• long running

Free to Watch - Winter on Fire: Ukraine’s Fight for Freedom @ YouTube

22853
Free to Watch - Winter on Fire: Ukraine’s Fight for Freedom @ YouTube
Go to Deal
Taegukgi on 06/03/2022 - 08:42 youtu.be (3980 clicks)

You will need to turn on English subtitles as documentary is in Ukrainian.

Source -

Netflix has just put a full documentary on YouTube, making Winter on Fire: Ukraine’s Fight for Freedom available free to anyone interested in understanding the Russia-Ukraine war. The move came late on Friday, just as Russia announced a new fake news law meant to hinder dissent in the country. Anyone disseminating news about the war — including calling it a “war” — will face up to 15 years in jail. That includes members of the press who do not serve the authoritarian regime in the country.

Separately, Russia has blocked parts of the internet in the county. That means many people in Russia are not able to watch Winter on Fire, even though you can stream the entire documentary for free on YouTube. But everyone else in the world can watch it in full for free on YouTube. The documentary will help you understand where Ukraine’s desire for freedom comes from and what kind of people are fighting Putin’s army.

Entertainment Documentary Ukraine

Related Stores

YouTube
YouTube

Comments

  • Musiclover on 06/03/2022 - 08:54
    +39

    There is a better one. "Ukraine on fire" by Oliver Stone https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKcmNGvaDUs
    It was made in 2016. Is that a coincidence that this one is called "Winter on fire"? Don't think so. Netflix is trying to misplace the real deal with propoganda.

    • ginmi on 06/03/2022 - 09:10

      Netflix is trying to misplace the real deal with propoganda

      Spot on! They are not even hiding it

      • brotherfranciz on 06/03/2022 - 10:54
        +84

        This is misinformation.

        A simple check would tell you:

        Winter on Fire - 2015

        Ukraine on Fire - 2016

        So in fact, it's the other way around - 'Ukraine on Fire' is the one using a similar title to the Netflix documentary to cause confusion.

        • MorriJ on 06/03/2022 - 12:00
          +29

          Aww who lets facts get in the way of a good propaganda spiel.

        • FW190 on 06/03/2022 - 12:00
          +1

          so which one is the better one?

          over the years, I have only heard of people talking about "Winter On Fire", but never heard of "Ukraine On Fire", haven't seen either of them.

        • Musiclover on 06/03/2022 - 12:07
          +9

          True, I was under impression that Netflix one was a new one judging by the heavy advertisement campaign that surronds it now and watched Ukraine on fire back in 2016… Also, it's been reported that they were deleting Ukraine on fire.
          Regardless of the name, I think Stone's movie is more truthful. Netflix always goes in line with the current mass propoganda trends.

          • odysseus on 06/03/2022 - 13:02
            +6

            @Musiclover: A movie where the interviewer is a very close friend, by a pro-Russian production house is "more truthful". lol

            Not sure how you came up with that since you haven't given any reason - though obviously those factors make it the most likely to have more propaganda.

            • Creamsoda on 06/03/2022 - 14:08
              +8

              @odysseus: Then you should watch what John Mearsheimers take on the subject which i have posted the link below. Mearsheimer is a distinguished Pro western Political Scientist who threatened Australia in Australia to choose between USA and China few years ago "you're either with us or against us, USA can be very nasty" then our PM crap their pants and started shirt fronting China.

              • deadpoet on 06/03/2022 - 14:31

                @Creamsoda:

                Mearsheimer is a distinguished Pro western Political Scientist who threatened Australia

                That doesn't sound like John Mearsheimer at all. When did he threaten Australia?

                • Creamsoda on 06/03/2022 - 14:51
                  +11

                  @deadpoet: This talk in Canberra 2019 was not in our media its very long and detailed. USA vs China and Australia choice. i suggest people go through the whole thing and understand why our government has turned very hostile against China in the last 3-4 years.

                  this part he threatens Australia
                  https://youtu.be/oRlt1vbnXhQ?t=1560

                  • 6828 on 06/03/2022 - 19:37
                    +2

                    @Creamsoda: Interesting video (the CIS one). Thanks for posting the link.

              • Bespoken on 06/03/2022 - 18:40
                +4

                @Creamsoda: Mearsheimer is just a political realist. He simply speaks honestly from his (American) perspective about the US/China competition-conflict. While he thinks the US will win and Australia needs to be on the winning side, he is probably wrong. Siding with a losing US will have dramatic consequences for our future prosperity and security. He can be honest and wrong without artifice or deceit.

