So Long And Thanks For All The Fish - Ukraine bombs Russian Nuclear Bombers

[Mavideol]

14 hours ago, Caldera said:

 

I'm reading nonsense on a daily basis, but this is really taking the cake. Nothing will happen, keep calm.

 

That's exactly the kind of operation I'd like to see more of, well done. 

you are correct, nothing will change  as PACO.... he's always bluffing with nuclear this nuclear that, if he ever pushed the button he knows very well Russia would cease to exist

[ChicagoExpat]

35 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Think what you like. Putin will retaliate because of this drone strike. There has also been what is being said to be two attacks on bridges taking out passenger trains.

Sorry to be argumentative, but I won't even call it "retaliate."  He would intentionally go on killing civilians and needs no excuse to do it more.  Little men need to act tough -- compensation for all kinds of things, you know.

[Seppius]

12 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

More lies, before the terrorist attack in Russia the Ukrainian forces were retreating and the Russians were advancing in Ukraine.

 

Gained nothing but open fields and small towns and villagers, costing tens-thousands of Russian troops, Ukraine is well dug in and retreat as they slaughter the on coming sheep

 

"It has taken a year for Russia's troops to advance about 40km (25 miles). Ukraine was forced to withdraw from Avdiivka, just north of Donetsk, in February 2024 after months of fighting"

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0l0k4389g2o

 

"more lies"

I think the Institute for War would know a bit more than you, don't you think?

 

https://www.understandingwar.org/who-we-are

[Cameroni]

11 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

Cute. There is just one itsy, bitsy detail that this great scheme overlooks: membership in NATO was never  going to happen. There was no way that the USA and others were going to take on the  risks and exposures that Ukraine would bring.  It was never ever a viable option. No one trusted Ukraine. Ukraine was filled with Russian spies, and NATO did not need another member that leaked secrets and technology like Turkey.

 

Please. 

 

NATO grandly announced Ukraine was on track to become a member. Ukraine has enshrined the goal of NATO membership in its very constitution.

 

 

in February 1994, Ukraine was the first post-Soviet country to conclude a framework agreement with NATO in the framework of the Partnership for Peace initiative, supporting the initiative of Central and Eastern European countries to join NATO.

 

 

 During President Viktor Yushchenko's first official visit to the United States, President George W. Bush declared: "I am a supporter of the idea of Ukraine's membership in NATO.

 

On 27 April 2006 at a meeting of NATO foreign ministers, the representative of the NATO Secretary General, James Appathurai, stated that all members of the alliance support the speedy integration of Ukraine into NATO.

 

At the NATO summit in Bucharest in April 2008, NATO decided it would not yet offer membership to Georgia and Ukraine; nevertheless, NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said that those two countries would eventually become members. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine–NATO_relations

[LosLobo]

8 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

Liar!

 

"According to a Foreign Affairs article from October 2022, multiple former senior U.S. officials said that “Russian and Ukrainian negotiators appeared to have tentatively agreed on the outlines of a negotiated interim settlement

 

Former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett played a large role in those April 2022 negotiations. In an interview, he also claimed that Russia and Ukraine were willing to make major concessions and end the conflict, until pressure from then UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson convinced Zelensky to back down from such a deal. Davyd Arakhamia, a Ukrainian parliamentary representative at the talks, made a similar claim. “They were hoping almost to the end to put pressure on us to sign such a document and accept neutrality. It was a big deal for them,” he said in November 2023, referring to the Russians. “They were ready to end the war if we, like Finland once did, would accept neutrality and pledge not to join NATO. In fact, that was the main point. All the rest are cosmetic and political ‘additions.

 

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/ukraine-russia-2669196351/

Throwing around “Liar!” doesn’t make your version true — it just shows you’ve got nothing but headlines and half-quotes.
 

Yes, there were exploratory talks in early 2022. Yes, intermediaries like Naftali Bennett were involved. And yes, Ukraine considered proposals — including neutrality. But no, there was no finalized deal, no formal agreement, and no genuine Russian offer that didn’t require Ukraine to effectively surrender.
 

You cite Davyd Arakhamia — but leave out that he said Russia’s offer was conditional on Ukraine giving up NATO and accepting “neutrality,” with no binding guarantees. Ukraine didn’t reject peace. They rejected a dictated settlement while Russian troops were murdering civilians in Bucha and launching missile strikes during the talks.
 

