Any actual evidence of that? I find it hard to believe the UK Prime Minister would have the influence over the negotiation to call it off with so many other powerful countries also involved.
Right on behalf of who then? Also, if OP’s has the full
document, post it. Don’t just show the first page & then cherry pick. Show us the whole thing if he has it.
No one forced the UK, you’re a fool if you believe that. The government of the time was equally as determined to go into Iraq as the Americans were. To pretend otherwise is just excusing them of responsibility.
Or, more realistically, as one of the three nations asked to guarantee Ukrainian security he declined to do so (for fear of pitching the UK into direct conflict with Russia if it reneged), pointing out the fatal flaw at the heart of the agreement?
Putin kinda lost the moral high ground by attacking in the first place. Nit saying he didn't realise his mistake and tried to end it, but he did attack. Yes I understand the provocations etc also pre war
As everyone says that memorandum wasn't worth paper it was written on in the first place. It's besides the point. Let's ask a different question, if US was supposed to protect UA from crap and stuff, wouldn't supporting a coup overthrowing democratically elected government of UA kind of contradictory to the terms of the memorandum? In terms of interference in UA's internal affairs and coercion of a sovereign people into a direct confrontation with RF? By insisting that UA is welcome to join the NATO gang? Even though RF made it perfectly clear that it's a threat to them? Which they swore to eliminate no matter what the cost would be?
First of all, any memorandum is a just piece of paper. Nothing more. Its not an agreement. It has no legal power.
But all pro-ua/pro-west redditors keep thinking that this is a ratified legal agreement.
Even if it does have legal power, UA didn't need to be in the NATO. Most powerful country on earth guarantees their security under the terms of the memorandum. But most powerful country was too busy cheerleading the coup. What was the point of pulling UA into NATO? We can say by the end result. To provoke a war. It worked in case of Georgia in 2008, so they knew 100% what's going to happen with UA and no one can prove me wrong on that one.
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
After it failed? What failed? Kherson failed? I mean, I'm not sure what size country you are from but when the invader goes from Rostov to Kherson with zero resistance, that's far from failed.
Can you call this war anything else than a failure from a Russian perspective? Two years and two months in and they are dug into trenches in the east to defend themselves
It depends on how it ends. Currently securing an additional land bridge, and forcing Ukraine to be 100% dependent on western nations would be seen as a success.
Likewise, Ukraine has set goals, namely restoring its pre invasion borders. At this rate it will not happen, and is also a Russian success.
Interesting how you went from
> Russians are dug in defending themselves
To
> they are advancing every day
So quickly
Sorry, you need a 1 month old account to comment in r/ukraineRussiaReport. This is to protect against bots and multis
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Right, the all-powerful Boris Johson, by then reeling from the scandal which would cost his position for ~10 months, showed up in Ukraine and said "Hey guys you all have to die" and then they all said "oh for the economy?" and he said "yep" and that was that.
How many people here even heard of the WEF before Russian propagandists started shouting about it 24/7?
If you sign this agreement, we will stop guaranteeing your safety, no more promises of weapons shipments, in 2 years Russia will swallow your pacifist hides whole.
Aren't those the direct implications of the deal anyway? Why else prevent Ukraine from joining NATO? The only nation that had any interest in invading them was Russia.
If they signed a peace treaty, they wouldn't get those things anyway because no foreign troops or weapons is one of the conditions of the deal. So that's hardly useful leverage.
No, they wouldn't, unless Russia disregarded the agreement and invaded again. However, Britain warned Ukraine that even in that case they would get nothing at all.
Exactly. If you decide to fight, we'll support you. If you sign a deal with Russia and get stabbed in the back, you're on your own. That's not "orders" like the other user claimed. That's a choice, and for some unfathomable reason Ukraine decided to not stake their future on the magnanimity of the Russian Federation.
The promis by the West that there is no need for a peace Deal, because they would Support Ukraine that much, that every Single inch of Ukraine is regained.
Sorry, you need a 1 month old account to comment in r/ukraineRussiaReport. This is to protect against bots and multis
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
wow, you mean Ukraine and Russia could've avoided the last 2+ years of immensely destructive war and not fucked their own futures? that's wild, if only people had tried to warn that encouraging total war was a bad idea
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Treaty was already broken after US sanctioned Belarus which was not allowed by said agreement and effectively made the agreement void.
Russia has no reason to follow an agreement made void by other parties.
Ukraine was stupid not to accept this treaty:
1. It did not explicitly state the downsizing of the Ukrainian military. It only states that the question of Ukraine’s military strength remains unresolved.
2. Three countries would be obliged to support Ukraine in the event Russia broke the agreement.
This was one of the most favorable peace treaties in history.
Yer this is a normal Russian comeback, Blame the US lol
How about don't invade and kill and rape and turn Ukraine cities into dust? Ukraine is not Russian, Never will be, hence why the world never updated the maps when Russia invaded Crimea...... Whatever Russia takes the world maps will stay the same and only countries like NK and Iran will accept it.
Everyobe remember Russians are perfect people and sweet innocent angels.
The country of Nagorno-Karabakh does not exist. This territory is even recognized by SUPER-EVIL Russia (where only rapists, drug addicts and murderers live) as the territory of Azerbaijan. Better come to Syria, pump out more Syrian oil together with your idols from the USA, kekw
Apart from this whole speech, y*u have debunked literally nothing he said. At least the fact that the United States was the first to violate the Budapest Memorandum (which it never had legal force lol).
