Russian draft documents on legal security guarantees from the United States and NATO

[Rigby5]

They deserved to be enslaved by Russia after WWII.

Wrong.
The Poles deserve to never be their own country due to what they did before WWI.
Russia enslaved no one.
Colonial imperialists enslave in order to steal resources.
The countries Russia occupied needed rebuilding by Russia, and cost Russia instead of Russia taking a profit like the US would.

 

[Rigby5]

I guess it's the clicks.

Putin's views aren't a mystery, he's been saying the same thing for 20 years, and not just about Ukraine. Poland, the Baltics, etc

I think the time to complain about NATO nukes in Europe was about 1985, when there were thousands of them...

Today there is barely a handful, and they are not anywhere near the Russian borders.

The excuse that he had invade Ukraine to prevent NATO nukes on Russia's borders isn't rooted in reality.

Wrong.
There were never lots of NATO nukes in Europe.
It was just England, France, and Spain who had them.
And they did not want a lot of them, making themselves more of a target.
There were no nukes in Germany until 1983, when the Germans allowed 15 US nuclear bombers to be assigned to German bases.
There are no German nukes.
Turkey had their US nukes removed after the Cuban Missile Crisis.

And you keep missing the point.
England, Spain, and France are far enough from Russia for a retaliatory launch before first impact.
Tactical nukes right on Russia's border are entirely different, in that there is no such time for a retaliatory launch, so a first strike becomes possible, without retaliation.
That is dangerously provocative and can NEVER be allowed by anyone.

 

[Toro]

Everybody hates Russia. For good reason. They murder women and children. They conduct genocide. They are killers. Nobody likes Russia.

In the terrible winter of 1932–33, brigades of Communist Party activists went house to house in the Ukrainian countryside, looking for food. The brigades were from Moscow, Kyiv, and Kharkiv, as well as villages down the road. They dug up gardens, broke open walls, and used long rods to poke up chimneys, searching for hidden grain. They watched for smoke coming from chimneys, because that might mean a family had hidden flour and was baking bread. They led away farm animals and confiscated tomato seedlings. After they left, Ukrainian peasants, deprived of food, ate rats, frogs, and boiled grass. They gnawed on tree bark and leather. Many resorted to cannibalism to stay alive. Some 4 million died of starvation.​

Ukraine and the Words That Lead to Mass Murder

First comes the dehumanization. Then comes the killing.

www.theatlantic.com

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Wrong.
All European nations are so socialist as to actually be communist.
And Russians have never been remotely communist, but always capitalists instead.
And Russia never attacked anyone.
It was Napoleon who invaded Russia, not the other way around.
Europe hated Slavs, not Russians, and it was the Polish Slavs they actually were referring to.
The Poles used Ukrainian (Cossack) cavalry and terrorized Europe for over 100 years.
Russia is xenophobic and kept to itself.
The colonial imperialists in Europe were first Spain, then later England and France, and finally the USA.
The closest the Russian came to be colonial imperialists was the Sino-Russo wars around 1900, with Japan.

All European nations are so socialist as to actually be communist.

That's why they joined NATO, because they love Russia and Commies.

Makes perfect sense now that you've explained it.

 

[Mac-7]

Wrong.

The Ukraine illegally was given large chunks of Russia, populated by ethnic Russians, and since the Ukraine Azov Battalion is murdering these ethnic Russians, the Ukraine is forfeit.
The Ukraine is almost half ethnic Russians, but Kyiv is entirely Ukrainian and prevents any ethnic Russian participation in government.

Combined with crimes like stealing Russian oil, violating treaties, trying to join NATO, etc., the Ukraine is forfeit.
It is like the Confederacy in the South. If you want to commit crimes, like murder and slavery, you forfeit any sovereignty.

And the Ukraine agreed to this Russian invasion in 1992, as terms of their treaty then that gave them independence.
The Ukraine agreed to NEVER try to join any alliance hostile to Russia.

