Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PPs have posted a lot of old information about Azov battallion and not much about how Azov‘s founder has done with his attempt to leave Azov battalion and start his own political party (hint - terribly) and what Azov was and is now.

Yes, Azov was founded back in 2014 by some people who had Nazi or far right beliefs, but at that time the Ukrainian army was very small and weak and had to rely on ad hoc militias like Azov which fought amazongly well and held off the Russians from taking Mariupol in 2014. As the UA developed tbe strategy was to regularize Azov into official structures so as to be able to diminish any far right influence. The founder of Azov left to start his own party, which has not been succesful at winning seats in parliament.

Ros Atkins of BBC does a great 10 minute piece with the complete 8 year history on Azov and what its influence is today. It’s an accurate, well-balanced piece.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0bx9slf/ros-atkins-on-ros-atkins-on

So.. you mean they are "good" nazis?

Posts like this convince me that the Venn diagram of people who think Ukraine has a Nazi problem because of how the Azov battalion got its start and the people who think the United States isn't racist despite how it got its start is a perfect circle.

Umm, no. Those of us who cared to look up some history understand that nazi problem in Ukraine started decades ago and that some Ukrainians were on side of nazi germany in WW2. It is a fact, go look it up. If you think that nazis only appeared in Ukraine in whatever measly numbers in 2014 then you are the one buying the propaganda of another side. Some of us don't want ANY propaganda, I don't care if it comes from Russia or Ukraine, I don't like mind games and being played and this goes for everyone.

Fun fact. Some Irish and Indians were also on the side of the nazis. They had the exact same reason for their stance as Ukrainians. You are forgetting that Stalin killed millions of Ukrainians just prior to WW2. That beng said, there's a lot of racism in eastern europe.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're nazis...that's the deal.

There is no if's and's or but's...they are nazis.

The Ukraine has a nazi problem, I've posted links here a few times about it.

But since they support the current thing...the sheep will be ok with it as a few PP's seem to indicate.

A country which elected a Jewish man as president with something like 75% of the vote does not have a significant nazi problem. There are a handful of nazis in the country, something that is sadly true of many countries.

More than that...

We elected a black president...twice...overwhelmingly too. Yet we're still a country steeped in deep systematic racism everywhere and it's so bad brown people all over the world still want to come here for some reason.

In fact...the Ukraine openly accepted the Germans and quite a number joined the SS. In fact the last Nazi the Israeli's hunted down was a Ukrainian SS camp guard:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/may/12/john-demjanjuk-guilty-nazi-war-crimes

So say they don't have a Nazi problem is NPC speak.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PPs have posted a lot of old information about Azov battallion and not much about how Azov‘s founder has done with his attempt to leave Azov battalion and start his own political party (hint - terribly) and what Azov was and is now.

Yes, Azov was founded back in 2014 by some people who had Nazi or far right beliefs, but at that time the Ukrainian army was very small and weak and had to rely on ad hoc militias like Azov which fought amazongly well and held off the Russians from taking Mariupol in 2014. As the UA developed tbe strategy was to regularize Azov into official structures so as to be able to diminish any far right influence. The founder of Azov left to start his own party, which has not been succesful at winning seats in parliament.

Ros Atkins of BBC does a great 10 minute piece with the complete 8 year history on Azov and what its influence is today. It’s an accurate, well-balanced piece.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0bx9slf/ros-atkins-on-ros-atkins-on

So.. you mean they are "good" nazis?

DP. No, no one is saying that. Their relative prominence and strength has been diminishing as the army was being strengthened over the past years since 2014. But yes, back in March - May 2014 (February 2014 yanukovych ran away with contents of Ukraine’s treasury, russia annexed crimea and invaded donbas, while trying similar scenarios in odesa, Kharkiv, and a few other cities), Volunteer battalions including azov were crucial in fighting russia.

Why were they so crucial? Other Ukrainians weren't as enthusiastic to fight Russia? Just trying to understand why their involvement was so important in 2014. It's pretty clear Putin is taking advantage of this fact and it serves his propaganda

I didn’t write only Azov was crucial. I wrote volunteer battalions ***including*** Azov were crucial. They were crucial because the army was week and unprepared for russian invasion and a lot of reliance was on volunteers. It was not clear if russia at the time would go ahead with a full scale invasion, but it was a possibility then that they would attack from the northern borders. Back then they didn’t, but the army and the international support were nowhere where they are now.

