Your original claim:

Why did it wait for 2021 to fight the neo nazis? Why Putin talks about ukranian identity not existing claiming they are simply Russian? Why Putin keep talking about shared identity with Israel the worst type of nazis today?

Which the interview clearly addressed.

Then you claimed:

Because during Tucker interview Putin talked about how ukraniain identity do not exists and that they are simply russians. I don’t see why the logic do not apply to other former ussr territories

Refuted

Nowhere in that interview did Putin say anything of the sort. Nor was he building up armed forces anywhere. He very patiently and pragmatically recounted history all the way back to the first century bce, and without revision. Nor did he revise any part of history until the day of the interview. Reread it yourself and copy and paste where he denied Ukraine identity.

Then you claimed

He willingfully omitted part of history where Ukrainian ancestors had a distinct culture and history before becoming part of an Russian empire . Putin logic is it was part of Russia therefore it should always be part of Russia. He do not want a distinct independent Ukrainian identity . It is very similar rhetoric to Zionist logic of jews existed before Muslims and Arabs in the land therefore that land always belong to Jews . The only difference is Putin want russification of Ukrainians while Israel want to wipe out the Palestinians from the land.

Both Ukrainians and Russians originated from different branches of the Slavic tribes, but Ukrainians did not ‘break away’ from Russians. They are two distinct lineages that developed their own identities on different lands at the same time

Nor was he building up armed forces anywhere

I never claimed this

He didn’t leave it out at all. He said it. Plainly.

No you didn’t say it, you just claimed Russia wanted to invade their neighbors. They very clearly don’t, or would have already done it.

You then said

What’s the point of mentionning that Ukraine used to be part of Russia then?

To which I answered:

You’re moving goalposts, friend.

The point is explained in the interview, very clearly. Perhaps you can reread it as a refresher. The separatist movement, which you already agreed was stirred by outside interests, is the point of mentioning it. So I ask you, what is the point of your circumlocution?

Yes. Moving goalposts. I posted the full transcript, for anyone to read, including yourself. Perhaps your memory is faulty and you don’t care to admit it. Perhaps you have an emotional attachment to a fallacious argument. Perhaps you have an ulterior agenda. Who knows, because you refuse to address it and argue in circles. I’ve engaged in more than good faith and you’ve done nothing of the sort, despite several attempts to understand your wild, unfounded claims. If there were any valid reasoning, you’d state them. I’ve wasted enough time on your nonsense.