International Russia/Ukraine Megathread V8

Status
Not open for further replies.
It wasn't even called Kievan Rus back then. That is a modern term. It was called Russkaya Zemlja - "Rus Land." It is only called Kievan Rus to differentiate it from the various other Rus regions that existed throughout history.

Kiev was the capital of an alliance of different tribal polities. It was only the capital because its economy was more developed thanks to its trade routes. Ukrainians weren't really the founders of it (they were Norse anyway). Many parts of modern Ukraine were some of the last regions to join the alliance.
Regads to current ties.
IMHO they like 99,9% of russians doesn't know a fuck about Nordic stuff.
1. It had nothing common with 1900 and later germans...by ideology alone.
2. Nazis were idiots in norse core and true it's soul and value. With 0 doubts just patients....
Etc....

Ukr mentality is far from Norse stuff.
While some modified signs they are using.
Nothing wrong. Commies used alchemists, occultists and dreamers symbol pentagram etc stuff....
Again the same IMHO.
 
I'm just playing devil's advocate and countering what I see as an overcorrection to Russian versions of history. Russians indeed have a nonsense version of east slavic history. What I have seen in recent years however is practically a mirror image to this; trading Russo-centrism for Ukraino-centrism. But just more nonsense nonetheless.

It's certainly more accurate than to say Ukraine doesn't exist, never existed, and currently shouldn't exist by force.

The Rurikid dynasty founded most of the major cities that went on to become the principalities that formed both historic and modern Russia and Ukraine.

Kiev was their ancestral seat of power for the majority of that history. It's not too far fetched at all the say Moscow was founded by Kiev, not the other way around. And sure, they were initially a foreign dynasty, but by the time Moscow and other cities were founded, they had lived there and intermingled for centuries. It's not like they just invaded the week prior to founding these cities, but for centuries.

They were in modern terms Ukrainian by geography based on where they lived and were the ancestors of both nations.
 
Two reasons: 1) for about ten years, the US has viewed Russia as a direct adversary, for a variety of reasons, and because of that we 2) seek to weaken and limit Russian power by diplomacy and by proxy. This means the US is looking for ways to weaken and reduce Russia's ability to cause trouble. The easiest and least costly way to do this is to pull away Russian satellite states that are economically important to Russia. This was attempted in 2020 in Belarus, 2021 in Kazakhstan, Armenia, etc but the big prize was Ukraine- which had much of the Russian defense plant, was deeply economically intertwined with the Russian economy, and hosted its Black Sea fleet. That's the diplomatic/intelligence moves. The US also will supply forces close to Russia's border with military equipment. The whole purpose of supplying Ukranian forces (without our intelligence, money and arms, they would have lost) is to weaken and overextend the Russian state. The end goal is regime change probably, but simply reducing Russia's ability to project power is more realistic. This is just grand chessboard power politics, plain and simple- Ukraine's form of government does not matter.
About Ukraine you are wrong.
We didn't wanted to see them nor in NATO nor EU.

Belarus stuff was cos old paranoid dictator ordered to intercept western owned airplane flying form Greece to Lithuania.
And sorry guys calling Lithuania as mice, it is more stable and important country than Greece.
Cos they have 70% world's market for f s lasers etc....
For sure dumb area...+ food exporter etc...
 
It's certainly more accurate than to say Ukraine doesn't exist, never existed, and currently shouldn't exist by force.

The Rurikid dynasty founded most of the major cities that went on to become the principalities that formed both historic and modern Russia and Ukraine.

Kiev was their ancestral seat of power for the majority of that history. It's not too far fetched at all the say Moscow was founded by Kiev, not the other way around. And sure, they were initially a foreign dynasty, but by the time Moscow and other cities were founded, they had lived there and intermingled for centuries. It's not like they just invaded the week prior to founding these cities, but for centuries.

They were in modern terms Ukrainian by geography based on where they lived and were the ancestors of both nations.

The origin of what we now call Ukraine and the Ukrainian people probably didn't even begin in Kiev, but in modern day western Ukraine.

The main principalities that emerged after the break up of Rus were Halych-Volhynia in western Ukraine and Vladimir-Suzdal around Moscow. People from Kiev/central Ukraine mostly either migrated west to western Ukraine or north to Russia. Kiev was actually subordinate to Halych and Lviv at this time.

Halych-Volhynia existed as a sovereign state for a while before falling to Poland at which point the Polish empire expanded eastward to and a bit past the Dniepr river (and north of the steppe). The former Rus in western and central Ukraine became largely Polonized (to say yes in Russian is Da, in Ukrainian is Tak, in Polish is Tak).

During this Ukrainian ethnogenesis, Kiev was at the eastern periphery of the Polish empire and was rather unpopulated. People eventually did move back there though.

Here's a population density map of Ukraine (well, the Ukrainian part of the Polish Kingdom) during the 16th century. Central Ukraine was largely unpopulated except for Podolia in the south. And this was after they had repopulated it somewhat.

R6uUVi9.png
 


4 crashes in 5 weeks? Everything is fine


Shitty maintenance standard's, corruption, and Putin ruining the Russian Aerospace industry will do that. Also doesn't help that su-30 is long over do for replacement.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top