Putin's games with the West | The Economist

[Litwin]

Great points . do you agree with Garry Kasparov?

 

[MarcoLT]

Great points . do you agree with Garry Kasparov?

1) Georgia bombed regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia with civilians living there for three days in a row and Russian troops invaded Georgia to protect Russian speaking population as a response to Georgian military actions. Maybe an answer by invading the country was too brutal, but according to the laws of war they attacked the command and radio posts inside the country to prevent further aggression by Georgia.
2) In Crimea 16.000 military personnel were located on a permanent basis due to an agreement between Russia and Ukraine since 1997. This agreement allowed Russia to have up to 25.000 troops. The forces protected the peaceful referendum and not forced people to vote one way or the other. How many victims do we see of so-called aggression in Crimea? None. How many victims do we see from a peaceful invasion of Kosovo by NATO?
3) It was proven that gas attacks in Syria were staged and filmed by White Helmets. Nobody wants to hear that people including children on the video were brought to Hague to prove that everything was fake.
4) Mueller probe found no connection between Trump campaign and Russia.
5) Freedom of speech and democracy? Think of Julian Assange

This is my personal view, so I'd be happy to see a response to broaden my perspective if I am wrong

 

[Rogue Valley]

1) Georgia bombed regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia with civilians living there for three days in a row and Russian troops invaded Georgia to protect Russian speaking population as a response to Georgian military actions. Maybe an answer by invading the country was too brutal, but according to the laws of war they attacked the command and radio posts inside the country to prevent further aggression by Georgia.
2) In Crimea 16.000 military personnel were located on a permanent basis due to an agreement between Russia and Ukraine since 1997. This agreement allowed Russia to have up to 25.000 troops. The forces protected the peaceful referendum and not forced people to vote one way or the other. How many victims do we see of so-called aggression in Crimea? None. How many victims do we see from a peaceful invasion of Kosovo by NATO?
3) It was proven that gas attacks in Syria were staged and filmed by White Helmets. Nobody wants to hear that people including children on the video were brought to Hague to prove that everything was fake.
4) Mueller probe found no connection between Trump campaign and Russia.
5) Freedom of speech and democracy? Think of Julian Assange

This is my personal view, so I'd be happy to see a response to broaden my perspective if I am wrong

You are wrong on every point above. But you already know this. How is the weather in St. Petersburg today?

 

[MarcoLT]

You are wrong on every point above. But you already know this. How is the weather in St. Petersburg today?

Well, if every person who presents arguments based on verifiable data is wrong because the position is not pro-western but balanced, I have a doubt in correctness of your all judgements on this forum.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Well, if every person who presents arguments based on verifiable data is wrong because the position is not pro-western but balanced, I have a doubt in correctness of your all judgements on this forum.

Here is some verifiable hard data for you.....

U.N. General Assembly declares Crimea secession vote invalid

General Assembly Adopts Resolution Calling upon States Not to Recognize Changes in Status of Crimea Region

Putin says plan to take Crimea hatched before referendum

 

[MarcoLT]

Here is some verifiable hard data for you.....

U.N. General Assembly declares Crimea secession vote invalid

General Assembly Adopts Resolution Calling upon States Not to Recognize Changes in Status of Crimea Region

Putin says plan to take Crimea hatched before referendum

Have you read everything that you send me? There is nothing controversial to what I am arguing, apart from showing that you read one-sided biased sources.

 

[Litwin]

You are wrong on every point above. But you already know this. How is the weather in St. Petersburg today?

