Fast track NATO membership For Ukraine Like now!

a reply to: MidnightWatcher

russian teevee can easily present 'evidence' in any language you like.

Then perhaps they should do so. Can they force American stations to play their programming?

Or does Mr. Know-it-all No-pants control what I see? He really does not like Russia. He tells me so every say.

TheRedneck

a reply to: ScepticScot

Restrictions on Russian Internet are put in place by the Russian government.

I stand corrected again. I was misinformed. Thank you for the correction.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Putin tells me every day himself why I really don't like his fascist lies and Hitlery aggressions.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: ScepticScot

You seen obsessed with the fact it was 2 days later before they actually crossed the border. Do you think the whole invasion was decided on, organised and supplied in 2 days?

Because there was no reason to apply sanctions until Russia actually invaded. Everything before that was instigation, not retaliation.

Again how does that justify invading Ukraine?

I am not going to keep repeating myself. If you don't understand my last two responses to that question, you never will.

Cooler heads need to prevail in Russia as its them invading.

Cooler heads need to prevail, period.

Ultimatums are not diplomacy.

stop the childish attempts at insults

I'd like to know when in this thread I have insulted you. I am actually trying desperately not to do so. I will admit it is hard when you keep parroting debunked statements and ignoring anything that goes against your "Russia evil" agenda.

TheRedneck

The sanctions are to reduce Russias ability to wage war, not realiation.

I don't understand because you haven't given a coherent answer. Probably because mental gymnastic aside there is no justification.

Ultimatiums like threatening nuclear attacks? Again that is Russia.

The one parroting debunked naratives here is you. We know that Russia lied about its intentions for weeks yet you are still trying to paint it as a response (magically planned, supplied, and implemented in 2 days).

I don't think Russia is evil at all. I think they are highly unfortunate to gave a lying, delusional psychopath as president. That is very different.

Do you really need to quote back your comments at the end of the last few posts? Try and discuss the topic with some civility please.

a reply to: TheRedneck

I'm just trying to get some logical perspective on this. When Germany cancelled the Nord Stream 2, they claimed it was because of Russian military buildup, but Russia was not in Ukraine (unless you count Crimea, which means they had been there 8 years already). Where were the Russian forces supposed to be? Does Germany have some right to tell Russia where they have to deploy their troops on Russian soil? Who else does Germany get to handle troops movements of?

I answered this Redneck. They also invaded from Belarus towards Kiev. This just didn't happen from Russian soil. And the build up began in April of '21.

This my surprise you, but I support Crimea, Dontesk and Luhansk's right to determine their future entirely. If it's organic and truly the will of the people. This isn't that. This is a situation that has such historical foundations that it's hard what to know to call the "starting point". For this situation would probably be the Yalta Conference at the end WW2. Stalin loved Crimea and didn't like Ukraine to much. Kruschev didn't like Stalin very much so he gave Crimea to Ukraine for their sacrifices during the war. Just to spit on Ole Joe's legacy. Crimea, Russia and Ukraine have a pretty long and violent history with regards to that part of the world.

I have an issue with any peoples status being determined by global consensus. If, say, the USA and most of Europe decided that Canada was actually a part of Russia, would that be OK?

I didn't need your hyperbole, my country has faced two referendums to split in the last 45 years. The way, I would hope anyway, most modern countries would decide things like this. See, we didn't have France inside Quebec with military power influencing and forcing the decisions to happen, the people of Quebec got to chose for themselves. There wasn't American troops on the border waiting for the decisions to happen to invade and annex the new "free" Quebec. We didn't have the Russians lined up to help us defeat the worlds largest super power on our border, giving us weapons and materiel if we showed the will to fight. Cause that's what has basically happened with Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea.

This current struggle had been happening since the USSR went tits up. In another post you've made, you asked why nothing was done about Crimea and where were the sanctions back in '14. They did place sanctions on them but Merkel loved that Big Russian pipe a little too much and Germany being usually the highest GDP nation in the EU, they didn't push to hard. The conditions for what happened in Feb have been built over the last 35 years. Putin got away with Georgia; we were on Crusade in the Middle East, who gives a # what happens in some backwards part of the world like Georgia, let the bear have it. They got away with their other actions in the Caucasus. We were to busy trying to rewrite the map of North Africa and the Near/Middle East, and "pivoting" towards Asia, making sure we had all the oils and the Chinese had none. Or the wholesale sellout of our collective nations to China, depending on your point of view of course. Putin rolled the dice again but this time he chose a piece of land that we do care about, so the response to the dice rolls changed. And we again, find ourselves where we are today.

a reply to: TheRedneck


Western teevee would have a 24x7 America bashing party if russia presented even a single shred of 'evidence', but russia has not given them any.

