Most liked posts in thread: World war 3....

Don't be so pathetic.
Where have I said I 'sympathise' with Nazis? Anyone with any knowledge of my posts on this forum and on C&B before it, will know that nothing could be further than the truth. I've consistently posted against far right and Nazi views and actions over the years, including pointing out the overlap of views between the far right of the Tory Party and various neo-Nazi groups in Britain.

There are neo-Nazis in every country in Europe, including Russia and Britain. Large parts of eastern Europe have intolerant right wing views that verge on the neo-Nazi - hence the popularity of Orban in Hungary - but we don't invade them to purge these elements, do we?

The size of the Azov Battalion is quoted as 900 men on Al-Jazeera; other sites say 1000; some say 1500. Even if the larger figure is correct it's still tiny in comparison to the Ukranian population and to the size of its armed forces.

Yes, it's extremely regrettable and distasteful that one battalion of the Ukrainian army has Nazi motivation. But not as distasteful as using that tiny unrepresentative sample as an excuse to invade a sovereign country, flatten its towns & cities, slaughter it's civilian population by the thousands and force millions to flee as refugees. Try to get some perspective.

 

Show me a country without a far/nazi/extremist problem.

 

It takes a slightly warped viewpoint to see what is infront of your eyes and find another reason for it due to preconceived ideas.

Just because some resident - rightly - take up arms against their invaders does not make every citizen a legitimate target.

 

The least one can expect is some neutrality when you invade another country.

 

The Americans always need an enemy and will never accept Russia, It fuels the economy and allows politicians to spend huge amounts on defence,
Putin is right when he claims that NATO has increased its presence in Europe, As he said "While NATO has come to the Russian border we have not come to there's,

 

It's a ridiculous decision and ironically exactly the sort of thing that Russia would do. Hilariously it's been done on the same day that the BBC have an article about "what propaganda is on Russian TV"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60571737

So we can be told what is being shown on Russian news but we can't actually see it for ourselves - isn't that literally what Russian media do to their population?

 

Team America World police. But only when it suits them.

 

How can the people of Crimea be given a vote by Russia when it is part of Ukraine? That would be like France saying they are giving the people in Cornwall a vote

 

Rapes; decapitations; mass graves; forced deportations; children placed on tanks to deter attacks.

The scale of the atrocities points firmly to war crimes, not 'legitimate targets'.

 

there are no shortage of peoplein western nations that want those responsible to stand trial for things like the iraq war

 

Sure, it's quite surprising that other civilians don't hang around shooting videos while their neighbours are being shot in the back of the head by Russian troops.

 

I’ll take that as a you can not actually say which law they have broken

 

Russia has illegally invaded another sovereign country, is systematically targeting and slaughtering its civilian population and causing millions to flee. The war in Ukraine is a battle between an autocratic totalitarian dictatorship and the right of independent democratic governments to make their own choices.
It's not 'racist' against Russians to oppose Putin's actions any more than opposing Hitler's Germany was racist against Germans.

Yes, it's unfortunate that individual Russian sportspeople are caught in the recriminations from this conflict. But Russia has for decades systematically used its sports stars to bolster its international reputation and prestige, even going as far as state financed drug programmes to enhance performance and gain more medals. Refusing to allow Russian tennis players to play at Wimbledon is part of a broad strategy to isolate Russia from all cultural and sporting activities. It's not racist or discriminatory against those individuals - it's a targeted strategy to make Russia feel the consequences of its illegal and unwarranted actions in Ukraine.

 

It was more than 'Russia friendly'. It was basically a Russian puppet government. Putin couldn't stand the fact that the Ukraine population had kicked his toady out on his arse.

Zelensky's (perfectly understandable) attempts to join NATO may have hastened the Russian invasion but it would have happened anyway, sooner or later. Once his stooge was booted out Putin was never going to take that lying down.
Putin thought his forces could swiftly overrun Kiev and install a new puppet regime. His mistake was to let the Chinese talk him out of invading several weeks earlier, which would have distracted from the Olympics. That meant his forces were caught in the early Spring thaw and got bogged down in mud, just like Napoleon and Hitler's troops before him. For someone who is so fixated on Russia's history, he made a very stupid error there.

 

Russia had the chance to become a modern democracy when the USSR broke up. Had it done so there would be no need for NATO. But it didn't - it reverted to a corrupt dictatorship led by a man who wants to re-establish Russian dominance over the old Soviet bloc countries.
You talk about NATO 'surrounding' Russia. But why did that happen? It happened because the ex-Soviet bloc countries sought membership of NATO to protect themselves from Russia, because they knew that Putin has never accepted their right to be independent sovereign nations. Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea and fermentation of unrest in Donbas confirmed the worst fears of neighbouring countries. Who can blame them for wanting NATO's protection?