And the Ukraine is not a single culture so should never be a single nation.
It is half Slavic Poles in the west, and half Slavic Russians in the east. They never got along and should never be one country. It was entirely the fault of Khrushchev, in 1955. That problem still needs to be fixed. The Ukraine needs to split off ALL provinces that are more than half ethnic Russian.

it was done through international agreement and was not illegal

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The Poles deserve to never be their own country due to what they did before WWI.

Then the Russians don't deserve to be their own country due to what they did since the 1920s

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The countries Russia occupied needed rebuilding by Russia,

Nah, they needed Russia to leave.

 

[para bellum]

That is a lie.

The US already had put nukes in Poland, under the ridiculous claim they were ABMs to protect Poland from any missile attack from Iran.
The Sprint 3 stage missiles we put into Poland were actually just short range, tactical nukes.
And we only finally took them back out because of threats.

Nonsense. The Sprint was a 2-stage not 3, and was cancelled in 1976. Poland was still under the Soviet yoke.

The system was never deployed outside US territory, and was limited to something like 17 US cities (by then it was called Sentinel, and included a long range missile called Spartan).

The concept of a nuclear ABM system never got past the development stage in the US, MIRV's made it impractical.

----------------

The 1997 Founding Act gave NATO assurances to Russia that there would not be nukes in new member States.

"The member States of NATO reiterate that they have no intention, no plan and no reason to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of new members, nor any need to change any aspect of NATO's nuclear posture or nuclear policy - and do not foresee any future need to do so. This subsumes the fact that NATO has decided that it has no intention, no plan, and no reason to establish nuclear weapon storage sites on the territory of those members, whether through the construction of new nuclear storage facilities or the adaptation of old nuclear storage facilities."

 

[para bellum]

Wrong.
There were never lots of NATO nukes in Europe.
It was just England, France, and Spain who had them.
And they did not want a lot of them, making themselves more of a target.

There were both strategic and tactical nukes in large numbers in Europe during the cold war.

"The total number of nuclear weapons based in Europe reached an all-time peak of 7,300 during the height of Cold War tensions in 1971. The 98% reduction to today’s stockpile reflects the end of Cold War hostilities as well as shifting American defense priorities."

Fact Sheet: U.S. Nuclear Weapons in Europe - Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

Nuclear weapons owned by the United States have been deployed in Europe since the mid-1950s, when President Dwight D. Eisenhower authorized their storage at allied North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) bases on the continent for use against the Soviet Union. Though NATO officially declares...

armscontrolcenter.org

 

[Batcat]

I https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_regimesqWhat did Russia EVER do that was harmful to anyone?
Like with China, Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Syria, Afghanistan, Ukraine, etc.?
The US tried to illegal put dictators in power in all those cases, and Russia worked to defend the people, with nothing in return.

The USSR was hard on its citizens.

Stalin killed millions. A Stanford historian answers the question, was it genocide?

When it comes to use of the word “genocide,” public opinion has been kinder to Stalin than Hitler. But one historian looks at Stalin’s mass killings and urges that the definition of genocide be widened.

news.stanford.edu

Mass killings under communist regimes - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Rigby5]

Everybody hates Russia. For good reason. They murder women and children. They conduct genocide. They are killers. Nobody likes Russia.

In the terrible winter of 1932–33, brigades of Communist Party activists went house to house in the Ukrainian countryside, looking for food. The brigades were from Moscow, Kyiv, and Kharkiv, as well as villages down the road. They dug up gardens, broke open walls, and used long rods to poke up chimneys, searching for hidden grain. They watched for smoke coming from chimneys, because that might mean a family had hidden flour and was baking bread. They led away farm animals and confiscated tomato seedlings. After they left, Ukrainian peasants, deprived of food, ate rats, frogs, and boiled grass. They gnawed on tree bark and leather. Many resorted to cannibalism to stay alive. Some 4 million died of starvation.​

Ukraine and the Words That Lead to Mass Murder

First comes the dehumanization. Then comes the killing.

www.theatlantic.com

Wrong.
The Ukrainians were not the main ones starving to death.
The Russians died in far greater number.
That is because the Ukrainians were hiding and hoarding food.
The more northern Russian cites were too cold to be able to grow as much food as the Ukraine.

