1
MaverickBoobies 1 point ago +1 / -0

Read his speech, found nothing. This is the closest it comes with the use of the word "nuclear" and does not even say anything you claimed.

Otherwise - who's next? Will NATO countries have to defend each other? I want to believe that the North Atlantic Treaty and Article 5 will be more effective than the Budapest Memorandum.

Ukraine has received security guarantees for abandoning the world's third nuclear capability. We don't have that weapon. We also have no security. We also do not have part of the territory of our state that is larger in area than Switzerland, the Netherlands or Belgium. And most importantly - we don’t have millions of our citizens. We don’t have all this.

So I ask again for evidence. He even mentioned the Budapest Memorandum, which I already mentioned before.

1
MaverickBoobies 1 point ago +1 / -0

ou literally quoted me saying what I just said they threatened.

Cool, with what nukes?

. I notice you've ignored my many quotes saying they were demanding nukes once they officially joined NATO

Source?

You're going to move the goalposts, I think.

Noine that involves government control.

. Once it ended, trying to surround them with hostile vassal states shouldn't have happened.

Cool. Explain Georgia, Moldova(who didn't even apply to NATO before), and Ukraine(predating their current NATO application by 8 years). You also must explain why should Russia control these countries, choosing what they can and can not do.

1
MaverickBoobies 1 point ago +1 / -0

I've been saying they were trying to get them from the beginning. You're hyperfocusing on one line and ignoring the adjacent lines for a socal media "W."

That's not what you said.

The Ukraine kept threatening to point nukes at Moscow,

Remember this? This is what you said.

The Ukraine is a puppet state run by their enemies, and now NATO's trying to make their relationship official. T

Ukraine is a puppet state of Russia?! That is new!

The puppet state says they're going to get nukes, threatens Russia with what they'll do when they get them

Do you have any source for that?

has existed long after its original purpose has become irrelevant,

Irrelevant? Remember, Russia has been invading countries for years. And the invasion of Moldova, Georgia and now Ukraine proves that NATO is more relevant than ever.

1
MaverickBoobies 1 point ago +1 / -0

When did Ukraine try to get nukes? So you went from Ukraine having nukes to trying to get nukes. That is progress.

Ukraine is a sovereign state, they can decide if they want to join NATO or not.

Stop the lies with the slaughtering Russians in th east. You know damn well nothing happened before 2014

0
MaverickBoobies 0 points ago +1 / -1

Then you won't mind if Ukraine does the same thing? Because I know for a fact Russia likes to cry some fake news about Ukraine bombing their "citizens" in Donetsk and thus giving reason to their invasion.

0
MaverickBoobies 0 points ago +2 / -2

Sure, but it is because of China they keep growing and having funds instead of collapsing. This should be blamed on Russia and China.

-1
MaverickBoobies -1 points ago +2 / -3

No.

Environmentalist groups funded by Russia did. They were the ones who forced Germany to eliminate the Nuclear plants.

-3
MaverickBoobies -3 points ago +1 / -4

Are you sure? I seem to recall certain people who criticized this war who is now in jail in Russia. Remember the globohomo was created by the Russians.

-1
MaverickBoobies -1 points ago +1 / -2

What sort of gain would Russia have in destroying a pedestrian bridge, a playground and a random car in the middle of the street? Or perhaps they didn't care. Or they were so incompetent that they tried to aim somewhere but fucked it up and missed by a mile or more their target. Interesting that they withdrew from that convention, perhaps preparing for this war since then.

-5
MaverickBoobies -5 points ago +2 / -7

Some of that is fake news. Do not forget the mass killing of civilians the Russians did as well, and the mass graveyards.

Do not ignore the thread made by a pro-Russian shill celebrating this.

-3
MaverickBoobies -3 points ago +2 / -5

Do you understand the reason why Japan was nuked... twice?

Hint: Purple hearts made for the invasion of the main island of Japan are still being handed to soldiers today.

2
MaverickBoobies 2 points ago +3 / -1

The Ukraine kept threatening to point nukes at Moscow, a

According to the Budapest memorandum, in which America, England and Russia would intervene in case one or the other was invaded meant that Ukraine would forfeit their nukes. In other words, Ukraine has no nuclear weapons.

-3
MaverickBoobies -3 points ago +2 / -5

Yes! It is weird how they think Russian weapons are somehow superior. I remember how these people used to have boners preaching the superiority of the Russian weapons years ago. Then peddle the excuse when these weapons failed that it was either "monkey models" or bad training of the army who employed them. Now we now that they all suck. The best evidence until 2022 was when Russia attacked Israel, and both sides fought for a brief period of time in the 70s. Russia failed miserably then. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Rimon_20

Egyptian military leaders were pleased with the outcome of the battle because the Soviets had long been criticizing Egypt's aerial losses to Israel and attributing them to a lack of skill among Egyptian fighter pilots. The Soviets kept quiet about the incident so as to avoid the embarrassment of their defeat. It was one of the final engagements of the War of Attrition and is widely believed to have contributed to its conclusion.

And remember that the Mirage IIIs were interceptors, not designed for dogfights(which the Israelis somehow managed to do and be very successful at it), while the MiG-21 was very agile.

I am sure that if Ukraine gets even the early Abrams model that destroyed the Iraqi T-72 brigade, they will wipe the floor with the rusted carcass of the T-72/80/90 they will destroy.

-7
MaverickBoobies -7 points ago +2 / -9

Wasn't that bridge a legitimate military target because it was supplying the entire southern front? Yes... And what does a pedestrian bridge that Russia failed to blow up offer in military support?

-5
MaverickBoobies -5 points ago +2 / -7

Oh, they used Iranian drones too? It speaks volumes when Russia has to resort to a country like Iran to get drones. Not even China(which some pro-Russian shills here seems to think they are the bestest friendz evah) wants to sell it to them. That is like America buying thousands of drones from Colombia.

I saw about those S300s being used as artillery rockets. It is also another example that Russia is running out of munitions. They even admit it on TV!

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1680009/Vladimir-Putin-Russia-state-TV-Solovyov-Ukraine-war-invasion-crisis-latest-news-vn

-1
MaverickBoobies -1 points ago +1 / -2

Yes. They should have donated them proper items. Unless Russian soldiers go by she/her pronouns and have periods.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›