6 ms·

Nice twisted rhetoric, really. For a split second I did believed you, that Russia haven't invaded Ukraine, it merely 'protected it's local territory'.

mmjaa 9y ago
What part of "Russia needs the Black Sea to protect its sovereignty" do you not understand? What part of "Iraq is essential to the sovereign protection of the borders of the USA" do you .. not understand? I'm not trying to justify Russia's military action in Ukraine - living quite close to this action, it horrified me. But, on the other hand, I'm not ever going to be compelled to agree with someone who says that the mass destruction of Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen .. and so on .. is vital to the defence of the USA. Because, I know where those places are on a map, and they are nowhere near the USA ...
- fhood 9y ago
  > What part of "Iraq is essential to the sovereign protection of the borders of the USA" do you .. not understand? What are you talking about? Iraq was not mentioned in the original comment. Also, this "The USA has invaded, and destroyed, far, far more territory, resulting in 100x more human suffering and misery." is grossly untrue. Neither country is free of fault here, but for every Afghanistan, or Iraq, there is a North Korea or East Germany.
  - mmjaa 9y ago
    The point is, Russian military action in Ukraine was for the purpose of protecting its sovereign borders and access to the Black Sea. While I agree that it was a heinous action, it is more justifiable than any military action the USA has projected, if but for the simple fact that it was close to home - literally on Russias' doorstep. America, however, projects power around the globe - not for its own protection of sovereign assets, and certainly not as a consequence of needing to defend its sovereign border. Rather, American power projection is done in order to interfere with nations that the USA has decided, for some other reason, mostly psychology, is its enemy. >"The USA has invaded, and destroyed, far, far more territory, resulting in 100x more human suffering and misery." is grossly untrue. Sorry, but a lot of the world see it as being very, very true. Perhaps you should pay more attention to the refugee children walking across Europe to get away from American wars.
    - AnimalMuppet 9y ago
      "Protecting its sovereign borders" by stealing from others' sovereign borders? Sorry, not buying it.
      - mmjaa 9y ago
        I don't agree that Russia should have done what it did to Ukraine, and its territories. No, sir. But I find the argument that "USA is not bad, because Russia did bad" to be highly specious. Russia, and the Russians in the region that was invaded, can justify its mis-deeds as protection of its sovereignty. America, and thus Americans, cannot. There were no Americans to protect in Iraq. In Afghanistan. In Syria, Yemen, Libya. Seriously, Americans are liable for some deep, deep shit. Russians, less so.
        Sommersonn 9y ago
        >Russia, and the Russians in the region that was invaded, can justify its mis-deeds as protection of its sovereignty. America, and thus Americans, cannot. There were no Americans to protect in Iraq. And there was no Russians to protect in Crimea, so stop whitewashing Kremlin lies.
        ZoeZoeBee 9y ago
        Ummm, Crimea has been majority ethnic Russian for over 100 years, Ukranians weren't even the dominant minority in the region for most of the last two centuries. You really should learn some history before commenting
        AnimalMuppet 9y ago
        "Ethnic Russian" != "Russian", though. No matter what ethnicity, they were citizens of Ukraine. And I completely deny that Russia has the right to speak for ethnic Russians of other nationalities, and to invade their countries on their behalf.
ZoeZoeBee 9y ago
You might want to brush up on your history, mainly the part where the Ukraine has been part of Russian territory for most of the last 350 years, and while you're reading maybe you'll discover the reason Russia had to act with regards to Crimea.
- AnimalMuppet 9y ago
  Had to? No. Chose to.
  - ZoeZoeBee 9y ago
    Right, they could have made the choice to let their strategic naval base in Crimea fall under the sphere of NATO, despite the obvious problems with that
    - Sommersonn 9y ago
      It wasn't _their_ naval base in Crimea.
      - ZoeZoeBee 9y ago
        WTF are you smoking? You're completely ignorant of both the past and the present when it comes to the Crimean region. Sevastopol was founded in 1783 by Russia, the Black Sea Fleet has run out of there under the Russian Flag even after the dissolution of the Soviet Union.
        mmjaa 9y ago
        It truly is astounding, the level of dire ignorance that defenders of America's right to destroy nations, seem to employ in their effort to hinder truth. Astounding, and also, enlightening. No wonder their nation is allowed such free hand to destroy other nations: their citizens truly do not give enough of a damn to gain any insight into the history of the world.
        9y ago

mmjaa 9y ago

What part of "Russia needs the Black Sea to protect its sovereignty" do you not understand? What part of "Iraq is essential to the sovereign protection of the borders of the USA" do you .. not understand? I'm not trying to justify Russia's military action in Ukraine - living quite close to this action, it horrified me. But, on the other hand, I'm not ever going to be compelled to agree with someone who says that the mass destruction of Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen .. and so on .. is vital to the defence of the USA. Because, I know where those places are on a map, and they are nowhere near the USA ...

