Best Baltic NATO base - Russian attack

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: JeanPaul

The last I looked, they weren't "Russia's peripheral nations", they were independent countries, that had the right to do what they wanted on their own territory. The Ukraine wasn't balking on their lease of the Russian naval base, they weren't balking on their deals to produce engines for Russian rockets, they weren't balking on producing all the equipment and structures for Russian military equipment. So because they chose to be friendlier to the West, that gives Russia the right to "put their foot down" and take some of their territory?

Oh stop it. If Russia pushed Canada and Mexico into the EEU, then planned on putting up missile shields to stop IBM's the USA would throw a # fit. Not only the missile situation but the economic situation. China, Russia and Iran are seeking ways to offer alternatives to joining the "western fold". The USA/western Europe are attempting to maintain lopsided benefits from the worlds economic affairs while also marginalizing Russia/Iran and now China.

originally posted by: JeanPaul

This wasn't the cause of WW2. It's how the US entered the war but even that is up for debate. How much of a "surprise" attack Pearl Harbor actually was. The US population at the time were highly non interventionist.

The start of WWII occurred when Chamberlain and other European countries decided to appease Hitler, just as they are doing now with Putin. Stalin aligned his nation with Nazi Germany and in return got parts of Poland and the Baltic nations.

The US stopped trade with japan over Japans invasion of China, which put a pretty good crimp in their war plans. So no its not up for debate. Japan attacked the US, drawing us into WWII.

a reply to: JeanPaul

and yet all the evidence to ate suggests Russian aggression is the reason why other countries don't align themselves with Russia. Specifically because the push other nations into their sphere and think they outright own said country and that they should do what ever Russia wants.

Your own statements supports that view by making statements about Russian peripheral nations and Ukraine.

If Russia was loved by all and every hates the Us then why are those former SSR's running as far away from Russia as they can? Why did they voluntarily join NATO?

If Russia didn't act like an ass hat they might be in a different position than they are now.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: JeanPaul

There was no change in terms to surrender. The Allies, like they did with Nazi Germany, agreed on unconditional surrender. The Japanese tried to use their relationship with Russia to push for an armistice and unbeknownst to the Japanese the Russias were dumping their non aggression pact with the Japanese.

What does this have to do with the topic?

General MacArthur:

"MacArthur’s views about the decision to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were starkly different from what the general public supposed …. When I asked General MacArthur about the decision to drop the bomb, I was surprised to learn he had not even been consulted. What, I asked, would his advice have been? He replied that he saw no military justification for the dropping of the bomb. The war might have ended weeks earlier, he said, if the United States had agreed, as it later did anyway, to the retention of the institution of the emperor."

Many more to come if you continue this insulting line of "conversation".

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: JeanPaul

This wasn't the cause of WW2. It's how the US entered the war but even that is up for debate. How much of a "surprise" attack Pearl Harbor actually was. The US population at the time were highly non interventionist.

The start of WWII occurred when Chamberlain and other European countries decided to appease Hitler, just as they are doing now with Putin. .

You're out of it. I cant continue a conversation with you. Comparing Putin to Hitler is ignorance of the highest order.

a reply to: JeanPaul

And my attitude would be exactly the same if they did. They're sovereign nations, allowed to do what they want within their own borders. No country has the right to dictate what they do, as long as they're not violating international law, at which point another nation has the right to complain about it.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Man, you're so boring with your Putin=Hitler comparison!

But, if I'm not mistaken, the only reason for ribbentrop-molotov pact, was because earlier, Britain refused an alliance with USSR. In my opinion, the WW2 would have never happened, if only Chamberlain alongside other leaders had stopped Hitler before, even though they had a lot of opportunities to do so.

a reply to: Nikola014

The pact divided Poland between Nazi Germany and the USSR and gave the USSR the Baltic countries. Of course this was after the USSR had 240k killed and another 500k wounded trying to invade Finland.

Putin and the claims he makes are the exact same claims Hitler made.

You guys need to brush up on your history.

Let me start you out -
Hitler - We have invaded these countries to protect ethnic Germans.
Putin - We have invaded Ukraine to protect Ethnic Russians.

Hitler - We will defend Ethnic Germans where ever they made be.
Putin - We reserve the right to militarily intervene in other countries when ethnic Russians are at risk.

I can keep going but I think it be best we return to the topic.

originally posted by: Nikola014
a reply to: Xcathdra

Man, you're so boring with your Putin=Hitler comparison!

But, if I'm not mistaken, the only reason for ribbentrop-molotov pact, was because earlier, Britain refused an alliance with USSR. In my opinion, the WW2 would have never happened, if only Chamberlain alongside other leaders had stopped Hitler before, even though they had a lot of opportunities to do so.

Well let's look at what happened so far.His reasoning for his actions? His nation's ethnic peoples are being treated unfairly -- a problem that has become so severe as to ostensibly necessitate external involvement. This autocrat, fueled by a belief that his country was historically wronged, believes his own actions will ultimately rectify past injustices. Meanwhile, a weak Western leader proclaims appeasement and tepid diplomacy as the tools necessary to de-escalate the international predicament.

Thought I was talking about Putin didn't you? This was the start of world War 2 but as you can see History can repeat itself this works just as well in today's news.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: JeanPaul

And my attitude would be exactly the same if they did. They're sovereign nations, allowed to do what they want within their own borders. No country has the right to dictate what they do, as long as they're not violating international law, at which point another nation has the right to complain about it.

Denying people the right to speak their language, as Ukraine was planning on doing to the ethnic Russians, is a violation of International Law is it not?
Wasn't there at least one Ukrainian politician also talking about exterminating the ethnic Russian population?

But that's not reason enough.
Russia should have done what America, Germany and the UK did..in places like Serbia(and of course Ukraine).
In "Kosovo" they supported the Albanian terrorist group, got them to provoke the Serbs(knowing the Serbs wouldn't hesitate to respond in kind), and then used that as a pretext to intervene.

Of course, like someone said in another thread I think or was it this one, the Russian's dont have the extensive network of NGO's with billions in funding to pull this off time after time all across the planet, like America and her allies do. They are trying, but they are still quite a while off.

a reply to: mortex

What international law says that you have to let people speak their native language. Maybe you can cite that one.

So one politician says something about killing ethnic Russians and that's good enough to invade? Politicians say a lot of crap. If that was enough, the US should have attacked Russia when some of their politicians said they would invade Alaska and launch a nuclear attack on the US.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I understand it was the 10s of thousands of ukrainian russia rufugees into russia claiming their families were being targeted that forced them to invade.

politicians like to think they are important and claim credit for stuff that had nothing to do with them. particularly western ones. but really they are barely more important than the two guys in the op raising a flag.

a reply to: devilmoon

I understand it was the 10s of thousands of ukrainian russia rufugees into russia claiming their families were being targeted that forced them to invade.

Targeted you say...you can surely back that up with some proof, because I doubt it very seriously that certain families were the reason for the invasion as Putin has made it clear why he invaded.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Putin and the claims he makes are the exact same claims Hitler made.

You guys need to brush up on your history.

Let me start you out -
Hitler - We have invaded these countries to protect ethnic Germans.
Putin - We have invaded Ukraine to protect Ethnic Russians.

Hitler - We will defend Ethnic Germans where ever they made be.
Putin - We reserve the right to militarily intervene in other countries when ethnic Russians are at risk.

He didn't invade Ukraine. And, in this case, he had all the right to protect his people, because a revolution that was going on in Ukraine would put at risk lives of the Russians living there.

If you think that their lives weren't at danger, than you do not know what a civil war looks like. I know. So, I'm speaking from experience here.

So no, you cannot compare Putin and Hitler because it's two totally different things. But hey, you have been fed up with lies for your entire life, so I'm not surprised you have a belief like this one.

If you ask me, i think that the US government is the closest thing to Hitler there is. Remember 9/11? And compare it to what did the Nazis do so they can deal with the communist living in Germany back then. Draw the line between those two events and see what do they have in common. How shocking, isn't it?

I can keep going but I think it be best we return to the topic.

