Ukraine - Russia Conflict
- Thread starter randomradio
- Start date
They're systematically dismantling neo-Nazis from Ukraine and they would stop at nothing until they achieve that. Truth.
No, the Chinese are not neutral.
No. What you said applies for Armenia, not Ukraine.
The Russians only agreed to a Ukrainian entry based on them also being involved in the negotiations. It wasn't a blanket ban.
But they took a much harder approach with Armenia. And once Armenia decided not to sign, the West rewarded Armenia with a war. If you notice, the West didn't bother much about the invasion from Azerbaijan. In fact, the war was necessary to sway Armenia back to the West. This is another example FM Jaishankar gave for Western "principles."
It's funny how people forget about Armenia having withdrawn from the agreement at the same time as Ukraine.
Lol.
Then you gotta wait for the next elections, not call for elections willy nilly in the middle of someone's term. Elections hapen mid-term only when the ruling party no longer holds a clear majority. If simple protests disrupt this process, then it's no longer a democracy.
This is another example of your ignorance.
Lol.
It's from a Western poll.
Ipso facto.
Lol.
The crew of the Russian anti-tank grenade launcher SPG-9M "Spear" spoke about their combat work in Ukraine. The effective firing range of the SPG-9 grenade launcher against armored targets is up to 1300 meters, against infantry with fragmentation ammunition - up to 4.5 km.
Russia is not a state, it is an organised terrorist maffia who mostly targets unarmed civilians.
The Neo-Nazis in Ukraine are the Russian troops. Just so you know.
Russia's long history of neo-Nazis
The Russian state’s long history of cultivating homegrown neo-Nazis
www.latrobe.edu.au
Pro-Kremlin neo-Nazi militia inciting the torture and murder of Ukrainian prisoners
Task Force Rusich, linked to the Wagner Group, advises its fighters not to report the capture of Ukrainians to Russian commanders
Who Are The Neo-Nazis Fighting For Russia In Ukraine?
The Kremlin has claimed its war on Ukraine is aimed at “de-Nazifying” the country. What about the neo-Nazi groups actively fighting on the Russian side?
www.rferl.org
A soldier wearing Nazi imagery was given a medal by a Russia-backed separatist republic for killing Ukrainian 'nationalists'
The fighter's wore the "Valknot" and "Totenkopf," the first of which is tied to white supremacists and the second to Nazi Germany's SS divisions.
www.businessinsider.com
The only time Russia actually fought Neo-Nazis was when they blew up the plane with Utkin and Prigozhin on it. Those were actual Neo-Nazis, Utkin even had a full-body tattoo of a Waffen SS uniform decorations. You want Neo-Nazis, you look at Russia.
Russia is pushing a policy of ruthless dictatorship, constant military propaganda, revisionist and irredentist history, claims about the supremacy of the Russian race and culture and how it deserves to rule the world, glorifies violence including torture, commits war crimes constantly and on a massive scale. All the same bull load that Nazi Germany spouted comes from the Kremlin today.
Ukrain is not neo nazi or any *censored*ing rogue nation.
You can call Russia what ever you want,but in reality it's state like any other structurally.Russia is not a state, it is an organised terrorist maffia who mostly targets unarmed civilians.
The Neo-Nazis in Ukraine are the Russian troops. Just so you know.
Russia's long history of neo-Nazis
The Russian state’s long history of cultivating homegrown neo-NazisPro-Kremlin neo-Nazi militia inciting the torture and murder of Ukrainian prisoners
Task Force Rusich, linked to the Wagner Group, advises its fighters not to report the capture of Ukrainians to Russian commanderswww.theguardian.com
Who Are The Neo-Nazis Fighting For Russia In Ukraine?
The Kremlin has claimed its war on Ukraine is aimed at “de-Nazifying” the country. What about the neo-Nazi groups actively fighting on the Russian side?
A soldier wearing Nazi imagery was given a medal by a Russia-backed separatist republic for killing Ukrainian 'nationalists'
The fighter's wore the "Valknot" and "Totenkopf," the first of which is tied to white supremacists and the second to Nazi Germany's SS divisions.
The only time Russia actually fought Neo-Nazis was when they blew up the plane with Utkin and Prigozhin on it. Those were actual Neo-Nazis, Utkin even had a full-body tattoo of a Waffen SS uniform decorations. You want Neo-Nazis, you look at Russia.
Russia is pushing a policy of ruthless dictatorship, constant military propaganda, revisionist and irredentist history, claims about the supremacy of the Russian race and culture and how it deserves to rule the world, glorifies violence including torture, commits war crimes constantly and on a massive scale. All the same bull load that Nazi Germany spouted comes from the Kremlin today.
