5 ms·

Could you point to the articles of Minsk agreements that allow for military invasion as a penalty for any party failing to meet its obligations? You discuss th

Could you point to the articles of Minsk agreements that allow for military invasion as a penalty for any party failing to meet its obligations? You discuss the identities of the Nordstream pipeline saboteurs with some certainty. Are you privy to some exclusive information unavailable to the rest of us, or is this another belch of semi-digested RT-pap?

zmgsabst 4y ago
The Minsk agreements were a settlement to the previous war — which said that Ukraine would respect Russian heritage and allow those regions to be semi-autonomous. Instead, they banned the Russian language and shelled those regions for a decade. Russia then invaded after those shelled-for-a-decade regions formally asked for help. > You discuss the identities of the Nordstream pipeline saboteurs with some certainty. I think the evidence points to a clear culprit: - NATO conducted an exercise in that area months before (where they can map the exact location of the pipes) - Germans were protesting the lack of gas at the time - Russia didn’t blow up their own pipeline - various European countries refuse to say who it was after investigating - the US repeatedly threatened to end the pipeline
- _kbh_ 4y ago
  > The Minsk agreements were a settlement to the previous war — which said that Ukraine would respect Russian heritage and allow those regions to be semi-autonomous. Where’s Ukraines settlement for Russia breaking the Budapest accords for the past 8 years?. According to you they should get their nukes back now right?. > Instead, they banned the Russian language and shelled those regions for a decade. Russia then invaded after those shelled-for-a-decade regions formally asked for help. Russia installed Russian backed agents to start a civil war, its strange that this has happened, to what 3? Post soviet states it’s as if Russia keeps doing it intentionally. > I think the evidence points to a clear culprit: You are correct on this there is a clear culprit but it’s russia not america. Russia had ships in the area at the time, and Russia benefits from trying to force Germany to certify the Nord stream 2 pipeline that was left undamaged. Additionally Russia gets out of any damages for not supplying gas to countries via claiming force majeure. You should also know that Gazprom had robots that could have quite easily transported these explosives internally in the gas pipes without needing to be in the area.

zmgsabst 4y ago

The Minsk agreements were a settlement to the previous war — which said that Ukraine would respect Russian heritage and allow those regions to be semi-autonomous. Instead, they banned the Russian language and shelled those regions for a decade. Russia then invaded after those shelled-for-a-decade regions formally asked for help. > You discuss the identities of the Nordstream pipeline saboteurs with some certainty. I think the evidence points to a clear culprit: - NATO conducted an exercise in that area months before (where they can map the exact location of the pipes) - Germans were protesting the lack of gas at the time - Russia didn’t blow up their own pipeline - various European countries refuse to say who it was after investigating - the US repeatedly threatened to end the pipeline

_kbh_ 4y ago
> The Minsk agreements were a settlement to the previous war — which said that Ukraine would respect Russian heritage and allow those regions to be semi-autonomous. Where’s Ukraines settlement for Russia breaking the Budapest accords for the past 8 years?. According to you they should get their nukes back now right?. > Instead, they banned the Russian language and shelled those regions for a decade. Russia then invaded after those shelled-for-a-decade regions formally asked for help. Russia installed Russian backed agents to start a civil war, its strange that this has happened, to what 3? Post soviet states it’s as if Russia keeps doing it intentionally. > I think the evidence points to a clear culprit: You are correct on this there is a clear culprit but it’s russia not america. Russia had ships in the area at the time, and Russia benefits from trying to force Germany to certify the Nord stream 2 pipeline that was left undamaged. Additionally Russia gets out of any damages for not supplying gas to countries via claiming force majeure. You should also know that Gazprom had robots that could have quite easily transported these explosives internally in the gas pipes without needing to be in the area.