Oh dear
Where has this childish mentality come from that if you agree with an individual, organisation or government’s stance on one issue you must automatically agree with them on everything. 6th form debating gets thrown around a lot but this is a primary school mentality. It is possible to agree with a stance on Ukraine while disagreeing with the same person, organisation or government on their stance on Saudi Arabia.
You literally made up excuses earlier about nazis fighting for Ukraine ffs.You and your little band of followers don't seem to grasp the very basic concept of mutual exclusivity.
Using your pathetic thought process I can only assume that you supported the Nazi actions in Europe and their horrific war crimes.
You literally made up excuses earlier about nazis fighting for Ukraine ffs.
I agreed with something Pritti Patel said the other day.Exactly the point I'm making.
It's pathetic, and the argument of a child.
Exactly the point I'm making.
It's pathetic, and the argument of a child.
Isn’t the only countries strategy that counts here is Ukraines strategy of not bending to Russia? Any other countries strategy that matters is a response to Ukraines strategy.
Also Russia has always had the same strategy as the West. Disruption and interference. Maybe the US should make a fresh invasion of Cuba so we can see who calls for Cuba to concede more land and everyone who doesn’t agree has a blood lust. For the record I’ll be taking the stance that Cuba shouldn’t concede. I suspect that a few people who think Ukraine should concede will juxtapose position and agree with me. I guess it depends on who’s doing the invading and possibly in the US’s case who the president is. If Trump was in charge I can already hear the calls that America was provoked. Some people just love a wrong un. Trump and Putin are two cheeks of the same arse.
This is also an excellent article which everyone should read
It does also show that the US and the West thought sanctions would bring Russia to its knees (a real nonsense argument even if it worked - which it never would - as it ignores the impact of fairly recent history on destitution to the population) and once that failed it has to now attempt to keep this war going and somehow Westernise Russia by force once it owns Ukraine
What Is America’s Strategic Interest In Ukraine?
As the Ukraine war enters its twelfth month, the military situation remains a stalemate, but a stalemate that gives the political advantage to Russia. If Russia can hold most of the territory in the oblasts of Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson that it annexed on Sept. 30, 2022, it will...www.hoover.org
You don't help yourself.
That guy published a piece titled 'Why Russia Won't Invade Ukraine'
Three whole days later Russia invaded Ukraine.
No one on this forum has not said Ukraine are perfectly entitled to defend their country Tony no one has ever said otherwise
This article does mention someone who it seems has a diagnosis from a poster on here as being a crank but its a great read
Is America to Blame for Russia’s War in Ukraine?
No, but U.S. policy decisions might have caused it.nymag.com
Without Western intervention it would fall. If it falls then Putin has just annexed an enormous wedge of mainland Europe and taken a country off the map.No one on this forum has not said Ukraine are perfectly entitled to defend their country Tony no one has ever said otherwise
“For one thing, much of it rests on the presumption that Putin would have acquiesced to a genuinely neutral Ukraine as opposed to one that marched in lockstep with Russia’s interests. Given that Putin declared Ukraine an “inalienable part” of Russia’s “spiritual space” when justifying his invasion, it is not obvious that this is the case.”Did you even read it?
It shits on your guy Mearsheimer and says the exact opposite to what you're saying.
Classic.
Did you even read it?
It shits on your guy Mearsheimer and says the exact opposite to what you're saying.
Classic.
What is it about his report on Ukraine and the state of the war there that you disagree with?And convicted paedophiles?
‘Armchair general’ for not supporting Ukraine surrendering territory to achieve a temporary ceasefire? Got it.Also once again I will refer back which I did at the very start of this thread to the Wolfowitz doctrine and the Bush administration which founded US policy post Cold War - strange the armchair generals (they do appear to be in decline now) are not responding
‘Armchair general’ for not supporting Ukraine surrendering territory to achieve a temporary ceasefire? Got it.
The generals are the ones who want the death and destruction to carry on. Own it.
They want Russia’s military defeat. Ukraine was already persuaded to give up Crimea in 2014, a full scale invasion happened anyway just 8 years later.The generals are the ones who want the death and destruction to carry on. Own it.
By that logic you support Nazi Germany. Own that.
They want Russia’s military defeat. Ukraine was already persuaded to give up Crimea in 2014, a full scale invasion happened anyway just 8 years later.
There is zero reason to believe that Ukraine giving up more territory is going to result in a different outcome. Putin is on record as saying he doesn’t recognise Ukraine’s right to exist-a policy of appeasement will change nothing.
No it isn’t. We have already tried non intervention and persuading Ukraine to surrender territory. It changed nothing.But this is irrelevant
An anology that makes zero sense
No it isn’t. We have already tried non intervention and persuading Ukraine to surrender territory. It changed nothing.
Exactly. Well done, we got there in the end.
"With the death toll now at 51 people, 10% of the village's pre-war population were killed in one Russian attack"
That's absolutely tragic. Fuck sake.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?