Could you quote the actual treaty for me please and tell me where Britain and the US are obligated to defend Ukraine?
Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar
- Thread starter areksnumbr1sxylady
- Start date
- Status
Could you quote the actual treaty for me please and tell me where Britain and the US are obligated to defend Ukraine?
No because unlike your 5th year English teacher I'm not interested in failing to teach you anything. you're Wrong, just accept the facts as easily as you do all those edgy grifter YouTubers you like watching
I already quoted the treaty for you and it doesn't say that. Your grammar is also appalling, I'd suggest you go back to your 5th year English teacher and ask her to apologise for failing you so badly.
Last edited:
Unfortunately you seem to have quoted UN general assembly guidance by accident.
Google, “the fall of the USSR” and “the nuclear disarmament of Ukraine”
Alternatively pop down to the local library and ask for enlightenment.
Last edited:
You didn't quote it, you put one part up with no context and failed to even understand that part. like I said, I'm not interested in teaching you anything. you're a lost cause. my grammar might be awful, but it's still better than your comprehension, of well Everything, it seems.
Here's a deal, I'll go back and take English language if you go back and take English lit where they teach you to actually understand what's being written, OK ?
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 32,614
- Location
- Rutland
It could be considered that this is entirely his intent.
Over paying IMO.
It’s a shame there isn’t a ‘Hide replies to ignored content’ option.
I love the arrogant condescending responses, but I'm accurately quoting the Budapest memorandum. See point 4
Yeah sorry I'm interrupting Grim5 copy and pasting Ukrainian propaganda from Twitter
I see what you mean. Although point 2 states that everyone involved promises not to threaten Ukraine, it doesn't go on to say everyone else will defend Ukraine if one of those involves threatens Ukraine.
Point 4 isn't cut and dried either - those involved need to ask the UN what they as a group think they should do before responding to the use of Nukes in Ukraine.
Best we can do is what we've been doing thus far. Provide as much weaponry as possible to get RU out of Eastern Ukraine. It's up to UA to decide when to stop, not us.
Another agreement that Russia has since broken. I wonder if you are in fact aware of the guarantees made to the Ukrainians.
Last edited:
Not to mention the small point about the recognised boarders of Ukraine and surrounding nations, or Ukraines commitments of not perusing a nuclear program either domestic or foreign, both of which the Ukrainians have adhered to for the security of Europe and Russia even at the cost of its own demise.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2009
- Posts
- 5,773
- Location
- Location, Location!
Well the mods can't keep complaining, if they don't put a stop to blatant trolling then what direction do they expect the thread to always take.
You are in fact wrong though. What you’re attempting to argue is incorrect and from a single misunderstood point of one agreement out of many complex agreements.
Great tolerance and restraint was afforded to Putin and his aggression towards Ukraine. Now it’s for the Ukrainians to decide what’s tolerable.
Sorry, but what are you trying to achieve here in this thread? You are bringing the arrogant condescending responses on yourself. Most of your posts so far in this thread have been at best misinformed and at worst unintelligent rubbish easily argued against.
Take this post for example. You picked out part of point 4 because it sort of says what you want it to say. But the document isn't just one sentence, it has several sections. What about section 1, section 2 and section 3? Look at section 2. Would you not say that Russia has completely shattered the agreement on that section alone?
Moving onto point 4. Just at the start of the war they did some nuclear missile testing and very early on in the War Russia made threats with it's Nuclear capability.
Then there is point 6 about there been discussions if any of the commitments were broken. Russia already got away with annexing Crimea in 2014. The US, UK etc. tried discussions and sanctions back then. They didn't work. This time they used sanctions and talks but are also giving aid to Ukraine to defend itself and take back it's territory.
Throughout the document it's very clear that one side attacking Ukraine was going to mean a response from the other side.
Ok, I mean facts obviously aren't important here so I'll bow out.
- Status