4 ms·

> I hope you see that my analysis — while it may be unorthodox - is evenhanded. I condemn Russia for its funding and arming of terrorists in Donbas (Strelkov, M

by _kbh_ 3y ago

> I hope you see that my analysis — while it may be unorthodox - is evenhanded. I condemn Russia for its funding and arming of terrorists in Donbas (Strelkov, Motorola, etc.). Why don't you mention in this sentence that both Strelkov and Motorola are Russian and that Strelkov is an FSB officer?. It also less arming terrorists and more an invasion, the 'little green men' narrative _is_ propaganda. It was largely just literal Russian soldiers in Donbas. > I understand that each side reacts to the other and it’s SHEER FANTASY to expect either Russia or China or Brazil etc. to roll over and allow a roadmap where its enemies to place nukes on their doorstep. No one wants to place nukes in Ukraine. This is a false narrative designed to try and disguise Ukraines want to be in NATO as anything other than Ukraine wanting protection from the country that has so far invaded them at least twice.

EGreg 3y ago
They’ve already placed anti-nuke installations in Romania and Poland, that can be retrofitted to launch them —and now Poland wants nukes for their planes. There is no way to claim they’ll never put nukes in Ukraine. “No one wants” to do a lot of things, but when the tools are there, the next administrations may very well do those same things. That’s been the story of NATO expansion, US colonists’ expansion, erosion of civil liberties, outlawing cash etc etc.
- _kbh_ 3y ago
  > They’ve already placed anti-nuke installations in Romania and Poland Where and what?. > that can be retrofitted to launch them What can be retrofitted to launch what nukes? > and now Poland wants nukes for their planes. Yes because Belarus has already got actual Russian nukes inside Belarus. So now Poland feels like they need extra protection, and they feel the best way to do this is to get nukes from America, as they likely think it will dissuade Russia from invading Poland _again_ or trying to nuke them. > “No one wants” to do a lot of things, but when the tools are there, the next administrations may very well do those same things. Ah I see now we have moved onto future hypothetical's that may never happen. Also unlike Belarus, Ukraine has remained committed to the Budapest Memorandum and has shown no want to have nuclear weapons placed on their territory. > That’s been the story of NATO expansion, US colonists’ expansion, erosion of civil liberties, outlawing cash etc etc. NATO expansion is the direct result of Russian aggression. If Russia never invaded Ukraine theres a good chance Finland and Sweden would have just never joined NATO. But Russia has a seemingly uncontrollable need to invade former soviet states and until they calm down and stop the best bet for world stability and to stop the hyper proliferation of nuclear weapons is to start putting more countries that need protection into NATO.
  - EGreg 3y ago
    > Where and what? Romania: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nato-shield-idINKCN0Y30JX https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nato-shield-idINKCN0Y30JX (Undermines at the very least the treaty that Russia and USA had about not building nuclear interception defenses, in order to preserve the mutually assured destruction deterrent. At the worst, it can be quickly converted to an offensive site to launch rockets from. We wouldn’t allow Iran to build “defensive” nuclear installations, would we? I wonder why can’t we just trust Iran like Russia is being asked to trust NATO. In fact, the official line is that this installation in Romania had nothing to do with Russia at all… it was to counter a threat to Europe from… Iran! Yes the same Iran that had negotiated a deal with the US that the US broke right around that time.) Poland: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_missile_defense_complex_in_Poland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_missile_defense_... > What can be