Comments by "bobby hans" (@user-oc7ll9sv5r) on "UATV English"
channel.
-
Ukraine territory is a whopping 603,628 square kilometers (233,062 sq mi), Russia at one point occupied a total of 161,000 km2 (62,000 sq mi) or almost 27% of Ukraine's territory and some has been librated so now we are down to 119,000 km2
What really gets me is that some ppl. are now saying why does Ukraine not just let Russia have the areas /land it’s just a small part of Ukraine anyway.....
A small part of Ukraine ...WE ARE taking about a land mass is 119,000 km2
In EU terms thats the size of Belgium, Holland, luxembourg all put together..
In UK terms that the size of all of Scotland and 80% of England all put together !!
In US terms is the size of South Carolina, West Virginia all put together !!
Why the f. should Ukraine give Russia all that land for what? TO ONLY be invaded some years later when Russia as had a brake and regrouped ,rebuilt its army and fortified positions !!
I SAY RUSSIA GETS TO TAKE LAND AND DEMAND UKRAINE CAN NOT JOIN NATO IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AT ALL !! Nobody wants to be a "buffer country". NO nation wants to have a little bit of freedom !!!! ; The whole concept is demeaning to an independent nation. NO nation wants to have a little bit of freedom and self-determination, like some sort of 2nd class country; That is not right, and Russia has no right to demand or bully Ukrainians or Ukraine to accept that Ukraine and its ppl. should become some sort of lap dog on a leash 2nd class country to serve kremlins geopolitical agenda; so Kremlin, Putin and RuZZans can feel better about themselves ...
---------It is embarrassing that the US and Europe do not support Ukraine more than they do , the US. were in Afghanistan for 20 years and achieved less than Ukraine in 2 years, and Ukraine is also a much stronger opponent with many more resources !! As a Norwegian I am ashamed of our policies in the west , the western nations governments use every opportunity to go on national TV and tell how much they support, but the truth is that we have only provided 94 Euros per inhabitant, it is ridiculous when we look at the size of Ukraine, the opponent and the way Russia has bombed cities in Ukraine back to the Stone Age, and that we (western nations ) have not lost a single person in the war , we are talking about Europe, democracy and freedom that Ukraine is defending , one can only be ashamed
some ppl. are now saying why does Ukraine not just let Russia have the areas /land it’s just a small part of Ukraine anyway.....
19
-
The Black Sea countries are many!! And Then Black Sea does not belong to Russia that’s a myth !!
Bulgaria, (NATO )
Romania (NATO)
Turkey (NATO)
Ukraine (NATO partner )
Georgia (NATO partner)
So in-fact ANY NATO country members navy and or air force is within their full right to sail and be within the Black Sea, as non of the Black Sea Nations (That have a real and legal int. recognized cost-line not like Russia ) have any problem with NATO ships being in their waters and even the non NATO members like Ukraine and Georgia, even more so then the NATO nations, want and are begging for more NATO ships to come and be in the BLACK SEA !
(NATO nations of the black sea are in-fact real black sea nations not like Russia stealing land then claiming to be the owner of that land and sea )
Coastline length to the black see by country/ Country Coastline length (km)
Turkey 1,329km (NATO)
Ukraine 2,782km (NATO partner )
Bulgaria 354km (NATO)
Georgia 310km (NATO partner )
Romania 225km (NATO)
AND ON A SIDE NOTE : NATO is already 500 km from Moscow via Latvia and 150 km from St, Petersburg via Estonia so the argument that NATO will get closer to Moscow if Ukraine joins NATO is BS there is 800 km from Kyiv to Moscow ..
And her is a thought .. if every neighbor you have is running to begging NATO to let them join NATO is it becouse you are such a nice and good neighbor?
Or is it because you act like a bully and are aggressive and invade your neighbor lands sending in troops and tanks
Hungary 1956,
Czechoslovakia 1968,
Poland 1980
Moldova 1990-91,
Georgia 2008,
Ukraine 2014 ++
And now of Ukraine 2022+++
Russia eat eat eats and then blames its victims for eating them !!! ...
Maybe if you act in a more nicer way, then your neighbors will liked you more and maybe your neighbors in your neighborhood will want to be around you as well ..