They could even start with their buddy tucker.

a reply to: TheRedneck


You weren't completely wrong, some western platforms (twatter) have also banned users in russia, but the larger 'internet' restrictions are by russia.

a reply to: ScepticScot

The sanctions are to reduce Russias ability to wage war, not realiation.

At the time the Nord Stream 2 was cancelled, Russia had not waged war. They were still on Russian soil. Who were they warring against? Themselves?

I don't understand because you haven't given a coherent answer.

There's no mental gymnastics involved. If I have two options for commerce and one is closed to me, that forces me to do business with the other.

Ultimatiums like threatening nuclear attacks? Again that is Russia.

the only thing I have heard Putin say about nuclear weapons is that they would become his only choice if NATO invades Russia. He has also stated every single time that he does not want that to become his only option.

The ultimatum I referred to was from you:

originally posted by: ScepticScot

The conflict stops when Putin withdraws.simple as that then we can have diplomacy.

The one parroting debunked naratives here is you. We know that Russia lied about its intentions for weeks yet you are still trying to paint it as a response (magically planned, supplied, and implemented in 2 days).

That has not been debunked. A military is generally prepared for every conceivable contingency. It does not take more than 2 days to give an order to carry out a contingency and implement it.

I don't think Russia is evil at all. I think they are highly unfortunate to gave a lying, delusional psychopath as president. That is very different.

Fine, I can accept that. But that also begs the question, was Putin a "lying, delusional psychopath" during the 15 years prior to Crimea? Or the 22 years prior to Ukraine? If so, why weren't sanctions imposed earlier? Why was he treated with respect by world leaders?

That entire narrative has changed in 2022, and it keep contradicting itself.

Do you really need to quote back your comments at the end of the last few posts?

Apparently so.

Of the two of us, I have twice now been presented with evidence that my statement was incorrect. Both times I have accepted the correction, stated that I was incorrect, and moved on. You have consistently ignored questions I have posed, and then asked what questions. You have ignored statements I have made and then pretended they were illogical, after ignoring the illogic I have pointed out in your narrative.

I think I have been quite civil. I do not agree with you, but that is not the definition of being civil.

TheRedneck

a reply to: MidnightWatcher

Does it not come down to a nasty and uncomfortable fact, that the people of the Donbas region would rather be Russian than western? Quite frankly I don't blame them because life under a Russian system at the moment guarantees pensions, subsidized heating, and a raft of other social reforms that the present western governments can't or won't provide. These things are necessities for a decent life and guarantee a stable society. This is really what the fight is all about and skirting this fight for hearts and minds will have massive ramifications on the western states this winter.
The bogey man of the old Soviet Union kept all these wannabee facio capitalist in check, along with red Unions which waved the red flag. Thatcher and Ragan wanted to blue chip all these essential services without an economic system that allowed the average worker to pay for them. Thus massive homelessness social misery and politicians resorting to con jobs to convince all is well, they can't admit it did not work and we will all pay a heavy price when the financial system finally collapses.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: ScepticScot

The sanctions are to reduce Russias ability to wage war, not realiation.

At the time the Nord Stream 2 was cancelled, Russia had not waged war. They were still on Russian soil. Who were they warring against? Themselves?

I don't understand because you haven't given a coherent answer.

There's no mental gymnastics involved. If I have two options for commerce and one is closed to me, that forces me to do business with the other.

Ultimatiums like threatening nuclear attacks? Again that is Russia.

the only thing I have heard Putin say about nuclear weapons is that they would become his only choice if NATO invades Russia. He has also stated every single time that he does not want that to become his only option.

The ultimatum I referred to was from you:

originally posted by: ScepticScot

The conflict stops when Putin withdraws.simple as that then we can have diplomacy.

The one parroting debunked naratives here is you. We know that Russia lied about its intentions for weeks yet you are still trying to paint it as a response (magically planned, supplied, and implemented in 2 days).

That has not been debunked. A military is generally prepared for every conceivable contingency. It does not take more than 2 days to give an order to carry out a contingency and implement it.

I don't think Russia is evil at all. I think they are highly unfortunate to gave a lying, delusional psychopath as president. That is very different.

Fine, I can accept that. But that also begs the question, was Putin a "lying, delusional psychopath" during the 15 years prior to Crimea? Or the 22 years prior to Ukraine? If so, why weren't sanctions imposed earlier? Why was he treated with respect by world leaders?

That entire narrative has changed in 2022, and it keep contradicting itself.

Do you really need to quote back your comments at the end of the last few posts?

Apparently so.

Of the two of us, I have twice now been presented with evidence that my statement was incorrect. Both times I have accepted the correction, stated that I was incorrect, and moved on. You have consistently ignored questions I have posed, and then asked what questions. You have ignored statements I have made and then pretended they were illogical, after ignoring the illogic I have pointed out in your narrative.

I think I have been quite civil. I do not agree with you, but that is not the definition of being civil.

