正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

Another glimpse into the Russian mind. BBC journalist Victoria Derbyshire interviews Andrei Kelin, Russian ambassador to the UK. Question: It was Russian military aggression in 2014." Answer: Well, I hoped that in BBC, they better learn history. Question: What about giving back Ukraine some of its territory? Answer: Why... show more

Anton Gerashchenko

683,285 subscribers

77,810 次观看 • 1 年前 •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

10 条评论

Pasi Majuri 的头像

Pasi Majuri1 年前

Russia never changes.🇫🇮

Anatolii🇺🇦🇮🇱 的头像

Anatolii🇺🇦🇮🇱1 年前

Imperial arrogance in its purest form—Russia doesn’t acknowledge history, borders, or reality itself.

JustКіт 的头像

JustКіт1 年前

I have never understood the desire of Western media to make known outright liars from russia instead of completely ignoring and isolating them. Are they still looking for the mysterious russian soul?

Bazaarsally 的头像

Bazaarsally1 年前

Get this disgusting gangster out of Britain

🇨🇿 Mike #GiveMoreWeaponsToUkraine 的头像

🇨🇿 Mike #GiveMoreWeaponsToUkraine1 年前

While I understand (somewhat) the neccessity of interviewing the evil side, it fills me with disgust. And that not even mentioning that all of them russian diplomats are toad-people.

Claire 的头像

Claire1 年前

I watched this .This Russian liar and propagandist should not be getting a platform on the BBC. Victoria is a good journalist but trying to get a straight word out of this monstrosity is utterly pointless and a waste of my license fee.I will be complaining

💨💧Diogenes 的头像

💨💧Diogenes1 年前

What is the point giving these guys a voice and an opportunity to lie lie lie? He should be expelled. Travel by Russians into foreign countries banned including you @HHShkMohd because they are the world’s biggest murderers and modern day Nazis.

WW3finalboss 🇮🇱 🇺🇦 的头像

WW3finalboss 🇮🇱 🇺🇦1 年前

average orc jokes

Lou_bloom 的头像

Lou_bloom1 年前

why is he even in UK?

Francis Harris 的头像

Francis Harris1 年前

smug git

相关视频

Victoria Derbyshire, "What about giving back Ukraine it's territory?" Russian Ambassador to the UK, "Why should we?"

Victoria Derbyshire, "What about giving back Ukraine it's territory?" Russian Ambassador to the UK, "Why should we?"

Farrukh

82,906 次观看 • 1 年前

"What about giving back Ukraine some of its territory?" "Why should we?" Victoria Derbyshire asks Russia's Ambassador to the UK, Andrei Kelin, whether it will return any territory to Ukraine as part of a peace settlement. #Newsnight

"What about giving back Ukraine some of its territory?" "Why should we?" Victoria Derbyshire asks Russia's Ambassador to the UK, Andrei Kelin, whether it will return any territory to Ukraine as part of a peace settlement. #Newsnight

BBC Newsnight

94,849 次观看 • 1 年前

We don't need a deal, we don't need an agreement, we need Ukraine's surrender – the Russian ambassador to the UK, Kelin. That's what we already knew, but Putin was afraid to say it out loud. Why is that Russian swine still in the UK?

We don't need a deal, we don't need an agreement, we need Ukraine's surrender – the Russian ambassador to the UK, Kelin. That's what we already knew, but Putin was afraid to say it out loud. Why is that Russian swine still in the UK?

