The US felt threathened by Iraq. Canada felt threatened by ISIS and bombed Syria ..whatever. Ukraine was like that guy that chose to attack Kyle Rittenhouse with a skateboard. Not a good idea.
Ukrainian official fired over questionable Russian rape claims.
- Thread starter nottyboi
- Start date
well Nato was working full speed to expand and surround Russia. They fucked Over Russia with broken promises way to many times. A large country like Russia wouldn’t want the states to make decisions for it with military basses all around the border.
Many things in Russia (before sanctions)were way ahead of canada. The phones..the cars.. the medical equipment etc. and yes right now it’s not gonna be the case it’s obvious for everyone.
and I will not speak for Notty but I will speak for myself. I love Ukranians with all my heart.. I truly see no difference between the 2 nations.. but the way the world didn’t react on Russians being killed for so long in the east and the huge media campaign against Russia and its interest and all the lies I see in coverage, makes me feel resentful.it’s that reaction like the one from yourself makes Russians hate the frikin Ukraine and support military action.
I understand (partially) that Russia hate of yours. It’s the civilian casualties and the whole distraction brought upon the civilian sector.that cannot be supported by any sane being.
but here is the UN report for you that doesn’t close their eyes (to my surprise)on where Ukrainian forces tend to place their forces etc.
https://www.ohchr.org/en/statements/2022/07/ukraine-high-commissioner-updates-human-rights-council
I said to my surprise, because that happens during most wars… and the coverage is not as biased as with Ukraine .With all that media”war” you might as well tuck up the UN reports as to why there is such a large number of casualties..
Basically if you look at all US invasions after Vietnam war, they were only Panama, Iraq and Afghanistan and all those were responses to brutal law violations by criminal dictators or terrorists in those countries who were the first to adopt the law of the jungle in the human society and the US responded to them by giving them their own medicine which I deem to be fair enough. Again, Ukraine is a democratic country that has always lived by international laws and has never posed any risk to international security including Russia's security and we all know that US will never invade any country following international laws.
Russia's concerns were basically attempts to set new Putin's rules in international politics which were against the adopted international order which was definitely unacceptable since no decent country would yield to inadequate geopolitical manias of a derailed dictator. This dictator then decided to follow the law of the jungle and prove his global power thru his military might in Ukraine but he miscalculated the degree of support Ukraine would get from NATO so this dictator now has to fight the Ukraine strengthened with NATO's weapons and resources and yeah, we are now in a situation where "might is right". So let's see who will be right in the end: Ukraine (i.e. the West/NATO) or the Russian dictator. Hopefully the logical end of this story is near (history shows that most dictators, especially those trying to expand his dictatorship beyond his own nation, do not finish their lives happily...)
Last edited:
Wow you missed a lot Grenda, Lebenon, Cuba, Syria, Dominican republic, Libya (just a bombing) naval war with Iran, Somalia, bosnia, Haiti, Kosovo. The US did end up supporting several European nations when they overthrew Ghadaffi as well, with Hillary front and center in that operation. But then again you clearly are trying to make a false point so just ignored all of these...conveniently. the US is so nice, only wiped out 3 nations since Vitenam..is that your defense? LMAO.
They didn't attack Russia.
Its like arguing that France should invade Canada because of Quebec.
That is a long seperation. The US attacked Grenada over Americans there. So your point is BS. THey attacked Serbia over Bosnians.
Last edited:
RUSSIA-UKRAINE WAR
Ukrainian Forces Bear Some Blame for Civilian Deaths in Nursing Home Attack: UN Report
Authored by Mimi Nguyen Ly via The Epoch Times,
Ukrainian forces put civilians at risk during an attack on March 11 on a nursing home in southeast Kyiv, according to a report from the United Nations.
Just two weeks after Russia mounted an invasion into Ukraine on Feb. 24, a care house in the village of Stara Krasnianka was attacked. Located in the eastern region of Luhansk, the village is about 360 miles (580 kilometers) southeast of Kyiv.
Ukrainian authorities had blamed Russian forces squarely for killing more than 50 civilians in what it said was an unprovoked attack. But the report by the U.N.’s Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) released in late June, suggests that Ukrainian soldiers bear some blame for the situation.
The report (pdf) covers what the U.N. has assessed as violations of international humanitarian law that have occurred in the ongoing Ukraine–Russia war from Feb. 24 to May 15.
According to the report, soldiers from Ukrainian armed forces had entered the care house in Stara Krasnianka on March 7, because the site “had strategic value due to its proximity to an important road.”
The report stated that on the morning of March 11, soldiers from Russian-affiliated groups “attacked the care house with heavy weapons, with patients and staff still inside.”
At the time, 71 patients with disabilities and 15 staff, as well as Ukrainian soldiers, were in the care house with no access to water or electricity.
The OHCHR said that it is concerned that both Russian and Ukrainian soldiers launched military operations near civilians but didn’t take any measures to protect civilians, as required under international humanitarian law.
“OHCHR is further concerned by reports of the use of human shields, which involves seeking to use the presence or movement of the civilian population or individual civilians to render certain points or areas immune from military operations,” the office added. “The use of human shields is specifically prohibited by article 28 of Geneva Convention IV and article 51(7) of additional protocol I.”
David Crane, a former Defense Department official and a veteran of numerous international war crime investigation, told The Associated Press that Ukrainian forces may have violated the laws of armed conflict by not having evacuated the occupants in the care house.
“The bottom-line rule is that civilians cannot intentionally be targeted. Period. For whatever reason,” he told the news agency. “The Ukrainians placed those people in a situation which was a killing zone. And you can’t do that.”