Even Bennett later clarified that mistrust, not Western pressure, killed the deal. And “major concessions”? Russia wanted capitulation, not compromise.
 

You can toss links from opinion sites like Responsible Statecraft all day, but it doesn’t change the facts: there was no peace agreement ready to sign. Just a Kremlin narrative trying to pin the blame on everyone but the invader.
 

So next time, leave out the name-calling — and bring a full quote, not a fragment.

Sources:

https://www.businessinsider.com/ukrainian-peace-negotiator-says-mood-peace-talks-changed-bucha-russia-2022-4
https://www.axios.com/2023/02/22/israel-russia-invasion-ukraine-bennett-mediation-failure
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/feb/12/zelenskyy-rejects-claim-boris-johnson-talked-him-out-of-2022-peace-deal
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/zelenskiy-denies-uk-pm-johnson-dissuaded-him-peace-deal-2023-03-29/

[Mavideol]

2 hours ago, frank83628 said:

Its amazing how many here are still in the cold war era.

did you include yourself 

[Mavideol]

50 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Think what you like. Putin will retaliate because of this drone strike. There has also been what is being said to be two attacks on bridges taking out passenger trains.

no retaliation as PACO.... (Putin Always Chicken Out)

[transam]

1 minute ago, Mavideol said:

did you include yourself 

Spot on.............

And he can't see it.......🤗

[Cameroni]

4 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

Throwing around “Liar!” doesn’t make your version true — it just shows you’ve got nothing but headlines and half-quotes.
 

Yes, there were exploratory talks in early 2022. Yes, intermediaries like Naftali Bennett were involved. And yes, Ukraine considered proposals — including neutrality. But no, there was no finalized deal, no formal agreement, and no genuine Russian offer that didn’t require Ukraine to effectively surrender.
 

You cite Davyd Arakhamia — but leave out that he said Russia’s offer was conditional on Ukraine giving up NATO and accepting “neutrality,” with no binding guarantees. Ukraine didn’t reject peace. They rejected a dictated settlement while Russian troops were murdering civilians in Bucha and launching missile strikes during the talks.
 

Even Bennett later clarified that mistrust, not Western pressure, killed the deal. And “major concessions”? Russia wanted capitulation, not compromise.
 

You can toss links from opinion sites like Responsible Statecraft all day, but it doesn’t change the facts: there was no peace agreement ready to sign. Just a Kremlin narrative trying to pin the blame on everyone but the invader.
 

So next time, leave out the name-calling — and bring a full quote, not a fragment.

Sources:

https://www.businessinsider.com/ukrainian-peace-negotiator-says-mood-peace-talks-changed-bucha-russia-2022-4
https://www.axios.com/2023/02/22/israel-russia-invasion-ukraine-bennett-mediation-failure
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/feb/12/zelenskyy-rejects-claim-boris-johnson-talked-him-out-of-2022-peace-deal
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/zelenskiy-denies-uk-pm-johnson-dissuaded-him-peace-deal-2023-03-29/

 

You can keep posting misinformation if you want, but the historical record is very clear. 

 

Davyd Arakhamia, the head of the Ukrainian delegation, has said publicly that Johnson flew in to tell Zelensky to fight.

 

"According to the lawmaker, while another round of talks was underway in Istanbul, Boris Johnson unexpectedly came to Kyiv on April 9 and said that Ukraine "shouldn't sign anything with them at all – and let's just fight."

 

Three days after Johnson's departure from Kyiv, Putin publicly stated that talks with Ukraine had “turned into a dead end.

 

https://www.kyivpost.com/post/24645

 

So it was pure coincidence then that the Ukraine/Russia peace talks that went into four rounds ended abruptly 3 days after Boris Johnson flew to Kiev?

[LosLobo]

30 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

It’s worth adding that Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia didn’t simply “fall” to communism in a vacuum. These countries turned to the Soviet Union and China because they were being bombed, invaded, or manipulated — often with U.S. support for colonial powers like the French.
 

Ho Chi Minh even wrote to President Truman in 1945, appealing for support to rid Vietnam of French colonial rule — invoking the same principles the U.S. had used to gain independence from Britain. He was ignored.
 

Had the U.S. backed anti-colonial self-determination instead of siding with France, the Cold War landscape in Southeast Asia could have looked very different.

