Ukraine invasion

IlIlIlIlI said:
freedom to freeze :)

Freedom of thoughts visiting Latvia starts having consequences:
tass.com

Russian Foreign Ministry issues note of protest to Latvian Embassyâs charge dâaffaires

According to Ivan Nechayev, the Latvian authorities demanded that visiting nationals from Russia should sign a document stating a disagreement with their home countryâs policies or they should be barred from crossing the state border
tass.com tass.com

What's MSM tries to make out of it:
edition.cnn.com

Russia's Gazprom says it has stopped gas supplies to Latvia | CNN

Russian state-owned energy company Gazprom said on Saturday it had stopped supplying gas to Latvia, accusing the Baltic country of “violating conditions for gas withdrawal,” without giving any further details.
edition.cnn.com edition.cnn.com

What I think: you name it, you have it 🤣
www.naturalgasintel.com

Latvia Moves to Ban Russian Natural Gas Imports as Volumes Continue to Fall Short

Latvia taking steps to eliminate reliance on Russian natural gas imports starting in 2023. Explore the country's efforts to secure alternative gas supplies and reduce dependence on Russian energy.
www.naturalgasintel.com www.naturalgasintel.com
Click to expand...

I think cutting one's nose off to spite one's face captures it quite nicely.
 
Atilla said:
I mean what Stupidity for any country to turn down neutrality avoiding participation in any war?
Click to expand...
It depends who is making the promise;)

Yes, Russia promised in 1994 to never attack Ukraine if it gave up its nuclear weapons​

Ukraine, Russia, the U.S. and the UK signed a 1994 treaty that assured Ukraine it would be safe from attack as long as it gave up its massive stockpile of nukes.


e60973ce-4b5c-4dc9-a2bd-d2f82b151e7c_1920x1080.jpg




More Videos​

Author: Emery Winter
Published: 5:52 PM EST March 8, 2022
Updated: 4:56 PM EST March 10, 2022
Facebook Twitter
International leaders called Russia’s invasion of Ukraine illegal immediately after it began, citing a number of international laws and treaties. One of those treaties is the Budapest Memorandum, an agreement made between Ukraine, Russia, the United States and the United Kingdom in 1994.
Viewer Joe O. texted VERIFY to ask about the Budapest Memorandum: “Can you verify if [former President] Bill Clinton made a treaty with Ukraine and Russia that said if Ukraine would give up its nukes, America and Russia would guarantee their safety and never attack them?”

THE QUESTION​

Did Ukraine agree to give up its nuclear weapons in 1994 in exchange for safety from a U.S. or Russian invasion?

THE SOURCES​

THE ANSWER​

This is true.

Yes, Ukraine agreed to give up its nuclear weapons in 1994 in exchange for safety from a U.S. or Russian invasion.
Click to expand...
 
Sudan living the reality of partnering with Russia.

edition.cnn.com

Russia is plundering gold in Sudan to boost Putin's war effort in Ukraine | CNN

Multiple interviews with high-level Sudanese and US officials and troves of documents reviewed by CNN paint a picture of an elaborate Russian scheme to plunder Sudan's riches in a bid to fortify Russia against increasingly robust Western sanctions and to buttress Moscow's war effort in Ukraine.
edition.cnn.com edition.cnn.com
 
counter_violent said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1553428523590770688
Click to expand...
The Russians really are beyond the pale. The lengths they'll go to in order to frame the Ukrainians knows no bounds. They must have captured (rather than destroyed) one of the 16 U.S. Himars and then wasted one of the rockets to blow up the PoW building. What do they cost: somewhere in the region of $100,000 for each one? That's a lot of time, effort and money wasted in a vain attempt to make it look as if Ukrainian forces are responsible. After all, if they just wanted to kill the prisoners, surely they'd just line them up against a wall and shoot them? Quick, easy and cheap: job done. Needless to say, I smell a rat.
TIm.
 
counter_violent said:
Russia, trusted partner. Woteva!

Click to expand...

So what are the plans for the deployment of weapons on Ukraine if it were to join NATO?

Do you not see that Nukes or NATO they are one and the same, leading to WMD pointing at Russia? No eyes, no brain. No idea have you? MSM troll.

