Rusknight

US will hardly invest enough money into Ukraine to make it a prosperous country, but to let it survive, not to get economics disaster (what can lead to an uncontrolled goverment change) - sure, why not? US can give it enough money for it. It's not a business loan for US it's their geopolitical expenses.

It's a nature of information warfare. It doesn't really matter how reasonable and believable statements you make just repeat them again and again and if you have enough media resources many people will belive that it's the truth. So if you bombing your enemy for several months just say that it's enemy bombing himself all this time and people will finally agree with you - sure, it's logical they bombing themselfs again and again it's their never-ending provocation.

Yes, sure it's evil russians bombing Donetsk for several months already almost daily while Ukranian army has nothing to do with it. Ask Psaki about it, she will tell you the truth.

I doubt. Plutonium is how KGB eliminates enemies of Russia. CIA or NSA will probably stuff him with coca-cola and hamburgers to death.

Steve, I hoped to get an answer from a native american on why US goverment keeps so many citizens in prisons? I am just puzzled with this fact. Is it how true democracy functions? You ignored this question so you don't know the answer (it's ok you may not know) or US goverment will prosecute you if you tell me the truth?

I like how US special services wiretaped Merkel - is it how allies and friends acts to each other? Of course speaking about satelites I don't mean that they are by 100% controled by US. In fact US use the carrot and stick approach to control them but sometimes they can do something against US policy if population of their country is strongly against some US actions and ideas and if US won't punish them for it too harsh. National goverments still have to go via elections periodically so they cannot ignore all the time what people in their own country think and feel.

The point of this video is not that they pull some crap there by mistake becouse they didn't check facts good enough. This video shows that they actually don't care about facts at all being a propaganda and as soon as it becomes clear that facts are against them and their propaganda they prevent a truth (or the opposite point of view at least) to be said. And they are still in business after it what ruins a theory about western medios being so special in terms of reputation.

I think you should watch this video. It shows how some (I don't say all for sure) west medias work for goverment for propaganda purpoces instead of being a source of unbiased information. And against your theory it even doesn't ruin their media business.

Where did I say the source should be Russian? I would prefer Bulgarian sources on this exact matter.

And you prove your version with the link to a US news-paper, seriously?

The truth is that most countries in this list are not friends or allies of the west but it's sattelites. For example Bulgaria was really interested in building a new gas pipeline from Russia to Bulgaria (and further to other EU countires) via Black Sea called "South Stream" cause it would give a lot of energy for Bulgaria and EU and Russia wanted it as well, but EU blocked it cause US didn't want it to happen. Cancelation of this project is bad for Russia, it is bad for Bulgaria, it is bad for Europe, but who cares about Russia, EU or Bulgaria profit while US says NO. This is the difference between being a friend and sattelite.

You speak about France here... acually France refused to provide Russia with Mistrals ships recentry under the pressure of US. These ships are no way a strategic weapon and the fact that France broke the contract will hurt France reputation at the world weapon market and France will have to play a big forfeit for Russia so it's against french interests and they didn't want to do so, they delayed a final decisions and still didn't state it clear enough,but US makes them to say NO.

I didn't say US is a horrible place to live now. Nope. There is quite a high level of life there. Higher than in Russia for sure The point actually is that it's not the most democratic/free country in the world how US likes to present itself. However ordinary people don't care about democracy that much. They care about level of life (job, salaries, medicine, roads e.t.c.) and don't really care whether goverment watching them or not even if it breaks their right for private life e.t.c. Snowden showed US people that goverment watching them and what happened? Goverment was retired? Some new laws were implemented to prevent goverment from this? Nothing happened in fact. Ordinary people don't really care about freedom. Btw can you explain why US is at the 1st place in the world for the number of people kept in prisons per 100 000 of it's population. Russia is at the 10 place in this rating for example. Are there so many criminals in US or are US laws so severe or what? I personally have no exact idea but it makes me think bad about US justice though Russian justice is bad either I won't deny it. For your note I don't belive russian state media and don't usually read\watch them. The same I actually don't belive US or other state medias cause they all lie more or less. I make my conclusions on many sources of information and I had an oportunity to visit various countries (China, US, EU ) and talk to people from these countries directly. You probably will be shocked but I never voted for Putin and don't support his internal policy while I find his external policy reasonable more or less. It's not like I hate US or EU either, I just say about them here what I see in their actions without being blinded by US/EU propaganda (yes, western countries also has propaganda). I see that US nor tries to bring some real democracy anywhere, it just uses people dissatisfaction in various countries to change goverments there in profit of US first of all. I won't call US an evill empire for it however. I think the world is a cruel place and all countries in the world are fighting for their own interests except those that chosen a role of US sattelite already and betray their own interests in profit of US.

