Russia's invasion of Ukraine: Part 5

darkwolf20 said:It is painfully obvious that you and a handful of other bottom-feeders here are struggling to face reality.
One has to wonder what kind of twisted, hateful mindset leads someone to consciously and deliberately support an invasion of a sovereign nation.
Save these tired NATO conspiracy theories for the drunks loitering outside a dive bar after a few cheap beers.

Back when the US put missiles in Turkey, the USSR responded by putting them in Cuba, and we're basically looking at a modern version of that, except now we've got Putin, who's crazy enough to trigger everything we're seeing right now; plus, you had J. F. K. playing a similar role when he tried to take on Cuba with the CIA, though that whole Bay of Pigs thing was a total disaster.
So why on earth did Biden refuse to even entertain any negotiations with Putin regarding Eastern Ukraine and Crimea during that first month???
And wasn't Zelenskyy also refusing to sit down for any talks back then, which might actually be the real reason things went this way?

hollowdriver13 said:Do you mean "done deal" in the sense of how things stalled out in 2008 when Germany blocked the whole accession process and nothing has actually moved since?
Can you elaborate a bit on what you mean by it being a "done deal"?

I don't believe you're fully up to speed on this, and with all due respect, I really don't have the bandwidth to act as your personal tutor here. My main point—which I feel quite strongly about—is that while we must condemn aggression just as we would any other violation of sovereignty, we also have to understand the chain of cause and effect if we ever hope to prevent this from happening again. This time around, Europe charged into this situation like an unsuspecting maid walking into a trap, and frankly, there doesn't seem to be an end in sight.

Nancy Howard4 said:Someone said they're gonna be the next Switzerland, right? I think I heard that somewhere before.
Compared to their politicians and all those corruption scandals we've seen here, our leaders look pretty harmless, and when I see how fast everyone is trying to rush them into the EU, it mostly just feels like people are looking for any excuse to cash in on those Ukrainian resources.

East Germany, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Canada, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia... What do they all have in common, and where does that leave them today?

Kimberly Perez82 said:It really comes down to geography and the delicate balance of power, you see. It’s about proximity. You can't just have Russia setting up launch sites right on the doorstep of America—just like how Cuba isn't allowed to install Russian missile ramps, and we don't let Taiwan host American ones either. I mean, Taiwan could have been part of NATO ages ago, but obviously, that's a massive geopolitical headache that everyone understands is off the table.

But... wait... isn't that your whole principle right there?

I just don't buy into the idea that Person A gets to do things that Person B is forbidden from doing.

Or do your "principles" only apply when you're looking out for your pro-Russia buddies? I really hope the mods clear you out soon, but until then, welcome to my troll list.

Kimberly Perez82 said:I don't believe you're fully up to speed on this, and with all due respect, I really don't have the bandwidth to act as your personal tutor here. My main point—which I feel quite strongly about—is that while we must condemn aggression just as we would any other violation of sovereignty, we also have to understand the chain of cause and effect if we ever hope to prevent this from happening again. This time around, Europe charged into this situation like an unsuspecting maid walking into a trap, and frankly, there doesn't seem to be an end in sight.

So basically, since you can't find any actual arguments to counter my points or even disprove what I'm saying, you just pivot to "I don't have time to educate you"? Wow.☕
That is some top-tier defending of a position right there. Please, keep those high-quality, deeply reasoned insights coming.

Man, we really need a poll back here, because now I’m totally lost on what the vibe is—I can't tell if we're dealing with a fresh batch of trolls or just the same old troublemakers 😢

Honestly, it's just way easier for me to get a handle on who I'm actually talking to when I can see how they voted 😬

Kimberly Perez82 said:I don't believe you're fully up to speed on this, and with all due respect, I really don't have the bandwidth to act as your personal tutor here. My main point—which I feel quite strongly about—is that while we must condemn aggression just as we would any other violation of sovereignty, we also have to understand the chain of cause and effect if we ever hope to prevent this from happening again. This time around, Europe charged into this situation like an unsuspecting maid walking into a trap, and frankly, there doesn't seem to be an end in sight.

Then show me the receipts. You're talking about joining NATO like it's some local senior citizens' chess club. 😁

Typical move—acting like you've got all the facts while the rest of us are just clueless. 😁

electrichawk94 said:Then show me the receipts. You're talking about joining NATO like it's some local senior citizens' chess club. 😁

Typical move—acting like you've got all the facts while the rest of us are just clueless. 😁

They absolutely love bragging about being "so well-informed," but they always dodge the actual facts. In any decent debate, the burden of proof is on the person making the claim, but once their logic falls apart, they just pull the classic "I don't have time to educate you" card to bail out...🙏

electrichawk94 said:East Germany, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Canada, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia... What do they all have in common, and where does that leave them today?

Honestly, those two are pretty interesting because both countries went through that whole privatization mess, and just like here in the States, the big shots basically looted everything using the exact same playbook.
And look at them now, totally dependent on their neighbors and Russia.
Canada is a whole different beast—they’ve got this cartel running the show that'll do whatever it takes, and man, they did an incredible job grabbing up real estate. If we tried that kind of thing here, we could practically declare a tiny island like Key West our own private colony.😉

stormyangler32 said:But... wait... isn't that your whole principle right there?

