NATO weapons found in Donestk region!

originally posted by: Britguy
Thus, Russia has every right to protect it's ethnic people from murder at the hands of western funded and backed regimes. Wouldn't the US do the same? Of course they would, and have done in the past. I guess another set of standards are used though when someone else does it to protect their people from US initiated and funded aggression.

That is the exact same pretext Hitler used to invade and occupy Czechoslovakia at the start of WWII. Apparently some people slept through history at school and now think the tactic is perfectly fine.

Please quote me where the US has invaded and occupied a sovereign country under pretext of saving it's 'ethnic people'.

Some EU countries have begun supplying weapons to Ukraine. It isn't pumped out in the MSM but there are a few reports that get out. Most likely Poland and a Baltic state or two.

Russia has been pumping weapons and troops into Ukraine for months already, it was only a matter of time that the EU did the same. I expect a Republican bill to zoom through Congress about supplying weapons to Ukraine in the near future as well.

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: SpaDe_
a reply to: Echtelion

One thing that stands out to me is there are no visible manufacturer markings on the rifles, not sure if this is normal for standard NATO issue or not.

No, that's not normal for standard NATO issue.

If the M4's were emblazoned with the COLT logo on the left side and "Restricted Law Enforcement/Government Use Only" on the right, then the argument could be made that they originated in the U.S. As it stands, I'm going to assume they're knock-offs from another country.

Uhhh... would they be selling/loaning guns like these to paramilitaries in a proxy war!? Wouldn't that make it illegal? Engravings and blazons are just what they are... characters and logos made with little marking drills that any weapons manufacturer has. They basically could sell an authentic, USA-made AR-15 with Wal Mart or Chevron logos... which would be at least a honest gesture from Western governments!

Plus, these rifles are rather dusty and filmed with not-so-high resolution. Hard to make out the proper engravings. I mean, they could be copies made by some East European manufacturer bought on the black market... who knows, Ukraine has big mafia gangs run by Kolomoisky and others.

Okay, your comparison with Hitler partly makes sense and is noteworthy.

Though Czekoslovakia was far from being the same to Germany than Ukraine is to Russia, historically.

You do realize that today's "Ukraine" is entirely an historical product of the Soviet Union?

And that before the Soviet bloc it used to be mostly consisting of Novorossya, a part of the Russian Empire?

AND that this region -centered on Kiev for a long time during the dark ages- has been the home of the "Rus" people, who are, along with the much older Scythian-Siberian people more in the east, the roots of the current Russians?

So no, even though they aren't the only ethic group in today's Ukraine, Russians aren't some offshoots of recent invasions by some empire, like the Germans in Czech or the Hungarian in Romania are.

Most of Ukraine IS Russian. Americans are once again being caught by their poor knowledge of history... or lack of regard for it.

originally posted by: all2human
Chinese
Norinco CQ (CQ-311) Assault Rifles

How can you tell?

They're so close to AR-15's..

Posted 7 hours ago. Things heating up in minus 30 Donetsk ?

a reply to: r0xor

According to my info the Chinese versions have an abidextrous selector switch but other than than I don't think you could ,without seeing a logo or writing.www.sadefensejournal.com...

a reply to: Echtelion

Not NATO weapons.

However several EU countries announced in Sept 2013 +/- year they would be supplying weapons to Ukraine to counter the Russian invasion.

NATO released a statement specifically on this topic -
Sputnik - Kiev Says NATO Countries Start Supplying Arms to Ukraine

Reuteurs - NATO says arms supply to Ukraine up to individual allies

As has been stated time and again NATO is a defensive alliance. It does not prohibit member nations from directing their own national security.

Whether or not these weapons came from those nations is another question entirely.

This literally proves absolutely nothing... Especially since I can show you two dozen places RIGHT NOW to download a complete set of technical drawings for m16 (a1 a2 a4 m4 m4a1) as well as the sks akm ak74 rpk rpk74 rpd dp/dt (dp28 dpm dt dtm and others) and the pkm! This btw includes the call outs for material and heat treat which is necessary to put together a good product!

On top of that the AR15 is one of the most copied rifles on earth.

originally posted by: DodgyDawg
Russian weapons found all across the globe!
"They must be supporting terrorism as the Paris attackers used kalashnikovs!"

Given that the Paris attackers had AK-47's and the standard service rifle issued in Russia is the AK-74M and AK-103, I don't see your comparison as the AK-47 isn't used by the Russian state, so how can it constitue military aid to terrorists in France?

Where as if as the OP claims is true then those are NATO issue weapons that would constitute military aid.

originally posted by: noeltrotsky
Please quote me where the US has invaded and occupied a sovereign country under pretext of saving it's 'ethnic people'.

Off the top of my head US invasions with the pretext of protecting its citizens: Grenada 1983 and Panama 1986

originally posted by: TheRebel121
Off the top of my head US invasions with the pretext of protecting its citizens: Grenada 1983 and Panama 1986

Apparently the top of your head has a very poor memory.

Grenada was invaded after the coup leader was killed to restore a pre-revolutionary regime...
en.wikipedia.org...

Panama was invaded to maintain control over the important Panama canal.....
en.wikipedia.org...

