Topic: Russian act of war (Read 1008 times)
There will be no war. Ukraine has nothing to oppose Russia. And before calling Russia an aggressor, take a look at the United States first. How many so-called “operations” did they have in the countries of the third and third world? And we must always remember that the people themselves never want war, the war is created by the authorities who allegedly pursue the interests of their country.
Hackers leaked a lot of "The Integrity Initiative" documents.
https://ru.scribd.com/document/394374538/Interim-Report
It's a British infowarfare special service, pretending to be a non-profit NGO.
Their two fronts are currently Spain and Greece, judging from the docs.
https://ru.scribd.com/document/394374538/Interim-Report
It's a British infowarfare special service, pretending to be a non-profit NGO.
Their two fronts are currently Spain and Greece, judging from the docs.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/president-of-ukraine-claims-large-scale-russian-invasion-of-country-being-planned/
Holy shit. WW3 coming soon.
The Ukraine isn’t part of NATO and as such, western countries are unlikely to go to war over this in practice. Holy shit. WW3 coming soon.
Ah, but other obligations exists outside NATO:
Quote
The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,
Welcoming the accession of Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as non-nuclear-weapon State,
Taking into account the commitment of Ukraine to eliminate all nuclear weapons from its territory within a specified period of time,
Noting the changes in the world-wide security situation, including the end of the Cold War, which have brought about conditions for deep reductions in nuclear forces.
Confirm the following:
1. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.
2. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
3. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind.
4. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.
5. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm, in the case of Ukraine, their commitment not to use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, except in the case of an attack on themselves, their territories or dependent territories, their armed forces, or their allies, by such a State in association or alliance with a nuclear-weapon State.
6. Ukraine, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America will consult in the event a situation arises that raises a question concerning these commitments.
— Memorandum on Security Assurances in Connection with Ukraine’s Accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
Welcoming the accession of Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as non-nuclear-weapon State,
Taking into account the commitment of Ukraine to eliminate all nuclear weapons from its territory within a specified period of time,
Noting the changes in the world-wide security situation, including the end of the Cold War, which have brought about conditions for deep reductions in nuclear forces.
Confirm the following:
1. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.
2. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
3. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind.
4. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.
5. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm, in the case of Ukraine, their commitment not to use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, except in the case of an attack on themselves, their territories or dependent territories, their armed forces, or their allies, by such a State in association or alliance with a nuclear-weapon State.
6. Ukraine, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America will consult in the event a situation arises that raises a question concerning these commitments.
— Memorandum on Security Assurances in Connection with Ukraine’s Accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
We might see more economic sanctions as a result of this, but probably not military conflict. I would be surprised to ever see two countries with Nuclear weapons engage in a military conflict, but we will probably see war break out in efforts to stop countries from obtaining Nuclear weapons (Iran).
With oil prices where they are, the Russian economy cannot withstand more sanctions, and Russia may be forced to retreat because of the sanctions.
Check out this new incident it's really interesting... 17 Russian jets vs 1 Royal Navy Destroyer
Link: https://www.businessinsider.com/17-russian-jets-buzzed-a-british-destroyer-in-the-black-sea-2018-11
Link: https://www.businessinsider.com/17-russian-jets-buzzed-a-british-destroyer-in-the-black-sea-2018-11
Quote
The incident took place in May, but tensions in the Black Sea have been simmering for some time.
May? Why wasn't it in the news cycle then? Jesus christ.
Check out this new incident it's really interesting... 17 Russian jets vs 1 Royal Navy Destroyer
Link: https://www.businessinsider.com/17-russian-jets-buzzed-a-british-destroyer-in-the-black-sea-2018-11
Link: https://www.businessinsider.com/17-russian-jets-buzzed-a-british-destroyer-in-the-black-sea-2018-11
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/president-of-ukraine-claims-large-scale-russian-invasion-of-country-being-planned/
Holy shit. WW3 coming soon.
The Ukraine isn’t part of NATO and as such, western countries are unlikely to go to war over this in practice. Holy shit. WW3 coming soon.
Ah, but other obligations exists outside NATO:
Quote
The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,
Welcoming the accession of Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as non-nuclear-weapon State,
Taking into account the commitment of Ukraine to eliminate all nuclear weapons from its territory within a specified period of time,
Noting the changes in the world-wide security situation, including the end of the Cold War, which have brought about conditions for deep reductions in nuclear forces.
Confirm the following:
1. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.
2. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
3. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind.
4. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.
5. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm, in the case of Ukraine, their commitment not to use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, except in the case of an attack on themselves, their territories or dependent territories, their armed forces, or their allies, by such a State in association or alliance with a nuclear-weapon State.
6. Ukraine, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America will consult in the event a situation arises that raises a question concerning these commitments.
— Memorandum on Security Assurances in Connection with Ukraine’s Accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
Welcoming the accession of Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as non-nuclear-weapon State,
Taking into account the commitment of Ukraine to eliminate all nuclear weapons from its territory within a specified period of time,
Noting the changes in the world-wide security situation, including the end of the Cold War, which have brought about conditions for deep reductions in nuclear forces.
Confirm the following:
1. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.
2. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
3. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind.
4. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.
5. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm, in the case of Ukraine, their commitment not to use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, except in the case of an attack on themselves, their territories or dependent territories, their armed forces, or their allies, by such a State in association or alliance with a nuclear-weapon State.
6. Ukraine, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America will consult in the event a situation arises that raises a question concerning these commitments.
— Memorandum on Security Assurances in Connection with Ukraine’s Accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/president-of-ukraine-claims-large-scale-russian-invasion-of-country-being-planned/
Holy shit. WW3 coming soon.
The Ukraine isn’t part of NATO and as such, western countries are unlikely to go to war over this in practice. Holy shit. WW3 coming soon.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/us-conducts-rare-overflight-near-ukraine-in-pointed-message-to-moscow
Holy shit; US is showing force by flying over Ukraine.
Holy shit; US is showing force by flying over Ukraine.
I suggest that you get updated that treaty is no longer valid. That treaty was valid when Russia and Ukraine were allies until 2013 but not anymore thanks to our CIA and MI6 friends.
Source? As far as I can tell, the treaty is still in effect.
Can you give us a link to that document or "treaty"... For me is like Mexicans trying to claim that the Gulf of Mexico and other territories lost to the U.S.A are theirs. There is nothing we can do about it.. peace out
Quote
The Russian Federation and Ukraine, hereinafter referred to as the Parties,
guided by the relations of friendship and cooperation between the peoples of Russia and Ukraine, historically fraternal bonds between them;
Guided by the provisions of the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership between the Russian Federation and Ukraine of May 31, 1997, as well as the Treaty between the Russian Federation and Ukraine on the Russian-Ukrainian state border of January 28, 2003;
Noting the importance of the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait for the economic development of Russia and Ukraine;
Convinced that all issues relating to the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait should be resolved only by peaceful means jointly or with the consent of Russia and Ukraine;
based on the need to preserve the Azov-Kerch water area as an integral economic and natural complex used in the interests of Russia and Ukraine:
Agree on the following:
Article 1
The Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait are historically the inland waters of the Russian Federation and Ukraine.
