Ron Paul: Crimea Secedes. So What?...

[georgephillip]

The USA invaded and raped Russia in the 20th Century?

"The American Expeditionary Force Siberia was commanded by Major General William S. Graves and eventually totaled 7,950 officers and enlisted men. The AEF Siberia included the U.S. Army's 27th and 31st Infantry Regiments, plus large numbers of volunteers from the 13th, 62nd Infantry Regiments and 12th Infantry Regiments of the 8th Division, Graves' former division command.[2]"

American Expeditionary Force Siberia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That wasn't an invasion. We were invited in by the Russian government to help get 40000 Czech troops out of Siberia and moved by ship to the western front during WWI. Our enemy was the Red Army, the communist who were revolting against the Czar. Being invited into a country by the government for assistance is not the same as an invasion. But you knew that.

"Many Americans would be surprised to learn that the USA, along with Britain, France, and Japan, fought a campaign in Russia just after the Great War (World War I).

"The primary objective of this action was the re-establishment of an Eastern Front following the collapse of the Russian government during the 1917 Bolshevik revolution, but Allied fear of communist ambitions in other countries also played into the intervention as will be seen below.

"The overall campaign was named the Polar Bear Expedition, but was also known as the Northern Russian Expedition, the American North Russia Expeditionary Force - ANREF or the American Expeditionary Force North Russia - AEFNR.

"These efforts are not mentioned in most history survey courses, and few texts even mention that US troops (or those of any other nation) fought against the Bolsheviks during this period.

"The presence of US Army units from Michigan in Vladivostok, Archangel, and other Russian locations is rarely noted although the University of Michigan maintains an archive of photographs and other primary evidence relating to the period..."

"US involvement in this ill-conceived expedition was short. Once the Armistice was signed on November 11, 1918 the Wilson government began receiving letters and petitions to bring the troops home from Siberia and other regions in which they were deployed.

"Most were withdrawn from Russia by mid 1919, having lost several hundred men to combat as well as sickness (including the Spanish Flu).

"The Allied incursion generally accomplished nothing significant in terms of either foreign relations or military success.

"The small forces deployed to Russia were unable to break the power of the Red Army, and simply watched as the White Army (composed of anti-communist Russians) was slowly destroyed.

"Worse, the Allies are said to have made and then broken numerous promises of additional assistance made to Admiral Kolchak, the leader of a 'government in exile' established at Omsk following the Bolshevik revolution. John Ward, who lead the British force known as 'Die-Hards,' states that..."

Allied War in Russia, 1918-22

I suppose you would have a different spin if Russians had shown up at Valley Forge, right?

 

[Steinlight]

The only country that is acting like Nazi Germany is Russia. They invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea, just like Hitler invaded the german sections of Czechoslovakia in 1938 and annexed them into Germany.

Russia did not invade Crimea, they had an agreement with the elected government of Ukraine to maintain a military presence in Crimea and the coup threatened their established naval presence and access to the Black Sea and Mediterranean. Along with this the people of Crimea voted overwhelmingly to secede from the unelected coup government.

Unfortunately, nazi, anti anti-russian and essentially anti-slavic narrative of historical revision, which is born out of Lviv province(which was de-russified by Austria Hungary and Poland) has affected central regions like the capital Kiev. Just like they were used by Nazis, and maintain that identity, the US, NATO, and EU are using them as shock troops against the anti-coup ukrainians and Russians in the East. Now on par with nazi crimes against russian and ukrainian people in world war two, these anti russian nazis are slaughtering innocents in Odessa(including pregnant women).
How Neo-Nazi Thugs Supported by Kiev Regime Killed Odessa Inhabitants. Photographic Evidence | Global Research

While the Kiev Government isn't neo-nazi at the top, and actually has many jews and those with a history in finance(to secure the IMF loan that will cripple the country), they use neo-nazi shock troops in the east to terrorize opposition.

The only terrorist here are the Russians. Russia LEASED A BASE IN CRIMEA! RUSSIAN TROOPS WERE NOT ALLOWED OFF BASE TO HARRASS OR TAKE OVER UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS AND THEY WERE CERTAINLY NOT ALLOWED TO ANNEX CRIMEA OR ANY OTHER TERRITORY IN UKRAINE.

Does the fact that the United States has a base in South Korea allow the United States to annex South Korea?

None of the political events in Kiev threatened anyone in Crimea. The new government in Kiev never stated they were going to end Russia's lease of the base, but they certainly had the right to, just as any Apartment owner has a right to kick out renters at the appropriate time.

As for the referendum in Crimea, it was illegal based on the Ukrainian Constitution. The Ukrainian Constitution states that the entire country gets to vote on whether a certain province can be allowed to succeed. In addition, the referendum only allowed two choices, become independent or become apart of Russia. The people of Crimea were not given the option on the referendum to vote and stay in Ukraine. So the referendum itself is a crock of shit.

Wrong, they had a treaty with the elected government to keep 25,000 troops in Crimea, and have every right to protect their military interests from an unelected democratic coup. And the people of Crimea aren't beholden to an unelected unconstitutional government. The coup was unconstitutional, so the illegal government null and voided the Constitution when they usurped power.
Russia?s 25,000-troop allowance & other facts you may not know about Crimea ? RT News

And also, the US was happy to support the Kosovo, an Islamist narco-state secede from the democratically elected government of Serbia, against the Serbian Constitution. But hey when it supports US EU interests to balkanize regions and bring nations into the EU it is fine. So spare me the hypocrisy.

Again, South Korea is apples and oranges, South Koreans haven't voted to be part of Russia like Crimea has(at 97% with over 90% turnout), and South Korea wasn't part of the US for centuries until the 1950s like Crimea was part of Russia. Totally different and unrelated situation.

The government in Kiev is illegitimate and unelected, they have no authority to cancel agreements. And the RUSSIANS of Crimea wanted nothing to do with an unelected anti-Russian regime that uses neo-nazis to suppress dissent. It looks like Crimea was right to leave, especially after evens in Odessa, if they remained they could have been terrorized and murdered by neo-nazis.


And since when do you pro-eu liberal faggots and nazis care about a vote? You didn't care about the fact that you threw out Yanukovych without a vote, who had agreed to early elections and discussions with the EU. Perhaps you knew you would have lost in a fair election. Why should Crimea honor the wishes of an illegal unelected government?
BBC News - Ukrainian president and opposition sign early poll deal

And more lies here were the two options on the Crimea referendum.

1. Join the Russian Federation

2. Restore the 1992 constitution and remain as a part of Ukraine

Crimean status referendum, 2014 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



And you are lying again

 

[U2Edge]

Is the Jew Nuland part of the Russian Government? She said herself, they gave 5 billion to support pro-NATO pro- EU groups.

Victoria Nuland Admits: US Has Invested $5 Billion In The Development of Ukrainian, "Democratic Institutions"

So basically what your saying is, US intervention in Ukraine overthrowing an elected government is good, and the people of Crimea voting to leave the unelected government and Russia protecting it's bases which it has a right to as per an agreement with the previously elected government is bad. Ok gotcha love the consistency there you jew loving black faggot.
.

