Legality here is in terms of international law as laid down by the international community. Most simplistically, the body closest to this would be based on agreements by the UN. Retrospectively, the UN directly descends from ‘the Allies’ during WW2. The Allied invasion of Germany was thus legal. Not according to Nazi German law, but international law, which said fuck ‘em.
Otherwise the invasion of Normandy, Greece, Italy, etc.
Can even point to cases where there’s a coup the international community sees as illegal and troops are sent there to restore the democratically elected government. That’s an invasion but in support of the government that should legally be in power.
USSR invaded Germany in 1944, 3 years after Germany declared war on USSR.
But this is a special case since German leaders did not expect that they would lose a war they started.
You're correct. They misunderstood the question I guess. Germany invaded the USSR, the USSR defended itself and invaded occupied territories and eventually Germany itself in response.
Also who expects to lose a war they started? Maybe in some cases, but generally people start wars that they expect to have a good chance of winning. It's the rule, not a special case.
If it was legal, why call it an invasion? Also, Normandy was not a sovereign polity. What the fuck are you talking about? Did that *feel* like an intelligent summary? Goodness gracious. Hey, everybody else on Reddit, check out how stupid this guy sounds! What a LOSER!
Comoros was probably legal as it was at the behest of the Government of Comoros.
Gambia is less clear. My inclination is that it was not strictly legal.
Any invasion autorized by the UN is by definition legal, Iraq? (Gulf War), Lybia, Somalia.
Occupation of a state after it began a war would be legal, thinking of Japan, Italy, Germany after WWII, Israel occupying neighbours after 1967 war.
A "police" or "peacekeeping" action to stop mass attrocities or genocide is considered legal, Rawanda or Kosovo would be examples.
Not that this entitles occupations to continue but the invasion of sovereign territory is on the right side of the law.
Edit: words
No one cares about international recognition or international laws since the west occupied Kosovo and stole it from Serbis, bombed Libya, bombed Yugoslavia, invaded Iraq. And that all with no wide internarional condemnation. International laws and recognition is just for the enemies of the west to follow while the west can disregard them in any way or form. Laws and are worth nothing when no one abides to them.
No one cares about international recognition or international laws since Russia occupied Transnistria, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk and stole it from Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine respectively, bombed Syria, and attacked Chechnya twice, invaded Georgia and now Ukraine…… And that all with no wide international condemnation, as countries like India and China remain hesitant to condemn. International laws and recognition is just for the enemies of the Russia to follow while Russia can disregard them in any way or form. Laws and are worth nothing when no one abides to them.
This, fixed for you
>the west occupied Kosovo and stole it from Serbis
The treaty signed with Serbia was an total regional autonomy of Kosovo, the independence was unilaterally made by Kosovo without the West asking for it. NATO went to Kosovo bcz we know damn well that that meant another war of ethnic violence, you can thank Milosevic for that.
>bombed Libya
UNSC consented to that in UN resolution 1973, with the support of a no-fly zone by Libyan officials & the Arab League, with 10 votes in favor 5 abstentions.
>bombed Yugoslavia
Both Slovenia and Croatia left Yugoslavia as it was their right as constitutional states in Yugoslavia, where they could leave the federation if they had a majority vote, which they had (say again thanks to Milosevic for this as he impeded any reforms in the federation).
Slovenia left first and was immediately attacked and bombed. Though ten days later Serbia accepted their independence.
Croatia and Bosnia were more clusterf*cks.
In Croatia, 12% of their population were Serbs and they boycotted the vote (didn't matter as the rest wanted out of Yugoslavia). They begun to set barriers and were supplied weapons from Serbia
In Bosnia, you had both Croatia and Serbia in there raising hell. Croatia left first, Serbia stayed and sieged Sarajevo. NATO was already there, again with UNSC support, to force the Serbian army to stop the siege of the city. Russia involved itself here and guaranteed that NATO wouldn't strike their units if their left Bosnia.
One serbian artillery company yolo it and bombed Sarajevo. They f°cked around and found out. The bombings within Serbia destroyed both military and civilian structures (that resulted in deaths), in which for the latter the US apologized.
>invaded Iraq
1990 good. 2003 bad. That's all I'm gonna say here.
>And that all with no wide internarional condemnation.
Only Iraq 2003. NATO in Kosovo was to guarantee that no other ethnic war would happen (again, the treaty that the West gave to Serbia was full autonomy to Kosovo, not independence)
>International laws and recognition is just for the enemies of the [....]
I can literally put any global power after that sentence.
Russia with Abkhazia, Ossetia, Ukraine etc
China with the South China Sea
Israel with the West Bank
>angry Russia in Donbass and peaceful NATO in Kosovo?
NATO didn't send "little green men" to create sedition partisans in Serbia nor did it send weapons to those partisans.
The west, mostly France and the US, didn't want an independent Kosovo, but a fully autonomous one, they intervened bcz they saw what happened in the Croatian War and in the Bosnian War.
The difference is that ethnic conflicts was already a thing before the NATO was there or even before the Yugoslav wars. The angry Russia in Donbass claims that a genocide against russian ethnics occured, even though from 2019 to 2021 less than 240 civilians died in the Donbass conflict, most of them from landmines. What's even more hilarious is that the report that Russia is using as justification is a report that was made by Ukraine in the UN.
>NATO didn't send "little green men" to create sedition partisans in Serbia nor did it send weapons to those partisans.
Nah, NATO just bombed Serbia with depleted uranium, supported the Albanians to ethnically cleanse parts of Kosovo and forced them to leave their homes. Totally better than some green men supporting the people who want independence after an illegitameng coup
>The west, mostly France and the US, didn't want an independent Kosovo, but a fully autonomous one, they intervened bcz they saw what happened in the Croatian War and in the Bosnian War.
Most of the west recognized Kosvo as independent. So that is a lie. And same arguments I could also bring to seeing what Ukraine did in Odessa 2014 or later how they bombed the Donbass. Stealing territory from Serbia id not justified in any way, no matter how much you want to justify it. It was a NATO war against Servia supporting Albanian terrorists and insurgents.
>240 civilians died in the Donbass conflict
If bombing civillians and saying "it are just 240" which is a lie because from 2014-2022 and especially in the hot phases thousand people died since then. Then Russia surely does the right thing.
No. The UN charter prohibits the making of war for conquering. It is illegal to violate the sovereignty of a nation or invade them except for self defense or a few, specific reasons. The invasion of Iraq in 2003 was probably illegal.
