Comments by "Diogo Jorge" (@DiogoJ1) on "'NATO Yet To See Our Power': Russia's big warning amid Ukraine War | Details" video.

@prathitkushwaha8826 Russia has no valid reason to attack Ukraine.
10
And Russia will be to blame for that, for not leaving them alone.
8
@hitmantwovictors BRICS is an economic alliance, not a military one.
8
@rstefan1821 What selective amnesia? There's nothing in history that justifies Russia's actions.
4
Makes no difference. EU must support Ukraine, with or whitout Russia's "power".
3
@prathitkushwaha8826 Hardly. There are no contradictions. Denial on your turn? What's that supposed to mean? That I disagree with your logic? Of course I do. This invasion can't be justified.
2
@MeowMeow6118a Only by east lovers. Russia invaded Ukraine. Whoever invades first is to blame no matter the excuses they make. All this could have been avoided if Russia hadn't invaded Ukraine.
2
@Balenza345 No they don't. Nothing justifies invasion, save if one is invaded first.
2
@shobhitdagur1086 Well, then the rest of the world doesn't matter either by that reasoning.
2
@gazpachopolice7211 Then why did the high and mighty "Holy Russian Empire" fell?
2
@gazpachopolice7211 Stop dreaming. A killer doesn't make a good messenger for God.
2
@abdulimraan2706 Putin isn't stupid to use nukes. And if he was, Russia would have signed their death setence.
2
@PerceivedREALITY999 There's nothing that needs to be done. And the mentality of "the ends justify means", is a sign of an imoral mind.
2
You mean Russia. No invasion, no escalation would have happened.
2
@markbudaden110 I understand the reason, but it has no justication.
1
@colingr318 No, I'm not. Nothing, save if Ukraine had invaded Russia first, justifies Russia's invasion.
1
@prathitkushwaha8826 What is "denial on your turn" supposed to mean? You have to work on your english. Indeed I said. his reasons are understandable, but aren't justifiable. The reason is understood, but it's not a valid one. You are confusing "understanding" with "justified". I can understand someone, but that doesn't mean I will condone that person if they do something wrong. Your english really is mediocre at best. I can barely make sense of your last phrase. I don't want to be an actor in the first place.
1
@Brian H Afraid you are mistaken. Nazi Germany invaded France first, and France gave the green light to enter their lands to retaliate against Germany. Invasion can be justified if it's against an invading force. Which is why I said it before, if Ukraine had invaded Russia first, then Russia would have justification, but since Russia is the invader, then they have no justification. Simple, because Russia invaded first.
1
@prathitkushwaha8826 What is very clear, is that your english is barely readable, as you aren't making much sense. I understand what mediocre is, yes. I'm unable to make sense of what exactly is the double standard, since I see no contradictions on what I said before.
1
@Brian H Those weren't justified, so... Your point? USA did many unjustified invasions. USA didn't invade Ukraine. The majority of the people of Ukraine wished to oust their president. USA merely helped them. That legitimate elected president caused people to protest all over Ukraine, forcing him to remove himself from his position. I'm fully aware, yes. Unlike you, who honestly believes that USA pointed a gun at Ukraine to oust their leader.
1
@Brian H You mean USA and Ukraine forced Viktor out of the country. Read the whole story. There were protests all over Ukraine. The people were angry at their president for giving in to Russian pressure when the time came to sign the association agreement. It's not a matter of being gullible, I approve of their actions. Viktor was a puppet to Russia and a new government needed to be formed, picked or not, those were the facts. Also, Zelensky was legally elected, so their government was eventually picked by the Ukranians.
1
@prathitkushwaha8826 Sure. Pretend that you are striking back, when you were the one who started it by claiming I had a double standard, when there's no contradiction on what I said. Indeed. We can agree to disagree. You do that, I will not let anyone argue on my behalf. My english works considerably better than yours.
1
@prathitkushwaha8826 Lol. I'm not pretending anything, you simply speak weird with all the pointless fancy words and poor grammar. Because you started first with the insults, so you have no right to tell me what to do. I don't see how is that a double standard. I said it wasn't valid, with or whitout understanding. I don't want to be an actor in the first place. And I won't let anyone argue on my behalf. I know what is right, and thus will make my stance be known, with or whitout them.
1
@prathitkushwaha8826 Because I'm not liberal, dingus. You mean because it doesn't exist. Whatever you say. You must be trolling at this point or something. You don't know me, but like to pretend to know me. Get a grip. I keep looking, and don't see what's the problem with what I said before. Yeah, sure, whatever. Suit yourself with that english of yours. Figures a eastern would have trouble seeing the flaws in their english grammar. Or we could agree to disagree, far more simpler, whitout any need for others to intervene. And once again, only I speak in my behalf, and nobody else.
1
@820-t3q USA, obviously. What of it?
1
Imagine caring for the Russian Orthodoxy, the most vile form of christianity.
1
@rhuiden4086 They would lose everything anyway. Russia would just keep making excuses to keep invading Ukraine.
1
Then Russia will lose any moral ground, if they even had any. That will kill many innocents, all because Russia is a big baby. Fortunately, Putin as evill he is, he's not stupid, and thus won't use nukes.
1
Karma will hit the bear instead for their sins, if karma actually exists.
1
You say that as if Putin is stupid to use nukes. The man's lack of morals aside, he's clearly not stupid.
1