Jürgen Nauditt 🇩🇪🇺🇦

124,998 次观看 • 7 个月前

BREAKING - EXPLOSIVE: Republican Congressman Jim Jordan (Rep. Jim Jordan) confronts Dr. Fauci on alleged COVID-19 cover-up and outright lies. WATCH Question: Thank you, Mister Chairman. Doctor, why was it so important that the virus not have started in a lab? Answer: We don't know where it started. And that's the reason why I keep an open mind. So I don't know what you mean by why was it so important. It wasn't important. Question: You still don't know where it started. The guys you gave money to figured out in three days. Answer: No, no, no. They said, Mister Anderson said on January 31, 2020, virus looks engineered, virus not consistent with evolutionary theory. The very next day, Doctor Gerry said, I don't know how this happens in nature. It'd be easy to do in a lab. And then three days later, Shazam, they switched and say it has to be nature. So they figured out in three days. But you still don't know. Answer: No. In fact, if you look at what they were saying, Congressman Jordan, they were saying that it was not a manufactured virus. It still could have evolved out of a lab. Question: Let me read something here to you. They're not incompatible. In our study on the censorship of the Biden administration working with big tech, I want to read you a WhatsApp message from Mark Zuckerberg. Can we include that? The White House put pressure on us to censor the lab leak theory? Answer: Is there a question? Question: Here's another email to Mark Zuckerberg. It says, subject line COVID misinformation, Wuhan lab leak theory. Due to continued public pressure and tense conversations with the new administration, we started removing five COVID claims, including the lab leak theory. Mister Zuckerberg responds, this seems like a good reminder that when we compromise our standards due to pressure from an administration in either direction, we often later regret it. Why was it so important the virus not have started in a lab? Answer: It wasn't so important that the virus not. We don't know. Question: We know it was important to someone in the Biden administration. So much so that the top people at Meta, the top people at Facebook are asking, why are we getting all this pressure to downplay the lab leak theory? And we have an email from June of the same year, June 4, 2021, saying the same thing. It was certainly important to somebody. Answer: Well, what does that got to do with me? Question: I'm asking you because you're the expert on the coronavirus. I'm saying, why was the administration so pushing not to have the lab leak theory as something that was viable? Answer: I can answer that. I've kept an open mind throughout the entire time. Question: Doctor Fauci. Open mind. Answer: That is correct. Question: What happened in those three days? Why did Mister Anderson and Doctor Gerry, why did they change their mind in 180 degrees? Because what Christian Andersen says three days later after he said virus looks engineered, virus not consistent with evolutionary theory, three days later, he says the main crackpot theories going around at the moment relate to this virus being somehow engineered. And that is demonstrably false. Question: How did they figure all that out in three days? Answer: Well, what they did is that, you know, they testified before this committee what they did. They went back and looked at the sequences and realized that their initial concern was unfounded about that. And it did not look at all like it was manufactured. Question: But in three days, they figured that out? Answer: Exactly. You could do that in three days. You can scan sequences in a day. You don't need three days. Question: Okay, who's Robert Redfield? Answer: The former director of the CDC. Question: Doctor Redfield. Right. And he was also in the coronavirus task force. Is that accurate? Answer: He was a member of the coronavirus task force. Question: Here's what he said to this committee. He said, Redfield said that Fauci and Collins left him out because Redfield suspected that coronavirus had leaked from the Chinese lab. Is that accurate? Answer: Well, he said that, but that's not true. That is incorrect. Question: Congressman, Doctor Redfield's lying to the committee? Answer: When he sat right where you sat when he said that I kept him out. That is an incorrect statement. Question: The roster who was on the phone, was Doctor Redfield in that conference call on February 1 when you had Mister Anderson and Doctor Gerry on that call? Answer: He was not. And the conference call was put together by Jeremy Farrar. So no one kept him out. Question: He said he was kept out because did US tax dollars. Answer: You want me to answer the question? Question: Yeah. I would just wonder why it wasn't on the call. It seems to me the head of CDC, part of the coronavirus task force, which was formed two days prior to that call, would have been on the call. Answer: Well, the call was arranged by Jeremy Farrar. You should ask him. Question: Okay. Did US tax dollars flow through a grant recipient to the lab in China? Answer: I'm sorry, what was? Question: Did US tax dollars flow through a grant recipient to the lab in China? Answer: Yes, of course. It was a sub-award to the Wuhan Institute. Question: And who approved that award? Answer: Excuse me? Question: And who approved that award? Answer: What agency approved that award? Answer: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Question: Your agency approved that, right? Answer: Yes, it did. Question: Does that have anything to do with this downplaying of the lab leak theory? Answer: No, nothing to do with it. Question: Nothing. Do you agree that there was a push to downplay the lab leak theory? Answer: Not on my part. Question: Really? Really. Wow. Wow. I think most of the country find that amazing. Answer: I've kept an open mind throughout the entire process. Question: All right, I yield back.