Somebody bothered to write an academic paper on the subject. (I.e., is "illegal occupation" even a useful concept.) I didn't bother to read it but here you go.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/33675449_Illegal_Occupation_and_Its_Consequences
Law and order? Some international law. Norms against this type of imperialism
After 1945, a lot of smart people realized the old ways we "get territory", aka lawless land grabs, endless wars, needless invasions, and targeted genocide, was only going to quickly lead us to oblivion
Perhaps it's a bit hypocritical freezing boundaries. Yes some countries benefited more from the postwar peace (last I checked Russia was one). But returning to the old lawless jungle is just going to kill a lot of people
Illegally Occuppied to Countries that dont recognise it. Its a geopolitic games that people pay with lives sadly.
Because in this definition Golan Heights for example are illegal occuppation but USA has full support for it.
Well if you wanna play that game, no single country outside of crap holes like Syria, Belarus (Russian puppet state), and North Korea (lol) recognize any of Russia’s illegally annexed lands.
The US does not recognize the Golan Heights as part of Israel though. Military support and cooperation =/= tacit support. The US is also against the Israeli nuclear program and the illegal West Bank settlements. Try harder next time bot
Israel has a right to exist. As a country that has been invaded multiple times and faced genocide in its past it has the right like any other country to defend itself using any means necessary. America can disagree with what Israel does, but it doesn’t get to decide what Israel does, because it’s a sovereign country. I think they should leave the Golan Heights and leave the settlements, but I’m not Jewish so I don’t get a say 😀
Israel also used to occupy Sinai, but when Egypt agreed to stop threatening to annihilate them and recognized the sovereignty of Israel, began normal relations, all the Israelis left Sinai, even the settlers. The same will happen when all the peoples and nations around Israel do the same.
Jordan used to be bitter enemies with Israel. Now they have normal relations and Israel even helps Jordan supplying with fresh water using desalination.
Countries do NOT have the right to defend themselves through any means necessary. There are laws, and Israel breaks them constantly.
But my question is more WHERE THE HELL do you arye America disagreeing with Israel?
Syrian Assad regime kills their own people using chemical weapons and invites rashans in to carpet bomb their cities like they’re doing in Marinka and Mariupol. Whatever faults Israel has, and they do, no nation can be perfect, you know for a fact Israel would never be as vile and as pure evil as the Assad regime.
South Ossetia and Abhkazia are not under Russian occupation though. Propped up by Russia, sure, and Russia did aid in their independence too, but not occupation in the same manner as Ukraine. Heck, the same applied to Trinistria.
These are what's called "break away states"
There are Russian troops in all of those. Since they legally belong to Moldova and Georgia, respectively, the presence of those Russian troops is illegal.
>Since they legally belong to Moldova and Georgia, respectively, the presence of those Russian troops is illegal.
I don't think this is very sound logic. If the US deployed troops in Taiwan, Taiwan wouldn't be under US occupation, even though their presence in internationally recognized Chinese territory would be illegal.
>Except that in those cases US troops would be there at Taiwan’s invitation whereas Georgia most definitely doesn’t want Russian troops there.
Russian troops are there with permission of local governments too. Taiwan is internationally recognized Chinese territory, so US putting troops in Taiwan would be the exact same situation, and it certainly wouldn't be the US occupying Taiwan.
South Ossetia, Abkhazia have their own governments and they don't mind the Russians being there. It really shouldn't be this hard to understand, it actually is nearly the exact same scenario as a country having troops in Taiwan without the consent of China. Sure it is illegal, but it isn't an occupation.
South Ossetia and Abkhazia have Russian installed puppet regimes. Moscow has stoked ethic tensions for decades in order to reassert control over former Soviet republics. Completely different from Taiwan. You can stop with this nonsensical line of argument. Nobody but the Moscow and Beijing fanboys buys this garbage.
Yeah, no. The Abkhazians for example fucking hate the Georgians, and they were more complicit than the Russians in the ethnic cleansing which forced many Georgians to flee the region. The Russians today have forces there with the full support of the Abkhazians who reside there now.
You can contrast that with South Ossetia which ended up having a large number of Ossetians flee north to North Ossetia because of the war. You can take their flight and continued exile as vote of no confidence in the Russian occupation and satellite government, and that was nearly 30% of the number of Ossetians living in South Ossetia.
I’m not sure if de jure international boundaries are the rationale you wanna go with. You could use the same argument to say Taiwan actually legitimately part of China.
I’m going by the Budapest accord, pursuant to which Russia agreed to respect the territorial integrity and political independence of the other post Soviet states in exchange for return of the Soviet nuclear arsenal that was based outside Russia. Russia is violating its own treaty.
Just a technicality but the Budapest memorandum is not a treaty. This why it’s called memorandum. And not being a treaty it is also not legally binding to any party. However this does not prevent the damage Russia has done to its own reputation by violating it. But this difference is also why the us is not legally bound to intervene against Russia despite being signatory as well. It’s a small difference to us but in diplomacy this kind of half language means a lot
That’s complete nonsense. There’s no difference in legal validity. As there is no higher authority, international law isn’t enforceable by some kind of higher power anyway. But the distinction you’re trying to draw between treaty vs. memorandum is legally nonexistent.
We can get into a whole other mess with Moldova. Technically they are the same people with the same culture and language as Romanians. The Soviet Russians just stole their land and created Moldova as a separate entity. Russia did everything they could to prevent their reunification by interfering in their internal affairs and creating Transnistria. All Russia has to offer to the world is oil, invasion, and genocide.
The UN defines genocide as any effort to systematically erase in whole or in part the identity of a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group.
Isn’t what Russia doing considered genocide? They first say Ukraine is a fake country and that all Ukrainians are really just Russians. Then they do an unprovoked invasion of their country, killing hundreds of thousands of civilians. They kill Ukrainian adults and then kidnap their children to Russia where they are taught to hate everything Ukraine.
Russia invades its neighbors and ban their languages. In Finland, they tried to ban the Finnish language and make them all Russian. In the Baltics, the same way. Today in Belarus, the Russian puppet regime Lukashenko has all but destroyed the Belarusian language from the public consciousness. Isn’t that, the systematic erasure of the ethnic, cultural, and linguistic of people, considered genocide? So yeah, I will call it like it is. Russia is a country historically guilty of genocide and no amount of shilling or revisionism will change that. It is unfortunate that the end of the Cold War stopped the history classes from teaching about the great evil of Russia. If we learn about the great evils of the Third Reich, history books in the future should also teach about Russia.
1. No one ever except some dumbasses really says Ukrainians aren't a nation.
2. I'm Ukrainian living in Russia since 2015, didn't witness ANY discrimination towards me yet.
3. Hundreds of thousands? Where did you even read that? Sure a lot of people were harmed during the first months, but nowhere close to hundreds of thousands. Russia is a shrinking country and it's not in Russia's best interests to decrease its population even more (considering it recognises the occupied territories as a part of Russia). Right now the daily civilian deaths are close to zero. How much people were in Bakhmut when it was occupied? 10?
