Posted on 04/08/2022 9:23:32 PM PDT by Zhang Fei
Rather than be brutal and move the people to conform with lines on a map, move the lines on the map to conform with the what the people want. After all, government derives its legitimacy from the consent of the governed.
That is a true statement.
Democrats are attempting to protect the steal of Treasury money.
They really do not care what the cost is.
This is contrary to what I’ve heard....which is that Soviet military personnel - most of them Russian - had physical possession of those nukes and not Ukrainians.
***Then there would have been no need for the agreement nor UN involvement nor the US.
I think its clear that all sides broke a lot of promises made at the end of the Cold War.
***Pablum. Only one country broke a written agreement and invaded a sovereign country. Twice.
Then again, the borders were often a mess.
***They weren’t at the time of the signing of the agreement. The borders suddenly became “a mess” very soon after large oil and gas reserves were discovered in the regions where, you guessed it, Putin had stirred up the most trouble.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4050958/posts
There were large ethnic Russian minorities in a lot of the former Soviet republics. Nobody ever asked them if they wanted to be an oppressed minority in a newly created country.
***They have had time to move. The Budapest Agreement was more about nuclear proliferation anyways, not really about supposedly oppressed minorities.
The best, fairest and most reasonable thing to do would have been to hold local plebiscites to draw the new national borders but this was not done and thus there has been conflict.
***Yeah huh, it was not done because there was very little problem in those regions until oil & gas were discovered. The real reason Pootypoot is invading.
Kiss my a**.
In the same way the US was interested in the security of Ukraine and is supposedly interested in the security of Taiwan.
How many times have you heard, with regard to Ukraine, "How long is the West/the International Community/the World going to allow this to go on? (Of course, there is no political-military entity called "the World", these are all synonyms for the US).
This reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the US relationship with these three small nations with powerful neighbors.
The US, or at least the State Department/Deep State/Blue Empire part of it, specializes in egging small nations on to hostility to their large and powerful neighbors out of proportion to their own military capabilities. In the past, this has led to dragging the US military/Red Empire forces into foreign wars not in our national interest, but I believe that phase of history has come to an end.
No, its hardly "pablum". The US specifically promised Russia that it would not expand the borders of NATO beyond Germany after being told explicitly by the Russians that they would view it as a threat - then the US broke its promise and did exactly that. Its not surprising the Russians viewed that as an act of aggression against them.
***They weren’t at the time of the signing of the agreement. The borders suddenly became “a mess” very soon after large oil and gas reserves were discovered in the regions where, you guessed it, Putin had stirred up the most trouble. https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4050958/posts
No. This is false. There were millions of Russians who were now suddenly minorities in newly created countries....countries whose borders did not correspond to the ethnographic borders. This was always bound to cause strife.
***They have had time to move.
Why should they have to move and not the lines on the map?
***Yeah huh, it was not done because there was very little problem in those regions until oil & gas were discovered. The real reason Pootypoot is invading.
Yeah huh, this is false. What oil and gas is there in South Ossetia? Yet that was a trouble spot. The Donbas and Crimea have been areas that were part of Russia and in which there were large Russian majorities. That might have been tolerable until the government in Kiev started doing things like discriminating against them for speaking Russian.
That and a nickel will get you on the subway.
Governments derive their ability to persist by force and the willingness to use it.
Rather than be brutal and move the people to conform with lines on a map,
***The problem here is that the lines got redrawn by the discovery of oil & gas.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4050958/posts
The Russians weren’t even interested in eastern Ukraine until oil was found there. Their interest is simply in raping that country. Russia gets 60% of its revenues from oil exports. Europe gets 40% of their oil from Russia.
In 2012 massive oil and gas reserves were found in Crimea. Crimea signed a $10 billion exploration contracts with Shell and Chevron to develop the new found oil and gas fields. These oil and gas products would compete in Europe with Russia’s oil and gas, reducing Russia’s oil revenues, which we recall amount to 60% of their total GDP. Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, cancelling the contracts with Shell and Chevron.
But Ukraine still had massive reserves in, you guessed it, Donetsk and Luhansk, and other areas East of the Dnieper River. In 2019, Energy Secretary Rick Perry visited Ukraine, and soon after Ukraine awarded exploration contracts to a consortium of U.S. oil companies. Again, these oil reserves would compete in Europe with Russian oil, so Putin is invading Ukraine to shut down this latest attempt to extract Ukrainian oil and sell it in competition with Russian oil.
