Comments by "bobby hans" (@user-oc7ll9sv5r) on "The Icarus Project"
channel.
-
What really gets me is that some ppl. are now saying why does Ukraine not just let Russia have the areas /land it’s just a small part of Ukraine anyway.....
A small part of Ukraine ...WE ARE taking about a land mass is almost 200,000 sq km
In EU terms thats the size of Belgium, Holland, luxembourg and Greece all put together..
In UK terms that the size of all of Scotland , Wales and 80% of England all put together !!
In US terms is the size of South Carolina, West Virginia and New Jersey all put together !!
Why the f. should Ukraine give Russia all that land for what? TO ONLY be invaded some years later when Russia as had a brake and regrouped ,rebuilt its army and fortified positions !!
I SAY RUSSIA GETS TO TAKE LAND AND DEMAND UKRAINE CAN NOT JOIN NATO IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AT ALL !! Nobody wants to be a "buffer country". NO nation wants to have a little bit of freedom !!!! ; The whole concept is demeaning to an independent nation. NO nation wants to have a little bit of freedom and self-determination, like some sort of 2nd class country; That is not right, and Russia has no right to demand or bully Ukrainians or Ukraine to accept that Ukraine and its ppl. should become some sort of lap dog on a leash 2nd class country to serve kremlins geopolitical agenda; so Kremlin, Putin and RuZZans can feel better about themselves ...
Eastern European countries (ex soviet countries like Poland the baltic states ect ect ..) joined NATO because they are scared of Russia and want to be and stay independent. Nobody forced them to join NATO they was the ones running and knocking and begging to be able to join NATO and the EU ,,, .
When Russia invaded Ukraine Russia then just showed why it was a good idea for those countries to join NATO, because if they didn't they might just have got invaded as well just like Ukraine and Georgia did .
During Soviet times those Eastern European countries were nothing less than Russia puppet states. If they didn't join NATO after the fall of the USSR then they for sure couldn't guarantee their own independence from Russia.
Nato did nothing wrong, the only mistake was Ukraine not joining NATO to ensure Ukraines independence; Remember former satellite states like Poland, Romania, Czech Republic and The Baltic states, Slovakia ect ect all came running by their own accord, knocking, kicking, screaming and banging at the front door of EU and NATO begging to come in, no one forced them into it .
If Russia was not such a asshole country and stoped constantly bulling neighboring countries maybe other neighboring countries will not need to join NATO and by more open and welcoming to Russia ..
Also these people who advocate this view that Ukraine shroud just give up land and appeasement to Russians wants wishes are also being very ignorant to the fact that there were already treaties in place between Russia and Ukraine where Russia respecting the integrity of Ukraine's borders plus other treaties relating to the seas around Ukraine.
Putin has already broken those treaties.
Why would Ukraine believe Putin would stick to a new treaty when he's just broken half a dozen of the previous Russia Ukraine treaties and agreements.
Russia has demonstrated its treaties and agreements are worthless and you enter them at your great peril.
91
-
13
-
@sociopathstudio YOU SAY :
Do you believe that joining NATO was a necessity, based on the fact that Zelensky was warned by Russia not to....
MY ANSWER : Claim: NATO enlargement threatens Russia
Fact: Every country that joins NATO undertakes to uphold its principles and policies. This includes the commitment that "the Alliance does not seek confrontation and poses no threat to Russia," as reaffirmed at the Warsaw Summit. NATO enlargement is not directed against Russia.
Every sovereign nation has the right to choose its own security arrangements. This is a fundamental principle of European security, one that Russia has also subscribed to and should respect. NATO's Open Door policy has been a historic success. Together with EU enlargement, it has spread stability and prosperity in Europe since the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Claim: Russia has the right to demand a "100% guarantee" that Ukraine will not join NATO
Fact: According to Article I of the Helsinki Final Act which established the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in 1975, every country has the right "to belong or not to belong to international organizations, to be or not to be a party to bilateral or multilateral treaties including the right to be or not to be a party to treaties of alliance." All the OSCE member states, including Russia, have sworn to uphold those principles.
In line with those principles, Ukraine has the right to choose for itself whether it joins any treaty of alliance, including NATO's founding treaty.
