When a known serial killer sits on your fence pointing his gun to your windows, are you justified to worry? If yes what would you do?
You know i have already suggested to you to listen to an ex white house safety advisor about the safety concerns that the aggressive alliance, NATO, is violating and also i gave you a link that shows that USA knew that they are violating these safety concerns and that it would eventually lead to war...
Are you aware about that Ukraine is not the first country modern Russia was intruding?
The only difference to Tchechenia is, that Ukraine is closer to europe. But was is the same is that Russia expands their territory without any respect to international trieties.
Russia invests all their power to get access to the five seas and come back to emperialmgreatness.
Check out the Arte documentary about Putins plan to connect the five seas:
https://www.arte.tv/en/videos/119518-000-A/putin-and-the-five-seas-war/
And this plan is no reaction to other military powers at all. When Russias propaganda mentions international law to legitibize their war, this is kind of a non-argument, when they are concistantly violating international law.
I will watch it to see your position and thanks for the suggestion. Maybe not today though. Then i will comment about it (stay tunned if you are interested 😋).
Until then i am aware about the fact that the Georgian government said sorry about the 2008 war that Georgia caused under NATO influence.
It wasn't the government, but it was a political leader. Russia already occupies part of Georgia and his job is to convince the remainder that Russia is preparing to invade it and that they shouldn't fight back and risk ending up like Ukraine.
The country is hardly a democracy, anymore. Sad to watch.
There are Hungarian politicians who say the same: if Russia invades you, you shouldn't fight back. Defending yourself is stupid, they say, because it's okay to become Russian vassal state, instead of have your own country. At least, then the Russians don't bomb you.
They all talk like rapists.
Russia is occupying Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia, for years, now, and they have recently threatened Kazakhstan for being too independent-minded.
Ah yeah it was the governing party leader. And he said that they attacked (which is true), not you don't fight against Russia. And why it is not a democracy?
I see Donbass as liberated, not as occupied. Not sure about Cherson or Zaporyzia though.
Moldova is certainly under eu "occupation", not the opposite.
I have no idea about Kazakhstan, maybe i missed that.
Part of Georgia was taken by the Russians and their partisans. They then tried to take it back (and failed: it's still Russian). That was what he was referring to: that it was wrong to try to reclaim their own territory.
Russian partisans now run the rest of the country and it is losing independence. The parliament currently only has one party in it and they are banning and imprisoning the opposition.
Then you missed the western NGOs, Samantha Power's visit, eu leaders trying to interfere in the country etc.
Words are not violence, even if they are on an official press statement.
Words (hostile speeches) are not violence, sending weapons is not violence, funding violent regime changes in foreign countries is not violence, establishment of military bases is not violence, spying is not violence, fake news and propaganda is not violence, blackmail is not violence,sanctions is not violence, freezing accounts is not violence, but all them lead to violence and war. Saakasvilli sent troops because of such things. Georgia was ment to be a proxy as Ukraine is.
This seems a good list of Russian activities. But by no means it gives legitimacy to Russian actions. I am really done arguing with you. As you are clearly not making effort to accept Russia as the main offender I will only respond by reporting your notes, when you continue with unconfirmed baseless assults and publishing russian propaganda unfiltered.
Unconfirmed baseless assults.
Read your comments. It is just that.
nostr:npub1cm87c625x3tzqu2qzf7e845749k58u7xvx2gc8ym0wmg9sytwwuqdrzwm4 is allowed to remain unconvinced and hold to his own opinion. That is not diverging from dialectec.
I don't expect everyone to agree with me, just to remain civil and constructive, which he has been.
I don't need his agreement, to know that I am right. 😁
Totally he is allowed to post whatever he wants. But I do not see any point in letting pure propaganda notes be unreported.
I think when I learned something from twitters downfall into a noisechannel, than it is that everyone is to publish their notes.
So I am also allowed to report his notes as my free speech. And I am hardly oblidged to read his notes.
