Ukraine can win this war, NATO chief says; Finland and Sweden move to join military alliance

[Litwin]

gypsi

me ? Turk you are drunk, for sure . dont speak this way with with a white man, and you handle your own Kurdish Business without NATO, where you are just a guest

 

[kyzr]

^^^ I'm not wrong
Both Finland and Sweden shit their pants, have tiny armies and want to hide under the skirt of NATO as soon as possible.
Heroic, powerful stories about Swedish or Finnish Armies are just PR to get taxpayers of real powerful nations among NATO onboard.
It's a lie from the beginning, these are militarily weak nations and NATO will sink lots of money in those countries for their protection.
Even without Russia declaring general mobilization so far, if they do that, then all those Eastern Europeans are fucked.

LIAR. Stop posting unproven nonsense.
Prove what you say, oh, never mind, you can't.
Russia can declare a general mobilization and then what? Send more untrained targets to die?
Russia is no match for NATO, and that was before adding Sweden and Finland on Russia's northern flank.
Think about it...duh.

 

[RodISHI]

He also said he wasn't going to invade Ukraine.

 

[kyzr]

He also said he wasn't going to invade Ukraine.

Maybe Putin sees that he has a losing position and will start negotiating an end to the war, before his economy is totally ruined? McDonalds and many other corporations are leaving Russia. That's a lot of good jobs.

 

[RodISHI]

Maybe Putin sees that he has a losing position and will start negotiating an end to the war, before his economy is totally ruined? McDonalds and many other corporations are leaving Russia. That's a lot of good jobs.

He had a five nation (alliance) round table today. No doubt he knows he is losing and he's looking for help with his insane shit.

 

[JustAGuy1]

Ukraine can't win.

 

[Rigby5]

Finland and Sweden would make transportation easier for all three Nordic nations with NATO military bases and roads and infrastructure to the Arctic Ocean coast of Norway.

Nonsense.
NATO does not give countries money, but makes then buy US weapons instead.
Finland and Sweden would have worse roads because they would waste even more money on US weapons they do not need.
Russia is no threat at all unless you steal their oil, violate treaties with them, and try to put NATO nukes on their border.

 

[Rigby5]

Maybe Putin sees that he has a losing position and will start negotiating an end to the war, before his economy is totally ruined? McDonalds and many other corporations are leaving Russia. That's a lot of good jobs.

Wrong.
McDonalds used to drain hundreds of million out of Russia, that now Russia gets to keep.
And anyone who think McDonalds is "a lot of good jobs", has to be totally unrealistic.
McDonalds is about the worst place in the world to work.

 

[gipper]

You are wrong. Finns are now overwhelmingly in favor of joining NATO due to Putin's unwarranted aggression:

"The latest opinion poll conducted by Finnish public broadcaster YLE showed earlier this week that 76% of Finns are in favor of joining NATO, a big change from earlier years when only 20-30% of respondents favored such military alignment."

Finland Announces Intention to Join NATO 'Without Delay' Despite Russia's Threats

Finland’s leaders say they’re in favor of rapidly applying for NATO membership.

www.nbcwashington.com

.

Proof warmongering corporate media propaganda works just as well on Finns as it does Americans.

 

[JWBooth]

Ukraine can win this war, NATO chief says​

You silly fucktards will believe what ever fairy tales your handlers spoon feed you.

 

[Rigby5]

The reason the Ukraine can not possibly win, even with $50 billion worth of the latest US weapons, is that they lied, stole, cheated, murdered, and are totally corrupt.
They have been skimming Russian oil from pipelines through the Ukraine, for decades.
They murdered over 14k ethnic Russians, because Ukrainians are about the single most racist and bigoted culture in the world.
They were granted independence by Gorbachev on the premise they would NEVER try to join NATO.
So then trying to join NATO nullifies the 1992 treaty that granted them independence.
So if Russia has to use nukes, they will win, one way or the other.

 

[initforme]

McDonald's is a GOOD job? Whoa

 

[kyzr]

Ukraine can't win.

