Are areas of Ukraine happy to join Russia since they share common values?

>retard russian din't know about that land of Russia are sell to China
Typical russian pleb.
carnegie.ru/commentary/81181

Attached: 1645649765766.png (564x384, 244.4K)

It seems like the south would be more manageable. It may even cause portions of the Ukrainian population to move away in the long term.

Ukraine did a good job at anti-russian propaganda. Good thing we don't care about human rights and any opposition will be killed.

Nice fucking propaganda picture there. Making it seem as if half the country is Russian natives.
The cut off for yellow is at 10%. Not even half of 50%. Which in itself is a bit fucking SUS.

I got warned about this kind of deception tactic in images in school 7 years ago and this is the first time I've ever been able to apply it.

Attached: 786785.png (348x293, 12.94K)

Drawing the new country's borders at the battle front by the invading army is a serious breach of war ethics.

It's the same with paid Russians trolls on rotating shifts flooding Any Forums with thousands of posts 24/7. You don't care how wrong or uncool that is? Invading other countries, murdering their civilians, spreading lies and stealing their land.

This is why Russians will never be welcome in the West.

The problem isn't to control Ukraine or part of it's regions. The problem is gain/loss ratio for Russia in terms of demography and economy.

1. Ukraine is poor. Very poor. They were very rich compared to the rest of Russia in Soviet times, mostly due to industries Moscow placed there (like space industry, plane-manufacturing, etc). But they wasted it all. Everything was either stolen or rotted away. The funny thing in retrospective is that Ukrainians didn't treasure it at all, they thought they fed Russia and their industry will stay with them after they leave USSR. Obviously they failed miserably. And Russians are afraid it will happen again. We give them money, they get rich, spit in our faces and leave, got poor again and turns out it was better to just burn this money during winter or something.

2. Ukrainians are rapidly aging and emigrating. There aren't enough people to be considered substantial workforce anymore. Even if Russia decides to invest money again, there are not enough people to conduct industrialisation again. Besides, all that gain in population Russia got from Ukrainians emigrating into Russia will be nullified.

3. Ukrainians in Ukraine itself will be expecting at least the same level of life the rest of Russia has. But it is unachievable for 1 and 2.

In short, it is easier to just let Ukraine die out by itself. Nothing to gain, everything to lose.

I don't mind the scale, its useful because 0-50% is the relevant range here.

ALL of Ukraine is Russian.

"Ukrainian" is just a Russian dialect.

I hope Russia takes Sweden next BTW, that would be comedy gold.

Attached: russian_saviours_of_the_white_race.jpg (1280x930, 123.69K)

Ask yourself why 0-50% instead of 0-100% would be the relevant range

Attached: dughin.jpg (1371x993, 557K)

This all makes sense, but it seems to me that Putin is more concerned with long term security and geopolitical concerns. Annexing the south would improve Russia's situation militarily.
How concerned do you think Putin is about the economic situation that will follow? He has shown in the past that he is willing sacrifice the economy for security

Attached: NovoRussia.jpg (1024x683, 271.96K)

Because it is easier to compare and contrast. I don't want to see 0-100 when the regions I am looking at are all 0-50.

Oh, and:

4. They are disloyal. There won't be any guerilla/partisan movements in case Russia invades. Not because they like us, but because they are unable too. Ukraine and it's society aren't Afghanistan and Afghanis. It isn't a problem to control them directly, but it is a risk that when Russia becomes weaker even for a short period of time and for whatever reason, they will cause problems like mass political gatherings, disobedience, etc. They lived in an independent state for 30 years, there are at least two generations of Ukrainians right now who don't associate themselves with Russia. And modern Russian state would be unable to assimilate them. To assimilate them a strong, brutal, totalitarian state with high birthrates of its titular nation is needed. Moderns Russia is no state of such, it is demography much better than Ukrainian, but it is obviously not enough. Maybe in 200 years or so, there will be 500 mln of Russians and 6 mln of Ukrainians (believe it or not - it is quite possible given the trends) and Russia will be a much more "legist" state - then we can try. But in this century? No. Let them destroy themselves. They chose their fate in 1991 themselves.

I think he would be satisfied with keeping Ukraine neutral or organizing a coup or something like that. Taking responsibility for the whole of Ukraine would be a massive economic burden. Too much for Russia to bare in my opinion.

>Drawing the new country's borders at the battle front by the invading army is a serious breach of war ethics.
You seem to have some funny ideas about the nature of war

Why is Putin annexing territories in Ukraine? He says it's for security, but the U.S/NATO could launch attacks from anywhere. It's not like Putin has been portrayed as a saint in Western media, so any hostility (warranted or not) from the West will be welcomed with cheers by golem TV watchers.

hey Ivan
stay warm

Maybe they're not happy but they won't risk their lives to stop it.

Since ww2 Russia is all about keeping big conflicts as far from the motherland as possible.