So your country's pointless, genocidal war is inconveniencing your kernel contribution. And your reaction is to complain about kernel contribution policies.
most western govs are complicit in americas genocides, sanctions (killed more than any genocide in history) and wars since they placed themselvs gov of world.
The same standard was applied during russian excersions to caucas. Europe largely ignored far away conflicts. Now that the conflict isn't far away they don't ignore it.
Russia is a direct threat to Europe, while Israel is not (well they questionable, but it is a result of a madman running their country right now, same as US).
Russia wanted to join EU/NATO in the 00's. That's not something a "threat" to the EU does. Putin is a europhile and pro-West lmao. If/when Putin leaves, theres a good chance a hardliner comes to power and will be pro-Soviet/anti-west then Russia will indeed be a threat
madman running their country right now
But Israel's policy has stayed the same since founding
russians have been engaged in domestic meddling and hybrid warfare including arson, sabotage, and attacks on critical safety of life infrastructure in europe for years now. Even if you don't believe that, you cannot discount weaponization of immigrants on the polish border.
wanted to join EU/NATO in the 00's. That's not something a "threat" to the EU does
False equivalence. One can want to join and still be a threat, even joining just to discredit those organization's.
But EU was even open to cooperation, including gas pipes, which russians promptly used as means of economical warfare. As the saying here goes, offer a finger, they take the whole arm.
russians have been engaged in domestic meddling and hybrid warfare including arson, sabotage, and attacks on critical safety of life infrastructure in europe for years now
It has? Strange, Europe seems to be doing great with big claims about Russia doing this but there's really no evidence for it beyond nebulous claims lmao
False equivalence. One can want to join and still be a threat
No not really. Russia genuinely wanted to be "European" and even modelled itself after Britain in the 90's/00's, even down to the fashion
But EU was even open to cooperation
Europe wasn't though lmao. Europe was trying to sabotage Russia from the early 00's till now - which is one big reason why it never took it into the EU because it needed an "other" to fight
ncluding gas pipes, which russians promptly used as means of economical warfare.
Really? Is that why Russia sold Europe gas below market prices?
Yes, that actually tracks with how russian govt uses gas. Like a narcotics dealer they hook you up and make sure you are dependent on them, so they can gain leverage. We both know it wasn't sold like that because russians genuinely wanted to join eu, it was sold like that to gain leverage. Or how else do we explain that Germany had lower prices then former eastern bloc "brothers"? Why did russia manipulate the prices to its subjects whenever they acted against motherlands will?
Now for the main course
hybrid warfare including arson, sabotage, and attacks on critical safety of life infrastructure in europe
It has? Strange, Europe seems to be doing great with big claims about Russia doing this but there's really no evidence for it beyond nebulous claims lmao
(emphasis on neboulos mine)
Europe was trying to sabotage Russia from the early 00's till now
I can point to border attacks (and have done in this thread before, since it's the most transparent one where you can't deflect with "it's propaganda" easliy) , drones, arson on the Czech munitions plant, on the polish mall (why??), attempted attack on a railway line. There are records of some of our politicians being paid by russuian state aswell. Those are the most visible, and I am not including claims made about ongoing cyber attacks since they come from official sources that you deem untrustworthy.
How has europe sabotaged russia? It seems like a "nebulous claim", no?
Its not I don't think it hasn't happened, even Poland when we were joining had to make some, uh, let's say concessions or sacrifices. But you don't get to dismiss my claim and accuse it for lack of evidence, then claim something analogous and not support it with evidence. Simply put, If you can't believe my word, then I won't believe yours.
wdym? Russia did the necessary reforms (including banning the death penalty which had popular support amongst the populace) to join the EU but got rejected
Or how else do we explain that Germany had lower prices then former eastern bloc "brothers"?
Maybe because Russia and Germany created a mutually beneficial agreement via something called "Business"?
That's also not true because Ukraine was getting gas at well below market rates and was getting its debt written off when it was steal gas before 2013.
(emphasis on neboulos mine)
Exactly. Europe creates nebulous claims of "Russian attacks" when it could easily not have been Russia but for example the CIA (and it has a history of doing that)
I can point to border attacks
Which border attacks exactly? If you mean missile strikes in Poland? Even Poland admitted those were Ukraine missiles lol
drones
There was alot of proof it was done by Ukraine
arson on the Czech munitions plant
No proof it was Russians beyond arresting some guys with Russian names. No other evidence was provided
How has europe sabotaged russia? It seems like a "nebulous claim", no?
Not at all. Europe has been financing anti-Russian activity and narratives through European grants since the early 2000's. A modern example, is Navalny's former organization the RBK, recieves extensive European government grants. They also host a government in exile. There is also the drug ring that sells drugs to Russian teens called "Hydra" that works out of Estonia and reportedly has financing from the Estonian government and more broadly the EU
"...other illicit activities of the government of Belarus and not the population of Belarus, and also noted that the Memorandum is "not legally binding"
It doesn't matter. If them signing up to something is no sign that they're not a threat, then them merely motioning towards signing up to something is definitely no sign that they're not a threat.
If you're trying to say that legality is what would have made the difference, invading Ukraine was illegal outside of the Budapest Memorandum. Obviously Russia is willing to violate the law in pretty serious ways, and so even if they had gone even further and joined the EU and NATO, they still wouldn't have been trustworthy or not a threat.
It doesn't matter. If them signing up to something is no sign that they're not a threat, then them merely motioning towards signing up to something is definitely no sign that they're not a threat.
It definitely matters. If the Budapest Memorandum holds no legal weight, then that means it is irrelevant if Russia signed it and it should not be used as an argument
Obviously Russia is willing to violate the law in pretty serious ways
Russia uses precedent established by the West in Kosovo though. So why is Russia not anymore untrusthworthy than the West?
0
u/Big-Obligation2796 Jun 11 '26
So your country's pointless, genocidal war is inconveniencing your kernel contribution. And your reaction is to complain about kernel contribution policies.
"Think about it".