DMS

This escalation logic is flawed. People of a country are not a one whole. "Collective fault" is previous century stuff. Yes, bombing of Dresden was a mistake, like relocation of Germans from Konigsberg. My point was not "whataboutism", like "it's ok to hit civilians in Vinnitsya because civilians were hit in Donetsk", please. It was about sorrowful inequality of life value because of media coverage, that is it. I didn't write that Russia wasn't fighting, I did downscale invading force. I had impression that RA moved in only 2 BTGs (excluding special forces and volunteers) in August 2014, that was wrong. Language barrier distorts sense, I guess. Everyone thought that only Russian army was fighting, I wrote about 2 BTGs, that looked like "denial". But DPR and LPR forces were and are important, as this war showed, they fought sometimes better than RA. Ignoring them as a fighting force was wrong.

Donetsk city is shelled by 150mm artillery. It's hard to avoid killing civilians using this type of weapons. Yes, Ukrainians are desperate, but still they should use more precise weapons or avoid shelling targets in densely populated urban areas. (Like Russian army must.) Some people will die in any case because of this war that was started by Putin, but why not to minimise this number using Tochkas, HIMARS instead of "dumm" 150mm arty? And please don't read this like any sort of advocating of this strike in Vinnitsya, using of cruise missiles is risky because of AA defence that shoots them above the city and also must be avoided in urban areas. Sure, who can argue this.

Yeah, but you don't notice deaths from this side of a front line. Not because you don't care, but because this deaths are not shown to you. Donetsk is shelled by weeks, dozens of civilians are killed. But nobody posted the photos and this "didn't happen". No offence, Russian media also don't show civilian deaths in Ukraine cities.

Children are dying since 2014. I saw a lot of photos. It's awful to realise that people see only things that media show to them. Lives have different values. If media show this particular death - people sorrow. Media don't say about 100 another deaths - people don't care. Child in Vinnitsya is a human being, child in Donetsk is like Palestinian child, acceptable "collateral damage".

"Good manners" in Internet - to post links always. This is fiction story. Vladlen Tatarsky is writer, he published several books. "Based on true events" (he was there), but still fiction.

Please could you post a proof link?

Why do you always call me "Misha", it isn't my first name. (Because of M in DMS? No) I am ok when you say it in Russian (sort on nickname, ok), but in English it sounds bad. It's a little impolite to bring personal discussions to forum where no one cares about us, isn't it? What do you expect, that if you find some words and prove that Russia is "bad", Russians are ok with disintegration and partition? Like: "It's our fault? ok then, partition us free, kill us, take away our resources." I don't think so. And why that Putin is our fault? Yeltsin was approved by U.S. Congress. Anti-Yeltsin rebellion in 1993 was crushed with support of U.S. embassy. Elections of 1996 were openly frauded. I don't think that Yeltsin's appointee Putin wasn't approved by U.S. embassy in 1999. Bush and Clinton liked him, he was Russian Zelensky who helped to fight terror. Putin was usual pro-western dictator, like Mubarak in Egypt. West tried to shift him in 2011, he was hurt and gone wild. Deal with him. I have no relation to this imperialistic contention, but if someone come to my home to "de-rushificate" me, to punish for some "collective fault" - ok, I will have to support this dictator. (Not just me, but "average Russian") Quite simple logic, I don't understand what's wrong with it. I think that here are too much discussions about Russia, so in short: are you serious? South Russia is concentrated in few big cities, like rest of the country. That big cities are populated by people with roots from all over the country. Ukrainians use to say that Russians are "mudblood", "race mix". Well, ok. People try to hide their village roots, avoiding local dialects. You buy internet memes and jokes as true stories? Sounds like "American hillbillies are preparing to secession, because they are too different to New York city". You missed the point or my English is too bad. Anyway, ok. Please let's stop this wall of text. Here are too much of us.

"Sovietisation" doesn't equal to "Russification", it was opposite thing. Communists started politics of "rootification" ("коренизация", I don't know how to translate this), giving ethnic minorities more places in councils, giving them leader's positions. Russian population was forced to learn local languages. Russian nationalists curse communists for that, you know that Putin says that Lenin created Ukraine. Don't underestimate Soviet internationalism, it helped to neutralise hatred between ethnic groups. Baltic states, Ukraine were republics in union. They exited the union. Poland was not a part of union, Poland just changed block. Not good examples. Nuclear weapons are not a guarantee. There are ways. Proxy wars, bribing elites, regime change. And in case of "traditional" war, when to nuke? When border is crossed? When Smolensk is lost? When U.S. armored divisions are 50 km far from Moscow? If they are at 51 km, may be there is a chance to negotiate? Are you sure that NATO won't probe this? Well, if I am wrong and nuclear weapons make 3-rd world war impossible - ok then. I would disagree, but ok, I don't think that this is worth arguing.

