335
Germany set to double Ukraine military aid
(www.reuters.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2023
335 points (98.3% liked)
World News
32306 readers
401 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
All of this justifies Russia attacking a sovereign country, alright. With most of the equipment and uniforms bearing Z, the modern swastika. In mission to provide living room and freedom to true russian people. By committing genocide.
Also, land mines. Ukraine accused of using land mines. Projections give us 700 years to remove mines in Ukraine. 700. Years. Placed by a country that did not sign the Ottawa Treaty.
Now. Tell me about them projections. Cannot wait.
Then call me names.
And then a troll.
Or do we do whataboutism again (see the links comment, adding for clarity) and then change subjects?
Which part of the script are we rehearsing?
First of all, Ukraine lost its sovereignty back in 2014 in a western sponsored right wing coup that overthrew the legitimate and democratically elected government of the country.
I also love how you just keep pushing this false narrative about the war when Stoltenberg already let the cat out of the bag. The war happened because of NATO expansion plain and simple. This is something the west continued to deny for over a year, but now it's right there in black and white:
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_218172.htm#:~:text=The%20background%20was%20that%20President,condition%20for%20not%20invade%20Ukraine
Also, if you want to see what an actual genocide looks like, then look no further than to what Israel is doing with Biden's blessing. That's a real genocide where Israel massacred more civilians in three weeks than died in war in Ukraine in nearly two years.
Maybe get yourself a better script.
What is Russia business in Ukraine's overthrowing their government?
How is talking Israel not changing subjects?
Try asking more intelligent questions so you don't make a clown of yourself in public next time.
I see this Stoltenberg quote confidently thrown out so often in defence of Russia's invasion. Do you think Russia has some kind of actual right to invade countries if NATO doesn't do what it says? Would you be defending Germany if it sent a similar letter to the CSTO and then invaded Serbia?
Of course it does. It's a superpower with a right to protect its citizens from the threats of the world's most aggressive military alliance, making threats to install nukes etc. Do you think the US would behave differently?
Hot take but if the USA invaded Mexico because the CSTO refused to stop accepting members then I would, in fact, think that that was bad actually
But that's not a singular scenario. If you want an analogy it would be Russia or China installing nukes on the US-Mexico border and constantly talking shit.
It's the direct comparison to the scenario Russia created when it sent that letter. It's literally just swapping:
But let's not pretend it would be any more just for America to kill hundreds of thousands of Mexicans over nukes stored there. The way America treated Cuba around the time of the missile crisis was basically this, and I would hope that we can agree America was not justified in that. As it is you're just defending warmongering behaviour because it's against a side that you don't like.
Nobody is saying it's justified. It's predictable, expected and a normal way for a superpower to behave. You don't climb into the lion cage and whine about justice when you're mauled. Russia, the USA, whichever is going to act in its interests and the interests of its security. The unjust part is on the aggressor, in this case the USA in Ukraine funding and arming Nazi extremists to threaten Russia for "its interests in the region" and killing hundreds of thousands because it's "cheap" and a "good deal" for them.
No world power will tolerate an aggressive military alliance on its borders. If you don't understand this basic fact, then what else is there to say to you. NATO has been invading and destroyed countries for decades since USSR fell. The principle of invading countries because might makes right is already established by NATO.
It's pretty funny that you bring up Serbia, given that what Russia is doing in Ukraine is directly modelled on what NATO did to Yugoslavia. NATO recognized independence of the separatist regions and then had them invite NATO to assist. This is precisely the formula Russia followed with DPR and LPR. Russia is just following the rules based world order here buddy.
Also worth noting that Pakistan and India were created by the British when they got kicked out as effectively a scorched earth policy. The British used this same strategy in the Middle East in order to create unstable political entities that would be at each others throats.
If it's a free for all, Germany and its friends can do what they want and send Ukraine as many weapons as they like, can't they? Why have you got a problem with it? Under your logic they're just doing what world powers do
Where did I say I had a problem with anything? The west chose to play a stupid game, and it's very clearly turning into a debacle. Evidently you still don't understand what's happening though.
Oh I'm sorry, I must have mistaken your comment backing up the accusation of modern Germany doing Nazi stuff to be criticism of Germany's actions.
Modern Germany is literally backing a genocide in Gaza right now, so yeah we can definitely criticize modern Germany for doing nazi stuff. Meanwhile, anybody who thinks that the same country that's aiding and abetting a literal genocide is also helping people of Ukraine really needs to get their head checked.
Okay so you do have a problem with it. So what the fuck was with the, "Where did I say I had a problem with anything?"
"Britain supplying the Soviet Union with thousands of aircraft and tanks to fight the Nazis during WW2 was bad because Britain had a colonial empire." No, these things don't affect one another. They can, in fact, be evaluated differently.
You just keep trying to put words in my mouth when I'm explaining basic facts to you. Must be a coping mechanism you've developed.
Don't say stupid shit if you don't want to be asked about why you said stupid shit. I haven't put a single word in your mouth.
You should really follow your own advice given that you're the only one saying stupid shit here. The reality is that the west is cynically using Ukraine to fight a proxy war with Russia. Anybody who keeps pretending that the west is helping Ukraine is a deplorable piece of human garbage.
You're the one posting stupid shit again and again. Russia shouldn't have invaded, period. No country in the EU longed for war with Russia. On the opposite Russian governments have a very long history of being absolutely paranoid, thus justyfing annexation and assimilation of countless territories and peoples for the sake of "feeling secure". It's absolutely ridiculous to fall for this shitty narrative that fits so well with the rest of dumb Russian propaganda.
