1. I understand that you can't say anything uncomplimentary about Putin. My bad.
If you consider the US and Germany enemies you can compare us to Hitler, but Russia's actions, invading Ukraine, are more like Hitler
We don't like when Russia invades another country, and NATO decided to help Ukraine repel the unlawful invasion.
My apologies for not saying "please". But the link you provided says nothing about killing Russians. It condemns Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Its just a list of complaints against Russia. I don't see any threats against Russia. There is no genocide of Russians as you claim.
If by "decolonisation of Russia" you mean taking Ukraine away from Russia as one of their "colonies", that already happened when the USSR broke apart. Its like Britain saying New York state is still their colony and tries to invade it. Genocide of Russians in Russia is plain nonsense. Genocide of Russians in Ukraine is also nonsense. Ukraine is an independent county.
If true they are insignificant. Zelensky is president.
You don't know how stupid that sounds. No one wins WW3.
Dictators like Napoleon and Hitler invade other countries like Russia using their army. NATO has no leader, no dictator, no standing army to command. NATO is an organisation to protect its members from invasion by forming an army when needed. Putin invaded Ukraine.
After Putin that may be true, but not now. I never understood what Medvedev's job was? He was a figurehead with no authority.
There are no Nazis. Any future lines that have "Nazis" in them will be ignored and erased.
That is incorrect according to wiki.
Desperation because Putin made a blunder by invading Ukraine. That would be genocide.
The options or concerns of future escalation are not good.
Using nukes is always a bad option. Think harder.
Escalation is not the answer. Trump is working on a peace deal. Lets hope there is one before its too late.
Of course I can. I just don't know him as a person to say bad personally about him. But his scenic image, yes, its quite poor.
So do former regions of former Ukraine, who became free countries and freely decided to join our defensive federation. And no, Free World (in Russian understanding of the term) doesn't see NATO as "defensive alliance". The actions of its members (including numerous illegal and unprovoked aggresions and neo-colonial policy) speak much louder even than their loud words.
There is a peace plan. Actually its not even a plan, its a common sense.
You definitely are not friends, are you? You came on Russian land, you kill Russians - it basically means that if you are not stop - we'll at least, increase our presence in America (Canada, Mexico, Cuba and Venezuela are America aren't they) and we'll supply your enemies (right now its cartels, I believe) with more deadly weapons and more deadly poisons. Or, what is more likely - as you started direct hostile actions against Russian undisputed territory, there will be Russian direct actions against undisputed US territory.
And we don't like when Ukrainian government dicriminate and murder Russians.
For starters you can read thread of our dear friend Litwin .
www.usmessageboard.com
Being president doesn't mean his own inner quality (like royal blood or something). His is a president only because some other guys decided to see him as a president. Trump, Putin, Zelenskiy, me, you - we all have as much power as other human beings agree to give us. And if we are not playing our role well (whatever this role is) we are losing influence, money (as form of influence), power or even life.
Why not? We are going to win it, and, likely, with the loses lesser than in WW2.
You are simply repeating propaganda from CNN-verse (which is has lesser with reality than even Marvel-verse). Putin is not a Dark Wisard or a dragon, or a super-villian or an other imba-unit. He is just a leader of one of Russian fractions. No more, no less. And when Russians in South-Eastern Ukraine were attacked for being Russians by Ukrainian proxies of the western barbarians he simply didn't have a lot of choice.
Any president (including Putin and Trump) is, more or less, a figurehead with no authority. Any person can more or less control five or even other persons max, and only if they all are playing by a book.
There are Nazies in Russian understanding of the word Nazies. You can use term "bad guys" if you wish.
What is written in wiki is, often, not truth. Ok. May be, it deserves another post or even a thread to discuss. In fact, the difference even between Official Russian and Official Ukrainian is lesser than the difference between Standard American English and some hinterland British dialects.
Of course it won't. Say, little surgical strike of few kilotons at Beskid tunnel, won't cause more than a hundred death (may be, it won't cause deaths at all) but it will effectively cut western supply capability from 20 to 50 percent. Then, say, there will be bridges over Dniepr, then - important military targets like airfields.
Thats what we have, because you came where you are not belonging, and you got involved in the things you should not have involved in the first place.
Not always. It was a great option in 1945, wasn't it?
There are only two types of answer - escalation and de-escalation. We are doing what we are doing (defending ourselves) and Trump can pick his option.
They can hash those out during the peace negotiations.
1. Trump can advise Putin that unless he agrees to end the war Putin's "black fleet" will not be able to sell any oil. That hould get Putin's attention.
Threats of WW3 are not a good bargaining tactic. Especially with Trump. Take Crimea and Donbas and call it a win.
Not sure who "you" refers to. It could be the US or NATO. Either way, we don't kill Russians, Ukrainians are at war with Russia since Russia invaded them. Your threats against the US are like Litwin's empty threats to "decolonize" Russia. Never happen.