                • taki on 06/03/2022 - 20:04
                  +6

                  @Bespoken: True. Overdue for change of our incompetent govt.

                • Creamsoda on 06/03/2022 - 21:35
                  +6

                  @Bespoken: yea, you don't have to agree with his assessment since his using the US model as how a Hegemon will act to map out how China will act when they become a Hegemon them selves. IMO multipolar world is better than unipolar world, at least they can keep each other honest and keep each other from invading the weak simply because they can with out suffering sanctions.

                • JudoChop on 07/03/2022 - 07:22
                  +1

                  @Bespoken: Have been following Mearsheimer for a while. Truth be told, with all his knowledge and understanding of geopolitics, he still misjudged Russia in regards to Ukraine. He said that Putin had no interest in moving past the eastern Ukraine and only the Russian speaking areas would be taken militarily.
                  He claimed Russia would not take Kyev and that Russia would stand up to Iran.
                  Wrong on both fronts but admittedly I'm saying this with the benefit of hindsight given his famous presentation on Russia/Ukraine was from 2016 which is when he made those bold claims which are provably incorrect.

                  • Bespoken on 07/03/2022 - 08:49
                    +3

                    @JudoChop: I don't think what Putin will eventually do with Kyev is really known, particularly now he is factoring-in the West's retaliation. Putin is a smart man and understands the difficulties of insurgency. His goals in West Ukraine are likely just to create difficulties for EU/NATO.

                    There is an update of him and Ray McGovern exposing US plans, one of which was to install Tomahawke missiles in Ukraine to defeat Russia's nuclear counter/strike capability.
                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppD_bhWODDc

      • Creamsoda on 06/03/2022 - 12:34
        +11

        Or we can watch expert researchers on Political Science to analysis what happened. A lot of questions are answered in this lengthy discussion, things like "why shouldn't Ukraine have a choice to choose their own path" etc.. it's long and very detailed. (i don't support any invasion and horrors of war but in the real world international affairs things work differently)

        https://youtu.be/ppD_bhWODDc?t=228

    • sjj89 on 06/03/2022 - 09:10
      +2

      God damn that’s such a transparent attempt to bury the OG that questions the neo-lib western narrative

    • Mondorock on 06/03/2022 - 09:16

      It's not by Oliver Stone??

      • Musiclover on 06/03/2022 - 09:17
        +1

        Why? It is https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5724358/

        • alcadive on 06/03/2022 - 10:24
          +1

          It's produced by and stars Oliver Stone, it's directed by Igor Lopatonok.

          • [Deactivated] on 06/03/2022 - 10:54
            +4

            @alcadive:

            Igor Lopatonok

            Or as he’s known locally Igor Pop

      • jv on 06/03/2022 - 09:55
        -1

        It's not by Oliver Stone??

        It is Curtis Stone…

        jv on 06/03/2022 - 09:55 (Collapsed - Offtopic. Show)
        • Nugs on 06/03/2022 - 10:37
          +4

          Not Jamie Oliver?
          .

          • jv on 06/03/2022 - 12:00
            +1

            @Nugs: Maybe it's the 'love child' of Curtis Stone and Jamie Oliver?

            • kiriakoz on 06/03/2022 - 12:24

              @jv: I still don’t understand how people get so triggered by you. I find you inane and probably mentally imbalanced.

              • spackbace on 06/03/2022 - 12:32
                -2

                @kiriakoz:

                I still don’t understand how people get so triggered by you.

                Yet you felt triggered enough to comment…

                Let that sink in for a moment

                • kiriakoz on 06/03/2022 - 16:21
                  -1

                  @spackbace: I love that you took this to heart. Really proved my point, especially since I was talking to JV.

                  • spackbace on 06/03/2022 - 18:08

                    @kiriakoz: Except I didn't take it to heart…? If every comment is 'taking things to heart' then god help us all

        • [Deactivated] on 06/03/2022 - 10:53

          Heston Blumenthal

    • going nowhere on 06/03/2022 - 09:26
      +28

      Winter on fire was released in 2015 but Ukraine on fire was released in 2016. You might have got it the other way around.

      • [Deactivated] on 06/03/2022 - 10:55
        +29

        And Sex On Fire was released in 2008.

        You win this round Kings of Leon…

        • Popo on 08/03/2022 - 09:54

          I'm sure in 2008BC or earlier there would have been a "Grug on fire" chant ROFL moment.

