The art of the deal

[Quix0te]

So Russia gets to determine which allies sovereign nations choose to have?

US Sec of State James Baker to Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, Feb. 9, 1990:

“After explaining why the U.S. wanted the reunited Germany to stay within the framework of NATO, Baker told Gorbachev that "if we maintain a presence in a Germany that is a part of NATO, there would be no extension of NATO's jurisdiction for forces of NATO 1 inch to the east."

Fact-checking claims that NATO broke agreement on expansion

Two days before Russia invaded Ukraine with an assault that intelligence officials had warned was coming, conservative c

www.politifact.com

 

[Katscratch]

US Sec of State James Baker to Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, Feb. 9, 1990:

“After explaining why the U.S. wanted the reunited Germany to stay within the framework of NATO, Baker told Gorbachev that "if we maintain a presence in a Germany that is a part of NATO, there would be no extension of NATO's jurisdiction for forces of NATO 1 inch to the east."

Fact-checking claims that NATO broke agreement on expansion

Two days before Russia invaded Ukraine with an assault that intelligence officials had warned was coming, conservative c

www.politifact.com

You realize you just cited something that concluded that you are wrong.

Is this your way of admitting you are wrong?

 

[Quix0te]

You realize you just cited something that concluded that you are wrong.

Is this your way of admitting you are wrong?

At the time that the Berlin Wall came down, Russia was assured that there would be no further eastward expansion of NATO if Russia withdrew from East Germany and the country was united with West Germany. I was there. I was stationed at McGrawe Kaserne in Munich, West Germany from 1989-1992. There was great jubilation throughout Germany.

In 1991 and 1992, US forces in Germany and throughout NATO were withdrawn. That was the deal: Russian troops pull back and NATO does not expand to the East. Your childish taunts are ecidence that you have no inkling what you're talking about.

 

[Katscratch]

At the time that the Berlin Wall came down, Russia was assured that there would be no further eastward expansion of NATO if Russia withdrew from East Germany and the country was united with West Germany. I was there. I was stationed at McGrawe Kaserne in Munich, West Germany from 1989-1992. There was great jubilation throughout Germany.

In 1991 and 1992, US forces in Germany and throughout NATO were withdrawn. That was the deal: Russian troops pull back and NATO does not expand to the East. Your childish taunts are ecidence that you have no inkling what you're talking about.

First of all, you say this as if Ukraine was actually admitted into NATO—they were nowhere near that status.

So you think that sovereign nations like Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, etc. can never, never, never again choose democratic allies and explore NATO admission without full permission of Russia, and if they do so, they deserve to be militarily invaded?

That’s an extraordinarily pro KGB mindset.

 

[Quix0te]

First of all, you say this as if Ukraine was actually admitted into NATO—they were nowhere near that status.

So you think that sovereign nations like Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, etc. can never, never, never again choose democratic allies and explore NATO admission without full permission of Russia, and if they do so, they deserve to be militarily invaded?

That’s an extraordinarily pro KGB mindset.

You distort every comment that I make: “First of all, you say this as if Ukraine was actually admitted into NATO—they were nowhere near that status.”

No, I said that Ukraine was very clearly seeking admission to NATO and that’s why Russia invaded. I documented this statement. The rest of your comment is crap that you made up.

“So you think that sovereign nations like Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, etc. can never, never, never again choose democratic allies and explore NATO admission without full permission of Russia, and if they do so, they deserve to be militarily invaded?”

Again, I said nothing of the kind. This crap came from the voices in your head. At the time that the Cold War ended, Russia was assured that would not be “one inch” of NATO expansion to the east if Germany reunited and joined NATO. I documented this statement. Russia agreed and pulled their army out of East Germany. Ukraine joining NATO clearly violates that agreement.

 

[Katscratch]

You distort every comment that I make: “First of all, you say this as if Ukraine was actually admitted into NATO—they were nowhere near that status.”

No, I said that Ukraine was very clearly seeking admission to NATO and that’s why Russia invaded. The rest of your comment is crap that you made up.

“So you think that sovereign nations like Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, etc. can never, never, never again choose democratic allies and explore NATO admission without full permission of Russia, and if they do so, they deserve to be militarily invaded?”

Again, I said nothing of the kind. This crap came from the voices in your head. At the time that the Cold War ended, Russia was assured that would not be “one inch” of NATO expansion to the east if Germany reunited and joined NATO. Russia agreed. Ukraine joining NATO clearly violates that agreement.

And that merited military invasion?

