Russia-Ukraine War 2022 - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15213555
If Crimea , which by the way until it was ceded to the Ukraine , by Khrushchev , had initially been part of Russia, is stolen land , then so was Texas stolen from Mexico . The crucial question is does a population have the right of self-determination ? If so, then Donetsk , and Luhansk have the sovereign right to be reunited with the Russian motherland . At any rate , it is no rightful concern of the rest of the world what the border between Russia and Ukraine shall be . And from a historical standpoint , Putin is no worse , at the very worst , than U.S. President James Polk , in regards to the border crises which arose during his presidency . https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/oregon-treaty , https://archive.humanevents.com/2014/04/18/neds-chickens-come-home-to-roost/
#15213556
@annatar1914 @Deutschmania @late

Russia sought legal written guarantees from us. While, they themselves have torn up and not abided by the legal written guarantees they gave to Ukraine in the past in which Ukraine gave up it's own nuclear weapons in return. This was a naive move by Ukraine. So, anytime Russia signs on to legally written guarantees, we know for sure that those guarantees are not even worth the paper that they are written on. But, to be fair, no legally written guarantee written down on paper is worth the paper they are written on in geopolitics.

The only thing that is worth anything and has real value in Geo-politics is a country's ability to gain credible deterrence against any possible or eventual adversary. That might mean keeping your nation's nuclear arsenal to guarantee to an adversary that they will suffer unacceptable damage in return for any attack or invasion made against it. There are other ways to have credible deterrence as well.

But a nation that can afford to gain and maintain nuclear weapons and deploy them in such a way that they are not vulnerable to a pre-emptive attack in any shape, form or fashion provides a true security guarantee against any adversary or power that would otherwise seek to steal their land or attack.

It is only credible deterrence that guarantees the infliction of unacceptable damage in return against any adversary that can provide the security guarantee a nation needs to be able to prosper unmolested by foreign invaders. No written legal guarantee in geopolitics can provide that kind of security. That's the kind of security any nation needs to protect their land, to ensure they are not subjugated, and offers that nation the opportunity to prosper economically unmolested. To think otherwise is simply naive.
#15213561
Deutschmania wrote:If Crimea , which by the way until it was ceded to the Ukraine , by Khrushchev , had initially been part of Russia, is stolen land , then so was Texas stolen from Mexico . The crucial question is does a population have the right of self-determination ? If so, then Donetsk , and Luhansk have the sovereign right to be reunited with the Russian motherland . At any rate , it is no rightful concern of the rest of the world what the border between Russia and Ukraine shall be . And from a historical standpoint , Putin is no worse , at the very worst , than U.S. President James Polk , in regards to the border crises which arose during his presidency . https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/oregon-treaty , https://archive.humanevents.com/2014/04/18/neds-chickens-come-home-to-roost/

If anyone thinks Texas is the only land we took from Mexico, they need a bigger map.
#15213563
Politics_Observer wrote:@annatar1914 @Deutschmania @late

Russia sought legal written guarantees from us. While, they themselves have torn up and not abided by the legal written guarantees they gave to Ukraine in the past in which Ukraine gave up it's own nuclear weapons in return. This was a naive move by Ukraine. So, anytime Russia signs on to legally written guarantees, we know for sure that those guarantees are not even worth the paper that they are written on. But, to be fair, no legally written guarantee written down on paper is worth the paper they are written on in geopolitics.

The only thing that is worth anything and has real value in Geo-politics is a country's ability to gain credible deterrence against any possible or eventual adversary. That might mean keeping your nation's nuclear arsenal to guarantee to an adversary that they will suffer unacceptable damage in return for any attack or invasion made against it. There are other ways to have credible deterrence as well.

But a nation that can afford to gain and maintain nuclear weapons and deploy them in such a way that they are not vulnerable to a pre-emptive attack in any shape, form or fashion provides a true security guarantee against any adversary or power that would otherwise seek to steal their land or attack.

It is only credible deterrence that guarantees the infliction of unacceptable damage in return against any adversary that can provide the security guarantee a nation needs to be able to prosper unmolested by foreign invaders. No written legal guarantee in geopolitics can provide that kind of security. That's the kind of security any nation needs to protect their land, to ensure they are not subjugated, and offers that nation the opportunity to prosper economically unmolested. To think otherwise is simply naive.

