Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Last few days has seen Putin play a few brilliant moves. Firstly....having helped Assad forces take back Aleppo from the coalition of various jihadists and Islamist rebels he has put forward, with Turkey, a set of proposals that may end the conflict. Totally sidelining the useless Obama/Kerry muppets. Secondly, after Obama threw his Teddy out of the pram by evicting 35 Russian diplomats and closing down a number of Russian sites in the US. Putin has refused to retaliate and made Obama, once again, look like an idiot. I've much to dislike and to distrust Putin about....but he has proved a master statesman lately.....leaving Obama looking like a total clown." 
Obama just looks desperate and incredibly weak. You'd think he'd keep his head down now until his time is up but I suspect we've still not heard the last from this moron.
Putin will just ignore the Obama administration and the USA until Trump takes office, then Putin will start to develop a new positive constructive relationship with the USA and Donald Trump.
Trump had a little dig at Obama last night when he tweeted "it's time to move onto bigger and better things".
Russia also expressed their opinion of Obama in a tweet from the Russian embassy here in the UK last night with a picture of a duck with the word "LAME" written on it addressed to Obama.
Obama the Lame duck president has been slapped down big time.  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Totally sidelining the useless Obama/Kerry muppets" You left out the Saudi bum-licking Clintons! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The amount of Putin fanboys on this site is astounding." And that they think he'll form a great relationship with Trump! Seems as likely that Putin welcomes Trump because he knows he'll be able to run rings round him! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The amount of Putin fanboys on this site is astounding. And that they think he'll form a great relationship with Trump! Seems as likely that Putin welcomes Trump because he knows he'll be able to run rings round him!" And he started a new nuclear arms race on twitter  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The amount of Putin fanboys on this site is astounding." Here's an example of Putin's views on child rape: "Vladimir Putin has waded into the debate over a migrant who was accused of raping a boy, 10, at a swimming pool in Austria because he said it was a “sexual emergency”. The Russian president slammed European governments after the 20-year-old Iraqi’s conviction was quashed – when judges said the court couldn’t prove he knew the child had said no." So there you go. 'We' (i.e. Merkel and similar scum) in the 'sophisticated' liberal West don't mind illegal economic migrant criminals posing as refugees raping the arse of children (and/or women on News Years Eve) but Putin does!? Shocking isn't it? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The amount of Putin fanboys on this site is astounding. And that they think he'll form a great relationship with Trump! Seems as likely that Putin welcomes Trump because he knows he'll be able to run rings round him!" Trump will sit back and watch Russia re annex the Baltic states, whether it's a deal already done or not we won't know....... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The amount of Putin fanboys on this site is astounding. And that they think he'll form a great relationship with Trump! Seems as likely that Putin welcomes Trump because he knows he'll be able to run rings round him! Trump will sit back and watch Russia re annex the Baltic states, whether it's a deal already done or not we won't know......." Which is very worrying as we may have troops and/or Typhoons there at the time. Wonder what their rules of engagement are? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If one of the Baltic states, Estonia for instance, invokes Article 5 and the United States (under Trump) don't come to their assistance then NATO is finished and will disband within weeks." And if NATO (which, as well we all know according to some here!) does react then all bets are off! Still, it'll stop us worrying about Brexit! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The amount of Putin fanboys on this site is astounding. And that they think he'll form a great relationship with Trump! Seems as likely that Putin welcomes Trump because he knows he'll be able to run rings round him! Trump will sit back and watch Russia re annex the Baltic states, whether it's a deal already done or not we won't know......." . Why would he do that, what's in it for Russia? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The amount of Putin fanboys on this site is astounding. And that they think he'll form a great relationship with Trump! Seems as likely that Putin welcomes Trump because he knows he'll be able to run rings round him! Trump will sit back and watch Russia re annex the Baltic states, whether it's a deal already done or not we won't know........ Why would he do that, what's in it for Russia?" What was in it for Russia when they did it in Georgia, eastern Ukraine and Crimea? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The amount of Putin fanboys on this site is astounding. And that they think he'll form a great relationship with Trump! Seems as likely that Putin welcomes Trump because he knows he'll be able to run rings round him! Trump will sit back and watch Russia re annex the Baltic states, whether it's a deal already done or not we won't know........ Why would he do that, what's in it for Russia?" The valuable Baltic ports for starters...... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The first four people to post on this thread i totally agree and well said. Then the anti Russian and brexit idiots and pro clinton and pro war come along and talk utter claptrap as usual." So you would support Russia annexing the Baltic states?.....would that make you a happy bunny? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The first four people to post on this thread i totally agree and well said. Then the anti Russian and brexit idiots and pro clinton and pro war come along and talk utter claptrap as usual." Nice constructive argument there mate, well done! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The first four people to post on this thread i totally agree and well said. Then the anti Russian and brexit idiots and pro clinton and pro war come along and talk utter claptrap as usual. Nice constructive argument there mate, well done! " Well I've tried and tried on educating people when it comes to Russia but it falls on deaf ears and people just fall for the mai stream propegander that Russia are the big bad guys. When reality is for the past decade or more WE the west both US and UK have been the bad guys and cause of most of the problems we have today Especially terrorism. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The first four people to post on this thread i totally agree and well said. Then the anti Russian and brexit idiots and pro clinton and pro war come along and talk utter claptrap as usual. So you would support Russia annexing the Baltic states?.....would that make you a happy bunny?" They are NOT "annexing" the Baltic states. They took back crimera because Ukraine was falling apart and crimera was given to Ukraine by when Ukraine was part of the soviet union. Not knowing then that the soviet union would break. So when Ukraine was in disoray Russia stepped in and room crimera back without a gun shot or casualty. They did this before the west could take advantage and especially as missile defence systems are being put all around Russia's borders. Ive said this many times...every action causes a reaction. What ever Russia has done its because of the actions of the west. Anyways im signing off from the politic forums now and wont be posting again. And i joined this site for fun but these forums I've realised only bring the opposite. Wish everyone the best for 2017. Take care. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The amount of Putin fanboys on this site is astounding. And that they think he'll form a great relationship with Trump! Seems as likely that Putin welcomes Trump because he knows he'll be able to run rings round him! Trump will sit back and watch Russia re annex the Baltic states, whether it's a deal already done or not we won't know........ Why would he do that, what's in it for Russia? What was in it for Russia when they did it in Georgia, eastern Ukraine and Crimea? " . Georgia was about control over south Ossetia which the Georgians invaded, eastern Ukraine has shit loads of Russian gas pipes running through it and Crimea is Russias southern naval port! All strategic important issues for Russian sovereignty or economy. . The Ukraine has been destabilised by western powers the EU and UK and US policy has been for a pro western Ukrainian government. The Soviet union (Russia) already ceded control of all these countries with I direct promise by NATO that they wouldn't push into them!. Who broke the agreement? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The amount of Putin fanboys on this site is astounding. And that they think he'll form a great relationship with Trump! Seems as likely that Putin welcomes Trump because he knows he'll be able to run rings round him! Trump will sit back and watch Russia re annex the Baltic states, whether it's a deal already done or not we won't know........ Why would he do that, what's in it for Russia? The valuable Baltic ports for starters......" . What! And st Petersburg is just a million miles away from Tallinn isn't it or that Russian land south of Lithuania with Kaliningrad port is hopeless for them?. More ports, oh yeah just on the Russian wish list of things they desperately need  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start...." . Undue influence.... Your having a fucking laugh, you do know Joe bidens son (the vice president of the USA) runs the biggest fracking company in the Ukraine. Can anybody think what would be the outcome of Vladimir Putins son ran the biggest fracking company in Mexico... Right on that old disputed new Mexico border!!!! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start..... Undue influence.... Your having a fucking laugh, you do know Joe bidens son (the vice president of the USA) runs the biggest fracking company in the Ukraine. Can anybody think what would be the outcome of Vladimir Putins son ran the biggest fracking company in Mexico... Right on that old disputed new Mexico border!!!!" I think you have just replied to the wrong post mate..... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Putin has refused to retaliate and made Obama, once again, look like an idiot. I've much to dislike and to distrust Putin about....but he has proved a master statesman lately.....leaving Obama looking like a total clown." not quite...... what obama did was actually very clever.... what obama did was two things in one move 1) slapped down russia in a way that wont effect the normal person, but will effect the way russia conducts their "secret service" activities.... he cleverly put trump in a really awkward position.... 2) the way he did it was via "executive order" which means it didn't have to go thru congress/senate... it also means trump could reverse the decision.... which is what putin wants him to do, but he wont because what he is then saying is that he does not believe the joint FBI/CIA report saying the russians did hack.... if trump does that he will the wrath for a lot of republicans as well as democrats and he can kiss goodbye a lot of his high level nominations which need senate approval... of which he is already going to face some almighty fights over Sec. of State, Atterney General ect... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Putin has refused to retaliate and made Obama, once again, look like an idiot. I've much to dislike and to distrust Putin about....but he has proved a master statesman lately.....leaving Obama looking like a total clown. not quite...... what obama did was actually very clever.... what obama did was two things in one move 1) slapped down russia in a way that wont effect the normal person, but will effect the way russia conducts their "secret service" activities.... he cleverly put trump in a really awkward position.... 2) the way he did it was via "executive order" which means it didn't have to go thru congress/senate... it also means trump could reverse the decision.... which is what putin wants him to do, but he wont because what he is then saying is that he does not believe the joint FBI/CIA report saying the russians did hack.... if trump does that he will the wrath for a lot of republicans as well as democrats and he can kiss goodbye a lot of his high level nominations which need senate approval... of which he is already going to face some almighty fights over Sec. of State, Atterney General ect..." Completely disagree with you he has done the opposite to what you say,Obama is a nasty vindictive fool | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" what obama did was actually very clever.... what obama did was two things in one move 1) slapped down russia in a way that wont effect the normal person, but will effect the way russia conducts their "secret service" activities.... he cleverly put trump in a really awkward position.... 2) the way he did it was via "executive order" which means it didn't have to go thru congress/senate... it also means trump could reverse the decision.... which is what putin wants him to do, but he wont because what he is then saying is that he does not believe the joint FBI/CIA report saying the russians did hack.... .." Of course the Russians hack the US....and us, Germany, France....and damn near everybody else....and we all hack Russia and everybody else...it's just a big kids game! Obama had to use executive powers because congress/senate would have blocked any other methods. By NOT retaliating Putin has simply made Obama look like the idiot he clearly is. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If one of the Baltic states, Estonia for instance, invokes Article 5 and the United States (under Trump) don't come to their assistance then NATO is finished and will disband within weeks." Nobody should be worried because the EU is apparently entirely responsibappear maintaining peace in Europe for the last 70 years. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" what obama did was actually very clever.... what obama did was two things in one move 1) slapped down russia in a way that wont effect the normal person, but will effect the way russia conducts their "secret service" activities.... he cleverly put trump in a really awkward position.... 2) the way he did it was via "executive order" which means it didn't have to go thru congress/senate... it also means trump could reverse the decision.... which is what putin wants him to do, but he wont because what he is then saying is that he does not believe the joint FBI/CIA report saying the russians did hack.... .. Of course the Russians hack the US....and us, Germany, France....and damn near everybody else....and we all hack Russia and everybody else...it's just a big kids game! Obama had to use executive powers because congress/senate would have blocked any other methods. By NOT retaliating Putin has simply made Obama look like the idiot he clearly is." USA has been interfering in other countries election processes and imposing regime change in other countries for decades now. I'm not saying Russia is guilty of interfering in the USA election but if they did then maybe the USA deserved it. It's called karma, what goes around comes around. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Putin has refused to retaliate and made Obama, once again, look like an idiot. I've much to dislike and to distrust Putin about....but he has proved a master statesman lately.....leaving Obama looking like a total clown. not quite...... what obama did was actually very clever.... what obama did was two things in one move 1) slapped down russia in a way that wont effect the normal person, but will effect the way russia conducts their "secret service" activities.... he cleverly put trump in a really awkward position.... 2) the way he did it was via "executive order" which means it didn't have to go thru congress/senate... it also means trump could reverse the decision.... which is what putin wants him to do, but he wont because what he is then saying is that he does not believe the joint FBI/CIA report saying the russians did hack.... if trump does that he will the wrath for a lot of republicans as well as democrats and he can kiss goodbye a lot of his high level nominations which need senate approval... of which he is already going to face some almighty fights over Sec. of State, Atterney General ect..." So, in other words, Obama risked an international incident just to score a few domestic political points and set a trap for the new president. Very statesmanlike NOT! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Putin has refused to retaliate and made Obama, once again, look like an idiot. I've much to dislike and to distrust Putin about....but he has proved a master statesman lately.....leaving Obama looking like a total clown. not quite...... what obama did was actually very clever.... what obama did was two things in one move 1) slapped down russia in a way that wont effect the normal person, but will effect the way russia conducts their "secret service" activities.... he cleverly put trump in a really awkward position.... 2) the way he did it was via "executive order" which means it didn't have to go thru congress/senate... it also means trump could reverse the decision.... which is what putin wants him to do, but he wont because what he is then saying is that he does not believe the joint FBI/CIA report saying the russians did hack.... if trump does that he will the wrath for a lot of republicans as well as democrats and he can kiss goodbye a lot of his high level nominations which need senate approval... of which he is already going to face some almighty fights over Sec. of State, Atterney General ect..." I said I wasn't going to post in the political forums anymore but for this post I'll retract my words. _abio we all know you are anti trump but good god man you are acting very unamerican that you seem pleased that a president with less than a few weeks left in office is making executive orders that could have possibly made relations with russia even worse and in your own words unreversable without trump going against fbi/cia. not sure what planet your on but its not one where people want peace thats for sure. You seem like you are happy for two powerful countrys to be enemys and have no relationship...heck it seems like you wont be happy until theres a nuke exchange. Please go back and read what you wrote. you are happy and smug that obama is causing as much trouble for trump as he can before he leaves. very pety and gladly most people are seeing obama for what he is and praising putin for not responding. ..infact he inviting the familys of the american diplomats to the kremlin for new year. putin is showing maturity and proper statesmanlike manner. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If one of the Baltic states, Estonia for instance, invokes Article 5 and the United States (under Trump) don't come to their assistance then NATO is finished and will disband within weeks. Nobody should be worried because the EU is apparently entirely responsibappear maintaining peace in Europe for the last 70 years. " EU has helped to maintain peace between the member states, NATO has prevented external threats, such as from the USSR, the former Warsaw Pact, and now from Russia. Two different, but equally important things. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Putin has refused to retaliate and made Obama, once again, look like an idiot. I've much to dislike and to distrust Putin about....but he has proved a master statesman lately.....leaving Obama looking like a total clown. not quite...... what obama did was actually very clever.... what obama did was two things in one move 1) slapped down russia in a way that wont effect the normal person, but will effect the way russia conducts their "secret service" activities.... he cleverly put trump in a really awkward position.... 2) the way he did it was via "executive order" which means it didn't have to go thru congress/senate... it also means trump could reverse the decision.... which is what putin wants him to do, but he wont because what he is then saying is that he does not believe the joint FBI/CIA report saying the russians did hack.... if trump does that he will the wrath for a lot of republicans as well as democrats and he can kiss goodbye a lot of his high level nominations which need senate approval... of which he is already going to face some almighty fights over Sec. of State, Atterney General ect... So, in other words, Obama risked an international incident just to score a few domestic political points and set a trap for the new president. Very statesmanlike NOT!" Thats how I read it. And frankly couldn't believe I had. Clever??? I wanted Trump to win but really wasn't too bothered either way. Now I think its a good job he did and that the American people made the right choice for sure | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" So, in other words, Obama risked an international incident just to score a few domestic political points and set a trap for the new president. Very statesmanlike NOT!" No.... what Obama did was to back up the findings made by the security services in the FBI and CIA..... We all know that Obama and Trump are getting the same presidential daily national security briefings, they both know exactly what is happening.... So if you think trump is going to go against them and side with Russia it will spark the ire of people in his own party In America there is a lovely saying.... we have one president at a time, and putin is trying to go over the head of the one currently in office..... you honestly think some of the people being sent back and the two compounds being shut down were being used solely for the greater good You guys watch way to much RT | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Putin has refused to retaliate and made Obama, once again, look like an idiot. I've much to dislike and to distrust Putin about....but he has proved a master statesman lately.....leaving Obama looking like a total clown. not quite...... what obama did was actually very clever.... what obama did was two things in one move 1) slapped down russia in a way that wont effect the normal person, but will effect the way russia conducts their "secret service" activities.... he cleverly put trump in a really awkward position.... 