Sending money to support democratic development in countries is not illegal and not a coup. Russia is only allowed to have a base in Crimea with the permission of the Ukrainian Government. Russia has to pay the Ukrainian government a lease EVERY YEAR IN ORDER TO KEEP USING THE BASE.

There was no legal, or international sanctioned referendum in Crimea. The Ballot only had two options on it, independence or join Russia. People wanting to remain in Ukraine were not given any option to mark that on the ballot because it was not there, which means even if the referendum was legal, it was fraudulent because it did not allow the people of the choice of remaining in Ukraine.

Can't compare Alaska to Kiev, Kiev was where Rus was founded in 882. Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus were born from the Rus. Ukraine has historically been part of the Russian Empire. The only people who don't recognize themselves as racial and cultural brothers with the Russians are those nazis from Lviv, who were historically part of Poland and Austria Hungary and have been trying to de-russify the rest of Ukraine.

History is great, but it does not supercede the UN Charter which says that all United Nations members have their territorial integrity recognized and that such territory cannot be annexed by other countries. Further, Russia signed a treaty in 1994 in which they agreed to respect Ukraine's territorial integrity if they gave up their Nuclear Weapons to the Russian Federation. Russia also promised in a revisement of the CFE treaty in 1997 to respect the territorial integrity of all Eastern European Countries.

Russia never invaded Ukraine, they had a right to keep their troops in Crimea, I already linked that to you. And besides, US expanded NATO long before the Crimea issue. Get your timeline right, you neo-kahns expanded into the former Warsaw Pact as early as 1999 with Poland and in 2004 with Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia among others, you can't use "Russian Aggression" as an excuse when at that time Russia was doing nothing while the US just invaded Afghanistan and Iraq. So fuck you and your hypocrisy.

Russia had a right to keep troops on the bases they were LEASING in Crimea. They did not have right to deploy those troops off base to surround and take over Ukrainian Police, Military, and government buildings and sites throughout the province and then ANNEX the province into Russia. Doing so is an invasion and is illegal.

Russian forces based in Crimea have no more right to deploy and take government, police, and military buildings than the US military based in Okinawa Japan would have right to do the same. Its illegal to do so, and the invasion of another countries territory!

I know NATO expanded long before the Crimea issue and there was NEVER any formal agreement or treaty which stated that Eastern European countries were not allowed to join NATO.

The United States invaded Afghanistan because it was first attacked by terrorist based in Afghanistan and protected the Afghan government at that time.

The United States and other countries invaded Iraq in 2003 because of SADDAM's failure to comply with UN Security Council Resolutions passed in regards to his ILLEGAL INVASION AND ANNEXATION of Kuwait in 1990!

The only one swallowing up Eastern Europe is NATO and the EU Superstate. There is no american national security interest in fighting a war with Russia. Only neo-con/neo-lib idealogues and those who stand to make a profit from the conflict and its results want this war. You are just a useful puppet and fodder for ZOG

A country has to VOLUNTEER to become a member of NATO or the EU. NATO and the EU don't take anything. Norway is not a member of the EU and Sweden and Finland are not members of NATO. Neither is Swizterland or Austria members of NATO. But should they change their minds in the future, they are allowed to apply for membership, but they have to independently apply first, that is the only away you can become a member of NATO or the EU. So this idea that NATO and the EU are swallowing or, taking over, or invading anything in Europe is NONSENSE.

The United States has had a national security interest in protecting European Democracy for over a hundred years now. That is not going to change.

 

[georgephillip]

NATO is NOT an offensive alliance and only admits members that are politically, economically and socially stable. Bordering a NATO country is a good thing, not a bad thing, because such a country must meet certain human rights and stability requirements before becoming a member.

The only reason the Russians are concerned is that once these countries join NATO, Russia forever loses the ability to easily invade and rape these Eastern European countries like they did in the 20th century.

How many times did European and US Democracies invade and rape Russia in the 20th century? NATO lost its fictitious "defensive" purpose when the Wall fell, If you doubt that, ask the citizens of Yugoslavia and Libya about its concern for stability and human rights. Like the courts, the legislative, and executive branches of government in the "land of the free", NATO serves corporate power--one of the core definitions of fascism.

NATO came in and stopped Civil War and gross human rights abuses in Bosnia and Kosovo. Within the next 10 years, Bosnia, Macedonia, and Montenegro will all become members of the NATO Alliance.

Libya now has the first opportunity at democracy thanks to NATO in helping to remove its dictator. Of course, if you are a fan of dictatorship ala Putin and Saddam, or Qaidafi, I could see why you would not like NATO.

NATO bombs in Yugoslavia triggered the gross human rights abuses:

"During the 78 days of the military campaign, the Serbian government estimates that at least 2,500 people died and 12,500 were injured.

"But the exact death toll and the full extent of the damage remains unclear.

"It is estimated that the bombing damaged 25,000 houses and apartment buildings and destroyed 470 kilometres of roads and 600 kilometres of railway.

"So far only Serbia’s defence ministry has publicly revealed its data, saying that NATO forces killed 631 members of the Serbian armed forces, while a further 28 went missing..."

"During the NATO bombing, Yugoslav forces carried out an extensive campaign in Kosovo, resulting in the expulsion of the Kosovo Albanian population.

"The Hague Tribunal charged Milosevic and six other top officials with committing war crimes in Kosovo, although the former leader died before a verdict was reached.

"According to the Centre for Humanitarian Law in Belgrade, around 9,401 people were killed or went missing in Kosovo during the period of the NATO bombing, the majority of them Albanians.

"The bombing ended on June 10, 1999, after the signing of the Kumanovo Agreement and the adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 1244, which was followed by the withdrawal of all Yugoslav military forces from Kosovo and the arrival of 36,000 international peacekeepers.

"When the Yugoslav army moved out, the Kosovo Liberation Army expelled the majority of Serbs from Kosovo."

Death Toll From NATO Yugoslavia Bombing Still Unknown :: Balkan Insight

 

[U2Edge]

Russia did not invade Crimea, they had an agreement with the elected government of Ukraine to maintain a military presence in Crimea and the coup threatened their established naval presence and access to the Black Sea and Mediterranean. Along with this the people of Crimea voted overwhelmingly to secede from the unelected coup government.

Unfortunately, nazi, anti anti-russian and essentially anti-slavic narrative of historical revision, which is born out of Lviv province(which was de-russified by Austria Hungary and Poland) has affected central regions like the capital Kiev. Just like they were used by Nazis, and maintain that identity, the US, NATO, and EU are using them as shock troops against the anti-coup ukrainians and Russians in the East. Now on par with nazi crimes against russian and ukrainian people in world war two, these anti russian nazis are slaughtering innocents in Odessa(including pregnant women).
How Neo-Nazi Thugs Supported by Kiev Regime Killed Odessa Inhabitants. Photographic Evidence | Global Research

While the Kiev Government isn't neo-nazi at the top, and actually has many jews and those with a history in finance(to secure the IMF loan that will cripple the country), they use neo-nazi shock troops in the east to terrorize opposition.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDj0VRwQFnw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgtFNglt_YA

The only terrorist here are the Russians. Russia LEASED A BASE IN CRIMEA! RUSSIAN TROOPS WERE NOT ALLOWED OFF BASE TO HARRASS OR TAKE OVER UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS AND THEY WERE CERTAINLY NOT ALLOWED TO ANNEX CRIMEA OR ANY OTHER TERRITORY IN UKRAINE.