This explanation makes more sense to me than the “Putin feels threatened by NATO expansion” excuses for the invasion.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4044221/posts?page=1#1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CmdSzVFSKc
If the Ukes allow some small region in the west to be its own republic, but the OIL belongs to Ukraine, do ya think Pootypoot would allow that? Nope.
No, its hardly “pablum”.
***Yes it is. Invading another country is a much much much [get that part? much] higher issue than breaking some unwritten, whispered bureaucratic mumblings.
The US specifically promised Russia that it would not expand the borders of NATO beyond Germany
***unwritten, whispered bureaucratic mumblings — besides NATO is more than the US. Since you’re making such a big deal of this, then point to the signed agreement on it.
after being told explicitly by the Russians that they would view it as a threat
***Then why did Putin want to join NATO early on in his tenure?
- then the US broke its promise and did exactly that.
***It has come time to simply call bullshiite on this line of reasoning. Put up the signed agreement or shut up.
Its not surprising the Russians viewed that as an act of aggression against them.
***Perhaps not surprising to a Putinista, but surprising to those who looked at a signed agreement from Russia saying they’ll respect those particular borders.
Kevmo:***They weren’t at the time of the signing of the agreement. The borders suddenly became “a mess” very soon after large oil and gas reserves were discovered in the regions where, you guessed it, Putin had stirred up the most trouble. https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4050958/posts
FlightyBird: No. This is false. There were millions of Russians who were now suddenly minorities in newly created countries....
***Then Russia never would have consented to those current borders. They didn’t have to.
countries whose borders did not correspond to the ethnographic borders. This was always bound to cause strife.
***I don’t buy this bullshiite because it encourages such things as ethnographic illegal colonizing which we are seeing across our own border, the South Africans saw it across theirs, and wars are being fought over ethnographic nonsense like this in Africa. If this was such a big deal that it caused Russia to invade, it woulda been a big enough deal to focus on it when they signed the border assurance agreement.
Kevmo***They have had time to move.
Birdy: Why should they have to move and not the lines on the map?
***Because they HAVE been moving. There has been an INCREASE in Russians in those regions since 2014 [the first invasion] whereas there was decreasing population growth of Russians in that region until then.
Kevmo***Yeah huh, it was not done because there was very little problem in those regions until oil & gas were discovered. The real reason Pootypoot is invading.
FlightyBird: Yeah huh, this is false. What oil and gas is there in South Ossetia?
***Uhh, that’s in Georgia, not Ukraine. At least per Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ossetia#/media/File:Caucasus-ethnic_en.svg
Yet that was a trouble spot. The Donbas and Crimea have been areas that were part of Russia and in which there were large Russian majorities.
***Pretty much the same exact justifications that Hitler used except it was Germany & Sudetenland. It’s bullshiite. It’s pushing that region to start WW3 just like appeasement of Hitler over Sudetenland led to WW2.
That might have been tolerable until the government in Kiev started doing things like discriminating against them for speaking Russian.
***Not a valid reason to invade, not by a long shot.
No, its not. Firstly, breaking that promise set the table for the issues we are having today. Without that, there likely is no invasion. Its the NATO expansion right up to Russia's border and the deep state meddling in Ukraine that has caused all of this.
***unwritten, whispered bureaucratic mumblings — besides NATO is more than the US. Since you’re making such a big deal of this, then point to the signed agreement on it.
Does it have to be a signed treaty to be a broken promise? No, of course not. When you tell somebody what is a red line for you and the other guy says "yes I understand, don't worry. I promise I'll never do that." and then he goes ahead and does exactly that, what does anybody expect you to think? Of course you're going to think A) he's a liar/he acts in bad faith and B) he's deliberately threatening you.
***Then why did Putin want to join NATO early on in his tenure?
Irrelevant. The Russians made it clear they would view NATO expansion as a threat and they were promised NATO would not expand. There were plenty of serious people such as George Kennan, Margaret Thatcher and Henry Kissinger who warned against it. Nigel Farage warned against it too.