Moreover, when Russia signed the Founding Act, it pledged to uphold "respect for sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all states and their inherent right to choose the means to ensure their own security". Thus Ukraine has the right to choose its own alliances, and Russia has, by its own repeated agreement, no right to dictate that choice.
11
-
@sociopathstudio IS UKRAINIAN LANGUAGE LIGAL 2ND LINGO IN DPR , LPR, CRIMEA AND RUSSIA NO ITS NOT !! HYPOCRITE
Ukraine is ‘deeply divided along ethnic and linguistic lines is a myth used by the kremlin for propganda
Since gaining independence in 1991, Ukraine has mostly been a peaceful, ethnically and linguistically varied state, home to speakers of not only Ukrainian, but Russian, Eastern Yiddish, Rusyn, Romanian, Belarusian, Crimean Tatar, Bulgarian, Hungarian, Polish, Armenian, German and Greek.
While Ukrainian is the language most commonly spoken, Russian is also widely used, and many Ukrainians are equally proficient in both. Moreover, Ukrainians will switch between the two as the situation requires, sometimes using different languages to address the members of a single conversational group.
Politics had muddied the issue, but ethnic Ukrainians can be heard speaking Russian as well as Ukrainian. It is a mistake to identify a Russian-speaking Ukrainian as a “Russian,” just as it would be a mistake to say an American, Canadian, Australian, Irish person or Scot was “English” because they speak English.
10
-
7
-
@sociopathstudio Oooooo YESSSS THE GOOD OLD LANGUAGE BS ARGUMENT THAT KREMLIN LIKES TO USE ..
In Ukraine, they don’t have bilingualism — it’s diglossia,”.
(Diglossia is a term that describes when two or more languages are used under different conditions within a community, often by the same speakers.)
One language is termed “high,” and the second “low” referring to their status or prestige in society. in Kyiv, the Russian Sovieticus idea of Russian being the “high,” still shows among the older generation is still to some part considered to be prestigious but this is getting slowly rubbed out…
In Ukraine, Russian language and its status are both consequences of the genocide done to the people of Ukraine and an imperialistic of the Soviet Union in Ukraine . Due to its post-colonial status, the Ukrainian language was pushed to the margins of all areas of life.
In Tsarist Russia, the Ukrainian language suffered from numerous prohibitions. For instance, in 1863 Valuyev Circular, a decree suspending the publication of many religious and educational texts in Ukrainian, or as the Russians called it, Little Russian, denied its existence.
The younger Ukrainian generation is now taking back their culture and finding their way back to Ukraine's own roots and they are staring to be proud of their own true history (without Kremlins propaganda and myths ) and are now asserting their national identity and own language as it is their god-given the right to do so .
According to polls by the Razumkov Center, in 2017 some 68 percent of Ukrainians said Ukrainian was their native language. Only 14 percent consider Russian to be their native language, while 17 percent said they were native speakers of both Ukrainian and Russian.
Russian propaganda likes to misrepresent Ukraine as a country sharply divided geographically, ethnically and politically along linguistic lines for Kremlins agenda and propaganda needs: there are ethnic Russians in the east and south and in Ukraine’s Crimea who speak Russian, and ethnic Ukrainians in the west who speak Ukrainian, the story goes. But at same time Kremlin propaganda will pump out the Russian propaganda MYTH that Ukrainians and Russians are at the same time “one people,” (meaning Ukrainians are Russians as there is acceding to the Kremlin no such thing as Ukrainians ) the Kremlin’s incoherent and false narrative continues. It is a narrative that is sometimes picked up and lazily repeated by Western media.
The real situation is much more complicated than the Kremlin’s propaganda, of course. Many people in the east speak Ukrainian as their native language (mainly in rural areas), and many people in the west speak Russian as their native language (mainly in urban areas).
Some speak a blend of the two languages, called “surzhyk” combining elements of the vocabulary and grammar of the two languages in a variety of mixes, depending on the locality.
Surzhyk is most prevalent in east-central Ukraine but can be heard in all parts of the country, especially in areas adjacent to big Russian-speaking cities.
This complex linguistic landscape has been shaped, mainly, by centuries of Russian imperialism — first under the Russian Tsardom and Empire, and later under the Russian dominated Soviet Union.
The Russian government has in the history and are still today underhandedly and covertly promoting the spread of the Russian language and Russian dominance over Ukraine.
Russia even promotes this idea of a justifiable and rightful dominance over Ukraine not just to its own Russians and the world in general but among the native Ukrainian population as well...
They do this by actively refusing to acknowledge the historical facts and the existence of the Ukrainian language and take every opportunity to belittle Ukrainian history by calling it a myth; this way Moscow is indirectly saying that Ukrainian history never existed and Ukrainian people are just nothing more than confused little Russians..
If we look back in time this is nothing new, the Russian Minister of Internal Affairs Pyotr Valuev in 1863 issued a secret decree that banned the publication of religious texts and educational texts written in the Ukrainian language Emperor Alexander II expanded this ban by issuing the Ems Ukaz in 1876 (which lapsed in 1905). The Ukaz banned all Ukrainian language books and song lyrics, as well as the importation of such works. Furthermore, Ukrainian-language public performances, plays, and lectures were forbidden
During the Soviet times, the attitude to Ukrainian language and culture went through periods of suppression (during the period of Stalinism) While officially there was no state language in the Soviet Union until 1989, Russian in practice had an implicitly privileged position as the only language widely spoken across the country From around the 1960s nearly all dissertations were required to be written in Russian That caused most scientific works to be written exclusively in Russian. Studying Russian in all schools was not optional, but the requirement.
SO DO NOT COME SCREENING about Russian language rights in UKRAINE Mr Putin after Russia has forcefully been running a linguistic genocide on the Ukrainian language for years.
Language is the soul of a nation and this is why Russians are pushing Russian in Ukraine to destroy the soul of the Ukrainian nation ... The Russian language is a sign of a "low-born" person a sovieticus dimwit that directly or indirectly is by using Russian in Ukraine supporting the linguistic genocide The Kremlin has been running a linguistic genocide on the Ukrainian language for years.. Russian should not be taught in Ukrainian kindergartens and schools "not to spoil child's speech." and the future sole of the Ukrainian nation and that is what Russian is really trying to do by attacking the Ukrainian language ..
"Russian" really should be called 'Muscoviyan " was created in 17 century, and many Russians 'Muscovians "speakers don't understand this fact ! Under Peter the Greats Russia , (let's call it what it really is Muscovy ) and during the the reign of Peter the Great lots of words were borrowed not only from German, but also from Dutch, heavily.
So, 11 century Ukrainian (found as a graffiti on Sophia of Kyiv) example:
Maty ne khotjachy ditychja bizhja gеt
In modern Ukrainian, it is
Maty ne khotjachy dytyny bizhytj hеtj (pronounced the same as written)
In modern Russian, it is
Matj nje khotja (no "chy") rjebjonka bjezhyt prochj (written)
Matj nji khatja (no "chy") rjibjonka bjizhyt prochj (pronounced)
7
-
7
-
@sociopathstudio MY ANSWER ONCE MORE IS !!
MY ANSWER : Claim: NATO enlargement threatens Russia
Fact: Every country that joins NATO undertakes to uphold its principles and policies. This includes the commitment that "the Alliance does not seek confrontation and poses no threat to Russia," as reaffirmed at the Warsaw Summit. NATO enlargement is not directed against Russia.
Every sovereign nation has the right to choose its own security arrangements. This is a fundamental principle of European security, one that Russia has also subscribed to and should respect. NATO's Open Door policy has been a historic success. Together with EU enlargement, it has spread stability and prosperity in Europe since the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Claim: Russia has the right to demand a "100% guarantee" that Ukraine will not join NATO
Fact: According to Article I of the Helsinki Final Act which established the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in 1975, every country has the right "to belong or not to belong to international organizations, to be or not to be a party to bilateral or multilateral treaties including the right to be or not to be a party to treaties of alliance." All the OSCE member states, including Russia, have sworn to uphold those principles.
In line with those principles, Ukraine has the right to choose for itself whether it joins any treaty of alliance, including NATO's founding treaty.
Moreover, when Russia signed the Founding Act, it pledged to uphold "respect for sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all states and their inherent right to choose the means to ensure their own security". Thus Ukraine has the right to choose its own alliances, and Russia has, by its own repeated agreement, no right to dictate that choice.
