What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

NATO helped trigger the war in Ukraine

Silver Cat

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2020
Messages
3,014
Reaction score
624
Points
140
Location
Absaroka
I have read that the West of Ukraine now looks down on the East in general thinking of them derogatively as 'slavs' but the Tartars are something else. They are the people who are the most Indigenous to Crimea. They were forced out after WW2 then allowed to come back after the break of the Soviet Union and since the take over by Russia in 2014 they are being forced out again. Most of them are fighting on the side of Ukraine in this war.



Possibly this is what you are talking about above



again Ukraine is not interfering with the Crimean language no doubt because the Soviet Unions treatment of the Tartars makes their language one of the most likely to get lost
First of all, the main problem is not about Crimean Tatars, but about the Russians and Jews. They can't use their languages officially, too.
And no, Crimean Tatars were treated as they deserved. Almost all of them were cooperative with the Germans, taking part in genocide of the Jews and fighting against Soviet Army. So, Stalin had a choice - send almost all of them in prison, men and women separately, of course, which would mean the end of the nation, or give them a chance in exile.
 

alexa

Silver Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
1,794
Reaction score
384
Points
98
Location
Scotland
First of all, the main problem is not about Crimean Tatars, but about the Russians and Jews. They can't use their languages officially, too.
And no, Crimean Tatars were treated as they deserved. Almost all of them were cooperative with the Germans, taking part in genocide of the Jews and fighting against Soviet Army. So, Stalin had a choice - send almost all of them in prison, men and women separately, of course, which would mean the end of the nation, or give them a chance in exile.
Well then you should not have included the Tartars and you were wrong to say Ukraine has put limitations on the use of their language.

You believe in Collective Punishment. That's a war crime.

The deportation of the Crimean Tatars (Crimean Tatar: Qırımtatar halqınıñ sürgünligi, Cyrillic: Къырымтатар халкъынынъ сюргюнлиги) or the Sürgünlik ("exile") was the ethnic cleansing and cultural genocide[c 1] of at least 191,044[c 2] Crimean Tatars on 18–20 May 1944 carried out by the Soviet government, ordered by Lavrentiy Beria, head of the Soviet state security and secret police, acting on behalf of Joseph Stalin.[11][12][13][14] Within three days, the NKVD used cattle trains to deport mostly women, children, the elderly, even Communists and members of the Red Army, to mostly the Uzbek SSR, several thousand kilometres away. They were one of the several ethnicities who were encompassed by Stalin's policy of population transfer in the Soviet Union.

The deportation officially was intended as collective punishment[15] for the perceived collaboration of some Crimean Tatars with Nazi Germany; modern sources theorize that the deportation was part of the Soviet plan to gain access to the Dardanelles and acquire territory in Turkey where the Tatars had Turkic ethnic kin.

Nearly 8,000 Crimean Tatars died during the deportation, while tens of thousands perished subsequently due to the harsh exile conditions.[4] The Crimean Tatar exile resulted in the abandonment of 80,000 households and 360,000 acres of land. An intense campaign of detatarization to erase remaining traces of Crimean Tatar existence followed. In 1956, the new Soviet leader, Nikita Khrushchev, condemned Stalin's policies, including the deportation of various ethnic groups, but did not lift the directive forbidding the return of the Crimean Tatars, despite allowing the right of return for most other deported peoples. They remained in Central Asia for several more decades until the Perestroika era in the late 1980s when 260,000 Crimean Tatars returned to Crimea. Their exile lasted 45 years. The ban on their return was officially declared null and void, and the Supreme Council of Crimea declared on 14 November 1989 that the deportations had been a crime.

Crimea belongs first and foremost to the Tartars who you dispossessed after WW2 and again from 2014. They are fighting against Russia on the side of Ukraine and have had no restrictions on their language by Ukraine as you claimed.
 

Silver Cat

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2020
Messages
3,014
Reaction score
624
Points
140
Location
Absaroka
Well then you should not have included the Tartars and you were wrong to say Ukraine has put limitations on the use of their language.
Ukraine put limitations on the use of all languages but Ukrainian. Of course, they put limitations on usage of Crimean Tatarian language, too.

You believe in Collective Punishment. That's a war crime.
You see - collective punishment like deportation may be much lesser evil, comparing with the sum of individual punishments like death sentence (or twenty five years in prison) for almost all men and many women because of very active collaboration with the German Nazies, especially in genocide of Jews and Russians and brutality in anti-guerilla 'operations'.