Does the fact that the United States has a base in South Korea allow the United States to annex South Korea?

None of the political events in Kiev threatened anyone in Crimea. The new government in Kiev never stated they were going to end Russia's lease of the base, but they certainly had the right to, just as any Apartment owner has a right to kick out renters at the appropriate time.

As for the referendum in Crimea, it was illegal based on the Ukrainian Constitution. The Ukrainian Constitution states that the entire country gets to vote on whether a certain province can be allowed to succeed. In addition, the referendum only allowed two choices, become independent or become apart of Russia. The people of Crimea were not given the option on the referendum to vote and stay in Ukraine. So the referendum itself is a crock of shit.

Wrong, they had a treaty with the elected government to keep 25,000 troops in Crimea, and have every right to protect their military interests from an unelected democratic coup. And the people of Crimea aren't beholden to an unelected unconstitutional government. The coup was unconstitutional, so the illegal government null and voided the Constitution when they usurped power.

RUSSIA HAD A RIGHT TO KEEP UP TO 25,000 TROOPS ON A BASE THEY WERE LEASING FROM UKRAINE IN THE CRIMEA. THOSE TROOPS NEVER HAD A RIGHT TO BE DEPLOYED OFF BASE TO TAKE OVER UKRAINIAN POLICE, MILITARY, AND GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS!

The change in government does not change the constitution or the laws governing Russia's lease of the base in Ukraine period. The constitution can only be changed through a vote, which has yet to take place.

Victor Yunokovich committed illegal crimes against the people of Ukraine when he sent in snipers which murdered 100 people peacefully protesting. It is a fundamental human right to be allowed a venue to protest and any means used to prevent that is unconstituinal and illegal and those in government responsible deserve to be impeached. Even members of Victor Yanukoviches on party voted to impeach and remove him from office.

Russia?s 25,000-troop allowance & other facts you may not know about Crimea ? RT News

And also, the US was happy to support the Kosovo, an Islamist narco-state secede from the democratically elected government of Serbia, against the Serbian Constitution. But hey when it supports US EU interests to balkanize regions and bring nations into the EU it is fine. So spare me the hypocrisy.

The United States wanted Kosovo to remain part of Serbia, but that essentially became untenable do to the worst gross human rights violations in Europe since World War II when Milosovic launched operation Horshoe to ethnically cleanse Kosovo of the all ethnical Albanians. This was done in 1999 and this gross human rights violation was reversed by NATO. Since that time NATO and the EU used diplomacy and relations to try to come to an agreement between Kosovo and Serbia for 9 years. But ultimately this failed, Kosovo declared independence in 2008, 9 years after 10,000 of its citizens were executed, millions of dollars of private property destroyed, and over a million refugees sent fleeing into Albania.

As of today, 110 UN countries have recognized Kosovo as an independent state, and at the current rate, by 2030, every country and the world will recognize Kosovo as an independent state. Less than 5 countries have recognized Russia's annexation of Crimea from Ukraine by comparison. Less than 5 countries recognized Russia's moves to turn the Georgian territory of South Osetia and Abakazia into independent states.

Also, Serbia has renounced ANY further violence or military moves in regards to its relations with Kosovo. It still wants Kosovo back, but will not use military means to get it back.

Again, South Korea is apples and oranges, South Koreans haven't voted to be part of Russia like Crimea has(at 97% with over 90% turnout), and South Korea wasn't part of the US for centuries until the 1950s like Crimea was part of Russia. Totally different and unrelated situation.

The long history is irrelevant. In terms of law, the only thing that matters here is the UN Charter, and under the UN Charter, Ukraine is an independent sovereign state and its territorial integrity must be recognized and respected by all UN states. So Russia's annexation of the Crimea from Ukraine is a violation of the UN Charter.

The government in Kiev is illegitimate and unelected, they have no authority to cancel agreements. And the RUSSIANS of Crimea wanted nothing to do with an unelected anti-Russian regime that uses neo-nazis to suppress dissent. It looks like Crimea was right to leave, especially after evens in Odessa, if they remained they could have been terrorized and murdered by neo-nazis.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1XdJxRbe08

Unelected yes, illegitimate no. Yanokovich's government became illegitimate because of its illegal actions while in office. New elections are coming on May 25, 2014!

No one in Crimea had the rights compromised in anyway be events in Kiev. The only people killed or injured in Crimea were ethnic Ukrainians and Ethnic Tarters.

Also, a referendum, that does not allow people the choice to remain part of Ukraine on the ballot is a fraud and illegal.

And since when do you pro-eu liberal faggots and nazis care about a vote? You didn't care about the fact that you threw out Yanukovych without a vote, who had agreed to early elections and discussions with the EU. Perhaps you knew you would have lost in a fair election. Why should Crimea honor the wishes of an illegal unelected government?
BBC News - Ukrainian president and opposition sign early poll deal

And more lies here were the two options on the Crimea referendum.

1. Join the Russian Federation

2. Restore the 1992 constitution and remain as a part of Ukraine

Crimean status referendum, 2014 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



And you are lying again

The actual ballot that I saw only options for independence from Ukraine or to join Russia. I see the link, but its from Wikipedia which could have been edited by anyone. In any event, its unconstitutional for Crimea to hold its own referendendum and leave the country. The only way any province can leave Ukraine is through a national referendum according to the Ukrainian Constitution.

 

[Steinlight]

Is the Jew Nuland part of the Russian Government? She said herself, they gave 5 billion to support pro-NATO pro- EU groups.

Victoria Nuland Admits: US Has Invested $5 Billion In The Development of Ukrainian, "Democratic Institutions"

So basically what your saying is, US intervention in Ukraine overthrowing an elected government is good, and the people of Crimea voting to leave the unelected government and Russia protecting it's bases which it has a right to as per an agreement with the previously elected government is bad. Ok gotcha love the consistency there you jew loving black faggot.
.

Sending money to support democratic development in countries is not illegal and not a coup. Russia is only allowed to have a base in Crimea with the permission of the Ukrainian Government. Russia has to pay the Ukrainian government a lease EVERY YEAR IN ORDER TO KEEP USING THE BASE.

There was no legal, or international sanctioned referendum in Crimea. The Ballot only had two options on it, independence or join Russia. People wanting to remain in Ukraine were not given any option to mark that on the ballot because it was not there, which means even if the referendum was legal, it was fraudulent because it did not allow the people of the choice of remaining in Ukraine.

Can't compare Alaska to Kiev, Kiev was where Rus was founded in 882. Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus were born from the Rus. Ukraine has historically been part of the Russian Empire. The only people who don't recognize themselves as racial and cultural brothers with the Russians are those nazis from Lviv, who were historically part of Poland and Austria Hungary and have been trying to de-russify the rest of Ukraine.

History is great, but it does not supercede the UN Charter which says that all United Nations members have their territorial integrity recognized and that such territory cannot be annexed by other countries. Further, Russia signed a treaty in 1994 in which they agreed to respect Ukraine's territorial integrity if they gave up their Nuclear Weapons to the Russian Federation. Russia also promised in a revisement of the CFE treaty in 1997 to respect the territorial integrity of all Eastern European Countries.

