Ukraine American Hit list

[sexman333]

Your government at work:

U.S. taxpayer funds that are subsidizing the Ukrainian government are “being used to target and intimidate American citizens voicing their constitutional rights to freedom of speech.”

https://mronline.org/2022/09/21/ukra...propagandists/

[Next Best Thing]

Give them another $50 billion.

Problem almost 1/8th solved.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by sexman333

Your government at work:

U.S. taxpayer funds that are subsidizing the Ukrainian government are “being used to target and intimidate American citizens voicing their constitutional rights to freedom of speech.”

https://mronline.org/2022/09/21/ukra...propagandists/

how interesting that the leftist press was deriding Zelenskyy as a far right fascist dictator who suppressed political dissent and free media then Vlad Poots invades and now he's a paragon of freedom and democracy.


bahahahhaaaaa


and just so we are clear, it was Zelenskyy who upon being elected immediately began calling for admittance into NATO that forced Vlad Poots to invade.


when the USSR collapsed, it was agreed that NATO would not expand eastward and in exchange Ukraine gave back all those nukes to Mother Russia, then over time NATO did exactly that. forget the small potatoes, Ukraine is the big domino Putin would not stand for joining NATO.


now you have Zelenskyy, leader of the third most corrupt country behind only Russia and China calling for the US to save his corrupt ass with preemptive nuke strikes on Russia.


but he's a paragon of freedom and democracy.


bahahahhaaaaaaaaaa

[Next Best Thing]

Difficult not to agree with what Waco Kid has said.

Most of the time he's spitting out a plausible narrative that I almost entirely agree with, this is one of those times.

No longer really curious what the cum guzzling simp leftists have to say about this unless it's an admission that they're guiltists or outright homosexuals.

[Tigbitties38]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

how interesting that the leftist press was deriding Zelenskyy as a far right fascist dictator who suppressed political dissent and free media then Vlad Poots invades and now he's a paragon of freedom and democracy.


bahahahhaaaaa


and just so we are clear, it was Zelenskyy who upon being elected immediately began calling for admittance into NATO that forced Vlad Poots to invade.
Jesus you pour the shit on.

Russia stole the Crimea in 2014.

Ukraine president signs amendment on NATO, EU membership
Feb 19, 2019

KIEV, Ukraine (AP) — Ukraine’s president on Tuesday signed a constitutional amendment committing to join NATO and the European Union, acknowledging that the nation still has a long way to go to meet the membership criteria.

Speaking in parliament, Petro Poroshenko said he sees securing Ukraine’s membership in the EU and NATO as his “strategic mission.”

Poroshenko, who is running for a second five-year term in the March 31 election, told parliament that he aims to make a formal bid to join the EU by 2023 and also negotiate a detailed action plan for joining NATO.

He acknowledged, however, that Ukraine needs to go a “long way” to “do its homework” on meeting the criteria of joining both the EU and NATO.

Not Zelensky!

https://theconversation.com/ukraine-...he-east-177085


when the USSR collapsed, it was agreed that NATO would not expand eastward and in exchange Ukraine gave back all those nukes to Mother Russia, then over time NATO did exactly that. forget the small potatoes, Ukraine is the big domino Putin would not stand for joining NATO.
They also agreed not to shoot Santa down! It's obvious you make this shit up. No fake news would make up shit this lame.

Ukraine: the history behind Russia’s claim that Nato promised not to expand to the east

The main issue highlighted by the crisis on the Ukraine borders over the past few months has predominantly focused on the role of Nato and the friction over the eastward expansion of the alliance. This has been a constant message emerging from the Kremlin: that the Nato membership of many parts of the old Soviet Bloc, and the prospective membership of Ukraine to the alliance, poses a threat to Russian sovereignty.

But the decision to accept former members of the Warsaw Pact, the defensive alliance which included the USSR and several eastern European countries, is being subject to a revisionist history. This is perpetuating a myth that Nato promised not to expand eastwards after the Soviet Union dissolved.

In 2014, the former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev marked the 25th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin wall by noting in an interview that that Nato’s enlargement “was not discussed at all” at the time:

Not a single Eastern European country raised the issue, not even after the Warsaw Pact ceased to exist in 1991. Western leaders didn’t bring it up, either.

There was, he said, no promise not to enlarge the alliance, though in the same interview Gorbachev also stated that he thinks that enlargement was a “big mistake” and “a violation of the spirit of the statements and assurances made” in 1990.

Indeed, the only formal agreement signed between Nato countries and the USSR, before its breakup in December 1991, was the Treaty of Final Settlement with Respect to Germany. The promises made specifically relate to Germany, and the territory of the former GDR, which were on the deployment of non-German Nato forces into eastern Germany and the deployment of nuclear weapons – and these promises have been kept.

Looking for security
In seeking to develop a role in the international order after the end of the cold war, Nato realigned towards a crisis management and conflict prevention security function. The alliance agreed in July 1992 to offer to undertake peacekeeping duties on behalf of the United Nations and the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe. The North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC) had been established in 1991 with the USSR and former Warsaw Pact countries as members, to enable dialogue and enhance transparency between western and eastern Europe.