2) the way he did it was via "executive order" which means it didn't have to go thru congress/senate... it also means trump could reverse the decision.... which is what putin wants him to do, but he wont because what he is then saying is that he does not believe the joint FBI/CIA report saying the russians did hack.... if trump does that he will the wrath for a lot of republicans as well as democrats and he can kiss goodbye a lot of his high level nominations which need senate approval... of which he is already going to face some almighty fights over Sec. of State, Atterney General ect... So, in other words, Obama risked an international incident just to score a few domestic political points and set a trap for the new president. Very statesmanlike NOT! Thats how I read it. And frankly couldn't believe I had. Clever??? I wanted Trump to win but really wasn't too bothered either way. Now I think its a good job he did and that the American people made the right choice for sure" It wasn't so much that I wanted Trump to win as I really wanted Clinton to lose. Firstly because I can't stand her, and secondly for the added bonus that she would take the dangerous buffoon John Kerry into the political wilderness with her. As for Putin? I don't really like him, I certainly wouldn't trust him, but I do have a grudging admiration for him. He is much more politically astute at reading international events than anyone the Americans have put into office for the whole of the Obama administration. Like it or not, he has run rings around them. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" So, in other words, Obama risked an international incident just to score a few domestic political points and set a trap for the new president. Very statesmanlike NOT! No.... what Obama did was to back up the findings made by the security services in the FBI and CIA..... We all know that Obama and Trump are getting the same presidential daily national security briefings, they both know exactly what is happening.... So if you think trump is going to go against them and side with Russia it will spark the ire of people in his own party In America there is a lovely saying.... we have one president at a time, and putin is trying to go over the head of the one currently in office..... you honestly think some of the people being sent back and the two compounds being shut down were being used solely for the greater good You guys watch way to much RT" why would he want to put Trump in an an awkward position? Aren't they on the same side? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" So, in other words, Obama risked an international incident just to score a few domestic political points and set a trap for the new president. Very statesmanlike NOT! No.... what Obama did was to back up the findings made by the security services in the FBI and CIA..... We all know that Obama and Trump are getting the same presidential daily national security briefings, they both know exactly what is happening.... So if you think trump is going to go against them and side with Russia it will spark the ire of people in his own party In America there is a lovely saying.... we have one president at a time, and putin is trying to go over the head of the one currently in office..... you honestly think some of the people being sent back and the two compounds being shut down were being used solely for the greater good You guys watch way to much RT" Unfortunately I can see Trump finding himself in grave personal danger if he indeed does turn his back on the CIA and the Pentagon.....he will quickly find out that the Office of the President of The United States is largely one of a figurehead. He will be the head of the snake.....the body of which is enormous and very secretive. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" So, in other words, Obama risked an international incident just to score a few domestic political points and set a trap for the new president. Very statesmanlike NOT! No.... what Obama did was to back up the findings made by the security services in the FBI and CIA..... We all know that Obama and Trump are getting the same presidential daily national security briefings, they both know exactly what is happening.... So if you think trump is going to go against them and side with Russia it will spark the ire of people in his own party In America there is a lovely saying.... we have one president at a time, and putin is trying to go over the head of the one currently in office..... you honestly think some of the people being sent back and the two compounds being shut down were being used solely for the greater good You guys watch way to much RT" get over yourself _abio. every country is hacking/spying on each other. we all know america is hacking its alleys never mind its enemys. was only last year it came out they had hacked the German leaders phone and according to obama she is his cloest friend inthe EU. So stop being a hypocrite like obama. if and I say IF russia hacked the US to get those emails and gave them to wiki leaks to expose the truth then they deserve a thank you from the American people not a fuck you. when its a crime to expose a crime. The criminals win. bradly manning and edward snowden both exposed American crimes and yet they was the ones punished. Its all backwards. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" So, in other words, Obama risked an international incident just to score a few domestic political points and set a trap for the new president. Very statesmanlike NOT! No.... what Obama did was to back up the findings made by the security services in the FBI and CIA..... We all know that Obama and Trump are getting the same presidential daily national security briefings, they both know exactly what is happening.... So if you think trump is going to go against them and side with Russia it will spark the ire of people in his own party In America there is a lovely saying.... we have one president at a time, and putin is trying to go over the head of the one currently in office..... you honestly think some of the people being sent back and the two compounds being shut down were being used solely for the greater good You guys watch way to much RT" Firstly I never watch RT. Secondly embassy's have been full of spies since, well, the first embassy. Do you think there are no CIA/FBI in Moscow? or even MI6 for that matter. I'm pretty sure that the expelled Russians were probably up to no good but for an outgoing president to expel them only 3 weeks from the end of his term is reckless, to say the least. Of course Trump and Obama will get the same briefings but it would have been much more statesmanlike to sit back for a few weeks and let the new guy sort it out. But no, Obama's petulance got the better of him. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" So, in other words, Obama risked an international incident just to score a few domestic political points and set a trap for the new president. Very statesmanlike NOT! No.... what Obama did was to back up the findings made by the security services in the FBI and CIA..... We all know that Obama and Trump are getting the same presidential daily national security briefings, they both know exactly what is happening.... So if you think trump is going to go against them and side with Russia it will spark the ire of people in his own party In America there is a lovely saying.... we have one president at a time, and putin is trying to go over the head of the one currently in office..... you honestly think some of the people being sent back and the two compounds being shut down were being used solely for the greater good You guys watch way to much RT why would he want to put Trump in an an awkward position? Aren't they on the same side?" They are... but do you think think trump is going to ever come out and say " yeah, the Russians did help me or try to help win the election!" If this report comes on a table after jan 21... I don't think it ever comes out in the public domain because it would make the incoming president look bad I'd like to ask you people siding with putin how many of you have read the 13 page report, because if not I'll put up a link so you can..... It's interesting because one of the groups named.... the fancy bears... are the same group that leaked all the Wada information on athletes and TUE's right after the the report came out about russian state sponsored doping So if you are condoning one... you are condoning the other | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start...." And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The first four people to post on this thread i totally agree and well said. Then the anti Russian and brexit idiots and pro clinton and pro war come along and talk utter claptrap as usual." | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay." Well put. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" So, in other words, Obama risked an international incident just to score a few domestic political points and set a trap for the new president. Very statesmanlike NOT! No.... what Obama did was to back up the findings made by the security services in the FBI and CIA..... We all know that Obama and Trump are getting the same presidential daily national security briefings, they both know exactly what is happening.... So if you think trump is going to go against them and side with Russia it will spark the ire of people in his own party In America there is a lovely saying.... we have one president at a time, and putin is trying to go over the head of the one currently in office..... you honestly think some of the people being sent back and the two compounds being shut down were being used solely for the greater good You guys watch way to much RT" The FBI/CIA told us nothing that the world hasn't known for 20 years. And the biggest perpetrator of such hacking/interference is the USA themselves. The CIA might as well have announced (shock, horror!) that the Pope is catholic. And no....sending diplomats back/closing compounds was for nobodies good but Obama himself. He clearly wanted Putin to retaliate...that was the shit he wanted to stir up for Trump. Putin, however, has proved (in this case) to be the bigger man. It has backfired on Obama and made him look like a clown! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Wasn't Putin a communist for many years? " Of course, and now he has a Swiss bank account. Gotta love them Commies.  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Wasn't Putin a communist for many years? " He was until he became corrupt....then he morphed into an out and out capitalist. The cookie jar was far too tempting to ignore after the break up of the old Soviet block. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" So, in other words, Obama risked an international incident just to score a few domestic political points and set a trap for the new president. Very statesmanlike NOT! No.... what Obama did was to back up the findings made by the security services in the FBI and CIA..... We all know that Obama and Trump are getting the same presidential daily national security briefings, they both know exactly what is happening.... So if you think trump is going to go against them and side with Russia it will spark the ire of people in his own party In America there is a lovely saying.... we have one president at a time, and putin is trying to go over the head of the one currently in office..... you honestly think some of the people being sent back and the two compounds being shut down were being used solely for the greater good You guys watch way to much RT Unfortunately I can see Trump finding himself in grave personal danger if he indeed does turn his back on the CIA and the Pentagon.....he will quickly find out that the Office of the President of The United States is largely one of a figurehead. He will be the head of the snake.....the body of which is enormous and very secretive. " I bet they won't even tell him about the aliens | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put. "As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
.
.
Anyhow this current state sponsored propaganda of Russian aggression.... We've seen it before for decades, Vietnam, communism, China, Iraq Iran...
Look at what we did with Libya,a country that the average Libyan had a reasonable standard of living and freedom under Gaddafi has been reduced to third from bottom on the UN list of shit holes.... Are you fucking kidding me, is this some great western fucking genius move to liberate people, does anybody even know on here what the fuck we've been doing for the last twenty years.
.
Hey that Saddam, he's got bad ass missiles just waiting to attack us in 45 minutes.
Iran oh there intent on invading their neighbours... Arms embargo... Saudi Arabia.. Oh that's ok, that's terrorism when they go into Bahrain and the Yemen with arms that WE SOLD THEM.
.
ISRAEL oh yeah they can build all over their neighbours land... That's fine, in fact, we'll shout at them a bit but hey here's 39 fucking billion dollars of money aid... Sshhh keep it quite through... Remember Were meant to be cross with you!.
.
You know I actually don't give a rat's arse about Russians or Libyans.... But seen as since we've destabilised Libya and now we've got endless fucking problems with migrants sailing from there, seen as before we destabilised Syria none of those migrants were Syrian and now shit loads are.... Let's not fall for the same propaganda bollocks with Russia!.
.
.
Even if it's remotely true that Russia wants to invade the Baltic states, it isn't, but even if it was...I don't give a shit, I don't live in the Baltics.i live in the UK.. Where frankly we've got enough fucking problems to deal with | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded. "The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU. The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government."Just to play devils advocate....Ukraine are not in the EU..... but the EU did sponsor the coup against a democratically elected government....which like all previous gave Russia access to their traditional Black Sea ports. The EU backed, unelected "new" government were looking to block access and to treat the ethnic Russians in Crimea (about 85%) of the population of that area, as second class citizens. Hardly surprising Putin reacted. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... Ukraine are not in the EU..... but the EU did sponsor the coup against a democratically elected government....which like all previous gave Russia access to their traditional Black Sea ports. The EU backed, unelected "new" government were looking to block access and to treat the ethnic Russians in Crimea (about 85%) of the population of that area, as second class citizens. Hardly surprising Putin reacted." . We've seen this same line and same propaganda trotted out for decades with Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Iran.... Now it's Russia. . CLCC is the one that keeps saying we absolutely need to increase our military, there's danger everywhere.... Then he's not happy when folks don't want the refugees his military intervention keeps causing. Newsflash, the average person in Syria is perfectly fucking happy with Assad the average Libyan was happy with Gaddafi the average Egyptian was happy with Mubarak and the average Russian loves Putin and all in all they aren't/weren't causing the UK great problems unlike now. . Here's an idea, why don't we stop poking a nose and dropping our bombs on other countries and see how that works out for a change?... Hell if it turns out as bad as this, I'll order the nukes myself  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
Just to play devils advocate....Ukraine are not in the EU.....
but the EU did sponsor the coup against a democratically elected government....which like all previous gave Russia access to their traditional Black Sea ports. The EU backed, unelected "new" government were looking to block access and to treat the ethnic Russians in Crimea (about 85%) of the population of that area, as second class citizens.
Hardly surprising Putin reacted."You are perpetuating the Post Truth world with rubbish like that. The EU did not sponsor a coup. You're just talking crap. Which part of the EU supposedly orchestrated this coup? The EU Intelligence Agency? There isn't one. Perhaps the EU Army, no, there isn't one of those either. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government." | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded. "All those people in Belarus and Eastern Ukraine just gagging to enter the EU, they show it by siding with Putin of course. Wasn't Ukraine supposed to join? And now they want Turkey, who antagonise Russia. Sureee | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
"More and more blatant LIES! Poland didn't apply to join the EU? Estonia didn't apply to join the EU? Lithuania didnt apply? Latvia didn't apply? Hungary didn't apply? LIES. LIES LIES | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
Just to play devils advocate....Ukraine are not in the EU.....
but the EU did sponsor the coup against a democratically elected government....which like all previous gave Russia access to their traditional Black Sea ports. The EU backed, unelected "new" government were looking to block access and to treat the ethnic Russians in Crimea (about 85%) of the population of that area, as second class citizens.
Hardly surprising Putin reacted.
You are perpetuating the Post Truth world with rubbish like that. The EU did not sponsor a coup. You're just talking crap. Which part of the EU supposedly orchestrated this coup? The EU Intelligence Agency? There isn't one. Perhaps the EU Army, no, there isn't one of those either. "Guy Verhofstadt standing in front of the mob and calling them true democrats would be a start. Cathy Ashton publicly supporting the rebels for seconds, oh and how about the EU giving the rebel government an association agreement? The EU's grubby mits were all over the Ukraine coup. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
More and more blatant LIES! Poland didn't apply to join the EU? Estonia didn't apply to join the EU? Lithuania didnt apply? Latvia didn't apply? Hungary didn't apply?
LIES.
LIES
LIES"Poles hate Russia and the rest of those and culturally closer to Scandanvia and Fins. When they tried to get the Ukraine (who are basically ethnically Russian) it was different. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Sorry....perhaps the deal done with the IMF (which is pretty much controlled by EU/Germany) and the European Central Bank to support the "new" government doesn't count. The US was also behind it...though channelling through EU/Merkel etc to keep at a distance. Obama admitted this in a CNN interview with Fareed Zakira." Well let's try and get this straight, was it the EU, the IMF or the US????? Before you said it was the EU, then when called on your bullshit you start blaming other people. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
Just to play devils advocate....Ukraine are not in the EU.....
but the EU did sponsor the coup against a democratically elected government....which like all previous gave Russia access to their traditional Black Sea ports. The EU backed, unelected "new" government were looking to block access and to treat the ethnic Russians in Crimea (about 85%) of the population of that area, as second class citizens.
Hardly surprising Putin reacted.
You are perpetuating the Post Truth world with rubbish like that. The EU did not sponsor a coup. You're just talking crap. Which part of the EU supposedly orchestrated this coup? The EU Intelligence Agency? There isn't one. Perhaps the EU Army, no, there isn't one of those either.
Guy Verhofstadt standing in front of the mob and calling them true democrats would be a start. Cathy Ashton publicly supporting the rebels for seconds, oh and how about the EU giving the rebel government an association agreement?
The EU's grubby mits were all over the Ukraine coup.". | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
More and more blatant LIES! Poland didn't apply to join the EU? Estonia didn't apply to join the EU? Lithuania didnt apply? Latvia didn't apply? Hungary didn't apply?
LIES.
LIES
LIES"If you bother to look for a moment you will find Verhofstadt's speech to the mob on Youtube. It's there for all to see. The association agreement is well documented. Cathy Ashton did support the rebels. NO LIES NO LIES NO LIES | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
More and more blatant LIES! Poland didn't apply to join the EU? Estonia didn't apply to join the EU? Lithuania didnt apply? Latvia didn't apply? Hungary didn't apply?
LIES.
LIES
LIES
Poles hate Russia and the rest of those and culturally closer to Scandanvia and Fins. When they tried to get the Ukraine (who are basically ethnically Russian) it was different."Right, so you DO admit that ALL EU member states joined voluntarily? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
More and more blatant LIES! Poland didn't apply to join the EU? Estonia didn't apply to join the EU? Lithuania didnt apply? Latvia didn't apply? Hungary didn't apply?
LIES.
LIES
LIES
Poles hate Russia and the rest of those and culturally closer to Scandanvia and Fins. When they tried to get the Ukraine (who are basically ethnically Russian) it was different.
Right, so you DO admit that ALL EU member states joined voluntarily?"No, not at all. With the amount of backlash over EU behaviour and law from the likes of Hungary, and them defying them regarding refugees, you can't deny the divisions in those nations. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
More and more blatant LIES! Poland didn't apply to join the EU? Estonia didn't apply to join the EU? Lithuania didnt apply? Latvia didn't apply? Hungary didn't apply?
LIES.
LIES
LIES
If you bother to look for a moment you will find Verhofstadt's speech to the mob on Youtube.
It's there for all to see.
The association agreement is well documented.
Cathy Ashton did support the rebels.
