Russia will want revenge after losing the war, this may happen in 10 years – Ukraine's Defence Intellige

[Deadstick]

A nonsense statement. Exactly what was the threat an internal Ukrainian action posed to Russia's security?

I just told you, are you thick?

 

[Deadstick]

My point is that there is no legitimate reason for the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and hardly any Americans think there is.

They believe there is for the reasons i have given and that's all that matters.

 

[toomuchtime_]

I just told you, are you thick?

What you told me was that internal events in Ukraine made it a threat to Russia, but that is nonsense. Do have anything but nonsense to post today or is just the usual bullshit from you?

 

[Deadstick]

What you told me was that internal events in Ukraine made it a threat to Russia, but that is nonsense. Do have anything but nonsense to post today or is just the usual bullshit from you?

Internal events like a coup that overthrew the elected President, attacks on people in Donbas that refused to accept that, people burned alive in the trade union building in Odessa, 9years of shelling Cities like Donetsk,inviting Nato into the Country, those internal events.

 

[Hector12]

They believe there is for the reasons i have given and that's all that matters.

I believe they deserve to be defeated.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Internal events like a coup that overthrew the elected President, attacks on people in Donbas that refused to accept that, people burned alive in the trade union building in Odessa, 9years of shelling Cities like Donetsk,inviting Nato into the Country, those internal events.

Those internal events, even if true, posed no threat to the security of Russia, and therefore provided no grounds for a Russian invasion of Ukraine. Your argument is essentially that anything Russian doesn't like about how another country is handling its own business provides a valid basis for a Russian invasion.

Why not just admit you are an enthusiastic supporter of Russian imperialism and would rather live in a might makes right world in which Russia doesn't have to abide by any rules?

 

[Deadstick]

Those internal events, even if true, posed no threat to the security of Russia, and therefore provided no grounds for a Russian invasion of Ukraine. Your argument is essentially that anything Russian doesn't like about how another country is handling its own business provides a valid basis for a Russian invasion.

Why not just admit you are an enthusiastic supporter of Russian imperialism and would rather live in a might makes right world in which Russia doesn't have to abide by any rules?

What they won't do is abide by US rules, if all that was taking place in Canada it would be a threat to the US, Russia has drawn a line in the sand in Ukraine a far as Nato goes, this isn't a war between Ukraine and Russia it's between Nato and Russia, it's just that the poor dumb Ukrainians are doing the dying for Nato.

 

[Hector12]

What they won't do is abide by US rules, if all that was taking place in Canada it would be a threat to the US, Russia has drawn a line in the sand in Ukraine a far as Nato goes, this isn't a war between Ukraine and Russia it's between Nato and Russia, it's just that the poor dumb Ukrainians are doing the dying for Nato.

Keep nukes out of it and Russia would not stand a chance against NATO.

 

[Deadstick]

Keep nukes out of it and Russia would not stand a chance against NATO.

Not that my Dad is bigger than your Dad again,if it kicked off half of Nato would be a no show.

 

[Hector12]

Not that my Dad is bigger than your Dad again,if it kicked off half of Nato would be a no show.

Germany could defeat Russia. I am glad that Germany lost the Second World War, but Germany was also fighting Great Britain and the United States. Russia could not have defeated Germany alone back then, and cannot do it now.

 

[toomuchtime_]

What they won't do is abide by US rules, if all that was taking place in Canada it would be a threat to the US, Russia has drawn a line in the sand in Ukraine a far as Nato goes, this isn't a war between Ukraine and Russia it's between Nato and Russia, it's just that the poor dumb Ukrainians are doing the dying for Nato.

So you are agreeing with me that nothing that Ukraine did posed threat to Russian security, and the invasion is just an act of Russian imperialism.

 

[beautress]

Two Days Ago,

​

 

[Hector12]

Two Days Ago,

​

He is going insane over what he must know was a foolish mistake. I hope there are adults in the room with him who will not let him push the button.

 

[beautress]

​

Russia is using its deadliest weapons against Ukraine, and considering to go after NATO nations; I don't like this.

​

 

[beautress]

He is going insane over what he must know was a foolish mistake. I hope there are adults in the room with him who will not let him push the button.

I don't know, Hector. I just found the video above that pretty much shows Russia sending their long-range very bad weapons against the Ukraine. I saw one in which Putin was said to be talking about punishing NATO countries, though none were specified. 200,000 Russians just left Crimea in a big fast hurry hours ago. This is Hitler all over again, except there could be more victims than in WWII, concentrated in less than a week. If only the Moscovites could've put a leash on Putin months ago. A lot of them did not like the news about Putin killing children in elementary schools and womens' maternity hospitals. A lot of us didn't like it either.

 

[Kruska]

It is not acceptable for Russia to invade Ukraine with the argument that at some time in the future Ukraine might be a thread to Russia.

I was initially thinking, should I just laugh my head off, at such a naive statement - or should I reply afterwards.

The USA has practiced an imperialistic, hegemonic policy since the past 125 years. And in EVERY single war the main argumentation by the respective US government was in regards to their victims, posing a future threat towards the USA.

