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

Ringo

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
4,360
Reaction score
1,529
Points
208
Location
Over there
British Call of Du
Ukraine is not banning the Tartar's language. They recognise the importance of making sure it is not lost.

Russians do the same thing
forced deportation accusing them all of having links to the Nazis.
Because they did. Almost all of them. Of the 20,000 Tatar men drafted into the Red Army, almost all deserted. What do they do with deserters during the war? Should they have been shot instead of exiled? Considering also the fact that most of them went over to the side of the Germans and participated in the destruction of the non-Tatar population of the Crimea.
By the way, the Tatars of Crimea did this every time there were foreign interventionists in Crimea, in 1918 when the Crimea was occupied by German troops, in 1854-55, when Anglo-Franco-Turkish interventionists operated in Crimea. And before that, for several centuries, the Crimean Tatars raided Ukraine, Poland and Russia, stealing captives to the Crimea to sell them into slavery.
Even the idiot Khrushchev, who brought back the peoples who had stained themselves with collaboration with the Nazis, did not do this with regard to the Crimean Tatars, their guilt was so obvious and huge.
PS. Those тatars and their families who remained faithful to the oath and their country were not expelled from the Crimea.
 
Last edited:

alexa

Silver Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
1,794
Reaction score
384
Points
98
Location
Scotland
British Call of Du

Because they did. Almost all of them. Of the 20,000 Tatar men drafted into the Red Army, almost all deserted.

I have not found a link saying this. Can you give me one.
What do they do with deserters during the war? Should they have been shot instead of exiled? Considering also the fact that most of them went over to the side of the Germans and participated in the destruction of the non-Tatar population of the Crimea.

Frankly now we seem to be getting into different memes for the awful tartars. This is the sort of thing I keep finding

After the Nazi occupation and Soviet liberation of the Crimea in 1944, however, Stalin deported the Crimean Tatars to Central Asia in for allegedly collaborating with the Nazis. Although it is true that some Crimean Tatars did collaborate, recent scholarship has shown that Tatar treason was no more prevalent than that of any other nationality, including Ukrainians and Russians. Most of the male deportees had fought against the Nazis. More likely, Stalin’s motive in deporting the Crimean Tatars mirrored the fears of his Tsarist predecessors during the Crimean War: the Crimean Tatars were a “fifth column” due to the large diaspora in Turkey, and Sevastopol’s Black Sea Fleet was too important to Soviet strategy to risk.


another similar one seemed to be suggesting it was because they wanted their land. It also should be noted that not everyone who joined the Nazis in WW2 did so because the agreed with a holocaust of Jews or even knew about it.


By the way, the Tatars of Crimea did this every time there were foreign interventionists in Crimea, in 1918 when the Crimea was occupied by German troops, in 1854-55, when Anglo-Franco-Turkish interventionists operated in Crimea.
and other people and countries of course were all living like brothers.

And before that, for several centuries, the Crimean Tatars raided Ukraine, Poland and Russia, stealing captives to the Crimea to sell them into slavery.
and selling these white captives as slaves where?
Even the idiot Khrushchev, who brought back the peoples who had stained themselves with collaboration with the Nazis, did not do this with regard to the Crimean Tatars, their guilt was so obvious and huge.
Not sure what you are saying here. Who is guilty the tartars or Khrushchev. There was widespread 'guilt' in Russia about what Stalin had been up to.
PS. Those тatars and their families who remained faithful to the oath and their country were not expelled from the Crimea.
Well it says in the article I have left quotes from that those who fought against the Nazis were deported. Collective punishment is a war crime now. It may not have been then but it was a very ugly practice and resulted in thousands of Tartars dying.
Edit:
This article seems to describe the situation of the Tartars well including that many soviets knew that the Tartars remaining in Crimea when the war ended did not include any collaborators and so they were not keen to deport the Tartars.
 
Last edited:

Ringo

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
4,360
Reaction score
1,529
Points
208
Location
Over there
and selling these white captives as slaves where?
To the Turkish Empire. Turkey absorbed any number of slaves. The Crimean Khanate was based on the slave trade, having no other sources for existence, everything that could be done, except for catching slaves, agriculture and handicrafts, were occupied by the non tatar population of the peninsula.
The main occupation of the tatars, in addition to nomadic cattle breeding, were raids to Ukraine, Poland and Russia, from which they sometimes brought tens of thousands of prisoners, in addition, a large number of prisoners died on the way to the Crimea.
This bloody abscess existed for so long because Crimea was a vassal of the powerful Turkish empire and Turkish troops sometimes also took part in campaigns to the north.
 

