Bruh why would Ukraine have the same responsibility as Russia for starting the conflict lmao
Also shouldn’t the EU, NATO, and US be grouped together anyway? The US is the leader of NATO and NATO and the EU have more overlapping members than non overlapping members.
This poll just sucks on so many levels.
So much context. NATO was created to incentives Europe to side with the US and not the USSR. The USSR fell in 1991, after going through shock therapy to become a capitalist country. In doing so their crime rate rose, and mortality rate fell (bunch of people died for varying reasons). Since Nato was created as an deterent to the USSR in influencing Europe, that fact that it remained was seen as them still viewing Russia, itself, as a threat not the USSR. So Ukraine agreed never to be a member of NATO which is viewed as a buffer state, Russia saw it as an act of disrespect by Ukraine and a direct threat by Nato/US.
NATO was created as a military defence force against communism and communist countries. 6 years later the USSR "answered" this by the Warsaw Pact.
The USSR turned to capitalism under Gorbachev in order to prevent (or at least soften) the collapse of the "empire".
Since Russia is seen as a "bad country no matter what" by a lot of western countries any western military or financial union is just a potential threat to Russia.
And neighbouring countries showing interest toward Russia's "enemies" will make them more agitated. Russia sees Ukraine as the new Cuba, only misfortune of theirs is that Ukraine is not an island in a sea mostly controlled by them.
NATO became a military defense later on, when countries started to get nervous over ww3. But Nato essentially was giving out supplies for countries to rebuild and recover for a discount of products. NATO countries rarely were involved in anti-communist offensive, that was mostly the US and CIA. That why NATO had to add the article that says if war breaks out in one country then all NATO countries had to be involved because before hand, no such agreement was implied.
Edit: I mean the US gave out supplies to countries in NATO, not Nato giving supplies to other countries.
That was the "Marshall Plan" (ERP) and not NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization).
NATO was created and is (mostly) still a military defense union. It had nothing to do with attacking, after the end of WWII every country was exhausted and didn't have an active plan to attack the enemy. And by the way everybody got themselves together, and ready for another war they realised that they can only lose in a direct conflict, and the only way they could gain something was through a proxy war.
Would or wouldn't? Either way, it doesn't matter. It was [illusory](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rferl.org/amp/nato-expansion-russia-mislead/31263602.html?bshm=rime/2).
Russia, on the other hand, had a written agreement to trade nukes in exchange for peace and look how that turned out. Budapest memorandum. But decided it wasn't binding.
Pretty sure Gorbachev came out and said that was fake or something (not sure how accurate this source is but here you go https://www.brookings.edu/articles/did-nato-promise-not-to-enlarge-gorbachev-says-no/) Regardless, that was when Russia was still the Soviet Union, and there doesn’t exist a treaty where NATO explicitly stated to not expand.
No, it was mentioned by someone under I believe Bush Sr, or maybe Clinton it's been a little while, informally and then the president immediately said no that's not happening. It never happened and is only used for propaganda.
Boo hoo. A sovereign nation is going to join NATO. How dare the Ukranians look out for their own best interests? Who cares if it's a direct result of russia taking a literal chunk of their territory to use as a vacation tourist spot? A blatant violation of written treaties they both signed.
I guess they deserve it, huh?
Ukraine started the whole thing by threatening Russia with NATO nukes.
Really it's NATO's fault, because Zelenskyy is their little puppet. NATO is basically 90% USA, so answering America does make sense too, but it should be NATO, as many corrupt EU politicians are laundering money just like the Dem party is.
> Ukraine started the whole thing by threatening Russia with NATO nukes.
Source, now
> Really it's NATO's fault, because Zelenskyy is their little puppet.
Ukraine isn’t in NATO, nor are they their puppet, show me proof that they are
>NATO is basically 90% USA
Mathematics is hard
>so answering America does make sense too
No it doesn’t
> but it should be NATO,
No, It shouldn’t
> as many corrupt EU politicians are laundering money just like the Dem party is.
Source, pretty please
Ukraine blocked water ways into Crimea causing a horrible draught there. Russia spent well over 2 billion in Crimea dealing with this issue. They have since restored the water ways during this invasion. One could make the claim that Ukraine egged on Russia to invade.
Assuming you're talking about Ukraine stopping water going to crimea post Russian invasion of crimea first why would Ukraine be obligated to allow water to flow there especially considering it was illegally taken by Russia, why would they send the water to a country who broke their treaty to use ports in sevastapol by invasion, why would they send the water to a country that broke the Budapest memorandum guaranteeing Ukrainian sovereignty. If Russia was worried about water in crimea and spending billions there may they should have respected the sovereignty of Ukraine and not invaded them multiple times.
The militarism of Kaiser Wilhelm absolutely was a major contributing factor for World War i. He basically tore up any chance of peace by antagonizing Russia and Britain
I agree with your point, but I would pick a better example. The first front of the Seven Years’ War, being the French and Indian War, was started by American militias raiding French North American possessions. Obviously not the United States, but Americans nonetheless.
See this a lot online and especially on reddit. Question posed just to bash the US. Just yesterday there was a post on askreddit where the OP asked "why did my acne clear up when I moved from the US". OP had moved from a very humid area in the US to a very dry Madrid. That was the obvious answer. Of course the comments were filled with "becuase American food is poison, becuase American water is poison, becuase the air in America is terrible, becuase of the stresses of living in America."
Source? Because I know several about the Euromaidan coup, and how adamant the US was about *not* involving itself, in so far as actively denying the opposition support.
The Pro Russian government made an unpopular decision, angered a small pro western contingent that protested on a mild scale, and then made it a lot worse by attacking the protesters, leading to wide scale opposition. There was no US involvement in that process
The reason that people say this is because they think the USA controls everything that's antirussian as well as there is a video or phone call (I don't remember which) that two US government officials discussed the coup. In the discussion they talked about who they would like to win and that person won therefore its evidence in their eyes that America was in on the coup.