BREAKING - EXPLOSIVE: Republican Congressman Jim Jordan (Rep. Jim Jordan) confronts Dr. Fauci on alleged COVID-19 cover-up and outright lies. WATCH Question: Thank you, Mister Chairman. Doctor, why was it so important that the virus not have started in a lab? Answer: We don't know where it started. And that's the reason why I keep an open mind. So I don't know what you mean by why was it so important. It wasn't important. Question: You still don't know where it started. The guys you gave money to figured out in three days. Answer: No, no, no. They said, Mister Anderson said on January 31, 2020, virus looks engineered, virus not consistent with evolutionary theory. The very next day, Doctor Gerry said, I don't know how this happens in nature. It'd be easy to do in a lab. And then three days later, Shazam, they switched and say it has to be nature. So they figured out in three days. But you still don't know. Answer: No. In fact, if you look at what they were saying, Congressman Jordan, they were saying that it was not a manufactured virus. It still could have evolved out of a lab. Question: Let me read something here to you. They're not incompatible. In our study on the censorship of the Biden administration working with big tech, I want to read you a WhatsApp message from Mark Zuckerberg. Can we include that? The White House put pressure on us to censor the lab leak theory? Answer: Is there a question? Question: Here's another email to Mark Zuckerberg. It says, subject line COVID misinformation, Wuhan lab leak theory. Due to continued public pressure and tense conversations with the new administration, we started removing five COVID claims, including the lab leak theory. Mister Zuckerberg responds, this seems like a good reminder that when we compromise our standards due to pressure from an administration in either direction, we often later regret it. Why was it so important the virus not have started in a lab? Answer: It wasn't so important that the virus not. We don't know. Question: We know it was important to someone in the Biden administration. So much so that the top people at Meta, the top people at Facebook are asking, why are we getting all this pressure to downplay the lab leak theory? And we have an email from June of the same year, June 4, 2021, saying the same thing. It was certainly important to somebody. Answer: Well, what does that got to do with me? Question: I'm asking you because you're the expert on the coronavirus. I'm saying, why was the administration so pushing not to have the lab leak theory as something that was viable? Answer: I can answer that. I've kept an open mind throughout the entire time. Question: Doctor Fauci. Open mind. Answer: That is correct. Question: What happened in those three days? Why did Mister Anderson and Doctor Gerry, why did they change their mind in 180 degrees? Because what Christian Andersen says three days later after he said virus looks engineered, virus not consistent with evolutionary theory, three days later, he says the main crackpot theories going around at the moment relate to this virus being somehow engineered. And that is demonstrably false. Question: How did they figure all that out in three days? Answer: Well, what they did is that, you know, they testified before this committee what they did. They went back and looked at the sequences and realized that their initial concern was unfounded about that. And it did not look at all like it was manufactured. Question: But in three days, they figured that out? Answer: Exactly. You could do that in three days. You can scan sequences in a day. You don't need three days. Question: Okay, who's Robert Redfield? Answer: The former director of the CDC. Question: Doctor Redfield. Right. And he was also in the coronavirus task force. Is that accurate? Answer: He was a member of the coronavirus task force. Question: Here's what he said to this committee. He said, Redfield said that Fauci and Collins left him out because Redfield suspected that coronavirus had leaked from the Chinese lab. Is that accurate? Answer: Well, he said that, but that's not true. That is incorrect. Question: Congressman, Doctor Redfield's lying to the committee? Answer: When he sat right where you sat when he said that I kept him out. That is an incorrect statement. Question: The roster who was on the phone, was Doctor Redfield in that conference call on February 1 when you had Mister Anderson and Doctor Gerry on that call? Answer: He was not. And the conference call was put together by Jeremy Farrar. So no one kept him out. Question: He said he was kept out because did US tax dollars. Answer: You want me to answer the question? Question: Yeah. I would just wonder why it wasn't on the call. It seems to me the head of CDC, part of the coronavirus task force, which was formed two days prior to that call, would have been on the call. Answer: Well, the call was arranged by Jeremy Farrar. You should ask him. Question: Okay. Did US tax dollars flow through a grant recipient to the lab in China? Answer: I'm sorry, what was? Question: Did US tax dollars flow through a grant recipient to the lab in China? Answer: Yes, of course. It was a sub-award to the Wuhan Institute. Question: And who approved that award? Answer: Excuse me? Question: And who approved that award? Answer: What agency approved that award? Answer: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Question: Your agency approved that, right? Answer: Yes, it did. Question: Does that have anything to do with this downplaying of the lab leak theory? Answer: No, nothing to do with it. Question: Nothing. Do you agree that there was a push to downplay the lab leak theory? Answer: Not on my part. Question: Really? Really. Wow. Wow. I think most of the country find that amazing. Answer: I've kept an open mind throughout the entire process. Question: All right, I yield back.