retrofitted to launch what nukes? What nukes? That’s a strange question. Are you asking in good faith? You’re asking me to tell you which specific nukes? Can you tell me what the choices are here? Is there a kind of nuke that is acceptable to host at the missile “defense” site? The transparent trick is to call it “purely defensive” and have an army of patriots unquestioningly parrot the exact line, “purely defensive”, “Russia has nothing to worry about, on the contrary, they are the aggressor”. Very standard stuff every country always says (and usually is totally false) https://www.rferl.org/amp/nato-shows-off-missile-base-in-romania-calling-it-purely-defensive-/30291193.html https://www.rferl.org/amp/nato-shows-off-missile-base-in-rom... Experts admit that it is fairly easy to turn them into offensive sites into Russia, quote: Abraham Denmark, director of the Asia program at the Wilson Center and a former Pentagon official, said the two facilities “could fairly readily be turned” from defensive posture against Iranian ballistic missiles threatening Europe to an offensive capability targeting Russia. This would be a “direct threat” contention the Kremlin has said violated the existing treaty and was the American goal from that start in deploying the missiles, radars and fire control systems so close to its borders. https://news.usni.org/2018/10/31/aegis-ashore-new-role-post-inf-treaty-says-former-pentagon-official https://news.usni.org/2018/10/31/aegis-ashore-new-role-post-... I would wager none of that makes even a modicum of impact on you, and you have nothing to say about it, so let’s move on “But Russia has a seemingly uncontrollable need to invade former soviet states” USA has long since invaded, stolen, annexed and subjugated all the lands around it (manifest destiny). It has long ago staked its claim on the entire hemisphere as its protectorate, explicitly foreign foreign powers cannot come and meddle there (Monroe doctrine). It has since then gone around the world and did that same exact type of meddling — with disastrous results — in pretty much every country on earth! We have 800 bases around the world, which is 30x more than the rest of the world combined. We spend more on the military than the next 10 countries, including our own allies. It is a real problem that US Americans seem to only focus on other countries and call them out for the very things that their own country has done and is currently doing, while insisting they have nothing to worry about and if they respond in ANY WAY they’re the aggressor!! Nations need protection from the US, which is the only country on earth today that conducts drone strikes in multiple far-away sovereign countries, blowing up weddings, funds rebels and destabilizes countries on a mass scale, does regime change in dozens of countries around the world, sometimes leaving the country devastated (Iraq, Libya) and bouncing to the next. And of course US has economic hit men who come first (Guatemala, Iran, Chile, etc) and if the people elect a socialist or someone nationalizes resources the CIA and MI6 foment a revolution and take them out. We later put them in massive debt and offer our IMF and World Bank loans, as well as our corporations to own and make use of exporting the best resources. It’s standard practice: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confessions_of_an_Economic_Hit_Man https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confessions_of_an_Economic_H... BlackRock is doing it in Ukraine — it’s not just a bonanza for weapons contractors but also US conglomerates, watch this short video: https://fb.watch/lHuKHbM_fW/ https://fb.watch/lHuKHbM_fW/ If the concern is a rogue state that is belligerent on the world stage, then countries should start banding together to defend themslves from the USA. https://www.amazon.com/Rogue-State-Guide-Worlds-Superpower/dp/1567513743 https://www.amazon.com/Rogue-State-Guide-Worlds-Superpower/d... And they are: https://www.arabnews.com/node/2127586/amp https://www.arabnews.com/node/2127586/amp

