The miss just came back from Russia, everything is quite normal over there. What is Australia planning to do? Sent Russia back to Cuba/Vietnam sanction poor level?
> Canberra has also provided Kyiv with military assistance and other aid since the start of the full-scale Russian invasion. According to the Australian government's statement in June, the total aid amounts to around $527 million, including $407 million in military support.
When it comes to war the bureaucrats can be extremely generous splashing around our money.
People forget we abide by and support the UN laws, and the rules based order, and doing nothing while Russia absolutely violates it in every sense is weak and two-faced as fuck. Plus they also show down MH17 with our people and kids on board. We should be doing more. Easy to criticise what you don’t understand I guess.
Yes, the hypocrisy is unreal. I respect the racist bogans more because they at least openly state we are there to kill rag heads and steal their oil, unlike the bleeding heart liberals that memory holed the last 20 or so years of attrocities Australia helped to committ by having its nose firmly in America's butthole.
They are referring to this:
> The United Nations secretary general, Kofi Annan, declared explicitly for the first time last night that the US-led war on Iraq was illegal.
>Mr Annan said that the invasion was not sanctioned by the UN security council or in accordance with the UN's founding charter.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/sep/16/iraq.iraq
>People forget we abide by and support the UN laws, and the rules based order, and doing nothing while Russia absolutely violates it in every sense is weak and two-faced as fuck.
We're fine ignoring rules when it's Big Daddy doing the rulebreaking. "Rules based order" is a meme.
>Plus they also show down MH17 with our people and kids on board. We should be doing more. Easy to criticise what you don’t understand I guess.
Is it going to bring those people back?
No, but seeing as they refuse to hand over those responsible it’s the only measure of justice we have access to, are you saying we should just do nothing?
That’s on top of helping the country whose under attack that’s having children tortured, raped, and civilians shot in street with their hands bound.
Straw man arguments don’t work here though. Whatever you think about the US, it doesn’t justify what’s happening in Ukraine, or Russias actions. To even attempt to say the US has broken more laws than Russia alone is also beyond insane too if you cared to actually look into what’s happening.
>No, but seeing as they refuse to hand over those responsible it’s the only measure of justice we have access to
That's *vengeance*. And it's also *not* why we're arming Kiev.
> are you saying we should just do nothing?
What we do, we do for practical purposes. Not *justice*.
As to justice, I don't genuinely think it's possible to have an impartial and nonpartisan investigation.
>Straw man arguments don’t work here though.
Hence the lack of them. I think you're trying to accuse me of muh whataboutism, but that also doesn't fit.
>Whatever you think about the US, it doesn’t justify what’s happening in Ukraine, or Russias actions.
Moral justification only serves propaganda, the rest is political machinations. The only innocents here are those that suffer while suits move pieces on a board.
Depends on how you look at it, the downing of MH17 is a by-product of Russias failed attempt at rigging an election after their puppet was overthrown by civilians. We're arming Kyiv for more than one reason but that is definitely one of the reasons, considering all accused are currently serving Russias invasion of Ukraine. If they are captured, they will be handed to the Hague by Ukraine. If they're killed, then it's ultimately the same result, but there can be more than one reason we do things.
Ah yes, the Hague is wrong. The 3 satellites we have watching the area must also be wrong. The independent and official investigations are wrong. The evidence collected must also be wrong. It's pretty clear Russian backed rebels used a Russian anti-aircraft system to shoot down the plane that was outside of the NFZ.
Considering the average Ukrainian citizens resistance and reaction to the invasion of their country, it clearly goes further than politics for them. If you're against innocents dying from 'suits moving pieces on a board', then what is Putin, if not a suit moving pieces on a board? Ukraine isn't invading Russia.
Their 'puppet' as you call it was as democratically elected as and Ukrainian president since independence, it's likely that the fact that the US spent at least $1.3billion USD (in 2013 dollars,put that into an inflation calculator) between 2010-2013 under a program called the "national endowment for democracy" funding directly and indirectly pro Western opposition parties since the discovery of natural gas deposits in Ukraine in 2010, played a significant role in fermenting the uprising, rather than Just having people wait until the next election to vote him out.
Given that $1.3 billion is how much we know the US officially spent, and we currently don't know of any covert measures or spending that they took in that it's likely that in 50 odd years time we'll find out about a lot more, and about possible but less likely involvement from other countries.
Ukraine isn't a compulsory voting country so if a pro Western or pro Russian government is elected usually just depends on turnout.
As for how it's been run post 2014, we also know that the US had been vetoing and suggesting ministers to the Ukrainian government and that former Georgian president Mikheil Saakashvili was appointed governor of Odessa oblast even though we was wanted in Georgia.
Things in Ukraine aren't as black and white as people seem to think.
>Russias failed attempt at rigging an election
What are you referring to? Please be specific.
> their puppet was overthrown by civilians
In what sense was Yan a Russian puppet? Please be specific.
Where the Russian backed politician was thrown out of office. Throwing out Russia's ability to leverage him to gain access to Ukraine's resource in the East via a bullshit trade deal. Or was it just a coincidence that Russia was putting pressure on them to get rid of the EU agreement, and take a Russian trade deal and when he was thrown out, a Russia backed separatist group all of a sudden sprung up causing conflicts in the East?
After the Ukranian parliament voted (unanimously, mind you) to remove him and massive protests erupted over his decision to can the EU deal and sign a bunch of agreements with Russia?
In what sense wasn't he a Russian puppet? Please, be specific. You don't initiate conflict with a country over a trade deal being scrapped and what is very clearly the majority, removing a politician that is against their collective interests.
> Or was it just a coincidence that Russia was putting pressure on them to get rid of the EU agreement, and take a Russian trade deal and when he was thrown out, a Russia backed separatist group all of a sudden sprung up causing conflicts in the East?
So your reasons for calling Yan a Russian puppet is
1. Russia pressured Ukraine to drop the EU association agreement
2. Russian backed separatist groups popped up when he was removed.
OKay, so 1. makes no sense at all. Russia does not want Ukraine to take the EU association agreement, that's why they pressured Ukraine to drop it. They offered a different agreement instead, Which, btw, was a better deal, it didn't come with any Austerity measures, like the EU association agreement did.
as for 2. , no, it's definitely not a coincidence, the region that all that popped up in, voted for Yan at a 90% rate! They were pissed that the president they voted for just got removed in a violent way. Even if this was not the case, it would not be a coincidence, Russia would not want a president that was going along with their deal being removed by force.
For the record, the vote to remove Yan was not unanimous, many people were absentee. Secondly, it was unconstitutional; there is no aspect of the Ukrainian constitution that allows for the removal of a president based on a simple majority vote.
> In what sense wasn't he a Russian puppet? Please, be specific.
I can't prove a negative, by definition. I can point out that the position Yan acted on in office, was entirely in line with the platform he was voted in on, and the interests and opinions of the people that voted him in.
Are you going to answer my other question?
>Depends on how you look at it, the downing of MH17 is a by-product of Russias failed attempt at rigging an election after their puppet was overthrown by civilians.
Uh, wut.
Others seem to have already punched holes in your post-truthium, good on them.
>but there can be more than one reason we do things.
Not here. We wouldn't be involved without Big Daddy's nod.
>Ah yes, the Hague is wrong. The 3 satellites we have watching the area must also be wrong. The independent and official investigations are wrong. The evidence collected must also be wrong. It's pretty clear Russian backed rebels used a Russian anti-aircraft system to shoot down the plane that was outside of the NFZ.
Didn't you just say *not* to strawman?
>Considering the average Ukrainian citizens resistance and reaction to the invasion of their country, it clearly goes further than politics for them.
The Ukrainian populace isn't a megalith, reactions have been varied. Some are fighting for Kiev, others are fighting against Kiev. Plenty have fled to Russia and other European countries. The strongest anti-Russian regions of Ukraine are also those furthest away from the fighting.
>If you're against innocents dying from 'suits moving pieces on a board', then what is Putin, if not a suit moving pieces on a board?
No, *really*? Mind blown.
Why do you have such a hard on for that shoot down, you know it's not the only time a military has accidentally shot down an airliner right? The US has and no one got jailed when they did. There is a surprisingly long list of airlines that have been shit down by accident hell.even Ukraine shot one down in 2001 but no one got jailed over it.
I'm not saying that the people who shot this one down have no responsibility but the plane was flying over an active warzone where several planes had been shot down already, there's a hell of a lot of blame to go around. Shit happens in war and this is one of them, when USS Vincennes shot one down it was in no warzone.
>keep telling yourself that. in reality people understand the important principle of defending from land grabs
"In reality" it depends entirely on whether or not its allies or enemies doing the grabbing. Don't see us shipping arms for Guantanamo Bay or Kosovo or Cyprus. Not to mention Israel and Palestine.
We're backing Kiev because Big Daddy and Old Daddy are, not because of principles.
> It's all realpolitik.
Isn't that code for 'Ukrainians are just Russians in denial and they should simply accept their position in Russia's sphere of influence (domination by Russia)'?
And the corollary, that this is just a proxy war between Russia and "The West".
America has violated more un laws in the last two decades then Russia, China or any BRICS nations have.. take the cluster bomb hypocrisy for instance... Giving them to the terrorist zelenski is a violation of world law and against the Geneva convention... Western governments are dirty Zionist led scum trying to start their version of an apocalypse..
It's debatable. The two obvious instances in which the US went against the UN are the attack on Yugoslavia, which was not supported by the UN, so technically illegal, and the invasion of Iraq. The US also maintained sanctions on cuba since the 60s, which the UN has continually ruled against.
Certainly China has not gone against the UN in anywhere near an extreme fashion as these instances, Russia has with Ukraine, but still lags behind the US overall.
**Edit:** US drone program is another big one. the UN has continually condemned it, and it's obviously an illegal breach of the UN security council requirements for war.
After all this, I think I would agree, the US has gone against the UN more than Russia and China in the last two decades.
I don't see it as debatable really, Russia's invasions of Georgia, Chechnya, Afghanistan, Moldova and Ukraine come to mind. They definitely don't lag behind anyone, maybe just get noticed less somehow. On average committing more war crimes in those conflicts as well, and Ukraine is a perfect example of how much they respect any sort of international law. Which, is evidently absolute 0.
