They always leave it out. Literally covering up a genocide so they can push talking points out for a Russian dictator.
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
-
We hope the site problems here are now solved, however,
if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us
Ukraine agrees to demilitarized economic zone in Donbas to advance Trump’s peace plan
- Thread starter Valletta
- Start date
They always leave it out. Literally covering up a genocide so they can push talking points out for a Russian dictator.
- Jul 19, 2012
- 18,147
- 16,943
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Judaism
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Genocide is good when it's against people you don't like.
Upvote
0
SoldierOfTheKing
Christian Spenglerian
- Jan 6, 2006
- 9,258
- 3,053
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Presbyterian
- Marital Status
- Married
First, no it wasn't. Second, even if it were, it would still be war of aggression on NATO's part.
An internal conflict. No other country, let alone a NATO country, was party to that conflict. One of the oldest principles of international law, going all the way back to Westphalia, is noninterference in the civil conflicts of other nations.
If you're referring to Putin, he wasn't even President of Russia then. I'm not talking about Putin, I'm talking about NATO.
Upvote
0
RocksInMyHead
God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!
- May 12, 2011
- 9,862
- 10,641
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Yeah, it was.
Bosnia and Herzegovina - United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
An estimated 100,000 people were killed during the conflict in Bosnia between 1992 and 1995, including the July 1995 genocide of 8,000 Bosnian Muslims from Srebrenica. Learn more about what happened and what the international community could have done to prevent it below.
www.ushmm.org
What Happened in Bosnia | Remembering Srebrenica
What Happened Fifty years after the world said never again to the horrors of the Holocaust, genocide again took place on European soil. Learn more Bosnian G ...
srebrenica.org.uk
More recently, the international community has resolved that they have a responsibility to prevent and punish the crime of genocide:
Don't be obtuse. You're ignoring/covering up the genocide in Bosnia in order to advance the current Russian talking point of NATO as an aggressor.
Upvote
0
Stopped_lurking
Well-Known Member
- Jan 12, 2004
- 679
- 310
- Country
- Sweden
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Agnostic
- Marital Status
- Private
The 2+4 treaty does not contain any restrictions on NATO. NATO was not part of the 2+4 treaty, Ukraina wasn't either. Red herring. You are aware that you can condemn what you believe are US mistreating Russia, without defending Russias invasion of Ukraina?
Upvote
0
Laodicean60
Well-Known Member
- Jul 2, 2023
- 5,195
- 2,486
- 65
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Last post, look, I need you to think, as the current peace process is occurring nation leaders are making verbal commitment, nothing is written except notes.
Your red herring of 2+4 is focused on unifying
Germany but what western leaders said helped the process of the treaty.
- United States: On February 9, 1990, Secretary of State James Baker famously told Mikhail Gorbachev that "there would be no extension of NATO's jurisdiction for forces of NATO one inch to the east" if Germany unified within NATO. President George H.W. Bush also assured Gorbachev at the 1989 Malta Summit that the U.S. would not "take advantage" of the revolutions in Eastern Europe.
- West Germany: Chancellor Helmut Kohl echoed Baker’s sentiment on February 10, 1990, stating, "We believe that NATO should not expand the sphere of its activity". Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher proposed that NATO should rule out an "expansion of its territory towards the east" to protect Soviet security interests.
- United Kingdom: Foreign Secretary Douglas Hurd and Prime Minister John Major (and earlier Margaret Thatcher) reportedly gave similar assurances that the West did not intend to threaten Soviet security through NATO enlargement.
- France: President François Mitterrand spoke to Gorbachev about the necessity of including the USSR in a new European security architecture, suggesting that NATO's role would be circumscribed.
-
How? What should I say.
I said in the past about 2 years ago that Russian invasion was wrong but I see the reason for it and the events leading up to the invasion was wrong we had an opportunity for peace before the invasion.
Upvote
0
RocksInMyHead
God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!
- May 12, 2011
- 9,862
- 10,641
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Which was not a binding agreement or a clause of the treaty. It's been 36 years now - the geopolitical environment has changed, and we're long past the point of "taking advantage" of revolutions in Eastern Europe.
The Soviet Union no longer exists, and therefore, there are no "Soviet security interests" to protect. As I said, the geopolitical environment has changed since 1990, so pointing to statements from world leaders at the time is essentially meaningless with regards to actions today. I will note, though, that Russia made concrete guarantees of Ukraine's territorial integrity back in 1991 as part of the Budapest Memorandum - guarantees that it has since violated.
Russia has been given opportunities to join the EU and otherwise become part of the larger European security architecture. They have refused and/or failed to meet the expectations for membership.
I understand why Russia invaded too, but you won't see me making excuses for their actions or otherwise defending them.
Upvote
0
Laodicean60
Well-Known Member
- Jul 2, 2023
- 5,195
- 2,486
- 65
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
RocksInMyHead
God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!
- May 12, 2011
- 9,862
- 10,641
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Even in those days, a man's word only bound himself. Hence why we created treaties.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
