Ukraine

Started by Arhael4 pages

The guy used Russia Today as a source, so, you know...

I used first source that came up on google. I don't need to rely on sources for this one. Poroshenko's video is a source that proves my point on its own.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
What do you mean no concrete evidence? There are photographs and videos of Separatists using equipment that the Ukrainian military has never possessed.

Are you sure those are legitimate photographs and videos? Do they really prove things beyond denial. Because the new president will not agree with you:
YouTube video
"This is the best evidence for the aggression and for the presence of Russian troops"

He labes those passports he is holding as "best evidence". If there are photographs and videos that make it undeniable prove of Russian invasion, then why would he be so pathethic to wave Russian passports on interview that russian military DOES NOT carry?

1. Passports are taken away from soldiers, when they join military, so those passports cannot possibly belong to Russian soldiers.

2. If Russia is denying invasion, they would make sure their soldiers did not carry any form of id.

3. Poroshenko is holding 5 passports. Two of them are internal that have any meaning only inside Russia. Three other passports are international that are used for traveling. So, russian military is carrying tourist passports now? Did they need to get visa to invade Ukraine?

New sanctions on Russia being considered: http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/21/europe/ukraine-conflict/

Originally posted by Arhael

He labes those passports he is holding as "best evidence". If there are photographs and videos that make it undeniable prove of Russian invasion, then why would he be so pathethic to wave Russian passports on interview that russian military DOES NOT carry?

1. Passports are taken away from soldiers, when they join military, so those passports cannot possibly belong to Russian soldiers.

2. If Russia is denying invasion, they would make sure their soldiers did not carry any form of id.

3. Poroshenko is holding 5 passports. Two of them are internal that have any meaning only inside Russia. Three other passports are international that are used for traveling. So, russian military is carrying tourist passports now? Did they need to get visa to invade Ukraine?


Him calling it the "best evidence" is political rhetoric, not any kind of legal declaration. C'mon, child's-play.

I don't disagree with your skepticism about his passport "evidence." I don't think it nullifies all the other evidence of direct Russian involvement, it just shows that Poroshenko is willing to sensationalize and engage in obvious propaganda.

The situation in Ukraine goes to prove how little elections matter to nationalistic groups.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Him calling it the "best evidence" is political rhetoric, not any kind of legal declaration. C'mon, child's-play.

I don't disagree with your skepticism about his passport "evidence." I don't think it nullifies all the other evidence of direct Russian involvement, it just shows that Poroshenko is willing to sensationalize and engage in obvious propaganda.


Yep, I understand it. But legitimacy of the other evidence remains at question. Are you sure those pictures and videos are taken in Ukraine? Those videos might as well have been taken during Russo-Georgian war, in fact that's what RT source says but considering the obvious bias of the source I not gonna bring it up. Who says true and who says lie? Two different stories from media on either side, same things happens in literally every instance of war in the past years.

Same thing was happening during Russo-Georgian war. Russia sent military as response to Georgia invading Osetia, while in USA media made it look like Russia attacked Georgia and Osetia.

Another source, seemingly unconnected to russia:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-13/thirst-war-sen-inhofe-releases-fake-photos-russian-troops-ukraine

Originally posted by Arhael
Yep, I understand it. But legitimacy of the other evidence remains at question. Are you sure those pictures and videos are taken in Ukraine? Those videos might as well have been taken during Russo-Georgian war, in fact that's what RT source says but considering the obvious bias of the source I not gonna bring it up. Who says true and who says lie? Two different stories from media on either side, same things happens in literally every instance of war in the past years.

Same thing was happening during Russo-Georgian war. Russia sent military as response to Georgia invading Osetia, while in USA media made it look like Russia attacked Georgia and Osetia.

Another source, seemingly unconnected to russia:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-13/thirst-war-sen-inhofe-releases-fake-photos-russian-troops-ukraine


I think "invading" is a misleading verb considering Osettia was Georgian territory that the Russians had no diplomatic right to intervene in.

I don't think there's any doubt there's lots of spinning going on on either side, but I think if you were to examine each photo and video coming out of Ukraine there would be landmarks that are unequivocally Ukraine and not Georgia, after all the two countries are extremely different in terms of geography.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/5/boehner-top-democrats-demand-obama-arm-ukraine/

Seems like the rebels are moving their weapons/forces back. Finally some good news.

Literally before going to bed last night I was thinking about when this was going to happen, then I just read this.

http://rt.com/news/240705-ukraine-poroshenko-weapons-europe/

Uh...
http://www.rferl.org/content/united-states-ukraine-russia-mexico-arms-/26921256.html

Is Mexico actually still bitter over the U.S. taking their territories back in the day? 'Cause if they're not this threat is just freaking hilarious.

Seems like the fighting is resuming.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32296796

I thought Russia took them over already.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/27/us-ukraine-crisis-russia-military-idUSKBN0OC2K820150527

Originally posted by |King Joker|
Uh...
http://www.rferl.org/content/united-states-ukraine-russia-mexico-arms-/26921256.html

Is Mexico actually still bitter over the U.S. taking their territories back in the day? 'Cause if they're not this threat is just freaking hilarious.

The US does an excellent job of arming Mexico itself anyway. And not just it's government.

What do y'all think NATO should do if Russia did a full-scale invasion of Ukraine?

Originally posted by jaden101
The US does an excellent job of arming Mexico itself anyway. And not just it's government.
Indeed, lol.

Originally posted by |King Joker|
What do y'all think NATO should do if Russia did a full-scale invasion of Ukraine?

Direct covert intervention. Fight the Russians while lying through our teeth about even being there. Give the Russians a taste of their own medicine and bleed them out slowly until they're forced to withdraw.

Russia has actually never occupied an entire country in its modern (post-Soviet history) and probably isn't prepared to foot the financial and human costs of what that would entail.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33003237

Anyone actually think there'll be a full-scale Russian invasion? lol

Originally posted by |King Joker|
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33003237

Anyone actually think there'll be a full-scale Russian invasion? lol

If they can get away with it, yes.

Yea this is looking fantastic.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/23/politics/us-armor-tanks-europe-russia-ash-carter/

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Yea this is looking fantastic.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/23/politics/us-armor-tanks-europe-russia-ash-carter/

Good. Hopefully this dissuades Russia from more funny shit.