Can you apply the same principle to assurances given by the West to Russia after the Berlin wall came down?


Two-faced hypocrisy playing out again imo.
 
timsk said:
The Russians really are beyond the pale. The lengths they'll go to in order to frame the Ukrainians knows no bounds. They must have captured (rather than destroyed) one of the 16 U.S. Himars and then wasted one of the rockets to blow up the PoW building. What do they cost: somewhere in the region of $100,000 for each one? That's a lot of time, effort and money wasted in a vain attempt to make it look as if Ukrainian forces are responsible. After all, if they just wanted to kill the prisoners, surely they'd just line them up against a wall and shoot them? Quick, easy and cheap: job done. Needless to say, I smell a rat.
TIm.
Click to expand...

Of course it makes total sense for Russia to drop an expensive missile on a group of POW's who are co-operating with Russian forces and exposing the atrocities being committed by the Azov regiment...What possible motive is there for Ukraine to execute them?
 
Atilla said:
So what are the plans for the deployment of weapons on Ukraine if it were to join NATO?

Do you not see that Nukes or NATO they are one and the same, leading to WMD pointing at Russia? No eyes, no brain.
Click to expand...
So far, three NATO members have nuclear weapons.
1659276685243.png


But yes, Jens Stoltenberg tweeted that Ukraine would be the fourth NATO member to have nuclear weapons. It's in invisible ink thats hard to see by eyes and brain, so you'll have to use your imagination.:D
https://twitter.com/x/status/1293131139717226498
 
Last edited:
Atilla said:
So what are the plans for the deployment of weapons on Ukraine if it were to join NATO?

Do you not see that Nukes or NATO they are one and the same, leading to WMD pointing at Russia? No eyes, no brain. No idea have you? MSM troll.

Can you apply the same principle to assurances given by the West to Russia after the Berlin wall came down?


Two-faced hypocrisy playing out again imo.
Click to expand...
Same old playbook.

When the argument is lost, revert back to Ukraine joining NATO and deploying nukes.

Total nonsense and you know it.
 
counter_violent said:
Same old playbook.

When the argument is lost, revert back to Ukraine joining NATO and deploying nukes.

Total nonsense and you know it.
Click to expand...
c_v,
"When the argument is lost"
😲
That's rich coming from you, as your only argument is that Putin must be stopped because he's not a very nice man. So what? Does that adversely impact your life? Of course it doesn't. Oh, and your other reason is that if he isn't stopped he'll try and conquer the rest of Europe - even though there's not a shred of evidence to support such an outlandish claim. So, to stop a bit of cad (as if he's any worse than most western leaders), you're prepared to risk nuclear war - even though you don't think it'll happen (as if you have the faintest idea). And, in the meantime, untold $£billions are wasted, more people die needlessly every day and Ukraine's infrastructure gets steadily levelled - some of it by Zelensky's own forces. How you have the gall to present that as a winning argument that trumps the mountains of evidence provided by those of us on this side of the fence is taking the pi$$ in the extreme.

I'm sorry to have to say it c_v, but it's because of the insane hawkish gung-ho rhetoric like yours that the whole thing is more likely to escalate than it is to die down. Our best hope of avoiding nuclear war is that the west runs out of interest, ammo and money before the situation gets any worse and MSM, politicians et al move on to the next big thing - probably a another fictional pandemic. One thing's for certain, Putin's not going to stop unless and until he achieves his objectives and, as you surely know, (regardless of whether or not you're prepared to admit it publicly), the only way - the ONLY way to stop him - is by direct Nato involvement. Pray to god - or who/whatever you like - that that doesn't happen.
Tim.
 
timsk said:
c_v,
"When the argument is lost"
😲
That's rich coming from you, as your only argument is that Putin must be stopped because he's not a very nice man. So what? Does that adversely impact your life? Of course it doesn't. Oh, and your other reason is that if he isn't stopped he'll try and conquer the rest of Europe - even though there's not a shred of evidence to support such an outlandish claim. So, to stop a bit of cad (as if he's any worse than most western leaders), you're prepared to risk nuclear war - even though you don't think it'll happen (as if you have the faintest idea). And, in the meantime, untold $£billions are wasted, more people die needlessly every day and Ukraine's infrastructure gets steadily levelled - some of it by Zelensky's own forces. How you have the gall to present that as a winning argument that trumps the mountains of evidence provided by those of us on this side of the fence is taking the pi$$ in the extreme.