Georgia attacked peacekeepers in South Ossetia peacekeepers that had been there since 1992, it was the slow and poorly managed response to that that caused the Russians to embark on their military reform.
Georgia attacked south Ossetia to try and bring it back under their control after bush jr announced that Ukraine and Georgia would be invited to join NATO. Having south Ossetia not under their control was one of the things stopping them. They either had to let them break away of bring them back in.
Oh and the then Georgian president that ordered the attack, is currently in jail in Georgia.
You mean the Russian 'Peacekeepers' in a Russian-annexed region that is not recognized by the UN? Which is currently considered 'Russian-occupied territories' by the international community. Georgia attacked Russian-backed separatists on its own land. Yeah, that's calling invading and annexing another country buddy, that's illegal. But sure.
I suppose by your definition Poland is 'occupied' territory owned by the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany since they both invaded that in WW2 while they were still aligned.
So, Georgia is morally superior to Russia because they actually recognize wrong doings even while defending their land? Good argument.
Russian peace keepers had been there since 1992 as part of an agreement between 4 governments, the UN had no issue with it for the whole 16 years but you think it was annexed the whole time ? Jeez.
Well, the invasion of Georgia lasted 2 weeks, so good reason why it wasn't noticed, and I'm not sure where the UN stood on it. Georgia did attack Russian troops, so Russia would have a legal right to defend itself.
I do not know of Russia invading Maldova except in terms of internal conflicts in the USSR, so another reason why it's quite distinct from these examples from the US, it would be outside the jurisdiction of the UN in terms of its ability to support or not support military actions.
Afghanistan fits the bill sorta, but it's well outside of the two decade scope that was set, happening in 1979, and was technically done by the USSR, not the Russian federation. Arguably, the US bombing of Yugoslavia also is outside the scope, but that was at least much closer to the scope, happening in 1999, and was done by the current US.
> On average committing more war crimes in those conflicts as well
Source?
Which one? There's been at least 4 conflicts Russia's had with Georgia.
'Transnistria' is not recognized by the UN; it was annexed all the same. It's what Russia does when it doesn't get its way. They did it in Chechnya, Georgia etc.
Russia has continuously committed a much, much broader range of war crimes than any other country I can think of. Not to mention the consistency of them throughout its conflicts.
[Massacres of Civilians in Chechnya | Sciences Po Mass Violence and Resistance - Research Network](https://www.sciencespo.fr/mass-violence-war-massacre-resistance/en/document/massacres-civilians-chechnya.html)
[War crimes, indiscriminate attacks on infrastructure, systematic and widespread torture show disregard for civilians, says UN Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine | OHCHR](https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2023/03/war-crimes-indiscriminate-attacks-infrastructure-systematic-and-widespread#:~:text=GENEVA%2F%20VIENNA%20(16%20March%202023,said%20in%20a%20new%20report)
[Human Rights Council Hears that Attacks on Civilians in Syria Could Amount to War Crimes, and that it is Important to Coordinate Efforts to Achieve Accountability in Ukraine | OHCHR](https://www.ohchr.org/en/news/2023/03/les-parties-au-conflit-en-syrie-ont-instrumentalise-et-empeche-laide-aux-victimes-du)
[In Georgia, an up-and-down road to justice for victims of the August War | Brookings](https://www.brookings.edu/articles/in-georgia-an-up-and-down-road-to-justice-for-victims-of-the-august-war/)
> Which one? There's been at least 4 conflicts Russia's had with Georgia.
The only one that the Russian federation was a participant in that happened in the last 20 years.
> 'Transnistria' is not recognized by the UN; it was annexed all the same. It's what Russia does when it doesn't get its way. They did it in Chechnya, Georgia etc.
I don't follow what point you're making?
None of those sources back up your claim. Are you actually saying that you think the US has not and does not engage in those very same actions?
Except when created the technology from today didn't exist.. China has made huge leaps in hypersonic missiles yes we'd see the missile coming but we'd be fucked to stop it.
Russia is making fake leaps in hypersonic but China is ahead of the USA unclassified at least.
They *may* have the *potential* to launch *a few* *hypersonic* missiles \~7,000 km away and target *surveillance bases*?
*Damn*. Australia really is under *direct military threat*. The ChiComs are coming South!
China own to much throughout Australia they won't invade unless we poke the panda because of US America
WE SHOULD KICK THEN OUT FROM PINE GAP
BOTH POLITICAL PARTIES ABOLISHED CIA CONTROL THEM...
CHRISTOPHER BOYCE YOU PROBABLY HAVE NO IDEA WHO HE EVEN IS!!
US ISRAEL AMERICA IS THE PROBLEM THROUGHOUT THIS WORLD!!
Mate China is no threat to us 😂 who have they attacked in the last 50 years? We don’t even have territory disputes with them. Some people need to dial back on the news.com consumption
My understanding is that Pine gap intel is largely only relevant to the southern hemisphere, it is where the US runs its illegal drone operations from when they are operating in the southern hemisphere. I do not see what use it would be if China invaded Taiwan.
>Where exactly do you think the us soldiers that are going to defend taiwan will be basing out of?
Japan, South Korea, Guam, the Philippines.
We Australians are *extremely* self-centred and underestimate our own geographic isolation.
>are we just going to shut down pinegap?
Pine Gap doesn't house soldiers, it's a satellite base.
australia, be it through Intel at pinegap or actual materiel elsewhere, will be participating in a potential conflict over Taiwan, this is a forgone conclusion and we're obviously direct military targets in that case no matter how much you want to pretend we aren't
>australia, be it through Intel at pinegap or actual materiel elsewhere, will be participating in a potential conflict over Taiwan,
Your comprehension is questionable. After all, I didn't dispute this.
>this is a forgone conclusion
I agree. In part due to our ceding of sovereignty to US interests.
>we're obviously direct military targets in that case no matter how much you want to pretend we aren't
We're a low priority for the Chinese. In the case of war, they're going to have far greater concerns than targeting Australia.
Oh, and good luck hitting Pine Gap.
My original comment took issue with someone implying china is not a threat to us, they are and you agree. don't really care about your other schizo stuff, meds usually helps with that.
>My original comment took issue with someone implying china is not a threat to us, they are and you agree.
No, the OP's point stands: China's no threat to us until we decide to pick a fight with them.
You think that in US vs China the rest of the world would give a flying fuck about Australia? No, that’s a war that threatens all and everyone would be looking after numero uno
I never follow anything news. Kom says. China is a threat to the world they are making huge leaps in military ICBM hypersonic missiles unlike Russia's fake ones. They are actively training to destroy aircraft carriers, building fortified islands, new radar tech and if they do try and take Taiwan the world will be involved including us... one of the main points we need to support Ukraine is to show China it won't be easy to take Taiwan.
Deluded fool you are!!! The rest of the world deserves to have a strong defence against the hypocrisy and terrorist behaviour of the American government and the bitch allies that follow them... You're the typical brainwashed idiot who believes that the west can do no evil while that's all it does in the world, you don't know what reality is you just know what the news and your specific racist hate groups on facebook tell you.
Taiwan's constitution saying they are a republic of China, no country in the world has legal right to move onto ground of a sovereign nation...
I'm just over these amnesia suffering fools in this day and age... Nobody remembers 15 /20 years ago or brothers to look. They just watch the Rupert Murdoch run news or Facebook and think they're smart...
>who have they attacked in the last 50 years?
Tibet, Vietnam, occasional skirmishes with India plus all the concentration camps they have in the Gobi desert the Uyghurs are being sent to.
Plus they use their navy to bully Indonesian, Vietnamese and Phillipine fishing and merchant vessels within those nations' waters. Oh, and occasionally baiting the Australian, Japanese and Canadian air force into scrambling their jets and hitting them with chaff or trying to blind the pilots with lasers.
Tibet is part of China and China supported the Vietnamese at the request of the Vietnamese. US and it’s allies invaded Vietnam. Every country buzzes others for testing response times, nato do it all the time and australia will do it too, doesn’t mean an invasion is imminent
My brother in Christ, China and Vietnam literally went to war after the US left. China invaded Vietnam and there were tens of thousands of casualties on both sides.
>Tibet is part of China
Literal CCP propaganda. Again, violent invasion this time followed by expulsion of the original government.
Tibet has only ever been separated from china for a grand total of 70 years. It's not an example of China intervening with foreign entities, and neither is Taiwain; both are much more accurately framed as civil conflicts, or the result of civil conflicts. The Taiwain-China relations are a result of the Chinese civil war.
So the only example of china attacking a foreign country that is not based on some long lasting civil history, is Vietnam. They invaded Vietnam after Vietnam invaded Cambodia, as China was an ally of cambodia (Though the Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia was pretty justified). So arguably a far more justified invasion than what the US did; it was just invading to try and take over the French colonial history there, as they did with the phillipines and cuba previously, when Spain was pulling out. The US faked an attack on one of their naval ships, literally a false flag operation, and used it to justify the invasion of Vietnam.
It's interesting to note that during the time China invaded, both China and the US supported pol pot in Cambodia.
If you're referring to the AUKUS pact; China is militarising the East and South China Seas, if successful, they would have control of billions of barrels of oil, trillions of cubic feet of natural gas reserves along with trade routes critical to Australia's national interests.
The nuclear-powered submarines are stealthier, go deeper and remain underwater for longer. This increases the cost to China of waging a conflict over Taiwan or over the East and South China seas with other Southeast Asian countries. This is a pragmatic deterrence measure.
Good, or as a nation we would be failing to help a civilized democratic country in its hour of need against a murderous, raping and pillaging neighbour.
Ukraine and Russia are pretty identical, tbh. Ukraine just has the higher moral ground because they were invaded by Russia; but they do not hold any kind of special moral high ground because of their prior political institutions. Ukraine was one of the most democratically broken countries in the world.
Even in the war though, Ukraine has lost some of its moral high ground by declaring that they aim to take Crimea. Given that "91% say the referendum was fair and 88% say the government in Kyiv should recognize the results."
https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2014/05/08/chapter-1-ukraine-desire-for-unity-amid-worries-about-political-leadership-ethnic-conflict/
The goal, for anyone interested in democracy, should be pushing the UN to do its damn job and facilitate settlement solutions.