NO LIES
NO LIES
NO LIES"Right, let's take Verhofstadt first then. Was he sent there by the European parliament? Can you tell use the name of the motion passed that sent him there? Was he sent by the commission? Can you name the directive that supported him going? Maybe he is the official ambassador of the EU to Ukraine? No, you can't do any of those things. He's just an MEP. When Farage goes to New York to suck off Trump, is that then suddenly official EU policy? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
anyone else noticed that the people on here who voted to remain seem to blindly follow the western propoganda and belive whatever their governments and 'experts' tell them, where as the people who voted for Brexit tend to have an open mind, look at both sides of an argument, consider the facts and then make up their own minds?
(Not including doors in this as he didn't vote but has got it right ) | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Right, let's take Verhofstadt first then. Was he sent there by the European parliament? Can you tell use the name of the motion passed that sent him there? Was he sent by the commission? Can you name the directive that supported him going? Maybe he is the official ambassador of the EU to Ukraine? No, you can't do any of those things. He's just an MEP. When Farage goes to New York to suck off Trump, is that then suddenly official EU policy? " Pause while we kneel at his holy name! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
More and more blatant LIES! Poland didn't apply to join the EU? Estonia didn't apply to join the EU? Lithuania didnt apply? Latvia didn't apply? Hungary didn't apply?
LIES.
LIES
LIES
Poles hate Russia and the rest of those and culturally closer to Scandanvia and Fins. When they tried to get the Ukraine (who are basically ethnically Russian) it was different.
Right, so you DO admit that ALL EU member states joined voluntarily?
No, not at all. With the amount of backlash over EU behaviour and law from the likes of Hungary, and them defying them regarding refugees, you can't deny the divisions in those nations. "So which member state was forced to join the EU against their will? What was their governments response to forcibly joining the EU. Did they appeal to the UN? Tell the WTO that they didn't want to be in the single market? Of course they wouldn't have paid any contributions to the EU, or attend any EU events/summits etc. Wouldn't have started putting EU on their passports? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
More and more blatant LIES! Poland didn't apply to join the EU? Estonia didn't apply to join the EU? Lithuania didnt apply? Latvia didn't apply? Hungary didn't apply?
LIES.
LIES
LIES
If you bother to look for a moment you will find Verhofstadt's speech to the mob on Youtube.
It's there for all to see.
The association agreement is well documented.
Cathy Ashton did support the rebels.
NO LIES
NO LIES
NO LIES
Right, let's take Verhofstadt first then. Was he sent there by the European parliament? Can you tell use the name of the motion passed that sent him there? Was he sent by the commission? Can you name the directive that supported him going? Maybe he is the official ambassador of the EU to Ukraine? No, you can't do any of those things. He's just an MEP. When Farage goes to New York to suck off Trump, is that then suddenly official EU policy? "Verhofstadt was there as the head of an EU delegation. Look it up. Cathy Ashton was the EU foreign affairs commissioner. Are you trying to tell me she acted without authority? 
The association agreement was signed by the EU as a whole. Not by some maverick as you would like us to believe.
Stop trying to muddy the water.
The EU orchestrated the coup in Ukraine and you damn well know it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
More and more blatant LIES! Poland didn't apply to join the EU? Estonia didn't apply to join the EU? Lithuania didnt apply? Latvia didn't apply? Hungary didn't apply?
LIES.
LIES
LIES
If you bother to look for a moment you will find Verhofstadt's speech to the mob on Youtube.
It's there for all to see.
The association agreement is well documented.
Cathy Ashton did support the rebels.
NO LIES
NO LIES
NO LIES
Right, let's take Verhofstadt first then. Was he sent there by the European parliament? Can you tell use the name of the motion passed that sent him there? Was he sent by the commission? Can you name the directive that supported him going? Maybe he is the official ambassador of the EU to Ukraine? No, you can't do any of those things. He's just an MEP. When Farage goes to New York to suck off Trump, is that then suddenly official EU policy?
Verhofstadt was there as the head of an EU delegation. Look it up.
Cathy Ashton was the EU foreign affairs commissioner. Are you trying to tell me she acted without authority?
The association agreement was signed by the EU as a whole. Not by some maverick as you would like us to believe.
Stop trying to muddy the water.
The EU orchestrated the coup in Ukraine and you damn well know it."Why don't you tell us how many months BEFORE the coup they did that? They can hardly have orchestrated the coup AFTER it had happened could they. Yanukovych said in 2010 "Ukraine's integration with the EU remains our strategic aim" who forced him to say that? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I know I shouldn't bring the referendum into this thread... but I'm going to anyway
anyone else noticed that the people on here who voted to remain seem to blindly follow the western propoganda and belive whatever their governments and 'experts' tell them, where as the people who voted for Brexit tend to have an open mind, look at both sides of an argument, consider the facts and then make up their own minds?
(Not including doors in this as he didn't vote but has got it right )"The liberal Left are not capable of looking at all view Points ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
More and more blatant LIES! Poland didn't apply to join the EU? Estonia didn't apply to join the EU? Lithuania didnt apply? Latvia didn't apply? Hungary didn't apply?
LIES.
LIES
LIES
If you bother to look for a moment you will find Verhofstadt's speech to the mob on Youtube.
It's there for all to see.
The association agreement is well documented.
Cathy Ashton did support the rebels.
NO LIES
NO LIES
NO LIES
Right, let's take Verhofstadt first then. Was he sent there by the European parliament? Can you tell use the name of the motion passed that sent him there? Was he sent by the commission? Can you name the directive that supported him going? Maybe he is the official ambassador of the EU to Ukraine? No, you can't do any of those things. He's just an MEP. When Farage goes to New York to suck off Trump, is that then suddenly official EU policy?
Verhofstadt was there as the head of an EU delegation. Look it up.
Cathy Ashton was the EU foreign affairs commissioner. Are you trying to tell me she acted without authority?
The association agreement was signed by the EU as a whole. Not by some maverick as you would like us to believe.
Stop trying to muddy the water.
The EU orchestrated the coup in Ukraine and you damn well know it.
Why don't you tell us how many months BEFORE the coup they did that? They can hardly have orchestrated the coup AFTER it had happened could they.
Yanukovych said in 2010 "Ukraine's integration with the EU remains our strategic aim" who forced him to say that? "The origin of the coup was all about the EU. Yes Yankovitch did say that in 2010 but in 2014 he refused to sign the association agreement with the EU. Which is what kicked it all off. The rebels whole reason to exist was to get Ukraine into the EU. Then when it did kick off the EU supported the rebels and then the unelected government. Try as you may you can not whitewash them out of it. Yankovitch may not have been everyone's favourite but he was the elected president and he was overthrown in a coup supported and encouraged by the EU. The evidence is there for all (except you) to see. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
More and more blatant LIES! Poland didn't apply to join the EU? Estonia didn't apply to join the EU? Lithuania didnt apply? Latvia didn't apply? Hungary didn't apply?
LIES.
LIES
LIES
If you bother to look for a moment you will find Verhofstadt's speech to the mob on Youtube.
It's there for all to see.
The association agreement is well documented.
Cathy Ashton did support the rebels.
NO LIES
NO LIES
NO LIES
Right, let's take Verhofstadt first then. Was he sent there by the European parliament? Can you tell use the name of the motion passed that sent him there? Was he sent by the commission? Can you name the directive that supported him going? Maybe he is the official ambassador of the EU to Ukraine? No, you can't do any of those things. He's just an MEP. When Farage goes to New York to suck off Trump, is that then suddenly official EU policy?
Verhofstadt was there as the head of an EU delegation. Look it up.
Cathy Ashton was the EU foreign affairs commissioner. Are you trying to tell me she acted without authority?
The association agreement was signed by the EU as a whole. Not by some maverick as you would like us to believe.
Stop trying to muddy the water.
The EU orchestrated the coup in Ukraine and you damn well know it.
Why don't you tell us how many months BEFORE the coup they did that? They can hardly have orchestrated the coup AFTER it had happened could they.
Yanukovych said in 2010 "Ukraine's integration with the EU remains our strategic aim" who forced him to say that?
The origin of the coup was all about the EU.
Yes Yankovitch did say that in 2010 but in 2014 he refused to sign the association agreement with the EU. Which is what kicked it all off.
The rebels whole reason to exist was to get Ukraine into the EU. Then when it did kick off the EU supported the rebels and then the unelected government.
Try as you may you can not whitewash them out of it.
Yankovitch may not have been everyone's favourite but he was the elected president and he was overthrown in a coup supported and encouraged by the EU. The evidence is there for all (except you) to see."And yet you are unable to provide a single scrap of evidence to support you claims. Very curious considering you say there is so much evidence, that you cant produce any of it. CandM says how good you are at looking at both sides, so how about this: Yanukovych was elected on the basis that he wanted to join the EU. He said that after he was elected, that's what the Ukrainian people wanted, but when he changed his mind, the people didn't change theirs, they still wanted to join, and so overthrew a government that no longer represented the will of the people. How does that sound? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
More and more blatant LIES! Poland didn't apply to join the EU? Estonia didn't apply to join the EU? Lithuania didnt apply? Latvia didn't apply? Hungary didn't apply?
LIES.
LIES
LIES
If you bother to look for a moment you will find Verhofstadt's speech to the mob on Youtube.
It's there for all to see.
The association agreement is well documented.
Cathy Ashton did support the rebels.
NO LIES
NO LIES
NO LIES
Right, let's take Verhofstadt first then. Was he sent there by the European parliament? Can you tell use the name of the motion passed that sent him there? Was he sent by the commission? Can you name the directive that supported him going? Maybe he is the official ambassador of the EU to Ukraine? No, you can't do any of those things. He's just an MEP. When Farage goes to New York to suck off Trump, is that then suddenly official EU policy?
Verhofstadt was there as the head of an EU delegation. Look it up.
Cathy Ashton was the EU foreign affairs commissioner. Are you trying to tell me she acted without authority?
The association agreement was signed by the EU as a whole. Not by some maverick as you would like us to believe.
Stop trying to muddy the water.
The EU orchestrated the coup in Ukraine and you damn well know it.
Why don't you tell us how many months BEFORE the coup they did that? They can hardly have orchestrated the coup AFTER it had happened could they.
Yanukovych said in 2010 "Ukraine's integration with the EU remains our strategic aim" who forced him to say that?
The origin of the coup was all about the EU.
Yes Yankovitch did say that in 2010 but in 2014 he refused to sign the association agreement with the EU. Which is what kicked it all off.
The rebels whole reason to exist was to get Ukraine into the EU. Then when it did kick off the EU supported the rebels and then the unelected government.
Try as you may you can not whitewash them out of it.
Yankovitch may not have been everyone's favourite but he was the elected president and he was overthrown in a coup supported and encouraged by the EU. The evidence is there for all (except you) to see.
And yet you are unable to provide a single scrap of evidence to support you claims. Very curious considering you say there is so much evidence, that you cant produce any of it.
CandM says how good you are at looking at both sides, so how about this:
Yanukovych was elected on the basis that he wanted to join the EU. He said that after he was elected, that's what the Ukrainian people wanted, but when he changed his mind, the people didn't change theirs, they still wanted to join, and so overthrew a government that no longer represented the will of the people.
How does that sound? "Quite plausible. However it does not excuse an armed coup, and it certainly doesn't excuse a foreign power sticking its nose in and making matters worse. If the EU was so keen on democracy maybe they would have been better served by using diplomatic pressure to force Ukraine to the polls. But no. They spotted the main chance and decided to support the mob. Funny thing is that on this one you go on about the will of the people, yet when it comes to Brexit you are quite happy to disregard it. LOL Oh and as for evidence? I've provided more than enough, in platefulls (I don't do scraps). | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Is somebody really advocating the overthrow of democratically elected governments here? "Yep, seems so. As long as it is the beloved EU of course.  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
More and more blatant LIES! Poland didn't apply to join the EU? Estonia didn't apply to join the EU? Lithuania didnt apply? Latvia didn't apply? Hungary didn't apply?
LIES.
LIES
LIES
If you bother to look for a moment you will find Verhofstadt's speech to the mob on Youtube.
It's there for all to see.
The association agreement is well documented.
Cathy Ashton did support the rebels.
NO LIES
NO LIES
NO LIES
Right, let's take Verhofstadt first then. Was he sent there by the European parliament? Can you tell use the name of the motion passed that sent him there? Was he sent by the commission? Can you name the directive that supported him going? Maybe he is the official ambassador of the EU to Ukraine? No, you can't do any of those things. He's just an MEP. When Farage goes to New York to suck off Trump, is that then suddenly official EU policy?
Verhofstadt was there as the head of an EU delegation. Look it up.
Cathy Ashton was the EU foreign affairs commissioner. Are you trying to tell me she acted without authority?
The association agreement was signed by the EU as a whole. Not by some maverick as you would like us to believe.
Stop trying to muddy the water.
The EU orchestrated the coup in Ukraine and you damn well know it.
Why don't you tell us how many months BEFORE the coup they did that? They can hardly have orchestrated the coup AFTER it had happened could they.
Yanukovych said in 2010 "Ukraine's integration with the EU remains our strategic aim" who forced him to say that?
The origin of the coup was all about the EU.
Yes Yankovitch did say that in 2010 but in 2014 he refused to sign the association agreement with the EU. Which is what kicked it all off.
The rebels whole reason to exist was to get Ukraine into the EU. Then when it did kick off the EU supported the rebels and then the unelected government.
Try as you may you can not whitewash them out of it.
Yankovitch may not have been everyone's favourite but he was the elected president and he was overthrown in a coup supported and encouraged by the EU. The evidence is there for all (except you) to see.
And yet you are unable to provide a single scrap of evidence to support you claims. Very curious considering you say there is so much evidence, that you cant produce any of it.
CandM says how good you are at looking at both sides, so how about this:
Yanukovych was elected on the basis that he wanted to join the EU. He said that after he was elected, that's what the Ukrainian people wanted, but when he changed his mind, the people didn't change theirs, they still wanted to join, and so overthrew a government that no longer represented the will of the people.
How does that sound?
Quite plausible.
However it does not excuse an armed coup, and it certainly doesn't excuse a foreign power sticking its nose in and making matters worse.
If the EU was so keen on democracy maybe they would have been better served by using diplomatic pressure to force Ukraine to the polls. But no. They spotted the main chance and decided to support the mob.
Funny thing is that on this one you go on about the will of the people, yet when it comes to Brexit you are quite happy to disregard it. LOL
Oh and as for evidence? I've provided more than enough, in platefulls (I don't do scraps)."You haven't provided a single link to an proof whatsoever! That not platefuls, thats not scraps, that's nothing! Ok so an armed "coup" orchestrated by the EU. So you can provide us of evidence that the EU supplied arms to support the coup then? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
More and more blatant LIES! Poland didn't apply to join the EU? Estonia didn't apply to join the EU? Lithuania didnt apply? Latvia didn't apply? Hungary didn't apply?
LIES.
LIES
LIES
If you bother to look for a moment you will find Verhofstadt's speech to the mob on Youtube.
It's there for all to see.
The association agreement is well documented.
Cathy Ashton did support the rebels.
NO LIES
NO LIES
NO LIES
Right, let's take Verhofstadt first then. Was he sent there by the European parliament? Can you tell use the name of the motion passed that sent him there? Was he sent by the commission? Can you name the directive that supported him going? Maybe he is the official ambassador of the EU to Ukraine? No, you can't do any of those things. He's just an MEP. When Farage goes to New York to suck off Trump, is that then suddenly official EU policy?
Verhofstadt was there as the head of an EU delegation. Look it up.
Cathy Ashton was the EU foreign affairs commissioner. Are you trying to tell me she acted without authority?
The association agreement was signed by the EU as a whole. Not by some maverick as you would like us to believe.
Stop trying to muddy the water.
The EU orchestrated the coup in Ukraine and you damn well know it.
Why don't you tell us how many months BEFORE the coup they did that? They can hardly have orchestrated the coup AFTER it had happened could they.
Yanukovych said in 2010 "Ukraine's integration with the EU remains our strategic aim" who forced him to say that?
The origin of the coup was all about the EU.
Yes Yankovitch did say that in 2010 but in 2014 he refused to sign the association agreement with the EU. Which is what kicked it all off.
The rebels whole reason to exist was to get Ukraine into the EU. Then when it did kick off the EU supported the rebels and then the unelected government.
Try as you may you can not whitewash them out of it.
Yankovitch may not have been everyone's favourite but he was the elected president and he was overthrown in a coup supported and encouraged by the EU. The evidence is there for all (except you) to see.
And yet you are unable to provide a single scrap of evidence to support you claims. Very curious considering you say there is so much evidence, that you cant produce any of it.