Russian Federation in not an empire, it is populated by one political nation with common (Soviet based) culture, economics, language. Eastern parts are weakly populated, Russia just looks on the map like very big. Partition of Russia would have one main purpose, to get oil and gas from Siberia without paying fair market price to Russian business. I doubt that life of average Russian would become better without taxes, paid by Gazprom, Lukoil and others. Even pro-western upper middle class in Moscow would suffer, if Moscow stops being government and trading centre. I strongly dislike concept of one, single, united nation without classes. But in this particular case all Russian people, all classes would stick together. Their interests would be common, for businessmen and working class. West should not turn this imperialistic war (with limited support) in national-liberation war for Russian people. Yes, there are some regional elites (most notable - in Yekaterinburg) with separatist intentions. They would be ok with leaving taxes in their region, even if they have to sell for lower prices. But, unfortunately for them, they are too close to People Republic of China and I doubt, that any gun would be fired in direction of PLA, if they come to help.

It's ironic that I read this topic to find another source of information and avoid official propaganda, but I find here confirmation of official propaganda scary tales about NATO leaders who plan to destroy and disintegrate Russia. (Well, you are not NATO leaders - but if public is ok with that, why leaders would not) And you ask: why Russians are stuck around that disgusting government. Because they (we) are scared of you, Putin is bad, but if he looses - here come people like Haiduk, who "will show Sudetes" and your collaborators like Grig, who will help disintegrating Russia. No way out. Ok, then we are cornered rats.

Well, I am glad to read that you don't support "collective punishing" and think that any punishment should be set by trial. Just wanted to know that. I think that Haiduk is also interested in this question, "probing" you, is it ok to write such things or not. How far Western sympathies go. Assumptions about my person are interesting, but I don't want to flood this topic, you know where PM button is. And no, I probably won't get any consequences personally to me, sitting in armchair, that doesn't mean that I shouldn't care.

"Collective guilt" and trial? 100 thousands of trials, 200 thousands? Well, ok.

No, he says about "collaborators".

No, I didn't mean Russian citizens. But Haiduk already answered, I see. Sudetes, Volhynia. Very progressive.

It's amazing that you openly admit that plans. And that western public "buy" it. "Pushing out of that Russian replacers"!

Sometimes I think that people here write not to me, but to someone else. "Defending Russia", really? Who cares? Not me. It's amazing that you (not just you, everyone, who started arguing to my statement about effect of Balkan war) really think that I do care about your opinion about Russia. (Not because I don't care about your opinion at all, I hope you get the point) People think that Chinese and Russians badly understand each other. Unfortunately Russians and Europeans don't understand each other at all. You can understand letters and words, but not perception of yourself, of country, of history. And that is more important than hieroglyphs.

I think you are overreacting to neutral description of process. Just like if someone would write: "Germans were feeling themselves humiliated by defeat of 1918 and wanted to revanche". You: "They should not be feeling humiliation! Their defeat was fair!" Ok, but they were. Go to the past and convince them.

Putin said that he asked Clinton in 2000, but he reacted "coldly".

Why do you react in this way? That is how it is. Why do you write it to me, must I travel to the past and convince people not to be scared of bombings?

Surely it's a long process. LongLeftFlank brightly described it here. Mix of bribing elites, soft power, sabotage, new proxy wars. It will work someday. NATO was slowly, but persistently moving to the East, incorporating more and more economics, like steamroller. Some politicians tried to stop it and were overthrown with ease. Russia is bigger than other countries, but as LongLeftFlank said, it weakens. At some point new intervention, like in 1918, is possible. Not open invasion, but some sort of proxy war, using bribed local elites, during political crisis. Nothing impossible. This is quite possible while Russia has this type of economic system. If it won't be changed, country will fall. It's ironic that you don't like Putin, but to throw off Russia from the table you need him to stay. You are a bit too optimistic (№7,8 - really?), but long term trend is correct. Yugoslavia broke the previous generation. They were really pro-western, like Ukrainians now days. Bombing of Belgrad was like cold shower. "Are we the next?" Obvious parallels, Kosowo and Chechnya.