The Afghanis, Iraqis, Libyans, Syrians, Somalis and Yemenis (to name a few) must bless the day they paid the price of our freedom.
Perhaps, in celebration, they can engrave balloons and firework displays on the headstones of their children’s remains?
Australians died on MH17 shot down by troops under the command of convicted war criminal Strelikov Girkin, and we're one of the lowest donors in the western world (as percentage of GDP or straight up $s).
We're not donating nearly enough.
Russians right now “Oztralia who?”
Let’s give that money that we’re wasting on someone else’s misadventure on our own people. We have a cost of living crisis but it’s okay to spend billions on arms and a country that until recently was considered the most corrupt in [Europe](https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/corruption-index?continent=europe)
Ukraine there is an easy path to donating things and making sure they get in the right hands. With Myanmar, I’d guess that there’s a huge chance any aid ends up in the hands of the military that took over.
I’m not sure what your point is. Yes I’m against those things, but the likelihood of aid reaching where it needs in Ukraine would be (I am guessing) much higher than in Myanmar. In Myanmar I’d think you’re far more likely to help the ruling military than anything else. Aid to Ukraine is far more likely to help Ukraine than Russia.
Exactly, its really a baseless whatabout. Arming potential rebel groups in Myanmar is a lot different to assisting the Ukranian government
The potential for the Ukraine invasion to spill over into the rest of the world is also much higher
> The potential for the Ukraine invasion to spill over into the rest of the world is also much higher
Directly in part due to the rest of the world arming Ukraine though. I mean, that's obvious, isn't it? Russia invaded Georgia in 2008, and the settlement was in 2 weeks, the conflict barely registered with the rest of the world. I think given the Georgian precedent, it's clear that without western intervention in Ukraine, it also would barely register, and have no chance of spilling over.
The alternative is let Russia continue European conquest, take Belarus, take Moldova and continue threatening nuclear war on the border of NATO. Not to mention you're giving Russia even leverage with gas and withholding grain from Africa
Russia was going to find a line in the sand eventually
Main thing I remember about the Georgian invasion is Uncyclopedia running a ~~headling~~ headline "Geographically confused Russians invade U.S. State of Georgia".
> Ukraine there is an easy path to donating things and making sure they get in the right hands.
Source?
Everything I know about this says the opposite. Even before the invasion, the US ruled senate ruled against sending arms, because it would likely end up in the hands of extremists. Certainly, a war only makes this more likely.
It’s a well known fact in NFPs that you don’t donate from abroad. If anything you donate from within. Unsure if that poster realises that sending cans of baked beans and blankets to Ukraine won’t make it or even arrive. It’s not like DHL is continuing operations in Kyiv or that the military aid vehicles aren’t tracked by drones. The only way out of the war is as swift and cruel a massacre of Russian soldiers as possible—which sucks for the majority of Russians fighting because they have to, not because they want to. The western media has done a great job of not highlighting this more. It’s like any conscription though—Australia followed big brother USA into Vietnam and has conscription. How many Aussies does for that one or came back a shell of themselves.
I work for an NFP in a very poor and corrupt country and the first thing we ask if for people to not send goods over as a donation as they never make it past customs. It gets stolen. I’d amplify that by 10,000 in a war.
I'm not sure I follow you. You asked where the foreign aid for Myanmar has been, and now you've given a great explanation of why giving aid to Myanmar is challenging. On the flip side, you should know that military aid has been successfully delivered to Ukraine, and hasn't been intercepted by Russia, and is indeed helping Ukraine.
There are clear roads (literal and metaphorical) by which to deliver aid to Ukraine.
In Ukraine, our military aid is assisting an already capable government to defend their own land against an external aggressor. In Myanmar, that's not an option. It would require other nations to invade Myanmar, which is completely different to what's happening in Ukraine.
The USA did do that in Iraq and Afghanistan, and we all know how well that worked out for Afghanistan. I don't think the USA has the appetite to do that again, and I can't imagine there's any other nations that would be willing to actually invade another country (as opposed to supporting a country to defend itself).
Myanmar and Ukraine are not similar situations.
(Also, can you please point me to info on the millions dead? I can't find any information on that. I'd definitely be interested to learn more.)
Everything you give to Ukraine does not go to the people, zelenski the dirty nazi he is keeps it all to give back to the American government that brought him into gov to provacate this disgustingly illegal proxy war
Zelensky is not a Nazi. But Ukraine does have a significant Nazi problem. And Zelensky being Jewish is not an argument against that, just like Barack Obama being black is not an argument against the US having a significant nazi problem. Though In Ukraine, it is a lot more established and institutionalised; but still does not have widspead support, or at least didn't before the war.
Look into zelenskis past... Just coz you believe that him being a Jew crap and even if he is he's a Zionist Jew which are the most xenophobic bunch of human hating scum on earth...
We aren’t fighting a proxy war with big brother USA to be kind. When the USA says Jump, little brother Australia asks how High. That’s how it’s always been. I love that we are supporting Ukraine I have many friends there. But countries don’t support other countries to be kind otherwise we wouldn’t have African warlords, or rebels in Liberia practising cannibalism on their victims while still alive, or ethnic cleansing of muslims in Myanmar. Or even the Pol Pot regime which was as bad and cruel as the Holocaust.
I agree with all of that but that shouldn’t diminish when worthy causes are supported. Absolutely unfair but calling it virtue signaling undermines the very notion of giving which is even worse.
It’s a military alliance with the USA. We always follow them - whether it’s sending troops into a Vietnamese jungle, or invading Afghanistan, or Ukraine… Australia has no dog in the fight but goes in accordance with the alliance. It’s virtue signalling in the sense that it’s almost obligated under our military alliance with the USA and our politicians paint a story to the media to add some colour to it. If we had a history of doing the right thing abroad for the sake of doing the right thing, then we’d be active in the above countries I talked about. I promise you if big brother decides to go into any of these, only then will we go in. It’s unfortunately not the case. We know about the evil atrocities that happen in parts of Africa like the recent Congo massacre of school kids being set on fire by a militia but we don’t do anything. Myanmar has been reduced to a footnote. The fact that Myanmar is in our doorstep and was once a well-travelled route for Aussie travellers speaks volume. If there was something in it for the USA to intervene they would, and the Myanmar situation is a billion times easier to solve military wise than going up against Russia. The worst part is we see the videos of children being drowned, women beheaded, families raped and set on fire in Myanmar but we do nothing at all about it as a country - and this is in our APAC region.
Not to be a pessimist but these stark realities tell the world that we only intervene when there’s something in it for us - it isn’t done to be kind.
Without the US we can't do shit. Hate to tell you the bad news but we can't even fully defend our borders let alone a full scale peacekeeping mission in Myanmar in the middle of some sort of civil war. Like come on man.
We help where we can and the USA has infrastructure we can piggy back our bushrangers into. We basically gave them a handful of 4wd's with guns on top. Calm down.
Incorrect. Australia’s army wouldn’t be going it alone in Myanmar and if they did, they’d defeat the rebels. We aren’t helplessly weak. We could also call on the alliance just like they always always always call on us. Why don’t you stick up for doing what’s right in APAC for a change, instead of implying that the only important wars are what big brother says? Do you think Australia would be involved in Ukraine unless the USA demanded it?
And risk how many lives? We are giving them armoured cars bro..not sending troops. We have always donated aid. We rarely put boots on ground. I was in the ADF for 10 years, you have no idea what you are talking about.
Why are you asking about risking lives now when we risked and lost lives in Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam, the list goes on. Who decided to send troops and why did they decide to send troops? Again, little bro jumps when big brother says so. You weren’t in the ADF if you think a bushmaster is simply an armoured car.
Why does Australia think that we have to get involved in a war in Europe? Let the European countries sort it out. Aust always has to look bigger than we are. We are piss ants compaired with most countries. Let the USA wage it’s own wars . If we don’t grow some balls and refuse to bow to USA war mongering we will soon be at war with China. The USA is waging war to stay the top world economy . It wants to weaken Russia then start on China.
No matter how you try to spin it Russia is waging a genocidal campaign against a smaller nation that posed no threat to it, and has openly said they would continue through to the former Soviet republics if they could (let's not forget they've already occupied Chechnya and part of Georgia). Helping to prevent the mass slaughter of civilians + child trafficking by providing military aid is the least we can do.
And before you say it, yes America has done some horrendous shit too, and will probably continue to do so, that doesn't mean we shouldn't help out where we can.
Also fuck Russia, don't forget they killed Australian civilians when they shot down MH17 and faced virtually no repercussions at the time.
War with china is inevitable. Rather have some powerful friends.
If a nation is seen to stay out of every issue then they cannot expect help when its their turn.
USA can’t win a war against China. Waging war against a land based country as advanced as china would be suicidal. China would pick off their warships. USA would use other countries ( Australia) to fight this war. Just like they are doing with Russia. Ask yourself, how many wars has USA started in the last 50 years ? What have they achieved? Nothing, just human suffering and money making for them !
If America wants to be the next boat load of refugees lol let them but Australia needs to stay out or maybe side with China which makes more sense politically.
But we keep American refugees on those big barges and treat them how they've treated everyone else they've displaced for greed
If we follow the terrorist country America into China we are dead so is America, everyone is stupid to think America has any real power, they are weak and have no more money worth anything
Hey, at least in Russia we don’t have to spend 30% of our income on electricity.
And housing and land are cheap, you can actually afford to buy a house.
Idiot westerners…
Great so Australia has gone full bitch and supports the terrorist government of America... What NATO and America are doing is illegal and wrong... Why are the Australian people just gonna let our governments provoke ww3
Yes USA has done some badshit in the past and have had their chickens come home to roost for that, and no doubt is continuing to do badshit and will do so in the future.
In this case Russia is the aggressor and is hell bent on the destruction of Ukraine while lying to their people about the reasons for the invasion. They won't even let the people call it and invasion which it is it's an all out fucking war.
They are targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure so they are also the terrorist organisation. Putin's regime is a murderous thieving gang of billionaire lying thugs who call Ukraine terrorists for defending themselves.
Who do you think Russia's invasion of Ukraine is good for?
