Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

then you now agree this is a civil war we have no business in, right?

---

No, this is an unprovokedinvasion of a sovereignnation and has been from the start.


And are we still running with the "women are being conscripted for combat" bit?

---

Both have been disproven. HTH

---

Making **** up isn't proof.

hth

---

What exactly do you think is made up?

---

Your proof.

---

I haven't posted any "proof" What are you even talking about?

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

then you now agree this is a civil war we have no business in, right?

---

No, this is an unprovokedinvasion of a sovereignnation and has been from the start.


And are we still running with the "women are being conscripted for combat" bit?

---

Both have been disproven. HTH

---

Making **** up isn't proof.

hth

---

What exactly do you think is made up?

---

Well we quite literally showed you proof that Russia recognized Ukraine as a sovereign independent nation for starters.

---

Was that pre or post coup?

---

Ah, so your "proof" is a conspiracy theory. And even if it were true, Ukraine at no point ceded independence to Russia, nor did Russia formally stop recognizing Ukraine as a sovereign nation.

---

So what was made up? Still waiting on an answer.

---

The proof is that Russia formally recognized Ukrainian indpendence and never revoked that recognition until they invaded on February of 2022.

---

Great thanks, but I was accused of making stuff up- and asked where/what. Can you tell me?

---

So basically your mission is to just derail and troll the thread today?

---

It's his mission every post he makes...

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

then you now agree this is a civil war we have no business in, right?

---

No, this is an unprovokedinvasion of a sovereignnation and has been from the start.


And are we still running with the "women are being conscripted for combat" bit?

---

Both have been disproven. HTH

---

Making **** up isn't proof.

hth

---

What exactly do you think is made up?

---

Your proof.

---

I haven't posted any "proof" What are you even talking about?

---

So they haven't been disproven. Good to know.

thanks.

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

then you now agree this is a civil war we have no business in, right?

---

No, this is an unprovokedinvasion of a sovereignnation and has been from the start.


And are we still running with the "women are being conscripted for combat" bit?

---

Both have been disproven. HTH

---

Making **** up isn't proof.

hth

---

What exactly do you think is made up?

---

Your proof.

---

I haven't posted any "proof" What are you even talking about?

---

So they haven't been disproven. Good to know.

thanks.

---

Ukraine is not a sovereign country. That's how getting invaded works.

LMCane said:

---

lex veritatem requirit said:

---

100% disagree the Putin's position is "human rights be damned" as shown both in his interview with Tucker Carlson and his attempts to avoid conflict and his offerings to negotiate an end to the conflict.

You may not like nor agree with his positions and approach, but to liken him to some sort of Mongolian invader, Spanish conquistador or European colonizer seems a bit off.

He has to what he believes to be a valid interest in Ukraine. I do not agree with his position though I understand it.

---

what's the difference between Putin's invasion of Ukraine

and Adolf Hitler's invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1938?

---

Are you familiar with the Munich Agreement?

A strong argument could be made for many of Hitler's actions in the early days of WWII dealt with resolving perceived "wrongs" Hitler felt Germany endured following WWI.

Note: None of it excuses other atrocities Hitler and his Nazi regime committed that were true human rights violations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement

Quote:

---

The Munich Agreement was an agreement concluded at Munich on 30 September 1938, by Nazi Germany, Great Britain, the French Republic, and Fascist Italy. The agreement provided for the German annexation of part of Czechoslovakia called the Sudetenland, where more than three million people, mainly ethnic Germans, lived.

---

Again, we can compare Putin to Hitler but that seems more of a topic for a history focused forum if there is one.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

then you now agree this is a civil war we have no business in, right?

---

No, this is an unprovokedinvasion of a sovereignnation and has been from the start.


And are we still running with the "women are being conscripted for combat" bit?

---

Both have been disproven. HTH

---

Making **** up isn't proof.

hth

---

What exactly do you think is made up?

---

Your proof.

---

I haven't posted any "proof" What are you even talking about?

---

So they haven't been disproven. Good to know.

thanks.

---

Ukraine is not a sovereign country. That's how getting invaded works.