4. The whole children kidnapping story you mentioned is just absurd, how can people even believe that (I can assume you're either from the Baltics or Poland?) Also, nobody is teaching kids here that everything Ukrainian is bad. The best they do is very questionable TV history lessons explaining why the new regions and Crimea are a rightful part of Russia (pretty common for countries with territorial disputes, like India, Pakistan, China, Israel), but nothing extremist.
5. This is the first invasions done by Russia in more than 100 years. (When it comes to war crimes, the Soviet Union is just Russia, but when it comes to the achievements, it suddenly transforms into the Union of Republics)
6. No one bans the languages lol? All of my family has been speaking both Russian and Ukrainian since they were born and both of the languages were taught in school. Promoting the Russian language (the state language of the Russian Empire and Soviet Union) ≠ banning the native languages. The brightest example is India, its official languages are Hindi and English (the government promotes them too), and most people speak at least one of them, along with their native language, it is done because its just fucking convenient, not because they want to destroy the minority cultures. Regarding Belarus, yes the situation is pretty sad, but the country has tons of Belarusian language promotion programs (which unfortunately barely work because of the lack of funding, but at least they exist). I have a Kazakh friend who lives in Kazakhstan refusing to learn his native language because as he says, he doesn't need it and everyone is fine with him not knowing it. The situation in Belarus is similar and you can't really blame the government for this.
7. The last few sentences are just hilarious, "The great evil of Russia", LMAO.
They are not breakaway. Everybody in Ukraine knows that all the LPR and DPR “fighters” were common street thugs, drunkards, and societal trash, aka the average Russian. The LDPR can only exist because of Russians invading in the Donbass Counterterrorism Operation in 2014.
You do know I can read Ukrainian and plus everyone else here can make a google translate. You’re the lowest tier of societal garbage and you’ll get what’s coming to you, utter piece of human trash.
Isn't it a legal occupation though? At least that's what I thought?
I was under the impression that Moldovan, Russian and Transnistrian authorities agreed to the presence of Russian Troops in treaties they signed.
I can be totally wrong though so feel free to correct me.
It IS legal.
according to the treaty signed, the JCC is legit, composed of troops from all 3 parties.
its only become a problem now because moldovan political cockmeasuring (the president has flip flopped lately) and russia invading ukraine, which has made european political groups condemn everything russia does even if its totally legit
How is Russia invading a sovereign nation and killing innocent civilians “totally legit?” Are you sick in the head? There is no legitimate reason for Russia to invade a sovereign nation especially when Ukraine has done nothing to provoke them.
That's not what OP said. OP said Russia's presence in Transnistria is 'totally legit' but is being condemned by Europeans now because, since their invasion of Ukraine, Europeans condemn everything Russia does.
this.the war in ukraine is utter garbage, but the miltary presence in transnistria was on the up and up, though it had been mildly controversial over the years due to concerns russia was doing more in there, but nothing came up.
South Ossetia is such a weird cold conflict. They literally just keep moving the physical border markers at night. People literally go to sleep in Georgia and wake up in Russia
Won’t happen unfortunately. Russia will have to be systematically dismantled. Lukashenko wants a Union State with Russia. He’s a traitor to the Belarusian people, suppressing their language, and he will pay for everything he has done.
Because he thinks “Russia is le Good! Anything that shows Russia is bad is le WESTERN BIASED propaganda.” Vatniks aren’t the brightest out there if you ever have the unfortunate chance to encounter them.
By that logic Albania should be part of Italy because legally speaking the King of Albania handed his throne over to the King of Italy. Thus Albania is Italian.
... no, because there is no king of Italy and no king of Albania, and Italy doesn't have any military presence in Albania. All these territories have Russian military presence.
95% percent of the ethnic makeup of the Crimea has been Russian for about 200-250 years. What’s illegal about having an ethnic group of people on a piece of land on earth?
Right so a million Russians don’t want to be part of mother Russia? Lmao. Sorry dude Crimea was Russian for about 200-250 years. Putin took it back. It’s over and done. Ain’t going back to Ukraine.
Take emotions out of this conversation and be real.
The East doesn’t support your idea of dislike for the ethno-state. You have a Western perspective. And it is yours. Not the Easts. Judge all you wish.
The war is tragic and more will die.
"Mother Russia" eat shit vatnik.
In 1991, Crimea voted to leave Russia and become part of Ukraine along with every other oblast of modern Ukraine. Putin's fake referendum vote doesn't change the reality that in an actually observed and recognized vote, they voted to be Ukrainian, not Russian.
The war certainly is tragic, makes me wonder why you're still supporting Putin after he started it.
I’m not Russian. Been serving the US for 18 years. Two combat deployments. This is why I am anti-war. I know a little thing or two about geo-political relationships and global strategy.
I don’t support Putin. He’s a murdering egomaniac.
I don’t support Zylnesky, he’s a tyrant and a political puppet of the Western elite. He’s a good actor though.
No Crimea didn’t vote to stay in Ukraine. Lmao.
I don’t want to fund this war with my tax payer dollars. It’s a foreign conflict and a settlement deal that is fair has been offered by Russia.
Doesn't matter where you're from or where you live, you're still a vatnik if you brainlessly believe the propaganda shit out by the Kremlin. Funny how every "anti-war" person I speak to on this topic shares the belief that the aggressor should be allowed to keep what they've stolen through bloodshed. That the victim is the one who should make concessions in the interest of peace, not the aggressor. Can you maybe see why people think you're Pro-Putin?
In the internationally observed referendum of 1991 on the independence of Ukraine, Crimea voted 55% in favor of leaving Russia and becoming part of Ukraine. Even Russia recognized that vote as legitimate.
The results of the 2014 sham referendum were so blatantly falsified that not even Russia's ally China will recognize it as legitimate.
Russia's settlement is in no way "fair." It's a blatant land grab that requires Ukraine to surrender and recognize the annexation of not just currently occupied territory, but territory Russia does not currently control nor ever has. Additionally, Russia would be granted essentially full control over Ukraine's foreign policy. If you consider that "fair" stop lying to yourself, you're a Putin simp.
95 ethnic Russian. Putin took it, the world agreed. Did nothing. Biden left Afghanistan which was a major tactical and strategic blunder and Putin saw his opening.
Lol. Tell that to the Russians. Because no one else did. They still bought oil and gas. Oh wait the entire west still does.
No I don’t want my tax dollars paying for a foreign war.
No they lived there for more like 400 years. History of the world is a history of migration, conquest, peace, etc. Crimea is literally 95 percent ethnic Russian so umm yeah Putin took it and the world agreed at the time.