 

[Quix0te]

And that merited military invasion?

I didn't say that it did. More baiting on your behalf.

 

[Katscratch]

I didn't say that it did. Another distortion on your behalf.

I am asking questions; not putting words in your mouth.

So your answer to my question “ (did) that merit military invasion?” was “I didn’t say that it did.”

which is a complete non-answer IMO.
That’s kind of like asking your kid “have you done your homework?” and getting an answer “I didn’t say I didn’t do it.”

So I’ll ask again: Did Ukraine’s interest in NATO admission, 40 years after the US/Russia agreement you cite, merit military invasion by Russia?

 

[Quix0te]

So I’ll ask again: Did Ukraine’s interest in NATO admission, 40 years after the US/Russia agreement you cite, merit military invasion by Russia?

I did not say the invasion was merited. I explained why it happened. When the Cold War ended, the US and NATO assured Russia that there would be no further expansion of NATO to the east if the Russians pulled their troops from eastern Europe. Ukraine and the US were openly planning to violate that agreement.

Something else to think about. If Russia had waited until Ukraine fully joined NATO before attacking, the collective defense clause of the North Atlantic Treaty, NATO Article 5, states that an armed attack against one or more member states is considered an attack against all members. We'd be in WWIII right now.

 

[tjreese]

I did not say the invasion was merited. I explained why it happened. When the Cold War ended, the US and NATO assured Russia that there would be no further expansion of NATO to the east if the Russians pulled their troops from eastern Europe. Ukraine and the US were openly planning to violate that agreement.

Something else to think about. If Russia had waited until Ukraine fully joined NATO before attacking, the collective defense clause of the North Atlantic Treaty, NATO Article 5, states that an armed attack against one or more member states is considered an attack against all members. We'd be in WWIII right now.

Trying to read you two I think you closed the gap. It seems the discussion is not whether it was merited, but rather the results were the expected, since we were told in advance. We may think another country should do this or that, but when warned that crossing a line would be considered a threat, we then encounter reality...not what we think is fair or what should happen. Would we see this different if in Putin's situation? Probably, even if not merited. In the whole mess I would like to know where half the money is since it cannot be explained what happened to it. I expect sometime in the future we see two of the three (USA, Russia, China) align "more closely" together and though I don't like any consolidation of two of them, I hope the USA is not singled out. Timing can change a lot of things...

 

[BB62]

Trying to read you two I think you closed the gap. It seems the discussion is not whether it was merited, but rather the results were the expected, since we were told in advance. We may think another country should do this or that, but when warned that crossing a line would be considered a threat, we then encounter reality...not what we think is fair or what should happen. Would we see this different if in Putin's situation? Probably, even if not merited. In the whole mess I would like to know where half the money is since it cannot be explained what happened to it. I expect sometime in the future we see two of the three (USA, Russia, China) align "more closely" together and though I don't like any consolidation of two of them, I hope the USA is not singled out. Timing can change a lot of things...

Another lie. The money can be explained if you choose to look. You'd rather just make false accusations.

 

[Katscratch]

I did not say the invasion was merited. I explained why it happened. When the Cold War ended, the US and NATO assured Russia that there would be no further expansion of NATO to the east if the Russians pulled their troops from eastern Europe. Ukraine and the US were openly planning to violate that agreement.

Something else to think about. If Russia had waited until Ukraine fully joined NATO before attacking, the collective defense clause of the North Atlantic Treaty, NATO Article 5, states that an armed attack against one or more member states is considered an attack against all members. We'd be in WWIII right now.

Holy diversion!

You still won’t answer this simple question:

Was the Russian military invasion of Ukraine merited?

 

[Quix0te]

Holy diversion!

You still won’t answer this simple question:

Was the Russian military invasion of Ukraine merited?

Diversion? I am addressing the issue with documented, historical facts from links. I am not playing "gotcha" using the bait words of your choosing.

 

[Katscratch]

Diversion? I am addressing the issue with documented, historical facts from links. I am not playing "gotcha" using the bait words of your choosing.

Gotcha.

Let’s try for the (I think) FIFTH time:

Was the Russian military invasion of Ukraine merited?

 

[BB62]

Diversion? I am addressing the issue with documented, historical facts from links. I am not playing "gotcha" using the bait words of your choosing.

Historical facts?

How about the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, agreed to by Russia.

Ukraine gave up its Soviet era nuclear arsenal in exchange for a guarantee from the Russian Federation, the UK, and the United States to respect and uphold Ukrainian territorial integrity.

