401–410 of 427 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So this is a troll account. Got it.
So anyone you disagree with is a troll? Got it. Anyways: - https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pentagon-demurs-biden-confir... - https://missilethreat.csis.org/system/russian-air-defense/ - https://georgetownsecuritystudiesreview.org/2019/06/26/the-r...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> he's blocking measures to increase North American oil production. How?
Not issuing drilling licenses? Besides, there is, or so I heard, so much political pressures that drilling has become a high-risk business that those companies either can't afford insurance or can't get one.
Which is kinda beside the point because it’s refinement that’s the biggest issue right now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OK you can have the Sudetenland! (please stop there) OK, you can have Czechoslovakia! (stop there, please) OK, you can have Poland. ...France? You see how this doesn't work anymore.
I just checked: only Moldova is left that's not in NATO and in place where Russians could march to (but they would need to get the western Ukraine first). Poland, Slovakia, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia are all under NATO nukes protection; Sweden and Finland will join shortly. Are you sure Putin - and all the people around, at the same time! - are insane enough to risk eradication of all its cities? Nuclear weapons chan…
He will not let the West to recover. Were his 200,000 troops to march into Poland instead of Ukraine in February, the entirety of NATO in Europe would' be in a giant trouble until USA would've brought forces from North America.
For as long as the West will be showing fear, he will continue to attack.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does the annexation of Crimea play into that agreement?
There's no relation, as the annexation of Crimea has everything to do with a prior armed coup (you can call it "a successful January 6 event", if you wish) against a legitimately[1] elected president in Kyiv. The coup, among many other things, violated the right to a political representation of the people's voice who voted for that president. In case of president Yanukovych, these were the people of the eastern Ukrai…
You provided a source to show the elections were valid but who was questioning that? The cause of the uprising (from wiki)
"In November 2013, a wave of large-scale protests (known as Euromaidan) erupted in response to President Yanukovych's sudden decision not to sign a political association and free trade agreement with the European Union (EU), instead choosing closer ties to Russia and the Eurasian Economic Union. "
And you also speak about lack of representation but
"A total of 315 of the 349 MPs registered in the sitting hall supported the document on Friday." [1]
That's a huge majority in any political system. I think there's room for debate whether the people were represented sufficiently by the president's actions.
Regardless, again unlike jan 6th, a foreign country was involed and later invaded. Two, the revolutionaries reason was truthful and not a lie about election fraud , and three a meaningful percentage of the population was involved which gives some merit to a revolution.
Sources
1.https://www.kyivpost.com/article/content/ukraine-politics/pa...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's an amazing essay on this: https://archive.ph/D9YWr It feels bad to us to have these ridiculous politicians who spend 95% of their time on theatrical in fighting as the US has for the last ~15 years but in terms of first order effects, it doesn't really matter. Like the risk of something like a kinetic civil war is still roughly zero in the US. But the problem is, no one actually believes that there is any nee…
Like the risk of something like a kinetic civil war is still roughly zero in the US. To us people on the outside, listening to US people denigrating each other on the web, it seems to us that it's 50-50 whether the US will be involved in a Civil War or a big peer-to-peer International War first.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anyone living close enough to Russia can attest to the fact that this invasion is just an external consequence of their internal politics.
The situation is caused by a confluence of US policy and Russian policy. It's not an either-or situation. The complexity is immense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anyone living close enough to Russia can attest to the fact that this invasion is just an external consequence of their internal politics.
The situation is caused by a confluence of US policy and Russian policy. It's not an either-or situation. The complexity is immense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Russia wins in Ukraine NATO population is 10 times that of Russia. The difference in economy/technology/production even more drastic. What winning are you talking about?
>> Russia wins in Ukraine In Ukraine . NATO's population is irrelevant if Russia is not fighting NATO.
Imagine, somebody did it for Afghanistan in 2001 what do you think NATO response would be?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US hasn't exactly dropped the Monroe Doctrine.
And yet doesn't recognise other countries' "Monroe Doctrines". I'm waiting for the Chinese to declare their version of the Monroe Doctrine forbidding Western Nations from East Asia. Imagine the screams from the US.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What makes the pope, a man who has dedicated his life to the study of religion and God an expert in global politics, that a quote from him has more value than a comment from anyone here. He mentions in the article that an unnamed world leader told him Russia would get upset at NATO being so close to their border. Putin has publicly mentioned this multiple times before the war with Ukraine. Finally, Ukraine has the ri…
> Finally, Ukraine has the right to join any alliance it wants No, it doesn't have this right to join ANY alliance, as it may violate one of the conditions (military bloc neutrality) under which their sovereignty was granted to them by the USSR, which Russia is a legitimate successor of: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31746866