Cyprus-Forum.com

[Kikapu]

I will keep my response short and sweet.

Apples and Oranges!

I hate to state the obvious but, Finland‘s NATO membership has far far less value to the alliance or a threat to Russia than Ukraine’s NATO membership would by far. Bring on Sweden too! Just look at the geography to see the differences. Finland was never a threat to Russia before as a NATO member or will it be after. Same with Russia against Finland. In chess, that would be called a “stalemate”.

You can not compare NATO Ukraine controlling Crimea and the Sea of Azov to the Baltic Sea becoming a “NATO Lake”. Turkey is a NATO member and Russian commercial and military ships pass through problem free through the Bosporus Straits and the same will be at “NATO Lake” in the Baltic Sea. Who is going to stop the Russian sea traffic in this area? I’m sorry, I didn’t hear. Say it again please!

AFAIK, ne're has the phrase "I see what you mean" been uttered (by any side) on the hallowed pages of this forum.

At the risk of being rebuked for repetition. One of the principle reasons given by Vladimir Putin for his invasion of Ukraine was to stop NATO's relentless expansion. Finland and ............... I am assuming here...........Sweden's accession significantly add to the organisations military power and geographic dominance of Russia.

Although you downplay the events, what has happened as a consequence of the invasion of Ukraine, wrt NATO expanding, is nothing short of a strategic disaster for Russia and the epitome of "unintended consequences".

You're view that "pointing" some nuclear missiles at Finland negates the situation doesn't hold water - for reasons stated. It's an attempt at flippant dismissal of the stark realities.


Wrt the Baltic the following shows just how drastically the area will have changed strategically with Sweden and Finland in NATO. Russia's Baltic fleet will be completely bottled up. St Petersburgh a stones throw away and Kaliningrad even more isolated.

Baltic.jpg

The rest of your post seems extraneous but as you point out Turkey - whatever they are under Erdogan these days - does have the capability to easily shut out the Russian Black Sea fleet from access to the Med and beyond.



In an earlier post I made the point the tone in this thread tends to quickly descend to the sarcastic/piss taking level. Making any civilised discussion impossible.

Examples here?

"I think the guy who stole the the files and leaked them is the same guy on the sail boat who free dived/dove and blew up the Nord Stream 2. "

"Only a sucker born every minute who would buy into such BS reporting as above"

Whatever your views on the story currently unfolding about the classified docs affair you only have to listen to Larry Johnson's lead-in comments to realise the slant of what you're looking at.

It's also worth bearing in mind that Bradley (sorry Chelsea) Manning was a mere Specialist (basically a Private soldier) who surreptitiously downloaded about 750,000 classified documents which he subsequently released to form the basis of Assange's Wickileaks exposures. Similarly, Snowden was fundamentally a lowly IT Consultant.

03FAF9CE-E016-4E30-B644-0963E2CF2ACF.png

Russia is used to navigating through NATO members for a very long time without any problems, so I don’t see any problems for Russia in the Baltic Sea either.

Your refusal to acknowledge the importance of Crimea and the Sea of Azov, both to Russia and for NATO is very disappointing. Once Russia solidify this region for good as part of greater Russia, NATO will drop Ukraine like a bad habit since Ukraine won’t have anything significant to offer NATO for it to become a member.

My sarcasm to what you have pointed out above was not directed at you, but to my other country’s lying government, the USA and her many lying “lap dogs” in the collective West. Any wonder why what they say can not be taken at face value, no?

[repulsewarrior]

..."not the American people, its politics."

[Kikapu]

There are many who tend to believe that the proxy war instigated by NATO against Russia in Ukraine is/was going to bring Russia to it’s knees economically and militarily, and with a bit of luck, fragmentation of Russia to much smaller states to which the collective West can control, just like what they did to Yugoslavia. Well, it hasn’t worked out that way and it never will. All the West has done, is to make Russia stronger than ever once this war is over, and since Russia is not going to trust the collective West again for a very long time, they are going to pour a lot of money into building up their military personnel as well as military equipment, weapons and supplies, that they will be able to sustain a military conflict with anyone even if it were to last 1, 5, 10 or 25 years, just because they can, unlike the West, who are out of ammo to give to Ukraine after 1 year of fighting. But we know the capitalist collective West, that as soon as they walk away from Ukraine in ruins, they will once again would like to cozy up to Russian cheap energy to boost their own industries and Russia will oblige and take their money to help build up its military. This is why one shouldn’t go and start poking at a sleeping bear to wake it up.