5
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
@sociopathstudio
YOU SAY : Russia offered to withdraw from Ukraine completely in Turkey,
MY ANSWER Russia has offered you say ... Listen here if i move into your house force you into the basement then offer you a deal where i end up keeping the 2nd floor why will you except that deal ITS YOUR HOUSE !!
(I will stop raping you if you marry me and give brith to my rape children we will call them Donetsk People's Republic (DPR) , Luhansk People's Republic (LPR) and Crimea Oblast is not an agreement it is slavery under a gun !!)
This IS NOT an agreement it is blackmail. It is extortion.
Also Russia has broken all deals and agreement treaties it ever has had with Ukraine why will any deal agreement be worth anything ..
FACT ; On 21 February 2022, Russia recognised the LPR and DPR as sovereign states. Three days later, Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, partially under the pretext of protecting the republics. Russian forces captured more of Luhansk Oblast (almost all of it), which became part of the LPR. In September 2022, Russia proclaimed the annexation of the LPR and other occupied territories, following illegitimate referendums which were illegal under international law. The United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution calling on countries not to recognise what it called the "attempted illegal annexation" and demanded that Russia "immediately, completely and unconditionally withdraw"
ON A SIDE NOTE WHEN IT COIMES TO MINSK TO TAKE THAT AS AN EKS ..
PUTINS CLAIM;; Putin said ; During these years, Kyiv authorities have ignored and sabotaged the implementation of the Minsk Package of Measures for a peaceful settlement of the crisis and ultimately late last year openly refused to implement it.
THE TRUTH AND FACT ; “Minsk Package of Measures”
Minsk agreements of 2014 and 2015 was to establish peace in eastern Ukraine.
The Kremlin has been calling on Kyiv to concede the separatist area a special status via a constitutional reform (point 11) and to hold elections there (point 12).
But for there to be fair elections, the Ukrainian government has demanded in accordance with the Minsk agreements, that all armed groups controlled by Russia must leave the area (point 10), that all Russian heavy weapons be withdrawn (point 3) and for Kyiv to recover control of the Donbas border with Russia (point 9). RUSSIA HAS DONE NONE OF THAT !!
So for the Minsk to even start it is in Russias ball park they must first remove and withdrawn Russian heavy weapons and armed groups leave the area ; then in accidence with Minsk agreement Ukraine will start hold elections there, but we are all waiting for Russia to remove its combatants first in accidence with Minsk agreement ..
1
-
@sociopathstudio
YOU SAY : do you believe that the United States would tolerate a military (not economic like BRICS) alliance powered by Russia to establish itself in a neighboring country considering what's going on with Cuba?
MY ANSWER : NATO enlargement is a fake pretext to excuse Russian aggression against its neighbors.
This argument does not comply with the timing of expansion: when Russian leadership was more pro-Western, NATO enlargement was not a problem. The issue is resurgent Russian revanchism and imperialism, trying to prevent post-Soviet space, the zone of Russian strategic interest, from becoming more integrated with the West.
Allowing 14 former communist countries and East Germany into NATO was a strategic and moral success.
The alliance did the right thing to listen to the millions of Europeans who asked to join the democracies of the West instead of giving Putin a veto over their future. Putin’s threats against Sweden and Finland, coup attempt against Montenegro, attack on Georgia, and two invasions of Ukraine show that he feels entitled to dominate and use violence against other countries. Each of the countries that joined NATO after the Cold War feels safer and protected from Russia’s aggression. Russia’s attacks on non-NATO countries show that NATO enlargement is a success and expanded the zone of peace in Europe.
RUSSIA DOSE NOT CARE ABOUT NATO EU OR EVEN ETHNIC RUSSIANS ITS A SMOKESCREEN !! RUSSIA IS RUNING A WAR IN UKRIANE OVER UKRAINIAN GAS AND OIL !!
Pavel Gubarev, the self-proclaimed leader of pro-Russian separatists in Donetsk, admitting in an interview with Russian television Rossiya 24 on 19 May that one of the key reasons for the fighting is Kyiv’s push to “continue development of shale gas on the territory of Ukraine”.