4
-
2
-
2
-
It might be useful to recap some of the reason why Russia is now an outcast :
Russian interference in numerous elections and referendums in EU countries over the last decade; Russia's active disinformation campaigns across the EU;
Russian-based cyber attacks targeting numerous EU countries;
Provocative Russian military flights in and around EU and NATO airspace;
Russia's interference with GPS navigation systems in Scandinavia;
Russia's continued deployment of "peacekeepers" in Moldova despite that country's repeated requests that Russian troops be replaced with UN peacekeepers;
Russia's 2008 war against Georgia and its continued occupation of some 20 percent of Georgian territory;
Russia's 2014 annexation of Ukraine's Crimea region;
Russia's intense involvement in the war in eastern Ukraine, which the ICC in November 2016 ruled "an international armed conflict between Ukraine and the Russian Federation";
Russia's obstructionism in implementation of the Minsk agreements to end the Ukraine conflict;
Russia's role in acts of terrorism in the 2014 downing of a passenger airliner (Malaysia Airlines MH17) over Ukraine that killed 298 people;
Russia's poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko in London in 2006;
Russia's attempted assassination of former Russian spy Sergei Skripal in Salisbury in 2018;
among lots of other things to much to even list up ..
NONE OF THIS ABOVE WAS SOMETHING THE EU , THE USA OR EVEN NATO, FORCED OR TRICKED RUSSIA INTO DOING !!!
RUSSIA’S INVASION OF UKRAINE in 2014 VIOLATED INTERNATIONAL LAW:
1. The Geneva Convention.
2. Charter of the United Nations
3. The Helsinki Accords
4. The Charter of the OSCE
5. Budapest Memorandum of 1994
6. Two Russia, Ukraine friendship treaties
7. International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination
8. European Court of Human Rights
THE LEGAL FACTS WHY CRIMEA BELONGS TO UKRAINE .
The earlier published documents, and materials that have emerged more recently make clear that the transfer of Crimea from the RSFSR to the UkrSSR was carried out in accordance with the 1936 Soviet constitution, which in Article 18 stipulated that “the territory of a Union Republic may not be altered without its consent.” The proceedings of the USSR Supreme Soviet Presidium meeting indicate that both the RSFSR and the UkrSSR had given their consent via their republic parliaments.
One of the officials present at the 19 February session, Otto Kuusinen, even boasted that “only in our country [the USSR] is it possible that issues of the utmost importance such as the territorial transfer of individual oblasts to a particular republic can be decided without any difficulties.” One might argue that the process in 1954 would have been a lot better if it had been complicated and difficult, but no matter how one judges the expeditiousness of the territorial reconfiguration, the main point to stress here is that it is incorrect to say (as some Russian commentators and government officials recently have) that Crimea was transferred unconstitutionally or illegally. The legal system in the Soviet Union was mostly a fiction, but the transfer did occur in accordance with the rules in effect at the time.
Moreover, regardless of how the transfer was carried out, the Russian Federation expressly accepted Ukraine’s 1991 borders both in the December 1991 Belovezhskaya Pushcha accords (the agreements that precipitated and codified the dissolution of the Soviet Union) and in the December 1994 Budapest Memorandum that finalized Ukraine’s status as a non-nuclear weapons state.
1
-
1
-
NATO is a "threat" to Russia in the sense that a cop on the beat is a "threat" to a mugger. NATO wouldn't have been formed in the first place if Stalin had not rejected the US offer of the same Marshall Plan which so benefited the rest of Europe everywhere it was instituted, Russia / Stalin was instead bent every effort to CONQUER and dominate European neighboring states and expand Russia, borders with its concept of "sphere of influence " over the near abroad..
We need to understand that Russia didn't come to encompass 11% of earth's land area, by being invaded by other countries; Russia did so by invading far more other countries, than it was itself invaded by ; Remember Russia is a Federation of states , and the Russian part of that federation is the smallest state in the "Russian federation.".
(Russia with a total area of 17,098,242 Km² (6,601,665 mi²) and a land area of 16,376,870 Km² (6,323,142 mi²), equivalent to 11% of the total world's landmass )
In history MANY and ALL countries have been invaded frequently by their neighbors throughout all of history. Was Russia invaded more than France? Germany? Poland in HISTORY ? NO IT WAS NOT !!!
So this acting the victim, (west always invades Russia act ) when it comes to the west, that Kremlin does all the time, .
This buhhh the evil-west AGGRESSIVE west always invades us always is attacking us Buhhhh; This is why we see western NATO as a danger buhhhh !!!! THIS TYPE OF ACTING THE VICTIM is absolute and nothing more and less than Kremlin BS it is done so you overlook the fact that it is Russia that invades other not vise versa and to pull the smoke over your eyes !!! ..
Do i need to mention all of eastern Europe was under brutal Russian regime, hegemonic control for over 50 years .. ?? And that historical Russia has invaded and occupied way more of its neighbors then vice versa !
1
-
What really gets me is that some ppl. are now saying why does Ukraine not just let Russia have the areas /land it’s just a small part of Ukriane anyway.....
A small part of Ukraine ...WE ARE taking about a land mass over 200,000 sq km
In EU terms thats the size of Belgium, Holland, and Greece all put together..
In UK terms that the size of all of Scotland , Wales and most of England
In US terms is the size of South Carolina, West Virginia and New Jersey all put together !!
Why the should Ukraine give up all that land for what to be invaded only some years later !!
I SAY RUSSIA GETS TO TAKE LAND AND DEMAND UKRAINE CAN NOT JOIN NATO IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AT ALL !! Nobody wants to be a "buffer country". NO nation wants to have a little bit of freedom and self-determination, like some sort of 2nd class country
The whole concept is demeaning to an independent nation. NO nation wants to have a little bit of freedom and self-determination, like some sort of 2nd class country; That is not right, and Russia has no right to demand or bully Ukrainians or Ukraine to accept to be some sort of lap dog on a leash 2nd class country to serve kremlins geopolitical agenda and so Kremlin, Putin and RuZZans can feel better about themselves ...
Eastern European countries (ex soviet countries like Poland the baltic states ect ect ..) joined NATO because they are scared of Russia and want to be and stay independent. Nobody forced them to join NATO they was the ones running and knocking and begging to be able to join NATO and the EU ,,, .
When Russia invaded Ukriane Russia then just showed why it was a good idea for those countries to join NATO, because if they didn't they might just have got invaded as well just like Ukraine and Georgia did .
During Soviet times those Eastern European countries were nothing less than Russia puppet states. If they didn't join NATO after the fall of the USSR then they for sure couldn't guarantee their own independence from Russia.
Nato did nothing wrong, the only mistake was Ukraine not joining NATO to ensure Ukraines independence; Remember former satellite states like Poland, Romania, Czech Republic and The Baltic states, Slovakia ect ect all came running by their own accord, knocking, kicking, screaming and banging at the front door of EU and NATO begging to come in, no one forced them into it .
If Russia was not such a asshole country and stoped constantly bulling neighboring countries maybe other neighboring countries will not need to join NATO and by more open and welcoming to Russia ..
Also these people who advocate this view that Ukraine shroud just give up land and appeasement to Russians wants wishes are also being very ignorant to the fact that there were already treaties in place between Russia and Ukraine where Russia respecting the integrity of Ukraine's borders plus other treaties relating to the seas around Ukraine.
Putin has already broken those treaties.
Why would Ukraine believe Putin would stick to a new treaty when he's just broken half a dozen of the previous Russia Ukraine treaties and agreements.
Russia has demonstrated its treaties and agreements are worthless and you enter them at your great peril.
On a side note ; Moscow is ONLY 480 km to Latvia and 150 km from St, Petersburg and via Estonia so the argument that NATO will get closer to Moscow if Ukraine joins NATO is BS there is 800 km from Kyiv to Moscow ..
On another side note ; Election under a gun with tanks and thugs standing over the voting boxes is not an election it can not be a free and legal election...Referendums vía gun point isn't a referendum, it's racketeering. Something that Russia knows oh so very well how to do. YOU CAN VOTE AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN It will never be legal as long as Russian army is there and as lone as it is an illegal gov. put there by an occupying force
1
-
Appeasement & Armageddon: Giving in to Vladimir Putin’s nuclear blackmail will spark an unprecedented nuclear arms race and make a future nuclear war far more likely!!