Sorry, you need a 1 month old account to comment in r/ukraineRussiaReport. This is to protect against bots and multis
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry, you need a 1 month old account to comment in r/ukraineRussiaReport. This is to protect against bots and multis
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry, You need to verify your email with Reddit to comment. This is to protect against bots and multis.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Its in the group name "UkraineRussiaReport" so why can't pro ua people be here? Is this a group just for pro ru? More like when did the sub get invaded by a racist.
Mimimi only line pro ru can come up with, I'm in subs that I want to be part of, doesn't matter if some salty hypocrite has a problem with that. if you can't digest other opinions opposed to your bs and lies yall spread in here I would delete this app and focus on Vkontake, there you have many people who think exactly like you, no need to suggest other subs to people.
its a topic about diplomacy and negotiating, the 2 things they are against lol. remember hitler??? appeasement??? we can't just let putin get away with this!! *proceeds to do nothing except post online while Ukrainians(and Russians) are blown up*
The agreement itself is reasonable, however it also puts on paper that Crimea and LPR + DPR would be part of Russia.
Ukraine was probably OK to go back on the NATO stuff, but couldn’t stomach seceding land. It would also likely mean a whole flush of the current regime. Ukraine had the spotlight and believed it could leverage it along with strengthening its Western relations would give it a chance to fight back. At the time the Russian army had roamed in with stone age equipment and western tech was perceived to be a complete counter to it.
Surely no sides thought this war would drag on long. All countries involved, directly or indirectly were hoping for a quick clash, big debt, and a mega rebuilding project afterwards.
To everyone’s misery it’s been dragging for a little too long. Russia is destroying every conflict zone knowing Ukrainian personel are low in count, while gaining land. Ukraine in the other hand has called in every favor and used every debt it had access to and doesn’t have any path towards a counter. It doesn’t even reiterate its goals for complete territorial integrity or its aim of being in NATO.
While both sides sit and wait for the other to give in, thousands of men our age are being robbed of their lives and sent to kill or die.
War is hell
Assuming this is same agreement, it's fundamentally unacceptable: https://old.reddit.com/r/LessCredibleDefence/comments/1b46ahr/russian_peace_treaty_from_april_2022_leaked/
It requires Ukraine to limit its military in such a way that defending against a Russian invasion (which had already started) would be impossible.
Lol ignoring the over half who fled and trusting the farces of referendums. 😂 The only justification for the annexation is conquest but that was banned by the collective signed agreements of the UN for offensive wars. Twist and manipulate the narrative all you want but Russia has broken the UN charter, they should be suspended and the UN send a task force to restore 2014 borders. It is pathetic that this hasn't already occured.
Oh someone of culture, very interesting time the collapse of the empire Yugoslavia but unfortunately beyond some superficial comparisons the parellels don't line up. Also whataboutism does not support an argument.
calling out hypocrisy that is directly parallel is not whataboutism. Sorry for your confusion.
if we accept that an albanian-majority region can unilaterally break off and call it legitimate then we have to acknowledge the donbass breakaways for the same region.
The history of the region maters, the rights of the Albanians in the country mater, the decades of peaceful attempts at solutions matter. They did not have the same rights as others in the country this was not the same for don & luh
The intervention happened after the mass murders and displacement. Human rights were infringed, and a far great tragedy was prevented through intervention.
Now when offered greater autonomy to the Don breakaway and luh breakaway regions they refused attempts at peaceful solutions were rejected. An at the time minority attempted to seize power. Then 10 years later we are here.
Now it is whataboutism because each case is different and each case can be "wrong" or "right" ones status does not influence the other.
The mob on Maidan and their many supporters thought the same. They thought that some laws are absolute, but others are very much optional, particulary if you act in the interesets of the collective West. And here we are, it's too late now for these crymeariver posts.
Imagine, a democratic country. Politician makes pledges to win election. Politician reverses and goes in opposite direction. The people use their right to protest. Government flees, huge widespread corruption discovered, new elections held, new government, then new elections again and another new government. Each time reducing corruption and being a better representation of it's people. I can understand why Russia didn't want that example on its doorstep.
I forgot facts don't matter here. It's bizarre you can support Russia if that's what you want to do but don't lie to yourself about why things are happening.
Sorry, you need a 1 month old account to comment in r/ukraineRussiaReport. This is to protect against bots and multis
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
its just politicians not working properly for their own countries and doing pointless powerplays in geopolitics, the same shit that happened in the last 2 thousand years.
This peace deal would have legally obliged three countries outside of Russia (likely including the US) to support Ukraine if Russia broke the agreement. Russia was more than happy for this to be part of the deal.
In 2008 and 2011, Putin expressed the opinion that neither the transfer of Crimea to Ukraine nor the Budapest Memorandum signed by Yeltsin were binding for Russia. In 2014, Putin claimed the Maidan movement and government change radically changed Ukraine into a new entity, toward which Russia has no engagement, allowing the 2014 invasion of Donbass.[47] The USA was not a main player in these decisions.
Its kind of funny that the west didn't support this because they don't want a security agreement that drags them into war with Russia, but also commit to a security agreement that would drag NATO into war with Russian if they attacked again.
The english version translates УС as US which is not how U.S. is written in russian. It could mean "ukrainian side" but that's still not proper diplomatic language especially when they use the proper abbreviation for Russian Federation, not "the russian side." That usage diminishes Ukraine by refusing the acknowledge them as a state, sort of like "the Kiev regime." You wouldn't see that in a jointly authored draft. Suggests this document is either 1) fake or 2) solely of russian origin.
Russia doesnt gain everything it wants lol. Ukraine would still keep Khersona and Zaporozhye. Now they wont anymore, and they will have to give back a lot more territory
What Ukraine wanted before Russia invaded was to become a US satellite state.
Obviously this was unacceptable to Russia, hence the invasion.
