News Forum - Ukraine’s Zelensky defies Russia’s ultimatum to lay down weapons

[EdwardV]

1 hour ago, Freeduhdumb said:

From their website... two important words. "Prevent Conflict" 

NATO has failed... 

Really? What member is in conflict? Because there is a third and even more important word on their website, it's "member". 

[Freeduhdumb]

Just now, EdwardV said:

Really? What member is in conflict? Because there is a third and even more important word on their website, it's "member". 

Did I mention ineptitude? Yeah... I did. Try a more cogent question friend. 

[EdwardV]

1 hour ago, Freeduhdumb said:

You haven't put the inception of NATO into context friend... why was NATO created in the first place? It was created as a treaty organization to mitigate the Soviet Union.

Pretty sure the Soviet Union no longer exists. Wouldn't you call that a success? 

[Thaidup]

1 hour ago, EdwardV said:

You seem to be assuming Americans don’t know that option exists. It’s not their first rodeo. Fact is the amount being give to Ukraine isn’t that much in the big picture (sadly), the US spends way more in wars. Which by the way this spending might just keep America out of. Seems like money well spent if you ask me. 

I understand your view But c'com man, not a joke, tell me the last time the USA got involved in a war and it worked out good for everyone since 1941?  Korea is still not sorted, Vietnam ended in a disaster, as did Afghanistan, Iraq is a shithole, not to mention Syria OR Libyia, and the list could go -on, Im sure that other members know of conflicts that the US poured money into and then everything turned out really good for them, yeah

[Benroon]

2 hours ago, oldschooler said:

Research “ representative democracy”.
You can’t ask a voting population  every time an important issue arises. 
The peoples’ elected reps., swayed by public opinion & politics, decide what is worthy. Except in very rare cases when a Referendum is held to directly consult & implement the peoples’ will.  

Referendums are a cop out imo - look no further than David Camerons's catastrophic decision to how it can all go badly wrong.

[Rookiescot]

Its odd. On all these threads regarding the Ukraine we have the same conspiracy theory nuts that were on the CCC thread.

Not once has any of them actually admitted they were wrong over things like "Covid is caused by 5G transmitters".

They all seamlessly move from one conspiracy theory to another while never acknowledging their last theory was a load of pish. 

[EdwardV]

5 minutes ago, Freeduhdumb said:

Did I mention ineptitude? Yeah... I did. Try a more cogent question friend. 

Actually no you didn't. At least I couldn't find it, it's hard as my eyes tend to gloss over while reading your posts. 

 

1 hour ago, Freeduhdumb said:

Why are states again embracing Russia. Belarus, the many stans, such as Kazakstan, and yes Ukraine, just to name a few.

Your kidding right? Besides the fact the only embracing Ukraine is doing with Russia is at the end of a 100mm gun, those others were already Russian client states. Not much proof of anything. 

1 hour ago, Freeduhdumb said:

(and resultant failure to fully implement the Minks II agreements) that followed IS the catalyst of why and where we are today (war).

Russia had breached the 1994 Budapest Memorandum by invading Crimea in 2014. Pretty sure anything after that is meaningless. The whole idea this is somehow anyone's fault other than Putin is absurd. When the USSR broke up, there was no Russian compliant about Ukraine's borders. Same when the 1994 Budapest Memorandum was signed, not a peep out of Russia over their border with Ukraine. Now we are supposes to believe it's all about Donbas. Except for the fact Russia now wants the entire south all the way to Moldova. It was never about the Minks agreements, and Russia has proven that time and again. It's all about expanding to defensible borders and Putin's desire to be mentioned in the same breath as Peter the Great. Ukraine is but a stepping stone along the way. Only problem is it appears Putin broke his foot kicking that particular stone. 

[Freeduhdumb]

13 minutes ago, EdwardV said:

Russia had breached the 1994 Budapest Memorandum by invading Crimea in 2014

Invasion? They had a vote... they voted, you know that thing democracy everyone likes to promote. The overwhelming population voted, given the actual invasion, coup de tat in 2014 by the west, to allow Russia to incorporate the Crimea. They necessarily had to vote this way, as the Ukraine was attempting to scrub the ethnic Russia speaking population from Ukraine... there was no invasion there friend. You clearly need to look at the facts more closely, or... you're completely being a disingenuous liar. 

[EdwardV]

18 minutes ago, Thaidup said:

I understand your view But c'com man, not a joke, tell me the last time the USA got involved in a war and it worked out good for everyone since 1941?  Korea is still not sorted, Vietnam ended in a disaster, as did Afghanistan, Iraq is a shithole, not to mention Syria OR Libyia, and the list could go -on, Im sure that other members know of conflicts that the US poured money into and then everything turned out really good for them, yeah

Besides the fact the South Koreans would probably say things turned out pretty well. The alternative is to just let Russia take Ukraine? Keeping in mind this isn't a US lead effort, it's a European one. Your argument only works if you believe Ukraine is the final objective. Problem is Eastern Europe doesn't agree (and most of Europe at that), and neither do I for reasons I've stated before numerous times. If you stand aside and let Russia take Ukraine, and it does turn out they were the final objective then fine (well except for the poor Ukrainian's of course). However if you are wrong, and Russia rolls into the Baltic States, Poland and Romania, well everyone is screwed (including the US). No matter how you cut it, the best place to stop Russia is Ukraine. It helps they believe the same thing too.  

[EdwardV]

6 minutes ago, Freeduhdumb said:

Invasion? They had a vote... they voted, you know that thing democracy everyone likes to promote. The overwhelming population voted, given the actual invasion, coup de tat in 2104 by the west, to allow Russia to incorporate the Crimea... there was no invasion there friend. You clearly need to look at the facts more closely, or... you're completely being a disingenuous liar. 

You mean they had a vote after being invaded by Russia. Pretty sure that vote doesn't wipe out the prior event. If so, you have to admit there was no coup (your words not mine) by the West to take over Ukraine from it's Russian puppet government. After all there have been votes afterword reaffirming their western desires and your logic says the prior event no longer happen. However if you wish to agree there was no coup to begin with, I'll be more than happy to agree with you. 

[Alavan]

3 hours ago, Fanta said:

Apart from the law of common sense that would say the Idea of issuing Ukrainian speaking refugees some form of official Russian documentation to use in Russia so they can get assistance is probably not such a bad thing ?  I don’t know.
People here have claimed that Ukrainian passports are being seized and “replacement” ID cards issued in place. I wasn’t aware that all Ukrainian refugees even had passports or IDs, let alone on hand to travel with during war times. I didn’t question that statement but Google isn’t helping me here. Got a link to a credible source? 

I don’t know if all, but most European countries give an ID card to all citizens, card that they always have to be with them. AFAIK UK is the only country that doesn’t have ID cards. One of the reasons why so many illegals want to reach UK.

[oldschooler]

2 hours ago, EdwardV said:

You mean besides the obvious fact that NATO bylaws don’t allow counties to join who are in conflict with others? For your theory to be correct, NATO had to feel they could manipulate Putin into attacking Ukraine. Wouldn’t the best way to do that is to actually make them a member? Not the opposite which is what happen. 

NO. That would risk WW3 ….. direct conflict with a nuclear armed nation. 
Ukraine also will NEVER qualify for NATO…. You have one reason… there are many others. 

[Freeduhdumb]

29 minutes ago, EdwardV said:

You mean they had a vote after being invaded by Russia. Pretty sure that vote doesn't wipe out the prior event. If so, you have to admit there was no coup (your words not mine) by the West to take over Ukraine from it's Russian puppet government. After all there have been votes afterword reaffirming their western desires and your logic says the prior event no longer happen. However if you wish to agree there was no coup to begin with, I'll be more than happy to agree with you. 

Good Luck

[oldschooler]

2 hours ago, Freeduhdumb said:

It seems that I need to explain this too you again... You're a typical troll running your mind in circles... let us review shall we...

From their website... two important words. "Prevent Conflict" 

NATO has failed... 

An excerpt from their mission statement:
POLITICAL - NATO promotes democratic values and enables members to consult and cooperate on defence and security-related issues to solve problems, build trust and, in the long run, prevent conflict.

MILITARY - NATO is committed to the peaceful resolution of disputes. If diplomatic efforts fail, it has the military power to undertake crisis-management operations. These are carried out under the collective defence clause of NATO's founding treaty - Article 5 of the Washington Treaty or under a United Nations mandate, alone or in cooperation with other countries and international organisations."

There would be no need to begin operating in fear of the great Russian Aggression if NATO had done its job from the beginning... IT HASN'T. NATO is a complete failure. 

You haven't put the inception of NATO into context friend... why was NATO created in the first place? It was created as a treaty organization to mitigate the Soviet Union. Why are states again embracing Russia. Belarus, the many stans, such as Kazakstan, and yes Ukraine, just to name a few. Ukraine sided with Russia in 2014, for their own democratic reasons and the engineered coup de tat, regime change operation that was the reaction of the "West" (and resultant failure to fully implement the Minks II agreements) that followed IS the catalyst of why and where we are today (war). So again... They've (NATO as a failed treaty organization failing there own mission statement) failed. That mission statement of conflict resolution/mitigation that again can be found on their website has been a complete failure to its member states. The members of that organization need to find another solution... what is occurring right now is a COMPLETE FAILURE... 

https://www.nato.int/nato-welcome/index.html

You speak as a trained Russian FSB Agitator would.Zero Criticism of Russia.

Your post extracts Assume Russia follows same “ rules”. Clearly they don’t so must be dealt with “off the record” like the evil vicious lawless thugs they are.

Safety of West a tad more important that a set of nice public rules applicable (only) to civilized nations. 

Deception is Critical to Winning Wars.

Russia has been deceived big time by NATO. Eat It.Beaten at their own game!

