Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Canadian-led battle group will deploy to Latvia, part of NATO move to deter Russia [View all]treestar
(82,383 posts)58. No, didn't we have world support then?
For the most part. We were taking out Saddam, not trying to take over part of Iraq and add it to the US. This was supposedly because Saddam was going to get WMD. Nobody in Ukraine or Crimea seems to be a threat in that vein.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
130 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Canadian-led battle group will deploy to Latvia, part of NATO move to deter Russia [View all]
Night Watchman
Jul 2016
OP
Before 2014 I probably would have agreed however Russia is in an expansionist mood
cstanleytech
Jul 2016
#3
Russia took Crimea by force, with a fig leaf of Russian equipped & secretly manned 'Crimean' forces.
Bernardo de La Paz
Jul 2016
#9
Unmarked Russian forces with local militias, before the referendum, against UN resolution.
Bernardo de La Paz
Jul 2016
#13
Force is not always marked by death. No avoidance. Russia used force to take over the Crimea.
Bernardo de La Paz
Jul 2016
#17
The referundum was not a true and proper referendum so there was not "willingness of the majority".
Bernardo de La Paz
Jul 2016
#19
No accusation. Written carefuly, so read carefully. You're overly-sensitive & only u think u win. nt
Bernardo de La Paz
Jul 2016
#25
Exactly. A vote under foreign occupation must ALWAYS be assumed to be illegitimate. nt
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#51
Killing is not required for one to wage an unprovoked war of aggression. See the Austrian anschluss
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#49
Sorry, but I do believe Austria, as a nation, joined the Third Reich willingly
uawchild
Aug 2016
#60
The historians all agree that the anschluss was a war crime, just like Crimea. That's my point.
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#66
Yes they do all agree that it was a war crime. Sorry you don't get to make stuff up
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#68
thank you for taking on a DUer defending Nazi war crimes comparable to Putin's takeover of Ukraine
uhnope
Aug 2016
#72
If I hadn't read Orwell's notes on Nationalism, I wouldnt believe it or understand from where it
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#80
Nope, my arguments to you are my arguments to you. I was talking with uhnope and
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#83
And you were talking about being ad-hominem? This is the problem with all your arguments
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#85
I've already laid it out for you several times. You are so determined to defend Putin you dont see
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#89
So a war crime is OK if Putin does it but not if the Third Reich does it. OK, I stand corrected.
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#91
Yes, YOUR defeat. Your hypocrisy on war crimes is laid bare for all to see. nt
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#93
Yeah, um, you are defending Putin's war crimes. I don't apologize to those who engage in apologia
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#96
Nope, while you have created straw men, I have been saying the same thing since my first
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#100
Nope, I was confused about your support for the same war crime in one case and not another.
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#103
Still not intellectually honest enough to admit you are supporting a war crime?
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#106
You are desperately trying to change the subject. You should be apologizing instead.
uawchild
Aug 2016
#109
Thats right, you don't get to slip away after being an apologist for Putin's war crimes.
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#112
Nope, I noted very specifically for which war crimes you are an apologist. nt
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#116
Yep, I noted specifically what false accusation you should apologize for. n/t
uawchild
Aug 2016
#119
And I noted that no apology is necessary, the confusion on that point is your fault. nt
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#120
It's important you apologize to not cheapen real accusations of anti-semitism
uawchild
Aug 2016
#121
I'm like a cat who likes playing with a caught mouse. Except in this case, the mouse kills itself at
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#97
English may not be their first language. Their first language is probably written in Cyrillic
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#101
Yes, the West does not readily recognize the Russian annexation of Crimea
Bernardo de La Paz
Jul 2016
#23
Use your head please. Neither NATO nor the US will start a war with Russia as the risk is to great
cstanleytech
Jul 2016
#31
Fences are different from walls. You can talk through fences, but not walls. . . . nt
Bernardo de La Paz
Aug 2016
#48
When do you think your war is going to happen? What evidence do you have other than speculation?
Bernardo de La Paz
Aug 2016
#125
No doubt, you have peer-reviewed, objective evidence to support this creative allegation
LanternWaste
Aug 2016
#52
Wrong. Very smart to announce deployment so that nobody makes any false moves in reaction
Bernardo de La Paz
Jul 2016
#10
Emphasis on "little" as that number of troops is more symbolic than anything. nt
cstanleytech
Jul 2016
#32
1st problem with your post is that Russia is no longer communist or even socialist.
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#81
More negative nationalism on display. As Orwell noted it makes people nutty
stevenleser
Aug 2016
#128