If this is indeed the case, Russia managed to accomplish its mission – at least for now. Both Shell and Chevron decided to freeze and pull out from their shale projects in the region.
Before the civil war, Ukraine had agreements with the energy giants to explore and tap its shale gas fields in hope to reduce the country’s heavy dependency on Russian gas imports. In the Donetsk Region Shell had a 50-year profit sharing deal with the government of Ukraine to explore and drill for natural gas in shale rock formations.
At first, the withdrawal of Shell and Exxon seemed to be strictly Ukraine’s problem. However, if we zoom out and look at Europe’s energy map, the case is quite different. Besides Russia, the future of Ukraine’s shale gas if confirmed could be of enormous importance for both the European Union and the US. In addition to its own independence, Ukraine also had ambitious plans to become an exporter of shale gas to Europe – with the active contribution of the America and its business interests.
Eduard Stavytskiy, then Ukrainian energy and coal industry minister, said in April 2013 that with the help of shale gas and Crimean offshore gas projects, Ukraine could start exports of gas to Europe in four to five years and to become a net energy exporter by 2020. As we know, by now, both of these areas are not under Kyiv’s control anymore.
The energy giant Chevron also signed a similar deal for $10 billion, but it was focusing on developing shale gas reserves in the West of Ukraine. However, one year into the Russia-backed conflict, both decided to freeze or postpone their shale-exploring activities in Ukraine. Probably also driven by the low gas prices, the profit-oriented energy giants simply shied away from their shale projects in the conflict-ridden country, citing the lack of security for their investments and worsening extraction prospects as their main reasons.
According to Unconventional Gas Information Project expert Mykola Shlapak, it was indeed the fighting that scared Shell away from the Yuzivska project. “In the geographical sense there are two major regions with unconventional gas production potential. One of them is located in the east of Ukraine and is partially on the territories currently not controlled by the Ukrainian government, where the armed conflict is taking place.
Kyiv is fighting in Ukraine’s east for the gas reserves. Germany says the reserves make 5,578 bcm. [the US reserves are 8,976 bcm]. Control will be from the US,” Russian State Duma’s international affairs committee head Aleksey Pushkov tweeted in August 2014.
If the explorations indeed confirm Ukraine’s estimated shale reserves, these would become a significant danger to Russia’s monopoly over the multi-billion euros gas supplies to Europe.
By continuing its officially denied support of the separatists in keeping Ukraine’s shale gas untapped, Moscow has also averted another crisis; American shale gas interests setting foot right at its doorsteps at the Ukrainian border and the European gas markets.
In Russia’s silent shale gas victory in Ukraine, the Russian-backed rebels fighting in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions ensured that at least for the near future, Ukraine’s shale gas potential will not be able to challenge Gazprom’s gas monopoly in the region.
“The question of Ukraine is a question of EU’s future, EU’s safety, and a correction of EU’s energy policy. We will not be able to efficiently fend off potential aggressive steps by Russia in the future, if so many European countries are dependent on Russian gas deliveries or wade into such dependence,” the then Prime Minister of Poland Donald Tusk said back in 2012.
Indeed, Gazprom accounted for 39% of the European Union’s natural gas imports in 2013 and the union’s dependency is still a big problem for Brussels, especially in the light of its cooling relations with Moscow.
Despite the downturn in domestic extraction, Ukraine has the third-largest confirmed natural gas reserves in Europe (1.1 tcm), exceeded only by Russia (35 tcm) and Norway (1.8 tcm), and ahead of the Netherlands (700 bcm) and the UK (200 bcm)[2]. At the same time, when measured according to the international methodology, Ukraine’s gas deposits have increased by more than one third over the last decade.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sociopathstudio Dombas and Crimea IS NOT RUSSIA !! LET ME ANSWER YOU IONE MORE TIME !! In Ukraine, they don’t have bilingualism — it’s diglossia,”.
(Diglossia is a term that describes when two or more languages are used under different conditions within a community, often by the same speakers.)
One language is termed “high,” and the second “low” referring to their status or prestige in society. in Kyiv, the Russian Sovieticus idea of Russian being the “high,” still shows among the older generation is still to some part considered to be prestigious but this is getting slowly rubbed out…
In Ukraine, Russian language and its status are both consequences of the genocide done to the people of Ukraine and an imperialistic of the Soviet Union in Ukraine . Due to its post-colonial status, the Ukrainian language was pushed to the margins of all areas of life.