Crimea belongs first and foremost to the Tartars who you dispossessed after WW2 and again from 2014. They are fighting against Russia on the side of Ukraine and have had no restrictions on their language by Ukraine as you claimed.
Actually, the Russians came in Crymea (and captured significant part of it, created Tmutarakan's principality on the site of former Greek colony Hermonassa and Khazarian region Tamantarkhan ) in X century, long before Turkish tribes invaded it in XIII century and the Crymean Khanate was established in 1441.
Anyway, the Russians are the vast majority of the Crimean population.
 

toomuchtime_

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
15,888
Reaction score
2,844
Points
280
I have read that the West of Ukraine now looks down on the East in general thinking of them derogatively as 'slavs' but the Tartars are something else. They are the people who are the most Indigenous to Crimea. They were forced out after WW2 then allowed to come back after the break of the Soviet Union and since the take over by Russia in 2014 they are being forced out again. Most of them are fighting on the side of Ukraine in this war.



Possibly this is what you are talking about above



again Ukraine is not interfering with the Crimean language no doubt because the Soviet Unions treatment of the Tartars makes their language one of the most likely to get lost
Again, you assert that Putin's Russia has no obligation to abide by international law or international treaties signed by Russian governments that preceded his if they do not support Putin's fantasies of expanding the Russian empire. This places Russia outside the pale of 21st century civilization which is built on respect for those international laws and treaties that Putin's Russia refuses to abide by. This means that to sign any peace treaty with Putin's Russia that leaves him in control of any part of Occupied Ukraine would be tantamount to abandoning all hope of advancing civilized life among nations. This means that this war and all its repercussions for the Russian economy and Russian civil life are the new normal for Putin's Russia for the foreseeable future.
 

Desperado

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2012
Messages
38,822
Reaction score
13,419
Points
1,560
NATO was the cause of the war in the Ukraine
 

Silver Cat

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2020
Messages
3,014
Reaction score
624
Points
140
Location
Absaroka
Again, you assert that Putin's Russia has no obligation to abide by international law or international treaties signed by Russian governments that preceded his if they do not support Putin's fantasies of expanding the Russian empire. This places Russia outside the pale of 21st century civilization which is built on respect for those international laws and treaties that Putin's Russia refuses to abide by. This means that to sign any peace treaty with Putin's Russia that leaves him in control of any part of Occupied Ukraine would be tantamount to abandoning all hope of advancing civilized life among nations. This means that this war and all its repercussions for the Russian economy and Russian civil life are the new normal for Putin's Russia for the foreseeable future.
In fact, illegal NATO's aggression against Serbia (and further agression against Iraq) ended the post-WWII order, started pre-WWIII order and marked that there is only one actual international law - 'might is right'.
 

toomuchtime_

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
15,888
Reaction score
2,844
Points
280
In fact, illegal NATO's aggression against Serbia (and further agression against Iraq) ended the post-WWII order, started pre-WWIII order and marked that there is only one actual international law - 'might is right'.
Which is exactly what Putin's Russia now saying to the world: give me what I want or I will kill you. What you call NATO aggression against Serbia was in fact defense of Kosovo against Serbian aggression, and the invasions of Iraq was to end Iraqi aggressions against its neighbors. What distinguishes these actions by NATO from the Russian atrocities now being committed in Ukraine is the fact that NATO never had any intention of keeping or profiting from its actions whereas territorial gains and access to Ukraine's natural resources is the whole reason for Russia's actions.
 

Silver Cat

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2020
Messages
3,014
Reaction score
624
Points
140
Location
Absaroka
Which is exactly what Putin's Russia now saying to the world: give me what I want or I will kill you. What you call NATO aggression against Serbia was in fact defense of Kosovo against Serbian aggression, and the invasions of Iraq was to end Iraqi aggressions against its neighbors. What distinguishes these actions by NATO from the Russian atrocities now being committed in Ukraine is the fact that NATO never had any intention of keeping or profiting from its actions whereas territorial gains and access to Ukraine's natural resources is the whole reason for Russia's actions.
First - Kosovo have been a province of Serbia (at least from the Serbian point of view), second - back in 2003 Iraq didn't committed aggression against its neighbours. As result of this aggression and deindustrialisation of former Yugoslavia European industry got plenty of money, say nothing about Middle East oil.
Third - Russia also is claiming defending Donbass (and other south-eastern provinces) from Ukrainian aggression.

85% of the world don't see any difference between Western actions in Serbia and Iraq and Russian actions in Ukraine.
 

AZrailwhale

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
5,712
Reaction score
4,361
Points
1,938
Location
Arizona
Actually, there are plenty of people who believe that the most important goal of American presence in Europe is to prevent ressurection of European Nazism (as well as the most important goal in Middle East is elimination of Jihadistes and terrorists). And for either goals we can cooperate (or, at least, coordinate our actions) with the Russians. And yes, really democratical solution of the Ukrainian conflict (and,wider, of the European security crisis) is granting equal rights (first of all linguistic rights) for the Russians, Tatars, Hungarians and Jews in Ukraine and in the liberalisation of the EU market.
Give us a break. The only people who give a fig about Nazis are those who are using a movement that died in April 1945 to justify current aggression. By that I mean Putin and his kleptocratic supporters. Under Putin, Russia is an expansionist, totalitarian state that has proven itself a danger to its neighbors. It has managed to push the two most isolationist states in Europe into joining NATO and making the pacifist Western European states into increasing their defense budgets to amounts not seen since the heights of the Cold War.
 

