It's a Ukrainian government account with a Twitter checkmark.
Where are you going with this? What does it say about the UN exactly? Should the UN just keep quiet about Russia's invasion because of these countries? Surely you don't think what Russia/Putin is doing here correct and a good thing for the whole world (just because some very populous countries refuse to condemn them over it)?
There's a mixture of reasons for that. Also, some of those countries are not democratic at all, which diminishes the claim that the governments' foreign policy decisions on Russia-Ukraine represents some collective will or judgement of the population.
First I note some of them are (like Ukraine was at one time) very much in the Russian "sphere of influence", their leaders are directly beholden to Putin or afraid of opposing Russia publically at the UN.
Second some of them are outright enemies of the US/Western countries (N. Korean, Iranian, Syrian regimes). If the US is for something they are against it. If something harms the US they are usually for it. Not a surprise that they either vote no or abstain.
Third this is a European war involving Europeans. Several of the countries are a very long way from Europe and don't particularly care about it. Some of them also still have axes to grind with "Europeans" as a collective either over colonialism or, as you said, the modern West harming or exploiting them economically. If they have some important trade relations with Russia as well, why stick their necks out for this to, as they see it, no real immediate benefit vs a risk perhaps?
You say their opinion doesn't count - where are you getting that from!? These countries govt.'s voted (or did not vote) as they did at the UN and gave their opinion, that is fair enough. Why do we (westerners) then have to respect or understand their opinion on the war? Russia's invasion may not matter to them enough to condemn it, it matters to us. Your arguments cut both ways. As regards criticising them, it's not a matter of expecting some "loyalty to the West" as you twisted it, but if shoe was on the other foot + you've the Western countries telling likes of India "why exactly is this our issue" with something they are very concerned about (e.g. during serious trouble they experienced during Covid-19 pandemic) I don't think you be so understanding of it.
Some of the abstentions are a little disappointing because there's big principles at play here that could come around and bite these countries in the arse later if a "rules based" + international system as represented by the UN and the other global bodies declines further in importance. They will suffer too if it is replaced by a more anarchic "law of the jungle" as the world de-globalises or regionalises.
I suppose this does not worry India and China though - they are the coming powers and expect to be the ones starting wars with neighbours if needed to secure what they want in the 21C or at least they have no fear someone will ever dare do it to them in their respective regions/spheres of influence. They are extremely comfortable with a more might makes right sort of world.
And yet on the official Ukrainian airforce varifed account,there was no post related to the claims.
The claim originated on the Kremlin bot zooka account which you have linked to previously ..
Pretty obvious
Ben Wallace seems to be the only capable politician in that government at the moment.
Future Tory leader and possible PM I imagine.
Nice bit of racism there - India a country with over a billion people and an area far larger than Europe and you've concluded its all a total dump. Very good sir
With all due respect, would you live there? Or any of the other countries listed above? I've seen many documentaries and it looks, quite frankly, disgusting. That's not meant in a racist way, I don't personally know any Indian people, but more a comment on the state of the country itself. .
But this is largely off topic. Any right thinking nation would condemn unequivocally what Russia has done. And these didn't. So that says more about them than anything else.....
Loss of the Ukrainian MiG-29 verified by Oryx.
I give him credit for having the brains not to want the top job. Yet, at least.
When even Serbia votes against Russia, that's a strong sign that Russia is on the wrong side of this conflict.
BRICS unfortunately.
Bold move from Brazil, only country in that alliance to vote in favour of the UN resolution.
You might want to check your maps again...
lol so you've seen documentaries about the poorest part of india no doubt and concluded that all billion people live in filth... I believe theres a word for people like yourself
I've been to India plenty, its a hugely diverse country in climate, ecology, architecture, history and ethnicity. It most certainly is not all a kip
Now get back to cheering for child raping Russian soldiers and fantasising about decadent Europeans freezing as you have been doing in a parallel thread.
Care to show where I've been doing any of this? Or is this more baseless accusations from yourself?
Guess what
"Sunday, March 20, 2022"
calling a country a dump is not racism in the slightest...
Indian Europe size comparison
Macron distancing himself from the US position:-
It also means that any potential nuclear attack on Ukraine also won't see a NATO response, rather it would be individual countries reacting in their own capacity.
Edit: His comments are in relation to nuclear weapons, not conventional weapons.
Care to elaborate on the "word" to describe me?
And that doesn't clearly show the Russia this side of the Urals. Europe is approx 3 times the size of India. Your man's been there plenty times though, but thinks India is "an area far larger than Europe".
Odd that I can't find a first hand source for that quote with a Google search. The context would be very important to see. Is he dismissing a nuclear response against Russia itself (which isn't the stated US position) , or a conventional one against Russian assets in the theatre of operations? There's a big difference between the two, and without seeing the context, there's no way to know what he's talking about.
is the glass half full or half empty?
Not quite what he said, he stated France would not use nuclear retaliation if a nuclear device was used in the Ukraine.
Videos claiming to show Ukrainian army retreating from Ivangrad south of Bakhmut
This would mean Russians control eastern bank of the Bakhmuktka river up as far as Bakhmut itself
That's pretty vague and typical of Macron's fence sitting at times. What does 'fundamental interests' mean? It could be anything - a nuclear attack on Ukraine could well be a attack on the 'fundamental interests' of the EU and France.
Ukrainian army does seem to be coming under increasing pressure around Bakhmut
Indeed it does seem Macron ruled out nuclear retaliation, but not conventional retaliation.
It was a France 2 interview I believe.
One video showing Ukrainian forces moving on a patrol ,
This is the evidence of the demoralized Ukrainians retreating....
That's up there with yesterday's mig29 story
Mobilize and get free food from the west-
I believe the gist of the comments were that France wouldn't use nukes in response to Russian use of tactical nukes in Ukraine, not that the wouldn't respond. And for that matter the US have not said they would use nukes either.
Poor response from Macron tbh. Any idiot knows that western nations aren't going to risk the nuclear apocalypse for Ukraine no matter what Russia do but to take a nuclear response off the table in public reeks of weakness.
Lets be honest, France are not going to go hands on regardless of the situation in Ukraine
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/eedacf599b4135dfd56d6fdbddcbd867.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w5.vanillicon.com/v2/5117ec177439400b1e5944f4d30acdda.svg)