dystopian
Veteran Member
Even if it was a coup (which it was not) so what?
That is demonstrably false; as I already showed earlier.
-
Features
Disaster for Ukraine. Rebels route Ukrainian forces at Donetsk
- Thread starter boneyard bill
- Start date
Even if it was a coup (which it was not) so what?
That is demonstrably false; as I already showed earlier.
barbos
Contributor
The only time Russia (Soviet Union really) invaded a foreign country was Afghan War.
Georgia 2008 was technically an invasion but Russia was provoked.
So yeah, compared to US russian army has had very little experience since WW2.
Georgia 2008 was technically an invasion but Russia was provoked.
So yeah, compared to US russian army has had very little experience since WW2.
dystopian
Veteran Member
List of wars and conflicts involving Russia in the 20th/21st centuries:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Russia
Pre WW2:
Boxer rebellion
Russo-Japanese war
World War 1
Russian Civil War
Ukrainian Independence War
Finnish Civil War
Latvian Independence War
Estonian Independence War
Lithuanian-Soviet War
Georgian-Ossetian Conflict
Polish-Soviet War
Invasion of Azerbaijan
Invasion of Georgia
February Uprising
East Karelian Uprising
August Uprising
Sino-Soviet Conflict
Islamic Rebellion in Xinjiang
Soviet-Japanese Border Conflicts
Invasion of Poland
Winter War (Finland)
Occupation of the Baltic States
World War 2
Post WW2:
Guerilla war in the Baltic states
Korean War
Hungarian Revolution
Invasion of Czechoslovakia
War of Attrition (egypt/israel)
Eritrean War of Independence
Ethio-Somali War
Soviet War in Afghanistan
War of Transnistria
East Prigorodny Conflict
Civil War in Tajikistan
Georgian Civil War
First Chechen War
War of Dagestan
Second Chechen War
Russo-Georgian War
North-Caucasus Insurgency
Ukraine/Crimea
List of wars and conflicts involving the US in the 20th/21st centuries:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States
Pre WW2:
Phillippine-American War
Boxer Rebellion
Border War
World War 1
Russian Civil War
World War 2
post ww2:
Korean War
Vietnam War
Operation Power Pack (Dominican Republic)
First Gulf of Sidra Incident
Invasion of Grenada
Invasion of Panama
Persian Gulf War
Somali Civil War
Bosnian War
Operation Uphold Democracy (Haiti)
Kosovo War
War in Afghanistan
Iraq War
2011 Military Intervention in Libya
Military Intervention against ISIS
Intervention in Syria
Russia's list is considerably longer, as you'll note. Keep in mind that whether they're called "invasion of x" or "occupation of x" "or x war" isn't particularly relevant to whether or not they involved actual invasions (these are just the names historians have given to the conflicts themselves); certainly, most of the russian conflicts on the list included invasions if we were to go by the pro-russian's own definitions.
barbos
Contributor
Chechnya and Dagestan are and were part of Russia who were fighting there fucking islamic terrorists from fucking Saidi Arabia who is a fucking friend of US.
Tadjikistan, there was no invasion, Russians are defending border with Afghanistan from fucking islamic terrorists and narco-traffickers, who I should mention it are supported by US. Tadjikistan asked for that themselves
The rest of your bullshit is no different from that.
I mean If I take your logic then I would have to put in the US list the every damn fight between native americans and white Europeans many of whom were dutch, so it's on you mister.
Ferguson,
Occupy Wall-street,
Waco Texas,
that moron in Colorado,
Civil War,
Mexiacan War,
War with England,
War over Philippines,
War with Japan,
Lybia, twice or three times
Egypt
Iran (few times)
Somalia
What the hell, Nazi Germany, Italy, Hungary Austria, Bulgaria!
Spanish War,
Cuban War,
Colombia
Argentina
Nicaragua
Salvador
Panama
Haiti
Guatemala
the rest of Central American counties
Chili
The Moon!
Mars
Venus
Mercury
Jupiter
Saturn
Uranus
Neptune
War on drugs!
Ebola War!
FoxNews!
War with France
War with every damn European nation which set foot in North America.
Zimmerman!
Stop and frisk!
Slavery!
Native americans!
Madoff!
Sub-prime crisis
General Motors!
US Congress
Jerry Springer
American dinosaurs extinction!
Canada is probably the only country which avoided to be "invaded" by US if I use your standard.
There was only one invasion - Afghan war, which was actually provoked by US too.
Soviet Union was order of magnitude less aggressive than US. Does not make SU right but fact is the fact. US was much more aggressive side in Cold War. And after the War US has not changed a bit and Russia basically scaled everything to zero.
You really are painting bad stereotype of dutch people.
Tadjikistan, there was no invasion, Russians are defending border with Afghanistan from fucking islamic terrorists and narco-traffickers, who I should mention it are supported by US. Tadjikistan asked for that themselves
The rest of your bullshit is no different from that.