TheRedneck

When you said I hadn't answered a question I showed you exactly where I had.

If there is any questions or points I have missed please show me and I will happily answer them.

You have made repeated childish insults about your invisible TV midget.

They are beneath you and add nothing to the conversation.

Sanctions have been in place for years. If anything Putins ontunyed actions suggest they should have been tougher earlier.

Militaries do not plan then move the troops armour and supplies for a major invasion 2 days . Putin lied. Repeatedly.

a reply to: anonentity

"Does it not come down to a nasty and uncomfortable fact, that the people of the Donbas region would rather be Russian than western"


It might, if russia hadn't invaded in 2014.

Now it doesn't matter at all, because there is no way to ask them what they want.

originally posted by: TheRedneck

At the time the Nord Stream 2 was cancelled, Russia had not waged war. They were still on Russian soil. Who were they warring against? Themselves?

Ukraine.

Since 2014.

Of the two of us, I have twice now been presented with evidence that my statement was incorrect. Both times I have accepted the correction, stated that I was incorrect, and moved on. You have consistently ignored questions I have posed, and then asked what questions. You have ignored statements I have made and then pretended they were illogical, after ignoring the illogic I have pointed out in your narrative.

I dare say, FAR more civil than anyone else even slightly leaning towards (or defending, explaining, or whatever the proper term is) russian words and actions.

a reply to: TheRedneck


Actually I am off to bed now so if there are any questions I missed it will be tomorrow at earliest.

Have a pleasant evening.

a reply to: TheRedneck


"Because there was no reason to apply sanctions until Russia actually invaded"


Correct, 2014.

Did any sanctions predate 2014?

a reply to: GAOTU789

They also invaded from Belarus towards Kiev. This just didn't happen from Russian soil. And the build up began in April of '21.

Belarus is closely allied with Russia, so it is reasonable to believe the troops were there at the pleasure of the Belarus government. The other possibility is that Russia forceably invaded Belarus prior to Ukraine, and that is a claim I have not heard made yet.

Again with the build-up. It was on Russian (and Belarian) soil. Russia has autonomy as a sovereign nation to move their troops wherever they wish on their own soil (or with permission on allies' soil). Until they crossed into Ukraine, they were not invading. The proper response would have been for Ukraine to take a defensive position with military on their side of the border, not to start slapping on sanctions prematurely.

This my surprise you, but I support Crimea, Dontesk and Luhansk's right to determine their future entirely. If it's organic and truly the will of the people.

No, it doesn't surprise me. I would be surprised if you stated anything else.

This isn't that.

This is where we diverge. I cannot make that statement. I do not know what the Crimean people want. I do know, if there were some major sentiment against Russia in Crimea, we should have heard about it in the last 8 years.

Unless the Crimean people make the claim that the referendum was improper, I see no reason to start a global conflict.

See, we didn't have France inside Quebec with military power influencing and forcing the decisions to happen, the people of Quebec got to chose for themselves. There wasn't American troops on the border waiting for the decisions to happen to invade and annex the new "free" Quebec. We didn't have the Russians lined up to help us defeat the worlds largest super power on our border, giving us weapons and materiel if we showed the will to fight. Cause that's what has basically happened with Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea.

I see the parallels and I understand your point. But I need to see more.

The narrative has shifted too much for me to simply accept. Yes, Putin is a little too quick to pull out the military; I agree with that. But then, every Russian I have ever personally known is quick-tempered... it seems to be just who they are as a culture. But this year, he has gone from being a dangerous man who should be handled with care to being some evil combination of Hitler and Stalin bent on global conquest. Now, which is it? Either Putin was already pure evil personified in 1999 when he was elected, or he is still just a bit quick-tempered.

Another inconsistency lies in the state of the Russian military. We are told every day that the Russians are impotent, being trounced at every turn by the Ukrainian military. But that military is made up in large part of untrained, forceably-conscripted men who were trying to flee the country! That says that Russia is not even a reasonable concern for any other country. But wait... Ukraine is also in dire trouble and their very survival depends on Western support and aid to fight the big, bad Russian bear! And at the same time, all these other countries are begging for admission into NATO out of fear of this impotent Russian army that can't seem to get out of their own way.

Which is it?

Hopefully you'll see why I am questioning everything about this conflict that appears in the Western media. Mr. Know-it-all No-pants has been pretty busy and he needs to get his story straight.

In another post you've made, you asked why nothing was done about Crimea and where were the sanctions back in '14. They did place sanctions on them but Merkel loved that Big Russian pipe a little too much and Germany being usually the highest GDP nation in the EU, they didn't push to hard.

So what changed this year? Germany is just as addicted to Russian fuels as they ever were; I am expecting this winter to see a lot of needless deaths from the cold. Why now? Why change the narrative, contradict the narrative, and escalate this conflict as much as possible now?