---

Under that definition there is no such thing as a sovereign country. Do you see how ridiculous that is?

lex veritatem requirit said:

---

LMCane said:

---

lex veritatem requirit said:

---

100% disagree the Putin's position is "human rights be damned" as shown both in his interview with Tucker Carlson and his attempts to avoid conflict and his offerings to negotiate an end to the conflict.

You may not like nor agree with his positions and approach, but to liken him to some sort of Mongolian invader, Spanish conquistador or European colonizer seems a bit off.

He has to what he believes to be a valid interest in Ukraine. I do not agree with his position though I understand it.

---

what's the difference between Putin's invasion of Ukraine

and Adolf Hitler's invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1938?

---

Are you familiar with the Munich Agreement?

A strong argument could be made for many of Hitler's actions in the early days of WWII dealt with resolving perceived "wrongs" Hitler felt Germany endured following WWI.

Note: None of it excuses other atrocities Hitler and his Nazi regime committed that were true human rights violations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement

Quote:

---

The Munich Agreement was an agreement concluded at Munich on 30 September 1938, by Nazi Germany, Great Britain, the French Republic, and Fascist Italy. The agreement provided for the German annexation of part of Czechoslovakia called the Sudetenland, where more than three million people, mainly ethnic Germans, lived.

---

Again, we can compare Putin to Hitler but that seems more of a topic for a history focused forum if there is one.

---

Can you provide a similar agreement where Russia and Ukraine agreed that Ukraine would cede independence back to Russia? A real, internationally recognized agreement for all to see. Thanks!

Assume you meant to reply to the other poster named LMCane.

I did not make the comparison, so not sure why you are asking me to support a comparison.

Apologize if my response created confusion, I was simply addressing what was not an appropriate comparison.

I dunno what has happened here the past few hours, quite a hornets nest at times. Glad for your input here, and I am also glad more are paying attention to this matter/absurdity.

Ukraine Driven Further Back by Russia in Latest Surgehttps://t.co/bo2znlZmBy

— Jazz Shaw (@JazzShaw) February 28, 2024

Hopefully an amicable truce followed by a peace treaty can be established soon, though I also hope somehow it can be done without the current American White House occupant team and Senate figuring out how to spend a trillion dollars to subsidize blackrock's post-war investment strategy.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

then you now agree this is a civil war we have no business in, right?

---

No, this is an unprovokedinvasion of a sovereignnation and has been from the start.


And are we still running with the "women are being conscripted for combat" bit?

---

Both have been disproven. HTH

---

Making **** up isn't proof.

hth

---

What exactly do you think is made up?

---

Your proof.

---

I haven't posted any "proof" What are you even talking about?

---

So they haven't been disproven. Good to know.

thanks.

---

Ukraine is not a sovereign country. That's how getting invaded works.

---

Just admit that you don't understand what a sovereign country means...

From your article...

Quote:

---

As the linked AP analysis points out, the loss of Lastochkyne isn't all that large of a setback. It's a relatively small village and the Ukrainians only had to fall back a couple of miles

---

For those following at home. The line circled in red represents the Russian "hornets nest" of an advance.

A glorious and stunningly successful offensive. Not like the mythical/failed Ukrainian offensive that also took months to capture a tiny sliver of moonscape.

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

then you now agree this is a civil war we have no business in, right?

---

No, this is an unprovokedinvasion of a sovereignnation and has been from the start.


And are we still running with the "women are being conscripted for combat" bit?

---

Both have been disproven. HTH

---

Making **** up isn't proof.

hth

---

What exactly do you think is made up?

---

Your proof.

---

I haven't posted any "proof" What are you even talking about?

---

So they haven't been disproven. Good to know.

thanks.

---

Ukraine is not a sovereign country. That's how getting invaded works.

---

Just admit that you don't understand what a sovereign country means...