CandM says how good you are at looking at both sides, so how about this:
Yanukovych was elected on the basis that he wanted to join the EU. He said that after he was elected, that's what the Ukrainian people wanted, but when he changed his mind, the people didn't change theirs, they still wanted to join, and so overthrew a government that no longer represented the will of the people.
How does that sound?
Quite plausible.
However it does not excuse an armed coup, and it certainly doesn't excuse a foreign power sticking its nose in and making matters worse.
If the EU was so keen on democracy maybe they would have been better served by using diplomatic pressure to force Ukraine to the polls. But no. They spotted the main chance and decided to support the mob.
Funny thing is that on this one you go on about the will of the people, yet when it comes to Brexit you are quite happy to disregard it. LOL
Oh and as for evidence? I've provided more than enough, in platefulls (I don't do scraps)."....well said. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Sorry....perhaps the deal done with the IMF (which is pretty much controlled by EU/Germany) and the European Central Bank to support the "new" government doesn't count. The US was also behind it...though channelling through EU/Merkel etc to keep at a distance. Obama admitted this in a CNN interview with Fareed Zakira. Well let's try and get this straight, was it the EU, the IMF or the US????? Before you said it was the EU, then when called on your bullshit you start blaming other people. " Why does it have to be one or the other? Is it not possible that all 3 were involved? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Is somebody really advocating the overthrow of democratically elected governments here? "Yep and all those who overthrew a democratically elected government in Ukraine were waving EU flags about at the time when the coup happened. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Is somebody really advocating the overthrow of democratically elected governments here?
Yep and all those who overthrew a democratically elected government in Ukraine were waving EU flags about at the time when the coup happened. "It seems as though at least 3 of you are ignorant to the meaning of the word "advocating" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
More and more blatant LIES! Poland didn't apply to join the EU? Estonia didn't apply to join the EU? Lithuania didnt apply? Latvia didn't apply? Hungary didn't apply?
LIES.
LIES
LIES
If you bother to look for a moment you will find Verhofstadt's speech to the mob on Youtube.
It's there for all to see.
The association agreement is well documented.
Cathy Ashton did support the rebels.
NO LIES
NO LIES
NO LIES
Right, let's take Verhofstadt first then. Was he sent there by the European parliament? Can you tell use the name of the motion passed that sent him there? Was he sent by the commission? Can you name the directive that supported him going? Maybe he is the official ambassador of the EU to Ukraine? No, you can't do any of those things. He's just an MEP. When Farage goes to New York to suck off Trump, is that then suddenly official EU policy?
Verhofstadt was there as the head of an EU delegation. Look it up.
Cathy Ashton was the EU foreign affairs commissioner. Are you trying to tell me she acted without authority?
The association agreement was signed by the EU as a whole. Not by some maverick as you would like us to believe.
Stop trying to muddy the water.
The EU orchestrated the coup in Ukraine and you damn well know it.
Why don't you tell us how many months BEFORE the coup they did that? They can hardly have orchestrated the coup AFTER it had happened could they.
Yanukovych said in 2010 "Ukraine's integration with the EU remains our strategic aim" who forced him to say that?
The origin of the coup was all about the EU.
Yes Yankovitch did say that in 2010 but in 2014 he refused to sign the association agreement with the EU. Which is what kicked it all off.
The rebels whole reason to exist was to get Ukraine into the EU. Then when it did kick off the EU supported the rebels and then the unelected government.
Try as you may you can not whitewash them out of it.
Yankovitch may not have been everyone's favourite but he was the elected president and he was overthrown in a coup supported and encouraged by the EU. The evidence is there for all (except you) to see.
And yet you are unable to provide a single scrap of evidence to support you claims. Very curious considering you say there is so much evidence, that you cant produce any of it.
CandM says how good you are at looking at both sides, so how about this:
Yanukovych was elected on the basis that he wanted to join the EU. He said that after he was elected, that's what the Ukrainian people wanted, but when he changed his mind, the people didn't change theirs, they still wanted to join, and so overthrew a government that no longer represented the will of the people.
How does that sound?
Quite plausible.
However it does not excuse an armed coup, and it certainly doesn't excuse a foreign power sticking its nose in and making matters worse.
If the EU was so keen on democracy maybe they would have been better served by using diplomatic pressure to force Ukraine to the polls. But no. They spotted the main chance and decided to support the mob.
Funny thing is that on this one you go on about the will of the people, yet when it comes to Brexit you are quite happy to disregard it. LOL
Oh and as for evidence? I've provided more than enough, in platefulls (I don't do scraps).
You haven't provided a single link to an proof whatsoever! That not platefuls, thats not scraps, that's nothing!
Ok so an armed "coup" orchestrated by the EU. So you can provide us of evidence that the EU supplied arms to support the coup then? "No links are needed. Everything hotlovefun has said can be put into Google and verified from there. You do know how to use Google? He also said footage of Guy Verhofstadt speech is on YouTube. You do know how to use YouTube don't you? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Sorry....perhaps the deal done with the IMF (which is pretty much controlled by EU/Germany) and the European Central Bank to support the "new" government doesn't count. The US was also behind it...though channelling through EU/Merkel etc to keep at a distance. Obama admitted this in a CNN interview with Fareed Zakira. Well let's try and get this straight, was it the EU, the IMF or the US????? Before you said it was the EU, then when called on your bullshit you start blaming other people. Why does it have to be one or the other? Is it not possible that all 3 were involved? " They were all involved.....just the point I was making. At least someone here does not have blinkers on! And as for members of the EU not being forced to join...correct. But sod all to do with Ukraine as they are NOT members of EU! More muddying of the waters by some.... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
More and more blatant LIES! Poland didn't apply to join the EU? Estonia didn't apply to join the EU? Lithuania didnt apply? Latvia didn't apply? Hungary didn't apply?
LIES.
LIES
LIES
If you bother to look for a moment you will find Verhofstadt's speech to the mob on Youtube.
It's there for all to see.
The association agreement is well documented.
Cathy Ashton did support the rebels.
NO LIES
NO LIES
NO LIES
Right, let's take Verhofstadt first then. Was he sent there by the European parliament? Can you tell use the name of the motion passed that sent him there? Was he sent by the commission? Can you name the directive that supported him going? Maybe he is the official ambassador of the EU to Ukraine? No, you can't do any of those things. He's just an MEP. When Farage goes to New York to suck off Trump, is that then suddenly official EU policy?
Verhofstadt was there as the head of an EU delegation. Look it up.
Cathy Ashton was the EU foreign affairs commissioner. Are you trying to tell me she acted without authority?
The association agreement was signed by the EU as a whole. Not by some maverick as you would like us to believe.
Stop trying to muddy the water.
The EU orchestrated the coup in Ukraine and you damn well know it.
Why don't you tell us how many months BEFORE the coup they did that? They can hardly have orchestrated the coup AFTER it had happened could they.
Yanukovych said in 2010 "Ukraine's integration with the EU remains our strategic aim" who forced him to say that?
The origin of the coup was all about the EU.
Yes Yankovitch did say that in 2010 but in 2014 he refused to sign the association agreement with the EU. Which is what kicked it all off.
The rebels whole reason to exist was to get Ukraine into the EU. Then when it did kick off the EU supported the rebels and then the unelected government.
Try as you may you can not whitewash them out of it.
Yankovitch may not have been everyone's favourite but he was the elected president and he was overthrown in a coup supported and encouraged by the EU. The evidence is there for all (except you) to see.
And yet you are unable to provide a single scrap of evidence to support you claims. Very curious considering you say there is so much evidence, that you cant produce any of it.
CandM says how good you are at looking at both sides, so how about this:
Yanukovych was elected on the basis that he wanted to join the EU. He said that after he was elected, that's what the Ukrainian people wanted, but when he changed his mind, the people didn't change theirs, they still wanted to join, and so overthrew a government that no longer represented the will of the people.
How does that sound?
Quite plausible.
However it does not excuse an armed coup, and it certainly doesn't excuse a foreign power sticking its nose in and making matters worse.
If the EU was so keen on democracy maybe they would have been better served by using diplomatic pressure to force Ukraine to the polls. But no. They spotted the main chance and decided to support the mob.
Funny thing is that on this one you go on about the will of the people, yet when it comes to Brexit you are quite happy to disregard it. LOL
Oh and as for evidence? I've provided more than enough, in platefulls (I don't do scraps).
You haven't provided a single link to an proof whatsoever! That not platefuls, thats not scraps, that's nothing!
Ok so an armed "coup" orchestrated by the EU. So you can provide us of evidence that the EU supplied arms to support the coup then? "Last time I provided a link to back up something against you, some TWAT reported me for posting a commercial link (it wasn't BTW) and I got a 24 hour ban. So I wont fall for that one again. Go on Youtube and check out "Guy Verhofstadt Ukraine speech" Google "Cathy Ashton Ukraine" Google "EU Ukraine association agreement" The association agreement is even on the EU's own fucking website for Christs sake. How much more do you need. Maybe I should get hold of Verhofstadt and beat a confession out of him. You see the evidence then trot out the same old shit. Time after time after time. The one thing I've learned though is that it is usually your final tactic when you know you've lost. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
More and more blatant LIES! Poland didn't apply to join the EU? Estonia didn't apply to join the EU? Lithuania didnt apply? Latvia didn't apply? Hungary didn't apply?
LIES.
LIES
LIES
If you bother to look for a moment you will find Verhofstadt's speech to the mob on Youtube.
It's there for all to see.
The association agreement is well documented.
Cathy Ashton did support the rebels.
NO LIES
NO LIES
NO LIES
Right, let's take Verhofstadt first then. Was he sent there by the European parliament? Can you tell use the name of the motion passed that sent him there? Was he sent by the commission? Can you name the directive that supported him going? Maybe he is the official ambassador of the EU to Ukraine? No, you can't do any of those things. He's just an MEP. When Farage goes to New York to suck off Trump, is that then suddenly official EU policy?
Verhofstadt was there as the head of an EU delegation. Look it up.
Cathy Ashton was the EU foreign affairs commissioner. Are you trying to tell me she acted without authority?
The association agreement was signed by the EU as a whole. Not by some maverick as you would like us to believe.
Stop trying to muddy the water.
The EU orchestrated the coup in Ukraine and you damn well know it.
Why don't you tell us how many months BEFORE the coup they did that? They can hardly have orchestrated the coup AFTER it had happened could they.
Yanukovych said in 2010 "Ukraine's integration with the EU remains our strategic aim" who forced him to say that?
The origin of the coup was all about the EU.
Yes Yankovitch did say that in 2010 but in 2014 he refused to sign the association agreement with the EU. Which is what kicked it all off.
The rebels whole reason to exist was to get Ukraine into the EU. Then when it did kick off the EU supported the rebels and then the unelected government.
Try as you may you can not whitewash them out of it.
Yankovitch may not have been everyone's favourite but he was the elected president and he was overthrown in a coup supported and encouraged by the EU. The evidence is there for all (except you) to see.
And yet you are unable to provide a single scrap of evidence to support you claims. Very curious considering you say there is so much evidence, that you cant produce any of it.
CandM says how good you are at looking at both sides, so how about this:
Yanukovych was elected on the basis that he wanted to join the EU. He said that after he was elected, that's what the Ukrainian people wanted, but when he changed his mind, the people didn't change theirs, they still wanted to join, and so overthrew a government that no longer represented the will of the people.
How does that sound?
Quite plausible.
However it does not excuse an armed coup, and it certainly doesn't excuse a foreign power sticking its nose in and making matters worse.
If the EU was so keen on democracy maybe they would have been better served by using diplomatic pressure to force Ukraine to the polls. But no. They spotted the main chance and decided to support the mob.
Funny thing is that on this one you go on about the will of the people, yet when it comes to Brexit you are quite happy to disregard it. LOL
Oh and as for evidence? I've provided more than enough, in platefulls (I don't do scraps).
You haven't provided a single link to an proof whatsoever! That not platefuls, thats not scraps, that's nothing!
Ok so an armed "coup" orchestrated by the EU. So you can provide us of evidence that the EU supplied arms to support the coup then?
No links are needed. Everything hotlovefun has said can be put into Google and verified from there. You do know how to use Google? He also said footage of Guy Verhofstadt speech is on YouTube. You do know how to use YouTube don't you? "Thank you. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
More and more blatant LIES! Poland didn't apply to join the EU? Estonia didn't apply to join the EU? Lithuania didnt apply? Latvia didn't apply? Hungary didn't apply?
LIES.
LIES
LIES
If you bother to look for a moment you will find Verhofstadt's speech to the mob on Youtube.
It's there for all to see.
The association agreement is well documented.
Cathy Ashton did support the rebels.
NO LIES
NO LIES
NO LIES
Right, let's take Verhofstadt first then. Was he sent there by the European parliament? Can you tell use the name of the motion passed that sent him there? Was he sent by the commission? Can you name the directive that supported him going? Maybe he is the official ambassador of the EU to Ukraine? No, you can't do any of those things. He's just an MEP. When Farage goes to New York to suck off Trump, is that then suddenly official EU policy?
Verhofstadt was there as the head of an EU delegation. Look it up.
Cathy Ashton was the EU foreign affairs commissioner. Are you trying to tell me she acted without authority?
The association agreement was signed by the EU as a whole. Not by some maverick as you would like us to believe.
Stop trying to muddy the water.
The EU orchestrated the coup in Ukraine and you damn well know it.
Why don't you tell us how many months BEFORE the coup they did that? They can hardly have orchestrated the coup AFTER it had happened could they.
Yanukovych said in 2010 "Ukraine's integration with the EU remains our strategic aim" who forced him to say that?
The origin of the coup was all about the EU.
Yes Yankovitch did say that in 2010 but in 2014 he refused to sign the association agreement with the EU. Which is what kicked it all off.
The rebels whole reason to exist was to get Ukraine into the EU. Then when it did kick off the EU supported the rebels and then the unelected government.
Try as you may you can not whitewash them out of it.
Yankovitch may not have been everyone's favourite but he was the elected president and he was overthrown in a coup supported and encouraged by the EU. The evidence is there for all (except you) to see.
And yet you are unable to provide a single scrap of evidence to support you claims. Very curious considering you say there is so much evidence, that you cant produce any of it.
CandM says how good you are at looking at both sides, so how about this:
Yanukovych was elected on the basis that he wanted to join the EU. He said that after he was elected, that's what the Ukrainian people wanted, but when he changed his mind, the people didn't change theirs, they still wanted to join, and so overthrew a government that no longer represented the will of the people.
How does that sound?
Quite plausible.
However it does not excuse an armed coup, and it certainly doesn't excuse a foreign power sticking its nose in and making matters worse.
If the EU was so keen on democracy maybe they would have been better served by using diplomatic pressure to force Ukraine to the polls. But no. They spotted the main chance and decided to support the mob.
Funny thing is that on this one you go on about the will of the people, yet when it comes to Brexit you are quite happy to disregard it. LOL
Oh and as for evidence? I've provided more than enough, in platefulls (I don't do scraps).
You haven't provided a single link to an proof whatsoever! That not platefuls, thats not scraps, that's nothing!
Ok so an armed "coup" orchestrated by the EU. So you can provide us of evidence that the EU supplied arms to support the coup then?
Last time I provided a link to back up something against you, some TWAT reported me for posting a commercial link (it wasn't BTW) and I got a 24 hour ban. So I wont fall for that one again.
Go on Youtube and check out "Guy Verhofstadt Ukraine speech"
Google "Cathy Ashton Ukraine"
Google "EU Ukraine association agreement"
The association agreement is even on the EU's own fucking website for Christs sake.
How much more do you need.
Maybe I should get hold of Verhofstadt and beat a confession out of him.
You see the evidence then trot out the same old shit. Time after time after time.
The one thing I've learned though is that it is usually your final tactic when you know you've lost.
"Fab forum rules state you can post links to well known newspapers, and other well known news media such as television news station's (BBC and sky news, etc). You can also post links to Wikipedia and YouTube, but post a link to anything else and you are liable to get a forum ban. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
More and more blatant LIES! Poland didn't apply to join the EU? Estonia didn't apply to join the EU? Lithuania didnt apply? Latvia didn't apply? Hungary didn't apply?
LIES.
LIES
LIES
If you bother to look for a moment you will find Verhofstadt's speech to the mob on Youtube.
It's there for all to see.
The association agreement is well documented.
Cathy Ashton did support the rebels.