It does not pass the smell test for me. I think the whole idea was, is, and has been to trigger Putin into invading and then turn the world, including the Russian people themselves, against him. I know of only one reason doing so would be so damn important to the West: to put in a USA-friendly puppet that will reinstate the OPEC dollar-oil peg.

Is it not coincidental that there are protests going on across Iran?

This is another Arab Spring and this time Putin is the target. But this time it risks nuclear exchange and places the entire planet in jeopardy whether it works or not. If it doesn't, we end up with nuclear fireballs; if it does, there's bad, possibly worse, things on the horizon.

The only way this does not end in tragedy on a global scale is for diplomacy to be used... leave Putin in power and get him to withdraw from Ukraine. And it looks like that is becoming more impossible with each passing day.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck


"But that military is made up in large part of untrained, forceably-conscripted men who were trying to flee the country"



The conscripts have barely started to reach the battlefield, russia has been getting whooped for quite a while now.

The conscripts had nothing to do with russia's military catastrophe.

But they will certainly make the russian situation even worse.

a reply to: ScepticScot

When you said I hadn't answered a question I showed you exactly where I had.

I asked whose soil the Russian troops were on February 22, 2022. You answered they invaded on the 24th. Not once have you actually said, even now, that the Russian troops were on Russian soil on February 22, 2022. I accepted your half-hearted explanation, but you did NOT directly answer the question.

And now this attempt to twist the conversation into who insulted whom serves no purpose other than to change the topic.

You have made repeated childish insults about your invisible TV midget.

The media is not imaginary, nor is it invisible. You are stating the exact same narrative that the media is pushing. That is not an insult; it is an observation.

You may not like the way I present the media, but I consider it accurate.

Militaries do not plan then move the troops armour and supplies for a major invasion 2 days .

They can, and they have before. That is a lack of understanding about how the military operates.

Look up "contingency plan."

TheRedneck

a reply to: MidnightWatcher

Ukraine.

Since 2014.

If, on February 22, 2022, when Nord Stream 2 was cancelled, the Russian troops on the Russian side of the Ukrainian border were waging war with Ukrainian forces, then Ukraine had invaded Russia.

I do not think that is accurate. I think you misunderstood the point. Russia was not waging war against Ukraine when the Nord Stream 2 was cancelled. Russia switched from a show of strength to an invasion force two days later.

My biggest question now is, what, if anything, did Ukraine do to make attempts at diplomacy seem unachievable to Russia? they had dealt with the conflicts for so long, why now did they decide invasion was preferable? Did Putin just decide he had had enough, or did something else happen that we are not being told?

I dare say, FAR more civil than anyone else even slightly leaning towards (or defending, explaining, or whatever the proper term is) russian words and actions.

Thank you. I have no intention to antagonize or deceive... I only want to understand, but I cannot accept some of the contradictions being tossed around.

TheRedneck

a reply to: ScepticScot

Have a pleasant evening.

You as well.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: MidnightWatcher

Ukraine.

Since 2014.

If, on February 22, 2022, when Nord Stream 2 was cancelled, the Russian troops on the Russian side of the Ukrainian border were waging war with Ukrainian forces, then Ukraine had invaded Russia.

I do not think that is accurate. I think you misunderstood the point. Russia was not waging war against Ukraine when the Nord Stream 2 was cancelled. Russia switched from a show of strength to an invasion force two days later.

My biggest question now is, what, if anything, did Ukraine do to make attempts at diplomacy seem unachievable to Russia? they had dealt with the conflicts for so long, why now did they decide invasion was preferable? Did Putin just decide he had had enough, or did something else happen that we are not being told?

I dare say, FAR more civil than anyone else even slightly leaning towards (or defending, explaining, or whatever the proper term is) russian words and actions.

Thank you. I have no intention to antagonize or deceive... I only want to understand, but I cannot accept some of the contradictions being tossed around.

TheRedneck

If, on February 22, 2022, when Nord Stream 2 was cancelled, the Russian troops on the Russian side of the Ukrainian border were waging war with Ukrainian forces, then Ukraine had invaded Russia

The NS2 political battles weren't based on the 2022 invasion, they started LONG before then.

But I'm sure the fact that we were watching russia rapidly preparing for an even larger invasion played a large part in the West winning over the last few European holdouts.

My biggest question now is, what, if anything, did Ukraine do to make attempts at diplomacy seem unachievable to Russia? they had dealt with the conflicts for so long, why now did they decide invasion was preferable? Did Putin just decide he had had enough, or did something else happen that we are not being told?

I think putin saw an opportunity to do what he long wanted to do in Feb 21 and spent the next year preparing to do it.

There is 'some' evidence for this, but no 'proof'.




Elections have consequences.

Sometimes war consequences.