Thing is they had no right to be part of these negotiations. USA, China, Japan, India, or Lesotho were not party to the negotiations either.
Russia wanting to be involved was a way for them of denying Ukraine the right to make its own decisions.
What the heck is this nonsense.
West couldn't do much about Azeri invasion because Russia had decided that lands that were historically and ethnically Armenians did in fact belong de jure to Azerbaijan. And when the USSR crumbled, these Russian-inherited borders stuck. If West had intervened to stop Azerbaijan, you wankers would call that hypocrisy because how comes borders must be respected in Ukraine but not in Azerbaijan, SMH, blah blah blah.
But Armenia is in CSTO, and Russia was the guarantor of security and stability. Look where that got them.
The CSTO, like its spiritual predecessor the Warsaw Pact, has never acted to protect a country against an external threat. Only to protect a Russian-backed regime against its people. But morons, imbeciles, and other assorted idiots will still claim that "NATO is annexing countries" or some other blatant absurdity. Russia's neighbors are desperate to join NATO entirely because of how Russia acts. And those that did not join NATO as soon as they could, like Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, and Armenia, are regretting it now.
That's not how it works though. By your logic Cuba can hold Russian and Chinese troops. What if Algeria gives basing rights to them?
Sovereignty is subjective to whoever's strong enough to influence an outcome.
Something called sanctions. Rightfully Azerbaijan should have been sanctioned for invading another country. But absolutely nothing was done.
They can.
The UN charter clearly states that countries have an "inherent right of individual or collective self-defence" (article 51). That inherent right to collective self-defence means that countries have an inherent right to enter collective defense alliances such as NATO. If Cuba or Algeria want to ally with Russia or China, then this is their sovereign right.
You can look at just how many countries have military bases in Djibouti nowadays. Nobody but the Djibouti government is allowed to choose whether they can invite one more or not.
Other countries can then decide to complain about it, they can recall their ambassador or stop trade relations or whatever; but they are not entitled to invade. A military intervention against another country is only permissible in the UN charter if it was approved by the Security Council (article 42).
Again, thanks to Stalin, they invaded what was de jure their own country. Blame Russia for that.
And they did time it quite skillfully, as it was right after the EU had passed deals with them for oil and gas so as to decouple from Russian hydrocarbons. They knew they couldn't easily be sanctioned.
pakistan, saudi arabia, jordan, iraq ...etc all which were created by the west are the only states.
then why did US threaten cuba when they allied with russia ?
There as neutral as India. Officially neutral, media pro-Russian, buying Russian oil.
They were not fine with Ukraine joining the EU. Putin was not even fine with East German being let go in 1989, he was in the KGB HQ in Dresden cursing senior Soviet command for not killing the protestors that had surrounded their offices. You're kidding yourself about Putin because you know nothing about his history.
Like I said before, the EU only works one way. Russia would have lost another chunk of its economic sphere due to its own economic incompetence and lack of prospects. In the early '90s they actually tried to persuade the Baltic states into not leaving the USSR by allowing them to keep more of their own harvest, silly *censored*s.
Zero evidence here at all. Armenia and Azerbaijan had been warring for 100+ years, punctuated by Soviet occupation.
Don't try blame the west for the Nagorno-Karabakh war, that's been going for some time, and the strip never historically belonged to Armenia.
It's fact. That's how things work in a proper democracy. Yanukovych broke the rule of law by attacking peaceful protestors.
Protestors are not restricted in terms of what they can ask for. By the next term the damage would have been done, they'd have gladly waited out the 12 months otherwise.
Yeah, exactly and after the EEU decision it did not. MPs described Yanukovych's move as 'treason'. Also, where the hell did you get 'majority from'? It was anything but clear or a majority. Basically his win was based on a slim mandate which he then broke, hence he loses legitimacy.
2010 Ukrainian presidential election - Wikipedia
No, that's required for a democracy. An elected leader cannot simply do whatever they like after being elected LOL. Otherwise they could just disband elections altogether, or stuff ballots at the next election, or poison and kill opposition MPs lol. Even Thatcher had to back down on poll tax FFS. That is exactly how a democracy works.
It's an example of yours. If a leader can completely change everything they stood for election on mid-term that isn't a democracy. Besides, they've had plenty of elections since. If regions invaded by Russia in the interim couldn't participate due to occupying forces, that's on Russia.
You are a lol.
JFC dude, people in Russia get locked up for having the wrong opinion. I'm sure Kim Jong Un has a 110% approval rating.
Clown.
Lol because you're uninformed, watch this series and learn some facts about Putin, Russia and Ukraine, rather than regurgitating Russian crap.
Because Cuba based nuclear missiles on its soil. Even Khrushchev regretted that dumb move in the end, since it became apparent that Castro was unstable and there were no guarantees about what would happen to the missiles.
