Russia could use chemical weapons in Ukraine

Page 2 of 13 [ 208 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 13 Next

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

10 Mar 2022, 3:58 pm

It's preposterous to believe that there is any justification for what the Russians are doing.

It's ridiculous to put any spin on the situation-----other than Russia invading a sovereign country with the intention of making it unsovereign. All for the obsolete concept of a "Great Russia."

And they're committing war crimes in the process. They are playing very dirty pool.

magz
Forum Moderator

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

10 Mar 2022, 4:04 pm

1. What "totally legal" weapons for depopulation do you mean?

2. Originally, Russians didn't want to depopulate Ukraine, they wanted to install a puppet government there - but Ukrainians turned out completely unwilling to accept that "operation".

3. Dictators can't afford to lose wars, their position is based on impression of power, so Russians can't just go home (which would have been the best for everyone but Putin and his KGB cronies).

4. So now, the war is about bullying Ukrainians into submission.

_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>

VegetableMan
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,208
Location: Illinois

10 Mar 2022, 4:08 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:

It's preposterous to justify the invasion, but not preposterous to give the full context of how this crisis happened.

It wasn't unprovoked. The U.S. and NATO bear a part of the responsiblity for this invasion. After the unification of Germany, NATO agreed not to push further east into countries that were part of the former USSR. But they didn't comply, and kept pushing towards Russia's borders arming the NATO countries to the teeth.

Again, it doesn't justify this invasion. But rather tired of not getting the whole truth from our sh***y media.

_________________
What do you call a hot dog in a gangster suit?

Oscar Meyer Lansky

Matrix Glitch
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Oct 2021
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,741
Location: US

10 Mar 2022, 4:17 pm

Mikah wrote:

magz wrote:

It's no time for mocking.
It's freaking happening here.

If you want to terrorise or depopulate an area (itself a questionable claim to make of Russian forces in Ukraine right now) there are plenty of legal and more effective weapons that will do the trick, with a much lower chance of killing friendlies; weapons that don't also helpfully give various countries yet another casus belli against Russia. It makes no sense for Russia to do this, just as it didn't make sense for Assad to use them when his war was winding down. You don't even have to investigate to know that it's BS war propaganda. The false flag attacks will no doubt come next, just as they did in Syria.

Unless you actually want this war to escalate to the point where nuclear armed powers are fighting each other over such a completely stupid and avoidable conflict, you must take a stand against this propaganda.

At what point is Putin doing what makes sense?

magz
Forum Moderator

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

10 Mar 2022, 4:18 pm

No formal commitment regarding expansion of NATO was ever made after unification of Germany.
Russia gave very mixed signals at the time.

Quote:

Russian reactions to possible NATO expansion during the 1990s were however mixed.[17] During an August 1993 visit to Poland, Russian President Boris Yeltsin told Polish President Lech Wałęsa that "Russia does not oppose Poland's membership in NATO and does not perceive its membership in NATO as a threat to Russia." Under pressure from opposition within Russia, this informal declaration was retracted the following month,[18] and Yeltsin wrote that October that expansion violated the spirit of the 1990 agreement, marking the beginning of this grievance among Russian elites.[19] Similarly, in May 1997, Yeltsin signed an agreement with NATO that included text allowing enlargement, but then described NATO expansion as a threat in his "National Security Blueprint" that December.[20]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlargement_of_NATO

_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>

Mikah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Oct 2015
Age: 37
Posts: 3,201
Location: England

10 Mar 2022, 4:18 pm

magz wrote:

1. What weapons do you mean?

Off the top of my head, napalm or other incendiaries would do the trick. But no, Russia is going to use banned chemical weapons, obligating third parties to respond. How thoughtful of them.

magz wrote:

2. Originally, Russians didn't want to depopulate Ukraine, they wanted to install a puppet government there - but Ukrainians turned out completely unwilling to accept that "operation". Dictators can't afford to lose wars, so Russians can't just go home (which would have been the best for everyone but Putin and his KGB cronies).

3. So now, the war is about bullying Ukrainians into submission.

Perhaps, I'm skeptical of everything I'm hearing about the invasion plans. Even if it isn't going as quickly as first desired, they are still making record time, beating even the U.S. invasion of Iraq. But as said, if this is their intent, which I doubt, there are other ways of going about it that don't potentially drag foreign powers further into the conflict. Putin is neither a comic book villain, nor an idiot.

_________________
Behold! we are not bound for ever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory, Farewell!

Mikah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Oct 2015
Age: 37
Posts: 3,201
Location: England

10 Mar 2022, 4:25 pm

Matrix Glitch wrote:

At what point is Putin doing what makes sense?