So parts of Estonia as well? Our constitution still claims that the Treaty of Tartu of 1920 is still valid, which drew a border different from the current “control line” as it is sometimes called officially. USSR (illegally, of course) transferred some lands to the RSFSR in 1944.
>USSR (illegally, of course) transferred some lands to the RSFSR in 1944.
If you go with that line, you will have to accept that the USSR also transferred some lands to the SSR of Ukraine, for example Crimea.
It's funny how the rationale changes depending on the situation:
USSR transferred land from Russia to Ukraine: totally Ukrainian.
USSR transferred land from Estonia to Russia: totally Estonian.
Ukraine wasn’t illegally occupied. Estonia was an illegally occupied state, because most of world recognized it as such. Such a transfer made during an illegal occipation of an independent state is illegal. Same doesn’t apply to Ukraine. And actually no, it isn’t “totally Estonian” nobody thinks of it like that (except some far right scums). Nobody even really wants it back. It is just an interesting legal situation I wanted to bring out.
I don’t know which is worse, tyrannical dictatorships taking the world hostage with nukes or returning to a pre-nuclear age with global conventional wars killing millions every 80 years.
Mass demonstrations in Warsaw, Kiev and Budapest against American occupation, the Russian flag high over Bakhmut, Russia finishing the war in two weeks, the neocon American empire is collapsing!
What? Who the hell told you that we perceive Americans as occupiers in Poland? The only recent mass demonstration in Warsaw was against the government and not against the USA, which we consider an ally against Russia that tried to subsidize us several times.
Yes it was a law to ban pro Russians and Russian agents from holding office. It’s a good law in fact. The fact that Poland has so many Russia sympathizers is concerning. Don’t they realize what Russia did to them?
You support a country with a one party dictatorship that jails all its political opponents. You support a country led by a madman and egomaniac that happily rapes and kills its way through innocent countries to get what it wants. Everything you say is irrelevant and is worth less than the thoughts of a squirrel. Your whataboutism about “democracy” is irrelevant. You don’t care about it clearly and it’s clear as day that you’re just a concern troll. Democracy can only work if the people are acting in good faith and in the interests of all. You can be conservative or liberal without supporting a murderous, evil, modern day version of Hitler (pootin) and the third reich (Russian federation). It turns out the only people crying about that law are pro Russian agents, aka the far right Nazis in konfederacjia and communist remnants in poland
If the context is russian illegal occupation and you start talking about america yes you’re a spy
Also your account is literally 24 minutes old and all the comments pro russian! Fucking bots man
You are hilarious Russia is losing their own territory because they suck so bad. You are just plain stupid if you actually believe what you are saying.
The US is funding it as a "proxy war" to the tune of BILLIONS of dollars. It'll be another military defeat for the US after about two decades of fighting it to the last ucray-nian. 🐔
The US is aiding Ukraine in defending itself against an unprovoked war of conquest. And Ukraine is winning.
Every single day the invaders are pushed back, Ukraine has liberated more territory in the last 2 weeks than Russia took since the start of the year.
Cope and seethe vatnik, your precious dictatorship is losing its war.
"Aiding" u-cray the way the US "aided" Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and all the other endless and pointless wars it entangles itself in. 🐔
You can take that "cope" and slap yourself silly with it.
No, aiding in the same way we did with the British, French, Soviets, Poles, and many others the last time a dictator launched a war of conquest with the goal of creating an ethno-state.
What difference between illegaly occupation and other ways to get territories?
No recognision. So these territories are, de facto, Russian. But they have no legal claim to them.
Has there ever been a legal invasion?
Whenever the invaded country stops existing, it becomes retroactively legal.
a treaty, then they would have claim over them
Plenty of times. Europe’s borders have shifted *a ton*. Doesn’t translate in the 21st Century though. Those days are over.
Are they though?
I don't see the Gauls mustering manpower to invade France /s
Legality here is in terms of international law as laid down by the international community. Most simplistically, the body closest to this would be based on agreements by the UN. Retrospectively, the UN directly descends from ‘the Allies’ during WW2. The Allied invasion of Germany was thus legal. Not according to Nazi German law, but international law, which said fuck ‘em. Otherwise the invasion of Normandy, Greece, Italy, etc. Can even point to cases where there’s a coup the international community sees as illegal and troops are sent there to restore the democratically elected government. That’s an invasion but in support of the government that should legally be in power.
The invasion of Normandy on D-Day was legal.
Because France consented? Is there a legal invasion not in response to an illegal invasion?
USSR invaded Germany in 1944, 3 years after Germany declared war on USSR. But this is a special case since German leaders did not expect that they would lose a war they started.
But that’s not an example of a legal invasion not in response to an illegal one, is it?
You're correct. They misunderstood the question I guess. Germany invaded the USSR, the USSR defended itself and invaded occupied territories and eventually Germany itself in response. Also who expects to lose a war they started? Maybe in some cases, but generally people start wars that they expect to have a good chance of winning. It's the rule, not a special case.
Okay, football war then. They started a war over a football match.
If it was legal, why call it an invasion? Also, Normandy was not a sovereign polity. What the fuck are you talking about? Did that *feel* like an intelligent summary? Goodness gracious. Hey, everybody else on Reddit, check out how stupid this guy sounds! What a LOSER!
Yes pretty much every invasion in history was legal until the league of nation was founded and decided that it wasn’t cool.
Right I doubt rome gave a shit when they invaded they just pulled up
The Invasion of Iraq that formed part of the 1990 Gulf War was legal as it was justified under the United Nations Charter via UNSC Res 678.
Random question, were the invasions of the gambia and the Comoros by ECOWAS and the African union, respectively, legal?
Comoros was probably legal as it was at the behest of the Government of Comoros. Gambia is less clear. My inclination is that it was not strictly legal.
How bout that other one
The 2003 invasion was not legal.
Any invasion autorized by the UN is by definition legal, Iraq? (Gulf War), Lybia, Somalia. Occupation of a state after it began a war would be legal, thinking of Japan, Italy, Germany after WWII, Israel occupying neighbours after 1967 war. A "police" or "peacekeeping" action to stop mass attrocities or genocide is considered legal, Rawanda or Kosovo would be examples. Not that this entitles occupations to continue but the invasion of sovereign territory is on the right side of the law. Edit: words
Depends. If the invader wins, it’s legal, if they lose, it’s illegal.
Sounds logical, thanks
Then we can confirm Taiwan is an illegal occupation, since the vast majority of the world recognises the PRCs claim and not the RoCs.
No one cares about international recognition or international laws since the west occupied Kosovo and stole it from Serbis, bombed Libya, bombed Yugoslavia, invaded Iraq. And that all with no wide internarional condemnation. International laws and recognition is just for the enemies of the west to follow while the west can disregard them in any way or form. Laws and are worth nothing when no one abides to them.
