Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Her facial expressions are quite creepy.
But, JS, these people would probably appease Russia just like you've been squealing for all day.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
for the record, i'm not pro-putin, or pro-war,
i'm just trying to get you to see this from the other side's point of view
Ukraine has been a "country" only since the dissolution of the USSR in 1991. Until then it was one of the "Soviet Socialist Republics" that together formed the USSR. Before the Russian Revolution Ukraine was a region, a province, of the Romanov Empire.
From Russia's perspective. A military alliance is planning to station its armed forces in Russia's back yard. Imagine a scenario in which Scotland becomes independent, signs a treaty with Russia then Russia stations its forces at the northern border of England. Who would be seen as the aggressor then?
Peks must be a Russian bot.
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 7 minutes ago
for the record, i'm not pro-putin, or pro-war,
i'm just trying to get you to see this from the other side's point of view
Ukraine has been a "country" only since the dissolution of the USSR in 1991. Until then it was one of the "Soviet Socialist Republics" that together formed the USSR. Before the Russian Revolution Ukraine was a region, a province, of the Romanov Empire.
From Russia's perspective. A military alliance is planning to station its armed forces in Russia's back yard. Imagine a scenario in which Scotland becomes independent, signs a treaty with Russia then Russia stations its forces at the northern border of England. Who would be seen as the aggressor then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Blyaaaaat
This invasion isnt about NATO Peks old bean, it's mad Vlad's imperialist ambitions and legacy.
how many years before a country is allowed to be a country? didnt realise there was a time limit
If we go back in history then Peks argiement cud b applied too nearly every nation in europe
Ridiculus
https://thehill.com/policy/international/595656-finland-says-debate-on-nato-membership-will-change-after-russian
Finland could be saying goodbye to finlandisation. Putin has shown no respect for sovereign nations not in NATO so why not.
Q Will Russia’s invasion of Ukraine mean that we go back to flying to east Asia via Anchorage in Alaska?
A The suffering of the people of Ukraine and their fears for the future are the world’s main concerns. Vladimir Putin’s bloody and unprovoked attack on his neighbour, however, has significant implications for travellers. It has triggered airspace closures above Ukraine and in the surrounding area, while the UK has banned all Russian aircraft. Moscow may well retaliate with its own ban on British and other airlines flying over Russian territory. If that happens, it will take aviation back three decades. As I write, Japan Airlines flight 44 from London Heathrow has just touched down in Tokyo. The jet entered Russian airspace near St Petersburg and spent six hours crossing the biggest country on earth en route to the Japanese capital. A 6,000-mile direct flight, well within the capabilities of the Boeing 777, will become a much longer undertaking if Russia closes its airspace. While a southerly course over the Gulf states might seem logical, it would involve flying around 8,500 miles. Flying to the east by going west via Anchorage is about 500 miles shorter (almost an hour’s flying time). Such a flightpath is also largely over oceans, meaning the airline pays less in overflying rights. So, yes, passengers could find themselves once again pausing in the rather rudimentary surroundings of the passenger terminal at Anchorage – turning a 12-hour nonstop into a 16-hour trip, and doing even more environmental harm. Compared with the immense suffering of the people of Ukraine, this is a trivial detail. But it shows how geo-political crises affect international aviation.
From Simon Calder's travel blog earlier today.
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 21 minutes ago
for the record, i'm not pro-putin, or pro-war,
i'm just trying to get you to see this from the other side's point of view
Ukraine has been a "country" only since the dissolution of the USSR in 1991. Until then it was one of the "Soviet Socialist Republics" that together formed the USSR. Before the Russian Revolution Ukraine was a region, a province, of the Romanov Empire.
From Russia's perspective. A military alliance is planning to station its armed forces in Russia's back yard. Imagine a scenario in which Scotland becomes independent, signs a treaty with Russia then Russia stations its forces at the northern border of England. Who would be seen as the aggressor then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet more bullshiiiit.
