It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russia targets the Baltic states, NATO warns Russia (round 2)

page: 11
22
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 5 2014 @ 03:31 AM
link   
a reply to: GargIndia


The Russian takeover of Crimea and the events of East Ukraine are not due to any Russian plan but forced by events that Russia could not control.


Are you saying that Russia could not control its agents in Kyiv? It could not control its lackey Yanukovytch? It could not control FSB marksmen on the Maidan? It could not control FSB agents in Odessa? It could not control arsonists? It could not control its "military advisers" in Donetsk and Luhansk? It could not control its unmarked troops in Crimea? It could not control its coup there?


Russian actions are to protect their own country, which we all must agree is a genuine need.


Russian actions have been to aggrandize their country at the expense of the sovereignty of its neighbors, which we all agree is imperialism.


NATO in Ukraine is a clear threat to Russia. Only fools will say otherwise.


NATO is not in Ukraine, only gullible victims of Russian propaganda say otherwise. Thanks to Putin's imperialism, NATO's presence in Ukraine is now necessary and inevitable. For the sake of the Russian people, Putin needs to go before the secret trickle of body bags becomes a flood!




posted on Oct, 5 2014 @ 06:14 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

You seem to glorify the actions of criminals that ran the protests on the Maidan.

I characterize the Ukraine trouble as "civil war". USA is supporting one party in the civil war and Russia is supporting the other.

The word like "imperialism" is your fabrication and denotes your aggression and attitude.



posted on Oct, 5 2014 @ 06:33 AM
link   
a reply to: GargIndia



You seem to glorify the actions of criminals that ran the protests on the Maidan.


Exactly the opposite: I am suggesting that the very real crimes that were committed were orchestrated my Moscow to justify their aggression.


I characterize the Ukraine trouble as "civil war". USA is supporting one party in the civil war and Russia is supporting the other.


There is a civil war going on thanks to Russian meddling. The USA has done nothing to support Kyiv but pay lip service. Russia has troops occupying what is still legally Ukrainian territory.


The word like "imperialism" is your fabrication and denotes your aggression and attitude.


Explain how characterizing the acquisition of territory by force of arms as "imperialism" is a "fabrication" and denotes aggression on my part?



posted on Oct, 5 2014 @ 07:08 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

Oh don't bother having these types of arguments on the internet. When you spot someone who can offer a good conversation/argument/debate then you should go ahead. But this guy is just a brainwash.

Life is short you know.As far as we know, this is a RT junkie,stuck on the whole "left vs right" paradigm,paid troll by the kremlin,etc. Not worth any of our time.

On the subject: I was really expecting Putin to move on towards Romania because it is on the Black Sea. It didn't come to me it would be smarter to just finish up taking over bordering countries not already "occupied".

It seems bold since Ukraine is still in open conflict despite the ceasefire, quite unfinished business they got there but I think it's better to back off for now.



posted on Oct, 5 2014 @ 09:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: GargIndia



You seem to glorify the actions of criminals that ran the protests on the Maidan.


Exactly the opposite: I am suggesting that the very real crimes that were committed were orchestrated my Moscow to justify their aggression.


I characterize the Ukraine trouble as "civil war". USA is supporting one party in the civil war and Russia is supporting the other.


There is a civil war going on thanks to Russian meddling. The USA has done nothing to support Kyiv but pay lip service. Russia has troops occupying what is still legally Ukrainian territory.


The word like "imperialism" is your fabrication and denotes your aggression and attitude.


Explain how characterizing the acquisition of territory by force of arms as "imperialism" is a "fabrication" and denotes aggression on my part?



Crimea people voted to join Russian Federation; and this is perfectly legal in a democracy.

Russian troops protected people of Crimea from violence during their plebiscite which is also perfectly legal.

If you find something illegal, go back to Yugoslavia war.

Look at this video - www.youtube.com...

The DNR fighters do not look like Russian troops to me. These are definitely militia - the tactics shows these people are not regular army.

"Russian Meddling": Why Russia should not meddle. Give me a reason? Russia has every reason to meddle in Ukraine. If West stops support of Ukraine, the war will stop today. So I can ask the question - why is West meddling in Ukraine?

"Acquisition of territory": As actions against Russia pile up, it is clear that Russia will rise up to the challenge. Territory does change hands in war. The enemies of Russia can lose their land. I see nothing wrong if that happens.

"Legally Ukrainian territory": What you mean by this term?

Legally Yugoslavian territory was taken away in the name of "democracy".

No legal definition saves any country from USA bombers. What do you really mean here??



posted on Oct, 5 2014 @ 11:01 PM
link   
a reply to: GargIndia

A fraud election where Putin's own Presidential Council questioned the outcome.

The "election" was held after the invasion by Russia. If you check your international law, as well as the Ukraine and Crimean Constitution, the actions were illegal and are not recognized. No amount of you guys putting your head in the sand will change that fact.



posted on Oct, 6 2014 @ 12:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: GargIndia

A fraud election where Putin's own Presidential Council questioned the outcome.