      • joshk on 06/03/2022 - 09:52
        +96

        This take just shows the level of cognitive dissonance that comes from tribalism and information bubbles. You’re simultaneously condemning the invasion of Iraq while attempting to justify the invasion of Ukraine. You’re suggesting that the Ukraine, a nation of 44 million people shouldn’t have the right to choose its own government and alliances because Russia wants vassal states between it and the west. You’re neglecting to mention that Russia has a pattern of invading their neighbours. You’re trying to paint Putin, an autocrat who pushes journalists out of windows and poisons political opponents with polonium as the good guy against the evil west. What’s next an ode to Kim Jong Il?

        • Bullion78 on 06/03/2022 - 09:55
          +63

          I don't intend for this to sound insensitive but there is always more going on that what you're being told through the legacy media lens. Just ask yourself this, would the US tolerate Russian troops stationed at the border of Mexico, Canada or even Cuba?

          • shkippy on 06/03/2022 - 10:41
            +12

            @Bullion78:

            there is always more going on

            I completely agree, I found this video/documentary/explainer very interesting and informative in summarising the whole situation factually and unbiased. If only our free-to-air news sources were more like this.
            If you ignore the obvious plugs it shows there is a lot more at stake for Putin than simply territory and he is more of a strategist than a sadistic maniac. Spoiler: as usual it always boils down to money and power using oil, gas & water. Nevertheless it's definitely food for thought.

            • bamberg on 06/03/2022 - 16:41
              +4

              @shkippy: Thanks for sharing this! Brilliant content and in 30 minutes this sheds more light on the real drivers of the conflict than all the sad violins in the Netflix programme (though still worth watching to feel the human tragedy behind the conflict) and Stone's anti-West conspiracy theory laden piffle.

              • shkippy on 06/03/2022 - 18:11

                @bamberg: Yep this is the most factual unbiased and easy-to-digest summary I've seen so far (even my 14yo niece understood it). It really shows that Putin has a lot more to lose without this war than what most people first think.

          • Plimsol on 06/03/2022 - 10:42
            +9

            @Bullion78: So Russia has a legitimate case to invade 3rd party sovereign nations to help prevent themselves from… being invaded?

            • tightm8 on 06/03/2022 - 11:17
              +35

              @Plimsol: He's not saying that, you're just being cheeky and trying to make him look like the 'bad guy' when he's simply saying its not just a simple 'Russia bad, the rest of the world 'freedom fighting angels'.

              • Plimsol on 06/03/2022 - 11:26
                +19

                @tightm8: They literally are justifying invasion as a form of defence by suggesting other countries would do it too. No one has said the rest of the world are good, you should treat each event individually, each country is not allowed a few war crimes each. Iraq invasion was the same. Occupation of Palestine is the same.

                • tightm8 on 06/03/2022 - 11:32
                  +16

                  @Plimsol: In their minds, if they don't do what they're doing in Ukraine, they eventually be taken over by the US because a third of their border will be Nato nations with nukes directed at them. Do I agree with the invasion? no.

                  But we all know how the US has a fantastic track record of human rights and defending democracy don't we?

                  End of the day mate, wars have always been a mainstay on this planet, whether we like it or not. The plebs end up suffering for it while the elite always come out on top.

                • Bespoken on 06/03/2022 - 19:08
                  -4

                  @Plimsol: While West Ukraine nationalists are working with the US to dominate all Ukraine and shift Ukraine's political alliance from Russia to the West, Russian speaking East Ukrainians want to remain allied with Russia. So to half the country welcomes Russia as peace-keepers and the other half call it an invasion. But the western media conveniently only present the story of the West Ukraine nationalists/ ultra nationalists - because? because the US wants to expand NATO.

              • sn00ze on 06/03/2022 - 14:19
                +6

                @tightm8: yep, you'd think more would be quicker to question corporate / legacy media after the last 2 years.

            • Spets on 06/03/2022 - 19:21
              +2

              @Plimsol: In their eyes, yes. That's who international politics works, unfortunately. And the bigger your stick (nuclear arsenal), the bigger your sway.

          • lulzenberg on 06/03/2022 - 11:56
            +14

            @Bullion78: I'm a bit confused here - what you said above has been said on the news. Ukraine is being invaded for deciding it didn't want to be a neutral buffer country to Russia, sick of having part of it taken by force, knowing more will be taken by force eventually, and join NATO. I don't think it's being hidden at all? What is wrong with a country deciding it doesn't want to be basically a human shield to a larger country? How is asking a country to be your buffer zone a 'fair request'?

