Ukrainian War Developments

Status
Not open for further replies.

Overbom

Brigadier
Registered Member
Could you please stop with these stupid comments!

what he did is a clear break of the UN carta! I don't know why invading another country by ignoring and violating formal international borders is called smart or clever!? It seems as if you try to legitimate his actions... and regardless of the reasons behind, some even I can understand, there is no right for war.

So stop with this BS.
Oh please...
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Yugoslavia refused to sign the Rambouillet Accords, which among other things called for 30,000 NATO peacekeeping troops in Kosovo; an unhindered right of passage for NATO troops on Yugoslav territory; and immunity for NATO and its agents to Yugoslav law; the right to use local roads, ports, railways, and airports without payment and requisition public facilities for its use free of cost.[80][81]
NATO then prepared to install the peacekeepers by force, using this refusal to justify the bombings.


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) carried out an aerial bombing campaign against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia during the Kosovo War. The air strikes lasted from 24 March 1999 to 10 June 1999. The bombings continued until an agreement was reached that led to the withdrawal of Yugoslav armed forces from Kosovo

Yugoslavia refused to sign the Rambouillet Accords which was offered as an initial justification for NATO's use of force.[30] NATO countries attempted to gain authorisation from the UN Security Council for military action, but were opposed by China and Russia, who indicated that they would veto such a measure. As a result, NATO launched its campaign without the UN's approval, stating that it was a humanitarian intervention. The UN Charter prohibits the use of force except in the case of a decision by the Security Council under Chapter VII, or self-defence against an armed attack – neither of which were present in this case.[31]
 

Phead128

Captain
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
'Chinese analysts' disagree on comparison between Ukraine and Taiwan.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Instead of Taiwan, the closest analogy would be Mongolia or Vietnam if they sought US-alliance on China border, and China citing past shared history, culture, geography to restore imperial control over Mongolia/Vietnam. Which is obviously bullshit and requires massive revisionism and mental gymnastics. You can't take Russian propaganda on "Muh Blood brother" irredenticism/revanchism at face value.
Yes, because China didn't have a conflict with Vietnam in 1979. Don't be silly.
China attacked Vietnam and immediately left in 1979. It didn't stay forever using a weird mix of 'Muh blood brother' mental gymnastics in Vietnam like Russia is doing in Ukraine, even though China probably has better claim to Vietnam than Russia has on Ukraine. The Vietnamese state was founded by a Qin-dynasty general and Vietnam was a province of China for almost 1,200 years and Vietnamese Emperors were calling their subjects 'Han people' as late as the 18th century. (I'm not supporting irredentism/revanchism, I'm just proving any nationalist can make up any BS to justify annexation)

I would say its pretty easy as in both terms of the Russian areas of Ukraine and the Island of Taiwan, there is a common theme of returning territory seized or seperated and now being held in the Anglozone being returned to its rightful Motherland. Hence it is the historic passing of Russian territory to the Ukraine that was the act of separatism, not Putins current program of bringing back the Individual Republics concerned.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
(basically Chinese gov't approved) have publicly said there was no comparison between Ukraine and Taiwan.

Rather than Taiwan
, a better comparison would be Outer Mongolia after Qing-collapse, PRC (reluctantly) recognized Mongolia as sovereign independent countries in a legally-binding treaty despite their legacy part of Qing/Yuan dynasties. Just like Ukraine was formed post-Soviet collapse, Russia (reluctantly) recognized Ukraine as a sovereign independent nation, despite legacy as part of Tsar/Soviet empires. Some Chinese nationalists even push for reunification of Outer Mongolia, which is not much different from Russia nationalists advocating for restoration of Ukraine into Russia. Taiwan was never an ex-colony, never recognized as sovereign, and is part of an unresolved civil war. Taiwan is not "Lost territory" like Mongolia or Vietnam which declared independence and was accepted by China as independent. China never accepted Taiwan as dejure independent and Taiwan even claims to be "China" whereas Mongolia/Vietnam doesn't want anything to do with China, which is similar to Ukraine.

Now imagine if Mongolia/Vietnam sought US alliance with US troops on China's borders, how would China react? It will likely use massive economic and even punitive military attack (1979 war) to dissuade any alliance containment. But would China annex any territory using a weird amalgam of "we were part of Yuan dynasty together", "we share similar culture, Buddhism", and "Chinggis Khan was Chinese emperor"? NO, that is some bullshit weird revanchism/irredentism mental gymnastics that doesn't make sense. It's borderline 'Korean-insanity' with their claim that all things like Confucius has 'Korean-origin'. However, Russia is invoke "Blood brothers", "Shared Culture", and "Shared Kievan Rus" history to justify annexation of Ukraine. This is why Russian propaganda on "Muh Blood brothers" is so troublesome, because it's based on flimsy anecdotes and is not remotely comparable to Taiwan, which is exact same Han ethnicity, same Mandarin language, same characters, literally the same people. Ukrainians/Russians are almost as different as Mongols/Vietnamese vs. Chinese.
 
Last edited:

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
What about Tibet then? I would prefer not to get into this sort of argument.

I do not agree with the recognition of LPR and DPR either. But it is true those people were stuck in a bad situation and the Ukraine regime had over 7 years to respect the Minsk accords and failed to do so in bad faith.
 

Anlsvrthng

Captain
Registered Member
I still think the first should be the establishment of capacity to close the Panama canal, and to strike the CONUS.

But we haven't got any reliable information about the events in Donbas, appart from the mainstream news claim about the Russians shooting themselves.
 

Phead128

Captain
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
What about Tibet then? I would prefer not to get into this sort of argument.
Tibet? Tibet? You Russophiles are funny.
  • Did ROC/PRC formally recognize Tibet as sovereign/independent after Tibet declared independence post-Qing collapse? Heck no.
  • Whereas Russia formally-recognized Ukraine as sovereign/independent after Ukraine declared independence post-Soviet collapse.
  • Ukraine has worldwide international recognition post-Soviet collapse, did Tibet have worldwide international recognition post-Qing collapse?
The difference is ROC/PRC never recognized Tibet as a sovereign state post-Qing collapse, whereas Russia did recognize Ukraine as sovereign state post-Soviet collapse. Russia violated two legally-binding treaties (1989 agreement, and Budapest Memorandum) when it violated Ukraine, whereas ROC/PRC simply pacified the separatists immediately. ROC/PRC did not violate any legally-binding treaties.

You Russophiliacs have only a modicum of understanding of history and will twist and warp any historical event to your favor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top