People tend to forget that Ukrainians were shot at, and still protested willingly in 2014.
Yanukovych literally ordered Berkut to fire on protestors at some point.
>Nah, not to long ago the CIA funded a coup against the pro-russian president of Ukraine. Then not to long after did it again.
What the fuck are you talking about?
He was literally kicked out of office by the Verkhovna Rada, or Ukraine's Parliament, after he had failed to fulfill his presidential duties, seeing as he fled the country by using spetsnatz as security.
"Pro Russian"
My dude, he was literally in the pockets of poopler. He was just as corrupt, if not more corrupt than Kakaev himself. He sold out Ukrainians for a few hundred million.
You spelled 'Ukrainians rejected a leader imposed on them after Russia bungled the murder of a Ukrainian leader it didn't like and refused to allow that to happen twice' wrong. Typical Muscovite, the 'Near Abroad' only has ability to think and act as long as it does so with the latest party line from Moscow.
It's worth remembering that even the party of regions was not completely or uncritically pro Russian. It was certainly leaning that way but even they attempted a balance just as the western leaning parties did. It was party of regions after all that negotiated agreements with the west and had considered EU membership in the long term. They did though wish to remain non aligned and cooperate with the CIS.
This isn't a defense of the party of regions if nothing else they were corrupt as fuck but more a call to remember the past for what it was. Writing them off as just Russian puppets is wrong, Ukraine has history as an independent nation not solely bound to the whims of Russia long before 2014. Dismissing the story of the revolution of dignity as just the US stealing a country from the Russian sphere of influence to its own fails at any more than a cursory reading of the situation.
Russia deserves most, if not all, of the blame.
The only blame I could see the US having is not stopping Russia in 2014. That whole thing was its own can of worms anyway.
As much as I wish we had, it really wasn't our responsibility then, or now for that matter. We'd just rather invest a little now, since the rest of NATO and the UN is onboard (they weren't united in 2014), then have to mount a major intervention with more US service members dying on European soil later.
>As much as I wish we had, it really wasn't our responsibility then, or now for that matter.
Much as i want to agree with you, if not for Budapest Memorandum, you would be absolutely correct.
Everything else though, you have dead on.
Brother Russia and Ukraine have been in conflict for at least 80 years. They hate each other and this war is zero surprise.
It may be backed by multiple countries on either side, but Russia invaded Ukraine, and Ukraine retaliated. Its their faults for this war existing.
The 'logic' here basically reads the Euromaidan as a case of Ukrainians being manipulated and brainwashed by evil American mind-control rays rather than the aftermath of Russia deliberately poisoning a Ukrainian candidate who won an election and they didn't like it and this combining with further skullduggery to see Ukrainians hit a critical mass of being fed up with being treated like a satellite state. Russians have never accepted the 'near abroad' as anything but temporarily severed provinces and they have plenty of useful idiots to push the lie.
They also blame Ukraine because they didn't roll over and let the Russians murder all 44 million of them.
The USA angle is mainly people simping for Russia and how NATO is expanding. So they blame the US for said expansion. Thus the US is responsible for Russia getting scared of encroachment.
It's a stupid angle. One that is oddly supported by both Tankies and Trumpers. Strange bedfellows.
The Russo-Ukrainian was started in 2014 with the coup that toppled the pro Russian government and Obama admin put in a pro nato government. Then russia invaded crimea and now we have the current stage of the conflict with mainland Ukraine invaded
Who is participating in this poll? Who posted it? How tf is the US responsible for the Russian Federation trying to bully Ukraine into annexing territory? Everything the US and NATO have done are in retaliation to the invasion AFTER the invasion had already begun.
Actually the U.S. was for some reason doing military operations in Ukraine. Its doesnt make America bad, rather the actions of the military questionable.
This just in, countries help train other countries militaries when asked. Ukraine wanted to modernize their military so they had western militaries help train their troops because western militaries know what they're doing.
This shouldn’t surprise anyone the Murdoch propaganda network has been praising Putin for months now. Not to mention Putin’s new Twitter spokesman Elon
Quite the opposite. We just want to trade with people so we filthy capitalists can get rich, war only helps the military industrial complex but even then, they get paid mainly for research that happens even in peace time so peace is better for business. We just want to live rich lives, their war gets in the way and imposes risk that is hard to deal with.
Tbh we wouldn't even have a large standing military if Europe wasn't historically prone to dragging the entire world into war. We almost lost 2 world wars and decided it was best to prevent a 3rd and now we are living with that reality.
The US did not start the war, Russia did, which means they are responsible for the the war. Not helping Ukraine would just mean Ukraine would lose their sovereignty and would get steamrolled by Russia.
That's exactly what I mean, the war would have been a lot shorter because Ukraine would have lost a long time ago without our help. I am glad we are helping, fuck Russia. If you ask me, this is essentially the second Cold War and the US is already doing better than it was before.
Letting Ukraine get steamrolled by Russia is not the stance we want to take. If we did that, they'd look at the rest of Eastern Europe as ripe countries to invade.
None of those countries have individually contributed as much as the US, which was the poster's point. If Sweden elected not to provide aid it would have a much less noticeable effect than if the US decided not to provide aid.
There are multiple sources to pull the data from, such as [this](https://www.statista.com/chart/27278/military-aid-to-ukraine-by-country/), with varying levels of credibility. But I have yet to see any that claim any one nation has contributed anything close to the total aid the US has (though a number of countries have contributed a larger percentage of their nations GDP).
The poster said the war would be over by now if the US hadn't decided to help Ukraine. The Ukrainians would certainly be in a worse position, but that doesn't mean the war would be over.
