The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Solidarity with Ukraine

Status
Not open for further replies.

Shashin

Well-known member
I am not sure we have any Ukrainian members, but our thoughts are with you and your families. We obviously have little in the way of political power, but I for one support the freedom for your nation and grieve for your losses. This is not the first time a country has faced Russian aggression and history has shown that their imperialist ambitions have not lasted.
 

Thorkil

Well-known member
Hi Will

The situation is more complex that it seems to be.

During World War 2, 10 mio. of Russian soldiers died, 17 mio. civilian Russian died, either by being killed by the German Nazi army or in their established starvation camps, or by hunger while Hitler occupied Ukraine which was the “food chamber” for Russia. Plus 5 mio. jews also got killed by the Nazi’s in both Russia and Ukraine. All together about 32 mio. people got killed in Russia and Ukraine.

This unbelievable amount of death people in Russia, became naturally a huge trauma in Russia together with the behavior and killings of different thinking people by Lenin and Stalin.

But havn’t the Russian people made such a terrible and horrible offer during WW 2, then whole Europe might have been speaking German now.

And this offer made the Russian people and leaders think: Never again. Therefore they wouldn’t give up the occupation of Eastern Europe, while they would have this area as a security buffer towards other Hitler-lunatics in the future.

After the break down of the Sovjet union, 14 East European countries have become members of Nato.

By this fact it has destabilized the power balance East-West.

Russia fears another threat towards them. They legitimately need security. Just as we all do.

Ukraine is a country at the size of France, with a huge agricultural production due to the good soil.

Their border towards Russia is 1.000 miles long.

European leaders have said that Nato would be open for any country. And Ukraine would like to be member.

If Ukraine became Nato member, their neighbor Bellarus would be the next step. Their border towards Russia is 815 miles long.

In total would the potentially new Nato boarder, from Ukraine and Bellarus towards Russia, be 1.800 miles long. That is a distance a bit longer than from Copenhagen to Sicily in south Italy.

Imagine how many missiles there could be placed at that boarder pointing towards the big Russian cities.

The distance from the boarders of Ukraine and Bellarus towards Russia – and to Moscow are just 270 miless.

That is about the same distance between Havana and Washington DC.

Kennedy threatened Russia with a World War 3 if the missiles in the 60’s from Russia shipped to Cuba wasn’t returned.

So USA didn’t want to have missiles from East in their front garden.

So Russia neither want to have West-missiles in their front garden

Putin and Lavrov begged the European leaders to insure that Ukraine would stay neutral, and to insure that they didn’t became a Nato member.

The West didn’t wanted to give this guaranty.

So the West did provoke Russia to defend and ensure their boarder. Wouldn’t USA have done the same? They did.

Russia do have reason the misbelieve USA and Europe by historic reason. F.ex. CIA killed a democratic elected president Allende in Chile and put in a dictator Pinochet who killed and tortued a lot of civilians in Chile.

USA in coalition with f.ex. Great Britain and Denmark, made a false claim that there were mass-destruction-weapons in Iraq. There wasn’t. But USA bombed Iraq back to stone-age. Around 500-700.000 Iraqis were killed. One of the largest war-crimes in modern history. No one were persecuted for this crime. It was so to speak a free “killing-playgame” for the coalition. The result was civil war in Iraq and further increased terrorism, and a immense amount of killings.

There are a lot of examples of bad behavior from western countries. We support f.ex. Saudi Arabia (who kill critical jounalist) - and Israel and their Apartheid system towards the occupied Palestinian areas.

So Russia have no reason to rely on the good and peaceful intension from the West.

If only we, the West, had ensured that Ukraine (and their neighbor Belarus, if it later would come to that) would stay neutral, and not become a Nato member, we could all have avoided this war. It was a piece of cake for us. But we didn't want just to give a tiny little-finger. Our super-liberalism are more importent for us.
We have put down the seed in the soil for this war, by our usual disrespect.

KR Thorkil
 
Last edited:

buildbot

Active member
An idiotic take. Innocent's are dying due to one mans power mad dreams.

Russia has insured all remaining countries around it join NATO as quickly as they can. P
Hi Will

The situation is more complex that it seems to be.