I assume you understand what "respect Ukrainian territorial integrity" means?

 

[tjreese]

Another lie. The money can be explained if you choose to look. You'd rather just make false accusations.

View embedded media

View embedded media

View embedded media

View embedded media

There are many places where Zelenskyy says he doesn't know where the money differential is between what he says he has and what others say he has. My accusation isn't false as you try to label me as you typically do to everyone, but rather a repeat of the difference between what Zelenskyy says he received and what others say he should have. Maybe I can find the true answer in the media someplace once I start deleting websites

 

[Quix0te]

Historical facts?

How about the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, agreed to by Russia.

Ukraine gave up its Soviet era nuclear arsenal in exchange for a guarantee from the Russian Federation, the UK, and the United States to respect and uphold Ukrainian territorial integrity.

I assume you understand what "respect Ukrainian territorial integrity" means?

Bill Clinton readily admits that it was the biggest mistake he ever made:

Bill Clinton says he feels 'terrible' for pushing a 1994 agreement with Russia that resulted in Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons

Clinton acknowledged that Putin had foresight into how Ukraine was weakened, plotting his first opportunity to invade Crimea in 2014.

www.businessinsider.com

Bill Clinton admits regret for having Ukraine give up nuclear weapons

Former President Bill Clinton has expressed remorse over his role in negotiating a 1994 deal that resulted in Ukraine giving up its nuclear arsenal, suggesting that Russia never would have invaded …

nypost.com

 

[Riveting-]

Another lie. The money can be explained if you choose to look. You'd rather just make false accusations.

Are you trying to claim that US expenditures to US arm manufacturers for weapons for Ukraine do not count as support for Ukraine?

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-co...ntries-have-committed-the-most-aid-to-ukraine

 

[BB62]

There are many places where Zelenskyy says he doesn't know where the money differential is between what he says he has and what others say he has. My accusation isn't false as you try to label me as you typically do to everyone, but rather a repeat of the difference between what Zelenskyy says he received and what others say he should have. Maybe I can find the true answer in the media someplace once I start deleting websites

You should. You constantly throw out this BS with ZERO backup.

Wtf does this even mean?

"There are many places where Zelenskyy says he doesn't know where the money differential is between what he says he has and what others say he has."

As usual, this is you running your mouth until people stop asking for proof. You'll reply to this with more of the same. No evidence, repeat the accusations, another 4 paragraph stream of consciousness word salad that goes nowhere. Did you bother to look at the links?

 

[BB62]

Are you trying to claim that US expenditures to US arm manufacturers for weapons for Ukraine do not count as support for Ukraine?

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-co...ntries-have-committed-the-most-aid-to-ukraine

Of course not. They are support for Ukraine. They are also jobs for Americans. They are putting our tax dollars back into the economy They are upgrading our weapons systems. They are putting obsolete weapons to use instead of being sold for scrap. All while not one American soldier has died.

 

[SIBoiler2]

Still say that Burisma was Hunter's best moneymaker.

 

[BB62]

Bill Clinton readily admits that it was the biggest mistake he ever made:

Bill Clinton says he feels 'terrible' for pushing a 1994 agreement with Russia that resulted in Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons

Clinton acknowledged that Putin had foresight into how Ukraine was weakened, plotting his first opportunity to invade Crimea in 2014.

www.businessinsider.com

Bill Clinton admits regret for having Ukraine give up nuclear weapons

Former President Bill Clinton has expressed remorse over his role in negotiating a 1994 deal that resulted in Ukraine giving up its nuclear arsenal, suggesting that Russia never would have invaded …

nypost.com

So WHAT? Stop changing the subject. You deflect worse that riveting. Russia agreed to respect Ukrainian sovereignty if they got rid of their nukes.

You love you some Russians. Reagan would be proud. How does it feel to turn your back on democracy and the uniform over politics?

 

[Quix0te]

So WHAT? Stop changing the subject. You deflect worse that riveting. Russia agreed to respect Ukrainian sovereignty if they got rid of their nukes.

I didn't change the subject, you did. Yes, in 1994 Russia agreed to respect Ukrainian sovereignty if they got rid of their nukes. But that did not negate the 1990 agreement that Russia made with the US and with NATO that NATO would not expand "one inch" to the east if Russia withdrew their army from eastern Europe. Obviously a violation of the first agreement would negate the later agreement, and that's what happened. The US, Ukraine and NATO should have honored both agreements.