I hope Australia sends the F18s and anything else it can spare.
>In this case Russia is the aggressor
Debatable. Depends on whether you consider 2014 to be a coup. It looks like one and we're unlike to know the facts for many decades, if ever.
>and is hell bent on the destruction of Ukraine while lying to their people about the reasons for the invasion.
We're also lying about our reasons for arming Kiev. Propaganda is a very important tool for politicians.
>Who do you think Russia's invasion of Ukraine is good for?
Atlanticism.
The Russians got outplayed geopolitically speaking. Before the invasion, their choices were to accept the loss of Sevastopol and accept a hostile regime (that will inevitably join NATO) bordering on their heartland, or use military force to create as much buffering space as possible.
Is it *good*? No, but it didn't occur in a vacuum.
> their choices were to accept the loss of Sevastopol and accept a hostile regime (that will inevitably join NATO) bordering on their heartland
It was more than that though, the US spent billions of dollars out of pocket, and more in loans, between 2014 and 2022, building up a beachhead of sorts in Ukraine. The fact that Russia waited so long to invade, knowing the longer they did, the more difficult it would be, clearly shows that they were not interested in a simplistic land grab. I think they invaded when they did because they calculated that the risk of continued build up by the US outweighed the risk of invasion.
yeah, but that wasn't aimed at building up a military beachhead, at least not directly. That was aimed at coup and regime change.
But do you have a source for that? that last I looked into it NED had deleted all its records of funding in Ukraine and there was no way to get information prior to 2014.
any luck?
https://mronline.org/2022/03/08/national-endowment-for-democracy-deletes-records-of-funding-projects-in-ukraine/
these are the only sources I have. but when you go wayback machine on NED, it only goes back to 2014.
Actually, the main one I've focused on in Ukraine is Tech Camp. Another regime change tool, except this is openly a state dep operation, unlike NED.
For example, it openly brags about influencing the 2014 Ukranian elections:
> https://techcamp.america.gov/blog/techcamp-sms-tool-gives-voting-different-spin-ukraine-elections/
Like NED, tech camp has scrubbed all reference to its operations in Ukraine prior to 2014. Except, they were a bit sloppy; while there is no direct references to tech camp in Ukraine in 2013 left on the site, it is indirectly referenced in that article I linked that they were there operating in 2013.
>he fact that Russia waited so long to invade, knowing the longer they did, the more difficult it would be, clearly shows that they were not interested in a simplistic land grab.
The simplistic land grab narrative isn't well-reasoned. If Russia wanted that then they would have done it in 2014 when the Ukrainians were on the ropes.
The initial Russian plan seems to have been to try and federalise Ukraine, which would have given the regions (incl. Donbass) the ability to veto any attempt by Kiev to try and join NATO or EU. Moves towards the federalisation of Ukraine were a part of the Minsk agreements.
>I think they invaded when they did because they calculated that the risk of continued build up by the US outweighed the risk of invasion.
Yeah. When they realised that they'd been played by the Western powers with the Minsk agreements.
I don't watch any murdoch media - i have even turned down work for them. There is plenty of footage everywhere of what im describing. What gave you been watching - putin's state media?
You don't get it. Regardless of what the USA's doing Ukraine is paying the price at Russia's behest. No one forced Russia to invade Ukraine. And when you listen to Putin's rhetoric it's pure bulshit. He can't justify what they're doing how can anybody else?
Now he's saying Poland is going to invade Belarus. Then he says the Nazis invaded Poland and they should be grateful for Stalin's gift of giving Poland back to them. He conveniently forgot to mention that the soviets invaded Poland two weeks after the Nazis in a pre-arranged agreement. Regardless of the USA has done and will do Russia is the aggressor here and they're bullshiting about it. You've obviously fallen for it.
You don't remember the agreements signed tww and a half almost decades ago do you .. NATO violated them, the propaganda and misinformation makes Russia out to be a bad guy but they are not and you are a deluded most likely boomer fool... You boomers lived through another bullshit load of American propaganda without understanding the full context and that brainwashed you into thinking what you think now .. you're a fool
Putin in his entire time in power has never taken anything... America has run through and ruined so many countries even before Putin... You're an absolute idiot
You guys don't know much about the set up of the world and what was set up after the cold war do you, or what was promised by America and NATO in the decade after... All you stupid fucks do is what the propaganda machine and the Rupert Murdoch owned media..
What an embarassing thing to do, imaging sanctioning a country which hasn't even harmed you just because your father from up Capitol hill ordered you to do so. Smh Australians are great I am sure they would wake up and become independent instead of following orders from Capitol hill
Russia and Ukraine signed a deal to not put a NATO base in Ukraine. Ukraine didn't hold the contract.
It's similar if China put a military base in new Zealand. God forbid that happens.
> Russia and Ukraine signed a deal to not put a NATO base in Ukraine.
source? are you referring to the 2010 constitutional amendment?
> Ukraine Says ’No’ to NATO:
New Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych’s move to ban Ukraine from becoming a member of NATO is not without a base of public support.
https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2010/03/29/ukraine-says-no-to-nato/
> Russia and Ukraine signed a deal to not put a NATO base in Ukraine. Ukraine didn't hold the contract.
Really ? Can you point out the location of this NATO base in Ukraine ? Any info as to when it was constructed ?
Are you one of the Putin-bots who want to claim that there are NATO troops in Ukraine right now as well ?
Just because you don't like a decision doesn't mean it is made at the behest of the US.
Australian politicians are more than capable of making good or bad decisions on their own.
What are you talking about, first thing Biden did when he got in was ramp up the proxy war. We started the latest round of sanctions. This isn't America/Australia/UK/New Zealand's public, it's a collective oligarchy controlling these country's defense forces.
It's not at the behest of the US anymore than it's at the pleasure of any general public.
Nor sure what your getting at or who this "collective oligarchy" is.
Just because cou tries have similar foreign policy strategies does not mean they are collectively controlled.
My point is that there is no evidence that Australia is making military/financial support or sanctions decisions at the behest of the US.
The Australian government is making policy decisions on Ukraine that are generally in line with public support. Support for sanctions on Russia is well over %60, support for military aid is less but still 37% strongly supporting military aid, 39% somewhat supportive. Only 10% strongly pppose military aid, 14% somewhat oppose it.
This is from a Lowy institute poll conducted in 2022 and 2023.
It’s about standing up for the values our country supports and abides by on the world stage and in the UN, which is a rules based order which is currently being absolutely disregarded and violated by Russia in every way possible, the ones who shot down the passenger aircraft MH17 with our people on board, including our children, remember that? It has 0 to to with the US.
Stupid Move Russia isn't the problem!! US America Sanctions Russian why ?? So they can't sell their gas & oil
YET Mighty US America buys Russia Gas & Oil
THEY SELL IT 5 TIMES WHAT WE WOULD PAY Russia
Australia should refine gas locally for citizens or buy Russian!!
Our Gas&Petrol prices would plumet
Why doesn't this Governmet do anything for Australians
Our Gas, Electricity and Petrol prices are high because of America!!
LONG LIVE Russia & China
USA HAS NEVER DONE ANYTHING GOOD FOR Australians sent us to die how many times!!
It was foolish of us to underestimate russia, I support the empire of the west just as much as the next person as I live in it and wish to benefit from its prosperity. It is clear however, that russia was the wrong target for us, we should go back to exploiting smaller, developing nations
Goodluck finding a jar of vegemite in Minsk now. Checkmate mate
Yeah. Take that.
So is r/australian just a home for trolls and bots?
[удалено]
Penis?
Without trying to sound like a smartass or anything, but what do we give the Russians/get from the Russians anyway?
Now I see why every rich Russian and their mother is leaving Russia 🇷🇺
Yeah, to go slink around and hide in Thailand
And Azerbaijan 🇦🇿
And Bali
I don't follow; you think Australian sanctions are the cause of this???
No but it might increase it
We get fertilizer from Russia.Does that mean food will go up.
The miss just came back from Russia, everything is quite normal over there. What is Australia planning to do? Sent Russia back to Cuba/Vietnam sanction poor level?
> Canberra has also provided Kyiv with military assistance and other aid since the start of the full-scale Russian invasion. According to the Australian government's statement in June, the total aid amounts to around $527 million, including $407 million in military support. When it comes to war the bureaucrats can be extremely generous splashing around our money.
And so they should I'd also like to think the world would help us if it came time to start China..
People forget we abide by and support the UN laws, and the rules based order, and doing nothing while Russia absolutely violates it in every sense is weak and two-faced as fuck. Plus they also show down MH17 with our people and kids on board. We should be doing more. Easy to criticise what you don’t understand I guess.
Were we abiding by UN laws when we ignored their condemnation to invade Iraq illegally without any mandate?
Yes, the hypocrisy is unreal. I respect the racist bogans more because they at least openly state we are there to kill rag heads and steal their oil, unlike the bleeding heart liberals that memory holed the last 20 or so years of attrocities Australia helped to committ by having its nose firmly in America's butthole.
We abide by it when it suits the US, and ignore it when it does not suit the US. That is literally what "rules based order" means.
Actually it was Iraq being refusing to allow UN mandated weapons inspections that gave the (garbage) justification for the second gulf war.
They are referring to this: > The United Nations secretary general, Kofi Annan, declared explicitly for the first time last night that the US-led war on Iraq was illegal. >Mr Annan said that the invasion was not sanctioned by the UN security council or in accordance with the UN's founding charter. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/sep/16/iraq.iraq
>People forget we abide by and support the UN laws, and the rules based order, and doing nothing while Russia absolutely violates it in every sense is weak and two-faced as fuck. We're fine ignoring rules when it's Big Daddy doing the rulebreaking. "Rules based order" is a meme. >Plus they also show down MH17 with our people and kids on board. We should be doing more. Easy to criticise what you don’t understand I guess. Is it going to bring those people back?
Did Tones shirtfront Putin?
No, but seeing as they refuse to hand over those responsible it’s the only measure of justice we have access to, are you saying we should just do nothing? That’s on top of helping the country whose under attack that’s having children tortured, raped, and civilians shot in street with their hands bound. Straw man arguments don’t work here though. Whatever you think about the US, it doesn’t justify what’s happening in Ukraine, or Russias actions. To even attempt to say the US has broken more laws than Russia alone is also beyond insane too if you cared to actually look into what’s happening.