Likewise there is no genocide in Gaza. If you're in support of a terrorist group using hospitals, kindergartens, mosques, etc. to hide, keep hostages and store explosives, I'm really wondering how wicked one can be. Maybe you're an antisemite?
It's pretty funny how you accuse me of posting stupid shit and then proceed to spew utter nonsense. Russia had no interest in invading Ukraine and was perfectly fine with the status quo, until the west overthrew the government in Ukraine. Then Russia tried to make Minsk work for 8 years while Ukraine and the west sabotaged it. Then finally, Russia gave NATO an ultimatum that NATO refused. There is overwhelming evidence now showing that aggressive NATO expansion was the reason for the war, and anybody who continues to spin this as anything else is deeply intellectually dishonest.
Meanwhile, a top UN official recently resigned calling what's happening in Gaza a genocide, and the fact that you rush in to white wash that really tells us what an utter deplorable piece of human garbage you truly are.
Russia had already acted in bad faith and abandoned it's contractual obligations with regard to giving security guarantees (!) to Ukraine in exchange for Ukraine giving up the nuclear weapons on their soil after the fall of the soviet union. The Minsk negotiations took place AFTER Russia illegally annexed the Krim and moved troops into the Donbass to stage an insurrection.
Now you could say that some Western nations also didn't honor their obligation to guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty. But doing so would've meant open war with Russia so it's partly understandable why they acted this way. And at least the West didn't outright invade the country the pledged to protect like Russia did. It's indefensible and you white washing these rogue and terrorist acts just shows what an utter deplorable piece of human garbage you truly are (did I word this correctly?)
An UN official having an opinion doesn't make any claim about genocide in Gaza a fact btw.
Ukraine or the west never bothered to actually implement Minsk, and this is what even CNN was openly reporting was happening in 2014. Also, Ukraine never had nuclear weapons to give up, because these were Soviet nuclear weapons and Russia was officially recognized as the inheritor state to the Soviet Union.
NATO and its individual members have been doing nothing but invading countries since USSR fell. Yugoslavia, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria are just a few examples. In fact, US currently illegally occupies a larger portion of Syria than Russia is occupying of Ukraine. You're either an utter ignoramus or a liar.
That's just one example of the expert and global consensus on the subject. The fact that you keep trying to paint it as anything else says everything we need to know about you.
Nevertheless Ukraine had physical control over these nuclear weapons although it couldn't have launched them. Ukraine also had claims to the black sea fleet and gave up on both in the years before the Budapest memorandum in which the above-mentioned security guarantees where given. In hindsight that was probably a mistake and the west should have used Russia's weakness to break Crimea and the black sea fleet out of Russia's hands for good to avoid future conflict and cripple Russia's geopolitical ambitions which where always fueled by paranoia. But you can't be that paranoid about losing sth. that you don't have anymore.
Russia can't be trusted to adhere to the contracts they sign. They will even invade and terrorise a country they themselves called "brothers" for a long time. It's utterly shameful and all you have to say about this is "bUt nAtO DiD bAd tHiNgS!!1".
That's a self-contradictory statement. The weapons were located on the territory of Ukraine, but Ukraine never had any legal possession of the weapons or the launch codes.
More false narrative here. The conflict is a direct result of NATO expansion, as Stoltenberg himself admitted. This has nothing to do with Russia's geopolitical ambitions, and it's obviously not paranoia when it's openly admitted. Stop lying.
Seems like plenty of countries have no problems making contracts with Russia. All the problems are invariably in relation to NATO and the west. It's pretty clear that NATO who promised not to move one inch east and then broke that promise consistently for decades is the party that can't be trusted.
I love how all you do here is just regurgitate nonsense you've memorized, but we now have ample evidence that all of these talking points are completely false. Either you're lying intentionally here or you're just a useful idiot for the empire.
It's not contradictory but thanks for repeating my sentence with different wording.
Sovereign countries can choose their alliances freely. Of course it's Russian paranoia to be fearful of the NATO expansion. NATO would not start WW3 by invading Russia. And NATO expansion is the direct consequence of Russian imperialism. Russia's neighbors are afraid of Russia which has proven time and time again that it can and will use military force to subjugate it's neighbors. We've seen it under the reign of the Tsar. We've seen it during soviet times and we've seen it in modern Russia with Chechenia, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine... You have to be willingly blind to overlook all these cases of military aggression out of paranoia and megalomania. Do you think the largest country on earth was created by peaceful negotiations and hugs? It's absolutely ridiculous.
Your "ample evidence" is fabricated by the spin doctors in Moscow. Congratulations for drinking up that propaganda so willingly.
Absolutely is, using your galaxy brain logic every country occupied by US and hosting US bases owns them too right?
It's true, unfortunately for the countries that fall under US control, their sovereignty goes out of the window. And in extreme cases such as Ukraine, US even overthrows their governments to put in compliant puppet regimes.
NATO has a demonstrated record of invading countries and has an openly hostile stance towards Russia. The fact that you keep calling this paranoia continues to expose your intellectual dishonesty.
See, there you go ignoring reality of NATO again because it doesn't fit into your propaganda narrative.
One problem with this narrative of yours is that the problem only seems to occur in countries that have been politically captured by US. All of Russia's eastern neighbours seem to be getting along with Russia just fine.
You have to be either a liar or an ignoramus to frame these cases the way you did.
Ah yes, spin doctors in Moscow such as Jens Stoltenberg and Loyd Austin. 🤡
There's very little point continuing this discussion since all you're capable of doing is regurgitating the script you've memorized.
Bye.