The nukes Ukraine had were built by Russia in the first place, secondly they weren't a nuclear nation under international law.
Which of these countries has Russia threatened to bomb as the USA threatened Cuba in 1962.
Hungary,Slovenia,Czeck Rep, Poland, Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania. The original idea is Nato was to promote dialogue for peace in eastern Europe. Fat lot of peace they've brought about.
Morally speaking the USA army has a long history of targeting civilians for instance in Korea and Vietnam. They have no leg to stand on in condemning Putin and his army. The have been and are a law unto themselves.
Can anyone remember Operation Ranch Hand in the Vietnam war. The USA used a chemical substance called Agent Orange to remove plant cover and agricultural produce. Agent Orange was a powerful herbicide used by U.S. military forces during the Vietnam War to eliminate forest cover and crops for North Vietnamese and Viet Cong troops. The U.S. program, codenamed Operation Ranch Hand, sprayed more than 20 million gallons of various herbicides over Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos from 1961 to 1971.
Agent Orange, which contained the deadly chemical dioxin, was the most commonly used herbicide. It was later proven to cause serious health issues—including cancer, birth defects, rashes and severe psychological and neurological problems—among the Vietnamese people as well as among returning U.S. servicemen and their families.
That to my mind was a war crime - but since the USA do not recognize the authority of the International Criminal Court in Den Haag they were not charged with war crimes. There is no real evidence how many people died directly from the more than 20 million gallons of it used between 1961 and 1971 in Vietnam and Laos - it is more likely more than what is happening in Ukraine during the present war? .
The USA never recognizes any war crimes court.
200000 civilian philipinos died in American concentration camps at the turn of the 20th C. They, ve been a bloodthirsty country throughout their history.
I do not had the answers to that Stav.
I don't think anyone does.
I don't blame anyone for not having the answers, I just find it odd that they can criticize other countries for allowing or not ending the war when they don't have solution themselves.
The nukes Ukraine had were built by Russia in the first place, secondly they weren't a nuclear nation under international law.
Irrelevant, they still had in their possession 1,800 nuclear warheads.
Which of these countries has Russia threatened to bomb as the USA threatened Cuba in 1962.
Hungary,Slovenia,Czeck Rep, Poland, Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania. The original idea is Nato was to promote dialogue for peace in eastern Europe. Fat lot of peace they've brought about.You non-reply to American bloodthirstyness proves any accusation levelled against Russia is irrelevant.
You non-reply to American bloodthirstyness proves any accusation levelled against Russia is irrelevant.
So your argument is that anything Russia does is okay because America has been bloodthirsty in the past? How very moral of you.
In previous posts on this forum I've already said the west including America is guilty of hypocrisy when it comes to criticizing Russia, but that doesn't mean their criticism is wrong or that it justifies Russia's actions.
So you agree that USA and therefore Nato are immoral. They are also immoral in their establishment of Nato countries alongside Russia,without Russia's permission.
Nato is not a council for dialogue as it should be but a warmongering agent. Your basis of supporting Ukraine is therefore irrevalent.
What's has the US or NATO's morality got to do with Russia invading Ukraine. Ukraine is not controlled by the US or is it a member of NATO.
They are also immoral in their establishment of Nato countries alongside Russia,without Russia's permission.
Neighboring states need Russia's permission?
Nato is not a council for dialogue as it should be but a warmongering
agent. Your basis of supporting Ukraine is therefore irrevalent.
NATO is primarily a defensive alliance designed to deter aggression against member states. Have you ever once heard NATO or any member state suggesting in anyway that it would or that there was cause for it to attack Russia. America was reducing its military presence in Europe before Russia invaded in the process of pivoting to Asia to counter China which is sees as the bigger threat than Russia. In the Baltic states the only NATO countries that bordered Russia, there was just 1,000 NATO troops split across the 3 countries. Many European NATO states where happy to buy large quantities of Russian energy. Germany the biggest European NATO member has something of a joke reputation when it comes to its military and had a habit of bending over backwards to extend the olive branch of friendship to Russia. It along with France blocked Ukraine membership to NATO and there was nothing in the short to medium term to suggest that stance was going to change.
So I ask you where was this warmongering from NATO. Where was this existential threat to Russia coming from that they felt compelled to act?
Yes, we revert back to the 1962 Cuban Missile crisis where your immoral USA threatened to bomb Cuba.
