Touche. But Who is the fool.? The guardian reader or the follower of distinguished experts. Pray tell Boyo. So the article I linked to is a lie ? Boyo. You bunch are so delusional it’s painful
Global mass rearmament
- Thread starter MNW67
- Start date
My source was Vladimir Putin speaking…….do you consider that a left wing source?
And don’t bother trying to discredit the news channnel, it’s Putin the words are coming from
Putin compares himself to Peter the Great in fight to expand Russia
“Putin has been tearing off a lot of masks — what he’s revealing rather consistently is Russia’s new imperial ambitions,”
Putin compares himself to a famous historical figure, worrying experts about his ambitions
“Putin has been tearing off a lot of masks — what he’s revealing rather consistently is Russia’s new imperial ambitions,” one expert said.
www.nbcnews.com
HairyMelon, the logic claiming Putin invaded because of NATO expansion does not compute……you are literally trying to claim that Putin should be allowed to have influence over the defence policies of sovereign countries. As a Brexit supporter, you are I presume a believer that countries should have the right to self determination.
I doubt you will answer because you are not interested in reasoned debate
- Joined
- 7 Nov 2023
- Messages
- 7,394
- Reaction score
- 3,531
- Country
To you nothing computes, this whole mess has been about Ukraine wanting to join NATOMy source was Vladimir Putin speaking…….do you consider that a left wing source?
And don’t bother trying to discredit the news channnel, it’s Putin the words are coming from
Putin compares himself to Peter the Great in fight to expand Russia
“Putin has been tearing off a lot of masks — what he’s revealing rather consistently is Russia’s new imperial ambitions,”
Putin compares himself to a famous historical figure, worrying experts about his ambitions
“Putin has been tearing off a lot of masks — what he’s revealing rather consistently is Russia’s new imperial ambitions,” one expert said.
HairyMelon, the logic claiming Putin invaded because of NATO expansion does not compute……you are literally trying to claim that Putin should be allowed to have influence over the defence policies of sovereign countries. As a Brexit supporter, you are I presume a believer that countries should have the right to self determination.
I doubt you will answer because you are not interested in reasoned debate
Please could you explain how you reached that conclusion
- Joined
- 7 Nov 2023
- Messages
- 7,394
- Reaction score
- 3,531
- Country
Yes its called history. Try it and not just watching 5 mins of youtube and 5 mins of google!!!!!!
Including the 1994 treaty that guaranteed Ukraines security in return for giving up their nuclear weapons?
and that they wouldn`t allow nato or any other nation to encroach closer to Russia
Point 1. Putin was threatening no one. All he requested was the Minsk agreements be honoured , and ethnic Russians in the Donbass not be shelled by the Ukraine militiaMy source was Vladimir Putin speaking…….do you consider that a left wing source?
And don’t bother trying to discredit the news channnel, it’s Putin the words are coming from
Putin compares himself to Peter the Great in fight to expand Russia
“Putin has been tearing off a lot of masks — what he’s revealing rather consistently is Russia’s new imperial ambitions,”
Putin compares himself to a famous historical figure, worrying experts about his ambitions
“Putin has been tearing off a lot of masks — what he’s revealing rather consistently is Russia’s new imperial ambitions,” one expert said.
HairyMelon, the logic claiming Putin invaded because of NATO expansion does not compute……you are literally trying to claim that Putin should be allowed to have influence over the defence policies of sovereign countries. As a Brexit supporter, you are I presume a believer that countries should have the right to self determination.
I doubt you will answer because you are not interested in reasoned debate
Point 2. Why assume I am a brexit supporter?
Wrong quote somehow
Were they actually Ukraines nuclear weapons.
I thought they belonged to the old Soviet Union, of which Ukraine was a member at the time.
A bit like the UK siting nuclear weapons in Scotland and if Scotland became independent, would those nuclear weapons then belong to Scotland.
You mean when he crossed the border with a massive military force and started killing people? Let me guess - he was just passing through? Sure is taking his time on that.
Highway Man can’t come with anything at all the proves countries that protected themselves against Putin forced him to invade Ukraine.
Highways Man’s not very clever argument is that every country surrounding Russia should only be allowed to do what Putin wants…..ie let itself be vulnerable to invasion. It’s not the brightest idea in the world
That is clearly untrue
Putin broke the Minsk agreements 1 and 2 continuously from 2014 onwards.
That is false.
Putin sent in Wagner group in 2014 to annexe Donbas
Putin armed Russian separatists, many of whom came from Russia
Azov started fighting to defend the Donbas against annexation by Wagner and separatists.
Claiming that Ukraine was shelling ethnic Russians is pure Russian propaganda
Venn diagram mate
You post Russian propaganda
You support Donald Trump
You are an anti vaxxer
You are a conspiracy theorist
I bet you think man made climate change is a hoax and you support Brexit.
If you don’t and I am wrong, I apologise.
Putin propaganda
There’s no treaty that says what you claim
Oh and you seem to not know about the 1997 NATO,Russia founding act
- Joined
- 7 Nov 2023
- Messages
- 7,394
- Reaction score
- 3,531
- Country
and neither do you, you are straight out of a facebook page
For those interested in actual facts on NATO, here is a breakdown of the actual details:
Key messages on Russian myths
Did NATO promise not to build infrastructure in the new Allies, or to station
troops there? (The Founding Act can be read here)
No. In the 1997 NATO-Russia Founding Act, NATO agreed that, "in the current and foreseeable security environment", the Alliance would ensure the ability to carry out collective defence by maintaining "adequate infrastructure", rather than the "permanent stationing of substantial combat forces".
NATO has lived up to this fully. Working with the new Allies, we have ensured adequate infrastructure by upgrading, for example, air bases in Lithuania and Estonia. Russia has no cause to complain about this.
Furthermore, the Act specifically states that "reinforcement may take place, when necessary, in the event of defence against a threat of aggression and missions in support of peace consistent with the United Nations Charter and the OSCE governing principles". This is what the Alliance is now doing. We are taking legitimate steps to deal with the instability created by Russia’s illegitimate actions.
Did NATO promise not to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of the new Allies?
In the Founding Act, Allies reiterated that “they have no intention, no plan and no reason to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of new members.”
NATO has lived up to this, and has dramatically reduced the number, types, and readiness of nuclear weapons stationed in Europe and its reliance on nuclear weapons in NATO strategy.
At the same time, Russia maintains greater stockpiles of short-range nuclear weapons than NATO Allies
Did NATO promise not to expand into Eastern Europe in return for the reunification of Germany? (The Washington Treaty can be read here.)
No. NATO has never made any such promise. Russian leaders allege that individual politicians from Germany or the United States gave Russia informal verbal assurances that the Alliance would not expand. No documentary evidence of any kind has ever been produced to back up these allegations.
But regardless, the only way for NATO to make such a promise would be for all the members of the Alliance to agree it formally.
Article 10 of the North Atlantic Treaty - NATO’s founding document - states, “The Parties may, by unanimous agreement, invite any other European State in a position to further the principles of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic
area to accede to this Treaty.” The only way to change that policy would be to change the treaty. No unrecorded, unwritten promises could possibly do so.
Moreover, these alleged promises were made in 1990, at the time of German reunification.
In 1990, the Warsaw Pact still existed, and it only dissolved in 1991. So the accession to NATO of Central and Eastern European countries was simply not on the cards at that time.
Russia agreed on enhanced cooperation with NATO in 1997, and again in 2002 - when enlargement was on the agenda. If Russia really had been given such promises, that would have been the time to invoke them - not ten years later. And far from trying to isolate Russia, NATO offered closer partnership at every step of the way.
Finally, the Founding Act states that all signatories, including Russia, will work with “the aim of creating in Europe a common space of security and stability, without dividing lines or spheres of influence limiting the sovereignty of any state” and respect “the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all states and their inherent right to choose the means to ensure their own security.” Russia pledged that; Russia should respect it.
Key messages on Russian myths
Did NATO promise not to build infrastructure in the new Allies, or to station
troops there? (The Founding Act can be read here)
No. In the 1997 NATO-Russia Founding Act, NATO agreed that, "in the current and foreseeable security environment", the Alliance would ensure the ability to carry out collective defence by maintaining "adequate infrastructure", rather than the "permanent stationing of substantial combat forces".
NATO has lived up to this fully. Working with the new Allies, we have ensured adequate infrastructure by upgrading, for example, air bases in Lithuania and Estonia. Russia has no cause to complain about this.
Furthermore, the Act specifically states that "reinforcement may take place, when necessary, in the event of defence against a threat of aggression and missions in support of peace consistent with the United Nations Charter and the OSCE governing principles". This is what the Alliance is now doing. We are taking legitimate steps to deal with the instability created by Russia’s illegitimate actions.
Did NATO promise not to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of the new Allies?
In the Founding Act, Allies reiterated that “they have no intention, no plan and no reason to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of new members.”
NATO has lived up to this, and has dramatically reduced the number, types, and readiness of nuclear weapons stationed in Europe and its reliance on nuclear weapons in NATO strategy.
At the same time, Russia maintains greater stockpiles of short-range nuclear weapons than NATO Allies
Did NATO promise not to expand into Eastern Europe in return for the reunification of Germany? (The Washington Treaty can be read here.)
No. NATO has never made any such promise. Russian leaders allege that individual politicians from Germany or the United States gave Russia informal verbal assurances that the Alliance would not expand. No documentary evidence of any kind has ever been produced to back up these allegations.
But regardless, the only way for NATO to make such a promise would be for all the members of the Alliance to agree it formally.
Article 10 of the North Atlantic Treaty - NATO’s founding document - states, “The Parties may, by unanimous agreement, invite any other European State in a position to further the principles of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic
area to accede to this Treaty.” The only way to change that policy would be to change the treaty. No unrecorded, unwritten promises could possibly do so.
Moreover, these alleged promises were made in 1990, at the time of German reunification.
In 1990, the Warsaw Pact still existed, and it only dissolved in 1991. So the accession to NATO of Central and Eastern European countries was simply not on the cards at that time.
Russia agreed on enhanced cooperation with NATO in 1997, and again in 2002 - when enlargement was on the agenda. If Russia really had been given such promises, that would have been the time to invoke them - not ten years later. And far from trying to isolate Russia, NATO offered closer partnership at every step of the way.
Finally, the Founding Act states that all signatories, including Russia, will work with “the aim of creating in Europe a common space of security and stability, without dividing lines or spheres of influence limiting the sovereignty of any state” and respect “the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all states and their inherent right to choose the means to ensure their own security.” Russia pledged that; Russia should respect it.
Similar threads