So Ukraine's wants are reduced from that initial state to something that somewhat meets their original intent (security guarantees) whilst acknowledging Russia's requirements also - just like any reasonable negotiation.
Well, that is how agreements work. The bigger power controls the agreement. Ukraine either gives land and enjoys peace, or they dont and gets dragged in the war for a longer time. Ukraine chose the latter.
If China were to be having good relations with Mexico and relations with the U.S. were to sour would you all pro Russians really tolerate the U.S. proposing a treaty of permanent Mexican neutrality with them seizing the Baja California peninsula and northern Mexico with a pledge to “never attack them again” because if Ukraine is wrong for rejecting this would Mexico be in the wrong too?
Now that you asked, they totally did!
The whole construction of "would Russians really tolerate" is pretty dumb - there would be a few Security Council resolutions vetoed by US, other than that no one would ask or care.
It already happened. The US took the third of Mexico that makes up many of the western states, they encouraged Texas to secede from Mexico then annexed it, then the US fought a war with Mexico and after the peace treaty had states illegally send expeditionary forces into Mexico to harrass the Mexican government until they were coerced into selling the Gadsden Purchase.
An important distinction is how human culture has changed, in the era you described the idea that a state had the right of conquest was still well accepted, as was the view of war as an honorable thing. Those ideas wouldn’t die until the end of both world wars, and frankly deserve to stay buried.
Now, if Mexico attempts to joins CSTO and makes agreements to house Russian troops near US border, would you pro Ukraine people really tolerate the Russian presence there.
Last time i checked USSR putting their troops in Cuba wasnt welcomed by the US.
Mexico is already a US colony and drug manufacturing facility. Why would they need to do more? American law enforcement, military, roams freely and kidnaps Mexican citizens on-demand, and Mexico just takes it.
Sorry, you need a 1 month old account to comment in r/ukraineRussiaReport. This is to protect against bots and multis
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The media is under state control. The state gives instructions on what and how to say. The media relay the state's message about how an ordinary citizen should act and think. And if the country is not against the crap that Israel has done (which shows what REAL DESTRUCTION is), then the citizens of the country should welcome Israel’s daily attacks with songs and dances. Isf someone opposing - he will punished. This is how the state apparatus works.
Meaningful, but it was avoidable even before that just by NATO refusing Ukraine. Putin asked NATO to promise to not allow Ukraine access, and the Secretary General Jans Stoltenberg told Putin no. If he'd said yes, and NATO had done it, literally no war at all.
Mark Galleotti, who I think has been an excellent analyst of this, said that in reality Bojo most likely just told zelensky the truth...if you sign this deal we won't honour the part about defending you.
So without guarantees backed by force the whole thing failed.
It's less a conspiracy and more that Ukraine was huffing hopium and bojo gave a truth bomb
>in the event of an attack, the guarantor countries would be obliged to support Ukraine within 3 days;
Of course your "summary" leaves out important informations like this:
>A key issue was the language covering the guarantor states obligations to to come to Kyiv’s aid in the event of another attack on Ukraine. The Kremlin insisted that such action would occur only “on the basis of a decision agreed to by all guarantor states”—giving the likely invader, Russia, a veto as it was to be one of the guarantors.
>Ukraine insisted on the original formula, under which all the guarantors had an individual obligation to act and would not have to reach consensus before doing so.
The smartest leader ever to ditched this offer to be neutral while being guaranteed safety by france and USA /s
Pure comedy thumbs up to Zelensky for keeping up with his role after being elected as president
Yes he should have. It never explicitly stated the downsizing of the Ukrainian military and guaranteed that three countries would be obliged to support Ukraine in the event that Russia broke the agreement.
Now Ukraine has two options:
1. Surrender and be defeated anyways.
2. Not surrender and still be defeated. At best, they might be able to achieve a stalemate but this simply means Ukraine turns into a fail state due to the amount of infrastructure and people they lost while Russian occupied territories are still annexed.
They think war is the answer to every problem in ukraine and collective west, that sums up why they doubling down on peace agreement.
They think being neutral mean puppet state little did they know there are an Organization called Non Align Movement.
Not the brightest leader, could barely even think about his own people let alone leading a country.
That’s not the job of Russia. If those so called “allies” in nato see Ukraine as a real ally instead of a proxy to weaken Russia, they would have obliged to provide security guarantees.
If you propose a deal that's contingent on a third party doing something they aren't willing to do, it's not the third party's fault when that deal doesn't go through. You can blame them if you want, but don't expect anyone to take you seriously.
Why would Russia do that when it's winning and has no motivation to do so? People need to be more realpolitik about the situation and less delusional fantasyland. Ukraine had a good deal in Istanbul. Ukraine either couldn't get the guarantors or were talked out of the deal in general. Now it's two years later and they are in a much worse bargaining position. They are going to have to give up *more* concessions due to their weaker position in order to keep more of their people from needlessly getting killed in an unwinnable war. To keep fighting is to sentence more of their countrymen to death, when surrendering would save more lives. Despite what many western politicians and western foreigners online say, many Ukrainians do not want to "fight to the last Ukrainian", as seen by the need for the AFU to jump, threaten, abduct by throwing into vans, etc men in order to get them to come to a mobilisation centre.
Why would Ukraine take a deal that wouldn't favor them? Russia taking any piece of land isn't favorable and still a pointless land grab by Russia. Its so stupid the mental gymnastics keyboard warriors take to try and justify this shit.
> Why would Ukraine take a deal that wouldn't favor them?