Russia never invaded Ukraine, they had a right to keep their troops in Crimea, I already linked that to you. And besides, US expanded NATO long before the Crimea issue. Get your timeline right, you neo-kahns expanded into the former Warsaw Pact as early as 1999 with Poland and in 2004 with Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia among others, you can't use "Russian Aggression" as an excuse when at that time Russia was doing nothing while the US just invaded Afghanistan and Iraq. So fuck you and your hypocrisy.

Russia had a right to keep troops on the bases they were LEASING in Crimea. They did not have right to deploy those troops off base to surround and take over Ukrainian Police, Military, and government buildings and sites throughout the province and then ANNEX the province into Russia. Doing so is an invasion and is illegal.

Russian forces based in Crimea have no more right to deploy and take government, police, and military buildings than the US military based in Okinawa Japan would have right to do the same. Its illegal to do so, and the invasion of another countries territory!

I know NATO expanded long before the Crimea issue and there was NEVER any formal agreement or treaty which stated that Eastern European countries were not allowed to join NATO.

The United States invaded Afghanistan because it was first attacked by terrorist based in Afghanistan and protected the Afghan government at that time.

The United States and other countries invaded Iraq in 2003 because of SADDAM's failure to comply with UN Security Council Resolutions passed in regards to his ILLEGAL INVASION AND ANNEXATION of Kuwait in 1990!

The only one swallowing up Eastern Europe is NATO and the EU Superstate. There is no american national security interest in fighting a war with Russia. Only neo-con/neo-lib idealogues and those who stand to make a profit from the conflict and its results want this war. You are just a useful puppet and fodder for ZOG

A country has to VOLUNTEER to become a member of NATO or the EU. NATO and the EU don't take anything. Norway is not a member of the EU and Sweden and Finland are not members of NATO. Neither is Swizterland or Austria members of NATO. But should they change their minds in the future, they are allowed to apply for membership, but they have to independently apply first, that is the only away you can become a member of NATO or the EU. So this idea that NATO and the EU are swallowing or, taking over, or invading anything in Europe is NONSENSE.

The United States has had a national security interest in protecting European Democracy for over a hundred years now. That is not going to change.

They made an agreement with the elected government not the jew/neo-nazi coup government. The coup government, which is illegal and unconstitutional has no right to abrogate treaties. And if you read the treaty it clearly says no such thing about russian troops being restricted to bases only, particularly when its military bases are under threat during a coup.

Russian troops only removed the illegal government military personal after the people voted to secede from the unelected unconstitutional government, not before, so get your facts straight.

Wrong, the US overthrew the Afghan government and went into a ten year nation building quagmire where they lost lol.

I thought it was because of Saddam being involved in 911 and WMDS, good to know thousands of americans, about a million iraqis, and a trillion dollars were lost to enforce the sanctions of an anti-american organization whose in majority opposed the invasion of Iraq to begin with.

And if the US refuses to honor its agreement to not expand nato, Russia is under no obligation to repsect the sovereignty of an illegal ukrainian government when they accepted Crimea into Russia. After, both of these aren't formal agreements. So if you want the US and EU playing hardball and expanding dishonoring informal agreements, than Russia will do the same when it's allied government in Ukraine, ethnic russians in crimea want to secede, and when its military installations are threatened.

You can't pretend to be for the "rule of law" in Crimea, and against it when Kosovo seceded from serbia and the US supported it. You can't pretend to be for dishonoring informal agreements with russia not to expand NATO, than expect Russia to sit by and hold Russia to informal treaties with an unelected kiev government it never made informal agreements with in the first place..

And that is the thing, that is why the US Government is hated worldwide, for their hypocrisy. They accuse others of aggression, when in reality, they are the biggest threat to world peace, they are the ones who are nationbuilding and overthrowing governments whether it be Yugoslavia, Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Ukraine etc. That is why most of the world laughs when you make these claims.

 

[Steinlight]

If you want war with Russia over this artificial nation and shitty eastern european backwater known as Ukraine, be my guest, but send your money, your family, and yourself to fight the war. I will have nothing to do with it. I can be across the border into Mexico in two hours flat if I hear a war is going down, and believe me I will leave.

 

[U2Edge]

How many times did European and US Democracies invade and rape Russia in the 20th century? NATO lost its fictitious "defensive" purpose when the Wall fell, If you doubt that, ask the citizens of Yugoslavia and Libya about its concern for stability and human rights. Like the courts, the legislative, and executive branches of government in the "land of the free", NATO serves corporate power--one of the core definitions of fascism.

NATO came in and stopped Civil War and gross human rights abuses in Bosnia and Kosovo. Within the next 10 years, Bosnia, Macedonia, and Montenegro will all become members of the NATO Alliance.

Libya now has the first opportunity at democracy thanks to NATO in helping to remove its dictator. Of course, if you are a fan of dictatorship ala Putin and Saddam, or Qaidafi, I could see why you would not like NATO.

NATO bombs in Yugoslavia triggered the gross human rights abuses:

"During the 78 days of the military campaign, the Serbian government estimates that at least 2,500 people died and 12,500 were injured.

"But the exact death toll and the full extent of the damage remains unclear.

"It is estimated that the bombing damaged 25,000 houses and apartment buildings and destroyed 470 kilometres of roads and 600 kilometres of railway.

"So far only Serbia’s defence ministry has publicly revealed its data, saying that NATO forces killed 631 members of the Serbian armed forces, while a further 28 went missing..."

"During the NATO bombing, Yugoslav forces carried out an extensive campaign in Kosovo, resulting in the expulsion of the Kosovo Albanian population.

"The Hague Tribunal charged Milosevic and six other top officials with committing war crimes in Kosovo, although the former leader died before a verdict was reached.

"According to the Centre for Humanitarian Law in Belgrade, around 9,401 people were killed or went missing in Kosovo during the period of the NATO bombing, the majority of them Albanians.

"The bombing ended on June 10, 1999, after the signing of the Kumanovo Agreement and the adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 1244, which was followed by the withdrawal of all Yugoslav military forces from Kosovo and the arrival of 36,000 international peacekeepers.

"When the Yugoslav army moved out, the Kosovo Liberation Army expelled the majority of Serbs from Kosovo."

Death Toll From NATO Yugoslavia Bombing Still Unknown :: Balkan Insight

Had the Serbs been willing to work with the international community, none of this would have happened. Instead, the invaded with tanks and troops executed 10,000 people and sent over a million people fleeing into other countries. NATO responded to those gross human rights violations which stopped the explusion of people from their homes and allowed more than a million people who ran to Albania to return to their homes in Kosovo to pick up the pieces of what was left. Today 110 countries around the world recognize Kosovo's independence from Serbia.

 

[Steinlight]

Wrong, Russian troops only force coup military to leave once the people of Crimea voted overwhelmingly to break from the illegal(as per the Ukrainian Constitution, you don't have a right to violent coup) and unelected government. The Constitution was abrogated with the coup because the government in Kiev is illegal. Crimea refused to bend to neo nazi criminals, eu liberals, and jew oligarchs

Wrong, even European ambassadors admit neo-nazi right sector and svoboda used the the snipers, the buildings the snipers were in were in coup possession.

