|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
posted October 15, 2023 10:55 AM |
|
|
It's exactly the opposite, all Putin speeches before, during and after February 2022 are about protecting the Donbass.
When those drones attacked Odessa?
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 11:09 AM |
|
|
Salamandre said:
It's exactly the opposite, all Putin speeches before, during and after February 2022 are about protecting the Donbass.
What is "exactly the opposite"?
You are putting an awful lot of attention to casus belli itself and not to what transpired afterwards. What Russians claim are their reasons (and, by extension, goals) and what Russians do afterwards are not compatible at all, therefore, what Russians say is BS.
If it has been about "protecting Donbass", there would be no need to:
- shell Ukrainian cities, targeting civilian infrastructure in particular, especially not cities hundreds of kilometers away from the Donbass region
- commit countless atrocities against civilians and hostages (there's so much gut-wrenching footage of those atrocities that you'd have to be mad to deny it happened - those animals even filmed and shared their war crimes themselves - for example, remember the castration video? What, that was PROTECTING DONBASS? does Ochur-Suge Mongush deserve a medal for denazifiaction, or something?
- organize and maintaing torture halls in occupied cities (what, is that protecting Donbass as well?)
- Repeatedly claim that Ukraine has no right to exist and Ukrainians are not a nation
- Commit countless acts of terror, such as blowing up Nova Khakhovka Dam and flooding the neighboring territories
- Abduct countless Ukrainian children (by Lvova-Belova's own claim, over 700 000), to such extent that ICC issues arrest warrants against her
Defending Donbass, man. Don't even make me laugh.
Everything above just screams full-scale war aimed at total control over Ukraine.
What they do shows what they really want/plan. What they say is irrelevant if it doesn't match the actions. And clearly it does not.
Not to mention you are wrong:
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/66181
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/67828
You see, I try to mostly quote Putin himself so you can't repeat the "they are twisting his words!" Russian propaganda to deny the facts.
Salamandre said:
And when was that? Check the timeline.
What does this have to do with anything? Russians fired dumb/imprecise munitions (including thermobaric weaponry and white phosphorus) over densly populated areas far away from Donbass, killing civilians and destroying civilain infrastructure. This is a war crime and there is nothing to discuss here.
How the **** did THAT contribute to "protecting the minorities in Donbass", huh?
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 11:38 AM |
|
|
Well, first they not fired drones in the early stage, but starting with September 2022, so that was a lie. Or let's say you misread the sources.
Then from your article, which probably you misread again :
The anti-Russia project has been rejected by millions of Ukrainians. The people of Crimea and residents of Sevastopol made their historic choice. And people in the southeast peacefully tried to defend their stance. Yet, all of them, including children, were labeled as separatists and terrorists. They were threatened with ethnic cleansing and the use of military force. And the residents of Donetsk and Lugansk took up arms to defend their home, their language and their lives. Were they left any other choice after the riots that swept through the cities of Ukraine, after the horror and tragedy of 2 May 2014 in Odessa where Ukrainian neo-Nazis burned people alive making a new Khatyn out of it? The same massacre was ready to be carried out by the followers of Bandera in Crimea, Sevastopol, Donetsk and Lugansk. Even now they do not abandon such plans. They are biding their time. But their time will not come.
The coup d'état and the subsequent actions of the Kiev authorities inevitably provoked confrontation and civil war. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights estimates that the total number of victims in the conflict in Donbas has exceeded 13,000. Among them are the elderly and children. These are terrible, irreparable losses.
Russia has done everything to stop fratricide. The Minsk agreements aimed at a peaceful settlement of the conflict in Donbas have been concluded. I am convinced that they still have no alternative. In any case, no one has withdrawn their signatures from the Minsk Package of Measures or from the relevant statements by the leaders of the Normandy format countries. No one has initiated a review of the United Nations Security Council resolution of 17 February 2015.