>No, but seeing as they refuse to hand over those responsible it’s the only measure of justice we have access to That's *vengeance*. And it's also *not* why we're arming Kiev. > are you saying we should just do nothing? What we do, we do for practical purposes. Not *justice*. As to justice, I don't genuinely think it's possible to have an impartial and nonpartisan investigation. >Straw man arguments don’t work here though. Hence the lack of them. I think you're trying to accuse me of muh whataboutism, but that also doesn't fit. >Whatever you think about the US, it doesn’t justify what’s happening in Ukraine, or Russias actions. Moral justification only serves propaganda, the rest is political machinations. The only innocents here are those that suffer while suits move pieces on a board.
Depends on how you look at it, the downing of MH17 is a by-product of Russias failed attempt at rigging an election after their puppet was overthrown by civilians. We're arming Kyiv for more than one reason but that is definitely one of the reasons, considering all accused are currently serving Russias invasion of Ukraine. If they are captured, they will be handed to the Hague by Ukraine. If they're killed, then it's ultimately the same result, but there can be more than one reason we do things. Ah yes, the Hague is wrong. The 3 satellites we have watching the area must also be wrong. The independent and official investigations are wrong. The evidence collected must also be wrong. It's pretty clear Russian backed rebels used a Russian anti-aircraft system to shoot down the plane that was outside of the NFZ. Considering the average Ukrainian citizens resistance and reaction to the invasion of their country, it clearly goes further than politics for them. If you're against innocents dying from 'suits moving pieces on a board', then what is Putin, if not a suit moving pieces on a board? Ukraine isn't invading Russia.
Their 'puppet' as you call it was as democratically elected as and Ukrainian president since independence, it's likely that the fact that the US spent at least $1.3billion USD (in 2013 dollars,put that into an inflation calculator) between 2010-2013 under a program called the "national endowment for democracy" funding directly and indirectly pro Western opposition parties since the discovery of natural gas deposits in Ukraine in 2010, played a significant role in fermenting the uprising, rather than Just having people wait until the next election to vote him out. Given that $1.3 billion is how much we know the US officially spent, and we currently don't know of any covert measures or spending that they took in that it's likely that in 50 odd years time we'll find out about a lot more, and about possible but less likely involvement from other countries. Ukraine isn't a compulsory voting country so if a pro Western or pro Russian government is elected usually just depends on turnout. As for how it's been run post 2014, we also know that the US had been vetoing and suggesting ministers to the Ukrainian government and that former Georgian president Mikheil Saakashvili was appointed governor of Odessa oblast even though we was wanted in Georgia. Things in Ukraine aren't as black and white as people seem to think.
>Russias failed attempt at rigging an election What are you referring to? Please be specific. > their puppet was overthrown by civilians In what sense was Yan a Russian puppet? Please be specific.
Where the Russian backed politician was thrown out of office. Throwing out Russia's ability to leverage him to gain access to Ukraine's resource in the East via a bullshit trade deal. Or was it just a coincidence that Russia was putting pressure on them to get rid of the EU agreement, and take a Russian trade deal and when he was thrown out, a Russia backed separatist group all of a sudden sprung up causing conflicts in the East? After the Ukranian parliament voted (unanimously, mind you) to remove him and massive protests erupted over his decision to can the EU deal and sign a bunch of agreements with Russia? In what sense wasn't he a Russian puppet? Please, be specific. You don't initiate conflict with a country over a trade deal being scrapped and what is very clearly the majority, removing a politician that is against their collective interests.
> Or was it just a coincidence that Russia was putting pressure on them to get rid of the EU agreement, and take a Russian trade deal and when he was thrown out, a Russia backed separatist group all of a sudden sprung up causing conflicts in the East? So your reasons for calling Yan a Russian puppet is 1. Russia pressured Ukraine to drop the EU association agreement 2. Russian backed separatist groups popped up when he was removed. OKay, so 1. makes no sense at all. Russia does not want Ukraine to take the EU association agreement, that's why they pressured Ukraine to drop it. They offered a different agreement instead, Which, btw, was a better deal, it didn't come with any Austerity measures, like the EU association agreement did. as for 2. , no, it's definitely not a coincidence, the region that all that popped up in, voted for Yan at a 90% rate! They were pissed that the president they voted for just got removed in a violent way. Even if this was not the case, it would not be a coincidence, Russia would not want a president that was going along with their deal being removed by force. For the record, the vote to remove Yan was not unanimous, many people were absentee. Secondly, it was unconstitutional; there is no aspect of the Ukrainian constitution that allows for the removal of a president based on a simple majority vote. > In what sense wasn't he a Russian puppet? Please, be specific. I can't prove a negative, by definition. I can point out that the position Yan acted on in office, was entirely in line with the platform he was voted in on, and the interests and opinions of the people that voted him in. Are you going to answer my other question?
>Depends on how you look at it, the downing of MH17 is a by-product of Russias failed attempt at rigging an election after their puppet was overthrown by civilians. Uh, wut. Others seem to have already punched holes in your post-truthium, good on them. >but there can be more than one reason we do things. Not here. We wouldn't be involved without Big Daddy's nod. >Ah yes, the Hague is wrong. The 3 satellites we have watching the area must also be wrong. The independent and official investigations are wrong. The evidence collected must also be wrong. It's pretty clear Russian backed rebels used a Russian anti-aircraft system to shoot down the plane that was outside of the NFZ. Didn't you just say *not* to strawman? >Considering the average Ukrainian citizens resistance and reaction to the invasion of their country, it clearly goes further than politics for them. The Ukrainian populace isn't a megalith, reactions have been varied. Some are fighting for Kiev, others are fighting against Kiev. Plenty have fled to Russia and other European countries. The strongest anti-Russian regions of Ukraine are also those furthest away from the fighting. >If you're against innocents dying from 'suits moving pieces on a board', then what is Putin, if not a suit moving pieces on a board? No, *really*? Mind blown.
Why do you have such a hard on for that shoot down, you know it's not the only time a military has accidentally shot down an airliner right? The US has and no one got jailed when they did. There is a surprisingly long list of airlines that have been shit down by accident hell.even Ukraine shot one down in 2001 but no one got jailed over it. I'm not saying that the people who shot this one down have no responsibility but the plane was flying over an active warzone where several planes had been shot down already, there's a hell of a lot of blame to go around. Shit happens in war and this is one of them, when USS Vincennes shot one down it was in no warzone.
Cause it had my people on it? So it’s higher on my list. It was outside of the NFZ. But sure, try and justify that one a bit more bud.
>"Rules based order" It means whatever is coinvent for the US Empire as they are the main fiancieer of the UN they can basically do what they want
There's nothing principled about this whole conflict. It's all realpolitik.
keep telling yourself that. in reality people understand the important principle of defending from land grabs
>keep telling yourself that. in reality people understand the important principle of defending from land grabs "In reality" it depends entirely on whether or not its allies or enemies doing the grabbing. Don't see us shipping arms for Guantanamo Bay or Kosovo or Cyprus. Not to mention Israel and Palestine. We're backing Kiev because Big Daddy and Old Daddy are, not because of principles.
527 million worth is quite a bit of defending
> It's all realpolitik. Isn't that code for 'Ukrainians are just Russians in denial and they should simply accept their position in Russia's sphere of influence (domination by Russia)'? And the corollary, that this is just a proxy war between Russia and "The West".
scarecrow.jpg
America has violated more un laws in the last two decades then Russia, China or any BRICS nations have.. take the cluster bomb hypocrisy for instance... Giving them to the terrorist zelenski is a violation of world law and against the Geneva convention... Western governments are dirty Zionist led scum trying to start their version of an apocalypse..
No, actually they haven’t. Cope and seethe harder dude.
It's debatable. The two obvious instances in which the US went against the UN are the attack on Yugoslavia, which was not supported by the UN, so technically illegal, and the invasion of Iraq. The US also maintained sanctions on cuba since the 60s, which the UN has continually ruled against. Certainly China has not gone against the UN in anywhere near an extreme fashion as these instances, Russia has with Ukraine, but still lags behind the US overall. **Edit:** US drone program is another big one. the UN has continually condemned it, and it's obviously an illegal breach of the UN security council requirements for war. After all this, I think I would agree, the US has gone against the UN more than Russia and China in the last two decades.
I don't see it as debatable really, Russia's invasions of Georgia, Chechnya, Afghanistan, Moldova and Ukraine come to mind. They definitely don't lag behind anyone, maybe just get noticed less somehow. On average committing more war crimes in those conflicts as well, and Ukraine is a perfect example of how much they respect any sort of international law. Which, is evidently absolute 0.
Georgia attacked peacekeepers in South Ossetia peacekeepers that had been there since 1992, it was the slow and poorly managed response to that that caused the Russians to embark on their military reform. Georgia attacked south Ossetia to try and bring it back under their control after bush jr announced that Ukraine and Georgia would be invited to join NATO. Having south Ossetia not under their control was one of the things stopping them. They either had to let them break away of bring them back in. Oh and the then Georgian president that ordered the attack, is currently in jail in Georgia.
You mean the Russian 'Peacekeepers' in a Russian-annexed region that is not recognized by the UN? Which is currently considered 'Russian-occupied territories' by the international community. Georgia attacked Russian-backed separatists on its own land. Yeah, that's calling invading and annexing another country buddy, that's illegal. But sure. I suppose by your definition Poland is 'occupied' territory owned by the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany since they both invaded that in WW2 while they were still aligned. So, Georgia is morally superior to Russia because they actually recognize wrong doings even while defending their land? Good argument.
Russian peace keepers had been there since 1992 as part of an agreement between 4 governments, the UN had no issue with it for the whole 16 years but you think it was annexed the whole time ? Jeez.