Simon Ateba

997,322 次观看 • 2 年前

Reporter: What is your assessment on Ukraine's strike on Russian oil refineries and military factories? Trump: Uhhh phrase the question differently please. Reporter: Ukraine delivered a lot of strikes on the Russian military factories and on oil refineries, and they ran out of gas. Trump: Uhhhh Marco why don't you answer that?

Reporter: What is your assessment on Ukraine's strike on Russian oil refineries and military factories? Trump: Uhhh phrase the question differently please. Reporter: Ukraine delivered a lot of strikes on the Russian military factories and on oil refineries, and they ran out of gas. Trump: Uhhhh Marco why don't you answer that?

Headquarters

278,676 次观看 • 23 天前

"We should bomb Kyiv because it's fun." "We could have bombed Kyiv right away and made it Russian." "NASA wanted to attack Russia, we prevented that." A glimpse into the Russian mind. This is not a joke. If they get Ukraine, they will go further and laugh about it.

"We should bomb Kyiv because it's fun." "We could have bombed Kyiv right away and made it Russian." "NASA wanted to attack Russia, we prevented that." A glimpse into the Russian mind. This is not a joke. If they get Ukraine, they will go further and laugh about it.

Anton Gerashchenko

172,166 次观看 • 1 年前

💬 Ambassador Kelin: The major question that has been put in front of Ukraine for many years, even before 2014, is whether it should choose to align with Russia or with the West. It has ruined Ukraine because it should not have to make such a choice.

💬 Ambassador Kelin: The major question that has been put in front of Ukraine for many years, even before 2014, is whether it should choose to align with Russia or with the West. It has ruined Ukraine because it should not have to make such a choice.

Russian Embassy, UK

23,117 次观看 • 4 个月前

HRW calls on the US government not to give cluster munitions to Ukraine. Why is HRW silent about russian strikes with phosphorous shells and cluster shells on civilians? Why is HRW silent about the genocide, but calls not to help Ukrainians fight against the genocide? I think the answer in this video from 2014. When russia was already killing Ukrainians, when it shot down MH17 and occupied Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk, HRW said that there was an internal conflict in Ukraine, not russian aggression.

HRW calls on the US government not to give cluster munitions to Ukraine. Why is HRW silent about russian strikes with phosphorous shells and cluster shells on civilians? Why is HRW silent about the genocide, but calls not to help Ukrainians fight against the genocide? I think the answer in this video from 2014. When russia was already killing Ukrainians, when it shot down MH17 and occupied Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk, HRW said that there was an internal conflict in Ukraine, not russian aggression.

Serhii Sternenko

207,940 次观看 • 3 年前

Trump's Ukraine envoy Kellogg: We had a discussion in the Oval; they were talking about the "primacy" of the Russian military. I said, "we would kick their ass." They are not as good as Putin says they are; for that, I give credit to the Ukrainian military. I don't think anybody should be afraid of the Russian military. I don't believe they have the capacity to march to Berlin or anywhere else.

Trump's Ukraine envoy Kellogg: We had a discussion in the Oval; they were talking about the "primacy" of the Russian military. I said, "we would kick their ass." They are not as good as Putin says they are; for that, I give credit to the Ukrainian military. I don't think anybody should be afraid of the Russian military. I don't believe they have the capacity to march to Berlin or anywhere else.

Clash Report

21,414 次观看 • 10 个月前

A bespectacled Rosie seems to counsel the new PM Carney to give non-answers, word salad or obfuscate if he doesn't want to answer a question from the opposition "If I would say one thing about the current Prime Minister is if you're not going to answer the question, sometimes you have to give a little something more or answer a question that you would rather answer is another way they go about it in question, period, in order to give the opposition something." "We'll see whether we get there"

