Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sheb]

NATO don't give a fuck about members with far-righter in government. Greece was in NATO under the colonels.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

NATO don't give a fuck about members with far-righter in government. Greece was in NATO under the colonels.

Heh. But Ukrainian Far-Rights don't like the whole idea of NATO.

On other hand Svoboda is a borderline political corpse and can save itself only by changing leadership and kicking some people from the party... but knowing internal working of the party. I doubt that it will be done. My prediction at most 3% percents on the next parliamentary elections assuming that it will happen relatively soon

As for The Right Sector I am still wondering what will happen with it. It has many different guys inside, ranging from liberals with nationalistic tendencies to the guys who have huge swastika tatooed on their backs. It is a wartime alliance and it can't be very stable.
I like Yarosh very much. He is way closer to my own vision of nationalism than Svoboda ever was but I am waiting what will be done with destructive elements of the Right Sector. Kicking out "White hammer" for "lack of discipline and actions that hurts reputation of the Right Sector" was a nice first step.
What can Right Sector reformed into a party achieve? Hard to say. But winning elections is out of the question

[Helgoland]

On centuries-old treaties: They still are legally binding, very much so. The close cooperation between Portugal and England is based on a treaty from the 12th century IIRC, and it was never revoked. Revolutions and such don't matter: The legal successor still has to follow any agreements and fulfill any duties that were previously agreed upon. That's why the BRD had to pay the Weimar Republic's reparations for WWI, you know?

Of course, Turkey is not interested in a war, and so these speculations are completely hypothetical. But they have a valid claim (if that treaty is valid, that is).

[burningpet]

How did your friend loose that kind of equipment? A cart shooting rockets ain't exactly the kind of stuff you leave behind sofa cushions.

his puma was completely stripped, but he didn't have the CARPET nor the Viper. it was during a rather big operation with lots of forces camping in the same rally area, so it was probably stripped by a company from another battalion. its sadly a pretty common practice on some battalions and even in the more decent ones, you are pretty much encouraged to "grow" (making things "magically appear") what you miss.

[XXSockXX]

On centuries-old treaties: They still are legally binding, very much so. The close cooperation between Portugal and England is based on a treaty from the 12th century IIRC, and it was never revoked. Revolutions and such don't matter: The legal successor still has to follow any agreements and fulfill any duties that were previously agreed upon. That's why the BRD had to pay the Weimar Republic's reparations for WWI, you know?

Of course, Turkey is not interested in a war, and so these speculations are completely hypothetical. But they have a valid claim (if that treaty is valid, that is).

Germany is a special case, because the BRD is indeed the legal sucessor state of the German Empire, which is why reparations from WW1 (until recently) and WW2 continue, these were part of peace treaties also. It wasn't until after WW2 that there were some rules for the legal sucession of states, sometimes this stuff isn't even clear today.
That treaty between Portugal and England wouldn't be legally binding today anymore. It's highly doubtful that Turkey could use that treaty to get a valid legal claim out of it. Even if Turkey and Russia were legal sucessors to the parties in the treaty, which is questionable, nobody would recognize such a claim as legally relevant.
Still Turkey sees itself as a protector of the Crimean Tatars. They apparently threatened to close the Bosphorus for Russian ships, if there is violence against the Crimean Tatars.

[Bouchart]

UKRAINIAN PM: "TODAY RUSSIAN SOLDIERS BEGAN SHOOTING AT UKRAINIAN SERVICEMEN. THIS IS A WAR CRIME"

It's from Zero Hedge, which isn't always the most credible.

[Sheb]

That's stupid. Invading itself is a war crime ("Waging a war of aggression"). But shooting enemy soldiers is just called war.

[olemars]

Still Turkey sees itself as a protector of the Crimean Tatars. They apparently threatened to close the Bosphorus for Russian ships, if there is violence against the Crimean Tatars.

Incidentally:

Hundreds of mourners gathered at a cemetery outside Simferopol on Tuesday for the burial of Reshat Ametov, whose murder has sparked anger and fear in a Crimean Tatar community bitterly opposed to Russia's annexation of the Black Sea peninsula.

Ametov, who was in his 30s, disappeared on March 3 when three men in military jackets led him away from the scene of a protest in the Crimean regional capital of Simferopol, witnesses said.

One friend at the burial, who declined to be named for fear of reprisals from pro-Russian agitators, said the father of three had gone into town in order to enlist for the Ukrainian army amid escalating tensions with Russia.

His body was found nearly two weeks later near the town of Belogorsk, 50 km (30 miles) east of Simferopol, naked and showing signs of torture and beating.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

They apparently threatened to close the Bosphorus for Russian ships, if there is violence against the Crimean Tatars.

Looks like they'd better get to it, then.

Damn you olemars. I challenge you to a duel for this link.

[olemars]

Wow, we even picked the same link.

edit: now you ninjaed my comment about the link.

[LeoLeonardoIII]

Things are happening so quickly!

[Ukrainian Ranger]

NATO don't give a fuck about members with far-righter in government. Greece was in NATO under the colonels.

By the way I am among the guys who has little trust in NATO. For example: I doubt that Spain will be ready to send it's soldiers in a war vs Russia should it attack Estonia just because Spain has signed some piece of paper.

The treaty had sense in the times of Warsaw Pact vs NATO situation when it was obvious that USSR may try to bring communism to the whole Europe and neutrality was a very questionable option

UKRAINIAN PM: "TODAY RUSSIAN SOLDIERS BEGAN SHOOTING AT UKRAINIAN SERVICEMEN. THIS IS A WAR CRIME"

So typical for him. Loud words but little to no actions
He issued something like dozens of ultimatums to Yanukovich....

[Sheb]

Yeah, me too.

[olemars]

The NATO member countries are taking turns on being the Estonian air force, so in case of invasion those would probably be the first on the line.

[XXSockXX]

By the way I am among the guys who has little trust in NATO. For example: I doubt that Spain will be ready to send it's soldiers in a war vs Russia should it attack Estonia just because Spain has signed some piece of paper.

The treaty had sense in the times of Warsaw Pact vs NATO situation when it was obvious that USSR may try to bring communism to the whole Europe and neutrality was a very questionable option

NATO invaded Afghanistan because something a dozen people did was ruled as an attack on a NATO member. Defense is the purpose of NATO and members are legally bound to defend each other. It's not like that is optional, it would have dire diplomatic repercussions if a country ignored these treaties.
Also it doesn't really matter which country sends how many troops, the US and Turkey have the two biggest armies in the NATO and are not known for their reluctance when it comes to military action. Even Germany sent troops to Afghanistan, I can tell you that takes some convincing to achieve that. Most importantly several NATO countries have nukes. I really don't see how anybody would want to risk an open conflict with NATO, hoping they don't react.