I just don't buy into the idea that Person A gets to do things that Person B is forbidden from doing.

Or do your "principles" only apply when you're looking out for your pro-Russia buddies? I really hope the mods clear you out soon, but until then, welcome to my troll list.

Why does everyone insist on this constant grouping into camps? It’s such an exhausting habit. Personally, I refuse to be pigeonholed into any single faction. We have spent far too much time being shoved into other people's boxes, and frankly, it hasn't worked out well for us—not once. It always ends in disappointment. Now, perhaps if we could just take a breath and look at things through a more realistic lens... maybe focus on our own national interests instead of getting caught up in someone else's agenda, we might actually get somewhere.

Russ has really checked all the boxes on the list... NATO, missiles on the border, denazification, oppression of Russian speakers, banning the language, literal human experimentation, evil West, the New World Order... honestly, there's a conspiracy theory for everyone. 😁

On top of that, you've got Putin standing up there publicly claiming Ukrainians don't even exist as a people or a language, and they just double down on those same old excuses. 🤣

Let’s get one thing straight regarding Ukraine and NATO. You can't just waltz into NATO if you have unresolved territorial disputes or occupied land. If Putin actually gave a damn about Ukraine joining the Alliance, holding onto Crimea would be his biggest sticking point. That would mean Ukraine would basically have to hand over Crimea just to get in. So, maybe Ukraine joining NATO isn't even the core reason for this invasion—it might just be one of those side issues. Honestly, I think most of those Russian trolls already know that, but jbga. They're just here to troll anyway.

Donna Harris11 said:Looking at those photos taken in front of the shopping mall, you can see quite a few guys decked out in dark green... I mean, it’s pretty easy to assume there might be a deployed military unit stationed nearby or something.

There’s a massive industrial complex located behind the shopping mall. Americans might call it collateral damage, but I’d just say it was a stray shot that missed its mark.

Gregory Ramos3 said:Man, we really need a poll back here, because now I’m totally lost on what the vibe is—I can't tell if we're dealing with a fresh batch of trolls or just the same old troublemakers 😢

Honestly, it's just way easier for me to get a handle on who I'm actually talking to when I can see how they voted 😬

jbga, I didn't vote because there wasn't a third option.

ironseal said:Let’s get one thing straight regarding Ukraine and NATO. You can't just waltz into NATO if you have unresolved territorial disputes or occupied land. If Putin actually gave a damn about Ukraine joining the Alliance, holding onto Crimea would be his biggest sticking point. That would mean Ukraine would basically have to hand over Crimea just to get in. So, maybe Ukraine joining NATO isn't even the core reason for this invasion—it might just be one of those side issues. Honestly, I think most of those Russian trolls already know that, but jbga. They're just here to troll anyway.

Even without a war, Germany could have easily blocked Ukraine from joining NATO and just kept enjoying that cheap Russian gas.

That whole "reason" for the war is stupid for a dozen different reasons, but people keep pushing it anyway. 😁

electrichawk94 said:Then show me the receipts. You're talking about joining NATO like it's some local senior citizens' chess club. 😁

Typical move—acting like you've got all the facts while the rest of us are just clueless. 😁

You really are a sweetheart, aren't you? Too lazy to even look it up yourself. 🙂 Just check Wikipedia, copy-paste it, or Google it just to make sure I didn't just pull this out of thin air.

"At the June 2021 Brussels summit, NATO leaders reiterated the decision taken at the 2008 Bucharest summit that Ukraine would become a member of the Alliance with the NATO MAP as an integral part of the process and Ukraine's right to determine its own future and foreign policy course without outside interference."

So, look—ever since NATO Bucharest 2008, when Putin was also around, he’s been incredibly blunt about not allowing Ukraine into NATO because he views it as an act of aggression against Russia. This isn't news; people have known this for fifteen years now. Yet, here we are, seeing the exact same agenda being pushed just like it was back in 2008. It's baffling. Either they are being willfully ignorant, or they simply didn't believe Putin, even though he was crystal clear. Honestly, if you ask them, I don't think even they actually know why they're pushing so hard to get Ukraine into NATO in the first place.

Kimberly Perez82 said:You really are a sweetheart, aren't you? Too lazy to even look it up yourself. 🙂 Just check Wikipedia, copy-paste it, or Google it just to make sure I didn't just pull this out of thin air.

"At the June 2021 Brussels summit, NATO leaders reiterated the decision taken at the 2008 Bucharest summit that Ukraine would become a member of the Alliance with the NATO MAP as an integral part of the process and Ukraine's right to determine its own future and foreign policy course without outside interference."

So, look—ever since NATO Bucharest 2008, when Putin was also around, he’s been incredibly blunt about not allowing Ukraine into NATO because he views it as an act of aggression against Russia. This isn't news; people have known this for fifteen years now. Yet, here we are, seeing the exact same agenda being pushed just like it was back in 2008. It's baffling. Either they are being willfully ignorant, or they simply didn't believe Putin, even though he was crystal clear. Honestly, if you ask them, I don't think even they actually know why they're pushing so hard to get Ukraine into NATO in the first place.