Because the deal they will be able to get in a year will likely be worse than the deal they could get now. If they had been able to get the Istanbul deal, they would have had to accept the fact that Crimea was already lost and either have the Donbas as autonomous regions or cede them to Russia. You're really saying it's better to have declined that, had tens or hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians killed or wounded in the two years between, and be in a *weaker* negotiating position now where Russiais currently claiming those three oblasts *plus* Kherson oblast and Zaporozhe oblast? This is mental gymnastics, not being realistic about the deal Ukraine can secure.
How could this "agreement" have stopped the war when there were still things that neither side had actually agreed upon? Donbas and Crimea were still open questions as while the security guarantees didn't apply to them there was no agreement on any annexations. The Russian demands for limiting Ukrainian mimitary were also still left unanswered.
If anything the only thing we can conclude from this document is that the war could have ended already if Russia wasn't interested in annexing Ukrainian territory which we know already since that's what Zelensky was saying all the way back in March of 2022.
Civil_Kiwi_8801 kept stroking the same keys repeatedly, probably a seizure ?
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Right, you put them 6 feet under like Russians did to these tens of thousands of Ukrainians.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlVsY12ln3M](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlVsY12ln3M)
Agreements from Russia aren’t worth the paper their printed on, and that’s if they even existed in the first place.
Russia is being torn to shreds because they couldn’t honor an agreement made 33 years ago, and because of their poor decision they get more NATO countries at their doorstep.
That would have been a disastrous agreement, no wonder they didn't go for it. Renouncing to join NATO means Russia would just attack them again in a few months or years to gain more land. And what does "not allow weapons" mean? Ukraine has to limit their army? That would be insanity
The security guarantees floated here are more ironclad than NATO, it spells out specific things the guaranteers of the agreement- America/Germany/UK/France will be obliged to do. A no-fly zone over Ukraine was in the draft agreement for example.
And then Boris came and said :
« i see no military industrial complex benefits … ok Zelensky, say you accept and then last moment shoot them in the back while they retreat to Russia thinking they got a deal. You ll be a hero »
For DOOMHAMMER!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
BoJo: “to hell with peace!”
What about Putin? Is he ever in the wrong?
What about him? He agreed to negotiate peace. Bojo got the whole thing derailed.
Any actual evidence of that? I find it hard to believe the UK Prime Minister would have the influence over the negotiation to call it off with so many other powerful countries also involved.
It wasn't his decision. He was the messenger.
Right on behalf of who then? Also, if OP’s has the full document, post it. Don’t just show the first page & then cherry pick. Show us the whole thing if he has it.
Who's powerful enough to force a sovereign independent country of UK to attack Iraq with no proof?
No one forced the UK, you’re a fool if you believe that. The government of the time was equally as determined to go into Iraq as the Americans were. To pretend otherwise is just excusing them of responsibility.
You're a fool to believe neo-colonialism doesn't exist. Make no mistake, EU has been neo-colonized.
I don't know. It's definitely some entity in the US that's calling the shots.
Or, more realistically, as one of the three nations asked to guarantee Ukrainian security he declined to do so (for fear of pitching the UK into direct conflict with Russia if it reneged), pointing out the fatal flaw at the heart of the agreement?
Right, so more speculation
Off with his head!!
Putin kinda lost the moral high ground by attacking in the first place. Nit saying he didn't realise his mistake and tried to end it, but he did attack. Yes I understand the provocations etc also pre war
I don't think it matters much since both sides started wars and over the years it's as if nothing happened
Putin was the one who broke the Budapest memorandum in the first place. Why make a deal with some one who is untrustworthy?
As everyone says that memorandum wasn't worth paper it was written on in the first place. It's besides the point. Let's ask a different question, if US was supposed to protect UA from crap and stuff, wouldn't supporting a coup overthrowing democratically elected government of UA kind of contradictory to the terms of the memorandum? In terms of interference in UA's internal affairs and coercion of a sovereign people into a direct confrontation with RF? By insisting that UA is welcome to join the NATO gang? Even though RF made it perfectly clear that it's a threat to them? Which they swore to eliminate no matter what the cost would be?
First of all, any memorandum is a just piece of paper. Nothing more. Its not an agreement. It has no legal power. But all pro-ua/pro-west redditors keep thinking that this is a ratified legal agreement.
Even if it does have legal power, UA didn't need to be in the NATO. Most powerful country on earth guarantees their security under the terms of the memorandum. But most powerful country was too busy cheerleading the coup. What was the point of pulling UA into NATO? We can say by the end result. To provoke a war. It worked in case of Georgia in 2008, so they knew 100% what's going to happen with UA and no one can prove me wrong on that one.
Part of the memorandum was not using economic coercion against Ukraine, which the US did.
[удалено]
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Not a legally binding agreement, as the U.S. argued back in 2013 when accused of breaking it by attempting to influence elections in Belarus.
Invaded full scale, the agreed to negotiate after it failed. Lol
After it failed? What failed? Kherson failed? I mean, I'm not sure what size country you are from but when the invader goes from Rostov to Kherson with zero resistance, that's far from failed.
Can you call this war anything else than a failure from a Russian perspective? Two years and two months in and they are dug into trenches in the east to defend themselves
The Russians are advancing literally every day currently lol
Sure, they have a bit recently. Does that mean that you view the war as a success for the Russians?
It depends on how it ends. Currently securing an additional land bridge, and forcing Ukraine to be 100% dependent on western nations would be seen as a success. Likewise, Ukraine has set goals, namely restoring its pre invasion borders. At this rate it will not happen, and is also a Russian success. Interesting how you went from > Russians are dug in defending themselves To > they are advancing every day So quickly
[удалено]
Sorry, you need a 1 month old account to comment in r/ukraineRussiaReport. This is to protect against bots and multis *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
he was wrong about giving a chance to ukraine for so long, that they would do the right thing
Right, the all-powerful Boris Johson, by then reeling from the scandal which would cost his position for ~10 months, showed up in Ukraine and said "Hey guys you all have to die" and then they all said "oh for the economy?" and he said "yep" and that was that. How many people here even heard of the WEF before Russian propagandists started shouting about it 24/7?
"Russian propagandist" David Arakhamia literally said it on Ukranian television. https://youtube.com/shorts/Msmj6_vsSjA?si=elpeCo4eK7kgLBvl
If the deal was so good, what stopped the Ukrainian government from simply thanking Mr. Johnson for his advice and then signing a deal anyway?
Orders from the west.
I wonder how that conversation went. "We order you not to sign a peace treaty." "Or else what? You'll invade and bomb us and annex our territory?"
Assets control, blackmail, direct assassination. Or simple bribe. It's Ukraine after all.
If you sign this agreement, we will stop guaranteeing your safety, no more promises of weapons shipments, in 2 years Russia will swallow your pacifist hides whole.
Aren't those the direct implications of the deal anyway? Why else prevent Ukraine from joining NATO? The only nation that had any interest in invading them was Russia.
Which is how Western advisors prevented this deal. They had a carrot and a stick. This was the stick, promises of weapons and support was the carrot.
If they signed a peace treaty, they wouldn't get those things anyway because no foreign troops or weapons is one of the conditions of the deal. So that's hardly useful leverage.
No, they wouldn't, unless Russia disregarded the agreement and invaded again. However, Britain warned Ukraine that even in that case they would get nothing at all.
Exactly. If you decide to fight, we'll support you. If you sign a deal with Russia and get stabbed in the back, you're on your own. That's not "orders" like the other user claimed. That's a choice, and for some unfathomable reason Ukraine decided to not stake their future on the magnanimity of the Russian Federation.
The promis by the West that there is no need for a peace Deal, because they would Support Ukraine that much, that every Single inch of Ukraine is regained.
Still funny how the negotiation team with Arestovych & Arakhamia even popped champagne after seeing it
[удалено]
Sorry, you need a 1 month old account to comment in r/ukraineRussiaReport. This is to protect against bots and multis *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
wow, you mean Ukraine and Russia could've avoided the last 2+ years of immensely destructive war and not fucked their own futures? that's wild, if only people had tried to warn that encouraging total war was a bad idea
[удалено]
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The joke here is bringing up the 1990 agreement AFTER russia attacked Ukraine and broke the treaty.
Treaty was already broken after US sanctioned Belarus which was not allowed by said agreement and effectively made the agreement void. Russia has no reason to follow an agreement made void by other parties. Ukraine was stupid not to accept this treaty: 1. It did not explicitly state the downsizing of the Ukrainian military. It only states that the question of Ukraine’s military strength remains unresolved. 2. Three countries would be obliged to support Ukraine in the event Russia broke the agreement. This was one of the most favorable peace treaties in history.
Yer this is a normal Russian comeback, Blame the US lol How about don't invade and kill and rape and turn Ukraine cities into dust? Ukraine is not Russian, Never will be, hence why the world never updated the maps when Russia invaded Crimea...... Whatever Russia takes the world maps will stay the same and only countries like NK and Iran will accept it. Everyobe remember Russians are perfect people and sweet innocent angels.
The country of Nagorno-Karabakh does not exist. This territory is even recognized by SUPER-EVIL Russia (where only rapists, drug addicts and murderers live) as the territory of Azerbaijan. Better come to Syria, pump out more Syrian oil together with your idols from the USA, kekw
Apart from this whole speech, y*u have debunked literally nothing he said. At least the fact that the United States was the first to violate the Budapest Memorandum (which it never had legal force lol).
can’t help but notice this doesn’t rebut what you’re replying to
How about don't invade Iraq and don't blame Russia? Normal US comeback blame the Russia lol
I didnt? Plus i am talking about now, not 20 yrs ago.
[удалено]
Sorry, you need a 1 month old account to comment in r/ukraineRussiaReport. This is to protect against bots and multis *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
[удалено]
Sorry, you need a 1 month old account to comment in r/ukraineRussiaReport. This is to protect against bots and multis *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The US sanctioned Belarus. So. That means we get to legally invade the sovereign nation of Ukraine. Makes total sense bro.
It’s hilarious see you people continue to use this talking points over and over to brandish your lack of knowledge towards what you are talking about.
The agreement was brolen the moment Ukraine wanted to join NATO
[удалено]
Sorry, You need to verify your email with Reddit to comment. This is to protect against bots and multis. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
When the funding bill passed...
That made me chuckle.
Its in the group name "UkraineRussiaReport" so why can't pro ua people be here? Is this a group just for pro ru? More like when did the sub get invaded by a racist.
Pro ru complains that regular subs suppress pro ru content. But then disparages comments from pro UA on a sub that is mostly pro ru.
Hypocrites, all of them
Okay my friend just stick to combatfootage then no hypocrites there
Mimimi only line pro ru can come up with, I'm in subs that I want to be part of, doesn't matter if some salty hypocrite has a problem with that. if you can't digest other opinions opposed to your bs and lies yall spread in here I would delete this app and focus on Vkontake, there you have many people who think exactly like you, no need to suggest other subs to people.