During official negotiations, especially after being reined in by Western partners, Ukraine's representatives regularly declare their ”full adherence“ to the Minsk agreements, but are in fact guided by a position of ”unacceptability“. They do not intend to seriously discuss either the special status of Donbas or safeguards for the people living there. They prefer to exploit the image of the ”victim of external aggression“ and peddle Russophobia. They arrange bloody provocations in Donbas. In short, they attract the attention of external patrons and masters by all means.
And it goes like that 4 more paragraphs.
So, is hard to claim "it has nothing with Donbass protection". Of course, if what russians say is irrelevant to you - because har har propagaaanda, then nothing can be done, let's just nuke them and burn their kids. To make Doomforge happy.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 12:39 PM |
|
|
You are turning in circles.
The undiputable fact is that Russia had no business on the territory of the Ukraine. And had signed a treaty to be one of the powers guaranteeing the territorial integrity of the Ukraine when they handed over their nuclear weapons.
That's it.
|
|
Ben80
Famous Hero
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 02:19 PM |
|
Edited by Ben80 at 14:32, 15 Oct 2023.
|
JollyJoker said:
You are turning in circles.
The undiputable fact is that Russia had no business on the territory of the Ukraine. And had signed a treaty to be one of the powers guaranteeing the territorial integrity of the Ukraine when they handed over their nuclear weapons.
That's it.
Now everyone can do anything, including invading other countries. The US has completely destroyed international law over the past 30 years. Now, if the United States says something, no one believes it. "Don't listen to what I say, but watch what I do".
Now it is not even necessary to have a reason for an attack - you can simply attack preventively, due to distrust of another country. By the way, American doctrines almost always have possibility of a preventive attack - simply because the United States is afraid of something. No contracts or guarantees work - only force works. And all this is because of the USA.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 02:54 PM |
|
|
Salamandre said:
Well, first they not fired drones in the early stage, but starting with September 2022, so that was a lie. Or let's say you misread the sources.
I have never even given a time context to this because it is entirely irrelevant. What matters is - they did it. It's you who started this weird discussion about chronology.
So no, I never "misread" anything - I simply never mentioned it because it has nothing to do with the facts I'm trying to underline. And those facts are: Russians used Shahed-136 drones to attack Ukrainian civilain infrastructure. End of fact. Whether it happened in February 2022 or September 2023 has zero relevance.
Pootin Swollen Botox Lord said:
The people of Crimea and residents of Sevastopol made their historic choice.
We've been over this before, Sal. People of Crimea cannot make a valid choice in an unconstitutional referendum. Just like Silesia or Catalonia cannot "vote to leave" Poland and Spain, respectively.
Next, whatever the so called "Neo Nazis" did is an internal, Ukrainian issue. Refer to my previost posts.
Salamandre said:
And it goes like that 4 more paragraphs.
It can go for 40 paragraphs. Let me state the facts for you for the 10000th time:
1. Ukraine is not Russia
2. Russia has no jurisdiction over Ukraine
3. Russia cannot organize referendums on Ukrainian territory
4. Ukraine is a sovereign country that solves its internal issues in whatever way it decides valid
5. Russian soldiers have no business being in Ukraine and doing whatever they are doing in Ukraine
Salamandre said:
So, is hard to claim "it has nothing with Donbass protection". Of course, if what russians say is irrelevant to you - because har har propagaaanda, then nothing can be done, let's just nuke them and burn their kids. To make Doomforge happy.
Now you're just putting words in my mouth. Please refrain from posting nonsense about nuking anyone and burning kids and relating it even remotely to me, that's a rather disgusting lie.
Let me rephrase for the 1000th time:
You are obsessed over casus belli that is largely irrelevant because of what the Russians actually did.
They spoke about Donbas and then did things I mentioned in previous post which have absolutely nothing to do with Donbas and don't benefit Donbas in any single way. However, they do cause civilian suffering at parts of Ukraine that are entirely unrelated to Donbass, and there isn't a single way to explain or validate countless Russian terror acts/atrocities, not even "they were a collateral in a greater scheme of things" (which would be a strawman, but let's pretend otherwise for the sake of argument) - and that's because bombing Odessa has absolutely ZERO strategic, tactical or political value from the point of "let's liberate Donbas" point of view.