But many former Warsaw Pact countries wanted a greater level of assurance of their security after the collapse of the Soviet Union, especially Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia. These countries duly signed the Visegrad Declaration in February 1991, with the objective of “full involvement in the European … system of security”.

The relative security of the eastern European states was challenged during the 1990s due to the attempted October coup in Moscow in 1993, the first Chechen war in 1994 and Russian assistance to the breakaway Republic of Abkhazia in the south Caucasus. The combination of these events increased the perception of vulnerability, particularly in the Baltic states, indicating that Moscow was prepared to act militarily to pursue its security objectives.

Alongside the increasing security concerns of former Warsaw Pact countries, there was significant debate in the early 1990s about the merits of enlargement. Rather than jump straight into enlarging Nato, the Partnership For Peace (PfP) was established in 1994 and included NACC members as well as former Soviet Asian countries, such as Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan. The result was a greater formalisation of the security arrangements, initially developed by the NACC, into a structure that allowed for PfP members to engage in Nato peacekeeping operations in the former Yugoslavia.

Russia was a participant in these new security arrangements, and was keen to clarify that Nato enlargement was not a security threat to Russia. The then president of Russia, Boris Yeltsin, wrote in a September 1993 letter to the then US president, Bill Clinton: “Any possible integration of east European countries into Nato will not automatically lead to the alliance somehow turning against Russia.” So it was being clearly signalled that Russia did not object to the direction Europe’s new security architecture was following.

The three Visegrad countries were duly invited to join Nato at the 1997 Madrid Summit, joining in 1999. Slovakia was forced to wait until 2004. The move was widely supported by the people of the countries which joined. Hungarians voted 85.3% in favour of Nato membership in a referendum, for example.

Enemies no longer
The bedrock of the Nato-Russia relationship, the Nato-Russia Founding Act, was also signed at the 1997 Madrid Summit alongside the enlargement invitations. As the second formal agreement of the post-Cold War era between Russia and Nato, the act confirms that “Nato and Russia do not consider each other as adversaries”, and that Nato transformation is “a process that will continue”. It is, therefore, clear that Nato enlargement, was not considered a primary security concern for Russia.
The Baltic States openly pursued Nato membership, following the signing of the Baltic Charter of Partnership with the US in 1998. Rather than oppose Baltic membership, Russia actually helped it to happen by resolving border disputes with Lithuania.

Russia also demonstrated its continued to desire to remain in a cooperative security relationship by developing the Nato-Russia Council in 2002. Despite Russia’s occupation of the Crimea and Donbass, both legally still part of Ukraine, the council has still met a number of times a year, most recently on January 12 2022, alongside the informal lines of communications that continually remain open.

Nato enlargement has been a controversial subject – within as well as outside of the alliance – since the 1990s. But, when the present situation is placed within an appropriate context, it can be argued that Nato is not an aggressive, expansionist alliance. It also appears that Russia gave at least tacit approval to the enlargement, including the former Soviet Baltic states, and was signalling its desire to be a partner in the European security architecture.

Of course this has changed over the past decade. But the reason for that changed relationship is not Nato – it’s Vladimir Putin.


now you have Zelenskyy, leader of the third most corrupt country behind only Russia and China calling for the US to save his corrupt ass with preemptive nuke strikes on Russia.
Jesus H Christ

Zelensky called for pre-emptive nuclear strikes?

What ever you say.


but he's a paragon of freedom and democracy.


bahahahhaaaaaaaaaa

As a matter of fact, he is.
Another fact is you are lying out of your ass.

You and trump are in putin's pocket.

But we knew that already.
Think how you look pretending to be an American.
But at least your party dues are up to date.

[Next Best Thing]

It's possible there's something more boring and less convincing than copying/pasting bullshit liberal blather, not sure what it is though. Maybe posting retarded cartoons? Who knows.

[Tigbitties38]

Originally Posted by Next Best Thing

It's possible there's something more boring and less convincing than copying/pasting bullshit liberal blather, not sure what it is though. Maybe posting retarded cartoons? Who knows.

Listening to you go off topic and try to hijack the thread is right up there.

I can see the truth bores you since you can't refute to the facts in my post. That's called a linked post. You can't argue with facts so you argue with me.

[rooster]

Originally Posted by Next Best Thing

It's possible there's something more boring and less convincing than copying/pasting bullshit liberal blather, not sure what it is though. Maybe posting retarded cartoons? Who knows.

I would offer that copying/pasting bullshit conservative blather is at least as bad. Yer pal sexy-man just luvs him some good unbiased slobber from "Covert Action." (Hey! It is NOT a conspiracy theory rag! They have told you that a million times!)

AND ....sexy is the pro at posting "r-word" cartoons (sorry, my wokeness won't allow me to use that word).

Whew. Is there dissent amongst the elitist Icky cabal of NBT and sexy-man? Some (not so) thinly veiled criticism here?

.