Clearly as of my goal, I will report notes, that creat unconfirmed stories that collide with well documented stories in a way, that it is clear desinformation or a simple lie.
I totally respect genuine commenter, the open their opinion. One can opinate that the russian Agression is legit. But to me it is not open for discussion if Russia invaded Ukraine or not. Same with Georgia or Tchechenia. And I am not open for discussion if Russia committed horrible warecrimes in Butcha.
Who does not respect that facts exist should not expect that I respect notes disreguarding proven facts.
You can report all you want. Nostr is a free country.
Yes you can report all you want. Maybe you should not forget to report your notes too, since they definitely create unconfirmed stories that collide with well documented stories in a way, that it is clear desinformation or a simple lie. Especially after bringing Butcha as an example where the western propaganda was trying to convince us that russians were bombarding themselves, while denying to participate to an international investigation about the case and insisting to make only their own. Extraordinary claims need extraordinary proofs someone was saying and if this is not a baseless accusation then what is it?
Reporting on Nostr is always a double-edged sword, as some people will block excessive reporters from their feed or their relays.
Nobody likes a tattle-tell.
Yeah, but a cold conflict is still much better than a hot one.
Exactly. During the cold war there were some measures taken by both sides for example. There was some balance.
After the fall of the soviet union someone is pushing for hot wars etc.
Russia. Russia has been pushing for hot wars. Because, as I have pointed out, it doesn't have much appeal to anyone, so it can't use propaganda effectively.
To win a cold war, you need an inspiring narrative, and Russia doesn't have one.
You are committing the same logical fallacy. You claim that the invadad country can have caused a war. No one can cause a country to attack nor can anyone stop a country from attacking. If Russia invades a country, it is all Russias decision to do so.
I think on every legal level this is common sense. Also when a person kills someone, there is no law that lets the murderer blame someone else. He committed the action therefore he has to go to jail. Russia entered foreing borders with their military, therefore they entered war. No other party is to blame for this.
Exactly
So you say Russia is to blame for the 2008 war with Georgia also?
People in a country: We don't want to be Russian. We are fine, as our own country.
Russia: *sends in the tanks*
People in a country: Why did you invade us?
Russia: You said you didn't want to be Russian. That made us scared. We were very frightened. Why did you have to attack us?
People in a country:
Your mistake is in thinking that other people being happy is justification for killing them, merely because it makes you upset.
That is a literal fact, well documented. Otherwise show some reliable proof, to justify your argument.
I watched the first 6 minutes or so. What a crap!🤮 Especially the claim thhat Putin was bombing Syria was glorious 😵💫
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_intervention_in_the_Syrian_civil_war
And in Reuters, Moscow clearly approves that they were bombing syrian locations: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-russia-syria/russia-says-no-evidence-of-civilian-deaths-in-its-syria-bombings-idUSKCN0VI0UW/
You know the first link you provided writes at the beginning: "On 30 September 2015, Russia launched a military intervention in Syria after a request by the regime of Bashar al-Assad for military support in its fight against the Syrian opposition and Islamic State"
...
But Putin was bombing Syria...
Glorious...
Also the most important.
Merry Christmas be healthy, stay safe, don't be a proxy and make as many reports as you want. I don't care about that.
Happy christmas to you as well. Maby we understand some things differently. But as I see it is rather on how we read things.
It is great we keep a respectful conversation. Happy christmas to you and your family ✌️
How is invading Ukraine keeping the serial killer out? If anything, it's more likely he'll attack.
And why didn't they attack? Russia is now weak, attacking them would be easiest now.
I think it's more likely that this story is total bullshit. A story made up to justify murder, even though they were not attacked.
What story was bs? And how Ukraine ended up having one of the strongest armies in Europe? Arming Ukraine has been admitted also so...
Ukraine built up it's military _after_ being invaded, not before.
United Kingdom and the USA are actually obliged to defend Ukraine against Russian aggression, and have failed to do so.
"United Kingdom and the USA are actually obliged to defend Ukraine against Russian aggression"
Why?
