Members banned from this thread: evince and Doc Dutch


Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 139

Thread: "We are fighting against the genocide of the Russian-speaking population" - Rus. Com.

  1. #76 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    6,180
    Thanks
    2,837
    Thanked 4,318 Times in 2,772 Posts
    Groans
    65
    Groaned 215 Times in 209 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenyx View Post
    According to the results released by the Russian Central Election Commission through its sections in the DPR and the LPR, 99.23% (2,116,800 voters) supported the annexation in Donetsk and 98.42% (1,636,302 voters) in Luhansk. The turnouts were 97.51% (2,131,207 voters) and 94.15% (1,662,607 voters), respectively.
    Taking those figures at face value, 95% of the TOTAL population in the Donetsk and Luhansk “People's Republics” voted to join Russia. Do you believe that?

    10% - 20% of people in those areas are native Ukrainian speakers. Virtually all of them want to join Russia, you think?

    I suggest there's a likelier explanation. The referendum in question was conducted by the Russian army.

  2. #77 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2022
    Posts
    2,718
    Thanks
    700
    Thanked 303 Times in 272 Posts
    Groans
    1
    Groaned 22 Times in 21 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquillus in Exile View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenyx View Post
    Meanwhile, Russia's elections in portions of the 4 regions they control show a very different picture:

    **
    According to the results released by the Russian Central Election Commission through its sections in the DPR and the LPR, 99.23% (2,116,800 voters) supported the annexation in Donetsk and 98.42% (1,636,302 voters) in Luhansk. The turnouts were 97.51% (2,131,207 voters) and 94.15% (1,662,607 voters), respectively.[45][46][47]

    [snip]

    Source:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_a...cupied_Ukraine
    Taking those figures at face value, 95% of the TOTAL population in the Donetsk and Luhansk “People's Republics” voted to join Russia. Do you believe that?
    I do, yes. Let's not forget that the Ukrainian military has been killing thousands of them over the last 8 years. Imagine that a good chunk of the province of Ontario, Canada, decides to secede from Canada and the Canadian government's response is to kill people in Ontario. The U.S. decides to step in and hold an election in Ontario asking Ontarians if they'd like to secede to the U.S. Don't you think it's highly likely that a good many of them would want to join the U.S.?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquillus in Exile View Post
    10% - 20% of people in those areas are native Ukrainian speakers. Virtually all of them want to join Russia, you think?
    First of all, how many of those native Ukrainian speakers do you figure were still in Donetsk and Lugansk after Ukraine's 8 year bombardment of the area? Second of all, I think most would agree that a country that is bombarding your area for 8 years (be it State, Province or Region) is probably not going to be a country you want to be a part of, regardless of whether or not they speak your native tongue.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquillus in Exile View Post
    I suggest there's a likelier explanation. The referendum in question was conducted by the Russian army.
    In some places, presumably where it was hard to get out to vote, possibly due to the constant bombardments by Ukraine. In Donetsk, I know there were international observers, such as Canadian American journalist Eva Bartlett. She went out and interviewed people on the street and found pretty much everyone wanted to join Russia.
    "Trust those who seek the truth, doubt those who find it" - Andre Gide

  3. #78 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    6,180
    Thanks
    2,837
    Thanked 4,318 Times in 2,772 Posts
    Groans
    65
    Groaned 215 Times in 209 Posts

    Default

    In January 2022 the Washington Post organized a public opinion survey of 4025 people living in Donbas on both side of the secession line. The survey was carried out by UK-based R-Research, Ukraine-based Kyiv International Institute of Sociology, and Russia-based Levada Marketing Research.

    In the separatist areas of Donbas 49% of people favored joining the Russian Federation with or without special autonomy.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ublic-opinion/


    By September 2022 when the Russia-backed referendums were carried out, virtually everybody wanted to join Russia! 99.23% in Donetsk and 98.42% in Luhansk.
    The Russian army must have done something right.