alexa

Silver Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
1,794
Reaction score
384
Points
98
Location
Scotland
To the Turkish Empire. Turkey absorbed any number of slaves. The Crimean Khanate was based on the slave trade, having no other sources for existence, everything that could be done, except for catching slaves, agriculture and handicrafts, were occupied by the non tatar population of the peninsula.
The main occupation of the tatars, in addition to nomadic cattle breeding, were raids to Ukraine, Poland and Russia, from which they sometimes brought tens of thousands of prisoners, in addition, a large number of prisoners died on the way to the Crimea.
This bloody abscess existed for so long because Crimea was a vassal of the powerful Turkish empire and Turkish troops sometimes also took part in campaigns to the north.
Please provide a source for this. What you said in your previous post does not appear to be accurate.
 

alexa

Silver Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
1,794
Reaction score
384
Points
98
Location
Scotland
Please provide a source for this. What you said in your previous post does not appear to be accurate.
The Crimea Tartars appear to be a conglomeration of a lot of people

The Crimean Tatars were formed as a people in Crimea and are descendants of various peoples who lived in Crimea in different historical eras. The main ethnic groups that inhabited the Crimea at various times and took part in the formation of the Crimean Tatar people are Tauri, Scythians, Sarmatians, Alans, Greeks, Goths, Bulgars, Khazars, Pechenegs, Italians and Circassians. The consolidation of this diverse ethnic conglomerate into a single Crimean Tatar people took place over the course of centuries. The connecting elements in this process were the commonality of the territory, the Turkic language and Islamic religion.[39][40][41][18][42][43]


Let's get back on topic as to what we were discussing which was your claims that the Crimea Tartars deserved to be deported - something which apparently led to the death of up to 40% of them. You believed that they all deserted when this was not the case. I have provided sources for this. Your belief for why the Tartars were forced to leave their homeland resulting in the death of up to 40% of them is wrong and even worse the male Tartars who were forced out not only had fought for the Red Army but were known to have. Women, the old, and children were also forced out.
 

Ringo

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
4,360
Reaction score
1,529
Points
208
Location
Over there
Please provide a source for this. What you said in your previous post does not appear to be accurate.
You can translate from Chapter 8, using Google Translate or some other online translator, it tells about the total collaboration of the Crimean tatars during the war with the nazis. This includes the brutal murders of soviet soldiers (for example, mass burning alive). Actually, Stalin did a great favor to the tatars by exiling them from the Crimea, because the returning front-line soldiers would have destroyed them if they had seen what they were doing under the germans.

Chapter 8 DESERTION AND TREASON
"It is a great honor for us to have the opportunity to fight under the leadership of Fuhrer Adolf Hitler, the greatest son of the German people... Our names will later be honored along with the names of those who stood up for the liberation of oppressed peoples."
– From the speech of the chairman of the Tatar Committee Dzhelyal Abdureshidov at the solemn meeting on January 3, 1942 in Simferopol...
 
Last edited:

Silver Cat

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2020
Messages
3,014
Reaction score
624
Points
140
Location
Absaroka
It is hardly a civil war when Russia has invaded Ukraine.
Really? There were civil wars in Vietnam, former Yugoslavia, Libya and Sirya when the USA invaded them. It's difficult to invade really united country.

It would be a bad idea for Russia to try to wage a military war against NATO.
Any war is a bad idea. Even a war of the NATO against small and weak Afghanistan. But there is a plenty of things much more worse.

The US chooses to fight to a decisive victory.

To fight to a decisive victory against nuclear state - you must be ready to fight and win a nuclear war. And Pentagon isn't ready.
You never win nuclear wars. You only ensure that the other side is destroyed. If there is a nuclear war, the US military knows how to ensure that Russia is destroyed.
The Russians are sure that they can win a nuclear war even if the price of the victory will be terrible. That's why they are ready to escalate in this tension situation.

The right questions are being asked. The answer is to keep supplying Ukraine with the weapons they need to defend themselves and thereby keep up the slaughter of Russian troops.

This will prevent Russia from later being able to invade NATO countries.
No. It will make Russia military stronger, more aggressive, bit more poor (or, may be, more rich) and more dependent from China and India.
And, at the same time, it will decrease NATO military possibilities and ruin western economy (say nothing about all these ATGMs and MANPADs in the hands of numerous militants and criminals in Europe, Middle East and Latin America).

Even in the fantastic case of the decisive Ukrainian military victory (Ukrainian Abrams tanks, Leclercs and Leopards in Moscow) - we'll face the same reunited Russia (however they will call it), but with capital in Kiev and far-right ideology, and NATO will have much lesser military capabilities this time.

