[Politics] Russia invades Ukraine (24/02/2022)

[Rdodge30]

Can you provide proof of this … of course not Because it’s bollocks.

why bother …

It is all readily accessible information that is available and has been for a long time.

 

[SouthSaxon]

It is all readily accessible information that is available and has been for a long time.

If it’s so readily accessible, I presume you can easily save us all some time and provide a few links to the reliable sources you’ve used?

 

[Shropshire Seagull]

When Zelenskyy ran for President it was basically on 2 main issues, an end to corruption and an end to the war with Russia. He wanted to implement Minsk2 and as part of that agreement hold elections in Donetsk.

He campaigned on bringing peace to Ukraine and won with about 75% of the vote

Let's just focus for starters on your first 2 paragraphs. Specifically, your quote about ending the war with Russia when he ran for president.

Russia invaded in Feb 2022 and that's when this war stated. Are you suggesting Zelensky was not the president of Ukraine at this point?

He campaigned to bring peace ....

My understanding is war broke out during his presidency? Someone more knowledgeable on here will tell us the date Zelenskyy became president.

I'll be shocked if this truly is AFTER the Feb 2022 invasion as you state.

Enough of your garbage, please close the door on your way out ....

 

[essbee1]

Let's just focus for starters on your first 2 paragraphs. Specifically, your quote about ending the war with Russia when he ran for president.

Russia invaded in Feb 2022 and that's when this war stated. Are you suggesting Zelensky was not the president of Ukraine at this point?

He campaigned to bring peace ....

My understanding is war broke out during his presidency? Someone more knowledgeable on here will tell us the date Zelenskyy became president.

I'll be shocked if this truly is AFTER the Feb 2022 invasion as you state.

Enough of your garbage, please close the door on your way out ....

Shropshire S. - ignore them mate and they'll soon f**k off.

 

[Nobby]

When Zelenskyy ran for President it was basically on 2 main issues, an end to corruption and an end to the war with Russia. He wanted to implement Minsk2 and as part of that agreement hold elections in Donetsk.

He campaigned on bringing peace to Ukraine and won with about 75% of the vote

He went back on Minsk2 as soon as he was in power and told the German newspaper that he never intended to stick to minsk2 and that it was a terrible deal.

America strongly advised he proceed but no he just went about arming his country - publicly demanding NATO commit 1% of its armies to Ukraine, demanding Ukraine be allowed to join NATO. Publicly announcing again and again that there was no chance of a Russian invasion and that all the scaremongering was affecting the economy.


I never really bought the explanation for the off shore bank accounts in British Virgin Isles… we needed them to keep our money safe? But his boss was one of the most corrupt people in the country Kolomosky, he funded the election campaign and owned the company that paid Hunter Biden $50,000 a month.

The off shore accounts all got swept under the carpet really.

After denying the claims that $400 million had gone missing there was the dismissal and forced resignation of 15 deputy ministers but only after allegations of corruption were in the press … and this was over 3 years after he took power so hardly a clean broom when becoming President.

After the Oval Office incident, this thread was wild, Trump was trying to steal Ukraine’s wealth with the mineral deal etc etc

I got shouted down on here when I said that it was Zelenskyy himself who had proposed the mineral deal with US and that he had gone to the White House to sign a pre agreement. Not true they shouted - yet 24hours later Zelenskyy made a statement that he was willing to sign the deal. So go figure.

No free press, political parties banned and no elections because the country is at war. However if you get elected on a ticket that you will bring peace- you must’ve been at war when you got elected so that doesn’t add up to me.

To be honest that is only the tip of the iceberg, whilst I completely agree that Putin and Trump are in the wrong, I do not see Zelenskyy as wanting Peace- in fact he showed that as soon as he got in power.

*Genuinely shocked at all the nasty comments aimed at me simply because I hold a different opinion, would really appreciate it if things weren’t so personal please.

Fair enough.
No personal attack.

But actually typing the words

Putin and Trump are “in the wrong”

Dear oh dear

 

[Bold Seagull]

When Zelenskyy ran for President it was basically on 2 main issues, an end to corruption and an end to the war with Russia. He wanted to implement Minsk2 and as part of that agreement hold elections in Donetsk.

He campaigned on bringing peace to Ukraine and won with about 75% of the vote

He went back on Minsk2 as soon as he was in power and told the German newspaper that he never intended to stick to minsk2 and that it was a terrible deal.

