Now you're arguing semantics of "invasion" versus "peacekeepers" which is stupid, and arguing that they didn't go where the US said they would but instead went somewhere else in the country. It's pointless distinctions
To be more precise, the current areas they've "invaded" are areas that Russian troops have already been in for several years. All that really changed today was that Putin made their presence official.
Not to say that what Putin is doing is "good," but you reap what you sow, and maybe if NATO hadn't lied so much to Russia over the years things would be different. Innocent civilians getting caught in the crossfire has certainly never stopped NATO before.
Isn't it though? The US has also used "peacekeeping" forces to invade other countries.
The US has been saying that Russia was going to target Kyiv as part of an invasion, just peacekeepers in the Donbas isn’t that
Now you're arguing semantics of "invasion" versus "peacekeepers" which is stupid, and arguing that they didn't go where the US said they would but instead went somewhere else in the country. It's pointless distinctions
To be more precise, the current areas they've "invaded" are areas that Russian troops have already been in for several years. All that really changed today was that Putin made their presence official.
Not to say that what Putin is doing is "good," but you reap what you sow, and maybe if NATO hadn't lied so much to Russia over the years things would be different. Innocent civilians getting caught in the crossfire has certainly never stopped NATO before.
Canada airborne inserting "Peacekeepers" into Korea, the last time they would ever deploy paratroopers as such
Never give Nato the benefit of the doubt
At this point, it's world powers doing "NO U" to eachother. lol.