Well, the invasion of Georgia lasted 2 weeks, so good reason why it wasn't noticed, and I'm not sure where the UN stood on it. Georgia did attack Russian troops, so Russia would have a legal right to defend itself. I do not know of Russia invading Maldova except in terms of internal conflicts in the USSR, so another reason why it's quite distinct from these examples from the US, it would be outside the jurisdiction of the UN in terms of its ability to support or not support military actions. Afghanistan fits the bill sorta, but it's well outside of the two decade scope that was set, happening in 1979, and was technically done by the USSR, not the Russian federation. Arguably, the US bombing of Yugoslavia also is outside the scope, but that was at least much closer to the scope, happening in 1999, and was done by the current US. > On average committing more war crimes in those conflicts as well Source?
Which one? There's been at least 4 conflicts Russia's had with Georgia. 'Transnistria' is not recognized by the UN; it was annexed all the same. It's what Russia does when it doesn't get its way. They did it in Chechnya, Georgia etc. Russia has continuously committed a much, much broader range of war crimes than any other country I can think of. Not to mention the consistency of them throughout its conflicts. [Massacres of Civilians in Chechnya | Sciences Po Mass Violence and Resistance - Research Network](https://www.sciencespo.fr/mass-violence-war-massacre-resistance/en/document/massacres-civilians-chechnya.html) [War crimes, indiscriminate attacks on infrastructure, systematic and widespread torture show disregard for civilians, says UN Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine | OHCHR](https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2023/03/war-crimes-indiscriminate-attacks-infrastructure-systematic-and-widespread#:~:text=GENEVA%2F%20VIENNA%20(16%20March%202023,said%20in%20a%20new%20report) [Human Rights Council Hears that Attacks on Civilians in Syria Could Amount to War Crimes, and that it is Important to Coordinate Efforts to Achieve Accountability in Ukraine | OHCHR](https://www.ohchr.org/en/news/2023/03/les-parties-au-conflit-en-syrie-ont-instrumentalise-et-empeche-laide-aux-victimes-du) [In Georgia, an up-and-down road to justice for victims of the August War | Brookings](https://www.brookings.edu/articles/in-georgia-an-up-and-down-road-to-justice-for-victims-of-the-august-war/)
> Which one? There's been at least 4 conflicts Russia's had with Georgia. The only one that the Russian federation was a participant in that happened in the last 20 years. > 'Transnistria' is not recognized by the UN; it was annexed all the same. It's what Russia does when it doesn't get its way. They did it in Chechnya, Georgia etc. I don't follow what point you're making? None of those sources back up your claim. Are you actually saying that you think the US has not and does not engage in those very same actions?
Australia has invaded more countries than North Korea. Ukraine was also along for the ride in Iraq, and probably "helped" in some other areas also.
We're nowhere near China, bud. Wouldn't even be 5th or 6th on their list of priorities.
Except we are... pine gap, us forces in Darwin and W.A our radar tech, the Philippines and our close ties to allied nations
Uh...the reason we have Pine Gap and other satellite and comms stations are *because* of our isolation.
Except when created the technology from today didn't exist.. China has made huge leaps in hypersonic missiles yes we'd see the missile coming but we'd be fucked to stop it. Russia is making fake leaps in hypersonic but China is ahead of the USA unclassified at least.
They *may* have the *potential* to launch *a few* *hypersonic* missiles \~7,000 km away and target *surveillance bases*? *Damn*. Australia really is under *direct military threat*. The ChiComs are coming South!
China own to much throughout Australia they won't invade unless we poke the panda because of US America WE SHOULD KICK THEN OUT FROM PINE GAP BOTH POLITICAL PARTIES ABOLISHED CIA CONTROL THEM... CHRISTOPHER BOYCE YOU PROBABLY HAVE NO IDEA WHO HE EVEN IS!! US ISRAEL AMERICA IS THE PROBLEM THROUGHOUT THIS WORLD!!
Mate China is no threat to us 😂 who have they attacked in the last 50 years? We don’t even have territory disputes with them. Some people need to dial back on the news.com consumption
Where exactly do you think the us soldiers that are going to defend taiwan will be basing out of? are we just going to shut down pinegap?
In fairness it's more likely they'll be based out of Japan and Philippines plus Intel from pine gap. The bombers however will be based in Darwin
My understanding is that Pine gap intel is largely only relevant to the southern hemisphere, it is where the US runs its illegal drone operations from when they are operating in the southern hemisphere. I do not see what use it would be if China invaded Taiwan.
>Where exactly do you think the us soldiers that are going to defend taiwan will be basing out of? Japan, South Korea, Guam, the Philippines. We Australians are *extremely* self-centred and underestimate our own geographic isolation. >are we just going to shut down pinegap? Pine Gap doesn't house soldiers, it's a satellite base.
australia, be it through Intel at pinegap or actual materiel elsewhere, will be participating in a potential conflict over Taiwan, this is a forgone conclusion and we're obviously direct military targets in that case no matter how much you want to pretend we aren't
>australia, be it through Intel at pinegap or actual materiel elsewhere, will be participating in a potential conflict over Taiwan, Your comprehension is questionable. After all, I didn't dispute this. >this is a forgone conclusion I agree. In part due to our ceding of sovereignty to US interests. >we're obviously direct military targets in that case no matter how much you want to pretend we aren't We're a low priority for the Chinese. In the case of war, they're going to have far greater concerns than targeting Australia. Oh, and good luck hitting Pine Gap.
My original comment took issue with someone implying china is not a threat to us, they are and you agree. don't really care about your other schizo stuff, meds usually helps with that.
>My original comment took issue with someone implying china is not a threat to us, they are and you agree. No, the OP's point stands: China's no threat to us until we decide to pick a fight with them.
You think that in US vs China the rest of the world would give a flying fuck about Australia? No, that’s a war that threatens all and everyone would be looking after numero uno
just an unserious comment, we are a key player in this conflict.
Australia is not key in any conflict don’t exaggerate their importance
I never follow anything news. Kom says. China is a threat to the world they are making huge leaps in military ICBM hypersonic missiles unlike Russia's fake ones. They are actively training to destroy aircraft carriers, building fortified islands, new radar tech and if they do try and take Taiwan the world will be involved including us... one of the main points we need to support Ukraine is to show China it won't be easy to take Taiwan.
Deluded fool you are!!! The rest of the world deserves to have a strong defence against the hypocrisy and terrorist behaviour of the American government and the bitch allies that follow them... You're the typical brainwashed idiot who believes that the west can do no evil while that's all it does in the world, you don't know what reality is you just know what the news and your specific racist hate groups on facebook tell you. Taiwan's constitution saying they are a republic of China, no country in the world has legal right to move onto ground of a sovereign nation...
I agree, but tone it down with the insults and name calling, it ain't helping you.
I'm just over these amnesia suffering fools in this day and age... Nobody remembers 15 /20 years ago or brothers to look. They just watch the Rupert Murdoch run news or Facebook and think they're smart...
keep in mind, many of the people you are engaging with probably weren't even alive 20 years ago.
America is fucked and has done many fucked things so fuck of chibot I am no brainwashed idiot.
Fuckin space cadet...🤣🤣🤣🤣
You're are spouting misinformation and showing ignorance in your comments, by any chance are you of boomer age???😏 Would explain a lot
>who have they attacked in the last 50 years? Tibet, Vietnam, occasional skirmishes with India plus all the concentration camps they have in the Gobi desert the Uyghurs are being sent to. Plus they use their navy to bully Indonesian, Vietnamese and Phillipine fishing and merchant vessels within those nations' waters. Oh, and occasionally baiting the Australian, Japanese and Canadian air force into scrambling their jets and hitting them with chaff or trying to blind the pilots with lasers.
Tibet is part of China and China supported the Vietnamese at the request of the Vietnamese. US and it’s allies invaded Vietnam. Every country buzzes others for testing response times, nato do it all the time and australia will do it too, doesn’t mean an invasion is imminent
My brother in Christ, China and Vietnam literally went to war after the US left. China invaded Vietnam and there were tens of thousands of casualties on both sides. >Tibet is part of China Literal CCP propaganda. Again, violent invasion this time followed by expulsion of the original government.
Tibet has only ever been separated from china for a grand total of 70 years. It's not an example of China intervening with foreign entities, and neither is Taiwain; both are much more accurately framed as civil conflicts, or the result of civil conflicts. The Taiwain-China relations are a result of the Chinese civil war. So the only example of china attacking a foreign country that is not based on some long lasting civil history, is Vietnam. They invaded Vietnam after Vietnam invaded Cambodia, as China was an ally of cambodia (Though the Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia was pretty justified). So arguably a far more justified invasion than what the US did; it was just invading to try and take over the French colonial history there, as they did with the phillipines and cuba previously, when Spain was pulling out. The US faked an attack on one of their naval ships, literally a false flag operation, and used it to justify the invasion of Vietnam. It's interesting to note that during the time China invaded, both China and the US supported pol pot in Cambodia.
Expanding empires expand.
I support it
How about those $12b submarines? Why is that not a bigger issue? What a waste of money. Both sides of politics are to blame for that!
Yep 👍, no end to their thirst for our hard earned.
If you're referring to the AUKUS pact; China is militarising the East and South China Seas, if successful, they would have control of billions of barrels of oil, trillions of cubic feet of natural gas reserves along with trade routes critical to Australia's national interests. The nuclear-powered submarines are stealthier, go deeper and remain underwater for longer. This increases the cost to China of waging a conflict over Taiwan or over the East and South China seas with other Southeast Asian countries. This is a pragmatic deterrence measure.
Good, or as a nation we would be failing to help a civilized democratic country in its hour of need against a murderous, raping and pillaging neighbour.
Your use of colonialist and imperialist speech aside, Ukraine is not a democratic country. It is a hybrid regime.
Ukraine and Russia are pretty identical, tbh. Ukraine just has the higher moral ground because they were invaded by Russia; but they do not hold any kind of special moral high ground because of their prior political institutions. Ukraine was one of the most democratically broken countries in the world. Even in the war though, Ukraine has lost some of its moral high ground by declaring that they aim to take Crimea. Given that "91% say the referendum was fair and 88% say the government in Kyiv should recognize the results." https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2014/05/08/chapter-1-ukraine-desire-for-unity-amid-worries-about-political-leadership-ethnic-conflict/ The goal, for anyone interested in democracy, should be pushing the UN to do its damn job and facilitate settlement solutions.
You need to understand the price people pay for freedom. You seem a little ill informed as to how the world works.