There is a reason why the Soviet Union, nor any nuclear power, never launched a first strike (nuclear attack) since Word War 2, despite all of the Cold War fears that the Soviets would. And it’s because you can't launch a first strike without being annihilated in the second strike. I remember in the 80s when The Day After aired, and everyone hoped the Soviets would see the movie and learn the lesson. Probably not realizing the Soviets can be trusted to act in the best self-interests...which mutually assured destruction is clearly against... and that the Soviets knew this since the 60s, if not the 50s. -- How is it any different today?
Even if Putin had the launch codes (he doesn't), or the ability to order a first strike by himself (he doesn't), even he would know the response is not going to be 'more sanctions'. -- The only way I could fathom Russia using a nuclear weapon in Ukraine, or against any enemy country, is the FSB had a foolproof plan to blame am ISIS terror cell, or rogue Chechen element, or claim the Ukrainians did it in a false-flag conspiracy to frame the Russians. -- But that would require a convincing story on how such an element got the nuclear weapon 'elsewhere', and eliminating everyone involved in the planning and execution. Whatever the case, Russia would need absolute plausible deniability. -- Here's my two cents, if there was really a way to use a nuclear weapon against an enemy without equal repercussions, Russia and China (and the US) would have figured it out a long time ago and did it already.
All NATO must do is take out Moscow and 5 -6 other city's to take out all of Russia.... But Russia must take out city's all over the planet from USA , CANADA ,FRANCE UK. ALL OF EUROPE and as far away as , AUSTRALIA and so on and so on ...
United Kingdom 225 warheads (submarine delivery systems new and up to date systems )
France 300 warheads
(submarine delivery systems new and up to date systems )
United States 7,315 warheads
(Mixed delivery systems new and up to date systems )
Russia 8,000 warheads
(Mixed delivery systems old mostly from the soviet union times NOT up to date systems )
RUSSIA IS AT DISADVANTAGE !!! and they know it Putin's regime knows its and that is why they will not use nukes they will hint and shout about nukes but that's it !!
ON A SIDE NOTE : Missiles require a huge amount of upkeep and if the maintenance that we've seen on Russian captured tanks in Ukraine is anything to go by, or how there nuclear sublime fleet upkeep is I figure half of Russian Missiles would be defect or even blow up on in mid flight ; Any NBC specialist can tell you that they estimate that without extensive maintenance an ICBM has about a 5% per year cumulative failure rate. And mote of Russia ICBMs are form the late 80s early nineties so based on those facts like I say many as much as half of their weapons can end up and would failx.
ALSO ON A 2nd NOTE ; Putin can not just wake up one day and press a button because he wants to when it comes to sending nukes around the world !!!
The president, and minister of defense and chief of the General Staff together prepare the authorization for use of nuclear weapons and they must all 3 be in 100% agreement before and launch can take place they can not be in the same room and have all of them fiscally use their personal one time login codes to activate the launch procedure it is a complicated process with lost of redundancy for safety so it is impossible for only one man to go crazy and launch a nuke attack !! So even if Putin went off his head he still can not launch the nukes without consent form the others !!
The “direct command” (launch order) would be sent, via the Chegets, to the units by the General Staff, which holds the codes to access the machine that will produce the codes for launch and then the General Staff and the commanders have to send two different codes to all three branches as an extra layer of authentication.
Launch orders would be transmitted by second-level communication systems (distinct from Kazbek):
Signal for Strategic Rocket Forces, and KSBU (which stands for centralized command-and-control
system) for air and sea forces.
And then they orders and codes will be sent back to the General Staff , the defense minister and the President via the Chegets, and the orders and codes must be verified and confirmed up the chain of commend to give authorization only after a authentication process is/ has been confirmed ...
When that is done then the president and the defense minister have to send two separate codes, to be integrated by the chief of the General Staff, who added his or her own code. and send that though the system to give authorization and authentication process is confirmed .
PS. And lets not forget the the Submarine KURSK was part of Russia's nuclear weapons platform and it was falling apart to such an degree that its systems torpedo systems on the Sub. malfunctions and blow up under water and sank the sub and .. killed all of its crew ....
Now if that is what Russia's nuclear delivery platform and weapons platform is like all I can say is WTF !!! And let us not forget that Kursk was the pride and joy of Russia's navy... What does the rest of the Russian nuclear weapons program look like if Kursk is anything to go by ?