Thus, we can establish that it was never "just Donbass", that it was meant to be a regular landgrabber from the very beginning, and whatever Pootin said was simply meaningless.
Ben80 said:
T. Now, if the United States says something, no one believes it.
Comrade, we've already established that your "but the US" "but NATO" "but Israel" whataboutism isn't going to work as an argument here. We're not on pikabu.ru.
Russia invaded Ukraine. That's it. There's no amount of "but the united states" whataboutism that can justify it.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
Ben80
Famous Hero
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 03:02 PM |
|
Edited by Ben80 at 15:02, 15 Oct 2023.
|
Doomforge said:
Comrade, we've already established that your "but the US" "but NATO" "but Israel" whataboutism isn't going to work as an argument here. We're not on pikabu.ru.
You have established, you live in your own made-up world along with all your whataboutisms and other violations of logical thinking and neurology.
Normal people prefer to live in the real world. They look to see whether there is international law or not. If it exists, then you can’t invade; if it doesn’t, then you can. In order to understand whether it exists or not, you must look at what is happening in reality. But in reality, we see that the United States, Israel and NATO behave as if there is no international law. We draw conclusions: there is no international law.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 03:37 PM |
|
|
Ben80 said:
You have established, you live in your own made-up world along with all your whataboutisms and other violations of logical thinking and neurology.
Comrade, ad personam is also not an argument.
Ben80 said:
Normal people prefer to live in the real world. They look to see whether there is international law or not. If it exists, then you can’t invade; if it doesn’t, then you can. In order to understand whether it exists or not, you must look at what is happening in reality. But in reality, we see that the United States, Israel and NATO behave as if there is no international law. We draw conclusions: there is no international law.
Lol.
There never WAS an international law that says a country cannot invade another country. So what the hell are you on about?
Countries don't attack other countries because after WW2, especially in Europe, we actually believe that working with each other and diplomacy is the way.
Then there's Russia, who still believes that swarming neighbours in T-72s is the valid way of expressing diplomatic doubts. Kek.
And your answer is "but the USA did it too". Sigh. Yeah, the USA did it too. Doesn't mean you have to do it as well.
If you see someone on the street stealing, it doesn't give you a moral excuse to start stealing yourself.
This is why your whataboutism makes absolutely no sense.
Whatever USA did doesn't give you any right to bring hell upon civilians and ruin their lives.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 03:44 PM |
|
|
The idea that any country, never mind the location, can decide wherever to arm itself or let anyone install military bases upon agreement is nonsense. It doesn't exist, it never existed, will never exist and if by stupidity or on purpose such thing happens, it will always trigger a war. There is reality then there is Disney land.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
Ben80
Famous Hero
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 03:49 PM |
|
|
Doomforge said:
Lol.
There never WAS an international law that says a country cannot invade another country. So what the hell are you on about?
You attribute to others what they did not say. I'm talking about whether there is such a thing as international law at all, and if there is, then to what extent its real jurisdiction extends. From what we see, this right does not exist, and here you are arguing that this right prohibits something.
Even if we assume that this right exists, and according to it, Russia must be condemned and punished. Okay, then let's do that. But we will also condemn and punish other countries that violated this right. What does whataboutism have to do with it ? If one person was accused of something and punished - can't we do it to other people who deserve it? Do you understand the absurdity of your reasoning?
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 03:49 PM |
|
|
Salamandre said:
The idea that any country, never mind the location, can decide wherever to arm itself or let anyone install military bases upon agreement is nonsense.
Lol, what?
Who's there to say what we can and cannot do? Putin?
Who gave him the right to decide what's good or bad for countries that aren't under his jurisdiction?
Are you actually trying to form an argument that it is morally OK for a stronger country to beat weaker country into submission?
So if we meet in person and I break your jaw and take your wallet, you'll too accept this as my biological right? 
