0 sats \ 15 replies \ @Cje95 6 Sep \ parent \ on: Is Russia bleeding the West dry fiscally? econ
Wait so your telling me and I am sorry but I gotta try and wrap my head around this... that Russia invading its neighbor and slaughtering and torturing civilians is somehow provocation? It was only once this happened and the true vile nature of the crimes came out that you saw aid surge into the country.
Russia came through and on video just mowed down civilians man... that alone provoked the West into action.
write
preview
55 sats \ 11 replies \ @TomK OP 6 Sep
We need to put this conflict into a larger historic picture. To include the Maidan plot is important. And the attacks on russians in Donbas since then. The fight for resources is in most cases at the center of any conflict (Biden crime family was highly involved). Look what happens in the Middle East since they found oil and gas
reply
0 sats \ 10 replies \ @Cje95 6 Sep
Lets not forget the Budapest Memorandum. Russia has loved meddling in its neighbors' activities and hated all of those who looked towards the West for economic advances.
Lets not forget he based this war on the idea that a person of Jewish heritage was a Nazi and Hitler supporter which I mean is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard.
reply
21 sats \ 7 replies \ @TomK OP 6 Sep
Calm down. You don't need to fight. The moto is: 'fight until the last Ukrainian'
Where are the diplomats, I ask You?
reply
0 sats \ 6 replies \ @Cje95 6 Sep
Russia didnt want to participate in peace conferences soooo ya know you can only do so much if the otherside doesn't want to negotiate in good faith
reply
47 sats \ 2 replies \ @Bell_curve 6 Sep
Ukraine is open to a ceasefire but nato won’t allow it.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @Cje95 6 Sep
Ah yeah when Russia pulls back and leaves Ukraine which Russia has clearly stated time and time again it wont do so I guess you could say its a half truth? NATIO is going to keep on doing what Ukraine wants and it is pretty clear they want weapons so wala weapons they will get
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 6 Sep
Ukraine is a pawn for NATO which will never commit their own troops against Russia
reply
21 sats \ 2 replies \ @TomK OP 6 Sep
That's simply false. One month ago russia offered negociations
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @Cje95 6 Sep
Ukraine said they had to leave Ukraine Russia said that was a non starter so again its something that isn't in good faith. Russia still wants/plans on somehow getting Kherson back since it is now Russian in their eyes cause they said so
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @TomK OP 6 Sep
And above all this joke of a 'peace conference' in Switzerland without inviting russia...
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @Bell_curve 6 Sep
A memorandum is a piece of paper that lacks the force of a treaty.
The Budapest Memorandum was not ratified by the U.S. Senate. It is a political agreement rather than a legally binding treaty, which means it did not require Senate ratification. The memorandum was designed to provide security assurances to Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan in exchange for their accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) as non-nuclear states. The U.S. administrations involved did not seek Senate ratification because they believed the Senate would not approve a treaty with military commitments to Ukraine. Instead, the memorandum was adopted with more limited terms as a political commitment rather than a formal treaty[1][4][5].
Sources [1] Budapest Memorandum - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum [2] Ukraine: The Budapest Memorandum of 1994 https://policymemos.hks.harvard.edu/links/ukraine-budapest-memorandum-1994 [3] Budapest Memorandum at 25: Between Past and Future https://www.hks.harvard.edu/publications/budapest-memorandum-25-between-past-and-future [4] What the Budapest Memorandum means for the U.S. on Ukraine https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/02/01/what-budapest-memorandum-means-us-ukraine/ [5] Constructive Ambiguity of the Budapest Memorandum at 28 - Lawfare https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/constructive-ambiguity-of-the-budapest-memorandum-at-28-making-sense-of-the-controversial-agreement [6] Ukraine war: what is the Budapest Memorandum and why has Russia’s invasion torn it up? https://theconversation.com/ukraine-war-what-is-the-budapest-memorandum-and-why-has-russias-invasion-torn-it-up-178184 [7] Memorandum on security assurances - UNTC https://treaties.un.org/Pages/showDetails.aspx?objid=0800000280401fbb [8] [PDF] Ukraine's Territorial Integrity and the Budapest Memorandum https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/publication/Issue%20Brief%20No%203--The%20Breach--Final4.pdf
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Cje95 6 Sep
*Edit lmao do you really think I dont know how the government works when I work for Congress... like... what even
Ah clearly not someone who understands the Southern Culture of honor and how Ukraine is handling this situation as it would be handled in the South.
Also your statement is like straight out of a Chappelle show skit
reply
47 sats \ 2 replies \ @Bell_curve 6 Sep
NATO expansion for Ukraine was and is a redline for Russia.
Crimea was a response to the color revolution in 2014.
The provocation was and is NATO enlargement.
When the Cold War ended in 1991, there were 16 members. Today NATO has 32 members.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @Cje95 6 Sep
Lol is really all I can say... first Budapest Memorandum second Russia interfered when both Ukraine and Georgia began to look towards the West for economic and well social growth.
They exercised the freedom that they got in the USSR collapse and make a choice that Putin hated.
If Russia had something to offer would be one thing but Putin assassinates people weekly at this point and jails those who don't like him.
Population collapse is a hell of a thing
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 6 Sep
Memorandum is not a treaty. Senate didn’t ratify.
The Budapest Memorandum was not ratified by the U.S. Senate. It is a political agreement rather than a legally binding treaty, which means it did not require Senate ratification. The memorandum was designed to provide security assurances to Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan in exchange for their accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) as non-nuclear states. The U.S. administrations involved did not seek Senate ratification because they believed the Senate would not approve a treaty with military commitments to Ukraine. Instead, the memorandum was adopted with more limited terms as a political commitment rather than a formal treaty[1][4][5].
Sources [1] Budapest Memorandum - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum [2] Ukraine: The Budapest Memorandum of 1994 https://policymemos.hks.harvard.edu/links/ukraine-budapest-memorandum-1994 [3] Budapest Memorandum at 25: Between Past and Future https://www.hks.harvard.edu/publications/budapest-memorandum-25-between-past-and-future [4] What the Budapest Memorandum means for the U.S. on Ukraine https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/02/01/what-budapest-memorandum-means-us-ukraine/ [5] Constructive Ambiguity of the Budapest Memorandum at 28 - Lawfare https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/constructive-ambiguity-of-the-budapest-memorandum-at-28-making-sense-of-the-controversial-agreement [6] Ukraine war: what is the Budapest Memorandum and why has Russia’s invasion torn it up? https://theconversation.com/ukraine-war-what-is-the-budapest-memorandum-and-why-has-russias-invasion-torn-it-up-178184 [7] Memorandum on security assurances - UNTC https://treaties.un.org/Pages/showDetails.aspx?objid=0800000280401fbb [8] [PDF] Ukraine's Territorial Integrity and the Budapest Memorandum https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/publication/Issue%20Brief%20No%203--The%20Breach--Final4.pdf
reply