+1. i sent already rapport to our Mods

 

[Fledermaus]

1) Georgia bombed regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia with civilians living there for three days in a row and Russian troops invaded Georgia to protect Russian speaking population as a response to Georgian military actions. Maybe an answer by invading the country was too brutal, but according to the laws of war they attacked the command and radio posts inside the country to prevent further aggression by Georgia.
2) In Crimea 16.000 military personnel were located on a permanent basis due to an agreement between Russia and Ukraine since 1997. This agreement allowed Russia to have up to 25.000 troops. The forces protected the peaceful referendum and not forced people to vote one way or the other. How many victims do we see of so-called aggression in Crimea? None. How many victims do we see from a peaceful invasion of Kosovo by NATO?
3) It was proven that gas attacks in Syria were staged and filmed by White Helmets. Nobody wants to hear that people including children on the video were brought to Hague to prove that everything was fake.
4) Mueller probe found no connection between Trump campaign and Russia.
5) Freedom of speech and democracy? Think of Julian Assange

This is my personal view, so I'd be happy to see a response to broaden my perspective if I am wrong

Crimea was an illegal annexation by Russia.

Kosovo intervention was to stop genocide.

The White Helmets staged the gas attacks? According to whom? The White Helmets were the Syrian version of the Red Cross and Red Crescent.

 

[Fledermaus]

Have you read everything that you send me? There is nothing controversial to what I am arguing, apart from showing that you read one-sided biased sources.

One sided? is ANYTHING he posted WRONG?

 

[MarcoLT]

One sided? is ANYTHING he posted WRONG?

I can't understand why you're typing with Caps-lock the words "ANYTHING/WRONG" which I didn't write. It's self-explanatory what I meant. If I provide you information from Russia Today media outlet, how reliable you'd consider my argument even if it is stating facts? I see information from the platform Reuters similarly reliable as from Russia Today, and similarly question how biased it is either, that's all.

 

[Rogue Valley]

I can't understand why you're typing with Caps-lock the words "ANYTHING/WRONG" which I didn't write. It's self-explanatory what I meant. If I provide you information from Russia Today media outlet, how reliable you'd consider my argument even if it is stating facts? I see information from the platform Reuters similarly reliable as from Russia Today, and similarly question how biased it is either, that's all.

So you don't accept any UN resolutions and major media as valid?

If not, then it really makes little sense even engaging with you. Time is too precious to waste on knuckleheads.

 

[MarcoLT]

So you don't accept any UN resolutions and major media as valid?

If not, then it really makes little sense even engaging with you. Time is too precious to waste on knuckleheads.

Crimea was an illegal annexation by Russia.

Kosovo intervention was to stop genocide.

The White Helmets staged the gas attacks? According to whom? The White Helmets were the Syrian version of the Red Cross and Red Crescent.

I don't argue it was legal. It was illegal because it was against the Ukrainian constitution. Indeed. I argue that there weren't any military intervention because Russian forces were already inside the country protecting the local population.

I god. I wonder whether you've ever talked with someone from Serbia and asked about NATO intervention and claimed by you attempt to stop genocide.. Just compare data on how many civilians died or were injured during "aggression/occupation" and "humanitarian intervention".

Considering the White Helmets if you'd ever be interested, you could spend one day and do your own further research for not blindly believing what's written in the yellow press.

 

[Fledermaus]

I can't understand why you're typing with Caps-lock the words "ANYTHING/WRONG" which I didn't write. It's self-explanatory what I meant. If I provide you information from Russia Today media outlet, how reliable you'd consider my argument even if it is stating facts? I see information from the platform Reuters similarly reliable as from Russia Today, and similarly question how biased it is either, that's all.

Is ANYTHING Rogue Valley posted WRONG?

 

[Fledermaus]

I don't argue it was legal. It was illegal because it was against the Ukrainian constitution. Indeed. I argue that there weren't any military intervention because Russian forces were already inside the country protecting the local population.

Russians leaving their bases armed is the very definition of military intervention.

I god. I wonder whether you've ever talked with someone from Serbia and asked about NATO intervention and claimed by you attempt to stop genocide.. Just compare data on how many civilians died or were injured during "aggression/occupation" and "humanitarian intervention".

Did or did not the ethnic cleansing cease after NATO intervention.

Considering the White Helmets if you'd ever be interested, you could spend one day and do your own further research for not blindly believing what's written in the yellow press.

The White Helmets staged the gas attacks? According to whom?

Try answering.

 

[MarcoLT]

Is ANYTHING Rogue Valley posted WRONG?

I am not a judge to say that he is right or wrong. I claim that in his response there is nothing at all to claim that I am wrong on any of my five aforementioned points.

 

[Fledermaus]

I am not a judge to say that he is right or wrong. I claim that in his response there is nothing at all to claim that I am wrong on any of my five aforementioned points.

There is plenty there germane to the discussion.

 

[MarcoLT]

Russians leaving their bases armed is the very definition of military intervention.

Well, your statement is just wrong. If you're not familiar with the background of their allocation due to 1997 agreement between Ukraine and Russia, which also was later extended in 2010 by 25 years in Kharkiv agreements, then just do it. The bilateral agreement on official allocation of forces cannot be called a military intervention, at least in my understanding.

Did or did not the ethnic cleansing cease after NATO intervention.

If you frame the question in this way - Indeed, it ceased ethnic cleansing, but it caused more consequences for the upcoming two decades than Russian annexation of Crimea. Look at numbers and talk with people from these areas. I don't know your situation, but I am lucky enough to study in an international environment with locals from these areas.
The question about Kosovo - whether it was legal? Whether it was a success? Whether NATO has any moral right to judge Russia's actions in Crimea, especially after Kosovo and later another failure in Libya?

The White Helmets staged the gas attacks? According to whom?

Try answering.

Start to familiarise yourself with this topic by listening debate: YouTube
Video from a briefing on staged chemical attacks from The Hague at Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, with father and son participating who were on the video of alleged chemical attacks in Syria: YouTube
I could find sources which I read previously to get rid of illusion regarding the White Helmets, but try to make an effort yourself.

 

[Fledermaus]

Well, your statement is just wrong. If you're not familiar with the background of their allocation due to 1997 agreement between Ukraine and Russia, which also was later extended in 2010 by 25 years in Kharkiv agreements, then just do it. The bilateral agreement on official allocation of forces cannot be called a military intervention, at least in my understanding.

They left their bases, armed, and took over various buildings of importance.

If you frame the question in this way - Indeed, it ceased ethnic cleansing, but it caused more consequences for the upcoming two decades than Russian annexation of Crimea. Look at numbers and talk with people from these areas. I don't know your situation, but I am lucky enough to study in an international environment with locals from these areas.

So, yes, NATO stopped ethnic cleansing. NATO and KOSOVO have nothing to do with Russians illegally occupying and annexing Crimea.

The question about Kosovo - whether it was legal? Whether it was a success? Whether NATO has any moral right to judge Russia's actions in Crimea, especially after Kosovo and later another failure in Libya?

KOSOVO stopped ethnic cleansing. NATO and KOSOVO have nothing to do with Russians illegally occupying and annexing Crimea. Nor does Libya.

The White Helmets staged the gas attacks? According to whom?

Try answering.

Start to familiarise yourself with this topic by listening debate: YouTube
Video from a briefing on staged chemical attacks from The Hague at Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, with father and son participating who were on the video of alleged chemical attacks in Syria: YouTube
I could find sources which I read previously to get rid of illusion regarding White Helmets, but try to make an effort yourself.

YouTubes are not discussion.

The White Helmets staged the gas attacks? According to whom?

 

[Fledermaus]

The OPCW's conclusions were based on environmental samples, witness interviews and other data gathered by members of a fact-finding mission that visited a number of sites in Douma two weeks after the attack.

The watchdog also said it found no evidence of the use of nerve agents in Douma, as some initial reports suggested, nor any evidence to support the government's claim that a local facility was being used by rebel fighters to produce chemical weapons.

In June, the OPCW was given new powers to assign blame for chemical attacks. However, it was not the mandate of the fact-finding team sent to Douma to do so.

