Comments by "bobby hans" (@user-oc7ll9sv5r) on "Pyotr Kurzin | Geopolitics"
channel.
-
Ukraine territory is a whopping 603,628 square kilometers (233,062 sq mi), Russia at one point occupied a total of 161,000 km2 (62,000 sq mi) or almost 27% of Ukraine's territory and some has been librated so now we are down to 119,000 km2
What really gets me is that some ppl. are now saying why does Ukraine not just let Russia have the areas /land it’s just a small part of Ukraine anyway.....
A small part of Ukraine ...WE ARE taking about a land mass is 119,000 km2
In EU terms thats the size of Belgium, Holland, luxembourg all put together..
In UK terms that the size of all of Scotland and 80% of England all put together !!
In US terms is the size of South Carolina, West Virginia all put together !!
Why the f. should Ukraine give Russia all that land for what? TO ONLY be invaded some years later when Russia as had a brake and regrouped ,rebuilt its army and fortified positions !!
I SAY RUSSIA GETS TO TAKE LAND AND DEMAND UKRAINE CAN NOT JOIN NATO IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AT ALL !! Nobody wants to be a "buffer country". NO nation wants to have a little bit of freedom !!!! ; The whole concept is demeaning to an independent nation. NO nation wants to have a little bit of freedom and self-determination, like some sort of 2nd class country; That is not right, and Russia has no right to demand or bully Ukrainians or Ukraine to accept that Ukraine and its ppl. should become some sort of lap dog on a leash 2nd class country to serve kremlins geopolitical agenda; so Kremlin, Putin and RuZZans can feel better about themselves ...
---------It is embarrassing that the US and Europe do not support Ukraine more than they do , the US. were in Afghanistan for 20 years and achieved less than Ukraine in 2 years, and Ukraine is also fighting a much stronger opponent with many more resources !! As a Norwegian I am ashamed of our policies in the west , the western nations governments use every opportunity to go on national TV and tell how much they support, but the truth is that we have only provided 94 Euros per inhabitant, it is ridiculous when we look at the size of Ukraine, the opponent and the way Russia has bombed cities in Ukraine back to the Stone Age, and that we (western nations ) have not lost a single person in the war , we are talking about Europe, democracy and freedom that Ukraine is defending , one can only be ashamed
58
-
CRIMEA BELONGS TO UKRAINE THIS WAR STARTED WITH CRIMEA AND WILL END AFTER CRIMEA IS LIBERATED AND BACK UNDER UKRAINIAN CONTROL !!
The 1994 context: a “cold war” for Crimea Crimea, populated by a mix of Ukrainians, Russians, and Crimean Tatars during the first half of the 20th century, was transferred BACK to Ukraine then former Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic in 1954.
(remember the Crimean peninsula and Ukraine was and Ukraine forcefully against its will annexed into the Russian Empire in 1783 ; So in reality Ukraine nor Crimea has ever been Russian just occupied from some time in its history by Russia )
According to official Soviet logic, this transferred BACK to Ukraine would optimize the economy and management of the peninsula because of geographical reason of closure administration as Kyiv was closer than Moscow was to Crimea . (But culturally, the Russian leadership of the USSR was trying to suppress any Ukrainian influence in Crimea).
This had been Russia’s goal since the Russian Empire annexed the peninsula in 1783. That policy continued until Ukraine’s independence in 1991.
No Ukrainian schools were in Crimea, and Russian was spoken in public institutions. Although this was a standard imperial Russian and Soviet policy, it was especially reinforced in Crimea. In the 1991 referendum after the fall of the Soviet Union , 54% of Crimean residents at the time, voted for Ukrainian independence and for Crimean peninsula to join the newly independent Ukraine .
This was far below the national average of 90%, but it still indicated a pro-Ukrainian majority on the peninsula. At the same time, the vote was influenced by the legacy of Russian colonialism: According to the 2001 census, nearly 58% of Crimean residents considered themselves Russian by ethnicity, while 24% considered themselves Ukrainian and 12% identified as Crimean Tatar. Many of the latter group, deported from Crimea by Stalin in 1944, returned to the peninsula after Ukrainian independence in 1991.
Results of the 1991 referendum on supporting Ukraine’s independence from Russia by ever region was overwhelming for all of Ukraine in all of the country without exception ; not just in western Ukriane but also in East and south and Crimea . (don't believe me google; " 1991 referendum result for Ukraine independence by region " ) the results was as high as 97 % and no lower than 54 % for independence with the different regions /" oblasts "
(Also google and see the ; Russian Federation expressly accepted Ukraine’s 1991 borders that included Crimea as being belonging to Ukraine , both in the December 1991 Belovezhskaya Pushcha accords and in the December 1994 Budapest Memorandum)
A primary source of animosity between Ukraine and Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union was the Black Sea Fleet. One of the most potent Soviet fleets, it was internationally staffed while under Russian control, contributing to the increased number of Russian settlers in Crimea. Based in the Ukrainian city of Sevastopol, the fleet had to become Ukrainian. According to the Parliament of Ukraine’s resolution, “On military formations in Ukraine,” adopted in 1991, all Soviet armed forces stationed in Ukraine formally became under parliamentary control. On 5 April 1992, then-President of Ukraine Leonid Kravchuk signed a decree putting those armed forces under the control of Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense. Subsequently, on 7 April 1992, the then President of the Russian Federation, Boris Yeltsin, issued a decree putting the Black Sea Fleet under the control of the Russian Federation. After these competing decrees, the two presidents met, agreeing to “continue negotiations.” The result: a lack of agreement and the continuation of what had become a “cold war.” between the two Russian propaganda of the two " brothers nations "
RUSSIA’S INVASION OF UKRAINE in 2014 VIOLATED INTERNATIONAL LAW:
1. The Geneva Convention. 2. Charter of the United Nations
3. The Helsinki Accords
4. The Charter of the OSCE
5. Budapest Memorandum of 1994
6. Two Russia, Ukraine friendship treaties
7. International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination
8. European Court of Human Rights
9. The 1991 Belovezhskaya Pushcha accords
THE LEGAL FACTS WHY CRIMEA BELONGS TO UKRAINE . The earlier published documents, and materials that have emerged more recently make clear that the transfer of Crimea from the RSFSR to the UkrSSR was carried out in accordance with the 1936 Soviet constitution, which in Article 18 stipulated that “the territory of a Union Republic may not be altered without its consent.” The proceedings of the USSR Supreme Soviet Presidium meeting indicate that both the RSFSR and the UkrSSR had given their consent via their republic parliaments. One of the officials present at the 19 February session, Otto Kuusinen, even boasted that “only in our country [the USSR] is it possible that issues of the utmost importance such as the territorial transfer of individual oblasts to a particular republic can be decided without any difficulties.” One might argue that the process in 1954 would have been a lot better if it had been complicated and difficult, but no matter how one judges the expeditiousness of the territorial reconfiguration, the main point to stress here is that it is incorrect to say (as some Russian commentators and government officials recently have) that Crimea was transferred unconstitutionally or illegally. The legal system in the Soviet Union was mostly a fiction, but the transfer did occur in accordance with the rules in effect at the time. Moreover, regardless of how the transfer was carried out, the Russian Federation expressly accepted Ukraine’s 1991 borders both in the December 1991 Belovezhskaya Pushcha accords (the agreements that precipitated and codified the dissolution of the Soviet Union) and in the December 1994 Budapest Memorandum that finalized Ukraine’s status as a non-nuclear weapons state.
14
-
8
-
US. and UK., gave Ukraine a guarantee of protecting Ukraine sovereignty and territorial integrity based on the 1991 borders that included Crimea and east Ukraine Luhansk and Donbass..
As of the result of the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, US., gave Ukraine a guarantee that the US, stands now as a grantor of Ukraine sovereignty , because Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons and back then, Ukraine had the world's third-largest nuclear weapons stockpile !!
This guarantee was reconfirmed by United States when in 2009 released a statement that the memorandum's security assurances would still be respected after the expiration of the START Treaty
After the annexation of Crimea by in 2014, The US, Canada, the UK, France along with other countries, stated that Russian involvement was a breach of its obligations to Ukraine under the Budapest Memorandum and in violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Let me explain and give some Content !!
According to the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, Russia, the US and the UK confirmed their recognition of Ukraine becoming parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and effectively abandoning their nuclear arsenal to Russia and that they would:
1. Respect Ukrainian independence and sovereignty in the existing borders.
2. Refrain from the threat or the use of force against Ukraine.
3. Refrain from using economic pressure on Ukraine to influence their politics.
4. Seek immediate action to provide assistance Ukraine if they "should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used".
5. Refrain from the use of nuclear arms against Ukraine.
6. Consult with one another if questions arise regarding those commitments
We need to understand that EITHER the word/ deals and / or the grantees of the west are worth something or they are not !!
And here we can clearly see what such guarantees with the west is worth, it has been 8 years now since Russia invaded Ukraine in the east of the country and annexed parts of Ukraine in Crimea AND NOTHING HAS HAPPENED so now Russia is going all inn and taking everything THE CAN!!
That is the result of worthless grantees !!
And here's something the WEST is clearly overlooking ; Taiwan , Israel and everyone else is also asking the question; CAN I TRUST THE WEST TO HOLD TO THEIR WORD AND STAND BY THE GUARANTEES THEY GIVE ! and not just Taiwan and Israel, is right now asking themselves those questions, but even small eastern European NATO member states that border Russia, will be asking themselves those questions as well !! IT'S ABOUT TRUST YOU LOSE TRUST YOU LOSE EVERYTHING!!
And her is the real kicker ; Also Iran, North Korea and China will be seeing what is going on and soon they will be thinking the west is weak; And the will be thinking and saying things like, just look what the west did when Russia was calling out their bluff about red lines in Ukraine ... The time is now, we have our chance to stick it to them !!!!
And then we will see China take Taiwan (so no more silicon-chips for you ) and then we will see Iran take Israel (middle east oil all gone and the middles east up in fire ) And when North Korea goes into South no more south Korea as north will take it over as well !!
SO YOUR OPTIONS ARE ,TO TAKE A STAND NOW OR LATER !!
6
-
Some ppl. are now saying why does Ukraine not just let Russia have the areas /land it’s just a small part of Ukraine anyway.....
A small part of Ukraine ...WE ARE taking about a land mass is almost 200,000 sq km
In EU terms thats the size of Belgium, Holland, luxembourg and Greece all put together..
In UK terms that the size of all of Scotland , Wales and 80% of England all put together !!
In US terms is the size of South Carolina, West Virginia and New Jersey all put together !!
Why the f. should Ukraine give Russia all that land for what? TO ONLY be invaded some years later when Russia as had a brake and regrouped ,rebuilt its army and fortified positions !!
I SAY RUSSIA GETS TO TAKE LAND AND DEMAND UKRAINE CAN NOT JOIN NATO IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AT ALL !! Nobody wants to be a "buffer country". NO nation wants to have a little bit of freedom !!!! ; The whole concept is demeaning to an independent nation. NO nation wants to have a little bit of freedom and self-determination, like some sort of 2nd class country; That is not right, and Russia has no right to demand or bully Ukrainians or Ukraine to accept that Ukraine and its ppl. should become some sort of lap dog on a leash 2nd class country to serve kremlins geopolitical agenda; so Kremlin, Putin and RuZZans can feel better about themselves ...
---------It is embarrassing that the US and Europe do not support Ukraine more than they do , the US. were in Afghanistan for 20 years and achieved less than Ukraine in 2 years, and Ukraine is also a much stronger opponent with many more resources !! As a Norwegian I am ashamed of our policies in the west , the western nations governments use every opportunity to go on national TV and tell how much they support, but the truth is that we have only provided 94 Euros per inhabitant, it is ridiculous when we look at the size of Ukraine, the opponent and the way Russia has bombed cities in Ukraine back to the Stone Age, and that we (western nations ) have not lost a single person in the war , we are talking about Europe, democracy and freedom that Ukraine is defending , one can only be ashamed
Eastern European countries (ex soviet countries like Poland the baltic states ect ect ..) joined NATO because they are scared of Russia and want to be and stay independent. Nobody forced them to join NATO they was the ones running and knocking and begging to be able to join NATO and the EU ,,, .