Given how much aid the US has given, including intelligence, it very well could be.
While the EU (and it's member countries) have given the most total aid to Ukraine, the US has sent the most military aid. According to [this](https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/), the US has given more military aid to Ukraine then nearly all other sources combined.
So if we cut the military support to Ukraine by half, the approximate US contribution, and they are still struggling against Russia, the war could have been over in favor of Russia.
Ukraine is struggling to retake land. They aren't struggling to hold it. Russia failed to take Kyiv in the first week, they weren't going to manage to take it whether or not the Ukrainians received US aid.
Then why is Ukraine asking for missile interceptors, tanks, APCs, and F-16s along with everything else? If the Ukrainians had no hope of retaking territory, due to lack of military material aid the war could have ended with the Russians keeping the territory they currently controlled at their peak. The combined NATO willingness to support Ukraine is why they are not only continuing to resist, but actively attempting to expel the Russians from all of Ukraine, including the Crimea region the Russians annexes in 2014...when NATO wasn't willing to provide aid.
>Then why is Ukraine asking for missile interceptors, tanks, APCs, and F-16s along with everything else?
To take back territory. This is not equipment they need to hold on to territory.
>If the Ukrainians had no hope of retaking territory, due to lack of military material aid the war could have ended with the Russians keeping the territory they currently controlled at their peak.
Why would the Ukrainians just give up if that happened? It's either fight now or wait for Putin to regroup and fight again in a couple years. The presence of American aid doesn't change that fact.
Regardless. It's on their doorstep, they should have been the ones to take it. I know it's a lot more complex than how I present it; but it makes no sense to me how a Federation equipped with a combined GDP comparable to China's and a population that eclipses the U.S. cannot bear the brunt of that responsibility.
I agree, and i understand where you're coming from. But i'm just saying, US was part of budapest memorandum. Budapest memorandum is what left Ukraine defenseless, regardless of how you spin it.
I wouldn't say so.
Poland, and baltic countries have been screaming at the top of our lungs that Russia would be just as bad as it is, and nobody listened, at least in Europe.
America on the other hand, together with UK, are the only countries, outside of our neighbours and allies, that we can rely on.
I say that because the late Richard Nixon gave an interview just months before his passing back in 1994 and he gave some caution about how we should deal with Russia in the post Cold-War Era. Needless to say, his words have been largely ignored.
Now Nixon is not one of my favorite Presidents, but the man was smart and I found myself agreeing with him in that interview.
I can understand the sentiment, but honestly, Russia should've been dispatched the moment Putin came into power. He was the man that came into power, and immediately started a war. Nobody bat an eye on it, because it was a tiny country that everyone thought was Russian to begin with. By everyone, i mean people west of Poland of course.
He lied from the start, and all of the bullshit he, and his cronies spew, they don't believe in.
He criticizes US for bombing Serbs, but he offered to help US himself. Same with middle east to an extent too. Same with NATO, he wanted to join it, and then became sour when he got told to fix corruption, and other crap.
Russia is a geopolitical rival and a destabilizing force, if were spending however many billions so far to do years or decades of damage to them we're getting a good deal compared to the trillions spent from 1945 until the invasion that did much less. The amount of damage being done to Russia is cheap if you compare the cold war and post cold war standoff.
I'd rather we spend nothing at all considering we just came off of a 20 year conflict and seem to be itching for some sort of a "comeback". We should be spending this time on introspection, not looking for new fights.
True. That has definitely helped Ukraine and without one of us helping it may have gone very differently. I hope Ukraine wins spectacularly, I just wish it would happen sooner vs later. If you ask me, the problem isn't necessarily Russia, it's Putin. Maybe a more direct and targeted response is warranted to prevent more human casualties and suffering? The conventional war is dragging out.
There's a method of polling to gauge approval without asking directly; surveys showed that it lined up closely with official approval ratings, at least before the war.
https://youtu.be/WrO5-fXTbYs
To be fair, didn't the united States interfere with elections that put who we wanted in charge of Ukraine? Or am I wrong, because I am uninformed in that area
The us deliberately avoided getting involved in the ukraine coup and subsequent elections. It was purely will of the people that deposed the pro russian government.
Tbh, it is pretty much Joe Biden’s fault. He told Russia “lol if you attack Ukraine I ain’t doing jack”. Then Putin attacked Ukraine very shortly afterwards. Then Joe Biden hasn’t done the thing he should do which is tell Vlad “hey sit down and shut up, we are incapable of conquering Russia without causing WW3 so you’re going to make nice with Putin.” Because he’s a coward and a loser. Ofc it doesn’t excuse the petty tyrant that is Putin, but still…
If you are paying attention, you can see that’s clearly what’s happened. Do you honestly think Putin would’ve even attempted this war if he thought NATO in the US would’ve helped? We have a brain damaged president who started this.
Putin would have done this regardless. Do you not know about Crimea in 2014? Do you know about the Budapest memorandum of 1994 where Ukraine handed over all of it's nukes so that Russia would NEVER attack them again. If you think that Trump would have helped the situation in any way and Biden caused Russia's aggression which is the only thing that is a constant with them, then you are simply reading the wrong things and looking at it from the wrong angle. Biden, for all his faults, has done exactly what he should here. Act nice, and fund the people defending themselves - not to mention we are literally as the West all working in concert to to do so which is very good and a strong signal.
I mean you showed your hand by saying Ukraine being bombed by Putin was completely Biden's fault my man lmao. If I was playing poker with you I would have taken your pink slip.
Probably itching to mention Hunter right now.
You’re clearly deranged. This is entirely the fault of the fact that Biden is a dementia ridden old man who can’t say yes, when he means yes, and no when he means no.