Ukraine was an independent nation after WWI, and remained so until the Bolsheviks took control in the 1920s.
Despite becoming part of the USSR (as the Ukrainian SSR), firstly, there were strong independence movements more or less throughout the Soviet era (which ultimately were a large part of the reason for the break up of the USSR), and secondly, the Ukrainian SSR was always considered a special case in terms of autonomy by the leadership of the USSR.
Khrushchev, for example, both before he took the reins and throughout his premiership, considered Ukraine to be a distinct nation.
Lastly, PUTIN IS NOT IN UKRAINE BECAUSE UKRAINE IS ABOUT TO JOIN NATO.
comment by 🇺🇦 Boris 'Inky' Gibson 🇺🇦 (U5901)
posted 43 seconds ago
Q Will Russia’s invasion of Ukraine mean that we go back to flying to east Asia via Anchorage in Alaska?
A The suffering of the people of Ukraine and their fears for the future are the world’s main concerns. Vladimir Putin’s bloody and unprovoked attack on his neighbour, however, has significant implications for travellers. It has triggered airspace closures above Ukraine and in the surrounding area, while the UK has banned all Russian aircraft. Moscow may well retaliate with its own ban on British and other airlines flying over Russian territory. If that happens, it will take aviation back three decades. As I write, Japan Airlines flight 44 from London Heathrow has just touched down in Tokyo. The jet entered Russian airspace near St Petersburg and spent six hours crossing the biggest country on earth en route to the Japanese capital. A 6,000-mile direct flight, well within the capabilities of the Boeing 777, will become a much longer undertaking if Russia closes its airspace. While a southerly course over the Gulf states might seem logical, it would involve flying around 8,500 miles. Flying to the east by going west via Anchorage is about 500 miles shorter (almost an hour’s flying time). Such a flightpath is also largely over oceans, meaning the airline pays less in overflying rights. So, yes, passengers could find themselves once again pausing in the rather rudimentary surroundings of the passenger terminal at Anchorage – turning a 12-hour nonstop into a 16-hour trip, and doing even more environmental harm. Compared with the immense suffering of the people of Ukraine, this is a trivial detail. But it shows how geo-political crises affect international aviation.
From Simon Calder's travel blog earlier today.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
memory serves its still a key destination for freight
comment by The goat did it (U10408)
posted 42 minutes ago
Set. FFS
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't worry. Relax. Have a cup of tea. Maybe take a little break from here. Go for a nice walk.
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 27 minutes ago
Peks must be a Russian bot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace the b in not with idi and you've got it.
comment by 4zA - its into the shame and into the guilt and into the fooking fray (U22472)
posted 21 minutes ago
If we go back in history then Peks argiement cud b applied too nearly every nation in europe
Ridiculus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it's not my argument Forza, that's the Russian argument
Also worth pointing out that:
- the Bolsheviks recognised the Ukrainians as ethnically and culturally distinct from the Russians
- the Ukrainian SSR was a republic in its own right, and with its own government (under the Communist Party of Ukraine) and legislature
- the Ukrainian SSR was, independently, a founding member of the United Nations, recognised as a member in its own right, with Moscow’s backing
- the nation of Ukraine is a *successor* to the Ukrainian SSR, not some completely new republic conjured out of nowhere.
The idea that Ukraine didn’t exist or have any well-defined identity of its own before 1991 is absolute bunkum.
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by 4zA - its into the shame and into the guilt and into the fooking fray (U22472)
posted 21 minutes ago
If we go back in history then Peks argiement cud b applied too nearly every nation in europe
Ridiculus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it's not my argument Forza, that's the Russian argument
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s a shiiiit argument based on a fabricated history.
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 27 minutes ago
Peks must be a Russian bot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace the b in bot with idi and you've got it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
automistake.
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 23 minutes ago
https://thehill.com/policy/international/595656-finland-says-debate-on-nato-membership-will-change-after-russian
Finland could be saying goodbye to finlandisation. Putin has shown no respect for sovereign nations not in NATO so why not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you get my rabbling reply on Russia and the left, mate?
