rose up with covert western support just like what happened in the Arab Springs that worked out so wonderfully.
Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar
- Thread starter areksnumbr1sxylady
- Start date
- Status
rose up with covert western support just like what happened in the Arab Springs that worked out so wonderfully.
Ahh right, you mean morons.
Not possible, the protests/riots were a snap reaction to the surprise announcement that the president was blocking the EU deal. There simply wouldn't have been time for the "covert western powers" to get out of bed never-mind get involved and try to stir up rebellion.
incorrect. The EU and Ukraine were already starting to deal back on 30th march 2012, thus western infiltration was already ongoing well before the row back that lead to the riots. Western states would already have planted their "people" well ahead of the main event in November 2013.
Which NATO members promised to attack Russia in response for her invasion of Ukraine?
What promises were those?
Another one who isn't looking at my post in the light of what has happened over the last few hours...
Russia has been careful to skirt around them but there are aspects of the nuclear disarmament treaties that tie into the the Budapest treaty (Memorandum on Security Assurances) that in theory could compel NATO to come to Ukraine's aid against Russia on paper.
What happened over the last few hours is even more unwarranted aggression from Russia. Nothing you can say will justify that.
So the answer is 'none.' That's what I thought.
Sure if you are talking about an explicit agreement if Russia does X or Y but there is more to it than that - there certainly are treaties in play that on paper would compel NATO to take action against <entity> in this case Russia in response to certain circumstances that are part of the nuclear disarmament treaties and the Budapest treaty that are effectively a promise to Ukraine (and others).
And at no point have I disputed that there has been unwarranted aggression from Russia - try and actually understand what I'm saying - it is why I've not bothered with replying again to dowie as there is obviously not even an attempt to try and work out what I'm saying just a generic reply to what you think I'm saying.
NATO didn't, the USA did but when Ukraine applied NATO said no as France/et al were worried about disturbing the balance of power in Europe.
Ukraine surrendered its nuclear weapons and decommissioned it's intercontinental bombers in exchange for security guarantees from the west, it was called the Budapest memorandum. The guarantees were even reaffirmed in 2009 however when Ukraine was invaded and asked for help, nobody answered.
Ted Cruz actually explained it to Trump during one of the presidential debates: "Ukraine used to be the third-largest nuclear country on the face of the Earth. Ukraine voluntarily gave up its nuclear weapons because the United States of America came in and said if you hand over those nuclear weapons, we will ensure your territorial integrity from Russia. We made a commitment, and then the Obama administration has broken its word."
He is playing with words - the actual treaties IIRC don't explicitly name Russia so there isn't a specific promise. Even the actions today have been probably carefully calculated as they don't constitute a direct territorial infringement at this point.
Yeah, the Putinistas are always trying to twist words, however I don't see the fact we promised to help Ukraine if it was attacked and not specifically if it was attacked by Russia as an issue. They were invaded by somebody and that's what we promised to assist them with if they gave up their nukes.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 16,715
You gotta be some kinda crazy to give up your nukes in this mad world.
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 4,383
- Location
- Oxford
Even if they where a member of NATO some PM wannabees have said they couldn't come to the aid of a Nato allies if they where invaded/attacked by Russia.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 12,657
Russia wasn't invading, it was protecting Ukrainians who identified as Russian who were being murdered by Ukrainians who identified as Western NPC's
Crimea just happened to make a perfect sanctuary for the persecuted UkroRussians
Crimea just happened to make a perfect sanctuary for the persecuted UkroRussians
I watched the video posted on a news site.
The headline was confusing, maybe purposely so.
First off the headline said that a Russia boat rammed a Ukrainian boat.
Then the Ukrainian minister released a video of the incident.
But the video came from the boat that was ramming the other boat!
At first I was thinking how as this Ukrainian minister got ahold of a video that was being filmed on the Russia boat i.e. the boat the headline said rammed the other boat. Then the penny dropped and I realised it must have been the Ukrainian boat who did the ramming!
The headline was confusing, maybe purposely so.
First off the headline said that a Russia boat rammed a Ukrainian boat.
Then the Ukrainian minister released a video of the incident.
But the video came from the boat that was ramming the other boat!
At first I was thinking how as this Ukrainian minister got ahold of a video that was being filmed on the Russia boat i.e. the boat the headline said rammed the other boat. Then the penny dropped and I realised it must have been the Ukrainian boat who did the ramming!
Not that odd. Ukraine sends in ships that disregard treaties on inspection and navigation, heading towards the new bridge between Crimea and Russia. Ukraine must have known Russia would head them off (the tanker which blocked them was put there after this). When the ships keep coming, then they are fired upon. Now WHY Ukraine would do this, is up for debate. But that they knew they were doing so is not.
One theory - the Ukranian president (Petro Poroshenko, a billionaire who bought himself a presidency three years ago) is up for re-election early next year. He is now asking for Martial Law. Can't ask for Martial Law without a cause.
- Status