You scum have a lot of blood on your hands, in Kiev, Odessa, and Donetsk.



And pro-russians in Odessa or Slovyansk had no such right of protest they were just killed, fuck you and your double talk and hypocrisy.

Thank you for admitting you support the "illegal" secession of Kosovo but oppose the "illegal" secession of Crimea and thus exposing your hypocrisy and US Government hypocrisy. When Kosovo violates the UN charter it is ok, but when Crimea violates it it is unacceptable.The fact is, you don't care about secession or self-determination, all you care about just support US Government interests.

So in the future, just stop hiding behind the law, you don't care about the law, you just use it in certain instances to justify US intervention. Just be honest and say you support all US Government actions regardless of the law.

And you are either lying or ignorant, probably the first. It is known world wide and accepted by western press even the second option allowed them to remain in Ukraine. Initialy their was a disinfo campaign by jewish press outfits like the NY Times, but they were exposed as telling the same lies you tell.

Here is the authentic ballot, which very clearly shows they were given an option to remain in Ukraine. Or are you too stupid and you can't even read Russian?

BBC News - Crimea referendum: What does the ballot paper say?

 

[Camp]

No room for 'Nyet' in Ukraine's Crimea vote to join Russia | Reuters

Rigged election that has never been accepted by the world community, including the United Nations.

 

[Steinlight]

Jewish American media lies in title, but admits truth in article.

According to a format of the ballot paper, published on the parliament's website, the first question will ask: "Are you in favor of the reunification of Crimea with Russia as a part of the Russian Federation?"

The second asks: "Are you in favor of restoring the 1992 Constitution and the status of Crimea as a part of Ukraine?"
No room for 'Nyet' in Ukraine's Crimea vote to join Russia | Reuters

 

[Camp]

Jewish American media lies in title, but admits truth in article.

According to a format of the ballot paper, published on the parliament's website, the first question will ask: "Are you in favor of the reunification of Crimea with Russia as a part of the Russian Federation?"

The second asks: "Are you in favor of restoring the 1992 Constitution and the status of Crimea as a part of Ukraine?"
No room for 'Nyet' in Ukraine's Crimea vote to join Russia | Reuters

Read the reuters link I posted. It gives an easy to understand interpretation what the second option was.

 

[Camp]

Proof of Ukraine citizenship can be gotten by Russians wanting to visit Ukraine for pennies.

 

[U2Edge]

Is the Jew Nuland part of the Russian Government? She said herself, they gave 5 billion to support pro-NATO pro- EU groups.

Victoria Nuland Admits: US Has Invested $5 Billion In The Development of Ukrainian, "Democratic Institutions"

So basically what your saying is, US intervention in Ukraine overthrowing an elected government is good, and the people of Crimea voting to leave the unelected government and Russia protecting it's bases which it has a right to as per an agreement with the previously elected government is bad. Ok gotcha love the consistency there you jew loving black faggot.
.

Sending money to support democratic development in countries is not illegal and not a coup. Russia is only allowed to have a base in Crimea with the permission of the Ukrainian Government. Russia has to pay the Ukrainian government a lease EVERY YEAR IN ORDER TO KEEP USING THE BASE.

There was no legal, or international sanctioned referendum in Crimea. The Ballot only had two options on it, independence or join Russia. People wanting to remain in Ukraine were not given any option to mark that on the ballot because it was not there, which means even if the referendum was legal, it was fraudulent because it did not allow the people of the choice of remaining in Ukraine.



History is great, but it does not supercede the UN Charter which says that all United Nations members have their territorial integrity recognized and that such territory cannot be annexed by other countries. Further, Russia signed a treaty in 1994 in which they agreed to respect Ukraine's territorial integrity if they gave up their Nuclear Weapons to the Russian Federation. Russia also promised in a revisement of the CFE treaty in 1997 to respect the territorial integrity of all Eastern European Countries.




Russia had a right to keep troops on the bases they were LEASING in Crimea. They did not have right to deploy those troops off base to surround and take over Ukrainian Police, Military, and government buildings and sites throughout the province and then ANNEX the province into Russia. Doing so is an invasion and is illegal.

Russian forces based in Crimea have no more right to deploy and take government, police, and military buildings than the US military based in Okinawa Japan would have right to do the same. Its illegal to do so, and the invasion of another countries territory!

I know NATO expanded long before the Crimea issue and there was NEVER any formal agreement or treaty which stated that Eastern European countries were not allowed to join NATO.

The United States invaded Afghanistan because it was first attacked by terrorist based in Afghanistan and protected the Afghan government at that time.

The United States and other countries invaded Iraq in 2003 because of SADDAM's failure to comply with UN Security Council Resolutions passed in regards to his ILLEGAL INVASION AND ANNEXATION of Kuwait in 1990!

The only one swallowing up Eastern Europe is NATO and the EU Superstate. There is no american national security interest in fighting a war with Russia. Only neo-con/neo-lib idealogues and those who stand to make a profit from the conflict and its results want this war. You are just a useful puppet and fodder for ZOG

A country has to VOLUNTEER to become a member of NATO or the EU. NATO and the EU don't take anything. Norway is not a member of the EU and Sweden and Finland are not members of NATO. Neither is Swizterland or Austria members of NATO. But should they change their minds in the future, they are allowed to apply for membership, but they have to independently apply first, that is the only away you can become a member of NATO or the EU. So this idea that NATO and the EU are swallowing or, taking over, or invading anything in Europe is NONSENSE.

The United States has had a national security interest in protecting European Democracy for over a hundred years now. That is not going to change.

They made an agreement with the elected government not the jew/neo-nazi coup government. The coup government, which is illegal and unconstitutional has no right to abrogate treaties. And if you read the treaty it clearly says no such thing about russian troops being restricted to bases only, particularly when its military bases are under threat during a coup.

.

The new government in Ukraine has not violated or abrogated Russia's Lease agreement with Ukraine over the base in Crimea. Its is the Russians that have violated the agreement by deploying tanks and troops into civilian area's of crimea in order to sieze Ukrainian government, military, and police buildings. That's ILLEGAL, and invasion, you can't do that.

US Marines based in Okinawa Japan are NOT allowed to deploy in combat formations off base in order to seize property owned by Japanese private citizens or the Japanese government. That is the same basing deal the Russians had with the Ukrainians in Crimea, and the grossly violated it!

The only military bases that were ever threatened in Crimea, were Ukrainian military bases which the Russians forced the Ukrainian military to leave. Unlike the Russians, the Ukrainian military in Crimea, NEVER DEPLOYED OFF BASE!

Russian troops only removed the illegal government military personal after the people voted to secede from the unelected unconstitutional government, not before, so get your facts straight.

There is video of Russian forces breaking into government buildings on the last day of February 2014. Russian forces showed up outside Ukrainian Army bases in the week that followed as well. All of those actions were ILLEGAL and so was the so called referendum which took place AFTER Russian forces deployed off base. An Illegal referendum can NEVER make the illegal actions of the Russian military in Crimea, legit.

Wrong, the US overthrew the Afghan government and went into a ten year nation building quagmire where they lost lol.