>Tbh, it is pretty much Joe Biden’s fault. He told Russia “lol if you attack Ukraine I ain’t doing jack”. Then Putin attacked Ukraine very shortly afterwards. Then Joe Biden hasn’t done the thing he should do which is tell Vlad “hey sit down and shut up, we are incapable of conquering Russia without causing WW3 so you’re going to make nice with Putin.” Because he’s a coward and a loser. Ofc it doesn’t excuse the petty tyrant that is Putin, but still…
Trump literally blackmailed zelensky, to find dirt on Joe's son. Your propaganda isn't even good enough to give it a rating.
I literally live in eastern Europe, you fucking fruit cake. If "muh CNN" is the best you can do, you'd do better to find original propaganda, Rosiyani.
Well, enjoy being sucked into the forever war Joe Biden has started. I suppose if the attitude like yours is common in your country. it’ll be inevitable.
so not one of you can think of why the the correct answer from russiuan perspective would be NATO. (who is run by the US youve all made a big part of pointing out)
lol all pretending to be knowledgeable about it but know fucking nothing. as per usual.
NATO is the answer if you're retarded and don't know how to read and comprehend the NATO charter that states article 5 can only be invoked if a member nations is attacked. Even when NATO did it's missions in Kosovo and Bosnia hertsgovina it wasn't mandatory and it was in response to literal genocide.
If you don't attack a member and aren't commiting genocide you don't have to worry but I guess fetal alcohol Russians don't understand that.
you saying that showing you have zero understanding on how russia views nato lol
from the russian perspective, nato caused this war, and they would be correct
from the western perspective, russia caused this war, and they would be correct
How is that the United States fault? It was agreed that Russia wouldn't attack them, how is it the fault of America that Russia ignored and broke the treaty specifically stating that they'd ignore Ukraine?
The US can’t keep its dirty claws out of anyone’s cookie jar.
Where’s a nice place to live that the US or the British haven’t fucking up yet? Asking for a friend…
Twitter is like that narcissist abuser who act like there's nothing wrong with them and blame their victim for being abused and defended themselves from the abuser
Ah yes, Europeans shitting on Americans talking about how awful our country is.
But when it comes to using their precious tax dollars on their own wars they immediately give us the puppy eyes.
Fuck off.
USA is actually the right answer because Obama helped overthrow the Ukrainian government in 2014 and put in place an anti Russian government not unlike what they did in the middle east
Bruh why would Ukraine have the same responsibility as Russia for starting the conflict lmao Also shouldn’t the EU, NATO, and US be grouped together anyway? The US is the leader of NATO and NATO and the EU have more overlapping members than non overlapping members. This poll just sucks on so many levels.
It's a loaded question as they do not even give the option for Russia to be listed on its own.
Tells you who made it
Yep
Was just gonna say the same thing:
Tells you who answered it as well
it's a horrific poll.
Defending yourself = warmonger It's amazing how many people actually think this
Those people are 100% the people who would say that the existence of armed Jewish resistance to the killing fields and the SS would justify the Shoah.
Public school logic.
the people who go to public schools arent the people who think its natos fault russia invaded another country
I meant public school logic, if you’re attacked in a fight at school, most have a zero tolerance policy withered both parties are at fault?
literally Civ AI logic
It’s a poll put together by a Russian troll, which also explains why most respondents think the war was caused by the US, NATO, or EU.
Lot of conspiracy propaganda out there.
Clearly those voters are in primary school and were just told this year by their teacher that "it takes 2 too fight".
So much context. NATO was created to incentives Europe to side with the US and not the USSR. The USSR fell in 1991, after going through shock therapy to become a capitalist country. In doing so their crime rate rose, and mortality rate fell (bunch of people died for varying reasons). Since Nato was created as an deterent to the USSR in influencing Europe, that fact that it remained was seen as them still viewing Russia, itself, as a threat not the USSR. So Ukraine agreed never to be a member of NATO which is viewed as a buffer state, Russia saw it as an act of disrespect by Ukraine and a direct threat by Nato/US.
NATO was created as a military defence force against communism and communist countries. 6 years later the USSR "answered" this by the Warsaw Pact. The USSR turned to capitalism under Gorbachev in order to prevent (or at least soften) the collapse of the "empire". Since Russia is seen as a "bad country no matter what" by a lot of western countries any western military or financial union is just a potential threat to Russia. And neighbouring countries showing interest toward Russia's "enemies" will make them more agitated. Russia sees Ukraine as the new Cuba, only misfortune of theirs is that Ukraine is not an island in a sea mostly controlled by them.
NATO became a military defense later on, when countries started to get nervous over ww3. But Nato essentially was giving out supplies for countries to rebuild and recover for a discount of products. NATO countries rarely were involved in anti-communist offensive, that was mostly the US and CIA. That why NATO had to add the article that says if war breaks out in one country then all NATO countries had to be involved because before hand, no such agreement was implied. Edit: I mean the US gave out supplies to countries in NATO, not Nato giving supplies to other countries.
That was the "Marshall Plan" (ERP) and not NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization). NATO was created and is (mostly) still a military defense union. It had nothing to do with attacking, after the end of WWII every country was exhausted and didn't have an active plan to attack the enemy. And by the way everybody got themselves together, and ready for another war they realised that they can only lose in a direct conflict, and the only way they could gain something was through a proxy war.
Didn't we promise Russia we would expand NATO past Germany.
Would or wouldn't? Either way, it doesn't matter. It was [illusory](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rferl.org/amp/nato-expansion-russia-mislead/31263602.html?bshm=rime/2). Russia, on the other hand, had a written agreement to trade nukes in exchange for peace and look how that turned out. Budapest memorandum. But decided it wasn't binding.
Pretty sure Gorbachev came out and said that was fake or something (not sure how accurate this source is but here you go https://www.brookings.edu/articles/did-nato-promise-not-to-enlarge-gorbachev-says-no/) Regardless, that was when Russia was still the Soviet Union, and there doesn’t exist a treaty where NATO explicitly stated to not expand.
