Next scheduled rescrape ... never
Version 1
Last scraped
Scraped on 09/04/2025, 22:02:48 UTC
The bigger the picture the better the argument?Huh

That's where we partially agree. The fact is that there is no reason whatsoever to allow another country to change Ukrainian government at a whim. I'm sure everyone would agree that a third highest diplomat from a country on another continent, bringing cookies and supporting coup d'etat against dully elected democratic government is direct meddling by everyone's definition. As we're all well aware, it has been done all over the world, but Ukraine was a red line for Russia, which US decided to ignore. Putin is irrelevant here, we see that Russian elites, generals, and society in general are willing to spill their blood over Ukraine because it is an existential threat for Russia. Thinking that the same applies to Poland (that NATO in Poland is an existential threat to Russia) is just a scary propaganda Ukraine pushes to drum up support for itself, since it became clear that continuing to take Ukraine with force is just no longer of interest for the west.

[...]
Nuland is also heard weighing in on the make-up of the next Ukrainian government.
She is heard telling Ambassador Pyatt that she doesn’t think Vitaly Klitschko, the boxer-turned-politician who is a main opposition leader, should have a role in a new government.

“So I don’t think Klitsch (Klitschko) should go into the government,” she said. “I don’t think it’s necessary. I don’t think it’s a good idea.”

She also comments on possible future roles for the two other main protest leaders, Ukraine's former economy minister Arseny Yatseniuk and Oleh Tyahnybok, the far-right nationalist opposition leader.

“I think [Yatseniuk] is the guy who’s got the economic experience, the governing experience. What he needs is [Klitschko] and [Tyahnybok] on the outside. He needs to be talking to them four times a week,” Nuland said in the recording.
[/b][/url]

Roll Eyes but i'm sure you'll find a way to justify this with American exceptionalism and how that's somehow totally acceptable

You're once again (at this point I'm assuming intentionally) confusing the cause and effect. Dropping oil prices is the effect of the world going into recession, we already see that USA stopped allocating money to Ukraine and now ask yourself what will happen to European aid to Ukraine once Europe itself enters into a recession. But keep on drumming up support to encourage more Ukrainian young to go to the front lines, knowing the futility of this and that outcome has already been decided

Oh again your fixation... Well let's then talk about what is acceptable...

- On one side you are ok with the imperial vision of Ruzzia as dominant power with full right to impose conditions around and have an area of influence. You are absolutely ok with Ruzzia trying to change a government, not even by soft power, but by direct anhilation.

- while at the same time you complain because someone else think of themselves exactly in the same terms and does the same things (in you view anyway).

Basically, you are complaning of another taur being better a cheating = at a cheater's poker table - than you.You cannot be taken seriously.

Either you accept an imperialistic view, in which case Ruzzia is clearly loosing the case or you are in favour of allowing people to vote, in which case... you are also loosing it.

BTW again and again and again...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation

Quote
n February and March 2014, Russia invaded the Crimean Peninsula, part of Ukraine, and then annexed it. This took place in the relative power vacuum[34] immediately following the Revolution of Dignity. It marked the beginning of the Russo-Ukrainian War.

Anyone can see why Ukraine was seeking allies, not the other way around.

Again and again... Putin does not need a reason to think he owns half the world...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War

Quote
The August 2008 Russo-Georgian War, also known as the Russian invasion of Georgia,[note 3] was a war waged against Georgia by the Russian Federation and the Russian-backed separatist regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The fighting took place in the strategically important South Caucasus region. It is regarded as the first European war of the 21st century.[31]

You once again are missing a crucial part of my argument. USA set a precedent that loosing influence over a country on it's (almost) border, is considered an existential threat. That's why Russia will extend all it's resources for Ukraine, and just guess what is the prime target for China's growing military.

We had a relative stability in the last 50years because there was an understanding not to encroach on another nuclear power bordering countries, breaking that rule is the fastest way to a war. No one doubts for a second what US navy would do if China decided to enter Cuba.

You must either support for Russians to have their bases/nuclear weapons in Cuba (we know how that turned out), or for US to get out of Ukraine, but you just can't have it both ways without a war. It really is that simple.