  4. #79 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    20,801
    Thanks
    5,108
    Thanked 5,632 Times in 4,084 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 1,357 Times in 1,282 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquillus in Exile View Post
    In January 2022 the Washington Post organized a public opinion survey of 4025 people living in Donbas on both side of the secession line. The survey was carried out by UK-based R-Research, Ukraine-based Kyiv International Institute of Sociology, and Russia-based Levada Marketing Research.

    In the separatist areas of Donbas 49% of people favored joining the Russian Federation with or without special autonomy.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ublic-opinion/


    By September 2022 when the Russia-backed referendums were carried out, virtually everybody wanted to join Russia! 99.23% in Donetsk and 98.42% in Luhansk.
    The Russian army must have done something right.
    And yet when the Soviet Union collapsed, the MAJORITY of Ukrainian people voted to be an independent and sovereign nation....Donbas non-withstanding.

    They could've always relocated.

    And the band played on.
    During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.

    George Orwell

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Taichiliberal For This Post:

    Guno צְבִי (02-05-2023)

  6. #80 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2022
    Posts
    2,718
    Thanks
    700
    Thanked 303 Times in 272 Posts
    Groans
    1
    Groaned 22 Times in 21 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquillus in Exile View Post
    In January 2022 the Washington Post organized a public opinion survey of 4025 people living in Donbas on both side of the secession line. The survey was carried out by UK-based R-Research, Ukraine-based Kyiv International Institute of Sociology, and Russia-based Levada Marketing Research.

    In the separatist areas of Donbas 49% of people favored joining the Russian Federation with or without special autonomy.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ublic-opinion/
    I took a look at the article. It reveals some telling information:

    **
    But the figure in which we averaged data from all the survey firms summary data hides some big differences. While the Ukrainian and Russian pollsters found similar opinions in areas controlled by the Ukrainian government, in the breakaway area, pollsters calling from Russia found higher support (70 percent) for joining Donbas with Russia than did the pollsters calling from Ukraine (16 percent). (Some respondents may have decided whether to answer the call or participate in the survey according to whether it originated in Kyiv or Moscow, or may have replied with answers that they thought the interviewers wanted to hear.)
    **

    I think we can agree that 70% and 16% are wildly different numbers and the explanations they give make sense. There's another important fact here as well. 9 percent of respondents from -both- sides opted for independence. I strongly suspect that most of those who want independence are from the Russian side. Bottom line, I believe that very few eastern Ukrainians want to stay in Ukraine. Makes a lot of sense, considering the 8 years of bombardment they've weathered from the Ukrainian military.
    "Trust those who seek the truth, doubt those who find it" - Andre Gide

  7. #81 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2022
    Posts
    2,718
    Thanks
    700
    Thanked 303 Times in 272 Posts
    Groans
    1
    Groaned 22 Times in 21 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
    And yet when the Soviet Union collapsed, the MAJORITY of Ukrainian people voted to be an independent and sovereign nation....Donbas non-withstanding.
    Even the majority of -Crimeans- voted to become an independent nation, although it wasn't much higher than 50%. But let's remember that Russia -itself- chose to leave the Soviet Union. -Everyone- thought that the Soviet Union was essentially the Titanic that had struck its iceberg and it was time to abandon ship. Much more telling is the fact that in order to get these numbers, the fledgling Ukrainian government promised that the Russian language and customs of eastern Ukrainians would be respected. Clearly that was a promise that was brutally broken after Euromaidan.

    Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
    They could've always relocated.
    I remember watching a documentary where both pro European and pro Russian sides told each other they could either "go to Europe" or "go to Russia". What neither really thought much about is that for both sides, where they were was there home. It's not easy to just "relocate" somewhere else. That being said, many did. Those that stayed decided they'd rather weather a civil war then leave. It was their choice to make, sure, but I think we can all agree that they would have preferred simply avoiding the war to begin with. There's clear evidence that most western Ukrainians wanted the civil war to end long ago and that Zelensky was elected based on his promises to resolve the civil war diplomatically. The far right had other plans. Backed by the U.S., Zelensky walked back his promises and even initiated a renewed assault on the Donbass region days before Putin finally decided to start a military operation in Ukraine of his own. The rest is history.
    "Trust those who seek the truth, doubt those who find it" - Andre Gide

  8. #82 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    20,801
    Thanks
    5,108
    Thanked 5,632 Times in 4,084 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 1,357 Times in 1,282 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenyx View Post
    Even the majority of -Crimeans- voted to become an independent nation, although it wasn't much higher than 50%. But let's remember that Russia -itself- chose to leave the Soviet Union. -Everyone- thought that the Soviet Union was essentially the Titanic that had struck its iceberg and it was time to abandon ship. Much more telling is the fact that in order to get these numbers, the fledgling Ukrainian government promised that the Russian language and customs of eastern Ukrainians would be respected. Clearly that was a promise that was brutally broken after Euromaidan.



    I remember watching a documentary where both pro European and pro Russian sides told each other they could either "go to Europe" or "go to Russia". What neither really thought much about is that for both sides, where they were was there home. It's not easy to just "relocate" somewhere else. That being said, many did. Those that stayed decided they'd rather weather a civil war then leave. It was their choice to make, sure, but I think we can all agree that they would have preferred simply avoiding the war to begin with. There's clear evidence that most western Ukrainians wanted the civil war to end long ago and that Zelensky was elected based on his promises to resolve the civil war diplomatically. The far right had other plans. Backed by the U.S., Zelensky walked back his promises and even initiated a renewed assault on the Donbass region days before Putin finally decided to start a military operation in Ukraine of his own. The rest is history.
    And when all is said and done, it's the SOS.......disgruntled folk not liking the new set up of a new nation, internal strife, two super powers playing proxy games.

    Oh, and could you explain how the US backed Zelensky walking away from promises and initiated a military assault without sending weapons or troops? The same question can be posed to Putin prior to actual military action....something some would say was a reaction to that idiot G.W. Bush's actions around the world.
    During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.

    George Orwell

  9. #83 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2022
    Posts
    2,718
    Thanks
    700
    Thanked 303 Times in 272 Posts
    Groans
    1
    Groaned 22 Times in 21 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
    And when all is said and done, it's the SOS.......disgruntled folk not liking the new set up of a new nation, internal strife, two super powers playing proxy games.
    I definitely agree on the super powers bit, but I also believe that the U.S. and various NATO allies were essentially "poking the bear" (aka Russia) for the past 8 years until finally decided that enough was enough.

    Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
    Oh, and could you explain how the US backed Zelensky walking away from promises and initiated a military assault without sending weapons or troops?
    First of all, the U.S. has been sending Ukraine weapons since the Trump administration. The following article from well known journalist Aaron Mate explains both this as well as the U.S.'s backing of Ukraine's far right and what this did to Zelensky's peace mandate:

    Siding With Ukraine’s Far-Right, US Sabotaged Zelensky’s Peace Mandate | Scheerpost


    Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
    The same question can be posed to Putin prior to actual military action....something some would say was a reaction to that idiot G.W. Bush's actions around the world.
    I believe that Putin tried to resolve the civil war in Ukraine for 8 years without getting involved militarily. I strongly suspect that the Ukrainian military's renewed assault on the Donbass region literally days before February 24, 2022 was what decided Putin to start his military operation. I think that former Swiss Intelligence Officer Jacques Baud does a great job of laying out the evidence that this is probably why he decided to start his operation when he did in the following article:

    Former NATO Military Analyst Blows the Whistle on West’s Ukraine Invasion Narrative | Scheerpost

    I believe that his article is so important that I've made a thread of it in numerous forums, including this one, here:

    Former Swiss Intelligence Officer blows the whistle on West's Ukraine War Narrative | justplainpolitics.com
    "Trust those who seek the truth, doubt those who find it" - Andre Gide

  10. #84 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    20,801
    Thanks
    5,108
    Thanked 5,632 Times in 4,084 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 1,357 Times in 1,282 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenyx View Post
    I definitely agree on the super powers bit, but I also believe that the U.S. and various NATO allies were essentially "poking the bear" (aka Russia) for the past 8 years until finally decided that enough was enough.