I personally think that russian people mentality and russian culture much more close to the West than to the East and we would better cooperate with US and EU to balance growing power of China, and Russia actually wanted to cooperate with US and EU after USSR failure, however it was showed to Russia quite clear that West doesn't want any fair cooperation with Russia.

Where did I say that Russia want to isolate itself from world and world economy? By independence I mean that Russian people whant to have a goverment that will make decisions for the profit of Russia. We don't want a goverment that will do what US president tells them to do against our national interests as EU leaders used to already.

Regarding how the West treats Russia... We live in a monopolar world now. US pretends to be the king of this world. Other big countries should be US sattelites or they get problems in some way - economical, political, military. Europe is US sattelite now so it is allowed to live quietly while US controls it's political establishment and says Europe what to do even if it turns against EU real profit - like with anti-russian sanctions which hurt Europe much more than US, and US made Europe to apply them anyway. Russia, China and some other countries are friends of the West till they follow US as its sattelites either and do what US wants them to do irrespecrtive of Russian or Chinese real profit and national interests. As soon as Russia or China try to defend their own profit and interests they become enemies, "threats to all civil world" e.t.c. So while Russia stays independent country it will be treated by West (US) as an enemy. I hope Russia stay independent however.

I don't say russian current strategy is good. Frankly speaking if I were a president of Russia I don't know what decision I would make in case of Ukraine since all decisions look as no-win decisions for Russia. Just let Ukraine go to west and become a part of EU and NATO? it would be a great strategical fail for Russia irrespective of whether Russia see itself as some local empire or as a democratic state. NATO and US are not friends of Russia anyway and won't be its friends untill Russia won't become their satellite while Russia wants to stay independent. Support rebbels there preventing Ukraine becoming a EU and NATO member? - it costs Russia a lot already politically and economically so it's not a perfect decision either. What I say here is that the way Russia choosen by supproting rebels is not something new. US did the same thing in other countries supporting rebbels when they wanted to change the goverment of these countries to more loyal for US or just creat a mess there. US actually supported rebbels and revolution in Ukrain first initiating all this mess. Then Russia had to react by supporting the opposite force. When you speak about people protesting against corruption and so, I do agree that it's a valid point to protets but it still not a valid reason for US to come there and creat a mess just to have a mess and nothing else. Lybia wasn't a democratic state for sure, but people there actually had a better life before US and NATO decided that Lybia is not democratic enough. What's the result? A lot of people killed and a complete mess and anarchy there now. The same thing happend with Irac already. US came there and created a complete mess as a result. Looking at this I am comming to an idea that creating a mess all other world making other countries weaker by stimulating some local conflicts and civil wars there is a real strategy of US in fact to stay the only big, stable and powerfull country in the world of chaos.