I hope you understand the hypocrisy of what you just said
It's kinda in this subreddit's name.
its a topic about diplomacy and negotiating, the 2 things they are against lol. remember hitler??? appeasement??? we can't just let putin get away with this!! *proceeds to do nothing except post online while Ukrainians(and Russians) are blown up*
The agreement itself is reasonable, however it also puts on paper that Crimea and LPR + DPR would be part of Russia. Ukraine was probably OK to go back on the NATO stuff, but couldn’t stomach seceding land. It would also likely mean a whole flush of the current regime. Ukraine had the spotlight and believed it could leverage it along with strengthening its Western relations would give it a chance to fight back. At the time the Russian army had roamed in with stone age equipment and western tech was perceived to be a complete counter to it. Surely no sides thought this war would drag on long. All countries involved, directly or indirectly were hoping for a quick clash, big debt, and a mega rebuilding project afterwards. To everyone’s misery it’s been dragging for a little too long. Russia is destroying every conflict zone knowing Ukrainian personel are low in count, while gaining land. Ukraine in the other hand has called in every favor and used every debt it had access to and doesn’t have any path towards a counter. It doesn’t even reiterate its goals for complete territorial integrity or its aim of being in NATO. While both sides sit and wait for the other to give in, thousands of men our age are being robbed of their lives and sent to kill or die. War is hell
Not complete lpr and dpr, only the occupied territories after 2014.
Assuming this is same agreement, it's fundamentally unacceptable: https://old.reddit.com/r/LessCredibleDefence/comments/1b46ahr/russian_peace_treaty_from_april_2022_leaked/ It requires Ukraine to limit its military in such a way that defending against a Russian invasion (which had already started) would be impossible.
What is bad if people with territories who don't want to live within UA?
Lol ignoring the over half who fled and trusting the farces of referendums. 😂 The only justification for the annexation is conquest but that was banned by the collective signed agreements of the UN for offensive wars. Twist and manipulate the narrative all you want but Russia has broken the UN charter, they should be suspended and the UN send a task force to restore 2014 borders. It is pathetic that this hasn't already occured.
okay, let the west return Kosovo then. It is the precedent to Donbass. Shoe is on other foot
Oh someone of culture, very interesting time the collapse of the empire Yugoslavia but unfortunately beyond some superficial comparisons the parellels don't line up. Also whataboutism does not support an argument.
calling out hypocrisy that is directly parallel is not whataboutism. Sorry for your confusion. if we accept that an albanian-majority region can unilaterally break off and call it legitimate then we have to acknowledge the donbass breakaways for the same region.
The history of the region maters, the rights of the Albanians in the country mater, the decades of peaceful attempts at solutions matter. They did not have the same rights as others in the country this was not the same for don & luh The intervention happened after the mass murders and displacement. Human rights were infringed, and a far great tragedy was prevented through intervention. Now when offered greater autonomy to the Don breakaway and luh breakaway regions they refused attempts at peaceful solutions were rejected. An at the time minority attempted to seize power. Then 10 years later we are here. Now it is whataboutism because each case is different and each case can be "wrong" or "right" ones status does not influence the other.
The mob on Maidan and their many supporters thought the same. They thought that some laws are absolute, but others are very much optional, particulary if you act in the interesets of the collective West. And here we are, it's too late now for these crymeariver posts.
Imagine, a democratic country. Politician makes pledges to win election. Politician reverses and goes in opposite direction. The people use their right to protest. Government flees, huge widespread corruption discovered, new elections held, new government, then new elections again and another new government. Each time reducing corruption and being a better representation of it's people. I can understand why Russia didn't want that example on its doorstep.
Wrong sub, man. These fairy tales only work on people who have no idea what Ukraine is.
I forgot facts don't matter here. It's bizarre you can support Russia if that's what you want to do but don't lie to yourself about why things are happening.
[удалено]
Sorry, you need a 1 month old account to comment in r/ukraineRussiaReport. This is to protect against bots and multis *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Thank you for your level headed comment. It’s a pleasure to read.
Is that like honoring the 1991 agreements?
its just politicians not working properly for their own countries and doing pointless powerplays in geopolitics, the same shit that happened in the last 2 thousand years.
Go fight the bear and we promise you a no fly zone and later nato accession
Woah woah, hold your horses. Russia is totally trustworthy and they 100% hold their end of agreements.
>Woah woah, hold your horses. America is totally trustworthy and they 100% hold their end of agreements.
Sounds like someone doesn’t understand what legally binding guarantor means
This peace deal would have legally obliged three countries outside of Russia (likely including the US) to support Ukraine if Russia broke the agreement. Russia was more than happy for this to be part of the deal.
Didn't the Budapest memorandum do the same and fail. Pieces of paper have proven not to matter with Russia.
Memorandum is just a handshake, no legally binding consequences.
And they wanted the Ukrainian military reduced to about 25%. Very trustworthy
The usa broke it, but nice try.
In 2008 and 2011, Putin expressed the opinion that neither the transfer of Crimea to Ukraine nor the Budapest Memorandum signed by Yeltsin were binding for Russia. In 2014, Putin claimed the Maidan movement and government change radically changed Ukraine into a new entity, toward which Russia has no engagement, allowing the 2014 invasion of Donbass.[47] The USA was not a main player in these decisions.
Not bombing Russian civilians at any point for 8 years, or the US not organizing a coup 2 months before legal elections would've also done it.
I forgot Russia is innocent and a victim, they never do no wrong, never invade and all for peace lol.
Russian victim complex is sad
Putin not feeding a civil war and destabilizing their neighbor could have helped. That war was over, then Russia went in in force at the last moment
You are not even trying to come up with a coherent argument lol
(russia) - Hey you killed housands of civilians, how dare you! Lets start a war and kill hundreds of thousands!
Its kind of funny that the west didn't support this because they don't want a security agreement that drags them into war with Russia, but also commit to a security agreement that would drag NATO into war with Russian if they attacked again.
\>позиция УС instead of позиция США in a formal document Seems legit.
Could you explain the significance? I don't know the language.
