Facts.is
Proof Never Trust

Our Mission: To anonymously present reason, evidence, and testimony on issues of most importance to life on Earth, especially those issues most urgent and popularly misunderstood.
CURRENT ALERTS (if any):22 April, 2023: We are slowly transitioning to LifeFacts.is (under construction). That will be the new site; this one is planned to be abandoned.

The Ukraine War:
Fight on the Right Side

Last Update: 23 March, 2023

Topic: What is this Issue Concerning?

This issue is primarily concerning the 2022 eruption of violence in eastern Ukraine where a local conflict became a proxy conflict between Eastern and Western superpowers.

Importance: What is the potential impact from this issue to life on Earth?

Relative Imporrtance Rating: 4 out of 5 (widespread lasting lethal threat to planetary life but probably not extinction)

Although war is always horrific, there are limits to the region it is fought over and the destructiveness of the weapons used. The Ukraine War could escalate into into a world war involving nuclear weapons, since: the fighting is already on, nuclear powers on opposite sides of it, and it's only a matter of when they might decide to target each other directly. A widespread nuclear war would have catastrpophic planetary implications, ie. for a great amount of life and earth, not only immediately, but for many years to come.

Topics Related to this Issue:

War, Nuclear War

Assumptions underlying this issue:

  1. Assumption that this problem didn't start until 2022: actually this is a shooting war since 2014 and which Russia and NATO are supporting on opposite sides.

  2. Assumption that there is no history, that Russia suddenly invaded for no reason Actually there are Minsk agreements, since 2014 and 2015, which were supposed to end the Donbas war, Russia has enetered the war based on the failure of, and which the West reveals were made without the slightest intent to honour them but only to give Ukraine more time to arm up.

  3. Assumptio that the Ukraine government is in the moral right. Actually the Ukraine government has horrific immoral involvements related to this issue, including clear neo-Nazi leanings, language laws, race laws, and attacking a region (Donbas) following their vote to separate.

  4. Assumption that NATO must help Ukraine militarily: actually they're not a NATO ally.

  5. Assumption that it's better to send weapons into a warzone than peace negotiators

  6. Ignoring that Nord Stream pipeline sabotage is a crime of epic scale, putting the lives of millions of civilians at risk of shortage of a life-support, and releasing tremendous amounts of greenhouse gas into the atmosphere far worse than carbon dioxide.

  7. Assumption that Russia must always be stopped, forgetting that Russia has been our ally not enemy in history.

  8. Assumption that Russia can be easily beaten, forgetting tha they are heavily invested in super-weapons some of which there is no defense for.

  9. Assumption that nuclear superpowers of broad regions militarily supporting opposite sides of a hot war is not a world war. Actually it is in term of fighting being on and who's on opposing sides; it's only the legal definition of war which is holding back the understanding.

Undisputed Timeline and Facts of this Issue:

  1. Ukraine is not a NATO ally and so NATO is under no obligation to support them militarily.

    2. Ukraine chose to delay their entry into NATO in 2010. Wikipedia article here.

  2. The Russian military entered the Donbas region on 24 February, 2022, calling it a 'special military operation'.

  3. NATO has been generous to arm Ukraine against Russia, including donating increasingly heavy weapons to no obvious pemanent limit, even dangerously depleting their own stockpiles, considering sending banned munitions, and prioritizing these expenditueres about the needs of their own People.

  4. NATO has decided to send depleted uranium (DU) ammunition (to Ukraine for use against Russia)

    5. It happens to fit the tanks they have donated.

    It is radioactive with a very long half-life.

    Russia considers it crossing the line into nuclear weapons. Although the direct use of DU in this application is merely for its armor-penetrating ability, it does have radiactive fallout which lasts a very long time. Specifically, when the munition impacts it creates radiactive dust which can blow over a very wide area and has a very long half-life.

    Articles:

  5. NATO military support has definitely been increasing in types towards deeper and deeper invovlement in the war by NATO nations

    6. For example, NATO nations refused to send Ukraine tanks earlier, for fears that supplying heavy weapons might be seen as direct parties to the conflict. Later, they're not only sending heavy battle tanks but DU ammunition and starting to send warplanes as well. (Isn't that a kind of self-admission of direct involvement?)

  6. Both sides have and are threatening the use of nuclear weapons.

  7. Russia has powerful super-weapons, some of which no one is known to have a defense for.

    8. Russia has more nuclear weapons than all of NATO combined, hypersonic missiles deployed, underwater apocalyptic weapons, a nuclear cruise missile (which can fly for years), and even a mutually assured destruction (MAD) defense system.  These weapons were generally designed to bypass existing defenses.  In particular, they have fifty new RS-28 Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missiles (named ‘SATAN-II’ by NATO), which stand 116 feet tall, fly at 16,000 mph (Mach 21), and carry up to either 10-15 (depending on the report) nuclear warheads (with independent targeting) or 24 hypersonic cruise missiles.

