Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So, you really believe in this shit, do you? As much as I hate Bandarites, I can't imagine even them doing this.
Russian troops 'gang-raped Ukrainian mum before attacking her daughter, 4'
Harrowing testimonies of rape and torture have come out in a new UN report.metro.co.uk
Putin is a war criminal. The crimes are piling up. His desperation is growing as he tries to stifle any opposition in Russia.
was it your new boyfriend picture ? she is ugly^^ right on queue…
Poootin HumperYou are free to move to Ukraine, sign up, and fight Putin.
Will you join the Levites, or run up a hill and hold up a wooden staff?
This is very true, but. . . even the western media, before the war broke out, pointed out, that the AZOV battalion, were, literal fascists.
All true.Yes, and?
We had an active Fascist movement in the US in the 1930s. As well as the UK. And we still have such groups in the US even today. Does that make the US a "Nazi country"? President Trump had such groups endorsing him as President, does that make him a Nazi?
David Duke was a Democrat, then a Republican, then a Democrat again before being a Republican again. He also belonged to the Ross Perot "Reform Party". Does that make those parties "Nazi Parties"?
There will always be "Nazis" in almost any government, political party, and country. However, rational people know that in the modern era, they are always going to be fringe individuals. That will support anybody or any movement that they think gets them attention. They are low-life trash that thrives on attention, and will latch onto anything that gets them that attention.
Just like those "Moron Label" inbreeds that I have been mocking in here for years.
Yet another neo-fascist movement, that tries to disguise themselves as "mainstream", and getting support it really does not deserve. And for those that do not look into it, they do have a message that appeals to many. However, most who actually look into them critically I think react like me. Pinching their noses closed and turning away from them.
Azov is not part of the Ukraine military. It is a bunch of idiots who saw that they were in a desperate position, and volunteered themselves to fight. Yes, they are a Neo-Nazi group. And myself, I find it hilarious that since they have placed themselves voluntarily to defend Ukraine, they are now supporting and defending a Jewish President. I actually find a delicious irony in that, and quite often chuckle as they inbred morons themselves likely can't even figure out how stupid that makes them.
multipolarista.com
nationalinterest.org
Who exactly is apologizing for Putin?
Mostly anybody that tries to play the "Ukrainians are Nazis" card. For a lot of the brain dead, they play the Nazi card endlessly.
All true.
But the point here? We promised Gorbechev we would not expand NATO. But we have. We purposely used the CIA to use these Neo-Nazis to subvert the democratically elected government to pose a risk to the Russian federation, when all they wanted was an East-West security pact. NATO and the EU have purposely been using Ukrainain Nazis both during the Soviet empire, and the post Soviet era, to try to destroy Russia, this is just a fact. And we have broken promises and purposely tried to provoke war with Russia, and now? The Deep State got what it wanted, while we squander billions of tax payer money on the ruling western oligarchs and their corruption.
US gov’t knew NATO expansion to Ukraine would force Russia to intervene
US gov't knew NATO expansion to Ukraine would force Russia to intervene - Geopolitical Economy Report
US Ambassador William Burns, now CIA director, admitted in 2008 embassy cable that NATO expansion to Ukraine crosses Russia's security "redlines" and could lead to violence which would force Moscow to intervene.
". . . Ukraine and Georgia’s NATO aspirations not only touch a raw nerve in Russia, they engender serious concerns about the consequences for stability in the region. Not only does Russia perceive encirclement, and efforts to undermine Russia’s influence in the region, but it also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would seriously affect Russian security interests. Experts tell us that Russia is particularly worried that the strong divisions in Ukraine over NATO membership, with much of the ethnic-Russian community against membership, could lead to a major split, involving violence or at worst, civil war. In that eventuality, Russia would have to decide whether to intervene; a decision Russia does not want to have to face.. . .
Burns’ warnings came true just a few years later.. . ."
The CIA knew what it was doing. . . it wanted war, and it got one.
NATO should have never have been expanded. . . guarantees were given to Gorbachev, the west was NOT to be allowed to, and Putin is right. Nor were they allowed to place missiles in any of the new NATO members, which they have, since talks about the unification of Germany occurred.
