In this thread, @puzzlegal wrote:
The issue is that @Kedikat seems to be an apologist for Russian aggression in Ukraine, and that others (myself included) disagree.
In accordance to moderator instructions, I’m posting this thread to provide an outlet for Kedikat and others to discuss the issue. I’m putting it in The BBQ Pit because the discussion may become heated.
I am failing to try and quote over to here, so I copy pasted. This completely wrong one.
You do not sign a verbal agreement. As it was signed, on paper.
The Donbas areas have not, in fact, declared independence. Copy and pasted too.
Another false one.
Although Wiki declares the referendums moot. They took place and the majority did not want to remain a part of Ukraine. It is common for some countries to declare moot what they disagree with. If one looks at the ethnic makeup of Donbass regions and Crimea, it is no surprise that the majority of the folks wanted to separate from Ukraine, which was passing laws to erase their ethnicity. I do not exclude Russia past or present from also choosing to ignore realities it does not like. But it certainly is not alone in this.
Ukraine was ZERO threat to the Russia Federation. Aside from being smaller, poorer, and having a smaller military, it had surrendered its nuclear capability in return for a promise for its borders to be respected.
NATO is not a threat to Russia (except in the mind of some Russians who, regrettably, seem to be in charge there). Don’t want NATO to fight you? Don’t attack a NATO member. The only thing NATO was a threat to here was Russia ambition to conquer a weaker neighbor.
Russia started this war, full stop. It is entirely the fault of Russia, no one else.
I agree, Ukraine itself was not a threat. But its military was being trained to NATO integration standards. It desired to be in NATO. If in NATO there would be NATO bases in it. That is a threat to Russia. Also, one does not have to attack NATO to be attacked by NATO. NATO has conducted military operations against those who have not attacked NATO members.
I agree, Russia started the war. Obviously. But one should not ignore the reasons for wars starting. Past and present, wars could have been averted.
Apologies for how disjointed my posts are. I don’t know if it is possible to get that nice Quote feature to work across threads.
There is a bit of a backlog from another thread, that I am replying to here. As Johnny_L.A. decided to start this alternative thread.
But I will not drag all of that over here. Some is just opinion, which is great, so I don’t feel a need to retort to great extent.
Thank you.
But if Russia did manage to conquer Ukraine, guess what? They’d have NATO on their border! By your logic, Russia would then have to conquer Poland.
I believe @Broomstick addressed this in the other thread. I’ll let her respond.
Because Putin felt like it?
If you can’t figure out the quote feature, the least you could do is put the quoted part in quotation marks and add who said it, like so:
“Apologies for how disjointed my posts are. I don’t know if it is possible to get that nice Quote feature to work across threads.” -Kedikat.
Is there a way to grab a quote from another thread?
I will try and get it clearer.
I look forward to, and expect, more of this sort of well thought out, in depth replies.
Open the thread in a new window. Quote the post. Copy and paste the post into this thread. (That’s how I quoted puzzlegal in the OP.)
When it comes down to it, this is the answer. Russia had ZERO provocation for invading a sovereign nation. They invaded because Putin wanted to.
So what provocation did NATO have to bomb Libya?
Putin is a fucking thug that doesn’t give a shit about anything but acquiring and keeping power. He will steal, kill and physically intimidate, and if the intimidation doesn’t work, he assassinates as a lesson to others.
Is that in depth enough for you?
No. It is not.
“Look! Over there!!”
Fuck that-Let’s talk about Russia.
Just using the same tactics that others are using.
But of course they are only just if your side uses them.
While the intervention was NATO-led, it was the UN who ordered the attacks. The UN is not NATO.
Life’s a bitch, ain’t it? With Putin, that is all the depth there is, so that is all the depth you’re going to get…unless you want to lie about him, of course.
Correct. So why did NATO do the bombing?
Is NATO under the command of the U.N.?
No. Unless it pleases them.