  8. Many sources are raising the alarm over the Ukraine War escalating into a broader region, even a world war, including:

    1. 19 Mar, 2023: Poland may end up ‘joining’ Ukraine conflict – diplomat

    2. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres

    3. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg

    4. USA President Joe Biden

    5. Dmitry Medvedev (Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of the Russian Federation)

    6. ex-President Trump

    7. The famous Doomsday clock is now closer to 'midnight' (human extinction) than it's ever been in its history, specifically because of the Ukraine War.

     

  9. The Nord Stream piplelines were sabotaged.

    10. No one has claimed responsibility for the blasts, but it is thought that only a state actor would have the expertise required, and specifically alleged that the US is responsible:

    These underwater pipelines supplied natural gas from Russia to Germany in a mutually beneficial arrangement: Russia received a strong revenue, and Germany received a reliable source of cheap energy for many important uses.

    One of these important uses was fertilizer, made by BASF, which has had to shut down for lack (or expense) of natural gas. It's thought it can never be restarted, and that this will have catastrophic consequences for food production which relied on that fertilizer.

    To destroy them just before the cold season is tantamount to murder as many Germans could have died if the following winter was very cold (fortunately it was not).

The Common Narrative (or Explanation of the Events, from a Western perspective unless stated otherwise):

  1. Western Establishment has justified their military support for Ukraine as a reaction to the 24 February 2022 incursion by Russia (framed as unprovoked aggression) to protect Ukraine's sovereignty, while quiet about NATO's military support for Ukraine since many years earlier.

  2. A secondary reason NATO gives to justify military support for Ukraine is allegation that the Russians (alone) are committing war crimes (eg. cruelties to civilians).

  3. A third reason NATO gives to justify military support for Ukraine is defending democracy

Evidence which Conflicts with the Common Narrative or Explanation:

  1. The Ukraine War is between the Ukranian Government and eastern regions which want to separate from Ukraine, supported by NATO on the Ukrainian government side and Russia on the separtist side.

  2. This war has been on for 8 years (since 2014) before Russia joined it (in 2022). The People of the Donbas region voted to separate from Ukraine in 2014 but the Ukraine Government would not allow it, and made war on them since that time.

  3. The Ukraine War is so heavily supported by NATO and Russia on opposite sides, that many consider it a proxy war between NATO and Russia fought in Ukraine.

  4. Russia didn't 'invade' Ukraine, at least not if we recognized a right to a People's self-determination. The Donbas rebupblics, formally promised self-governance since 2014, and not being given it, were officially recognized by Russia in 2022, signed a cooperation treaty with Russia, and Russia entered to help them based on that treaty.

  5. NATO supply of military aid has been ongoing for the Ukraine government since approximately 2014. For example, Canada has been training Ukrainian troops since 2014 underOperation Unifier

    6. .

    Some of NATO's military support has already crossed the line into direct participation in the conflict with Russia

    1. 23 Mar, 2023: Ukrainian special forces getting military targets from CIA satellite – Times

    2. 1 Dec, 2022: US and NATO directly involved in Ukraine conflict – Lavrov

    3. 16 Oct, 2022: Ukraine attacks Donetsk with American missiles – mayor. This will be interpreted by Russia as a direct attack on Russian soil.

  6. NATO military aid for for Ukraine seems to be reaching the black market as much or more than the troops on the front line, and NATO doesn't seem bothered by that:

    7. Russia's weapons are very advanced:

  7. The People of the eastern parts of Ukraine rejected the illegal replacement of the elected president in 2014.

  8. The People of the Donbas region voted for independence from Ukraine by referendum in 2014 (and again in 2022).

  9. Although the referendums were called 'sham', by he West, before they even happened, the West didn't offer independent observers, or offer to repeat the referendum. In fact the West actually threatened anyone who participated in the election, even independent observers visiting from other nations, with prison (example article: EU threatens foreign observers over Donbass referendums ). The West offered no option to the people of that region to decide their fate, despite that we are supposedly the most democratic.

  10. The right to break away from a parent nation is what principle the United States is founded on, since it broke away from British rule.

  11. The Ukraine government made war on the people of Donbas by first declaring them terrorists.

  12. There is evidence that the people of Donbas want or have incentive to join Russia

    1. They are ethnically Russian.

    2. They speak Russian.

    3. The civilians of Donbas have been enduring serious oppression by the Ukranian government on the basis of their culture and race and religion.

    The Donbas republics, as well as two more, have in September 2022 (besides 2014) held referendums of overwhelming support to join Russia (Donetsk 99.23%, Lugansk 98.42%, Zaporozhye 93%, and Kherson 87%), and Russia has formally annexed them in late 2022.

