6 ms·

Only Belarus and Syria. You cannot trust Russia right now. But the worry is that Russia can use nuclear weapons.

by NoPie 5y ago

jesterson 5y ago
> You cannot trust Russia right now Would you explain why? And can US be "trusted"? > Only Belarus and Syria That's very far from reality. China most certainly would, knowing the situation and reasons for invasion.
- csomar 5y ago
  China siding with Russia? No way. China taking the opportunity of a Russia vs. West war to take Taiwan: Yes!
  - bigodbiel 5y ago
    And they are certainly reassessing their chances of success and consequences right now, probably going back to the drawing board for some time.
- NoPie 5y ago
  Just based on the UN vote. Neutral doesn't mean support in military action. Russia cannot be trusted because it lied that they will not start a war and then it did.
  - jopsen 5y ago
    > Russia cannot be trusted because it lied that they will not start a war and then it did. Yeah, it's kind of hard for Ukraine to negotiate to avoid an invasion when Russia kept saying they wouldn't invade. I know an ultimatum is a last ditch effort of diplomacy, and often symbolic. But it demonstrates some commitment to diplomacy.
- EB-Barrington 5y ago
  One example: the number of times Russia publicly stated they would not invade Ukraine, leading up to the invasion. Another: Russians stating this is a "special military operation" against military targets, when their actions explicitly target civilians and civilian infrastructure. etc etc etc I'm not commenting about the US, only to state that the number of times Russia has proven it cannot be trusted is now truly countless. Hello from Ukraine.
  - jesterson 5y ago
    > Russians stating this is a "special military operation" against military targets, when their actions explicitly target civilians and civilian infrastructure That's a manipulation at least. Russian forces indeed targeted only military objects, but once numerous fights erupted, it's very hard to determine who was destroying civilian infrastructure. Ukraine has accumulated tremendous experience in blaming everyone else except their own forces in atrocities happened in eastern part of it, so at this stage I personally have very little trust in what they say. > truly countless So you mentioned 2, one is easily refuted. Can you bring more of those "truly countless"?
    - EB-Barrington 5y ago
      You have refuted neither.
      - jesterson 5y ago
        Your aggressiveness shows nothing but weakness of your arguments. If you'd bother to read what I am saying instead of pushing your opinion as the only correct one - I am not blaming one or another side. World is much more complex that that, particularly in a conflict zones. Ukrainian official sources have lied many times about shelling in easter ukraine. Why would anyone believe them now? When battle ensues, it's hard to know which missile hit civilian building, particularly when it's very beneficial to blame it the other side. To give you an example, recent demolition on world largest plane AN-225 Mriya, which was quickly blamed on russian forces. Very convenient, isn't it? Until video surfaced where AN-225 is in smoke altogether with many russian vehicles around it. It seems to be very clear that ukrainian artillery just shelled mindlessly everything around and later media just blamed it on russia. So there will be no further examples of "truly countless" cases? Thought so.

Only Belarus and Syria. You cannot trust Russia right now. But the worry is that Russia can use nuclear weapons.

by NoPie 5y ago

Only Belarus and Syria. You cannot trust Russia right now. But the worry is that Russia can use nuclear weapons.

> You cannot trust Russia right now Would you explain why? And can US be "trusted"? > Only Belarus and Syria That's very far from reality. China most certainly would, knowing the situation and reasons for invasion.

csomar 5y ago
China siding with Russia? No way. China taking the opportunity of a Russia vs. West war to take Taiwan: Yes!
- bigodbiel 5y ago
  And they are certainly reassessing their chances of success and consequences right now, probably going back to the drawing board for some time.
NoPie 5y ago
Just based on the UN vote. Neutral doesn't mean support in military action. Russia cannot be trusted because it lied that they will not start a war and then it did.
- jopsen 5y ago
  > Russia cannot be trusted because it lied that they will not start a war and then it did. Yeah, it's kind of hard for Ukraine to negotiate to avoid an invasion when Russia kept saying they wouldn't invade. I know an ultimatum is a last ditch effort of diplomacy, and often symbolic. But it demonstrates some commitment to diplomacy.
EB-Barrington 5y ago
One example: the number of times Russia publicly stated they would not invade Ukraine, leading up to the invasion. Another: Russians stating this is a "special military operation" against military targets, when their actions explicitly target civilians and civilian infrastructure. etc etc etc I'm not commenting about the US, only to state that the number of times Russia has proven it cannot be trusted is now truly countless. Hello from Ukraine.
- jesterson 5y ago
  > Russians stating this is a "special military operation" against military targets, when their actions explicitly target civilians and civilian infrastructure That's a manipulation at least. Russian forces indeed targeted only military objects, but once numerous fights erupted, it's very hard to determine who was destroying civilian infrastructure. Ukraine has accumulated tremendous experience in blaming everyone else except their own forces in atrocities happened in eastern part of it, so at this stage I personally have very little trust in what they say. > truly countless So you mentioned 2, one is easily refuted. Can you bring more of those "truly countless"?
  - EB-Barrington 5y ago
    You have refuted neither.
    - jesterson 5y ago
      Your aggressiveness shows nothing but weakness of your arguments. If you'd bother to read what I am saying instead of pushing your opinion as the only correct one - I am not blaming one or another side. World is much more complex that that, particularly in a conflict zones. Ukrainian official sources have lied many times about shelling in easter ukraine. Why would anyone believe them now? When battle ensues, it's hard to know which missile hit civilian building, particularly when it's very beneficial to blame it the other side. To give you an example, recent demolition on world largest plane AN-225 Mriya, which was quickly blamed on russian forces. Very convenient, isn't it? Until video surfaced where AN-225 is in smoke altogether with many russian vehicles around it. It seems to be very clear that ukrainian artillery just shelled mindlessly everything around and later media just blamed it on russia. So there will be no further examples of "truly countless" cases? Thought so.