And that will be a real problem. That's why, first of all, the USA must make America great again. Nobody - neither Ukrainians, nor Poles, nor Germans will protect American people.
 

Silver Cat

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2020
Messages
3,014
Reaction score
624
Points
140
Location
Absaroka
That is incorrect. Most Ukrainians love their government and hate Russia. And that includes all the Russian-speaking Ukrainians too.
Do you want to say, that in fact Ukrainians didn't elected Zelenskiy, and elected Poroshenko?

That's OK. Ukraine has all the Western support that they need.

Same way as Afghanistan's and Southern Vietnam's governments had?
I doubt they are unbeatable, and Russia is no longer going to be trading with Western countries.
Russia is trading with Western countries. Actually, German import from Russia increased at 60% since the start of the operation.
I doubt that Russia is trading one life for twenty Ukrainian ones. When Russia tried to capture Kyiv it was the reverse. Now in the east of Ukraine it is probably more of an even match.
Man, Russia don't try to capture city of 3 million population with few tens of battalions. Generals that stupid had ended after the siege of Grozniy.

But even if it really was one Russian life for twenty Ukrainian lives, that will still drain Russia of the forces that they will need to later invade a NATO country.
No. They won much more people (on the liberated territories) than they lost.
 

Open Bolt

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2022
Messages
1,764
Reaction score
638
Points
163
Location
Michigan
Really? There were civil wars in Vietnam, former Yugoslavia, Libya and Sirya when the USA invaded them. It's difficult to invade really united country.
I do not agree that Vietnam was a civil war.

I do not agree that Serbia/Kosovo was a civil war.

The US didn't invade Syria, although the genocide that Assad is perpetrating would justify such an invasion.


Any war is a bad idea. Even a war of the NATO against small and weak Afghanistan. But there is a plenty of things much more worse.
The war against Afghanistan was a good thing. They attacked us.


To fight to a decisive victory against nuclear state - you must be ready to fight and win a nuclear war. And Pentagon isn't ready.
There is never victory in nuclear war.

The Pentagon is ready to ensure that Russia will die along with everyone else if there is a nuclear war.


The Russians are sure that they can win a nuclear war even if the price of the victory will be terrible. That's why they are ready to escalate in this tension situation.
The Russians are wrong. If there is a nuclear war, they will die along with the rest of the world.


No. It will make Russia military stronger, more aggressive, bit more poor (or, may be, more rich) and more dependent from China and India.
Having their military gutted is making Russia weaker.


And, at the same time, it will decrease NATO military possibilities and ruin western economy (say nothing about all these ATGMs and MANPADs in the hands of numerous militants and criminals in Europe, Middle East and Latin America).
The war and Western support for Ukraine is not harming NATO military possibilities.

The economy may not be as strong as it might have been because of the war, but it is not being seriously harmed by this.

The economy is in far more danger from the inflation that Biden caused with all his pandemic stimulus.


Even in the fantastic case of the decisive Ukrainian military victory (Ukrainian Abrams tanks, Leclercs and Leopards in Moscow) - we'll face the same reunited Russia (however they will call it), but with capital in Kiev and far-right ideology, and NATO will have much lesser military capabilities this time.
NATO's military capabilities will remain strong.


And that will be a real problem. That's why, first of all, the USA must make America great again. Nobody - neither Ukrainians, nor Poles, nor Germans will protect American people.
I am satisfied with the Polish and German contribution to America's defense after 9/11.


Do you want to say, that in fact Ukrainians didn't elected Zelenskiy, and elected Poroshenko?
No. I don't want to say that.

I say that all of Ukraine loves Zelenskyy.


Same way as Afghanistan's and Southern Vietnam's governments had?
It was wrong for us to betray and abandon them (the Kurds as well).


Russia is trading with Western countries. Actually, German import from Russia increased at 60% since the start of the operation.
Western nations are cutting Russia off from their economies as quickly as they can.


Man, Russia don't try to capture city of 3 million population with few tens of battalions. Generals that stupid had ended after the siege of Grozniy.
Russia tried to do it. Russia failed and had many casualties. I do not know how many battalions they had.


No. They won much more people (on the liberated territories) than they lost.
Russia has not won any new soldiers to replace those who have died.
 

Ringo

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
4,360
Reaction score
1,529
Points
208
Location
Over there
Pope: "NATO's expansion to the East provoked Russia"

I observe some change of mood among the likely partners.There have already been several articles and speeches admitting that Moscow was deceived in the early 90s. With "the best intentions", of course, but nevertheless.
A deal is being prepared.
 