            You would be OK with some outspoken, anti-lgbt (profanity) making you be their human shield as they walk around town where people don't like them? It's a fair request because they are less likely to be accosted while you're there as a buffer? You don't get to choose how to live your life and who you associate with, because this loud (profanity) won't let you - that's OK/fair? They also just took your shoes, because they need them more than you do, even though they have plenty of other shoes. Now you're a shoe-less human shield who can't live their own life and has to escort the crazy (profanity) wearing your shoes everywhere, while waiting to see what he decides to take from you next. It's only fair?

            Oh, and he's now stabbing you randomly and telling everyone it's because you're actually a Nazi, he's just trying to de-nazify you, and some people are actually believing it.

          • joshk on 06/03/2022 - 12:13
            +3

            @Bullion78:

            Just ask yourself this, would the US tolerate Russian troops stationed at the border of Mexico, Canada or even Cuba?

            An interesting discussion point - I take it you fully support the Bay of Pigs invasion then? Or is it different when USA does it?

            • eggboi on 06/03/2022 - 12:22
              +2

              @joshk: Straw man argument - the US has never invaded Mexico, Canada or Cuba. Except maybe the idiot truck convoys going into Canada to create a total nuisance of themselves.

          • donga100 on 06/03/2022 - 21:10

            @Bullion78:

            Just ask yourself this, would the US tolerate Russian troops stationed at the border of Mexico, Canada or even Cuba?

            That's such a good point. No wonder Ukraine wanted to join NATO!

          • mun4 on 06/03/2022 - 23:49
            +1

            @Bullion78: There already are troops hostile to the US in Cuba. They're called the Cuban Army.

        • fusion17 on 06/03/2022 - 10:32
          +7

          Whataboutism.

          What about palestine
          What about iraq
          What about syria
          What about xxxx

          • Bullion78 on 06/03/2022 - 10:44
            +41

            @fusion17: There is nothing remotely insightful about the term "whataboutism". I don't condone any war. But you'd have to be an absolute muppet to be the type of person that cries war crimes when Russia invades Ukraine while remaining deadly silent, or even cheerleads at the monumental scale of innocent human lives that the US and its allies have been directly responsible for over the last 40 years through collateral damage. Call it whataboutism if you like, I just call it breathtaking hypocrisy.

            • tightm8 on 06/03/2022 - 11:36
              +19

              @Bullion78: the term whataboutism is thrown around so much these days, its disgusting.

              you look at the people that throw that term around, usually its elitist pricks that think the West can do know wrong and the line is drawn where they start doing dodgy stuff.

              It's definitely kosher when the US attack Iraq, indirectly cause the death of millions, as long as they say 'my bad' and make a few hollywood movies to show their remorse about it. They even get sympathy for it by showing a few soldiers suffering ptsd and the military being the innocent ones in all of it.

            • scud70 on 06/03/2022 - 12:44

              @Bullion78: Wish there were more intelligent people like you around… but then again we'd probably wouldnt be talkin about wars if that was the case…. Humans! we can acheive amazing things if we just didnt get in our own way… oh well maybe the next species once we go extinct from our own stupidity… lol

            • mun4 on 06/03/2022 - 23:52
              +1

              @Bullion78: Funny how you assume there has been no outcry or debate over the war in Iraq. But I don't recall the last time western troops attacked a nuclear plant.

        • abctoz on 06/03/2022 - 10:37
          +37

          you're missing teh point

          Ukraine wants to join NATO, which would mean the US can put nukes in Ukraine, Putin disagrees and has made this clear for at least 20 years

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_sharing

          https://twitter.com/NKeskenovic/status/1497859581183205378

          • UFO on 06/03/2022 - 11:08
            +18

            @abctoz: Putin disagrees.

            And there you have it in a nutshell.
            What right does Putin have to disagree with a sovereign nations decisions. He may not like it, but so what? I hate what China has become over the last 30 years. What right do I have to invade it and tell them what to do?

            Putin's insecurities are his own. Lithuania, Romania, Ukraine, Poland, etc etc etc… all independent sovereign nations. All free to do as they please and not be bullied by Russia. 20 years or not Putin has no right to force them to his will.

            • tightm8 on 06/03/2022 - 11:19
              +28

              @UFO: I'm curious if you'd have the same energy if Putin/Russia decide to plant nukes in Mexico?