The US overthrew the Afghan government because it was protecting terrorist who murdered 3,000 people on 911. The current democratically elected government that was put in place by NATO and the United States continues to run the country. The Afghan military built and trained by NATO has taken over all combat operations from NATO. By January 2015, all but perhaps a small residual force of NATO troops will have left the country. Despite that, whats left of the Taliban and Al quada which were thrown out of Government in 2001, continue to be out of government and remain in the hills hiding from the Afghan army and when they can't do that, they turn tail and run into Afghanistan.

A far different situation compared to how the Soviet Union left Afghanistan in 1989. The Soviets fully lost when the Afghan dictatorship they installed was overthrown 3 years after they left.

So far, NATO has been riding a wave of victory compared to the Soviets in Afghanistan. That's because NATO is actually there to help improve the lives of Afghan families everywhere unlike the Soviets who simply tried to exterminate anyone living in the countryside.

I thought it was because of Saddam being involved in 911 and WMDS, good to know thousands of americans, about a million iraqis, and a trillion dollars were lost to enforce the sanctions of an anti-american organization whose in majority opposed the invasion of Iraq to begin with.

It was the UN Security Council that authorized the use of military force by the United States and another nations in order to keep Iraq in compliance or wanted it violated UN Security Council Resolutions. These resolutions were passed in 1990 before the first Gulf War and authorized US airstrikes every year after the end of the First Gulf War as well as the ground invasion that followed in 2003.

While nearly a trillion dollars was spent, it was spent over a period of 10 years and was never more than 20% of the overall defense budget which was only 4.5% of annual US GDP, less than the US defense spending during the peacetime of the 1980s when the US was spending 6% of its GDP on defense.

Saddam's failure to verifiably disarm of all WMD and WMD related production facilities was a part of the reason a ground invasion proved necessary to enforce UN Security Council Resolutions against Iraq in 2003 that Iraq had been in violation of for years.

The number of Iraqi civilians killed number about 123,000 according to the most accurate sources. Most Iraqi civilians were murdered by other Iraqi's and not foreign troops. The number of civilians being murdered on an annual basis in Iraq is far less now than it was while Saddam was in power.

And if the US refuses to honor its agreement to not expand nato, Russia is under no obligation to repsect the sovereignty of an illegal ukrainian government when they accepted Crimea into Russia. After, both of these aren't formal agreements. So if you want the US and EU playing hardball and expanding dishonoring informal agreements, than Russia will do the same when it's allied government in Ukraine, ethnic russians in crimea want to secede, and when its military installations are threatened.

Russia is a member of the United Nations and agreed to the UN charter. That is a formal agreement under which they agreed to respect the territorial integrity of every member state of the UN including Ukraine. A second formal agreement under which Russia agreed to respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine was when Ukraine handed its nuclear weapons to Russia in 1994. A third formal agreement in which Russia agreed to respect Ukraine's territorial integrity was when it signed the revised CFE treaty of 1997. It agreed under that treaty to respect the territorial integrity of all Eastern European states.

In contrast, there was NEVER any formal agreement in which NATO agreed never to allow Eastern European countries to join NATO.

You can't pretend to be for the "rule of law" in Crimea, and against it when Kosovo seceded from serbia and the US supported it. You can't pretend to be for dishonoring informal agreements with russia not to expand NATO, than expect Russia to sit by and hold Russia to informal treaties with an unelected kiev government it never made informal agreements with in the first place..

If there had been gross human rights violations in Crimea by the Ukrainian military against citizens in Crimea, then under international law Crimea would have a case for succession, independent of the Ukrainian constitution. But that never happened. The Ukrainian military stayed on its bases and did not hurt anyone in Crimea.

So its not the same as Kosovo at all. Kosovo was a victim of genocide by the Serbian military and under international law, had a right to at least have its case for independence considered independent of Serbia.

There are three formal agreements which Russia signed, the first in 1991 upon Ukraine's independence from the Soviet Union, the second the exchange of nuclear weapons in 1994, and the third the revised CFE treaty in 1997. Under all these formal agreements Russia agreed to honor and respect Ukraine's territorial integrity.

In contrast, there was never any formal agreement in which NATO agreed not to allow Eastern European countries to join NATO.

And that is the thing, that is why the US Government is hated worldwide, for their hypocrisy. They accuse others of aggression, when in reality, they are the biggest threat to world peace, they are the ones who are nationbuilding and overthrowing governments whether it be Yugoslavia, Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Ukraine etc. That is why most of the world laughs when you make these claims

Most of the world countries have and want good relationships with the United States. Most of the world recognizes Kosovo as an independent State. NATO intervened in Serbia and Kosovo to end genocide and gross human rights violations. The United States and other member states with the authorization of the United Nations UN Security Council used military force against Saddam's Iraq from 1991 through 2003. US and UN member states that had troops on the ground in Iraq, had that authorized annually every year by the United Nations through the end of 2011 when the last foreign troops left Iraq.

The UN security Council approved the NATO bombing in Libya in order to protect civilians from government forces that were killing them.

The United States has primarily sent non-lethal aid to civilians in Syria, unlike Russia which rushes the latest military hardware to Syrian dictator.

The US has sent economic aid to Ukraine as well as money for democratic development. Compare that to Russia which invaded the country and annexed the Crimea.

Number of UN Nations approving Kosovo's Independence from Serbia: 110

Number of UN Nations approving Russia's annexation of Crimea: 5

 

[Steinlight]

Jewish American media lies in title, but admits truth in article.

According to a format of the ballot paper, published on the parliament's website, the first question will ask: "Are you in favor of the reunification of Crimea with Russia as a part of the Russian Federation?"

The second asks: "Are you in favor of restoring the 1992 Constitution and the status of Crimea as a part of Ukraine?"
No room for 'Nyet' in Ukraine's Crimea vote to join Russia | Reuters

Read the reuters link I posted. It gives an easy to understand interpretation what the second option was.

More like obfuscation.

And what are you liberal faggots and neo-cons gonna do about Crimea anyways? That ship has sailed. You gonna start a third world war to force them back into union with the ukraine government?

It's over man. Crimea is part of mother russia, Donetsk and Luhansk will declare independence, and their is nothing monkey boy obama and his handlers can do about it.

 

[U2Edge]

If you want war with Russia over this artificial nation and shitty eastern european backwater known as Ukraine, be my guest, but send your money, your family, and yourself to fight the war. I will have nothing to do with it. I can be across the border into Mexico in two hours flat if I hear a war is going down, and believe me I will leave.

No where did I ever mention that the United States or NATO was about to go to war in Ukraine. The United States, NATO, and the rest of the world are angry about what Russia has done in Ukraine and will impose sanctions and diplomatic penalties. But since Ukraine is not a member of NATO, the military will not be used.

The United States will definitely use military action though if Russia attempts the same bullshit in countries like Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania. All three countries are members of NATO and the EU. Latvia and Estonia have 25% of their populations being ethnic Russians. If the Russians invade these countries though, it will be war with the United States and NATO. That is the red line that Russia had better dare not cross in Europe.

The United States has been committed to defending NATO Europe from aggression for 70 years now.