Interesting. I honestly don't know much about that region, so it's all relatively new to me. But this also begs a question, why didn't Russia not attack back then full scale when Ukrainian army was weaker? It's would have been strategically advantageous then, now they are getting slaughtered by better trained, organized and armed Ukrainian armies and volunteers.

I don’t know. I guess they were not ready either. At the time, putin tried to use the same methodology that he used on Donetsk and Luhansk - bring over young athletic men wearing civilian clothes to protest pro-russia, occupy administrative buildings, raise russia flag and then appeal to russia for help as “rebels” and “break out regions”. The same was tried in several major cities including Kharkiv but by then the people had wisened up to the tactic and there was much more awareness of (the russian language of russian speaking Ukrainians differs from that of russians - accent, choice of some words, how some words are pronounced, that people can usually tell) and harder resistance to any such “demonstrations”. There was a few weeks back a news item that putin was questioning that the russians spent 5$ billion on destabilization in Ukraine so that people meet troops with flowers. So probably that was the strategy, prepare the ground to reduce resistance? But then Covid happened, which may have postponed the invasion, and guess thanks to kleptocracy that money went to someone’s yacht or vacation home and the Ukrainians missed the memo that they should have met the russian troops with flowers. Same it seems with the 2nd strongest army in the world, lots of funds went to private pockets….

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PPs have posted a lot of old information about Azov battallion and not much about how Azov‘s founder has done with his attempt to leave Azov battalion and start his own political party (hint - terribly) and what Azov was and is now.

Yes, Azov was founded back in 2014 by some people who had Nazi or far right beliefs, but at that time the Ukrainian army was very small and weak and had to rely on ad hoc militias like Azov which fought amazongly well and held off the Russians from taking Mariupol in 2014. As the UA developed tbe strategy was to regularize Azov into official structures so as to be able to diminish any far right influence. The founder of Azov left to start his own party, which has not been succesful at winning seats in parliament.

Ros Atkins of BBC does a great 10 minute piece with the complete 8 year history on Azov and what its influence is today. It’s an accurate, well-balanced piece.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0bx9slf/ros-atkins-on-ros-atkins-on

So.. you mean they are "good" nazis?

DP. No, no one is saying that. Their relative prominence and strength has been diminishing as the army was being strengthened over the past years since 2014. But yes, back in March - May 2014 (February 2014 yanukovych ran away with contents of Ukraine’s treasury, russia annexed crimea and invaded donbas, while trying similar scenarios in odesa, Kharkiv, and a few other cities), Volunteer battalions including azov were crucial in fighting russia.

Why were they so crucial? Other Ukrainians weren't as enthusiastic to fight Russia? Just trying to understand why their involvement was so important in 2014. It's pretty clear Putin is taking advantage of this fact and it serves his propaganda

I didn’t write only Azov was crucial. I wrote volunteer battalions ***including*** Azov were crucial. They were crucial because the army was week and unprepared for russian invasion and a lot of reliance was on volunteers. It was not clear if russia at the time would go ahead with a full scale invasion, but it was a possibility then that they would attack from the northern borders. Back then they didn’t, but the army and the international support were nowhere where they are now.

Interesting. I honestly don't know much about that region, so it's all relatively new to me. But this also begs a question, why didn't Russia not attack back then full scale when Ukrainian army was weaker? It's would have been strategically advantageous then, now they are getting slaughtered by better trained, organized and armed Ukrainian armies and volunteers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:There are a ton of articles in the mainstream media about the Azov battalion.

Here is the Washington Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2022/03/14/neo-nazi-ukraine-war/

Here is CBS News:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-russia-war-azov-battalion-putin-premise-war-vs-nazis/

It's brought up in the NPR story:

https://www.npr.org/2022/03/05/1084729572/the-russian-ukraine-conflict-could-strengthen-neo-fascist-groups-in-both-countri

Here is the New York Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/25/world/europe/militias-russia-ukraine.html

You linked to the Guardian.

Clearly it is acknowledged.

Next question?

This answers the question.

The other people who keep trying to amplify this issue are literally spreading Russian disinformation.

Ignore them.

They seem more active today. I wonder why.

There's been a pivot in Russia's position. They're looking for a way out and trying to just get Donbas to Crimes. The nazi thing is their defense to destroying Mariopul and what they want to celebrate on May 9th.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're nazis...that's the deal.

There is no if's and's or but's...they are nazis.

The Ukraine has a nazi problem, I've posted links here a few times about it.

But since they support the current thing...the sheep will be ok with it as a few PP's seem to indicate.

A country which elected a Jewish man as president with something like 75% of the vote does not have a significant nazi problem. There are a handful of nazis in the country, something that is sadly true of many countries.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:There are a ton of articles in the mainstream media about the Azov battalion.

Here is the Washington Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2022/03/14/neo-nazi-ukraine-war/

Here is CBS News:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-russia-war-azov-battalion-putin-premise-war-vs-nazis/

It's brought up in the NPR story:

https://www.npr.org/2022/03/05/1084729572/the-russian-ukraine-conflict-could-strengthen-neo-fascist-groups-in-both-countri

Here is the New York Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/25/world/europe/militias-russia-ukraine.html

You linked to the Guardian.

Clearly it is acknowledged.

Next question?

This answers the question.

The other people who keep trying to amplify this issue are literally spreading Russian disinformation.

Ignore them.

They seem more active today. I wonder why.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PPs have posted a lot of old information about Azov battallion and not much about how Azov‘s founder has done with his attempt to leave Azov battalion and start his own political party (hint - terribly) and what Azov was and is now.

Yes, Azov was founded back in 2014 by some people who had Nazi or far right beliefs, but at that time the Ukrainian army was very small and weak and had to rely on ad hoc militias like Azov which fought amazongly well and held off the Russians from taking Mariupol in 2014. As the UA developed tbe strategy was to regularize Azov into official structures so as to be able to diminish any far right influence. The founder of Azov left to start his own party, which has not been succesful at winning seats in parliament.

Ros Atkins of BBC does a great 10 minute piece with the complete 8 year history on Azov and what its influence is today. It’s an accurate, well-balanced piece.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0bx9slf/ros-atkins-on-ros-atkins-on

So.. you mean they are "good" nazis?

Posts like this convince me that the Venn diagram of people who think Ukraine has a Nazi problem because of how the Azov battalion got its start and the people who think the United States isn't racist despite how it got its start is a perfect circle.

Umm, no. Those of us who cared to look up some history understand that nazi problem in Ukraine started decades ago and that some Ukrainians were on side of nazi germany in WW2. It is a fact, go look it up. If you think that nazis only appeared in Ukraine in whatever measly numbers in 2014 then you are the one buying the propaganda of another side. Some of us don't want ANY propaganda, I don't care if it comes from Russia or Ukraine, I don't like mind games and being played and this goes for everyone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PPs have posted a lot of old information about Azov battallion and not much about how Azov‘s founder has done with his attempt to leave Azov battalion and start his own political party (hint - terribly) and what Azov was and is now.

Yes, Azov was founded back in 2014 by some people who had Nazi or far right beliefs, but at that time the Ukrainian army was very small and weak and had to rely on ad hoc militias like Azov which fought amazongly well and held off the Russians from taking Mariupol in 2014. As the UA developed tbe strategy was to regularize Azov into official structures so as to be able to diminish any far right influence. The founder of Azov left to start his own party, which has not been succesful at winning seats in parliament.

Ros Atkins of BBC does a great 10 minute piece with the complete 8 year history on Azov and what its influence is today. It’s an accurate, well-balanced piece.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0bx9slf/ros-atkins-on-ros-atkins-on

So.. you mean they are "good" nazis?

Posts like this convince me that the Venn diagram of people who think Ukraine has a Nazi problem because of how the Azov battalion got its start and the people who think the United States isn't racist despite how it got its start is a perfect circle.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:There are a ton of articles in the mainstream media about the Azov battalion.

Here is the Washington Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2022/03/14/neo-nazi-ukraine-war/

Here is CBS News:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-russia-war-azov-battalion-putin-premise-war-vs-nazis/

It's brought up in the NPR story:

https://www.npr.org/2022/03/05/1084729572/the-russian-ukraine-conflict-could-strengthen-neo-fascist-groups-in-both-countri

Here is the New York Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/25/world/europe/militias-russia-ukraine.html

You linked to the Guardian.