It’s ironic. Just as Ho Chi Minh turned to the Soviets and Chinese after the U.S. ignored his pleas for support against French colonialism, Trump-style isolationism today could push other nations — especially those under threat — to turn to China or Russia by necessity, not ideology.
 

When the U.S. steps back from global leadership or abandons allies, it doesn’t create peace — it creates a vacuum. And history shows who steps in.

[Mavideol]

32 minutes ago, impulse said:

In fact, the ones in Donbas already have.  (And even voted that way.) 

and free democratic elections took place, right??? come on,  get real

[BLMFem]

4 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

and free democratic elections took place, right??? come on,  get real

There's no point replying to Putin stooges.

[Yagoda]

44 minutes ago, Hummin said:

The historians is not on your side. 

Who and what?

 

46 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Once a Norwegian King ruled Kyiv, does that make it Norwegian? 

No

 

47 minutes ago, Hummin said:

you deny 183 countries reckoned Ukraine as a country

I deny that matters.

 

 

[Yagoda]

39 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

 

There is no attack.  It is just that your comments are often irrational and meandering,  lashing out at sinister cadres.   

There is a significant amount of research that  shows  that long-term and/or heavy use of cannabis can cause people who are high to not know what is real, to have hallucinations and to demonstrate paranoia. It is a psychosis. Heavy use of cannabis may lead to development of psychotic disorders, such as schizophrenia. The relationship between cannabis use and psychotic, bipolar, depressive, and anxiety disorders, has been documented.  For Example; Cannabis Use and the Risk for Psychosis and Affective Disorders:Lucia Sideli, PhD ,Harriet Quigley , MBBS, MRes, MRCPsych ,Caterina La Cascia, PhD & Robin M. Murray, MD, FRS Pages 22-42 |Journal of Dual Diagnosis 24 Oct 2019   

 

Translation: I have no cogent argument so I will just flame to express my rage at someone who could bests me in an argument constantly.

 

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

16 hours ago, frank83628 said:

I challenge all the war mongers here to my gym, for a Putin is bad sparring session

Learn from the idiocy of others:

 

Google “MAGA Coward CRUMBLES as Challenge Blows Up in His Face” before you make a similar idiot of yourself.

[rabas]

2 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Tell us what tactical purpose this attack served instead of the usual flaming we see from your crowd

 

Russia has been regularly attacking Ukraine and civilian targets with the very same Tu-22M3 and Tu-160 strategic bombers while the A-50 coordinated air operations and detect air defenses.

 

Recent evidence suggested Russia was preparing a much larger scale attack using these same aircraft, possibly to overshadow upcoming negotiations, quintessential Putin.

 

One must have a special love for Russian propaganda to not understand Ukraine has a right and obligation to defend itself from Putin's stone age war of territorial conquest and annihilation. 

[LosLobo]

23 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

You can keep posting misinformation if you want, but the historical record is very clear. 

 

Davyd Arakhamia, the head of the Ukrainian delegation, has said publicly that Johnson flew in to tell Zelensky to fight.

 

"According to the lawmaker, while another round of talks was underway in Istanbul, Boris Johnson unexpectedly came to Kyiv on April 9 and said that Ukraine "shouldn't sign anything with them at all – and let's just fight."

 

Three days after Johnson's departure from Kyiv, Putin publicly stated that talks with Ukraine had “turned into a dead end.

 

https://www.kyivpost.com/post/24645

 

So it was pure coincidence then that the Ukraine/Russia peace talks that went into four rounds ended abruptly 3 days after Boris Johnson flew to Kiev?

You’re accusing others of spreading misinformation while pushing a narrative built on selective quotes and logical fallacies.
 

“B happened after A, therefore A caused B” is a classic post hoc fallacy.
 

Yes, Boris Johnson visited Kyiv on April 9. And yes, Davyd Arakhamia said Johnson advised against signing anything. But he never said Johnson ended a peace deal. He also said Ukraine didn’t trust Russia and saw the offer — neutrality for vague assurances — as unreliable.
 

Meanwhile, the talks were already falling apart. On April 1, the world saw the Bucha massacre. That hardened Ukraine’s position. By April 4, Zelensky said peace was impossible without justice.
 

Putin’s “dead end” remark came after Ukraine rejected Russia’s core demands: neutrality, demilitarization, and ceding territory. That’s not a peace deal — that’s surrender.
 