In Tsarist Russia, the Ukrainian language suffered from numerous prohibitions. For instance, in 1863 Valuyev Circular, a decree suspending the publication of many religious and educational texts in Ukrainian, or as the Russians called it, Little Russian, denied its existence.
The younger Ukrainian generation is now taking back their culture and finding their way back to Ukraine's own roots and they are staring to be proud of their own true history (without Kremlins propaganda and myths ) and are now asserting their national identity and own language as it is their god-given the right to do so .
According to polls by the Razumkov Center, in 2017 some 68 percent of Ukrainians said Ukrainian was their native language. Only 14 percent consider Russian to be their native language, while 17 percent said they were native speakers of both Ukrainian and Russian.
Russian propaganda likes to misrepresent Ukraine as a country sharply divided geographically, ethnically and politically along linguistic lines for Kremlins agenda and propaganda needs: there are ethnic Russians in the east and south and in Ukraine’s Crimea who speak Russian, and ethnic Ukrainians in the west who speak Ukrainian, the story goes. But at same time Kremlin propaganda will pump out the Russian propaganda MYTH that Ukrainians and Russians are at the same time “one people,” (meaning Ukrainians are Russians as there is acceding to the Kremlin no such thing as Ukrainians ) the Kremlin’s incoherent and false narrative continues. It is a narrative that is sometimes picked up and lazily repeated by Western media.
The real situation is much more complicated than the Kremlin’s propaganda, of course. Many people in the east speak Ukrainian as their native language (mainly in rural areas), and many people in the west speak Russian as their native language (mainly in urban areas).
Some speak a blend of the two languages, called “surzhyk” combining elements of the vocabulary and grammar of the two languages in a variety of mixes, depending on the locality.
Surzhyk is most prevalent in east-central Ukraine but can be heard in all parts of the country, especially in areas adjacent to big Russian-speaking cities.
This complex linguistic landscape has been shaped, mainly, by centuries of Russian imperialism — first under the Russian Tsardom and Empire, and later under the Russian dominated Soviet Union.
The Russian government has in the history and are still today underhandedly and covertly promoting the spread of the Russian language and Russian dominance over Ukraine.
Russia even promotes this idea of a justifiable and rightful dominance over Ukraine not just to its own Russians and the world in general but among the native Ukrainian population as well...
They do this by actively refusing to acknowledge the historical facts and the existence of the Ukrainian language and take every opportunity to belittle Ukrainian history by calling it a myth; this way Moscow is indirectly saying that Ukrainian history never existed and Ukrainian people are just nothing more than confused little Russians..
If we look back in time this is nothing new, the Russian Minister of Internal Affairs Pyotr Valuev in 1863 issued a secret decree that banned the publication of religious texts and educational texts written in the Ukrainian language Emperor Alexander II expanded this ban by issuing the Ems Ukaz in 1876 (which lapsed in 1905). The Ukaz banned all Ukrainian language books and song lyrics, as well as the importation of such works. Furthermore, Ukrainian-language public performances, plays, and lectures were forbidden
During the Soviet times, the attitude to Ukrainian language and culture went through periods of suppression (during the period of Stalinism) While officially there was no state language in the Soviet Union until 1989, Russian in practice had an implicitly privileged position as the only language widely spoken across the country From around the 1960s nearly all dissertations were required to be written in Russian That caused most scientific works to be written exclusively in Russian. Studying Russian in all schools was not optional, but the requirement.
SO DO NOT COME SCREENING about Russian language rights in UKRAINE Mr Putin after Russia has forcefully been running a linguistic genocide on the Ukrainian language for years.
Language is the soul of a nation and this is why Russians are pushing Russian in Ukraine to destroy the soul of the Ukrainian nation ... The Russian language is a sign of a "low-born" person a sovieticus dimwit that directly or indirectly is by using Russian in Ukraine supporting the linguistic genocide The Kremlin has been running a linguistic genocide on the Ukrainian language for years.. Russian should not be taught in Ukrainian kindergartens and schools "not to spoil child's speech." and the future sole of the Ukrainian nation and that is what Russian is really trying to do by attacking the Ukrainian language ..