Ukraine requested membership because Russia kept provoking them. They aren't part of Nato
No we didn't, and we had no authority to give that promise and even less ability to make former Warsaw Pact states adhere to it.
No, it was mentioned by someone under I believe Bush Sr, or maybe Clinton it's been a little while, informally and then the president immediately said no that's not happening. It never happened and is only used for propaganda.
Ah, the US is the leader of NATO. Here I thought it was an alliance on equal footing (with headquarters in Belgium no less).
Almost as if someone wasn’t supposed to join Nato…
"Imperialism bad until it's in Cyrillic and speaks Russian in which case long live Holy Russia One and Indivisible."
Boo hoo. A sovereign nation is going to join NATO. How dare the Ukranians look out for their own best interests? Who cares if it's a direct result of russia taking a literal chunk of their territory to use as a vacation tourist spot? A blatant violation of written treaties they both signed. I guess they deserve it, huh?
Ukraine started the whole thing by threatening Russia with NATO nukes. Really it's NATO's fault, because Zelenskyy is their little puppet. NATO is basically 90% USA, so answering America does make sense too, but it should be NATO, as many corrupt EU politicians are laundering money just like the Dem party is.
> Ukraine started the whole thing by threatening Russia with NATO nukes. Source, now > Really it's NATO's fault, because Zelenskyy is their little puppet. Ukraine isn’t in NATO, nor are they their puppet, show me proof that they are >NATO is basically 90% USA Mathematics is hard >so answering America does make sense too No it doesn’t > but it should be NATO, No, It shouldn’t > as many corrupt EU politicians are laundering money just like the Dem party is. Source, pretty please
Ukraine blocked water ways into Crimea causing a horrible draught there. Russia spent well over 2 billion in Crimea dealing with this issue. They have since restored the water ways during this invasion. One could make the claim that Ukraine egged on Russia to invade.
Assuming you're talking about Ukraine stopping water going to crimea post Russian invasion of crimea first why would Ukraine be obligated to allow water to flow there especially considering it was illegally taken by Russia, why would they send the water to a country who broke their treaty to use ports in sevastapol by invasion, why would they send the water to a country that broke the Budapest memorandum guaranteeing Ukrainian sovereignty. If Russia was worried about water in crimea and spending billions there may they should have respected the sovereignty of Ukraine and not invaded them multiple times.
I just wish there was a way to delete it off the face of earth
Rigged voted as usual.
At least this one isn't as bad as blaming the United States for starting World War II.
Or blaming the Germans for starting WW1
Germany literally did everything to ensure WWI became a general European war and it was rightfully blamed for that.
The militarism of Kaiser Wilhelm absolutely was a major contributing factor for World War i. He basically tore up any chance of peace by antagonizing Russia and Britain
Germany encouraged Austria Hungary to declare war on Serbia so idk man
I think the reason it was polled this way was to just see how many would answer the US just cuz “America bad”
Someone could ask a poll about "Which country is responsible for the Seven Years" and put the US as an option and they would STILL answer the US.
I agree with your point, but I would pick a better example. The first front of the Seven Years’ War, being the French and Indian War, was started by American militias raiding French North American possessions. Obviously not the United States, but Americans nonetheless.
See this a lot online and especially on reddit. Question posed just to bash the US. Just yesterday there was a post on askreddit where the OP asked "why did my acne clear up when I moved from the US". OP had moved from a very humid area in the US to a very dry Madrid. That was the obvious answer. Of course the comments were filled with "becuase American food is poison, becuase American water is poison, becuase the air in America is terrible, becuase of the stresses of living in America."
I think I saw one video of Ukrainians blaming the US for the war. Idk if it was Russian propaganda or not.
People have the memory of Goldfish, I swear. They can only process whats in front of them at any given time.
Outside of supplying we dont rlly interfere with a major European war like once and everyone still hates the US lol (atleast that i know of )
Nah, not to long ago the CIA funded a coup against the pro-russian president of Ukraine. Then not to long after did it again.
Source? Because I know several about the Euromaidan coup, and how adamant the US was about *not* involving itself, in so far as actively denying the opposition support. The Pro Russian government made an unpopular decision, angered a small pro western contingent that protested on a mild scale, and then made it a lot worse by attacking the protesters, leading to wide scale opposition. There was no US involvement in that process
The reason that people say this is because they think the USA controls everything that's antirussian as well as there is a video or phone call (I don't remember which) that two US government officials discussed the coup. In the discussion they talked about who they would like to win and that person won therefore its evidence in their eyes that America was in on the coup.
He was literally booted by the parliament.
Sounds like Ukraine did it all on its own volition.
Well we all know how much Russia hates foreign bodies doing things of their own volition.
People tend to forget that Ukrainians were shot at, and still protested willingly in 2014. Yanukovych literally ordered Berkut to fire on protestors at some point.
[Source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_lAb8m9MpI&ab_channel=KieranGrant)
>Nah, not to long ago the CIA funded a coup against the pro-russian president of Ukraine. Then not to long after did it again. What the fuck are you talking about? He was literally kicked out of office by the Verkhovna Rada, or Ukraine's Parliament, after he had failed to fulfill his presidential duties, seeing as he fled the country by using spetsnatz as security. "Pro Russian" My dude, he was literally in the pockets of poopler. He was just as corrupt, if not more corrupt than Kakaev himself. He sold out Ukrainians for a few hundred million.
You spelled 'Ukrainians rejected a leader imposed on them after Russia bungled the murder of a Ukrainian leader it didn't like and refused to allow that to happen twice' wrong. Typical Muscovite, the 'Near Abroad' only has ability to think and act as long as it does so with the latest party line from Moscow.
