Current Affairs Ukraine

[PKwalnuts]

MO is to spread disinformation, refuse to answer any question that incriminates or negates the position, pretend to have the moral high ground.

Just comes across as pathetic, contradictory, brainwashed gopher.

Probably thinks has everyone on strings, put doesn't realise they're this thread's plaything.

In fact the more I see the more I wonder, because they are so bad at this, whether they are really a Western Stooge portraying a lame Russian BOT, peddling the propaganda so badly that it actually makes you realise how obvious these trolls can be, how twisted their perspective would be and how dubious they're online personality can be.

Is @Kev The Rat really just a lesson, in [Poor language removed]-trolling?

 

[Kev The Rat]

https://tass.com/world/16798

Interesting comments from the man who’s probably the 4th most powerful person in Russia

Ukraine to either surrender on Moscow’s terms or cease to exist — top Russian lawmaker​

According to him, the outcome of the "war of attrition" also includes economic problems in Europe and the US, a lack of manpower for the Ukrainian armed forces, and ultimately bankruptcy and demographic disaster for Ukraine. "These seven facts speak for themselves: Ukraine will cease to exist as a state unless the Kiev regime capitulates on Russia’s terms," Volodin stressed.

What he didn't explain is what Russia's terms are at this juncture.

 

[Charro]

I’m not running around in circles just so someone can then move the goalposts after I’ve answered, sorry.

I asked a very simple question which you won’t answer because you know yourself the referendum wasn’t legitimate and you won’t admit it because you like to point to it as a defence for the invasion.

 

[Kev The Rat]

I asked a very simple question which you won’t answer because you know yourself the referendum wasn’t legitimate and you won’t admit it because you like to point to it as a defence for the invasion.

I’ve actually said it was legitimate - if you read my post earlier

I do believe the referendums themselves being held had a legal basis in Russian law

Not only that, the people of Donbass and the south of Ukraine exercised their lawful right to self-determination in accordance with the UN Charter

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

 

[WA Toffee]

Odd then, that the only areas they seem to be in control of now, are the areas that voted to join Russia.

I dont think that is as coincedental as you seem to think.

I think you're right, it's probably not coincidental that the only 4 areas that Russia have a military presence in are the ones that "voted" to become part of Russia

 

[WA Toffee]

On the actual breakdown I’ve no idea

I do believe the referendums themselves being held had a legal basis in Russian law

The referendums were held before Russia claimed they had annexed the regions. That means they were still part of Ukraine.
Russian law has no legal basis in any other sovereign nation.

So if Russian law is the only thing that makes the referndum genuine, but Russian law doesn't apply, do you maybe want to try and come up with another excuse?

 

[Kurt.]

The referendums were held before Russia claimed they had annexed the regions. That means they were still part of Ukraine.
Russian law has no legal basis in any other sovereign nation.

So if Russian law is the only thing that makes the referndum genuine, but Russian law doesn't apply, do you maybe want to try and come up with another excuse?

Don’t be silly, he discounts anything which goes against his narrative, legal or not.

 

[Tipp blue]

The referendums were held before Russia claimed they had annexed the regions. That means they were still part of Ukraine.
Russian law has no legal basis in any other sovereign nation.

So if Russian law is the only thing that makes the referndum genuine, but Russian law doesn't apply, do you maybe want to try and come up with another excuse?

If I remember correctly didn't Russia say they recognised these areas as independent just before the invasion? So according to Russian law they held a referendum in independent areas who voted to join Russia.
I wouldn't worry too much about Russian law they just change things with the stroke of a pen depending on what the agenda of those at the top.

 

[WA Toffee]

If I remember correctly didn't Russia say they recognised these areas as independent just before the invasion? So according to Russian law they held a referendum in independent areas who voted to join Russia.
I wouldn't worry too much about Russian law they just change things with the stroke of a pen depending on what the agenda of those at the top.

I think you're right, I do remember Russia claiming they were independant first.
Still not part of Russia though, so Russian law had no standing, which is what old mate Kev claimed. And still no justification for invading via Belarus

 

[Noisy noise annoys]

The referendums were held before Russia claimed they had annexed the regions. That means they were still part of Ukraine.
Russian law has no legal basis in any other sovereign nation.

So if Russian law is the only thing that makes the referndum genuine, but Russian law doesn't apply, do you maybe want to try and come up with another excuse?

He won’t answer this

 

[Kev The Rat]

The referendums were held before Russia claimed they had annexed the regions. That means they were still part of Ukraine.
Russian law has no legal basis in any other sovereign nation.

So if Russian law is the only thing that makes the referndum genuine, but Russian law doesn't apply, do you maybe want to try and come up with another excuse?

I have and you’ve obviously read it as you’ve purposefully cut it out of my quote

 

[davek]

Interesting comments from the man who’s probably the 4th most powerful person in Russia.

According to him, the outcome of the "war of attrition" also includes economic problems in Europe and the US, a lack of manpower for the Ukrainian armed forces, and ultimately bankruptcy and demographic disaster for Ukraine. "These seven facts speak for themselves: Ukraine will cease to exist as a state unless the Kiev regime capitulates on Russia’s terms," Volodin stressed.
What he didn't explain is what Russia's terms are at this juncture.

I'd have thought that would be an assurance that Ukraine never joins Nato and a redrawing of the border between Russia and Ukraine that looks pretty much as it would now if the front line were frozen.

 

[davek]

Ukraine v Poland issue takes another turn:


Polish experts have confirmed that the missile that killed two people at a grain facility in southern Poland in November was fired by Ukraine, Rzeczpospolita daily reported, citing sources.

The explosion of the missile in Nato-member Poland fuelled fears that the war in Ukraine could spiral into a wider conflict by triggering the alliance’s mutual defence clause, but at the time Warsaw and Nato said that they believed that it was a Ukrainian stray, easing worries about escalation.

“This rocket has a range of 75km to 90km,” the newspaper cited a source as saying. “At that time, the Russian positions were in a place from which no Russian missile could reach Przewodów.”

Rzeczpospolita reported that the Ukrainian side has not made any material available to Polish investigators. Ukraine has denied that one of its missiles had landed in Poland.

The development comes as relations between neighbouring Poland and Ukraine have become tense, with anger over Ukrainian agricultural imports becoming a campaigning factor in next month’s election in Poland.

Reuters reports that sources with knowledge of the investigation told Rzeczpospolita that Poland had established that the missile that landed in the village of Przewodów was an S 300 5-W-55 air-defence missile fired from Ukrainian territory.