I believe the harsh penlalty you are referring to is a death sentence in Uganda. This is outrageous.
I Am A Ukrainian, This Needs To Go Viral
- Thread starter Elberoth
- Start date
I believe the harsh penlalty you are referring to is a death sentence in Uganda. This is outrageous.
People need to remember that Crimea used to be part of the Soviet Union and was turned over to Ukraine at a time when Ukraine was still part of the Soviet Union. Nikita Khrushchev gave Crimea to Ukraine in 1954. Russia's Black Sea fleet has been headquartered in Sevastopol since 1783. None of this was an issue until the Soviet Union imploded and suddenly one of Russia's important fleets is headquartered in a country that is no longer theirs. They do have a leasing agreement with Ukraine to keep their Black Sea fleet there until 2042, but there has been and are continuing problems with the terms of the agreement. I wouldn't be surprised to see Russia re annex Crimea back to themselves. Ukraine is weak and so is the entire EU. There will be lots of blustering and threats, but I suspect no country is going to go to war with Russia over Crimea. The EU has no cajones for war and that's for damn sure. Russia taking back Crimea solves a big problem for them and the political price they will pay probably won't be high enough to keep them from doing it.
It is outrageous. I do think that some of the religious idiots from the US that went over there as missionaries helped foment that intolerance. Think of people like the Westboro Baptist Church and you get the picture.
Let's not forget that Russia, UK and US signed a treaty with Ukraine back in 1994, in which they confirmed Ukrainian borders in exchange for resignation of their nuclear weapons (leftover from the USSR times).
Ukraine gave away their nukes, and 20 years later Russia broke the treaty they have signed themselves and took over Crimea. So basicly they have fu@#ed Ukraine.
That is how much agreements with Russia are worth.
It is interesting to note what UK and US will do, as they were the other 2 sides that were to govern the treaty.
Ukraine gave away their nukes, and 20 years later Russia broke the treaty they have signed themselves and took over Crimea. So basicly they have fu@#ed Ukraine.
That is how much agreements with Russia are worth.
It is interesting to note what UK and US will do, as they were the other 2 sides that were to govern the treaty.
I suppose the americans are still looking for saddams weapons of massdestruction aren't they , as mep suggested there seems to be a donkey hiding in the desert with WoMDs strapped to his back
I suppose the americans are still looking for saddams weapons of massdestruction aren't they , as mep suggested there seems to be a donkey hiding in the desert with WoMDs strapped to his back
Saddam was an idiot. He did everything he could to convince everyone he indeed has the chemical weapons. A big mistake, one that costed him country and life. If it wasn't for that (stupid and the raid over Kuwait) he would be still alive.
I think the reason irak was invaded was :
1 : it was rich in oil
2 : saddam wanted to trade oil in euros and not anymore in $$ .
The US empire exists for a big part because of the fact that oil can only be bought in $$$ as far as I know , which gives a great demand for the $$$
http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,998512,00.html
1 : it was rich in oil
2 : saddam wanted to trade oil in euros and not anymore in $$ .
The US empire exists for a big part because of the fact that oil can only be bought in $$$ as far as I know , which gives a great demand for the $$$
http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,998512,00.html
Okay you re right on that one , but still " politically correct speaking" you could also say it was kuweits business not from the US, they could have just liberated kuweit and stop there or whatever
The West supplied him with chemical weapons, which he used against the Kurds. A subsequent UN resolution condemning Iraq / Saddam and imposing sanctions was veto'ed by the USA; we still needed him as a buffer against the spreading of the Iranian revolution, and who cares about a few thousand Kurdish kids gassed to death.
http://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2013/09/us-tolerated-chemical-weapon-attacks-saddam
Correct, that was the mistake they made some 30 years back. Not the first one, and not the last. I bet they would still rather have Saddam to counterweight Iran, but the guy went crazy and raided the Kuwait.
BTW - the Hitler thing reffers to the Nazi annexation of Czechoslovakia's northern and western border regions in 1938, known collectively as the Sudetenland, under terms outlined by the Munich Agreement. Nazi leader Adolf Hitler's pretext for this effort was the alleged privations suffered by the ethnic German population living in those regions.
Adam adam , I suggest you study the german expansion first in WW 2 before making such suggestions , very wrong imo ,Brussels is the fascist party in this all .
To me the whole thing is fairly simple , Germany tried with 2 wars to get control of Europe , they all failed.
After the iron curtain fell and Germany was united again, they try via their control office in brussles to bring European countries under their control , not a control by occupying forces but via treaties, economic sanctions , and euro " aid " , banking control .
And again this expansion will stop in the east by Russia , time will tell
Do you know of the ESM treaty (European stability mechanism) they can take any money they want from memberstates and cannot be in any way held legally responsible
Here is a short English doc : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CZr17HLH5U
To me the whole thing is fairly simple , Germany tried with 2 wars to get control of Europe , they all failed.
After the iron curtain fell and Germany was united again, they try via their control office in brussles to bring European countries under their control , not a control by occupying forces but via treaties, economic sanctions , and euro " aid " , banking control .
And again this expansion will stop in the east by Russia , time will tell
Do you know of the ESM treaty (European stability mechanism) they can take any money they want from memberstates and cannot be in any way held legally responsible
Here is a short English doc : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CZr17HLH5U
Not sure what history books you've been reading but I agree with Adam.
And personally, I do believe that Stalin would have moved into Europe had WWII not happened. The Russians were the only ones supplying arms to the Communists in Spain and many of the other countries had because of the economies, significant Communist party organizations. Just look to Greece and the war that ensued after WWII ended. Look at Russian aims on Finland and Scandinavia. Stalin had big plans too, just interrupted by Hitler.
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |