Incorrect use of the apostrophe again. You only use it when one noun is preceded by a possessive none. I.e. Ukraine’s missile.”were never Ukraines”
So only Russia is allowed to possess the goods from the era of the USSR?
Take your argument and apply it in an Irish context. Should we possess nothing from the era of the Commonwealth? Does it all belong to modern-day Britain?
You didn't state that question in your previous post, so what's with the accusation of avoiding?
Putin is surrounded by advisers that share the same view,and misses the old soviet union
No ,
Various countries have sent troops to Ukraine to help train Ukrainian forces and they are all short term deployments , there was a short visit from US marines a while back again more for training than anything.
What changed recently was a Russian heavy artillery gun was destroyed inside ukraine (under the minsk agreement it was in Ukraine illegally )
by a newly aquired drone from turkey ,this is what set putin off
The nuclear missiles were never Ukraine's.
Three words for you, friend: Russia-NATO council.
[detour]Mmm... ONUC wasn't exactly a minor squabble, on the other hand, 26 Irishmen were killed. Indeed, it was after the initial batch of losses that the Ministry of Defence started throwing some serious pounds at the problem and finally equipped the Irish Army to modern standards instead of WW2 equipment.
[/detour]
Less than 0% chance. Great knowledge of mathematics! Percent, of a hundred. It refers to the relative amount of a variable, relative to the entire quantity.
Probability, on the other hand is usually denoted in terms of a proportion of 1, with 0 representing something impossible and 1 representing something with utmost certainty. But probability cannot be expressed less than 0.
Back tracking 🤣🤣
Your side needs to get talking points in order.
When did NATO cease becoming an anti Russian alliance?
It's not a hypothetical scenario worthy of considering since it has less than 0% chance of ever occurring.
China and Russia are not enemies.
China doesn't invade other countries.
Both are armed nuclear powers and would not risk engaging each other militarily as it could end up going nuclear.
1949 is calling on the phone. It wants its talking point back. The whole thing needs to be studied in the context of the Cold War.
That was then. This is now. Listerine was originally invented to cure gonorrhoea. Does that mean that every person using Listerine does so to cure their gonorrhoea? The function of things can evolve.
The current (I wish that I knew how italicise) function of NATO is to protect its member states, militarily.
It's a good question, perhaps in time the truth will out.
Has something changed in NATO's behaviour the last few months to prompt a sudden escalation by the Russian Government? Has NATO started moving troops into Ukraine?
Funny they never said that when soviet union expanded as far west as the Baltic states and had missiles pointing towards all major European cities and millions of troops along the European borders.
Paranoia of the kremlin
What are you talking about. NATO was created to provide collective security against the USSR.
Really their are certain posters on here I just wouldn't bother responding to anymore. They will make all sorts of claims as if its fact, and then when anyone challenges them to provide evidence of said claims they just come back with dribble and whataboutism.
Many posters here claiming that Russia has no intentions of invading, that this is all just the US and NATO trying to stir up trouble. I actually really hope they are right. But I suspect the same posters will then wholly defend Russia in the event they do attack, and we will hear every justification for why Ukraine deserves it and they just brought it on themselves.
Very sad if its coming from Irish posters after the horific history we have had in the past with a large aggressor on our doorstep.
Ukraine has of yet not applied to join nato and has not given the go ahead for any NATO bases in their country. They are a sovereign nation and there is absolutely no justification whatsoever for Russia to attack them.
If anyone here has proof to the contry instead of speculative nonsense then post the evidence, otherwise stop posting random rubbish as fact if you cant back it up.
NATO’s purpose is to defend the sovereignty of a nation, not to invade a country.
Providing that Ukraine is not invaded, our whole conversation is academic and Putin will experience no reproach by NATO
Putin with nuclear weapons pointed at Europe is worried about nato 🙈
Putin has unambiguously expressed that Russia is deeply concerned for it's security by the encroachment of NATO.
Do you wonder then, does that provide NATO with an opportunity to address those concerns and avoid war?
That made me chuckle, Gatling!
We will get the reregs soon. Or the new accounts with 5 posts. And they will rehash the same tedious arguments. Should we copy and paste our responses in anticipation?
Reminds me of this recently whenever dealing with certain posters ,they are in a hole but keep digging
Actually, my last response was facetious. Look, Ukraine asked for diplomatic help and received it. Another thing, and I'm sure you've noticed it, the world economy is in an inflationary period. The last thing Europe, the EU in particular, needs right now is a war in Ukraine where one of it's main energy sources comes through. Not to mention the aggressor being the source of that energy. This type of thing causes widespread disruption and in the current economic state it's just amplified. Of course western nations are concerned, **** already bad as it is.
But what's about the other 1.3 million who were not allowed to vote in Crimea because only Russians and Russian military were allowed to vote
Anything to do with Sean Quinn, he was also into property in a big way in Kiev.
If the US went to occupy Canada tomorrow, against the will of the people, I would be raling against this on Boards.
The country is arbitrary. Wrong is wrong. An invasion is an invasion
Counter what? You haven't made any point other than US interventions are good and Russian ones bad?
The last vestiges of a fool. You don’t like what I am saying. Or perhaps, you lack the intellect to counter it. So, you use hackneyed arguments that are totally irrelevant to our discussion.
Where did I wish a war? Find me the quote? Or where did I discuss Crimea? Unlike you, I am not trying to use previous precedents to augment at best, a weak argument about the current situation.
Good psychological tactic, though. You throw an unjust accusation at me. The majority of people perusing Boards will not bother to read through my previous (or your previous posts). So, they will see your accusation. And presume that all those arguing against the invasion of Ukraine are pro-war. Despite me never wishing a war and believing that this time it will fizzle.
Your move!
My point is simple. It is not as simple as US bad, other countries good.
And the intervention of the US is not always unwelcomed
What's your point? Geopolitics is a space of competing claims, influence, alliances, subterfuge and violence. You don't want Crimea to be part of Russia despite 1.5+ million Russians living there? You're going to have to send in a substantial invasion force.
Have you considered volunteering to fight for "Ukraine"?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c635d680d76ce16e490d61f21d7a1353.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/eaabbaf8a16773590ee22dd6c15f1d68.svg)