            • Halc on 06/03/2022 - 11:22
              +11

              @UFO: really? that's naive to think putin will tolerate a NATO or west leaning country directly bordering russia. do you remember cuban missile crisis? the world was a whisker away from nuclear war because they suspected cuba was housing soviet missiles.

              • buffalo bill on 06/03/2022 - 15:26
                -3

                @Halc: There wasn't war though was there. Hospitals didn't get shelled and kids weren't killed in Cuba by US invading troops. There may have been some covert business with Cuban exiles and the CIA, but there as no US war with Cuba.

              • RiseAndRuin on 06/03/2022 - 19:06
                +1

                @Halc: You mean like e.g. Finland, Norway, Latvia, Estonia?

            • abctoz on 06/03/2022 - 11:24
              +8

              @UFO: if you're all about freedom why isn't Putin free to disagree

              • UFO on 06/03/2022 - 11:25
                +12

                @abctoz: He is allowed to disagree.

                He is NOT allowed to invade. There's a difference, and that has nothing to do with 'freedom'.

                • abctoz on 06/03/2022 - 11:27
                  -4

                  @UFO: so he has to follow your rules of not invading? where is the freedom man

                  • UFO on 06/03/2022 - 11:28
                    +12

                    @abctoz: wow. So you think "freedom" means free to invade other countries at will? Jeez mate, I can't help you… far too gone for that.

                    • buffalo bill on 06/03/2022 - 15:31
                      +2

                      @UFO: There's a lot of "well-red" individuals on this forum… freedom doesn't form part of their vocabulary.

                  • going nowhere on 06/03/2022 - 11:49
                    +3

                    @abctoz: Wow freedom to invade? Seriously?

              • buffalo bill on 06/03/2022 - 15:40
                +1

                @abctoz: I think your definition of freedom, which involves imposing a will on sovereign nations and citizens, killing kids and shelling hospitals etc. is actually not freedom. I think maybe it's closer to tyranny.

                Going back to the Netflix documentary theme, it'd be like saying Ted Bundy should have had his freedom to continue doing all those rapes and killings. They fried him, however Putin has killed exponentially more than any serial killer did. I guess he has a way to go before he catches up to his idol Stalin.

                • abctoz on 06/03/2022 - 17:32
                  +3

                  @buffalo bill: i say it half jokingly, to poke fun at the freedom crowd, because they use freedom do justify everything

                  of course Ukraine is free to join NATO, but the not well known implication is possibility of US nukes in Ukraine, and also not well known is the fact that Putin has made it clear to the west that this is not acceptable more than 20 years ago, so arguably this war is provoked by the west not Putin.

                  if you want to talk casualties i don't think Putin can even rival the US in the past decade, like its not even in the same order of magnitude

          • Bullion78 on 06/03/2022 - 11:17
            -2

            @abctoz: I'm very aware, just trying not to be a "putin apologist"

          • Techie4066 on 06/03/2022 - 11:22

            @abctoz:

            Ukraine wants to join NATO, which would mean the US can put nukes in Ukraine

            And you reckon they would? What was the last time they did something like that?

            • abctoz on 06/03/2022 - 11:25
              +2

              @Techie4066: it doesn't matter what i think, it matters what Putin thinks

          • mun4 on 06/03/2022 - 23:56
            +4

            @abctoz: Ukraine has been wanting to join the NATO for years and NATO hasn't been keen. All this is just a pretense for invasion. Putin's story has changed half a dozen times. At first it was a military drill, then it was because of NATO membership, then it was because of the safety of Russian citizens. Yeah, right.

        • Gorodemon on 06/03/2022 - 10:40

          Hey, don't paint my Supreme Leader with the same brush as Putin. At least he's only cruel to his relatives and people and never invaded his neighbours!

        • Blueflamingo on 06/03/2022 - 10:52
          +14

          Here’s some cognitive dissonance for you:

          https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/ukraine-new-al-qaeda…

          https://dilyana.bg/the-pentagon-bio-weapons/

          https://greekcitytimes.com/2022/03/01/greek-in-mariupol-fasc…

          Putin has warned the West for 30 years but they’ve proceeded with expansion of their Georgia facility, NATO and nuclear power stations. Should Australia just chill out if Indonesia did this to us?

      • banana365 on 06/03/2022 - 09:52
        +33

        "Look, we may have seized the eastern part of your country 8 years ago and killed thousands of your citizens already, but you'd better not try to protect yourself or there'll be trouble."