***It has come time to simply call bullshiite on this line of reasoning. Put up the signed agreement or shut up.
It has come time to simply call bullshiite on this denial. There is no question the US promised that according to all sides. There doesn't need to be a signed agreement for a promise to have been made....and broken. Trying to claim a signed agreement is necessary for a promise not to have been made and broken is just an attempt to weasel.
***Perhaps not surprising to a Putinista, but surprising to those who looked at a signed agreement from Russia saying they’ll respect those particular borders.
I can see for a Soros/Schwab butt boy how it would be inconvenient to acknowledge the obvious reality that anybody in Russia's place would view it as a threat, but everybody else can easily see it - and can see the obvious attempt to weasel by claiming a signed agreement had to be made for a promise not to have been broken.
***Then Russia never would have consented to those current borders. They didn’t have to.
As I said at the time, all parties should have sat down and negotiated the terms of their separation at the time. Redrawing the borders of the newly created independent countries to fit the ethnographic lines of where various national populations actually lived should have been something that was resolved at that time.
***I don’t buy this bullshiite because it encourages such things as ethnographic illegal colonizing which we are seeing across our own border, the South Africans saw it across theirs, and wars are being fought over ethnographic nonsense like this in Africa. If this was such a big deal that it caused Russia to invade, it woulda been a big enough deal to focus on it when they signed the border assurance agreement.
I don't buy the bullshiite denial of this because one would have to be massively ignorant of European history not to see how this has led to strife and warfare between European countries in the past. Hell, this was the whole Kosovo conflict in the 90s. And no, we're not talking about colonization. We're talking about native populations that have been in place for a long time when somebody draws a border that does not correspond to the wishes of the locals.
***Because they HAVE been moving. There has been an INCREASE in Russians in those regions since 2014 [the first invasion] whereas there was decreasing population growth of Russians in that region until then.
Would anybody deny that those regions have been majority ethnic Russian and Russian speaking for a long time? Nobody who has looked at it and who is honest would deny that. Hell, Crimea was never part of Ukraine. It was Russian for centuries. Kruschov just gave Crimea to Ukraine in the 50s. It didn't matter then because they were all part of the Soviet Union. It did matter when the Soviet Union broke apart.
***Uhh, that’s in Georgia, not Ukraine. At least per Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ossetia#/media/File:Caucasus-ethnic_en.svg
Yes, I'm aware of that. This was another example of the exact same thing. There's no oil and gas there. There is a now minority ethnic Russian population there that was oppressed by the national government and Russia sided with their countrymen and invaded - exact same dynamic. If there is oil and gas in Crimea, I'm not aware of it. Yet Russia annexed Crimea 8 years ago. I think this has a lot more to do with the people inhabiting those areas than the oil and gas in the Donbass. Russia already has a crap ton of oil and gas.
***Pretty much the same exact justifications that Hitler used except it was Germany & Sudetenland. It’s bullshiite. It’s pushing that region to start WW3 just like appeasement of Hitler over Sudetenland led to WW2.
Had it not been Hitler....had it been a sane German nationalist instead, it would have been entirely reasonable for Germany to object to the oppression of 3 million ethnic Germans in the Sudetenland - which they had inhabited for centuries and centuries - being put in a Czech/Slovak state without their consent. Letting the people choose is democratic, just, and would remove a cause of conflict between countries. Wilson violated some of his own 14 points (subject nationalities, self determination of peoples) in backing the inclusion of the Sudetenland in a newly created Czech/Slovak state.
***Not a valid reason to invade, not by a long shot.
That's what started it. Then the locals objected. Then Kiev called in the Nazi Azov Battalion to put them down. Then the locals fought back. Then the government in Kiev ignored the signed Minsk Agreement they made to grant local autonomy to the two regions and proceeded to shell them over and over and over again killing upwards of 14,000 people there since 2015. Then the government in Kiev massed troops on the border prepared to launch an offensive into the Donbas. Then Russia - once again backing the ethnic Russians there - invaded.
Kevmo:***Yes it is. Invading another country is a much much much [get that part? much] higher issue than breaking some unwritten, whispered bureaucratic mumblings.
S-Bird: No, its not.
***This should be the end-all for the discussion. So I’ll break up my responses to you. It becomes surreal dealing with Putinistas when they can swallow this camel while straining out other gnats.
Firstly, breaking that promise set the table for the issues we are having today.