This time NATO will want to partition Russia, to take away nuclear weapons e.t.c. It is obvious to everyone. Better to have cold war with West, than be stuck in never ending civil war. War hawks in all involved countries must retire before something like that is possible. No one will accept it. Including Western side. Both sides are not ready for negotiations just now, each side expects to win. Each side wants capitulation of opposing side. If Putin (or any person instead of him) signs capitulation now, he becomes a traitor. Then he will be overthrown and you will get more radical leader. Raising pressure only scares people and sticks them to authorities. West doesn't give a "golden bridge" to retreat. People in Russia don't think that we are losing. (I am also not sure what is going on) And if they will, they won't necessarily want to capitulate. So, there is no way out.

Thank you for listening and replying. The gap between two realities is huge. What is highly probable for you is doubtful for me (and nearly impossible for most of Russian citizens), and vice versa. Probably we should wait few years, so facts would be fully clear. To The_Capt: I didn't advocate anything, I got emotional a little, seeing someone believes that "phone call intercepts". I realise that no one will change opinion. And regime change in Russia won't change anything, I can't imagine what amount of violence you will need to "derushificate" us, like Ukrainians use to say. You won't succeed, there are several million sized agglomerations in Russia, Raqqa is small town in comparance. May be new iron curtain and cold war with defined rules can save us. Bad, but better, than big war (bigger war). And I should believe in this also. During WW2 some Soviet propagandist published article about Germans, draining blood from locals. It was published, but soon it was prohibited to quote it. Ukrainians also should prohibit to quote something.

Sure. Crimes happen during peace time, for example Russian soldier in Armenia deserted and killed a family some years ago, it was a loud case. It happens in Russia, it happens in foreign bases, it surely happens in Ukraine. War adds more cases, like shooting at civilian cars, bombardments of towns. But there is a difference between crimes and all that stuff, when "wife tells husband to rape, but not to tell her". It makes difference between badly organised army and "orcs". Actually it is zagrad otryad (blocking unit) checking documents. I thought it was fun to put it after several discussions about it here. If you want to know my political views, you won't like it, I am left. (You are far, far right, as I remember)) And I don't like Putin's BS about "Lenin, who created Ukraine" and other right propaganda. (And I don't like that he started this war, if it was unclear.) As well as I don't like Ukrainian nationalists. Our and their rightists raised this war, playing along with each other. Just to explain my position, if you ask, no need to argue with that, PM me if you want.

Replying to everyone: there are war crimes and still war propaganda exist. Sometimes propaganda lies, someone tells truth, sometimes - exaggerated truth. It's a question of tactic. War propaganda can't be "truthful", only idiot would limit himself during war. And yes, it is possible that there are some real war crimes and this time propaganda says true, but next time it invents fictional new case, using trust, raised by previous one. Good propaganda must use real cases. But it is not enough, they must provide flow of events, so public would stay interested. Ok, world wars are "dark past", no parallels are acceptable. But, Kuweit girl Nayirah. "Iraqi soldiers take babies out of incubators in a Kuwaiti hospital, take the incubators, and leave the babies to die." You know that she was Kuweit ambassador's daughter, that it was 100% lie, right? There were a lot of real war crimes, committed by Iraq soldiers in Kuweit. But propaganda needs something tremendous to dehumanise enemy. "They are not like us, they are savages". Private Jessica Lynch. You must know, that she was not raped, she was treated well by expecting capitulation Iraq soldiers. There are a lot of Russian propaganda examples, but you believe in existence of Russian propaganda, so no sense in mentioning them. Please don't believe to anything you read, stay critical. When you dehumanise somebody, you dehumanise yourself. You can support Ukraine without believing in this dehumanising BS about Russian soldiers raping toddlers and their wives, advising to rape more.

OMG, how men can be so naive. Random dude reads text, everyone: "oh, it's a stunning truth!" I remember CNN video with that "phone call intercepts". 1-st episode: "we raped 16 year girl" (to woman, must be "wife"), 2-nd: "we eat dogs", 3-rd: "I hate their medals, we suffer here" (realistic one!). In 3-rd episode actor even didn't try to imitate Russian accent, must be from Poland or Baltic. 1-st world war British propaganda was more sophisticated. You believe in everything you are fed, it's amazing. And that is wargaming forum, where people read books about WWII and must have higher erudition. And you compose theories about broken Russian nature, based on this!