 

[Camp]

Another thingy about bombing the old Yugoslav Serbian dudes, it stopped them from murdering all the men and boys in the villages, gang raping the females, even the little ones, and bashing their heads in afterwards with a big ol' mallet normally used for killing cows. Of course those were the lucky gals, the ones that got the hammer.

 

[Steinlight]

Sending money to support democratic development in countries is not illegal and not a coup. Russia is only allowed to have a base in Crimea with the permission of the Ukrainian Government. Russia has to pay the Ukrainian government a lease EVERY YEAR IN ORDER TO KEEP USING THE BASE.

There was no legal, or international sanctioned referendum in Crimea. The Ballot only had two options on it, independence or join Russia. People wanting to remain in Ukraine were not given any option to mark that on the ballot because it was not there, which means even if the referendum was legal, it was fraudulent because it did not allow the people of the choice of remaining in Ukraine.



History is great, but it does not supercede the UN Charter which says that all United Nations members have their territorial integrity recognized and that such territory cannot be annexed by other countries. Further, Russia signed a treaty in 1994 in which they agreed to respect Ukraine's territorial integrity if they gave up their Nuclear Weapons to the Russian Federation. Russia also promised in a revisement of the CFE treaty in 1997 to respect the territorial integrity of all Eastern European Countries.




Russia had a right to keep troops on the bases they were LEASING in Crimea. They did not have right to deploy those troops off base to surround and take over Ukrainian Police, Military, and government buildings and sites throughout the province and then ANNEX the province into Russia. Doing so is an invasion and is illegal.

Russian forces based in Crimea have no more right to deploy and take government, police, and military buildings than the US military based in Okinawa Japan would have right to do the same. Its illegal to do so, and the invasion of another countries territory!

I know NATO expanded long before the Crimea issue and there was NEVER any formal agreement or treaty which stated that Eastern European countries were not allowed to join NATO.

The United States invaded Afghanistan because it was first attacked by terrorist based in Afghanistan and protected the Afghan government at that time.

The United States and other countries invaded Iraq in 2003 because of SADDAM's failure to comply with UN Security Council Resolutions passed in regards to his ILLEGAL INVASION AND ANNEXATION of Kuwait in 1990!




A country has to VOLUNTEER to become a member of NATO or the EU. NATO and the EU don't take anything. Norway is not a member of the EU and Sweden and Finland are not members of NATO. Neither is Swizterland or Austria members of NATO. But should they change their minds in the future, they are allowed to apply for membership, but they have to independently apply first, that is the only away you can become a member of NATO or the EU. So this idea that NATO and the EU are swallowing or, taking over, or invading anything in Europe is NONSENSE.

The United States has had a national security interest in protecting European Democracy for over a hundred years now. That is not going to change.

They made an agreement with the elected government not the jew/neo-nazi coup government. The coup government, which is illegal and unconstitutional has no right to abrogate treaties. And if you read the treaty it clearly says no such thing about russian troops being restricted to bases only, particularly when its military bases are under threat during a coup.

.

The new government in Ukraine has not violated or abrogated Russia's Lease agreement with Ukraine over the base in Crimea. Its is the Russians that have violated the agreement by deploying tanks and troops into civilian area's of crimea in order to sieze Ukrainian government, military, and police buildings. That's ILLEGAL, and invasion, you can't do that.

US Marines based in Okinawa Japan are NOT allowed to deploy in combat formations off base in order to seize property owned by Japanese private citizens or the Japanese government. That is the same basing deal the Russians had with the Ukrainians in Crimea, and the grossly violated it!

The only military bases that were ever threatened in Crimea, were Ukrainian military bases which the Russians forced the Ukrainian military to leave. Unlike the Russians, the Ukrainian military in Crimea, NEVER DEPLOYED OFF BASE!




There is video of Russian forces breaking into government buildings on the last day of February 2014. Russian forces showed up outside Ukrainian Army bases in the week that followed as well. All of those actions were ILLEGAL and so was the so called referendum which took place AFTER Russian forces deployed off base. An Illegal referendum can NEVER make the illegal actions of the Russian military in Crimea, legit.




The US overthrew the Afghan government because it was protecting terrorist who murdered 3,000 people on 911. The current democratically elected government that was put in place by NATO and the United States continues to run the country. The Afghan military built and trained by NATO has taken over all combat operations from NATO. By January 2015, all but perhaps a small residual force of NATO troops will have left the country. Despite that, whats left of the Taliban and Al quada which were thrown out of Government in 2001, continue to be out of government and remain in the hills hiding from the Afghan army and when they can't do that, they turn tail and run into Afghanistan.

A far different situation compared to how the Soviet Union left Afghanistan in 1989. The Soviets fully lost when the Afghan dictatorship they installed was overthrown 3 years after they left.

So far, NATO has been riding a wave of victory compared to the Soviets in Afghanistan. That's because NATO is actually there to help improve the lives of Afghan families everywhere unlike the Soviets who simply tried to exterminate anyone living in the countryside.




It was the UN Security Council that authorized the use of military force by the United States and another nations in order to keep Iraq in compliance or wanted it violated UN Security Council Resolutions. These resolutions were passed in 1990 before the first Gulf War and authorized US airstrikes every year after the end of the First Gulf War as well as the ground invasion that followed in 2003.

While nearly a trillion dollars was spent, it was spent over a period of 10 years and was never more than 20% of the overall defense budget which was only 4.5% of annual US GDP, less than the US defense spending during the peacetime of the 1980s when the US was spending 6% of its GDP on defense.

Saddam's failure to verifiably disarm of all WMD and WMD related production facilities was a part of the reason a ground invasion proved necessary to enforce UN Security Council Resolutions against Iraq in 2003 that Iraq had been in violation of for years.

The number of Iraqi civilians killed number about 123,000 according to the most accurate sources. Most Iraqi civilians were murdered by other Iraqi's and not foreign troops. The number of civilians being murdered on an annual basis in Iraq is far less now than it was while Saddam was in power.



Russia is a member of the United Nations and agreed to the UN charter. That is a formal agreement under which they agreed to respect the territorial integrity of every member state of the UN including Ukraine. A second formal agreement under which Russia agreed to respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine was when Ukraine handed its nuclear weapons to Russia in 1994. A third formal agreement in which Russia agreed to respect Ukraine's territorial integrity was when it signed the revised CFE treaty of 1997. It agreed under that treaty to respect the territorial integrity of all Eastern European states.

In contrast, there was NEVER any formal agreement in which NATO agreed never to allow Eastern European countries to join NATO.

You can't pretend to be for the "rule of law" in Crimea, and against it when Kosovo seceded from serbia and the US supported it. You can't pretend to be for dishonoring informal agreements with russia not to expand NATO, than expect Russia to sit by and hold Russia to informal treaties with an unelected kiev government it never made informal agreements with in the first place..

If there had been gross human rights violations in Crimea by the Ukrainian military against citizens in Crimea, then under international law Crimea would have a case for succession, independent of the Ukrainian constitution. But that never happened. The Ukrainian military stayed on its bases and did not hurt anyone in Crimea.

So its not the same as Kosovo at all. Kosovo was a victim of genocide by the Serbian military and under international law, had a right to at least have its case for independence considered independent of Serbia.