***Then why didn’t Russia make it an issue in that Budapest Agreement where they signed assurances of the contemporary borders and sovereignty of Ukraine? If that table was set then they shoulda eaten at that table at that time.
Without that, there likely is no invasion.
***Incredible horse manure. The reason there’s an invasion was that the Ukes didn’t have nukes nor had they yet entered NATO. They presented an extremely tempting target due to the oil & gas reserves found there, and a weak-kneed democrap in place as prez of USA.
Its the NATO expansion right up to Russia’s border and the deep state meddling in Ukraine that has caused all of this.
***These are justifications for Putler. You’re kissing his @$$. It makes you a Putinista. Your justifications stink to high heaven.
Kevmo:***unwritten, whispered bureaucratic mumblings — besides NATO is more than the US. Since you’re making such a big deal of this, then point to the signed agreement on it.
Shiitebird: Does it have to be a signed treaty to be a broken promise? No, of course not.
***It does if you’re gonna justify an invasion over it.
When you tell somebody what is a red line for you and the other guy says “yes I understand, don’t worry. I promise I’ll never do that.”
***Other than the fact that you never said it, they never promised it, you can’t point to any promises, it’s all made up horse shiite, and the side making such noises actually DID sign an agreement saying the opposite... other than that, you MIGHT have a point but you’re using that ridiculous idiotic point to justify an INVASION.
and then he goes ahead and does exactly that, what does anybody expect you to think?
***When you make secret winkin’ and noddin’ hints in one set of discussions but sign another set of discussions in an agreement, which set of discussions has priority? The written one, duhh. Gigantic duhh factor.
Of course you’re going to think A) he’s a liar/he acts in bad faith and B) he’s deliberately threatening you.
***More like C) this guy is just making noise for his own constituents while he signs away the real document, a lot like how the average RINO congressman acts.
The problem here is the locals are not Ukrainian and no longer want to be part of Ukraine....in truth nobody asked them at the time of the breakup of the Soviet Union if they wanted to be part of a separate country.
The Russians weren’t even interested in eastern Ukraine until oil was found there. Their interest is simply in raping that country. Russia gets 60% of its revenues from oil exports. Europe gets 40% of their oil from Russia. In 2012 massive oil and gas reserves were found in Crimea. Crimea signed a $10 billion exploration contracts with Shell and Chevron to develop the new found oil and gas fields. These oil and gas products would compete in Europe with Russia’s oil and gas, reducing Russia’s oil revenues, which we recall amount to 60% of their total GDP. Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, cancelling the contracts with Shell and Chevron.
I was unaware of any oil and gas in Crimea. OK, point for you on that one. However, I do not agree that this is all just an oil and gas play by Russia. You are ignoring what has happened inside Ukraine. Aside from the massive corruption in Ukraine that has left the locals rather poor, the US deep state has launched multiple color revolutions in Ukraine. The government that was brought to power after the Maidan coup of 2014 was explicitly hostile to Russians who are a sizable minority in Ukraine and who are a majority in Crimea and the Donbas. The government in Kiev removed Russian as an official language in the Ukraine. They furthermore banned the speaking of Russian in schools, on official documents, etc etc. They explicitly made those Russian speakers 2nd class citizens in Ukraine. They also lionized Bandera who was an outright Nazi Ukrainian nationalist who had worked with the Nazis during WWII and whose Ukrainian Nazis had committed all sorts of atrocities against Russians. Russia then annexed Crimea and the ethnic Russians in the Donbas demanded autonomy because they did not want Kiev's boot on their necks. The government in Kiev then sent in the Nazi Azov Battalion which it integrated into the Ukrainian military. Russia backed the Russians in the Donbas. The Minsk Agreement was signed by all parties in 2015 in which the government in Kiev agreed to grant autonomy to the Donbas. It then almost immediately ignored the promise it had just made and shelled the Donbas thousands of times killing upwards of 14,000 people over the next several years. When Russian intel determined that the Ukes were massing for an invasion of the Donbas, they struck first and invaded Ukraine.
Let's not pretend this is one sided...that its all that eeeeeeevil Pooty Poot....that gosh the government in Ukraine is pure as the driven snow and What? Nazi Azov Battalion? Why we've never heard of them.