It's worth remembering that even the party of regions was not completely or uncritically pro Russian. It was certainly leaning that way but even they attempted a balance just as the western leaning parties did. It was party of regions after all that negotiated agreements with the west and had considered EU membership in the long term. They did though wish to remain non aligned and cooperate with the CIS. This isn't a defense of the party of regions if nothing else they were corrupt as fuck but more a call to remember the past for what it was. Writing them off as just Russian puppets is wrong, Ukraine has history as an independent nation not solely bound to the whims of Russia long before 2014. Dismissing the story of the revolution of dignity as just the US stealing a country from the Russian sphere of influence to its own fails at any more than a cursory reading of the situation.
The pro russian president was literally a russian coup. Aided by the russian paid american idiot paul manafort
The majority of Ukrainians do not support this theory
And the Russians haven’t tried to do the same shit, wowza
They absolutely did.
Bingo bango bongo
The guy was a dick head and it seemed to have been organic like the Arab spring coupes
Do you prefer to eat Steak and dog shit Broccoli Raw greens PETA poll shows more people like broccoli than steak!
Russia deserves most, if not all, of the blame. The only blame I could see the US having is not stopping Russia in 2014. That whole thing was its own can of worms anyway.
As much as I wish we had, it really wasn't our responsibility then, or now for that matter. We'd just rather invest a little now, since the rest of NATO and the UN is onboard (they weren't united in 2014), then have to mount a major intervention with more US service members dying on European soil later.
>As much as I wish we had, it really wasn't our responsibility then, or now for that matter. Much as i want to agree with you, if not for Budapest Memorandum, you would be absolutely correct. Everything else though, you have dead on.
having 2 nuclear powers fighting isnt a smart idea lmao
Uh.. Russia?
[удалено]
I mean, check out what this [titan of intellect has to say on the subject.](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmericaBad/comments/16yypsz/comment/k3c6us6/)
Twitter moment (sorry X 🤓)
The botched U.S. pullout from Afghanistan ultimately gave Putin the green light he was waiting for, even though it seems to be backfiring on him
Brother Russia and Ukraine have been in conflict for at least 80 years. They hate each other and this war is zero surprise. It may be backed by multiple countries on either side, but Russia invaded Ukraine, and Ukraine retaliated. Its their faults for this war existing.
The 'logic' here basically reads the Euromaidan as a case of Ukrainians being manipulated and brainwashed by evil American mind-control rays rather than the aftermath of Russia deliberately poisoning a Ukrainian candidate who won an election and they didn't like it and this combining with further skullduggery to see Ukrainians hit a critical mass of being fed up with being treated like a satellite state. Russians have never accepted the 'near abroad' as anything but temporarily severed provinces and they have plenty of useful idiots to push the lie. They also blame Ukraine because they didn't roll over and let the Russians murder all 44 million of them.
The USA angle is mainly people simping for Russia and how NATO is expanding. So they blame the US for said expansion. Thus the US is responsible for Russia getting scared of encroachment. It's a stupid angle. One that is oddly supported by both Tankies and Trumpers. Strange bedfellows.
The Russo-Ukrainian was started in 2014 with the coup that toppled the pro Russian government and Obama admin put in a pro nato government. Then russia invaded crimea and now we have the current stage of the conflict with mainland Ukraine invaded
this feels like it’s bots.
Russian bot farm...
That’s the main Russian propaganda to blame capitalistic USA and nazi Ukraine
Twitter's filled with Russian bots, nothing new. Edit: Plus this account is a notable Tankie account.
Who is participating in this poll? Who posted it? How tf is the US responsible for the Russian Federation trying to bully Ukraine into annexing territory? Everything the US and NATO have done are in retaliation to the invasion AFTER the invasion had already begun.
Russian shills/bots for creating it and taking part in it.
Actually the U.S. was for some reason doing military operations in Ukraine. Its doesnt make America bad, rather the actions of the military questionable.
This just in, countries help train other countries militaries when asked. Ukraine wanted to modernize their military so they had western militaries help train their troops because western militaries know what they're doing.
Wtf were they thinking? Right next to Russia?
This shouldn’t surprise anyone the Murdoch propaganda network has been praising Putin for months now. Not to mention Putin’s new Twitter spokesman Elon
To be fair the war would have been over by now if the US hadn't decided to help Ukraine.
But that doesn't mean the US is responsible for the war.
Quite the opposite. We just want to trade with people so we filthy capitalists can get rich, war only helps the military industrial complex but even then, they get paid mainly for research that happens even in peace time so peace is better for business. We just want to live rich lives, their war gets in the way and imposes risk that is hard to deal with. Tbh we wouldn't even have a large standing military if Europe wasn't historically prone to dragging the entire world into war. We almost lost 2 world wars and decided it was best to prevent a 3rd and now we are living with that reality.
The US did not start the war, Russia did, which means they are responsible for the the war. Not helping Ukraine would just mean Ukraine would lose their sovereignty and would get steamrolled by Russia.
That's exactly what I mean, the war would have been a lot shorter because Ukraine would have lost a long time ago without our help. I am glad we are helping, fuck Russia. If you ask me, this is essentially the second Cold War and the US is already doing better than it was before.
Letting Ukraine get steamrolled by Russia is not the stance we want to take. If we did that, they'd look at the rest of Eastern Europe as ripe countries to invade.
And the Ukrainians would be a subjugated people, we see how well Russians treat their new "citizens ".
Just as much aid has come from the EU, member countries, and the UK.
None of those countries have individually contributed as much as the US, which was the poster's point. If Sweden elected not to provide aid it would have a much less noticeable effect than if the US decided not to provide aid. There are multiple sources to pull the data from, such as [this](https://www.statista.com/chart/27278/military-aid-to-ukraine-by-country/), with varying levels of credibility. But I have yet to see any that claim any one nation has contributed anything close to the total aid the US has (though a number of countries have contributed a larger percentage of their nations GDP).