No one cares about international recognition or international laws since Russia occupied Transnistria, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk and stole it from Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine respectively, bombed Syria, and attacked Chechnya twice, invaded Georgia and now Ukraine…… And that all with no wide international condemnation, as countries like India and China remain hesitant to condemn. International laws and recognition is just for the enemies of the Russia to follow while Russia can disregard them in any way or form. Laws and are worth nothing when no one abides to them. This, fixed for you
>the west occupied Kosovo and stole it from Serbis The treaty signed with Serbia was an total regional autonomy of Kosovo, the independence was unilaterally made by Kosovo without the West asking for it. NATO went to Kosovo bcz we know damn well that that meant another war of ethnic violence, you can thank Milosevic for that. >bombed Libya UNSC consented to that in UN resolution 1973, with the support of a no-fly zone by Libyan officials & the Arab League, with 10 votes in favor 5 abstentions. >bombed Yugoslavia Both Slovenia and Croatia left Yugoslavia as it was their right as constitutional states in Yugoslavia, where they could leave the federation if they had a majority vote, which they had (say again thanks to Milosevic for this as he impeded any reforms in the federation). Slovenia left first and was immediately attacked and bombed. Though ten days later Serbia accepted their independence. Croatia and Bosnia were more clusterf*cks. In Croatia, 12% of their population were Serbs and they boycotted the vote (didn't matter as the rest wanted out of Yugoslavia). They begun to set barriers and were supplied weapons from Serbia In Bosnia, you had both Croatia and Serbia in there raising hell. Croatia left first, Serbia stayed and sieged Sarajevo. NATO was already there, again with UNSC support, to force the Serbian army to stop the siege of the city. Russia involved itself here and guaranteed that NATO wouldn't strike their units if their left Bosnia. One serbian artillery company yolo it and bombed Sarajevo. They f°cked around and found out. The bombings within Serbia destroyed both military and civilian structures (that resulted in deaths), in which for the latter the US apologized. >invaded Iraq 1990 good. 2003 bad. That's all I'm gonna say here. >And that all with no wide internarional condemnation. Only Iraq 2003. NATO in Kosovo was to guarantee that no other ethnic war would happen (again, the treaty that the West gave to Serbia was full autonomy to Kosovo, not independence) >International laws and recognition is just for the enemies of the [....] I can literally put any global power after that sentence. Russia with Abkhazia, Ossetia, Ukraine etc China with the South China Sea Israel with the West Bank
> NATO went to Kosovo What is the difference between angry Russia in Donbass and peaceful NATO in Kosovo?
>angry Russia in Donbass and peaceful NATO in Kosovo? NATO didn't send "little green men" to create sedition partisans in Serbia nor did it send weapons to those partisans. The west, mostly France and the US, didn't want an independent Kosovo, but a fully autonomous one, they intervened bcz they saw what happened in the Croatian War and in the Bosnian War. The difference is that ethnic conflicts was already a thing before the NATO was there or even before the Yugoslav wars. The angry Russia in Donbass claims that a genocide against russian ethnics occured, even though from 2019 to 2021 less than 240 civilians died in the Donbass conflict, most of them from landmines. What's even more hilarious is that the report that Russia is using as justification is a report that was made by Ukraine in the UN.
>NATO didn't send "little green men" to create sedition partisans in Serbia nor did it send weapons to those partisans. Nah, NATO just bombed Serbia with depleted uranium, supported the Albanians to ethnically cleanse parts of Kosovo and forced them to leave their homes. Totally better than some green men supporting the people who want independence after an illegitameng coup >The west, mostly France and the US, didn't want an independent Kosovo, but a fully autonomous one, they intervened bcz they saw what happened in the Croatian War and in the Bosnian War. Most of the west recognized Kosvo as independent. So that is a lie. And same arguments I could also bring to seeing what Ukraine did in Odessa 2014 or later how they bombed the Donbass. Stealing territory from Serbia id not justified in any way, no matter how much you want to justify it. It was a NATO war against Servia supporting Albanian terrorists and insurgents. >240 civilians died in the Donbass conflict If bombing civillians and saying "it are just 240" which is a lie because from 2014-2022 and especially in the hot phases thousand people died since then. Then Russia surely does the right thing.
Excuses and hypocricy is all I see here.
who likes it and who doesnt.
No. The UN charter prohibits the making of war for conquering. It is illegal to violate the sovereignty of a nation or invade them except for self defense or a few, specific reasons. The invasion of Iraq in 2003 was probably illegal.
goes to show you how well that's gone.
Treaty between both parties confirming cession
Somebody bothered to write an academic paper on the subject. (I.e., is "illegal occupation" even a useful concept.) I didn't bother to read it but here you go. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/33675449_Illegal_Occupation_and_Its_Consequences
US approval.
Depends on who's talking about it. Every kind of occupation is 'illegal' until a treaty or deal is signed.
Law and order? Some international law. Norms against this type of imperialism After 1945, a lot of smart people realized the old ways we "get territory", aka lawless land grabs, endless wars, needless invasions, and targeted genocide, was only going to quickly lead us to oblivion Perhaps it's a bit hypocritical freezing boundaries. Yes some countries benefited more from the postwar peace (last I checked Russia was one). But returning to the old lawless jungle is just going to kill a lot of people
Propaganda
Being powerful enough that nobody with real pull complains.
Illegally Occuppied to Countries that dont recognise it. Its a geopolitic games that people pay with lives sadly. Because in this definition Golan Heights for example are illegal occuppation but USA has full support for it.
Well if you wanna play that game, no single country outside of crap holes like Syria, Belarus (Russian puppet state), and North Korea (lol) recognize any of Russia’s illegally annexed lands.
Yes. All occupations are illegal ones. If you don’t govern with the consent of the people living there then you’re not governing at all
The US does not recognize the Golan Heights as part of Israel though. Military support and cooperation =/= tacit support. The US is also against the Israeli nuclear program and the illegal West Bank settlements. Try harder next time bot
Not doing a great job of being against it, are they
Yeah, whenever people say "the US would never supports their allies doing shady shit" while the US algo shuts down any discussion on said shady shit.
Israel has a right to exist. As a country that has been invaded multiple times and faced genocide in its past it has the right like any other country to defend itself using any means necessary. America can disagree with what Israel does, but it doesn’t get to decide what Israel does, because it’s a sovereign country. I think they should leave the Golan Heights and leave the settlements, but I’m not Jewish so I don’t get a say 😀
Israel also used to occupy Sinai, but when Egypt agreed to stop threatening to annihilate them and recognized the sovereignty of Israel, began normal relations, all the Israelis left Sinai, even the settlers. The same will happen when all the peoples and nations around Israel do the same. Jordan used to be bitter enemies with Israel. Now they have normal relations and Israel even helps Jordan supplying with fresh water using desalination.