I had to look up what in the world you were going on about . If you were referring to the Budapest Memorandum , as you seem to be , then here is Russia's response to the allegation of violation .
On February 10, 2022 Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov after a meeting with his British counterpart Liz Truss recalled at a news conference that the Budapest Memorandum was accompanied by a declaration, also signed by France and Ukraine, which required that all signatories should refrain from any violations of the OSCE principles, including respect for the rights of ethnic minorities. Ukraine has ignored this document to this day https://tass.com/world/1406455
An agreement signed in the 1990s that granted security guarantees to three former republics of the Soviet Union is not legally binding, the German ambassador to Kiev Anke Feldhusen claimed on Saturday.

Speaking to TV channel Kanal 24, Feldhusen was responding to a suggestion made by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who called for the agreement’s signatories to assemble to review its terms.

The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances was signed in 1994 by three nuclear powers – Russia, the UK, and the US. The agreement promised a set of guarantees to Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Ukraine, in exchange for these countries giving up their nuclear weapons. Until then, Ukraine had the world’s third-largest arms stockpile, which was previously owned by the Soviet Union.

Now, Zelensky believes that the agreement has been breached and has threatened to start developing nuclear weapons.

“The Budapest Memorandum is indeed a format without legal obligations under international law. But I think that now we must try everything to avoid war,” Feldhusen said. She also expressed cautious optimism and hopes of finding a diplomatic solution to the crisis, reminding that Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Joe Biden spoke more frequently on the phone in the last few months than any Russian and American heads of states before them in decades.

In 2013, the US also said the agreements were not legally binding, after it imposed sanctions on Belarus which contravened one of the articles. https://www.rt.com/russia/550075-budapest-memorandum-legally-binding/
Kiev has been arguing since 2014 that Russia breached the agreement when it “occupied” Crimea and parts of Eastern Ukraine.
Moscow denies this. The people of Crimea, it argues, exercised their right of self-determination under the UN Charter, when they voted to break away from Ukraine and rejoin Russia. The conflict in Donbass, Russia further states, is a civil war launched by Kiev against breakaway regions and not an international conflict. https://www.rt.com/russia/550040-ukraine-acquire-nuclear-weapon/
#15213565
Scamp wrote:If anyone thinks Texas is the only land we took from Mexico, they need a bigger map.

I was attempting to make the analogy between Texas , or for that matter California ,with that of Donetsk and Luhansk , as breakaway provinces . Yes , I am very much aware of the Mexican Cession , in the aftermath of the Mexican-American War . The United States of America as such has no moral authority to condemn Russia , from the standpoint of international law .
#15213567
Deutschmania wrote:I was attempting to make the analogy between Texas , or for that matter California ,with that of Donetsk and Luhansk , as breakaway provinces . Yes , I am very much aware of the Mexican Cession , in the aftermath of the Mexican-American War . The United States of America as such has no moral authority to condemn Russia , from the standpoint of international law .





No one living in the US today, lived in America in that time. It's time to focus on the future. Using the past to justify present atrocities is a trash justification.

If you have to dig that far back to derive another lazy ass "what aboutism", then it's garbage. In general, whataboutism is stupid and has become the go-to "argument" on pofo to defend authoritarian shit bag regimes like Putin's and Xi's.

By this logic, Russia does not have a legitimate claim to Crimea, ti should go to the Tar tars.

It's important to look back at history and understand the wrongs of the past, but it's also very silly to reach back to some arbitrary wrong to justify a wrong in the present. All nations have blood on their hands for something. If we keep doing this, we are doomed to constant conflict when some asshat strongman takes over a nation. This technique is loved by strongmen the world over. fuck them all.
Last edited by Rancid on 23 Feb 2022 00:05, edited 2 times in total.
#15213575
In my opinion Putin actually has issues with Lenin, which is like having issues with your grandfather or great-grandfather. He obviously has a problem with Ukraine's mere existence, and blames Lenin for really having been an anti-imperialist so much so that he created Ukraine and even gave it the Donbass. Then came Khrushchev, who gave it Crimea for some reason, which is way beyond his comprehension, and now he has to deal with all the mess to restore Russia's integrity and repair Russian history. :lol:
#15213576
Beren wrote: Then came Khrushchev, who gave it Crimea for some reason, which is way beyond his comprehension, and now he has to deal with all the mess to restore Russia's integrity and repair Russian history. :lol:


I find it odd that everyone calls Khrushchev giving Crimea to Ukraine as "odd, and incomprehensible". The peninsula is connected to Ukraine, which is the main way for it to get it's supplies. Roads, rails, communication wires, electricity, etc. In a united nation, where everyone shares in all, it makes complete practical sense to have given CRimea to Ukraine.

I don't find this odd.
#15213578
Rancid wrote:I find it odd that everyone calls Khrushchev giving Crimea to Ukraine as "odd, and incomprehensible". The peninsula is connected to Ukraine, which is the main way for it to get it's supplies. Roads, rails, communication wires, electricity, etc. In a united nation, where everyone shares in all, it makes complete practical sense to have given CRimea to Ukraine.

I don't find this odd.

Maybe it wasn't odd, but Crimea was considered Russian anyway, so Putin obviously has never got it if why it had to be given to Ukraine.
#15213583
In case some of you missed it, my favourite moment of the security council meeting.



People are saying this was all prerecorded therefore it's all acting. But that would mean the spy chief is a grade-A actor, which is possible, he has decades of experience in the KGB. Still, that fear seems genuine. Hard to act that out. Chadputin inspires fear in his minions, clearly.

Image

Only two people I didn't see as servile in that exchange were Shoygu and Medvedev. They too are scary.
#15213609
Historically, the heads of security and intelligence agencies in Russia have often come to an… unfortunate end. Russian leaders don’t trust them, often with good reason. That guy wasn’t acting. Lol.
#15213612
Potemkin wrote:Historically, the heads of security and intelligence agencies in Russia have often come to an… unfortunate end. Russian leaders don’t trust them, often with good reason. That guy wasn’t acting. Lol.


Lol...

Although to be fair, Patrushev was jumping the gun and advocating an apparent move to unite the Donbass region republics directly into the Russian Federation, and Putin correctly affirmed that the effort is instead to recognize their independence. This doesn't abolish the Minsk 2 directives either, as it calls for Ukraine's central government to negotiate with the republics as separate entities-which it never has done for the past 8 years now.
#15213614
annatar1914 wrote:Patrushev was jumping the gun and advocating an apparent move to unite the Donbass region republics directly into the Russian Federation, and Putin correctly affirmed that the effort is instead to recognize their independence.


Haha, what nonsense. :lol:

Patrushev was simply speaking the truth. Mistakenly, of course.
#15213615
annatar1914 wrote:Those are the people who actually live there, who you dehumanize by the language you use. It's their land, and they're done with Fascists shooting at them.


Ah yes, "the people". What a joke :lol:.

Nobody ever asked the people there. Putin thinks the very concept of "asking the people" ridiculous.
#15213617
Image
Image
What a typically beautiful Russian historic moment, which must have been broadcast live and not scripted. The guy obviously and mistakenly thought the event still had something to do with a usual ordinary Security Council meeting, then he got totally confused, I hope he manages to survive. :lol:
#15213621
Rugoz wrote:Ah yes, "the people". What a joke :lol:.

Nobody ever asked the people there. Putin thinks the very concept of "asking the people" ridiculous.


The people of the Donbass spoke in 2014, when attacked by representatives of their own alleged government they defended themselves and declared their independence. And your opinion of Putin as some sort of dictator is a stupid cliche created by Russias geopolitical enemies, and I say that as one who often disagrees with him.
#15213622
annatar1914 wrote:The people of the Donbass spoke in 2014, when attacked by representatives of their own alleged government they defended themselves and declared their independence.


That statement is complete bullshit on so many levels. :knife:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 832

EU is not prepared on nuclear war, but Russia,[…]

It is implausible that the IDF could not or would[…]

Moving on to the next misuse of language that sho[…]

There is no reason to have a state at all unless w[…]