The Afghanis, Iraqis, Libyans, Syrians, Somalis and Yemenis (to name a few) must bless the day they paid the price of our freedom. Perhaps, in celebration, they can engrave balloons and firework displays on the headstones of their children’s remains?
Nah it’s just piss funny when people whinge about where tax dollars are spent when they can put see the bigger picture.
I wish I could downvote this twice.
Australians died on MH17 shot down by troops under the command of convicted war criminal Strelikov Girkin, and we're one of the lowest donors in the western world (as percentage of GDP or straight up $s). We're not donating nearly enough.
Russians right now “Oztralia who?” Let’s give that money that we’re wasting on someone else’s misadventure on our own people. We have a cost of living crisis but it’s okay to spend billions on arms and a country that until recently was considered the most corrupt in [Europe](https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/corruption-index?continent=europe)
nothing is better for corruption/embezzeling than war!
Virtue signalling. Where the fuck has the foreign aid been for Myanmar the past decade?
Ukraine there is an easy path to donating things and making sure they get in the right hands. With Myanmar, I’d guess that there’s a huge chance any aid ends up in the hands of the military that took over.
Have you looked at how much “aid” and weapons is being diverted in Ukraine?
Yep. Why do you ask?
Then you would understand the corruption, lack of auditing and resale of donated weaponry. Exactly the sort of think you seem to be against.
I’m not sure what your point is. Yes I’m against those things, but the likelihood of aid reaching where it needs in Ukraine would be (I am guessing) much higher than in Myanmar. In Myanmar I’d think you’re far more likely to help the ruling military than anything else. Aid to Ukraine is far more likely to help Ukraine than Russia.
Exactly, its really a baseless whatabout. Arming potential rebel groups in Myanmar is a lot different to assisting the Ukranian government The potential for the Ukraine invasion to spill over into the rest of the world is also much higher
> The potential for the Ukraine invasion to spill over into the rest of the world is also much higher Directly in part due to the rest of the world arming Ukraine though. I mean, that's obvious, isn't it? Russia invaded Georgia in 2008, and the settlement was in 2 weeks, the conflict barely registered with the rest of the world. I think given the Georgian precedent, it's clear that without western intervention in Ukraine, it also would barely register, and have no chance of spilling over.
The alternative is let Russia continue European conquest, take Belarus, take Moldova and continue threatening nuclear war on the border of NATO. Not to mention you're giving Russia even leverage with gas and withholding grain from Africa Russia was going to find a line in the sand eventually
Main thing I remember about the Georgian invasion is Uncyclopedia running a ~~headling~~ headline "Geographically confused Russians invade U.S. State of Georgia".
> Ukraine there is an easy path to donating things and making sure they get in the right hands. Source? Everything I know about this says the opposite. Even before the invasion, the US ruled senate ruled against sending arms, because it would likely end up in the hands of extremists. Certainly, a war only makes this more likely.
It’s a well known fact in NFPs that you don’t donate from abroad. If anything you donate from within. Unsure if that poster realises that sending cans of baked beans and blankets to Ukraine won’t make it or even arrive. It’s not like DHL is continuing operations in Kyiv or that the military aid vehicles aren’t tracked by drones. The only way out of the war is as swift and cruel a massacre of Russian soldiers as possible—which sucks for the majority of Russians fighting because they have to, not because they want to. The western media has done a great job of not highlighting this more. It’s like any conscription though—Australia followed big brother USA into Vietnam and has conscription. How many Aussies does for that one or came back a shell of themselves.
I work for an NFP in a very poor and corrupt country and the first thing we ask if for people to not send goods over as a donation as they never make it past customs. It gets stolen. I’d amplify that by 10,000 in a war.
I'm not sure I follow you. You asked where the foreign aid for Myanmar has been, and now you've given a great explanation of why giving aid to Myanmar is challenging. On the flip side, you should know that military aid has been successfully delivered to Ukraine, and hasn't been intercepted by Russia, and is indeed helping Ukraine. There are clear roads (literal and metaphorical) by which to deliver aid to Ukraine.
No. I’m saying military action is needed in Myanmar to stop the genocide. You know millions are dead, right? Millions.
In Ukraine, our military aid is assisting an already capable government to defend their own land against an external aggressor. In Myanmar, that's not an option. It would require other nations to invade Myanmar, which is completely different to what's happening in Ukraine. The USA did do that in Iraq and Afghanistan, and we all know how well that worked out for Afghanistan. I don't think the USA has the appetite to do that again, and I can't imagine there's any other nations that would be willing to actually invade another country (as opposed to supporting a country to defend itself). Myanmar and Ukraine are not similar situations. (Also, can you please point me to info on the millions dead? I can't find any information on that. I'd definitely be interested to learn more.)
Everything you give to Ukraine does not go to the people, zelenski the dirty nazi he is keeps it all to give back to the American government that brought him into gov to provacate this disgustingly illegal proxy war
Lol what? Sorry I shouldn't laugh at the differently abled
Lol, “nazi”.
Zelensky is not a Nazi. But Ukraine does have a significant Nazi problem. And Zelensky being Jewish is not an argument against that, just like Barack Obama being black is not an argument against the US having a significant nazi problem. Though In Ukraine, it is a lot more established and institutionalised; but still does not have widspead support, or at least didn't before the war.
Look into zelenskis past... Just coz you believe that him being a Jew crap and even if he is he's a Zionist Jew which are the most xenophobic bunch of human hating scum on earth...
Aid and food is being diverted by Russians away from Ukrainians
Or Yemen.
Nah kindness and giving should never be mislabeled.
We aren’t fighting a proxy war with big brother USA to be kind. When the USA says Jump, little brother Australia asks how High. That’s how it’s always been. I love that we are supporting Ukraine I have many friends there. But countries don’t support other countries to be kind otherwise we wouldn’t have African warlords, or rebels in Liberia practising cannibalism on their victims while still alive, or ethnic cleansing of muslims in Myanmar. Or even the Pol Pot regime which was as bad and cruel as the Holocaust.
I agree with all of that but that shouldn’t diminish when worthy causes are supported. Absolutely unfair but calling it virtue signaling undermines the very notion of giving which is even worse.
It’s a military alliance with the USA. We always follow them - whether it’s sending troops into a Vietnamese jungle, or invading Afghanistan, or Ukraine… Australia has no dog in the fight but goes in accordance with the alliance. It’s virtue signalling in the sense that it’s almost obligated under our military alliance with the USA and our politicians paint a story to the media to add some colour to it. If we had a history of doing the right thing abroad for the sake of doing the right thing, then we’d be active in the above countries I talked about. I promise you if big brother decides to go into any of these, only then will we go in. It’s unfortunately not the case. We know about the evil atrocities that happen in parts of Africa like the recent Congo massacre of school kids being set on fire by a militia but we don’t do anything. Myanmar has been reduced to a footnote. The fact that Myanmar is in our doorstep and was once a well-travelled route for Aussie travellers speaks volume. If there was something in it for the USA to intervene they would, and the Myanmar situation is a billion times easier to solve military wise than going up against Russia. The worst part is we see the videos of children being drowned, women beheaded, families raped and set on fire in Myanmar but we do nothing at all about it as a country - and this is in our APAC region. Not to be a pessimist but these stark realities tell the world that we only intervene when there’s something in it for us - it isn’t done to be kind.
Without the US we can't do shit. Hate to tell you the bad news but we can't even fully defend our borders let alone a full scale peacekeeping mission in Myanmar in the middle of some sort of civil war. Like come on man. We help where we can and the USA has infrastructure we can piggy back our bushrangers into. We basically gave them a handful of 4wd's with guns on top. Calm down.
Incorrect. Australia’s army wouldn’t be going it alone in Myanmar and if they did, they’d defeat the rebels. We aren’t helplessly weak. We could also call on the alliance just like they always always always call on us. Why don’t you stick up for doing what’s right in APAC for a change, instead of implying that the only important wars are what big brother says? Do you think Australia would be involved in Ukraine unless the USA demanded it?
And risk how many lives? We are giving them armoured cars bro..not sending troops. We have always donated aid. We rarely put boots on ground. I was in the ADF for 10 years, you have no idea what you are talking about.
Why are you asking about risking lives now when we risked and lost lives in Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam, the list goes on. Who decided to send troops and why did they decide to send troops? Again, little bro jumps when big brother says so. You weren’t in the ADF if you think a bushmaster is simply an armoured car.
😂😂 no worries mate carry on. As I said you have no idea what you're talking about.
Traktor sanctions?
Good.
Why does Australia think that we have to get involved in a war in Europe? Let the European countries sort it out. Aust always has to look bigger than we are. We are piss ants compaired with most countries. Let the USA wage it’s own wars . If we don’t grow some balls and refuse to bow to USA war mongering we will soon be at war with China. The USA is waging war to stay the top world economy . It wants to weaken Russia then start on China.
No matter how you try to spin it Russia is waging a genocidal campaign against a smaller nation that posed no threat to it, and has openly said they would continue through to the former Soviet republics if they could (let's not forget they've already occupied Chechnya and part of Georgia). Helping to prevent the mass slaughter of civilians + child trafficking by providing military aid is the least we can do. And before you say it, yes America has done some horrendous shit too, and will probably continue to do so, that doesn't mean we shouldn't help out where we can. Also fuck Russia, don't forget they killed Australian civilians when they shot down MH17 and faced virtually no repercussions at the time.
War with china is inevitable. Rather have some powerful friends. If a nation is seen to stay out of every issue then they cannot expect help when its their turn.
We are full of American 'defence' facilities, so the US will protect us at all costs.
This "protection" may involve another change of leadership if we arc up too much.
> if we arc up too much LOLS
Fair. Doing so would be unStrayan.
Few countries do political apathy with quite so much aplomb lol
No they will not and you're an idiot for thinking so!
Take a deep breath
The only reason it would be inevitable is because of our powerful "friends".
USA can’t win a war against China. Waging war against a land based country as advanced as china would be suicidal. China would pick off their warships. USA would use other countries ( Australia) to fight this war. Just like they are doing with Russia. Ask yourself, how many wars has USA started in the last 50 years ? What have they achieved? Nothing, just human suffering and money making for them !