---

Not to speak for anyone else but the line of argument is this;

• Russia recognized Ukraine as a sovereign country (1991)
• Ukraine was toppled by a CIA-led coup (2014)
• Sovereignty was lost
• Russia believed the historical ties and shelling of Russian peoples within Ukraine warranted retaking Crimea
• Separatist russian groups sought to further get away from Nuland-Kiev, were oppressed.
• Nato-Biden pushed for rapid introduction of Nuland-Kiev to Nato
• Russia felt need to stop that so invaded, consider it a civil war on their side, after Minsk agreement terms had been abused/discarded.

There, it's not that hard. A 1991 press clipping about an independent Ukraine being forever sovereign is not the beginning and end of history, any more than the articles of secession of US states were in the 1860's. In fact, to go into very basic terms, the classical Westphalian definition of a sovereign state included "the concept of nation-state sovereignty based on territoriality and the absence of a role for external agents in domestic structures."

The very basic truth is that the CIA's propaganda funding request in the NYT this past week belies that. Ukraine is anything but sovereign, free, or democratic in its operation/existence, no matter what one thinks of Putin.

We are all well aware of what Russia's BS propaganda line of thought is to justify a land grab. You also left the Nazis and Biolabs.




Saddam had one too when he invaded Kuwait for more oil.

nortex97 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

then you now agree this is a civil war we have no business in, right?

---

No, this is an unprovokedinvasion of a sovereignnation and has been from the start.


And are we still running with the "women are being conscripted for combat" bit?

---

Both have been disproven. HTH

---

Making **** up isn't proof.

hth

---

What exactly do you think is made up?

---

Your proof.

---

I haven't posted any "proof" What are you even talking about?

---

So they haven't been disproven. Good to know.

thanks.

---

Ukraine is not a sovereign country. That's how getting invaded works.

---

Just admit that you don't understand what a sovereign country means...

---

Not to speak for anyone else but the line of argument is this;

• Russia recognized Ukraine as a sovereign country (1991)
• Ukraine was toppled by a CIA-led coup (2014)
• Sovereignty was lost
• Russia believed the historical ties and shelling of Russian peoples within Ukraine warranted retaking Crimea
• Separatist russian groups sought to further get away from Nuland-Kiev, were oppressed.
• Nato-Biden pushed for rapid introduction of Nuland-Kiev to Nato
• Russia felt need to stop that so invaded, consider it a civil war on their side, after Minsk agreement terms had been abused/discarded.

There, it's not that hard. A 1991 press clipping about an independent Ukraine being forever sovereign is not the beginning and end of history, any more than the articles of secession of US states were in the 1860's. In fact, to go into very basic terms, the classical Westphalian definition of a sovereign state included "the concept of nation-state sovereignty based on territoriality and the absence of a role for external agents in domestic structures."

The very basic truth is that the CIA's propaganda funding request in the NYT this past week belies that. Ukraine is anything but sovereign, free, or democratic in its operation/existence, no matter what one thinks of Putin.

---

Just saying "sovereignty was lost" doesn't make it true...

At no time did the become a non-sovereign nation. EVEN NOW, with Russia invading and occupying their country, they have not ceded their sovereignty. Russia would love to TAKE it from them, though.

Teslag said:

---

We are all well aware of what Russia's BS propaganda line of thought is to justify a land grab. You also left the Nazis and Biolabs.




Saddam had one too when he invaded Kuwait for more oil.

---

Not unlike yours, "Kurdistan invited me"

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

We are all well aware of what Russia's BS propaganda line of thought is to justify a land grab. You also left the Nazis and Biolabs.




Saddam had one too when he invaded Kuwait for more oil.

---

Not unlike yours, "Kurdistan invited me"

---

Actually completely unlike his.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

We are all well aware of what Russia's BS propaganda line of thought is to justify a land grab. You also left the Nazis and Biolabs.




Saddam had one too when he invaded Kuwait for more oil.

---

Not unlike yours, "Kurdistan invited me"

---

We aren't in Kurdistan to claim it as part of the US. We are there because the Kurdish government didn't want to be part of ISIS and asked for help.

Do you disagree with any of that or are you just trolling again?

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

We are all well aware of what Russia's BS propaganda line of thought is to justify a land grab. You also left the Nazis and Biolabs.