Am shattered, and have not read back as working everyday at present and just did my other job today, in-between posting bollox here 🤔
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 27 minutes ago
Peks must be a Russian bot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace the b in bot with idi and you've got it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
automistake.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They fixed my motor🤔
comment by And... Rosso... Though its... Yeah and... That... (U17054)
posted 7 minutes ago
Also worth pointing out that:
- the Bolsheviks recognised the Ukrainians as ethnically and culturally distinct from the Russians
- the Ukrainian SSR was a republic in its own right, and with its own government (under the Communist Party of Ukraine) and legislature
- the Ukrainian SSR was, independently, a founding member of the United Nations, recognised as a member in its own right, with Moscow’s backing
- the nation of Ukraine is a *successor* to the Ukrainian SSR, not some completely new republic conjured out of nowhere.
The idea that Ukraine didn’t exist or have any well-defined identity of its own before 1991 is absolute bunkum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So, you're not an internationalist, comrade🤣
Not having a pop, it's just the concept of nationality, nationalism, cultural and ethnic distinct identity, borders drawn on maps, is all a bit, right wing, innit.
Russians are not our kind, springs to mind.
Could apply to anywhere on earth of course, and any group, any distinct cultural and ethnic group...and white supremacists use such terminology.
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 27 minutes ago
Peks must be a Russian bot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace the b in not with idi and you've got it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Am replacing the b in not with idi and struggling badly, pal 🥳🥰
Is it a Russian word?
Sign in if you want to comment
Arguing w/strangers cause I'm lonely thread
Page 2458 of 4971
2459 | 2460 | 2461 | 2462 | 2463
posted on 25/2/22
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 25/2/22
Her facial expressions are quite creepy.
posted on 25/2/22
But, JS, these people would probably appease Russia just like you've been squealing for all day.
posted on 25/2/22
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 25/2/22
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 25/2/22
for the record, i'm not pro-putin, or pro-war,
i'm just trying to get you to see this from the other side's point of view
Ukraine has been a "country" only since the dissolution of the USSR in 1991. Until then it was one of the "Soviet Socialist Republics" that together formed the USSR. Before the Russian Revolution Ukraine was a region, a province, of the Romanov Empire.
From Russia's perspective. A military alliance is planning to station its armed forces in Russia's back yard. Imagine a scenario in which Scotland becomes independent, signs a treaty with Russia then Russia stations its forces at the northern border of England. Who would be seen as the aggressor then?
posted on 25/2/22
Peks must be a Russian bot.
posted on 25/2/22
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 7 minutes ago
for the record, i'm not pro-putin, or pro-war,
i'm just trying to get you to see this from the other side's point of view
Ukraine has been a "country" only since the dissolution of the USSR in 1991. Until then it was one of the "Soviet Socialist Republics" that together formed the USSR. Before the Russian Revolution Ukraine was a region, a province, of the Romanov Empire.
From Russia's perspective. A military alliance is planning to station its armed forces in Russia's back yard. Imagine a scenario in which Scotland becomes independent, signs a treaty with Russia then Russia stations its forces at the northern border of England. Who would be seen as the aggressor then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Blyaaaaat
posted on 25/2/22
This invasion isnt about NATO Peks old bean, it's mad Vlad's imperialist ambitions and legacy.
posted on 25/2/22
how many years before a country is allowed to be a country? didnt realise there was a time limit
posted on 25/2/22
If we go back in history then Peks argiement cud b applied too nearly every nation in europe
Ridiculus
posted on 25/2/22
https://thehill.com/policy/international/595656-finland-says-debate-on-nato-membership-will-change-after-russian
Finland could be saying goodbye to finlandisation. Putin has shown no respect for sovereign nations not in NATO so why not.
posted on 25/2/22
Q Will Russia’s invasion of Ukraine mean that we go back to flying to east Asia via Anchorage in Alaska?