    Peace for the separatist areas was never achieved under Ukrainian rule but only under Russian rule.  The result of the 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea was peace but there was continual war in Donbas being left behind within Ukraine. This is strong evidence that these ethnic Russian peoples really do want to be with Russia, and not in Ukraine, regardless of referendum criticisms, since they rebel against Ukrainian rule but not against Russian rule.

    Have you seen the laws which the Ukrainian Government has been oppressing the Russian-speaking population with (even the ones not trying to separate)? There is a language law restricting any other language but Ukrainian. There is a race law denying human rights for anyone of Slavic origin (ethnic Russians).  The Government even uses the Law to persecute the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. 

    As for daily quality of life, it's basically a genocide being carried out against them by the Ukraine government.

    Why would they not want to leave!?  If they want to join Russia (as they've kept expressing by referendums which our side has kept ignoring), why are we arming Ukraine to take them back by conquest?

  13. It is a widely accepted principle of human rights that a People should have the right to self-determination.

    14. Related article: The Dangers of Ukrainian Revanchism.

  14. Assuming we recognize a People's right to self-determination (to leave a country if they want), then Russia didn't 'invade' Ukraine in February 2022 but only defended the newly independent states at their invitation and treaty.

  15. Ukrainian presedient Zelensky deliberately mislead his own people, assuring them of peace when he was advised of Russia's plans in detail, leaving his own people unnecessarily unprepared. This maximized the harm on his people by the Russian intervention. Article: Zelensky faces furious criticism from Ukrainians — WaPo

  16. Ukraine government is reported to have refused rejected many peace and peace talk opportunities:

  17. NATO military support for the Ukraine government started much earlier than the 2022 Russian incursion.

  18. Both sides are accused of war crimes.

    Since Russian war crimes have gotten vastly more attention, we will present articles on Ukranian ones:

  19. The Ukraine Forces have neo-Nazi ideologies and NATO knows about it.

    20. The Ukranian forces have serious Nazi leanings (neo-Nazi), and it's quite outrageous for Canada to support them militarily knowing that.

    As for Ukranian president Zelensky, he is no hero: he concealed from his own people detailed knowledge of Russia's plans for their special military operation, saying he would lose money if he had warned Ukranians.  Instead he assured them, up to January 2022, of a peaceful year ahead.

    In donating a tremendous amount of arms to an immoral regime, we should consider: is it possible that, after this war ends, all the weapons we've given them could be used to intimidate or harm parties we didn't intend to be intimidated or harmed?  In other words, even if the Ukraine War ended now, isn't it possible that those weapons will come back to haunt us or our allies?

  20. Ukraine president Zelenky's goals are not merely be to get Russian troops out of Ukraine, or back to borders before this crisis, but to retake Crimea and actual regime change in Russia.

    21. Meanwhile Russia has made clear its willingness to use nuclear weapons if Ukraine tries to re-take Crimea.

ANVIL OF TRUTH: Implications of combining the unconventional facts with the conventional narrative: (Opinion)

  1. NATO's military support for Ukraine cannot be merely in reaction to the 2022 Russian incursion, as pretended, because NATO has been in military support since 2015 at latest. For NATO governments to portray military support for Ukraine to their own People as opposing Russian invasion is an attempt to justify military support for Ukraine based on an event which happend approximately 8 years after the support started. The justification is invalid.

  2. NATO's military support for Ukraine before the 2022 Russian incursion must be to fighting an enamy other than Russia since Russia was not a party to the conflict at that time.

  3. Since the only enemy being fought by the Ukranian government from 2014 to 2022 was the people of the Donbas, that is who NATO has been supporting Ukraine to conquer.

  4. The cause of this war is that the Russian-speaking people want to leave Ukraine rule and Ukraine and NATO won't allow them. Ukraine and NATO ignore the referendums, ignore the Minsk Agreements, militarily oppose the independence of the Donbas peoples, and pretend the war is about Russian aggression.

  5. NATO's support for Ukraine is so extreme that they have ignored the obvious (neo)NAZI aspects of the Ukranian forces, the shocking race laws against the Russian-speaking peoples, two refereendums in the Donbas region, and all peace treaties.

HOW THIS CRISIS HAS CHANGED SOCIETY: (Opinion, from a Western perspective unless stated otherwise)

With the Ukranian government showing Nazi leanings, for the first time since World War 2 in NATO society it was no longer encouraged to hate Nazis but hate Russians.

MORAL CRITICISM: (Opinion, from a Western perspective unless stated otherwise)

  1. It was very disappointing to see how many people were ready to hate Russia as soon as the Government lead them to. The support for the 'oppose the Russian invasion' narrative was/is based on the unspoken belief that Russia is evil and must be stopped.

  2. NATO shouldn't be sending weapons into a conflict but humanitarian aid and calling for peace talks. Sending weapons absolutely promotes war.

  3. NATO shouldn't have ignored the NATO traits of the Ukrainian government, nor the obvious even codified discrimination against the ethnic Russian-speaking peoples under Ukranian rule.

  4. NATO peoples should not use Russia's actions to justify clearly immoral actions on our side.

  5. It is completely immoral for anyone to destroy the Nord Stream pipeline on which Russia relied for money but Germany relied for life support. This is terrorismm against life-supporting civilian infrastructure, and even terrorists usually take responsibility. It is unreasonable to think Russia did this because it was a major revenue stream for them, it gave them poiltical leverage over Europe, and if they wanted the gas stopped they only had to turn off the valve on their side of the pipeline. It is also a devastating ecological disaster, with tremendous release of methane; whoever did this is an enemy of the Earth's living environment.

  6. When a missile hit an apartment building in Poland, it was almost comical to see the News portray it as a reason for NATO to attack Russia, when they thought it was Russia that fired the missile, but how quickly they killed the story when they realized Ukraine fired the missile.

CONCLUSIONS: (Opinion, from a Western perspective unless stated otherwise)

  1. PERCEPTIVE CONCLUSIONS:

    1. This is a war between the Ukranian Government and regions of eastern Ukraine separatist regions (which People voted to and have every practical reason to want to separate), since 2014, with NATO supporting the Ukranian Government and Russia supporting the separtist regions. It is not based on any 2022 Russian invasion.

    2. Russia didn't invade but entered the Donbas separtist region at the formal treaty and request of that local government.

    3. In our eagerness to follow NATO's assumption that Russia must always be stopped, we forgot that Russia is a historical ally, including being on our side in both WWI and WWII, and much earlier supporting American independence following their civil war.

  2. TACTICAL CONCLUSIONS:

    1. There is something very strange about NATO's eagerness to donate tremendous military support for Ukraine, without peace negotiators, despite Ukraine not being a treaty ally, and the process putting us against Russia in a hot war. There is so much to lose and no clear chance of any gain.

    2. NATO leaders and citizens should realize that donating increasing militarily support for the Ukranian government against Russia puts us into military opposition of Russia and at some point direct war with Russia if the kinds of ways we support are not limited. The pretense that NATO is not a direct party to the conflict grows weaker by the day as not only increasingly heavy weapons are sent but also a few components (eg. satellite targetting, missile upgrades) already cross the line.

    3. NATO shouldn't ignore that many and seemingly most of the weapons we send Ukraine don't reach the battlefield and may be ending up on the black market.

    4. There may come a day that Ukraine is so well armed with NATO weaponry that they point those weapons in a direction we didn't expect.

    5. It would have profited us more to have good relations with the huge nation of Russia than the tiny nation of Ukraine.

    6. There is a problem in Ukraine and it would have been better for us to just let the Ukranian peoples, or at most the nations immediately surrounding Ukraine, to clean it up, rather than get involved.

  3. MORAL CONCLUSIONS:

    1. NATO leaders should have put it to their people, in referendum, as to whether or not to support any side of this war. If we are democracies, we should have a say in wars we get involved with, especially when militarily supporting governments we have no treaty obligations to.

    2. It is immoral for NATO governments to portray this crisis as being all about opposing the 2022 Russian incursion/invasion since the fighting has been on since 2014.

    3. The Ukranian government has explicit Nazi leanings, shocking race laws, and other critical fundamental moral problems which we shouldn't support.

    4. Sending weapons and no peace negotiators into a conflict, as NATO has been doing, is extremely immoral.

  4. FORECAST CONCLUSIONS:

    1. The ever-increasing types of military involvement by NATO against Russia in a shooting war, not to mention the Nord Stream pipeline sabotage thought to be done by NATO, is increasingly provoking Russia to retaliate against NATO. So far Russia has not taken military retaliation against NATO, but as long as NATO keeps doing more, it seems that Russia will have to react at some point.

SUGGESTIONS FOR ACTIVISM: What can you do about it? (Opinion)

  1. Stop hating Russia just because your Government leads you to. Hate is a destructive foundation to build your thinking on.

  2. Write your elected represenatives to Withdraw NATO Military Support for Ukraine. Sending humanitarian aid is OK, though, but ideally it should be to both sides.

  3. Rally Others to Withdraw NATO Military Support for Ukraine: Point out that since NATO has been militarily supporting the Ukranian government in the Donbas war since 2014/2015, and since Russia didn't enter until 2022, it can't be about fighting Russia.

NEWS UPDATES (by date):

Flag Counter

Return to Homepage