Ukraine placated putin after he invaded donbass, then they placated him after he invaded crimea. what makes you think that placating putin now will have any positive effects?
The regime that the west put in power after 2014 created a war in Donbas, not sure how you managed to attribute this to Putin. Meanwhile, Crimea voted to join Russia in a referendum because it’s populated by Russians. Again, I don’t understand why people keep twisting basic facts of the situation to try and paint a narrative that’s completely at odds with reality. Do you realize that Crimea was part of Russia until Khrushchev gifted it to Ukraine in the 70s. You seriously trying to claim that these people wanted to live in a country that outlawed the use of Russian language?
This is a lie. The so called “referendum” happened after Russia invaded.
Stop trying to rewrite history. Russian troops were already stationed in Crimea because the legitimate government of Ukraine had a deal with Russia to provide them with bases.
Everything was a part of something else in the past; this is irrelevant.
What’s relevant is that the people of Crimea, who are Russian did not want to live under a regime that outlawed Russian language. Apparently this is something that you’re having trouble wrapping your head around.
My question is: “when in the past has placating putin actually worked?”
My question is: when has the west ever engaged with Russia in good faith. Point me to a single example.
How about a thought experiment. There are protests going on in Moscow, so what if Ukraine sends a “peacekeeping” mission to Moscow and two days after they capture the city there is a referendum for Moscow to become a part of Ukraine. Would you say this was a legitimate referendum, or an obviously hostile takeover?
Crimea used to be a part of the Ottoman empire, and there is someone who speaks turkish over there, so clearly it belongs to turkey…
My question is: when has the west ever engaged with Russia in good faith. Point me to a single example.
There are tons of examples actually… how about the ISS? That’s been orbiting for over 20 years, what has the US done in bad faith up there?
How about a thought experiment. There are protests going on in Moscow, so what if Ukraine sends a “peacekeeping” mission to Moscow and two days after they capture the city there is a referendum for Moscow to become a part of Ukraine.
Wow that’s a fascinating thought experiment. Fortunately it has absolutely nothing to do with Crimea. Maybe read up on the subject before talking about it?
By the way, you still haven’t answered my question of why Russian people living in Crimea would want to be part of Ukraine that bans the use of Russian language. I’m really curious to see the mental gymnastics you’re going to use to explain that.
There are tons of examples actually… how about the ISS? That’s been orbiting for over 20 years, what has the US done in bad faith up there?
How is ISS an example of appeasing Putin, do enlighten me. This is the most deranged thing you’ve said here so far.
why Russian people living in Crimea would want to be part of Ukraine that bans the use of Russian language.
everyone knows the only reason for russias invasion was to secure the naval base; stop pretending otherwise.
I don’t support that law
the law doesn’t “ban russian language” it requires the people to know ukrainian, for politicians to make official statements in ukrainian, and for most tv and books to be in ukrainian.
one reason there were so many russians there is they moved there to work at the russian naval base…
none of this justifies a hostile takeover…
How is ISS an example of appeasing Putin
It’s not, its an example of a good-faith deal between the two nations that has stood the test of time. this is what you asked for remember? “My question is: when has the west ever engaged with Russia in good faith. Point me to a single example.”
When I say “placating putin” I mean “when has putin broken the terms of a deal and the other party let it slide and it hasn’t resulted in further violations of the terms?”
Please just answer the question and stop deflecting.
You still haven’t explained to me why a bunch of Russian people living in Crimea would want to be part of Ukraine that banned the use of Russian language. Please explain this. The reason there are 95% Russian in Crimea is because it was part of Russia until 1970. If you knew anything about Russia or Ukraine you’d know this.
It’s not
You didn’t answer my question then. Stop deflecting and answer it. You’re asking me when appeasement has worked, but you can’t actually name a single instance of appeasement. Intellectual honesty isn’t your strong point I see.
You’re asking me when appeasement has worked, but you can’t actually name a single instance of appeasement. Intellectual honesty isn’t your strong point I see.
I started this thread by listing two examples of appeasement:
Ukraine placated putin after he invaded donbass, then they placated him after he invaded crimea. what makes you think that placating putin now will have any positive effects?
youre the one whos being intellectually dishonest… you have failed to answer my question and are deflecting…
why a bunch of Russian people living in Crimea would want to be part of Ukraine that banned the use of Russian language.
They wouldn’t, but how is that a justification for invasion? answer: its not! its just an excuse for the real reason: wanting to secure the naval base…
Here’s one: the Allies didn’t invade Russia after they defeated Hitler. Even though Patton was ready to go. Even though Churchill said we took out the wrong pig. How many Russians would have survived, if they’d just dealt with Stalin then and there?