It makes perfect sense. Imagine if Quebec or some other part of Canada became independent, then entered a military alliance with the Russian Federation, the Russians salivating at the prospect of planting weapon systems along the northern U.S. border. At what point in that story would the U.S. intervene? Would the U.S. respect the sovereignty of said independent Canadians? Or would the Munroe Doctrine still stand? The answer of course is the hypothetical independent Canadians desperate to be buddies with Russia would find themselves subject to torrents of propaganda and money and NGOs f*****g around, CIA-lead coup-d'etats and perhaps even direct military action, which is where Ukraine now finds itself.

_________________
Behold! we are not bound for ever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory, Farewell!

magz
Forum Moderator

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

10 Mar 2022, 4:30 pm

He may or may not use chemical weapons - but he has invaded a souvereign nation, targetting civilians, shelling cities, bombing hospitals, blocking Mariupol, shooting at escaping civilians and using several already banned weapons in the process (cluster, thermobaric, ignition).

Being prepared for a possibility of chemical weapons use is rational in this context.

_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>

Matrix Glitch
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Oct 2021
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,741
Location: US

10 Mar 2022, 4:31 pm

VegetableMan wrote:

kraftiekortie wrote:

Thirty years down the road, NATO shouldn't be a threat to Russia. Or put another way, Russia shouldn't still be a threat to Europe.

VegetableMan
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,208
Location: Illinois

10 Mar 2022, 4:32 pm

There were oral agreements to cease expansion of NATO past Germany, but no formal ones. That is correct. But that still doesn't negate the fact that expanding NATO towards Russia's borders was dangerous business. Imagine if the U.S. had foreign armies and missles lined up along its border with Mexico? Do you think we wouldn't react in a similar fashion?

Nobody's hands are clean in this, unfortunately. I will never condone invasions of the type Putin has perpetrated, but full context of how we got to this dangerous place needs to be discussed.

_________________
What do you call a hot dog in a gangster suit?

Oscar Meyer Lansky

magz
Forum Moderator

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

10 Mar 2022, 4:34 pm

Mikah wrote:

Matrix Glitch wrote:

At what point is Putin doing what makes sense?

You need to add this Quebec or other part of Canada to first be a globally recognized souvereign state for 30 years.

Rather imagine Mexico started a pro-Russian policy, resulting in US invading, shelling cities and creating a humanitarian catastrophe.

_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>

Mikah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Oct 2015
Age: 37
Posts: 3,201
Location: England

10 Mar 2022, 4:36 pm

magz wrote:

Being prepared for a possibility of chemical weapons use is rational in this context.

That isn't what this warning it about. It's about buttering the right people up for a false flag attack which is no doubt coming. Trump fortunately didn't fall for it when it happened in Syria, but Trump is not in control any more.

_________________
Behold! we are not bound for ever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory, Farewell!

Matrix Glitch
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Oct 2021
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,741
Location: US

10 Mar 2022, 4:37 pm

Mikah wrote:

Matrix Glitch wrote:

At what point is Putin doing what makes sense?

So Putin is protecting Russia from being attacked by NATO via Ukraine?

magz
Forum Moderator

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

10 Mar 2022, 4:38 pm

VegetableMan wrote:

Living next to Russia is a dangerous business and that's why East European states ask to join NATO.
If NATO didn't expand, the shelled city today would have been Warsaw, not Kiev. That's all the differrence.
The imperial narrative of Putin has been pretty consistent for many years.

_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>

Mikah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Oct 2015
Age: 37
Posts: 3,201
Location: England

10 Mar 2022, 4:41 pm

magz wrote:

You need to add this Quebec or other part of Canada to first be a globally recognized souvereign state for 30 years.

That would make absolutely no difference to the hypothetical U.S. response, nor to any country.

magz wrote:

Rather imagine Mexico started a pro-Russian policy, resulting in US invading, shelling cities and creating a humanitarian catastrophe.

I think you minimise the idiocy of successive Ukrainian governments.

_________________
Behold! we are not bound for ever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory, Farewell!

Mikah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Oct 2015
Age: 37
Posts: 3,201
Location: England

10 Mar 2022, 4:42 pm

Matrix Glitch wrote:

So Putin is protecting Russia from being attacked by NATO via Ukraine?

They believe so. As much as the U.S. believed its actions during the Cuban missile crisis was protecting the U.S.

_________________
Behold! we are not bound for ever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory, Farewell!

Page 2 of 13 [ 208 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 13 Next

Jump to:

Russia could use chemical weapons in Ukraine Post Reply New Topic

Russia could use chemical weapons in Ukraine