And why is it thatdid Russia took Crimea, what preceded that? Could it be that someone showed up with cookies in Ukraine and supported a coup d'etat against dully elected democratic government? You keep conveniently leaving out the root cause of this all.
Original archived Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine[In Progress]
Scraped on 09/04/2025, 21:57:34 UTC
The bigger the picture the better the argument?Huh

That's where we partially agree. The fact is that there is no reason whatsoever to allow another country to change Ukrainian government at a whim. I'm sure everyone would agree that a third highest diplomat from a country on another continent, bringing cookies and supporting coup d'etat against dully elected democratic government is direct meddling by everyone's definition. As we're all well aware, it has been done all over the world, but Ukraine was a red line for Russia, which US decided to ignore. Putin is irrelevant here, we see that Russian elites, generals, and society in general are willing to spill their blood over Ukraine because it is an existential threat for Russia. Thinking that the same applies to Poland (that NATO in Poland is an existential threat to Russia) is just a scary propaganda Ukraine pushes to drum up support for itself, since it became clear that continuing to take Ukraine with force is just no longer of interest for the west.

[...]
Nuland is also heard weighing in on the make-up of the next Ukrainian government.
She is heard telling Ambassador Pyatt that she doesn’t think Vitaly Klitschko, the boxer-turned-politician who is a main opposition leader, should have a role in a new government.

“So I don’t think Klitsch (Klitschko) should go into the government,” she said. “I don’t think it’s necessary. I don’t think it’s a good idea.”

She also comments on possible future roles for the two other main protest leaders, Ukraine's former economy minister Arseny Yatseniuk and Oleh Tyahnybok, the far-right nationalist opposition leader.

“I think [Yatseniuk] is the guy who’s got the economic experience, the governing experience. What he needs is [Klitschko] and [Tyahnybok] on the outside. He needs to be talking to them four times a week,” Nuland said in the recording.
[/b][/url]

Roll Eyes but i'm sure you'll find a way to justify this with American exceptionalism and how that's somehow totally acceptable

You're once again (at this point I'm assuming intentionally) confusing the cause and effect. Dropping oil prices is the effect of the world going into recession, we already see that USA stopped allocating money to Ukraine and now ask yourself what will happen to European aid to Ukraine once Europe itself enters into a recession. But keep on drumming up support to encourage more Ukrainian young to go to the front lines, knowing the futility of this and that outcome has already been decided

Oh again your fixation... Well let's then talk about what is acceptable...

- On one side you are ok with the imperial vision of Ruzzia as dominant power with full right to impose conditions around and have an area of influence. You are absolutely ok with Ruzzia trying to change a government, not even by soft power, but by direct anhilation.

- while at the same time you complain because someone else think of themselves exactly in the same terms and does the same things (in you view anyway).

Basically, you are complaning of another taur being better a cheating = at a cheater's poker table - than you.You cannot be taken seriously.

Either you accept an imperialistic view, in which case Ruzzia is clearly loosing the case or you are in favour of allowing people to vote, in which case... you are also loosing it.

BTW again and again and again...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation

Quote
n February and March 2014, Russia invaded the Crimean Peninsula, part of Ukraine, and then annexed it. This took place in the relative power vacuum[34] immediately following the Revolution of Dignity. It marked the beginning of the Russo-Ukrainian War.

Anyone can see why Ukraine was seeking allies, not the other way around.

Again and again... Putin does not need a reason to think he owns half the world...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War

Quote
The August 2008 Russo-Georgian War, also known as the Russian invasion of Georgia,[note 3] was a war waged against Georgia by the Russian Federation and the Russian-backed separatist regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The fighting took place in the strategically important South Caucasus region. It is regarded as the first European war of the 21st century.[31]

You once again are missing a crucial part of my argument. USA set a precedent that loosing influence over a country on it's (almost) border, is considered an existential threat. That's why Russia will extend all it's resources for Ukraine, and just guess what is the prime target for China's growing military.

We had a relative stability in the last 50years because there was an understanding not to encroach on another nuclear power bordering countries, breaking that rule is the fastest way to a war. No one doubts for a second what US navy would do if China decided to enter Cuba.

You must either support for Russians to have their bases/nuclear weapons in Cuba (we know how that turned out), or for US to get out of Ukraine, but you just can't have it both ways without a war. It really is that simple.

And why is it that Russia took Crimea? Could it be that someone showed up with cookies in Ukraine and supported a coup d'etat against dully elected democratic government? You keep conveniently leaving out the root cause of this all.