But Ukraine still had massive reserves in, you guessed it, Donetsk and Luhansk, and other areas East of the Dnieper River. In 2019, Energy Secretary Rick Perry visited Ukraine, and soon after Ukraine awarded exploration contracts to a consortium of U.S. oil companies. Again, these oil reserves would compete in Europe with Russian oil, so Putin is invading Ukraine to shut down this latest attempt to extract Ukrainian oil and sell it in competition with Russian oil.
I don't agree that that's what caused Russia to invade. See above.
This explanation makes more sense to me than the “Putin feels threatened by NATO expansion” excuses for the invasion. https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4044221/posts?page=1#1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CmdSzVFSKc
It makes more sense to you because you are determined to avoid looking at what has happened with NATO expansion since the early 90s and you are determined to avoid looking at what has happened inside Ukraine since the US Deep State started meddling there in the early 2000s.
If the Ukes allow some small region in the west to be its own republic, but the OIL belongs to Ukraine, do ya think Pootypoot would allow that? Nope.
Let the locals hold a plebiscite. If they want to stay part of Ukraine OR they want to be independent countries OR they want to be part of Russia, the choice should be theirs. Government derives its legitimacy from the consent of the governed.
I happen to agree with the Declaration of Independence and the Founding Fathers.
Its also tiring dealing with Soros/Schwab Globalists. You ignore the fact that the local people in those areas DO NOT WANT to be part of Ukraine. Ukraine has been using force against them and Russia used force to back them. THE big issue here is should people be able to decide for themselves?....or should they have a government imposed upon them without their consent?
I happen to agree with the Founding Fathers that government derives its legitimacy from the consent of the governed.
Kevmo:***Then why did Putin want to join NATO early on in his tenure?
Shiitebird:Irrelevant.
***Totally relevant. Your whole basis is ripped to shreds.
The Russians made it clear they would view NATO expansion as a threat
***Not clear enough. They SIGNED assurances about sovereignty and borders for Ukraine. Where is the clarity? Signed versus unsigned. Clear signature versus mumblings.
and they were promised NATO would not expand.
***You keep going back to this dog-vomit argument. There was no promise worth codifying, especially when it counteracts other codified structures in place.
There were plenty of serious people such as George Kennan, Margaret Thatcher and Henry Kissinger who warned against it. Nigel Farage warned against it too.
***I really don’t care. NATO is pretty useless but Putin has never invaded a NATO state. There are plenty of serious people who said that letting countries into NATO that wanted to get into NATO was the right thing to do.
Kevmo:***It has come time to simply call bullshiite on this line of reasoning. Put up the signed agreement or shut up.
Shiitebird: It has come time to simply call bullshiite on this denial. There is no question the US promised that according to all sides.
***Dog vomit argument. Show us where this promise was made, at the same level as the promises made towards borders & sovereignty of Ukraine as the Budapest Agreement. Until then, you’re just acting like a dog returning to its vomit.
There doesn’t need to be a signed agreement for a promise to have been made....and broken.
***If a Shiitebird like you goes down to Mehico and promises to give them we’re at war due to illegal colonization, has a promise been “made”? Yes, but is it a legitimate promise? Nope, because you do not represent the USA. But if the president of the USA signs an agreement saying the same thing , we are at war because he represents the USA.
Trying to claim a signed agreement is necessary for a promise not to have been made and broken is just an attempt to weasel.
***No, shiitebird, it is not weaseling because you are the weasel who is using this obscure unsigned bureaucratic mumbling as justification for a full-scale INVASION of one sovereign country into another.
Kevmo:***Perhaps not surprising to a Putinista, but surprising to those who looked at a signed agreement from Russia saying they’ll respect those particular borders.
Shiitebird:I can see for a Soros/Schwab butt boy
***Who is Soros? Who is Schwab? I have never mentioned them. They never signed any border sovereignty agreement, the president of the USA signed them. And I’m no fan of that particular prez, but he did sign that agreement.
how it would be inconvenient to acknowledge the obvious reality that anybody in Russia’s place would view it as a threat,
***Then Russia should never have signed the agreement which displaces all this bullshiite you’re pointing out. Simple. Duhh.
but everybody else can easily see it - and can see the obvious attempt to weasel by claiming a signed agreement had to be made for a promise not to have been broken.
***If everybody else can see it then produce these overwhelmingly overriding evidences that shunt signed agreements from 3 presidents of sovereign guvmints aside. Go ahead. You’re overlooking the obvious priority here.