        No need to imagine a bogeyman when you've got Putin as a neighbour. Read further than the headlines mate.

        • UFO on 06/03/2022 - 11:26
          +7

          Oh but didn't you hear, he's "liberating" those zones he invaded! Those evil Ukraine people looking to fight back… how dare they!
          Putin's a hero apparently!

          • PDeez on 06/03/2022 - 14:37
            +3

            @UFO: Putin couldn't be more of a stereotype villain, this is right out of the Dictator's Playbook 101.

            Step 1. Rally against a foreign enemy (usually the US but in this connected world the collective West or NATO in this instance also works) so you can shift blame for your countries failings externally.

            Step 2. Amass a vast fortune by stealing your country's wealth while the average citizen can barely afford to buy basics. Helps if you can reach the Billionaires club along the way on a civil servants salary.

            Step 3. Spend the remaining wealth your country has left over after you and your buddies have become grossly rich, by buying weapons usually from your rich buddies.

            Step 4. Threaten your neighbours, because their freedoms and democracy and higher quality of life are a threat and may cause your own citizens to want change. Use excuses about reunification or historical claims to garner popular support.

            Step 5. Go to Step 1.

            • UFO on 06/03/2022 - 14:47
              +4

              @PDeez: I couldn't have said it better mate.

              The brain drain in Russia is very sad. All the young educated people are leaving in droves.
              Putin prefers to rule over the old and dumb. Short term… he loves the young ones leaving. Easier to control the dumb and poor.

              But then when the country suffers due to lack of young skilled labour (doctors engineers etc), he doesn't look to himself to blame, he blames other countries. He tells his people THEY are the reason your lives suck.

              He rallies them into an "us vs them" nationalistic mentality.

              Why build nuclear power stations when you can steal the one in your neighbours yard.
              Why worry about food security in your country, when you can steal the land of neighbour who can be the food bowl or your entire nation due to its geographic location and natural resources.

              Putin has mismanaged Russia into a state of real crisis, and his solution is to invade now…. because later when he has an older and dumber population he won't be able to do it. The thing is, Ukraine wasn't the easy solution he thought it was.

              Boy are they fighting for what's theirs!
              If only Afghanistan had the same ticker. They had 20 years to fight, and billions of dollars spent on them to do it… but failed to.

      • diddy50 on 06/03/2022 - 09:59

        Found the Russian war sympthatist here

        • iWan on 06/03/2022 - 17:35
          +4

          How the fk is this being downvoted. Innocent, happy, peaceful Ukrainians are dying.

          So disappointed.

          • [Deactivated] on 06/03/2022 - 21:49

            @iWan: What about the Iraqi people? are their lives worth less than the Ukarinians?

            • iWan on 07/03/2022 - 22:36

              @[Deactivated]: Hang on mate, this is no competition.

              These things are completely mutually exclusive.

              I have family in Ukraine, so yes for me this is a little closer to home.

              But no, I wasn't saying that anyone's lives are worth less than anyone elses.

              • [Deactivated] on 08/03/2022 - 09:16

                @iWan: Mutually exclusive? so iraqi people are not humans? ok to kill them? no one protest? why?

      • Bespoken on 06/03/2022 - 10:21
        +4

        Worth a try, but these people have been indoctrinated by western media for years. Anybody only has to look outside of MSM for the real story here. If people choose not to be ignorant, they can listen to a respected very pro-US American academic Prof Mearsheimer about what the US via NATO has been trying to do with Ukraine.

      • iWan on 06/03/2022 - 10:30
        -4

        Get stuffed.

      • Chocobros on 06/03/2022 - 10:34
        -5

        @bullion78 Putin is that you?

      • Clarky77 on 06/03/2022 - 17:52
        +1

        Yes could've been avoided by Russia standing by its 1990's agreement to never attack Ukraine I'm return for giving up it's nuclear weapons also. Do you think any country is likely to give them up now no matter what agreement is made? The consequences of this action by Russia is going to be felt for decades or more no matter the outcome.

    • owlturtle on 06/03/2022 - 10:21
      +3

      "Ukraine on fire' was released after "Winter on fire".
      By a crackpot conspiracy theorist named Oliver Stone.

    • Astaltar on 06/03/2022 - 10:52
      +14

      I am from Ukraine, and I would say it's vice versa. I would categorise "Ukraine on fire" as a propaganda against ukrainian people.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join