War in Ukraine

How is them not being under Russias thumb a violation of the Budapest Memorendum? That was the agreement the borders of Ukraine were guarenteed by Russia as long as they gave up the nukes they had and no new nukes were placed there.

Not sure when the last Ukrainian nuke left but there havent been any new ones show up in those 39 years, so yet again you are pulling stuff from the air.

Remain neutral and no expansion of nato which is what they had been trying to do for 20 years. You admitted they were not going to be under their thumb, for them to live within the agreement means they would have to live under the thumb.

You're not making any sense.
 
First off, I’m not Russian so I don’t live in a hole. Second, kadyrov is scum. The fact that you believe he has any shred of credibility or honesty is hilarious.
Kadyrov has far more credibility that 3elensky, Biden or the majority of other Western clowns. That's more of an indictment of The West than it is of Kadyrov.

You can't name one Western leader outside of Orban that has any credibility.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DonjoVol
But it’s ok if Putin tramples on Ukraine’s front lawn because your neighbor’s dog took a big **** in your wife’s geraniums.
You compare 14k-15k dead over 8 years in Donbas as a dog in your neighbor's lawn?

You compare a military alliance arming and training troops in a neighboring country as a dog in your neighbor's lawn?
 
Germany Weighs Nationalizing Uniper To Avert 'Lehman-Like Contagion' As Energy Crisis Worsens



For everyone that hates the old USSR 1980s model, sure seems like Europe is hell bent on getting there. :D Someone should tell them they haven't even entered the bad times, supply still exists. None of this is addressing their problems with is going to be supply long-term.

Germans better start clearing out those caves.

Replay of 1930-1945 on deck? Mass depopulation of Europe while the UK and the United States try and benefit.
And Russia. Let's not forget what they were doing at that same time. They were the only one of the three that actually expanded their borders in that time. You know by attacking a neighbor that used to be part of them, taking some border regions with a historically large, but not majority, Russian ethnicity. Sound familiar?
 
And Russia. Let's not forget what they were doing at that same time. They were the only one of the three that actually expanded their borders in that time. You know by attacking a neighbor that used to be part of them, taking some border regions with a historically large, but not majority, Russian ethnicity. Sound familiar?

Well, that can be a point of view, I don't necessarily see it that way but that is kind of immaterial.

Let'em fight it out.

Let the Ukrainians fight to the last one, that is really the goal here anyway.
 
"The Ukrainian people do not exist..."

"When Ukraine became part of Russia...." without blinking.

"Let's further reduce our military command infrastructure by putting their heads on Putin's desk"

These guys have to be a spoof.

Sounds like they too have over the top pundits who want to make outrageous statements just to grab headlines.
 
But it’s ok if Putin tramples on Ukraine’s front lawn because your neighbor’s dog took a big **** in your wife’s geraniums.
In your analogy, who would be the Israelis and who would be the Palestinians? Would Israel by Putin or the neighbor?
 
Kadyrov has far more credibility that 3elensky, Biden or the majority of other Western clowns. That's more of an indictment of The West than it is of Kadyrov.

You can't name one Western leader outside of Orban that has any credibility.

Kadyrov, the guy who has committed such acts as illegally detaining and executing people, ordered people to be sodomized before being beaten to death or executed, gets off on torturing people with blow torches and the like, that’s who you clearly have some sort of admiration or affinity for. Yeah, I’m sure that piece of sh** is a real honest, stand up guy. No bullsh** propaganda speak from a puppet like him .
 
Remain neutral and no expansion of nato which is what they had been trying to do for 20 years. You admitted they were not going to be under their thumb, for them to live within the agreement means they would have to live under the thumb.

You're not making any sense.
No, you arent making any sense.

1. The Budapest Memorendum doesnt cover NATOs expansion. Doesnt mention NATO at all.
2. Being a puppet under someone's thumb is not being neutral. You even claim as much with the US controlling NATO. Ukraine being under Russia's thumb would violate their neutrality.
3. The agreement was for Ukraine not to have any nukes in it. No nukes have even been whispered to be coming back to Ukraine except for the Russians dropping them.

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. The US-Russia-Ukraine Trilateral Statement and Annex | Arms Control, Deterrence and Nuclear Proliferation | Historical Documents
 
There's a better chance of Ukrainian military going after 3elensky.

The best solution at this point would be for 3elensky to ignore the UK and US and go back to the negotiating table. The deal will not be the same as what could have been negotiated in March/April or the Minsk II agreements, however.

Pretty sure Zelensky presented a deal - "get out and we won't keep killing your soldiers, blowing up you tanks and sinking your ships."

Seems like pretty reasonable terms to us rationale folks.
 
Well, that can be a point of view, I don't necessarily see it that way but that is kind of immaterial.

Let'em fight it out.

Let the Ukrainians fight to the last one, that is really the goal here anyway.
Yes, the Russians have been trying to kill off the Ukrainian "race" for a good long while now. Weird that Russia is getting what it wants from something the CIA started.
 