Kevmo:***Then Russia never would have consented to those current borders. They didn’t have to.
Shiitebird: As I said at the time, all parties should have sat down and negotiated the terms of their separation at the time.
***Which is what I have said, but they DIDN’T. Because they had that other, more pertinent agreement to actually SIGN and implement.
As I've said multiple times, this should have been resolved at the time of the breakup of the Soviet Union....though in fairness, Ukraine had not then developed as it has.....ie massively corrupt, poor and quite oppressive and violent toward its ethnic Russian minority.
***Incredible horse manure. The reason there’s an invasion was that the Ukes didn’t have nukes nor had they yet entered NATO. They presented an extremely tempting target due to the oil & gas reserves found there, and a weak-kneed democrap in place as prez of USA.
[sarcasm]Yeah, I'm sure trampling on the rights of the Russian minority, declaring Nazis as national heroes, incorporating a Nazi organization into the country's military, outside meddling to overthrow multiple Ukrainian governments, the now officially incorporated Nazis murdering a whole bunch of people in the region when they demanded autonomy to keep from being relegated to being 2nd class citizens, I'm sure all of that had nothing at all to do with the conflict. No, its all oil and gas and that oh so eeeeeeevil Putin.[/sarcasm] Talk about horse manure. That's a steaming load of it straight from the Globalists/Deep State warmongers.
***These are justifications for Putler. You’re kissing his @$$. It makes you a Putinista. Your justifications stink to high heaven.
Your denial is typical of the Soros/Schwab globalists and Deep state warmongers. I realize the actual history is damned inconvenient for your globalist ambitions, but not everybody is prepared to go along with the Soros propaganda.
{shitmo]***It does if you’re gonna justify an invasion over it.[/shitmo]
Oh, I see you somehow managed yet again to not see everything that has happened inside Ukraine for the last 20 years. How convenient!
***Other than the fact that you never said it, they never promised it, you can’t point to any promises, it’s all made up horse shiite, and the side making such noises actually DID sign an agreement saying the opposite... other than that, you MIGHT have a point but you’re using that ridiculous idiotic point to justify an INVASION.
That's just a lie. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/newly-declassified-documents-gorbachev-told-nato-wouldnt-23629 Then there is the Minsk agreement which Ukraine signed then promptly ignored. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements Yet more horse shiite in trying to deny this by the globalist Soros stooge.
***When you make secret winkin’ and noddin’ hints in one set of discussions but sign another set of discussions in an agreement, which set of discussions has priority? The written one, duhh. Gigantic duhh factor.
As pointed out above, it was not a "secret wink and a nod". It was an explicit promise and it was broken. Then there is also the formal written Minsk Agreement which the Ukrainian side violated.....Y'know the Minsk Agreement which was guaranteed by France and Germany which did nothing to uphold it when Kiev started ignoring it almost immediately? Yeah, that one.
***More like C) this guy is just making noise for his own constituents while he signs away the real document, a lot like how the average RINO congressman acts.
You're going to think he's a liar and acts in bad faith - like the Globalists and the Deep State - and their various propaganda arms like the Corporate Media and Big Tech routinely do.
Redrawing the borders of the newly created independent countries to fit the ethnographic lines of where various national populations actually lived should have been something that was resolved at that time.
***Look at your timing. You think it shoulda been solved AFTER oil & gas were discovered, AFTER Russia signed the border sovereignty agreement, AFTER Russia VIOLATED that agreement but not BEFORE. That’s being a serious PUtinista$$ki$$er.
Kevmo:***I don’t buy this bullshiite because it encourages such things as ethnographic illegal colonizing which we are seeing across our own border, the South Africans saw it across theirs, and wars are being fought over ethnographic nonsense like this in Africa. If this was such a big deal that it caused Russia to invade, it woulda been a big enough deal to focus on it when they signed the border assurance agreement.
Shiitebird: I don’t buy the bullshiite denial of this because one would have to be massively ignorant of European history
***You mean, as massively ignorant of history as you have demonstrated? You think that some bureaucratic mumblings override presidential-signed agreements.
not to see how this has led to strife and warfare between European countries in the past.
***Sure I can see that — in Sudetenland and the Rheinland. Hitler jumped up & down & made noise and all those frienly favorite bureaucrats of yours made accommodation. Due to their own cowardice.
