obelisks wrote:Funny how so many are ready to accuse Russia without any evidence, but purely based on speculation. I would rather believe Putin any day compared to those that started the iraq, syria, afghanistan and libya wars

I think it's pretty obvious Russia provided teh missiles and condone/approve what the pro-Russian rebels are doing.

However, I still maintain the west stirred up a bees nest, and know they have to take some responsibility.

There's audio recording of rebels discussing it with Russia. That's pretty good evidence. The Ukraine plane that was shot down by a Russian fighter... it was in Ukraine airspace. Wouldn't that be an invasion of a sovereign country by a military force. You know, like Russia has been doing all along with Ukraine since the president that was in Putin's pocket was ousted and replaced by one that wanted to join the EU?

And he's just itching to fire a nuke it seems...

OrangeDragon wrote:There's audio recording of rebels discussing it with Russia. That's pretty good evidence. The Ukraine plane that was shot down by a Russian fighter... it was in Ukraine airspace. Wouldn't that be an invasion of a sovereign country by a military force. You know, like Russia has been doing all along with Ukraine since the president that was in Putin's pocket was ousted and replaced by one that wanted to join the EU?

And he's just itching to fire a nuke it seems...

As an American you are an expert in the definition of an invasion. Sure the Ukraine's previously elected pro Russian president may have had financial ties with Russia but are you suggesting the current unelected prime minister isn't bank rolled by the EU?

The Ukraine did shell the Russian side of the border last week.The Russians are within their rights to make a pre-emptive strike.

There is no evidence the airliner was shot down by the rebels. Sky news were originally reporting it was shot down by the Ukraine's. The only people that will benefit from this incident will be the Ukraine's. The rebels and their Russian backers would know it would be a public relations nightmare to shot down a civilian airliner.

obelisks wrote:Funny how so many are ready to accuse Russia without any evidence, but purely based on speculation. I would rather believe Putin any day compared to those that started the iraq, syria, afghanistan and libya wars

Now America does have the fire power but since obama s take over he has put his stooges at high positions in the military. So even a 3rd world country can beat America right now. Last week a small black women now holds the rank if full admiral. Insanity.

Putin may save western civilization.

Digg3r wrote:

OrangeDragon wrote:There's audio recording of rebels discussing it with Russia. That's pretty good evidence. The Ukraine plane that was shot down by a Russian fighter... it was in Ukraine airspace. Wouldn't that be an invasion of a sovereign country by a military force. You know, like Russia has been doing all along with Ukraine since the president that was in Putin's pocket was ousted and replaced by one that wanted to join the EU?

And he's just itching to fire a nuke it seems...

As an American you are an expert in the definition of an invasion. Sure the Ukraine's previously elected pro Russian president may have had financial ties with Russia but are you suggesting the current unelected prime minister isn't bank rolled by the EU?

The Ukraine did shell the Russian side of the border last week.The Russians are within their rights to make a pre-emptive strike.

There is no evidence the airliner was shot down by the rebels. Sky news were originally reporting it was shot down by the Ukraine's. The only people that will benefit from this incident will be the Ukraine's. The rebels and their Russian backers would know it would be a public relations nightmare to shot down a civilian airliner.

But does one bank rolled leader changing to a different one justify invasion? Last I checked, it didn't. And last I checked Ukraine shelled Ukraine... not Russia. So Russia isn't justified in doing shit to Ukraine.

OrangeDragon wrote:There's audio recording of rebels discussing it with Russia.

How does a person talk to a country? I'll have half a kilo of what you are on.

Bring Back Buck wrote:

OrangeDragon wrote:There's audio recording of rebels discussing it with Russia.

How does a person talk to a country? I'll have half a kilo of what you are on.

Ok, discussing it with a Russian military officer... nothing more annoying than someone being pedantic.

OrangeDragon wrote:

Digg3r wrote:

OrangeDragon wrote:There's audio recording of rebels discussing it with Russia. That's pretty good evidence. The Ukraine plane that was shot down by a Russian fighter... it was in Ukraine airspace. Wouldn't that be an invasion of a sovereign country by a military force. You know, like Russia has been doing all along with Ukraine since the president that was in Putin's pocket was ousted and replaced by one that wanted to join the EU?

And he's just itching to fire a nuke it seems...

As an American you are an expert in the definition of an invasion. Sure the Ukraine's previously elected pro Russian president may have had financial ties with Russia but are you suggesting the current unelected prime minister isn't bank rolled by the EU?

The Ukraine did shell the Russian side of the border last week.The Russians are within their rights to make a pre-emptive strike.

There is no evidence the airliner was shot down by the rebels. Sky news were originally reporting it was shot down by the Ukraine's. The only people that will benefit from this incident will be the Ukraine's. The rebels and their Russian backers would know it would be a public relations nightmare to shot down a civilian airliner.

But does one bank rolled leader changing to a different one justify invasion? Last I checked, it didn't. And last I checked Ukraine shelled Ukraine... not Russia. So Russia isn't justified in doing shit to Ukraine.

Ukraine shells Russia

I don't know who the better politician is but I would presume the democratically elected one would generally represent the people's wishes.

I'd also like orange Dragon to answer what north Korea, north Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq did to justify an American attack or invasion

OrangeDragon wrote:Ok, discussing it with a Russian military officer... nothing more annoying than someone being pedantic.

Sure there is. Two pedants.

Digg3r wrote:

OrangeDragon wrote:

Digg3r wrote:

OrangeDragon wrote:There's audio recording of rebels discussing it with Russia. That's pretty good evidence. The Ukraine plane that was shot down by a Russian fighter... it was in Ukraine airspace. Wouldn't that be an invasion of a sovereign country by a military force. You know, like Russia has been doing all along with Ukraine since the president that was in Putin's pocket was ousted and replaced by one that wanted to join the EU?

And he's just itching to fire a nuke it seems...

As an American you are an expert in the definition of an invasion. Sure the Ukraine's previously elected pro Russian president may have had financial ties with Russia but are you suggesting the current unelected prime minister isn't bank rolled by the EU?

The Ukraine did shell the Russian side of the border last week.The Russians are within their rights to make a pre-emptive strike.

There is no evidence the airliner was shot down by the rebels. Sky news were originally reporting it was shot down by the Ukraine's. The only people that will benefit from this incident will be the Ukraine's. The rebels and their Russian backers would know it would be a public relations nightmare to shot down a civilian airliner.

But does one bank rolled leader changing to a different one justify invasion? Last I checked, it didn't. And last I checked Ukraine shelled Ukraine... not Russia. So Russia isn't justified in doing shit to Ukraine.

Ukraine shells Russia

I don't know who the better politician is but I would presume the democratically elected one would igenerally represent the people's wishes.

I'd also like orange Dragon to answer what north Korea, north Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq did to justify an American attack or invasion

Straw man arguments,....give me a break digger. All those invasions are easily justifiable but all on false pretenses or embellished truths.