Cuba wasn't a democracy either.
Then explain the Monroe Doctrine?
Russia was very easily sanctioned though. See what I mean? Different countries, different rules. Nothing for Armenia even though they were in pretty much the same boat as Ukraine.
You know, the West could have very easily sanctioned everything but the oil and gas deals. A military embargo would have been the minimum.
Washington Must End Its Support for Azerbaijan’s War Crimes
The US has long offered unconditional military assistance to Azerbaijan even as it carries out ethnic cleansing in Nagorno-Karabakh. It’s consistent with Washington’s support for brutal human rights violators from Saudia Arabia to Israel.
jacobin.com
Dude, they are not neutral. How dumb can you get?
A P5 by definition needs to have a position. If a P5 is neutral, then they will just about damn near veto every single resolution there is.
Everybody and their grandma know that China is supporting Russia, and even the Chinese have said it.
At the very least:
China’s Position on Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine
Summarizing China’s position since February 21, 2022
Sure, sure. One state waging war on the other is okay as long as the aggressor is on your side.
Lol.
Lol.
Sure, let's subvert democracy.
Yeah, exactly and after the EEU decision it did not. MPs described Yanukovych's move as 'treason'. Also, where the hell did you get 'majority from'? It was anything but clear or a majority. Basically his win was based on a slim mandate which he then broke, hence he loses legitimacy.
View attachment 326242010 Ukrainian presidential election - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
That is a majority. 12.5m voted for him versus 11.5m for Tymoshenko.
Lol.
These polls are anonymous.
Clown.
Lol because you're uninformed, watch this series and learn some facts about Putin, Russia and Ukraine, rather than regurgitating Russian crap.
Lol. You are free to get your information from a partisan documentary.
You should speak to CNN for the truth about Trump.
Irrelevant, but since you ask!
Back in the early 19th century, when the Great Powers were just the British, French, and German empires, followed by Spain, Portugal, Netherlands, Austria-Hungary, Russia, and the Ottomans in the second rung and the USA were like, far far far below, Americans decided that if the Great Powers of the time meddled in American affairs, it would be a threat to them, so they decided to discourage such meddling as much as they could.
Didn't stop various European countries, including UK, France, Netherlands from actually keeping territories in the Americas. It did stop the Spanish but only after the Americans actually waged war on them.
Anyway it's moot now.
Nope. Sanctions against Russia was anything but easy. They happened because the military invasion of Ukraine was the culmination of a long pattern.
1991: Russia wages multiple wars in Georgia, creates Abkhazia and South Ossetia puppet states.
1992: Russia wages war in Moldova, creates the Transdnistria puppet state. Russia also involved in Tajikistan civil war.
1994: Russia wages war in Ichkeria (Chechnya), loses in 1996. Chechnya is granted independence.
1999: Russia wages war in Chechnya again, using a false flag operation as a pretext. After ten years of combat and over 50 000 deaths, they regained control of it.
2008: Russia wages war in Georgia again, establish permanent military occupation.
2014: Russia wages war in Ukraine, annex Crimea, creates the DPR and LPR puppet states, shoots down a civilian airliner.
Europe, and especially Germany and the eastern countries of the EU, were extremely dependent on Russian oil and gas. In fact some of these eastern countries didn't even have the infrastructure to get gas from elsewhere than Russia. The sanctions passed against Russia caused a huge energy price hike in Europe, which took a few months to climb down. Getting the energy price back under control required creating new commercial accords with other energy providers, including Azerbaijan.
Without Russia's history of aggression and escalation, and without all the failed attempts at diplomacy first, passing significant sanctions against Russia would have been politically impossible. Even the sanctions that were passed had to get some loopholes and exceptions due to the need to have some political compromise with certain politically compromised individuals (yes, Victor Orban, I'm looking at you).
In that context, passing sanctions against Azerbaijan for taking control of what was, de jure and thanks to Stalin's decision, legally their own territory, impossible. The EU needed Azerbaijan so as to not need Russia too much.
Azerbaijan could have threatened to cancel the oil and gas deals in case of sanctions.
And a military embargo would have been largely toothless anyway. There's technically an OSCE embargo against Azerbaijan since 1992. Most of the Azeri arsenal is from the Soviet Union. From this they have kept mostly sourcing their stuff from Russia as well as other post-Soviet states, like Belarus and Ukraine. The non-Soviet-derived stuff is mostly sourced from Israel and Turkey, two countries that just do whatever they want and frequently oppose Western interests. (They didn't pass sanctions against Russia either.)
You know what else is a majority? The Ukrainian independence referendum, absolute majority in every single oblast including Crimea.
You know what else subverts democracy? Corruption and treason.