And no you can't. But if you can, then send me a pm, I would like to know more about it so we don't go any deeper to off-topic.

a reply to: Nikola014

Funny how every other country in the world informs their citizens to contact their local embassy if they are in an area of unrest. They don't annex land. If all Russia cared about were their citizens why didn't they just organize an evacuation of its citizens? Why did they seize Crimea? Why do they continue to fund and arm the separatists? One would think if Putin cared about protecting Russian citizens he would be seeking an end to the violence instead of perpetuating it.

Also, there's that little fact that Russia was planning to seize Crimea before the protests even started. So that kind of blows apart the whole trying to protect Russian citizens thing.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

They don't annex land.

If I remember correctly, and I'm pretty sure that I do, people of Crimea held a referendum where they decided to join Russia. Or that wasn't the case? So basically, Russia didn't annex anyone. After the referendum was held, Russian Federation decided to acknowledge the will of people and consider them as part of Russia now.

Funny how every other country in the world informs their citizens to contact their local embassy if they are in an area of unrest.

Do you even know just how many Russians there are in Ukraine? We're not talking about 5-10 people, we're talking about hundreds thousand of people, so I wonder how would go if every single one of them was to contact their embassy.

Why do they continue to fund and arm the separatists? One would think if Putin cared about protecting Russian citizens he would be seeking an end to the violence instead of perpetuating it.

Simply. They are not funding the separatists, but their people fighting for their lives. My question to you is why does the west do the same thing? Why are they funding and helping Ukrainian army? Why are they using the same form of propaganda which they used against Iraq and Saddam Hussein? Why are they trying to portrait Putin the same way they did with Saddam? Why are they comparing him to Hitler? The same way that they did with Saddam.

Have you guys not learned a thing from the propaganda that you have been exposed to in the past? Can't you see the same tricks, just in a different color?

And how come Putin is trying to settle things down in Ukraine and bring peace there, but on the other hand, we have economic sanctions against Russia, we have the US sending military equipment to Ukraine and Poland, Romania and three baltic countries? How's that finding a way to put an end to the conflict in the Eastern Ukraine?

originally posted by: Nikola014
If I remember correctly, and I'm pretty sure that I do, people of Crimea held a referendum where they decided to join Russia. Or that wasn't the case? So basically, Russia didn't annex anyone. After the referendum was held, Russian Federation decided to acknowledge the will of people and consider them as part of Russia now.

No, you're remembering what you want to remember and that is largely discredited propaganda. The Russian Governments own Presidential Council on Civil Society and Human Rights has thrown the whole "unanimous verdict and high turnout" into question - they issues a report (which was quickly pulled back down again, which indicated less than 30% of the people of Crimea actually voted and only 50% of those voted for annexation, meaning 15% of the total population actually voted.

Not to mention it all took place under the presence of a foreign occupying power.

Then there is Putins own admission, in an interview for Rossiya-1 (Russian state owned TV channel) documentary "Homeward bound”" that the annexation of Crimea was planned well before any unrest.

originally posted by: Nikola014

Do you even know just how many Russians there are in Ukraine? We're not talking about 5-10 people, we're talking about hundred thousands of people, so I wonder how would go if every single one of them was to contact their embassy.

Irrelevant really. No matter how many foreign nationals reside in another state, it does not give the other state the right to intervene militarily and grab land. Besides, those Russians are living there largely down to Soviet policies of Russification where locals were "displaced" - or even killed - then replaced by Russians.

originally posted by: Nikola014
Simply. They are not funding the separatists, but their people fighting for their lives.

Then were do you explain the rebels getting all that fancy weaponry from? Some of it isn't even available outside Russia (see some of the MBT's in action)

originally posted by: Nikola014
Have you guys not learned a thing from the propaganda that you have been exposed to in the past? Can't you see the same tricks, just in a different color?

Oh, the irony.

originally posted by: Nikola014
And how come Putin is trying to settle things down in Ukraine and bring peace there, but on the other hand, we have economic sanctions against Russia, we have the US sending military equipment to Ukraine and Poland, Romania and three baltic countries? How's that finding a way to put an end to the conflict in the Eastern Ukraine?