When Russia invaded Ukraine Russia then just showed why it was a good idea for those countries to join NATO, because if they didn't they might just have got invaded as well just like Ukraine and Georgia did .
During Soviet times those Eastern European countries were nothing less than Russia puppet states. If they didn't join NATO after the fall of the USSR then they for sure couldn't guarantee their own independence from Russia.
Nato did nothing wrong, the only mistake was Ukraine not joining NATO to ensure Ukraines independence; Remember former satellite states like Poland, Romania, Czech Republic and The Baltic states, Slovakia ect ect all came running by their own accord, knocking, kicking, screaming and banging at the front door of EU and NATO begging to come in, no one forced them into it .
If Russia was not such a asshole country and stoped constantly bulling neighboring countries maybe other neighboring countries will not need to join NATO and by more open and welcoming to Russia ..
Also these people who advocate this view that Ukraine shroud just give up land and appeasement to Russians wants wishes are also being very ignorant to the fact that there were already treaties in place between Russia and Ukraine where Russia respecting the integrity of Ukraine's borders plus other treaties relating to the seas around Ukraine.
Putin has already broken those treaties.
Why would Ukraine believe Putin would stick to a new treaty when he's just broken half a dozen of the previous Russia Ukraine treaties and agreements.
Russia has demonstrated its treaties and agreements are worthless and you enter them at your great peril.
4
-
4
-
RUSSIA AND GERMANY STARTING WW2 AND UNDER WW2
Poland (1939 Invasion of Poland and Bessarabia invasion of Poland together with Germany
(World War II)
Invasion and occupation Baltic states (1940–1991)
invasion and occupation Finnish territories (1940)
Invasion and occupation Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina (1940)
Invasion and occupation Northern Iran 1941–1946
Invasion and occupation Hungary (1944)
invasion and occupation Romania (1944)
Invasion and occupation Bulgaria (1944)
Invasion and occupation Czechoslovakia (1944)
Invasion and occupation Northern Norway 1944–1946 / Bornholm 1945–1946
### OCCUPATION AFTER WW2 Occupation after ww2
Invasion and occupation Germany (1945)
Invasion and occupation Austria 1945–1955
Invasion and occupation Manchuria 1945–1946
Invasion and occupation Korea 1945–1948
Invasion and occupation Czechoslovakia (1968–1989)
Invasion and occupation Afghanistan 1979–1989
AND ONE CAN ALSO SAY THAT Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Armenia and other was also under occupation a political occupation and hegemony control by Moscow puppets that was holding those nation's inside Moscow’s hegemony control and dominance...
### RUSSIA WORLD EVIL DOMINATION TOUR
TODAYS RUSSIA !
1992 invasion and occupation Moldovan (Transnistria War)
1994 invasion and occupation Nagorno Karabakh
1994 First Chechen War
1999 Second Chechen War
2000 Second Chechen War part 2
2008 invasion and occupation Georgia
2014 invasion, occupation and annexation of CRIMEA
2015 invasion and occupation East Ukraine
Russians that support Putin historical glory version of facts are nothing but stupid an have not historical knowledge
Soviet's Crimes Against Humanity
RUSSIAN PROXY WARS
###
In many cases, involvement was in the form of military advisors as well as the sale or provision of weapons. addition to explicit wars, the Soviet military took part in a number of internal conflicts in various countries as a means of advancing their strategic interests.
1936-39 Spain
1933-34, 1937-39 Republic of China
1939 Mongolia
1945-49, 1950-53 People's Republic of China
1950-53 North Korea
1961-74 North Vietnam
1962-64 Algeria
1962-63, 1967-75 Egypt
1962-63, 1969-76 Yemen
1967, 1970, 1972-73, 1982 Syria
1975-79 Angola
1967-69, 1975-79 Mozambique
1977-79 Ethiopia
1960-70 Laos
1980-91 Iraq
1982 Lebanon
2011 Syria still ongoing ….
2014 Crimea
2014 East Ukraine
2022 All of Ukraine
This Is What A Russian Invasion Of Ukraine Could Look Like
3
-
RUSSIA GETS TO TAKE LAND IS NOT ACCEPTABLE !! Nobody wants to be a "buffer country". The whole concept is demeaning to an independent nation. NO nation wants to have a little bit of freedom and self-determination like a type of 2nd class country; that is not right, and Russia has no right to demand or bully Ukrainians or Ukraine to accept to be some sort of lap dog on a leash 2nd class country, that indirectly will serving the kremlin's geopolitical agenda, and so Kremlin, the RuZZians and Putin can feel better about themselves ...
THE LEGAL FACTS WHY CRIMEA BELONGS TO UKRAINE .
The earlier published documents, and materials that have emerged more recently make clear that the transfer of Crimea from the RSFSR to the UkrSSR was carried out in accordance with the 1936 Soviet constitution, which in Article 18 stipulated that “the territory of a Union Republic may not be altered without its consent.” The proceedings of the USSR Supreme Soviet Presidium meeting indicate that both the RSFSR and the UkrSSR had given their consent via their republic parliaments.
One of the officials present at the 19 February session, Otto Kuusinen, even boasted that “only in our country [the USSR] is it possible that issues of the utmost importance such as the territorial transfer of individual oblasts to a particular republic can be decided without any difficulties.” One might argue that the process in 1954 would have been a lot better if it had been complicated and difficult, but no matter how one judges the expeditiousness of the territorial reconfiguration, the main point to stress here is that it is incorrect to say (as some Russian commentators and government officials recently have) that Crimea was transferred unconstitutionally or illegally. The legal system in the Soviet Union was mostly a fiction, but the transfer did occur in accordance with the rules in effect at the time.
Moreover, regardless of how the transfer was carried out, the Russian Federation expressly accepted Ukraine’s 1991 borders both in the December 1991 Belovezhskaya Pushcha accords (the agreements that precipitated and codified the dissolution of the Soviet Union) and in the December 1994 Budapest Memorandum that finalized Ukraine’s status as a non-nuclear weapons state.
Summary: former states of the USSRs are now full independent states and their borders are defined and recognized by not just the international community , the UN and intr. org. treaties and agreements but when it comes to UKRAINE Russia itself RECOGNIZED Ukraines borders and territory in the 1991 ( Belovezhskaya Pushcha accords ) and in 1994 with the Budapest Memorandum and Russian back in 1991 recognized all the other internal borders of the USSR as international boards that now defines all the other different countries sovereign statehood . Those borders Russia recognized when it came to Ukraine clearly puts Crimea within Ukrainian territorial control . Period.
2
-
THE LEGAL FACTS WHY CRIMEA BELONGS TO UKRAINE .
The earlier published documents, and materials that have emerged more recently make clear that the transfer of Crimea from the RSFSR to the UkrSSR was carried out in accordance with the 1936 Soviet constitution, which in Article 18 stipulated that “the territory of a Union Republic may not be altered without its consent.” The proceedings of the USSR Supreme Soviet Presidium meeting indicate that both the RSFSR and the UkrSSR had given their consent via their republic parliaments.
One of the officials present at the 19 February session, Otto Kuusinen, even boasted that “only in our country [the USSR] is it possible that issues of the utmost importance such as the territorial transfer of individual oblasts to a particular republic can be decided without any difficulties.” One might argue that the process in 1954 would have been a lot better if it had been complicated and difficult, but no matter how one judges the expeditiousness of the territorial reconfiguration, the main point to stress here is that it is incorrect to say (as some Russian commentators and government officials recently have) that Crimea was transferred unconstitutionally or illegally. The legal system in the Soviet Union was mostly a fiction, but the transfer did occur in accordance with the rules in effect at the time.
Moreover, regardless of how the transfer was carried out, the Russian Federation expressly accepted Ukraine’s 1991 borders both in the December 1991 Belovezhskaya Pushcha accords (the agreements that precipitated and codified the dissolution of the Soviet Union) and in the December 1994 Budapest Memorandum that finalized Ukraine’s status as a non-nuclear weapons state.
Summary: former states of the USSRs are now full independent states and their borders are defined and recognized by not just the international community , the UN and intr. org. treaties and agreements but when it comes to UKRAINE Russia itself RECOGNIZED Ukraines borders and territory in the 1991 ( Belovezhskaya Pushcha accords ) and in 1994 with the Budapest Memorandum and Russian back in 1991 recognized all the other internal borders of the USSR as international boards that now defines all the other different countries sovereign statehood . Those borders Russia recognized when it came to Ukraine clearly puts Crimea within Ukrainian territorial control . Period.
2
-
US. and UK., gave Ukraine a guarantee of protecting Ukraine sovereignty and territorial integrity based on the 1991 borders that included Crimea and east Ukraine Luhansk and Donbass..
As of the result of the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, US., gave Ukraine a guarantee that the US, stands now as a grantor of Ukraine sovereignty , because Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons and back then, Ukraine had the world's third-largest nuclear weapons stockpile !!
This guarantee was reconfirmed by United States when in 2009 released a statement that the memorandum's security assurances would still be respected after the expiration of the START Treaty
After the annexation of Crimea by in 2014, The US, Canada, the UK, France along with other countries, stated that Russian involvement was a breach of its obligations to Ukraine under the Budapest Memorandum and in violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Let me explain and give some Content !!
According to the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, Russia, the US and the UK confirmed their recognition of Ukraine becoming parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and effectively abandoning their nuclear arsenal to Russia and that they would:
1. Respect Ukrainian independence and sovereignty in the existing borders.
2. Refrain from the threat or the use of force against Ukraine.
3. Refrain from using economic pressure on Ukraine to influence their politics.
4. Seek immediate action to provide assistance Ukraine if they "should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used".
5. Refrain from the use of nuclear arms against Ukraine.
6. Consult with one another if questions arise regarding those commitments
We need to understand that EITHER the word/ deals and / or the grantees of the west are worth something or they are not !!
And here we can clearly see what such guarantees with the west is worth, it has been 8 years now since Russia invaded Ukraine in the east of the country and annexed parts of Ukraine in Crimea AND NOTHING HAS HAPPENED so now Russia is going all inn and taking everything THE CAN!!
That is the result of worthless grantees !!
And here's something the WEST is clearly overlooking ; Taiwan , Israel and everyone else is also asking the question; CAN I TRUST THE WEST TO HOLD TO THEIR WORD AND STAND BY THE GUARANTEES THEY GIVE ! and not just Taiwan and Israel, is right now asking themselves those questions, but even small eastern European NATO member states that border Russia, will be asking themselves those questions as well !! IT'S ABOUT TRUST YOU LOSE TRUST YOU LOSE EVERYTHING!!
And her is the real kicker ; Also Iran, North Korea and China will be seeing what is going on and soon they will be thinking the west is weak; And the will be thinking and saying things like, just look what the west did when Russia was calling out their bluff about red lines in Ukraine ... The time is now, we have our chance to stick it to them !!!!
And then we will see China take Taiwan (so no more silicon-chips for you ) and then we will see Iran take Israel (middle east oil all gone and the middles east up in fire ) And when North Korea goes into South no more south Korea as north will take it over as well !!
SO YOUR OPTIONS ARE ,TO TAKE A STAND NOW OR LATER !!
1
-
THE AID TO UKRAINE IS NOT REALY FREE MONEY .. Its more like buying yourself a new cell phone and giving the old away to your kid, and claiming you gave your kid $2,000 (the price of the new phone) because he now has your old cell phone and you have the new one !!!
NOW LET ME EXPLAIN
The aid is not pallets of cash. It’s in the form of military equipment, assigned a value, that is donated,”. “That equipment is usually older and would be replaced in the next few years anyway, at a cost. I’m sure she doesn’t understand this.”
Still, the largest bucket of overall U.S. aid committed to Ukraine — more than $46 billion, is military support in the form of equipment NOT cash !!
The military equipment has been pulled directly from existing U.S. military old SURPLUS inventory that has a shelf date that soon will be past that date ; and will be needing replacement anyway this way US. gets to restock its military equipment with more newer updates versions and send the soon to by out of date to Ukraine and as a bonus US. military saves the money it will have used for destroying the old military equipment as well !!
