Assault on Kiev: Russian helicopters swoop above Ukraine's capital

[placeholder]

2 minutes ago, TacoKhun said:

Today 2022, 32 after Ukraine signed the memorandum and Kim still have no long range delivery devices, and what his weapons are capable of no one really knows.

Including you. So maybe you should be a little less categorical about what a poor nation can afford in the way of nuclear weapons.

[TacoKhun]

Just now, placeholder said:

Including you. So maybe you should be a little less categorical about what a poor nation can afford in the way of nuclear weapons.

no need to argue with me, i stated facts why back then the decision was made.

[LosLobo]

5 minutes ago, TacoKhun said:

I dont understand why you writing this to me, it was not in US interest to give a country nuclear weapons that can hit the US territory, therefore there was no choice for Ukraine to have it, memorandum or not. If Ukraine declined the memorandum, then there would be something else.

The start of this sub thread was about trusting Russia to honour a Peace Agreement.

Apologies if I offended you, it was not my intention!

[placeholder]

7 minutes ago, TacoKhun said:

Today 2022, 32 after Ukraine signed the memorandum and Kim still have no long range delivery devices, and what his weapons are capable of no one really knows.

Depends what you mean by long range. North Korea did fire ballistic missiles over japan that flew 2200 kilometers. And they have a missile that has a range of 3500 kilometers. In addition they've demonstrated the capability to fire missiles from submarines. So that extends the range quite a bit, no?

[placeholder]

5 minutes ago, TacoKhun said:

no need to argue with me, i stated facts why back then the decision was made.

Except, not everything you stated was a fact.

[Bkk Brian]

1 hour ago, Kwasaki said:

Best I continue to ignore you I think, the world will just have to wait for the final outcome.

Yep, ignore and deflect it when you cant back up your claims, truth hurts right..............still waiting to see your claim that Russia still has the resources to build its own planes? That's the problem right, you blurt claims out telling everyone  "I understand perfectly well the whole nature of Russia's invasion" yet its all talk and no verifiable information.

[Bkk Brian]

58 minutes ago, TacoKhun said:

1. Memorandum was an option to safe face. The giving up of nuclear weapons was an offer one cant refuse, neither US or Russia was interested in Ukraine having any, because the delivery devices were capable of hitting US and every other NATO country. If Ukraine declined then USSR might have decided to not give independence to soviet states. 

2. Nuclear weapon is very expensive to maintain and requires advanced technology, Ukraine as a poor country could not afford that and did not have the required technology, since the rockets were not produced by Ukraine alone but whole USSR.

3. The launch codes were in Russia hands and it was virtually impossible to operate the rockets.

4. While rockets were stationed in Ukraine territory, it did not belong to it, the rockets were a product of whole USSR nuclear program.

 

Basically nuclear weapons were no use to Ukraine back then and nobody could predict, what will happen in the future, especially taking in mind the promise not to expand NATO border towards Russia. History could go other way, and Ukraine would be allied with Russia and possible target for NATO, US could not risk that, therefore the deal of giving up nuclear weapons was arranged, all the speculation of leaving weapon in Ukraine hands just hindsight. 

 

One can speculate that already back then Ukraine was a potential target for US and memorandum was more targeted towards US and NATO then towards Russia, having the plans in mind US insisted on giving up nuclear weapons to Russia, the risk of leaving it in Ukraine hand was too big.

So why did Sergey Lavrov, who was in Paris at the time of the 2014 Russian invasion in Ukraine, simply not show up to the meeting that Ukraine called. Claiming the memorandum was signed with a different government, not with this "illegitimate" one.

 

If it was signed with an illegitimate government as he claims, they also claim the present government in Ukraine is illegitimate so it just shows that any new peace agreement is worthless and they can't be trusted.

Edited July 7, 2022 by Bkk Brian

[TacoKhun]

16 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

So why did Sergey Lavrov, who was in Paris at the time of the 2014 Russian invasion in Ukraine, simply not show up to the meeting that Ukraine called. Claiming the memorandum was signed with a different government, not with this "illegitimate" one.

 

If it was signed with an illegitimate government as he claims, they also claim the present government in Ukraine is illegitimate so it just shows that any new peace agreement is worthless and they can't be trusted.

no idea, ask Lavrov. Ukraine having NW was never an option. US wont allow it. Memorandum was just a bandage, to give an illusion some kind of trade has happened.

Edited July 7, 2022 by TacoKhun

[Bkk Brian]

3 minutes ago, TacoKhun said:

no idea, ask Lavrov. Ukraine having NW was never an option. US wont allow it. Memorandum was just a bandage, to give an illusion some kind of trade has happened.

You have no idea? No you wouldn't, too uncomfortable to realize that any new agreement would be worthless.

[gargamon]

6 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Ukraine having NW was never an option. US wont allow it.

Sorry to cloud the conversation with facts, but the Ukraine HAD nuclear weapons but because Russia signed a non-invasion treaty, they would give them up.

Edited July 7, 2022 by gargamon

[coolcarer]

1 hour ago, farmerjo said:

So your getting ready for a i told you so post.

