Putin offers truce if Ukraine exits Moscow-occupied areas and drops NATO bid — nonstarters for Kyiv
- Thread starter cigaretteman
- Start date
You really can’t verify it yourself?
Gawd, that must be like living in the dark.
Don’t worry, I’ll spoon feed you.
Here’s a link to The Hill article:
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/...al-ukrainian-militia-linked-to-neo-nazis/amp/
Here’s a link to Rep. Ro Khanna’s congressional webpage touting the same article:
https://khanna.house.gov/media/in-the-news/congress-bans-arms-ukraine-militia-linked-neo-nazis
LOL
I’m not the bitch asking for a link anyone can find with a highlight and click.
It’s literally easier than making a post requesting the same.
You are not good at this. Anyone with half a brain can see it.LOL
I’m not the bitch asking for a link anyone can find with a highlight and click.
It’s literally easier than making a post requesting the same.
From ChatGPT:
The claim that the Ukrainian National Guard is made up of neo-Nazis is misleading and inaccurate. However, this claim has been used in various forms of disinformation, particularly by Russian state media and propaganda outlets.
Key Points:
- Ukrainian National Guard:
- The Ukrainian National Guard is a branch of Ukraine's military, formed to support the regular armed forces and ensure internal security. It includes various units with different histories and ideologies.
- Azov Regiment:
- One source of this claim is the Azov Regiment, a unit that was initially formed as a volunteer militia in 2014 during the conflict in eastern Ukraine. The unit included some members who held far-right and nationalist views, and its early insignia included symbols associated with neo-Nazism.
- The Azov Regiment was later integrated into the National Guard of Ukraine. While some members have expressed far-right views, it does not represent the entirety of the Ukrainian National Guard, which is a diverse force composed of various units with different backgrounds and ideologies.
- Diversity in the Ukrainian Military:
- The Ukrainian National Guard, like the broader Ukrainian military, is composed of individuals from a wide range of political, ethnic, and social backgrounds. The overwhelming majority of its members are not associated with extremist ideologies.
- Ukraine, as a nation, has condemned neo-Nazism, and its government has been working to address and reduce the influence of extremist groups.
- Russian Propaganda:
- Russian state media and other actors have amplified the presence of far-right elements within Ukraine as part of a broader narrative to delegitimize the Ukrainian government and justify military actions. This narrative selectively highlights the presence of these groups to create a misleading impression about the Ukrainian military as a whole.
Conclusion:
While it is true that some members of the Azov Regiment and other far-right groups have been part of the Ukrainian National Guard, it is inaccurate to characterize the entire National Guard or the Ukrainian military as neo-Nazi. The majority of Ukrainian forces do not subscribe to these ideologies, and the narrative suggesting otherwise is often used as a tool of disinformation.
Vlad is a Jew. The neo-Nazi theme does not apply or make sense.
No, Vladimir Putin is not Jewish. Vladimir Putin, the President of Russia, is of Russian Orthodox Christian background. His religious affiliation and cultural background are rooted in Russian Orthodox Christianity, which is the predominant religion in Russia.
There has been no credible information or evidence to suggest that Putin is of Jewish descent or that he practices Judaism. In fact, Putin has been publicly associated with the Russian Orthodox Church, and he has often appeared in church services and events related to the Orthodox Christian faith.
Russia/Putin wants Ukraine back due to its location and resources. For about 2 decades Putin has been sending Russians into the Donetsk region to stir unrest and have more influence over the area. The Donetsk Clan working with Putin even made their way into the Ukraine govt. So, it only took about a 2 decades from when 80% of the country voted for independence from Russia to this region having heavy Russia influence. Putin has been slowly playing this game and thought Ukraine would collapse within a week. A couple of years later he's still fighting and now has them attacking deep into Russia. How long before the people of Russia have enough of this?
Depends on number of windows in buildings 4 stories or more.
I'm curious if it was downed, pilot error or malfunction of the jet. That said, the F16 isn't as good as Russia's top jets... just the best thing allies are willing to give to Ukraine to use.
Ask Chat GPT to teach you about Volodymyr Zelenskyy, as I imagine that’s the person being referenced.
Ignore Seminole, he continues to think in his words, Russian propaganda that Ukrainians were Nazi's legitimizes the war.
Care to quote where you came away with that misunderstanding?
I have never said I think Russia’s invasion is legitimate.
It is not.
I have tried to explain to you the origin and purpose of the Russian government calling Ukrainians Nazis, but I have never said that legitimizes their invasion. Nor that I believe it to be true.
If someone tells you Hitler invaded Russia for lebensraum, do you think that person is telling you what Hitler’s reasoning was, or is the person saying Hitler’s invasion was legitimate?
“While it is true that some members of the Azov Regiment and other far-right groups have been part of the Ukrainian National Guard, it is inaccurate to characterize the entire National Guard or the Ukrainian military as neo-Nazi.”
This seems almost Trumpian-like: “…there are fine folks on both sides of the neonazi divide.” 😂 😂 😂
Yeah, it’s ALWAYS about the money.
Lindsey ‘Lady G’ Graham let that slip in June when he said Ukraine is sitting on $12 trillion in mineral wealth and ‘we’ can’t afford to let Russia get their hands on it.
