18 hours ago, FritsSikkink said:

There is another "treaty" between Russia and Ukraine about amongst things:

Ukraine will get rid of his nuclear weapons

Ukraine will not join NATO

Ukraine will decrease the size of their army from about 900K to 300K (not sure about these numbers)

Details of this treaty please; name of the treaty, when and where it was signed and the names of the signatories will do …. thanks

20 hours ago, NanLaew said:

What did the Russian Federation attest to when they signed the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances in 1994?

 

Here's an aide memoire (with my emphasis).

 

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.

 

Nope. Not a hint of anyone being forbidden from exercising their freedom to choose their own political or military alliances.

 

None whatsoever.

FritsSikkink won’t like that because it is factual. He has already falsely claimed that there is another treaty between Ukraine and Russia, so facts are not a currency that he seems to trade in  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

16 hours ago, zzaa09 said:

It appears that the usual and predictable circles have been hood winked regarding this Russian-Ukranian affair without knowledge as to all the other unsavoury factors that are part of the mix......and largely ignored or omitted. 

Imagine that.

Like which country's government will profit from this war! I see Goldman Sachs are quick on the scene by selling Russian debt to its US hedge fund members. Do they actually realize that they are helping Russia win the war with these bonds? Ignorance and falling for their country's propaganda.

23 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

FritsSikkink won’t like that because it is factual. He has already falsely claimed that there is another treaty between Ukraine and Russia, so facts are not a currency that he seems to trade in  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

https://calhoun.nps.edu/bitstream/handle/10945/8939/russianukrainian00stew.pdf

24 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

FritsSikkink won’t like that because it is factual. He has already falsely claimed that there is another treaty between Ukraine and Russia, so facts are not a currency that he seems to trade in  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Do you watch the CNN or BBC?

5 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

https://calhoun.nps.edu/bitstream/handle/10945/8939/russianukrainian00stew.pdf

I don’t open links posted by others for security reasons; if you’ve got something to say articulate it yourself.

I think neutrality in a war that is nothing to do with them and far away is a very SENSIBLE stance by Thailand. In fact the first thing Prayut has got right. 

 

This is a senseless war brought on by USA shenanigans and now innocents are dying. Stay out of it Thailand!

9 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

Do you watch the CNN or BBC?

What on earth has that got to do with me stating that another member has made a false claim about a treaty between Ukraine and Russia.

 

If you know something about his allegation of another treaty, then please say so; if not, don’t expect me to respond to puerile questions about TV channels

On 3/11/2022 at 5:02 AM, Victornoir said:

Thailand is right to affirm its neutrality and seek ways around it. This country took no part in the measures and intimidation that led to this war and should not take sides or suffer the consequences.

 

I think the same for Europe but I am in the extreme minority and anyway it is too late now.

There are some thinkers who feel as you do. The ones who love this war have no clue as to the history of Zelensky and his Azov boys raping and killing in Donbas since the USA coup of 2014. Very sad situation. All they have to do is declare neutrality and not be USA's poodles and it stops.

2 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

What on earth has that got to do with me stating that another member has made a false claim about a treaty between Ukraine and Russia.

 

If you know something about his allegation of another treaty, then please say so; if not, don’t expect me to respond to puerile questions about TV channels

It has everything to do with it. I deliberately kept the question simple, but if you can't answer it and can't research on the treaty between the Ukraine and Russia(the The CNN or BBC don't mention for obvious reasons), then I am wasting my time. It's not hard to google - some people are happy not knowing the truth. 

1 minute ago, Neeranam said:

some people are happy not knowing the truth

you are indeed

4 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

It has everything to do with it. I deliberately kept the question simple, but if you can't answer it and can't research on the treaty between the Ukraine and Russia(the The CNN or BBC don't mention for obvious reasons), then I am wasting my time. It's not hard to google - some people are happy not knowing the truth. 

Okay, fine; just tell me when and where this supposed other treaty was signed and by whom, and I will be happy to google it.

2 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

Wrong - it was clear "no expansion of NATO"

Can you tell me what treaty this was a part of please .... many thanks 

*Deleted post edited out*

 

Neither can you rely on pundits with unverifiable propaganda nor what the Russian foreign ministry puts out as propaganda. There is a middle ground somewhere. However the truth is Ukranian innocents are being slaughtered and Thailands supposed neutrality will bite them in the rear eventually.

3 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

Excuse me sir you need to do a lot more research, with respect. You cannot rely on CNN/FOX/BBC spin they are not telling you the truth.

Thank you kindly sir. Now please be kind enough to tell me where I should look for my information, rather than just telling me where I should not. 

1 minute ago, BobBKK said:

Dear sir I posted the academic video for your enjoyment.

Can you verify the Information from the speaker as being true and not false.

3 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

Watch the University of Chicago video that I kindly supplied for your further education. The Professor lists, intelligently, the issues - thank you.

No ......  just tell me what treaty said "no expansion of NATO", such a simple question, why can't you answer ??

40 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

some people are happy not knowing the truth. 

More not really caring about 'the truth', but that might just be me.

20 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

Can you post the RT material you use or the Channel 5 Thai media info that's aligned with Russia for us to view as well. It's so i can compare with what you say is not posted in the MSM.

 

Please enlighten us. You seem to wobble on the fence between wanting Thailand to be neutral and then going on about Russia being in the right.