Nato needs permission from Russia in order to establish bases nearer than what was agreed previously. Your objections are null and void. Stick with the agreements and avoid being bombed.
Mooobeam, why are so many fundamentalist evangelistic Christians, fanboys of the psychotic evil war criminal puking Putin ?
Are you a pacifist you evil atheist?
Maybe ouBeano or ouMaaik will front you're too chi ckensht. Amen.
Yes, we revert back to the 1962 Cuban Missile crisis where your immoral USA threatened to bomb Cuba.
After Russia had put nuclear weapons into Cuba and was in the process of placing more nuclear weapons there.
Neither the US or NATO supplied or had any intentions of placing nuclear weapons in Ukraine.
Nato needs permission from Russia in order to establish bases nearer than what was agreed previously. Your objections are null and void. Stick with the agreements and avoid being bombed.
What agreement? Any such agreement is highly debated by scholars and even Gorbachev said in an interview no such agreement was ever given.
Even if that agreement was made and NATO had broken the agreement. Ukraine is not a NATO member so why on earth are they being bombed?
Are you a pacifist you evil atheist?
LOL, you sir are a morally bankrupt individual who's only remit it to engage in an endless circle of whataboutery. You're in no position to call anyone else evil.
It’s not the Cuban missile crisis….it’s the Jameson raid.
Please explain each campaign and why you think the reason for bombing said country was valid.
All after WW11, so you know where I stand. Maybe the Korean War but even then not totally but I bet your arse 99% of the south Koreans thank the US for that one.
Why do you presume just because we support I conflict (aid only not ground troops) that we support every war.
It's like you far right fuckwits that's think if you oppose one thing from the looney right then you are a looney left supporter.
the worlds not black and white you know, most people are centre in my opinion but you fuckwits only believe you have to hold far right or far left ideals.
Well fuck off is all I can say to cunts like you
Here are some of the countries bombed by your mighty USA...
That's some next level whataboutery.
If you cannot supply valid reasons for your mighty righteous country that you support then don't ask me to supply reasons for a country you oppose.
I support Ukraine's right to defend itself from invasion by an violently aggressive foreig n power. Whether or not I've supported US military actions in the past (and I frequently did not) is irrelevant and you know it.
Your answer is not entirely correct and you know it.You are dismissed.
When you argue with a fool, two fools are arguing
BB
Fools are those who ignore real facts and live by one-sided propaganda.- which undermined real progress in potential peace negotiations.
Buttplug, Buttplug...
Of course, everyone has at least considered the possibility that Ukraine bombed Poland to bring NATO into the war against Russia.
However, just because there is a motive, it does not make it true.
US, EU and NATO intel would have explored that option. Just like Ukraine "could" have bombed the EU gas pipeline, investigations would surely consider all possibilities.
It is not as if governments are going to say this in the media though.
The above answers are mostly totally out of context. The USA, UK and Communist Russia leaders decided to let Russia occupy what then was Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Romania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia. However Tito refused to allow Russian troops to enter Yugoslavia and remain there as an occupying force. Stalin played ping-pong with the Western so-called leaders and the whole Yalta Treaty was an abortion. Russia was also allowed to occupy the previously independent Lithuaania, Estonia and Latvia - which became slave states under Stalin as part of the Soviet Union.
The Communist regime departed from Russia in 1991 and never returned. The idea that Russia is still under Communist control with an imperial policy as to expansion is propaganda BS. Russia never since 1991 invaded any independent country - there were minor problems with the new borders of countries - but that over time was settled. The new free countries like Georgia and Armenia are factual examples.
So why is Ukraine different from the rest? The Ukraine did not give up nuclear bombs as suggested, In the Ukraine Independence negotiations and in the Ukraine Constitution it as agreed that the independent Ukraine would be nuclear free and by 2003 the nuclear bombs were all transferred back to Russia. So how could the present nuclear issue become an issue in Ukraine.
What became an issue under Obama was corrupt activities of the US leadership of the Democratic Party with some allies from the Republican Party in both Russia and especially in the totally corrupt Ukraine Government. Since independence in 1991 the Ukraine Government was the most corrupt in Europe and a long list of especially Democrat leaders were involved in Ukraine and Russian corruption. That ranged from Obama himself and included Clinton, Biden, Pelosi Schumer, Schiff, Podesta and virtually every Democrat leader in the USA. Obama was directly involved in the Uranium 1`scandal for which Russia paid $142 million to the Clinton Foundation from where the money was distributed to the various beneficiaries. By the way Mueller was appointed as Special Council in that case and found nothing untoward about the issue and his report was a white-wash to protect the Obama regime. Since 2014 the USA provided billions in aid to Ukraine - and the famous 10% kick back scenario became in full force with Clinton on her own getting $38 million assistance through the corruption vehicle - the Clinton Foundation. Hunter Biden was his father's agent in Ukraine corruption - the Biden's have a joint bank account through which the corrupt money flows.
By 2019 Trump found out about the 10% kickback issue and instructed that all foreign aid assistance should be suspended until clarification could be attained about processes followed and the 10% kickback system be stopped. For instance the corrupt activities in Ukraine of Pelosi and Schiff were stopped in its tracks and that led to the Impeachment Joke in 2019.
The fact is that Trump was an impediment to continuation of US politician corruption in Ukraine. The FBI knew about everything going on in corruption in the USA by especially Democrat Politicians in Ukraine - but refuse to act on it in an effort to prevent any scandal involving the Democrats becoming public knowledge. . The election of the ultra-corrupt Biden as President opened the gate to ultra-corruption by the Democrats in Ukraine. The famous $40 billion aid package to Ukraine was a farce and a further $1 billion was voted by the House in aid money in Ukraine. Two days after that money was provided to Ukraine Pelosi and Schiff were in Kiev to deal with the usage of the money and the handling of the kick-back money - nothing else. The 40 billion did not go to the Ukraine in cash - it was for replacement of second-hand armaments collected from the US Army and the beneficiaries were the US Armaments industry, The said Industry was known for decades as a kickback institution for US politicians. It started in Vietnam and is continuin g to this day. Every defense force contract is inflated to cater for kick-backs and one of the kick-back vehicles has been Haliburton largely controlled by the Cheyne's.
There is a massive amount of money benefitting USA politicians in the present Ukraine scenario. Biden himself is involved and that account for the undermining of the Minsk agreement as to a ceasefire in Ukraine and the establishment of a proper Constitution for Ukraine. Instead of abiding by the agreement the corrupt elements in the USA Government - supported by the media - undermined the agreement,
Is Ukraine a democracy at present? It was and is not one. Since the 2014 coup the country has NO constitution and the Minsk agreement that would have led to a proper constitution was aborted. After the2019 election Ukraine gradually deteriorated into a one party dictatorship - at present the ruling party is the only one allowed to operate politically - all opposition parties are banned and all Russian speaking members of the Ukraine Parliament have been arrested.
In the meantime Russia is NOT a one-party state like the media and especially the USA want everybody to believe. In the end if the media are fed with enough lies they use the Goebbels method - if lies are repeated enough times people may start to believe they are the truth. That is why the conduct of some of our members are so ridiculous. They constantly believe every lie concocted by the media and this is just one of many such lies.
Dumb Mike, you need to understand that authoritarianism can take many guises.
Just because a country does not have a communist economy- and has capitalism instead - that does not mean it is not authoritarian.
Communism in practice is just a form of authoritarianism.
Capitalism left unchecked can become authoritarianism. (e.g. global monopolies).
If the wealth is becoming more centralised in fewer people, they have all the money and power to appoint politicians that will do their bidding. Promote their agenda like no tax for the rich.
The characteristics of an authoritarian country are:
1. One Party State. (Opposition are jailed frequently or have to leave the country)
2. No Freedom of Media- State owned. (Opposition are jailed frequently or have to leave the country)
3. A leader that has appointed himself for life or/and rigged elections. Rigged elections are basically a one-party state.
China is an example where they were semi-authoritarian but became more Democratic because they had a limited term on their leader. Now XiPing has appointed himself for life, and closed down freedom of the media so China is going back to being authoritarian. They do use capitalism...
Does Communism actually exist in the 21st century?
SB
Now let react on the issue of Russia. The Russian Constitution allows for freedom of speech and for a multi-party state. In the last Russian Parliamentary election Putin's Party only got 48,2% of the vote - the other 9 participating parties got 51,8% of the vote. However, Russia is a massively large country and some of the opposition parties have local but not national organization. Because of the above split in voting Putin's Party won 65% of the Duma seats. In the Russian Presidential election Putin got 60% of the vote, The Russian Constitution only allows for two term presidency, The fact is that the Duma approved that an exception be made for Putin to serve a third term candidate.