During World War 2, 10 mio. of Russian soldiers died, 17 mio. civilian Russian died, either by being killed by the German Nazi army or in their established starvation camps, or by hunger while Hitler occupied Ukraine which was the “food chamber” for Russia. Plus 5 mio. jews also got killed by the Nazi’s in both Russia and Ukraine. All together about 32 mio. people got killed in Russia and Ukraine.

This unbelievable amount of death people in Russia, became naturally a huge trauma in Russia together with the behavior and killings of different thinking people by Lenin and Stalin.

But havn’t the Russian people made such a terrible and horrible offer during WW 2, then whole Europe might have been speaking German now.

And this offer made the Russian people and leaders think: Never again. Therefore they wouldn’t give up the occupation of Eastern Europe, while they would have this area as a security buffer towards other Hitler-lunatics in the future.

After the break down of the Sovjet union, 14 East European countries have become members of Nato.

By this fact it has destabilized the power balance East-West.

Russia fears another threat towards them. They legitimately need security. Just as we all do.

Ukraine is a country at the size of France, with a huge agricultural production due to the good soil.

Their border towards Russia is 1.000 miles long.

European leaders have said that Nato would be open for any country. And Ukraine would like to be member.

If Ukraine became Nato member, their neighbor Bellarus would be the next step. Their border towards Russia is 815 miles long.

In total would the potentially new Nato boarder, from Ukraine and Bellarus towards Russia, be 1.800 miles long. That is a distance a bit longer than from Copenhagen to Sicily in south Italy.

Imagine how many missiles there could be placed at that boarder pointing towards the big Russian city.

The distance from the boarders of Ukraine and Bellarus towards Russia – and to Moscow are just 270 miless.

That is about the same distance between Havana and Washington DC.

Kennedy threatened Russia with a World War 3 if the missiles in the 60’s from Russia shipped to Cuba wasn’t returned.

So USA didn’t want to have missiles from East in their front garden.

So Russia neither want to have West-missiles in their front garden

Putin and Lavrov begged the European leaders to insure that Ukraine would stay neutral, and to insure that they didn’t became a Nato member.

The West didn’t wanted to give this guaranty.

So the West did provoke Russia to defend and ensure their boarder. Wouldn’t USA have done the same? They did.

Russia do have reason the misbelieve USA and Europe by historic reason. F.ex. CIA killed a democratic elected president Allende in Chile and put in a dictator Pinochet who killed and tortued a lot of civilians in Chile.

USA in coalition with f.ex. Great Britain and Denmark, made a false claim that there were mass-destruction-weapons in Iraq. There wasn’t. But USA bombed Iraq back to stone-age. Around 500-700.000 Iraqis were killed. One of the largest war-crimes in modern history. No one were persecuted for this crime. It was so to speak a free “killing-playgame” for the coalition. The result was civil war in Iraq and further increased terrorism, and a immense amount of killings.

There are a lot of examples of bad behavior from western countries. We support f.ex. Saudi Arabia (who kill critical jounalist) - and Israel and their Apartheid system towards the occupoied Palestinian areas.

So Russia have no reason to rely on the good and peaceful intension from the West.

If only we, the West, had ensured that Ukraine (and their neighbor Belarus, if it later would come to that) would stay neutral, and not become a Nato member, we could all have avoided this war. It was a pieca of cake for us. But we didn't to give a tiny little-finger. Our super-liberalism are more importent for us.
We have put down the seed in the soil for this war, by our usual disrespect.

KR Thorkil
 

f8orbust

Active member
Putin's actions are indefensible. Just like his murder of political opponents in the UK with Polonium and Novichok is indefensible. Just like the murder or repression of any dissenting voices within Russia is indefensible. He has a completely twisted world view, and a complete lack of any understanding of Ukrainian history (e.g. millions of Ukrainians were starved to death in the 1930s as a result of Stalin's actions, but Putin appears to have forgotten all about that). After becoming (unofficially) the world's richest man, he's now entering the 'empire building' phase of his life and a modern, democratic country has been invaded by a brutal, repressive, totalitarian regime led by a complete and utter megalomaniac (clear echoes of 1939 then). There is no defence for his unilateral actions, undertaken solely for his own personal glorification. What's particularly worrying is that he last few speeches have been the utterly insane ramblings of a deranged mind (e.g. the implied threat of nuking anyone that intervenes), so where this is headed is anyone's guess.
 
Last edited:

Thorkil

Well-known member
From New York Times 21. Feb. 2022 – part of an article by Thomas L. Friedman:

Quote:

The mystery was why the U.S. — which throughout the Cold War dreamed that Russia might one day have a democratic revolution and a leader who, however haltingly, would try to make Russia into a democracy and join the West — would choose to quickly push NATO into Russia’s face when it was weak.

A very small group of officials and policy wonks at that time, myself included, asked that same question, but we were drowned out.

The most important, and sole, voice at the top of the Clinton administration asking that question was none other than the defense secretary, Bill Perry. Recalling that moment years later, Perry in 2016 told a conference of The Guardian newspaper:

“In the last few years, most of the blame can be pointed at the actions that Putin has taken. But in the early years I have to say that the United States deserves much of the blame. Our first action that really set us off in a bad direction was when NATO started to expand, bringing in Eastern European nations, some of them bordering Russia.

“At that time, we were working closely with Russia and they were beginning to get used to the idea that NATO could be a friend rather than an enemy … but they were very uncomfortable about having NATO right up on their border and they made a strong appeal for us not to go ahead with that.”

On May 2, 1998, immediately after the Senate ratified NATO expansion, I called George Kennan, the architect of America’s successful containment of the Soviet Union. Having joined the State Department in 1926 and served as U.S. ambassador to Moscow in 1952, Kennan was arguably America’s greatest expert on Russia. Though 94 at the time and frail of voice, he was sharp of mind when I asked for his opinion of NATO expansion.

I am going to share Kennan’s whole answer:

“I think it is the beginning of a new cold war. I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely and it will affect their policies. I think it is a tragic mistake. There was no reason for this whatsoever. No one was threatening anybody else. This expansion would make the founding fathers of this country turn over in their graves.

“We have signed up to protect a whole series of countries, even though we have neither the resources nor the intention to do so in any serious way. [NATO expansion] was simply a lighthearted action by a Senate that has no real interest in foreign affairs. What bothers me is how superficial and ill informed the whole Senate debate was. I was particularly bothered by the references to Russia as a country dying to attack Western Europe.

“Don’t people understand? Our differences in the Cold War were with the Soviet Communist regime. And now we are turning our backs on the very people who mounted the greatest bloodless revolution in history to remove that Soviet regime. And Russia’s democracy is as far advanced, if not farther, as any of these countries we’ve just signed up to defend from Russia. Of course there is going to be a bad reaction from Russia, and then [the NATO expanders] will say that we always told you that is how the Russians are — but this is just wrong.”

It’s EXACTLY what has happened.

Quote end
 

Thorkil

Well-known member
if only people had be parellel alarmed at the time when US/Bush killed 5-700.000 innocent Iraqes.... I guess the families in Iraq would have appriciated that
 
Last edited:

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Putin's actions are indefensible. Just like his murder of political opponents in the UK with Polonium and Novichok is indefensible. Just like the murder or repression of any dissenting voices within Russia is indefensible. He has a completely twisted world view, and a complete lack of any understanding of Ukrainian history (e.g. millions of Ukrainians were starved to death in the 1930s as a result of Stalin's actions, but Putin appears to have forgotten all about that). After becoming (unofficially) the world's richest man, he's now entering the 'empire building' phase of his life and a modern, democratic country has been invaded by a brutal, repressive, totalitarian regime led by a complete and utter megalomaniac (clear echoes of 1939 then). There is no defence for his unilateral actions, undertaken solely for his own personal glorification. What's particularly worrying is that he last few speeches have been the utterly insane ramblings of a deranged mind (e.g. the implied threat of nuking anyone that intervenes), so where this is headed is anyone's guess.
While I agree that Putin's action is unacceptable and unwise, he is right when he claims that western countries can't be trusted. As Thorkil points out, western countries have killed millions of innocent people in unprovoked wars since WWII. Iraq and Libya which were undemocratic but well functioning societies were both bombed to pieces with little infrastructure left and millions of people losing everything they owned including their homes. USA is currently occupying the eastern regions of Syria, the part of the country where the Syrians mostly get their agricultural produce. The Syrians are deprived of food, medicine and fuel due to occupation and sanctions.

If we go a bit further back in history, during the Vietnam war, USA dropped around 2 million tons of bombs over Laos between 1964 and 1973. Since 1964, more than 50,000 Laotians have been killed or injured by U.S. bombs, 98 percent of them civilians. An estimated 30 percent of the bombs dropped on Laos failed to explode upon impact, and in the years since the bombing ended, 20,000 people have been killed or maimed by the estimated 80 million bombs left behind. Laos covers an area of 237,955 sq km (91,875 sq mi), around the size of Minnesota, and has a population of around 7 million people. None has been accused or convicted for these war crimes or other war crimes by USA and other western countries. Western government do go after journalists who uncover the crimes though.

This list can go on and on and on, but I'm sure you all know about these things. It's part of our "proud" western history.

Shortly after Putin came to power, in a meeting with President Clinton, Putin requested informally about Russian NATO membership. The request was promptly denied. The only conclusion Putin could draw from that was that USA doesn't want Russia as a friend. Today's crisis started in 2014, with the western supported coup against a democratically elected president in Kyiv. Even Henry Kissinger at the time warned about the consequences of a western dominated Ukraine. All warnings fell for deaf ears of course, and Russia felt compelled to annex Crimea to protect their navy base in Sevastopol, and the mostly Russian population on the peninsula.

Western countries don't hesitate going to war against poor nations weakened by lacklustre leaders and crippling western sanctions. They do however know very well that they can't start a conventional war against Russia. The losses on both sides would be beyond belief. So the Ukrainians will have to fend for themselves, and they'll most probably lose. This is what happens when you use a smaller third country to provoke a large country like Russia. You promise them gold, but when the bear has been poked long enough and wakes up, you pack your bags and go home to post a little Ukrainian flag on your Facebook profile. That's about as far as the solidarity goes.

And with all this going on, the pragmatic Chinese can pick up the pieces and increase their sphere of influence, not by invading or bombing people, but through their immense network for trade and industrial investment.

“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye."

- Luke 6:41-42
 
Last edited:

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Read and become wiser:

 

buildbot

Active member
This is a post in SOLIDARITY with Ukraine.

Not for whataboutism about which world powers are the worst.

I encourage anyone who wonders why Ukraine doesn’t want to be Russian to look into the Holodomor, where more civilians were starved by Stalin than Hilter killed in the Holocaust.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
This is a post in SOLIDARITY with Ukraine.

Not for whataboutism about which world powers are the worst.

I encourage anyone who wonders why Ukraine doesn’t want to be Russian to look into the Holodomor, where more civilians were starved by Stalin than Hilter killed in the Holocaust.
The word "whataboutism" is just a word invented as an excuse not to take responsibility for one's own side's actions.

Putin uses the same excuses as American presidents, "defending national interests". I despise the actions of both, but one cannot mention one without mentioning the other. And just for the record, Hitler also killed 27 million Russians and Ukrainians, more than half of them civilians. The Russians have good reason to fear western military forces creeping up towards their borders, particularly forces from countries that have shown willingness to attack, bomb and invade other countries unprovoked.

This war wouldn't have happened if western nations had kept their fingers off Ukraine. Yes, Putin is guilty, but so are the greedy western politicians who weren't willing to show a bit of restraint. Solidarity with Ukraine would have been to ensure that they stayed neutral and not got into a conflict with their big neighbour. It's a bit late to be solidaric after the war has started and people started dying.
 

buildbot

Active member
This war wouldn't have happened if western nations had kept their fingers off Ukraine. Yes, Putin is guilty, but so are the greedy western politicians who weren't willing to show a bit of restraint. Solidarity with Ukraine would have been to ensure that they stayed neutral and not got into a conflict with their big neighbour. It's a bit late to be solidaric after the war has started and people started dying.
"You made me hit you"
Disgusting
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
"You made me hit you"
Disgusting
If you step into someone's backyard carrying guns, you will be chased away. Putin is not afraid of the Ukrainians, he's afraid of increased western military presence in Ukraine. Remember when President Kennedy told the Soviet Union what he thought about Russian missiles in Cuba? The Russians were smart and turned around. NATO has shown no such restraint in Ukraine.

 

Shashin

Well-known member
Hi Will

The situation is more complex that it seems to be.

During World War 2, 10 mio. of Russian soldiers died, 17 mio. civilian Russian died, either by being killed by the German Nazi army or in their established starvation camps, or by hunger while Hitler occupied Ukraine which was the “food chamber” for Russia. Plus 5 mio. jews also got killed by the Nazi’s in both Russia and Ukraine. All together about 32 mio. people got killed in Russia and Ukraine.

This unbelievable amount of death people in Russia, became naturally a huge trauma in Russia together with the behavior and killings of different thinking people by Lenin and Stalin.

But havn’t the Russian people made such a terrible and horrible offer during WW 2, then whole Europe might have been speaking German now.

And this offer made the Russian people and leaders think: Never again. Therefore they wouldn’t give up the occupation of Eastern Europe, while they would have this area as a security buffer towards other Hitler-lunatics in the future.

After the break down of the Sovjet union, 14 East European countries have become members of Nato.

By this fact it has destabilized the power balance East-West.

Russia fears another threat towards them. They legitimately need security. Just as we all do.

Ukraine is a country at the size of France, with a huge agricultural production due to the good soil.

Their border towards Russia is 1.000 miles long.

European leaders have said that Nato would be open for any country. And Ukraine would like to be member.

If Ukraine became Nato member, their neighbor Bellarus would be the next step. Their border towards Russia is 815 miles long.

In total would the potentially new Nato boarder, from Ukraine and Bellarus towards Russia, be 1.800 miles long. That is a distance a bit longer than from Copenhagen to Sicily in south Italy.

Imagine how many missiles there could be placed at that boarder pointing towards the big Russian cities.

The distance from the boarders of Ukraine and Bellarus towards Russia – and to Moscow are just 270 miless.

That is about the same distance between Havana and Washington DC.

Kennedy threatened Russia with a World War 3 if the missiles in the 60’s from Russia shipped to Cuba wasn’t returned.

So USA didn’t want to have missiles from East in their front garden.

So Russia neither want to have West-missiles in their front garden

Putin and Lavrov begged the European leaders to insure that Ukraine would stay neutral, and to insure that they didn’t became a Nato member.

The West didn’t wanted to give this guaranty.

So the West did provoke Russia to defend and ensure their boarder. Wouldn’t USA have done the same? They did.

Russia do have reason the misbelieve USA and Europe by historic reason. F.ex. CIA killed a democratic elected president Allende in Chile and put in a dictator Pinochet who killed and tortued a lot of civilians in Chile.

USA in coalition with f.ex. Great Britain and Denmark, made a false claim that there were mass-destruction-weapons in Iraq. There wasn’t. But USA bombed Iraq back to stone-age. Around 500-700.000 Iraqis were killed. One of the largest war-crimes in modern history. No one were persecuted for this crime. It was so to speak a free “killing-playgame” for the coalition. The result was civil war in Iraq and further increased terrorism, and a immense amount of killings.

There are a lot of examples of bad behavior from western countries. We support f.ex. Saudi Arabia (who kill critical jounalist) - and Israel and their Apartheid system towards the occupied Palestinian areas.

So Russia have no reason to rely on the good and peaceful intension from the West.

If only we, the West, had ensured that Ukraine (and their neighbor Belarus, if it later would come to that) would stay neutral, and not become a Nato member, we could all have avoided this war. It was a piece of cake for us. But we didn't want just to give a tiny little-finger. Our super-liberalism are more importent for us.
We have put down the seed in the soil for this war, by our usual disrespect.

KR Thorkil
Thorkil,

Thank you. I appreciate the thoughtful response. I do know European history: I lived in Europe for 13 years and was brought up there.

But let's put this into context. How many NATO countries have invaded a neighbor? One of the problems of collective defense is that it makes it difficult to have a member go it alone. After WWII, the French and the German steel industries merged so no one country can build a military. This eventually became what is now the European Union. It is also one of the longest periods of peace in Europe.

Lets look at what Putin has been doing. Georgia was not a NATO country and Putin did invade it. Putin took Crimea, which has little to do with the front lines of NATO. Putin also supported the Syrian Regime and has been active in the Lybian civil war. Putin has also been attacking his own democracy with murders and threats against his political opponents and the media. Putin does not seem to be a very nice guy.

Putin has now threaten both Finland and Sweden about joining NATO. Or course, he has had his eye on the Baltic states. Now NATO is a problem for Putin, not because of a NATO invasion (unless you have any example of NATO invading or threatening other countries), because NATO would be a problem if he did want to invade a country. NATO is really a deterrent to his plans.

What I find curious is you do not believe Ukraine is a sovereign country. If Norway can choose to join NATO as a sovereign country, why not Ukraine? Why does Russia have the right to dictate what happens in a sovereign country? That does not sound like sovereignty to me.

Yes, Russia can be paranoid. That is their sovereign right. At that point, they can build a large military (just as a the Soviet Union did, which ended up being one of the factors that bankrupted the USSR). Invading a country, and as you pointed out, a neutral country, is not an act of self defense. With that logic, every nation is Europe is a threat and that in and of itself would be justification under this Putin doctrine to invade.

Let look at the statements of Putin himself:

“Once again I speak to the Ukrainian soldiers,” he said, addressing his enemy. “Do not allow neo-Nazis and Banderites to use your children, your wives and the elderly as a human shield. Take power into your own hands. It seems that it will be easier for us to come to an agreement than with this gang of drug addicts and neo-Nazis.”
Note, he is not using NATO as a reason for invasion, but rather stating the Jewish president of Ukraine is a Neo-NAZI. (Sometime I wonder if Putin has ever read a history book.)

The NAZIs also invaded Ukraine during WWII. 1.5 million Ukrainian Jew died. 34,000 died in a two-day massacre in Kyiv. But here is the toll the Ukrainians suffered:

Ukraine’s human and material losses during World War II were enormous. Some 5 to 7 million people perished. Even with the return of evacuees from the east and the repatriation of forced labourers from Germany, Ukraine’s estimated population of 36 million in 1947 was almost 5 million less than before the war. Because more than 700 cities and towns and 28,000 villages had been destroyed, 10 million people were left homeless. Only 20 percent of the industrial enterprises and 15 percent of agricultural equipment and machinery remained intact, and the transportation network was severely damaged. The material losses constituted an estimated 40 percent of Ukraine’s national wealth.
Source: https://www.britannica.com/place/Ukraine/The-Nazi-occupation-of-Soviet-Ukraine

The Ukrainian people only got their freedom in the 1990s, after decades of Soviet occupation. And even before WWII, the Soviets did not have a good history with Ukraine. Millions starved under Stalin: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

It seems your argument is that because the Soviets and Russians suffered under the NAZI invasion, their invasion of Ukraine today is legitimate. Perhaps the Ukrainians have earned their rights to independence. And as a sovereign state, that can act in a manner to best preserve their interests. No country has a right, and I include the US in their invasion of Iraq, to invade another, especially using lies, to simply cure their paranoia.

BTW, NAZI Germany was defeated in 1945. Germany does not even send their military overseas to support allies, at least in any meaningful way.
 

Shashin

Well-known member
Hitler also killed 27 million Russians and Ukrainians, more than half of them civilians. The Russians have good reason to fear western military forces creeping up towards their borders, particularly forces from countries that have shown willingness to attack, bomb and invade other countries unprovoked.
And as you point out, Ukrainians suffered under the NAZIs, and yet they trust the West more than Russia. Perhaps you have not read Russian and Soviet history. The Soviet and Russian have not been very pleasent. Given the Russian invasion in Crimea and now, it seems the Ukrainians were right not to trust the Russians.

But this is a thread about the solidarity with Ukraine that has been attacked by arguably one of the most brutal counties in the world--perhaps you have read about Soviet aggression in Budapest and Prague. Perhaps even about the invasion of Afghanistan. Or even the treatment of their own citizens. You seem to be missing an important piece in this discussion. Or are you for the invasion of Ukraine, a democratic sovereign state? Your argument seems to be that Western nations have a checkered history, that justifies the invasion of Ukraine by Russia. (That is actually the definition of whataboutism where you use other examples to defend an unrelated event.)

But I am happy to talk about history. But lets keep this about the current situation in Ukraine.
 
Last edited:

Shashin

Well-known member
If you step into someone's backyard carrying guns, you will be chased away. Putin is not afraid of the Ukrainians, he's afraid of increased western military presence in Ukraine. Remember when President Kennedy told the Soviet Union what he thought about Russian missiles in Cuba? The Russians were smart and turned around. NATO has shown no such restraint in Ukraine.

Two problems: 1. Ukraine does not belong to Russia, 2. NATO has no presence in Ukraine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top