I mean If I take your logic then I would have to put in the US list the every damn fight between native americans and white Europeans many of whom were dutch, so it's on you mister.
Ferguson,
Occupy Wall-street,
Waco Texas,
that moron in Colorado,
Civil War,
Mexiacan War,
War with England,
War over Philippines,
War with Japan,
Lybia, twice or three times
Egypt
Iran (few times)
Somalia
What the hell, Nazi Germany, Italy, Hungary Austria, Bulgaria!
Spanish War,
Cuban War,
Colombia
Argentina
Nicaragua
Salvador
Panama
Haiti
Guatemala
the rest of Central American counties
Chili
The Moon!
Mars
Venus
Mercury
Jupiter
Saturn
Uranus
Neptune
War on drugs!
Ebola War!
FoxNews!
War with France
War with every damn European nation which set foot in North America.
Zimmerman!
Stop and frisk!
Slavery!
Native americans!
Madoff!
Sub-prime crisis
General Motors!
US Congress
Jerry Springer
American dinosaurs extinction!
Canada is probably the only country which avoided to be "invaded" by US if I use your standard.
There was only one invasion - Afghan war, which was actually provoked by US too.
Soviet Union was order of magnitude less aggressive than US. Does not make SU right but fact is the fact. US was much more aggressive side in Cold War. And after the War US has not changed a bit and Russia basically scaled everything to zero.
You really are painting bad stereotype of dutch people.
Last edited:
dystopian
Veteran Member
Those conflicts and the history of the regions demonstrate that they're not happy about being part of Russia; it demonstrates Russia's imperial ambitions.
I didn't claim that everything on the list was an invasion. The list merely shows the conflicts Russia has been involved; more so than the US, which demonstrates a pattern of hostile imperialism.
Suuure. Occupying the baltic states, hungary, and so on... those are all just "bullshit".
Everything's someone else's fault, isn't it?
barbos
Contributor
And Russia is not happy about them being part of Russia either.
You are assuming that russians are at fault there, when in reality the opposite is true.
It was Chenchia who actually invaded Russia during second War, So you fail miserably.
...
I am surprised you have not blamed War with Nazi Germany on Russia.
Yes, bullshit, these were internal affairs and SU was not the only one member of Warsaw Pact who took part in "helping"
Suuure. Occupying the baltic states, hungary, and so on... those are all just "bullshit".
Everything's someone else's fault, isn't it?
Sure, It was Russia who invaded Nazi Germany, sure.
Last edited by a moderator:
barbos
Contributor
Yes, Dutch Invaded North Amerrica, not to mention Africa and South America.
Not as much as Netherlands
Absolutely. Not only that but dutch sounds like cursing to russian ear.
And Monarchy, they have a king! In 21st century!
I am glad too.
angelo
Deleted
Yes of course Russia has actually invaded places. So has ever major power on earth invades some place at some time or other.
barbos
Contributor
Yes, but unlike Dutch russians were invading places which were invading them first, that is border land.
Dutch would board a ship and sail to some new places in order to kill/enslave natives and take their land.
I know they have an excuse of not being able to invade Germany or France, so the only place to go is open sea.
angelo
Deleted
Everyone does it perhaps, but for what purpose? For the resources, like Japan did in WW2 ? The West had placed an embargo on all imports, what were they to do? Just an example of why sometimes one nation invades another.
Sabine Grant
Member
Obviously, you have no intention to address the reality presented in Article 6 of the Partition Treaty. Russians troops were to respect those stated limitations and did not. The point being (and now duly documented) that by dismissing the stated limitations in Article 6 of the Treaty, Russia engaged in an illegal occupation of Crimea. I am still waiting for you to address that documented argument.
As to my analogy to Italy, it was to point to the reality that an allowance given to a foreign nation to maintain military personnel stationed in a host nation in NO way means an allowance for that foreign nation to utilize its military personnel in a manner which compromises the sovereignty of the host nation. A point you missed from the get go.
As to "Cubans still want US out of Cuba" which you keep crying out as if there were any similarities between the activities of the US military personnel stationed at the Naval Station of Guantanamo bay on a territory leased from the Cuban government (the lease treaty requiring agreement from both US and Cuban governments to be terminated) and the documented activities of the Russian troops in Crimea as they undeniably violated the terms and limitations of Article 6 of the Treaty of Partition between Ukraine and Russia. To my knowledge, such US military presence on the leased territory in the South East corner of Cuba never engaged in any occupation or/and control over Cuban nationals and Cuban administrative buildings to include check points into Cuba. The terms and limitations of the lease agreement between the US and Cuba reflecting the responsibility for such US military presence to not interfere with the sovereignty of Cuba.
No differently than the Partition Treaty placed limitations and terms on the Russian troops stationed in Crimea in regard with respecting the sovereignty of Ukraine. Those terms and limitations I have documented for you. Which you refuse to address. While such documentation intended to point to the reality that the activities of the Russian troops in Crimea resulted in a violation of the said Treaty. That reality cannot and should not be dismissed as it supports the response from other nations who deem the Russian intervention in Crimea (while violating the Treaty of Partition) as being hostile.