Hell, this was the whole Kosovo conflict in the 90s.
***Pretty much completely irrelevant.
And no, we’re not talking about colonization. We’re talking about native populations that have been in place for a long time when somebody draws a border that does not correspond to the wishes of the locals.
***Those natives had their native country sign away sovereignty of those regions to the folks who had obvious sovereignty over the regions. They had plenty of time to move back home. They were drawn to the region due to the military hegemony imposed by their home country and that part ended. Sure sounds like a colonization to me, a lot like the English colonization of northern Ireland.
Kevmo:***Because they HAVE been moving. There has been an INCREASE in Russians in those regions since 2014 [the first invasion] whereas there was decreasing population growth of Russians in that region until then.
Shiitebird: Would anybody deny that those regions have been majority ethnic Russian and Russian speaking for a long time?
***Yes, the Russian guvmint did. When they signed the Budapest Memorandum.
Hardly. The US made a promise not to expand NATO and then DID. Putin proposed possibly joining NATO early on. Russia had to figure out what to do after the US broke its promise. By the way, when Putin floated the idea of Russia joining NATO, Bill Clinton shot that down.....another one of Clinton's big dumbass decisions. Were Russia in NATO, China would be screwed. Now that NATO has treated Russia as an enemy and made that a self fulfilling prophesy, China will have all the raw materials it needs. Oh by the way, CHINA is the big threat to us, not Russia.
***Not clear enough. They SIGNED assurances about sovereignty and borders for Ukraine. Where is the clarity? Signed versus unsigned. Clear signature versus mumblings.
Yeah and the government in Kiev signed the Minsk Agreements and France and Germany were guarantors of it. Then Ukraine promptly broke the signed Minsk Agreements granting autonomy to the Donbas and France and Germany did nothing about it.
***You keep going back to this dog-vomit argument. There was no promise worth codifying, especially when it counteracts other codified structures in place.
You keep trying to ignore this FACT. The US explicitly promised not to expand NATO and then did. How would the US look at it if China expanded its sphere of influence to include most of the Western Hemisphere and then even stationed troops in Cuba and Mexico? Imagine if there were an American minority in Mexico. Imagine if the Chinese overthrew multiple Mexican governments and installed a new one explicitly hostile to Americans and which then oppressed Americans in Mexico - contrary to a signed treaty in which it promised not to do exactly that. The US wouldn't stand for it. No major power would.
***I really don’t care. NATO is pretty useless but Putin has never invaded a NATO state. There are plenty of serious people who said that letting countries into NATO that wanted to get into NATO was the right thing to do.
Of course you don't care. It would be damned inconvenient for you to admit that its true or to admit the US would react similiarly were it in Russia's place.
[shitmo]***Dog vomit argument. Show us where this promise was made, at the same level as the promises made towards borders & sovereignty of Ukraine as the Budapest Agreement. Until then, you’re just acting like a dog returning to its vomit.[/shitmo]
Horseshit denial. I have shown you. I provided a link. You want to cite the Budapest Agreement? Ok. What about the Minsk Agreement? Until you acknowledge that you're jsut acting like a dog returning to its vomit.
***If a Shiitebird like you goes down to Mehico and promises to give them we’re at war due to illegal colonization, has a promise been “made”? Yes, but is it a legitimate promise? Nope, because you do not represent the USA. But if the president of the USA signs an agreement saying the same thing , we are at war because he represents the USA.
If a shitmo like you can't admit the obvious - ie that the US explicitly promised not to expand NATO and then did or that the Ukes promised to grant autonomy to the Donbas in the signed Minsk Agreement and then broke that promise immediately and shelled the place thousands of times killing thousands of people over the last several years then I dunno what to tell you. The evidence of the US promise made to the Russians and of the Ukrainian treaty made to respect the local autonomy of the Donbas is indisputable.
***No, shiitebird, it is not weaseling because you are the weasel who is using this obscure unsigned bureaucratic mumbling as justification for a full-scale INVASION of one sovereign country into another.
Yes shitmo, it definitely IS weaseling and its not surprising that a globalist weasel like you is trying to deny the undisputed fact that the US did promise exactly that. Nor is it surprising that you are trying to ignore the signed Minsk Agreement or the thousands of people killed in the Donbas since then due to the Ukes shelling the place thousands of times.