Clausewitz: War as Politics by other Means | Online Library of Liberty
Related Links: Clausewitz Subject Area: War and Peace Source: Carl von Clausewitz, On War, trans. Col. J.J. Graham. New and Revised edition with Introduction and Notes by Col. F.N. Maude, in Three Volumes (London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & C., 1918). Vol. 1. Chapter: CHAPTER I: WHAT IS WAR...oll.libertyfund.org
WAR IN EUROPE AND THE RISE OF RAW PROPAGANDA
". . . Setting aside the manoeuvres and cynicism of geopolitics, whomever the players, this historical memory is the driving force behind Russia’s respect-seeking, self-protective security proposals, which were published in Moscow in the week the UN voted 130-2 to outlaw Nazism. They are:WAR IN EUROPE AND THE RISE OF RAW PROPAGANDA
WAR IN EUROPE AND THE RISE OF RAW PROPAGANDAjohnpilger.com
- NATO guarantees that it will not deploy missiles in nations bordering Russia. (They are already in place from Slovenia to Romania, with Poland to follow)
- NATO to stop military and naval exercises in nations and seas bordering Russia.
- Ukraine will not become a member of NATO.
- the West and Russia to sign a binding East-West security pact.
- the landmark treaty between the US and Russia covering intermediate-range nuclear weapons to be restored. (The US abandoned it in 2019)
These amount to a comprehensive draft of a peace plan for all of post-war Europe and ought to be welcomed in the West. But who understands their significance in Britain? What they are told is that Putin is a pariah and a threat to Christendom.. . . "
Newly Declassified Documents: Gorbachev Told NATO Wouldn't Move Past East German Border
". . .Gorbachev only accepted German reunification—over which the Soviet Union had a legal right to veto under treaty—because he received assurances that NATO would not expand after he withdrew his forces from Eastern Europe from James Baker, President George H.W. Bush, West German foreign minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher, West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, the CIA Director Robert Gates, French President Francois Mitterrand, British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, British foreign minister Douglas Hurd, British Prime Minister John Major, and NATO secretary-general Manfred Woerner.Newly Declassified Documents: Gorbachev Told NATO Wouldn't Move Past East German Border
So what happenned?
Indeed, as late as March 1991, the British were reassuring Gorbachev that they could not foresee circumstances under which NATO might expand into Eastern and Central Europe. As former British Ambassador to the Soviet Union recounted in March 5, 1991, Rodric Braithwaite, both British foreign minister Douglas Hurd and British Prime Minister John Major told the Soviet that NATO would not expand eastwards.
“I believe that your thoughts about the role of NATO in the current situation are the result of misunderstanding,” Major had told Gorbachev. We are not talking about strengthening of NATO. We are talking about the coordination of efforts that is already happening in Europe between NATO and the West European Union, which, as it is envisioned, would allow all members of the European Community to contribute to enhance [our] security.”
US, UK, France Promised USSR Not to Expand NATO East of Germany, Newly Discovered Document Proves
21 Feb 2022 - A newly discovered document provides more evidence that Western governments broke their promise not to expand NATO eastward after German reunification. Notes from a 1991 meeting prove that the US, UK, France, and Germany assured the Soviet Union that NATO would not expand east. ...www.transcend.org
". . The 2+4 negotiations were talks in 1990 that allowed for the reunification of Germany, featuring capitalist West Germany and socialist East Germany (the 2) along with the United States, Soviet Union, Britain, and France (the 4).
Chrobog’s comments in the notes, therefore, confirm that the Western powers had promised the USSR in 1990 that they would not expand NATO eastward after German reunification.
Further clarifying this fact, the document adds that there was a “general agreement that membership of NATO and security guarantees [are] unacceptable” for countries east of Germany.. . ."
I posted what I posted, the truth and facts are self-evident.We promised Gorbechev we would not expand NATO.
Promised? Like a pinky swear?
NATO should have never have been expanded. . . guarantees were given to Gorbachev, the west was NOT to be allowed to, and Putin is right.
Formerly enslaved nations wanted protection from Russia for some reason.
Why do you think? Did they have a good reason?
I posted what I posted, the truth and facts are self-evident.
If you wish to gas-light yourself, do so.
I have no wish to twist reality, or make excuses for warmongering.
Can't handle the facts huh? You have to attack the messenger when you don't like hearing truth and reality conflict with the propaganda you hear daily?I posted what I posted, the truth and facts are self-evident.
Poor Russia. She never did nuthin' to nobody.
I have no wish to twist reality, or make excuses for warmongering.
You're too busy sucking up to Russia to do that.
www.usmessageboard.com
Can't handle the facts huh? You have to attack the messenger when you don't like hearing truth and reality conflict with the propaganda you hear daily?
Deploying attacks on me? That doesn't change the facts, or the truth. Hermann Goering would none the less, be proud of your efforts though!
NOW? Pay special attention to the "Final Act of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe," which the EU and NATO, have continually rebuffed Russia and Putin on. . . .
So yeah, that bullshit RAND, CFR, and Atlantic Council propaganda you are gobbling? Is just that, biased garbage.