Nobody “embraces” toxic Russia except other worthless tyrannies, & India

Russia doesn’t do coup d’tats then right ?  Yeah right …….. NATO ain’t too shabby there either. But sure looked like the whole nation rose up when protesters got murdered in the street. Eat It.

“Minsk” an “ imposed” tyrant treaty so invalid and never complied by ratbag imposer Russia either. Only Putin Agitators reference “Minsk”. Clear “ Reveal” of Putin Puppet Apologist. 

[oldschooler]

26 minutes ago, Freeduhdumb said:

Good Luck

No Case = No Argument=Childish One Liners🫠

Beaten out of sight by Reason & Facts.

Nobody buying your hate- fueled FSB-supplied false bankrupt “ narrative”. 

[EdwardV]

35 minutes ago, oldschooler said:

NO. That would risk WW3 ….. direct conflict with a nuclear armed nation. 
Ukraine also will NEVER qualify for NATO…. You have one reason… there are many others. 

What others?

 

 

[oldschooler]

1 hour ago, Benroon said:

Referendums are a cop out imo - look no further than David Camerons's catastrophic decision to how it can all go badly wrong.

On the contrary,Referendums are Democracy ( “rule by the people”) in its most pure form. Doesn’t matter whether you like the result or not. 
However, if you don’t accept the result you are like the majority of the UK Establishment, exposed big time as anti - democratic and discarded from elected office by due democratic process. 

[oldschooler]

19 minutes ago, EdwardV said:

What others?

Corruption Levels off the charts (Russian People & Culture). 

Insufficient Control over Lands & Borders.

Wanted as Buffer State & Russian Killing Ground by NATO.

Vetoed by France & Germany (at least)

NATO not formed to defend with blood one group of anti- western Ethnic Russians from another.

Ukraine of High Strategic Importance  to Russia but NOT to NATO. 

NATO could not prevent even with membership Russian Invasion & Wrecking Ukraine. 

Probable Nuclear WW3 ( after Inevitable Russian Invasion). 

[KRLMRX]

6 hours ago, Alavan said:

Amazing that more than 1400 Ukrainians had family in Arkhangelsk have family there. And now some Ukrainians have family in Siberia also. Those familymembers must have moved there gladly during Stalin's reign.

I understand that "everyone knows this", but I would like to see at least some confirmation.

[EdwardV]

Seems even German industry isn't happy with the decision by the government to not send weapons to Ukraine: 

German defence company Rheinmetall has requested approval to export 100 old Marder infantry fighting vehicles to Ukraine, a defence source told Reuters on Monday, in what would be the first heavy weapons shipment from Germany to Ukraine. The company is seeking an export licence for the vehicles in their current state, aiming to restore them over the coming months before shipping them to Ukraine, the source said, confirming a report in the Welt am Sonntag newspaper. Rheinmetall's move is set to force Chancellor Olaf Scholz to take a clear position on whether heavy weapons can be sent directly from Germany to Ukraine because the Marder deal requires approval from the national security council, which is chaired by Scholz.

Rheinmetall seeks to export heavy weapons to Ukraine, source says (msn.com)

When you consider on Sunday the US gave Ukraine $300M to go out and buy it's own weapons, you have to think the White House knew this might be a result. It's going to be hard to say no when Scholz was quoted saying: 

“The German government is not against heavy weapons being sent to Ukraine per se," a government source said. “We approved the delivery by the Czech Republic of old German-origin tanks to Ukraine and will support Dutch artillery sent to Ukraine with ammunition. It is about availability.”

EXPLAINED: Why is Germany Not Sending Ukraine Heavy Weapons? (news18.com)

Kinda puts him between a rock and a hard place. 

 

[Thaidup]

Just a couple of reminders, of how libertarians used to feel, If you want full on war with Russia, That is your prerogative, But While we sit in our loungeroom and debate the the pro's and con's of the issue, people are being blown apart.

 

[Thaidup]

I am so sorry to anyone that read my previous threads, It turns out that Ukraine is the most reliable country and not corrupt at all, All of the money and weapons going to Ukraine are being diligently  followed and traced by Snopes.com Just a joke, or is it?

[oldschooler]

34 minutes ago, Thaidup said:

Just a couple of reminders, of how libertarians used to feel, If you want full on war with Russia, That is your prerogative, But While we sit in our loungeroom and debate the the pro's and con's of the issue, people are being blown apart.

The Russians being blown apart don’t matter though.

[oldschooler]

19 minutes ago, Thaidup said:

I am so sorry to anyone that read my previous threads, It turns out that Ukraine is the most reliable country and not corrupt at all, All of the money and weapons going to Ukraine are being diligently  followed and traced by Snopes.com Just a joke, or is it?

That those weapons are being efficiently used to kill invading murdering raping Russian scum, to destroy their war machinery, and to drive the rest OUT is ALL that presently matters. Wouldn’t go proposing your audit schemes to any field commanders either. 

[Thaidup]

Seriously? you get it dont you? we are being led on a media driven war path again, can't you remember the "weapons of mass destruction"  speach at the Un by, the US . > here.