[Londonrake]

Russia is used to navigating through NATO members for a very long time without any problems, so I don’t see any problems for Russia in the Baltic Sea either.

Absolutely, but we're not talking about the normality of peacetime navigation. In a period of heightened tension, or even war, you can see, in a cursory glance of the Baltic map, what I'm talking about. With the previously neutral Finland (75 years) and Sweden (175) NATO members, the strategic reality has changed exponentially for Russia in the Baltic. Ipso facto, a war supposedly motivated by the desire to prevent the expansion of the NATO threat has become an absurdity.

Your refusal to acknowledge the importance of Crimea and the Sea of Azov, both to Russia and for NATO is very disappointing. Once Russia solidify this region for good as part of greater Russia, NATO will drop Ukraine like a bad habit since Ukraine won’t have anything significant to offer NATO for it to become a member.

TBH, I wasn't aware you were looking for such an acknowledgement.

Ukraine doesn't seem to have much of a navy. Mostly coastal patrol boats and some amphibious landing ships. There are a few NATO naval bases in Turkey and I believe one in Bulgaria but that's been the case for quite a while. There didn't appear to be an escalation in NATO naval activities prior to Russia's annexation of Crimea. Nor much since. A few right-of-passage in International waters incidents have reached the news. Mostly relating to Russian over-reaction.

I think it's more a case of what NATO membership has to offer Ukraine, rather than the other way around. I've said quite a few times, their joining was unlikely to happen anytime soon. Given German and French economic relationships with/dependency on Russia and Hungary's outright leaning towards them I suspect Ukraine would have been left hanging as long as Turkey has been with its hopes of joining the EU. Ukraine NATO membership, like the supposed imminent threat of a NATO invasion designed to split up Russia, is nonsense - for domestic consumption (and Western supporters of course! ).

Contrarywise, I would add I have been disappointed at your refusal to acknowledge the significance of Putin's reneging on the 1992 Budapest Memorandum, which Russia solemnly signed, resulting in Ukraine giving up it's very considerable inventory of nuclear weapons. Moreover, the similar 1997 treaty which.................... fixed the principle of strategic partnership, the recognition of the inviolability of existing borders, and respect for territorial integrity................ Not worth the paper it was printed on, obviously.

Regardless. My opinion (I emphasise) is that Ukraine's desire to join NATO had nothing at all to do with recent events. Putin annexed Crimea to great acclaim from his population in 2014. It was a popular, relatively bloodless coup (you don't have to look too far through history to find similar examples). The subsequent international reaction was muted. In essence, he got away with it. Invading Ukraine was supposed to be a similar event. The rest being history.

I appreciate your response to my comment on sarcasm. Call me naive but given the way US policy on secrecy has evolved since 9/11 - prior to which it was "need to know", resulting in all the clues being compartmentalised, subsequently becoming "need to share", as demonstrated in the Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden fiascos. I find it entirely credible that a young idiot who wished to impress members of his forum would be able to steal and post such material. 20 years ago I could have been guilty of the same thing in here. Though, that would be stretching the limits of "impress" I suspect.

Moreover, you post a YT where the interviewer opens commenting "............. a story which seems too fantastic to believe. The leaker of the Top Secret no foreign documents prepared for - blah, blah - is in fact a 21 year old National Guardsman..... shared among teen gamers - is this even remotely credible" I would say you're looking at/listening to something about as unobjective as you could get. Shame on you.


Paphitis is late again!

I'm sure that Paphitis, like me, will appreciate the fact we can express our views on these events freely without finding ourselves incarcerated for 25 years.

[Kikapu]

Russia is used to navigating through NATO members for a very long time without any problems, so I don’t see any problems for Russia in the Baltic Sea either.

Absolutely, but we're not talking about the normality of peacetime navigation. In a period of heightened tension, or even war, you can see, in a cursory glance of the Baltic map, what I'm talking about. With the previously neutral Finland (75 years) and Sweden (175) NATO members, the strategic reality has changed exponentially for Russia in the Baltic. Ipso facto, a war supposedly motivated by the desire to prevent the expansion of the NATO threat has become an absurdity.

But we are talking normality since NATO supposedly is a defensive alliance, and since Russia has not threatened any NATO member, Finland and Sweden joining the so called “defensive alliance” is really a moot point, no?

Regardless, NATO has proven itself to be a cowardly alliance to take on Russia directly, hence the proxy war started by the “defensive alliance” using Ukraine, because NATO knows that a direct war with Russia is WWIII, which means Sweden and Finland will also be up in smoke once the mushroom cloud clears. So what is it exactly that Finland and Sweden brings to NATO, other than receiving few nukes from Russia in the event of WWIII?[/quote]

Your refusal to acknowledge the importance of Crimea and the Sea of Azov, both to Russia and for NATO is very disappointing. Once Russia solidify this region for good as part of greater Russia, NATO will drop Ukraine like a bad habit since Ukraine won’t have anything significant to offer NATO for it to become a member.

TBH, I wasn't aware you were looking for such an acknowledgement.

Contrarywise, I would add I have been disappointed at your refusal to acknowledge the significance of Putin's reneging on the 1992 Budapest Memorandum, which Russia solemnly signed, resulting in Ukraine giving up it's very considerable inventory of nuclear weapons. Moreover, the similar 1997 treaty which.................... fixed the principle of strategic partnership, the recognition of the inviolability of existing borders, and respect for territorial integrity................ Not worth the paper it was printed on, obviously.

Acknowledging that NATO’s proxy war with Russia in Ukraine is mostly about Crimea and the regions around Sea of Azov would be telling that you understand the purpose of this war in Ukraine!

I have already answered your above “Contrarywise” statement few weeks back which you did not respond. To reiterate, once Ukraine tried to change the political landscape starting from 1991, Russia gave Ukraine every opportunity to make things right to maintain their agreement, but not to be, hence today’s results.

cyprus47496-3250.html#p934460
[/quote]

Moreover, you post a YT where the interviewer opens commenting "............. a story which seems too fantastic to believe. The leaker of the Top Secret no foreign documents prepared for - blah, blah - is in fact a 21 year old National Guardsman..... shared among teen gamers - is this even remotely credible" I would say you're looking at/listening to something about as unobjective as you could get. Shame on you.

When the news broke out regarding the leak from an unknown persons stating that the Spring counteroffensive by Ukrainian forces against the Russians would not take place for various reasons, it seemed like an deliberate leak by one or more of the “defensive alliances” to save face because Ukraine does not have the means to make a Spring counteroffensive. Who is to say this young man who is accused of leaking is not set up as a patsy to make the leaks by having the leaked materials made availàble to him deliberately? It is possible that someone fucked up big time and gave this kid more information to leak than it was ever intended? You need to cover all your bases before you come out with the “shame on you” statement!

[Pyrpolizer]

Anyone who thinks the Russian special military operation in Ukraine is based on one and only reason, is ignorant. Anyone who thinks all those billions poured in Ukraine, are in support of Western values about democracy, freedom, and sovereignty, suffers from cranial rectal defilement (as McGregor says).

[Kikapu]

Anyone who thinks the Russian special military operation in Ukraine is based on one and only reason, is ignorant. Anyone who thinks all those billions poured in Ukraine, are in support of Western values about democracy, freedom, and sovereignty, suffers from cranial rectal defilement (as McGregor says).

Cucumbers have been absent for a while on CF.

You have just brought it back!

[Lordo]

Anyone who thinks the Russian special military operation in Ukraine is based on one and only reason, is ignorant. Anyone who thinks all those billions poured in Ukraine, are in support of Western values about democracy, freedom, and sovereignty, suffers from cranial rectal defilement (as McGregor says).

Cucumbers have been absent for a while on CF.

You have just brought it back!

I am sure LR and Maxy Baby will thank you for bringing the subject up, they dig that scene.