NO LIES
NO LIES
NO LIES
Right, let's take Verhofstadt first then. Was he sent there by the European parliament? Can you tell use the name of the motion passed that sent him there? Was he sent by the commission? Can you name the directive that supported him going? Maybe he is the official ambassador of the EU to Ukraine? No, you can't do any of those things. He's just an MEP. When Farage goes to New York to suck off Trump, is that then suddenly official EU policy?
Verhofstadt was there as the head of an EU delegation. Look it up.
Cathy Ashton was the EU foreign affairs commissioner. Are you trying to tell me she acted without authority?
The association agreement was signed by the EU as a whole. Not by some maverick as you would like us to believe.
Stop trying to muddy the water.
The EU orchestrated the coup in Ukraine and you damn well know it.
Why don't you tell us how many months BEFORE the coup they did that? They can hardly have orchestrated the coup AFTER it had happened could they.
Yanukovych said in 2010 "Ukraine's integration with the EU remains our strategic aim" who forced him to say that?
The origin of the coup was all about the EU.
Yes Yankovitch did say that in 2010 but in 2014 he refused to sign the association agreement with the EU. Which is what kicked it all off.
The rebels whole reason to exist was to get Ukraine into the EU. Then when it did kick off the EU supported the rebels and then the unelected government.
Try as you may you can not whitewash them out of it.
Yankovitch may not have been everyone's favourite but he was the elected president and he was overthrown in a coup supported and encouraged by the EU. The evidence is there for all (except you) to see.
And yet you are unable to provide a single scrap of evidence to support you claims. Very curious considering you say there is so much evidence, that you cant produce any of it.
CandM says how good you are at looking at both sides, so how about this:
Yanukovych was elected on the basis that he wanted to join the EU. He said that after he was elected, that's what the Ukrainian people wanted, but when he changed his mind, the people didn't change theirs, they still wanted to join, and so overthrew a government that no longer represented the will of the people.
How does that sound?
Quite plausible.
However it does not excuse an armed coup, and it certainly doesn't excuse a foreign power sticking its nose in and making matters worse.
If the EU was so keen on democracy maybe they would have been better served by using diplomatic pressure to force Ukraine to the polls. But no. They spotted the main chance and decided to support the mob.
Funny thing is that on this one you go on about the will of the people, yet when it comes to Brexit you are quite happy to disregard it. LOL
Oh and as for evidence? I've provided more than enough, in platefulls (I don't do scraps).
You haven't provided a single link to an proof whatsoever! That not platefuls, thats not scraps, that's nothing!
Ok so an armed "coup" orchestrated by the EU. So you can provide us of evidence that the EU supplied arms to support the coup then?
Last time I provided a link to back up something against you, some TWAT reported me for posting a commercial link (it wasn't BTW) and I got a 24 hour ban. So I wont fall for that one again.
Go on Youtube and check out "Guy Verhofstadt Ukraine speech"
Google "Cathy Ashton Ukraine"
Google "EU Ukraine association agreement"
The association agreement is even on the EU's own fucking website for Christs sake.
How much more do you need.
Maybe I should get hold of Verhofstadt and beat a confession out of him.
You see the evidence then trot out the same old shit. Time after time after time.
The one thing I've learned though is that it is usually your final tactic when you know you've lost.
"Right ok, lets look at the EU Ukraine association agreement then which was signed on 27th June 2014. How did that agreement signed in June 2014, CAUSE a revolution that happened in February 2014, 4 months earlier. Did the EU use a time machine? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"NATO chiefs believe that Putins action in Crimea and Ukraine are a precursor to organising insurrection amongst native Russians living in the Baltic states....... That's how it will start.... And what is wrong with that? It astounds me that people happily watch the EU culturally colonize former Soviet state after Soviet state, especially the Slavic ones and then they have a problem with Russia doing the exact same. All it's done is make Russia feel threated and made millions of competition amongst the poorest in the EU. Ah but that's Left wing colonialism, so that's okay. Well put.
As usual, complete and utter bullshit. They ASKED to join the EU, they are NOT asking to be invaded.
The elected government did NOT ask to join the EU.
The EU rabble roused and supported a coup to overthrow the elected government and then supported the unelected government.
More and more blatant LIES! Poland didn't apply to join the EU? Estonia didn't apply to join the EU? Lithuania didnt apply? Latvia didn't apply? Hungary didn't apply?
LIES.
LIES
LIES
If you bother to look for a moment you will find Verhofstadt's speech to the mob on Youtube.
It's there for all to see.
The association agreement is well documented.
Cathy Ashton did support the rebels.
NO LIES
NO LIES
NO LIES
Right, let's take Verhofstadt first then. Was he sent there by the European parliament? Can you tell use the name of the motion passed that sent him there? Was he sent by the commission? Can you name the directive that supported him going? Maybe he is the official ambassador of the EU to Ukraine? No, you can't do any of those things. He's just an MEP. When Farage goes to New York to suck off Trump, is that then suddenly official EU policy?
Verhofstadt was there as the head of an EU delegation. Look it up.
Cathy Ashton was the EU foreign affairs commissioner. Are you trying to tell me she acted without authority?
The association agreement was signed by the EU as a whole. Not by some maverick as you would like us to believe.
Stop trying to muddy the water.
The EU orchestrated the coup in Ukraine and you damn well know it.
Why don't you tell us how many months BEFORE the coup they did that? They can hardly have orchestrated the coup AFTER it had happened could they.
Yanukovych said in 2010 "Ukraine's integration with the EU remains our strategic aim" who forced him to say that?
The origin of the coup was all about the EU.
Yes Yankovitch did say that in 2010 but in 2014 he refused to sign the association agreement with the EU. Which is what kicked it all off.
The rebels whole reason to exist was to get Ukraine into the EU. Then when it did kick off the EU supported the rebels and then the unelected government.
Try as you may you can not whitewash them out of it.
Yankovitch may not have been everyone's favourite but he was the elected president and he was overthrown in a coup supported and encouraged by the EU. The evidence is there for all (except you) to see.
And yet you are unable to provide a single scrap of evidence to support you claims. Very curious considering you say there is so much evidence, that you cant produce any of it.
CandM says how good you are at looking at both sides, so how about this:
Yanukovych was elected on the basis that he wanted to join the EU. He said that after he was elected, that's what the Ukrainian people wanted, but when he changed his mind, the people didn't change theirs, they still wanted to join, and so overthrew a government that no longer represented the will of the people.
How does that sound?
Quite plausible.
However it does not excuse an armed coup, and it certainly doesn't excuse a foreign power sticking its nose in and making matters worse.
If the EU was so keen on democracy maybe they would have been better served by using diplomatic pressure to force Ukraine to the polls. But no. They spotted the main chance and decided to support the mob.
Funny thing is that on this one you go on about the will of the people, yet when it comes to Brexit you are quite happy to disregard it. LOL
Oh and as for evidence? I've provided more than enough, in platefulls (I don't do scraps).
You haven't provided a single link to an proof whatsoever! That not platefuls, thats not scraps, that's nothing!
Ok so an armed "coup" orchestrated by the EU. So you can provide us of evidence that the EU supplied arms to support the coup then?
Last time I provided a link to back up something against you, some TWAT reported me for posting a commercial link (it wasn't BTW) and I got a 24 hour ban. So I wont fall for that one again.
Go on Youtube and check out "Guy Verhofstadt Ukraine speech"
Google "Cathy Ashton Ukraine"
Google "EU Ukraine association agreement"
The association agreement is even on the EU's own fucking website for Christs sake.
How much more do you need.
Maybe I should get hold of Verhofstadt and beat a confession out of him.
You see the evidence then trot out the same old shit. Time after time after time.
The one thing I've learned though is that it is usually your final tactic when you know you've lost.
Right ok, lets look at the EU Ukraine association agreement then which was signed on 27th June 2014.
How did that agreement signed in June 2014, CAUSE a revolution that happened in February 2014, 4 months earlier. Did the EU use a time machine? "My god. You really just don't (want to) get do you? 1. The revolution started BECAUSE Yankovitch refused to sign it. 2. The mob were demanding that he signed it. 3. They then overthrew the government aided and abetted by the EU. 4. The NEW unelected government then signed it. How much clearer do you need it? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Right ok, lets look at the EU Ukraine association agreement then which was signed on 27th June 2014. How did that agreement signed in June 2014, CAUSE a revolution that happened in February 2014, 4 months earlier. Did the EU use a time machine?
My god. You really just don't (want to) get do you?
1. The revolution started BECAUSE Yankovitch refused to sign it.
2. The mob were demanding that he signed it.
3. They then overthrew the government aided and abetted by the EU.
4. The NEW unelected government then signed it.
How much clearer do you need it?"How were they aided and abetted? They weren't. The Ukrainian people decided to overthrow the government that wasnt doing what it was elected to do. You have no evidence that between the president changing his mind, and the revolution, that the EU did anything to incite the revolution. Nothing. Did they provide arms? Money? Tell the people of Ukraine to overthrow the government? No, absolutely none of that happened. You are somehow trying to claim that events that happened AFTER the revolution, some how CAUSED the revolution. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I wonder what sort of country some people on this thread would want to live in? They criticise political leaders who stand for the open, tolerant and free society that we and our American cousins enjoy and think that Vladimir Putin is a figure to be admired. I can only hope that admiring from afar is not the same as wistfully thinking that we too had a head of state who would sanction the shooting down of civilian airliners and the violent suppression of dissent. " . You've been drinking the cool aid again. . Iran Air Flight 655 was an Iran Air passenger flight from Tehran to Dubai. On 3 July 1988, the aircraft operating on this route was shot down by the United States Navy guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes under the command of William C. Rogers III. The incident took place in Iranian airspace, over Iran's territorial waters in the Persian Gulf, and on the flight's usual flight path. The aircraft, an Airbus A300 B2-203, was destroyed by SM-2MR surface-to-air missiles fired from Vincennes. All 290 people on board died. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Right ok, lets look at the EU Ukraine association agreement then which was signed on 27th June 2014. How did that agreement signed in June 2014, CAUSE a revolution that happened in February 2014, 4 months earlier. Did the EU use a time machine?
My god. You really just don't (want to) get do you?
1. The revolution started BECAUSE Yankovitch refused to sign it.
2. The mob were demanding that he signed it.
3. They then overthrew the government aided and abetted by the EU.
4. The NEW unelected government then signed it.
How much clearer do you need it?
How were they aided and abetted? They weren't. The Ukrainian people decided to overthrow the government that wasnt doing what it was elected to do.
You have no evidence that between the president changing his mind, and the revolution, that the EU did anything to incite the revolution. Nothing. Did they provide arms? Money? Tell the people of Ukraine to overthrow the government? No, absolutely none of that happened.
You are somehow trying to claim that events that happened AFTER the revolution, some how CAUSED the revolution. "Guy Verhofstadt MEP did encourage the people of Ukraine to overthrow the government in his speech, in effect he was telling them to overthrow the government. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Right ok, lets look at the EU Ukraine association agreement then which was signed on 27th June 2014. How did that agreement signed in June 2014, CAUSE a revolution that happened in February 2014, 4 months earlier. Did the EU use a time machine?
My god. You really just don't (want to) get do you?
1. The revolution started BECAUSE Yankovitch refused to sign it.
2. The mob were demanding that he signed it.
3. They then overthrew the government aided and abetted by the EU.
4. The NEW unelected government then signed it.
How much clearer do you need it?
How were they aided and abetted? They weren't. The Ukrainian people decided to overthrow the government that wasnt doing what it was elected to do.
You have no evidence that between the president changing his mind, and the revolution, that the EU did anything to incite the revolution. Nothing. Did they provide arms? Money? Tell the people of Ukraine to overthrow the government? No, absolutely none of that happened.
You are somehow trying to claim that events that happened AFTER the revolution, some how CAUSED the revolution.
Guy Verhofstadt MEP did encourage the people of Ukraine to overthrow the government in his speech, in effect he was telling them to overthrow the government. "Did he do that before, or after the revolution started? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Right ok, lets look at the EU Ukraine association agreement then which was signed on 27th June 2014. How did that agreement signed in June 2014, CAUSE a revolution that happened in February 2014, 4 months earlier. Did the EU use a time machine?
My god. You really just don't (want to) get do you?
1. The revolution started BECAUSE Yankovitch refused to sign it.
2. The mob were demanding that he signed it.
3. They then overthrew the government aided and abetted by the EU.
4. The NEW unelected government then signed it.
How much clearer do you need it?
How were they aided and abetted? They weren't. The Ukrainian people decided to overthrow the government that wasnt doing what it was elected to do.
You have no evidence that between the president changing his mind, and the revolution, that the EU did anything to incite the revolution. Nothing. Did they provide arms? Money? Tell the people of Ukraine to overthrow the government? No, absolutely none of that happened.
You are somehow trying to claim that events that happened AFTER the revolution, some how CAUSED the revolution. "So the whole basis of the protests and the revolution were about EU membership. Both Verhofstadt's delegation and Cathy Ashton went to Kiev to support the mob. The association agreement (which started the ball rolling) was signed within a couple of months after the revolution. And you still say it was nothing to do with the EU.
I would add that in the case of Cathy Ashton she has been left with serious egg on her face. A recently leaked conversation between her and the Estonian foreign minister showed that there was evidence that the snipers (blamed at the time on Yankovitch and condemned by Ashton) were actually Maidan provocateurs. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If one of the Baltic states, Estonia for instance, invokes Article 5 and the United States (under Trump) don't come to their assistance then NATO is finished and will disband within weeks. Nobody should be worried because the EU is apparently entirely responsibappear maintaining peace in Europe for the last 70 years. " Bollocks | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Right ok, lets look at the EU Ukraine association agreement then which was signed on 27th June 2014. How did that agreement signed in June 2014, CAUSE a revolution that happened in February 2014, 4 months earlier. Did the EU use a time machine?
My god. You really just don't (want to) get do you?
1. The revolution started BECAUSE Yankovitch refused to sign it.
2. The mob were demanding that he signed it.
3. They then overthrew the government aided and abetted by the EU.
4. The NEW unelected government then signed it.
How much clearer do you need it?
How were they aided and abetted? They weren't. The Ukrainian people decided to overthrow the government that wasnt doing what it was elected to do.
You have no evidence that between the president changing his mind, and the revolution, that the EU did anything to incite the revolution. Nothing. Did they provide arms? Money? Tell the people of Ukraine to overthrow the government? No, absolutely none of that happened.
You are somehow trying to claim that events that happened AFTER the revolution, some how CAUSED the revolution.
Guy Verhofstadt MEP did encourage the people of Ukraine to overthrow the government in his speech, in effect he was telling them to overthrow the government.
Did he do that before, or after the revolution started? "Does it really matter? He did it. Full stop. Your pedantic bitching about the timing is just another attempt to muddy the water. Maybe it was 4 o'clock maybe it was half past six. Who gives a shit? He did it. Accept it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Right ok, lets look at the EU Ukraine association agreement then which was signed on 27th June 2014. How did that agreement signed in June 2014, CAUSE a revolution that happened in February 2014, 4 months earlier. Did the EU use a time machine?
My god. You really just don't (want to) get do you?
1. The revolution started BECAUSE Yankovitch refused to sign it.
2. The mob were demanding that he signed it.
3. They then overthrew the government aided and abetted by the EU.
4. The NEW unelected government then signed it.
How much clearer do you need it?
How were they aided and abetted? They weren't. The Ukrainian people decided to overthrow the government that wasnt doing what it was elected to do.
You have no evidence that between the president changing his mind, and the revolution, that the EU did anything to incite the revolution. Nothing. Did they provide arms? Money? Tell the people of Ukraine to overthrow the government? No, absolutely none of that happened.
You are somehow trying to claim that events that happened AFTER the revolution, some how CAUSED the revolution.
So the whole basis of the protests and the revolution were about EU membership.
Both Verhofstadt's delegation and Cathy Ashton went to Kiev to support the mob.
The association agreement (which started the ball rolling) was signed within a couple of months after the revolution.
And you still say it was nothing to do with the EU.
I would add that in the case of Cathy Ashton she has been left with serious egg on her face. A recently leaked conversation between her and the Estonian foreign minister showed that there was evidence that the snipers (blamed at the time on Yankovitch and condemned by Ashton) were actually Maidan provocateurs."I never said it had nothing to do with the EU. I said the EU didn't cause it, or aid it. EU membership was what the people wanted, and what the president said he would deliver. He didn't, so they got rid of him. So just to be clear, you STILL haven't provided any proof of incement to revolution from the EU before it started. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Right ok, lets look at the EU Ukraine association agreement then which was signed on 27th June 2014. How did that agreement signed in June 2014, CAUSE a revolution that happened in February 2014, 4 months earlier. Did the EU use a time machine?
