Comments by "Dylan Vogler" (@dylanvogler2165) on "Lithuania Blockades Kaliningrad: What happens now? - TLDR News" video.

I agree. Also I think Lithuania has all rights do decide what it wants to cross its territory. Imagine it having been the other way around. Russia would have said that it has every right decide what crosses into it's territory. I think Lithuania did a good thing, it is not a blockade at all.
71
@LuggageStardate you would say treaty, if Russia would have shown to be a reliable partner... it isn't. Russia has shown that Otto von Bismarck was right all along when he said agreements with the Russians are not worth the paper they are written on. So in this case I understand Lithuania complying with the EU sanctions.
3
@kevinyaucheekin1319 sucks when it's the other party breaking it's promises isn't it?
3
@joeyjojojrshabadoo7462 and thus Lithuania gave as much weight to it as Russia did to the memorandum. That was exactly the point of his comment
2
@trickybarrel444 breaking news: Lithuania triggers article 5 of the NATO charter.
1
@chico9805 you are aware that Lithuania is part of NATO right? Russia won't do shit whilst they're stuck in Ukraine.
1
@El-px6wl the Budapest memorandum of the 5th of December 1994. I would explain it to you but I can't be bothered. Look it up yourself.
1
UAE Emirates let's blame the west instead of the one to break the promise. Seems legit. So you actually say it's bad the west didn't cause ww3 back then?
1
@kevinyaucheekin1319 you can send as much text to justify your stuff. But the fact remains that Russia broke it's agreements first. Not to mention the fact that it isn't a blockade, as non sanctioned goods as well as persons can travel freely between Kaliningrad oblast and the rest of Russia. You can twist and turn as much as you want but the rule of law in international affairs has been destroyed by Russia. This new world in which we live, in which again might makes right, is the result of Russia's actions and now it faces it's consequences. The part about China doesn't interest me in the slightest. Why don't you mention how the Ugyhur people are doing in Xinjiang? When you've sorted your shit, come and criticize the West okay? Otto van Bismarck famously said, that agreements made with the Russians aren't worth the paper it is written on. He was right. They have shown time and time to not be trustworthy. If they would need to break an agreement with China to improve its position, it would. Had Russia been stronger than China (it isn't), it would have attacked you and threatened you without any difficulty if the opportunity would arise and it would benefit from it. Russia's current leaders only understand military power, international law means nothing to them, unless somebody else breaks it. There are consequences to illegal invasions, this is theirs.
1
@bololollek9245 what stuff have you used? Can I have some of that too? either that or you're delusional and should stop watching Russian propaganda. I apparently is rotting your brain.
1
Yeah we are poking the bear whilst it illegally invaded a sovereign state. Obviously the west is the aggressor and bad guy in this case 🤔
1
@Matt-yg8ub yeah and Russia has been so faithful with it's agreements right? This happens when you break your agreements with other countries all the time. At some point countries will do the same to you )). It is typically Russian though, for example they broke their agreement with Germany by suddenly decreasing gas supplies, not to mention how they broke their guarantee to respect Ukraine territorial integrity which is all okay in the Russian mind. Then another country breaks an agreement with them and you all start crying 🤣🤣. It's called consequences for your actions.