The above is detailed and clear enough that there should not be any further comprehension issue on your part. Nor should there be any evasion from the central points.
As to this other outcry in your reply :
Is such one liner supposed to present a justification for the Russian troops to have violated Article 6 of the Treaty of Partition?
Sabine Grant
Member
The reply I have posted for barbos is also addressed to you :
oh and as an aside, the "he" is a she.
barbos
Contributor
Meanwhile there seems to be another Maidan brewing in Ukraine.
Right Sector does not like new government, not right enough for them.
Not a day goes by without mob beating some member of parliament mayor or some other officials.
Right Sector does not like new government, not right enough for them.
Not a day goes by without mob beating some member of parliament mayor or some other officials.
barbos
Contributor
Sabine Grant, you are so good at legalese.
Now try your legalese to justify what you did to native americans, slavery and iran-contras/death squads.
And when you are done with that go talk to british, they think you owe them some explanation about some independence thing or something.
Now try your legalese to justify what you did to native americans, slavery and iran-contras/death squads.
And when you are done with that go talk to british, they think you owe them some explanation about some independence thing or something.
Sabine Grant
Member
Non. I am actually good at documenting my point, a point you and Thief of Fire pursue to evade. While you, particularly, engage mostly in emotional drivel.
Out of those 3, I would be glad to start a thread as to the effects of the European Commercial Triangle which fueled the enslaving of African natives while setting an antecedent for the abuses of French colonialism in my native continent, Africa. Basically, I am a strong anti colonialist. "Native continent" as I was born in a now ex French colony in Africa. If I had to discuss slavery, that would be the focal point of my argumentation exposing the ills of French colonialism which perpetrated the exploitation of native Africans.
Also, try to remember that I am NOT a US citizen. I am not even remotely close to being a "culturally americanized" long term foreign resident in the US.
Once more, you have NOT addressed the point I have underlined now several times : being that the Russian troops stationed in Crimea violated Article 6 of the Partition Treaty. Instead you adopt the mentality that 2 wrongs somehow make it a right. You keep mentioning wrongs committed by other nations as if it justifies the wrong of Russia violating the terms and conditions of the Partition Treaty. It does not. A point you are refusing to acknowledge in this thread.
Then you address me as if I would be inclined in any way shape or form to rationalize or justify colonialism whether it be in Africa, the Middle East, South East Asia, American continents etc...
As to the British, if I have to, Jo who is a Maori and owner of this board will attest as to my stated positions regarding how the British colonization in the native land of her people, New Zealand, exploited and abused the Maori people and their culture. Get it?
As to your addressing me as if I am some ignorant moron, I am the party here who rubbed your nose into a document you still refuse to acknowledge its content. A document , at this point, I believe you had previously done NO home work on. Just you rehashing the same emotionally prompted drivel.
dystopian
Veteran Member
barbos said:
Then give them independence. You know; that thing they've been fighting for.
Actually, it was Russia that started the 2nd war. The Invasion of Dagestan served as the trigger for the 2nd Chechen war; this invasion *did* come from elements that were based in Chechnya, but it is a severe distortion of the facts to claim "Chechnya" invaded Russia. The invasion force that entered Dagestan was in fact part of the Islamic International Brigade, who were not affiliated with the Chechnyan government and thus can not be pointed to as "Chechnya invading Russia". The situation is more comparable what the US faced from terrorist groups operating out of Pakistan and striking into Afghanistan; note that the United States did *not* respond by invading Pakistan, the way Russia invaded Chechnya (again).
Russia's military invasion of Chechnya was completely disproportional to the cassus belli they gave for starting it. Not to mention that if the cassus belli was the IIB's actions in Dagestan, then why was the intent and result of the Russian invasion an end to Chechnyan independence? Again; imperial ambitions at work.
No, just the deal they made with the Nazi's to divide up Poland.
These were not "internal affairs". These were states rightfully reasserting their independence after they had previously been conquered by the Soviet union. These were not part of Russia, and thus were not "internal affairs" (not that that'd justify a damn thing.)
Do you REALLY want me to compare the lists, seeing as how you made the exact same claim about the United States only to be shown to be completely wrong?
We're the darlings of star trek fanatics everywhere; our language makes us sound like Klingons, our history makes us look Ferengi, and our current position in international politics makes us the equivalent of a founding member of the Federation. Not that the sound of our language has anything to do with anything.
A symbolic figurehead with no real power beats a dictator any day.
thief of fire
Member
Ukraine can't be independent. They can't even pay for the gas they have taken from Russia.
They will be looted by the west.
thief of fire
Member
Many people are fooled by the lies the west tells about Russia, but not everyone.
Vaclav Klaus: the West’s lies about Russia are monstrous
- - - Updated - - -
There was no invasion.