My god. You really just don't (want to) get do you?
1. The revolution started BECAUSE Yankovitch refused to sign it.
2. The mob were demanding that he signed it.
3. They then overthrew the government aided and abetted by the EU.
4. The NEW unelected government then signed it.
How much clearer do you need it?
How were they aided and abetted? They weren't. The Ukrainian people decided to overthrow the government that wasnt doing what it was elected to do.
You have no evidence that between the president changing his mind, and the revolution, that the EU did anything to incite the revolution. Nothing. Did they provide arms? Money? Tell the people of Ukraine to overthrow the government? No, absolutely none of that happened.
You are somehow trying to claim that events that happened AFTER the revolution, some how CAUSED the revolution.
So the whole basis of the protests and the revolution were about EU membership.
Both Verhofstadt's delegation and Cathy Ashton went to Kiev to support the mob.
The association agreement (which started the ball rolling) was signed within a couple of months after the revolution.
And you still say it was nothing to do with the EU.
I would add that in the case of Cathy Ashton she has been left with serious egg on her face. A recently leaked conversation between her and the Estonian foreign minister showed that there was evidence that the snipers (blamed at the time on Yankovitch and condemned by Ashton) were actually Maidan provocateurs.
I never said it had nothing to do with the EU. I said the EU didn't cause it, or aid it. EU membership was what the people wanted, and what the president said he would deliver. He didn't, so they got rid of him.
So just to be clear, you STILL haven't provided any proof of incement to revolution from the EU before it started. "Ah. Quick change of tack. You would make a good sailor. BTW. At the beginning you did say it had nothing to do with the EU. You tried to brush it away as a maverick MEP acting alone. When you finally got proved wrong you changed tack and started bitching about the timing (as if it matters) OK let's look at the cause of it this way. Do you think that offering an association agreement (the first step on the road to EU membership) would be a good idea to a country that (at the time) provided Russia with one of its biggest naval bases? Or do you think it would be deliberately provocative? We are talking about career politicians and diplomats here who would be well aware of the consequences of their actions. I have no doubt that Putin probably put pressure on Yankovitch not to sign the agreement and put a sizeable chunk of cash on the table as well. But once Yankovitch refused to sign then the EU should have backed off. Yes Verhofstadt and his delegation did go after the protests started (I never said that they went before) but maybe if the EU had left the situation well alone rather than jumping in with both feet and encouraging, what was still at that time just a protest, it to turn into a full blown coup. The timing means nothing. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Right ok, lets look at the EU Ukraine association agreement then which was signed on 27th June 2014. How did that agreement signed in June 2014, CAUSE a revolution that happened in February 2014, 4 months earlier. Did the EU use a time machine?
My god. You really just don't (want to) get do you?
1. The revolution started BECAUSE Yankovitch refused to sign it.
2. The mob were demanding that he signed it.
3. They then overthrew the government aided and abetted by the EU.
4. The NEW unelected government then signed it.
How much clearer do you need it?
How were they aided and abetted? They weren't. The Ukrainian people decided to overthrow the government that wasnt doing what it was elected to do.
You have no evidence that between the president changing his mind, and the revolution, that the EU did anything to incite the revolution. Nothing. Did they provide arms? Money? Tell the people of Ukraine to overthrow the government? No, absolutely none of that happened.
You are somehow trying to claim that events that happened AFTER the revolution, some how CAUSED the revolution.
So the whole basis of the protests and the revolution were about EU membership.
Both Verhofstadt's delegation and Cathy Ashton went to Kiev to support the mob.
The association agreement (which started the ball rolling) was signed within a couple of months after the revolution.
And you still say it was nothing to do with the EU.
I would add that in the case of Cathy Ashton she has been left with serious egg on her face. A recently leaked conversation between her and the Estonian foreign minister showed that there was evidence that the snipers (blamed at the time on Yankovitch and condemned by Ashton) were actually Maidan provocateurs.
I never said it had nothing to do with the EU. I said the EU didn't cause it, or aid it. EU membership was what the people wanted, and what the president said he would deliver. He didn't, so they got rid of him.
So just to be clear, you STILL haven't provided any proof of incement to revolution from the EU before it started.
Ah. Quick change of tack. You would make a good sailor.
BTW. At the beginning you did say it had nothing to do with the EU. You tried to brush it away as a maverick MEP acting alone. When you finally got proved wrong you changed tack and started bitching about the timing (as if it matters)
OK let's look at the cause of it this way.
Do you think that offering an association agreement (the first step on the road to EU membership) would be a good idea to a country that (at the time) provided Russia with one of its biggest naval bases? Or do you think it would be deliberately provocative?
We are talking about career politicians and diplomats here who would be well aware of the consequences of their actions.
I have no doubt that Putin probably put pressure on Yankovitch not to sign the agreement and put a sizeable chunk of cash on the table as well. But once Yankovitch refused to sign then the EU should have backed off.
Yes Verhofstadt and his delegation did go after the protests started (I never said that they went before) but maybe if the EU had left the situation well alone rather than jumping in with both feet and encouraging, what was still at that time just a protest, it to turn into a full blown coup.
The timing means nothing.
"A quick change of tack? Im going to call you out yet again, stop lying, nowhere have I said that it has nothing to do with the EU, read through the thread and quote me where I have a said that, or admit that you a nothing but a liar. Of course the timing matters! You are saying the CAUSED the revolution AFTER the revolution. Thats not how it works, time only moves in one direction. That means you can’t cause something after it has happened. I like the way that you are trying to bring in the excuses for Putin again by saying its “provocative” for Ukraine to seek closer links to the EU. Like I have said before, you are using the same arguments that rape excusers use. Saying that the victim was wearing provocative clothes, so she shouldnt be surprised if she is raped. You think Ukraine was being provocative, so shouldnt be surprised if it gets invaded. I think that’s disgusting and that you should be ashamed of yourself. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Right ok, lets look at the EU Ukraine association agreement then which was signed on 27th June 2014. How did that agreement signed in June 2014, CAUSE a revolution that happened in February 2014, 4 months earlier. Did the EU use a time machine?
My god. You really just don't (want to) get do you?
1. The revolution started BECAUSE Yankovitch refused to sign it.
2. The mob were demanding that he signed it.
3. They then overthrew the government aided and abetted by the EU.
4. The NEW unelected government then signed it.
How much clearer do you need it?
How were they aided and abetted? They weren't. The Ukrainian people decided to overthrow the government that wasnt doing what it was elected to do.
You have no evidence that between the president changing his mind, and the revolution, that the EU did anything to incite the revolution. Nothing. Did they provide arms? Money? Tell the people of Ukraine to overthrow the government? No, absolutely none of that happened.
You are somehow trying to claim that events that happened AFTER the revolution, some how CAUSED the revolution.
So the whole basis of the protests and the revolution were about EU membership.
Both Verhofstadt's delegation and Cathy Ashton went to Kiev to support the mob.
The association agreement (which started the ball rolling) was signed within a couple of months after the revolution.
And you still say it was nothing to do with the EU.
I would add that in the case of Cathy Ashton she has been left with serious egg on her face. A recently leaked conversation between her and the Estonian foreign minister showed that there was evidence that the snipers (blamed at the time on Yankovitch and condemned by Ashton) were actually Maidan provocateurs.
I never said it had nothing to do with the EU. I said the EU didn't cause it, or aid it. EU membership was what the people wanted, and what the president said he would deliver. He didn't, so they got rid of him.
So just to be clear, you STILL haven't provided any proof of incement to revolution from the EU before it started.
Ah. Quick change of tack. You would make a good sailor.
BTW. At the beginning you did say it had nothing to do with the EU. You tried to brush it away as a maverick MEP acting alone. When you finally got proved wrong you changed tack and started bitching about the timing (as if it matters)
OK let's look at the cause of it this way.
Do you think that offering an association agreement (the first step on the road to EU membership) would be a good idea to a country that (at the time) provided Russia with one of its biggest naval bases? Or do you think it would be deliberately provocative?
We are talking about career politicians and diplomats here who would be well aware of the consequences of their actions.
I have no doubt that Putin probably put pressure on Yankovitch not to sign the agreement and put a sizeable chunk of cash on the table as well. But once Yankovitch refused to sign then the EU should have backed off.
Yes Verhofstadt and his delegation did go after the protests started (I never said that they went before) but maybe if the EU had left the situation well alone rather than jumping in with both feet and encouraging, what was still at that time just a protest, it to turn into a full blown coup.
The timing means nothing.
A quick change of tack? Im going to call you out yet again, stop lying, nowhere have I said that it has nothing to do with the EU, read through the thread and quote me where I have a said that, or admit that you a nothing but a liar.
Of course the timing matters! You are saying the CAUSED the revolution AFTER the revolution. Thats not how it works, time only moves in one direction. That means you can’t cause something after it has happened.
I like the way that you are trying to bring in the excuses for Putin again by saying its “provocative” for Ukraine to seek closer links to the EU. Like I have said before, you are using the same arguments that rape excusers use. Saying that the victim was wearing provocative clothes, so she shouldnt be surprised if she is raped. You think Ukraine was being provocative, so shouldnt be surprised if it gets invaded. I think that’s disgusting and that you should be ashamed of yourself."Here we go. About a third of the way down you said. "You are perpetuating the Post Truth world with rubbish like that. The EU did not sponsor a coup. You're just talking crap. Which part of the EU supposedly orchestrated this coup? The EU Intelligence Agency? There isn't one. Perhaps the EU Army, no, there isn't one of those either." Then about halfway down you said. "Right, let's take Verhofstadt first then. Was he sent there by the European parliament? Can you tell use the name of the motion passed that sent him there? Was he sent by the commission? Can you name the directive that supported him going? Maybe he is the official ambassador of the EU to Ukraine? No, you can't do any of those things. He's just an MEP. When Farage goes to New York to suck off Trump, is that then suddenly official EU policy?" Comparing politicians and diplomats deliberately provoking a major world power to rape victims should be quite laughable. But you are not funny at all. In fact if you have to stoop so low to try to make a point then I think you have finally lost whatever little bit of credibility that you may have ever had. I really do find that comparison disgusting. As for your timing bullshit? I really think you have flogged that dead horse a bit too often. Time to give up. It is dead. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Right ok, lets look at the EU Ukraine association agreement then which was signed on 27th June 2014. How did that agreement signed in June 2014, CAUSE a revolution that happened in February 2014, 4 months earlier. Did the EU use a time machine?
My god. You really just don't (want to) get do you?
1. The revolution started BECAUSE Yankovitch refused to sign it.
2. The mob were demanding that he signed it.
3. They then overthrew the government aided and abetted by the EU.
4. The NEW unelected government then signed it.
How much clearer do you need it?
How were they aided and abetted? They weren't. The Ukrainian people decided to overthrow the government that wasnt doing what it was elected to do.
You have no evidence that between the president changing his mind, and the revolution, that the EU did anything to incite the revolution. Nothing. Did they provide arms? Money? Tell the people of Ukraine to overthrow the government? No, absolutely none of that happened.
You are somehow trying to claim that events that happened AFTER the revolution, some how CAUSED the revolution.
So the whole basis of the protests and the revolution were about EU membership.
Both Verhofstadt's delegation and Cathy Ashton went to Kiev to support the mob.
The association agreement (which started the ball rolling) was signed within a couple of months after the revolution.
And you still say it was nothing to do with the EU.
I would add that in the case of Cathy Ashton she has been left with serious egg on her face. A recently leaked conversation between her and the Estonian foreign minister showed that there was evidence that the snipers (blamed at the time on Yankovitch and condemned by Ashton) were actually Maidan provocateurs.
I never said it had nothing to do with the EU. I said the EU didn't cause it, or aid it. EU membership was what the people wanted, and what the president said he would deliver. He didn't, so they got rid of him.
So just to be clear, you STILL haven't provided any proof of incement to revolution from the EU before it started.
Ah. Quick change of tack. You would make a good sailor.
BTW. At the beginning you did say it had nothing to do with the EU. You tried to brush it away as a maverick MEP acting alone. When you finally got proved wrong you changed tack and started bitching about the timing (as if it matters)
OK let's look at the cause of it this way.
Do you think that offering an association agreement (the first step on the road to EU membership) would be a good idea to a country that (at the time) provided Russia with one of its biggest naval bases? Or do you think it would be deliberately provocative?
We are talking about career politicians and diplomats here who would be well aware of the consequences of their actions.
I have no doubt that Putin probably put pressure on Yankovitch not to sign the agreement and put a sizeable chunk of cash on the table as well. But once Yankovitch refused to sign then the EU should have backed off.
Yes Verhofstadt and his delegation did go after the protests started (I never said that they went before) but maybe if the EU had left the situation well alone rather than jumping in with both feet and encouraging, what was still at that time just a protest, it to turn into a full blown coup.
The timing means nothing.
A quick change of tack? Im going to call you out yet again, stop lying, nowhere have I said that it has nothing to do with the EU, read through the thread and quote me where I have a said that, or admit that you a nothing but a liar.
Of course the timing matters! You are saying the CAUSED the revolution AFTER the revolution. Thats not how it works, time only moves in one direction. That means you can’t cause something after it has happened.
I like the way that you are trying to bring in the excuses for Putin again by saying its “provocative” for Ukraine to seek closer links to the EU. Like I have said before, you are using the same arguments that rape excusers use. Saying that the victim was wearing provocative clothes, so she shouldnt be surprised if she is raped. You think Ukraine was being provocative, so shouldnt be surprised if it gets invaded. I think that’s disgusting and that you should be ashamed of yourself.
Here we go.
About a third of the way down you said.
"You are perpetuating the Post Truth world with rubbish like that. The EU did not sponsor a coup. You're just talking crap. Which part of the EU supposedly orchestrated this coup? The EU Intelligence Agency? There isn't one. Perhaps the EU Army, no, there isn't one of those either."
Then about halfway down you said.
"Right, let's take Verhofstadt first then. Was he sent there by the European parliament? Can you tell use the name of the motion passed that sent him there? Was he sent by the commission? Can you name the directive that supported him going? Maybe he is the official ambassador of the EU to Ukraine? No, you can't do any of those things. He's just an MEP. When Farage goes to New York to suck off Trump, is that then suddenly official EU policy?"
Comparing politicians and diplomats deliberately provoking a major world power to rape victims should be quite laughable. But you are not funny at all.
In fact if you have to stoop so low to try to make a point then I think you have finally lost whatever little bit of credibility that you may have ever had.
I really do find that comparison disgusting.
As for your timing bullshit? I really think you have flogged that dead horse a bit too often. Time to give up. It is dead.
"Saying "the EU didn't sponsor a coup" isn't saying "its nothing to do with the EU" neither is the second quote. Of course the timing is import when looking at cause and effect. You cant cause something after it has already happened. Seriously what is wrong with your brain? Your conspiracy theory has been thoroughly debunked and discredited. All of the actions you have stated happened AFTER the revolution, therefore could not have caused it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Right ok, lets look at the EU Ukraine association agreement then which was signed on 27th June 2014. How did that agreement signed in June 2014, CAUSE a revolution that happened in February 2014, 4 months earlier. Did the EU use a time machine?
My god. You really just don't (want to) get do you?
1. The revolution started BECAUSE Yankovitch refused to sign it.
2. The mob were demanding that he signed it.
3. They then overthrew the government aided and abetted by the EU.
4. The NEW unelected government then signed it.
How much clearer do you need it?
How were they aided and abetted? They weren't. The Ukrainian people decided to overthrow the government that wasnt doing what it was elected to do.
You have no evidence that between the president changing his mind, and the revolution, that the EU did anything to incite the revolution. Nothing. Did they provide arms? Money? Tell the people of Ukraine to overthrow the government? No, absolutely none of that happened.
You are somehow trying to claim that events that happened AFTER the revolution, some how CAUSED the revolution.
So the whole basis of the protests and the revolution were about EU membership.
Both Verhofstadt's delegation and Cathy Ashton went to Kiev to support the mob.
The association agreement (which started the ball rolling) was signed within a couple of months after the revolution.
And you still say it was nothing to do with the EU.
I would add that in the case of Cathy Ashton she has been left with serious egg on her face. A recently leaked conversation between her and the Estonian foreign minister showed that there was evidence that the snipers (blamed at the time on Yankovitch and condemned by Ashton) were actually Maidan provocateurs.