Calm things down? The rebels have undertaken dozens of offensives against towns along the dividing line and have repeatedly broken the terms of the Minsk accord. Russian heavy weapons are still seen pouring over the border and Russian soldiers are still being cycled into Eastern Ukraine.

Talk about being in denial...

a reply to: stumason

No, you're remembering what you want to remember and that is largely discredited propaganda. The Russian Governments own Presidential Council on Civil Society and Human Rights has thrown the whole "unanimous verdict and high turnout" into question - they issues a report (which was quickly pulled back down again, which indicated less than 30% of the people of Crimea actually voted and only 50% of those voted for annexation, meaning 15% of the total population actually voted.

I'd like to see who exactly discredited this propaganda as you call it.

Not to mention it all took place under the presence of a foreign occupying power

Yes i guess you can call one brigade/unit that didn't even fire one bullet a occupation power.

Irrelevant really. No matter how many foreign nationals reside in another state, it does not give the other state the right to intervene militarily and grab land. Besides, those Russians are living there largely down to Soviet policies of Russification where locals were "displaced" - or even killed - then replaced by Russians.

So, you're saying that you would rather let people die to lunatics than react and prevent that from happening? And why? Just because some international law say so? Didn't you know that the international laws doesn't apply to countries like Russia/US and others?

Then were do you explain the rebels getting all that fancy weaponry from? Some of it isn't even available outside Russia (see some of the MBT's in action)

I'm not denying it, i'm just using a different word to describe the people fighting for their lives in Eastern Ukraine. Some call them terrorists, some separatists, i call them ordinary people.

Oh, the irony.

Where exactly do you see irony? I call it sad, that you allow yourself to be fooled by the same trick second time already in a short period of time.

Calm things down? The rebels have undertaken dozens of offensives against towns along the dividing line and have repeatedly broken the terms of the Minsk accord. Russian heavy weapons are still seen pouring over the border and Russian soldiers are still being cycled into Eastern Ukraine.

It has been proven over and over again that the one's firing first and breaking the Minks accord are the Ukrainian army. And how exactly do you know that Russia is transporting their equipment and troops into Ukraine? You base this opinion on an article by guardian reporters that saw them crossing the border but forgot their cameras in their car, so they couldn't take the pictures? Where are the satellite images? Where are tons and tons amateur videos of these phantom Russian army? Where's anything?

In the meantime, have you guys found nuclear weapons in Iraq already?
Or maybe chemical...

Talk about being in denial indeed...

a reply to: Nikola014

If te referendum was on the up and up why was it done at the barrel of Russian guns? Why were the only ones there to monitor te vote Russian? Why were the numbers that Russia originally reported declared false by Russia themselves? Why does Russia's BFF China not even recognize the results of the referendum?

The simple fact of the matter is that te referendum was in no way kosher. Hell, Ukraine even has a part in their constitution that allows areas to break away. Of course the Crimean referendum did by adhere to the constitution.

In regards to aid wing sent to Ukraine. The US is sending non-lethal aid. Russia is sending lethal aid among other things. The equipment the US is sending is defensive. Meaning it's meant to protect lives. The aid Russia is sending is meant to take lives.

The aid being sent to the Baltics, Poland, etc is being done so at those countries' request and is also defensive in nature. Whether or not it would actually happen those countries are scared Putin is going to make them the next Ukraine and want some protection.

originally posted by: Nikola014
I'd like to see who exactly discredited this propaganda as you call it.

I told you already, why not get off your arse and look something up for a change? I could provide with link, upon link, upon link, but we both know you won't read them and even if you did, you'd dismiss them.

Here is one anyway and within it, it contains links to it's sources.

originally posted by: Nikola014
Yes i guess you can call one brigade/unit that didn't even fire one bullet a occupation power.

A brigade? Do you know how big a brigade is? There were thousands of soldiers present. There were already 27,000 in Crimea as a result of the Base.

There were at least 3 full Brigades (18th Detached Motorised Rifle Brigade, 31st Air Assault Brigade, and 22nd Spetznaz Brigade) along with elements of two other divisions and Infantry from the Black Sea fleet.

One brigade.... The amount of soldiers they had deployed constituted almost a full Corps.