Saddam had one too when he invaded Kuwait for more oil.

---

Not unlike yours, "Kurdistan invited me"

---

We aren't in Kurdistan to claim it as part of the US. We are there because the Kurdish government didn't want to be part of ISIS and asked for help.

Do you disagree with any of that or are you just trolling again?

---

None of this matters to the point.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

We are all well aware of what Russia's BS propaganda line of thought is to justify a land grab. You also left the Nazis and Biolabs.




Saddam had one too when he invaded Kuwait for more oil.

---

Not unlike yours, "Kurdistan invited me"

---

We aren't in Kurdistan to claim it as part of the US. We are there because the Kurdish government didn't want to be part of ISIS and asked for help.

Do you disagree with any of that or are you just trolling again?

---

None of this matters to the point.

---

Your point is that you are trying to equate two military actions that are completely different. And your point is bad.

Tough to detail a point with that poster, imho. He'll probably come back telling you what you meant to say/didn't say but really thought.

Anyway, interesting analyses;

Quote:

---

Territorial Enlargement vs. NATO Enlargement

The issue of 'downgrading' NATO and building other security relationships on this basis served as a prelude to the beginning of the operation the relevant requirements were contained in a memorandum of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in December 2021. As far as we know today, the same was discussed at the negotiations in Belarus and Turkey in the spring of 2022. Neutral status for Ukraine (i.e., the Western bloc agreeing not to expand further) and the limitation of its military potential were apparently intended as a starting point for further, broader agreements. Putin said the same thing in his recent interview with Tucker Carlson: the war could have ended in Istanbul if outsiders hadn't prevented the parties from reaching an agreement at that time. This shows once again that the original goal was formulated in terms of the European situation as a whole, not territorial gains.

However, the situation has changed over the past two years, and it is the second motivational component that has come to the fore. In two appeals by Vladimir Putin in February 2022, shortly before the start of hostilities, emphasis was placed on the historical injustice and incongruity of dividing one nation into citizens of two different states, and on the artificiality of the borders drawn. Since the original plan of the campaign (a sharp and rapid change in the military-strategic status of Ukraine) was not realized and it took on a protracted character, the question of territorial control and the crossing of the front line became the main issue. And the accession of new territories to the Russian Federation in the autumn of 2022 ruled out the possibility of compromises that could have been discussed in the spring of that year (a return to the positions occupied before the outbreak of full-scale hostilities). The constant refrain is that any talks from now on will have to take into account the realities 'on the ground', and since these are constantly changing, the outcome is not predetermined.

The costs incurred primarily in human terms, but also in material have sharply raised the bar for a hypothetical agreement.

From the Kremlin's point of view, Ukraine's inability to fight without continuous huge supplies from abroad only confirms the thesis expressed in Putin's article about the externally inspired nature of the Ukrainian national project.

Thus, the two components European security and Ukrainian territorial composition/identity are ultimately linked.

In other words, Russia's relations with Ukraine and Russia's relations with the US/NATO are one and the same problem.

---

Quote:

---

To the boiling point

There is no compromise in sight: the NATO issue is a matter of principle for both sides. Russia hopes to force the US and its friends to recognize the need for a political retreat on this issue. Washington and its allies regard this as categorically unacceptable. The conditions for escalation are there. Russia intends to convert its current advantage into further territorial gains at any cost, demonstrating that the enemy is running out of resources for confrontation. But the hiccup in American aid to Kiev, if resolved, will lead not only to quantitative but also to qualitative results to the unfreezing of funds and the start of the delivery of more powerful long-range weapons to inflict maximum damage on Russia.

The heat of the confrontation is already such that a further rise in temperature will bring it to a full boiling point, i.e. close to a direct confrontation between Russia and NATO.

And Moscow's military successes, far from being sobering, may have the opposite effect of raising the stakes.