America strongly advised he proceed but no he just went about arming his country - publicly demanding NATO commit 1% of its armies to Ukraine, demanding Ukraine be allowed to join NATO. Publicly announcing again and again that there was no chance of a Russian invasion and that all the scaremongering was affecting the economy.


I never really bought the explanation for the off shore bank accounts in British Virgin Isles… we needed them to keep our money safe? But his boss was one of the most corrupt people in the country Kolomosky, he funded the election campaign and owned the company that paid Hunter Biden $50,000 a month.

The off shore accounts all got swept under the carpet really.

After denying the claims that $400 million had gone missing there was the dismissal and forced resignation of 15 deputy ministers but only after allegations of corruption were in the press … and this was over 3 years after he took power so hardly a clean broom when becoming President.

After the Oval Office incident, this thread was wild, Trump was trying to steal Ukraine’s wealth with the mineral deal etc etc

I got shouted down on here when I said that it was Zelenskyy himself who had proposed the mineral deal with US and that he had gone to the White House to sign a pre agreement. Not true they shouted - yet 24hours later Zelenskyy made a statement that he was willing to sign the deal. So go figure.

No free press, political parties banned and no elections because the country is at war. However if you get elected on a ticket that you will bring peace- you must’ve been at war when you got elected so that doesn’t add up to me.

To be honest that is only the tip of the iceberg, whilst I completely agree that Putin and Trump are in the wrong, I do not see Zelenskyy as wanting Peace- in fact he showed that as soon as he got in power.

*Genuinely shocked at all the nasty comments aimed at me simply because I hold a different opinion, would really appreciate it if things weren’t so personal please.

Zelenskyy was elected in 2019, Russia’s invasion for this war was 2022. Minsk II was signed in 2015 - Zelenskyy continued a policy of his predecessor Poroshenko of not fully adhering to the agreement, a line both administrations took.

Your claim that ‘all this information is out there’ but not offering any links tells its own story. Yes it’s out there on well known conspiracy websites, YouTube blogs and general tools of the Russian propaganda machine.

Buying into this stuff then calling everyone else ‘groupthink’ is how conspiracists grow conspiracies.

 

[Deportivo Seagull]

It is all readily accessible information that is available and has been for a long time.

Point me to where and to whom published it.
Conspiracy websites Russian backed media outlets don’t count.

 

[SouthSaxon]

Let’s pull at just one of the threads in @Rdodge30’s post, in order to highlight that he is parroting Putin’s talking points.

For anyone interested, there’s a good summary of the Minsk agreements, their background, their flaws and, why Ukraine did not implement them, from Chatham House (definitely not a conspiracy site!).

I’ve linked the Minsk 2 page below, which is one page of a bigger report on Ukraine.

What it shows is that Minsk 2 was indeed a “terrible deal”. Here’s the key line on that:

In short, Minsk-2 supports mutually exclusive views of sovereignty: either Ukraine is sovereign (Ukraine’s interpretation), or it is not (Russia’s interpretation) – this is the ‘Minsk conundrum’.

If it’s possible for Ukraine and Russia to reach different interpretations of the same agreement, it is by definition not an agreement at all. In fact, the text contains no mention of Russia and therefore represents a badly drafted fudge.

Loading…

www.chathamhouse.org

@Rdodge30 references Zelenskyy’s 2023 interview with Der Spiegel (link below, I used Chrome to translate). Key quote on Minsk:

SPIEGEL: But you yourself tried to implement the Minsk Agreement?
Zelensky: I jumped on this train, which, quite frankly, was already heading for the abyss. By "train," I mean these agreements as a whole. Each point represents a carriage, and when you start to dissect them, you realize: the whole thing is constructed so that one side can't fulfill something, and the other freezes the conflict. I didn't recognize any desire in the agreements to allow Ukraine its independence! I understand their purpose as wanting to initially satisfy Russia's appetite at Ukraine's expense.

Loading…

archive.is

This hardly reflects the notion that he never intended to solve the issue.

The idea that Zelenskyy is the one seeking war, or refusing to seek peace, is a Russian viewpoint.

@Rdodge30 - the bottom line is this: Russia invaded Ukraine. Anything else you wish to post that paints Zelenskyy in a bad light is irrelevant to this fundamental point. He did not start the war, he cannot end it without Putin also wanting to.

 

[Nobby]

Just posted this on the Trump thread.

An interesting comment from the wonderful JD Vance. Talking about bombing the Houthis he said

I just hate bailing Europe out again.