Is that really your only take away from my post, try harder next time, it’s not only me with that opinion.

 

With the Luhansk region under Russian control, President Vladimir Putin may now focus on seizing all of the Donbas region in eastern Ukraine before offering a cease-fire, a defense policy analyst told CNBC’s “Capital Connection” on Tuesday.

“Putin [may] offer the potential for a cease-fire if only to give him[self] an opportunity to fortify the gains that he’s managed to achieve so far,” said Victor Abramowicz, principal of Ostoya Consulting, which advises firms in the defense industry.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/06/putin-may-offer-a-cease-fire-after-taking-all-of-donbas-says-analyst.html

 

Western officials emphasise that Russia, despite early setbacks, still plans to seize the capital Kyiv and subjugate much of Ukraine. "Those maximalist objectives remain in place," one official said.

Russia could capitalise on its gains in Donbas, freeing up forces for use elsewhere, perhaps even targeting Kyiv once again.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-61674469

Edited July 7, 2022 by coolcarer

[Bkk Brian]

13 minutes ago, gargamon said:

Sorry to cloud the conversation with facts, but the Ukraine HAD nuclear weapons but because Russia signed a non-invasion treaty, they would give them up.

You're quoting the wrong person, its ok, made that mistake myself sometimes

[gargamon]

3 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

You're quoting the wrong person, its ok, made that mistake myself sometimes

Don't know how that happened. I selected the text from tacochun's post and clicked quote selection. We now have to check the website does this basic stuff correctly?

[TacoKhun]

24 minutes ago, gargamon said:

Sorry to cloud the conversation with facts, but the Ukraine HAD nuclear weapons but because Russia signed a non-invasion treaty, they would give them up.

Do you understand back then that Russia was not considered to be a threat to Ukraine, but NATO was. So the memorandum was to protect Ukraine from NATO aggression in the 1st place, also this is why the US insisted on transferring NW to Russia.

[Bkk Brian]

16 minutes ago, TacoKhun said:

Do you understand back then that Russia was not considered to be a threat to Ukraine, but NATO was. So the memorandum was to protect Ukraine from NATO aggression in the 1st place, also this is why the US insisted on transferring NW to Russia.

Not true, I see no links to back up your claims.

 

This on February 8, 1994 10 months before the Budapest Memorandum

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) welcomes Ukraine into its Partnership for Peace, a collaborative arrangement open to all non-NATO European countries and post-Soviet states.

https://www.cfr.org/timeline/ukraines-struggle-independence-russias-shadow

[placeholder]

28 minutes ago, TacoKhun said:

Do you understand back then that Russia was not considered to be a threat to Ukraine, but NATO was. So the memorandum was to protect Ukraine from NATO aggression in the 1st place, also this is why the US insisted on transferring NW to Russia.

Really? So NATO was considered to be a threat to Ukraine? Considered to be a threat by whom? If Ukrainians really felt threatened by NATO then why did they overwhelmingly vote to leave the warm protective embrace of its Russian big brother? 90% of those Ukrainians who voted, voted for Ukraine to become independent.  You think they felt threatened by NATO? 

Edited July 7, 2022 by placeholder

[TacoKhun]

37 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Really? So NATO was considered to be a threat to Ukraine? Considered to be a threat by whom? If Ukrainians really felt threatened by NATO then why did they overwhelmingly vote to leave the warm protective embrace of its Russian big brother? 90% of those Ukrainians who voted, voted for Ukraine to become independent.  You think they felt threatened by NATO? 

well if no one felt threatened then whats the point in keeping NW with memorandum or not, keeping NW was never an option, it is just hindsight speculation. 

Edited July 7, 2022 by TacoKhun

[placeholder]

6 minutes ago, TacoKhun said:

well if no one felt threatened then whats the point in keeping NW with memorandum or not, keeping NW was never an option.

please dont say they were threatened by Russia, does make even less sense to become independent, easier just to stay together as is.

If Ukraine hadn't agreed to surrender the nuclear weapons, Russia wouldn't have let it go. The nuclear provisions were there to please Russia and not to encourage nuclear proliferation.

And spare me your cheap rhetorical trick of deprecating a strong argument by calling it a weak one.. Of course, Ukraine felt threatened by Russia. Ukraine has hardly had a happy experience of Russian domination. Its bid to be a free nation was brutally quashed by the new Soviet govt in the wake of WW1 and Stalin had millions of Ukrainians starved to death in the 1930's. 

[heybruce]

7 hours ago, TacoKhun said:

well if no one felt threatened then whats the point in keeping NW with memorandum or not, keeping NW was never an option, it is just hindsight speculation. 

The point is that in the Budapest Memorandum Russia guaranteed that it would:

 

"Respect Belarusian, Kazakh and Ukrainian independence and sovereignty in the existing borders.^[23] "

"Refrain from the threat or the use of force against Belarus, Kazakhstan or Ukraine."

"Refrain from using economic pressure on Belarus, Kazakhstan or Ukraine to influence their politics."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances

 

Russia's blatant violation of the agreement makes all agreements with Russia suspect.

[heybruce]

14 hours ago, Kwasaki said:

I have said Putin and in addition or Russia will not attack NATO.