Open Bolt

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2022
Messages
1,768
Reaction score
638
Points
163
Location
Michigan
What you call NATO aggression against Serbia was in fact defense of Kosovo against Serbian aggression,
Actually no. NATO and Kosovo were the aggressors.

Most of the nonsense coming out of Russia is nothing but KGB lies, but Russia does have a legitimate grievance regarding NATO's rape of Serbia and subsequent theft of Kosovo.
 

toomuchtime_

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
15,888
Reaction score
2,844
Points
280
First - Kosovo have been a province of Serbia (at least from the Serbian point of view), second - back in 2003 Iraq didn't committed aggression against its neighbours. As result of this aggression and deindustrialisation of former Yugoslavia European industry got plenty of money, say nothing about Middle East oil.
Third - Russia also is claiming defending Donbass (and other south-eastern provinces) from Ukrainian aggression.

85% of the world don't see any difference between Western actions in Serbia and Iraq and Russian actions in Ukraine.
Whatever people may think of the wars in Iraq or Serbia, the UN vote to condemn the Russian invasion of Ukraine was supported by an overwhelming majority of nations, including some states like Serbia that had previously been thought to be Russia's allies, and the vote to suspend Russia from the Human Rights Council because of the atrocities Russia was committing in Ukraine confirmed Russia's international status as a pariah state.

Much more importantly, when Putin tries to justify his atrocities with bs about defending Russian speaking Ukrainians he is saying he has no respect for the relevant treaties and laws and is tearing a huge hole in the fabric of civilization. He is saying that if you don't like what your neighbor is doing, you have the right to blow up his house and kill his family, but if you were a civilized person, you would instead take him to court and have the court forge a compromise, and if Russia were a civilized nation and was honestly concerned about the Russian speaking people of Donbas, Russia would have would have sought to organize the international community to force a plebiscite in Donbas to determine the future status of the region, and Ukraine would have been forced to accede to those demands.

Laws and treaties are the fabric of civilization within countries and among countries, and when Putin's Russia spits on them as it is doing now, Russia becomes the enemy of all civilized nations and makes a diplomatic solution to this war impossible no matter what further atrocities against the Ukrainian people Putin threatens.
 

toomuchtime_

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
15,888
Reaction score
2,844
Points
280
Actually no. NATO and Kosovo were the aggressors.

Most of the nonsense coming out of Russia is nothing but KGB lies, but Russia does have a legitimate grievance regarding NATO's rape of Serbia and subsequent theft of Kosovo.
Possibly, Serbia has a right to complain about the conflict and its aftermath, but since Serba has been campaigning to join the EU since 2009, it would seem that complaint has been largely resolved in the minds of the Serbian government and Serbian people. To assert that Russia has a legitimate grievance about what happened in Serbia is bizarre.
 

Open Bolt

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2022
Messages
1,768
Reaction score
638
Points
163
Location
Michigan
Possibly, Serbia has a right to complain about the conflict and its aftermath, but since Serba has been campaigning to join the EU since 2009, it would seem that complaint has been largely resolved in the minds of the Serbian government and Serbian people. To assert that Russia has a legitimate grievance about what happened in Serbia is bizarre.
Russia is a close ally of Serbia and disliked seeing their friend harmed. It is like the US objecting if someone does something bad to Israel or Canada.
 

toomuchtime_

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
15,888
Reaction score
2,844
Points
280
Russia is a close ally of Serbia and disliked seeing their friend harmed. It is like the US objecting if someone does something bad to Israel or Canada.
There may be a cultural affinity between the two largely Slavic states, but Serbia is trying to join the EU and voted in the UN to condemn the Russian invasion of Ukraine, so calling them close allies is overstating the relationship.
 

Silver Cat

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2020
Messages
3,014
Reaction score
624
Points
140
Location
Absaroka
Whatever people may think of the wars in Iraq or Serbia, the UN vote to condemn the Russian invasion of Ukraine was supported by an overwhelming majority of nations, including some states like Serbia that had previously been thought to be Russia's allies, and the vote to suspend Russia from the Human Rights Council because of the atrocities Russia was committing in Ukraine confirmed Russia's international status as a pariah state.

