No. The government is saying “believe us” with no supporting or corroborating evidence. None.
On the other hand Ukraine itself is saying it’s not a crisis…
On the other hand Ukraine itself is saying it’s not a crisis…
This is such a dishonest take.
The Ukrainian government is downplaying the Russian threat because it doesn't want its tax paying population to flee to Western Europe.
Our devs in Ukraine are expecting war soon and are looking into relocating with their families.
It's, we have proof of this thing, so we're announcing it because that's possibly a good in and of itself.
And the concrete actions we're taking are deploying some troops to NATO countries that want to host them and sending weapons to Ukraine. Neither of these seem like unreasonable actions, considering the numerical disparity between local Russian units and NATO ones.
So in the end they'd still be saying "believe us." And those who don't can call it unverifiable fake evidence.
"Sure, here is a high resolution video allowing everyone to figure out the locations of your spy cameras, and btw we got the hint from Ivan Snitchovsky, a double agent aged 35, he lives here and this is a picture of him. Oops, he's probably dead by now and a valuable source of intelligence is gone!"
I mean goddam it the gov of Ukraine is saying hold up, we don’t see the same alarm you do.
That was two decades ago and totally different people and political party. Be skeptical, but don't just be blindly anti.
> I mean goddam it the gov of Ukraine is saying hold up, we don’t see the same alarm you do.
Odds are pretty good that they see it the same way, they just don't want their economy to crater while waiting.
There's reason to be skeptic but it's also extremely naive to think evidence of that nature can just be handed as proofs without blowing multiple sources
"No supporting evidence" oh I'm sure there's plenty of circumstantial evidence (like the satellite photos). Putin knows how to play the game of plausible deniability together with plausible aggressiveness.
"Oh but Iraq", we should definitely remember about it. It doesn't help that Saddam played himself. No kidding, he's like a person acting like he's shoplifting something but in the end isn't. Except you just don't get told off at the store door, you get invaded and overthrown.
The strategy of appeasement is known to fail because it emboldens dictators like Hitler or Putin to always want and take more.
Putin already has taken a large chunk of Ukraine and Georgia with invasions that launched during a prior olympic event.
He needs to be stopped so that Ukraine doesn't end up getting another Russian imposed genocide and the world doesnt't end up in WW3.
At least in case of Georgia, this is incorrect. The "invasion" was initiated by Georgian advance on Tskhinvali, and as a final result of this "invasion", no territorial changes have occurred, and the Russian troops haven't moved anywhere they haven't been for centuries already (including all the way up to 2008). If the goal was to invade Georgia, how come when it was all done nobody moved even a mile closer to Tbilisi, and even that clown fool Saakashvili was allowed to continue to embarrass himself in the same role?
What, exactly, was the goal, and the result of this "invasion"?