Kadyrov, the guy who has committed such acts as illegally detaining and executing people, ordered people to be sodomized before being beaten to death or executed, gets off on torturing people with blow torches and the like, that’s who you clearly have some sort of admiration or affinity for. Yeah, I’m sure that piece of sh** is a real honest, stand up guy. No bullsh** propaganda speak from a puppet like him .

You're about to be regaled assailed with story's of Syria and other non sequiturs. Prepare thineself.
 
No, you arent making any sense.

1. The Budapest Memorendum doesnt cover NATOs expansion. Doesnt mention NATO at all.
2. Being a puppet under someone's thumb is not being neutral. You even claim as much with the US controlling NATO. Ukraine being under Russia's thumb would violate their neutrality.
3. The agreement was for Ukraine not to have any nukes in it. No nukes have even been whispered to be coming back to Ukraine except for the Russians dropping them.

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. The US-Russia-Ukraine Trilateral Statement and Annex | Arms Control, Deterrence and Nuclear Proliferation | Historical Documents

Jesus dude, you are not making sense.

They have to be neutral which would preclude NATO. They are under the thumb of Russia as that who they signed the agreement with.
 
Kadyrov, the guy who has committed such acts as illegally detaining and executing people, ordered people to be sodomized before being beaten to death or executed, gets off on torturing people with blow torches and the like, that’s who you clearly have some sort of admiration or affinity for. Yeah, I’m sure that piece of sh** is a real honest, stand up guy. No bullsh** propaganda speak from a puppet like him .
All that may be true. What does that have to do with whether he is giving credible info about the progress of the conflict?
 
Jesus dude, you are not making sense.

They have to be neutral which would preclude NATO. They are under the thumb of Russia as that who they signed the agreement with.
Lol. You clearly havent read up on it. They signed with Russia, and the US, three parties with Ukraine to make it the TRIlateral agreement. You dont even understand its name.

"The three Presidents reiterated that they will deal with one another as full and equal partners and that relations among their countries must be conducted on the basis of respect for the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of each nation"

And again before Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Ukraine was just as close to joining NATO as they were in 1994 when they ALL signed. Just like Finland and Sweden were not going to join NATO, until Russia invaded Ukraine. And now it's pretty effing understandable that Ukraine wants to join the defensive alliance specifically made to protect against invasion by Russia, after they were invaded by Russia.

Russias invasion shreds any previous agreements with Ukraine, written or verbally agreed to.
 
All that may be true. What does that have to do with whether he is giving credible info about the progress of the conflict?

Because he isn’t. He literally does the same sh** Putin does, silences critics, journalists, or people who don’t just buy into their propaganda with violence and murder. Does that seem like a man who speaks truth? He has zero honesty or integrity. You tell me what makes him so reliable and trustworthy to you? Earlier you said because he is involved in it, has his finger on the pulse of the situation. That automatically makes what he says reliable? Do you accept every report coming out from Ukrainians who “have their finger on the pulse of the situation”?
 
How is that brainwashing when it clearly shows 80% do not line up with the communists party? I wonder how many people in America right now would support a communist party.

You might have somewhat of a point if Russian election results were anything close to being reliable. But they aren’t and you don’t
 
Russias invasion shreds any previous agreements with Ukraine, written or verbally agreed to.

OKay, they have no agreement with Russia. Russia proceeds as they would have in the early 90s. If there is no agreement than the Russians have every right to be there.

"The three Presidents reiterated that they will deal with one another as full and equal partners and that relations among their countries must be conducted on the basis of respect for the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of each nation"

And that didn't happen as parties didn't listen to Russia for roughly 20 years.

You are not making any sense, they were trying to join NATO for 20+ years... which would contrary to the statement you provided. Basically, you are saying that the Ukrainians never intended to follow the agreement, but someone how the other side should just pretend they are... or something. If there is no agreement than they are back to pre-agreement stage meaning there is no Ukraine.

Either way, Russia is going to disagree with you just like I have.... its moot.

Let'em fight till the last Ukrainian, nobody cares... that is what their purpose is really.
 
Last edited:
OKay, they have no agreement with Russia. Russia proceeds as they would have in the early 90s. If there is no agreement than the Russians have every right to be there.



And that didn't happen as parties didn't listen to Russia for roughly 20 years.

You are not making any sense, they were trying to join NATO for 20+ years... which would contrary to the statement you provided. Basically, you are saying that the Ukrainians never intended to follow the agreement, but someone how the other side should just pretend they are... or something. If there is no agreement than they are back to pre-agreement stage meaning there is no Ukraine.

Either way, Russia is going to disagree with you just like I have.... its moot.

Let'em fight till the last Ukrainian, nobody cares... that is what their purpose is really.
Russias justification was complete bs.

Them TALKING about joining NATO doesnt violate the agreement. Heck even them joining NATO wouldnt violate the agreement. You are literally just making stuff up.

You were completely wrong* from the start on the agreement. It wasnt just with Russia and Ukraine. It wasnt about Ukraine staying under Russias thumb. And Russias invasion only invalidates the agreement AFTER they invaded, not before, so the agreement cant be used as justification. If you were honest at all you would admit you were wrong.

But if this is your idea of neutrality you probably believe your fundamentally flawed argument not based in any real facts, was correct.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tvolsfan

VN Store



Back
Top