Or perhaps you'll see this as injust, unfair, and call the police?
Salamandre said:
It doesn't exist, it never existed, will never exist and if by stupidity or on purpose such thing happens, it will always trigger a war. There is reality then there is Disney land.
Sure, let's collectively disarm our countries so Pootin can just capture everything without firing a bullet.
Great idea. Totally worked in 1938, too, right?
Ben80 said:
Even if we assume that this right exists, and according to it, Russia must be condemned and punished.
All Russia needs to do is to leave other countries alone and focus on their own well being. Nobody will ever dare to attack a nuclear power. You're safe.
I am not going to discuss your punishment idea because I've never mentioned it. Thus, I do not agree with your "absurdity" claim, since this is not my reasoning at all.
Withdraw, end the war, sign peace, move on.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
Galaad
Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 03:58 PM |
|
|
Doomforge said:
[Sigh. Yeah, the USA did it too. Doesn't mean you have to do it as well.
Absolutely, but it sure does make us look silly when we start lecturing them. "Hey, you cannot do atrocities like we do, you monsters!".
____________
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 04:04 PM |
|
|
Galaad said:
Absolutely, but it sure does make us look silly when we start lecturing them. "Hey, you cannot do atrocities like we do, you monsters!".
I'm not sure about this.
The US commited many atrocities. So did Nazi Germany, or Soviet Union. That is a fact. Not for debate.
It is, however, history. We can't keep going back to Atilla the Hun. We need to evolve, as society, and I think that WW2 has massively changed Europe for the better.
All atrocities should be condemned, and politicians shouldn't have that kind of power. No matter what nationality they are.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
Ben80
Famous Hero
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 04:22 PM |
|
|
Doomforge said:
It is, however, history. We can't keep going back to Atilla the Hun. We need to evolve, as society, and I think that WW2 has massively changed Europe for the better.
We will not be able to move forward as long as there are US military bases around the world - we have seen many times that these bases pose a threat to other countries, violating their sovereignty. Salamander often talks about these bases - he is right.
The war in Ukraine was preceded by proposal from Russia to NATO to remove American bases from Eastern Europe. This is not whataboutism, not a justification for the war in Ukraine - this is simply addition to the thesis that as long as there are many American military bases in the world, there will not be a normal world based on international laws and normal development.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 05:30 PM |
|
|
Ben80 said:
We will not be able to move forward as long as there are US military bases around the world - we have seen many times that these bases pose a threat to other countries, violating their sovereignty. Salamander often talks about these bases - he is right.
Is he, though?
The American bases were actually welcome in the countries you mentioned. So I don't get the sovereignty part. NATO didn't invade Poland to put NATO bases here. We asked for them. It was our sovereign decision to join the pact.
That is, unfortunately, because most Russian neighbours are afraid of Russia. Unfortunately, Russia did everything to prove that you really need NATO to be relatively safe from invasion.
We literally have no choice. Russian military is too strong to stop on our own, and Russia keeps making threats.
With the invasion, nobody will trust Russia for decades.
Ben80 said:
The war in Ukraine was preceded by proposal from Russia to NATO to remove American bases from Eastern Europe. This is not whataboutism, not a justification for the war in Ukraine - this is simply addition to the thesis that as long as there are many American military bases in the world, there will not be a normal world based on international laws and normal development.
A proposal would call for joint reduction of arms. Which Russia didn't do. That was an ultimatum. "Go away, or we invade Ukraine". It also included other countries, like a demand to withdraw NATO forces/bases from Poland.
That being said, I am curious whether you actually believe that NATO's presence in Ukraine is a threat, and why.
Russia is several magnitudes behind NATO when it comes to army strength (numbers and quality), and cannot even dream to rival the combined economy of NATO. Not to mention that NATO literally surrounds Russia from all sides.
It is pretty obvious that Russia wouldn't have the slightest chance to win a conventional war. That's why Russia's defense doctrine assumes going nuclear right away. Which is reasonable as a deterrent.