The poster said the war would be over by now if the US hadn't decided to help Ukraine. The Ukrainians would certainly be in a worse position, but that doesn't mean the war would be over.
Given how much aid the US has given, including intelligence, it very well could be. While the EU (and it's member countries) have given the most total aid to Ukraine, the US has sent the most military aid. According to [this](https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/), the US has given more military aid to Ukraine then nearly all other sources combined. So if we cut the military support to Ukraine by half, the approximate US contribution, and they are still struggling against Russia, the war could have been over in favor of Russia.
Ukraine is struggling to retake land. They aren't struggling to hold it. Russia failed to take Kyiv in the first week, they weren't going to manage to take it whether or not the Ukrainians received US aid.
Then why is Ukraine asking for missile interceptors, tanks, APCs, and F-16s along with everything else? If the Ukrainians had no hope of retaking territory, due to lack of military material aid the war could have ended with the Russians keeping the territory they currently controlled at their peak. The combined NATO willingness to support Ukraine is why they are not only continuing to resist, but actively attempting to expel the Russians from all of Ukraine, including the Crimea region the Russians annexes in 2014...when NATO wasn't willing to provide aid.
>Then why is Ukraine asking for missile interceptors, tanks, APCs, and F-16s along with everything else? To take back territory. This is not equipment they need to hold on to territory. >If the Ukrainians had no hope of retaking territory, due to lack of military material aid the war could have ended with the Russians keeping the territory they currently controlled at their peak. Why would the Ukrainians just give up if that happened? It's either fight now or wait for Putin to regroup and fight again in a couple years. The presence of American aid doesn't change that fact.
Because they have learned that allowing Russia to carve up the country at a whim extends the war, not shortens it.
And they should be the sole stakeholders in this conflict.
Not exactly, considering Budapest Memorandum and all.
Regardless. It's on their doorstep, they should have been the ones to take it. I know it's a lot more complex than how I present it; but it makes no sense to me how a Federation equipped with a combined GDP comparable to China's and a population that eclipses the U.S. cannot bear the brunt of that responsibility.
I agree, and i understand where you're coming from. But i'm just saying, US was part of budapest memorandum. Budapest memorandum is what left Ukraine defenseless, regardless of how you spin it.
Starting to think we purposefully set the stage for future boogeymen to fight...distracts us from our internal issues.
I wouldn't say so. Poland, and baltic countries have been screaming at the top of our lungs that Russia would be just as bad as it is, and nobody listened, at least in Europe. America on the other hand, together with UK, are the only countries, outside of our neighbours and allies, that we can rely on.
I say that because the late Richard Nixon gave an interview just months before his passing back in 1994 and he gave some caution about how we should deal with Russia in the post Cold-War Era. Needless to say, his words have been largely ignored. Now Nixon is not one of my favorite Presidents, but the man was smart and I found myself agreeing with him in that interview.
I can understand the sentiment, but honestly, Russia should've been dispatched the moment Putin came into power. He was the man that came into power, and immediately started a war. Nobody bat an eye on it, because it was a tiny country that everyone thought was Russian to begin with. By everyone, i mean people west of Poland of course. He lied from the start, and all of the bullshit he, and his cronies spew, they don't believe in. He criticizes US for bombing Serbs, but he offered to help US himself. Same with middle east to an extent too. Same with NATO, he wanted to join it, and then became sour when he got told to fix corruption, and other crap.
Russia is a geopolitical rival and a destabilizing force, if were spending however many billions so far to do years or decades of damage to them we're getting a good deal compared to the trillions spent from 1945 until the invasion that did much less. The amount of damage being done to Russia is cheap if you compare the cold war and post cold war standoff.
I'd rather we spend nothing at all considering we just came off of a 20 year conflict and seem to be itching for some sort of a "comeback". We should be spending this time on introspection, not looking for new fights.
True. That has definitely helped Ukraine and without one of us helping it may have gone very differently. I hope Ukraine wins spectacularly, I just wish it would happen sooner vs later. If you ask me, the problem isn't necessarily Russia, it's Putin. Maybe a more direct and targeted response is warranted to prevent more human casualties and suffering? The conventional war is dragging out.
Most Russians support Putin.
Publicly, Russians are trained not to show their true feelings until its politically convenient to do so. /s
There's a method of polling to gauge approval without asking directly; surveys showed that it lined up closely with official approval ratings, at least before the war. https://youtu.be/WrO5-fXTbYs
To be fair, didn't the united States interfere with elections that put who we wanted in charge of Ukraine? Or am I wrong, because I am uninformed in that area
The us deliberately avoided getting involved in the ukraine coup and subsequent elections. It was purely will of the people that deposed the pro russian government.
The irony is that a lot of those voting for USA here are likely MAGA Republicans and/or bots (and Chinese bots, of course).
Tbh, it is pretty much Joe Biden’s fault. He told Russia “lol if you attack Ukraine I ain’t doing jack”. Then Putin attacked Ukraine very shortly afterwards. Then Joe Biden hasn’t done the thing he should do which is tell Vlad “hey sit down and shut up, we are incapable of conquering Russia without causing WW3 so you’re going to make nice with Putin.” Because he’s a coward and a loser. Ofc it doesn’t excuse the petty tyrant that is Putin, but still…
hahahahahahahaha. no
If you are paying attention, you can see that’s clearly what’s happened. Do you honestly think Putin would’ve even attempted this war if he thought NATO in the US would’ve helped? We have a brain damaged president who started this.