Syria war: Chlorine likely used in Douma attack - OPCW - BBC News

 

[Fledermaus]

Russians leaving their bases armed is the very definition of military intervention.

Well, your statement is just wrong. If you're not familiar with the background of their allocation due to 1997 agreement between Ukraine and Russia, which also was later extended in 2010 by 25 years in Kharkiv agreements, then just do it. The bilateral agreement on official allocation of forces cannot be called a military intervention, at least in my understanding.

Did or did not the ethnic cleansing cease after NATO intervention.

If you frame the question in this way - Indeed, it ceased ethnic cleansing, but it caused more consequences for the upcoming two decades than Russian annexation of Crimea. Look at numbers and talk with people from these areas. I don't know your situation, but I am lucky enough to study in an international environment with locals from these areas.
The question about Kosovo - whether it was legal? Whether it was a success? Whether NATO has any moral right to judge Russia's actions in Crimea, especially after Kosovo and later another failure in Libya?

The White Helmets staged the gas attacks? According to whom?

Try answering.

Start to familiarise yourself with this topic by listening debate: YouTube
Video from a briefing on staged chemical attacks from The Hague at Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, with father and son participating who were on the video of alleged chemical attacks in Syria: YouTube
I could find sources which I read previously to get rid of illusion regarding the White Helmets, but try to make an effort yourself.

A whole lot of CLAIMING by the Russian Government and the Russian Government propaganda channel.

What did the OPCW actually find?

 

[MarcoLT]

A whole lot of CLAIMING by the Russian Government and the Russian Government propaganda channel.

What did the OPCW actually find?

I can't really see the reason to debate with you further if there is a number of proofs that these chemical attacks were staged, victims confessed and final report on this attack contains only vague formulations on the use of chemical weapons with allegedly, possibly or highly likely.
Although, I'll take my time to answer you.
Having studied chemistry in the lab for several years and seeing most of the substances in real life it was fascinating to read. The report contains vague formulations which can be interpreted in many ways, either chlorine gas was used or either there were used alternatives chemicals substances which resulted in the presence of chlorine on the samples.
You can also read the whole final report:
https://web.archive.org/web/2019030...lt/files/documents/2019/03/s-1731-2019(e).pdf
Claims based on
witnesses’ /interviews testimonies - videos expose the chemical attack was staged and victims came to the Hague, I sent the links in previous posts to the briefing and add a few additional ones from Douma:
YouTube
YouTube
YouTube
If you're not satisfied with this argument, then you can dive into the OPCW report:
8.48 Medical staff interviewed by the FFM team members provided their account of events at the hospital on that day. A number of these witnesses reported that there were many fatalities caused by suffocation from dust and rubble as a consequence of the heavy shelling. The number of deaths was exacerbated by the absence of ambulance and
rescue services.
8.52 Some of the medical staff who were interviewed did not hear about the alleged chemical attack from videos circulating on the internet or from other people until a couple of days after the alleged attack on 7 April.
8.54 A number of the interviewed medical staff who were purportedly present in the emergency department on 7 April emphasised that the presentation of the casualties was not consistent with that expected from a chemical attack.
8.83 All treatment was reported to be based upon observed signs and symptoms. No diagnostic tests were performed on any casualty.
8.103 "based on the information reviewed and with the absence of bio-medical samples from the dead bodies or any autopsy
records, it is not currently possible to precisely link the cause of the signs and symptoms to a specific chemical."
environmental and biomedical samples analysis results
2.11 (p.4) - based on the information reviewed and with the absence of biomedical samples from the dead bodies or any autopsy records, it is not currently possible to precisely link the cause of the signs and symptoms to a specific chemical.
detected chemicals (a) chemical triethanolamine, which was detected at trace levels in various clothing samples belonging to alleged victims and in grouting from the tunnel beneath the hospital; and (b) chemical known as “AmgardV19” which was detected at trace levels in one item of clothing of one alleged victim. The presence and concentration of both
chemicals are readily explained given their common use in surfactant and flame retardant formulations in textiles.
8.9 Two of the wood samples collected at the alleged sites showed the presence of bornyl chloride.
8.10 Based on these findings alone, it cannot be unequivocally stated that the wood was
exposed to chlorine gas, rather than to hydrogen chloride or hydrochloric acid. Other
chemicals such as phosgene or cyanogen chloride, which also decompose to give hydrogen chloride or hydrochloric acid, also could theoretically give rise to bornyl chloride from interaction with alpha-pinene in the wood.
8.39 From the information gathered during the two on-site visits to these locations, there was no indication of
either facility being involved in the production of chemical warfare agents or toxic
chemicals to be used as weapons.
8.40 The collected information indicated that both facilities were related to the production of explosives. This conclusion was based on the fact that virtually all the chemicals present were common precursors for explosives manufacture neither facility had the raw materials or the appropriate equipment to manufacture chemical weapons, particularly nerve agents or vesicants.