Much more importantly, when Putin tries to justify his atrocities with bs about defending Russian speaking Ukrainians he is saying he has no respect for the relevant treaties and laws and is tearing a huge hole in the fabric of civilization. He is saying that if you don't like what your neighbor is doing, you have the right to blow up his house and kill his family, but if you were a civilized person, you would instead take him to court and have the court forge a compromise, and if Russia were a civilized nation and was honestly concerned about the Russian speaking people of Donbas, Russia would have would have sought to organize the international community to force a plebiscite in Donbas to determine the future status of the region, and Ukraine would have been forced to accede to those demands.

Laws and treaties are the fabric of civilization within countries and among countries, and when Putin's Russia spits on them as it is doing now, Russia becomes the enemy of all civilized nations and makes a diplomatic solution to this war impossible no matter what further atrocities against the Ukrainian people Putin threatens.
Bla-bla-bla. There is only one international law since 1999 - "Might is right". That was why the Western countries invaded Serbia, Iraq, Libya, other places. That was why Saudis invaded Yemen. That was why China violated treaties about HongKong. That was why Kievan Junta invaded Donbass. And that was why Russia invaded Ukraine. All of them used nice words for justification of their actions, but the words are cheap and only real military possibilities matter now.
And that is why we have to make America great again. It's a mere illusion that we have a choice. In fact we can elect Trump, or Biden will ruin the USA.
 

toomuchtime_

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
15,888
Reaction score
2,844
Points
280
Bla-bla-bla. There is only one international law since 1999 - "Might is right". That was why the Western countries invaded Serbia, Iraq, Libya, other places. That was why Saudis invaded Yemen. That was why China violated treaties about HongKong. That was why Kievan Junta invaded Donbass. And that was why Russia invaded Ukraine. All of them used nice words for justification of their actions, but the words are cheap and only real military possibilities matter now.
And that is why we have to make America great again. It's a mere illusion that we have a choice. In fact we can elect Trump, or Biden will ruin the USA.
Exactly my point. Putin's Russia respects no laws, no treaties and that is why there is no diplomatic solution to this war, no peace treaty can be taken seriously by a nation that believes, might is right. The war will go on until Putin's Russia exhausts itself trying to prove might is right.
 

Richard-H

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
8,078
Reaction score
2,224
Points
245
Yes. From their point of view - the stake is the very existence of the Russian people (or at least twenty million Russians in Ukraine).

The Russian high command (as well as ordinary soldiers) prefer to kill enemies of the Russian people i.e. western-backed Ukrainian militants and western mercenaries. And they are eager to kill Western soldiers as well.


You see, in the case of NATO occupation of the lands West from Dniepr - the Russians will, at least, use their proxies against NATO forces and, it will be full scale guerilla war, in which ordinary American soldiers can't see the difference between a Russian and an Ukrainian at all, and often will try to shoot them all just to survive. And the things can go really ugly with all those western ATGMs and Manpads (say nothing about tanks and jets) in the hands of irregulars with unclear loyalty. It will be much worse than Vietnam by itself, but what is much worse, it can easily and even almost inevitablely escalate to the level of a regional nuclear war.

I see that your pushing the BIG LIE that Ukrainians want to exterminate all Russian Ukrainians. Yet about half of the Ukrainian army are Russian Ukrainians. Ther may have been a small number of Ukrainians that wanted to eliminate everything Russian in Ukraine, but Russia ahs grossly exagerated their numbers and their power in Ukraine.

In the U.S. there are people who'd like to eliminate all non-whites, and others that want to eliminate Jews. They are a tiny nimber and have no real power.

Russia has a history of revolution and coups. Once this war goes on long enough, and Russian casualties mount, Putin's days are numbered. They only question is if the Ukrainians can hold out that long. Since they don't have a choice, they probably will.

NATO would do fine in Ukraine. At least a whole lot better than the Russians are doing!
 

Ringo

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
4,360
Reaction score
1,529
Points
208
Location
Over there
There are almost imperceptible changes in the electrified air of international relations. ..
Reuters honestly write that no one was killed in the missile strike of the Russian Aerospace Forces on the Kiev plant. A month ago they would have told a chilling story about a hospital or a school that was hit
 

Silver Cat

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2020
Messages
3,014
Reaction score
624
Points
140
Location
Absaroka
Exactly my point. Putin's Russia respects no laws, no treaties and that is why there is no diplomatic solution to this war, no peace treaty can be taken seriously by a nation that believes, might is right. The war will go on until Putin's Russia exhausts itself trying to prove might is right.
The problem is, that from the Russian point of view, it's US and NATO who don't respect laws, treaties and this is why they have to finish Ukrainian Civil War (and, may be, European Security Crisis) by military force.
So, the USA and Russia have a simple choice - to find a mutually acceptable diplomatic solution, or to fight until decisive victory of one of the sides. The problem is that current US administration isn't ready for both scenarios. US diplomats don't understand Russia, and the soya boys from Pentagon don't know how to win a nuclear war against Russia. And that's why American People and American Congress must control those incompetent fools from Administration and ask them right questions.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$225.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top