I wonder what has happened in his past that makes him hate Europe so much.

Ditched by a French girlfriend?
Maybe a German tourist called him a chipmunk cheeked prat?

Something has happened in his past. No doubt about it.

 

[Eric the meek]

Here's Paul Warburg whose opinion we value on here.

@Rdodge30, you won't like it, as it is based on solid research and is therefore objective.

TLDR: US sanctions are irrelevant and probably won't be removed anyway.

 

[Scappa]

Just posted this on the Trump thread.

An interesting comment from the wonderful JD Vance. Talking about bombing the Houthis he said

I just hate bailing Europe out again.


I wonder what has happened in his past that makes him hate Europe so much.

Ditched by a French girlfriend?
Maybe a German tourist called him a chipmunk cheeked prat?

Something has happened in his past. No doubt about it.

Rejected by a chaise longue

 

[Binney on acid]

There's so much c**p on this thread. Let's simplify matters. A bunch of psychotic, genocidal Nazis are trying to obliterate their neighbours from the face of the earth. I'm struggling to understand how anyone could criticise Zelensky. His is the most difficult job on the planet, trying to prevent the subjugation of the peaceful nation that he represents. He's criticised for not holding elections ! Would you go out to vote, if there were Russian bombs detonating around you ? He's being accused of not always wearing the correct attire ! I don't recollect Churchill's choice of clothing hindering efforts to prevent a nazi invasion.

Peace talks?!! I've never heard anything so preposterous ! Seriously. Does Mr Genocide have any interest in peace? This must not be confused with delaying tactics favoured by a nazi regime that wants to regroup and rearm in preparation for their next incursion. The Russian psyche is the main obsticle to peace. All of the time that prevails, there will be no peace. They have to be defeated economically and militarily. They have to be left in a position where they are unable to rise from the ashes. Only then can peace be achieved.

 

[raymondo]

Let’s pull at just one of the threads in @Rdodge30’s post, in order to highlight that he is parroting Putin’s talking points.

For anyone interested, there’s a good summary of the Minsk agreements, their background, their flaws and, why Ukraine did not implement them, from Chatham House (definitely not a conspiracy site!).

I’ve linked the Minsk 2 page below, which is one page of a bigger report on Ukraine.

What it shows is that Minsk 2 was indeed a “terrible deal”. Here’s the key line on that:



If it’s possible for Ukraine and Russia to reach different interpretations of the same agreement, it is by definition not an agreement at all. In fact, the text contains no mention of Russia and therefore represents a badly drafted fudge.

Loading…

www.chathamhouse.org

@Rdodge30 references Zelenskyy’s 2023 interview with Der Spiegel (link below, I used Chrome to translate). Key quote on Minsk:

Loading…

archive.is

This hardly reflects the notion that he never intended to solve the issue.

The idea that Zelenskyy is the one seeking war, or refusing to seek peace, is a Russian viewpoint.

@Rdodge30 - the bottom line is this: Russia invaded Ukraine. Anything else you wish to post that paints Zelenskyy in a bad light is irrelevant to this fundamental point. He did not start the war, he cannot end it without Putin also wanting to.

Thank you for taking the time to post that, and especially the excellent article from Chatham House (which I hadn't read in full before).
That was broadly my recollection of that time, very fraught.
Minsk 2 was corrosive and unworkable for Ukraine, and to a degree they were strong armed into it by the German and French leaders of the time.
This quote from the article spells it out for me:

"The German and French leaders seem to have been so keen for a ceasefire that they assented to political provisions at odds with Ukraine’s existence as a sovereign entity and, probably, its EU integration. This explains why the Kremlin used military power so demonstrably as talks were in session: to intimidate Western interlocutors who, it judged, lacked the stomach for confrontation – and who might be induced to get Ukraine to fold.58"

 

[raymondo]

Just posted this on the Trump thread.

An interesting comment from the wonderful JD Vance. Talking about bombing the Houthis he said

I just hate bailing Europe out again.


I wonder what has happened in his past that makes him hate Europe so much.

Ditched by a French girlfriend?
Maybe a German tourist called him a chipmunk cheeked prat?

Something has happened in his past. No doubt about it.

He definitely has some anger Issues about Europe .
I don't know what he means by 'bailing out Europe ' in this context? Is most of the maritime traffic in this zone headed for Europe maybe.
It's funny really...it was the US that heavily promoted globalisation of trade (to their great benefit) and basically patrolled the routes to enable it...now they seem easily upset.

