Jump to content

Ukraine ... Enlighten yourself


KhunLA

Recommended Posts


19 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

 

Even he have some points, he is far off the truth when it comes to Putin. Putin fights for the same as us, and trust me, we do not want Putin to become stronger, especially through a war capturing valuable resources in Ukraine. 

 

 

  • Sad 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The truth can be right and wrong, just depending on what we want the end result going to be. As said, we do not want Putin and Russia to become stronger, to quick, but eventually China, Russia and Allies, will win the war on available resources. 

 

So? What do you want? Hoping Musk solve the Mars colonization? 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Will B Good said:

Utter rubbish from Kennedy as usual......

 

In November 2013, protests erupted in Ukraine’s capital, Kyiv, after then-President Viktor Yanukovych suspended preparations to sign an Association Agreement with the European Union (EU). Many Ukrainians, especially in the western part of the country, supported closer ties with the EU.

 

The protests, known as Euromaidan, began as a peaceful movement advocating for Ukraine’s European integration but quickly escalated as Yanukovych’s government responded with force.

 

Over the months, the movement grew into a larger protest against government corruption, police brutality, and authoritarianism.

 

You are, of course, completely correct.

 

I got as far as Kennedy "explaining" that Gorbachev bargained German unification for Baker's assurance of no eastwards NATO expansion, before giving up: Complete and utter nonsense.

 

Firstly, Baker was not in a position to give such assurances. Secondly, Gorbachev had no real say in the matter wrt East Germany. It was not a question of what Russia wanted to do with East Germany, rather would West Germany accept reunification, on what terms and would West Germany's allies in the EU, notably France and the UK, be supportive of reunification (initially at least, both Mitterrand and Thatcher had reservations and were lukewarm in their support).

 

Oh, by the way Ted. The Berlin Wall fell in 1989, not 1991 as you stated. How can anyone take seriously a man who can't even get the basic facts regarding dates correct?

  • Love It 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

You are, of course, completely correct.

 

I got as far as Kennedy "explaining" that Gorbachev bargained German unification for Baker's assurance of no eastwards NATO expansion, before giving up: Complete and utter nonsense.

 

Firstly, Baker was not in a position to give such assurances. Secondly, Gorbachev had no real say in the matter wrt East Germany. It was not a question of what Russia wanted to do with East Germany, rather would West Germany accept reunification, on what terms and would West Germany's allies in the EU, notably France and the UK, be supportive of reunification (initially at least, both Mitterrand and Thatcher had reservations and were lukewarm in their support).

 

Oh, by the way Ted. The Berlin Wall fell in 1989, not 1991 as you stated. How can anyone take seriously a man who can't even get the basic facts regarding dates correct?

Really ... and yet .. we have this

 image.png.7acc61bfc5ece0975fac77c30f9306a0.png

 

and this ... short version

 

image.png.96156d229021025d89e31b941f0bb2b8.png

Edited by KhunLA
  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From link I posted above ... for the lazy folks ...

... facts can't be ignored :coffee1:

 

... "With the exception of RT in Russia and a handful of online opinion articles (see below), no major media outlet has so far reported on the release of these newly declassified documents. In ending the Cold War by breaking promises to Gorbachev, the attitude of the revived Russia of today should not come as a surprise."

 

1960 ... RU's missiles on Cuba, and how did the USA react.   

 

Just think if they, RU's missiles were on the border of the USA, in CA & MX, how would the USA react ?

Edited by KhunLA
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is breathtaking is the active role Ukraine has played in involving the US and UK intelligence services in their dispute with Russia.

 

The Ukraine situation has echoes of Poland 1939, with Boris Johnson flying in to persuade Zelensky not to sign the peace treaty with Russia that was on the table.

 

And of course the US and UK pledging their support for Ukraine, which turns out to be useless.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever happened to the old GOP, the strong defense party? See above. It's tragic. 

To those who have contributed so far in this thread;

 

Putin thanks you from the bottom of his black heart!

 

PS. Do you guys have the same standing in your respective families as RFK Jr 'enjoys' in his (i.e. everyone detests him)?

Edited by Inderpland
  • Confused 1
  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Really ... and yet .. we have this

 image.png.7acc61bfc5ece0975fac77c30f9306a0.png

 

and this ... short version

 

image.png.96156d229021025d89e31b941f0bb2b8.png

 

40 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

 

 

And you consider these non-contextualised snippets to be sufficient proof of what exactly?

 

Rhetorical question: They say and prove absolutely nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

What is breathtaking is the active role Ukraine has played in involving the US and UK intelligence services in their dispute with Russia.

 

The Ukraine situation has echoes of Poland 1939, with Boris Johnson flying in to persuade Zelensky not to sign the peace treaty with Russia that was on the table.

 

And of course the US and UK pledging their support for Ukraine, which turns out to be useless.

 

 

 

The parallel with 1939 is that trying to appease an expansionist, tyrannical dictator is doomed to failure.

 

The rest of your post is absolute tosh as usual.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

Lol, they're from a website that details in exruciating details the promises by the West not to expand NATO to the East.

 

They prove in detail how Russia was lied to and misled.

Yes, Russia is the victim here!

 

And in other news brought to you by RT............

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Inderpland said:

Yes, Russia is the victim here!

It can be argued they are.

(NATO expansion despite the promises not to)

 

The certain victims are the Ukrainians, lied to that they could defeat Russia ! the largest country "in the world"   reclaim all "their land"  fight to the last man  we have your back...but you can't join NATO why ?  well because that would be WWIII  !!!

whilst edging closer and closer to that outcome now  its frankly quite insane !!   no dialogue no negations  Russia must surrender unequivocally ?  the country with the largest nuclear arsenal 

will just give up  when really pushed ?

Edited by johng
spellins
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

 

And you consider these non-contextualised snippets to be sufficient proof of what exactly?

 

Rhetorical question: They say and prove absolutely nothing.

The underlined texts in my post are links to the source.  Been here 5+ years, and haven't figured that out yet.

Edited by KhunLA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

The underlined texts in my post are links to the source.  Been here for almost 5 years, and haven't figured that out yet.

I could make a looooong list of things you haven't figured out yet, and I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess you're far older than five years.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, johng said:

It can be argued they are.

(NATO expansion despite the promises not to)

 

The certain victims are the Uranians lied to that they could defeat Russia ! the largest country "in the world"   reclaim all "their land"  fight to the last man  we have your back...but you can't join NATO why ?  well because that would be WWIII  !!!

whilst edging closer and closer to that outcome now  its frankly quite insane !!   no dialogue no negations  Russia must surrender unequivocally ?  the country with the largest nuclear arsenal 

will just give up  when really pushed ?

Yes, Ukraine should obviously have just put their arms up and gone completely surrender monkeys because Russia's got nuclear arms.

Everyone, put your weapons down. Putin is knocking on the door and we cannot resist him - he's got nukes!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Inderpland said:

PS. Do you guys have the same standing in your respective families as RFK Jr 'enjoys' in his (i.e. everyone detests him)?

 

More rubbish !

Some of his family don't agree with his opinions

I'm sure some of your family don't agree with your opinions either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Inderpland said:

Everyone, put your weapons down. Putin is knocking on the door and we cannot resist him - he's got nukes!

So has the US,UK,Israel,North Korea,China  etc etc etc  its supposed to be a deterrent  MAD  ( Russia has the most BTW)

don't mess with me and I won't mess with you (or else) except certain participants seen to have forgotten that principle  thinking that one side is just "bluffing"  

 

It is not about "resisting" its about negotiation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now








×
×
  • Create New...