A The suffering of the people of Ukraine and their fears for the future are the world’s main concerns. Vladimir Putin’s bloody and unprovoked attack on his neighbour, however, has significant implications for travellers. It has triggered airspace closures above Ukraine and in the surrounding area, while the UK has banned all Russian aircraft. Moscow may well retaliate with its own ban on British and other airlines flying over Russian territory. If that happens, it will take aviation back three decades. As I write, Japan Airlines flight 44 from London Heathrow has just touched down in Tokyo. The jet entered Russian airspace near St Petersburg and spent six hours crossing the biggest country on earth en route to the Japanese capital. A 6,000-mile direct flight, well within the capabilities of the Boeing 777, will become a much longer undertaking if Russia closes its airspace. While a southerly course over the Gulf states might seem logical, it would involve flying around 8,500 miles. Flying to the east by going west via Anchorage is about 500 miles shorter (almost an hour’s flying time). Such a flightpath is also largely over oceans, meaning the airline pays less in overflying rights. So, yes, passengers could find themselves once again pausing in the rather rudimentary surroundings of the passenger terminal at Anchorage – turning a 12-hour nonstop into a 16-hour trip, and doing even more environmental harm. Compared with the immense suffering of the people of Ukraine, this is a trivial detail. But it shows how geo-political crises affect international aviation.
From Simon Calder's travel blog earlier today.
posted on 25/2/22
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 21 minutes ago
for the record, i'm not pro-putin, or pro-war,
i'm just trying to get you to see this from the other side's point of view
Ukraine has been a "country" only since the dissolution of the USSR in 1991. Until then it was one of the "Soviet Socialist Republics" that together formed the USSR. Before the Russian Revolution Ukraine was a region, a province, of the Romanov Empire.
From Russia's perspective. A military alliance is planning to station its armed forces in Russia's back yard. Imagine a scenario in which Scotland becomes independent, signs a treaty with Russia then Russia stations its forces at the northern border of England. Who would be seen as the aggressor then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet more bullshiiiit.
Ukraine was an independent nation after WWI, and remained so until the Bolsheviks took control in the 1920s.
Despite becoming part of the USSR (as the Ukrainian SSR), firstly, there were strong independence movements more or less throughout the Soviet era (which ultimately were a large part of the reason for the break up of the USSR), and secondly, the Ukrainian SSR was always considered a special case in terms of autonomy by the leadership of the USSR.
Khrushchev, for example, both before he took the reins and throughout his premiership, considered Ukraine to be a distinct nation.
Lastly, PUTIN IS NOT IN UKRAINE BECAUSE UKRAINE IS ABOUT TO JOIN NATO.
posted on 25/2/22
comment by 🇺🇦 Boris 'Inky' Gibson 🇺🇦 (U5901)
posted 43 seconds ago
Q Will Russia’s invasion of Ukraine mean that we go back to flying to east Asia via Anchorage in Alaska?
A The suffering of the people of Ukraine and their fears for the future are the world’s main concerns. Vladimir Putin’s bloody and unprovoked attack on his neighbour, however, has significant implications for travellers. It has triggered airspace closures above Ukraine and in the surrounding area, while the UK has banned all Russian aircraft. Moscow may well retaliate with its own ban on British and other airlines flying over Russian territory. If that happens, it will take aviation back three decades. As I write, Japan Airlines flight 44 from London Heathrow has just touched down in Tokyo. The jet entered Russian airspace near St Petersburg and spent six hours crossing the biggest country on earth en route to the Japanese capital. A 6,000-mile direct flight, well within the capabilities of the Boeing 777, will become a much longer undertaking if Russia closes its airspace. While a southerly course over the Gulf states might seem logical, it would involve flying around 8,500 miles. Flying to the east by going west via Anchorage is about 500 miles shorter (almost an hour’s flying time). Such a flightpath is also largely over oceans, meaning the airline pays less in overflying rights. So, yes, passengers could find themselves once again pausing in the rather rudimentary surroundings of the passenger terminal at Anchorage – turning a 12-hour nonstop into a 16-hour trip, and doing even more environmental harm. Compared with the immense suffering of the people of Ukraine, this is a trivial detail. But it shows how geo-political crises affect international aviation.