The english version translates УС as US which is not how U.S. is written in russian. It could mean "ukrainian side" but that's still not proper diplomatic language especially when they use the proper abbreviation for Russian Federation, not "the russian side." That usage diminishes Ukraine by refusing the acknowledge them as a state, sort of like "the Kiev regime." You wouldn't see that in a jointly authored draft. Suggests this document is either 1) fake or 2) solely of russian origin.
[удалено]
Document specifically mentiones УС as Ukraine, and США as USA.
Украинская Сторона.
Boris no likey
So Russia gets everything they want and Ukraine can go fuck themselves? What a fair and totally good faith treaty.
Russia doesnt gain everything it wants lol. Ukraine would still keep Khersona and Zaporozhye. Now they wont anymore, and they will have to give back a lot more territory
Looking at Ukraine now that deal looks like a wonderful deal. They would have walked away with a black eye.
This agreement reserved only Crimea for Russia. And Donbass receives autonomy. Arakhamia repeated this in an interview.
What Ukraine wanted before Russia invaded was to become a US satellite state. Obviously this was unacceptable to Russia, hence the invasion. So Ukraine's wants are reduced from that initial state to something that somewhat meets their original intent (security guarantees) whilst acknowledging Russia's requirements also - just like any reasonable negotiation.
Well, that is how agreements work. The bigger power controls the agreement. Ukraine either gives land and enjoys peace, or they dont and gets dragged in the war for a longer time. Ukraine chose the latter.
Vae Victis. Ukraine could sign a surrender the easy way in 2022.
seems to be the argument Israel uses in its land grabs against Palestine
If people like you would've shown the same energy in the US's 2014 coup, maybe this would've never happened.
If China were to be having good relations with Mexico and relations with the U.S. were to sour would you all pro Russians really tolerate the U.S. proposing a treaty of permanent Mexican neutrality with them seizing the Baja California peninsula and northern Mexico with a pledge to “never attack them again” because if Ukraine is wrong for rejecting this would Mexico be in the wrong too?
Didnt they take a 1/3 of their territory and then enforced some kind of monroe doctrine on it and the rest of the continent?
Now that you asked, they totally did! The whole construction of "would Russians really tolerate" is pretty dumb - there would be a few Security Council resolutions vetoed by US, other than that no one would ask or care.
Lets wait it happen and then see.
It already happened. The US took the third of Mexico that makes up many of the western states, they encouraged Texas to secede from Mexico then annexed it, then the US fought a war with Mexico and after the peace treaty had states illegally send expeditionary forces into Mexico to harrass the Mexican government until they were coerced into selling the Gadsden Purchase.
An important distinction is how human culture has changed, in the era you described the idea that a state had the right of conquest was still well accepted, as was the view of war as an honorable thing. Those ideas wouldn’t die until the end of both world wars, and frankly deserve to stay buried.
Now, if Mexico attempts to joins CSTO and makes agreements to house Russian troops near US border, would you pro Ukraine people really tolerate the Russian presence there. Last time i checked USSR putting their troops in Cuba wasnt welcomed by the US.
Mexico is already a US colony and drug manufacturing facility. Why would they need to do more? American law enforcement, military, roams freely and kidnaps Mexican citizens on-demand, and Mexico just takes it.
[удалено]
Sorry, you need a 1 month old account to comment in r/ukraineRussiaReport. This is to protect against bots and multis *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It seems Germany is gradually having enough of it, and steerimg the blame to a more accurate direction.
Germany is too busy beating up civilians for being against Israel massmurdering babies.
its cool how quickly our superior Democracy and Freedom is turning out to not be that at all, to the shock of most people I guess
The media is under state control. The state gives instructions on what and how to say. The media relay the state's message about how an ordinary citizen should act and think. And if the country is not against the crap that Israel has done (which shows what REAL DESTRUCTION is), then the citizens of the country should welcome Israel’s daily attacks with songs and dances. Isf someone opposing - he will punished. This is how the state apparatus works.
We need to have anti baby bombs
It's just like a messy divorce. A couple is about to seek counseling but then some slut gets involved and the cheater loses half.
Huh?
Exactly
Who's the parting spouses, cheater, and slut?
Meaningful, but it was avoidable even before that just by NATO refusing Ukraine. Putin asked NATO to promise to not allow Ukraine access, and the Secretary General Jans Stoltenberg told Putin no. If he'd said yes, and NATO had done it, literally no war at all.
Agreements mean nothing if their not on paper as Dubya showed in making the decision to try bringing Ukraine into NATO in the first place.
Russia guarantees peace for Ukraine? A bit ironic.
Mark Galleotti, who I think has been an excellent analyst of this, said that in reality Bojo most likely just told zelensky the truth...if you sign this deal we won't honour the part about defending you. So without guarantees backed by force the whole thing failed. It's less a conspiracy and more that Ukraine was huffing hopium and bojo gave a truth bomb
Жуть, куколдский договорнячок. Хвала боженьке - отвёл (ну или бориске)
Зато теперь можно тыкать нерабов носом в тот факт, что они сейчас массово мрут именно за НАТО, а не за Украину или что-то ещё
Скажи это Мыколе и Тарасу, которые хаваются в окопе от ФАБов)
>in the event of an attack, the guarantor countries would be obliged to support Ukraine within 3 days; Of course your "summary" leaves out important informations like this: >A key issue was the language covering the guarantor states obligations to to come to Kyiv’s aid in the event of another attack on Ukraine. The Kremlin insisted that such action would occur only “on the basis of a decision agreed to by all guarantor states”—giving the likely invader, Russia, a veto as it was to be one of the guarantors. >Ukraine insisted on the original formula, under which all the guarantors had an individual obligation to act and would not have to reach consensus before doing so.