***Who is Soros? Who is Schwab? I have never mentioned them. They never signed any border sovereignty agreement, the president of the USA signed them. And I’m no fan of that particular prez, but he did sign that agreement.
They are your globalist puppet masters. Ukraine signed the Minsk Agreement granting autonomy to the Donbas and then they promptly broke it and killed thousands of people there. and Yes the US DID explicitly promise not to expand NATO.
***Then Russia should never have signed the agreement which displaces all this bullshiite you’re pointing out. Simple. Duhh.
Then the US should never have promised not to expand NATO, the Ukes should not have broken their signed agreement to grant autonomy to the Donbas and the Deep State warmongers like Victoria Nuland should not have meddled in Ukraine deliberately stirring up trouble. Why do you defend those scumbags and their propaganda mouthpieces? They dont' give the slightest shit about America and they really hate any Americans who do. They view patriot Americans as nothing more than sources of funding and cannon fodder to further their globalist ambitions. They use their influence in the media to run down American patriots and their minions in the government to oppress patriotic Americans every chance they get. Putin may not be our friend, but those scumbags are the real enemy.
***If everybody else can see it then produce these overwhelmingly overriding evidences that shunt signed agreements from 3 presidents of sovereign guvmints aside. Go ahead. You’re overlooking the obvious priority here.
I've already provided a link to declassified documents showing the US promised not to expand NATO. I've also cited the signed Minsk Agreements.
[shitmo]***Which is what I have said, but they DIDN’T. Because they had that other, more pertinent agreement to actually SIGN and implement.[/shitmo]
Of course this overlooks the fact that the Ukes agreed to grant autonomy to the Donbas via the signed Minsk Agreement in which France and Germany were the guarantors. They then almost immediately broke the Minsk Agreement, shelled the Donbas thousands of times and killed thousands of people while France and Germany didn't do a damn thing about it.
No, it should have been resolved at the time. Of course, the Ukes should have kept the Minsk Agreement which they signed granting autonomy to the Donbas but instead they broke that almost immediately and shelled the place thousands of times killing thousands of people there over the last few years. Ignoring that is being a serious Soros/Schab/Deep state globalist ass kisser.
***You mean, as massively ignorant of history as you have demonstrated? You think that some bureaucratic mumblings override presidential-signed agreements.
No, I mean as massively ignorant of history as you are being. This isn't a case of "colonizing". That Russian population has been in those areas for centuries. The lines on the map moved - the population didn't. I do like how you constantly try to pretend an explicit promise is something other than a promise eg "bureaucratic mumblings" AND how you ignore the signed Minsk Agreement in which the Ukes agreed to grant autonomy to the Donbas and then broke that treaty almost immediately.
***Sure I can see that — in Sudetenland and the Rheinland. Hitler jumped up & down & made noise and all those frienly favorite bureaucrats of yours made accommodation. Due to their own cowardice.
Maybe they shouldn't have drawn the lines on the map so as to put millions of people into a foreign country without their consent. Maybe that foreign country should not have set about oppressing them. That was always bound to lead to trouble when that oppressed minority in one country was the majority in the country next door.
***Pretty much completely irrelevant.
Its a direct example of the exact same thing. The only difference was the parties were reversed. I can see why you are desperate to dismiss it. Its extremely inconvenient for you.
***Those natives had their native country sign away sovereignty of those regions to the folks who had obvious sovereignty over the regions. They had plenty of time to move back home. They were drawn to the region due to the military hegemony imposed by their home country and that part ended. Sure sounds like a colonization to me, a lot like the English colonization of northern Ireland.
They didn't sign up to be 2nd class citizens or to be murdered by the national government for demanding their rights. Why should the people have to move rather than the lines on the map? Let the lines on the map correspond to the wishes of the people. And those people have lived in those areas for centuries. Saying "oh they should just move away" would be akin to telling Americans they should just move away....after all, most of them are descended from people who haven't lived in America all that long....
[shitmo]***Yes, the Russian guvmint did. When they signed the Budapest Memorandum.[/shitmo]
No they didn't. They agreed to no such thing. The Ukes signed the Minsk agreement granting autonomy to the Donbas. Then they broke the treaty and shelled the place thousands of times killing an estimated 14,000 people over the last several years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