When did Russia actually invade Ukraine? And when did the official integration process even start?

The invasion happened six years after that first date you posted and seven years before the second one. So, walk me through the logic here—how is that supposed to be the "real" reason?

Kimberly Perez82 said:You really are a sweetheart, aren't you? Too lazy to even look it up yourself. 🙂 Just check Wikipedia, copy-paste it, or Google it just to make sure I didn't just pull this out of thin air.

"At the June 2021 Brussels summit, NATO leaders reiterated the decision taken at the 2008 Bucharest summit that Ukraine would become a member of the Alliance with the NATO MAP as an integral part of the process and Ukraine's right to determine its own future and foreign policy course without outside interference."

So, look—ever since NATO Bucharest 2008, when Putin was also around, he’s been incredibly blunt about not allowing Ukraine into NATO because he views it as an act of aggression against Russia. This isn't news; people have known this for fifteen years now. Yet, here we are, seeing the exact same agenda being pushed just like it was back in 2008. It's baffling. Either they are being willfully ignorant, or they simply didn't believe Putin, even though he was crystal clear. Honestly, if you ask them, I don't think even they actually know why they're pushing so hard to get Ukraine into NATO in the first place.

We've been hearing for 13 years that Ukraine is going to be a NATO member, but the whole thing hasn't moved an inch. Plus, let's be real—they were never going to become a member while Crimea was under occupation.
They drop these kinds of statements at every single summit and nothing ever changes. It's just like how they kept saying the Minsk agreements needed to be implemented at every meeting, but you totally glossed over that part.

Also, how does it make sense that Ukraine is seen as a threat to Russia, but Finland isn't? If you look at the flight distances, St. Petersburg is right there on the border with Finland, and Moscow is much closer to 81 miles than the Ukrainian border is, which is 597 miles (compared to the distance from the UA border being 469 miles).

Or maybe they just view Ukraine as their own little colony and don't want to let go? All this talk about "threats" sounds like a cheap way to muddy the waters...
Same goes for the NATO stuff; the military presence in Europe has never been stronger than it is right now, following this invasion.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive...ectedLocale=en

Here is the full statement you're citing. Article 14 is pretty interesting, don't you think?..

Donna Harris11 said:I honestly think the breaking point was that whole mess last year when the British destroyer cruised right past Sevastopol.

Messing around comes with a price tag. Look at the facts: Minsk2 was never actually put into motion, Zelenskyy banned certain political parties and opposition news channels... and he even shut down Nord Stream 2.

Russia just decided to wrap things up, and that’s that.

Yeah, airspace violations happen from all sides several times a year, but this time, enough was enough. 😁

Remember when the Turks shot down that plane? 😁

Legolas said:Let's just do a quick little refresher on geography here... Sevastopol is on the Crimea peninsula. Crimea is part of Ukraine. And now we hear this British destroyer was basically "skating" through Ukrainian territorial waters.
Or am I totally off base here?

Doesn't really matter.
You’ve got a traditional Russian adversary over there poking them right in the eye.

By teaming up with the Brits, Ukraine is basically turning itself into a massive long-term headache.

Ever since they left the European Union, the Brits have been leaning back into that old-school aggressive geopolitics, basically sabotaging the European Union whenever they get the chance.

hollowdriver13 said:We've been hearing for 13 years that Ukraine is going to be a NATO member, but the whole thing hasn't moved an inch. Plus, let's be real—they were never going to become a member while Crimea was under occupation.
They drop these kinds of statements at every single summit and nothing ever changes. It's just like how they kept saying the Minsk agreements needed to be implemented at every meeting, but you totally glossed over that part.

Also, how does it make sense that Ukraine is seen as a threat to Russia, but Finland isn't? If you look at the flight distances, St. Petersburg is right there on the border with Finland, and Moscow is much closer to 81 miles than the Ukrainian border is, which is 597 miles (compared to the distance from the UA border being 469 miles).

Or maybe they just view Ukraine as their own little colony and don't want to let go? All this talk about "threats" sounds like a cheap way to muddy the waters...
Same goes for the NATO stuff; the military presence in Europe has never been stronger than it is right now, following this invasion.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive...ectedLocale=en

Here is the full statement you're citing. Article 14 is pretty interesting, don't you think?..

You make a fair point. Finland joining NATO presents a new threat to Russia, and this shift is something neither side has truly tested or prepared a response for yet. Personally, I feel like Finland is making a massive mistake; they are sacrificing seventy years of peace and prosperity just to cater to America. It is surprising to see them getting dragged into a mess where they don't belong, especially since they worked so hard to build such a remarkably stable relationship with Russia.

Regardless, if a nuclear superpower—whether we are talking about Russia China or America—tells you, "Don't do that, or I will view it as an act of aggression," then if you have even a shred of common sense, you simply won't do it. It's the same logic as not showing off when a gang of thugs attacks you. Why did we stand our ground in front of Banjaluka back in 1995, even though it didn't suit our interests? Because we had that tiny bit of sense in our heads.