What makes you think I watch Channel 5? I don't. 

 

I never said Russia is in the right.  Actually, I never said I want Thailand to be neutral.

 

You are confused ????

*Deleted post edited out*

 

There's a predilection I've noted that seems to infest mostly, but not only, right wingers. Instead of relying on print, they cite videos as their source of information.  The thing about videos is they're a lot harder to fact check. And they take up a lot more time. Is there nothing in print that supports what this professor claims? Why not share that with us instead of asking us to spend an hour of our time viewing a video?

11 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

It is clear that neutrality was in the CONSTITUTION of Ukraine ergo NO NATO. Only the CIA coup of 2014 threw that out and war was inevitable. You can't cancel history. Don't be a petty revisionist, dear fellow, as you have not done your research. Watch the video yet? 

It doesn’t matter how much obfuscating, and trying to deflect, by posting external links you indulge in, there has never been any agreement by NATO that they would not expand by considering the application of any country that chose to apply for membership of their own free will. This included Ukraine, and there is no treaty, or anything written in the constitution of Ukraine that prevents them from applying.

 

And please stop shouting certain words by capitalising them, it is against forum etiquette ... thanks

*Deleted post edited out*

 

Apparently, if the results of my googling are correct, it's John Mearsheimer you're referring to. Here's a link to a rather searching interview with him.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/why-john-mearsheimer-blames-the-us-for-the-crisis-in-ukraine

To those who might have a problem coping with the written word, I apologize for it being only in print. Apparently, it's not available on video.

The huge problem with Mearsheimer's claims is that they depend on depicting Putin as being a realist. He is anything but as the botched invasion of the Ukraine shows. Just as the botched invasion of Iraq showed the same about Bush.

And NATO membership is clearly just an excuse. Putin has long claimed that Ukraine isn't a real country. And he has holed himself up with Russian nationalist revanchists and isolated himself from former advisers.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/10/opinion/putin-russia-ukraine.html

The least this Government can do is to block Russian Television (RT) on True Vision, it's only a propaganda Station.

Yes its not Russian tourist fault. But even less fault is those hundred's / thousand's mothers and kids who suffer  or die in Ukraine! All my empathy is in Ukraine.

3 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

I hate to break it to you but Mearsheimer is known in many circles as being a psuedo conspiracy theorist and his information is viewed with skepticism.  He is a right wing individual who claims to be a realist yet I find him to be far off to the side of reality.  My view so I agree to disagree with you, and why would I lie like he claims world leaders always do.....debunked.

And I don't think anyone should be under an obligation to spend an hour viewing a video.  I know  it's widely lamented that kids aren't reading anymore thanks to the Internet. It seems that goes for a lot of adults, too.

12 hours ago, NeoDinosaw said:

I remember the Cuban missile crisis. The US threatened to kick ass if the missile bases were set up.  The Russians backed off and war was avoided.

Wasn't that time a trade-off included? I have read somewhere "Kennedy also secretly agreed to remove U.S. missiles from Turkey".

 

Or did I get it wrong? Nowadays one reads so many lies...

 

 

On 3/11/2022 at 7:18 AM, wombat said:

The whole world will do nothing when Taiwan is taken back.

The same way the whole world did nothing when HK was taken back and all those bits of signed paper aka treaties were shown for what they were ...bits of paper.

HK was given back because there was a signed bit of paper that constituted a lease and the lease expired.

 

I get your point, all countries have ripped up treaties when it suits their purpose, Russia with the treaty on Ukraine when it gave back nuclear weapons, USA when it had a new president that didn’t like a treaty with Iran signed by a previous president, the UK with those bits of  Brexit that it doesn’t like. But HK is a poor example because UK actually abided by the conditions contained in a bit of paper.

A post with a video has been removed along with numerous replies.  

 

Simply posting a video is generally not sufficient to support a claim.  Insisting that members watch the video is also not acceptable, especially when it is a long video.  

 

 

11 hours ago, Neeranam said:

https://calhoun.nps.edu/bitstream/handle/10945/8939/russianukrainian00stew.pdf

Good, long read, thanks.

 

Can you reference which page the following specific assurances cited by @FritsSikkink were allegedly given by Kuchma to Yeltsin?

 

Ukraine will get rid of his nuclear weapons

Ukraine will not join NATO

Ukraine will decrease the size of their army from about 900K to 300K 

On 3/11/2022 at 8:11 PM, Onerak said:

Nobody has to circumvent any Western sanctions. China, UAE are already helping Russians Oligarch move money around. China is engaged with payment system replaced by MC/Visa. India is negotiating to buy Russian oil using Indian Rupees. China is already buying Russian oil. Thailand being a small country so stay neutral without helping the Russian government or it Oligarchs. Not sure if Thailand buys oil from Russia or not. 

The China system was set up quite some time ago. It is not a specific reaction to the current rounds of sanctions on Russia. Hence it does not exist to circumvent these specific sanctions. 
 

sure, Russia will seek to maximize payment systems that are unaffected by western sanctions. What else could one expect the, to do. And sure, there are countries who will opportunistically help the Russians in their endeavor to avoid western sanctions. China is one and what does the west think of China in general? 
 

So are you saying that it’s ok for Thailand to join a club of two or three countries? Russia, China, N Korea, Belarus, Eritrea………..Thailand.