No body would be able to honestly state that Spain, the Philippines and China - were an imminent or future threat to the USA in the 1900's. Neither was Germany in WW1. Nor were N-Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Granada.
Neither was Iraq in 1991, nor in 2003. the same applies to Serbia, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya and presently Russia.

Your statement: None of that threatened the geographical integrity of Russia.
Well - not a single one of these above listed US wars - threatened the geographical integrity of the USA.

Your statement: My point is that there is no legitimate reason for the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and hardly any Americans think there is.
Well - what "legitimate" reason did the USA have to attack any of the above mentioned countries aside from UN backing in regards to N-Korea and Iraq in 1991?

Your statement: The only country that might conceivably plan to invade Russia is China.
China hasn't started nor got into a single war since 1980 - who aside from the USA would be nuts enough to start a war with a nuke power?
China doesn't need land - if they would they could go for e.g. Kazakhstan or Mongolia any time. And who the hell goes into war due to wanting to marry other countries women? That is by far the absurdest statement I ever come across in this Forum.

Your statement: Keep nukes out of it and Russia would not stand a chance against NATO.
Therefore in total contradiction to your and @toomuchnonsense argumentation of Russia being a threat to NATO and the former Warsaw-Pact states.

Your statement: Germany could defeat Russia.
Honestly what war comic books have you been reading? try and get some books in regards to economic and industrial output/resources

Your statement: Russia could not have defeated Germany alone back then, and cannot do it now
Again what war-comic books have you been reading? Allied supplies certainly helped the Soviet Union - just as without the Soviet-Union neither Britain nor the USA could have succeeded in Africa, Italy nor Normandy.

The present German Armed Forces are incapable to conduct a war, that goes beyond contributing more then a division to some NATO adventure and expansionist undertaking.

Your statement: ..that at some time in the future Ukraine "might" be a thread to Russia.
Ukraine and NATO had become a factual threat to Russia latest in 2008. And NATO was also the one who had encouraged Georgia to attack a separatist region that was aligned with Russia in 2008.

Not a single one of your statements holds up towards facts and factual occurrences. Naturally the same goes for @toomuchnonsense.

As for the legitimacy of a war in general, according to international law:
United Nations (UN) Charter, resort to war is permitted only under two narrow conditions. The first is the traditional war (defending against an aggressor).

The second type of legitimate resort to arms refers to preemptive war, considered to be the only kind of legitimate anticipatory war precisely because it is a war launched in response to a threat that is at once overwhelming and so imminent as to allow no time
for deliberation and no choice of means.

Classic and well cited example; the 1967, 6 day Israel-Arab war. (with Israel being the attacker).

There is NO provision in the UN Charter - defining the time-frame "imminent" However Putin clearly had forwarded his demands in order to avoid a war - more then a year prior, 8 weeks and 4 weeks prior to the attack. (all three which NATO & Ukraine decided to ignore). Putin's main demand? - NO NATO membership for Ukraine and a NEUTRALITY of Ukraine - guaranteed by Russia and NATO.


The ONLY valid argument one could bring in, would refer to Putin's illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014. And the UN foremost controlled and instrumented by the USA/NATO and the EU - had 8 years time to set up a referendum-plebiscite under a UN mandate. It is crystal-water clear, that the USA/NATO and Ukraine were fully aware that such a plebiscite would internationally legalize Putin's annexation. Therefore it NEVER took place.

All sides were not willing to adhere to the Minsk I and II accords - Ukraine hoping to gain back Crimea, Donbas and Luhansk via military force (initially via NAZI militias) - and Russia not willing to allow NATO to gain a further foothold in Ukraine. Russia could have very easily rolled over Ukraine from 2015-2020 - (especially with a fellow like Trump in power) they NEVER did - why? after-all they supposedly want to resurrect Czarist Russia.

IMO - simply because Russia did not want a war - (Crimea had proven to be a bloodless enterprise) (and separatists had demanded their own republics, Donbas and Luhansk - certainly supported by Russia) all they wanted, was for NATO to stop it's Eastward Expansion. Something that even Trump wasn't willing to accept - so now Americans blaming Biden is just ludicrous.

 

[Kruska]

...Do have anything but nonsense to post today or is just the usual bullshit from you?

Look who is talking.

 

[Kruska]

So you are agreeing with me that nothing that Ukraine did posed threat to Russian security, and the invasion is just an act of Russian imperialism.

Placing words into other peoples mouth is obviously your favored discussion tool - the typical signature of a moron who got nothing factual to contribute.

 

[Hector12]

I was initially thinking, should I just laugh my head off, at such a naive statement - or should I reply afterwards.

The USA has practiced an imperialistic, hegemonic policy since the past 125 years. And in EVERY single war the main argumentation by the respective US government was in regards to their victims, posing a future threat towards the USA.

No body would be able to honestly state that Spain, the Philippines and China - were an imminent or future threat to the USA in the 1900's. Neither was Germany in WW1. Nor were N-Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Granada.
Neither was Iraq in 1991, nor in 2003. the same applies to Serbia, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya and presently Russia.

Your statement: None of that threatened the geographical integrity of Russia.
Well - not a single one of these above listed US wars - threatened the geographical integrity of the USA.