There are three formal agreements which Russia signed, the first in 1991 upon Ukraine's independence from the Soviet Union, the second the exchange of nuclear weapons in 1994, and the third the revised CFE treaty in 1997. Under all these formal agreements Russia agreed to honor and respect Ukraine's territorial integrity.

In contrast, there was never any formal agreement in which NATO agreed not to allow Eastern European countries to join NATO.

And that is the thing, that is why the US Government is hated worldwide, for their hypocrisy. They accuse others of aggression, when in reality, they are the biggest threat to world peace, they are the ones who are nationbuilding and overthrowing governments whether it be Yugoslavia, Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Ukraine etc. That is why most of the world laughs when you make these claims

Most of the world countries have and want good relationships with the United States. Most of the world recognizes Kosovo as an independent State. NATO intervened in Serbia and Kosovo to end genocide and gross human rights violations. The United States and other member states with the authorization of the United Nations UN Security Council used military force against Saddam's Iraq from 1991 through 2003. US and UN member states that had troops on the ground in Iraq, had that authorized annually every year by the United Nations through the end of 2011 when the last foreign troops left Iraq.

The UN security Council approved the NATO bombing in Libya in order to protect civilians from government forces that were killing them.

The United States has primarily sent non-lethal aid to civilians in Syria, unlike Russia which rushes the latest military hardware to Syrian dictator.

The US has sent economic aid to Ukraine as well as money for democratic development. Compare that to Russia which invaded the country and annexed the Crimea.

Number of UN Nations approving Kosovo's Independence from Serbia: 110

Number of UN Nations approving Russia's annexation of Crimea: 5

so more countries condone illegality. As a man of the LAW, you should be OUTRAGED by this massive abrogation of legal resposibility. After all, America's job is to die for UN laws, according to you, lol.

So of course they want good relations, even Russia wants good relations. They don't want to end up in a third world war and most countries don't want to be made a parking lot by the US lol.

The difference is, US financed groups that overthrew and elected government. Putin enforced a democratic referendum in Crimea. Putin is spreading democracy throughout the region...

Number of civilians that died in Kosovo and Iraq due to US intervention is over a million.

1 Ukrainian soldier died in Crimea, lol.

Most people in the world are smart enough to recognize the threat when they see it, and that is why a growing number, those in East and South Ukraine, want nothing to do with the puppet government in Kiev. Whether it is Iraq, Afghanistan, East Ukraine, Syria or other nations, they want nothing to do with the US. They want to be left alone.

 

[Steinlight]

If you want war with Russia over this artificial nation and shitty eastern european backwater known as Ukraine, be my guest, but send your money, your family, and yourself to fight the war. I will have nothing to do with it. I can be across the border into Mexico in two hours flat if I hear a war is going down, and believe me I will leave.

No where did I ever mention that the United States or NATO was about to go to war in Ukraine. The United States, NATO, and the rest of the world are angry about what Russia has done in Ukraine and will impose sanctions and diplomatic penalties. But since Ukraine is not a member of NATO, the military will not be used.

The United States will definitely use military action though if Russia attempts the same bullshit in countries like Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania. All three countries are members of NATO and the EU. Latvia and Estonia have 25% of their populations being ethnic Russians. If the Russians invade these countries though, it will be war with the United States and NATO. That is the red line that Russia had better dare not cross in Europe.

The United States has been committed to defending NATO Europe from aggression for 70 years now.

Russia has no designs on those countries. It won't happen, only the US will start a war at this point.

Russia has and will continue to be defensive.

 

[Steinlight]

"The new government in Ukraine has not violated or abrogated Russia's Lease agreement with Ukraine over the base in Crimea. Its is the Russians that have violated the agreement by deploying tanks and troops into civilian area's of crimea in order to sieze Ukrainian government, military, and police buildings. That's ILLEGAL, and invasion, you can't do that. "

They only threw the Ukies out after the referendum. And yes, you can do that, they did, lol, and you won't dont anything about it.

" US Marines based in Okinawa Japan are NOT allowed to deploy in combat formations off base in order to seize property owned by Japanese private citizens or the Japanese government. That is the same basing deal the Russians had with the Ukrainians in Crimea, and the grossly violated it!"

This isn't Okinawa. This is Crimea. We aren't talking about the US Marines, we are talking Russian Military.

"There is video of Russian forces breaking into government buildings on the last day of February 2014. Russian forces showed up outside Ukrainian Army bases in the week that followed as well."

Show the video

"An Illegal referendum can NEVER make the illegal actions of the Russian military in Crimea, legit. "

It did in Kosovo, and they are legit despite violating the LAW.

"The US overthrew the Afghan government because it was protecting terrorist who murdered 3,000 people on 911. The current democratically elected government that was put in place by NATO and the United States continues to run the country. The Afghan military built and trained by NATO has taken over all combat operations from NATO. By January 2015, all but perhaps a small residual force of NATO troops will have left the country. Despite that, whats left of the Taliban and Al quada which were thrown out of Government in 2001, continue to be out of government and remain in the hills hiding from the Afghan army and when they can't do that, they turn tail and run into Afghanistan.

A far different situation compared to how the Soviet Union left Afghanistan in 1989. The Soviets fully lost when the Afghan dictatorship they installed was overthrown 3 years after they left.

So far, NATO has been riding a wave of victory compared to the Soviets in Afghanistan. That's because NATO is actually there to help improve the lives of Afghan families everywhere unlike the Soviets who simply tried to exterminate anyone living in the countryside."


Wrong, Taliban offered up Bin Laden, and in fact, US air force lifted al qaeda rebels to pakistan in late 2001. The US Government didn't care about bin laden or al qaeda, just opium which the taliban banned.
Annals of National Security: The Getaway : The New Yorker
Al-Jazeera: Taliban offered to give up bin Laden before 9/11
Drug War? American Troops Are Protecting Afghan Opium. U.S. Occupation Leads to All-Time High Heroin Production | Global Research

Taliban has won, NATO doesn't have control of whole sectors of the country, and without US troops, the puppet government will collapse, centralized government wont work in Afghanistan. Same in Iraq, they are in civil war and al qaeda has taken over parts of the country after us withdrawal. If protecting all those un resolutions helps you sleep at night after losing two wars, I guess whatever makes you happy.
Iraq: Sunni leader says Fallujah under complete ISIS control « ASHARQ AL-AWSAT
BBC News - Afghanistan Taliban 'confident of victory' over Nato


"Russia is a member of the United Nations and agreed to the UN charter. That is a formal agreement under which they agreed to respect the territorial integrity of every member state of the UN including Ukraine. A second formal agreement under which Russia agreed to respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine was when Ukraine handed its nuclear weapons to Russia in 1994. A third formal agreement in which Russia agreed to respect Ukraine's territorial integrity was when it signed the revised CFE treaty of 1997. It agreed under that treaty to respect the territorial integrity of all Eastern European states."

Cry me a river, US violates UN resolutions as well by invading Iraq. Don't see you crying about it. Like I said, before, you are picking and choosing which laws to follow and exhibiting faux outrage. Not that it matters, a faggot like yourself and the faggots in the government won't do anything about Russia in Crimea, they can't.
Iraq war was illegal and breached UN charter, says Annan | World news | The Guardian