by _kbh_ 3y ago

EGreg 3y ago

They’ve already placed anti-nuke installations in Romania and Poland, that can be retrofitted to launch them —and now Poland wants nukes for their planes. There is no way to claim they’ll never put nukes in Ukraine. “No one wants” to do a lot of things, but when the tools are there, the next administrations may very well do those same things. That’s been the story of NATO expansion, US colonists’ expansion, erosion of civil liberties, outlawing cash etc etc.

_kbh_ 3y ago
> They’ve already placed anti-nuke installations in Romania and Poland Where and what?. > that can be retrofitted to launch them What can be retrofitted to launch what nukes? > and now Poland wants nukes for their planes. Yes because Belarus has already got actual Russian nukes inside Belarus. So now Poland feels like they need extra protection, and they feel the best way to do this is to get nukes from America, as they likely think it will dissuade Russia from invading Poland _again_ or trying to nuke them. > “No one wants” to do a lot of things, but when the tools are there, the next administrations may very well do those same things. Ah I see now we have moved onto future hypothetical's that may never happen. Also unlike Belarus, Ukraine has remained committed to the Budapest Memorandum and has shown no want to have nuclear weapons placed on their territory. > That’s been the story of NATO expansion, US colonists’ expansion, erosion of civil liberties, outlawing cash etc etc. NATO expansion is the direct result of Russian aggression. If Russia never invaded Ukraine theres a good chance Finland and Sweden would have just never joined NATO. But Russia has a seemingly uncontrollable need to invade former soviet states and until they calm down and stop the best bet for world stability and to stop the hyper proliferation of nuclear weapons is to start putting more countries that need protection into NATO.
- EGreg 3y ago
  > Where and what? Romania: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nato-shield-idINKCN0Y30JX https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nato-shield-idINKCN0Y30JX (Undermines at the very least the treaty that Russia and USA had about not building nuclear interception defenses, in order to preserve the mutually assured destruction deterrent. At the worst, it can be quickly converted to an offensive site to launch rockets from. We wouldn’t allow Iran to build “defensive” nuclear installations, would we? I wonder why can’t we just trust Iran like Russia is being asked to trust NATO. In fact, the official line is that this installation in Romania had nothing to do with Russia at all… it was to counter a threat to Europe from… Iran! Yes the same Iran that had negotiated a deal with the US that the US broke right around that time.) Poland: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_missile_defense_complex_in_Poland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_missile_defense_... > What can be retrofitted to launch what nukes? What nukes? That’s a strange question. Are you asking in good faith? You’re asking me to tell you which specific nukes? Can you tell me what the choices are here? Is there a kind of nuke that is acceptable to host at the missile “defense” site? The transparent trick is to call it “purely defensive” and have an army of patriots unquestioningly parrot the exact line, “purely defensive”, “Russia has nothing to worry about, on the contrary, they are the aggressor”. Very standard stuff every country always says (and usually is totally false) https://www.rferl.org/amp/nato-shows-off-missile-base-in-romania-calling-it-purely-defensive-/30291193.html https://www.rferl.org/amp/nato-shows-off-missile-base-in-rom... Experts admit that it is fairly easy to turn them into offensive sites into Russia, quote: Abraham Denmark, director of the Asia program at the Wilson Center and a former Pentagon official, said the two facilities “could fairly readily be turned” from defensive posture against Iranian ballistic missiles threatening Europe to an offensive capability targeting Russia. This would be a “direct threat” contention the Kremlin has said violated the existing treaty and was the American goal from that start in deploying the missiles, radars and fire control systems so close to its borders. https://news.usni.org/2018/10/31/aegis-ashore-new-role-post-inf-treaty-says-former-pentagon-official https://news.usni.org/2018/10/31/aegis-ashore-new-role-post-... I would wager none of that makes even a modicum of impact on you, and you have nothing to say about it, so let’s move on “But Russia has a seemingly uncontrollable need to invade former soviet states” USA has long since invaded, stolen, annexed and subjugated all the lands around it (manifest destiny). It has long ago staked its claim on the entire hemisphere as its protectorate, explicitly foreign foreign powers cannot come and meddle there (Monroe doctrine). It has since then gone around the world and did that same exact type of meddling — with disastrous results — in pretty much every country on earth! We have 800 bases around the world, which is 30x more than the rest of the world combined. We spend more on the military than the next 10 countries, including our own allies. It is a real problem that US Americans seem to only focus on other countries and call them out for the very things that their own country has done and is currently doing, while insisting they have nothing to worry about and if they respond in ANY WAY they’re the aggressor!! Nations need protection from the US, which is the only country on earth today that conducts drone strikes in multiple far-away sovereign countries, blowing up weddings, funds rebels and destabilizes countries on a mass scale, does regime change in dozens of countries around the world, sometimes leaving the country devastated (Iraq, Libya) and bouncing to the next. And of course US has economic hit men who come first (Guatemala, Iran, Chile, etc) and if the people elect a socialist or someone nationalizes resources the CIA and MI6 foment a revolution and take them out. We later put them in massive debt and offer our IMF and World Bank loans, as well as our corporations to own and make use of exporting the best resources. It’s standard practice: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confessions_of_an_Economic_Hit_Man https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confessions_of_an_Economic_H... BlackRock is doing it in Ukraine — it’s not just a bonanza for weapons contractors but also US conglomerates, watch this short video: https://fb.watch/lHuKHbM_fW/ https://fb.watch/lHuKHbM_fW/ If the concern is a rogue state that is belligerent on the world stage, then countries should start banding together to defend themslves from the USA. https://www.amazon.com/Rogue-State-Guide-Worlds-Superpower/dp/1567513743 https://www.amazon.com/Rogue-State-Guide-Worlds-Superpower/d... And they are: https://www.arabnews.com/node/2127586/amp https://www.arabnews.com/node/2127586/amp