:Ru: Care to comment on Russian aggression?

:Ru: Care to comment on Russian aggression?
0
#141

Where did I get it from then? I can’t see it now so I can only assume its from a previous piece by him, I’ll find or retract and apologise.

#142
#143

Its in there.

#144

Your still not getting the basics of how a calendar works, are you?
Only 4 years before the purported ‘evidence’ was available. Your getting further and further away from reality.

#145

So its ok to provide heavy weapons later on to rebels and Russians invading?

#146

Your doing it again. You claimed Robert Parry was a Russian lackey and in reply to the article posted, you said this(the last word proves it).

You have shown no spurious quotes. Why do you lie so much?

#147

Why is it a lie if he said it?

#148

Did you read this?
If you did and understand a calendar, i’m not sure why you posted it. You do help prove some earlier points and it does show how ahead of most of the rest Parry was(not to mention, far more honest).

"Gershman, whose NED is funded by the U.S. Congress, wrote: “Ukraine’s choice to join Europe will accelerate the demise of the ideology of Russian imperialism that Putin represents. Russians, too, face a choice, and Putin may find himself on the losing end not just in the near abroad but within Russia itself.”

In other words, from the start, Putin was the target of the Ukraine initiative, not the instigator. But even if you choose to ignore Gershman’s clear intent, you would have to concoct a bizarre conspiracy theory to support the conventional wisdom about Putin’s grand plan."

The next 3 paragraphs fill it out. Worth reading Barry.
The the bit after your quoted paragraph, just for context(remember the date, it’s important) :wink:

One former U.S. intelligence official who has examined the evidence said the intelligence to support the claims of a significant Russian invasion amounted to “virtually nothing.” Instead, it appears that the ethnic Russian rebels may have evolved into a more effective fighting force than many in the West thought. They are, after all, fighting on their home turf for their futures.

Concerned about the latest rush to judgment about the “invasion,” the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, a group of former U.S. intelligence officials and analysts, took the unusual step of sending a memo to German Chancellor Angela Merkel warning her of a possible replay of the false claims that led to the Iraq War.

“You need to know,” the group wrote, “that accusations of a major Russian ‘invasion’ of Ukraine appear not to be supported by reliable intelligence. Rather, the ‘intelligence’ seems to be of the same dubious, politically ‘fixed’ kind used 12 years ago to ‘justify’ the U.S.-led attack on Iraq.”
The link to the memo is available on the Parry article.
You’ve dismissed time to cast spurious allegations against Parry. Who do you work for(i’m giving you the benifit of the doubt, that you’re not a fucking idiot)?
For everyone else, the article is very good.

#149

You’re simply believing that as you want to, a narrative to complete your opinions, what about heavy weaponry, are you denying they’re in Eastern Ukraine and Crimea?

#150

You made a spurious claim against Parry. You can’t admit it. No one is surprised. I’m just calling you out on it, like Gav is on the football thread.
Do you understand time?

#151

Perfectly well.

#152

But you still claimed (apparent)evidence from 2018 should have been known by Parry in 2014.
I don’t think you understand it at all.

#153

I don’t think I said 2018, if I did I apologise.

#154

Radio cia article has date on it. Read what you post and apologise to the memory of Robert Parry.
Want to do territorial sovereignty and nautical law now?
You know, who broke the rules and who followed them rigorously, despite Washington politicians openly saying they were going to blow the bridge up. Thank fuck not all powerful people are fucking mad.

#155

No not at all why would I answer those questions when you refute an invasion took place.

#156

I don’t refute it, the dictionary does. You ignore the meaning of words and you try to disparage a well respected journalist by ignoring time and evidence. Admit that you got it wrong.
You do everything mentioned in the 3 Patrick Armstrong articles.

#157

Who refutes it, the whole international community must need a dictionary.
His analysis was evidently wrong as Russian forces have amassed in Crimea and Eastern Ukriane (land grab buffer zones, remember us talking about them) and using Nazi’s is an age old slander since World War II against Ukrainians and the Soviet days, they’re both extremely nationalist, homophobic and right wing compared to us broadly.
Why did the Russians illegally build a bridge?
If you don’t think the definition of invasion covers Russia’s acts then you shouldn’t be on here you should be in night school.

As per its all bleating with you.

Admit invasion and I’ll happily clear the air with you without dubious copy and pastes and twitter feed examples which carry little weight in a disinformation war.

#158

Considering at the time that no “actual” Russian forces “invaded” Crimea or elsewhere, perhaps a redefinition of “invasion” would make your points more accurate Bazza.

Pedantic yes, but then many of your quotes are pushing pedantic debating points.

So was there a Russian invasion? No.
Did troops alleged to be of Russian Origin enter Ukraine? Yes.
Was that a de facto “invasion” or an illegal act. Which is the better rant to focus on?

:lou_eyes_to_sky:

#159

I would argue the Russian military in Ukraine in advancing, holding, engaging and occupying is an invasion against the civilian population.
Whether the Russian military are so ill-disciplined as not to taking their (markings) off properly and also not respecting even basic rules for engagement is neither here nor there.

The Russians want to control the Azov Sea (illegal bridge building) and in turn turn Eastern Ukraine towards them, old skool Soviet style bullying and the nice West full for it every time as we’re scared of confrontation with them.

We all know or I do what this is about, its about buffer zones and influence, Russia can not stand any of its previous states becoming democratic and possibly joining NATO, any nation with internal disputes can not join hence their land grabs and stoking up of tensions in Georgia.

The same goes with the Transnistria region.

#160