Johnson’s advice reflected reality. Ukraine couldn’t negotiate while Russia bombed its cities.
 

You suggest it’s suspicious the talks collapsed three days after Johnson’s visit. It’s also when Bucha’s mass graves hit global headlines. So no — not a “pure coincidence,” just a brutal reminder of who Ukraine was dealing with. Correlation isn’t causation — and pretending otherwise is dishonest.

Zelensky himself called the idea that Johnson blocked peace “illogical”.
 

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/zelenskiy-denies-uk-pm-johnson-dissuaded-him-peace-deal-2023-03-29/
 

There was no deal to sign. No Western veto. Just another recycled Kremlin myth — clung to by people who should know better.
 

And when someone opens with an insult instead of evidence, it’s usually because they’ve already lost the argument.

[dinsdale]

21 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

There's no point replying to Putin stooges.

There are "Putin stooges" for sure. Just as there are "Zelensky stooges". Then there are those who who have rational thought. Where would you place yourself. Your history of posts suggests not the latter.

[dinsdale]

14 minutes ago, rabas said:

Recent evidence suggested Russia was preparing a much larger scale attack using these same aircraft, possibly to overshadow upcoming negotiations

This is something you really need to back up. How about a source or two otherwise this can only be seen as something you've made up.

[Cameroni]

17 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

He also said Ukraine didn’t trust Russia and saw the offer — neutrality for vague assurances — as unreliable.

 

Which is why Ukraine insisted on "security guarantees". However, when Johnson flew in to tell Zelensky that the West would not support any deal with Russia it was clear that there would be no security guarantees, so Zelensky had no choice but to fight as Johnson asked him to.. Of course Johnson ended the peace deal.

 

Massive, and very prolongued peace negotiations that had gone into four rounds were abruptly ended 3 days after Zelensky welcomed Boris Johnson. 

 

You have to read the evidence like an adult. Very obviously Johnson ended the peace deal. Without security guarantees he knew Ukraine could not sign. Without Western backing it was impossible for Ukraine to sign.

 

Of course Zelensky has to make it look like a principled decision, Russia were war criminals, etc etc, but the crux of the matter obviously was that Johnson flew in precisely with the aim to abort the peace talks and to exhort Zelensky to fight Russia instead.  Zelensky's denials are not worth the paper they're written on. He just wants to make himself look good. He can hardly admit that he was railroaded by the West into war, can he?

 

The fact is there were long peace negotiations at the start of the war, when Russia offered to end the war if Ukraine would become neutral and forego NATIO, as well some territories Russia considered hers. Ukraine would have signed if they had received security guarantees, ie had the West backed the deal, but Johnson made clear the West would not. So Ukraine had no option but to fight. For obvious reasons Zelensky would not admit that is was happened, but the head of the Ukrainian delegation has admitted it.

 

"Elsewhere in the interview, Arakhamia brought up former U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson's surprise visit to Kyiv in April 2022. He said Johnson encouraged Ukraine to not "sign anything" with Russia and "just fight.

 

https://www.newsweek.com/russia-offered-end-war-if-ukraine-dropped-nato-bid-kyiv-official-1847373

[Yagoda]

13 minutes ago, rabas said:

Russia has been regularly attacking Ukraine and civilian targets with the very same Tu-22M3 and Tu-160 strategic bombers while the A-50 coordinated air operations and detect air defenses.

Thank god somebody tried to answerthe question. Please show us where strategic nuclear bombers are being used against Ukraine

 

14 minutes ago, rabas said:

Recent evidence suggested Russia was preparing a much larger scale attack using these same aircraft, possibly to overshadow upcoming negotiations, quintessential Putin.

Please show us the source of that allegation

 

16 minutes ago, rabas said:

One must have a special love for Russian propaganda to not understand Ukraine has a right and obligation to defend itself from Putin's stone age war of territorial conquest and annihilation. 

Russia is a scumbag country run by a scumbag, fighting over their scumbag "breakaway" territory run by a scumbag in an area where all the mouth breathing scumbag eurotrash kill each over and over for ethnic reasons, if they arent killing jews first. 

 

None of you Ukraine fanboys know a whit about the history of this area, and how stupid Western policy was after the breakup of the Soviet Union.

[ChicagoExpat]

1 hour ago, Yagoda said:

Russians have been barbaric since they have become a nation. Ukrainians are no better.