Your statement: My point is that there is no legitimate reason for the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and hardly any Americans think there is.
Well - what "legitimate" reason did the USA have to attack any of the above mentioned countries aside from UN backing in regards to N-Korea and Iraq in 1991?

Your statement: The only country that might conceivably plan to invade Russia is China.
China hasn't started nor got into a single war since 1980 - who aside from the USA would be nuts enough to start a war with a nuke power?
China doesn't need land - if they would they could go for e.g. Kazakhstan or Mongolia any time. And who the hell goes into war due to wanting to marry other countries women? That is by far the absurdest statement I ever come across in this Forum.

Your statement: Keep nukes out of it and Russia would not stand a chance against NATO.
Therefore in total contradiction to your and @toomuchnonsense argumentation of Russia being a threat to NATO and the former Warsaw-Pact states.

Your statement: Germany could defeat Russia.
Honestly what war comic books have you been reading? try and get some books in regards to economic and industrial output/resources

Your statement: Russia could not have defeated Germany alone back then, and cannot do it now
Again what war-comic books have you been reading? Allied supplies certainly helped the Soviet Union - just as without the Soviet-Union neither Britain nor the USA could have succeeded in Africa, Italy nor Normandy.

The present German Armed Forces are incapable to conduct a war, that goes beyond contributing more then a division to some NATO adventure and expansionist undertaking.

Your statement: ..that at some time in the future Ukraine "might" be a thread to Russia.
Ukraine and NATO had become a factual threat to Russia latest in 2008. And NATO was also the one who had encouraged Georgia to attack a separatist region that was aligned with Russia in 2008.

Not a single one of your statements holds up towards facts and factual occurrences. Naturally the same goes for @toomuchnonsense.

As for the legitimacy of a war in general, according to international law:
United Nations (UN) Charter, resort to war is permitted only under two narrow conditions. The first is the traditional war (defending against an aggressor).

The second type of legitimate resort to arms refers to preemptive war, considered to be the only kind of legitimate anticipatory war precisely because it is a war launched in response to a threat that is at once overwhelming and so imminent as to allow no time
for deliberation and no choice of means.

Classic and well cited example; the 1967, 6 day Israel-Arab war. (with Israel being the attacker).

There is NO provision in the UN Charter - defining the time-frame "imminent" However Putin clearly had forwarded his demands in order to avoid a war - more then a year prior, 8 weeks and 4 weeks prior to the attack. (all three which NATO & Ukraine decided to ignore). Putin's main demand? - NO NATO membership for Ukraine and a NEUTRALITY of Ukraine - guaranteed by Russia and NATO.


The ONLY valid argument one could bring in, would refer to Putin's illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014. And the UN foremost controlled and instrumented by the USA/NATO and the EU - had 8 years time to set up a referendum-plebiscite under a UN mandate. It is crystal-water clear, that the USA/NATO and Ukraine were fully aware that such a plebiscite would internationally legalize Putin's annexation. Therefore it NEVER took place.

All sides were not willing to adhere to the Minsk I and II accords - Ukraine hoping to gain back Crimea, Donbas and Luhansk via military force (initially via NAZI militias) - and Russia not willing to allow NATO to gain a further foothold in Ukraine. Russia could have very easily rolled over Ukraine from 2015-2020 - (especially with a fellow like Trump in power) they NEVER did - why? after-all they supposedly want to resurrect Czarist Russia.

IMO - simply because Russia did not want a war - (Crimea had proven to be a bloodless enterprise) (and separatists had demanded their own republics, Donbas and Luhansk - certainly supported by Russia) all they wanted, was for NATO to stop it's Eastward Expansion. Something that even Trump wasn't willing to accept - so now Americans blaming Biden is just ludicrous.

We go to war when the other side hits us first. We could have allowed North Korea to over run South Korea. I am glad we did not, because South Korea is a vastly superior country to North Korea. Vietnam was a tragic mistake, but it was legal to protest that war and I did. It is neither legal nor safe for Russians to protest their war in Ukraine. Now Putin is threatening to use nuclear weapons.

 

[Kruska]

We go to war when the other side hits us first. We could have allowed North Korea to over run South Korea. I am glad we did not, because South Korea is a vastly superior country to North Korea. Vietnam was a tragic mistake, but it was legal to protest that war and I did. It is neither legal nor safe for Russians to protest their war in Ukraine. Now Putin is threatening to use nuclear weapons.

None of the aforementioned countries hit the USA first - nor did they hit the USA at all. - as such it's an untrue & meaningless statement.

You are defending and excusing US imperialism and hegemonism of the past 125 years - whist accusing Russia of the same - without Russia having done so, or with you being able to proof such an accusation. The Russian Federation is not the USSR - their system and policy has entirely changed since 1990 - whilst that of the USA has never changed in those 125 years.

That Putin just as China's Xi - started to openly defy US/NATO aggression, it's imperialistic and hegemonic policy, unlike their predecessors, is indeed the case.

If Russians are able to protest or not - has nothing to do with this war having been provoked "wanted" by the USA/NATO.