Just because a country wants to join the EU doesn’t mean the EU should send weapons and foment a civil war there. It is scary and absurd that this needs to be said, yet here we are. Arguing for starting a civil war because of “freedom.” Where have we heard this before?

Lviv/Western Ukraine is also very anti-Russia and has been for a long time (pre-WW2). Ukraine is a very divided country and there is more than one opinion on what to do. If each region voted independently, you’d probably see Ukraine split into two states, one aligning with the EU and the other with Russia.

> Lviv/Western Ukraine is also very anti-Russia and has been for a long time (pre-WW2). Ukraine is a very divided country and there is more than one opinion on what to do. If each region voted independently, you’d probably see Ukraine split into two states, one aligning with the EU and the other with Russia.

For what it's worth, the Party of Regions, which used to be in power until 2014 and which got voted into power by South and East of Ukraine, won the 2012 elections with a program featuring signing the Association Agreement with the EU, visa waiver with the EU and joining the EU market.

Anyhow, if the question "Would you rather be in a political and economic alliance with the EU or with Russia?" might have seemed divisive to some before 2014, I'd think Russian aggression fixed that for good.

The election results don't support your argument: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Ukraine#/media/Fi...

Yes, they do? The candidate who won was less harsh on Russia than others. The only region which didn’t vote for him was Lviv, who voted for the more hardline one.

We are united against Russia aggression. No one wants their city destroyed like Donetsk and Luhansk. A lot of people are switching their language to Ukrainian to distance themselves from all the crime that Russia does, myself included.

Kharkiv, east of Ukraine.