I thought only children believe in generous US that supports protests and revolutions in various countries over the world just becouse US loves liberty and freedom so much that it wants to share it with all other nations . Now I see that I was wrong. Even some old people belive in these fairtales. Steve, you are from US, right? If so, you live in the country where big brother watching you even more closely now than it was in USSR evil empire or in modern Russia. Did you hear anything about "big data"? US goverment watching all citizens automatically without any adjudgement. US goverment also use tortures against citizens of other countries. I would say that some European countries are much more democratic places to live than modern US in fact. Do you really beilve that such country as US really want to save other nations from some kind of dictatorship while US slowly transforms into George Orwell's novel itself? US invades other countries or support protests and revolutions there if US has some real profit from it. Why US won't invade north korea now and won't free poor north korean people from dictatorship? No profit for US to invade there, so they don't care about poor north korean people. Why US supported protests and even revolution in Ukraine? Cause Ukraine is a Russian sattelite. US treats Russia as an opponent and will do everything to make Russia weaker. Taking Ukraine from Russian influence will make Russia weaker. Creating a conflict between Russia and Europe will make both Europe and Russia weaker. US doesn't need nor strong Russia nor strong Europe nor let them to cooperate. The same way US acts in Asia against China or supports various conflicts in middle east. So now Russia and US fighting for Ukraine in fact. Russia supports local rebells and provide them with weapon (sure they wouldn't be able to fight against regular Ukraine army without a weapon) , money and mentorship I suppose. US supports the new Urkanian goverment and provide it with money, political support, mentorship, will lilkely send some weapon to it soon either, and pushing Russia with sanctions of course. The funny thing here is that Russia called and prosecuted as agressor in this case while US did the same things over the world (US supported Libian rebbels figting against their govermernt for example) and nobody prosecuted US for this simply becouse US is a superpower and can do anything it wants. It just shows that we live in a world of double standards. What the hell US did in Irac or Afganistan or Lybia? All these countries have nothing to do with US in fact. When USSR invanded Afganistan or when Russia has some interests at Ukraine now it have a clear reason for it at least cause these countries are USSR/Russian neighbours so it's a matter of Russian national security either what way these countries following by. The same as US had a valid reason to be furious about Cuba being USSR satellite and about USSR missiles at Cuba, Russia has a valid reason to be furrious about Urkaine becoming US satellite and by possible US/NATO missiles at Ukraine in the future.

I don't really bother whether your a war expert and historian or not. I just read what you write here and you write quite weird things for anybody who made even a minimal research about Ukraine and Russian armies capabilities and their current state. 1. What about diference in millitary budgets I mentioned before (3rd place in the word for Russia, 37th place in the world for Ukraine)? Do you really belive that country which spends so little on it's army can stand against the country which spends so much? 2. What about the fact that Ukraine has almost no aviation? 160 outdated planes vs 2000 russian ones where at least a half is modern or upgraded? 160 planes is a very optimistic evaluation in fact becouse they lost some of these planes already. Besides nobody knows how many of these planes can fly becouse they obviously didn't spent enough money on them before. They also doen't have enough pilots since they didn't invest enough money in training either. So Russia will simply rule the sky in any massive conflict with Urkaine. 3. Ukrainian army might got some experience durring the last year but they also lost most of their best armoured vehicles and helicopters in these fights.They lost so many t64 already that they now even take old t72a from reserve on pair with btr70 and other equipment 30 years old. Do you belive that equipment which spent 30 years somewhere in reserve is a good equipment in fact? To summarize if a massive Russian invasion happen and NATO won't help Ukraine, instead of some world war II tactics with close range fights Russia would rather play with Ukraine in a modern war using great advantage in aviation, artillery and recon - the same way US did in Irac against outdated Saddam forces. What for to have a tank vs tank battle if enemy tanks can be eliminated with modern ground assault planes or AT helos which Russia has for example or with ground ATGMs Kornet - 5500m range, 1300mm penetration...

They were probably slaughtering each other but so what? Why NATO should bomb on side of the conflict (the one which they like more)? It was still a NATO agression against this country. Russian peace-making forces were there in accordance with the resolution №1244 of UN while NATO bombed the country on it's own just becouse they wanted to do so...

I know you guys in the West have been fed a long diet of USSR wants to invade you and destroy you various other crazy stories Sounds weird for you, right? The truth is that both sides during cold war were ready to invade and destroy each other if things go wrong. What is really weird that cold war ended but NATO still exists and even becoming larger. Who was the enemy of NATO after cold war ended and why NATO countries invaded other countries several times? What should non NATO countries think and feel when NATO bombed Yugoslavia? Did Yugoslavia attack NATO first? We are not kids to belive in fairtales about open hearted military block which exists just for self-defence. The world is a cruel place where different countries compete for resources and dominance. NATO is an instrument that allows several western countries rule the world and say other countries outside NATO what they should or shouldn't do. Fist law on pair with economics power is still the real law of the modern world. If you don't see it you are an actual victim of propaganda.

Why Russia shouldn't see it as a treat? NATO was created even before Warsaw PACT as a dirrect opponent to USSR durring cold war. You are wrong saying that western plans was only about stopping the Soviets invading. West actually had some offensive plans either. The first plan called Peancer made by US in 1945 (even before NATO creation) was about bombing USSR with nuclear weapon which USSR didn't have yet. While cold war ended in 91 and Warsaw PACT with USSR disappeared, NATO still exists and even growing taking new members, but not Russia. NATO and US as a real leader of NATO performed several invasions already to various countries over the world like Irac, Afganistan, Yugoslavia while these countries didn't attack NATO, so it was offence actions from US and NATO. Of course they stated some reasons for such invasions but it was invasions anyway. So how Russia can be sure that NATO or US wouldn't like to invade it for some reason sooner or later?

So you admit that Ukraine cannot fight against Russia without dirrect NATO support? Nice, that's what I was talking about actually. It's not 19-th century anymore to evaluate army power by pairs of boots first of all. LOL. How many US soldiers were fighting in Irac in 2003 against how many Saddam soldiers? Internet sources says US forces had 5 divisions against 23 divisions of Saddam? So what? US army was much more powerfull becouse of better equipment and training. Why is Russia kvetching so about Ukraine choosing the West's apron strings over Moscow's? - you ask... Well why USA was and still furious about Cuba choosing the red way? The answer is simple - no country in the world would like it's neighbours getting influenced by its opponents too much. So Russia treats possible Ukraine affiliation to EU and NATO as a direct threat to Russian national security. It's an obvious logic.

What are you even talking about? Do you have Google? Use it! According to open sources Ukrainian army has 160 millitary jets + 23 transport planes in service now. Almost all of them they got from USSR - so they are quite outdated and Ukraine didn't upgrade them. Russian Army has 2 000 millitary jets in service now (not counting those that are in reserve). A big part of them are made in USSR either but many are upgraded already. Besides Russian army gets some new jets every year. In 2014 they got 90 completly new jets for example. It's a half of all Ukranian Air force! The scale difference is simmilar for other weapons: like helos, tanks, artillery e.t.c. I don't even speak here about level of training and about how many people can Russia mobilize if it needs so, while Ukraine is almost out of it's reserves already. Russia spent 87,8$ milliards on it's army in 2013. It's in a 3-rd place of millitary expences in the world after US and China. Ukraine spent 5$ milliards on it's army in 2013. It's in a 37-th place of millitary expences in the world. So, again, what are you even talking about? Without direct NATO millitary help, Ukraine has no a single chance to stand against Russian army for more than a couple of weeks in the best case. The reason why Russian army is not in Kiev yet is simple - what's the reason for Russia to take Kiev in fact? Nobody needs world war III here just to expand a big country a little bit more. While Russia took Crimea becouse majority of people there really wanted to be with Russia and it was historically a part of Russa, while it supports Donbas becouse a lot of people there were isnpired with Crimea precedent and it's histotically a russian land either with russian population mostly, it would be suicide for Russia to go to Kiev simply becouse most of the people there are Ukranians and they don't want to be in Russia. So even if Russia capture Kiev with millitary forces what profit would it get? Nothing. Just problems.

Are you serious? OMG... Ukraninan and Russian armies are simmply incomparable to each other from the point of scale, equipment and trainig. The simple fact that Ukraine has almost no aviation says a lot. It's like discussing how long Mexico can stand against US if US decide to invade it - a week maybe? I have nothing against Ukraine and actually hope that such a war won't happen, but they simply didn't invest enough money and efforts in their army for years and it's impossible to build a powerfull army just at once even if you get millions of dollars and some equipment for it from EU and US. Ukranian officials actually understand it and say that in the case of the massive russian invasion they won't be able to stop it without dirrect NATO help.