Russia has as free a press as for instance the Western media owners allows freedom of speech.
Russia meets none of the criteria you listed as being proof of a dictatorship. Ukraine at present meets all the requirements of being a dictatorship. It is a one-party state not allowing any opposition parties to function. All Russian-speaking members of the Ukraine Parliament are in jail. The media is under total state control - there is no freedom of speech allowed - people speaking Russian are fined if they dare speak Russian in public.
So if you expect anything to change Ukraine back to become a democracy - you are believing in cloud 9 stories. I would like to remind you of the rise to power of Hussein in Iraq in the late 1970's and the whole of the 1980-88. The USA did exactly the same as they are doing in Ukraine - Hussein became their great ally in the Mid-East and received massive aid from the USA. Now watch out - with a Nazi-element in the Ukraine Government and in the Ukraine Army the chances of returning of Democracy in Ukraine would be zero.
Now about China - when were they ever non-authoritarian since 1949 when the Communist Party took over. They always were an outright dictatorship. Mao was a mass-murdering dictator - and his successors were slightly less bloodthirsty - but no element of freedom of speech was ever allowed and there were no members of the Chinese Parliament who are opposition party members.
As to Communism being existing - no real Communism ever existed other than in the Kibbutz in Israel. It always was a cover for operation of a dictatorship in countries. In the late 1980's I met Roly Arenstein a grandnephew of Karl Marx after he was banned for 52 years for being a Communist. I one day had a long discussion with him about Communism and when I asked him about the oppression of people in Communist countries he told me that the USSR was NOT a Communist Country - it was a dictatorship. Whether it is a Communist dictatorship is another question - it has all the trappings of Fascism.
The real situation is now Fascism - in other words a coalition of the ultra-rich and especially so-called liberal socialist parties. That was the case in both Italy and Germany - when they had Fascist Governments. It is a particularly serious problem in the USA at present and probably the greatest threat to democracy over the last 200 years in the world - if the USA become Fascist the rest of thew world would follow it .
Hall Of Fame
47006 posts
Nov 20, 2022, 19:02SB
The Russian Constitution only allows for two-term presidency, The fact is that the Duma approved that an exception be made for Putin to serve a third term candidate.
---------
You mean Putin made an exception, by removing anyone who opposed him from the Duma.
---
I
This Kholomoisky, Zelensky's backer in his rise to power makes the Guptas look like amateurs.
No - SB - Putin removed nobody from membership of the Duma. However, during the issue of discussion on the third term of Putin - it was decided not to change the Constitution - which would have to be confirmed by a referendum - but by the Duma approval of a special case allowing him stand as a candidate for election Whether he would win an election in that case depends onm the electorate. It was obvious that Putin influenced the decision of the Duma in that regard and I have reservations about the whole issue myself - but that on its own does not negate the fact that Russia is constitutionally a democratic country and election results confirm that is a multi-party country.
There is one problem in Russia which is similar to the USA - namely the existence of the Mafia in both countries. Since the 1930's the Democratic Party has had a close association with the US Mafia - so close that Kennedy was able to win in Illinois by a very small percentage in the 1960 Presidential election and the Mafia claimed they made him the USA President by lection fraud in Chicago, Clinton's link to the Mafia and drug smuggling while he was governor was so close that Hilary in a recent statement said that if Fox News was in exostence in 1992 Bill would not have been the President of the USA. The Clintons came to Washington pennyless but after 8 years as President the Clinton cabal was worth $200 million. So what about Obama? He declared in a statement of assets when he became Senator that he was worth $100 000 - 4 years later when he became President he declared that he had $3,5 million in assets. When he left the Presidency he went on a buying spree in buying luxury homes in Hawai, California, Washington and Martha's Vineyard to the tune of an estimated $32 million. That was before he got the $61 million dollars he was paid by Netfix. He was a master in insder trading as well. Coming from Chicago - still a Mafia playground - he may have links to the Mafia.
So are there links between the Russian Mafia and the Putin Presidency. Some suggested in the past that there may be links - but am not sure of that one at all. Some of the Russian billionaires definitely had links to the bloodthirsty Russian Mafia - but whether that means Putin has similar links is not clear. Some of the murders in Russia Putin is blamed for may well be by Russian Mafia acting in their own interests.