They can't lose, duh.

 

[kyzr]

Wrong.
McDonalds used to drain hundreds of million out of Russia, that now Russia gets to keep.
And anyone who think McDonalds is "a lot of good jobs", has to be totally unrealistic.
McDonalds is about the worst place in the world to work.

Ok, so you won't miss any of those jobs.....but the Russian economy, GDP and other metrics will shrink, Putin will have much less revenue to spend on weapons and wars. Russia is losing oil and gas sales too. Putin needs to grow a fucking brain...

 

[kyzr]

The reason the Ukraine can not possibly win, even with $50 billion worth of the latest US weapons, is that they lied, stole, cheated, murdered, and are totally corrupt.
They have been skimming Russian oil from pipelines through the Ukraine, for decades.
They murdered over 14k ethnic Russians, because Ukrainians are about the single most racist and bigoted culture in the world.
They were granted independence by Gorbachev on the premise they would NEVER try to join NATO.
So then trying to join NATO nullifies the 1992 treaty that granted them independence.
So if Russia has to use nukes, they will win, one way or the other.

That's a lot of assertions without any proof.
How about you take a look at the actual battlefield before making stupid statements?
Russia is losing territory all over the place.
Your "Ukrainian crimes" list looks pretty insignificant compared to losing 1/3 of his invading force and all of that military equipment, huh??
Ukraine applied for NATO membership in 2008, but that was withdrawn by Victor Yanukovich in 2010, so that reason is a lie.
If Russia uses nukes against Ukraine they will regret it. Russia can't win, and Putin knows it, its just how bad he wants his economy to get before he negotiates a peace agreement.

 

[Litwin]

 

[Litwin]

Please America ze Bad Russians"

said Turks many times , and gonna do it again

Soviet message to Turkey​

On 7 August 1946, the Soviets presented a note to the Turkish Foreign Ministry which stated that the way Turkey was handling the straits no longer represented the security interests of its fellow Black Sea nations. This drew attention to the occasions in which Italian and German warships had passed through the straits without conflict (the German ships were only detained by Turkish forces once the country declared war on Germany on 23 February 1945). The note concluded that the regime of the straits was no longer reliable and demanded that the Montreux Treaty be re-examined and rewritten in a new international conference.[19]

The US stance​

When the issue was brought up at the Potsdam Conference, the President of the United States, Harry S. Truman, said the question of the straits was a domestic political issue pertaining to Turkey and the USSR, and should be solved by the two involved parties.[20] As the argument heated up in the days preceding Potsdam, the United States decided it firmly did not want the straits to fall into Soviet hands, as it would give them a major strategic gateway between the Black Sea and Mediterranean and possibly lead to a Communist Turkey. In a secret telegram sent by US Under Secretary of State Dean Acheson to diplomats in Paris, he explained the American position on the matter.[21]

In our opinion the primary objective of the Soviet Union is to obtain control over Turkey. We believe that if the Soviet Union succeeds in introducing into Turkey armed forces with the ostensible purpose of enforcing the joint control of the Straits, the Soviet Union will use these forces to obtain control over Turkey…. In our opinion, therefore, the time has come when we must decide that we shall resist with all means at our disposal any Soviet aggression and in particular, because the case of Turkey would be so clear, any Soviet aggression against Turkey. In carrying this policy our words and acts will only carry conviction to the Soviet Union if they are formulated against the background of an inner conviction and determination on our part that we cannot permit Turkey to become the object of Soviet aggression.
— Dean Acheson, Telegram to the Secretary of State at Paris – August 8, 1946

On 20 August 1946, Undersecretary Acheson met with fifteen journalists to explain the urgency of the situation and make the opinions of the United States Government known.[22]