"No one can ever actually produce a copy of the Budapest Memorandum. Only claims that security assurances are guaranteed. I maintain that comes with some caveats. Why?Historical background of the conflict in Ukraine
I understood all the ins and outs of this conflict. Historically, in the northern Black Sea region, on the territory of Ukraine, there lived Poles, descendants of the Sarmatians and Turks (true ethnic Turks, Torks), the population of the Hetmanate. Bandera justify their claims to the whole of...
Because the closest outline of that Memorandum I have yet dug up? Is this. . .
Primary Sources
Budapest Memorandums on Security Assurances, 1994
Budapest Memorandums on Security Assurances, 1994
The Presidents of Ukraine, Russian Federation and United States of America, and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom signed three memorandums (UN Document A/49/765) on December 5, 1994, with the accession of Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Through this...web.archive.org
"Excerpt:
"Welcoming the accession of Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as a non-nuclear-weapon State,
Taking into account the commitment of Ukraine to eliminate all nuclear weapons from its territory within a specified period of time,
Noting the changes in the world-wide security situation, including the end of the cold war, which have brought about conditions for deep reductions in nuclear forces,
Confirm the following:
1. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine;
2. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations;
3. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind;
4. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used;
5. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm, in the case of Ukraine, their commitment not to use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, except in the case of an attack on themselves, their territories or dependent territories, their armed forces, or their allies, by such a State in association or alliance with a nuclear-weapon State;
6. Ukraine, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America will consult in the event a situation arises that raises a question concerning these commitments.
This Memorandum will become applicable upon signature.
Signed in four copies having equal validity in the Ukrainian, English and Russian languages."
That makes no such guarantee of security in case of invasion, only it refers to using this, which I maintain, is exactly the OPPOSITE, of escalating violent confrontation.
Source: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars 1
Final Act of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe
". . . Accordingly, the participating States will refrain from any acts constituting a threat of force or
direct or indirect use of force against another participating State. Likewise they will refrain from
any manifestation of force for the purpose of inducing another participating State to renounce the
full exercise of its sovereign rights. Likewise they will also refrain in their mutual relations from
any act of reprisal by force.
No such threat or use of force will be employed as a means of settling disputes, or questions
likely to give rise to disputes, between them.. . . "
Hey, whatever lies you need to tell yourself pal.Can't handle the facts huh? You have to attack the messenger when you don't like hearing truth
The truth is, Russia enslaved Eastern Europe after WWII. The truth is, those formerly enslaved nations wanted to join NATO to protect themselves from Russia. Even if that makes Putin sad.
Pay special attention to the "Final Act of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe," which the EU and NATO, have continually rebuffed Russia and Putin on. . .
Rebuffed? That's awful!
Hey, whatever lies you need to tell yourself pal.
I have links and proof, documented proof, not editorials or opinion pieces, actual historical documents. You have nothing but parroted propaganda.
You got nothing, so, eh, whatever.
And after getting and assurances on both sides, Russia started invading and annexing parts of its neighbors. That action invalidated those agreements and caused all the ex- Warsaw Pact and Ex-Soviet nations to need the defensive advantages of joining NATO. Just look at recent history, Russia has launched unprovoked invasions of Chechnya, Georgia and Ukraine TWICE. It has annexed territories belonging to both Georgia AND Ukraine. Russia has fomented civil unrest and sent Russian Army troops into several old Soviet Socialist republics to create the appearance of civil wars to give Russia excuses for invasions.All true.
But the point here? We promised Gorbechev we would not expand NATO. But we have. We purposely used the CIA to use these Neo-Nazis to subvert the democratically elected government to pose a risk to the Russian federation, when all they wanted was an East-West security pact. NATO and the EU have purposely been using Ukrainain Nazis both during the Soviet empire, and the post Soviet era, to try to destroy Russia, this is just a fact. And we have broken promises and purposely tried to provoke war with Russia, and now? The Deep State got what it wanted, while we squander billions of tax payer money on the ruling western oligarchs and their corruption.
US gov’t knew NATO expansion to Ukraine would force Russia to intervene
US gov't knew NATO expansion to Ukraine would force Russia to intervene - Geopolitical Economy Report
US Ambassador William Burns, now CIA director, admitted in 2008 embassy cable that NATO expansion to Ukraine crosses Russia's security "redlines" and could lead to violence which would force Moscow to intervene.