The Sea of Azov is delimited by the state border line in accordance with the agreement between the Parties.
Settlement of issues relating to the water area of the Kerch Strait, is carried out by agreement between the Parties.
Article 2
1. Merchant ships and warships, as well as other state ships under the flag of the Russian Federation or Ukraine, operated for non-commercial purposes, enjoy freedom of navigation in the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait.
2. Trade ships under the flags of third countries may enter the Sea of Azov and pass through the Kerch Strait if they are sent to or returned from the Russian or Ukrainian port.
3. Warships and other state vessels of third states, operated for non-commercial purposes, may enter the Sea of Azov and pass through the Kerch Strait if they are sent on a visit or business call to the port by one of the Parties at its invitation or permission agreed with the other Party .
Article 3
Russian-Ukrainian cooperation, including joint activities in the field of shipping, including its regulation and navigation and hydrographic support, fisheries, protection of the marine environment, environmental safety, as well as search and rescue in the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait, and concluding, as appropriate, new arrangements.
Article 4
Disputes between the Parties related to the interpretation and application of this Agreement shall be resolved through consultation and negotiation, as well as other peaceful means chosen by the Parties.
Article 5
This Treaty is subject to ratification and shall enter into force on the date of the exchange of the instruments of ratification of the Parties.
Changes and additions to this Agreement are drawn up in separate protocols, which enter into force in accordance with the procedure described in paragraph 1 of this Article.
Done in the city of Kerch
"December 24, 2003,
in duplicate, each in the Russian and Ukrainian languages, both texts being equally authentic.
guided by the relations of friendship and cooperation between the peoples of Russia and Ukraine, historically fraternal bonds between them;
Guided by the provisions of the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership between the Russian Federation and Ukraine of May 31, 1997, as well as the Treaty between the Russian Federation and Ukraine on the Russian-Ukrainian state border of January 28, 2003;
Noting the importance of the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait for the economic development of Russia and Ukraine;
Convinced that all issues relating to the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait should be resolved only by peaceful means jointly or with the consent of Russia and Ukraine;
based on the need to preserve the Azov-Kerch water area as an integral economic and natural complex used in the interests of Russia and Ukraine:
Agree on the following:
Article 1
The Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait are historically the inland waters of the Russian Federation and Ukraine.
The Sea of Azov is delimited by the state border line in accordance with the agreement between the Parties.
Settlement of issues relating to the water area of the Kerch Strait, is carried out by agreement between the Parties.
Article 2
1. Merchant ships and warships, as well as other state ships under the flag of the Russian Federation or Ukraine, operated for non-commercial purposes, enjoy freedom of navigation in the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait.
2. Trade ships under the flags of third countries may enter the Sea of Azov and pass through the Kerch Strait if they are sent to or returned from the Russian or Ukrainian port.
3. Warships and other state vessels of third states, operated for non-commercial purposes, may enter the Sea of Azov and pass through the Kerch Strait if they are sent on a visit or business call to the port by one of the Parties at its invitation or permission agreed with the other Party .
Article 3
Russian-Ukrainian cooperation, including joint activities in the field of shipping, including its regulation and navigation and hydrographic support, fisheries, protection of the marine environment, environmental safety, as well as search and rescue in the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait, and concluding, as appropriate, new arrangements.
Article 4
Disputes between the Parties related to the interpretation and application of this Agreement shall be resolved through consultation and negotiation, as well as other peaceful means chosen by the Parties.
Article 5
This Treaty is subject to ratification and shall enter into force on the date of the exchange of the instruments of ratification of the Parties.
Changes and additions to this Agreement are drawn up in separate protocols, which enter into force in accordance with the procedure described in paragraph 1 of this Article.
Done in the city of Kerch
"December 24, 2003,
in duplicate, each in the Russian and Ukrainian languages, both texts being equally authentic.
https://www.ecolex.org/details/treaty/agreement-between-the-russian-federation-and-the-ukraine-on-cooperation-in-the-use-of-the-sea-of-azov-and-the-strait-of-kerch-tre-149547/
Quote
The Parties, proceeding from the necessity of conservation of the Azov-Kerch defined area of water as integral economic and natural complex, to be used in the interests of the Russian Federation and the Ukraine, have agreed as follows: 1) The sea of Azov and the strait of Kerch are historically internal waters of the Russian Federation and the Ukraine. 2) The sea of Azov must be delimited by the state border in accordance with the Agreement signed by the Parties. 3) Dispute settlement regarding the issues pertaining to the defined area of water of Kerch must be regulated by agreement between the Parties. 4) Mercantile vessels and other state non-commercial vessels flying the flags of the Russian Federation and the Ukraine have free navigation in the sea of Azov and the strait of Kerch. 5) Russian-Ukrainian cooperation in the spheres of navigation, fisheries, protection of marine environment, ecological safety and life-saving in the sea of Azov and the strait of Kerch must be implemented on the basis of existing international agreements and by conclusion, in respective cases, of the new ones.
I suggest that you get updated that treaty is no longer valid. That treaty was valid when Russia and Ukraine were allies until 2013 but not anymore thanks to our CIA and MI6 friends.
Can you give us a link to that document or "treaty"... For me is like Mexicans trying to claim that the Gulf of Mexico and other territories lost to the U.S.A are theirs. There is nothing we can do about it.. peace out
Quote
The Russian Federation and Ukraine, hereinafter referred to as the Parties,
guided by the relations of friendship and cooperation between the peoples of Russia and Ukraine, historically fraternal bonds between them;
Guided by the provisions of the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership between the Russian Federation and Ukraine of May 31, 1997, as well as the Treaty between the Russian Federation and Ukraine on the Russian-Ukrainian state border of January 28, 2003;
Noting the importance of the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait for the economic development of Russia and Ukraine;
Convinced that all issues relating to the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait should be resolved only by peaceful means jointly or with the consent of Russia and Ukraine;
based on the need to preserve the Azov-Kerch water area as an integral economic and natural complex used in the interests of Russia and Ukraine:
Agree on the following:
Article 1
The Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait are historically the inland waters of the Russian Federation and Ukraine.
The Sea of Azov is delimited by the state border line in accordance with the agreement between the Parties.
Settlement of issues relating to the water area of the Kerch Strait, is carried out by agreement between the Parties.
Article 2
1. Merchant ships and warships, as well as other state ships under the flag of the Russian Federation or Ukraine, operated for non-commercial purposes, enjoy freedom of navigation in the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait.
2. Trade ships under the flags of third countries may enter the Sea of Azov and pass through the Kerch Strait if they are sent to or returned from the Russian or Ukrainian port.
3. Warships and other state vessels of third states, operated for non-commercial purposes, may enter the Sea of Azov and pass through the Kerch Strait if they are sent on a visit or business call to the port by one of the Parties at its invitation or permission agreed with the other Party .
Article 3
Russian-Ukrainian cooperation, including joint activities in the field of shipping, including its regulation and navigation and hydrographic support, fisheries, protection of the marine environment, environmental safety, as well as search and rescue in the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait, and concluding, as appropriate, new arrangements.