A bespectacled Rosie seems to counsel the new PM Carney to give non-answers, word salad or obfuscate if he doesn't want to answer a question from the opposition "If I would say one thing about the current Prime Minister is if you're not going to answer the question, sometimes you have to give a little something more or answer a question that you would rather answer is another way they go about it in question, period, in order to give the opposition something." "We'll see whether we get there"

cbcwatcher

52,135 次观看 • 1 年前

Gill: "Should American taxpayers pay for Medicaid for illegal aliens?" Saenz: "In many circumstances, yes. They should... and Not just American taxpayers, but immigrant taxpayers." Gill: "Should American taxpayers pay taxes for Social Security for illegal aliens?" Saenz: "There is no exception for taxpaying based immigration status."- Gill: "I'm the one who's asking questions here. Should American taxpayers pay for Social Security for illegal aliens? It's a yes or no question. I think the answer's no." Saenz: "It's not a yes or no question. It doesn't happen..."- Gill: "I'm asking you should it. I'm asking you if it should." Saenz: "I wasn't aware that was a topic of today's..."- Gill: "I don't think that that should happen, and I'm asking you if you think it should happen." Saenz: "I don't believe that that's a question when it doesn't happen. It's misleading to suggest it does. No one who's undocumented..."- Gill: "It's a really basic question... and you don't wanna answer it because you've got a crazy radical open borders agenda that we can all see. Thank you, Mr. Chairman." Why don’t they ever answer the question?!!

Gill: "Should American taxpayers pay for Medicaid for illegal aliens?" Saenz: "In many circumstances, yes. They should... and Not just American taxpayers, but immigrant taxpayers." Gill: "Should American taxpayers pay taxes for Social Security for illegal aliens?" Saenz: "There is no exception for taxpaying based immigration status."- Gill: "I'm the one who's asking questions here. Should American taxpayers pay for Social Security for illegal aliens? It's a yes or no question. I think the answer's no." Saenz: "It's not a yes or no question. It doesn't happen..."- Gill: "I'm asking you should it. I'm asking you if it should." Saenz: "I wasn't aware that was a topic of today's..."- Gill: "I don't think that that should happen, and I'm asking you if you think it should happen." Saenz: "I don't believe that that's a question when it doesn't happen. It's misleading to suggest it does. No one who's undocumented..."- Gill: "It's a really basic question... and you don't wanna answer it because you've got a crazy radical open borders agenda that we can all see. Thank you, Mr. Chairman." Why don’t they ever answer the question?!!

Kathleen Winchell ❤️🤍💙🇺🇸🇺🇸

213,076 次观看 • 2 个月前

Too shy? Rutte could not give a direct answer to the question of which country is behind the UAV incident in Poland "On the one hand, I think the question of who is behind this is significant, but on the other hand, it is not that significant because it does not matter whether it was done intentionally. It was reckless in any case, these were Russian drones," he believes. - SMI

Too shy? Rutte could not give a direct answer to the question of which country is behind the UAV incident in Poland "On the one hand, I think the question of who is behind this is significant, but on the other hand, it is not that significant because it does not matter whether it was done intentionally. It was reckless in any case, these were Russian drones," he believes. - SMI

Zlatti71

90,969 次观看 • 10 个月前

Putin was stunned by an uncomfortable question. It seems the dictator has forgotten how to answer them An Indian journalist caught Putin off guard with a question about Russian-speaking Ukrainians. Geeta Mohan asked the Russian leader what he could say to those Russian-speaking residents of Ukraine who, at the start of the invasion, were asking: “Why is Putin doing this to us?” Many of them spoke Russian, did not consider Russia an enemy, and never expected Russians to start destroying their homes. Putin was clearly confused and interrupted her: “I didn’t understand the question — shocked by what?” Mohan clarified that people were shocked that it was Russia that destroyed their homes. After a pause, Putin delivered a standard set of propaganda talking points: 📌 that these people supposedly lived in areas controlled by Kyiv, which the “Kyiv regime” was “destroying”; 📌 that Moscow was “forced” to launch the operation and “support” the occupation administrations; 📌 that “everyone could have left” if they didn’t want to “be with Russia”; 📌 and that the “referendums” were allegedly “open”. He never answered the main question — why Russia struck those it claimed it intended to protect.

Putin was stunned by an uncomfortable question. It seems the dictator has forgotten how to answer them An Indian journalist caught Putin off guard with a question about Russian-speaking Ukrainians. Geeta Mohan asked the Russian leader what he could say to those Russian-speaking residents of Ukraine who, at the start of the invasion, were asking: “Why is Putin doing this to us?” Many of them spoke Russian, did not consider Russia an enemy, and never expected Russians to start destroying their homes. Putin was clearly confused and interrupted her: “I didn’t understand the question — shocked by what?” Mohan clarified that people were shocked that it was Russia that destroyed their homes. After a pause, Putin delivered a standard set of propaganda talking points: 📌 that these people supposedly lived in areas controlled by Kyiv, which the “Kyiv regime” was “destroying”; 📌 that Moscow was “forced” to launch the operation and “support” the occupation administrations; 📌 that “everyone could have left” if they didn’t want to “be with Russia”; 📌 and that the “referendums” were allegedly “open”. He never answered the main question — why Russia struck those it claimed it intended to protect.