OK, here's a stat that probably explains Vance's comment.
Edit update:
"Vance wrote: “Three per cent of US trade runs through the Suez. Forty per cent of European trade does. There is a real risk that the public doesn’t understand this or why it’s necessary. The strongest reason to do this is, as POTUS said, to send a message.”

 

[Mellotron]

I agree that voting will still happen, but the fact is, no-one in the current administration even thinks the US should be a democracy. They will use every trick in the book to stay I power. If all else fails, there's even Marshall law.

I'll never forgive him for bringing that Law in.

 

[SouthSaxon]

He definitely has some anger Issues about Europe .
I don't know what he means by 'bailing out Europe ' in this context? Is most of the maritime traffic in this zone headed for Europe maybe.
It's funny really...it was the US that heavily promoted globalisation of trade (to their great benefit) and basically patrolled the routes to enable it...now they seem easily upset.

OK, here's a stat that probably explains Vance's comment.
Edit update:
"Vance wrote: “Three per cent of US trade runs through the Suez. Forty per cent of European trade does. There is a real risk that the public doesn’t understand this or why it’s necessary. The strongest reason to do this is, as POTUS said, to send a message.”

Is there any evidence that Europe was asking the US to do this? I know there was chatter about UK refuelling planes supporting the mission but that could’ve happened either way. I’d assumed the links to Gaza were as much of a factor.

 

[Triggaaar]

When Zelenskyy ran for President it was basically on 2 main issues, an end to corruption and an end to the war with Russia. He wanted to implement Minsk2 and as part of that agreement hold elections in Donetsk.

He campaigned on bringing peace to Ukraine and won with about 75% of the vote

He went back on Minsk2 as soon as he was in power and told the German newspaper that he never intended to stick to minsk2 and that it was a terrible deal.

America strongly advised he proceed but no he just went about arming his country

The Minsk II agreement wasn't going to do any good, so Zelenskyy used it as a delaying tactic, because his country had been attacked, which seems pretty sensible. It didn't get him the presidency. The Budapest Memorandum was already an agreement in place to protect Ukraine. Given that Russia were completely ignoring that, it's naive to think any other agreement would help Ukraine.

- publicly demanding NATO commit 1% of its armies to Ukraine, demanding Ukraine be allowed to join NATO

It would be good for world peace if Ukraine had joined NATO, so it makes sense for Ukraine to ask to join. I don't understand how you're trying to paint that as a bad thing?

Publicly announcing again and again that there was no chance of a Russian invasion and that all the scaremongering was affecting the economy.

And what's the problem with that? Zelenskyy wasn't in control of if/when Putin would invade, so it made sense to try and join NATO in time to stop it, and talk of an imminent invasion wouldn't help that. Putin was also stating that Russia wouldn't invade and if Zelenskyy had stated the opposite, you'd be on here saying Zelenskyy goaded and dared Putin.

I never really bought the explanation for the off shore bank accounts in British Virgin Isles… we needed them to keep our money safe? But his boss was one of the most corrupt people in the country Kolomosky, he funded the election campaign and owned the company that paid Hunter Biden $50,000 a month.

The off shore accounts all got swept under the carpet really.

After denying the claims that $400 million had gone missing there was the dismissal and forced resignation of 15 deputy ministers but only after allegations of corruption were in the press … and this was over 3 years after he took power so hardly a clean broom when becoming President.

According to Forbes, Zelenskyy is worth $20m at most. Meanwhile Putin, on a salary of $140k, is worth about $200b. That's 10,000 times as much, so I'm not sure what your point is.

After the Oval Office incident, this thread was wild, Trump was trying to steal Ukraine’s wealth with the mineral deal etc etc

I got shouted down on here when I said that it was Zelenskyy himself who had proposed the mineral deal with US and that he had gone to the White House to sign a pre agreement. Not true they shouted - yet 24hours later Zelenskyy made a statement that he was willing to sign the deal. So go figure.

We know that it was Zelenskyy who suggested a deal, where the US would get fair recompense for military aid given. Where has someone here shouted 'Not true'? And yes, he went there to sign such a deal. But Trump figured that Ukraine are desperate, so he thought he could get a better deal than 'fair recompense', and wanted double his money plus no security guarantees etc. As part of the negotiation, Trump and Vance attacked Zelenskyy to make him more desperate. Trump admitted this afterwards (so go figure that).