 

Crimea you are referring to? Can you show us where Crimea is historically Ukraine?

Your pro-Russia argument is SO transparent, amigo -- It doesn't matter when it was "historically" Ukraine.  It matters when it was ACTUALLY Ukraine.  So the answer is 1954.  And as Russia is the center of your arguments on these issues, I also offer 1992, when Russia established diplomatic relations with Ukraine, having recognized it in 1991.  But you knew all this -- clearly you've wikipedia'd up on this stuff, as you keep challenging people to the Ukraine version of a slap fight, and everyone just rolls their eyes and moves on.  I indulged you, so you're welcome!

[RayC]

38 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

Please. 

 

NATO grandly announced Ukraine was on track to become a member. Ukraine has enshrined the goal of NATO membership in its very constitution.

 

 

in February 1994, Ukraine was the first post-Soviet country to conclude a framework agreement with NATO in the framework of the Partnership for Peace initiative, supporting the initiative of Central and Eastern European countries to join NATO.

 

 

 During President Viktor Yushchenko's first official visit to the United States, President George W. Bush declared: "I am a supporter of the idea of Ukraine's membership in NATO.

 

On 27 April 2006 at a meeting of NATO foreign ministers, the representative of the NATO Secretary General, James Appathurai, stated that all members of the alliance support the speedy integration of Ukraine into NATO.

 

At the NATO summit in Bucharest in April 2008, NATO decided it would not yet offer membership to Georgia and Ukraine; nevertheless, NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said that those two countries would eventually become members. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine–NATO_relations

 

An incomplete history. Why stop at 2008? Ahh .... here's why:

 

Ukraine voted to abandon the goal of NATO membership and re-affirm her neutral status in 2010. 

 

Ukraine was a non-aligned country when Russia annexed Crimea in March 2014. She only reapplied for NATO membership in December 2014 following the annexation and Moscow's increased support for separatist rebels in Donbass.

[Chomper Higgot]

6 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

Which is why Ukraine insisted on "security guarantees". However, when Johnson flew in to tell Zelensky that the West would not support any deal with Russia it was clear that there would be no security guarantees, so Zelensky had no choice but to fight as Johnson asked him to.. Of course Johnson ended the peace deal.

 

Massive, and very prolongued peace negotiations that had gone into four rounds were abruptly ended 3 days after Zelensky welcomed Boris Johnson. 

 

You have to read the evidence like an adult. Very obviously Johnson ended the peace deal. Without security guarantees he knew Ukraine could not sign. Without Western backing it was impossible for Ukraine to sign.

 

Of course Zelensky has to make it look like a principled decision, Russia were war criminals, etc etc, but the crux of the matter obviously was that Johnson flew in precisely with the aim to abort the peace talks and to exhort Zelensky to fight Russia instead.  Zelensky's denials are not worth the paper they're written on. He just wants to make himself look good. He can hardly admit that he was railroaded by the West into war, can he?

 

The fact is there were long peace negotiations at the start of the war, when Russia offered to end the war if Ukraine would become neutral and forego NATIO, as well some territories Russia considered hers. Ukraine would have signed if they had received security guarantees, ie had the West backed the deal, but Johnson made clear the West would not. So Ukraine had no option but to fight. For obvious reasons Zelensky would not admit that is was happened, but the head of the Ukrainian delegation has admitted it.

 

"Elsewhere in the interview, Arakhamia brought up former U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson's surprise visit to Kyiv in April 2022. He said Johnson encouraged Ukraine to not "sign anything" with Russia and "just fight.

 

https://www.newsweek.com/russia-offered-end-war-if-ukraine-dropped-nato-bid-kyiv-official-1847373

Let me remove the dross for you.

 

Russia aren’t made to look like war criminals, Putin put a lot of effort into Russia engaging in war crimes by ordering an illegal war of invasion against Ukraine.

 

 

[ChicagoExpat]

8 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

This is something you really need to back up. How about a source or two otherwise this can only be seen as something you've made up.

I'll disagree with both of you and say it doesn't matter.  Bombers are a legitimate military target in war.  There's no need to justify it, neither is there any need to cry "TERRORISM" when legitimate military targets (like bombers) are destroyed.