I mean...... If you can not hold your submarines floating in pace time what hope do you really have for holding your submarines floating in war time ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
Appeasement & Armageddon: Giving in to Vladimir Putin’s nuclear blackmail will spark an unprecedented nuclear arms race and make a future nuclear war far more likely!!
There is a reason why the Soviet Union, nor any nuclear power, never launched a first strike (nuclear attack) since Word War 2, despite all of the Cold War fears that the Soviets would. And it’s because you can't launch a first strike without being annihilated in the second strike. I remember in the 80s when The Day After aired, and everyone hoped the Soviets would see the movie and learn the lesson. Probably not realizing the Soviets can be trusted to act in the best self-interests...which mutually assured destruction is clearly against... and that the Soviets knew this since the 60s, if not the 50s. -- How is it any different today?
Even if Putin had the launch codes (he doesn't), or the ability to order a first strike by himself (he doesn't), even he would know the response is not going to be 'more sanctions'. -- The only way I could fathom Russia using a nuclear weapon in Ukraine, or against any enemy country, is the FSB had a foolproof plan to blame am ISIS terror cell, or rogue Chechen element, or claim the Ukrainians did it in a false-flag conspiracy to frame the Russians. -- But that would require a convincing story on how such an element got the nuclear weapon 'elsewhere', and eliminating everyone involved in the planning and execution. Whatever the case, Russia would need absolute plausible deniability. -- Here's my two cents, if there was really a way to use a nuclear weapon against an enemy without equal repercussions, Russia and China (and the US) would have figured it out a long time ago and did it already.
All NATO must do is take out Moscow and 5 -6 other city's to take out all of Russia.... But Russia must take out city's all over the planet from USA , CANADA ,FRANCE UK. ALL OF EUROPE and as far away as , AUSTRALIA and so on and so on ...
United Kingdom 225 warheads (submarine delivery systems new and up to date systems )
France 300 warheads
(submarine delivery systems new and up to date systems )
United States 7,315 warheads
(Mixed delivery systems new and up to date systems )
Russia 8,000 warheads
(Mixed delivery systems old mostly from the soviet union times NOT up to date systems )
RUSSIA IS AT DISADVANTAGE !!! and they know it Putin's regime knows its and that is why they will not use nukes they will hint and shout about nukes but that's it !!
1
-
The Black Sea countries are many!! And Then Black Sea does not belong to Russia that’s a myth !!
Bulgaria, (NATO )
Romania (NATO)
Turkey (NATO)
Ukraine (NATO partner )
Georgia (NATO partner)
So in-fact ANY NATO country members navy and or air force is within their full right to sail and be within the Black Sea, as non of the Black Sea Nations (That have a real and legal int. recognized cost-line not like Russia ) have any problem with NATO ships being in their waters and even the non NATO members like Ukraine and Georgia, even more so then the NATO nations, want and are begging for more NATO ships to come and be in the BLACK SEA !
(NATO nations of the black sea are in-fact real black sea nations not like Russia stealing land then claiming to be the owner of that land and sea )
Coastline length to the black see by country/ Country Coastline length (km)
Turkey 1,329km (NATO)
Ukraine 2,782km (NATO partner )
Bulgaria 354km (NATO)
Georgia 310km (NATO partner )
Romania 225km (NATO)
AND ON A SIDE NOTE : NATO is already 500 km from Moscow via Latvia and 150 km from St, Petersburg via Estonia so the argument that NATO will get closer to Moscow if Ukraine joins NATO is BS there is 800 km from Kyiv to Moscow ..
And her is a thought .. if every neighbor you have is running to begging NATO to let them join NATO is it becouse you are such a nice and good neighbor? Or is it because you act like a bully and are aggressive and invade your neighbor lands sending in troops and tanks Hungary 1956, Czechoslovakia 1968, Poland 1980 Moldova 1990-91, Georgia 2008, Ukraine 2014 ++ and no all of Ukraine 2022+++ eat eat eat ... Maybe if you act in a more nicer way, then your neighbors will liked you more and maybe your neighbors in your neighborhood will want to be around you as well ..
1
-
1
-
1