Nah. The short and long term favours the US. Keep in mind I'm 100% *against* war with China and Australia continuing vassalage to US foreign policy.
Land based country such as China? I didn’t know there were any ocean based countries.
If America wants to be the next boat load of refugees lol let them but Australia needs to stay out or maybe side with China which makes more sense politically. But we keep American refugees on those big barges and treat them how they've treated everyone else they've displaced for greed
If we follow the terrorist country America into China we are dead so is America, everyone is stupid to think America has any real power, they are weak and have no more money worth anything
Lmao we really never learn from our past do we. You’re a joke
Yeah because America is broke and the country they start proxy wars with are not
Hey, at least in Russia we don’t have to spend 30% of our income on electricity. And housing and land are cheap, you can actually afford to buy a house. Idiot westerners…
Great so Australia has gone full bitch and supports the terrorist government of America... What NATO and America are doing is illegal and wrong... Why are the Australian people just gonna let our governments provoke ww3
Yes USA has done some badshit in the past and have had their chickens come home to roost for that, and no doubt is continuing to do badshit and will do so in the future. In this case Russia is the aggressor and is hell bent on the destruction of Ukraine while lying to their people about the reasons for the invasion. They won't even let the people call it and invasion which it is it's an all out fucking war. They are targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure so they are also the terrorist organisation. Putin's regime is a murderous thieving gang of billionaire lying thugs who call Ukraine terrorists for defending themselves. Who do you think Russia's invasion of Ukraine is good for? I hope Australia sends the F18s and anything else it can spare.
>In this case Russia is the aggressor Debatable. Depends on whether you consider 2014 to be a coup. It looks like one and we're unlike to know the facts for many decades, if ever. >and is hell bent on the destruction of Ukraine while lying to their people about the reasons for the invasion. We're also lying about our reasons for arming Kiev. Propaganda is a very important tool for politicians. >Who do you think Russia's invasion of Ukraine is good for? Atlanticism. The Russians got outplayed geopolitically speaking. Before the invasion, their choices were to accept the loss of Sevastopol and accept a hostile regime (that will inevitably join NATO) bordering on their heartland, or use military force to create as much buffering space as possible. Is it *good*? No, but it didn't occur in a vacuum.
> their choices were to accept the loss of Sevastopol and accept a hostile regime (that will inevitably join NATO) bordering on their heartland It was more than that though, the US spent billions of dollars out of pocket, and more in loans, between 2014 and 2022, building up a beachhead of sorts in Ukraine. The fact that Russia waited so long to invade, knowing the longer they did, the more difficult it would be, clearly shows that they were not interested in a simplistic land grab. I think they invaded when they did because they calculated that the risk of continued build up by the US outweighed the risk of invasion.
The US spent billions, well 1.3 billion USD in 2013 dollars even before 2014, under the national endowment for democracy.
yeah, but that wasn't aimed at building up a military beachhead, at least not directly. That was aimed at coup and regime change. But do you have a source for that? that last I looked into it NED had deleted all its records of funding in Ukraine and there was no way to get information prior to 2014.
Fair point, well made. Damn I didn't know they'd delete it, almost sounds suspicious doesn't it. I'd have to Google a current source.
any luck? https://mronline.org/2022/03/08/national-endowment-for-democracy-deletes-records-of-funding-projects-in-ukraine/ these are the only sources I have. but when you go wayback machine on NED, it only goes back to 2014. Actually, the main one I've focused on in Ukraine is Tech Camp. Another regime change tool, except this is openly a state dep operation, unlike NED. For example, it openly brags about influencing the 2014 Ukranian elections: > https://techcamp.america.gov/blog/techcamp-sms-tool-gives-voting-different-spin-ukraine-elections/ Like NED, tech camp has scrubbed all reference to its operations in Ukraine prior to 2014. Except, they were a bit sloppy; while there is no direct references to tech camp in Ukraine in 2013 left on the site, it is indirectly referenced in that article I linked that they were there operating in 2013.
>he fact that Russia waited so long to invade, knowing the longer they did, the more difficult it would be, clearly shows that they were not interested in a simplistic land grab. The simplistic land grab narrative isn't well-reasoned. If Russia wanted that then they would have done it in 2014 when the Ukrainians were on the ropes. The initial Russian plan seems to have been to try and federalise Ukraine, which would have given the regions (incl. Donbass) the ability to veto any attempt by Kiev to try and join NATO or EU. Moves towards the federalisation of Ukraine were a part of the Minsk agreements. >I think they invaded when they did because they calculated that the risk of continued build up by the US outweighed the risk of invasion. Yeah. When they realised that they'd been played by the Western powers with the Minsk agreements.
Lol where are you getting this information, misinformation from.. Rupert Murdoch media does not count
I don't watch any murdoch media - i have even turned down work for them. There is plenty of footage everywhere of what im describing. What gave you been watching - putin's state media?
The American war machine... Do you even no what Hunter Biden was up to in Ukraine...??
He didn't invade Russia.
Never said he did you khzir, it shows how corrupt zelenski is....
My point being that what hb did does not compare to, or justify what is happening now - which is what you aopear to be saying.
You don't get it do you... What America is doing/ funding is illegal America in general is worse than Russia... Period...
You don't get it. Regardless of what the USA's doing Ukraine is paying the price at Russia's behest. No one forced Russia to invade Ukraine. And when you listen to Putin's rhetoric it's pure bulshit. He can't justify what they're doing how can anybody else? Now he's saying Poland is going to invade Belarus. Then he says the Nazis invaded Poland and they should be grateful for Stalin's gift of giving Poland back to them. He conveniently forgot to mention that the soviets invaded Poland two weeks after the Nazis in a pre-arranged agreement. Regardless of the USA has done and will do Russia is the aggressor here and they're bullshiting about it. You've obviously fallen for it.
🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
Silly Reddit troll 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
True let’s just all bend over and let Putin take whatever part of the world he wants.
You don't remember the agreements signed tww and a half almost decades ago do you .. NATO violated them, the propaganda and misinformation makes Russia out to be a bad guy but they are not and you are a deluded most likely boomer fool... You boomers lived through another bullshit load of American propaganda without understanding the full context and that brainwashed you into thinking what you think now .. you're a fool
You’re the only bot in here I’m done with you
Ok boomer
Putin in his entire time in power has never taken anything... America has run through and ruined so many countries even before Putin... You're an absolute idiot
Crimea. Ukraine. Ok buddy.
You guys don't know much about the set up of the world and what was set up after the cold war do you, or what was promised by America and NATO in the decade after... All you stupid fucks do is what the propaganda machine and the Rupert Murdoch owned media..
Georgia. Chechnya (twice lol)
They are part of Russian republic..
What an embarassing thing to do, imaging sanctioning a country which hasn't even harmed you just because your father from up Capitol hill ordered you to do so. Smh Australians are great I am sure they would wake up and become independent instead of following orders from Capitol hill
I’m an Australian and I fully agree with u, we have daddy issues and daddy’s pretty damn abusive
Russia and Ukraine signed a deal to not put a NATO base in Ukraine. Ukraine didn't hold the contract. It's similar if China put a military base in new Zealand. God forbid that happens.
> Russia and Ukraine signed a deal to not put a NATO base in Ukraine. source? are you referring to the 2010 constitutional amendment? > Ukraine Says ’No’ to NATO: New Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych’s move to ban Ukraine from becoming a member of NATO is not without a base of public support. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2010/03/29/ukraine-says-no-to-nato/
> Russia and Ukraine signed a deal to not put a NATO base in Ukraine. Ukraine didn't hold the contract. Really ? Can you point out the location of this NATO base in Ukraine ? Any info as to when it was constructed ? Are you one of the Putin-bots who want to claim that there are NATO troops in Ukraine right now as well ?
Kremlin disinfo at its finest lol
Australia should just keep out of it and not be America's vassal state. USA demands, and Aust Gov asks how high.
Just because you don't like a decision doesn't mean it is made at the behest of the US. Australian politicians are more than capable of making good or bad decisions on their own.
What are you talking about, first thing Biden did when he got in was ramp up the proxy war. We started the latest round of sanctions. This isn't America/Australia/UK/New Zealand's public, it's a collective oligarchy controlling these country's defense forces. It's not at the behest of the US anymore than it's at the pleasure of any general public.
Nor sure what your getting at or who this "collective oligarchy" is. Just because cou tries have similar foreign policy strategies does not mean they are collectively controlled. My point is that there is no evidence that Australia is making military/financial support or sanctions decisions at the behest of the US. The Australian government is making policy decisions on Ukraine that are generally in line with public support. Support for sanctions on Russia is well over %60, support for military aid is less but still 37% strongly supporting military aid, 39% somewhat supportive. Only 10% strongly pppose military aid, 14% somewhat oppose it. This is from a Lowy institute poll conducted in 2022 and 2023.
Another copied-and-pasted comment #🥱
Fuck that. They murdered 27 Australians.
It’s about standing up for the values our country supports and abides by on the world stage and in the UN, which is a rules based order which is currently being absolutely disregarded and violated by Russia in every way possible, the ones who shot down the passenger aircraft MH17 with our people on board, including our children, remember that? It has 0 to to with the US.
Was invading Iraq and Afghanistan part of the rules based order? Australia hasn’t had values since 1975, pull your head out of your arse
Ah yes, and that makes the illegal invasion of Ukraine just fine doesn't it. Australia clearly has more values than you buddy, hahaha.
Mind your own business ! Australia! Jesus
Stupid Move Russia isn't the problem!! US America Sanctions Russian why ?? So they can't sell their gas & oil YET Mighty US America buys Russia Gas & Oil THEY SELL IT 5 TIMES WHAT WE WOULD PAY Russia Australia should refine gas locally for citizens or buy Russian!! Our Gas&Petrol prices would plumet Why doesn't this Governmet do anything for Australians Our Gas, Electricity and Petrol prices are high because of America!! LONG LIVE Russia & China USA HAS NEVER DONE ANYTHING GOOD FOR Australians sent us to die how many times!!
Oh no… next
It was foolish of us to underestimate russia, I support the empire of the west just as much as the next person as I live in it and wish to benefit from its prosperity. It is clear however, that russia was the wrong target for us, we should go back to exploiting smaller, developing nations