Clearly it is acknowledged.

Next question?

This answers the question.

The other people who keep trying to amplify this issue are literally spreading Russian disinformation.

Ignore them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PPs have posted a lot of old information about Azov battallion and not much about how Azov‘s founder has done with his attempt to leave Azov battalion and start his own political party (hint - terribly) and what Azov was and is now.

Yes, Azov was founded back in 2014 by some people who had Nazi or far right beliefs, but at that time the Ukrainian army was very small and weak and had to rely on ad hoc militias like Azov which fought amazongly well and held off the Russians from taking Mariupol in 2014. As the UA developed tbe strategy was to regularize Azov into official structures so as to be able to diminish any far right influence. The founder of Azov left to start his own party, which has not been succesful at winning seats in parliament.

Ros Atkins of BBC does a great 10 minute piece with the complete 8 year history on Azov and what its influence is today. It’s an accurate, well-balanced piece.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0bx9slf/ros-atkins-on-ros-atkins-on

So.. you mean they are "good" nazis?

DP. No, no one is saying that. Their relative prominence and strength has been diminishing as the army was being strengthened over the past years since 2014. But yes, back in March - May 2014 (February 2014 yanukovych ran away with contents of Ukraine’s treasury, russia annexed crimea and invaded donbas, while trying similar scenarios in odesa, Kharkiv, and a few other cities), Volunteer battalions including azov were crucial in fighting russia.

Why were they so crucial? Other Ukrainians weren't as enthusiastic to fight Russia? Just trying to understand why their involvement was so important in 2014. It's pretty clear Putin is taking advantage of this fact and it serves his propaganda

I didn’t write only Azov was crucial. I wrote volunteer battalions ***including*** Azov were crucial. They were crucial because the army was week and unprepared for russian invasion and a lot of reliance was on volunteers. It was not clear if russia at the time would go ahead with a full scale invasion, but it was a possibility then that they would attack from the northern borders. Back then they didn’t, but the army and the international support were nowhere where they are now.

jsteele wrote:There are a ton of articles in the mainstream media about the Azov battalion.

Here is the Washington Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2022/03/14/neo-nazi-ukraine-war/

Here is CBS News:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-russia-war-azov-battalion-putin-premise-war-vs-nazis/

It's brought up in the NPR story:

https://www.npr.org/2022/03/05/1084729572/the-russian-ukraine-conflict-could-strengthen-neo-fascist-groups-in-both-countri

Here is the New York Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/25/world/europe/militias-russia-ukraine.html

You linked to the Guardian.

Clearly it is acknowledged.

Next question?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PPs have posted a lot of old information about Azov battallion and not much about how Azov‘s founder has done with his attempt to leave Azov battalion and start his own political party (hint - terribly) and what Azov was and is now.

Yes, Azov was founded back in 2014 by some people who had Nazi or far right beliefs, but at that time the Ukrainian army was very small and weak and had to rely on ad hoc militias like Azov which fought amazongly well and held off the Russians from taking Mariupol in 2014. As the UA developed tbe strategy was to regularize Azov into official structures so as to be able to diminish any far right influence. The founder of Azov left to start his own party, which has not been succesful at winning seats in parliament.

Ros Atkins of BBC does a great 10 minute piece with the complete 8 year history on Azov and what its influence is today. It’s an accurate, well-balanced piece.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0bx9slf/ros-atkins-on-ros-atkins-on

This.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PPs have posted a lot of old information about Azov battallion and not much about how Azov‘s founder has done with his attempt to leave Azov battalion and start his own political party (hint - terribly) and what Azov was and is now.

Yes, Azov was founded back in 2014 by some people who had Nazi or far right beliefs, but at that time the Ukrainian army was very small and weak and had to rely on ad hoc militias like Azov which fought amazongly well and held off the Russians from taking Mariupol in 2014. As the UA developed tbe strategy was to regularize Azov into official structures so as to be able to diminish any far right influence. The founder of Azov left to start his own party, which has not been succesful at winning seats in parliament.

Ros Atkins of BBC does a great 10 minute piece with the complete 8 year history on Azov and what its influence is today. It’s an accurate, well-balanced piece.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0bx9slf/ros-atkins-on-ros-atkins-on

So.. you mean they are "good" nazis?