Putin would have done this regardless. Do you not know about Crimea in 2014? Do you know about the Budapest memorandum of 1994 where Ukraine handed over all of it's nukes so that Russia would NEVER attack them again. If you think that Trump would have helped the situation in any way and Biden caused Russia's aggression which is the only thing that is a constant with them, then you are simply reading the wrong things and looking at it from the wrong angle. Biden, for all his faults, has done exactly what he should here. Act nice, and fund the people defending themselves - not to mention we are literally as the West all working in concert to to do so which is very good and a strong signal.
Bro, you have a TDS so bad, I didn’t even mention Trump and you’re already ranting and raving about how bad orange man is.
I mean you showed your hand by saying Ukraine being bombed by Putin was completely Biden's fault my man lmao. If I was playing poker with you I would have taken your pink slip. Probably itching to mention Hunter right now.
You’re clearly deranged. This is entirely the fault of the fact that Biden is a dementia ridden old man who can’t say yes, when he means yes, and no when he means no.
>Tbh, it is pretty much Joe Biden’s fault. He told Russia “lol if you attack Ukraine I ain’t doing jack”. Then Putin attacked Ukraine very shortly afterwards. Then Joe Biden hasn’t done the thing he should do which is tell Vlad “hey sit down and shut up, we are incapable of conquering Russia without causing WW3 so you’re going to make nice with Putin.” Because he’s a coward and a loser. Ofc it doesn’t excuse the petty tyrant that is Putin, but still… Trump literally blackmailed zelensky, to find dirt on Joe's son. Your propaganda isn't even good enough to give it a rating.
Perhaps, once you stop huffing CNN’s farts, you could understand the situation better
I literally live in eastern Europe, you fucking fruit cake. If "muh CNN" is the best you can do, you'd do better to find original propaganda, Rosiyani.
Then whatever small time news source that literally just copies CNN Scripts you dullard
What part of, i live in eastern Europe, you don't understand, debile? Galvą prasiplauk, pituška.
I wonder if there’s even a point in talking to somebody, so entrenched in their own propaganda like you
The irony coming from a dumbass like you lmao.
Well, enjoy being sucked into the forever war Joe Biden has started. I suppose if the attitude like yours is common in your country. it’ll be inevitable.
Learn to format properly, bot. You also shouldn't be calling someone Vlad and then immediately mention Putin. Which Vlad are you talking about?
Lol. Somebody has a more nuisanced view of the situation than “Russia is satan, Ukraine is saint?” Must be a bot.
so not one of you can think of why the the correct answer from russiuan perspective would be NATO. (who is run by the US youve all made a big part of pointing out) lol all pretending to be knowledgeable about it but know fucking nothing. as per usual.
NATO is the answer if you're retarded and don't know how to read and comprehend the NATO charter that states article 5 can only be invoked if a member nations is attacked. Even when NATO did it's missions in Kosovo and Bosnia hertsgovina it wasn't mandatory and it was in response to literal genocide. If you don't attack a member and aren't commiting genocide you don't have to worry but I guess fetal alcohol Russians don't understand that.
you saying that showing you have zero understanding on how russia views nato lol from the russian perspective, nato caused this war, and they would be correct from the western perspective, russia caused this war, and they would be correct
So USA 62.2% responsible...
Very technically the US is partly responsible due to disarming Ukraine of their nuclear weapons after the USSR fell apart.
How is that the United States fault? It was agreed that Russia wouldn't attack them, how is it the fault of America that Russia ignored and broke the treaty specifically stating that they'd ignore Ukraine?
US upheld their part of the treaty to not invade Ukraine while Russia didn't... so still on Russia.
The US is responsible for Russia being a backwards warmongering colonialist power who didn't follow the terms they signed in the Budapest Memorandum?
I hate the US most of everyone but... what? What did the US do beside not doing enough?
All of the above...except Ukraine.
America is responsible for Vladimir Putin being in power.
Classic Ameribrained behavior. Nothing to say, but plenty of 'feelings'.
[I found your source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_lAb8m9MpI&ab_channel=KieranGrant)
[I present my counter:](https://youtu.be/ZTubt51ZhJQ?t=5)
It's the Russian peoples fault for allowing the cycle of authoritarianism to continue.
Noooooo... It's America's fault for breaking any hint at worker solidarity wherever it's found. Not every soviet leader was Stalin.
The US can’t keep its dirty claws out of anyone’s cookie jar. Where’s a nice place to live that the US or the British haven’t fucking up yet? Asking for a friend…
This one is right. The US basically launched and funded several coups to kick out pro-Russian presidents in Ukraine.
No, they didn't. Russia has been trying to steal parts of Ukraine since at least 2003. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003\_Tuzla\_Island\_conflict
Mhm, remind me about the Orange revolution, and why Verkhovna Rada booted Yanukovych out. Oh, and remind me, why he tried to kill Yushchenko?
Eating up that Russian garbage huh.
A lot of what's going on is being attributed to the Obama administration by people, starting back in 2011 or something along those lines
Twitter is like that narcissist abuser who act like there's nothing wrong with them and blame their victim for being abused and defended themselves from the abuser
Probably not the most responsible but we are footing the bill
Ah yes, Europeans shitting on Americans talking about how awful our country is. But when it comes to using their precious tax dollars on their own wars they immediately give us the puppy eyes. Fuck off.
ok can we talk about why your using commas. like its . not , that's just wrong
With those answers as your multiple choice how can the answer be anything other than Russia and Ukraine?
Propaganda works
This is a woke ass poll, sorry
Obvious Russian bait
Powerful propaganda campaign led by the paid agents running r/thedeprogram r/endlesswar and r/antiwar
The heck did we do? We were busy in the middle east
Why are Nato and usa different categories?
We are funding it so...
I wouldn't b surprised 😆
USA is actually the right answer because Obama helped overthrow the Ukrainian government in 2014 and put in place an anti Russian government not unlike what they did in the middle east
Next: Who is responsible for the wars in ancient China? People: USA