Ukrainian Forces Bear Some Blame for Civilian Deaths in Nursing Home Attack: UN Report
Authored by Mimi Nguyen Ly via The Epoch Times,
Ukrainian forces put civilians at risk during an attack on March 11 on a nursing home in southeast Kyiv, according to a report from the United Nations.
Just two weeks after Russia mounted an invasion into Ukraine on Feb. 24, a care house in the village of Stara Krasnianka was attacked. Located in the eastern region of Luhansk, the village is about 360 miles (580 kilometers) southeast of Kyiv.
Ukrainian authorities had blamed Russian forces squarely for killing more than 50 civilians in what it said was an unprovoked attack. But the report by the U.N.’s Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) released in late June, suggests that Ukrainian soldiers bear some blame for the situation.
The report (pdf) covers what the U.N. has assessed as violations of international humanitarian law that have occurred in the ongoing Ukraine–Russia war from Feb. 24 to May 15.
According to the report, soldiers from Ukrainian armed forces had entered the care house in Stara Krasnianka on March 7, because the site “had strategic value due to its proximity to an important road.”
The report stated that on the morning of March 11, soldiers from Russian-affiliated groups “attacked the care house with heavy weapons, with patients and staff still inside.”
At the time, 71 patients with disabilities and 15 staff, as well as Ukrainian soldiers, were in the care house with no access to water or electricity.
Prior to the attack, in early March, the management of the care house had requested local authorities to evacuate the residents, but it was “was reportedly impossible as Ukrainian armed forces had allegedly mined the surrounding area and blocked roads.”
The OHCHR said that it is concerned that both Russian and Ukrainian soldiers launched military operations near civilians but didn’t take any measures to protect civilians, as required under international humanitarian law.
“OHCHR is further concerned by reports of the use of human shields, which involves seeking to use the presence or movement of the civilian population or individual civilians to render certain points or areas immune from military operations,” the office added. “The use of human shields is specifically prohibited by article 28 of Geneva Convention IV and article 51(7) of additional protocol I.”
David Crane, a former Defense Department official and a veteran of numerous international war crime investigation, told The Associated Press that Ukrainian forces may have violated the laws of armed conflict by not having evacuated the occupants in the care house.
“The bottom-line rule is that civilians cannot intentionally be targeted. Period. For whatever reason,” he told the news agency. “The Ukrainians placed those people in a situation which was a killing zone. And you can’t do that.”
He's not.
Look at his posts #99. #101, and indeed most of his posts on the subject.
Might makes right.
He firmly believes this.
The US and NATO have *every* right to attack and destroy Russia if they can accomplish it, according to him.
Every invasion they have ever done is 100% justified.
Nottyboi believes that lying to provide fake justification for a war is completely ok if you think it is the best way to get what you want.
It's just hardcore pro-imperialism/"offensive realism".
That's why it took over 30 years, they never accomplished it, and they repeatedly discouraged countries from joining NATO.
That's what "full speed" looks like in your world.
Remind me never to drive with you.
Last edited:
Yes, those are fair points.
Which makes all his pro-Russian posts just pro-Russian posts, not anti-imperialism.
He's all for Russian imperialism, just not American imperialism.
Strange stance.
I think he is in favor of American imperialism, though.
He seems to have talked himself into it, since he is now saying that all the American wars and military actions were justified, because those justify Russia's actions by analogy.
He just believes that every major power has the right to control everything nearest to it by any means necessary.
Buffer states only exist so much as those Great Powers decide they need them to head off a larger war - otherwise they should just be invaded so that your troops and bases are right on your enemy's borders.
Thus Russia is doing its best to eliminate the buffer zone against NATO and make sure Russia's armies are directly confronting NATO's borders and forcing NATO to increase its troops there.
He seems to have talked himself into it, since he is now saying that all the American wars and military actions were justified, because those justify Russia's actions by analogy.
He just believes that every major power has the right to control everything nearest to it by any means necessary.
Buffer states only exist so much as those Great Powers decide they need them to head off a larger war - otherwise they should just be invaded so that your troops and bases are right on your enemy's borders.
Thus Russia is doing its best to eliminate the buffer zone against NATO and make sure Russia's armies are directly confronting NATO's borders and forcing NATO to increase its troops there.
But if might is right then he should have no problem with NATO and support them using implied force as they want to keep the lesser power of Putin under their thumb.
Ok it LIBERATED them lol. Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya Panama Serbia, Just to name a some.
Major nations are gonna be imperialist. All powerful nations seek to shape the world. That is how they become powerful nations. The US seeks to dominate the planet and space. Russia feels the need to have a sphere of influence. China well, we will see how much they want by they certainly plan to dominate their region.
So why pick Russia as the one you love the most?
By the way, the news from the last few days has Ukraine using HIMARS to hit Russia ammunition depots all through the occupied territories.
This is forcing Russia to get desperate at home. I doubt Putin can survive this failure.
I am not "picking Russia" its not about loyalty. Its about common sense. All powerful nations have imperialist tendencies. We either find a way to accomodate or defeat them in war. We cannot have security without some mutual agreement with russia. War with russia is not a viable option. So what would your choice be ? Mutual agreement and pragmatism or death. The only reason i appear pro russian is you are so vehemently anti russian you cannot be rational or impartial.
Oh boy.. you are speaking off the warshaw pact. It was the start. And yes they knew better that expanding to Baltic states etc will create problems.. they did anyways and if there was no eastern Ukraine situation they would have scooped Ukraine in a heartbeat. Don’t pick at words”full speed” or not. The OP said
NATO wasn’t Gona invade Russia.. and I replied it was not about the invasion ,but expansion