Also it is true other parts of the Aid / funding will be used to purchase new weapons and this will be sent to Ukraine; but all sales must be and will be bought from the US industrial complex industry and American manufacturers; this supports local American communities in states (over 33 states ) that produce weapon's this helps marginalized communities and sates get a solid cash influx / bust into their local economy and supports jobs within the factors that will be producing those new weapons.-.
(So the money doesn't go into the pockets of Zelensky and fiends thats a myth pumped out by Russian propaganda and regurgitated by "pathetic tools" of the kremlin like Tucker Carlsen )
Members of Congress have questioned how closely the U.S. is tracking its aid to Ukraine to ensure that it is not subject to fraud or ending up in the wrong hands.
The Pentagon’s inspector general told lawmakers at a hearing, that his office has found no evidence of such corruption or wrongdoing, but cautioned that investigations are only in their early stages.
The Pentagon’s inspector general also informed the Members of Congress that despite claims to the contrary, the United States is not sending bags of unaccounted-for cash to Ukraine. Most US contributions go to military aid, including weapons and equipment made by American defense contractors who employ communities across the country. When the United States spends money to purchase military equipment as part of an international aid package, the materiel may go overseas, but the money and jobs stay in America. Similarly, appropriations for the US Foreign Military Financing program provide incentives for NATO allies and partners to secure US-made capabilities. This translates to more business for US companies and sustained employment for rural communities in which they operate.
For instance, Lockheed Martin, maker of the HIMARS—which has been central to Ukraine’s counteroffensive—plans to increase its Camden, Arkansas facility’s workforce by 20%, and recently announced increased profit projections through the end of the year. Similarly, General Dynamics has committed to building new production facilities in Mesquite, Texas, bringing money and jobs to the region. Change like this takes place only when the Pentagon sends strong and stable market signals to the defense industry, giving it the confidence to expand and hire.
In short, the numbers suggest that continued support for Ukraine is a win-win for Ukrainians and the American people.
The United States can continue to defend stability and democratic governance across the globe, while at the same time boosting American industrial output and advancing US economic interests.
So like i have said; This is more like buying yourself a new cell phone and giving the old away to your kid, and claiming you gave your kid $2,000 (the price of the new phone) because he now has your old cell phone and you have the new one !!! ITS A WIN WIN !!
1
-
1
-
Putin did not begin the undercover proxy-war in 2014 so that it would end in peace, independency and prosperity for Ukraine and its people. and he did not start a all out war in 2022 for the independency and prosperity for Ukraine and its people
This war does not hinder Putin, it facilitates his goals instead.
Putin started it so it would end with the defeat of Ukraine and the Ukrainian peoples/ nations aspirations of true self-government true independence and democratic nation, that was fare away from the hegemony control and orbit of Russia … IN OTHER words with our collapse of Ukrainian society.
It helps him keep Ukraine on the Kremlin hook and hegemony control and helps Putin feel himself as an influential leader negotiating with the West. So, why would he need peace?
And before someone starts up about Russia right to protect itself from the "western incursion and decadent western incorrectness of political arrogance" (whatever that means ) and therefor Russian needs a "a broader sphere of interest in Ukraine "
Let me ask you this ; Who gives Putin the right to have "a broader sphere of interest in Ukraine " we live in 2022 not 1822 ??? What about the people who live in "that so called sphere of interest" that is the sovereign country of Ukraine don't they (the Ukrainian ppl.) have an " sphere of interest in Ukraine itself " ?
Shall the Ukrainians just bend their knee and behave as slaves, and become some sort of quasi 2nd class nation/ country, and have their society run under the heal and accept being kicked by Kremlin's boot of the " sphere of Russian interest " ; Should Ukraine just roll over and let Russia controlled Ukraine for the sole benefit of Putins klan agenda and the geo political intrs. of the Moscow Kremlin kleptocracy elites?: And let Ukraine become some sort of quasi geographical entity for political advantages of the Kremlin ? Or should Ukraine stand up and fight against such tyrannical things as PUTINS "sphere of interest" as the independent European self governing state it is FIGHT for freedom, sovereignty and self-rule ??
FACT !!! Ukraine was forced into this war by Russia not Russia by Ukraine (or anyone else ) Volodymyr Zelenskyy, has no choice he needs to now be the president of a country, that is in a war defending its country and ppl. against a brutal evil aggressor. And the authorities of the aggressor country do not want any peace.
(If the Russia army stops fighting today and goes home back to Russia tomorrow there will be NO war If Ukraine stops fighting today there will be NO Ukraine !! )
Russians doesn't want to be a part of the western democracy thats fine Ukraine does Ukrainian society has nothing good to say about marximen or wokeisem or Russian imperialism they among Ukraine's stand absolutely equal and are seen with the disdain, loathing and contempt !!!
But like I say if Russia has no intrs. and they feel Russia society values and norms living is so much better than the despicable arrogant western world, just stay in Russia stop living inside the west stop buying houses , sending your kids to western schools for a western education and holidays to the western world and stop using western products and technology no prob you go do you; you go be Russia no one is stopping you !!
Why not try and stop emulating the west will at the same time rejecting the west and then on top of it claiming to be its equal .. here is a thought if you are the emulating the west you are a copy and a copy is just hard core evidence that the original is the better !! If your Russki Mir (Russian World ideology of imperialism and expansionism ) was better than the western world; why do you not 100% just stick to being Russian why are you emulating everything that is western !! The answer is clear because its better than your Russki Mir !!
Ukraine, Georgia , Moldova the Baltic's and the rest of Eastern Europe don't want your Russian world (KGB Putin Stalinism strong man BS ) they want western democracy freedom and choice so let them make their own future there own mistakes and there own success those ppl. countries and nations don't want your Moscow /Kremlin HEGEMONY called Russki Mir or your so called Russian greatness of special rights of so called 3rd Rome !!
Let's take a look at Ukraine and the same goes for Georgia and other countries that Moscow wants to bully and kick around !!
Ukraine is a sovereign nation with rights and should be free to govern itself. Russia as a political entity has never had the best interest of the Ukraine and its people at heart. The Ukrainians have a distinct and rich culture, their own language, and a desire for self-rule, liberty and freedom to make decisions of its own.
Russia wants to control Ukraine so it can obtain its resources for its own benefit (as has happened throughout history). Ukraine in its east and south has in-fact the 3rd biggest oil and gas reservers in Europe and should those resources start getting taped and sold to the west then Russia has a massive competitor on its hands for the European market !! You don't believe me google Ukraine shield gas reserves !!
Russian control has never been for the benefit of the Ukrainian people. BUT HERE"S THE REAL POINT: even if it had been, Ukraine is still a sovereign nation and has the right to rule itself!!!
The Russian state has sought to control Ukraine and to deceive the rest of the world into believing that there is no Ukrainian culture or language, and that Ukraine is simply a dissident Russian state through use of propaganda and oppression has repeatedly attempted to wipe out the Ukrainian people and culture.
Do I need to mention the millions of Ukrainians killed by the Russian government? The fear and repression of Ukraine under Russian rule? The families lost behind the "Iron Curtain?"
The Holodomor genocide when Russia killed 10 mill Ukrainians in 1933 - 1934 and after that replaced then with ethnic Russians manly in the east of Ukraine (todays Donbas ) for crying out loud?
And that is why after 1991 the Ukrainians rally around their rich and beautiful culture - because it is THEIRS. And because they deserve a voice of their own, and to live free from the oppression of foreign state that seeks to exploit and obliterate them!
Russian controlled soviet union former satellite states like Poland, Romania, and Czech the Baltic states, Slovakia ect ect ect ...couldn't wait to join NATO and the EU to get as fare away from Russian hegemony control as fast as the possibly can at the time .
If the Russians weren't suchaaaaholes, they wouldn't have to worry about EU NATO and former satellite states like Poland, Romania, and Czech the Baltic states, Slovakia ect ect ect running too the front door of EU and NATO .
(PS : yes i agree not all is perfect in the west but is why better and has always been why better than anything Russia has come up with in history ; And that is why ppl from all over the world (including Russians ) move to Europe ,UK and US in the millions !! ; For all its faults that the western world has and it has a few, it still is 10000 times better than Russia , Africa or china !!! I mean no one is building a wall to hold ppl. inside like Russian controlled Soviet Union did the US is in fact building walls to stop ppl. for coming inn and so dose European countries as well )j
1
-
AND ITS NOT CORRECT AT ALL ITS MYTH AND SUCH A MYTH THAT EVEN SOME AMERICANS BELIEVE IN THIS MYTH AS WELL !!
BEFORE SOMEONE STARTS SAYING USA AND NATO ILLEGALLY INVADES OTHERS BLA BLA BLA IS WRONG SOME WARS ARE LEGAL SOME ARE NOT ...LET ME TELL YOU THIS !!
1. Iraqi invaded Kuwait (first Iraq war ) and US responded with a UN secretary council mandate !! Members of Congress of both political parties, and members of the United Nations Security Council, (that both Russia and China are members of and both have veto rights in the UN Security Council ) agree at the time that Saddam Hussein is a threat to peace and must disarm.
2. Afghanistan was harboring al-Qaede, and was asked to give up Bin Landen the refused and became a party in the 9/11 attacks ... so USA was attacked and it responded with a UN mandate
3. Libya was NOT USA it was in fact a UN security counsel section mission by the UN.. They asked NATO to help ... The NATO-led operation was launched under the authority of two UN Security Council Resolutions (UNSCR), 1970 and 1973, both quoting Chapter VII of the UN Charter, and neither of which was opposed by Russia.
4. In 2003 invasion of Iraq (2nd Iraq war )!! Everyone believed Saddam when he said he had weapons and why not believe he had only some years before in the IRAN /IRAQ war used such weapons so there was not reason to not to believe him and he was offered several time to prove he did not have and let the UN weapons inspectors in to confirm or disconfirm if he had those weapons that everyone believed he had and he refused to let in the UN weapons inspectors (by the way how was french not American ) and the UN Security Council that Russia and CHINA are members of and has veto vote in (so they can use veto vote to block anything they want )did not have any problem in the United Nations Security Council and US demanding Saddam follow the restriction and demands that was imposed by the United Nations Security Council at they time !! Because everyone's own intelligence agency (not just the US ) even Russia and china was convinced Sadam did in-fact have WMDs
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 is a United Nations Security Council resolution adopted unanimously by the United Nations Security Council on 8 November 2002, offering Iraq under Saddam Hussein "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations" that had been set out in several previous resolutions (Resolutions 660, 661, 678, 686, 687, 688, 707, 715, 986, and 1284).[1] It provided a justification for what was subsequently termed the US invasion of Iraq !!!
Resolution 1441 stated that Iraq was in material breach of the ceasefire terms presented under the terms of Resolution 687. Iraq's breaches related not only to weapons of mass destruction (WMD), but also the known construction of prohibited types of missiles, the purchase and import of prohibited armaments, and the continuing refusal of Iraq to compensate Kuwait for the widespread looting conducted by its troops during the 1990–1991 invasion and occupation. It also stated that "...false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations."
IF RUSSIA DID NOT PLAY BALL ON THE LYBIA ISSUE AND RUSSIA DID NOT WANT THE UN TO ASK NATO TO TAKE OUT LYBIA WHY DID RUSSIA NOT USE ITS VETO RIGHT IN THE UN AND STOP ANY ACTION ????
Resolution 1441 stated that Iraq war as Iraq was in material breach of the ceasefire terms presented under the terms of Resolution 687. Iraq's breaches related not only to weapons of mass destruction (WMD), but also the known construction of prohibited types of missiles, the purchase and import of prohibited armaments, and the continuing refusal of Iraq to compensate Kuwait for the widespread looting conducted by its troops during the 1990–1991 invasion and occupation. It also stated that "...false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations."
I Can go on and on but you get the point !!
RUSSIASINVASION OF UKRAINE in 2014 VIOLATEDINTERNATIONAL LAW:
1. The Geneva Convention.
2. Charter of the United Nations
3. The Helsinki Accords
4. The Charter of the OSCE
5. Budapest Memorandum of 1994
6. Two Russia, Ukraine friendship treaties
7. International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination
8. European Court of Human Rights
there was not any Observers in Crimea from OSCE and UN in this so called referendum
And yes I would vote Yes in a referendum too if I had 20,000 Russian soldiers pointing their weapons at me when I was standing at the votingbox.