Open Bolt

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2022
Messages
1,764
Reaction score
638
Points
163
Location
Michigan
A deal is being prepared.
Wishful thinking. It is far better for the West to trap Russia in an endless war that keeps slaughtering Russian troops forever.

The last thing the West wants to do is give Russia a way to escape the trap.
 

Ringo

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
4,360
Reaction score
1,529
Points
208
Location
Over there
The street named after Soviet cosmonaut Volkov in Kiev they want to rename the street "Forest brothers".
The "Forest Brothers" are gangs of Baltic nationalists, who collaborated with the nazis during the Second World War. It was recognized by the courts that they massively exterminated jews and soldiers of the Red Army.
It must be understood that the convictions and persecutions for Holocaust denial were canceled by the "Jew" Zelensky?
 

alexa

Silver Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
1,794
Reaction score
384
Points
98
Location
Scotland
You can translate from Chapter 8, using Google Translate or some other online translator, it tells about the total collaboration of the Crimean tatars during the war with the nazis. This includes the brutal murders of soviet soldiers (for example, mass burning alive). Actually, Stalin did a great favor to the tatars by exiling them from the Crimea, because the returning front-line soldiers would have destroyed them if they had seen what they were doing under the germans.

Chapter 8 DESERTION AND TREASON
"It is a great honor for us to have the opportunity to fight under the leadership of Fuhrer Adolf Hitler, the greatest son of the German people... Our names will later be honored along with the names of those who stood up for the liberation of oppressed peoples."
– From the speech of the chairman of the Tatar Committee Dzhelyal Abdureshidov at the solemn meeting on January 3, 1942 in Simferopol...
I am needing new glasses and I would need them before reading that. Here is the problem. You are arguing that they deserved to be chucked out of their homeland because they were all Nazi lovers who deserted the red army and joined the Nazis and you provide an old book written when and by whom I do not know. Other people say that Modern texts say that it is now known that only a few went with the Nazis who managed through aggressive policy to be involved with a few more. However it was not many and those who had fought for the red army were those who were in Crimea and were thrown out resulting in around 40% of them dying on their journey to the new place. That is the basic two arguments. I agree with the second and suspect it must have come out of Russia after Russia became Democratic for a short time. If it was the West who wanted to give this version they would have had no problem giving it when Russia was hidden off from the world - though I don't think anyone thought they all deserted. Stalin wanted their land. It was not the first time Russia had chucked them out. After a war which had killed so many Russian's there was really no better suspicion to put on them although it is said even at the time people knew it was not true. What you believe is now described as Propaganda.
 

zaangalewa

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
14,701
Reaction score
1,277
Points
140
That is a lie.
The Ukraine deliberately started this war by stealing Russian oil, murdering 14k ethnic Russians, and trying to put NATO nukes on Russia's border.
Even the Pope admitted all that.

I fear the Pope had been informed in a wrong way from the Patriarch Kirill of Moscow. The NATO is only a defence alliance which was in an extraordinary weak position under president Donald Trump. I remember a time when was even discussed to make also Russia to a NATO member. Germany for example stopped to work together in armament with Russia in 2014 - because of the Russian interventions in the Donbass region of the Ukraine. And when Germany was envolved in Afghanistan this made only sense as long as German soldiers had been able to come home to Germany by crossing Russia. All this situations changed but no one reacted in an adequate way. I would say the whole mass started in 2008 when Russia had attacked Georgia.

I'm sure many nations in the world will be losers because of the war Russia-Ukraine or because of the economic war China-USA.
 
Last edited:

Open Bolt

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2022
Messages
1,764
Reaction score
638
Points
163
Location
Michigan
That is a lie.
The Ukraine deliberately started this war by stealing Russian oil, murdering 14k ethnic Russians, and trying to put NATO nukes on Russia's border.
Even the Pope admitted all that.
Ukraine never did any of those things. Russia is invading them out of pure predatory aggression.
 

Ringo

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
4,360
Reaction score
1,529
Points
208
Location
Over there
 

Ringo

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
4,360
Reaction score
1,529
Points
208
Location
Over there
straight from the heart of events.
 

Ringo

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
4,360
Reaction score
1,529
Points
208
Location
Over there
Lithuania has begun dismantling another memorial dedicated to Soviet soldiers who fell in the fight against Nazism.
Fighting with the dead is all that the Lithuanian leadership is capable of. Apparently, Nazism in Europe is ineradicable
FW1tFcCXkAIgFiP
 

Ringo

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2021
Messages
4,360
Reaction score
1,529
Points
208
Location
Over there
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$225.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top