- Joined
- 23 Feb 22
- Moves
- 1798
01 May 22
@no1marauder saidRight about last month I'd say.
He has? When exactly?
Do you listen to the news much?
01 May 22
@jj-adams saidI must have missed it.
Right about last month I'd say.
Do you listen to the news much?
Maybe you could provide an article directly quoting Putin saying he intended to "gobble up" Eastern Europe and "maybe more".
Thanks in advance.
- Joined
- 23 Feb 22
- Moves
- 1798
01 May 22
@no1marauder saidGee Whiz, he's been "gobbling up" Eastern Europe (Ukraine) for the last couple of months, with a few more take-overs of territory going back a couple years... tiny little concessions, etc.
I must have missed it.
Maybe you could provide an article directly quoting Putin saying he intended to "gobble up" Eastern Europe and "maybe more".
Thanks in advance.
But maybe this last gigantic land grab will be all he wants?
I'll trust to your judgement.
Trust a commie, you will pay the price.
01 May 22
@no1marauder saidThis is from FOX News so hopefully the conservatives and nay sayers will read and listen.
I must have missed it.
Maybe you could provide an article directly quoting Putin saying he intended to "gobble up" Eastern Europe and "maybe more".
Thanks in advance.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/putin-soviet-union-next-move
01 May 22
@phranny saidI don't find Fox News opinion pieces to be conclusive evidence.
This is from FOX News so hopefully the conservatives and nay sayers will read and listen.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/putin-soviet-union-next-move
Sorry.
01 May 22
@jj-adams saidAnd happy May Day to you.
Gee Whiz, he's been "gobbling up" Eastern Europe (Ukraine) for the last couple of months, with a few more take-overs of territory going back a couple years... tiny little concessions, etc.
But maybe this last gigantic land grab will be all he wants?
I'll trust to your judgement.
Trust a commie, you will pay the price.
You still haven't provided any evidence that Putin is hellbent on conquest of at least Eastern Europe and probably this and whatever other planets are available.
01 May 22
1 edit
@no1marauder saidI've agreed with you before that there are records showing that NATO agreed to cease eastward expansion. So I shouldn't have posted that link regarding Gorbachev's statement.
We've went all through this.
Russia agreed to accept the territorial integrity of the Ukraine even though it contained large areas with Russian majorities comprising about a 1/3 or more of that administrative subdivision of the USSR. In return, the Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons (which it did not have operational control of)and declared that it would not join any ...[text shortened]... u/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early
But regarding Ukraine's constitution, it should no longer be used as a point by you: "they violated their own constitution". While it's true that the provision for remaining neutral was made with Russia's requirement mind to not expand NATO, there are multiple, very clear provisions allowing the citizens to make that final call.
If you want to continue saying that Russia was wronged in have the assurances regarding NATO and Russia's former states, fine; you're correct. But citing their *constitution* should no longer be a point of yours, since the citizens, as you well know, overwhelmingly supported European integration, including joining NATO.
Do we at least agree on that?
01 May 22
@vivify saidSo what? Are you implying that other countries should never trust the foreign policy promises of democracies?
I've agreed with you before that there are records showing that NATO agreed to cease eastward expansion. So I shouldn't have posted that link regarding Gorbachev's statement.
But regarding Ukraine's constitution, it should no longer be used as a point by you: "they violated their own constitution". While it's true that the provision for remaining neutral was made with R ...[text shortened]... rwhelmingly supported European integration, including joining NATO.
Do we at least agree on that?
Actually, Ukraine made such promises BEFORE its Constitution (see the last paragraph of section IX of the Declaration of State
Sovereignty of Ukraine https://www.usubc.org/site/recent-news/road-to-independence--declaration-of-state-sovereignty-of-ukraine-on-july-16--1990), so if you want me to concede I shouldn't just rely on its Constitution, fair point. But the reality is that the Ukraine committed to be a neutral State and then went back on that commitment after Russia had relied on it to its detriment.
- Joined
- 23 Feb 22
- Moves
- 1798
01 May 22
1 edit
@no1marauder saidOh my god look at a map.
And happy May Day to you.
You still haven't provided any evidence that Putin is hellbent on conquest of at least Eastern Europe and probably this and whatever other planets are available.
The Ukraine IS most of "Eastern Europe".
You're like a bystander watching some guy chase after a woman with a butcher knife and saying "derhhh...you can't prove he is trying to hurt her".
01 May 22
3 edits
@no1marauder saidYes. Words like "violated its own constitution" are loaded. That's not quite the case, since Ukraine's constitution explicitly gives the people the right to decide on such matters as the final authority.
if you want me to concede I shouldn't just rely on its Constitution
But the reality is that the Ukraine committed to be a neutral State and then went back on that commitment after Russia had relied on it to its detriment.
I completely agree. Still; should that agreement be in perpetuity? I guess that's a question for another day. The point remains that Ukraine went back on its agreement.
01 May 22
@phranny saidI'm sure it thrills your communist heart, phranny
This is from FOX News so hopefully the conservatives and nay sayers will read and listen.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/putin-soviet-union-next-move
01 May 22
@vivify saidIF the People of Ukraine want to change an agreement with a foreign country, then they should accept that they'll probably have to lose some of the benefits that agreement gave them.
Yes. Words like "violated its own constitution" are loaded. That's not quite the case, since Ukraine's constitution explicitly gives the people the right to decide on such matters as the final authority.
But the reality is that the Ukraine committed to be a neutral State and then went back on that commitment after Russia had relied on it to its detriment.
I co ...[text shortened]... guess that's a question for another day. The point remains that Ukraine went back on its agreement.
In this case, they have been unwilling to do so.
01 May 22
@jj-adams saidNATO has shown itself to be an aggressive military alliance quite willing to overthrow regimes and attack nations to change their territorial status all in the name of the neocon goal of Western world domination.
That was not an act of aggression.
You need better critical thinking skills.
Having countries in NATO and/or NATO committing to accept such countries in the alliance on your border, after Western leaders explicitly promised this wouldn't happen, is an act of aggression.
It doesn't justify Russia's invasion of the Ukraine, but it does make this a bit more complicated then the "Putin is trying to conquer the world" narrative being ceaselessly spewed.