This might be a little tougher than Putin thought...
- Thread starter Nole Lou
- Start date
I didn't say anything. I just posted a link. Someone else blamed it on slow joe and bho.
Why do you think the USA would want nukes removed from Ukraine in 1994? Seriously.
Progress in Disarmament
- By 1996, Ukraine transferred all Soviet-era strategic warheads to Russia. [4]
- Ukraine received extensive assistance to dismantle ICBMs, ICBM silos, heavy bombers, and cruise missiles from the U.S. funded Cooperative Threat Reduction Program. ICBM silos were destroyed by 2002, ICBMs were dismantled or transferred to Russia, and heavy bombers were eliminated by 2001. [5]
- Former President Yanukovych announced at the 2010 Nuclear Security Summit that Ukraine would remove all of its HEU by 2012. [6] The Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed in March 2012 that all of the HEU had been transferred to Russia. [7]
- Some countries (mainly the United States and other NATO members) argue that recent Russian aggression, including the annexation of Crimea, violates the Budapest Memorandum that led to Ukraine renouncing the nuclear weapons on its territory following the dissolution of the Soviet Union and joining the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state. Ukraine remains committed to the NPT regime. [8]
But in hindsight, it was a bad deal for Ukraine, which is the point.
And Bush. No reason to jail you for being stupid.
Hindsight? Ukraine was under Russian influence at the time. See any difference?
Once you get out of Moscow or St. Petersburg and into smaller towns or rural areas there is support for Putin and this war.
The WSJ has a very good article about this today.
Russians are so conditioned over generations to believe the propaganda they’re fed.
Agreed. I think the citizens are going to need to be punished to overcome the propaganda.
The Soviet Union had control of them even though they were on Ukraine property. There is no way they should have been left up for grabs back then when the country collapsed-right?
The phrase "in hindsight" does not have anything to do about what people thought in 1994.
What? Doesn't in hindsight mean in the past? You have me confused.
There’s a reason the Minus Six existed. It’s a totally different world outside of the major cities.
It means that TODAY, we should be able to agree that giving up the nukes was a bad deal for Ukraine. Russia wouldn't be doing this if they still had nukes today.
There’s a reason the Minus Six existed. It’s a totally different world outside of the major cities.
You can't just say something is wrong without having a way to prove it. Right?
So in 1994 our country should have know that Russia would invade Ukraine in 2022? Makes sense.
What message does this send to all the other non-nuclear armed countries in the world?
Don't believe any security guarantees.
Get nukes or get invaded.
Sad.
Am I the only one who thinks that if talking out of both sides of one’s mouth was an Olympic sport the Russians might medal every time?
In 1994, The USA was worried about former Soviet states having nukes without proper oversight.
Don’t always agree with you, lady, but once in a while you hit the bullseye.
That's pretty good but I do like a strong military. Best deterrent against aggression.
This - empty shelves, no dog food or Nestle baby formula.
Canada would have the nicest nuclear weapon program in the world.
Canada’s fine. Mexico is a narco-state.
This Ukraine invasion is soo depressing. We need some happy news after these 2 years lol