In considering this pattern, it is important to bear in mind domestic circumstances, which today may be more important than any geopolitical calculations. The deepening divisions in the US in an election year, the fragmentation of Western Europe, and the increasingly unclear socio-political situation in Ukraine. Russia looks the most stable in this respect, but crisis situations cannot be ruled out. Again, there could be outbreaks of confrontation outside the direct Ukraine context in Eurasia, in Asia as a whole, or in the unfolding of tensions in the Middle East. All of these could become significant inputs.

The third year of the campaign promises to be decisive in every way. And there is no reason to expect a resolution in the foreseeable future, given the complexity of the conflict and the size of the prize at stake.

---

So your source to say it's not a sovereign nation is to echo Russian state media saying the target of their invasion was not a sovereign nation?


Do you expect the official Russian position, of which RT is, to say anything contrary to their actions?

Teslag said:

---

So your source to say it's not a sovereign nation is to echo Russian state media saying the target of their invasion was not a sovereign nation?

---

Once again I'd ask that you not paraphrase my thoughts. Seriously, you've not ever, even once, done so correctly/accurately. Feel free to make your own points and stuff, goodness.

Who said they were your thoughts? You posted the official Russian reasons for why they believe Ukraine isn't sovereign. Why would they state anything otherwise?

Quote:

---

There is no compromise in sight

---

This is now the official position of Russia.

Do you now blame them for not trying to end this war and end the suffering you have opposed?

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

We are all well aware of what Russia's BS propaganda line of thought is to justify a land grab. You also left the Nazis and Biolabs.




Saddam had one too when he invaded Kuwait for more oil.

---

Not unlike yours, "Kurdistan invited me"

---

We aren't in Kurdistan to claim it as part of the US. We are there because the Kurdish government didn't want to be part of ISIS and asked for help.

Do you disagree with any of that or are you just trolling again?

---

None of this matters to the point.

---

Your point is that you are trying to equate two military actions that are completely different. And your point is bad.

---

You have your reasonings for justifying your invasion and I see through them. That is all.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

We are all well aware of what Russia's BS propaganda line of thought is to justify a land grab. You also left the Nazis and Biolabs.




Saddam had one too when he invaded Kuwait for more oil.

---

Not unlike yours, "Kurdistan invited me"

---

We aren't in Kurdistan to claim it as part of the US. We are there because the Kurdish government didn't want to be part of ISIS and asked for help.

Do you disagree with any of that or are you just trolling again?

---

None of this matters to the point.

---

Your point is that you are trying to equate two military actions that are completely different. And your point is bad.

---

You have your reasonings for justifying your invasion and I see through them. That is all.

---

So trolling then. Carry on.

lex veritatem requirit said:

---

LMCane said:

---

lex veritatem requirit said:

---

100% disagree the Putin's position is "human rights be damned" as shown both in his interview with Tucker Carlson and his attempts to avoid conflict and his offerings to negotiate an end to the conflict.

You may not like nor agree with his positions and approach, but to liken him to some sort of Mongolian invader, Spanish conquistador or European colonizer seems a bit off.

He has to what he believes to be a valid interest in Ukraine. I do not agree with his position though I understand it.

---

what's the difference between Putin's invasion of Ukraine

and Adolf Hitler's invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1938?

---

Are you familiar with the Munich Agreement?

A strong argument could be made for many of Hitler's actions in the early days of WWII dealt with resolving perceived "wrongs" Hitler felt Germany endured following WWI.

Note: None of it excuses other atrocities Hitler and his Nazi regime committed that were true human rights violations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement

Quote:

---

The Munich Agreement was an agreement concluded at Munich on 30 September 1938, by Nazi Germany, Great Britain, the French Republic, and Fascist Italy. The agreement provided for the German annexation of part of Czechoslovakia called the Sudetenland, where more than three million people, mainly ethnic Germans, lived.

---

Again, we can compare Putin to Hitler but that seems more of a topic for a history focused forum if there is one.

---

You clearly know little about actual history:

Less than half a year after it was signed, Nazi Germany broke the Munich Pact. Germany invaded the Czech provinces of Bohemia and Moravia on 15 March 1939.

Unlike with the Sudetenland, these provinces were not incorporated directly into the German Reich.

They instead became known as the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, and were placed under Nazi rule.

Following Nazi Germany's move, Hungary soon made territorial claims on the south of what was formerly Czechoslovakia.

Slovakia, a province of Czechoslovakia, just above the Hungarian annexed zone, became an independent Catholic state with close links to Nazi Germany.

By the end of 1939, Czechoslovakia had completely disappeared from the map.

Despite breaking the Munich Pact almost immediately, Hitler did not face a military response from the Allies.

Yes, Hitler did actually invade Czechoslovakia after Munich

Hitler is dead, fyi. So is Stalin. And don't tell George Tankai but so is FDR.

Czech's are pretty pissed off at the new socialists in Europe nowadays, from the EU, and their government's support for it/Ukraine...

nortex97 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

So your source to say it's not a sovereign nation is to echo Russian state media saying the target of their invasion was not a sovereign nation?

---

Once again I'd ask that you not paraphrase my thoughts. Seriously, you've not ever, even once, done so correctly/accurately. Feel free to make your own points and stuff, goodness.

---

BTW, that wasn't an "interesting analysis". It was nothing but the Russia propagandist reasoning for invasion.

Hell that wasn't even propaganda. It was the literal Russia position from a Russian government agency.

LMCane said:

---

lex veritatem requirit said:

---

LMCane said:

---

lex veritatem requirit said:

---

100% disagree the Putin's position is "human rights be damned" as shown both in his interview with Tucker Carlson and his attempts to avoid conflict and his offerings to negotiate an end to the conflict.

You may not like nor agree with his positions and approach, but to liken him to some sort of Mongolian invader, Spanish conquistador or European colonizer seems a bit off.

He has to what he believes to be a valid interest in Ukraine. I do not agree with his position though I understand it.

---

what's the difference between Putin's invasion of Ukraine

and Adolf Hitler's invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1938?

---

---

You clearly know little about actual history:

Less than half a year after it was signed, Nazi Germany broke the Munich Pact. Germany invaded the Czech provinces of Bohemia and Moravia on 15 March 1939.

Unlike with the Sudetenland, these provinces were not incorporated directly into the German Reich.

They instead became known as the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, and were placed under Nazi rule.

Following Nazi Germany's move, Hungary soon made territorial claims on the south of what was formerly Czechoslovakia.

Slovakia, a province of Czechoslovakia, just above the Hungarian annexed zone, became an independent Catholic state with close links to Nazi Germany.

By the end of 1939, Czechoslovakia had completely disappeared from the map.

Despite breaking the Munich Pact almost immediately, Hitler did not face a military response from the Allies.

Yes, Hitler did actually invade Czechoslovakia after Munich

---

Sorry, you clearly said 1938 which they did not invade. Fee free to update your post. I clearly pointed out Hitler committed other atrocities after. Though one could still argue that Hitler was within his purview as leader of his country to break any previously agreed to pacts, agreements and treaties.

Breaking pacts, treaties, agreements, alliances, etc happens all the time. History continues to debate who was right and wrong for centuries after.

Painting it in black / white or good v evil is overly simplistic and fails to consider the geopolitical issues at play.

Again, I would encourage a move to a more history focused thread and not continue to derail this one.

nortex97 said:

---

Hitler is dead, fyi. So is Stalin. And don't tell George Tankai but so is FDR.

Czech's are pretty pissed off at the new socialists in Europe nowadays, from the EU, and their government's support for it/Ukraine...

---

Hitler - Show me the body and prove it.

Stalin - We have the goods for us to see on permanent display.

Rise of nationalism is HUGE in Germany and other areas of the EU and former Soviet republics, though with the latter I suspect one or more will either join back with Putin OR extract a significant price to remain "sovereign" over the next 10 years... especially after the US showing how lucaritive that game is with the Ukraine bullschizen.

Teslag said:

---

Hell that wasn't even propaganda. It was the literal Russia position from a Russian government agency.

---

I remember when you were posting the same because it made Uke feel good.

Yes, I remember when I used the Russian government as a source to find out what they considered one of their own ships to be.