I never said it had nothing to do with the EU. I said the EU didn't cause it, or aid it. EU membership was what the people wanted, and what the president said he would deliver. He didn't, so they got rid of him.
So just to be clear, you STILL haven't provided any proof of incement to revolution from the EU before it started.
Ah. Quick change of tack. You would make a good sailor.
BTW. At the beginning you did say it had nothing to do with the EU. You tried to brush it away as a maverick MEP acting alone. When you finally got proved wrong you changed tack and started bitching about the timing (as if it matters)
OK let's look at the cause of it this way.
Do you think that offering an association agreement (the first step on the road to EU membership) would be a good idea to a country that (at the time) provided Russia with one of its biggest naval bases? Or do you think it would be deliberately provocative?
We are talking about career politicians and diplomats here who would be well aware of the consequences of their actions.
I have no doubt that Putin probably put pressure on Yankovitch not to sign the agreement and put a sizeable chunk of cash on the table as well. But once Yankovitch refused to sign then the EU should have backed off.
Yes Verhofstadt and his delegation did go after the protests started (I never said that they went before) but maybe if the EU had left the situation well alone rather than jumping in with both feet and encouraging, what was still at that time just a protest, it to turn into a full blown coup.
The timing means nothing.
A quick change of tack? Im going to call you out yet again, stop lying, nowhere have I said that it has nothing to do with the EU, read through the thread and quote me where I have a said that, or admit that you a nothing but a liar.
Of course the timing matters! You are saying the CAUSED the revolution AFTER the revolution. Thats not how it works, time only moves in one direction. That means you can’t cause something after it has happened.
I like the way that you are trying to bring in the excuses for Putin again by saying its “provocative” for Ukraine to seek closer links to the EU. Like I have said before, you are using the same arguments that rape excusers use. Saying that the victim was wearing provocative clothes, so she shouldnt be surprised if she is raped. You think Ukraine was being provocative, so shouldnt be surprised if it gets invaded. I think that’s disgusting and that you should be ashamed of yourself.
Here we go.
About a third of the way down you said.
"You are perpetuating the Post Truth world with rubbish like that. The EU did not sponsor a coup. You're just talking crap. Which part of the EU supposedly orchestrated this coup? The EU Intelligence Agency? There isn't one. Perhaps the EU Army, no, there isn't one of those either."
Then about halfway down you said.
"Right, let's take Verhofstadt first then. Was he sent there by the European parliament? Can you tell use the name of the motion passed that sent him there? Was he sent by the commission? Can you name the directive that supported him going? Maybe he is the official ambassador of the EU to Ukraine? No, you can't do any of those things. He's just an MEP. When Farage goes to New York to suck off Trump, is that then suddenly official EU policy?"
Comparing politicians and diplomats deliberately provoking a major world power to rape victims should be quite laughable. But you are not funny at all.
In fact if you have to stoop so low to try to make a point then I think you have finally lost whatever little bit of credibility that you may have ever had.
I really do find that comparison disgusting.
As for your timing bullshit? I really think you have flogged that dead horse a bit too often. Time to give up. It is dead.
Saying "the EU didn't sponsor a coup" isn't saying "its nothing to do with the EU" neither is the second quote. Of course the timing is import when looking at cause and effect. You cant cause something after it has already happened. Seriously what is wrong with your brain?
Your conspiracy theory has been thoroughly debunked and discredited. All of the actions you have stated happened AFTER the revolution, therefore could not have caused it."Oh for fucks sake. Believe what you want to believe. However. When does a protest become a revolution? Factor that into your time line. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Oh for fucks sake. Believe what you want to believe. However. When does a protest become a revolution? Factor that into your time line." . When you've handed over 5 billon dollars to get the government you want installed instead of the democratically elected one!. . It's not exactly the first time we've done it | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"When the protesters are promised backing....?" . The protesters were genuine, they all fucked off after a few weeks.... The militants however they came in shortly after.... Does it sound familiar... Something like Syria????. . . Remember your all racists for not wanting to take in those Ukrainian refugees | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Sits waiting for the AIOTNEHO report findings that justify all CLCC's claims." All the dates I have given are easily verifiable. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Sits waiting for the AIOTNEHO report findings that justify all CLCC's claims. All the dates I have given are easily verifiable. " They probably are. It's just that they don't really matter one jot. It's a bit like the guy who commits murder. He did it on Monday. No he didn't, he did it on Wednesday. Oh that's all right then. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Sits waiting for the AIOTNEHO report findings that justify all CLCC's claims. All the dates I have given are easily verifiable. They probably are. It's just that they don't really matter one jot. It's a bit like the guy who commits murder. He did it on Monday. No he didn't, he did it on Wednesday. Oh that's all right then. "How can it not matter? To use your anology, imagine person A told person B to murder person C on Thursday, but then it turned out person B already committed the murder a week before, would the Person A be responsible? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Sits waiting for the AIOTNEHO report findings that justify all CLCC's claims. All the dates I have given are easily verifiable. They probably are. It's just that they don't really matter one jot. It's a bit like the guy who commits murder. He did it on Monday. No he didn't, he did it on Wednesday. Oh that's all right then.
How can it not matter? To use your anology, imagine person A told person B to murder person C on Thursday, but then it turned out person B already committed the murder a week before, would the Person A be responsible?"Where did man A come from? I never mentioned him. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Sits waiting for the AIOTNEHO report findings that justify all CLCC's claims. All the dates I have given are easily verifiable. They probably are. It's just that they don't really matter one jot. It's a bit like the guy who commits murder. He did it on Monday. No he didn't, he did it on Wednesday. Oh that's all right then.
How can it not matter? To use your anology, imagine person A told person B to murder person C on Thursday, but then it turned out person B already committed the murder a week before, would the Person A be responsible?"Is that a riddle? I think that person A might be found guilty of attempted murder. He or she would not be responsible for murder but would nevertheless be irresponsible. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Is somebody really advocating the overthrow of democratically elected governments here?
Yep and all those who overthrew a democratically elected government in Ukraine were waving EU flags about at the time when the coup happened. "Actually the 12 gold stars on a blue field is the flag of the Council of Europe, which both Russia and the Ukraine are members of already and to witch Britain will still be a members of when, or if, we actually leave the EU or not. If you don't know something as fundamental as who's is who's flag it does bring into question how much genuine research you've actually done into this so called EU orchestrated coupe. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I know I shouldn't bring the referendum into this thread... but I'm going to anyway
anyone else noticed that the people on here who voted to remain seem to blindly follow the western propoganda and belive whatever their governments and 'experts' tell them, where as the people who voted for Brexit tend to have an open mind, look at both sides of an argument, consider the facts and then make up their own minds?
(Not including doors in this as he didn't vote but has got it right )"There is nothing particularly open minded about finding facts to support your already decided point of view. You think the EU is a bad thing and find the evidence to support that point of view. If you occasionally put arguments that the EU is not all bad but on balance you're opposed to it, that would show a more open minded attitude. To blindly accept the Russian, anti-EU version of events just because it's not your government's or the EU's version seems to me to be even more closed minded than those who aren't blindly believing that and are asking for proper proof to back it up. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Is somebody really advocating the overthrow of democratically elected governments here?
Yep and all those who overthrew a democratically elected government in Ukraine were waving EU flags about at the time when the coup happened.
Actually the 12 gold stars on a blue field is the flag of the Council of Europe, which both Russia and the Ukraine are members of already and to witch Britain will still be a members of when, or if, we actually leave the EU or not.
If you don't know something as fundamental as who's is who's flag it does bring into question how much genuine research you've actually done into this so called EU orchestrated coupe."That isn't quite true. While it is the flag of the Council of Europe CoE. It is also the official flag of the European Union EU. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Who mentioned a flag with 12 gold stars?... they said EU flag....they didn't describe it...." So what EU flag are they talking about then? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Is somebody really advocating the overthrow of democratically elected governments here?
Yep and all those who overthrew a democratically elected government in Ukraine were waving EU flags about at the time when the coup happened.
Actually the 12 gold stars on a blue field is the flag of the Council of Europe, which both Russia and the Ukraine are members of already and to witch Britain will still be a members of when, or if, we actually leave the EU or not.
If you don't know something as fundamental as who's is who's flag it does bring into question how much genuine research you've actually done into this so called EU orchestrated coupe.
That isn't quite true. While it is the flag of the Council of Europe CoE. It is also the official flag of the European Union EU."And, as the flag of the Council of Europe, it is also flown sometimes in Russia to. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Is somebody really advocating the overthrow of democratically elected governments here?
Yep and all those who overthrew a democratically elected government in Ukraine were waving EU flags about at the time when the coup happened.
Actually the 12 gold stars on a blue field is the flag of the Council of Europe, which both Russia and the Ukraine are members of already and to witch Britain will still be a members of when, or if, we actually leave the EU or not.
If you don't know something as fundamental as who's is who's flag it does bring into question how much genuine research you've actually done into this so called EU orchestrated coupe.
That isn't quite true. While it is the flag of the Council of Europe CoE. It is also the official flag of the European Union EU.
And, as the flag of the Council of Europe, it is also flown sometimes in Russia to. "Quite possibly, but I don't see Putin saluting it any time soon. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Is somebody really advocating the overthrow of democratically elected governments here?
Yep and all those who overthrew a democratically elected government in Ukraine were waving EU flags about at the time when the coup happened.
Actually the 12 gold stars on a blue field is the flag of the Council of Europe, which both Russia and the Ukraine are members of already and to witch Britain will still be a members of when, or if, we actually leave the EU or not.
If you don't know something as fundamental as who's is who's flag it does bring into question how much genuine research you've actually done into this so called EU orchestrated coupe.
That isn't quite true. While it is the flag of the Council of Europe CoE. It is also the official flag of the European Union EU.
And, as the flag of the Council of Europe, it is also flown sometimes in Russia to.
Quite possibly, but I don't see Putin saluting it any time soon. "And you wouldn't see me saluting it either. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have to say that I'm getting more and more alarmed at how those who claim to be simply anti-EU are sounding more and more pro Russian and seem to be having a total love-in fest with Mr Putin who, let us not forget, is a brutal dictator who has already subverted democracy in his own country, invaded more than one of his neighbours and actually annexed the territory of another. Are you sure some of you UKIPers and BREXITers are not allowing your dislike of one thing (the EU) blind you to the reality of a far bigger and much more dangerous threat to Europe and the UK from the east?" I'm not entirely sure all of them actually believe that Putin is so good......they just like to follow and are too afraid to dare to be seen to have an opinion of their own..... Sheep...... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Sits waiting for the AIOTNEHO report findings that justify all CLCC's claims. All the dates I have given are easily verifiable. They probably are. It's just that they don't really matter one jot. It's a bit like the guy who commits murder. He did it on Monday. No he didn't, he did it on Wednesday. Oh that's all right then.
How can it not matter? To use your anology, imagine person A told person B to murder person C on Thursday, but then it turned out person B already committed the murder a week before, would the Person A be responsible?
Is that a riddle?
I think that person A might be found guilty of attempted murder. He or she would not be responsible for murder but would nevertheless be irresponsible."An interesting legal buzzle. In the scenario as set out I don't think A could be found legally guilty of anything. Person C, in this scenario, was already murdered by B before A spoke to him. As you cannot conspire with someone to commit an act that has already happened, especially if one those involved knows the act has already happened. A may have had the Mems Rae to commit a crime but there is no Actus Rae so no crime. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have to say that I'm getting more and more alarmed at how those who claim to be simply anti-EU are sounding more and more pro Russian and seem to be having a total love-in fest with Mr Putin who, let us not forget, is a brutal dictator who has already subverted democracy in his own country, invaded more than one of his neighbours and actually annexed the territory of another. Are you sure some of you UKIPers and BREXITers are not allowing your dislike of one thing (the EU) blind you to the reality of a far bigger and much more dangerous threat to Europe and the UK from the east?" Actually I started the post. It was about the clever moves that Putin had done to (a) bring a potentially workable peace deal in Syria to the table....with further plans for the future and totally sidelining the US. (b) refusing to retaliate when Obama through his teddy out of the oram regarding Russia publicising the truth about Hilary. I have no love of Putin. He is basically a Mafia bully. Homophobic, mysoginistic etc.... but he has pulled a blinder in making Obama look stupid. It was a few of the usual bremoaners who brought up Ukraine. And regardless of who supported the coup or when....it was an illegal overthrow of a democratically elected government of an ally of Russia. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have to say that I'm getting more and more alarmed at how those who claim to be simply anti-EU are sounding more and more pro Russian and seem to be having a total love-in fest with Mr Putin who, let us not forget, is a brutal dictator who has already subverted democracy in his own country, invaded more than one of his neighbours and actually annexed the territory of another. Are you sure some of you UKIPers and BREXITers are not allowing your dislike of one thing (the EU) blind you to the reality of a far bigger and much more dangerous threat to Europe and the UK from the east?" I would agree with everything you say about him. However he backed the right horse in Syria. While the EU and America were (in some ways rightfully) demonising Assad, Putin was well aware of the alternative. Sometimes it really is "better the devil you know" They EU should have only know too well that you can't poke someone like him in the eye and not get a reaction. Contrary to what CLCC likes to say the EU did wind up Ukraine into revolution and Putin reacted. While I have never condoned his annexation of Ukraine I do understand it. Pity a few of the so called experienced politicians and diplomats (AKA experts) didn't. Who do I dislike the most between him and the EU? It would be a close call but I think the EU would just get the nod. Putin is at least up front. The EU are much more subtle and devious about their subversion of democracy. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have to say that I'm getting more and more alarmed at how those who claim to be simply anti-EU are sounding more and more pro Russian and seem to be having a total love-in fest with Mr Putin who, let us not forget, is a brutal dictator who has already subverted democracy in his own country, invaded more than one of his neighbours and actually annexed the territory of another. Are you sure some of you UKIPers and BREXITers are not allowing your dislike of one thing (the EU) blind you to the reality of a far bigger and much more dangerous threat to Europe and the UK from the east? Actually I started the post. It was about the clever moves that Putin had done to (a) bring a potentially workable peace deal in Syria to the table....with further plans for the future and totally sidelining the US. (b) refusing to retaliate when Obama through his teddy out of the oram regarding Russia publicising the truth about Hilary. I have no love of Putin. He is basically a Mafia bully. Homophobic, mysoginistic etc.... but he has pulled a blinder in making Obama look stupid. It was a few of the usual bremoaners who brought up Ukraine. And regardless of who supported the coup or when....it was an illegal overthrow of a democratically elected government of an ally of Russia." Hotlovefun brought up Ukraine, Im sure they’ll love being called a Bremoaner! You know that workable peace deal you are so proud of? Well its falling apart because the Russians aren’t sticking to it. A US power company has just found Russian hacking software on their computer systems, are you still sure those diplomats shouldn't be expelled? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have to say that I'm getting more and more alarmed at how those who claim to be simply anti-EU are sounding more and more pro Russian and seem to be having a total love-in fest with Mr Putin who, let us not forget, is a brutal dictator who has already subverted democracy in his own country, invaded more than one of his neighbours and actually annexed the territory of another. Are you sure some of you UKIPers and BREXITers are not allowing your dislike of one thing (the EU) blind you to the reality of a far bigger and much more dangerous threat to Europe and the UK from the east? I would agree with everything you say about him. However he backed the right horse in Syria. While the EU and America were (in some ways rightfully) demonising Assad, Putin was well aware of the alternative. Sometimes it really is "better the devil you know" They EU should have only know too well that you can't poke someone like him in the eye and not get a reaction. Contrary to what CLCC likes to say the EU did wind up Ukraine into revolution and Putin reacted. While I have never condoned his annexation of Ukraine I do understand it. Pity a few of the so called experienced politicians and diplomats (AKA experts) didn't. Who do I dislike the most between him and the EU? It would be a close call but I think the EU would just get the nod. Putin is at least up front. The EU are much more subtle and devious about their subversion of democracy." He backed the right horse in Syria?
