Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Check the date. After they were invaded. Find me an article or even a statement that entertained the idea of Ukraine joining NATO before the invasion and you might, and I say might have some point.
www.theguardian.com
Why not? It was already explained by many authors, like, say, George Orwell. Your freedom is slavery. And, using the conception of doublethinking, we can explain it in at least two different ways: "American freedom to do whatever they want (including support of Neo-nazis in Ukraine and Baltic States) means slavery (inability to make their own decisions) for the rest of the world" if we are talking about American foreign policy. Or, if we are talking about American inner policy, "American freedom is the possibility to solve yourself in the worst kinds of slavery, like drug-addiction".explaining the concept of freedom to foreigners seems an exercise in futility here
~S~
explaining the concept of freedom to foreigners seems an exercise in futility here
~S~
So as proof that Ukraine was entering NATO, you give the ultimatum the Russians gave the West? That doesn't establish that Ukraine was about to enter NATO. It doesn't even establish that Russia thought Ukraine was joining NATO. The only thing it establishes is that Russia used it as a justification for INVADING Ukraine. Guess what, every invader comes out with a justification for their belligerent actions. It doesn't mean they are facts. In fact, they rarely are.Russia issues list of demands it says must be met to lower tensions in Europe
Contentious security guarantees Moscow is seeking include a ban on Ukraine from entering Nato
So as proof that Ukraine was entering NATO, you give the ultimatum the Russians gave the West? That doesn't establish that Ukraine was about to enter NATO. It doesn't even establish that Russia thought Ukraine was joining NATO. The only thing it establishes is that Russia used it as a justification for INVADING Ukraine. Guess what, every invader comes out with a justification for their belligerent actions. It doesn't mean they are facts. In fact, they rarely are.
As I said, you are literally just spewing Russian talking points, and try to present them as facts.
Your claim is that Ukraine was going to enter NATO. So far you have giving me an article AFTER hostilities began and a Russian ultimatum. Since time is linear, you have to have an actual reason to think they were planning on it before the conflict. What is it?
Sure I can. I'm asking a simple question. You obviously believe the Russian version. What makes you so certain Ukraine was about to join NATO? If the only thing you got is "The Russians said so." I'd argue you don't have much of an argument.Sheesh. Can no one discuss anything honestly here?
99% of Americans aren't free by any useful metric
The attack on the beach in Sevastopol is painfully reminiscent of the tragedy in Zugres in Donbas in August 2014, when Ukrainian aircraft bombarded the beach with people with cluster munitions.
They had been talking about it since 2008, what did you think Russia would do wait for Nato to take over the Russian Sevastopol Naval base after the Coup?Sure I can. I'm asking a simple question. You obviously believe the Russian version. What makes you so certain Ukraine was about to join NATO? If the only thing you got is "The Russians said so." I'd argue you don't have much of an argument.
Why for heavens sake do you speak continuously such a bullshit? Putin started this stupid, senseless and criminal war on Europe in the Ukraine. Russia did do meanwhile many thousands of evil war crimes in the Ukraine. Only Russia is able to stop this war and to go home. And you will have to do exactly this and nothing else, because you are a nuclear power. Otherwise you risk a nuclear third world war. I doubt that any Russians will survive such a world war because even when on a mysterious reason some human beings should survive they will immediatelly kill any Russians they will meet afterwards.
Sure I can. I'm asking a simple question. You obviously believe the Russian version. What makes you so certain Ukraine was about to join NATO? If the only thing you got is "The Russians said so." I'd argue you don't have much of an argument.
Actually, no. It was NATO who started it's expansion eastward, it were NATO countries who ruined international law, and it were NATO countries who refused all Russian attempts to build a reliable peace with equal rights and undivided safety for everyone.Why for heavens sake do you speak continuously such a bullshit? Putin started this stupid, senseless and criminal war on Europe in the Ukraine.
Ukraine is a part of our home, too. Anyway, we can stop this war another way. Burn your cities and kill your men. Like a final solution of European question. You like that sort of things, don't you?Russia did do meanwhile many thousands of evil war crimes in the Ukraine. Only Russia is able to stop this war and to go home.
Ha-ha-ha! Of course, no. You guys are risking a nuclear war, and your risk is much more significant, exactly because you are not a nuclear power. We can wipe out the whole Germany, and nobody will say us a bad word for it.And you will have to do exactly this and nothing else, because you are a nuclear power. Otherwise you risk a nuclear third world war.
I doubt that any Russians will survive such a world war because even when on a mysterious reason some human beings should survive they will immediatelly kill any Russians they will meet afterwards.
It was not my post.
kyivindependent.com
Your tax dollars at work
As feared, US drone directs terrorist cluster munitions strike on residential section of Sevastopol
WWIII as October surprise to keep Biden and democrat Party competitive?
Putin once again offered a peace deal, then we do this
If Ukraine had been a neutral state, it would likely have avoided being caught in the middle of geopolitical tensions between Russia and the West. This neutrality could have potentially prevented the annexation of Crimea by Russia and the ongoing conflict in eastern Ukraine.
As a neutral state, Ukraine may have been able to focus more on internal development and economic growth without the external pressures of choosing sides in international conflicts.
Being a neutral state could have also allowed Ukraine to serve as a bridge between Russia and the West, facilitating diplomatic relations and potentially promoting peace and stability in the region.
However, being a neutral state does not guarantee complete protection from external threats, as seen in other neutral countries that have still faced challenges in maintaining their sovereignty.
Switzerland is a notable example of a neutral country that has faced challenges in maintaining its sovereignty despite its neutral status. During World War II, Switzerland was surrounded by Axis powers and faced significant pressure to align with them. The country had to navigate delicate diplomatic situations to protect its neutrality and sovereignty.
Similarly, Sweden maintained a policy of neutrality during both World War I and World War II but still faced challenges in safeguarding its independence. The country had to make strategic decisions to protect itself from potential threats while staying neutral.
Even countries like Finland and Austria, which have historically been neutral, have had to navigate geopolitical tensions to assert their sovereignty and protect their interests.
Overall, if Ukraine had been a neutral state, it could have potentially avoided the current conflict and focused on internal development and diplomacy.
Edit:
However, the effectiveness of neutrality would depend on various factors, including the willingness of other countries to respect Ukraine's neutral status.
If Mr. NATO keeps showing off his muscles that way, he will eventually get into BIG TROUBLE one day, especially with BIG KGB man like Putin. lol.