". . . Ukraine and Georgia’s NATO aspirations not only touch a raw nerve in Russia, they engender serious concerns about the consequences for stability in the region. Not only does Russia perceive encirclement, and efforts to undermine Russia’s influence in the region, but it also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would seriously affect Russian security interests. Experts tell us that Russia is particularly worried that the strong divisions in Ukraine over NATO membership, with much of the ethnic-Russian community against membership, could lead to a major split, involving violence or at worst, civil war. In that eventuality, Russia would have to decide whether to intervene; a decision Russia does not want to have to face.. . .
Burns’ warnings came true just a few years later.. . ."
The CIA knew what it was doing. . . it wanted war, and it got one.
NATO should have never have been expanded. . . guarantees were given to Gorbachev, the west was NOT to be allowed to, and Putin is right. Nor were they allowed to place missiles in any of the new NATO members, which they have, since talks about the unification of Germany occurred.
Clausewitz: War as Politics by other Means | Online Library of Liberty
Related Links: Clausewitz Subject Area: War and Peace Source: Carl von Clausewitz, On War, trans. Col. J.J. Graham. New and Revised edition with Introduction and Notes by Col. F.N. Maude, in Three Volumes (London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & C., 1918). Vol. 1. Chapter: CHAPTER I: WHAT IS WAR...oll.libertyfund.org
WAR IN EUROPE AND THE RISE OF RAW PROPAGANDA
". . . Setting aside the manoeuvres and cynicism of geopolitics, whomever the players, this historical memory is the driving force behind Russia’s respect-seeking, self-protective security proposals, which were published in Moscow in the week the UN voted 130-2 to outlaw Nazism. They are:WAR IN EUROPE AND THE RISE OF RAW PROPAGANDA
WAR IN EUROPE AND THE RISE OF RAW PROPAGANDA
- NATO guarantees that it will not deploy missiles in nations bordering Russia. (They are already in place from Slovenia to Romania, with Poland to follow)
- NATO to stop military and naval exercises in nations and seas bordering Russia.
- Ukraine will not become a member of NATO.
- the West and Russia to sign a binding East-West security pact.
- the landmark treaty between the US and Russia covering intermediate-range nuclear weapons to be restored. (The US abandoned it in 2019)
These amount to a comprehensive draft of a peace plan for all of post-war Europe and ought to be welcomed in the West. But who understands their significance in Britain? What they are told is that Putin is a pariah and a threat to Christendom.. . . "
Newly Declassified Documents: Gorbachev Told NATO Wouldn't Move Past East German Border
". . .Gorbachev only accepted German reunification—over which the Soviet Union had a legal right to veto under treaty—because he received assurances that NATO would not expand after he withdrew his forces from Eastern Europe from James Baker, President George H.W. Bush, West German foreign minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher, West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, the CIA Director Robert Gates, French President Francois Mitterrand, British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, British foreign minister Douglas Hurd, British Prime Minister John Major, and NATO secretary-general Manfred Woerner.Newly Declassified Documents: Gorbachev Told NATO Wouldn't Move Past East German Border
So what happenned?
Indeed, as late as March 1991, the British were reassuring Gorbachev that they could not foresee circumstances under which NATO might expand into Eastern and Central Europe. As former British Ambassador to the Soviet Union recounted in March 5, 1991, Rodric Braithwaite, both British foreign minister Douglas Hurd and British Prime Minister John Major told the Soviet that NATO would not expand eastwards.
“I believe that your thoughts about the role of NATO in the current situation are the result of misunderstanding,” Major had told Gorbachev. We are not talking about strengthening of NATO. We are talking about the coordination of efforts that is already happening in Europe between NATO and the West European Union, which, as it is envisioned, would allow all members of the European Community to contribute to enhance [our] security.”
US, UK, France Promised USSR Not to Expand NATO East of Germany, Newly Discovered Document Proves
21 Feb 2022 - A newly discovered document provides more evidence that Western governments broke their promise not to expand NATO eastward after German reunification. Notes from a 1991 meeting prove that the US, UK, France, and Germany assured the Soviet Union that NATO would not expand east. ...www.transcend.org
". . The 2+4 negotiations were talks in 1990 that allowed for the reunification of Germany, featuring capitalist West Germany and socialist East Germany (the 2) along with the United States, Soviet Union, Britain, and France (the 4).
Chrobog’s comments in the notes, therefore, confirm that the Western powers had promised the USSR in 1990 that they would not expand NATO eastward after German reunification.
Further clarifying this fact, the document adds that there was a “general agreement that membership of NATO and security guarantees [are] unacceptable” for countries east of Germany.. . ."
People can argue the wisdom of NATO expansion till the cows come home. It is a matter of opinion.I have links and proof, documented proof, not editorials or opinion pieces, actual historical documents. You have nothing but parroted propaganda.
We promised Gorbechev we would not expand NATO.
