I mean.
One might be a coincidence.
Two out of two? Considering how few high profile whistleblowers there are, that is much more unlikely to be due to random chance, statistically speaking.
Similar to how it's not impossible that someone might fall out of a window and die.
But if in a certain country, important people who have crossed the leadership keep falling out of windows, ... well.
I wish Russians thought like you do.
I don't see what that has to do with anything
It's one thing to have a general plan for a hypothetical scenario. It's entirely different to train your troops for a very specific scenario in a literal replica of the target location.
How many US troops do you think have received anti-zombie warfare training?
In my language, the word for coal refers to both types, but you can specify "wood coal" or "rock coal" if necessary.
I'm not sure why they want to make Russian people believe that Putin and his SMO are causing this misery to them but ok
People also often feed bread to birds, but bread is harmful to birds because it doesn't provide the nutrients they need while filling them up so that they don't go find more nutritious foods.
I see no problem as long as the fire department didn't order them to touch it.
There are roughly speaking two kinds of systems. The kind of system where Bachelor is the default degree you get from university, and you can go on to get a Masters and/or a doctorate. And the other kind of system where the default university degree is a combined Bachelor and Masters, and you can study further to get a doctorate. The latter kind is in use in a lot of continental Europe, at least.
They are arguing in bad faith and they know it. The peace-absolutism is in a long tradition of pro-Soviet propaganda, where the only obstacle to eternal world peace was countries (particularly those opposing the Soviet Union) having any military at all. (Soviet Union was of course allowed to have a strong military to "protect" itself from Western, particularly US, "aggression").
All of the calls for "peace" and "diplomacy" now are exactly the same: calls to stop actively resisting Russian aggression, and in the longer term to destroy your capability of being able to resist in the first place. And, if possible, to simply roll over to all Russian demands because you aren't being "diplomatic" otherwise.
War, in this propagandistic view, is only caused by the country being invaded defending itself; after all, if they simply allowed Russia to take over, there would be no war. In the best case, the situation would have been solved through "diplomacy", i.e. simply agreeing to all Russian demands. That way war would have been avoided, right?
And because no sensible person wants war, the leaders saying "no" to Russian demands (and who therefore must not want diplomacy, right?) must want war either because they're corrupt and want to profit off of the war, because they're "russophobic" "nazis" who "unreasonably" hate Russia, or because they're being used as pawns by someone else, most likely the US. Because no one wants war, and therefore should be willing to conduct diplomacy over any questions (i.e. roll over to Russian demands) if they were not being manipulated in some way. And that is why poor Russia is "forced" to invade countries because of the US and the West, because being US pawns they are not willing to be diplomatic (i.e. agree to all Russian demands).
Anyone in the West supporting the invaded country is therefore a "warmongerer" if they do not support "diplomacy" (= letting Russia have whatever they want). Because there would be no war if Russia could just do whatever they want with no resistance.
That's literally not how it works, anything else is Russian fearmongering.
Also a bunch of countries fucking up a single country who can't even conquer their neighbor does not a world war make. If it did, the Gulf War would be called WW3 already.