Woods Ag said:
That's all you choose to comment on? Ok, whether they made the promise or not is irrelevant. It was pretty clear that Russia was not going to take well to NATO advancement to their border when NATOs reason for being is to be a Russian deterrent. i.e. - adversary to Russia.
Yes, because the rest was a lot of Russian propaganda mixed with bad ideas.
No one provoked Russia to invade Ukraine. Pushing that lie pretty much uses up his credibility.
If we are going to ask Ukraine to trade land for peace, the only way that works is with NATO membership. Without a treaty obligation whereby a Russian attack on Ukraine is an attack on NATO, Russia will not be dissuaded, regardless of what they promise.
Re-establishing energy ties between Russia and Europe would also be foolish from a security standpoint. Western Europe needs to find other sources of energy (it would help if the Germans weren't so stupidly hung up on their green energy project).
The effort to link China to this mess is nonsensical.
The idea that Ukraine is a kleptocracy that needs reform and that Russia's imperialist dreams need to be kept in check are not mutually exclusive. Both can be true.