"Russian" really should be called 'Muscoviyan " was created in 17 century, and many Russians 'Muscovians "speakers don't understand this fact ! Under Peter the Greats Russia , (let's call it what it really is Muscovy ) and during the the reign of Peter the Great lots of words were borrowed not only from German, but also from Dutch, heavily.
So, 11 century Ukrainian (found as a graffiti on Sophia of Kyiv) example:
Maty ne khotjachy ditychja bizhja gеt
In modern Ukrainian, it is
Maty ne khotjachy dytyny bizhytj hеtj (pronounced the same as written)
In modern Russian, it is
Matj nje khotja (no "chy") rjebjonka bjezhyt prochj (written)
Matj nji khatja (no "chy") rjibjonka bjizhyt prochj (pronounced)
1
-
1
-
@sociopathstudio YOU SAY YOU GUYS ... I AM NORWEGIAN !!!
UKRAINIANS WAS NO MORE NAZIS THAN FINLAND WAS AT THE TIME THEY WAS BOTH FIGHTING STALIN OCCUPATION AND WORKED WITH THE GERMANS IN THAT ASPECT !!
And Bandera was not personally part of the genocide the evidence clearly shows that Bandera had nothing to do with it ...BANDERA WAS a prisoner (POW) of war when the massacre in Volhynia happened..so how is Bandera responsible ????
The Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists under the leadership of Stepan Bandera decided to fight against the Hitler after they was arrested in 1941.
Now that is NOT much collaboration now is it.... AND THAT IS WHY Stepan Bandera was arrested by the GERMANS and sent to Sachsenhausen concentration camp...
Bandera and all top leaders of the Ukrainian freedom fighter movement was there Taras Bulba-Borovets, Andriy Melnyk and Oleh Stuhl, Stepan Bandera and Yaroslav Stetsko, was all arrested by the GESTAPO !!
ITS A MYTH BLOWN UP OF HALF TRUTHS THAT UKRAINIANS WAS NAZIS !!
With the arrival of Nazi troops in Ukraine, Ukrainians and even Bandera himself, foolishly believed it was a new time of Freedom from Communism and Stalin's USSR and freedom from years of Polish oppression and that it will be a new time for an independent free Ukraine .
On 30 June 1941, Bandera and the OUN-B declared an independent Ukrainian State. Many Some of the published proclamations of the formation of this state say that it would "work closely with the National-Socialist Greater Germany, helping the Ukrainian People to free itself from Moscovite occupation ( freedom from communism and Stalins USSR ) ." – as stated in the text of the "Act of Proclamation of Ukrainian Statehood"
But it did not take long before In 1941 relations between Germany and the OUN-B had soured to the point where a Nazi document was signed and dated 25 November 1941 that stated "The German high command in Ukraine sent a memo saying that all functionaries of the Bandera Movement must be arrested at once and, after thorough interrogation, are to be liquidated...".
Why did some Ukrainians believe that Germany was liberating them at the time from the USSR and Polish hegemony ...??
YOU MUST remember and take into account that only 8 years before the Germans came to Ukraine Stalin had run a genocide inside Ukraine that had killed off 10 million Ukrainians and before that west Ukraine had been under brutal hegemony polish control for years !!
Also take into account this facts ..
When Bandera got arrested by the Gestapo in 1941 many members of the OUN was left without any direction and some joined the the Police forces that at the time was under the control of the germans ,they enlistment and served as an opportunity to receive military training and direct access to weapons. The OUN leadership (when Bandera still was a prisoner at Sachsenhausen concentration camp ) on 20 March 1943 issued secret instructions ordering their members who had joined the German auxiliary police to desert with their weapons and join with the military detachment of OUN (SD) units in Ukraine. The number of trained and armed policemen who in spring 1943 joined the ranks of the future Ukrainian Insurgent Army were estimated to be 10,000. This process was to take up arms and fight the nazis and in some places this involved engaging in armed conflict with German forces as they tried to prevent desertion by the ethnic Ukrainians that had joined ..
Evidence that Bandara was NOT a Nazi tool, but in-fact will use or fight anyone if he was thinking it will help in achieving a free Ukraine and Ukrainian independence..
1