[Robin Hood]

Anyone who thinks the Russian special military operation in Ukraine is based on one and only reason, is ignorant. Anyone who thinks all those billions poured in Ukraine, are in support of Western values about democracy, freedom, and sovereignty, suffers from cranial rectal defilement (as McGregor says).

I would suggest that you are wrong in that assumption!

The SMO from the very beginning was named such because it WAS an operation with a single purpose. That purpose was clearly stated at the time by the Russians to be a special operation of limited scope and that was to protect the population of Donbas from what would probably have been a genocide by the Kyiv regime had they not responded as they did. Had Zelensky had his way at the time (Feb 2022) then it would have stopped then! Johnson was sent by his US puppet masters to make him change his mind about negotiation ...... with the threat of 'repercussions' if he did!

The US/UK new this would happen and looking at the historic facts of all that happened that led up to Russia’s actions on the 24th Feb 2022 it is very clear WHY that SMO was launched.

The SMO had as stated limited objectives! It was not a war for territorial gain or an unprovoked war against an innocent neighbour which is what the Western propaganda would have people believe. Whilst the facts support such a view the Western propaganda swung into overdrive and decided to make it a US/UK/NATO ‘defensive’ action. NATO is the US’s Foreign Legion and their history shows their ‘wars’ to date have ALL been offensive. They use the Israeli concept of pre-emptive 'defensive' strikes as justification for their military attacks.

The Western Alliance created an ant-Russian/Pro-Ukraine scenario by ignoring the facts and using the Ukrainians to carry out the destabilisation of the Russian Federation ....... and that was ALWAYS the Western Alliance intent.

Most of the destruction and death in this conflict is in the East and the South of Ukraine, a region very much pro-Russian and occupied for centuries by largely Russian speaking people. The Russian targets outside the SE region have been military and industrial targets to reduce KYIV’s ability to retake the Donbas and the other SE regions. Although if you listen to the Western propaganda machine Russia only attacks schools, hospitals, nurseries and old peoples homes! It is a pity no one read the Amnesty International report that blamed Ukraine for most of this civilian destruction and the deaths! Zelensky went berserk on its release and tried to force a retraction ...... thankfully, AI refused but the report was frozen out of the media ...... like the West have done with the OSCE report on Ukraine up tp 24.02.22!

The conflict does have one purpose, as explained, and that is why it was deemed a Special Military Operation .......... the US/UK/NATO have just expanded the violence and have achieved nothing other than the destruction of Ukraine as a Country.

IMO: On the other hand the Russians have tried since 2014 to take the route of negotiation. All the Donbas wanted, like many other regions was some autonomy ...... within a single Ukrainian State. The Donbas now has that autonomy (or will have) but with independence from Ukraine and I think it could well expand in time to other Oblast’s in the region when the US and its partners walk away from the conflict. Which they will!

[Londonrake]

Kicks.

Well, it was nice while it lasted, and thanks for the reasonable (reasoned) responses. As I remarked earlier, we inhabit alternate realities on the matter though.

These are obviously very emotive events, with it seems no room for anything in the way of a meeting of minds.

Having said that, I didn't think it would be too long before the bully-boy, piss taking comments appeared.

Moving on:

I am sure LR and Maxy Baby will thank you for bringing the subject up, they dig that scene.

It's a measure of your dorkishness that no manner how many times you've been, proverbially, kicked up the ass in here you haven't been able to learn from it. It's difficult not to conclude that in fact you're the one with the fondness for being butt-fucked. You're an incurable and often embarrassing idiot and I thank the (real) Lord you're not on my "side"

On another thread here you've just posted:

The United Nations estimates that over 14 million people have already fled their homes in Ukraine as a result of the Russian invasion, with nearly 8 million people seeking refuge in other countries.

You could have added the UN OCHR estimate that about 9000 Ukrainian civilians have been killed and 22,000 injured. Their towns flattened and cities repeatedly blitzed.

Yet, despite that sort of "view", you've never had any hesitation rushing to support the big boys in here on this issue. Which basically comes down to none of it being the fault of Russia. It's all the wicked West.

Can't resist the urge to suck up though - can you?