NEXTA

548,620 次观看 • 7 个月前

Gill: "This is a really simple question. Should illegal aliens receive taxpayer-funded unemployment benefits?" Newman: "I think people in the state of California should receive benefits..."- Gill: "So illegal aliens should receive taxpayer-funded unemployment benefits." Newman: "Again, that's your word and..."- Gill: "That's the view of your organization. I mean you were trying to get 1,000 signatures. You only got 503. I think it's worth pointing out because that's a crazy idea." Why can’t they ever answer the question?

Gill: "This is a really simple question. Should illegal aliens receive taxpayer-funded unemployment benefits?" Newman: "I think people in the state of California should receive benefits..."- Gill: "So illegal aliens should receive taxpayer-funded unemployment benefits." Newman: "Again, that's your word and..."- Gill: "That's the view of your organization. I mean you were trying to get 1,000 signatures. You only got 503. I think it's worth pointing out because that's a crazy idea." Why can’t they ever answer the question?

Kathleen Winchell ❤️🤍💙🇺🇸🇺🇸

27,584 次观看 • 1 个月前

Russian ambassador to the UK Andrei Kelin reveals Russia's true intentions and attitude towards the peace plan: Definitely, it should not be a deal. At the moment, we have to talk about surrender, because Kyiv should think not about the deal, but definitely the situation on the ground, the situation in economics of Ukraine, the situation in Europe, where there is no more money, spare money for Ukraine.

Russian ambassador to the UK Andrei Kelin reveals Russia's true intentions and attitude towards the peace plan: Definitely, it should not be a deal. At the moment, we have to talk about surrender, because Kyiv should think not about the deal, but definitely the situation on the ground, the situation in economics of Ukraine, the situation in Europe, where there is no more money, spare money for Ukraine.

Anton Gerashchenko

40,020 次观看 • 7 个月前

A vivid illustration of the effectiveness of Russian artillery. War correspondent Dmitry Steshin recounts how Russia tried to capture Marinka in 2015. So here’s your answer to the question of who was really shelling Donbas and its residents back then. As usual, time has passed, and now Russians themselves are openly talking about their "heroics" in 2014–2015, which they used to keep quiet about.

A vivid illustration of the effectiveness of Russian artillery. War correspondent Dmitry Steshin recounts how Russia tried to capture Marinka in 2015. So here’s your answer to the question of who was really shelling Donbas and its residents back then. As usual, time has passed, and now Russians themselves are openly talking about their "heroics" in 2014–2015, which they used to keep quiet about.

WarTranslated

40,679 次观看 • 1 年前

Putin on his endgame: “They [the West] say that they want to achieve the strategic defeat of Russia on the battlefield. What does this mean for Russia? For Russia, this means the end of its statehood. This means the end of the 1000-year history of the Russian state. I think this is clear to everyone. And then the question arises: why should we be afraid? Isn't it better for us to go to the end? This is elementary formal logic”

Putin on his endgame: “They [the West] say that they want to achieve the strategic defeat of Russia on the battlefield. What does this mean for Russia? For Russia, this means the end of its statehood. This means the end of the 1000-year history of the Russian state. I think this is clear to everyone. And then the question arises: why should we be afraid? Isn't it better for us to go to the end? This is elementary formal logic”

Dmitri Alperovitch

3,410,801 次观看 • 2 年前

"It's kind of worrying because in [case of] Ukraine, it was the same pattern with 'military exercises' in Belarus and Russia." Polish residents shared their thoughts about the Russian attack drones violating Polish airspace. 📹: BBC News Ukrainian, Radio Liberty

"It's kind of worrying because in [case of] Ukraine, it was the same pattern with 'military exercises' in Belarus and Russia." Polish residents shared their thoughts about the Russian attack drones violating Polish airspace. 📹: BBC News Ukrainian, Radio Liberty

Anton Gerashchenko

73,516 次观看 • 10 个月前