When RuSSia actually get another country (besides North Korea and a couple of other basket-cases) to support the claim of ownership of Crimea, I hope Putin will let us know, In the meantime, Putin can and will do what the Kremlin like there, but it will always belong to Ukraine and in the end it will go back to Ukraine
TODAYS RUSSIA ! ALL DONE WITH OUT ANY LEGAL STANDING WITHOUT ANY UN MADATE !!
1992 invasion and occupation Moldovan (Transnistria War)
1994 invasion and occupation Nagorno Karabakh
1994 First Chechen War
1999 Second Chechen War
2000 Second Chechen War part 2
2008 invasion and occupation Georgia
2014 invasion, occupation and annexation of CRIMEA
2015 invasion and occupation East Ukraine
2022 Kazakhstan
2022 All of UKRINE ???
1
-
Putin did not begin the undercover proxy-war in 2014 so that it would end in peace, independency and prosperity for Ukraine and its people. and he did not start a all out war in 2022 for the independency and prosperity for Ukraine and its people
This war does not hinder Putin, it facilitates his goals instead.
Putin started it so it would end with the defeat of Ukraine and the Ukrainian peoples/ nations aspirations of true self-government true independence and democratic nation, that was fare away from the hegemony control and orbit of Russia … IN OTHER words with our collapse of Ukrainian society.
It helps him keep Ukraine on the Kremlin hook and hegemony control and helps Putin feel himself as an influential leader negotiating with the West. So, why would he need peace?
And before someone starts up about Russia right to protect itself from the "western incursion and decadent western incorrectness of political arrogance" (whatever that means ) and therefor Russian needs a "a broader sphere of interest in Ukraine "
Let me ask you this ; Who gives Putin the right to have "a broader sphere of interest in Ukraine " we live in 2022 not 1822 ??? What about the people who live in "that so called sphere of interest" that is the sovereign country of Ukraine don't they (the Ukrainian ppl.) have an " sphere of interest in Ukraine itself " ?
Shall the Ukrainians just bend their knee and behave as slaves, and become some sort of quasi 2nd class nation/ country, and have their society run under the heal and accept being kicked by Kremlin's boot of the " sphere of Russian interest " ; Should Ukraine just roll over and let Russia controlled Ukraine for the sole benefit of Putins klan agenda and the geo political intrs. of the Moscow Kremlin kleptocracy elites?: And let Ukraine become some sort of quasi geographical entity for political advantages of the Kremlin ? Or should Ukraine stand up and fight against such tyrannical things as PUTINS "sphere of interest" as the independent European self governing state it is FIGHT for freedom, sovereignty and self-rule ??
FACT !!! Ukraine was forced into this war by Russia not Russia by Ukraine (or anyone else ) Volodymyr Zelenskyy, has no choice he needs to now be the president of a country, that is in a war defending its country and ppl. against a brutal evil aggressor. And the authorities of the aggressor country do not want any peace.
(If the Russia army stops fighting today and goes home back to Russia tomorrow there will be NO war If Ukraine stops fighting today there will be NO Ukraine !! )
Russians doesn't want to be a part of the western democracy thats fine Ukraine does Ukrainian society has nothing good to say about marximen or wokeisem or Russian imperialism they among Ukraine's stand absolutely equal and are seen with the disdain, loathing and contempt !!!
But like I say if Russia has no intrs. and they feel Russia society values and norms living is so much better than the despicable arrogant western world, just stay in Russia stop living inside the west stop buying houses , sending your kids to western schools for a western education and holidays to the western world and stop using western products and technology no prob you go do you; you go be Russia no one is stopping you !!
Why not try and stop emulating the west will at the same time rejecting the west and then on top of it claiming to be its equal .. here is a thought if you are the emulating the west you are a copy and a copy is just hard core evidence that the original is the better !! If your Russki Mir (Russian World ideology of imperialism and expansionism ) was better than the western world; why do you not 100% just stick to being Russian why are you emulating everything that is western !! The answer is clear because its better than your Russki Mir !!
Ukraine, Georgia , Moldova the Baltic's and the rest of Eastern Europe don't want your Russian world (KGB Putin Stalinism strong man BS ) they want western democracy freedom and choice so let them make their own future there own mistakes and there own success those ppl. countries and nations don't want your Moscow /Kremlin HEGEMONY called Russki Mir or your so called Russian greatness of special rights of so called 3rd Rome !!
Let's take a look at Ukraine and the same goes for Georgia and other countries that Moscow wants to bully and kick around !!
Ukraine is a sovereign nation with rights and should be free to govern itself. Russia as a political entity has never had the best interest of the Ukraine and its people at heart. The Ukrainians have a distinct and rich culture, their own language, and a desire for self-rule, liberty and freedom to make decisions of its own.
Russia wants to control Ukraine so it can obtain its resources for its own benefit (as has happened throughout history). Ukraine in its east and south has in-fact the 3rd biggest oil and gas reservers in Europe and should those resources start getting taped and sold to the west then Russia has a massive competitor on its hands for the European market !! You don't believe me google Ukraine shield gas reserves !!
Russian control has never been for the benefit of the Ukrainian people. BUT HERE"S THE REAL POINT: even if it had been, Ukraine is still a sovereign nation and has the right to rule itself!!!
The Russian state has sought to control Ukraine and to deceive the rest of the world into believing that there is no Ukrainian culture or language, and that Ukraine is simply a dissident Russian state through use of propaganda and oppression has repeatedly attempted to wipe out the Ukrainian people and culture.
Do I need to mention the millions of Ukrainians killed by the Russian government? The fear and repression of Ukraine under Russian rule? The families lost behind the "Iron Curtain?"
The Holodomor genocide when Russia killed 10 mill Ukrainians in 1933 - 1934 and after that replaced then with ethnic Russians manly in the east of Ukraine (todays Donbas ) for crying out loud?
And that is why after 1991 the Ukrainians rally around their rich and beautiful culture - because it is THEIRS. And because they deserve a voice of their own, and to live free from the oppression of foreign state that seeks to exploit and obliterate them!
Russian controlled soviet union former satellite states like Poland, Romania, and Czech the Baltic states, Slovakia ect ect ect ...couldn't wait to join NATO and the EU to get as fare away from Russian hegemony control as fast as the possibly can at the time .
If the Russians weren't suchaaaaholes, they wouldn't have to worry about EU NATO and former satellite states like Poland, Romania, and Czech the Baltic states, Slovakia ect ect ect running too the front door of EU and NATO .
(PS : yes i agree not all is perfect in the west but is why better and has always been why better than anything Russia has come up with in history ; And that is why ppl from all over the world (including Russians ) move to Europe ,UK and US in the millions !! ; For all its faults that the western world has and it has a few, it still is 10000 times better than Russia , Africa or china !!! I mean no one is building a wall to hold ppl. inside like Russian controlled Soviet Union did the US is in fact building walls to stop ppl. for coming inn and so dose European countries as well )j
1
-
NATO is a "threat" to Russia in the sense that a cop on the beat is a "threat" to a mugger. NATO wouldn't have been formed in the first place if Stalin had not rejected the US offer of the same Marshall Plan which so benefited the rest of Europe everywhere it was instituted, Russia / Stalin was instead bent every effort to CONQUER and dominate European neighboring states and expand Russia, borders with its concept of "sphere of influence " over the near abroad..
We need to understand that Russia didn't come to encompass 11% of earth's land area, by being invaded by other countries; Russia did so by invading far more other countries, than it was itself invaded by ; Remember Russia is a Federation of states , and the Russian part of that federation is the smallest state in the "Russian federation.".
(Russia with a total area of 17,098,242 Km² (6,601,665 mi²) and a land area of 16,376,870 Km² (6,323,142 mi²), equivalent to 11% of the total world's landmass )
In history MANY and ALL countries have been invaded frequently by their neighbors throughout all of history. Was Russia invaded more than France? Germany? Poland in HISTORY ? NO IT WAS NOT !!!
So this acting the victim, (west always invades Russia act ) when it comes to the west, that Kremlin does all the time, .
This buhhh the evil-west AGGRESSIVE west always invades us always is attacking us Buhhhh; This is why we see western NATO as a danger buhhhh !!!! THIS TYPE OF ACTING THE VICTIM is absolute and nothing more and less than Kremlin BS it is done so you overlook the fact that it is Russia that invades other not vise versa and to pull the smoke over your eyes !!! ..
Do i need to mention all of eastern Europe was under brutal Russian regime, hegemonic control for over 50 years .. ?? And that historical Russia has invaded and occupied way more of its neighbors then vice versa !
Russia says NATO is using Ukraine as a nuke base and therefore letting Ukraine into NATO is to close to Russian borders!!
But if you take a closer look at the argument it turns out to be absolute BS argument (even before Finland and Sweden join NATO ) because NATO is and was already 150 km away to St Petersburg via Estonia and 500 km via Latvia to Moscow (there is about 800 km from Ukraine to the Russia's capital so how is NATO getting closer to Moscow if Ukraine joins NATO !!) the concerns of the Russian Federation regarding the possible admission of the Ukraine to NATO is merely a cover for a fear of democracy developing on its frontiers and therefor a threat to Putin dictator like leadership the modern authoritarian obsession with civil society repression dates back to how all NON-rational agent/ or rational being like exs KGB Putin is and how this paranoid ppl like him think and acts in other words "You Can’t Assume a Nut Will Act Rationally," and a nut that is manic-paranoid and narcissistic like KGB Putin is a special kind of nut !! .
The argument of Moscow that Ukraine borders are dangerously close to Russia and its capital so Ukraine cannot join NATO It is absolutely irrelevant in this day and age!!!
Ukraine has no intrs, in becoming a hegemony Puppet on a string country of Moscow geopolitical needs in fact Nobody wants to be a "buffer country". The whole concept is demeaning to an independent nation and Ukraine is no exception to that rule .
So why is this NUKE platform country argument by Moscow a BS agreement in this day and age ??
Well becouse Russia has also had and always will have at all times some Russian nuclear submarines plant off the cost of western nations coastlines armed with nuclear warheads YES !! they are load up with tactical nukes missiles and those subs are there 365 days a year undetected and reddy to launch the nukes or/and even drones with small nukes from there lunch base platforms ( Russia has its subs on nations porch as Putin likes to say)
So Putin's reasons are weak to say the least its a BS argument becouse NATO also has nuclear subs of the Russian consline so like Putin also says they (Nato ) has nukes on our porch (on the Russian borders act act ) of our beloved city of Moscow and Russia we need to react !.. .
1
-
1
-
RUSSIA GETS TO TAKE LAND IS NOT ACCEPTABLE !! Nobody wants to be a "buffer country". The whole concept is demeaning to an independent nation. NO nation wants to have a little bit of freedom and self-determination like a type of 2nd class country; that is not right, and Russia has no right to demand or bully Ukrainians or Ukraine to accept to be some sort of lap dog on a leash 2nd class country, that indirectly will serving the kremlins geopolitical agenda, and so Kremlin, the RuZZians and Putin can feel better about themselves ...
All the Eastern European countries has more or less joined NATO because they was scared of Russia and want make sure they will stay independent, (and the same goes for the EU financial independence ) Nobody forced Eastern European countries to join , NATO or the EU all of them came running and begging and knocking on the door of NATO and EU by themselves, asking and begging to be let into The EU and NATO !!
Russia invading Ukraine back 2014 and Georgia back in 2008 and now all out war with Ukraine from 2022++ just showed, why it was and still is a good idea for those Eastern European countries to join NATO, and the EU because if they didn't they might just have got invaded as well .
During Soviet times those Eastern countries were nothing but quasi Russia puppet states and were totally exploited by Russia under its heel and boot. If those eastern European countries didn't join NATO then they couldn't have guaranteed their own future continuous independence from Russia by themselves . Nato did nothing wrong, the only mistake was Ukraine not joining NATO to ensure their independence !!!
