Nato to Keep the Ukraine at Arm's Length.

Donald H

Platinum Member
Nov 26, 2020
27,780
9,503
433

“We reaffirm the commitment we made at the 2008 summit in Bucharest that Ukraine will become a member of NATO, and today we recognize that Ukraine’s path to full Euro-Atlantic integration has moved beyond the need for the Membership Action Plan,” the statement read.

Which really means that America and only some Nato members will have a say.

And so it's now necessary to say that Nato is absolutely a tool of America's aggression.
 
10PerBus.jpg
 
El Mundo: Hungarian Prime Minister Orban has accused the West of seeking to continue the conflict in Ukraine

Ukraine has lost its sovereignty because it has no money and is fighting with Western weapons, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said on Kossuth radio station, El Mundo reports. At the same time, the Hungarian leader also accused the West of wanting to continue the Ukrainian conflict.

Hungarian Prime Minister, as El Mundo writes, "ultra-nationalist" Viktor Orban accused the West of wanting to continue the conflict in Ukraine. He added that this is why his government is preparing for a long armed conflict in the neighboring country.
"Western countries want this conflict. There is an overwhelming majority of those who support this conflict," Orban said on the air of Kossuth radio station.

The Hungarian prime minister also commented on the recent NATO summit in Vilnius, where, among other things, Ukraine's accession to the alliance was discussed. Orban noted that Kiev's demands to join the bloc are understandable.
"But if we were to fulfill them, we would get involved in World War III," he emphasized.

At the same time, Orban criticized the Ukrainian leadership's manner of communication, which he said is often "aggressive and demanding." He added that with the deliveries of Western weapons, Ukraine "has not even come close to peace."
The Hungarian leader, as the newspaper noted, also reiterated that Ukraine had "lost its sovereignty" because it had no money and was fighting with Western weapons.
 



Which really means that America and only some Nato members will have a say.

And so it's now necessary to say that Nato is absolutely a tool of America's aggression.

Ukraine is already practically a NATO member
 
Ukraine is already practically a NATO member
No, not really, but no peace agreement is possible without Ukraine becoming a member. Putin claims he started this war because of NATO's presence in eastern Europe, but his war against Ukraine has already enlarged NATO by one new member, Finland, another soon, Sweden, and it is inevitably Ukraine, when Russia finally concedes this war.
 
Last edited:
No, not really, but no peace agreement is possible without Ukraine becoming a member. Putin claims he started this war because of NATO's presence in eastern Europe, but his war against Ukraine has already enlarged NATO by one new member, Finland, another soon, Sweden, and it is inevitably Ukraine, when Russia finally concedes this war.
Actually, the peace is possible after total annexation of the lands of former Ukraine by its neighbors.
 
It means just "Borderland". "The borderland". They tried to build a nation, but obviously failed.
They built a nation. It is a separate and sovereign nation. Then Putin invaded that sovereign nation. It is Ukraine. Not “the” Ukraine.

Plus, even Wikipedia notes that your alleged definition of “Ukraine” is disputed.

Ukrainian scholars, beginning in the 1930s, have interpreted the term ukraina in the sense of "region, principality, country",[28]"the land around" or "the land pertaining to" a given centre.[29][30]

Linguist Hryhoriy Pivtorak (2001) argues that there is a difference between the two terms україна (Ukraina, "territory") and окраїна (okraina, "borderland"). Both are derived from krai "division, border, land parcel, territory" but with a difference in preposition, U (оу)) meaning "in" vs. o (о) meaning "about, around"; *ukrai and *ukraina would then mean "a separated land parcel , a separate part of a tribe's territory".

 
They built a nation. It is a separate and sovereign nation. Then Putin invaded that sovereign nation. It is Ukraine. Not “the” Ukraine.

Plus, even Wikipedia notes that your alleged definition of “Ukraine” is disputed.



The bunch of Nazies is not a "nation". And even they don't need "independent Ukraine". Some of them want to (actually, they are payed for) join the EU, some of them want to join Russia.
 
The bunch of Nazies is not a "nation". And even they don't need "independent Ukraine". Some of them want to (actually, they are payed for) join the EU, some of them want to join Russia.
You are ignorant and in denial. Ukraine is an independent sovereign nation.

Ukraine was one of the founding members of the United Nations when it joined in 1945 as the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic; along with the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Ukraine signed the United Nations Charter when it was part of the Soviet Union. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, the newly independent Ukraine retained its seat.
 
The supposed 'nazies' of Ukraine are fighting well for their Jewish president.

The Crimea bridge was fucked up again by the Ukies.

The struggle continues with Russia making no gain.
 
Clearly, peace with Russia is simply not possible any more than peace with Hitler's Germany would have been possible.
Peace with Russia is impossible, and war against Russia is unwinnable yet. So, what is the only possible solution? Yes, it is - leave Ukraine (and, may be, the rest of Europe) and do what is really necessary for the safety of the USA, for example, build more and better strategic nuclear weapons, build more ships, make our Army and society stronger. In other words - Make America Great Again.
 

Forum List

Back
Top