Not true.
Lets end the war, and everyone wins.
Litwin and I are debating that very subject on another thread. He posts videos of EU politicians promoting the "decolonisation" of Russia. and I remind Litwin that those loud EU countries don't have the military power to enforce that threat, so they need to shut up and let Trump negotiate.
Wish-list is a good description. Not to worry.
Decolonisation is not happening, so lets drop it and talk about a peace plan.
True.
You are not considering long term effects of radioactivity and a "nuclear winter".
The 2014 lines protected Russian speaking Ukrainians in east Ukraine, Putin had no justification for invading to capture Kiev. Putin is 72 years old. He probably has a few good years left and needs to pick a successor. Who do you see as "heir-apparent" to Czar Putin? I can't imagine a real democracy with people running for office and having real elections. We have a saying in US politics "Putins political support is a mile wide but a millimeter deep". We saw that when Prigozhin "the chef" was marching toward Moscow and was cheered by the people.
If Putin escalates he will run out of oil money very fast, bad idea.
That statement also applies to Putin's invasion of Ukraine.
Yes it was in WW2. The alternative was invading Japan and losing many more lives on both sides.
You are invading Ukraine fighting on Ukrainian soil. Take Crimea and Donbas and call it a win before escalation happens and things escalate to WW3.
I disagree. If Putin uses a tactical nuke, its over, everything is over...from escalation to escalation.
There is nothing to negotiate about. What is even more important - there is nobody to negotiate with. You don't negotiate with a rabid dog, you just kill it.
If Trump wants to legitimise piracy - no problem, its game for more than one side. I'm sure Mexican Cartels, and not only them will be happy to have modern anti-ship missiles and unmanned ships to wipe out US Fleet, Coastal Guard and damage American coastal an port infrastructure.
Plain lie.There are still a lot of them, and what is worse - Baltic governments glorificate and them as persons and Nazism as ideology.
We already agreed that NATO won't spread eastward. We already agreed that there will be no permanent foreign bases in Eastern Europe. We already agreed that no one country will attack another country without permission of UN SC or in self-defense. We already agreed than Ukraine should be de-facto federalised. We already agreed that human rights (including the right to speak one's language should be respected or visit one's church) should be respected.
No. There are no any "threats" or "bargainings" anymore. We are defending ourselves from genocidal barbarians, and we are going to kill them all to not allow them to kill us. You can help us, you can help them or you can stay away.
Bad analogy. Some people just need to learn things the hard way.
Not piracy, a "boycott". If no one buys Putin's oil what does he do? Your threats about using drug cartels is hilarious.
Russia has no justification for attacking any NATO country. People say stupid things all the time, especially politicians.
Maybe its time to make a formal treaty between Russia and NATO as part of the peace deal? I know you already said that the Budapest Memorandum is just a piece of paper.
Very bad idea.
Russians are fighting on Ukrainian soil, so stop with the "defending yourselves from genocidal barbarians" argument. The 2014 lines were stable until Putin invaded Ukraine and lost. Cut your losses, stop the threats of WW3. Take Crimea and Donbas and call it a win.
Of course you do. The attacks with long-range weapons against undisputed Russian territory makes the difference between facilitation and participation. You are already the participants.
Europeans tried to do it before, they are tring to do it now. They will do it, if we don't kill them first.
It's true. We really hate when other people discriminate, abuse and murder us.
Everyone wins if we end the war on the terms of equal safety and equal rights.
But if the USA choose to be on their side (as they did with Biden) - they have (or they believe they have) a good chance to do it.
If the largest military alliance on the planet wants to genocide you - there is what to worry about. Two previous time when we believed western barbarians - it costed us millions of lives. I don't think that we should repeat the same mistake third time.
They do want it, they try to do it, and there is the good chance that you will help them. So, if you want to talk about reliable and long lasting peace - lets start from the common understanding that we should build the system of equal rights and equal safety for everyone (first of all, of course, for safety of Russians and Americans).
Of course I do. Radioactivity from Chernobyl was more or less equal to radioactivity from, say, 300 ground bursts of Hiroshima-like nuclear bombs may be even more, if we count specifically long term effects (in a week radioactivity will be at almost normal level). And most of counter-value bursts will be air bursts with virtually zero fallouts.
Of course no. They don't protect Russian speaking Ukrainians in Odessa, Kharkov or Kiev.
Who knows? May be Mishustin, may be - Medvedev, may be Nabiullina.
Of course no. We are defending ourselves.
Yes. So, if the alternative is invading Europe (or Europe invading us) - nukes are preferred.
No. As I said many times, its not about territory. Its about safety of Russian people.
Then accept a peace plan and no one gets hurt.
You can't kill Europeans for saying they 'd like to see Russia fall apart (decolonise). Litwin showed us a video where Siberians are fighting with the Ukrainians. So there may be Russian regions that want autonomy from Moscow?