The "election" was held after the invasion by Russia. If you check your international law, as well as the Ukraine and Crimean Constitution, the actions were illegal and are not recognized. No amount of you guys putting your head in the sand will change that fact.


But who was the first who was did something unconstitutional ?

"What comes around goes around"

It wouldn`t have happened if The West hadn`t done it first.


You`re very good in leaving out critical pieces of information for your use in making Russia looking bad, but it doesn`t work that way!



posted on Oct, 6 2014 @ 01:55 AM
link   
Washington’s Ukrainian Puppet Regime Seeks NATO and EU Membership



“The staged revolution, devised by the CIA, EU, State Department, and George Soros funded NGO’s in Ukraine, has overthrown the democratically elected government of Victor Yanukovych in a coup designed to forge closer ties between Ukraine and the E.U., in a long term strategy of integrating Ukraine into the E.U. and NATO.”

Both E.U. and NATO membership are on the horizon for Ukraine in the foreseeable future if the puppet regime in Kiev is allowed to stay in charge and run the country for the benefit of their masters in the West.

Source

Poor Ukrainians who only wanted to be independent and now will become a Western puppet state.

I bet there will be some Ukrainians who are going to scream for NATO protection in the future against "Russian aggression," and imperialism of The West has once again showed itself.


edit on 6-10-2014 by BornAgainAlien because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2014 @ 02:18 AM
link   
a reply to: BornAgainAlien





Source


Anything a bit more credible than globalresearch as your source.



I bet there will be some Ukrainians who are going to scream for NATO protection in the future against "Russian aggression," and imperialism of The West has once again showed itself.


So let me get this straight here...It's okay for Russia to invade a sovereign nation, but it isn't okay for that sovereign nation to ask for help from being invaded by Russia and that is wrong.

My you have a strange way at seeing the world.



posted on Oct, 6 2014 @ 03:02 AM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

It`s not okay when there`s a foreign coup in a country/region while the majority of it citizens doesn`t want that.

- Ukrainians in majority didn`t wanted to be part of The West and NATO which has been proved by independent polls from before the crisis

- Crimeans didn`t wanted to be part of a Ukraine with a Western puppet regime

- Eastern Ukrainians didn`t wanted to be part of Western puppet regime

Doing what the majority of people want is actual democracy and what The West is doing has nothing to do with democracy.

And yes, for some people it`s strange to see someone with a real democracy view and not the fake ones we now see all over the place (the ones where the governments don`t represent it citizens at all).
edit on 6-10-2014 by BornAgainAlien because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2014 @ 03:42 AM
link   
a reply to: GargIndia


Crimea people voted to join Russian Federation; and this is perfectly legal in a democracy.


The "election" was held by an un-elected, self proclaimed government in contravention of the constitution. It was neither democratic nor legal.


Russian troops protected people of Crimea from violence during their plebiscite which is also perfectly legal.


The presence of foreign troops at polling stations without the permission of the legitimate government is about as illegal as you can get. The only Crimeans who need "protection" from anyone but the Russians were the Jews and Tatars, and somehow, they didn't get protected.


If you find something illegal, go back to Yugoslavia war.

Look at this video - www.youtube.com...


Irrelevant.


The DNR fighters do not look like Russian troops to me. These are definitely militia - the tactics shows these people are not regular army.


It doesn't matter what you think they look like, Putin admitted that there were Russian troops occupying Crimea before the election was held. Invasion, period.


"Russian Meddling": Why Russia should not meddle. Give me a reason? Russia has every reason to meddle in Ukraine. If West stops support of Ukraine, the war will stop today. So I can ask the question - why is West meddling in Ukraine?


Russia should not meddle because it violates Westphalian principles. If it wants to project soft power through cultural outreach, that is fine. If it sends in troops, that is war. The United States and Europe have worked through diplomacy and cultural institutions. Russia has sent in troops.


"Acquisition of territory": As actions against Russia pile up, it is clear that Russia will rise up to the challenge. Territory does change hands in war. The enemies of Russia can lose their land. I see nothing wrong if that happens.


So, here is an hypothetical for you: Kashmir is majority Muslim, giving it strong cultural, religious and historical ties to Pakistan. Recognizing this, Pakistan sends un-marked troops into Kashmir to protect the Muslims there. An un-elected Kashmiri leader dissolves the local government and announces a referendum: Unite with Pakistan or remain Hindu. Any Muslim, whether they live in Kashmir or not,is allowed to vote. Armed Pakistani troops patrol the streets to prevent "Hindu violence." The vote is 115% in favor of becoming part of Pakistan. I assume you see nothing wrong with this, as Pakistan has the right to rise up against its enemies.


"Legally Ukrainian territory": What you mean by this term?


Even if you consider the referendum legitimate, Russian troops were occupying Crimea before it separated from Ukraine. Why are you having such a hard time understanding this.


Legally Yugoslavian territory was taken away in the name of "democracy".


Not only irrelevant, but wrong. Yugoslavia ceased to exist as an entity almost the moment Tito died.


