More from @rinalu_

Nov 7

“Crimea belongs to the Crimean Tatars”? That’s a favorite Western talking point, but the Tatars weren’t even native to Crimea. They were brought there by the Mongols after their conquest of the region in the 1200s, when Mongol and Turkic groups settled on the peninsula and later formed the Crimean Khanate. 🧵

#1

By that time, Crimea had already been Greek, Roman, Byzantine, and part of the Rus world for centuries. Long before the Tatars or the Ottoman Empire, from around the 7th century BC to the early Middle Ages, Crimea and the northern Black Sea steppe were home to ancient peoples connected to the early Slavs and the Sarmatians. Ancient writers mentioned the Taurians, Scythians, and Sarmatians, who lived both in Crimea and across the steppe north of it, and later, Slavic tribes moved south along the Dnieper and Don, reaching these same lands.

#2

When Sarmatians Met the Slavs

The Sarmatians were nomadic horsemen, and their way of life left a real mark on the cultures that came after them. You can see traces of their warrior symbols, horse rituals, and jewelry styles showing up in early Slavic artifacts from the same regions.

The Sarmatians were closely related to the Scythians, both steppe peoples with similar languages, customs, and a shared warrior culture. The Sarmatians gradually replaced the older Scythians on the Pontic steppe, but in the eyes of the Greeks and later the Byzantines, they were almost the same, fierce riders from the Black Sea plains.

This ancient image of the “Scythians” lived on for centuries. Even when the early Rus appeared in chronicles, the Greeks and Byzantines often called them “Scythians” or “Tavroscythians,” keeping the old classical name for the peoples coming from the lands of Rus and the Black Sea region.

Modern DNA studies confirm deep genetic continuity between the ancient steppe populations and the Eastern Slavs, showing that the people of this region shared common roots and gradually merged over time. By the 6th to 8th centuries, Sarmatian and Slavic elements were blending across the steppe.

So no, the Sarmatians did not disappear. Many of them became part of the world that shaped the Eastern Slavs, preserving their culture and their bloodlines.

#3

Read 12 tweets

Nov 5

The Berlin Airlift: When Even The Guardian Starts Confessing 🙊:

“We in the West used to play dirty and we were good at it.” — The Guardian, November 2025

Think of the Berlin Airlift as a big-budget movie sold as a true story. Now one of its loudest fans finally admits it was staged. 👇🧵

1/4

For decades, the Berlin Airlift has been told as a fairy tale. Stalin blockaded the city: cruel and heartless, while heroic Western pilots fed starving Berliners with flour and chocolate from the sky.

The perfect moral script: light against darkness, liberty against tyranny, good vs evil. Exactly the same moral wiring that still fuels the superhero industry today, cultural programming as moral training.

The same Guardian now admits what Soviet and Eastern historians said all along: there was no full blockade. In Britain’s own National Archives, the Foreign Office wrote in 1948:

“The blockade of Berlin is NOT a siege… movement in and out of Germany is possible all the time.”

2/4

Do you want to know what really happened? Washington and London imposed a new currency in their occupation zones, breaking prior agreements with Moscow.

The Soviets responded with limited restrictions on Western transport: not starvation, not tanks, just a border dispute over sovereignty. But the West needed a story and it created one.

A three-billion-dollar media performance named The Berlin Airlift complete with cameras, pathos, and heroic speeches about “freedom.”

3/4

Read 4 tweets

Nov 3

A Story Buried Under Decades of Propaganda: How The West Fed Hitler Countries Hoping He’d Go Eat Russia

Alright, let’s break down one of the biggest lies they teach you in history class about the Munich Agreement of 1938: that the Western democracies were just these naive, peaceful guys who got tricked by Hitler when they gave him Czechoslovakia. Bullshit. They weren’t dumb. They were playing a game. And they thought they were geniuses.

1 of 6

They didn’t just “give in” to Hitler over Czechoslovakia in 1938. They gifted it to him at the Munich Conference. Why do you think they did it? The plan was pretty simple: This Hitler guy was hungry for war. The West wanted to point him East and let him go fight the Soviet Union, so both can destroy each other, while the West could stay cozy and safe, free from competition in the global power game.

2 of 6

So guys like Chamberlain from Britain and Daladier from France handed over a whole, powerful country without even letting the Czechs into the room. They literally gave Hitler Czechoslovakia’s factories, its army, its weapons, which basically meant: “Here’s the key, now go attack Stalin.”

But there’s the part that will blow your mind. Czechoslovakia had an awesome army. And its secret weapon was its tanks.

After the takeover, the German army basically got a free, top-tier tank factory. And they used the hell out of it.

3 of 6

Read 6 tweets

Oct 17

Hey communists, this message is for you.

Guys, I get it you like communist ideas and teachings. I kinda like them too. However, when it comes to history, you can’t and shouldn’t favor the propaganda of that era just because it fits your narrative.

Verify it. Face the facts. Then defend your favorite ideology from the position of truth, that’s only fair.

