@JamesSkepp

The entire goal of this was is to prevent NATO from having a border with Russia in Ukraine

I have to admit that this is very strange argument indeed, repeated here by many. See picture why IMO it is strange.

I agree with polishknight, that they didn't want NATO there, only because they would loose puppet state/ takeover possibility. Imperial minds in Moscow, wanted to keep them close and unite them again with mother Ru when circumstances would allow [long or very long game]. It is not XV century anymore, RU knows that going in forcefully is not simple, cheap. Getting Ukr civilised would remove them very much from the Red Square's area of influence. Yet at the moment they are sharing religion, language is similar, culturally very close. With behind the scenes control [including media, corruption], Ukr unlikely would drift far away from Ru and at minimum in coming years Ru would at least milk Ukr economically.

Another reason is saving face. Loosing Ukraine to West would be a slap on the face, especially after warnings not to do it.

They weren't shelling empty land, they were shelling cities.

It would be a gamble with rather flimsy economy this is why they circled around the bush since 2014 and din't want to risk it.

Mea culpa. I missed that you were talking about the first conflict. I don't wanna dispute did shelling happen as this is hardly relevant - if separatist would be allowed to grab piece of land and fetch it to Russia [with help of green helpers without ID] then after all we probably should let all minorities in all countries do the same, creating Chinese and Mexican enclaves in USA and so on in other countries [so far they are called NO GO zones, but technically they are already small but growing enclaves without political status, but lets wait another 100 years].

On top of that let's split 3 Baltic countries into Real part and Rusian part - especially Latvia that was having over 50% of Russians in 2000 and now only ~25%. I knew just a few Balticians and they feared this mix - rightfully so IMO.

For the same reason although Baltic countries are not strong themselves they were sending some stuff to Ukr as they knew how it is and they know that they might be next and even NATO warranties might not save them.

I see it in a simple terms. You want it, OK then try to get it but then be prepared for the consequences. And whether Russia wins or looses, they are getting consequences. This is what a war and a street brawl ends up like.

I would speculate that west allowed to remove nukes from Ukr as they were expecting troubles and didn't want someone irresponsible starting proper shit. With level of corruption it could be even someone from Ru trying to frame Ukr into un/successful nuclear attack.

Fuck it - there is many options. Fact is borders were established and if someone was not happy with them, they could sell and move on. And for the money Ru spent on a war, they could likely resettle all these ppl if they were so worried about their welfare. But Donbas Being what Ruhr region is for Germany was to juicy to let go.

it actually made their eco more resilient?

Another thing is how anyone can rely on any data provided by big players. USA paints economic data in lies, China was proven to hide stuff - how could anyone take data from Russia seriously - being likely as accurate as war loses. Only time will tell.

It was used by everyone

I don't have stats, but ofc they were corrupt and went for the highest bidder, but then IMO the income was split between oligarch and Moscow. President from around 2014 running away to Russia? With this money why not UK, USA, Spain?

As you see I'm not denying idea of Russia invading some other country to defend its own interests [or rather ruling group], but I call official reasons bullshit. After all no one would eat up the real ones.

In west stuff is wrapped in helping women, children in Russia it is more old-school since it is more macho and follows old narratives, around which values were build: superpower, sacrifice, mother Russia and what not. In both cases these are slogans and people eat this up.

@ShapeShiffer

Russia wanted to represent their own interest and had to start a war.

Russia didn't want to star a war. War costs money and contrary to US in Russia the military industrial complex isn't really that private, it's state controlled. It would be a gamble with rather flimsy economy this is why they circled around the bush since 2014 and din't want to risk it. They had their choice made for them when Ukr baited them into attacking.

Ukraine should [looking at history of abuse as satellite country] do everything to get away from Russia

They should have done even more not to to act against it and not to provoke it.

Ukr was still being used by Ru

It was used by everyone, mostly b/c it was so corrupt. The corruption wasn't the fault of anyone else than Ukr. All they had to do is not to take the money.

loose chance to take over the whole country at some much later date

The entire goal of this was is to prevent NATO from having a border with Russia in Ukraine. Why would Russia want to take over if they would just end up on the NATO border anyway? A much more realistic assumption is that Rus wanted a neutral country that would be a buffer from the NATO.

Ukrainians were shelling their own land, maybe not exactly cool

They weren't shelling empty land, they were shelling cities. This is well known since the very start of the 2014 conflict.

If UKR wants to get away, they need to bleed Russia as much as possible and HOPE for the best.

All Ukr had to do is to agree it will not enter NATO. This is pretty well understood even in the West, it's admitted this was the agreed upon condition during the unsuccessful negotiations just after the war started.

They need to get Russia to the point where even internal problems would destabilise Russia

How many years will it take for people who believe in this that this isn't going to happen? Do you realize that Russia has been placed under more economic sanctions than ALL other countries combined - and not only it haven't broken them it actually made their eco more resilient?

I wouldn't be surprised if Hamas was supported by Russia

Yes indeed Hamas is supported by Russia by supplying them with weapons the West sent to Ukraine. Much more probable than Ukrainians making money on the side.

Russia has rather close ties to Israel due to the fact that a lot of Rus Jews went to Israel and a lot of Israeli Jews do business in Russia, sanctions or not. This is pretty well know.

Hamas was allowed to grow and prepare by Bibi, this is also documented.

@JamesSkepp

No idea what you mean here.

1. Russia wanted to represent their own interest and had to start a war.
2. Ukraine should [looking at history of abuse as satellite country] do everything to get away from Russia
3. Ukr was still being used by Ru since gaining independence, by puppet gov / oligarch tied to Russia [Ukr might be used to provoke Ru by 3rd parties, but from Ukr perspective it was OK enough]
4. Ukr to move on, needs support from outside
5. No one will provide this support [to high corrupt/wild country] for free
6. Ukr needs to bargain, EU accession is unrealistic short term and even if... Ru would not allow Ukr to get civilised. By keeping Ukr corrupted, Ru can have good enough control over the state
7. NATO is interested [or not - as Ukr doesn't give NATO much more than Poland or Baltic countries already do - but Russia would loose influence over puppet and possibly loose chance to take over the whole country at some much later date]

This is why nations need to split,

Like US split from UK. No one like leaches. Especially if they commit genocide and the oldest citizens can still remember it.

this is why Ukrainians had to provoke the invasion by massively amping up the artillery strikes on the Donbas

come on, Ukrainians were shelling their own land, maybe not exactly cool, but at least they didn't design their own area of Donbas for nuclear tests.

If Ukraine wouldn't pick a fight, it would be matter of time for the next chapter. Ru "would think" that it's OK to invade weak ass pussies. Ukr had to retaliate at this point. Even if the war will finish with even greater loses to Ukr, then there was no choice. If UKR wants to get away, they need to bleed Russia as much as possible and HOPE for the best.

Ukr doesn't need to win. They need to get Russia to the point where even internal problems would destabilise Russia. With that in mind Russia would loose much more influence in other countries - will they risk so much in the name of Ukraine?

I wouldn't be surprised if Hamas was supported by Russia, because they should have been planning overstretching US/EU support lines as well.