No legal definition saves any country from USA bombers. What do you really mean here??


Sadly, you are correct. If Putin does not start acting responsibility, many more Russians will die. Is that what you want?

Now, stop evading this simple question:

Explain how characterizing the acquisition of territory by force of arms as "imperialism" is a "fabrication" and denotes aggression on my part?



posted on Oct, 6 2014 @ 04:24 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001


The "election" was held by an un-elected, self proclaimed government in contravention of the constitution. It was neither democratic nor legal.


Democracy is the will of the people, so if it was the will of the people of Crimea to join Russia, it was as Democratic as it can be.



The presence of foreign troops at polling stations without the permission of the legitimate government is about as illegal as you can get. The only Crimeans who need "protection" from anyone but the Russians were the Jews and Tatars, and somehow, they didn't get protected.


The government wasn`t legit because it was formed unconstitutional. The law wasn`t followed, so no points for you there.

And where are the piles of bodies of Jews and Tatars ?

You do realize I`m expecting now of course dubious claims from mothers and wives of missing Jews and Tatars.



It doesn't matter what you think they look like, Putin admitted that there were Russian troops occupying Crimea before the election was held. Invasion, period.


No period, it was needed to have honest elections with a government which used neo-Nazi groups to intimidate people. No fair elections could have been held without security against those groups, that`s a real period.



The United States and Europe have worked through diplomacy and cultural institutions.


Please drink another pot of coffee.



Russian troops were occupying Crimea before it separated from Ukraine. Why are you having such a hard time understanding this.


16.000 Russian troops were actual allowed to be in Crimea by agreement



If Putin does not start acting responsibility, many more Russians will die.


When Putin did, The West didn`t, so it doesn`t matter how Putin acts, all that matters if The West wants to act irresponsible again.



posted on Oct, 6 2014 @ 04:30 AM
link   
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Have another drink of Kool-Ade.

Edit to add: Why didn't you respond to my hypothetical? Would it be okay for Pakistan to annex Kashmir?


edit on 6-10-2014 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2014 @ 04:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Have another drink of Kool-Ade.

Edit to add: Why didn't you respond to my hypothetical? Would it be okay for Pakistan to annex Kashmir?



Kashmir isn`t Crimea and a whole different kind of situation, so it`s stupid to come u with such analogy.

You seem to be particulate proud on those stupid analogies and think of them as looking intellectual...I don`t responds on every stupid thing I read, some things are just so much IQ lowering I just pass on them.



posted on Oct, 6 2014 @ 05:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Have another drink of Kool-Ade.

Edit to add: Why didn't you respond to my hypothetical? Would it be okay for Pakistan to annex Kashmir?



Kashmir isn`t Crimea and a whole different kind of situation, so it`s stupid to come u with such analogy.

You seem to be particulate proud on those stupid analogies and think of them as looking intellectual...I don`t responds on every stupid thing I read, some things are just so much IQ lowering I just pass on them.


In other words, it's okay for Russia to do things that would be wrong for other countries to do. Why? Because anything Russia does is some blow against the evil "West?"



posted on Oct, 6 2014 @ 05:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Have another drink of Kool-Ade.

Edit to add: Why didn't you respond to my hypothetical? Would it be okay for Pakistan to annex Kashmir?



The Indian Army stands between Pakistan and Kashmir. Pakistan can try for sure.

If you ask my opinion, I have nothing against parts of Kashmir that want to be with Pakistan to be allowed to do so. But then we go back pre-1947. I want Pakistan's Sindh in return that had as many Hindus as Muslims pre-1947. And I want Baluchistan to be made an independent country.

Talking about Kashmir is opening a hornet's nest.



posted on Oct, 6 2014 @ 05:24 AM
link   
a reply to: GargIndia


Talking about Kashmir is opening a hornet's nest.


So is talking about Eastern and Central Europe. It is so easy for you to read the minds of Russians, Ukrainians and Germans. You understand nothing about the situation; all you have is your contempt for Europe.



posted on Oct, 6 2014 @ 05:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
In other words, it's okay for Russia to do things that would be wrong for other countries to do. Why? Because anything Russia does is some blow against the evil "West?"


No. However we understand Ukraine's events and West's intentions. Russia is entitled to self-defence.



posted on Oct, 6 2014 @ 05:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: GargIndia


Talking about Kashmir is opening a hornet's nest.


So is talking about Eastern and Central Europe. It is so easy for you to read the minds of Russians, Ukrainians and Germans. You understand nothing about the situation; all you have is your contempt for Europe.



This is quite novel phrase you used: "contempt for Europe". Interesting.
What can I say about such foolishness.
edit on 6-10-2014 by GargIndia because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2014 @ 05:31 AM
link   
a reply to: GargIndia


This is quite novel phrase you used: "contempt for Europe". Interesting.
What can I say about such foolishness.


Sorry, but you keep talking as though Europe was belligerent, a threat to Russia and the sponsor of revolution, terror and fascism in Ukraine. Are you saying that you admire and respect Europe for this behavior?



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join