You gave me 14 articles you scrounged up about Ukrainian nazi ties, sorry for the confusion. Then why do you also seem concerned about the damaged pipeline. If you don’t support Russia why do you want nato to go after Ukraine?
You literally said, "So please let’s discuss the Nazis again."
So I obliged, by providing you articles from:
BBC, USA Today, Salon, CNN, Huffpost, Foreign Policy, NBCnews, The New Republic, Atlantic Council, The Hill, The Nation, Reuters, etc.
Don't have to 'scrounge' into the deep recesses of the internet to find this stuff, it was right there in mainstream media, it's just been memory holed since 2022, so if you weren't paying any attention before, maybe it just didn't exist to you.
Which of those do you think were really just carrying water for Putin?
Do you think they were spreading lies?
My whole point was that there is a seed of truth in successful propaganda.
Why do I point out how so many of you got suckered into a false narrative that defied common sense?
Seems relevant.
I don't want NATO to go after Ukraine, I was simply pointing out the naked hypocrisy.
Can you genuinely not see it?
Then please tell us what you want. And I really don’t know where you are moving forward now, you have no concerns with the pipeline, you agree that the war was based off of propaganda that had vaguely to do with some right wing imbeciles in Ukraine from articles in 2014. Let’s see, so you want Russia to call a truce and Ukraine allowed into NATO,
How big picture do you want to go?
My concern with the pipeline is how people fell for the propaganda about it, got all lathered up about the ‘attack on NATO’, etc, only to go Emily Litella as the truth emerges.
Where’s the self reflection from the people who were fooled? What war will they thirstily go along with next?
I’m trying to explain to you the origin of Russia’s Nazi propaganda, not to assert it’s the ‘real’ reason Russia went to war, even less so a valid justification.
Imagine the Nazis are WMD, and NATO membership is the oil to whatever you want to call the Russian version of our neocons.
‘from articles in 2014’
You can acknowledge the reality without bullshit minimizations that make it look like you’re not really paying attention.
What year did Congress ban funding Azov battalion?
I don’t think what I’d like to see is in the cards.
That’d be Russia behind 1991 borders and an end to NATO expansion.
If think the outcome of this war is going to be Russian annexation of Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk, with some line to be determined south of Zaporizhzhia that gives the Russians a land bridge to Crimea and secures the canal’s access to the Dnepr.
Some horse trade of land in Kursk that Ukraine is taking to adjust Russia gains beyond Luhansk and Donetsk.
I think the Russians might try to sell relinquishing their claim on Kherson and Zaporizhzhia oblasts as compromise for peace.
Stealing a loaf, giving back half, and calling it good.
I think the war goes on until they get the neutrality guarantee they’re looking for. I believe the Ukrainian negotiator who said it was their primary aim.
So you admit the majority of the articles you copied from yesterday were from 2014, you know that can be easily fact checked. There will be no neutrality. No one is agreeing to jack crap with Putin. You need to find way to defend yourself from Putin, so joining NATO is the likely solution for most.How big picture do you want to go?
My concern with the pipeline is how people fell for the propaganda about it, got all lathered up about the ‘attack on NATO’, etc, only to go Emily Litella as the truth emerges.
Where’s the self reflection from the people who were fooled? What war will they thirstily go along with next?
I’m trying to explain to you the origin of Russia’s Nazi propaganda, not to assert it’s the ‘real’ reason Russia went to war, even less so a valid justification.
Imagine the Nazis are WMD, and NATO membership is the oil to whatever you want to call the Russian version of our neocons.
‘from articles in 2014’
You can acknowledge the reality without bullshit minimizations that make it look like you’re not really paying attention.
What year did Congress ban funding Azov battalion?
I don’t think what I’d like to see is in the cards.
That’d be Russia behind 1991 borders and an end to NATO expansion.
If think the outcome of this war is going to be Russian annexation of Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk, with some line to be determined south of Zaporizhzhia that gives the Russians a land bridge to Crimea and secures the canal’s access to the Dnepr.
Some horse trade of land in Kursk that Ukraine is taking to adjust Russia gains beyond Luhansk and Donetsk.
I think the Russians might try to sell relinquishing their claim on Kherson and Zaporizhzhia oblasts as compromise for peace.
Stealing a loaf, giving back half, and calling it good.
I think the war goes on until they get the neutrality guarantee they’re looking for. I believe the Ukrainian negotiator who said it was their primary aim.
Last edited:
15 from 2014 (the year of the coup, Ukraine was in the news a lot, and the neo-Nazis saw mainstream coverage consequently).
13 from the years after 2014.
Do you want me to find 5 more after 2014 so you can’t say it’s a majority from then?
Will that matter at all somehow?
This seems a shallow point.
We’ll see.
When I was sparring with him, he was dug in on Russia's right to invade Crimea. It made absolutely no sense. I mean, he thought the area was still Russia's. And he used the Nazi reason. It was pointless to argue with this and similar nonsense, so I put him on ignore.
Somethings are simply beyond the pale.
If that was true you could readily quote it.
I explained the Russian government's reason for invading, but never said they had a right to invade Crimea.
I can explain Mussolini's reason for invading Albania, but that doesn't mean I consider it his right, or justified, or anything like that.
