Russia Ukraine Update Thread

originally posted by: ISeekTruth101

Do you have any proof that between 2004 and 2022, Russia did not call for negotiations? Or not call on NATO to address it's security concerns?

Why would I have proof of something that I never claimed and is a strawman?

originally posted by: ISeekTruth101

I counter your point, and say, was there not plenty of opportunities for NATO to not expand further eastward, to stop and consider the potential fall out with Russia.

Why would an organization whose posture is purely defensive and in protection of other like-minded sovereign nations need to worry about fallout?

originally posted by: ISeekTruth101

So what do you say to those officials? Are they full of "whataboutisms"?

It was you who brought up the prospect of "whataboutism" not I.

originally posted by: alphabetaone

Why would an organization whose posture is purely defensive and in protection of other like-minded sovereign nations need to worry about fallout?

Why? Because of the reasons cited by the former US Defense Secretary:

“trying to bring Ukraine into NATO was truly overreaching." That initiative, he concluded, was a case of "recklessly ignoring what the Russians considered their own vital national interests

And also “ the Obama administration still sought to turn Ukraine into a NATO political and military asset. In late 2013 and early 2014, the United States and several European governments meddled shamelessly to support the efforts of demonstrators to unseat Ukraine's generally pro-Russia president, Victor Yanukovych, some two years before the expiration of his term” - Ted Galen Carpenter, a senior fellow in defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute, is the author of 12 books and more than 950 articles on international affairs.

I concurr with the reasons stated by these well-informed individual on the matter.

originally posted by: all2human
a reply to: dragonridr

Then why the initial need for a NATO
Ukraine? If weapons have range that nullify proximity
Zelensky or his handlers were aware, heavy flirting with an
Organization with the stated goal Of containing Russia
he was endangering his countrymen
Not mentioning the elephant being resources and the chance
to blunt an emerging economic block

I think Ukraine answers that question. Russian neighbors are scared It's Putin and his actions that cause people to want to join NATO. These former soviet republics know who and what they are dealing with joining Nato guarantees Russia won't try to invade them. At one point Russia was allowed in NATO what happened is Putin did not believe that the rules for joining NATO should apply to Russia. Even though he was given access to NATO headquarters They were cooperating with NATO and in fact worked alongside them in Brussels.

1997-2001.state.gov...


Russia disbanded the treaty in October 2021 after 8 Russians in Brussels were removed from NATO headquarters for spying.

BRUSSELS (AP) — NATO on Wednesday expelled eight members of Russia’s mission to the military alliance, saying that they were secretly working as intelligence officers and halved the size of Moscow’s team able to work at its headquarters.

“We can confirm that we have withdrawn the accreditation of eight members of the Russian Mission to NATO, who were undeclared Russian intelligence officers,” a NATO official said. The official was speaking under customary condition of anonymity and can’t be named in public.

So Putin was not always against NATO

“Putin said: ‘When are you going to invite us to join Nato?’ And [Robertson] said: ‘Well, we don’t invite people to join Nato, they apply to join Nato.’ And he said: ‘Well, we’re not standing in line with a lot of countries that don’t matter.’”

Putin told Frost he would not rule out joining Nato “if and when Russia’s views are taken into account as those of an equal partner”.

He told Frost it was hard for him to visualise Nato as an enemy. “Russia is part of the European culture. And I cannot imagine my own country in isolation from Europe and what we often call the civilised world.”

originally posted by: all2human
a reply to: PatriotGames4u

Then explain Libya
or would you prefer hypotheticals for 300 Alex

I can't explain libya, it looks illegal to me.

You wanna put obama, biden & hillary on trial for that?

You have my FULL support.



Still doesn't justify what russia is doing in Ukraine.

originally posted by: ISeekTruth101

I concurr with the reasons stated by these well-informed individual on the matter.

So you agree with an opinion. Congratulations.

How is that at all relevant to my questions?

Here, let me get that for you, it's not.... as you're trying to bring up strawman arguments for......whatever the hell reason it is you feel like doing so.

a reply to: dragonridr

NATO's shenanigans in Georgia put an end to Russia's cooperation
Sweden or Moldova don't share the same sentiments as other eastern States
regarding regional safety.
Nor does Finland,but i suspect they will likely join

a reply to: ISeekTruth101

This is revisionist history Yanukovych was stealing money from Ukrainians that is why he was under investigation and why he loaded planes and fled in the middle of the night. The RADA was about to vote on impeachment he decided not to wait for the results and fled to Russia. The irony is had he not fled they were 10 votes short for impeachment meaning he would have kept his position. When he fled they just simply declared that he abandoned the Ukrainian people.

As for US involvement, it was limited the EU had much more interest in bringing Ukraine into the EU. It would have been the largest country in the EU and the most resources of any of the countries. Had nothing to do with Russia and everything to do about money. So yes the EU was trying to get them to join and I have little doubt was making substantial offers for them to do so.

originally posted by: all2human
a reply to: dragonridr

NATO's shenanigans in Georgia put an end to Russia's cooperation
Sweden or Moldova don't share the same sentiments as other eastern States
regarding regional safety.

Your wrong again there was a rift over Kosovo. Georgia was just Putin again invading another country. I can see you have been heavily influenced by Russian propaganda. This is why Putin invaded Ukraine he began to believe his own lies. He forgot it was propaganda

a reply to: dragonridr


Yes Kosovo is another
I admit I’m not a fan of NATO’s
Offensive operations,
The truth is somewhere in the middle

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: ISeekTruth101

I concurr with the reasons stated by these well-informed individual on the matter.

So you agree with an opinion. Congratulations.

How is that at all relevant to my questions?

Here, let me get that for you, it's not.... as you're trying to bring up strawman arguments for......whatever the hell reason it is you feel like doing so.

You appear to be confused on the meaning of a straw-man argument. Here let me get that definition out for you:

“A strawman is a fallacious argument that distorts an opposing stance in order to make it easier to attack.”

You asked a direct question, mind you a loaded one, about why should NATO worry about fall out. I cited reasons offered by two individuals that I happen to agree with. But if you cannot comprehend the reasons stated then I’ll have to break it down further for you to wrap your head around -

NATO granting membership to eastern states has infuriated Russia. Russia has made this clear several times, over a long period.

The opinion I shared previously with you by the former US secretary of defense, in NATO considering Ukraine for membership into NATO was recklessly ignoring Russias concerns.

The second opinion by Ted, regarding NATOs pursuit of Ukraine as a NATO asset reinforces the above opinion regarding NATO being reckless in ignoring Russias concerns and issues on NATO meddling with Ukraine.

For these reasons above which I echo, NATO should have been concerned with the fallout regarding their expansion into the eastern baltic states and Ukraine.

Oh and regarding your description of NATO being “purely defensive” excuse me while I laugh out loud! And politicians have our best interests at heart hey? Could you be any more romantic on the description of NATO?

a reply to: ISeekTruth101


"NATO granting membership to eastern states has infuriated Russia."


Duh.

That's what we've been saying all along.

putin got Feelz and invaded Ukraine.

All the nazi and bio weapon stuff is just propaganda to lighten the PR catastrophe.

NATO is not a country, it's a group of countries combining their efforts to defend against russian invasions.

If russia doesn't like NATO, russia should stop invading.

Then NATO has no reason to exist.

Russia asked China for military, economic aid in Ukraine conflict following invasion

Russia asked China for military and economic aid following their invasion of Ukraine, Fox News has confirmed.

In an attempt to protect intelligence sources, U.S. officials have been reluctant to detail what type of aid is being sought.

The request for military assistance, which was first reported by The New York Times, has reportedly raised concern among U.S. officials that China might interfere with any efforts from Western nations to assist Ukrainian forces.

Grains of salt... But if China does help Russia militarily, let me guess... More "consequences?" That word has been flung around so much. Who knows what it entails.

a reply to: majesticgent

I was just getting ready to post this lol. The bold section discusses what Russia is asking from China.

Russia strikes Ukrainian base near Poland, reportedly arrests own spy chiefs, gains in Donetsk

Russia launched a heavy volley of missiles Sunday on a military base in western Ukraine near the Polish border, killing 35 and injuring scores at a location often used by NATO trainers.

By Sunday evening, reports surfaced that Russia has requested military assistance from China as its unprovoked invasion of Ukraine enters a third week.

U.S. officials told several outlets, including the Financial Times, CNN and the Washington Post, that Russia is asking China for military equipment and aid. Some officials told the Finanical Times that there are signs that Russia is "running out of some kinds of weaponry."

National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan on NBC warned China against assisting Russia, but he did not say what measures would be taken by the United States if Beijing gets involved.

"We will ensure that neither China, nor anyone else, can compensate Russia for these losses," Sullivan said on Sunday. "In terms of the specific means of doing that, again, I’m not going to lay all of that out in public, but we will communicate that privately to China, as we have already done and will continue to do."

Russian and Ukranian officials have spent the weekend in negotiations for a possible ceasefire that could end the conflict in the next few days.

Video conference discussions have been going "non-stop," tweeted Mykhailo Podolyak, an adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. "Working groups are constantly functioning. A large number of issues require constant attention," he said.

In a possible positive sign, Podolyak said that a negotiating session will be held Monday "to sum up the preliminary results" from negotiations.

Russia's Leonid Slutsky, head of the State Duma’s Committee on International Affairs, expressed similar optimism.

click link for full article


Having to get military items from China... Russia is worse off than I thought.

a reply to: ISeekTruth101

so... uhm... yeah...

nice straw man argument in your response.

and NATO is purely defensive.. What part of that are you incapable of comprehending? When NATO countries act outside of NATO (Libya for example) they still use the NATO setup, as in chain of command, logistics, overall command (ground, sea and air). Why would countries that are allied / NATO not use the NATO structure being its something we all have been training with for more than 50 years now?

The use of a NATO style command does NOT mean NATO is taking action. This is not hard to understand unless you are being willfully obtuse.

a reply to: Xcathdra

If I had to guess, Russia is running low on short range ballistic missiles. That's just an uninformed guess though. They probably want to save their longer ranged missiles.

They launched 30 at a base near Lviv and claimed to have killed 180 foreign fighters that came to Ukraine to fight.

Peace talks are scheduled on the 14th, so something may come of those.

a reply to: Xcathdra

I think your confused

From the NATO WEBSITE:

"NATO answered the United Nations call to the international community to protect the Libyan people":
www.nato.int...
Do you not see they refer to themselves as NATO in relation to the operation?
nice try with the mental gymnastics
and fail with the defensive only bs

a reply to: all2human

Except it didnt. NATO can only act with consensus to invoke article 5. Absent that countries that are a part of NATO acted using NATO command since they trained with it for the last 50+ years. Keep doing research.. You will eventually figure it out.

Also link your source for what you claimed. I mean to the actual article and not the generic NATO website.

a reply to: Xcathdra

lets put words into action then
explain Kosovo
i'll wait
lol

a reply to: all2human

How about we stick to Ukraine instead of constantly trying to deflect?? Link please.


btw - NATO's role in Kosovo

The operation derives its mandate from United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999) and the Military-Technical Agreement between NATO, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and Serbia.

UNSC Resolution 1244 (1999)

and I think your the one who is confused.