But the claim there were "brigades" from Moscow are silly.
When everyone is starving, you can't afford to send "brigades" anywhere.
That would require huge amounts of food for horses, which no one had.

 

[Rigby5]

All European nations are so socialist as to actually be communist.

That's why they joined NATO, because they love Russia and Commies.

Makes perfect sense now that you've explained it.

Countries joined NATO because of bribes, like the billions the US funneled into Kyiv after 2014.

 

[Rigby5]

it was done through international agreement and was not illegal

Wrong.
When something is declared autocratically, against the will of the indigenous people, it is inherently illegal.
The people never agreed to being annexed by the Ukraine.
Khrushchev unilaterally declared it and no one was willing to oppose it.
It was completely and inherently illegal.

 

[Rigby5]

Then the Russians don't deserve to be their own country due to what they did since the 1920s

Wrong.
Russia did nothing "wrong" at all.
You simply have been reading false propaganda, from the evil sources who tried to install dictators in China, Korea, Vietnam, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Panama, Nicaragua, Grenada, Chile, Egypt, Syria, Libya, etc.

 

[Rigby5]

Nah, they needed Russia to leave.

Which Russia willingly and peacefully did, once Russia felt their borders were secure.
Russia never enslaved or exploited anyone like the US does constantly.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Countries joined NATO because of bribes,

And because Russia enslaved and impoverished them.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

When something is declared autocratically, against the will of the indigenous people, it is inherently illegal.

I agree. Russia should stop doing that.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Wrong.
Russia did nothing "wrong" at all.
You simply have been reading false propaganda, from the evil sources who tried to install dictators in China, Korea, Vietnam, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Panama, Nicaragua, Grenada, Chile, Egypt, Syria, Libya, etc.

Russia did nothing "wrong" at all.

LOL! Commie apologists are funny.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Which Russia willingly and peacefully did, once Russia felt their borders were secure.

It was all about feelings? LOL!
Commie apologists are funny. When they're not being all sensitive.

 

[Rigby5]

Nonsense. The Sprint was a 2-stage not 3, and was cancelled in 1976. Poland was still under the Soviet yoke.

The system was never deployed outside US territory, and was limited to something like 17 US cities (by then it was called Sentinel, and included a long range missile called Spartan).

The concept of a nuclear ABM system never got past the development stage in the US, MIRV's made it impractical.

----------------

The 1997 Founding Act gave NATO assurances to Russia that there would not be nukes in new member States.

"The member States of NATO reiterate that they have no intention, no plan and no reason to deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of new members, nor any need to change any aspect of NATO's nuclear posture or nuclear policy - and do not foresee any future need to do so. This subsumes the fact that NATO has decided that it has no intention, no plan, and no reason to establish nuclear weapon storage sites on the territory of those members, whether through the construction of new nuclear storage facilities or the adaptation of old nuclear storage facilities."

Wrong.
The Sprint was 3 stage, but the version they were going to put in Poland was 2 stage.
The Sprint was deployed in the US in 1975.
And you have it totally backwards, as it was MIRV that made a wide general nuclear shield necessary, because with MIRV you can no longer try to impact each warhead with a kinetic or explosive warhead.

The US was in the process of installing these nuclear Sprint missiles in Poland from 2002 and did not finally end the attempt until 2009.
But we only switched to different missiles, the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System.
And still have these nuclear missiles in Poland.

{...
The United States missile defense complex in Poland, also called the European Interceptor Site (EIS), was a planned (but never built) American missile defense base. It was intended to contain 10 silo-based interceptors: two-stage versions of the existing three-stage Ground-Based Interceptors with Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicles that had a closing speed of about 7 km/s. The first planned complex was to be located near Redzikowo, Poland, forming a Ground-Based Midcourse Defense system in conjunction with a U.S. narrow-beam midcourse tracking and discrimination radar system located in Brdy, Czech Republic. EIS was cancelled in 2009 and subsequently replaced with a phased plan—the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System, which will include SM-3 Block IIA interceptors to be positioned in Poland from 2018.
...}

United States missile defense complex in Poland - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Obviously Iran is not a missile threat to Poland, and this is just an attempt to put US nukes closer to Russia.