Both sides agree that there would be no victor in nuclear war, should it ever occur (except Miedwiediew, but he's drunk most of the time it seems - his warmongering seems pretty damn deranged).
So, what's the risk here?
Russia already cannot win a conventional war. That's pretty much obvious.
Russia has a GDP slightly higher than Italy, 3x less than Germany and over 10x less than United States. The combined NATO GDP dwarfs over Russia. The combined manpower and industry potential of NATO is significantly higher.
What will some bases in Ukraine change, exactly?
Eventual conflict would go nuclear quickly, because Russia is otherwise bound to lose - and that's essentially game over to United States, so they would never dare to.
So what exactly is the danger Putin is rambling about?
To me, the only "danger" here is loss of control zones.
But control zones are from 1980, when the Soviet Union, a country a magnitude stronger than its successor, played cold war with US.
Control zones lost meaning after Soviet Union collapse.
Putin is living in some sort of nostalgia trip. He's defending something that no longer has relevance or meaning.
This is reflected in his article (linked above).
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 05:33 PM |
|
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 05:37 PM |
|
|
Let's repeat this, because some people don't seem to get it:
Budapest Memorandum
"According to the three memoranda,[Russia, the US and the UK confirmed their recognition of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine becoming parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and effectively removing all Soviet nuclear weapons from their soil, and that they agreed to the following:
Respect the signatory's independence and sovereignty in the existing borders (in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act).
Refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of the signatories to the memorandum, and undertake that none of their weapons will ever be used against these countries, except in cases of self-defense or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
Which means, in 2014 Russia broke that treaty, although they had guaranteed the sovereignty and independence in the existing borders.
So the point here isn't so much that Russia did something they had no right to do, they also did it, although they signed a treaty pledging not to.
Which means, treaties signed by Russia are worth crap and that makes it so much more problematic - how could you trust a peace treaty when they don't honor the treaties they sign?
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 05:40 PM |
|
|
Also, Russian diplomats kept lying through their teeth till the very last day.
https://www.npr.org/2022/01/10/1071766987/u-s-russia-dicuss-ukraine-can-diplomacy-help-avoid-a-military-confrontation
"Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov emerged from the nearly eight hours of talks and declared, "There are no plans or intentions to attack Ukraine." He went on to say, "There is no reason to fear some kind of escalatory scenario.""
And all they could offer afterwards was some stupid wordplay. "This isn't a war, it's a special military operation" or "we didn't invade, we denazify".
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
Ghost
Undefeatable Hero
Therefore I am
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 05:41 PM |
|
|
Save your Doomforge.. But you are Doomforce.. Remember you can't talk to a believer in propaganda! The same Christians. Forget them. Laugh in secret! It's benefit than Doomforce.. Ok 
|
|
Ben80
Famous Hero
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 06:24 PM |
|
Edited by Ben80 at 18:28, 15 Oct 2023.
|
Doomforge said:
A proposal would call for joint reduction of arms. Which Russia didn't do. That was an ultimatum. "Go away, or we invade Ukraine". It also included other countries, like a demand to withdraw NATO forces/bases from Poland.
Concessions from Russia have already been made - in the late 80s it withdrew its troops from Eastern Europe. It was the Western side's turn to demilitarize Europe. Therefore, Russia’s latest proposal in 2021 is a reminder of the agreement to demilitarize Europe.
I readily believe that Poland and the Baltic states voluntarily and without any pressure decided to host military bases (but this does not mean that in all other countries US military bases are now welcome guests for the respective peoples (namely the peoples, and not the corrupt or intimidated authorities of these countries)). Poland and Baltic states were sure that it would be beneficial to have allied relations with the only remaining hegemon in the world (the USA). Time will tell how justified this will be in the coming years. I would say that the United States is like a wooden idol that has completely deteriorated before our eyes. And he may well bury those who linked their fate with him.
JollyJoker said:
Budapest Memorandum
Enough with the jesuitism.
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