No free press, political parties banned and no elections because the country is at war. However if you get elected on a ticket that you will bring peace- you must’ve been at war when you got elected so that doesn’t add up to me.

You're being deliberately obtuse here. Ukraine are in a full scale war, and in no position to hold elections. Millions of their people have been displaced and bombs land on citizens across the country every day. There are also enemy soldiers in control of 20% of the country, so of course they can't hold fair and democratic elections. Just as the UK didn't have elections during WW2 (even though we hadn't been invaded). Are you seriously trying to claim otherwise? There were elections in 2019 when there wasn't a full scale war, and people were still in their homes. Zelenskyy didn't call that election, so I'm not sure why you'd want to blame him for that.

To be honest that is only the tip of the iceberg, whilst I completely agree that Putin and Trump are in the wrong, I do not see Zelenskyy as wanting Peace- in fact he showed that as soon as he got in power.

Your tip of the iceberg amounts to nothing. Of course Zelenskyy wants peace, he didn't want Russia to invade his country. You have no evidence at all that he doesn't want peace (other than him not surrendering the whole country to Putin, which is not what the people of Ukraine want).

*Genuinely shocked at all the nasty comments aimed at me simply because I hold a different opinion, would really appreciate it if things weren’t so personal please.

Russia have invaded Ukraine, tortured, raped and executed their citizens on Putin's orders, and intend to take over the whole of Ukraine so that Putin can rebuild a Russian empire, and you're response is 'Well I don't think Zelenskyy is very nice anyway'. People are genuinely shocked at your response and the fact you stick to ridiculous notions when they're proved to be false.

 

[Triggaaar]

Let’s pull at just one of the threads in @Rdodge30’s post, in order to highlight that he is parroting Putin’s talking points.

For anyone interested, there’s a good summary of the Minsk agreements, their background, their flaws and, why Ukraine did not implement them, from Chatham House (definitely not a conspiracy site!).

I’ve linked the Minsk 2 page below, which is one page of a bigger report on Ukraine.

What it shows is that Minsk 2 was indeed a “terrible deal”. Here’s the key line on that:



If it’s possible for Ukraine and Russia to reach different interpretations of the same agreement, it is by definition not an agreement at all. In fact, the text contains no mention of Russia and therefore represents a badly drafted fudge.

Loading…

www.chathamhouse.org

@Rdodge30 references Zelenskyy’s 2023 interview with Der Spiegel (link below, I used Chrome to translate). Key quote on Minsk:

Loading…

archive.is

This hardly reflects the notion that he never intended to solve the issue.

The idea that Zelenskyy is the one seeking war, or refusing to seek peace, is a Russian viewpoint.

@Rdodge30 - the bottom line is this: Russia invaded Ukraine. Anything else you wish to post that paints Zelenskyy in a bad light is irrelevant to this fundamental point. He did not start the war, he cannot end it without Putin also wanting to.

Very well put. I'd like to see @Rdodge30 's response.

 

[Bodian]

He definitely has some anger Issues about Europe .
I don't know what he means by 'bailing out Europe ' in this context? Is most of the maritime traffic in this zone headed for Europe maybe.
It's funny really...it was the US that heavily promoted globalisation of trade (to their great benefit) and basically patrolled the routes to enable it...now they seem easily upset.

OK, here's a stat that probably explains Vance's comment.
Edit update:
"Vance wrote: “Three per cent of US trade runs through the Suez. Forty per cent of European trade does. There is a real risk that the public doesn’t understand this or why it’s necessary. The strongest reason to do this is, as POTUS said, to send a message.”

Is there any evidence that Europe was asking the US to do this? I know there was chatter about UK refuelling planes supporting the mission but that could’ve happened either way. I’d assumed the links to Gaza were as much of a factor.

Precisely. If their stance now is not to get involved in others' disputes and not to be the 'World's Policeman' anymore - why did they do anything at all? If Europe had wanted to take some action - we have plenty of missiles between us to have done so.

 

[raymondo]

Is there any evidence that Europe was asking the US to do this? I know there was chatter about UK refuelling planes supporting the mission but that could’ve happened either way. I’d assumed the links to Gaza were as much of a factor.

I thought similarly to you.

Also, IIRC, the UK's RAF jets were fairly recently involved (at the US's request I believe) in shooting down Iranian missiles/drones heading for Israel.
I'm not sure if we would have invoiced the US for our fuel, missiles, and wages ...but probably Vance will be doing that to the EU/us.