Article 4
Disputes between the Parties related to the interpretation and application of this Agreement shall be resolved through consultation and negotiation, as well as other peaceful means chosen by the Parties.
Article 5
This Treaty is subject to ratification and shall enter into force on the date of the exchange of the instruments of ratification of the Parties.
Changes and additions to this Agreement are drawn up in separate protocols, which enter into force in accordance with the procedure described in paragraph 1 of this Article.
Done in the city of Kerch
"December 24, 2003,
in duplicate, each in the Russian and Ukrainian languages, both texts being equally authentic.
guided by the relations of friendship and cooperation between the peoples of Russia and Ukraine, historically fraternal bonds between them;
Guided by the provisions of the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership between the Russian Federation and Ukraine of May 31, 1997, as well as the Treaty between the Russian Federation and Ukraine on the Russian-Ukrainian state border of January 28, 2003;
Noting the importance of the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait for the economic development of Russia and Ukraine;
Convinced that all issues relating to the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait should be resolved only by peaceful means jointly or with the consent of Russia and Ukraine;
based on the need to preserve the Azov-Kerch water area as an integral economic and natural complex used in the interests of Russia and Ukraine:
Agree on the following:
Article 1
The Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait are historically the inland waters of the Russian Federation and Ukraine.
The Sea of Azov is delimited by the state border line in accordance with the agreement between the Parties.
Settlement of issues relating to the water area of the Kerch Strait, is carried out by agreement between the Parties.
Article 2
1. Merchant ships and warships, as well as other state ships under the flag of the Russian Federation or Ukraine, operated for non-commercial purposes, enjoy freedom of navigation in the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait.
2. Trade ships under the flags of third countries may enter the Sea of Azov and pass through the Kerch Strait if they are sent to or returned from the Russian or Ukrainian port.
3. Warships and other state vessels of third states, operated for non-commercial purposes, may enter the Sea of Azov and pass through the Kerch Strait if they are sent on a visit or business call to the port by one of the Parties at its invitation or permission agreed with the other Party .
Article 3
Russian-Ukrainian cooperation, including joint activities in the field of shipping, including its regulation and navigation and hydrographic support, fisheries, protection of the marine environment, environmental safety, as well as search and rescue in the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait, and concluding, as appropriate, new arrangements.
Article 4
Disputes between the Parties related to the interpretation and application of this Agreement shall be resolved through consultation and negotiation, as well as other peaceful means chosen by the Parties.
Article 5
This Treaty is subject to ratification and shall enter into force on the date of the exchange of the instruments of ratification of the Parties.
Changes and additions to this Agreement are drawn up in separate protocols, which enter into force in accordance with the procedure described in paragraph 1 of this Article.
Done in the city of Kerch
"December 24, 2003,
in duplicate, each in the Russian and Ukrainian languages, both texts being equally authentic.
https://www.ecolex.org/details/treaty/agreement-between-the-russian-federation-and-the-ukraine-on-cooperation-in-the-use-of-the-sea-of-azov-and-the-strait-of-kerch-tre-149547/
Quote
The Parties, proceeding from the necessity of conservation of the Azov-Kerch defined area of water as integral economic and natural complex, to be used in the interests of the Russian Federation and the Ukraine, have agreed as follows: 1) The sea of Azov and the strait of Kerch are historically internal waters of the Russian Federation and the Ukraine. 2) The sea of Azov must be delimited by the state border in accordance with the Agreement signed by the Parties. 3) Dispute settlement regarding the issues pertaining to the defined area of water of Kerch must be regulated by agreement between the Parties. 4) Mercantile vessels and other state non-commercial vessels flying the flags of the Russian Federation and the Ukraine have free navigation in the sea of Azov and the strait of Kerch. 5) Russian-Ukrainian cooperation in the spheres of navigation, fisheries, protection of marine environment, ecological safety and life-saving in the sea of Azov and the strait of Kerch must be implemented on the basis of existing international agreements and by conclusion, in respective cases, of the new ones.
[/quote]
Uhhhh; Ukraine and Russia had a joint treaty over that water way. A country just can't lay claims to something covered by a treaty arbitrarily. The fact that Russia violated a treaty means that they're entirely at fault for this incident.
Where do you even get your
[/quote]
Can you give us a link to that document or "treaty"... For me is like Mexicans trying to claim that the Gulf of Mexico and other territories lost to the U.S.A are theirs. There is nothing we can do about it.. peace out
Ukranian vessels were trespassing the waters of Russia so it was Ukrania that did an act of war. (I'm not pro Russia)Ukranian vessels were trespassing the waters of Russia so it was Ukrania that did an act of war. (I'm not pro Russia) I'm just saying that Ukrainians already lost some territories to Russia why try to recover it?
Uhhhh; Ukraine and Russia had a joint treaty over that water way. A country just can't lay claims to something covered by a treaty arbitrarily. The fact that Russia violated a treaty means that they're entirely at fault for this incident.
Where do you even get your
That's right! They have a joint treaty over a SHARED waterway, where at some point, the Ukrainian border ends and the Russian border begins. They crossed the border as defined in that agreement.
Where the hell do you get your propaganda from? Jesus christ; it was a joint water way that Russia illegally seized. Honestly, I don't see any country in the world ever entering in another treaty with Russia again -- because they obviously can't be trusted.
Ukranian vessels were trespassing the waters of Russia so it was Ukrania that did an act of war. (I'm not pro Russia)Ukranian vessels were trespassing the waters of Russia so it was Ukrania that did an act of war. (I'm not pro Russia) I'm just saying that Ukrainians already lost some territories to Russia why try to recover it?
Uhhhh; Ukraine and Russia had a joint treaty over that water way. A country just can't lay claims to something covered by a treaty arbitrarily. The fact that Russia violated a treaty means that they're entirely at fault for this incident.
Where do you even get your
That's right! They have a joint treaty over a SHARED waterway, where at some point, the Ukrainian border ends and the Russian border begins. They crossed the border as defined in that agreement.
Ukranian vessels were trespassing the waters of Russia so it was Ukrania that did an act of war. (I'm not pro Russia)Ukranian vessels were trespassing the waters of Russia so it was Ukrania that did an act of war. (I'm not pro Russia) I'm just saying that Ukrainians already lost some territories to Russia why try to recover it?
Uhhhh; Ukraine and Russia had a joint treaty over that water way. A country just can't lay claims to something covered by a treaty arbitrarily. The fact that Russia violated a treaty means that they're entirely at fault for this incident.
Where do you even get your
Ukranian vessels were trespassing the waters of Russia so it was Ukrania that did an act of war. (I'm not pro Russia)Ukranian vessels were trespassing the waters of Russia so it was Ukrania that did an act of war. (I'm not pro Russia) I'm just saying that Ukrainians already lost some territories to Russia why try to recover it?
http://uk.businessinsider.com/mi6-head-alex-younger-russia-wont-be-trusted-2018-12
Russian asshats. The whole world needs to treat that shithole like north korea, and stop all trade with them.
Russian asshats. The whole world needs to treat that shithole like north korea, and stop all trade with them.
Except what if Ukraine bought energy from the European-United States global power grid instead of importing gas/oil from Russia? That's cripple the Russian economy even more.
European-United States global power grid - what is that? Buying Yamal gas on our Far North and delivering to Poland in tankers?
Or bringing Qatar gas and saying "it's American"?
HVDC grid between North Africa, Europe, and United States.
https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/the-smarter-grid/lets-build-a-global-power-grid
Except what if Ukraine bought energy from the European-United States global power grid instead of importing gas/oil from Russia? That's cripple the Russian economy even more.
European-United States global power grid - what is that? Buying Yamal gas on our Far North and delivering to Poland in tankers?
Or bringing Qatar gas and saying "it's American"?
To pass electricity on that hypothetical grid, one needs to generate it first.
2nd question: how Ukraine will pay for that energy, with it's deforestation selling all it's trees, or by selling even more russophobia and buying even more weapons?
Ukraine cannot be even properly privatized, because of Nazi batallions of far-right schizos roaming it freely. It's worse there than it was in the 90-ies in Russia.
America has complete and utter sea and air superiority from a military perspective. There is no nation in this world that can stand against the mighty naval and air capacities of the United States.
Except... Syria? How all this helped to overthrow Asad? I'll tell you a secret: that would be the least of Putin's concerns. A huge, rich neighbour buying natural gas and petrol at world prices, without trying to cheat every January, would be always good.
Even rocket launching sites on land would be not as bad: a rocket launched from land can be intercepted not far from the launching site.
The scary thing was NATO occupation of Crimea and uncontrolled military ships traffic in Black Sea because of that: a rocket launched from a ship has a chance to succeed.
So seriously speaking, when Odessa will fall, this direction of attack on Russia can be abandoned all together. Either fall of Odessa, or Turkey becoming outwardly anti-Ango-Saxon.
But there are 4 or 5 more directions. Question is, can US engage all or most of them at once.
Even rocket launching sites on land would be not as bad: a rocket launched from land can be intercepted not far from the launching site.
The scary thing was NATO occupation of Crimea and uncontrolled military ships traffic in Black Sea because of that: a rocket launched from a ship has a chance to succeed.
So seriously speaking, when Odessa will fall, this direction of attack on Russia can be abandoned all together. Either fall of Odessa, or Turkey becoming outwardly anti-Ango-Saxon.
But there are 4 or 5 more directions. Question is, can US engage all or most of them at once.
Except what if Ukraine bought energy from the European-United States global power grid instead of importing gas/oil from Russia? That's cripple the Russian economy even more.
America has plenty of cruise missiles and plenty of ships in the black sea. Russia is very lucky to have unlawfully seized the Sea of Azov.
America has complete and utter sea and air superiority from a military perspective. There is no nation in this world that can stand against the mighty naval and air capacities of the United States.
The largest air fleet in the world is the United States air force.
Want to take a guess at the second largest air fleet? Well, it's actually the United State's navy. Rofl. Our sea fairing military branch could single-handily claim air superiority against any single nation.
Russia lists 49th. South Korea lists 22nd.
Germany lists 5th.
S.Korea was for China's admiration, while Western Germany was for Eastern Europe and USSR.
The West took Ukraine from USSR in 1991. So where are it's riches?
I'm fairly certain if "capitalist" west took over Ukraine, the quality of life would increase dramatically for the average Ukrainian. The Iron Curtain nation states were an entire failure, just like the USSR.
I'll tell you a secret: that would be the least of Putin's concerns. A huge, rich neighbour buying natural gas and petrol at world prices, without trying to cheat every January, would be always good.Even rocket launching sites on land would be not as bad: a rocket launched from land can be intercepted not far from the launching site.
The scary thing was NATO occupation of Crimea and uncontrolled military ships traffic in Black Sea because of that: a rocket launched from a ship has a chance to succeed.
So seriously speaking, when Odessa will fall, this direction of attack on Russia can be abandoned all together. Either fall of Odessa, or Turkey becoming outwardly anti-Ango-Saxon.
But there are 4 or 5 more directions. Question is, can US engage all or most of them at once.
Putin will prevent Ukraine being turned into a "shiny example of the capitalist way of development", like West Germany and South Korea after WWII? That turning into a shop window-pane has patently failed without him, during last 4 years.
I'm just going to drop this here; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index#2018_Human_Development_Index
For some reason you think life in Russia is better than life in South Korea? You're dead wrong.
Russia lists 49th. South Korea lists 22nd.
Germany lists 5th.
I'm fairly certain if "capitalist" west took over Ukraine, the quality of life would increase dramatically for the average Ukrainian. The Iron Curtain nation states were an entire failure, just like the USSR.
Perhaps America can start training Ukrainians on how to fight well.
UK, US, Australia and Canada are doing that since 2013. It's not helping apparently.I wasn't speaking of "mercenaries" by the way, those get paid by multinationals so it's difficult to say whose losses they are.
And why do you think Russia can afford 5:1 losses in 2018-2019 Ukrainian campaign? To achieve what?
Just because you are sure that was kind of losses it had in WWII?
Does Ukraine have, umm, natural resources, or vaults full of gold, or rich debtors around the world with collateral and hostages ensuring repayment?
Or is your reasoning "Russia will invade Ukraine because:.."
Putin will avenge fall of USSR that way;
Putin will prevent Ukraine being turned into a "shiny example of the capitalist way of development", like West Germany and South Korea after WWII? That turning into a shop window-pane has patently failed without him, during last 4 years.
Quote
Huh; didn't know Ukrainians were that shitty of fighters
That's actually irrelevant. They are not "defending homeland", they are sent to kill civilians of Donbass who revolted against Poroshenko's dictatorship.And the dictator cannot admit that taxi drivers and coal miners fend off his armies counting in tens of thousands.
And cannot catch any Armed Forces from Russia, not a single one, not only him, but UN could not do that as well.
Also, a little known fact, when they were surrounded near Ilovaysk or Debaltsevo, they were given option to abandon their military vehicles, put down arms and get out alive. This was done in Syria all the time, and militants disarmed and escaped to retrain with Western instructors and get better weapons and ammunition, and assault Asad again with fresh zeal.
The Ukrainian commanders in that situation preferred to attempt to break out. So they valued vehicles more than human lives.
I hope the Russian troops get rekt by Ukraine soldiers. I'm willing to bet for each Ukrainian soldier defending their homeland, it'll take 5 Russians to kill.
Oh yeah.For every 1 Donetsk and Lugansk militant killed, it was more like 10 Ukrainian soldiers lost in 2014-2015.
By international law, a Commander in Chief that faces such heavy losses has to capitulate to prevent further loss of population.
So after having lost around 40000 Poroshenko stopped his offensives.
Let me remind you that combat-related losses of Armed Forces of Russia, excluding various "private companies" and volunteers, are exactly 0 (zero) so far in and around Ukraine. So who has most to lose?
Huh; didn't know Ukrainians were that shitty of fighters. I knew that Russian forces were really shitty compared to America after these events: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/24/world/middleeast/american-commandos-russian-mercenaries-syria.html
Perhaps America can start training Ukrainians on how to fight well.
I hope the Russian troops get rekt by Ukraine soldiers. I'm willing to bet for each Ukrainian soldier defending their homeland, it'll take 5 Russians to kill.
Oh yeah.For every 1 Donetsk and Lugansk militant killed, it was more like 10 Ukrainian soldiers lost in 2014-2015.
By international law, a Commander in Chief that faces such heavy losses has to capitulate to prevent further loss of population.
So after having lost around 40000 Poroshenko stopped his offensives.
Let me remind you that combat-related losses of Armed Forces of Russia, excluding various "private companies" and volunteers, are exactly 0 (zero) so far in and around Ukraine. So who has most to lose?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/12/03/ukraine-sends-troops-russian-border-amid-fears-invasion/
Defending their lands... let's see the Russian shills attack this action.
Defending their lands... let's see the Russian shills attack this action.
The war has been going on for 4 years, if someone does not know.
I hope the Russian troops get rekt by Ukraine soldiers. I'm willing to bet for each Ukrainian soldier defending their homeland, it'll take 5 Russians to kill.
Then again, looking at the KDR of American Commandos last time Russia attacked with their weak mercenaries, they got absolutely destroyed.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/24/world/middleeast/american-commandos-russian-mercenaries-syria.html
===
https://thehill.com/policy/international/419061-russia-trump-canceled-putin-meeting-over-domestic-political-situation
Ahahaha! Putin agrees with my theory. Shit.
Then again, looking at the KDR of American Commandos last time Russia attacked with their weak mercenaries, they got absolutely destroyed.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/24/world/middleeast/american-commandos-russian-mercenaries-syria.html
===
https://thehill.com/policy/international/419061-russia-trump-canceled-putin-meeting-over-domestic-political-situation
Ahahaha! Putin agrees with my theory. Shit.
The United Nations was formed to solve problems like this without relying on war, but they're failing in the same way the League of Nations failed post WW1.
I thought the United Nations was formed to invade countries to force the removal of elected governments, and to promote the sale of US armaments.
I could not agree more.
https://www.concordmonitor.com/Ukraine-urges-NATO-to-deploy-ships-in-dispute-with-Russia-21861660
Will NATO actually act? Probably not, but hopefully.
Ukraine should invite in a ship parade in the Sea of Azov and grant permission to blow the fuck out of anything that stands in the way from doing the parade.
Will NATO actually act? Probably not, but hopefully.
Ukraine should invite in a ship parade in the Sea of Azov and grant permission to blow the fuck out of anything that stands in the way from doing the parade.
Well, that escalated quickly. Didn't expect this tbh
Code:
The President pinned the cancellation on Russia's refusal to release Ukrainian Navy ships and sailors seized during a maritime confrontation between the two countries on Sunday.
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/29/politics/donald-trump-cancel-vladimir-putin-meeting/index.htmlYou beat me to it. To be honest; I don't think that's the true reason why Trump cancelled the meeting; just a reasonable excuse.
I bet by February, Trump will be unable to leave the country due to the on-going investigations.
For me it looks like the real reason for canceling the meeting, but this is not Trump’s decision sure thing but his administration’s. There must have been more than "I don't like this situation" tweet.
But still ridiculous.
>>just a reasonable excuse.
Trump's reasonable excuse for Putin is the cancellation of two other meetings with Erdogan and someone else. He really doesn't wanna hurt his buddy.
Well, that escalated quickly. Didn't expect this tbh
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/29/politics/donald-trump-cancel-vladimir-putin-meeting/index.html
Code:
The President pinned the cancellation on Russia's refusal to release Ukrainian Navy ships and sailors seized during a maritime confrontation between the two countries on Sunday.
You beat me to it. To be honest; I don't think that's the true reason why Trump cancelled the meeting; just a reasonable excuse.
I bet by February, Trump will be unable to leave the country due to the on-going investigations.
Well, that escalated quickly. Didn't expect this tbh
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/29/politics/donald-trump-cancel-vladimir-putin-meeting/index.html
Code:
The President pinned the cancellation on Russia's refusal to release Ukrainian Navy ships and sailors seized during a maritime confrontation between the two countries on Sunday.
Quote
The Ukrainian intelligence agency says a Russian fighter jet and a helicopter fired rockets Sunday at three Ukrainian ships before they were captured near Russia-occupied Crimea.
Russian border guard ships rammed into and fired on the Ukrainian vessels Sunday as they were trying to make their way via the Kerch Strait to the Sea of Azov. Russia insisted that the vessels were violating its border while Ukraine says it was following international maritime rules and that the ships were well in the international waters.
SBU deputy chief Oleh Frolov told reporters Thursday that a Russian Su-30 fighter jet and a Ka-52 attack helicopter fired four rockets on the ships. He says “it’s a miracle the Ukrainian seamen have survived.”
The use of the Russian fighter jet and the helicopter was not previously reported.
Russian border guard ships rammed into and fired on the Ukrainian vessels Sunday as they were trying to make their way via the Kerch Strait to the Sea of Azov. Russia insisted that the vessels were violating its border while Ukraine says it was following international maritime rules and that the ships were well in the international waters.
SBU deputy chief Oleh Frolov told reporters Thursday that a Russian Su-30 fighter jet and a Ka-52 attack helicopter fired four rockets on the ships. He says “it’s a miracle the Ukrainian seamen have survived.”
The use of the Russian fighter jet and the helicopter was not previously reported.
Russians using airforce to engage. Did not know!
There are several (tens of) javelins arrived in exchange for non-investigation Manafort case but that's all, nothing else to expect for.
That's crazy. Maybe if Russia doesn't invade before January, the house democrats will be able to negotiate more weaponry for investigation into the Manafort case.
Quote
Ukraine’s president says the government will impose unspecified restrictions on Russian citizens in response to the seizure of three Ukrainian vessels and their crews.
President Petro Poroshenko said that the one-month period of martial law introduced this week in Ukraine wouldn’t restrict travel, cash withdrawals or currency purchases by Ukrainians but Russians will face some constraints.
The Ukrainian leader tweeted Thursday that “there will be restrictions regarding Russian citizens, which I believe are quite justified.” He did not elaborate.
Ukrainian authorities have already denied entry to an increased number of Russians following the weekend incident.
President Petro Poroshenko said that the one-month period of martial law introduced this week in Ukraine wouldn’t restrict travel, cash withdrawals or currency purchases by Ukrainians but Russians will face some constraints.
The Ukrainian leader tweeted Thursday that “there will be restrictions regarding Russian citizens, which I believe are quite justified.” He did not elaborate.
Ukrainian authorities have already denied entry to an increased number of Russians following the weekend incident.
At least Ukraine's people aren't being targeted by her own government.
His rating fell anyway. Already, on the 1st day of Martial Law.
On the bright side; at least Russia hasn't invaded entirely yet.
Protecting national interests > presidential ratings.
The UK still has an active military? Rofl, that's pretty surprising.
Nah, I was thinking Germany, France, and Poland.
Yall think the UK really would make that much of a difference in a EU vs Russia conventional war?
Germany and France rejected idea to introduce new sanctions. And expressed concern about the Martial Law.
So it starts looking that Poroshenko either followed someone's bad advice, or engaged his military in his own stupid
poorly calculated initiative with this maritime provocation.
His rating fell anyway. Already, on the 1st day of Martial Law.
It can be EU or UK which broke away from EU due to Putin's trickery.
You will say they scared the shit out of him, after they broke away because of him.
All your reasoning is self-contradictory as it stems from MSM with their endless cognitive dissonances.
You will find the explanation, even if the reverse happens: Ukraine occupies Krasnodar and Sochi.
I am sure you will explain it away.
You will say they scared the shit out of him, after they broke away because of him.
All your reasoning is self-contradictory as it stems from MSM with their endless cognitive dissonances.
You will find the explanation, even if the reverse happens: Ukraine occupies Krasnodar and Sochi.
I am sure you will explain it away.
The UK still has an active military? Rofl, that's pretty surprising.
Nah, I was thinking Germany, France, and Poland.
Yall think the UK really would make that much of a difference in a EU vs Russia conventional war?
If that will not happen at all (not even attempt will be made) you will say that Ukrainian army plus NATO scared the shit out of Putin.
Ukraine isn't part of NATO. Even if it were, the largest member of NATO has a Russia-agent as a leader; so doubt defenses would be allowed from NATO.
Nah, this is more a European Union issue rather than a NATO issue.
You will say they scared the shit out of him, after they broke away because of him.
All your reasoning is self-contradictory as it stems from MSM with their endless cognitive dissonances.
You will find the explanation, even if the reverse happens: Ukraine occupies Krasnodar and Sochi.
I am sure you will explain it away.
If that will not happen at all (not even attempt will be made) you will say that Ukrainian army plus NATO scared the shit out of Putin.
Ukraine isn't part of NATO. Even if it were, the largest member of NATO has a Russia-agent as a leader; so doubt defenses would be allowed from NATO.
Nah, this is more a European Union issue rather than a NATO issue.
I'm assuming they're going to be pushed back to their river.
If that will not happen at all (not even attempt will be made) you will say that Ukrainian army plus NATO scared the shit out of Putin.
So you win this debate, whatever comes next.
Care to produce the military plans leaked from Moscow?
Come on let's be realistic. Simply by comparing the military power we can guess the approximate outcome.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_level_of_military_equipmentI'm assuming Ukraine needs a fuckton of anti-tank mines laid across their border. Perhaps a few SAM missiles.
There's defensive tactics that can be useful too; guerrilla warfare.
Russia can absolutely steamroll Ukraine with a full fledged assault to be honest, but it can still be a bloody fight. Hopefully, if Ukraine resists, the rest of Europe will consider pitching in on their defense efforts.
I'm assuming they're going to be pushed back to their river.
I mean, you supporting your nation's invasion of another nation's sovereignty is pretty bad. If America were to invade Mexico or Canada, I'd be protesting against my own government.
Overall, it sounds like you're another brainwashed citizen without the ability to look beyond state ran media.
First off, I am not a whacko.
But similar to a whacko, I do understand my nation's interests.
Do you have a problem with this?
We drove out Trotsky with his world revolution in 1937 and murdered him a bit later.
We are not internationalist commies anymore.
So we give some shit about such things as national interests.
But similar to a whacko, I do understand my nation's interests.
Do you have a problem with this?
We drove out Trotsky with his world revolution in 1937 and murdered him a bit later.
We are not internationalist commies anymore.
So we give some shit about such things as national interests.
I mean, you supporting your nation's invasion of another nation's sovereignty is pretty bad. If America were to invade Mexico or Canada, I'd be protesting against my own government.
Overall, it sounds like you're another brainwashed citizen without the ability to look beyond state ran media.
Wait, are you admitting Russia is lying? Omg! A break through!
I mean, you know in your heart your nation is lying directly to your face. I'm amazed that Russia is defending their actions when the rest of the world is condemning them.
But similar to a whacko, I do understand my nation's interests.
Do you have a problem with this?
We drove out Trotsky with his world revolution in 1937 and murdered him a bit later.
We are not internationalist commies anymore.
So we give some shit about such things as national interests.
As for the cartoon, I get it you are running out of words.
This is typical of this forum lefties. Your cartoon got it factually wrong: Putin began eating away from the South, not from Belarus/Poland borders as displayed on it.
Condemning. Copy-pasted from what Dept of State demanded to condemn. National interests is again the key word. European countries are not sovereign. They do whatever US tell them to do, with rare exceptions like Nordstream 2 which cause much outrage.
A very hungry Putin:
Turkey is actually insane; they have a dictatorship, so I ignore their state media.
Which means, let me translate from the liberalese: in 1924 Turkey had the balls to kick British out;they gained their country, not some piecework cut arbitrarily like Iraq/Transjordan.
In 2018 they prevented a coup. Their President stands for their national interests, unlike Poroshenko.
This is obvious to anyone who's not a leftie. Well, maybe some right-wing whackos can protest this, but
deep down in their hearts they would know they are lying, as they understand their own national interests as well
so can relate to Erdogan.
Wait, are you admitting Russia is lying? Omg! A break through!
I mean, you know in your heart your nation is lying directly to your face. I'm amazed that Russia is defending their actions when the rest of the world is condemning them.
Turkey is actually insane; they have a dictatorship, so I ignore their state media.
Which means, let me translate from the liberalese: in 1924 Turkey had the balls to kick British out;they gained their country, not some piecework cut arbitrarily like Iraq/Transjordan.
In 2018 they prevented a coup. Their President stands for their national interests, unlike Poroshenko.
This is obvious to anyone who's not a leftie. Well, maybe some right-wing whackos can protest this, but
deep down in their hearts they would know they are lying, as they understand their own national interests as well
so can relate to Erdogan.
So, all western nations are insane? Ukraine is insane
Bulgaria now regrets that it will be buying gas from Turkey, while it could directly and could also earn by transit.
Ukrainian junta and 2%-4% population that supports them is.
Quote
the martial law will not create any problems for the political democratic processes in Ukraine.
Dude, are you f*cking laughing in our faces? Martial law does not impede democracy? Gimme a break.
Uhhh, Germany condemned the actions of Russia globally. They're "western". You're the one that called all western media "insane".
Turkey is actually insane; they have a dictatorship, so I ignore their state media.
So, all western nations are insane? Ukraine is insane
Bulgaria now regrets that it will be buying gas from Turkey, while it could directly and could also earn by transit.
Ukrainian junta and 2%-4% population that supports them is.
Quote
the martial law will not create any problems for the political democratic processes in Ukraine.
Dude, are you f*cking laughing in our faces? Martial law does not impede democracy? Gimme a break.
No sane country in the world believes in it, which you can see from the recent international economical and political activity around Russia.
So, all western nations are insane? Ukraine is insane, and the only "sane" nation is Russia -- seems about right. Rofl.
