Ukraine Heats Up

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by finnbow

It's no more ironic that Putin negotiating conditions for the withdrawal of his troops from Ukraine while insisting he has none there.

Or how about Putin writing in the NYTimes "We need to use the United Nations Security Council and believe that preserving law and order in today’s complex and turbulent world is one of the few ways to keep international relations from sliding into chaos. The law is still the law, and we must follow it whether we like it or not." And then he blatantly disregards the Budapest Memorandum.

There's a reason that Kafka came from that part of the world.

John

[Bocas]

Originally Posted by finnbow

That's pretty much what Kerry and Lavrov are doing in Paris and Rome. If Russia indeed had no troops there whatsoever (as Putin insists), there would nothing to meet about.

He has had 16,000 there since the Ukraine / Russian agreement in the 1990's. The agreement allows him a max of 25,000. I haven't seen where he exceeded that agreement, but if he has then sanctions should be used against Russia.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Bocas

He has had 16,000 there since the Ukraine / Russian agreement in the 1990's. The agreement allows him a max of 25,000. I haven't seen where he exceeded that agreement, but if he has then sanctions should be used against Russia.

I know that, but he's insisting that none of the armed men on the streets are Russian soldiers and that the armed, masked guys without insignia are all locals. Then he defends the need for Russian troops to be there to protect ethnic Russians while denying that they're there. You can't have it both ways, comrade.

[JJIII]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

Where is the fun in that?

Ya got me!

[Bocas]

Originally Posted by finnbow

I know that, but he's insisting that none of the armed men on the streets are Russian soldiers and that the armed, masked guys without insignia are all locals. Then he defends the need for Russian troops to be there to protect ethnic Russians while denying that they're there. You can't have it both ways, comrade.

Stop the name calling. I gave you an opportunity to man up and tell me what your problem with me was privately you chose to sign off and not answer me. That was your chose to run away but if you cant tell me what your problem is then I cant help you.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Bocas

Stop the name calling. I gave you an opportunity to man up and tell me what your problem with me was privately you chose to sign off and not answer me.

Why don't you clue us all in to the reasoning behind your unequivocal knee-jerk support of Putin, including using Kremlin-controlled publications to support your views. You've pretty much posted on nothing else. It is widely felt on this forum that you're a shill, and I've seen nothing to dispel that notion.

What's the deal?

[Bocas]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Why don't you clue us all in to the reasoning behind your unequivocal knee-jerk support of Putin, including using Kremlin-controlled publications to support your views. You've pretty much posted on nothing else. It is widely felt on this forum that you're a shill, and I've seen nothing to dispel that notion.

What's the deal?

For example? I looked around here and quite frankly there is not much else to post on. Have you looked around. It is mostly play ground bullying bull shit. This is at this time the only current subject that interests me as if it is any of your business. What is your authority here?

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Bocas

For example?

Every post you've made thus far. What's the deal? No more evasion, please.

[Bocas]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Every post you've made thus far. What's the deal? No more evasion, please.

That is not an answer.

[piece-itpete]

I thought the accords dealt with territorial integrity and shielding internal politics from outside forces. Both of which our favorite KGB agent is violating.

Pete