Neither involved 'protecting it's citizens' at all.

originally posted by: Agent_USA_Supporter
a reply to: canucks555

Imo we should be arming Ukraine in order to stave off Russias illegal annexation of Crimea, and also Russias blatant and bombastic invasion of East Ukraine. -Arm them to the nutz. Russia must be stopped or this crap will never end.

Imo we should be arming Ukraine in order to stave off Russias illegal annexation of Crimea,
The logic mind of Senator John McCain and yeah i doubt your Canadian. Why dont you arm the Ukrankian army right now and see what happens? do you see this as a video game?


I find it comical how idiotic closed minded westerns believe that arming Ukraine would change anything it seems you forget the mess already in middle east.
Don't worry thats why i am here to remind you of it. And this is why i cant take you seriously.


Russias blatant and bombastic invasion of East Ukraine? you must be talking about the way Kiev and its fascist groups are attacking and invading the East Ukraine.


Russia must be stopped or this crap will never end.

So you want Saudi Arabia and America to prevail in there proxy wars then?

Sh!t!!! With American/NATO Policy's in the ME and elsewhere, why not? Arms 'em to the f-in teeth!!!

On a more serious note this is actually F'in scary!!! All the Muslim terror stuff will sooner spread to the states and maybe Canada. God forbid. It will likely happen, however. Ground invasion Syria here we come!!!! That's not even the half of it though. Russia. Iran. Lebanon. China. et al. This is about to turn into something serious. As if it wasn't already... But yeah, the politicos the work over are looking out for the common person.... Right?

originally posted by: Echtelion
You do realize that today's "Ukraine" is entirely an historical product of the Soviet Union?

Actually, Russia was initially controlled by Kiev before there even was an independent Russia...if you go back far enough. The roots of the Russian people actually come from the current territory of Ukraine. Guess that makes Russia an off shoot of Ukraine!

Most of Ukraine IS Russian. Americans are once again being caught by their poor knowledge of history... or lack of regard for it.

Not American and have lots of historical knowledge. Russia likes to think of itself as the birth place of the Slav's but it isn't and never was. Because people speak the language of the conquerors of the past 100 years doesn't make the country 'Russian'.

Of course historical claims have no bearing on the legality of invading a UN recognized country and annexing it's territory. You do know that territorial boundaries are UN recognized right? Of Russia has failed to respect that in Moldova, Georgia, Armenia...

originally posted by: noeltrotsky

originally posted by: Echtelion
You do realize that today's "Ukraine" is entirely an historical product of the Soviet Union?

Actually, Russia was initially controlled by Kiev before there even was an independent Russia...if you go back far enough. The roots of the Russian people actually come from the current territory of Ukraine. Guess that makes Russia an off shoot of Ukraine!

Most of Ukraine IS Russian. Americans are once again being caught by their poor knowledge of history... or lack of regard for it.

Not American and have lots of historical knowledge. Russia likes to think of itself as the birth place of the Slav's but it isn't and never was. Because people speak the language of the conquerors of the past 100 years doesn't make the country 'Russian'.

Of course historical claims have no bearing on the legality of invading a UN recognized country and annexing it's territory. You do know that territorial boundaries are UN recognized right? Of Russia has failed to respect that in Moldova, Georgia, Armenia...

Yeah... But look at the Nazi plans for those areas.... Its not restricted to Russia is my point.... Gave you a star too btw

a reply to: noeltrotsky

My memory isn't that poor and I'm not a big fan of wiki sources, but I digress.

You should also read your sources better as both do state those reasons, sure they weren't the only reason but they were an included reason.

a reply to: Agent_USA_Supporter

Here it is again for you:

RUSSIA INVADED UKRAINE

originally posted by: noeltrotsky

originally posted by: TheRebel121
Off the top of my head US invasions with the pretext of protecting its citizens: Grenada 1983 and Panama 1986

Apparently the top of your head has a very poor memory.

Grenada was invaded after the coup leader was killed to restore a pre-revolutionary regime...
en.wikipedia.org...

Neither involved 'protecting it's citizens' at all.

One of the entirely false premises used by the United States in its insane invasion of Grenada was the petition of the OECS, the Orginisation of Eastern Carribean States under fears of acts of aggression from the new left wing government against its peoples. This ultimately led to the OECS mutual assistance pact upon which the "legal" framework was based that allowed the United States and United Nations to justify military action.

originally posted by: Dabrazzo

originally posted by: noeltrotsky

originally posted by: TheRebel121
Off the top of my head US invasions with the pretext of protecting its citizens: Grenada 1983 and Panama 1986

Apparently the top of your head has a very poor memory.

Grenada was invaded after the coup leader was killed to restore a pre-revolutionary regime...
en.wikipedia.org...

Neither involved 'protecting it's citizens' at all.

One of the entirely false premises used by the United States in its insane invasion of Grenada was the petition of the OECS, the Orginisation of Eastern Carribean States under fears of acts of aggression from the new left wing government against its peoples. This ultimately led to the OECS mutual assistance pact upon which the "legal" framework was based that allowed the United States and United Nations to justify military action.

Yes, nothing to do with protecting Americans whatsoever. Of course it was a stupid cover story, but that isn't the point I'm arguing. America doesn't run around like Russia does saying we are going to invade to protect native Russians. Of course Russia hands out passports like candy in these areas to ensure they have 'citizens' there to protect.

It's not worth arguing thou....when people read your sources and claim they support their argument when they in fact don't then they are beyond my ability to rationally discuss with.