The former satellite states like Poland,Romania,Czech Republic and The Baltic states, Slovakia ect ect was running to and knocking at the front door of EU and NATO begging to come inn and thats the truth !! . If Russia was not such a asshole country and stoped constantly bulling neighboring countries maybe other neighboring countries will not need to join NATO and by more open and welcoming to Russia ..
1
-
NATO is a "threat" to Russia in the sense that a cop on the beat is a "threat" to a mugger. NATO wouldn't have been formed in the first place if Stalin had not rejected the US offer of the same Marshall Plan which so benefited the rest of Europe everywhere it was instituted, Russia / Stalin was instead bent every effort to CONQUER and dominate European neighboring states and expand Russia, borders with its concept of "sphere of influence " over the near abroad..
We need to understand that Russia didn't come to encompass 11% of earth's land area, by being invaded by other countries; Russia did so by invading far more other countries, than it was itself invaded by ; Remember Russia is a Federation of states , and the Russian part of that federation is the smallest state in the "Russian federation.".
(Russia with a total area of 17,098,242 Km² (6,601,665 mi²) and a land area of 16,376,870 Km² (6,323,142 mi²), equivalent to 11% of the total world's landmass )
In history MANY and ALL countries have been invaded frequently by their neighbors throughout all of history. Was Russia invaded more than France? Germany? Poland in HISTORY ? NO IT WAS NOT !!!
So this acting the victim, (west always invades Russia act ) when it comes to the west, that Kremlin does all the time, .
This buhhh the evil-west AGGRESSIVE west always invades us always is attacking us Buhhhh; This is why we see western NATO as a danger buhhhh !!!! THIS TYPE OF ACTING THE VICTIM is absolute and nothing more and less than Kremlin BS it is done so you overlook the fact that it is Russia that invades other not vise versa and to pull the smoke over your eyes !!! ..
Do i need to mention all of eastern Europe was under brutal Russian regime, hegemonic control for over 50 years .. ?? And that historical Russia has invaded and occupied way more of its neighbors then vice versa !
Russia says NATO is using Ukraine as a nuke base and therefore letting Ukraine into NATO is to close to Russian borders!!
But if you take a closer look at the argument it turns out to be absolute BS argument (even before Finland and Sweden join NATO ) because NATO is and was already 150 km away to St Petersburg via Estonia and 500 km via Latvia to Moscow (there is about 800 km from Ukraine to the Russia's capital so how is NATO getting closer to Moscow if Ukraine joins NATO !!) the concerns of the Russian Federation regarding the possible admission of the Ukraine to NATO is merely a cover for a fear of democracy developing on its frontiers and therefor a threat to Putin dictator like leadership the modern authoritarian obsession with civil society repression dates back to how all NON-rational agent/ or rational being like exs KGB Putin is and how this paranoid ppl like him think and acts in other words "You Can’t Assume a Nut Will Act Rationally," and a nut that is manic-paranoid and narcissistic like KGB Putin is a special kind of nut !! .
The argument of Moscow that Ukraine borders are dangerously close to Russia and its capital so Ukraine cannot join NATO It is absolutely irrelevant in this day and age!!!
Ukraine has no intrs, in becoming a hegemony Puppet on a string country of Moscow geopolitical needs in fact Nobody wants to be a "buffer country". The whole concept is demeaning to an independent nation and Ukraine is no exception to that rule .
So why is this NUKE platform country argument by Moscow a BS agreement in this day and age ??
Well becouse Russia has also had and always will have at all times some Russian nuclear submarines plant off the cost of western nations coastlines armed with nuclear warheads YES !! they are load up with tactical nukes missiles and those subs are there 365 days a year undetected and reddy to launch the nukes or/and even drones with small nukes from there lunch base platforms ( Russia has its subs on nations porch as Putin likes to say)
So Putin's reasons are weak to say the least its a BS argument becouse NATO also has nuclear subs of the Russian consline so like Putin also says they (Nato ) has nukes on our porch (on the Russian borders act act ) of our beloved city of Moscow and Russia we need to react !.. .
And Exactly JUST LIKE RUSSIA can and do have nuclear submarines (with nuclear warheads) plant of the cost of western nations coastlines; SO DO WE HAVE and the west do it as well we plant our subs of the Russian coastline; Because the UK , France and USA has the same capabilities and their tactical nuke subs are planted, just out of Murmansk and in the Baltic Sea and in the north pole and the Baltics sea !!!! Don't forget Estonian is only 150 away from St Petersburg if in the baltic sea or near Finland we are talking 2OO km its nothing !!
SO LIKE I SAY THE ARGUMENT THAT UKRAINE WILL BE USED AS LUNCH PLATFORM FOR NATO IS JUST BS NATO DOES NOT NEED UKRAINE AS A LUNCH PLATFORM !!!
(MAYBE BACK IN THE 60S this argument was a thing bit today with the tech of today it's not an argument anymore ; NOT TODAY )
NATO is not a threat to Russia. Putin is using it as a bogeyman to distract from the poor living standard. Every Muscovite gets fed their daily dose of "Geopolitika", "Nuclear Weapons", "Russia Superpower" Putin the strong leader , US weak and so on and so on ... . It numbs the hunger and the cold for the average Russian with his Bolshevik mindset and sorrow of the loose of USSR superpower status .
And her is a thought .. if and before someone comes with the Cuba nukes back in the 60s argument let me tell you this it was back in the cold war a was another time all together and The main difference is that Castro invited Russia with their missiles to Cuba to threaten the west while Ukraine’s young democracy has been annexed by clandestine operation and clandestine invading force in 2014 and a continuons secondary invasion overtly in 2022 by a nuke power Russia and Ukraine is trying to protect itself from Putin’s dictatorship and aggressive actions of war, that has already killed 50000 Ukrainians forced 3.8 mill internally displaced Ukrainian refugee fleeing Russian aggression running away from Russian bombs that are hitting their city homes and schools ; (so this Cuba argument falls dead in the water as there is no resemblance to the situation at all )
1
-
War started with Crimea and it ends with reuniting with ukraine !!!
Election under a gun with tanks and thugs standing over the voting boxes is not an election it can not be a free and legal election...
Referendums vía gun point isn't a referendum, it's racketeering. Something that Russia knows oh so very well how to do.
if I had 20,000 Russian soldiers pointing their weapons at me when I was standing at the voting-box I would vote Yes in a referendum as well THAT DOES NOT make it legal
RUSSIA GETS TO TAKE LAND IS NOT ACCEPTABLE !! Nobody wants to be a "buffer country". The whole concept is demeaning to an independent nation. NO nation wants to have a little bit of freedom and self-determination like a type of 2nd class country; that is not right, and Russia has no right to demand or bully Ukrainians or Ukraine to accept to be some sort of lap dog on a leash 2nd class country, that indirectly will serving the kremlin's geopolitical agenda, and so Kremlin, the RuZZians and Putin can feel better about themselves ...
THE LEGAL FACTS WHY CRIMEA BELONGS TO UKRAINE .
The earlier published documents, and materials that have emerged more recently make clear that the transfer of Crimea from the RSFSR to the UkrSSR was carried out in accordance with the 1936 Soviet constitution, which in Article 18 stipulated that “the territory of a Union Republic may not be altered without its consent.” The proceedings of the USSR Supreme Soviet Presidium meeting indicate that both the RSFSR and the UkrSSR had given their consent via their republic parliaments.
One of the officials present at the 19 February session, Otto Kuusinen, even boasted that “only in our country [the USSR] is it possible that issues of the utmost importance such as the territorial transfer of individual oblasts to a particular republic can be decided without any difficulties.” One might argue that the process in 1954 would have been a lot better if it had been complicated and difficult, but no matter how one judges the expeditiousness of the territorial reconfiguration, the main point to stress here is that it is incorrect to say (as some Russian commentators and government officials recently have) that Crimea was transferred unconstitutionally or illegally. The legal system in the Soviet Union was mostly a fiction, but the transfer did occur in accordance with the rules in effect at the time.
Moreover, regardless of how the transfer was carried out, the Russian Federation expressly accepted Ukraine’s 1991 borders both in the December 1991 Belovezhskaya Pushcha accords (the agreements that precipitated and codified the dissolution of the Soviet Union) and in the December 1994 Budapest Memorandum that finalized Ukraine’s status as a non-nuclear weapons state.
Summary: former states of the USSRs are now full independent states and their borders are defined and recognized by not just the international community , the UN and intr. org. treaties and agreements but when it comes to UKRAINE Russia itself RECOGNIZED Ukraines borders and territory in the 1991 ( Belovezhskaya Pushcha accords ) and in 1994 with the Budapest Memorandum and Russian back in 1991 recognized all the other internal borders of the USSR as international boards that now defines all the other different countries sovereign statehood . Those borders Russia recognized when it came to Ukraine clearly puts Crimea within Ukrainian territorial control . Period.
1
-
UKRAINE SHOULD REARM WITH NUKS!
As of the result of the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, US., gave Ukraine a guarantee that the US, stands now as a grantor of Ukraine sovereignty , because Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons and back then, Ukraine had the world's third-largest nuclear weapons stockpile !! AND LOOK NOW !! where is the force to uphold that guarantee of Ukraine sovereignty ????
It is clear that Ukraine, must and should start secretly rearming itself with nukes and when Ukraine has done that, point those nukes at everyone at Russia , Europa (UK, France and Germany) and The USA — And when all is ready and the nukes are operational and secured and when the time is right Kyiv should then and only then tell the world that Ukraine once more has now got a nuclear capability and is now a power to be reckoned with, because Ukraine has now remilitarize itself and acquired a nuclear platform with nuclear warheads and weapons.
This way anyone, be it Russia or anyone else, will think twice about taking a fight to Ukraine ever again; And when at a time of Ukraines own choosing in the fullest of time and at the earliest convenience for Ukraine Kyiv should take conventional military actions to take back control of its own borders, land and territory in East Ukraine and Crimea !!! But only when Ukraine has got its hands on a nuclear delivery system /platform and warheads, then and only then should Ukraine, send in all of its conventional armed forces into East Ukraine and Crimea and reestablish control and liberate its own territories that are today occupied by Russia..
As we all know....
The true power of the nukes are NOT that they can wipe out cities, NO the true power of the nukes, are that they give those nations that have them in their arsenal a sort of triumph card in the geopolitical game , a special kind/ type of freedom to do as they more or less want to do, a type of Carte Blanche, without having to worry about other nations hastily and aggressive jumping to military action against you for whatever reason they find fit ..(take a look at Russia it gets away with everything Russia gets away with things other nations will never get aways with, becouse it has nukes )
FACT : No country in history that has acquired nukes in its military arsenal has ever been invaded or annexed by another country
FACT : No country in history that has nukes has ever had its territories infringe upon EVER!! ..
FACT : The ONLY nation that did end up giving away their nuclear capabilities (Nuclear weapons systems ) has ended up being (as the only country ever) attacked and has seen there ppl. killed their lands invaded and occupied and parts of their land stolen and annexed by Russia (East Ukraine and Crimea )
FACT : No nation that has nukes has ever be attacked or militarily punished or threatened by another nation for committing any illegal actions including like Russia has done War crimes , Genocide , Braking international laws, Committing acts of terrorism , illegally invading other nations etc etc.....(The nuclear power that is Russia gets away with all those above illegal activities all the time with impunity )
FACT: If you have nukes no other nation / country even the ones that themselves have nukes will (or ever has ) gone to and or has engage into a full out military invasion or conflict with any other nation/ country that also has nukes in its military arsenal ..
There is 3 Powerful Lessons to be Learned here:
1. If you have nukes never ever give them up ..
2. If you have nukes you never get invaded..
3. if you have nukes you can more or less do what ever you want..
1
-
Did Bush Lie About Iraq? | 5 Minute Video NO HE DID NOT !!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgQw8EhPJWw
Members of Congress of both political parties, and members of the United Nations Security Council, (that both Russia and China are members of and both have veto rights in the UN Security Council ) agree at the time that Saddam Hussein is a threat to peace and must disarm.
Following the adoption of Security Council Resolution 1483 two months after the war, then-UN Secretary General Kofi Annan appointed a Special Representative for Iraq and the UN assumed some small responsibilities there.
