German chancellor Olaf Scholz's governing coalition has agreed in principle to double the country's military aid for Ukraine next year to 8 billion euros ($8.5 billion), a political source in Berlin said on Sunday.
All of this justifies Russia attacking a sovereign country, alright.
With most of the equipment and uniforms bearing Z, the modern swastika. In mission to provide living room and freedom to true russian people. By committing genocide.
Also, land mines. Ukraine accused of using land mines. Projections give us 700 years to remove mines in Ukraine. 700. Years. Placed by a country that did not sign the Ottawa Treaty.
Now. Tell me about them projections. Cannot wait.
Then call me names.
And then a troll.
Or do we do whataboutism again (see the links comment, adding for clarity) and then change subjects?
First of all, Ukraine lost its sovereignty back in 2014 in a western sponsored right wing coup that overthrew the legitimate and democratically elected government of the country.
I also love how you just keep pushing this false narrative about the war when Stoltenberg already let the cat out of the bag. The war happened because of NATO expansion plain and simple. This is something the west continued to deny for over a year, but now it’s right there in black and white:
Then lastly on Sweden. First of all, it is historic that now Finland is member of the Alliance. And we have to remember the background. The background was that President Putin declared in the autumn of 2021, and actually sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign, to promise no more NATO enlargement. That was what he sent us. And was a pre-condition for not invade Ukraine. Of course we didn’t sign that.
The opposite happened. He wanted us to sign that promise, never to enlarge NATO. He wanted us to remove our military infrastructure in all Allies that have joined NATO since 1997, meaning half of NATO, all the Central and Eastern Europe, we should remove NATO from that part of our Alliance, introducing some kind of B, or second class membership. We rejected that.
So he went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to his borders.
Also, if you want to see what an actual genocide looks like, then look no further than to what Israel is doing with Biden’s blessing. That’s a real genocide where Israel massacred more civilians in three weeks than died in war in Ukraine in nearly two years.
I see this Stoltenberg quote confidently thrown out so often in defence of Russia’s invasion. Do you think Russia has some kind of actual right to invade countries if NATO doesn’t do what it says? Would you be defending Germany if it sent a similar letter to the CSTO and then invaded Serbia?
Of course it does. It’s a superpower with a right to protect its citizens from the threats of the world’s most aggressive military alliance, making threats to install nukes etc.
Do you think the US would behave differently?
But that’s not a singular scenario. If you want an analogy it would be Russia or China installing nukes on the US-Mexico border and constantly talking shit.
It’s the direct comparison to the scenario Russia created when it sent that letter. It’s literally just swapping:
The CSTO for NATO
America for Russia, as the aggressor with a big military
Mexico for Ukraine, as the smaller neighbour that’s not even in the alliance in question
But let’s not pretend it would be any more just for America to kill hundreds of thousands of Mexicans over nukes stored there. The way America treated Cuba around the time of the missile crisis was basically this, and I would hope that we can agree America was not justified in that. As it is you’re just defending warmongering behaviour because it’s against a side that you don’t like.
But let’s not pretend it would be any more just for America
Nobody is saying it’s justified. It’s predictable, expected and a normal way for a superpower to behave. You don’t climb into the lion cage and whine about justice when you’re mauled. Russia, the USA, whichever is going to act in its interests and the interests of its security. The unjust part is on the aggressor, in this case the USA in Ukraine funding and arming Nazi extremists to threaten Russia for “its interests in the region” and killing hundreds of thousands because it’s “cheap” and a “good deal” for them.
No world power will tolerate an aggressive military alliance on its borders. If you don’t understand this basic fact, then what else is there to say to you. NATO has been invading and destroyed countries for decades since USSR fell. The principle of invading countries because might makes right is already established by NATO.
It’s pretty funny that you bring up Serbia, given that what Russia is doing in Ukraine is directly modelled on what NATO did to Yugoslavia. NATO recognized independence of the separatist regions and then had them invite NATO to assist. This is precisely the formula Russia followed with DPR and LPR. Russia is just following the rules based world order here buddy.
Also worth noting that Pakistan and India were created by the British when they got kicked out as effectively a scorched earth policy. The British used this same strategy in the Middle East in order to create unstable political entities that would be at each others throats.
If it’s a free for all, Germany and its friends can do what they want and send Ukraine as many weapons as they like, can’t they? Why have you got a problem with it? Under your logic they’re just doing what world powers do
Where did I say I had a problem with anything? The west chose to play a stupid game, and it’s very clearly turning into a debacle. Evidently you still don’t understand what’s happening though.
Modern Germany is literally backing a genocide in Gaza right now, so yeah we can definitely criticize modern Germany for doing nazi stuff. Meanwhile, anybody who thinks that the same country that’s aiding and abetting a literal genocide is also helping people of Ukraine really needs to get their head checked.
Okay so you do have a problem with it. So what the fuck was with the, “Where did I say I had a problem with anything?”
Meanwhile, anybody who thinks that the same country that’s aiding and abetting a literal genocide is also helping people of Ukraine really needs to get their head checked.
“Britain supplying the Soviet Union with thousands of aircraft and tanks to fight the Nazis during WW2 was bad because Britain had a colonial empire.” No, these things don’t affect one another. They can, in fact, be evaluated differently.
All of this justifies Russia attacking a sovereign country, alright. With most of the equipment and uniforms bearing Z, the modern swastika. In mission to provide living room and freedom to true russian people. By committing genocide.
Also, land mines. Ukraine accused of using land mines. Projections give us 700 years to remove mines in Ukraine. 700. Years. Placed by a country that did not sign the Ottawa Treaty.
Now. Tell me about them projections. Cannot wait.
Then call me names.
And then a troll.
Or do we do whataboutism again (see the links comment, adding for clarity) and then change subjects?
Which part of the script are we rehearsing?
First of all, Ukraine lost its sovereignty back in 2014 in a western sponsored right wing coup that overthrew the legitimate and democratically elected government of the country.
I also love how you just keep pushing this false narrative about the war when Stoltenberg already let the cat out of the bag. The war happened because of NATO expansion plain and simple. This is something the west continued to deny for over a year, but now it’s right there in black and white:
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_218172.htm#:~:text=The background was that President,condition for not invade Ukraine
Also, if you want to see what an actual genocide looks like, then look no further than to what Israel is doing with Biden’s blessing. That’s a real genocide where Israel massacred more civilians in three weeks than died in war in Ukraine in nearly two years.
Maybe get yourself a better script.
What is Russia business in Ukraine’s overthrowing their government?
How is talking Israel not changing subjects?
Try asking more intelligent questions so you don’t make a clown of yourself in public next time.
I see this Stoltenberg quote confidently thrown out so often in defence of Russia’s invasion. Do you think Russia has some kind of actual right to invade countries if NATO doesn’t do what it says? Would you be defending Germany if it sent a similar letter to the CSTO and then invaded Serbia?
Of course it does. It’s a superpower with a right to protect its citizens from the threats of the world’s most aggressive military alliance, making threats to install nukes etc. Do you think the US would behave differently?
Hot take but if the USA invaded Mexico because the CSTO refused to stop accepting members then I would, in fact, think that that was bad actually
But that’s not a singular scenario. If you want an analogy it would be Russia or China installing nukes on the US-Mexico border and constantly talking shit.
It’s the direct comparison to the scenario Russia created when it sent that letter. It’s literally just swapping:
But let’s not pretend it would be any more just for America to kill hundreds of thousands of Mexicans over nukes stored there. The way America treated Cuba around the time of the missile crisis was basically this, and I would hope that we can agree America was not justified in that. As it is you’re just defending warmongering behaviour because it’s against a side that you don’t like.
Nobody is saying it’s justified. It’s predictable, expected and a normal way for a superpower to behave. You don’t climb into the lion cage and whine about justice when you’re mauled. Russia, the USA, whichever is going to act in its interests and the interests of its security. The unjust part is on the aggressor, in this case the USA in Ukraine funding and arming Nazi extremists to threaten Russia for “its interests in the region” and killing hundreds of thousands because it’s “cheap” and a “good deal” for them.
No world power will tolerate an aggressive military alliance on its borders. If you don’t understand this basic fact, then what else is there to say to you. NATO has been invading and destroyed countries for decades since USSR fell. The principle of invading countries because might makes right is already established by NATO.
It’s pretty funny that you bring up Serbia, given that what Russia is doing in Ukraine is directly modelled on what NATO did to Yugoslavia. NATO recognized independence of the separatist regions and then had them invite NATO to assist. This is precisely the formula Russia followed with DPR and LPR. Russia is just following the rules based world order here buddy.
deleted by creator
Also worth noting that Pakistan and India were created by the British when they got kicked out as effectively a scorched earth policy. The British used this same strategy in the Middle East in order to create unstable political entities that would be at each others throats.
If it’s a free for all, Germany and its friends can do what they want and send Ukraine as many weapons as they like, can’t they? Why have you got a problem with it? Under your logic they’re just doing what world powers do
Where did I say I had a problem with anything? The west chose to play a stupid game, and it’s very clearly turning into a debacle. Evidently you still don’t understand what’s happening though.
Oh I’m sorry, I must have mistaken your comment backing up the accusation of modern Germany doing Nazi stuff to be criticism of Germany’s actions.
Modern Germany is literally backing a genocide in Gaza right now, so yeah we can definitely criticize modern Germany for doing nazi stuff. Meanwhile, anybody who thinks that the same country that’s aiding and abetting a literal genocide is also helping people of Ukraine really needs to get their head checked.
Okay so you do have a problem with it. So what the fuck was with the, “Where did I say I had a problem with anything?”
“Britain supplying the Soviet Union with thousands of aircraft and tanks to fight the Nazis during WW2 was bad because Britain had a colonial empire.” No, these things don’t affect one another. They can, in fact, be evaluated differently.