    First of all, the U.S. has been sending Ukraine weapons since the Trump administration. The following article from well known journalist Aaron Mate explains both this as well as the U.S.'s backing of Ukraine's far right and what this did to Zelensky's peace mandate:

    Siding With Ukraine’s Far-Right, US Sabotaged Zelensky’s Peace Mandate | Scheerpost




    I believe that Putin tried to resolve the civil war in Ukraine for 8 years without getting involved militarily. I strongly suspect that the Ukrainian military's renewed assault on the Donbass region literally days before February 24, 2022 was what decided Putin to start his military operation. I think that former Swiss Intelligence Officer Jacques Baud does a great job of laying out the evidence that this is probably why he decided to start his operation when he did in the following article:

    Former NATO Military Analyst Blows the Whistle on West’s Ukraine Invasion Narrative | Scheerpost

    I believe that his article is so important that I've made a thread of it in numerous forums, including this one, here:

    Former Swiss Intelligence Officer blows the whistle on West's Ukraine War Narrative | justplainpolitics.com
    1. I do wish you would stop trying to portray Russia as some type of victim here. They sure as hell weren't resting on their laurels after Putin rose to power....the Shrub just gave him more of an excuse to step up the program.

    2. Again, Ukraine's internal problems were happening BEFORE Trump took office.....no US arms shipped over, and to date no evidence of nefarious actions by our Intelligence agencies in that region (NOT that I wouldn't put it past them). Remember the heat Obama took for not going the aggressive confrontation route.

    3. Sorry, but your belief in Putin is just that...belief. Your link has merit, but then there's this perspective from earlier last year:

    https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and...ia-and-ukraine

    Also, this aspect of the timeline of this situation:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/18/w...-timeline.html
    During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.

    George Orwell

  11. #85 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2022
    Posts
    2,718
    Thanks
    700
    Thanked 303 Times in 272 Posts
    Groans
    1
    Groaned 22 Times in 21 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenyx View Post
    I definitely agree on the super powers bit, but I also believe that the U.S. and various NATO allies were essentially "poking the bear" (aka Russia) for the past 8 years until finally decided that enough was enough.

    First of all, the U.S. has been sending Ukraine weapons since the Trump administration. The following article from well known journalist Aaron Mate explains both this as well as the U.S.'s backing of Ukraine's far right and what this did to Zelensky's peace mandate:

    Siding With Ukraine’s Far-Right, US Sabotaged Zelensky’s Peace Mandate | Scheerpost

    I believe that Putin tried to resolve the civil war in Ukraine for 8 years without getting involved militarily. I strongly suspect that the Ukrainian military's renewed assault on the Donbass region literally days before February 24, 2022 was what decided Putin to start his military operation. I think that former Swiss Intelligence Officer Jacques Baud does a great job of laying out the evidence that this is probably why he decided to start his operation when he did in the following article:

    Former NATO Military Analyst Blows the Whistle on West’s Ukraine Invasion Narrative | Scheerpost

    I believe that his article is so important that I've made a thread of it in numerous forums, including this one, here:

    Former Swiss Intelligence Officer blows the whistle on West's Ukraine War Narrative | justplainpolitics.com
    1. I do wish you would stop trying to portray Russia as some type of victim here. They sure as hell weren't resting on their laurels after Putin rose to power....the Shrub just gave him more of an excuse to step up the program.
    Russia as a nation has many things, good and bad. I'm against their stance against homosexuality if that means anything to you. But when it comes to the war in Ukraine, I strongly believe that it was the U.S. that started it 8 years ago, not Russia. At first, it was fairly covert, but there's clear signs that they played a significant role in the violent uprisings that led to the former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych fleeing the country for his life. There's certainly evidence that a false flag operation was done on a certain day to falsely portray Yanukovych's government in an event, involving an American man who'd been and perhaps still was in the military. I personally think the following article is quite revealing in that regard:

    The Hidden Truth About Ukraine, Kiev Euromaidan Snipers Kill Demonstrators. Italian Documentary Bombshell Evidence | globalresearch.ca

    Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
    2. Again, Ukraine's internal problems were happening BEFORE Trump took office.....
    Indeed, I'd say they stepped into high gear during Euromaidan. But they got turbo charged once the Trump administration started sending them weapons to forcibly try to regain territory in the east that had essentially seceded from them after Euromaidan.

    Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
    no US arms shipped over, and to date no evidence of nefarious actions by our Intelligence agencies in that region (NOT that I wouldn't put it past them).
    As mentioned previously, there is -some- evidence that they may have been involved in some of the darkest moments of Euromaidan. But there's also plenty of evidence that they were using "soft power" to oust former Ukrainian President Yanukovych as well. Here's an article that gets into that:

    Timeline: Euromaidan, the original “Ukraine Crisis” : Genuine grassroots revolution or NATO backed coup? Here are the facts to help you decide. | Off Guardian

    Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
    Remember the heat Obama took for not going the aggressive confrontation route.
    Indeed. Trump caved though. Had he not, I think it's highly possible that Russia may have never gotten involved militarily.

    Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
    3. Sorry, but your belief in Putin is just that...belief. Your link has merit
    Which one? I linked to 2 articles.

    Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
    , but then there's this perspective from earlier last year:

    https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and...ia-and-ukraine
    Took a look at the article. Right off the bat, I saw something I don't believe. I don't see any evidence that Putin has ever said that "Ukraine has no historical claim to independent statehood".

    Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
    Also, this aspect of the timeline of this situation:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/18/w...-timeline.html
    That article sums up Euromaidan in 3 sentences, and makes absolutely no mention of the evidence that most of the 100 people who were killed were killed during what appears to have been a false flag operation. Again, I suggest you take a look at the article from Global Research above if you haven't already done so.
    "Trust those who seek the truth, doubt those who find it" - Andre Gide

  12. #86 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    20,801
    Thanks
    5,108
    Thanked 5,632 Times in 4,084 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 1,357 Times in 1,282 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenyx View Post
    Russia as a nation has many things, good and bad. I'm against their stance against homosexuality if that means anything to you. But when it comes to the war in Ukraine, I strongly believe that it was the U.S. that started it 8 years ago, not Russia. At first, it was fairly covert, but there's clear signs that they played a significant role in the violent uprisings that led to the former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych fleeing the country for his life. There's certainly evidence that a false flag operation was done on a certain day to falsely portray Yanukovych's government in an event, involving an American man who'd been and perhaps still was in the military. I personally think the following article is quite revealing in that regard:

    The Hidden Truth About Ukraine, Kiev Euromaidan Snipers Kill Demonstrators. Italian Documentary Bombshell Evidence | globalresearch.ca



    Indeed, I'd say they stepped into high gear during Euromaidan. But they got turbo charged once the Trump administration started sending them weapons to forcibly try to regain territory in the east that had essentially seceded from them after Euromaidan.



    As mentioned previously, there is -some- evidence that they may have been involved in some of the darkest moments of Euromaidan. But there's also plenty of evidence that they were using "soft power" to oust former Ukrainian President Yanukovych as well. Here's an article that gets into that:

    Timeline: Euromaidan, the original “Ukraine Crisis” : Genuine grassroots revolution or NATO backed coup? Here are the facts to help you decide. | Off Guardian



    Indeed. Trump caved though. Had he not, I think it's highly possible that Russia may have never gotten involved militarily.



    Which one? I linked to 2 articles.