Russia builds there own planes they have the resources to do so. 

Russia builds its own cars too, but because of sanctions has to drop basic safety features.   https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/sanctions-force-russia-produce-popular-car-safety-features-even-kremli-rcna32863

 

I assume something similar will be happening with aircraft manufacturing and many other parts of the economy. 

[Bkk Brian]

As everyone knew, Putin starts parroting the propaganda by so many Pro Russian activists and trolls that the west is causing the loss of life to Ukrainians by not accepting his terms, with the added threat that things can get a whole lot worse, what he really means by that of course is that Russias military is depleted and needs a break but they can still carry out their barbaric war crimes, 21,000 alleged 

 

Ukraine war: Vladimir Putin's warning that Russia has barely started its action

"We are hearing that they want to defeat us on the battlefield," he added. "Let them try."

Speaking at a meeting with leaders of the Kremlin-controlled parliament, Putin accused Western allies of fueling the hostilities, charging that “the West wants to fight us until the last Ukrainian.”

"It's a tragedy for the Ukrainian people, but it looks like it's heading in that direction," he said during a meeting with leaders of the Kremlin-controlled parliament.

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-putin-kyiv-moscow-6ccaef3a9d9d5ccd370d70126db78c5a

 

 

Zelensky says Ukraine will not give up territory for peace with Russia: 'This is our land'

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on Thursday that Ukraine is unwilling to cede any of its land to Russia, standing firm that a concession of Ukrainian territory won't be part of any diplomatic negotiations to end the war.

"Ukrainians are not ready to give away their land, to accept that these territories belong to Russia. This is our land," Zelensky said in an exclusive interview aired Thursday on CNN's "The Situation Room."

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/07/07/politics/volodymyr-zelensky-interview-cnntv/index.html

Edited July 8, 2022 by Bkk Brian

[Kwasaki]

12 hours ago, LosLobo said:

If Putin signed a Peace Treaty now it would only be for him "to save face" because he is unable to further prosecute a successful total war with Ukraine at this moment. 

 

So would you then suggest that the agreement was invalid because "saving face" is a legitimate out for Putin, to break the "Peace Agreement" when he has replenished retrained and rearmed his forces?

In my mind an agreement is always valid irrespective of the reasons for signing it!

The Russians still continue with relentless bombardment.

 

Where did you get your information on what Putin would do or not do. ????

[Kwasaki]

2 hours ago, heybruce said:

The point is that in the Budapest Memorandum Russia guaranteed that it would:

 

"Respect Belarusian, Kazakh and Ukrainian independence and sovereignty in the existing borders.^[23] "

"Refrain from the threat or the use of force against Belarus, Kazakhstan or Ukraine."

"Refrain from using economic pressure on Belarus, Kazakhstan or Ukraine to influence their politics."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances

 

Russia's blatant violation of the agreement makes all agreements with Russia suspect.

To be fair isn't that the same with any country around the world.

[coolcarer]

13 hours ago, Kwasaki said:

Hows the war going.

If you want to believe western media onesided nonsense up to you.

What realty is there needed to support my claims it's futile it's common knowledge and the fact that you do not want to believe it again is up to you.

I believe Chris B would support what I say but where is he after you and your mob hi-jacked his thread. 

 

Wait but you’ve categorically claimed that you get your news from Western media in previous posts. difficult to know what to believe from you anymore.

 

The thread is no longer about the Russian helicopters flying over Kiev, yes it’s moved on since then, derailed?

[coolcarer]

29 minutes ago, Kwasaki said:

To be fair isn't that the same with any country around the world.

No it not the same with any country, not in the slightest, silly comment

[transam]

WARNING.....Some may find my video disturbing, but for those interested in a visual of what's happening on the ground in Ukraine, a worthwhile watching link.....

 

 

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, Kwasaki said:

To be fair isn't that the same with any country around the world.

Ideally yes.  In reality, no.

 

What's significant in the case of the Budapest Memorandum is that Russia explicitly, in writing, guaranteed to respect Ukraine's borders and sovereignty, then ignored the written agreement it signed up to.  That leaves little faith in any promises Putin might make in peace talks.

[Bkk Brian]

Russian propaganda has no shame

 

NASA rebukes Russian use of space station for propaganda purposes

 

Three days after Russian cosmonauts displayed anti-Ukraine flags on the International Space Station, NASA issued a statement blasting this activity:

"NASA strongly rebukes Russia using the International Space Station for political purposes to support its war against Ukraine, which is fundamentally inconsistent with the station’s primary function among the 15 international participating countries to advance science and develop technology for peaceful purposes."

 

https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/07/russian-astronauts-use-space-station-to-promote-anti-ukraine-propaganda/

[rudi49jr]

Russian McDonalds runs short of french fries. And Coke.
 

https://guardian.ng/news/russian-mcdonalds-runs-short-of-french-fries/

[JetsetBkk]

On 7/5/2022 at 12:27 PM, Kwasaki said:

Bojo is doing his Churchill thing with Russia I have no idea how long his support will be able to continue.

Not so long, apparently. ????