Assad is killing his own people. They are dropping isdescrimiate barrel bombs on his own civilians. Assad has used chemical weapons against he own civilians. Thats who’s side you want to be on? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"...Are you sure some of you UKIPers and BREXITers are not allowing your dislike of one thing (the EU) blind you to the reality of a far bigger and much more dangerous threat to Europe and the UK from the east?" No, the two go hand in hand because the key threat is from PC European traitors like Merkel who is still in the process of directly inviting in the fascists from the East...the Middle East. And who has identified the threat this very day in her New Years Eve speech all the while incredibly still continuing with her deadly, mass open door immigration policies! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Assad is killing his own people. They are dropping isdescrimiate barrel bombs on his own civilians. Assad has used chemical weapons against he own civilians. Thats who’s side you want to be on?" . There you go again with your own little propaganda exercise!. . It's obvious to me why your desperate to spend loads more on the military | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"...Are you sure some of you UKIPers and BREXITers are not allowing your dislike of one thing (the EU) blind you to the reality of a far bigger and much more dangerous threat to Europe and the UK from the east? No, the two go hand in hand because the key threat is from PC European traitors like Merkel who is still in the process of directly inviting in the fascists from the East...the Middle East. And who has identified the threat this very day in her New Years Eve speech all the while incredibly still continuing with her deadly, mass open door immigration policies! " She doesn't have an open door immigration policy. The open door policy (which it actually isn't) is for refugees, not immigrants. And if you don't know the differences between a refugee, migrant, immigrant and asylum seeker then stop blowing your horn about something you know nothing about and find the facts out (preferably not from the Britain First site). | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Assad is killing his own people. They are dropping isdescrimiate barrel bombs on his own civilians. Assad has used chemical weapons against he own civilians. Thats who’s side you want to be on?. There you go again with your own little propaganda exercise!. . It's obvious to me why your desperate to spend loads more on the military" Could you explain it to me then because it's far from.obvious to me? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Assad is killing his own people. They are dropping isdescrimiate barrel bombs on his own civilians. Assad has used chemical weapons against he own civilians. Thats who’s side you want to be on?. There you go again with your own little propaganda exercise!. . It's obvious to me why your desperate to spend loads more on the military Could you explain it to me then because it's far from.obvious to me?" . Read my messages on this thread then | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have to say that I'm getting more and more alarmed at how those who claim to be simply anti-EU are sounding more and more pro Russian and seem to be having a total love-in fest with Mr Putin who, let us not forget, is a brutal dictator who has already subverted democracy in his own country, invaded more than one of his neighbours and actually annexed the territory of another. Are you sure some of you UKIPers and BREXITers are not allowing your dislike of one thing (the EU) blind you to the reality of a far bigger and much more dangerous threat to Europe and the UK from the east? Actually I started the post. It was about the clever moves that Putin had done to (a) bring a potentially workable peace deal in Syria to the table....with further plans for the future and totally sidelining the US. (b) refusing to retaliate when Obama through his teddy out of the oram regarding Russia publicising the truth about Hilary. I have no love of Putin. He is basically a Mafia bully. Homophobic, mysoginistic etc.... but he has pulled a blinder in making Obama look stupid. It was a few of the usual bremoaners who brought up Ukraine. And regardless of who supported the coup or when....it was an illegal overthrow of a democratically elected government of an ally of Russia. Hotlovefun brought up Ukraine, Im sure they’ll love being called a Bremoaner! You know that workable peace deal you are so proud of? Well its falling apart because the Russians aren’t sticking to it. A US power company has just found Russian hacking software on their computer systems, are you still sure those diplomats shouldn't be expelled?" We know Rusdia are hacking computers. We've known it for years....guess what? The Pope is catholic! We/US etc have been hacking others computers for years too..... the US were caught out hacking Merkels emails and phones too.....it isn't news, it isn't a surprise, it isn't anything new.....Spies have always spied....they may have changed methods but that's about it. The problem is Obama being duped into over reacting because this hack exposed a truth he didn't want exposing. Putin has decided not to retaliate. Simple. Currently the Syrian ceasefire is holding better than any other attempt in the last six years. Some of the more extreme Islamist groups refused to sign up for the ceasefire. The current action is in a suburb of Damascus where an Al-Qaeda sponsored group is holding some ground. And just as an aside...Assad was elected democratically in June 2014. There were observers from 30 other countries over serving the election. More than can be said for the UK where you can vote bumpy turning up, giving a name and showing no ID, | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have to say that I'm getting more and more alarmed at how those who claim to be simply anti-EU are sounding more and more pro Russian and seem to be having a total love-in fest with Mr Putin who, let us not forget, is a brutal dictator who has already subverted democracy in his own country, invaded more than one of his neighbours and actually annexed the territory of another. Are you sure some of you UKIPers and BREXITers are not allowing your dislike of one thing (the EU) blind you to the reality of a far bigger and much more dangerous threat to Europe and the UK from the east? Actually I started the post. It was about the clever moves that Putin had done to (a) bring a potentially workable peace deal in Syria to the table....with further plans for the future and totally sidelining the US. (b) refusing to retaliate when Obama through his teddy out of the oram regarding Russia publicising the truth about Hilary. I have no love of Putin. He is basically a Mafia bully. Homophobic, mysoginistic etc.... but he has pulled a blinder in making Obama look stupid. It was a few of the usual bremoaners who brought up Ukraine. And regardless of who supported the coup or when....it was an illegal overthrow of a democratically elected government of an ally of Russia. Hotlovefun brought up Ukraine, Im sure they’ll love being called a Bremoaner! You know that workable peace deal you are so proud of? Well its falling apart because the Russians aren’t sticking to it. A US power company has just found Russian hacking software on their computer systems, are you still sure those diplomats shouldn't be expelled? We know Rusdia are hacking computers. We've known it for years....guess what? The Pope is catholic! We/US etc have been hacking others computers for years too..... the US were caught out hacking Merkels emails and phones too.....it isn't news, it isn't a surprise, it isn't anything new.....Spies have always spied....they may have changed methods but that's about it. The problem is Obama being duped into over reacting because this hack exposed a truth he didn't want exposing. Putin has decided not to retaliate. Simple. Currently the Syrian ceasefire is holding better than any other attempt in the last six years. Some of the more extreme Islamist groups refused to sign up for the ceasefire. The current action is in a suburb of Damascus where an Al-Qaeda sponsored group is holding some ground. And just as an aside...Assad was elected democratically in June 2014. There were observers from 30 other countries over serving the election. More than can be said for the UK where you can vote bumpy turning up, giving a name and showing no ID," Seriously, what is wrong with you people? You genuinely believe that an election during a civil war is better than an election in the UK? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Sits waiting for the AIOTNEHO report findings that justify all CLCC's claims. All the dates I have given are easily verifiable. They probably are. It's just that they don't really matter one jot. It's a bit like the guy who commits murder. He did it on Monday. No he didn't, he did it on Wednesday. Oh that's all right then.
How can it not matter? To use your anology, imagine person A told person B to murder person C on Thursday, but then it turned out person B already committed the murder a week before, would the Person A be responsible?
Is that a riddle?
I think that person A might be found guilty of attempted murder. He or she would not be responsible for murder but would nevertheless be irresponsible.
An interesting legal buzzle.
In the scenario as set out I don't think A could be found legally guilty of anything. Person C, in this scenario, was already murdered by B before A spoke to him. As you cannot conspire with someone to commit an act that has already happened, especially if one those involved knows the act has already happened. A may have had the Mems Rae to commit a crime but there is no Actus Rae so no crime."I think you are referring to actus rea and mens rea. I think there is a case but I don't think anyone would bother. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Assad is killing his own people. They are dropping isdescrimiate barrel bombs on his own civilians. Assad has used chemical weapons against he own civilians. Thats who’s side you want to be on?. There you go again with your own little propaganda exercise!. . It's obvious to me why your desperate to spend loads more on the military" You don't believe it? Well the UN security council does and resolution 2118 called for the destruction of Syria's chemical weapons. But what would Russia, China, U.S., UK, France, Argentina, Australia, Azerbaijan, Guatemala, South Korea, Luxembourg, Morocco, Pakistan, Togo and Rwanda know? No, I'm sure you are better informed Doors | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" resolution 2118 called for the destruction of Syria's chemical weapons. But what would Russia, China, U.S., UK, France, Argentina, Australia, Azerbaijan, Guatemala, South Korea, Luxembourg, Morocco, Pakistan, Togo and Rwanda know? No, I'm sure you are better informed Doors ". Nobody denies Assad is a piss poor leader.... What we do know thanks to your last 16 years of military meddling is he is by far far far better than the alternative. . You can take your military intervention and shove it thanks, I'm a little bit older than you and already lived through it... You know where it's got us, in the fucking mess were in today. . Instead of spending these hundreds of billions on the military, let's give it to scientists and teachers and see what they come up with instead... It can't be any worse than the shit you're military bombing has got us into! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" resolution 2118 called for the destruction of Syria's chemical weapons. But what would Russia, China, U.S., UK, France, Argentina, Australia, Azerbaijan, Guatemala, South Korea, Luxembourg, Morocco, Pakistan, Togo and Rwanda know? No, I'm sure you are better informed Doors .
Nobody denies Assad is a piss poor leader.... What we do know thanks to your last 16 years of military meddling is he is by far far far better than the alternative.
.
You can take your military intervention and shove it thanks, I'm a little bit older than you and already lived through it... You know where it's got us, in the fucking mess were in today.
.
Instead of spending these hundreds of billions on the military, let's give it to scientists and teachers and see what they come up with instead... It can't be any worse than the shit you're military bombing has got us into!". Well said.
Just imagine a world where all these billions (even trillions) was spent on things that would better humanity instead of things that could be the destruction of it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" resolution 2118 called for the destruction of Syria's chemical weapons. But what would Russia, China, U.S., UK, France, Argentina, Australia, Azerbaijan, Guatemala, South Korea, Luxembourg, Morocco, Pakistan, Togo and Rwanda know? No, I'm sure you are better informed Doors .
Nobody denies Assad is a piss poor leader.... What we do know thanks to your last 16 years of military meddling is he is by far far far better than the alternative.
.
You can take your military intervention and shove it thanks, I'm a little bit older than you and already lived through it... You know where it's got us, in the fucking mess were in today.
.
Instead of spending these hundreds of billions on the military, let's give it to scientists and teachers and see what they come up with instead... It can't be any worse than the shit you're military bombing has got us into!"Of course oh old and wise one, please forgive my blissful childish ignorance. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Assad is killing his own people. They are dropping isdescrimiate barrel bombs on his own civilians. Assad has used chemical weapons against he own civilians. Thats who’s side you want to be on?. There you go again with your own little propaganda exercise!. . It's obvious to me why your desperate to spend loads more on the military You don't believe it? Well the UN security council does and resolution 2118 called for the destruction of Syria's chemical weapons. But what would Russia, China, U.S., UK, France, Argentina, Australia, Azerbaijan, Guatemala, South Korea, Luxembourg, Morocco, Pakistan, Togo and Rwanda know? No, I'm sure you are better informed Doors "Although UN resolutions are not always right..... Resolution 1441 springs to mind. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have to say that I'm getting more and more alarmed at how those who claim to be simply anti-EU are sounding more and more pro Russian and seem to be having a total love-in fest with Mr Putin who, let us not forget, is a brutal dictator who has already subverted democracy in his own country, invaded more than one of his neighbours and actually annexed the territory of another. Are you sure some of you UKIPers and BREXITers are not allowing your dislike of one thing (the EU) blind you to the reality of a far bigger and much more dangerous threat to Europe and the UK from the east? I would agree with everything you say about him. However he backed the right horse in Syria. While the EU and America were (in some ways rightfully) demonising Assad, Putin was well aware of the alternative. Sometimes it really is "better the devil you know" They EU should have only know too well that you can't poke someone like him in the eye and not get a reaction. Contrary to what CLCC likes to say the EU did wind up Ukraine into revolution and Putin reacted. While I have never condoned his annexation of Ukraine I do understand it. Pity a few of the so called experienced politicians and diplomats (AKA experts) didn't. Who do I dislike the most between him and the EU? It would be a close call but I think the EU would just get the nod. Putin is at least up front. The EU are much more subtle and devious about their subversion of democracy. He backed the right horse in Syria?
Assad is killing his own people. They are dropping isdescrimiate barrel bombs on his own civilians. Assad has used chemical weapons against he own civilians. Thats who’s side you want to be on?"As I said, and you ignored (as usual) "Better the devil you know" ISIS and god (pardon the pun) knows how many other gangs of nutters are beheading and stoning people for next to (and sometimes absolutely) nothing, chucking gays from rooftops just for being (and in many cases only allegedly) gay, sending children to blow themselves up (as long as they take a few infidels with them of course) and god (hey that fella again) knows how many other atrocities. Is that the side YOU want to be on? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have to say that I'm getting more and more alarmed at how those who claim to be simply anti-EU are sounding more and more pro Russian and seem to be having a total love-in fest with Mr Putin who, let us not forget, is a brutal dictator who has already subverted democracy in his own country, invaded more than one of his neighbours and actually annexed the territory of another. Are you sure some of you UKIPers and BREXITers are not allowing your dislike of one thing (the EU) blind you to the reality of a far bigger and much more dangerous threat to Europe and the UK from the east? I would agree with everything you say about him. However he backed the right horse in Syria. While the EU and America were (in some ways rightfully) demonising Assad, Putin was well aware of the alternative. Sometimes it really is "better the devil you know" They EU should have only know too well that you can't poke someone like him in the eye and not get a reaction. Contrary to what CLCC likes to say the EU did wind up Ukraine into revolution and Putin reacted. While I have never condoned his annexation of Ukraine I do understand it. Pity a few of the so called experienced politicians and diplomats (AKA experts) didn't. Who do I dislike the most between him and the EU? It would be a close call but I think the EU would just get the nod. Putin is at least up front. The EU are much more subtle and devious about their subversion of democracy. He backed the right horse in Syria?
Assad is killing his own people. They are dropping isdescrimiate barrel bombs on his own civilians. Assad has used chemical weapons against he own civilians. Thats who’s side you want to be on?
As I said, and you ignored (as usual) "Better the devil you know"
ISIS and god (pardon the pun) knows how many other gangs of nutters are beheading and stoning people for next to (and sometimes absolutely) nothing, chucking gays from rooftops just for being (and in many cases only allegedly) gay, sending children to blow themselves up (as long as they take a few infidels with them of course) and god (hey that fella again) knows how many other atrocities.
Is that the side YOU want to be on? "ISIS are the side we are dropping bombs on! So no, we’re not on their side! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"And no...I'm not supporting Assad...he is a murdering fucktard..... I'm just stating a few facts. If the jihadists win in Syria then I suggest you look at ISIS and/or Libya....." As maybe but it just sounds like right wing pacifistic appeasement to me. It's only ever been the true liberals (small L), like Churchill, who are willing to stand up for democracy and defend it. Next you'll be telling us that you don't like Putin but at least he getting the trains running on time, or that he's good on animal rights. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have to say that I'm getting more and more alarmed at how those who claim to be simply anti-EU are sounding more and more pro Russian and seem to be having a total love-in fest with Mr Putin who, let us not forget, is a brutal dictator who has already subverted democracy in his own country, invaded more than one of his neighbours and actually annexed the territory of another. Are you sure some of you UKIPers and BREXITers are not allowing your dislike of one thing (the EU) blind you to the reality of a far bigger and much more dangerous threat to Europe and the UK from the east? I would agree with everything you say about him. However he backed the right horse in Syria. While the EU and America were (in some ways rightfully) demonising Assad, Putin was well aware of the alternative. Sometimes it really is "better the devil you know" They EU should have only know too well that you can't poke someone like him in the eye and not get a reaction. Contrary to what CLCC likes to say the EU did wind up Ukraine into revolution and Putin reacted. While I have never condoned his annexation of Ukraine I do understand it. Pity a few of the so called experienced politicians and diplomats (AKA experts) didn't. Who do I dislike the most between him and the EU? It would be a close call but I think the EU would just get the nod. Putin is at least up front. The EU are much more subtle and devious about their subversion of democracy. He backed the right horse in Syria?
Assad is killing his own people. They are dropping isdescrimiate barrel bombs on his own civilians. Assad has used chemical weapons against he own civilians. Thats who’s side you want to be on?
As I said, and you ignored (as usual) "Better the devil you know"
ISIS and god (pardon the pun) knows how many other gangs of nutters are beheading and stoning people for next to (and sometimes absolutely) nothing, chucking gays from rooftops just for being (and in many cases only allegedly) gay, sending children to blow themselves up (as long as they take a few infidels with them of course) and god (hey that fella again) knows how many other atrocities.
Is that the side YOU want to be on? ". | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Gosh, you people should all move to Russia since you're such big fans to of Putin's work. I'm sure you'll love it "I wish I could 
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Gosh, you people should all move to Russia since you're such big fans to of Putin's work. I'm sure you'll love it "No thanks! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| back to top |  |