I'm sorry to have to say it c_v, but it's because of the insane hawkish gung-ho rhetoric like yours that the whole thing is more likely to escalate than it is to die down. Our best hope of avoiding nuclear war is that the west runs out of interest, ammo and money before the situation gets any worse and MSM, politicians et al move on to the next big thing - probably a another fictional pandemic. One thing's for certain, Putin's not going to stop unless and until he achieves his objectives and, as you surely know, (regardless of whether or not you're prepared to admit it publicly), the only way - the ONLY way to stop him - is by direct Nato involvement. Pray to god - or who/whatever you like - that that doesn't happen.
Tim.
Click to expand...

Hi Tim,

Contrary to all evidence external and increasingly internal from the UK and EU, these peeps just troll out the same old dribble.

Hence, the war.

The consequence of that war will soon be coming home to UK.

imo the Tories have fecked up big time on:

1. Brexit
2. Covid
3. Ukraine war support

Perhaps this belongs in the Politics thread but unbelievabley so, the Tories are claiming those three headed snake as getting the big calls correct. LMAOROTF

Give it until 2026 to see achievements.

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk

Jacob Rees-Mogg Says The Government Won't Assess Whether Brexit Is A Success

The cabinet minister dismissed a report saying quitting the EU has harmed Britain's economy as "the regurgitation of Project Fear".
www.huffingtonpost.co.uk www.huffingtonpost.co.uk

Here is performing walk of shame with mouth shut closed.
1659286118279.png
 
Last edited:
Atilla said:
imo the Tories have fecked up big time on:
1. Brexit
2. Covid
3. Ukraine war support
Click to expand...
At',
On covid and Ukraine I agree with you 100%. I also agree with you on Brexit in so far as the Tories handling of it was appalling. As you know, I voted leave, but your point is about how well the politicians have behaved and performed and, on those two measures, they score 0/10 from me. Worse than useless. They've shown a callous disregard for the health and welfare of the nation throughout Covid and are now pursuing a disastrous foreign policy that can't possibly benefit any of us in any way and is, already, causing us substantial harm. They are all incompetent, morally bankrupt and extremely dangerous. Liz Truss tops that list and Rishi Sunak comes a close second. I really do despair.
Tim.
 
timsk said:
The Russians really are beyond the pale. The lengths they'll go to in order to frame the Ukrainians knows no bounds. They must have captured (rather than destroyed) one of the 16 U.S. Himars and then wasted one of the rockets to blow up the PoW building. What do they cost: somewhere in the region of $100,000 for each one? That's a lot of time, effort and money wasted in a vain attempt to make it look as if Ukrainian forces are responsible. After all, if they just wanted to kill the prisoners, surely they'd just line them up against a wall and shoot them? Quick, easy and cheap: job done. Needless to say, I smell a rat.
TIm.
Click to expand...
The evidence is overwhelming it wasn't a HIMARS missile that killed the Azov POWs in the Volnovakha prison camp.
www.forbes.com

Russia Claims Ukraine Killed Its Own POWs—Here’s Why Few Believe It

On July 28, a blast consumed a building in Eastern Ukraine, killing 53 Ukrainian POWs sleeping inside. Moscow claimed the prison had been struck by a rocket fired by a HIMARS artillery system given to Kyiv by the U.S. Here's why many observers find it far more likely Russian forces were responsible.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com

Why would the Russians would want to make it look like Ukraine killed people who Russians hate but most Ukrainians consider heroes? Maybe that would be to deny another one of these:
1659366038153.png


So, you are right about the rat.;)
1659365547287.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

trendie
nasty invasive CMC advert
Replies
11
Views
3K
shadowninja
shadowninja
N Rothschild
Ukraine flu
Replies
0
Views
1K
N Rothschild
N Rothschild
M
Austria - Ukraine
Replies
0
Views
2K
markvighan
M
J
Ukraine plays?
Replies
8
Views
2K
PieterSteidelmayer
P
Y
Investing in Ukraine !
Replies
0
Views
2K
Yuriy
Y
Top