Western support of Turkey and de-escalation​

In the summer and autumn of 1946, the Soviet Union increased its naval presence in the Black Sea, having Soviet vessels perform manoeuvres near Turkish shores. A substantial number of ground troops were dispatched to the Balkans. Buckling under the mounting pressure from the Soviets, in a matter of days Turkey appealed to the United States for aid. After consulting his administration, President Truman sent a naval task force to Turkey.[23] On 9 October 1946, the respective governments of the United States and United Kingdom reaffirmed their support for Turkey.[24] On 26 October, the Soviet Union withdrew its specific request for a new summit on the control of the Turkish Straits (but not its opinions) and sometime shortly thereafter pulled out most of the intimidatory military forces from the region. Turkey abandoned its policy of neutrality and accepted USD $100 million in economic and defence aid from the US in 1947 under the Truman Doctrine's plan of ceasing the spread of Soviet influence into Turkey and Greece. The two aforementioned nations joined NATO in 1952.[25]

NATO is an anti- Moscow platform , not a platform for your personal watermelon shop , fix your own problems, dont try to use NATO for this, you´ll fail anywhere

 

[Litwin]

 

[Litwin]

Marianna Vyshemirsky: 'My picture was used to spread lies about the war'

A pregnant woman fleeing a bombed maternity hospital was targeted by a Russian disinformation campaign.

www.bbc.com

 

[ekrem]

said Turks many times , and gonna do it again

Soviet message to Turkey​

On 7 August 1946, the Soviets presented a note to the Turkish Foreign Ministry which stated that the way Turkey was handling the straits no longer represented the security interests of its fellow Black Sea nations. This drew attention to the occasions in which Italian and German warships had passed through the straits without conflict (the German ships were only detained by Turkish forces once the country declared war on Germany on 23 February 1945). The note concluded that the regime of the straits was no longer reliable and demanded that the Montreux Treaty be re-examined and rewritten in a new international conference.[19]

The US stance​

When the issue was brought up at the Potsdam Conference, the President of the United States, Harry S. Truman, said the question of the straits was a domestic political issue pertaining to Turkey and the USSR, and should be solved by the two involved parties.[20] As the argument heated up in the days preceding Potsdam, the United States decided it firmly did not want the straits to fall into Soviet hands, as it would give them a major strategic gateway between the Black Sea and Mediterranean and possibly lead to a Communist Turkey. In a secret telegram sent by US Under Secretary of State Dean Acheson to diplomats in Paris, he explained the American position on the matter.[21]




On 20 August 1946, Undersecretary Acheson met with fifteen journalists to explain the urgency of the situation and make the opinions of the United States Government known.[22]

Western support of Turkey and de-escalation​

In the summer and autumn of 1946, the Soviet Union increased its naval presence in the Black Sea, having Soviet vessels perform manoeuvres near Turkish shores. A substantial number of ground troops were dispatched to the Balkans. Buckling under the mounting pressure from the Soviets, in a matter of days Turkey appealed to the United States for aid. After consulting his administration, President Truman sent a naval task force to Turkey.[23] On 9 October 1946, the respective governments of the United States and United Kingdom reaffirmed their support for Turkey.[24] On 26 October, the Soviet Union withdrew its specific request for a new summit on the control of the Turkish Straits (but not its opinions) and sometime shortly thereafter pulled out most of the intimidatory military forces from the region. Turkey abandoned its policy of neutrality and accepted USD $100 million in economic and defence aid from the US in 1947 under the Truman Doctrine's plan of ceasing the spread of Soviet influence into Turkey and Greece. The two aforementioned nations joined NATO in 1952.[25]

NATO is an anti- Moscow platform , not a platform for your personal watermelon shop , fix your own problems, dont try to use NATO for this, you´ll fail anywhere

Whilst Sweden / Finland were enjoying life outside NATO for 70 years, Turks deployed in every NATO mission.
Risked nuclear annihilation by hosting U2 spy-plane flights into Soviet space and hosted Jupiter missiles setting the prelude to Cuban missile crisis.
The NATO-admission list doesn't start with either Sweden or Finland, but with Georgia, then Ukraine and maybe in 20 years we can consider Sweden / Finland, who are rich countries and stayed out of NATO for 70 years by own choice.