From Simon Calder's travel blog earlier today.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
memory serves its still a key destination for freight
posted on 25/2/22
comment by The goat did it (U10408)
posted 42 minutes ago
Set. FFS
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't worry. Relax. Have a cup of tea. Maybe take a little break from here. Go for a nice walk.
posted on 25/2/22
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 27 minutes ago
Peks must be a Russian bot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace the b in not with idi and you've got it.
posted on 25/2/22
comment by 4zA - its into the shame and into the guilt and into the fooking fray (U22472)
posted 21 minutes ago
If we go back in history then Peks argiement cud b applied too nearly every nation in europe
Ridiculus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it's not my argument Forza, that's the Russian argument
posted on 25/2/22
Also worth pointing out that:
- the Bolsheviks recognised the Ukrainians as ethnically and culturally distinct from the Russians
- the Ukrainian SSR was a republic in its own right, and with its own government (under the Communist Party of Ukraine) and legislature
- the Ukrainian SSR was, independently, a founding member of the United Nations, recognised as a member in its own right, with Moscow’s backing
- the nation of Ukraine is a *successor* to the Ukrainian SSR, not some completely new republic conjured out of nowhere.
The idea that Ukraine didn’t exist or have any well-defined identity of its own before 1991 is absolute bunkum.
posted on 25/2/22
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by 4zA - its into the shame and into the guilt and into the fooking fray (U22472)
posted 21 minutes ago
If we go back in history then Peks argiement cud b applied too nearly every nation in europe
Ridiculus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it's not my argument Forza, that's the Russian argument
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s a shiiiit argument based on a fabricated history.
posted on 25/2/22
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 27 minutes ago
Peks must be a Russian bot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace the b in bot with idi and you've got it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
automistake.
posted on 25/2/22
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 23 minutes ago
https://thehill.com/policy/international/595656-finland-says-debate-on-nato-membership-will-change-after-russian
Finland could be saying goodbye to finlandisation. Putin has shown no respect for sovereign nations not in NATO so why not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you get my rabbling reply on Russia and the left, mate?
Am shattered, and have not read back as working everyday at present and just did my other job today, in-between posting bollox here 🤔
posted on 25/2/22
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 27 minutes ago
Peks must be a Russian bot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace the b in bot with idi and you've got it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
automistake.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They fixed my motor🤔
posted on 25/2/22
comment by And... Rosso... Though its... Yeah and... That... (U17054)
posted 7 minutes ago
Also worth pointing out that:
- the Bolsheviks recognised the Ukrainians as ethnically and culturally distinct from the Russians
- the Ukrainian SSR was a republic in its own right, and with its own government (under the Communist Party of Ukraine) and legislature
- the Ukrainian SSR was, independently, a founding member of the United Nations, recognised as a member in its own right, with Moscow’s backing
- the nation of Ukraine is a *successor* to the Ukrainian SSR, not some completely new republic conjured out of nowhere.
The idea that Ukraine didn’t exist or have any well-defined identity of its own before 1991 is absolute bunkum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So, you're not an internationalist, comrade🤣
Not having a pop, it's just the concept of nationality, nationalism, cultural and ethnic distinct identity, borders drawn on maps, is all a bit, right wing, innit.
Russians are not our kind, springs to mind.
Could apply to anywhere on earth of course, and any group, any distinct cultural and ethnic group...and white supremacists use such terminology.
posted on 25/2/22
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 27 minutes ago
Peks must be a Russian bot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace the b in not with idi and you've got it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Am replacing the b in not with idi and struggling badly, pal 🥳🥰
Is it a Russian word?
Page 2458 of 4971
2459 | 2460 | 2461 | 2462 | 2463