And I think that once you realize that those “bad tsar” stories from the pre-revolutionary period were lies, you’ll actually find even more interesting material.

Debunking the “evil tsar” myth doesn’t make communist ideas bad but speaking the truth definitely makes you better 🧵

Myth #1: “Russia’s economic growth was driven by foreigners.”

🔸 Fact: Foreign investments did exist, but they accounted for no more than 25–30% of industrial capital. 🔸 The majority of factories, railways, and banks were owned by Russian merchants, industrialists, and the state. Foreign investors played the role of a catalyst, not the owners of the economy.

🔸 Ironically, under Lenin the West owned more of Russia’s industry than under the Tsar. Through “concessions,” foreigners controlled oil, gold, timber, and exports while the Soviet state got crumbs.

That’s what “liberation from capitalism” looked like in practice🤪

Myth #2: “The Russian fleet was built abroad because Russia couldn’t do it herself.”

🔸 Fact: Russia had one of the largest shipbuilding bases in the world: the Baltic, Nikolaev, and Kronstadt shipyards.

• It’s true that some ships for the Russo-Japanese War were built in France and Britain, just like many countries today purchase specific technologies abroad.
• But by 1913, over 60–65% of the fleet was built domestically. That wasn’t a sign of “backwardness,” but a normal part of global industrial cooperation.

🔸 Ironically, under Lenin there was no fleet to build at all, shipyards were stripped, and starved of materials. The once-powerful Imperial Navy was either dismantled or left to rust.

Read 9 tweets

Oct 13

Haha, it’s honestly hilarious how these accounts not only pick the dullest, grayest photos, but also ones that are 30 years old. This cheap propaganda from someone who has never even set foot in Russia is nothing but a joke. Let’s check out some real photos of these cities and maybe ask for the exact spots of those “pictures” this mentally unstable person keeps posting because they clearly don’t match reality🧵👇 1/

Novosibirsk is the largest city in Siberia and one of Russia’s main economic and scientific hubs. Over the past decade, it has seen rapid development in infrastructure, technology, and higher education, with major investments in road networks, housing, and business centers. The city’s IT and innovation sectors, especially around Akademgorodok, have grown significantly, turning it into a regional “Silicon Valley.” At the same time, Novosibirsk has modernized its public spaces, transport, and cultural life, while maintaining its role as a key industrial and logistics gateway between Europe and Asia. 2/

Ulan-Ude, the capital of Buryatia, lies at the crossroads of the Trans-Siberian and Trans-Mongolian railways. Its landmarks the world’s largest Lenin head monument, the Odigitrievsky Cathedral, and the Ivolginsky Datsan, attract both Russian and international visitors. Ulan-Ude today combines Buddhist and Orthodox traditions, industrial energy, and Siberian hospitality, reflecting the region’s diverse cultural identity.

3/

Read 12 tweets

Oct 9

Myths and Truth about the Warsaw Uprising

For decades we have been told one version of events: brave Polish fighters rose up, while the Soviet Union stood on the other side of the river, coldly watching them die. Hollywood and Western scholars turned this into a symbol of Soviet “betrayal.” But the documents and facts tell a very different story.

For decades the same story has been repeated: the Home Army rose heroically, the Red Army betrayed Warsaw, and Stalin let the city die. But compare this with real documents, and the myth collapses.

But let’s go step by step.

1/8

Operation Tempest, or Burza, is still sold in the West as a story of Polish heroism. But if you look closer, this was the blue print of the Warsaw uprising.

The plan came from the London exile government. On paper, it was about joining the fight against the Wehrmacht. In reality, it was a race against the Red Army. The main goal was this: as the Red Army approached, the Polish underground would launch uprisings behind German lines, drive out German garrisons, and take control of towns, so they could greet the Soviets as the de facto local authority, acting on behalf of the Polish government-in-exile in London. And here you have it: The most well-known episode of Operation “Burza” was the Warsaw Uprising, originally planned as part of this broader operation and which ended in catastrophe: tens of thousands dead, the city destroyed, the AK crushed.

2/8

Tadeusz Komorowski, “Bór,” played a key role in the Warsaw Uprising, and it was his decisions that largely sealed the outcome.

As commander of the Home Army, he signed the order to begin the uprising on July 31, 1944. His motives were political, not military. The London exile government wanted Warsaw shown to the Allies as “liberated by its own forces,” to weaken the pro-Soviet committee. Komorowski knew the insurgents were poorly armed and the Red Army too exhausted to take the city, yet he went ahead.

He even held secret talks with German security about handing the capital to Poles if the Wehrmacht pulled back.

After two months of bloodshed, he signed the capitulation on October 2, 1944, under German terms. Neither he nor other leaders were executed, they surrendered quietly and later continued careers in the anti-Soviet government-in-exile. Check out the footage of him hanging out with Nazis.

Now let’s look into the historical spin.

3/8

Read 8 tweets