 

And here's my reminder that Putin intentionally, daily, routinely targets civilians, and the dread retaliation Mr. Dinsdale says is coming will, as always, 100% falls on civilians.

 

Keep this in mind:  Ukraine hits military aircraft and you guys call them terrorists, and Russia hits hospitals and you guys call them heroes.

[BarraMarra]

2 hours ago, Yagoda said:

That was the point of Zelinskys attack. Absolutely no use on the battlefield, designed to provoke.

 

More war is in Zelinskys interest.

well he shouldn't have flattened McDonalds in Kiev should he Yagoda

[dinsdale]

2 hours ago, dinsdale said:

Things look a little different now. The second map is Sumy. I'd take most of the grey zone here which denotes "in dispute" as red denoting "Russian controlled". This is IMO the beginning of the buffer zone Putin is talking about and will expand. The blue zone in the second map is what's left of the territory held in Kursk by the Ukrainian's. As I stated before this is now only around 5 km² with the Russians now occupying somewhere between 106-170 km2. DeepState maps are always a bit slow to update. 

https://deepstatemap.live/en#11/51.1211959/35.0587463

I got a thumbs down for this. Why? This is what the situation looks like or there about. DeepState is Ukrainian so it's usually worse than shown. Eventually catches up but again is slow to update. Some people on here are just complete idiots. There are multiple other war mappers. Go and look. I've said so many times and I'll say it again Russia is winning the ground war albeit slowly because this is A WAR OF PROTRACTED ATTRITION. I've simply stated the situation yet some moron, probably will be joined by others, gives the thumbs down. 

[ChicagoExpat]

4 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

An incomplete history. Why stop at 2008? Ahh .... here's why:

 

Ukraine voted to abandon the goal of NATO membership and re-affirm her neutral status in 2010. 

 

Ukraine was a non-aligned country when Russia annexed Crimea in March 2014. She only reapplied for NATO membership in December 2014 following the annexation and Moscow's increased support for separatist rebels in Donbass.

So what you're saying is:  The number one reason people hate and fear Russia and turn to the West is... Russia.  An indisputable conclusion.

 

Thanks for expanding NATO, Vladimir!

[impulse]

5 minutes ago, RayC said:

Ukraine was a non-aligned country when Russia annexed Crimea in March 2014. She only reapplied for NATO membership in December 2014 following the annexation and Moscow's increased support for separatist rebels in Donbass.

 

Don't you mean after the coup?  

 

 

[Cameroni]

1 hour ago, RayC said:

 

An incomplete history. Why stop at 2008? Ahh .... here's why:

 

Ukraine voted to abandon the goal of NATO membership and re-affirm her neutral status in 2010. 

 

Ukraine was a non-aligned country when Russia annexed Crimea in March 2014. She only reapplied for NATO membership in December 2014 following the annexation and Moscow's increased support for separatist rebels in Donbass.

On 24 June 2010 the Ukrainian Cabinet of Ministers approved an action plan to implement an annual national program of cooperation with NATO that year.[82] This included:[82]

• Involvement of Ukrainian aviation and transport material in the transportation of cargo and personnel of the armed forces of NATO's member states and partners participating in NATO-led peacekeeping missions and operations;
• The continuation of Ukraine's participation in a peacekeeping operation in Kosovo;
• Possible reinforcing of Ukraine's peacekeeping contingents in Afghanistan and Iraq;
• Ukraine's participation in a number of international events organized by NATO;
• Training of Ukrainian troops in the structures of NATO members.

Ukraine and NATO continued to hold joint seminars and joint tactical and strategical exercises and operations during the Yanukovych Presidency.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine–NATO_relations

 

So whilst Ukraine was briefly non-aligned, this came to a swift end when Yanukovych was ousted in the CIA formented Maidan uprising. And even during this "non-alignment" Ukraine was co-operating closely with and aiding NATO.

 

But all that is irrelevant, Ukraine had shown it was receptive to switching sides to Europe and NATO. NATO had shown that it had lied, and deceived Russia that it would not expand eastwards. When NATO brazenly announced in Bucharest that Ukraine would become a NATO member, it was only THEN that Russia understood it was lied to and the danger of Ukraine becoming more friendly with the West than Russia was very real. Only THEN did Russia resolved to take military action, when years and years of making clear that Ukraine was a red line, when years of diplomatic efforts were shown to be fruitless.

 

The only language the West understands, sadly is force.