In August 2003, an attack on UN headquarters in Baghdad confirmed the critics' fears, killing fifteen UN staff including the Special Representative. The UN in February 2004, the UN agreed to send a mission to the country, to help construct a new interim government..
US and UK officials have argued that existing UN Security Council resolutions related to the 1991 Gulf War and the subsequent ceasefire (660, 678), and to later inspections of Iraqi weapons programs (1441), had already authorized the invasion,,
The United Nations Security Council Resolution 660 and 67 and 1441 made the iraq war legal !!
United Nations Security Council Resolution 660,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_660
United Nations Security Council Resolution 678
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_678
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1441
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1483
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1483
1
-
War started with Crimea and it ends with reuniting with ukraine !!!
Election under a gun with tanks and thugs standing over the voting boxes is not an election it can not be a free and legal election...
Referendums vía gun point isn't a referendum, it's racketeering. Something that Russia knows oh so very well how to do.
if I had 20,000 Russian soldiers pointing their weapons at me when I was standing at the voting-box I would vote Yes in a referendum as well THAT DOES NOT make it legal
RUSSIA GETS TO TAKE LAND IS NOT ACCEPTABLE !! Nobody wants to be a "buffer country". The whole concept is demeaning to an independent nation. NO nation wants to have a little bit of freedom and self-determination like a type of 2nd class country; that is not right, and Russia has no right to demand or bully Ukrainians or Ukraine to accept to be some sort of lap dog on a leash 2nd class country, that indirectly will serving the kremlin's geopolitical agenda, and so Kremlin, the RuZZians and Putin can feel better about themselves ...
NONE OF THIS ABOVE WAS SOMETHING THE EU , THE USA OR EVEN NATO, FORCED OR TRICKED RUSSIA INTO DOING !!!
RUSSIA’S INVASION OF UKRAINE in 2014 VIOLATED INTERNATIONAL LAW:
1. The Geneva Convention.
2. Charter of the United Nations
3. The Helsinki Accords
4. The Charter of the OSCE
5. Budapest Memorandum of 1994
6. Two Russia, Ukraine friendship treaties
7. International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination
8. European Court of Human Rights
THE LEGAL FACTS WHY CRIMEA BELONGS TO UKRAINE .
The earlier published documents, and materials that have emerged more recently make clear that the transfer of Crimea from the RSFSR to the UkrSSR was carried out in accordance with the 1936 Soviet constitution, which in Article 18 stipulated that “the territory of a Union Republic may not be altered without its consent.” The proceedings of the USSR Supreme Soviet Presidium meeting indicate that both the RSFSR and the UkrSSR had given their consent via their republic parliaments.
One of the officials present at the 19 February session, Otto Kuusinen, even boasted that “only in our country [the USSR] is it possible that issues of the utmost importance such as the territorial transfer of individual oblasts to a particular republic can be decided without any difficulties.” One might argue that the process in 1954 would have been a lot better if it had been complicated and difficult, but no matter how one judges the expeditiousness of the territorial reconfiguration, the main point to stress here is that it is incorrect to say (as some Russian commentators and government officials recently have) that Crimea was transferred unconstitutionally or illegally. The legal system in the Soviet Union was mostly a fiction, but the transfer did occur in accordance with the rules in effect at the time.
Moreover, regardless of how the transfer was carried out, the Russian Federation expressly accepted Ukraine’s 1991 borders both in the December 1991 Belovezhskaya Pushcha accords (the agreements that precipitated and codified the dissolution of the Soviet Union) and in the December 1994 Budapest Memorandum that finalized Ukraine’s status as a non-nuclear weapons state.
Summary: former states of the USSRs are now full independent states and their borders are defined and recognized by not just the international community , the UN and intr. org. treaties and agreements but when it comes to UKRAINE Russia itself RECOGNIZED Ukraines borders and territory in the 1991 ( Belovezhskaya Pushcha accords ) and in 1994 with the Budapest Memorandum and Russian back in 1991 recognized all the other internal borders of the USSR as international boards that now defines all the other different countries sovereign statehood . Those borders Russia recognized when it came to Ukraine clearly puts Crimea within Ukrainian territorial control . Period.
1
-
This Russian ORCS says ; "Russia will not be defeated on the battlefield, it is a great power".
Lets look at some facts of history shall we !!
Russia was defeated on the battlefield, by The British 1853–1856 Crimean War
Russia was defeated on the battlefield, by Japan, 8 February 1904 – 5 September 1905
Russia was defeated on the battlefield, in World War I by losing its empire 1914–1918
Russia was defeated on the battlefield, by Finland Finnish War of 1918-1920
Russia was defeated on the battlefield, by Latvia The Latvian War of 1918–1920
Russia was defeated on the battlefield, by Estonia The Estonian War of 1918–1920
Russia was defeated on the battlefield, by Lithuania The Lithuanian–Soviet 1918–1919
Russia was defeated on the battlefield, by Georgia The Ossetian war 1918–1920
Russia was defeated on the battlefield, by Poland Polish–Soviet War 1919–1921
Russia was defeated on the battlefield, by Ukraine People's Republic of Ukriane 1919–1921
Russia was defeated on the battlefield, by Afghanistan The Urtatagai conflict 1925–1926
Russia was defeated on the battlefield, by Afghanistan Red Army intervention 1929
Russia was defeated on the battlefield, by Finland The Winter War 1939–1940
Russia was defeated on the battlefield, by Eritrea The Eritrean War 1974–1991
Russia was defeated on the battlefield, by Angola The Angolan War 1975–1991
Russia was defeated on the battlefield, by Afghanistan Russia–Afghan War 1979–1989
Russia was defeated on the battlefield, by Chechnya The First Chechen War 1994–1996
AND RUSSIA WILL BE DEFEATED IN THE BATTLEFIELD BY UKRAINE 2022 +++ !!!!
1
-
Appeasement & Armageddon: Giving in to Vladimir Putin’s nuclear blackmail will spark an unprecedented nuclear arms race and make a future nuclear war far more likely!!
There is a reason why the Soviet Union, nor any nuclear power, never launched a first strike (nuclear attack) since Word War 2, despite all of the Cold War fears that the Soviets would. And it’s because you can't launch a first strike without being annihilated in the second strike. I remember in the 80s when The Day After aired, and everyone hoped the Soviets would see the movie and learn the lesson. Probably not realizing the Soviets can be trusted to act in the best self-interests...which mutually assured destruction is clearly against... and that the Soviets knew this since the 60s, if not the 50s. -- How is it any different today?
Even if Putin had the launch codes (he doesn't), or the ability to order a first strike by himself (he doesn't), even he would know the response is not going to be 'more sanctions'. -- The only way I could fathom Russia using a nuclear weapon in Ukraine, or against any enemy country, is the FSB had a foolproof plan to blame am ISIS terror cell, or rogue Chechen element, or claim the Ukrainians did it in a false-flag conspiracy to frame the Russians. -- But that would require a convincing story on how such an element got the nuclear weapon 'elsewhere', and eliminating everyone involved in the planning and execution. Whatever the case, Russia would need absolute plausible deniability. -- Here's my two cents, if there was really a way to use a nuclear weapon against an enemy without equal repercussions, Russia and China (and the US) would have figured it out a long time ago and did it already.
All NATO must do is take out Moscow and 5 -6 other city's to take out all of Russia.... But Russia must take out city's all over the planet from USA , CANADA ,FRANCE UK. ALL OF EUROPE and as far away as , AUSTRALIA and so on and so on ...
United Kingdom 225 warheads (submarine delivery systems new and up to date systems )
France 300 warheads
(submarine delivery systems new and up to date systems )
United States 7,315 warheads
(Mixed delivery systems new and up to date systems )
Russia 8,000 warheads
(Mixed delivery systems old mostly from the soviet union times NOT up to date systems )
RUSSIA IS AT DISADVANTAGE !!! and they know it Putin's regime knows its and that is why they will not use nukes they will hint and shout about nukes but that's it !!
1
-
ON A SIDE NOTE : Missiles require a huge amount of upkeep and if the maintenance that we've seen on Russian captured tanks in Ukraine is anything to go by, or how there nuclear sublime fleet upkeep is I figure half of Russian Missiles would be defect or even blow up on in mid flight ; Any NBC specialist can tell you that they estimate that without extensive maintenance an ICBM has about a 5% per year cumulative failure rate. And mote of Russia ICBMs are form the late 80s early nineties so based on those facts like I say many as much as half of their weapons can end up and would failx.
ALSO ON A 2nd NOTE ; Putin can not just wake up one day and press a button because he wants to when it comes to sending nukes around the world !!!
The president, and minister of defense and chief of the General Staff together prepare the authorization for use of nuclear weapons and they must all 3 be in 100% agreement before and launch can take place they can not be in the same room and have all of them fiscally use their personal one time login codes to activate the launch procedure it is a complicated process with lost of redundancy for safety so it is impossible for only one man to go crazy and launch a nuke attack !! So even if Putin went off his head he still can not launch the nukes without consent form the others !!
The “direct command” (launch order) would be sent, via the Chegets, to the units by the General Staff, which holds the codes to access the machine that will produce the codes for launch and then the General Staff and the commanders have to send two different codes to all three branches as an extra layer of authentication.
Launch orders would be transmitted by second-level communication systems (distinct from Kazbek):
Signal for Strategic Rocket Forces, and KSBU (which stands for centralized command-and-control
system) for air and sea forces.
And then they orders and codes will be sent back to the General Staff , the defense minister and the President via the Chegets, and the orders and codes must be verified and confirmed up the chain of commend to give authorization only after a authentication process is/ has been confirmed ...
When that is done then the president and the defense minister have to send two separate codes, to be integrated by the chief of the General Staff, who added his or her own code. and send that though the system to give authorization and authentication process is confirmed .
PS. And lets not forget the the Submarine KURSK was part of Russia's nuclear weapons platform and it was falling apart to such an degree that its systems torpedo systems on the Sub. malfunctions and blow up under water and sank the sub and .. killed all of its crew ....
Now if that is what Russia's nuclear delivery platform and weapons platform is like all I can say is WTF !!! And let us not forget that Kursk was the pride and joy of Russia's navy... What does the rest of the Russian nuclear weapons program look like if Kursk is anything to go by ?
I mean...... If you can not hold your submarines floating in pace time what hope do you really have for holding your submarines floating in war time ?
1
-
AND ITS NOT CORRECT AT ALL ITS MYTH AND SUCH A MYTH THAT EVEN SOME AMERICANS BELIEVE IN THIS MYTH AS WELL !!
BEFORE SOMEONE STARTS SAYING USA AND NATO ILLEGALLY INVADES OTHERS BLA BLA BLA IS WRONG SOME WARS ARE LEGAL SOME ARE NOT ...LET ME TELL YOU THIS !!
1. Iraqi invaded Kuwait (first Iraq war ) and US responded with a UN secretary council mandate !! Members of Congress of both political parties, and members of the United Nations Security Council, (that both Russia and China are members of and both have veto rights in the UN Security Council ) agree at the time that Saddam Hussein is a threat to peace and must disarm.
2. Afghanistan was harboring al-Qaede, and was asked to give up Bin Landen the refused and became a party in the 9/11 attacks ... so USA was attacked and it responded with a UN mandate
3. Libya was NOT USA it was in fact a UN security counsel section mission by the UN.. They asked NATO to help ... The NATO-led operation was launched under the authority of two UN Security Council Resolutions (UNSCR), 1970 and 1973, both quoting Chapter VII of the UN Charter, and neither of which was opposed by Russia.
4. In 2003 invasion of Iraq (2nd Iraq war )!! Everyone believed Saddam when he said he had weapons and why not believe he had only some years before in the IRAN /IRAQ war used such weapons so there was not reason to not to believe him and he was offered several time to prove he did not have and let the UN weapons inspectors in to confirm or disconfirm if he had those weapons that everyone believed he had and he refused to let in the UN weapons inspectors (by the way how was french not American ) and the UN Security Council that Russia and CHINA are members of and has veto vote in (so they can use veto vote to block anything they want )did not have any problem in the United Nations Security Council and US demanding Saddam follow the restriction and demands that was imposed by the United Nations Security Council at they time !! Because everyone's own intelligence agency (not just the US ) even Russia and china was convinced Sadam did in-fact have WMDs
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 is a United Nations Security Council resolution adopted unanimously by the United Nations Security Council on 8 November 2002, offering Iraq under Saddam Hussein "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations" that had been set out in several previous resolutions (Resolutions 660, 661, 678, 686, 687, 688, 707, 715, 986, and 1284).[1] It provided a justification for what was subsequently termed the US invasion of Iraq !!!
Resolution 1441 stated that Iraq was in material breach of the ceasefire terms presented under the terms of Resolution 687. Iraq's breaches related not only to weapons of mass destruction (WMD), but also the known construction of prohibited types of missiles, the purchase and import of prohibited armaments, and the continuing refusal of Iraq to compensate Kuwait for the widespread looting conducted by its troops during the 1990–1991 invasion and occupation. It also stated that "...false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations."
IF RUSSIA DID NOT PLAY BALL ON THE LYBIA ISSUE AND RUSSIA DID NOT WANT THE UN TO ASK NATO TO TAKE OUT LYBIA WHY DID RUSSIA NOT USE ITS VETO RIGHT IN THE UN AND STOP ANY ACTION ????
Resolution 1441 stated that Iraq war as Iraq was in material breach of the ceasefire terms presented under the terms of Resolution 687. Iraq's breaches related not only to weapons of mass destruction (WMD), but also the known construction of prohibited types of missiles, the purchase and import of prohibited armaments, and the continuing refusal of Iraq to compensate Kuwait for the widespread looting conducted by its troops during the 1990–1991 invasion and occupation. It also stated that "...false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations."
I Can go on and on but you get the point !!
RUSSIASINVASION OF UKRAINE in 2014 VIOLATEDINTERNATIONAL LAW:
1. The Geneva Convention.
2. Charter of the United Nations
3. The Helsinki Accords
4. The Charter of the OSCE
5. Budapest Memorandum of 1994
6. Two Russia, Ukraine friendship treaties
7. International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination
8. European Court of Human Rights
there was not any Observers in Crimea from OSCE and UN in this so called referendum
And yes I would vote Yes in a referendum too if I had 20,000 Russian soldiers pointing their weapons at me when I was standing at the votingbox.
When RuSSia actually get another country (besides North Korea and a couple of other basket-cases) to support the claim of ownership of Crimea, I hope Putin will let us know, In the meantime, Putin can and will do what the Kremlin like there, but it will always belong to Ukraine and in the end it will go back to Ukraine
TODAYS RUSSIA ! ALL DONE WITH OUT ANY LEGAL STANDING WITHOUT ANY UN MADATE !!
1992 invasion and occupation Moldovan (Transnistria War)
1994 invasion and occupation Nagorno Karabakh
1994 First Chechen War
1999 Second Chechen War
2000 Second Chechen War part 2
2008 invasion and occupation Georgia
2014 invasion, occupation and annexation of CRIMEA
2015 invasion and occupation East Ukraine
2022 Kazakhstan
2022 All of UKRINE ???
1
-
VIETNAM.. Vietnam war Was not started by the USA it was a proxy war started by the USSR and China to export communism and the French was in Vietnam first fighting a war know as Indochina War of the The Vietnam War (Vietnamese: Chiến tranh Việt Nam), also known as the Second Indochina War 1946, leaving Vietnam in the hands of the French. Soon thereafter, the Viet Minh began a guerrilla war against the French Union forces, beginning the First Indochina War. The Viet Minh fight was hampered by a lack of weapons; this situation changed by 1949 when the Chinese Communists had largely won the Chinese Civil War and were free to provide arms to their Vietnamese allies In January 1950, the People's Republic of China and the Soviet Union recognized the Viet Minh's Democratic Republic of Vietnam, based in Hanoi, as the legitimate government of Vietnam. The following month the United States and Great Britain recognized the French-backed State of Vietnam in Saigon, led by former Emperor Bảo Đại, as the legitimate Vietnamese government. : Geneva Conference (1954) Vietnam was temporarily partitioned at the 17th parallel, and under the terms of the Geneva Accords, civilians were to be given the opportunity to move freely between the two provisional states In December 1960, the National Liberation Front (NLF, a.k.a. the Viet Cong) was formally created with the intent of uniting all anti-GVN activists, including non-communists. This was what happened the Chinese and Soviet government started this proxy war to export communism the west and USA reacted on the request for help from the Vietnam government at the time,,,
Did the United States win or lose the Vietnam War? We are taught that it was a resounding loss for America, one that proves that intervening in the affairs of other nations is usually misguided. The truth is that our military won the war, but our politicians lost it. The Communists in North Vietnam actually signed a peace treaty, effectively surrendering. But the U.S. Congress didn't hold up its end of the bargain. In just five minutes, learn the truth about who really lost the Vietnam War. The Truth about the Vietnam War https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hqYGHZCJwk
1
-
YOU NEED TO RED SOM FACT ... Vietnam war Was not started by the USA it was a proxy war started by the USSR and China to export communism and the French was in Vietnam first fighting a war know as Indochina War of the The Vietnam War (Vietnamese: Chiến tranh Việt Nam), also known as the Second Indochina War 1946, leaving Vietnam in the hands of the French. Soon thereafter, the Viet Minh began a guerrilla war against the French Union forces, beginning the First Indochina War. The Viet Minh fight was hampered by a lack of weapons; this situation changed by 1949 when the Chinese Communists had largely won the Chinese Civil War and were free to provide arms to their Vietnamese allies In January 1950, the People's Republic of China and the Soviet Union recognized the Viet Minh's Democratic Republic of Vietnam, based in Hanoi, as the legitimate government of Vietnam. The following month the United States and Great Britain recognized the French-backed State of Vietnam in Saigon, led by former Emperor Bảo Đại, as the legitimate Vietnamese government. : Geneva Conference (1954) Vietnam was temporarily partitioned at the 17th parallel, and under the terms of the Geneva Accords, civilians were to be given the opportunity to move freely between the two provisional states In December 1960, the National Liberation Front (NLF, a.k.a. the Viet Cong) was formally created with the intent of uniting all anti-GVN activists, including non-communists. This was what happened the Chinese and Soviet government started this proxy war to export communism the west and USA reacted on the request for help from the Vietnam government at the time,
1
-
THE JIHADIST IN AFGHANISTAN WAS INFACT THE SOVIETS FAULT THEY CREATED THIS REACTION BY INVADING AFGHANISTAN BACK IN THE DAY
ISIS CAME OUT OF AL QAEDA
ISIS was founded by Abu Musab Al Zarqawi who originally was a member of Al Qaeda and one of the top guys !!! ... The split came due to power struggles within the Al Qaeda org.
After the death of (terrorist) Osama bin Laden and his protege Ayman al-Zawahiri (terrorist)'s and his accomplice in carrying out bad deeds, Al Zarqawi started ISIS... Al Zarqawi sees at the time this fight as a continuance of the Afghan war that he and his old buddy Bin Ladin had with Russia in the mind of Al Zarqawi anyone that is an infidel and from the west (what he sees as the west any christian nation ) is the enemy of islam !!! and that is why ISIS sees all of the world as an Islamic state this is their end goal !
The Russians USSR started this problems where muslims from all over the world went to a jihad by invading Afghanistan, the against the infidel was going on long before US, force even was able to point out on a map where the f...Afghanistan even was.. If Russia did not try and take over Afghanistan to export Kremlin domains over the country then this situation we have today with jihadist will most likely never developed in the way it has .
NEXT YOU WILL ASK WHO GAVE mujahideen STINGER MISSILES !!!!!
YES...back in the day it was the US that gave the mujahideen STINGER MISSILES.... but they did not start the war in AFGHANISTAN BACK IN THE DAY it was the USSR in 1979 that did that and that hornists nest and made that snow ball rolling, that was Russia controlled USSR that started it all by themselves ...
The Russians started this problems by invading Afghanistan 1979 and the US and the west responded by giving the stinger rockets to help the peoples freedom fighters of Afghanistan fight back the Russian invaders, the west and the US was helping defenseless people from what the USSR was doing with Russians helicopter gunships, they RuSSians was killing civilians and children in a scale that even STALIN will have be disgusted with a massive onslaught of killing of civilians So the fact the USA give the Afghani peoples freedom fighters some small help to help fight the evil, Russian control USSR is a good thing..
And lets get some facts correct the Taliban my friend was never in good with the white house and the oval office in the 80's, or with Reagan back in the day or anyone else in the west; as the Taliban did not see the light of day before after the war was over when the USSR pulled out then and only then did what we know today as the Taliban see its creation and was formed; WHEN THE USSR had pulled out of Afghanistan they left the country in a power vacuum with warlords all over the place they stated to form their own militant groups one of them was the Taliban among others and infighting between all the dif. groups started and after a lot in revelry the Taliban ended up as one of the dominate militant groups ...
The people that was in good the with Ronald W.Reagan White House, was the mujahideen (not to be confused with the Taliban ) the mujahideen that is who the US. was helping fight the evil of Russian USSR in the 80' the ppl. that was good in with Reagan was the leaders of the mujahideen fighters and the mujahideen fighters ended up later as the North United Front, The United Front was formed in late 1996 against the Taliban government by opposition factions of the old mujahideen fighters.
But after the USA invaded Afghanistan The North Front became part of the North Alliance (The Afghan Northern Alliance officially known as the United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan they became part of the Afghani ppl. that was fighting the Taliban and extreme jihadist in Afghanistan ) and they was hard core enemies of the Taliban. The Taliban was formed by some brake aways groups of the mujahideen and other groups as well that is true; but they was never the mujahideen as such and not a fare from the mujahideen we had as allies fighting the Russians back in the day YOU NEED TO GET YOUR FACTS CORRECT...
1
-
1
-
IRAQ Why did America invade Iraq in 2003? Was it for oil? Or was it because Saddam Hussein was a mass-murdering dictator who harbored terrorists and threatened the region with Weapons of Mass Destruction?
If it was the former, wouldn't it have been a lot easier to just buy Iraq's oil on the open market?
And if it was the latter, why did Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and John Kerry support President Bush?
Noted British historian, Andrew Roberts, has the answers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2tbpUqNwRU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgQw8EhPJWw
Members of Congress of both political parties, and members of the United Nations Security Council, (that both Russia and China are members of and both have veto rights in the UN Security Council ) agree at the time that Saddam Hussein is a threat to peace and must disarm.
Following the adoption of Security Council Resolution 1483 two months after the war, then-UN Secretary General Kofi Annan appointed a Special Representative for Iraq and the UN assumed some small responsibilities there.
In August 2003, an attack on UN headquarters in Baghdad confirmed the critics' fears, killing fifteen UN staff including the Special Representative. The UN in February 2004, the UN agreed to send a mission to the country, to help construct a new interim government..
US and UK officials have argued that existing UN Security Council resolutions related to the 1991 Gulf War and the subsequent ceasefire (660, 678), and to later inspections of Iraqi weapons programs (1441), had already authorized the invasion,,
The United Nations Security Council Resolution 660 and 67 and 1441 made the iraq war legal !!
United Nations Security Council Resolution 660,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_660
United Nations Security Council Resolution 678
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_678
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1441
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1483
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1483
5. LIBYA Claim: NATO's operation over Libya was illegitimate
The NATO-led operation was launched under the authority of two UN Security Council Resolutions (UNSCR), 1970 and 1973, both quoting Chapter VII of the UN Charter, and neither of which was opposed by Russia.
http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/1970(2011)
http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/1973(2011)
UNSCR 1973 authorized the international community "to take all necessary measures" to "protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack". This is what NATO did, with the political and military support of regional states and members of the Arab League.
After the conflict, NATO cooperated with the UN International Commission of Inquiry on Libya, which found no breach of UNSCR 1973 or international law, concluding instead that "NATO conducted a highly precise campaign with a demonstrable determination to avoid civilian casualties."
1
-
BEFORE SOMEONE STARTS SAYING USA AND NATO ILLEGALLY INVADES OTHERS BLA BLA BLA IS WRONG SOME WARS ARE LEGAL SOME ARE NOT ...LET ME TELL YOU THIS !!
1. Iraqi invaded Kuwait (first Iraq war ) and US responded with a UN secretary council mandate !! Members of Congress of both political parties, and members of the United Nations Security Council, (that both Russia and China are members of and both have veto rights in the UN Security Council ) agree at the time that Saddam Hussein is a threat to peace and must disarm.
2. Afghanistan was harboring al-Qaede, and was asked to give up Bin Landen the refused and became a party in the 9/11 attacks ... so USA was attacked and it responded with a UN mandate
3. Libya was NOT USA it was in fact a UN security counsel section mission by the UN.. They asked NATO to help ... The NATO-led operation was launched under the authority of two UN Security Council Resolutions (UNSCR), 1970 and 1973, both quoting Chapter VII of the UN Charter, and neither of which was opposed by Russia.
4. In 2003 invasion of Iraq (2nd Iraq war )!! Everyone believed Saddam when he said he had weapons and why not believe he had only some years before in the IRAN /IRAQ war used such weapons so there was not reason to not to believe him and he was offered several time to prove he did not have and let the UN weapons inspectors in to confirm or disconfirm if he had those weapons that everyone believed he had and he refused to let in the UN weapons inspectors (by the way how was french not American ) and the UN Security Council that Russia and CHINA are members of and has veto vote in (so they can use veto vote to block anything they want )did not have any problem in the United Nations Security Council and US demanding Saddam follow the restriction and demands that was imposed by the United Nations Security Council at they time !! Because everyone's own intelligence agency (not just the US ) even Russia and china was convinced Sadam did in-fact have WMDs
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 is a United Nations Security Council resolution adopted unanimously by the United Nations Security Council on 8 November 2002, offering Iraq under Saddam Hussein "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations" that had been set out in several previous resolutions (Resolutions 660, 661, 678, 686, 687, 688, 707, 715, 986, and 1284).[1] It provided a justification for what was subsequently termed the US invasion of Iraq !!!
Resolution 1441 stated that Iraq was in material breach of the ceasefire terms presented under the terms of Resolution 687. Iraq's breaches related not only to weapons of mass destruction (WMD), but also the known construction of prohibited types of missiles, the purchase and import of prohibited armaments, and the continuing refusal of Iraq to compensate Kuwait for the widespread looting conducted by its troops during the 1990–1991 invasion and occupation. It also stated that "...false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations."
IF RUSSIA DID NOT PLAY BALL ON THE LYBIA ISSUE AND RUSSIA DID NOT WANT THE UN TO ASK NATO TO TAKE OUT LYBIA WHY DID RUSSIA NOT USE ITS VETO RIGHT IN THE UN AND STOP ANY ACTION ????
Resolution 1441 stated that Iraq war as Iraq was in material breach of the ceasefire terms presented under the terms of Resolution 687. Iraq's breaches related not only to weapons of mass destruction (WMD), but also the known construction of prohibited types of missiles, the purchase and import of prohibited armaments, and the continuing refusal of Iraq to compensate Kuwait for the widespread looting conducted by its troops during the 1990–1991 invasion and occupation. It also stated that "...false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations."
I Can go on and on but you get the point !!
RUSSIASINVASION OF UKRAINE in 2014 VIOLATEDINTERNATIONAL LAW:
1. The Geneva Convention.
2. Charter of the United Nations
3. The Helsinki Accords
4. The Charter of the OSCE
5. Budapest Memorandum of 1994
6. Two Russia, Ukraine friendship treaties
7. International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination
8. European Court of Human Rights
there was not any Observers in Crimea from OSCE and UN in this so called referendum
And yes I would vote Yes in a referendum too if I had 20,000 Russian soldiers pointing their weapons at me when I was standing at the votingbox.
When RuSSia actually get another country (besides North Korea and a couple of other basket-cases) to support the claim of ownership of Crimea, I hope Putin will let us know, In the meantime, Putin can and will do what the Kremlin like there, but it will always belong to Ukraine and in the end it will go back to Ukraine
TODAYS RUSSIA ! ALL DONE WITH OUT ANY LEGAL STANDING WITHOUT ANY UN MADATE !!
1992 invasion and occupation Moldovan (Transnistria War)
1994 invasion and occupation Nagorno Karabakh
1994 First Chechen War
1999 Second Chechen War
2000 Second Chechen War part 2
2008 invasion and occupation Georgia
2014 invasion, occupation and annexation of CRIMEA
2015 invasion and occupation East Ukraine
2022 Kazakhstan
2022 All of UKRINE ???
1
-
@bilic8094 Claim: The cases of Kosovo and Crimea are identical
Fact: The Kosovo operation was conducted following exhaustive discussion involving the whole international community dealing with a long-running crisis that was recognized by the UN Security Council as a threat to international peace and security.
Following the operation, the international community engaged in nearly ten years of diplomacy, under UN authority, to find a political solution and to settle Kosovo's final status, as prescribed by UNSCR 1244.
In Crimea, there was no pre-existing crisis, no attempt to discuss the situation with the Ukrainian government, no involvement of the United Nations, and no attempt at a negotiated solution.
In Kosovo, international attempts to find a solution took over 3,000 days. In Crimea, Russia annexed part of Ukraine's territory in less than 30 days. It has sought to justify its illegal and illegitimate annexation, in part, by pointing to a "referendum" that was inconsistent with Ukrainian law, held under conditions of illegal armed occupation with no freedom of expression or media access for the opposition, and without any credible international monitoring.
Claim: Russia's annexation of Crimea was justified by the opinion of the International Court of Justice on the independence of Kosovo
Fact: The court stated that their opinion was not a precedent. The court said they had been given a "narrow and specific" question about Kosovo's independence which would not cover the broader legal consequences of that decision.
1
-
1
-
@bilic8094 Claim: Russia has the right to demand a "100% guarantee" that Ukraine will not join NATO
Fact: According to Article I of the Helsinki Final Act
Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in 1975, every country has the right "to belong or not to belong to international organizations, to be or not to be a party to bilateral or multilateral treaties including the right to be or not to be a party to treaties of alliance." All the OSCE member states, including Russia, have sworn to uphold those principles.
In line with those principles, Ukraine has the right to choose for itself whether it joins any treaty of alliance, including NATO's founding treaty.
Moreover, when Russia signed the Founding Act, it pledged to uphold "respect for sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all states and their inherent right to choose the means to ensure their own security".
Thus Ukraine has the right to choose its own alliances, and Russia has, by its own repeated agreement, no right to dictate that choice.
1
-
1
-
@bilic8094 NOT EVER SERBIA AGREES WITH YOU BUDDY Belgrade recognises Ukraine in its entirety, including territories occupied by Russian forces, while Kyiv refuses to recognise the independence of Kosovo, which declared independence from Serbia in 2008.
Since 2022, Serbia has accepted Ukrainian refugees, sent humanitarian aid to Ukraine and pledged help with its post-war rebuilding effort.
Belgrade recognises Ukraine in its entirety, including territories occupied by Russian forces, while Kyiv refuses to recognise the independence of Kosovo, which declared independence from Serbia in 2008.
Since 2022, Serbia has accepted Ukrainian refugees, sent humanitarian aid to Ukraine and pledged help with its post-war rebuilding effort.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bilic8094 Claim from Russia : The cases of Kosovo and Crimea are identical
Fact: The Kosovo operation was conducted following exhaustive discussion involving the whole international community dealing with a long-running crisis that was recognized by the UN Security Council as a threat to international peace and security.
Following the operation, the international community engaged in nearly ten years of diplomacy, under UN authority, to find a political solution and to settle Kosovo's final status, as prescribed by UNSCR 1244.
In Crimea, there was no pre-existing crisis, no attempt to discuss the situation with the Ukrainian government, no involvement of the United Nations, and no attempt at a negotiated solution.
In Kosovo, international attempts to find a solution took over 3,000 days. In Crimea, Russia annexed part of Ukraine's territory in less than 30 days. It has sought to justify its illegal and illegitimate annexation, in part, by pointing to a "referendum" that was inconsistent with Ukrainian law, held under conditions of illegal armed occupation with no freedom of expression or media access for the opposition, and without any credible international monitoring.
1
-
Ukraine territory is a whopping 603,628 square kilometers (233,062 sq mi), Russia at one point occupied a total of 161,000 km2 (62,000 sq mi) or almost 27% of Ukraine's territory and some has been librated so now we are down to 119,000 km2
What really gets me is that some ppl. are now saying why does Ukraine not just let Russia have the areas /land it’s just a small part of Ukraine anyway.....
A small part of Ukraine ...WE ARE taking about a land mass is 119,000 km2
In EU terms thats the size of Belgium, Holland, luxembourg all put together..
In UK terms that the size of all of Scotland and 80% of England all put together !!
In US terms is the size of South Carolina, West Virginia all put together !!
Why the f. should Ukraine give Russia all that land for what? TO ONLY be invaded some years later when Russia as had a brake and regrouped ,rebuilt its army and fortified positions !!
I SAY RUSSIA GETS TO TAKE LAND AND DEMAND UKRAINE CAN NOT JOIN NATO IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AT ALL !! Nobody wants to be a "buffer country". NO nation wants to have a little bit of freedom !!!! ; The whole concept is demeaning to an independent nation. NO nation wants to have a little bit of freedom and self-determination, like some sort of 2nd class country; That is not right, and Russia has no right to demand or bully Ukrainians or Ukraine to accept that Ukraine and its ppl. should become some sort of lap dog on a leash 2nd class country to serve kremlins geopolitical agenda; so Kremlin, Putin and RuZZans can feel better about themselves ...
---------It is embarrassing that the US and Europe do not support Ukraine more than they do , the US. were in Afghanistan for 20 years and achieved less than Ukraine in 2 years, and Ukraine is also a much stronger opponent with many more resources !! As a Norwegian I am ashamed of our policies in the west , the western nations governments use every opportunity to go on national TV and tell how much they support, but the truth is that we have only provided 94 Euros per inhabitant, it is ridiculous when we look at the size of Ukraine, the opponent and the way Russia has bombed cities in Ukraine back to the Stone Age, and that we (western nations ) have not lost a single person in the war , we are talking about Europe, democracy and freedom that Ukraine is defending , one can only be ashamed
some ppl. are now saying why does Ukraine not just let Russia have the areas /land it’s just a small part of Ukraine anyway.....
1
-
RUSSIA GETS TO TAKE LAND IS NOT ACCEPTABLE !! Nobody wants to be a "buffer country". The whole concept is demeaning to an independent nation. NO nation wants to have a little bit of freedom and self-determination like a type of 2nd class country; that is not right, and Russia has no right to demand or bully Ukrainians or Ukraine to accept to be some sort of lap dog on a leash 2nd class country, that indirectly will serving the kremlins geopolitical agenda, and so Kremlin, the RuZZians and Putin can feel better about themselves ...
All the Eastern European countries has more or less joined NATO because they was scared of Russia and want make sure they will stay independent, (and the same goes for the EU financial independence ) Nobody forced Eastern European countries to join , NATO or the EU all of them came running and begging and knocking on the door of NATO and EU by themselves, asking and begging to be let into The EU and NATO !!
Russia invading Ukraine back 2014 and Georgia back in 2008 and now all out war with Ukraine from 2022++ just showed, why it was and still is a good idea for those Eastern European countries to join NATO, and the EU because if they didn't they might just have got invaded as well .
During Soviet times those Eastern countries were nothing but quasi Russia puppet states and were totally exploited by Russia under its heel and boot. If those eastern European countries didn't join NATO then they couldn't have guaranteed their own future continuous independence from Russia by themselves . Nato did nothing wrong, the only mistake was Ukraine not joining NATO to ensure their independence !!!
The former satellite states like Poland,Romania,Czech Republic and The Baltic states, Slovakia ect ect was running to and knocking at the front door of EU and NATO begging to come inn and thats the truth !! . If Russia was not such a asshole country and stoped constantly bulling neighboring countries maybe other neighboring countries will not need to join NATO and by more open and welcoming to Russia ..
1
-
1
-
1