The Ukrainian government did not kill Russian speaking Ukrainians. That is a lie.
No one wants to decolonise Russia. A few loud politicians are promoting that to antagonize Russians.
NATO does not want to genocide Russia, that is propaganda. NATO wants Russia to stop invading Ukraine and killing Ukrainians.
Fine.
So hundreds or thousands of big nukes going off won't cause any ill effects to the climate?
climate.nasa.gov
newatlas.com
You are not defending yourselves fighting on Ukrainian soil, you are invading Ukraine.
Hope they are more peaceful than Putin.
Very bad decision. Ending the war is a much better outcome.
No one wants to invade Russia, that is propaganda. Russia invaded Ukraine.
End the invasion and everyone is safe. Very simple.
May be. And we are going to teach them hard way.
If the whole words bends before all-mighty America and meekly follows its orders? It's unlikely, but talking hypothetically, it will means that our bet on their independence is lost, and we need to settle the things hard way in relatively short time without diplomatic negotiations and economic coerction. It means that we need demonstratively eliminate one of our enemies (highly likely it will be the USA) to inspire not "fear", but "overwhelming terror" in the spirits of all other countries. Combined counter-force and countervalue strike and then - methodical elimination of the last traces of human life on the territory of the former USA (may be, without Alaska and California) with nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. And then - suggeting the world new mutally profitable post-WW3 world order with further demonstrative elimination of those who disagree (highly likely it will be the UK).
Yes, we have both justification and reason to do it. We didn't do it yet only because of our good will
First - they say stupid things. Then - they sign stupid documents. And then - then they do those stupid things. I prefer to kill them before they kill us.
Withdraw you forces back to 1997 borders, and then, may be, we'll negotiate.
It's not Ukrainian soil any more. People of Khersonshina and Zaporozhye already decided to join Russia, and I'm pretty sure, that people of Nikolaev, Odessa, Kharkov and Kiev will make the same choice soon.
NATO did not invade any country, ever.
Good luck with that scenario.
They are if you think they could be a military force near the US.
Attacking a NATO country is a very bad idea. That's why Putin hasn't done it yet.
We could all live like hillbillies ("Kolkhoznik" (Колхозник))
Never happen. NATO is NATO, its 2024 not 1997. You can't reconstitute the USSR either.
OK, we'll see how the war plays out. I think you are wrong.
It's gambling, of course, but it's much better than meekly allow western barbarians genocide us. In the worst case we have a good company in the hell, in the best case - we not just survive, but getting much richer and more powerful.
No, they can't. But they can create really serious problems to you.
Attacking Russia (directly or indirectly) is even worse idea, but you have it done already. So, you either make few steps back and pay fines, either we fight you back.
I do know, what the word "Hillbilly" means, and it is not "kolkhoznik" (for there are no state owned "collective farms" in the USA), and most of Hillbillies are not farmers at all, as much as I know
We are not going to reconstitute the USSR. We are going to crush European invaders, as we do at least once in century.
Nuclear war ends Russia, that is the surest way for Russian decolonisation.
Terrorists do what terrorists do.
NATO did not attack Russia. Russia invaded Ukraine.
EU invaders? Invading whom? NATO are helping defend Ukraine from Russian invaders, for 3-long years now.
Make few steps back, and then we'll talk (after elimination of immediate threats).
Of course we can, and we will. They want to kill us, we are going to kill them first.
No, there are not.
Odessa massacre was clearly demonstrated on-line from many points of view. It was demostrative mass-murder, and Kievan Junta (and their NATO masters') reaction was even more demonstrative.
It's not just few "loud politicians". Dechristianistion and decolonisation were officially declared as the goals of the war by PACE (European Parliament).
NATO's reaction on mass murder of Russian people in Odessa was demonstrative enough.
If we are talking about more or less realistic scenarios of a nuclear war, no.Fine.
So hundreds or thousands of big nukes going off won't cause any ill effects to the climate?
Climate Change - NASA Science
NASA is a global leader in studying Earth’s changing climate.Analysis: Nuclear war would be more devastating for Earth’s climate than cold war predictions
Professor Mark Maslin (UCL Geography) highlights in The Conversation research that used modern climate models to map the effects of a nuclear war, and which found the resulting nuclear winter would plunge the planet into a “nuclear little ice age” lasting thousands of years.www.ucl.ac.uk
"Nuclear winter" would starve billions, but some countries may be spared
If a nuclear war were ever to break out, it probably wouldn’t last long. For a few days, perhaps a week, nuclear weapons would be fired between several countries and catastrophic losses would be swift. But what happens next?
We are defending ourselves by fighting Western proxies on ex-Ukrainian, now Russian soil.
No. They simply can't take this position being more peaceful even than Putin. Putin personal advantage is his European connections and understanding of German language and German psychology. Anybody else will try to eliminate Europe as fast as possible to improve his position.