Because that was the deal Ukraine gave up nuclear weapons for, while the US that can actually defend themselves without nukes kept a fuckhead sized arsenal
Russia was a part of that deal in 1994 too…
Pretty sure there’s no deal n e more lol
Did you have a stroke and forget to type your whole train of thought in between the beginning and end of this comment?
Or are you trying to imply the deal was "we will defend you as long as you don't get attacked, but if you get attacked the deal is off"
"Or are you trying to imply the deal was "we will defend you as long as you don't get attacked, but if you get attacked the deal is off""
When the attacker is as part of an agreement yeah pretty sure it’s null and void…
What do you mean?
What do you mean?
Stop wasting my time if you can't explain your points. Trolling doesn't make you cool
I made my point… you under no circumstances give up weapons for peace as you get neither afterwards…
Why don’t you stop eating people’s time…
Well, that's what they're effectively telling Ukraine to do, again. They have built resilient fortresses along the border to the Russian-controlled lands, that Russia hasn't been able to take. They call those areas "the meatgrinder", if you get the drift, and it's nearly stopped the advancement.
So, Russia is trying to get them to give those fortresses up by treaty, in exchange for Russia pinky-swearing that it will be friendly and nice to them, forever, in exchange.
But Ukraine did that last time, and the whole Russian-pinky-swear treaty thing didn't really work out well for them. Now, everyone screams at them, that they are war-mongers, but if Russia mows them over, 5 minutes after they abandon the fortresses, those same people will be like, Oh, nobody could have seen that coming... Woops.
Well no. And i don't think anyone, including ukrainians disagree with that. Except if you mean that the ukrainian army grew in numbers with the conscripts. Other than that, they were building an army and fortresses like the one in Avdiivka for years before the invasion.
The START treaty expired in 2009 and only the US and Russia reiterated their commitment to Ukraine's border integrity.
Okay, so where are the US forces, to reinstate the Ukrainian border? The border is no longer integer.
US security guarantees are not worth the paper they are written on.
Russia sends in tanks. USA sends a tweet.
Russia and the USA agreed to continue to respect the Budapest Memorandum, which has as its first clause:
> Respect the signatory's independence and sovereignty in the existing borders
We’ve given them almost 190 billion dollars…
No, actually, you haven't. Most of that money was spent in the USA or by the US military in Europe. 20% was loans, not grants. Some it was promised, but not yet sent, as it can take years for contracts to clear. They've received more like $75 billion, directly to the Ukraine government.
Anything "associated with Ukraine" gets paid from that budget line item, but the Ukrainian government never sees most of it. But they _have_ received weapons and recon, which have been game-changers, so they don't usually complain.
It works like this:
Congress agrees to $50 billion in "military aid to Ukraine". The US Defense Department spends the money on developing a new weapons system, training troops on that system, producing the system, delivering the system to its arsenals. It makes room for that system by removing the older stuff, that was scheduled for decommision. It sends the older stuff to Ukraine.
The older stuff, that it would have had to pay to dispose of, gets sent to Ukraine. Same thing Germany did. Sent them everything they wanted to get rid of.
Another thing the US does, is that it loans Ukraine money, on the condition that Ukraine spend that money buying American arms. (EU does the same thing.) So, it's a defense industry stimulus package. That's why these "presents to Ukraine" often get approved by people who don't like Ukraine: the money actually goes to Americans, not Ukrainians.
The USA has probably made money off of "helping Ukraine", in fact, as everyone can see that the US-made stuff is vastly superior to the Russian-made stuff, and now they're completely swamped with weapons orders for high-grade stuff that goes for like $80 million a pop.
Welcome to the new world order
What in the..
I mean I get that our corrupt agencies and gov supported gain of function research out there and who knows what else but no my brothers and sisters and I aren’t going to die for the warmongering any longer. The US is going to focus on South America as our sphere of control changes. We can no longer babysit the EU. Yes, we caused this problem and for that I do feel bad but it’s not the right move to push a nuclear power into a corner.