I love how you manage to expose yourself to be ever more illiterate with every comment you make. First, USSR was one of the allies you dumb ignorant fuck. Second, vast majority of people in Europe supported USSR after the war. Third, the west was in no position to invade USSR that just built up a huge war machine during the war.
All that said, we were talking about Putin. But I guess being the utter idiot that you are, you probably think Putin was in charge of USSR in WW2. You are such an absolute 🤡.
I see. So Putin, who longs for the good old days of the USSR, who served in the KGB, is not part of the fabric of history. And the USSR was the worst Ally, btw. They never acted in good faith. Which is all too familiar.
Ukraine placated putin after he invaded donbass, then they placated him after he invaded crimea. what makes you think that placating putin now will have any positive effects?
The regime that the west put in power after 2014 created a war in Donbas, not sure how you managed to attribute this to Putin. Meanwhile, Crimea voted to join Russia in a referendum because it’s populated by Russians. Again, I don’t understand why people keep twisting basic facts of the situation to try and paint a narrative that’s completely at odds with reality. Do you realize that Crimea was part of Russia until Khrushchev gifted it to Ukraine in the 70s. You seriously trying to claim that these people wanted to live in a country that outlawed the use of Russian language?
This is a lie. The so called “referendum” happened after Russia invaded.
Everything was a part of something else in the past; this is irrelevant.
My question is: “when in the past has placating putin actually worked?”
Stop trying to rewrite history. Russian troops were already stationed in Crimea because the legitimate government of Ukraine had a deal with Russia to provide them with bases.
What’s relevant is that the people of Crimea, who are Russian did not want to live under a regime that outlawed Russian language. Apparently this is something that you’re having trouble wrapping your head around.
My question is: when has the west ever engaged with Russia in good faith. Point me to a single example.
How about a thought experiment. There are protests going on in Moscow, so what if Ukraine sends a “peacekeeping” mission to Moscow and two days after they capture the city there is a referendum for Moscow to become a part of Ukraine. Would you say this was a legitimate referendum, or an obviously hostile takeover?
Crimea used to be a part of the Ottoman empire, and there is someone who speaks turkish over there, so clearly it belongs to turkey…
There are tons of examples actually… how about the ISS? That’s been orbiting for over 20 years, what has the US done in bad faith up there?
your turn now, when has placating putin worked?
Wow that’s a fascinating thought experiment. Fortunately it has absolutely nothing to do with Crimea. Maybe read up on the subject before talking about it?
By the way, you still haven’t answered my question of why Russian people living in Crimea would want to be part of Ukraine that bans the use of Russian language. I’m really curious to see the mental gymnastics you’re going to use to explain that.
How is ISS an example of appeasing Putin, do enlighten me. This is the most deranged thing you’ve said here so far.
It’s not, its an example of a good-faith deal between the two nations that has stood the test of time. this is what you asked for remember? “My question is: when has the west ever engaged with Russia in good faith. Point me to a single example.”
When I say “placating putin” I mean “when has putin broken the terms of a deal and the other party let it slide and it hasn’t resulted in further violations of the terms?”
Please just answer the question and stop deflecting.
You still haven’t explained to me why a bunch of Russian people living in Crimea would want to be part of Ukraine that banned the use of Russian language. Please explain this. The reason there are 95% Russian in Crimea is because it was part of Russia until 1970. If you knew anything about Russia or Ukraine you’d know this.
You didn’t answer my question then. Stop deflecting and answer it. You’re asking me when appeasement has worked, but you can’t actually name a single instance of appeasement. Intellectual honesty isn’t your strong point I see.
I started this thread by listing two examples of appeasement:
youre the one whos being intellectually dishonest… you have failed to answer my question and are deflecting…
They wouldn’t, but how is that a justification for invasion? answer: its not! its just an excuse for the real reason: wanting to secure the naval base…
Here’s one: the Allies didn’t invade Russia after they defeated Hitler. Even though Patton was ready to go. Even though Churchill said we took out the wrong pig. How many Russians would have survived, if they’d just dealt with Stalin then and there?
I love how you manage to expose yourself to be ever more illiterate with every comment you make. First, USSR was one of the allies you dumb ignorant fuck. Second, vast majority of people in Europe supported USSR after the war. Third, the west was in no position to invade USSR that just built up a huge war machine during the war.
All that said, we were talking about Putin. But I guess being the utter idiot that you are, you probably think Putin was in charge of USSR in WW2. You are such an absolute 🤡.
Only commenting to say that the mods/admins might prefer you to mind your language a bit.
fair
I see. So Putin, who longs for the good old days of the USSR, who served in the KGB, is not part of the fabric of history. And the USSR was the worst Ally, btw. They never acted in good faith. Which is all too familiar.
I implore you to learn some actual history.