1
@Matt-yg8ub lol no my argument does not come down to whataboutism at all. As in this case Russia's bad reputation on the world stage considering its early actions in both Ukraine and its current actions in regards to violating the terms of its agreements with European countries and the sanctions opposed on it by its recent actions is exactly the reason why Lithuania has taken these actions. They're direct consequences of Russia's actions and therefore what I said is relevant for this subject. But nice try, it would have been whataboutism if I would have pointed to other actions of the Russian Federation, like it's invasion of Georgia of 2008 or the numerous political killings and imprisonments of Russian opposition members. As this is irrelevant to the current situation. Again nice try. You exactly point to the exact point I try to make with the sentence "Ukraine had a revolution and Russia no longer recognized an agreement they made with a different government". Russia has no right to just not recognize a government that was put into power by it's people, especially since there have been two governments since, which have been democratically chosen by the Ukrainian people. The fact Russia doesn't like they are pro Western governments, doesn't mean they can't just recognize any agreement they made with the country in the past. It's laughable especially considering the Russian cries about NATO promising not to expand to the east. In which case the agreement, if it ever have been made in the first place, was made with an entirely different country and government. In that case Russia is like "we are the USSR's successors, so any agreement made with them, still applies with us". You can't just stop recognizing agreements because you don't like the government the people of another country chose. Russia has taken this one sided unrecognizing of international agreements to the extreme with its earlier threat to annul the USSR's recognition of independence of Lithuania (which is not how recognition and international law works). Yet now it cries about Lithuania allegedly violating an international agreement, after the clear threat they made to Lithuanian independence. An international agreement that is not violated at all since there is still free movement of people and unsanctioned goods between Kaliningrad oblast and the Russian mainland. I think countries should keep their agreements, but when you yourself have shown to be prone to break agreements and are prone to disregard your own promises, you can't expect others to keep to their word when dealing with you. This happens with people that lie and break their promises and agreements too, other people won't take them serious anymore and don't give alot of value to agreements with such people. So stop playing the victim, which is also a Russian trick, and always blaming the West. This one is on you yourself and take responsibility for this.
1
@Matt-yg8ub "the West" didn't invade these countries. The US did. Maybe learn to differentiate the two terms okay? That would maybe help you understanding the world better. The vast majority of Europeans did at no point support the US's actions in the middle east and Latin America. Again it wasn't "the West" putting missiles in Turkey, it was the US. The Cuban missile crisis was between the US and the USSR not "the West" and the USSR. I, and with me alot of Europeans, are against the US's invasions as much as we are against the current Russian invasions. But it is again the Russian mind, which doesn't understand nations can disagree but still be friends like the European countries and the US. So no double standards at all. Also is it really strange Europeans react differently considering Russia brought war back to Europe? Shattering the notion of finally a peace Europe, you know the continent on which most of ww1 and a large part of ww2 was fought and both were started.. yeah really strange huh. People always react more on things happening close to them then further away. This is human psychology. Had Russia broken one agreement, I would have agreed with you. But it has a tendency to break it's agreements. Otto von Bismarck already famously said :"agreements made with the Russians aren't worth the paper they're written on". Do I agree with counties breaking their agreements? No, is it understandable now? Yes. Would you give any value to an agreement you made with a person that has constantly broken it's promises and agreements with you?
1
@Matt-yg8ub "on behalf of NATO". Bro stop watching Russian propaganda man. Would you blame Kazakhstan, part of the CSTO, for the current Russian invasion? Or Armenia? Etc. It weren't NATO invasions in Afghanistan and Iraq, it were American invasions. Learn your stuff man. My country hasn't fought a war since the war of Indonesian Independence. After that we have only been part of peace keeping missions. Would you blame my country for Guantanamo bay too? Idiot. My country has been barely spending anything on it's military for decades. Unlike Russia we actually do take responsibility for our mistakes as we acknowledged and apologized to the Indonesians and many here would say the unsanctioned interventions in Libya, Serbia and Syria of NATO were bad. But blaming NATO for Iraq and Afghanistan is ridiculous and shows a lack of knowledge of how the Western world actually works. But what do I expect from a Russian. It would be the same as me blaming Uzbekistan for the Russian invasion of Georgia of 2008. Maybe now you understand what I mean. Damn man what an idiot you are.
1
@Matt-yg8ub Bush was the most unpopular American president in my country exactly because of his ridiculous invasions. Nobody in Europe wanted that shit, that truly was just an American adventure, which the UK under Blair joined. Same with Afghanistan. They didn't do anything on behalf of NATO, they did it on behalf of themselves. Do you actually understand how NATO works and what it is?
1