And that right here is fascist as fuck
There are a number of definitions of the word "fascist". One is "belonging to a right-wing, authoritarian ideology", but that obviously doesn't work in this context because Russia is ruled by a right-wing, authoritarian government (Putin is perhaps one of the most recognisable, mainstream, modern-day right-wing autocrats) and the East Ukrainian protestors are also right wing and authoritarian in their politics, just like the Ultras on the West Ukrainian side.
The second definition is "belonging to a type of radical, ultranationalist, authoritarian ideology with an emphasis on militarism, the importance of the state and also a focus on strong leadership". Again, Russia fits the bill perfectly there, as do the East Ukrainian and Crimean protestors. To quote wikipedia directly, "Fascism views political violence, war, and imperialism as a means to achieve national rejuvenation, and it asserts that stronger nations have the right to expand their territory by displacing weaker nations." Again, Russia fits the bill perfectly. A number of people in this thread have expressed those exact views.
The only problem comes when we look at the focus on "ethnic" nationalism and the importance of purity of blood and such, but you could conceivably have a brand of Fascism that would accept those people as long as they identified with the correct ethnic group, like Jews deciding that they are indeed German and will speak German and so forth. That said, that particular point has nothing to do with the stuff Sergarr is calling Fascist, and funnily enough this entire conflict was founded on Russian efforts to protect "ethnic Russians".
Tell me, exactly who in this conflict is Fascist?
Even those that join Russia peacefully and are peaceful protestors? Would you kill the non-combatants that joined Russia that you are unable to arrest or refuse to be arrested (and are unarmed)?
Perhaps he should clarify what he meant by "acting illegally", which is really quite important.
I agree. I fear he may be slipping into a genocide mentality a little.
Just because he's started mentioning the word "kill"? I wouldn't go that far, but remember - if any Western government, such as that of the USA, was fighting a group of armed insurrectionists that you cannot arrest or deal with politically, it is likely that they would end up being killed unless it just leads to a standoff. I know the Bundy Ranch fiasco may come into play there but they're not that serious. If, on the other hand, you had guys actively shooting at police and throwing molotov cocktails I can imagine what would happen to them.