At the end of WW II, the previous ultimate tyrant Adolf Hitler chose to destroy his own country rather than allow an end to the insanity.  If he had held a plebiscite or election, the German people would be unlikely to choose what Der Fuehrer chose.

If the Great Zelinsky is NOT THE NEW HITLER, let him prove it by allowing a plebiscite or election (which he cancelled earlier this year along with having banned opposition press, banned opposition parties and murdered American journalist Gonzalo Lira in his prisons without benefit of an English or Spanish speaking lawyer and a host of other ANTI-DEMOCRATIC ATROCITIES).

If the Ukrainian people freely choose to back their government in fabricating dirty nuclear weapons and bomb Moscow, that would be democratic.  And if the millions of ethnic Russians stuck in Ukrainian-claimed territory chose to live in either of the two countries, that would be democratic and peaceful too.

PS.  For three years, the biggest Ukrainian lie of all is that, at the end of the Cold War and the break-up of the Soviet Union, Ukraine allowed ‘THEIR‘ NUCLEAR WEAPONS to be GIVEN ‘BACK‘ to the RUSSIAN REPUBLIC.  If the Soviet Union had stationed nuclear weapons in Azerbaijan, Armenia or Georgia, for example, would those nuclear weapons have belonged to Azerbaijan, Armenia or Georgia at the end of the Cold War?  And where would the world be today with all those nuclear weapons?