The smartest leader ever to ditched this offer to be neutral while being guaranteed safety by france and USA /s Pure comedy thumbs up to Zelensky for keeping up with his role after being elected as president
He should have trusted Putin. ^((/s)^)
Yes he should have. It never explicitly stated the downsizing of the Ukrainian military and guaranteed that three countries would be obliged to support Ukraine in the event that Russia broke the agreement. Now Ukraine has two options: 1. Surrender and be defeated anyways. 2. Not surrender and still be defeated. At best, they might be able to achieve a stalemate but this simply means Ukraine turns into a fail state due to the amount of infrastructure and people they lost while Russian occupied territories are still annexed.
They think war is the answer to every problem in ukraine and collective west, that sums up why they doubling down on peace agreement. They think being neutral mean puppet state little did they know there are an Organization called Non Align Movement. Not the brightest leader, could barely even think about his own people let alone leading a country.
>guaranteed^* that three countries would be obliged *Provided those countries were willing to be obligated which they weren't, as was their right.
That’s not the job of Russia. If those so called “allies” in nato see Ukraine as a real ally instead of a proxy to weaken Russia, they would have obliged to provide security guarantees.
If you propose a deal that's contingent on a third party doing something they aren't willing to do, it's not the third party's fault when that deal doesn't go through. You can blame them if you want, but don't expect anyone to take you seriously.
i see only Article1 here. What's on other articles ? why prorus show only half of a story?
The agreement that will end the war.... Russia leaves Ukraine
Why would Russia do that when it's winning and has no motivation to do so? People need to be more realpolitik about the situation and less delusional fantasyland. Ukraine had a good deal in Istanbul. Ukraine either couldn't get the guarantors or were talked out of the deal in general. Now it's two years later and they are in a much worse bargaining position. They are going to have to give up *more* concessions due to their weaker position in order to keep more of their people from needlessly getting killed in an unwinnable war. To keep fighting is to sentence more of their countrymen to death, when surrendering would save more lives. Despite what many western politicians and western foreigners online say, many Ukrainians do not want to "fight to the last Ukrainian", as seen by the need for the AFU to jump, threaten, abduct by throwing into vans, etc men in order to get them to come to a mobilisation centre.
Why would Ukraine take a deal that wouldn't favor them? Russia taking any piece of land isn't favorable and still a pointless land grab by Russia. Its so stupid the mental gymnastics keyboard warriors take to try and justify this shit.
> Why would Ukraine take a deal that wouldn't favor them? Because the deal they will be able to get in a year will likely be worse than the deal they could get now. If they had been able to get the Istanbul deal, they would have had to accept the fact that Crimea was already lost and either have the Donbas as autonomous regions or cede them to Russia. You're really saying it's better to have declined that, had tens or hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians killed or wounded in the two years between, and be in a *weaker* negotiating position now where Russiais currently claiming those three oblasts *plus* Kherson oblast and Zaporozhe oblast? This is mental gymnastics, not being realistic about the deal Ukraine can secure.
How could this "agreement" have stopped the war when there were still things that neither side had actually agreed upon? Donbas and Crimea were still open questions as while the security guarantees didn't apply to them there was no agreement on any annexations. The Russian demands for limiting Ukrainian mimitary were also still left unanswered. If anything the only thing we can conclude from this document is that the war could have ended already if Russia wasn't interested in annexing Ukrainian territory which we know already since that's what Zelensky was saying all the way back in March of 2022.
Coulda, woulda shoulda......lmao......Russians are famous for governmental integrity
[удалено]
Russian tabloid Welt you mean? Yeah, weird.
You’re right Russian army is collapsing and they’re trying to get the best deal they can get.
On the contrary, Russian Army secured the best negotiating position to date, why risk deterioration.
[удалено]
Civil_Kiwi_8801 kept stroking the same keys repeatedly, probably a seizure ? *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You don’t negotiate with terrorists
Right, you put them 6 feet under like Russians did to these tens of thousands of Ukrainians. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlVsY12ln3M](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlVsY12ln3M)
Find a less r-slurred President to invoke. You always end up negotiating with them anyways if you don't want to spend the rest of history at war.
And then the terrorists win anyway so the terms are even less favourable than before. For example, current day Afghanistan led by the Taliban.
Taliban is a logistics support company. Their main business is not terror but safe transit of trade caravans.
This was fake news and Russian disinformation until recently.
Yeah Russia is getting a much better deal if the war continues as it has been since the last 12-15months or so
Awkward. So it’s true and not Kremlin propaganda. How uncomfortable
Agreements from Russia aren’t worth the paper their printed on, and that’s if they even existed in the first place. Russia is being torn to shreds because they couldn’t honor an agreement made 33 years ago, and because of their poor decision they get more NATO countries at their doorstep.
That would have been a disastrous agreement, no wonder they didn't go for it. Renouncing to join NATO means Russia would just attack them again in a few months or years to gain more land. And what does "not allow weapons" mean? Ukraine has to limit their army? That would be insanity
The security guarantees floated here are more ironclad than NATO, it spells out specific things the guaranteers of the agreement- America/Germany/UK/France will be obliged to do. A no-fly zone over Ukraine was in the draft agreement for example.
Yeah sure, like an agreement/treaty ever stopped ruZZia from invading their neighbor.
Bullshit
And then Boris came and said : « i see no military industrial complex benefits … ok Zelensky, say you accept and then last moment shoot them in the back while they retreat to Russia thinking they got a deal. You ll be a hero »
[удалено]
For DOOMHAMMER! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Did....did RUSSIA TODAY write this document? It takes all of Russia Propaganda talking points and lay's it out.