Basically denying that leftist/donbass freedom fighters existed, russia somehow twisted the narrative to seem it more popular than it was. So while he concedes crimeans wanted to be russian (which most do at this point tbh) the donbass didnt because 47% of the donbass chose to identify as Ukrainian (which is not how their identity works in that region)

[–] Euergetes@hexbear.net 20 points 4 months ago (1 children)

lol it's even internally contradictory. if donbass was puppet regime, it's nonsense to concede crimea not being one.

the legitimacy/popularity of DPR LPR is pretty passé these days though, they're gone and the political question is superceded by nato/eu

[–] redchert@lemmygrad.ml 18 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah it is.

the legitimacy/popularity of DPR LPR is pretty passé these days though, they’re gone and the political question is superceded by nato/eu

They took the heaviest casualties, and then were marginalized with the arrival of the main russian force. It was a double bind for them. But anyways, he implied that russia conjured the whole separatist thing up in the first place (donbass only became separatist in response to the nazification and increasing hostility by Ukraine).

[–] Euergetes@hexbear.net 17 points 4 months ago

if anything has become clear as time has gone on it's how meek russia had been in the donbass, it's really difficult to imagine them being on the cutting edge of manufacturing separatism when their actual deployment of soldiers there was completely inadequate lol