No. of Recommendations: 3
Yeah, RT is not good. And the idea that US media is censored is absurd. Otherwise you would never have heard of Hunter Biden while Joe was POTUS, or Trump and Stormy Daniels while Trump was POTUS. There is a lot of bias, but it is not government controlled. Unlike Russia, who poisons and/or imprisons dissidents and journalists.
As for nations joining NATO, many of them weren't interested until Putin starting becoming bellicose. Then they realized they would once again be the "buffer", as Stalin used them back in 1939 when he seized them as a "buffer" to Germany. Then they clamored to join. Even then they weren't keeping up with the NATO military spending obligations (most of them) until Putin invaded Ukraine. They're much better about those obligations now. I fully support the expansion of NATO. Ukraine prior to the invasion didn't want to join, and even after the invasion Biden was expressing doubts about allowing them in. Putin had no reason to fear that event. But now he does, because they want to join. Last I heard, Biden is still not completely on-board, but is saying it can be discussed. It may be a coincidence, but Putin becoming Prime Minister was in 1999, the same year that the first former-Soviet block nations started apply for -and getting- NATO membership. Finland was just accepted this year (not a former Soviet nation), and Sweden looks like it will be accepted also (also not a former Soviet nation). Both were scared by Putin's war. The closest neighbors -other than Finland- were Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia, which were accepted in 2004 (18 years before Putin invaded).
As for Crimea, you fail to mention that most of the residents of Crimea were pro-Russian, and favored closer ties to Russia than the West. Most -but not all- of Ukraine favored closer ties to the West. It's a polarizing issue there, apparently. Putin is trying to make that decision for them. The sanctions on Putin began after he rolled into Crimea, so that can't be an excuse for this invasion (8 years later). He just wanted reliable access to a warm-water port.
For current events, I do read various sources. But I also listen to Perun whom provides much more detailed analysis than any other media source I have found, has many sources closer to the conflict, and freely admits when sourcing gets a bit dodgy (as he did with his recent Ukrainian spring offensive video). When Russian media claims destroying western tanks before any had even arrived (which they did), or shooting down the Ukrainian air force more than twice (i.e. claiming numbers in excess of what Ukraine has), they simply aren't credible. I do realize there are always two sides to a story. One key factor is that Putin was disillusioned when the Soviet Union fell, and has since wanted to put it back together. He has dealt harshly with critics, with Chechnya, and couldn't stand the pro-west elements in Ukraine. And I'm not even getting into unproven allegations, like the Moscow bombings (among others).
He should really just pack-up and go home. It will be a public-relations hit for him, but he controls the media so he can spin it however he likes. At this point, without using nukes, he can't win. Not unless the west suddenly gives up on Ukraine, which many nations (including Germany and Poland) aren't going to do. He could even lose Crimea (which was an illegitimate annexation anyway, even if most Crimeans didn't mind).
