Reply To: Russian Tensions
“Taking advantage of what amounted to insurrections, Russian troops entered Crimea and also the Donbas.”
As usual All-in with whatever the fuck propaganda narrative NATOstani MSM throws at you you are entirely wrong. Russia already had troops in Crimea at the Sevastopol naval base. Zero Russian troops entered Donbass. A great deal of the Ukrainian army changed sides though and fought for the Donbass republics with the weapons, both heavy and light, they’d taken with them.
“The International Court of Justice has held “the right of every state to conduct its affairs without outside interference”
Indeed, and yet that didn’t stop NATOstan from interfering.
“and that an alleged right of intervention could not find a place in international law.””
Well, that’s simply not true as their is a right to pre-emptive self defence. If you’re coming over to my house with a loaded gun waving in the air saying how you’re going to shoot me I’m well within my rights to plug you before you walk up my driveway.
“One of our goals in the SPGB is the abolition of the nation-state. We don’t recognise that countries are natural entities but artificial creations. That is why we accept the re-drawing of any border to avoid war.”
That is what all Marxists aspire to but you are not Marxists. You are Utopian idealists. You inhabit a fantasy world located in your belly buttons. It’s why are so ineffectual and will forever remain so.
“I very much doubt you ever read what we wrote 2014 but it has remained consistent and here is a reminder.”
No thanks. You are informed by the NATOstani psyops and grandiose delusions of spontaneous revolutions. You’re analysis is crap.
““Yanukovych, faced with the alarming prospect of the severance of East Ukraine’s economic ties with Russia, announced that he would not sign the agreement with the EU after all. Thereby he set off the Orange protests and the current crisis.”
And what of the 5 billion dollars the US funneled in to the country to foment color revolution? That played no role? You see, your analysis is crap. Give you a join the dots picture of an elephant and you’d end up with an apple. You have no understanding of geopolitics whatsoever.
“This time, it seems, Ukraine has to make a definite choice. It cannot move toward membership in both the EU and the EAEC. That is unacceptable to both organizations. Ukraine would become the gap through which Russian or Kazakh goods (say) could enter the EU or German or Polish goods enter the EAEC, effectively turning Europe and the post-Soviet region into a single customs union.””
Russia didn’t give a crap about the EU, it was concerned with NATOstani encroachment and the slaughter of ethnic Russians on its border.
““Those… who seek to justify Russian action to a greater or lesser extent resort to the largely ad-hominem argument of guilt by association. If you don’t lend support, even qualified support, to Russia then you are, by default, somehow supporting NATO. This remains so even if you condemn both sides.
NATO is the imperialist tool of the world hegemon, the USA, so those who resist it are by definition anti-imperialist and require understanding at least, not condemnation, or so goes the argument. Those who position themselves on the left, but condemn Russia, are supposedly social-imperialists.
Taking an active pro-Ukraine stance against Russian aggression is to become a perhaps unwary ally of a virulent nationalism…””
I think this is all about daddy issues for you lot. You got spanked too much as a child and now rebel against all authority. You’re are living examples of zlenin’s infantile disorder. You understand nothing in a profound way.