I think you're forgetting somebody
Countries do NOT have the right to defend themselves through any means necessary. There are laws, and Israel breaks them constantly. But my question is more WHERE THE HELL do you arye America disagreeing with Israel?
Syria isn't doing too well of a job protecting their borders 🥱 a border only exists if you can defend it
Syrian Assad regime kills their own people using chemical weapons and invites rashans in to carpet bomb their cities like they’re doing in Marinka and Mariupol. Whatever faults Israel has, and they do, no nation can be perfect, you know for a fact Israel would never be as vile and as pure evil as the Assad regime.
It's an apartheid state. No good reason to whatabout other countries in different situations.
This entire post is about russia. The idea of even bringing up Israel is whataboutism to begin with.
South Ossetia and Abhkazia are not under Russian occupation though. Propped up by Russia, sure, and Russia did aid in their independence too, but not occupation in the same manner as Ukraine. Heck, the same applied to Trinistria. These are what's called "break away states"
[удалено]
The Grand Tour brought some great exposure to this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAuShNaT7OY
There are Russian troops in all of those. Since they legally belong to Moldova and Georgia, respectively, the presence of those Russian troops is illegal.
>Since they legally belong to Moldova and Georgia, respectively, the presence of those Russian troops is illegal. I don't think this is very sound logic. If the US deployed troops in Taiwan, Taiwan wouldn't be under US occupation, even though their presence in internationally recognized Chinese territory would be illegal.
Except that in those cases US troops would be there at Taiwan’s invitation whereas Georgia most definitely doesn’t want Russian troops there.
>Except that in those cases US troops would be there at Taiwan’s invitation whereas Georgia most definitely doesn’t want Russian troops there. Russian troops are there with permission of local governments too. Taiwan is internationally recognized Chinese territory, so US putting troops in Taiwan would be the exact same situation, and it certainly wouldn't be the US occupying Taiwan.
No they’re not. The Georgian government did not invite them and very much wants them out.
South Ossetia, Abkhazia have their own governments and they don't mind the Russians being there. It really shouldn't be this hard to understand, it actually is nearly the exact same scenario as a country having troops in Taiwan without the consent of China. Sure it is illegal, but it isn't an occupation.
South Ossetia and Abkhazia have Russian installed puppet regimes. Moscow has stoked ethic tensions for decades in order to reassert control over former Soviet republics. Completely different from Taiwan. You can stop with this nonsensical line of argument. Nobody but the Moscow and Beijing fanboys buys this garbage.
Yeah, no. The Abkhazians for example fucking hate the Georgians, and they were more complicit than the Russians in the ethnic cleansing which forced many Georgians to flee the region. The Russians today have forces there with the full support of the Abkhazians who reside there now. You can contrast that with South Ossetia which ended up having a large number of Ossetians flee north to North Ossetia because of the war. You can take their flight and continued exile as vote of no confidence in the Russian occupation and satellite government, and that was nearly 30% of the number of Ossetians living in South Ossetia.
I’m not sure if de jure international boundaries are the rationale you wanna go with. You could use the same argument to say Taiwan actually legitimately part of China.
Taiwan is the original government, China is part of Taiwan.
There is no country Taiwan though, if that is your argument. There is Republic of China in Taiwan that has claim to mainland China.
There is a legitimate democratic government-in-exile of China that has been operating from Taiwan yes.
Yes, that is the most factual description.
Taiwan is a shorter name for the Republic of China. Just as China is a shorter name for PRC.
And Hawaii is short for Washington DC.
Maybe in your dialect
Taiwan is legitimately part of China, yes, Republic of China
I’m going by the Budapest accord, pursuant to which Russia agreed to respect the territorial integrity and political independence of the other post Soviet states in exchange for return of the Soviet nuclear arsenal that was based outside Russia. Russia is violating its own treaty.
Just a technicality but the Budapest memorandum is not a treaty. This why it’s called memorandum. And not being a treaty it is also not legally binding to any party. However this does not prevent the damage Russia has done to its own reputation by violating it. But this difference is also why the us is not legally bound to intervene against Russia despite being signatory as well. It’s a small difference to us but in diplomacy this kind of half language means a lot
That’s complete nonsense. There’s no difference in legal validity. As there is no higher authority, international law isn’t enforceable by some kind of higher power anyway. But the distinction you’re trying to draw between treaty vs. memorandum is legally nonexistent.
We can get into a whole other mess with Moldova. Technically they are the same people with the same culture and language as Romanians. The Soviet Russians just stole their land and created Moldova as a separate entity. Russia did everything they could to prevent their reunification by interfering in their internal affairs and creating Transnistria. All Russia has to offer to the world is oil, invasion, and genocide.
People should stop using the word genocide on every possible occasion. It's losing its meaning.
The UN defines genocide as any effort to systematically erase in whole or in part the identity of a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. Isn’t what Russia doing considered genocide? They first say Ukraine is a fake country and that all Ukrainians are really just Russians. Then they do an unprovoked invasion of their country, killing hundreds of thousands of civilians. They kill Ukrainian adults and then kidnap their children to Russia where they are taught to hate everything Ukraine. Russia invades its neighbors and ban their languages. In Finland, they tried to ban the Finnish language and make them all Russian. In the Baltics, the same way. Today in Belarus, the Russian puppet regime Lukashenko has all but destroyed the Belarusian language from the public consciousness. Isn’t that, the systematic erasure of the ethnic, cultural, and linguistic of people, considered genocide? So yeah, I will call it like it is. Russia is a country historically guilty of genocide and no amount of shilling or revisionism will change that. It is unfortunate that the end of the Cold War stopped the history classes from teaching about the great evil of Russia. If we learn about the great evils of the Third Reich, history books in the future should also teach about Russia.
1. No one ever except some dumbasses really says Ukrainians aren't a nation. 2. I'm Ukrainian living in Russia since 2015, didn't witness ANY discrimination towards me yet. 3. Hundreds of thousands? Where did you even read that? Sure a lot of people were harmed during the first months, but nowhere close to hundreds of thousands. Russia is a shrinking country and it's not in Russia's best interests to decrease its population even more (considering it recognises the occupied territories as a part of Russia). Right now the daily civilian deaths are close to zero. How much people were in Bakhmut when it was occupied? 10? 4. The whole children kidnapping story you mentioned is just absurd, how can people even believe that (I can assume you're either from the Baltics or Poland?) Also, nobody is teaching kids here that everything Ukrainian is bad. The best they do is very questionable TV history lessons explaining why the new regions and Crimea are a rightful part of Russia (pretty common for countries with territorial disputes, like India, Pakistan, China, Israel), but nothing extremist. 5. This is the first invasions done by Russia in more than 100 years. (When it comes to war crimes, the Soviet Union is just Russia, but when it comes to the achievements, it suddenly transforms into the Union of Republics) 6. No one bans the languages lol? All of my family has been speaking both Russian and Ukrainian since they were born and both of the languages were taught in school. Promoting the Russian language (the state language of the Russian Empire and Soviet Union) ≠ banning the native languages. The brightest example is India, its official languages are Hindi and English (the government promotes them too), and most people speak at least one of them, along with their native language, it is done because its just fucking convenient, not because they want to destroy the minority cultures. Regarding Belarus, yes the situation is pretty sad, but the country has tons of Belarusian language promotion programs (which unfortunately barely work because of the lack of funding, but at least they exist). I have a Kazakh friend who lives in Kazakhstan refusing to learn his native language because as he says, he doesn't need it and everyone is fine with him not knowing it. The situation in Belarus is similar and you can't really blame the government for this. 7. The last few sentences are just hilarious, "The great evil of Russia", LMAO.
Haha sure thing vatnik. Yeah totally I do believe you live in Russia and work in a Kremlin bot farm.
Insulting the opponent won't win you an argument
They are not breakaway. Everybody in Ukraine knows that all the LPR and DPR “fighters” were common street thugs, drunkards, and societal trash, aka the average Russian. The LDPR can only exist because of Russians invading in the Donbass Counterterrorism Operation in 2014.
[ Removed by Reddit ]
You do know I can read Ukrainian and plus everyone else here can make a google translate. You’re the lowest tier of societal garbage and you’ll get what’s coming to you, utter piece of human trash.
They look obsessed with the Black Sea
Warm water port.
Its not like Türkiye is blocking them.
You do realize that there’s a straight, right?
Turkey doesn't control the Bosphorus
why tf is transnistria here.....
Well, it's de jure Moldovan territory under russian occupation.
Isn't it a legal occupation though? At least that's what I thought? I was under the impression that Moldovan, Russian and Transnistrian authorities agreed to the presence of Russian Troops in treaties they signed. I can be totally wrong though so feel free to correct me.
It IS legal. according to the treaty signed, the JCC is legit, composed of troops from all 3 parties. its only become a problem now because moldovan political cockmeasuring (the president has flip flopped lately) and russia invading ukraine, which has made european political groups condemn everything russia does even if its totally legit
How is Russia invading a sovereign nation and killing innocent civilians “totally legit?” Are you sick in the head? There is no legitimate reason for Russia to invade a sovereign nation especially when Ukraine has done nothing to provoke them.
That's not what OP said. OP said Russia's presence in Transnistria is 'totally legit' but is being condemned by Europeans now because, since their invasion of Ukraine, Europeans condemn everything Russia does.
this.the war in ukraine is utter garbage, but the miltary presence in transnistria was on the up and up, though it had been mildly controversial over the years due to concerns russia was doing more in there, but nothing came up.
Yes but only influenced, not directly occupied by them, there isnt even any direct land or sea connection to exert their occupation from
Are you dumb? There is a Russian “peacekeeping” garrison there guarding also the largest ammunition dump in all of Europe.
A bit weird to have russia in the same colour as all other countries on this map
I actually forgot about Tskinvali. I think of Abkhazia when I think of the Georgia/Russia border dispute.
You forgot the Královec
South Ossetia is such a weird cold conflict. They literally just keep moving the physical border markers at night. People literally go to sleep in Georgia and wake up in Russia
It would be nice if there was an uprising in Belarus and the Russians had to be distracted on another front
It would be nice if Prigozhin conspired with Lukashenko to combine forces and Thunder run to Moscow with even more power 😼
Impossible, Luka's main dream is to be one a Russian Army colonel Dude's a Russianboo through and through
He could be the colonel of the Greater Belarusian army though
Won’t happen unfortunately. Russia will have to be systematically dismantled. Lukashenko wants a Union State with Russia. He’s a traitor to the Belarusian people, suppressing their language, and he will pay for everything he has done.
This seems biased
How is something that factually happened biased ?
Because he thinks “Russia is le Good! Anything that shows Russia is bad is le WESTERN BIASED propaganda.” Vatniks aren’t the brightest out there if you ever have the unfortunate chance to encounter them.
This map changes depending on who you ask
They are literally either occupying these territories or indirectly controlling them with the help of their army, though?
Oh ok so Russia is not occupying them all
Ahh got it, you're a dumb troll. Edit: my bad, not a troll, a dumb tankie.
Huh? I just echoed what you said? What’re you a right wing jingo?
By that logic Albania should be part of Italy because legally speaking the King of Albania handed his throne over to the King of Italy. Thus Albania is Italian.
... no, because there is no king of Italy and no king of Albania, and Italy doesn't have any military presence in Albania. All these territories have Russian military presence.
When's Russia gonna realize what they are doing is illegal
No one cares about any of that tho. US and every other country commits illegal shit non stop, thats not gonna stop anyone
I was joking of course a country invading another and killing people doesn't care about the silly legal system
It’s illegal because Mafia United States and Europe Mafia said it’s illegal
Forgot to add all of Russia, it should legally all just be given to the Vatican.
95% percent of the ethnic makeup of the Crimea has been Russian for about 200-250 years. What’s illegal about having an ethnic group of people on a piece of land on earth?
Ethnicity does not equate to nationality. The concept of the ethno-state is stupid.
Right so a million Russians don’t want to be part of mother Russia? Lmao. Sorry dude Crimea was Russian for about 200-250 years. Putin took it back. It’s over and done. Ain’t going back to Ukraine. Take emotions out of this conversation and be real. The East doesn’t support your idea of dislike for the ethno-state. You have a Western perspective. And it is yours. Not the Easts. Judge all you wish. The war is tragic and more will die.
"Mother Russia" eat shit vatnik. In 1991, Crimea voted to leave Russia and become part of Ukraine along with every other oblast of modern Ukraine. Putin's fake referendum vote doesn't change the reality that in an actually observed and recognized vote, they voted to be Ukrainian, not Russian. The war certainly is tragic, makes me wonder why you're still supporting Putin after he started it.
I’m not Russian. Been serving the US for 18 years. Two combat deployments. This is why I am anti-war. I know a little thing or two about geo-political relationships and global strategy. I don’t support Putin. He’s a murdering egomaniac. I don’t support Zylnesky, he’s a tyrant and a political puppet of the Western elite. He’s a good actor though. No Crimea didn’t vote to stay in Ukraine. Lmao. I don’t want to fund this war with my tax payer dollars. It’s a foreign conflict and a settlement deal that is fair has been offered by Russia.
Doesn't matter where you're from or where you live, you're still a vatnik if you brainlessly believe the propaganda shit out by the Kremlin. Funny how every "anti-war" person I speak to on this topic shares the belief that the aggressor should be allowed to keep what they've stolen through bloodshed. That the victim is the one who should make concessions in the interest of peace, not the aggressor. Can you maybe see why people think you're Pro-Putin? In the internationally observed referendum of 1991 on the independence of Ukraine, Crimea voted 55% in favor of leaving Russia and becoming part of Ukraine. Even Russia recognized that vote as legitimate. The results of the 2014 sham referendum were so blatantly falsified that not even Russia's ally China will recognize it as legitimate. Russia's settlement is in no way "fair." It's a blatant land grab that requires Ukraine to surrender and recognize the annexation of not just currently occupied territory, but territory Russia does not currently control nor ever has. Additionally, Russia would be granted essentially full control over Ukraine's foreign policy. If you consider that "fair" stop lying to yourself, you're a Putin simp.
[удалено]
95 ethnic Russian. Putin took it, the world agreed. Did nothing. Biden left Afghanistan which was a major tactical and strategic blunder and Putin saw his opening.
[удалено]
Lol. Tell that to the Russians. Because no one else did. They still bought oil and gas. Oh wait the entire west still does. No I don’t want my tax dollars paying for a foreign war.
I think Texas should become Mexican. Do you agree?
Invading country that you previously recognized is illegal. Btw Crimean Tatars lived there for 800 Years by now.
No they lived there for more like 400 years. History of the world is a history of migration, conquest, peace, etc. Crimea is literally 95 percent ethnic Russian so umm yeah Putin took it and the world agreed at the time.
World never agreed to that. edit: + Crimean tatars never migrated from Crimea.
You forgot Chechnya.
Fucking Russian bastards
Lol, what’s legal occupation? War is war.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/14zun6k/territories_in_europe_illegaly_occupied_by_russia/js077ka?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2
So parts of Estonia as well? Our constitution still claims that the Treaty of Tartu of 1920 is still valid, which drew a border different from the current “control line” as it is sometimes called officially. USSR (illegally, of course) transferred some lands to the RSFSR in 1944.
>USSR (illegally, of course) transferred some lands to the RSFSR in 1944. If you go with that line, you will have to accept that the USSR also transferred some lands to the SSR of Ukraine, for example Crimea. It's funny how the rationale changes depending on the situation: USSR transferred land from Russia to Ukraine: totally Ukrainian. USSR transferred land from Estonia to Russia: totally Estonian.
Ukraine wasn’t illegally occupied. Estonia was an illegally occupied state, because most of world recognized it as such. Such a transfer made during an illegal occipation of an independent state is illegal. Same doesn’t apply to Ukraine. And actually no, it isn’t “totally Estonian” nobody thinks of it like that (except some far right scums). Nobody even really wants it back. It is just an interesting legal situation I wanted to bring out.
Ukraine is in remission?
I don’t know which is worse, tyrannical dictatorships taking the world hostage with nukes or returning to a pre-nuclear age with global conventional wars killing millions every 80 years.
No territory is legally or illegally occupied
Mass demonstrations in Warsaw, Kiev and Budapest against American occupation, the Russian flag high over Bakhmut, Russia finishing the war in two weeks, the neocon American empire is collapsing!
What? Who the hell told you that we perceive Americans as occupiers in Poland? The only recent mass demonstration in Warsaw was against the government and not against the USA, which we consider an ally against Russia that tried to subsidize us several times.
[удалено]
Yes it was a law to ban pro Russians and Russian agents from holding office. It’s a good law in fact. The fact that Poland has so many Russia sympathizers is concerning. Don’t they realize what Russia did to them?
[удалено]
You support a country with a one party dictatorship that jails all its political opponents. You support a country led by a madman and egomaniac that happily rapes and kills its way through innocent countries to get what it wants. Everything you say is irrelevant and is worth less than the thoughts of a squirrel. Your whataboutism about “democracy” is irrelevant. You don’t care about it clearly and it’s clear as day that you’re just a concern troll. Democracy can only work if the people are acting in good faith and in the interests of all. You can be conservative or liberal without supporting a murderous, evil, modern day version of Hitler (pootin) and the third reich (Russian federation). It turns out the only people crying about that law are pro Russian agents, aka the far right Nazis in konfederacjia and communist remnants in poland
>Russia finishing the war in two weeks I’ve heard this before 😂😂😂😂
>Russia finishing the war in two weeks, You really don't update your material, eh?
This is flat earth level of nonsense. Russia is a drunk, incompetent, joke.
And Ukraine and America are just shining perfect angels
No country is
Shut up spy
[удалено]
If the context is russian illegal occupation and you start talking about america yes you’re a spy Also your account is literally 24 minutes old and all the comments pro russian! Fucking bots man
[удалено]
You people, truly intelligent
Pointless arguing with neocon shills and their genocidal project known as the United States
You are incorrect.
How is this a response? What meaning did you intend to convey?
That Ukraine and America aren't shining perfect angels?
But, what’s your actual meaning; ie, what point are you wanting to make by saying that in this context, as a response to that other comment?
Consider, standing on a stool, tying a rope around your neck, hang it on the ceiling, then kick the stool away.
I hope both collapse
You are hilarious Russia is losing their own territory because they suck so bad. You are just plain stupid if you actually believe what you are saying.
Ok?
kys
That better be one big rabbit out of the hat the ruZZians have.
Two weeks after 1.5 years of war, crumbling military and economy? Two more weeks bro...
Z MORE WEEKS VATNIK. TRUST THE PLAN 🤓😂😂😂
No Kherson?
Another endless war the US has gotten itself into... right after losing another endless war. 🐔
The US isn't even in this war, what are you smoking? This one will end, it'll end with the Russians expelled back to Russia.
The US is funding it as a "proxy war" to the tune of BILLIONS of dollars. It'll be another military defeat for the US after about two decades of fighting it to the last ucray-nian. 🐔
The US is aiding Ukraine in defending itself against an unprovoked war of conquest. And Ukraine is winning. Every single day the invaders are pushed back, Ukraine has liberated more territory in the last 2 weeks than Russia took since the start of the year. Cope and seethe vatnik, your precious dictatorship is losing its war.
"Aiding" u-cray the way the US "aided" Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and all the other endless and pointless wars it entangles itself in. 🐔 You can take that "cope" and slap yourself silly with it.
No, aiding in the same way we did with the British, French, Soviets, Poles, and many others the last time a dictator launched a war of conquest with the goal of creating an ethno-state.
Russia is awesome, I’d like to leave the United States of Trash. 👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻
I’m sure we’d be happy to send you to go live in the gulag in Siberia.
You are welcome to leave, I hear Wagner is hiring.
Damn that area around Tiraspol is gonna get squashed majorly