Well. The 9/11 stuff is spooky if you read into it. Specifically the 5000 put options placed on American airlines a day before 9/11.
The Ukraine war. (Yes, we'll mind our manners)
- Thread starter BigBlueFanGA
- Start date
Isn’t the guy technically include in Poland’s extradition request because of his involvement in the war?
Competent diplomacy could've easily avoided this war, as I was telling you, making this exact argument in the other thread.
Yet last week, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg committed a Washington gaffe, meaning that he accidently blurted out the truth.
...
In testimony to the European Union Parliament, Stoltenberg made clear that it was America’s relentless push to enlarge NATO to Ukraine that was the real cause of the war and why it continues today. Here are Stoltenberg’s revealing words:
When Prof. John Mearsheimer, I, and others have said the same, we’ve been attacked as Putin apologists. The same critics also choose to hide or flatly ignore the dire warnings against NATO enlargement to Ukraine long articulated by many of America’s leading diplomats, including the great scholar-statesman George Kennan, and the former US Ambassadors to Russia Jack Matlock and William Burns.
Burns, now CIA Director, was US Ambassador to Russia in 2008, and author of a memo entitled “Nyet means Nyet.” In that memo, Burns explained to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that the entire Russian political class, not just Putin, was dead-set against NATO enlargement. We know about the memo only because it was leaked. Otherwise, we’d be in the dark about it.
...
Even Zelensky’s team knew that the quest for NATO enlargement meant imminent war with Russia. Oleksiy Arestovych, former Advisor to the Office of the President of Ukraine under Zelensky, declared that “with a 99.9% probability, our price for joining NATO is a big war with Russia.”
...
So, yes, Putin went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to Russia’s border. Ukraine is being destroyed by U.S. arrogance, proving again Henry Kissinger’s adage that to be America’s enemy is dangerous, while to be its friend is fatal. The Ukraine War will end when the U.S. acknowledges a simple truth: NATO enlargement to Ukraine means perpetual war and Ukraine’s destruction. Ukraine’s neutrality could have avoided the war, and remains the key to peace.
www.commondreams.org
Yet last week, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg committed a Washington gaffe, meaning that he accidently blurted out the truth.
...
In testimony to the European Union Parliament, Stoltenberg made clear that it was America’s relentless push to enlarge NATO to Ukraine that was the real cause of the war and why it continues today. Here are Stoltenberg’s revealing words:
...
When Prof. John Mearsheimer, I, and others have said the same, we’ve been attacked as Putin apologists. The same critics also choose to hide or flatly ignore the dire warnings against NATO enlargement to Ukraine long articulated by many of America’s leading diplomats, including the great scholar-statesman George Kennan, and the former US Ambassadors to Russia Jack Matlock and William Burns.
Burns, now CIA Director, was US Ambassador to Russia in 2008, and author of a memo entitled “Nyet means Nyet.” In that memo, Burns explained to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that the entire Russian political class, not just Putin, was dead-set against NATO enlargement. We know about the memo only because it was leaked. Otherwise, we’d be in the dark about it.
...
Even Zelensky’s team knew that the quest for NATO enlargement meant imminent war with Russia. Oleksiy Arestovych, former Advisor to the Office of the President of Ukraine under Zelensky, declared that “with a 99.9% probability, our price for joining NATO is a big war with Russia.”
...
So, yes, Putin went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to Russia’s border. Ukraine is being destroyed by U.S. arrogance, proving again Henry Kissinger’s adage that to be America’s enemy is dangerous, while to be its friend is fatal. The Ukraine War will end when the U.S. acknowledges a simple truth: NATO enlargement to Ukraine means perpetual war and Ukraine’s destruction. Ukraine’s neutrality could have avoided the war, and remains the key to peace.
NATO Chief Admits NATO Expansion Was Key to Russian Invasion of Ukraine | Common Dreams
The continuing U.S. obsession with NATO enlargement is profoundly irresponsible and hypocritical. And now Ukrainians are paying a terrible price.
www.commondreams.org
It would be easy to make the case that the pre-war efforts of our leadership to avert war were tauntingly weak.Competent diplomacy could've easily avoided this war, as I was telling you, making this exact argument in the other thread.
Yet last week, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg committed a Washington gaffe, meaning that he accidently blurted out the truth.
...
In testimony to the European Union Parliament, Stoltenberg made clear that it was America’s relentless push to enlarge NATO to Ukraine that was the real cause of the war and why it continues today. Here are Stoltenberg’s revealing words:
...
When Prof. John Mearsheimer, I, and others have said the same, we’ve been attacked as Putin apologists. The same critics also choose to hide or flatly ignore the dire warnings against NATO enlargement to Ukraine long articulated by many of America’s leading diplomats, including the great scholar-statesman George Kennan, and the former US Ambassadors to Russia Jack Matlock and William Burns.
Burns, now CIA Director, was US Ambassador to Russia in 2008, and author of a memo entitled “Nyet means Nyet.” In that memo, Burns explained to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that the entire Russian political class, not just Putin, was dead-set against NATO enlargement. We know about the memo only because it was leaked. Otherwise, we’d be in the dark about it.
...
Even Zelensky’s team knew that the quest for NATO enlargement meant imminent war with Russia. Oleksiy Arestovych, former Advisor to the Office of the President of Ukraine under Zelensky, declared that “with a 99.9% probability, our price for joining NATO is a big war with Russia.”
...
So, yes, Putin went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to Russia’s border. Ukraine is being destroyed by U.S. arrogance, proving again Henry Kissinger’s adage that to be America’s enemy is dangerous, while to be its friend is fatal. The Ukraine War will end when the U.S. acknowledges a simple truth: NATO enlargement to Ukraine means perpetual war and Ukraine’s destruction. Ukraine’s neutrality could have avoided the war, and remains the key to peace.
NATO Chief Admits NATO Expansion Was Key to Russian Invasion of Ukraine | Common Dreams
The continuing U.S. obsession with NATO enlargement is profoundly irresponsible and hypocritical. And now Ukrainians are paying a terrible price.
WARSAW, Sept 26 (Reuters) - Polish experts have confirmed that the missile that killed two people at a grain facility in southern Poland in November was fired by Ukraine, Rzeczpospolita daily reported, citing sources.
The explosion of the missile in NATO-member Poland fuelled fears that the war in Ukraine could spiral into a wider conflict by triggering the alliance's mutual defence clause, but at the time Warsaw and NATO said that they believed that it was a Ukrainian stray, easing worries about escalation.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europ...Rzeczpospolita daily reported, citing sources.
The explosion of the missile in NATO-member Poland fuelled fears that the war in Ukraine could spiral into a wider conflict by triggering the alliance's mutual defence clause, but at the time Warsaw and NATO said that they believed that it was a Ukrainian stray, easing worries about escalation.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europ...Rzeczpospolita daily reported, citing sources.
LOLCompetent diplomacy could've easily avoided this war, as I was telling you, making this exact argument in the other thread.
Yet last week, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg committed a Washington gaffe, meaning that he accidently blurted out the truth.
...
In testimony to the European Union Parliament, Stoltenberg made clear that it was America’s relentless push to enlarge NATO to Ukraine that was the real cause of the war and why it continues today. Here are Stoltenberg’s revealing words:
...
When Prof. John Mearsheimer, I, and others have said the same, we’ve been attacked as Putin apologists. The same critics also choose to hide or flatly ignore the dire warnings against NATO enlargement to Ukraine long articulated by many of America’s leading diplomats, including the great scholar-statesman George Kennan, and the former US Ambassadors to Russia Jack Matlock and William Burns.
Burns, now CIA Director, was US Ambassador to Russia in 2008, and author of a memo entitled “Nyet means Nyet.” In that memo, Burns explained to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that the entire Russian political class, not just Putin, was dead-set against NATO enlargement. We know about the memo only because it was leaked. Otherwise, we’d be in the dark about it.
...
Even Zelensky’s team knew that the quest for NATO enlargement meant imminent war with Russia. Oleksiy Arestovych, former Advisor to the Office of the President of Ukraine under Zelensky, declared that “with a 99.9% probability, our price for joining NATO is a big war with Russia.”
...
So, yes, Putin went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to Russia’s border. Ukraine is being destroyed by U.S. arrogance, proving again Henry Kissinger’s adage that to be America’s enemy is dangerous, while to be its friend is fatal. The Ukraine War will end when the U.S. acknowledges a simple truth: NATO enlargement to Ukraine means perpetual war and Ukraine’s destruction. Ukraine’s neutrality could have avoided the war, and remains the key to peace.
NATO Chief Admits NATO Expansion Was Key to Russian Invasion of Ukraine | Common Dreams
The continuing U.S. obsession with NATO enlargement is profoundly irresponsible and hypocritical. And now Ukrainians are paying a terrible price.
Yeah I remember that shell was IDed as Ukrainian pretty early on.
I don't remember if that was the belief at the time without proof but initially, Ukraine said it was the Russians.
Next the shell will be invited to Canadian parliament where they will stand in rousing applause, only to claim ignorance later.
Very easy. Russia drew a pretty clear line that frankly was very easy to avoid crossing. We really thought NATO expansion for the benefit of Ukraine was really worth starting potential ww3. It just doesn't make sense
WW3 is a small price to pay to have another country committed to spending 2% of their GDP on NATO compliant weaponry from the MIC.
All the US aid to Ukraine can’t just be funneled back to the Biden’s.
You're right, the truth is. No dispute. But you ignore that the people clapping most likely didn't & were just being supremely ignorant. No one is framing it for me. It's pretty obvious they were oblivious.
If I knew what he was, no. If I didn't know & he was presented in a favorable light, good chance.
I'm not trying hard to do that. You're willfully misinterpreting my speculation as to why they did it.
As if the Canucks applause has anything to do with whether we should arm Ukraine or not. LOL.
So Russia has a veto over what another country does? Got it.Competent diplomacy could've easily avoided this war, as I was telling you, making this exact argument in the other thread.
Yet last week, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg committed a Washington gaffe, meaning that he accidently blurted out the truth.
...
In testimony to the European Union Parliament, Stoltenberg made clear that it was America’s relentless push to enlarge NATO to Ukraine that was the real cause of the war and why it continues today. Here are Stoltenberg’s revealing words:
...
When Prof. John Mearsheimer, I, and others have said the same, we’ve been attacked as Putin apologists. The same critics also choose to hide or flatly ignore the dire warnings against NATO enlargement to Ukraine long articulated by many of America’s leading diplomats, including the great scholar-statesman George Kennan, and the former US Ambassadors to Russia Jack Matlock and William Burns.
Burns, now CIA Director, was US Ambassador to Russia in 2008, and author of a memo entitled “Nyet means Nyet.” In that memo, Burns explained to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that the entire Russian political class, not just Putin, was dead-set against NATO enlargement. We know about the memo only because it was leaked. Otherwise, we’d be in the dark about it.
...
Even Zelensky’s team knew that the quest for NATO enlargement meant imminent war with Russia. Oleksiy Arestovych, former Advisor to the Office of the President of Ukraine under Zelensky, declared that “with a 99.9% probability, our price for joining NATO is a big war with Russia.”
...
So, yes, Putin went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to Russia’s border. Ukraine is being destroyed by U.S. arrogance, proving again Henry Kissinger’s adage that to be America’s enemy is dangerous, while to be its friend is fatal. The Ukraine War will end when the U.S. acknowledges a simple truth: NATO enlargement to Ukraine means perpetual war and Ukraine’s destruction. Ukraine’s neutrality could have avoided the war, and remains the key to peace.
NATO Chief Admits NATO Expansion Was Key to Russian Invasion of Ukraine | Common Dreams
The continuing U.S. obsession with NATO enlargement is profoundly irresponsible and hypocritical. And now Ukrainians are paying a terrible price.
I'm not ignoring anything... it's immaterial whether they were ignorant or not, ultimately irrelevant to my point. I know they were ignorant. I know you and the public are ignorant too.
There is of course, however, no way Zelly didn't know.
No. Way.
He just didn't care, and he knows that back home, honoring a person of such caliber is not unacceptable like it is in the West, but celebrated.
No. Way.
He just didn't care, and he knows that back home, honoring a person of such caliber is not unacceptable like it is in the West, but celebrated.
It is material. It's like cheering for UK scoring a TD on 4th down when replay shows in fact we were stopped short.
Sure. I mean if Ukes weren't dying that pink area would be 2x-3x larger - unless you believe Putin has everything he wants. LOL.
I hate Zelensky, Trudeau, Biden and the rest of the clown shows that are f'ing everything up right now, but unless they can prove this guy was out there leading the charge murdering innocent people I think this story is getting too much publicity.
Western Ukraine hated Russia - even back in the 40's. So when the Germans invaded Ukraine you had hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians on the German side - and hundreds of thousands working for or signing up for the SS. Chances are - if any of us were 18 years old at the time and lived there - we'd be Nazis. And we'd have grown up with a hatred for Russia and probably a hatred for Jewish people too. Kind of like if you were living in Birmingham, AL in the 1860's, you'd much more than likely been a confederate and probably not thought too much of black people. Was it wrong, yes? But there's a huge difference between being a leader at that time and instituting that policy and just being an 18-year old raised up in it.
My point is, I'm not going to be pissed off today at a 98-year old who was 18 and living in Ukraine when UPWARDS OF 25% of HIS ENTIRE COUNTRY DIED over a 5 year span.
I don’t think anyone here said you should be pissed off at him.
Most people are focused on the Ukrainian president who thought it was appropriate to honor him.
Bad shit has happened in human history. As civilization advances, some things look worse.
But everyone pretty much agrees the Nazis were wrong then and now.
So you can excuse a 98 year old for doing what he needed to do to survive, but honoring him when you’re fighting a purported war to save Ukraine from evil is pretty goddam stupid.
Well that f***** Zelenesky shouldn't have been there in the first place.
Competent diplomacy could've easily avoided this war, as I was telling you, making this exact argument in the other thread.
Yet last week, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg committed a Washington gaffe, meaning that he accidently blurted out the truth.
...
In testimony to the European Union Parliament, Stoltenberg made clear that it was America’s relentless push to enlarge NATO to Ukraine that was the real cause of the war and why it continues today. Here are Stoltenberg’s revealing words:
...
When Prof. John Mearsheimer, I, and others have said the same, we’ve been attacked as Putin apologists. The same critics also choose to hide or flatly ignore the dire warnings against NATO enlargement to Ukraine long articulated by many of America’s leading diplomats, including the great scholar-statesman George Kennan, and the former US Ambassadors to Russia Jack Matlock and William Burns.
Burns, now CIA Director, was US Ambassador to Russia in 2008, and author of a memo entitled “Nyet means Nyet.” In that memo, Burns explained to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that the entire Russian political class, not just Putin, was dead-set against NATO enlargement. We know about the memo only because it was leaked. Otherwise, we’d be in the dark about it.
...
Even Zelensky’s team knew that the quest for NATO enlargement meant imminent war with Russia. Oleksiy Arestovych, former Advisor to the Office of the President of Ukraine under Zelensky, declared that “with a 99.9% probability, our price for joining NATO is a big war with Russia.”
...
So, yes, Putin went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to Russia’s border. Ukraine is being destroyed by U.S. arrogance, proving again Henry Kissinger’s adage that to be America’s enemy is dangerous, while to be its friend is fatal. The Ukraine War will end when the U.S. acknowledges a simple truth: NATO enlargement to Ukraine means perpetual war and Ukraine’s destruction. Ukraine’s neutrality could have avoided the war, and remains the key to peace.
NATO Chief Admits NATO Expansion Was Key to Russian Invasion of Ukraine | Common Dreams
The continuing U.S. obsession with NATO enlargement is profoundly irresponsible and hypocritical. And now Ukrainians are paying a terrible price.
If by competent diplomacy you mean kowtowing to the Russian demands made on NATO, then perhaps. Your reliance on selective quoting from a biased, far-left website like Common Dreams is kinda funny, given your other viewpoints. And the selective quoting is par for the course for you and your ilk, never quite giving the full picture. If you click the NATO link, you get the full context. In relevant part, Stoltenberg said:
"Then lastly on Sweden. First of all, it is historic that now Finland is member of the Alliance. And we have to remember the background. The background was that President Putin declared in the autumn of 2021, and actually sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign, to promise no more NATO enlargement. That was what he sent us. And was a pre-condition for not invade Ukraine. Of course we didn't sign that.
The opposite happened. He wanted us to sign that promise, never to enlarge NATO. He wanted us to remove our military infrastructure in all Allies that have joined NATO since 1997, meaning half of NATO, all the Central and Eastern Europe, we should remove NATO from that part of our Alliance, introducing some kind of B, or second class membership. We rejected that.
So he went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to his borders. He has got the exact opposite. He has got more NATO presence in eastern part of the Alliance and he has also seen that Finland has already joined the Alliance and Sweden will soon be a full member."
Putin's demands, which were more much more than no more NATO expansion, were a joke, and he knew NATO would never agree to them. When Finland joined, Putin basically shrugged his shoulders and said "Meh, no biggie." That should tell you all you need to know. It was never really about NATO expansion. Russia's policy since the late 1990s has been to reject the finality of the post-Cold War European order and the sovereignty or territorial integrity of the states that gained their freedom due to the end of the Cold War. But sure, it's all our fault.
These guys are supporting Putin because they've bitten so far into that america bad, our country sucks, we are the worst, god we are so corrupt apple. And damn that apple is tasty. And I'm not saying we don't have problems (operation Northwoods, The CIA and JFK, etc etc). But when you start siding with Russia over America its hilarious. Russian makes our country look like choir boys. These guys literally just superimposed a dead admirals face onto a static body and played it for all their generals and broadcast it live on state TV to show ''Ukrainian lies''.
Freaking love Command and Conquer, the cpu game he is playing in that video. I actually just got done playing it a couple hours ago. Lol
Frankly astounding that we have some posters on here still convinced Putin could’ve been talked out of his invasion. Such naive people that are living in an idealistic fantasyland. Bless their hearts.
#10 is the key and the ultimate motivation behind it all: it empowers china
Also an argument I made from beginning for which I was similarily bombarded with insults andstrawman arguments about how they were allies, weakening Russia weakens China.z
I think very few actually appreciate the reality of this; namely, their long game and how (the methods being employed) they are weakening us from within, are patient wrt Taiwani, the fragile nature of their economy that may force their hands etc.
I think very few actually appreciate the reality of this; namely, their long game and how (the methods being employed) they are weakening us from within, are patient wrt Taiwani, the fragile nature of their economy that may force their hands etc.
This is a red herring imo. I don't think any reasonable person disagrees, when viewed in a vacuum, adding Ukraine to NATO really doesn't harm anyone. Granted it doesn't really help anyone either.
The real issue is they all knew taking these steps would prompt a certain response from Russia. Putin is part mad man and part old bloc guy that has to keep up appearances.
So the real question is, knowing Russia's position was it worth taking these steps that really add no benefit, and got an anticipated military response? The answer to me is clearly no. Given the costs vs benefits, there was very little benefit to adding them and the cost was great (and couldve actually been much worse)
Classified By: Ambassador William J. Burns. Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). 1. (C) Summary. Following a muted first reaction to Ukraine's intent to seek a NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP) at the Bucharest summit (ref A), Foreign Minister Lavrov and other senior officials have reiterated strong opposition, stressing that Russia would view further eastward expansion as a potential military threat. NATO enlargement, particularly to Ukraine, remains "an emotional and neuralgic" issue for Russia, but strategic policy considerations also underlie strong opposition to NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia. In Ukraine, these include fears that the issue could potentially split the country in two, leading to violence or even, some claim, civil war, which would force Russia to decide whether to intervene. Additionally, the GOR and experts continue to claim that Ukrainian NATO membership would have a major impact on Russia's defense industry, Russian-Ukrainian family connections, and bilateral relations generally. In Georgia, the GOR fears continued instability and "provocative acts" in the separatist regions. End summary.
...
While Russia might believe statements from the West that NATO was not directed against Russia, when one looked at recent military activities in NATO countries (establishment of U.S. forward operating locations, etc. they had to be evaluated not by stated intentions but by potential. Lavrov stressed that maintaining Russia's "sphere of influence" in the neighborhood was anachronistic, and acknowledged that the U.S. and Europe had "legitimate interests" in the region. But, he argued, while countries were free to make their own decisions about their security and which political-military structures to join, they needed to keep in mind the impact on their neighbors.
...
Ukraine and Georgia's NATO aspirations not only touch a raw nerve in Russia, they engender serious concerns about the consequences for stability in the region. Not only does Russia perceive encirclement, and efforts to undermine Russia's influence in the region, but it also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would seriously affect Russian security interests. Experts tell us that Russia is particularly worried that the strong divisions in Ukraine over NATO membership, with much of the ethnic-Russian community against membership, could lead to a major split, involving violence or at worst, civil war. In that eventuality, Russia would have to decide whether to intervene; a decision Russia does not want to have to face.
...
(C) Russia's opposition to NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia is both emotional and based on perceived strategic concerns about the impact on Russia's interests in the region. It is also politically popular to paint the U.S. and NATO as Russia's adversaries and to use NATO's outreach to Ukraine and Georgia as a means of generating support from Russian nationalists. While Russian opposition to the first round of NATO enlargement in the mid-1990's was strong, Russia now feels itself able to respond more forcefully to what it perceives as actions contrary to its national interests. BURNS
...
While Russia might believe statements from the West that NATO was not directed against Russia, when one looked at recent military activities in NATO countries (establishment of U.S. forward operating locations, etc. they had to be evaluated not by stated intentions but by potential. Lavrov stressed that maintaining Russia's "sphere of influence" in the neighborhood was anachronistic, and acknowledged that the U.S. and Europe had "legitimate interests" in the region. But, he argued, while countries were free to make their own decisions about their security and which political-military structures to join, they needed to keep in mind the impact on their neighbors.
...
Ukraine and Georgia's NATO aspirations not only touch a raw nerve in Russia, they engender serious concerns about the consequences for stability in the region. Not only does Russia perceive encirclement, and efforts to undermine Russia's influence in the region, but it also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would seriously affect Russian security interests. Experts tell us that Russia is particularly worried that the strong divisions in Ukraine over NATO membership, with much of the ethnic-Russian community against membership, could lead to a major split, involving violence or at worst, civil war. In that eventuality, Russia would have to decide whether to intervene; a decision Russia does not want to have to face.
...
(C) Russia's opposition to NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia is both emotional and based on perceived strategic concerns about the impact on Russia's interests in the region. It is also politically popular to paint the U.S. and NATO as Russia's adversaries and to use NATO's outreach to Ukraine and Georgia as a means of generating support from Russian nationalists. While Russian opposition to the first round of NATO enlargement in the mid-1990's was strong, Russia now feels itself able to respond more forcefully to what it perceives as actions contrary to its national interests. BURNS
Last edited:
