Why do the U.S. support Ukraine which has Nazi laws?

[AZrailwhale]

The US had no legal basis for claiming Iraq was a threat, and it was all deliberate lies, that makes the US criminal.
Same with Israel.
The Israeli invasion of Lebanon was not only completely criminal, but included attempted mass genocide at several Palestinian refugee camps.

If there really were a real UN with international laws, the US and Israel would no longer exist, due to their war crimes.

So you are claiming that Iraq DIDN’T invade and conquer Kuwait?

 

[Rigby5]

So...you made it up.

Link to the public press releases. YOU made the claim. Now support it.

There are years of press releases.
But the most obvious were the last in 1993, when the Ukraine and Russia committed to a mutual defense pact.
Are you claiming you don't know about? They why did the Ukraine give up the old Soviet nukes?

 

[g5000]

There are years of press releases.
But the most obvious were the last in 1993, when the Ukraine and Russia committed to a mutual defense pact.
Are you claiming you don't know about? They why did the Ukraine give up the old Soviet nukes?

Still no links, eh?

 

[Rigby5]

Actually THE UN decided Iraq was a threat to world peace after It invaded and conquered Kuwait and was preparing to conquer Saudi Arabia. But keep on editing actual history if it makes you feel better.

Wrong.
The UN always condemned any US force against Iraq.
With the Iraq occupation of Kuwait, Saddam got permission from US ambassador Glasspie before punishing Kuwait for stealing oil and violating treaties by dumping the stolen oil below market value.

And the claim that Iraq intended to remain in Kuwait, or invade Saudi Arabia is just totally false.
The US satellite image of Iraqi tanks on the Saudi border turned out to be totally fake, thanks to honest satellite images by Russia showing no tanks or even tracks.

 

[Rigby5]

So you are claiming that Iraq DIDN’T invade and conquer Kuwait?

I am saying the US ambassador Glasspie gave Iraq permission to punish Kuwait for oil theft and treaty violations.
But actually, Kuwait is populated by ethnic Iraqis, and the emir is a Bedouin whose dynasty was illegally established around the 1890s by a British invasion.

 

[Rigby5]

Still no links, eh?

As I have said a dozen times, the treaties were private, not public.

 

[g5000]

There are years of press releases.
But the most obvious were the last in 1993, when the Ukraine and Russia committed to a mutual defense pact.
Are you claiming you don't know about? They why did the Ukraine give up the old Soviet nukes?

First, you say 1992. Then 1991. Now...1993.

Stop making shit up.

As for why Ukraine gave up its nukes, it was part of the Budapest Memorandum of Security Assurances signed by Russia, the US, and the UK in 1994. That memorandum was an agreement that Russia would not attack Ukraine, Belarus, or Kazakhstan.

Your hallucination of a mutual defense pact between Russia and Ukraine is hilariously false.

In exchange for this security from attack by Russia, Ukraine gave up its nukes.

Ukraine did not ever have the codes for those nukes. Russia did. So when the USSR collapsed, the nukes went back to the Russian Federation in exchange for a guarantee of non-aggression by Russia toward those three countries.

Now let me show you how to do a link to back up one's claims:

Budapest Memorandum - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

See how easy that is?

 

[g5000]

As I have said a dozen times, the treaties were private, not public.

Oh, sooper sekrit treaties, eh?

You said there were public press releases. LINK!

 

[g5000]

As I have said a dozen times, the treaties were private, not public.

Those treaties were so secret, only YOU know about them.

 

[g5000]

Rigby5

You can read the Security Assurance agreement here: https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume 3007/v3007.pdf

Page 169. Which is the 194th page of the pdf.

So...contrary to your idiotic claims, Rigby, it is Russia which has violated the treaty. Not Ukraine.

Putin has been violating the agreement since 2014.

 

[g5000]

Oh, gosh. I provided a link to back up my claims again!

Still waiting for a link to those press releases, Rigby.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Wrong.
This is common knowledge that Gorbachev gave the Ukraine independence in 1991, but under certain conditions.

Betrayal Of Gorbachev Regarding NATO Explained In Detail

Clinton's betrayal of Gorbachov is the root cause of the current impasse. He promised not to expand NATO up to Russia's border.

progressivehub.net

{...

Top leaders of the “Free World” all agreed that the United States would never enlarge NATO to reassure Gorbachev that the new Russia had nothing to fear from NATO.​

By Sharon Tennison, Center for Citizen Initiatives
At last … 30 years plus, the truth comes out. There are numerous accounts by the top leaders of the Free World that they all agreed that the United States would never enlarge NATO to reassure Mikhail Gorbachev that the new Russia had no worry from NATO, definitely there would be no enlargement beyond the borders of the reunited Germany.
Below note how many of the VIP’s assured Gorbachev that he need have no fear … they were adamant that NATO would never move closer to the struggling-to-survive new Russia in the 1990s.
These facts below have been ignored, blurred and buried as Bill Clinton mercilessly began admitting one piece of the former USSR into NATO. Today NATO surrounds Russia with the latest NATO missiles and troops aimed at Russia.
This is what Putin’s defiant resistance and threat to NATO in Ukraine is all about. He demands to have assurances that NATO will back off … or else. Russia is now strong enough militarily to make such demands. All of us could be caught in the crossfires if this situation isn’t resolved.
...}

Absolutely wrong and FALSE.

None of the information you posted constitutes a treaty between Russia and Ukraine.

 

[Soupnazi630]

There were idealists who wanted revolution, but Stalin was not even remotely political.
He was just a bank robber out for personal profit.
That makes him a total capitalist.
Why do you think he killed off all the political idealists?

Stalin was a true communist and believer in the ideology which is rooted entirely in theft.

Capoitalists make money they do not steal it.

He killed anyone who disagreed with him as the dictatorship of gthe proletariate will always do

 

[Soupnazi630]

How was the invasion of the sovereign and innocent country of Iraq, legal?
It is only legal to invade when another nation is violating laws and rights of the US.
Iraq in no way violated any laws or rights related to the US.

Wrong. There is no restriction on who the US may make war on.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Do you think all negotiation are public or something?
Russia could have prevented the Ukraine from becoming independent.

Negotition does not mean treaty. And yes ALL treaties are public. You are a proven liar and can cite no treaty whcih Ukraine broke

 

[Soupnazi630]

Robbing banks is willing to murder others for profit.
That is absolute capitalist.

Marx was over 70 year earlier, but was an absolute egalitarian and believe in democracy.
Everything written by Marx or Engles is against enslavement and tyranny, which are entirely capitalist.

No it is not. Profit does not come from theft it comes from trade.

Marx was a racist piug who hated democracy and believed in tyranny and preached tyranny.

 

[Big Bend Texas]

In the middle of April, I published an article which dealt with the question whether some Ukrainian laws are the Nazi ones (see here).
This article was discussed on USMB (see here) and nobody could disprove that these laws are the Nazi ones, indeed.

It’s an obvious fact that, for example, ethnic Crimean Tatars - according to these laws - are “first-rate” citizens of Ukraine and have more rights; ethnic Hungarians are “second-rate” citizens and have less rights than Crimean Tatars; and ethnic Russians are “third-rate” citizens and have less rights than Hungarians.

Spoiler

It’s another obvious fact, that Ukrainian rulers always make territorial claims to the Russian Crimean Peninsula, where ethnic Russians amount to 67.9% of population (see here).
It means that the Ukrainian rulers want to turn 67.9% of Crimean population into citizens of the “third-rate”!

At the same time, Ukraine intensively armed itself, constantly declared its plans to join NATO etc. The Russian government many times tried to persuade the Ukrainian rulers to remain nonaligned, to let Crimea stay in Russia etc. But Ukraine continued to arm itself etc.

At a certain point of time the Russian government decided that the actions of the Ukrainian rulers reached a dangerous point and very soon the situation could become even more dangerous. And then, the Russian government decided to start a military operation against Ukraine.

But the U.S. supported and support all Ukrainian actions including its claims to the Crimean Peninsula – despite of the Nazi laws in Ukraine.
It means that the U.S. support, inter alia, the Ukrainian plan to turn 67.9% of Crimean population into citizens of the “third-rate”!

The question naturally arises – Why do the U.S. support such a country as Ukraine?

My opinion is that it doesn’t matter for the U.S. what kind of a country Ukraine is. The U.S. want to reduce Russian influence in Europe; the U.S. want to sell their liquefied gas in Europe etc.
Therefore, in my opinion, the U.S. are ready to support even Nazis if these Nazis are hostile towards Russia.

Source

We teach English in the US as the primary language because it is our national language.

Does that make us all Nazis?

 

[Big Bend Texas]

Do you think all negotiation are public or something?
Russia could have prevented the Ukraine from becoming independent.

How exactly? They were already a separate country even under Soviet Rule.

 

[Big Bend Texas]

Robbing banks is willing to murder others for profit.
That is absolute capitalist.

No, that is robbery which is a crime.

Capitalism is a voluntary exchange of goods or services for an agreed upon price without or at least with minimal gov't involvement.

 

[Big Bend Texas]

Wrong.
This is common knowledge that Gorbachev gave the Ukraine independence in 1991, but under certain conditions.

Betrayal Of Gorbachev Regarding NATO Explained In Detail

Clinton's betrayal of Gorbachov is the root cause of the current impasse. He promised not to expand NATO up to Russia's border.

progressivehub.net

{...

Top leaders of the “Free World” all agreed that the United States would never enlarge NATO to reassure Gorbachev that the new Russia had nothing to fear from NATO.​

By Sharon Tennison, Center for Citizen Initiatives
At last … 30 years plus, the truth comes out. There are numerous accounts by the top leaders of the Free World that they all agreed that the United States would never enlarge NATO to reassure Mikhail Gorbachev that the new Russia had no worry from NATO, definitely there would be no enlargement beyond the borders of the reunited Germany.
Below note how many of the VIP’s assured Gorbachev that he need have no fear … they were adamant that NATO would never move closer to the struggling-to-survive new Russia in the 1990s.
These facts below have been ignored, blurred and buried as Bill Clinton mercilessly began admitting one piece of the former USSR into NATO. Today NATO surrounds Russia with the latest NATO missiles and troops aimed at Russia.
This is what Putin’s defiant resistance and threat to NATO in Ukraine is all about. He demands to have assurances that NATO will back off … or else. Russia is now strong enough militarily to make such demands. All of us could be caught in the crossfires if this situation isn’t resolved.
...}

This is of course a lie, there was no such language in the final document they all agreed to and signed.