western wishes for NATO expansion was the reason for western intervention in Ukraine.

But there is no substance to the claim that Putin invaded Ukraine over fears of NATO expansion.

 

[TheTexan]

As is the idea that Putin was "shaking in his boots" from some neo Nazi militias that they alone would cause him to invade all of Ukraine and not just the Donbass. War game it out. If Putin just took the Donbass, and NATO expanded to the rest of Ukraine, what would happen as those neo Nazis kept shelling the Donbass from inside the rest of Ukraine? Why Putin would eventually respond of course. And that response would risk hitting NATO troops. And hitting NATO troops would risk WW III. I don't expect Sweden or Finland to start shelling any areas with large Russian speaking populations.

The logical inconsistencies in this post make my head hurt.

First you say that Putin doesn't have to worry about non-NATO shelling because it isn't an issue, then you say if Ukraine joined NATO he would be forced to attack because of the shelling.

The shelling is a major issue regardless of whether Ukraine is in NATO or not.

And yes the shelling of Donbass and the general genocidal behavior to the Russians in that region, is absolutely cause enough alone to invade. Add on top of that things like securing territory, oil, minerals, securing the black sea, and you have more than enough reasons to invade. You can even throw NATO expansion in as a contributing factor if you want but Putin would have invaded with or without that reason.

Reintegrating Eastern Ukraine has been a life goal for Putin since as early as 2001. He views them as historically, ethnically, and culturally Russian, and he simply jumped at the opportunity to do it.

His reasons have nothing to do with "NATO expansion" and he even explicitly said this in the OP.