During WWII, they had a common enemy in Hitler. It was a temporary alliance of necessity as far as both parties were concerned. And, even that wouldn't have happened if Hitler hadn't reneged on the non-aggression pact he'd signed with the USSR.
Did "The West" exist as a/the same concept before the end of WW2? Did pre-War Russia/USSR have allies among what are now countries of "The West"?
The WEST treats Russia as enemy now, it is unfair. Russia is protecting itself from future invasion from Europe. China must back Russia, if not both Russia and China will perish.
It is not unfair. They are attacking one of our allies. Russia is slaughtering civilians in another country. It is doing nothing to protect itself, and in fact is getting thousands of Russians killed, which weakens Russia. Spoken like . . . every minister of propaganda ever. Italy used the same sort of language in World War II. "Unless we support Germany we will both PERISH!"
Okay. Tell me: do you really think that RainbowSingularity was urging the destruction of the Russian territory and/or government, without the harming of any of its citizens? I think you seem to be missing the forest for the trees. That's what I think.
Back in the early 1990s, after the Soviet Union collapsed, the WEST was eager to engage with Russia, economically, socially and in other ways. The situation now is that Russia has regressed to what it knew best for most of the 20th century: a repressive, autocratic , corrupt government that oppresses its own people and threatens its neighbours. You're right that it is not "fair" to the many Russians who did not choose this path for their country. But it looks like it will be up to the Russian people to get themselves out of the mess they're in. Nonsense. Which European country has threatened to invade Russia? Answer: not a single one of them. Ultimately, China's siding with Russia in prosecuting an illegal war would be detrimental to China's interests, in many ways. But, then again, China has its own political problems and a similarly autocratic government.
It's not about not harming any of its citizens. Economic sanctions that the West has put on Russia harms its citizens, after all. Their eventual aim might be to encourage the Russian population into a popular uprising, which also will harm some of its citizens. I do really think that RainbowSingularity was urging the destruction of Russia as a country on the world stage, i.e. as a force in the global order of things, and not all the actual people who reside there. If those people wish to enter combat, that's a different matter, but the general public, no, I honestly don't think that he was urging their mass death. Let me turn the question around: if you honestly think, as you seem to, that he is promoting the mass killing of an entire population, the genocide of the Russian people, is it acceptable to you that he is allowed to make such a post? Is such a post acceptable to this site? I could of course be wrong but based on what he posted it's fairly obvious to me he was being figurative. Sometimes there is no forest to see, just the single tree in front of you that you're too close to such that it obscures your vision. So let's at least try not to always look for the worst in what people say. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Look at the West, banned Huawei 5G equipment, ban export of Chip making machines to China. The West is just belligerent, try to bully people, not following free market rule, scared of competition, create false accusation. Very shameless. Disgustable. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
They banned SOME Huawei equipment because it contained spyware. A good reason IMO. Nope. The US still exports hundreds of millions of dollars of lithography equipment to China. They just aren't exporting equipment that is used for geometries under 14nm. China is free to make their own. And Russia murders men, women and children with their indiscriminate bombing. If you think those two are the same - please stay in Malaysia. We don't want you here.
No shooting was involved. They rammed it, after trying for half an hour to down it by dumping fuel in front of it. If we can keep spending drones to keep Russia's aircraft from killing innocent children in Ukraine, it's worth it. If we saved 10 kids and had to lose a drone to do it, that seems like a good trade.
Yes, that the US should send more weapons to Ukraine to eliminate the rest of Russia's garbage air force, and stop exporting its technology to underachieving fascist crap countries like Russia and China.
Meanwhile, The International Criminal Court has issued an arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin. Specifically, this is for his ordering the illegal removal of children from their home country, Ukraine, extracting them to Russia. This means that Putin is now effectively unable to travel to countries that have ratified the ICC statute, because he could be subject to detention and extradition to the Hague for trial by the ICC. More warrants for Russian war criminals are likely to be coming from the ICC. After all, there is strong evidence of mass killings of civilians, rape by soldiers, the targeting of civilian infrastructure by the Russian army and other crimes. Much of this has been extensively documented by the Ukrainians.
Really, How? In fact, this may end up being worse for Russia in Ukraine. It has been reported that Russia plans to try and recover the drone. And while it is not likely that they'll recover enough to be of any use, let's consider the idea that they do. Russia doesn't have the technological know-how to quickly reverse engineer it and put up their own version, so by the time they did, it would be obsolete compared to what the US would be then using. Even then, the main reason the US has not provided Raptors( This type of drone) to Ukraine was to prevent the possible recovery of one by Russia. If they were to believe that Russia had been able to recover enough to be of use to them, that would become moot. Raptors are capable of more than surveillance, and would be a game changer if provided to Ukraine, since as noted above, Russia would not have the time or ability to put up anything comparable to counter them. As to the claim of Russia protecting itself from future invasion. Russia would not stand a chance in a conventional war against NATO. If you take the risk of a nuclear exchange out of the equation, NATO could easily invade Russia right now and Russia would not have a chance. Russia taking Ukraine wouldn't alter that one bit. (In fact, it makes things worse for Russia, as the material and personnel being wasted in this conflict weakens their overall military strength.) NATO has no intentions to invade Russia, because: 1) It could turn into a nuclear exchange in which nobody wins. 2) They have no desire to saddle themselves with the eventual occupation stage that would follow an successful invasion. Your arguments in support of Russia's invasion of Ukraine don't hold water.
There was already more than enough evidence to convict Putin 20 years ago, been disgusting to watch him showing up with impunity at G8's and G20's.
it wasnt shot down the incompetant russian pilot ran into it. the footage from the drone is available