To finalise, even though the conclusion states that highly likely chlorine was allegedly used, the report substance itself proves that there is no direct evidence of chlorine use whatsoever with only highly likely as usual, and later used as a bulletproof truth in the non-biased western media sources. Superficial yellow press, nothing to add more.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Russians leaving their bases armed is the very definition of military intervention.

Well, your statement is just wrong. If you're not familiar with the background of their allocation due to 1997 agreement between Ukraine and Russia, which also was later extended in 2010 by 25 years in Kharkiv agreements, then just do it. The bilateral agreement on official allocation of forces cannot be called a military intervention, at least in my understanding.

Do you speak Ukrainian or Russian?

I've lived in Ukraine. And in Crimea. The Partition Treaty on the Status and Conditions of the Black Sea Fleet (1997) specified how many marines/sailors the RF could station on Crimea, plus there were also strict constraints as to how far those marines/sailors could stray from the leased bases and in what numbers. The Russian military grossly violated those treaty terms. According to the United Nations and the Geneva Conventions, an occupying military power cannot legally orchestrate or conduct a referendum within occupied territory. Prior to the Russian military breakout, the Kremlin infiltrated provocateurs into the Crimean peninsula (as tourists) acting as a fifth column.

Do you recognize this one?

Convicted Russian spy Maria Butina agitating against Ukraine in Simferopol in early February 2014.

 

[MarcoLT]

Do you speak Ukrainian or Russian?

I've lived in Ukraine. And in Crimea. The Partition Treaty on the Status and Conditions of the Black Sea Fleet (1997) specified how many marines/sailors the RF could station on Crimea, plus there were also strict constraints as to how far those marines/sailors could stray from the leased bases and in what numbers. The Russian military grossly violated those treaty terms. According to the United Nations and the Geneva Conventions, an occupying military power cannot legally orchestrate or conduct a referendum within occupied territory. Prior to the Russian military breakout, the Kremlin infiltrated provocateurs into the Crimean peninsula (as tourists) acting as a fifth column.

Do you recognize this one?

Convicted Russian spy Maria Butina agitating against Ukraine in Simferopol in early February 2014.

I am from Lithuania and can speak Russian. Could you send me the source because I can't find anything on this topic.
Then you might also blame European politicians being as a fifth column who were similarly present on public events on the "occupied" territory before the referendum. The are mostly right-wing politicians, but they are still European. Aren't they? Screenshot-2019-04-19-at-01-19-15 — imgbb.com [better quality]

 

[Litwin]

Russians leaving their bases armed is the very definition of military intervention.



Did or did not the ethnic cleansing cease after NATO intervention.




The White Helmets staged the gas attacks? According to whom?

Try answering.

TV.ru and its propagandacondoms

YouTube

 

[MarcoLT]

TV.ru and its propagandacondoms

YouTube

and also according to logic.