fhood 9y ago
> What part of "Iraq is essential to the sovereign protection of the borders of the USA" do you .. not understand? What are you talking about? Iraq was not mentioned in the original comment. Also, this "The USA has invaded, and destroyed, far, far more territory, resulting in 100x more human suffering and misery." is grossly untrue. Neither country is free of fault here, but for every Afghanistan, or Iraq, there is a North Korea or East Germany.
- mmjaa 9y ago
  The point is, Russian military action in Ukraine was for the purpose of protecting its sovereign borders and access to the Black Sea. While I agree that it was a heinous action, it is more justifiable than any military action the USA has projected, if but for the simple fact that it was close to home - literally on Russias' doorstep. America, however, projects power around the globe - not for its own protection of sovereign assets, and certainly not as a consequence of needing to defend its sovereign border. Rather, American power projection is done in order to interfere with nations that the USA has decided, for some other reason, mostly psychology, is its enemy. >"The USA has invaded, and destroyed, far, far more territory, resulting in 100x more human suffering and misery." is grossly untrue. Sorry, but a lot of the world see it as being very, very true. Perhaps you should pay more attention to the refugee children walking across Europe to get away from American wars.
  - AnimalMuppet 9y ago
    "Protecting its sovereign borders" by stealing from others' sovereign borders? Sorry, not buying it.
    - mmjaa 9y ago
      I don't agree that Russia should have done what it did to Ukraine, and its territories. No, sir. But I find the argument that "USA is not bad, because Russia did bad" to be highly specious. Russia, and the Russians in the region that was invaded, can justify its mis-deeds as protection of its sovereignty. America, and thus Americans, cannot. There were no Americans to protect in Iraq. In Afghanistan. In Syria, Yemen, Libya. Seriously, Americans are liable for some deep, deep shit. Russians, less so.
      - Sommersonn 9y ago
        >Russia, and the Russians in the region that was invaded, can justify its mis-deeds as protection of its sovereignty. America, and thus Americans, cannot. There were no Americans to protect in Iraq. And there was no Russians to protect in Crimea, so stop whitewashing Kremlin lies.
        ZoeZoeBee 9y ago
        Ummm, Crimea has been majority ethnic Russian for over 100 years, Ukranians weren't even the dominant minority in the region for most of the last two centuries. You really should learn some history before commenting
        AnimalMuppet 9y ago
        "Ethnic Russian" != "Russian", though. No matter what ethnicity, they were citizens of Ukraine. And I completely deny that Russia has the right to speak for ethnic Russians of other nationalities, and to invade their countries on their behalf.

ZoeZoeBee 9y ago

You might want to brush up on your history, mainly the part where the Ukraine has been part of Russian territory for most of the last 350 years, and while you're reading maybe you'll discover the reason Russia had to act with regards to Crimea.

AnimalMuppet 9y ago
Had to? No. Chose to.
- ZoeZoeBee 9y ago
  Right, they could have made the choice to let their strategic naval base in Crimea fall under the sphere of NATO, despite the obvious problems with that
  - Sommersonn 9y ago
    It wasn't _their_ naval base in Crimea.
    - ZoeZoeBee 9y ago
      WTF are you smoking? You're completely ignorant of both the past and the present when it comes to the Crimean region. Sevastopol was founded in 1783 by Russia, the Black Sea Fleet has run out of there under the Russian Flag even after the dissolution of the Soviet Union.
      - mmjaa 9y ago
        It truly is astounding, the level of dire ignorance that defenders of America's right to destroy nations, seem to employ in their effort to hinder truth. Astounding, and also, enlightening. No wonder their nation is allowed such free hand to destroy other nations: their citizens truly do not give enough of a damn to gain any insight into the history of the world.
      - 9y ago