    Took a look at the article. Right off the bat, I saw something I don't believe. I don't see any evidence that Putin has ever said that "Ukraine has no historical claim to independent statehood".



    That article sums up Euromaidan in 3 sentences, and makes absolutely no mention of the evidence that most of the 100 people who were killed were killed during what appears to have been a false flag operation. Again, I suggest you take a look at the article from Global Research above if you haven't already done so.
    We are at an impasse in this discussion, because a repeated phrase you use is "I don't believe". I can't debate a belief, because it does not require adherence to facts and the logic derived from said facts.

    Also, you can point to a lot of lip service and signing of promissory documents, but NO commitment of troops, etc. Yes, it was no secret that the Ukraine gov't was mulling over joining NATO and NATO/USA was making all types of pie in the sky promises if they did...but again, that does NOT excuse the history of Russian intent regarding the Ukraine after the fall of the USSR.

    That's it....anything else is just a rehash on my part (and yours). You can have the last word, as I'll be moving on.
    During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.

    George Orwell

  13. #87 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2022
    Posts
    2,718
    Thanks
    700
    Thanked 303 Times in 272 Posts
    Groans
    1
    Groaned 22 Times in 21 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenyx View Post
    Russia as a nation has many things, good and bad. I'm against their stance against homosexuality if that means anything to you. But when it comes to the war in Ukraine, I strongly believe that it was the U.S. that started it 8 years ago, not Russia. At first, it was fairly covert, but there's clear signs that they played a significant role in the violent uprisings that led to the former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych fleeing the country for his life. There's certainly evidence that a false flag operation was done on a certain day to falsely portray Yanukovych's government in an event, involving an American man who'd been and perhaps still was in the military. I personally think the following article is quite revealing in that regard:

    The Hidden Truth About Ukraine, Kiev Euromaidan Snipers Kill Demonstrators. Italian Documentary Bombshell Evidence | globalresearch.ca



    Indeed, I'd say they stepped into high gear during Euromaidan. But they got turbo charged once the Trump administration started sending them weapons to forcibly try to regain territory in the east that had essentially seceded from them after Euromaidan.

    As mentioned previously, there is -some- evidence that they may have been involved in some of the darkest moments of Euromaidan. But there's also plenty of evidence that they were using "soft power" to oust former Ukrainian President Yanukovych as well. Here's an article that gets into that:

    Timeline: Euromaidan, the original “Ukraine Crisis” : Genuine grassroots revolution or NATO backed coup? Here are the facts to help you decide. | Off Guardian

    Indeed. Trump caved though. Had he not, I think it's highly possible that Russia may have never gotten involved militarily.

    Which one? I linked to 2 articles.

    Took a look at the article. Right off the bat, I saw something I don't believe. I don't see any evidence that Putin has ever said that "Ukraine has no historical claim to independent statehood".

    That article sums up Euromaidan in 3 sentences, and makes absolutely no mention of the evidence that most of the 100 people who were killed were killed during what appears to have been a false flag operation. Again, I suggest you take a look at the article from Global Research above if you haven't already done so.
    We are at an impasse in this discussion, because a repeated phrase you use is "I don't believe". I can't debate a belief, because it does not require adherence to facts and the logic derived from said facts.
    Have you ever considered asking why I believe things? I think of beliefs a bit like a programmer thinks of a program executings its functions. A programmer with sufficient knowledge of a given computer progamming language who has access to the source code would be able to understand why a computer program executes any given function. If you were to learn why I believe the things I believe, you'd then be able to question their basis instead of being stuck on the things I believe.

    Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
    Also, you can point to a lot of lip service and signing of promissory documents, but NO commitment of troops, etc.
    The U.S. had troops on the ground in Ukraine prior to Russia's military operation. I was able to find evidence of this article published a little under 2 weeks before Russia's military operation began after a quick internet search:

    Pentagon orders departure of U.S. troops in Ukraine as Russia crisis escalates | CNBC

    Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
    Yes, it was no secret that the Ukraine gov't was mulling over joining NATO and NATO/USA was making all types of pie in the sky promises if they did...but again, that does NOT excuse the history of Russian intent regarding the Ukraine after the fall of the USSR.
    You'll have to get a bit more specific as to what you believe Russia's intent was regarding Ukraine if you want to have something to discuss there. I also think that it's important to note that Russia tried to resolve the Ukrainian civil war diplomatically for 8 years before finally deciding its best option was a military one shortly after Ukraine started a renewed assault on the Donbass region.
    Last edited by Phoenyx; 02-09-2023 at 07:22 PM.
    "Trust those who seek the truth, doubt those who find it" - Andre Gide

  14. #88 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    53,510
    Thanks
    252
    Thanked 24,555 Times in 17,085 Posts
    Groans
    5,280
    Groaned 4,575 Times in 4,254 Posts

    Default

    Ukraine was rejected for NATO membership. I remember it being about the corruption in their system. They were given time to cleanup their system. It appears Putin was not going to let them join so he attacked.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Nordberg For This Post:

    Taichiliberal (02-09-2023)

  16. #89 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    20,801
    Thanks
    5,108
    Thanked 5,632 Times in 4,084 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 1,357 Times in 1,282 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenyx View Post
    Have you ever considered asking why I believe things? I think of beliefs a bit like a programmer thinks of a program executings its functions. A programmer with sufficient knowledge of a given computer progamming language who has access to the source code would be able to understand why a computer program executes any given function. If you were to learn why I believe the things I believe, you'd then be able to question their basis instead of being stuck on the things I believe.



    The U.S. had troops on the ground in Ukraine prior to Russia's military operation. I was able to find evidence of this article published a little under 2 weeks before Russia's military operation began after a quick internet search:

    Pentagon orders departure of U.S. troops in Ukraine as Russia crisis escalates | CNBC



    You'll have to get a bit more specific as to what you believe Russia's intenet was regarding Ukraine if you want to have something to discuss there. I also think that it's important to note that Russia tried to resolve the Ukrainian civil war diplomatically for 8 years before finally deciding its best option was a military one shortly after Ukraine started a renewed assault on the Donbass region.
    1. Much ado about nothing on your part here.....just a long winded way of doing EXACTLY what I pointed out succinctly. You may think otherwise, but that's how it reads to the objective observer.

    2. A clarification: https://www.newsweek.com/russia-ukra...-biden-1756387

    3. A primer in response: https://www.csis.org/analysis/russia...y-and-conflict
    During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.

    George Orwell

  17. #90 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2022
    Posts
    2,718
    Thanks
    700
    Thanked 303 Times in 272 Posts
    Groans
    1
    Groaned 22 Times in 21 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nordberg View Post
    Ukraine was rejected for NATO membership. I remember it being about the corruption in their system. They were given time to cleanup their system. It appears Putin was not going to let them join so he attacked.
    From what I've read, it seems pretty clear that the reason he attacked was not because Ukraine was about to join NATO but because Ukraine had started a renewed assault on the Donbass region. This is in line with what I quoted Russia's Sparta Commander saying in the first post of this thread. It's also in line with the evidence taht former Swiss Intelligence Officer Jacques Baud gathered and wrote about in an article he wrote that I quote and link to in the following thread:

    Former Swiss Intelligence Officer blows the whistle on West's Ukraine War Narrative | justplainpolitics.com
    "Trust those who seek the truth, doubt those who find it" - Andre Gide

Similar Threads

  1. Putin's State-Run Media Admits Russian-Speaking Ukrainians Fighting Back
    By Guno צְבִי in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-04-2022, 06:16 PM
  2. Replies: 49
    Last Post: 03-13-2021, 01:16 AM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-25-2020, 01:12 AM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-08-2020, 03:23 PM
  5. Replies: 38
    Last Post: 03-17-2017, 08:40 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •