Again, following the argument of "Russia is not at war" (which is already unbelievable), you say "Ukraine is in a civil war", that means that you admit that all the Donbas is Ukrainian territory at contest between two Ukrainian factions (Ukraine surely thanks you for that). You also say that Russia came to stop it. Thus Russia has sent troops into Ukrainian territory and has military presence there.
Almost. In Ukraine, there was a civil war in the Donbass for eight years, and then Dobnass asked Russia to recognize its independence and help deal with this protracted history. Thus, Russia has sent its troops to the territory of Ukraine and has its military presence there, without the approval of the UN Security Council.Invading another country with military forces is an act of war. Russia is at war with Ukraine. Ukraine can use any (legal) means to destroy Russian war infrastructure, including logistics, depots, factories, command centres, military installations, etc.
Not necessary. It can be a peacekeeping mission, or a counter-terrorist operation, or a special military operation, there are more than one options. But what you are right about is that Ukraine can use any legal means to destroy any legitimate targets. The use of illegal means and/or illegal purposes is a war crime.And let's now follow the opposite argument: If "Russia is not at war", then Putin is committing acts of terror in Ukraine which makes him a terrorist and makes Russia a terrorist supporting state. Ukraine is then in the right to capture, put to trial and sentence any member of the Russian government or military involved in these terrorist acts. They are lucky, if it were the US they would be sent to Guantanamo without trial and for an indeterminate period of time.
You have a logical error, and I pointed it out in the previous paragraph. It will be easier for you to understand it using the example of any peacekeeping mission with the approval of the UN Security Council - this is not a war, but peacekeepers sometimes shoot. It can also be viewed as a hybrid information-economic proxy war between the US and Russia for spheres of influence in Europe with a battlefield on the territory of Ukraine. But for my personal safety, I will call this a military special operation.But, none of that is true - Russia has started a war with Ukraine. And, as the saying goes, you only know how wars start, not how they end.
In practical terms, Russia will deny there is a war, and Ukraine will "not deny nor confirm" any activity in Russian territory. But words are just wind.
Call it what you will, but remember that war crimes are war crimes and will have to be answered.In practical terms, Russia will deny there is a war, and Ukraine will "not deny nor confirm" any activity in Russian territory. But words are just wind.
The govs in the West are banning anything that is considered disinformation. Anyone interested can still access Russian media. If you need proof, please, let me know any outlet that you would like me to read.
Unfortunately, all those bots and trolls like you sending false information have given the West govs the chance to restrict liberty. Another reason to hate this war.
Usually in each of my posts there is at least one link as a proof. But your statements are just unfounded blah blah blah with a bunch of logical errors. Well, which one of us is a bot and troll? Unfortunately, all those bots and trolls like you sending false information have given the West govs the chance to restrict liberty. Another reason to hate this war.