Quote
"He underlined that the introduction of martial law will not hinder the working of the democratic institutions of Ukraine, and will not create any problems for the upcoming presidential election," Stoltenberg said. "For NATO allies, this is of course important, that the president so clearly says that the martial law will not create any problems for the political democratic processes in Ukraine."
https://www.npr.org/2018/11/27/671084271/ukraine-parliament-approves-martial-law-after-naval-skirmish-with-russia
Nah, it's fake news from the Kremlin that's wrong my friendly Ruskie comrade.
Military is on high alert; citizens are on alert. When Russia invades the homeland, they'll be ready.
From what I've read in the media, even the oppositional party supports the martial law declaration.
Do you understand that 80% of population speaks Russian, or a very close dialect, and perceives junta
as occupants? That they still culturally belong to Soviet culture, raped and distorted and prohibited by junta?
Obviously, Martial Law will help against those dissenters who already capture power plants, which fail to start
the heating season.
Martial Law also reduces prices of all assets, making them really easy to buy up.
As for opposition, did you see the actual debates in Parliament? It was a clear revolt against President,
which ended with some protracted negotiations and he finally didn't get what he wanted.
So called Russian threat exists only in official Ukrainian and Western propaganda.
No sane country in the world believes in it, which you can see from the recent international economical and political activity around Russia.
Uhh, pretty sure that's fake news right there. They've implemented martial law, but only along the Russian border and the election dates have not moved.
Why the Martial Law if everything stays the same?Why not Martial Law in 2014? Or at the height of hostilities?
Uhhh; because Ukraine has intelligence that Russia is gathering military forces on their borders. Pretty much the invasion of Crimea was unexpected and rapid; now the Ukraine military is prepared and wants its citizens to be prepared.
Military is on high alert; citizens are on alert. When Russia invades the homeland, they'll be ready.
From what I've read in the media, even the oppositional party supports the martial law declaration.
I thought the United Nations was formed to invade countries to force the removal of elected governments, and to promote the sale of US armaments.
Most accurate statements of the United Nations I ever read.
Can you add the IMF in please?
Uhh, pretty sure that's fake news right there. They've implemented martial law, but only along the Russian border and the election dates have not moved.
Why the Martial Law if everything stays the same?Why not Martial Law in 2014? Or at the height of hostilities?
What are you on about?
Agreement between the Russian Federation and the Ukraine on cooperation in the use of the sea of Azov and the strait of Kerch.
I am on about Martial Law for 30 days in regions bordering the contested regions.Agreement between the Russian Federation and the Ukraine on cooperation in the use of the sea of Azov and the strait of Kerch.
Effective since 10am today. Limiting human rights. Postponing the presidential and parliamentary elections.
That was the reason to perform this provocation.
Uhh, pretty sure that's fake news right there. They've implemented martial law, but only along the Russian border and the election dates have not moved.
Just more Russian FUD from the Kremlin. Of course you'd know that if you read my links.
What are you on about?
Agreement between the Russian Federation and the Ukraine on cooperation in the use of the sea of Azov and the strait of Kerch.
I am on about Martial Law for 30 days in regions bordering the contested regions.Agreement between the Russian Federation and the Ukraine on cooperation in the use of the sea of Azov and the strait of Kerch.
Effective since 10am today. Limiting human rights. Postponing the presidential and parliamentary elections.
That was the reason to perform this provocation.
There were treaties in place that allowed the boats to be there (bilateral agreements).
You lie. Pre-2014 territorial waters were violated. Which can be demonstrated from satellites.(Also all Boeing stuff can be).
Also, there were multiple threats, from US as well, to blow up Kerch Bridge.
Moreso, Ukrainian junta claims to be at war with Russia.
Are you out of your mind to claim that a warring country should be admitted into territorial waters
because of some "treaties" it has long since denounced?
It is officially junta at half of Ukrainian territory (excluding Crimea) from this day. It's an official dictatorship,
voted in by Rada (parliament).
What are you on about?
Agreement between the Russian Federation and the Ukraine on cooperation in the use of the sea of Azov and the strait of Kerch.
Quote
The Parties, proceeding from the necessity of conservation of the Azov-Kerch defined area of water as integral economic and natural complex, to be used in the interests of the Russian Federation and the Ukraine, have agreed as follows: 1) The sea of Azov and the strait of Kerch are historically internal waters of the Russian Federation and the Ukraine. 2) The sea of Azov must be delimited by the state border in accordance with the Agreement signed by the Parties. 3) Dispute settlement regarding the issues pertaining to the defined area of water of Kerch must be regulated by agreement between the Parties. 4) Mercantile vessels and other state non-commercial vessels flying the flags of the Russian Federation and the Ukraine have free navigation in the sea of Azov and the strait of Kerch. 5) Russian-Ukrainian cooperation in the spheres of navigation, fisheries, protection of marine environment, ecological safety and life-saving in the sea of Azov and the strait of Kerch must be implemented on the basis of existing international agreements and by conclusion, in respective cases, of the new ones.
The fact that Russia broke this treaty and is feeding you false information regarding the situation highlights the propaganda coming from the Kremlin. Perhaps you should switch your news source from state media to something more independent?
There were treaties in place that allowed the boats to be there (bilateral agreements).
You lie. Pre-2014 territorial waters were violated. Which can be demonstrated from satellites.(Also all Boeing stuff can be).
Also, there were multiple threats, from US as well, to blow up Kerch Bridge.
Moreso, Ukrainian junta claims to be at war with Russia.
Are you out of your mind to claim that a warring country should be admitted into territorial waters
because of some "treaties" it has long since denounced?
It is officially junta at half of Ukrainian territory (excluding Crimea) from this day. It's an official dictatorship,
voted in by Rada (parliament).
bluefirecorp_, you would have much more luck finding like-minded persons in the so-called Russian section
of this forum, controlled by Ukrainians. But (oh the irony!) you need to know Russian to participate in Ukrainian-held section.
Because all Ukrainian politicians, including President, speak Russian when off-duty.
Boats violated pre-2014 territorial waters of Russia.
They were warned several dozen times. This can be proven by footage from satellites, and from recordings of the talks.
Sailors surrendered and testified against the Ukrainian organisers of this provocation.
Are you implying that all countries should stop defending their borders?
Well, regarding the situation on border with Mexico, you probably are.
They were warned several dozen times. This can be proven by footage from satellites, and from recordings of the talks.
Sailors surrendered and testified against the Ukrainian organisers of this provocation.
Are you implying that all countries should stop defending their borders?
Well, regarding the situation on border with Mexico, you probably are.
Uhhh; no. There were treaties in place that allowed the boats to be there (bilateral agreements). Ukraine has every right to be in that water. The fact that Russia fired upon MILITARY vessels is an ACT OF WAR.
Just because the Kremlin is feeding you fake news doesn't mean the rest of the world consumes it, silly Russian pawn.
Military boats violated pre-2014 territorial waters of Russia.
They were warned several dozen times. This can be proven by footage from satellites, and from recordings of the talks.
Sailors surrendered and testified against the Ukrainian organisers of this provocation.
Are you implying that all countries should stop defending their borders?
Well, regarding the situation on border with Mexico, you probably are.
They were warned several dozen times. This can be proven by footage from satellites, and from recordings of the talks.
Sailors surrendered and testified against the Ukrainian organisers of this provocation.
Are you implying that all countries should stop defending their borders?
Well, regarding the situation on border with Mexico, you probably are.
The United States is really the number one in the world. They can let Russia fall. If Russia is not Putin, it may have split. Now the Russian economy is terrible. The move by Ukraine is undoubtedly self-defeating. If the war begins, the Ukrainian people will instantly become dead bodies. Such a government should not ignore the people’s lives. Don't underestimate Russia, they have already had enough.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/president-of-ukraine-claims-large-scale-russian-invasion-of-country-being-planned/
Holy shit. WW3 coming soon.
Holy shit. WW3 coming soon.
If something like this happen it would be an economic suicide for Russia, plus they will be cut loose from all the international summit and global political decisions.
I see they have a lot to lose from a move like that. Without even considering the fact NATO will probably step up his presence on border countries. Is it really worth?
These statements aren't worth anything unless you're willing to back them up with war. Europe, in a way, is speaking on behalf of the US military. As an American, I'm not willing to go to war over this. Its none of my concern. We have our own crumbling nation to deal with. I may not like Trump but I never thought we should be the police of the world anyway. No. More. Wars.
The United Nations was formed to solve problems like this without relying on war, but they're failing in the same way the League of Nations failed post WW1.
If you look at Germany pre-WW2, you can see similar geopolitical land grabs that feel eerily similar to Russian's land grabs today. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Events_preceding_World_War_II_in_Europe#German_expansionism
The issue is being proactive rather than reactive; we KNEW this was coming: https://www.stripes.com/news/us/russia-warns-sea-of-azov-off-limits-to-us-nato-ship-drills-1.552511
If we had placed some of our larger destroyers in that sea (assuming they'd even fit through the multiple canals); they'd have issues seizing a US ship.
Yes this is a lot like Sudetenland to Germany but in both cases, they will only take what they know they can take, what the world powers will allow them to take without stepping in. They also will only take places where people will receive their occupation well. Taking Eastern Ukraine is not going to give Russia confidence that they can overrun NATO or make Polish people want to live under Russian rule. Putin understands that there will be overwhelming resistance the moment they cross into NATO territory. Empty threats would blur that red line and potentially lead to a miscalculation on one side. You have to calculate the cost here. Is Ukraine's sovereignty worth nuclear war?
https://www.forexlive.com/news/!/ukraine-defence-sec-says-russias-moves-act-of-war-20181125
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-46338671
After capturing 3x Ukraine military vessels.
Russian geopolitical expansion must be stopped; they shouldn't be able to seize the Sea of Azov.
Ahaha; even Reuters are reporting on the issue:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-russia-germany/germany-russian-blockade-of-sea-of-azov-is-unacceptable-idUSKCN1NV11V?utm_source=reddit.com
Quote
"We heard reports on incident and have concluded that it was an act of war by Russian Federation against Ukraine"
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-46338671
After capturing 3x Ukraine military vessels.
Russian geopolitical expansion must be stopped; they shouldn't be able to seize the Sea of Azov.
Ahaha; even Reuters are reporting on the issue:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-russia-germany/germany-russian-blockade-of-sea-of-azov-is-unacceptable-idUSKCN1NV11V?utm_source=reddit.com
Start arming the Ukrainians, I say!
I`d be cautious with making conclusions nowadays. With the amount of fake news and provocations, I wouldn`t be surprised if it was Ukraine`s masterplan.
After all, it looks too suspicious: there is president elections in Ukraine soon, and it`s not allowed to elect the new president during state of defense situation. It could as well be a political move and very skillful usage of the current political situation by Ukraine`s government
After all, it looks too suspicious: there is president elections in Ukraine soon, and it`s not allowed to elect the new president during state of defense situation. It could as well be a political move and very skillful usage of the current political situation by Ukraine`s government
Uhhh.... how would that remotely be true? It's be collaborated by several different nations. There's actual pictures from the BBC that shows that the boat blockaded actually exists.
In reality, this is Russia trying to spread misinformation regarding the situation by saying "UKRAINE IS AT FAULT FOR OUR ACTS OF AGGRESSION"
The United Nations was formed to solve problems like this without relying on war, but they're failing in the same way the League of Nations failed post WW1.
I thought the United Nations was formed to invade countries to force the removal of elected governments, and to promote the sale of US armaments.
I`d be cautious with making conclusions nowadays. With the amount of fake news and provocations, I wouldn`t be surprised if it was Ukraine`s masterplan.
After all, it looks too suspicious: there is president elections in Ukraine soon, and it`s not allowed to elect the new president during state of defense situation. It could as well be a political move and very skillful usage of the current political situation by Ukraine`s government
After all, it looks too suspicious: there is president elections in Ukraine soon, and it`s not allowed to elect the new president during state of defense situation. It could as well be a political move and very skillful usage of the current political situation by Ukraine`s government
These statements aren't worth anything unless you're willing to back them up with war. Europe, in a way, is speaking on behalf of the US military. As an American, I'm not willing to go to war over this. Its none of my concern. We have our own crumbling nation to deal with. I may not like Trump but I never thought we should be the police of the world anyway. No. More. Wars.
The United Nations was formed to solve problems like this without relying on war, but they're failing in the same way the League of Nations failed post WW1.
If you look at Germany pre-WW2, you can see similar geopolitical land grabs that feel eerily similar to Russian's land grabs today. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Events_preceding_World_War_II_in_Europe#German_expansionism
The issue is being proactive rather than reactive; we KNEW this was coming: https://www.stripes.com/news/us/russia-warns-sea-of-azov-off-limits-to-us-nato-ship-drills-1.552511
If we had placed some of our larger destroyers in that sea (assuming they'd even fit through the multiple canals); they'd have issues seizing a US ship.
These statements aren't worth anything unless you're willing to back them up with war. Europe, in a way, is speaking on behalf of the US military. As an American, I'm not willing to go to war over this. Its none of my concern. We have our own crumbling nation to deal with. I may not like Trump but I never thought we should be the police of the world anyway. No. More. Wars.
https://www.forexlive.com/news/!/ukraine-defence-sec-says-russias-moves-act-of-war-20181125
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-46338671
After capturing 3x Ukraine military vessels.
Russian geopolitical expansion must be stopped; they shouldn't be able to seize the Sea of Azov.
Ahaha; even Reuters are reporting on the issue:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-russia-germany/germany-russian-blockade-of-sea-of-azov-is-unacceptable-idUSKCN1NV11V?utm_source=reddit.com
Quote
"We heard reports on incident and have concluded that it was an act of war by Russian Federation against Ukraine"
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-46338671
After capturing 3x Ukraine military vessels.
Russian geopolitical expansion must be stopped; they shouldn't be able to seize the Sea of Azov.
Ahaha; even Reuters are reporting on the issue:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-russia-germany/germany-russian-blockade-of-sea-of-azov-is-unacceptable-idUSKCN1NV11V?utm_source=reddit.com
Jump to: