Like from some magical reason on English page Ukraine is still fighting alone without support while even khohol page is more honest
Also funny how battle of bakhmut ended in German language
The Israel Wikipedia pages fights must be even fiercer but I don't know Arabic or Jewish
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Cite your source, sweaty, so I can read it.
From what you gave, they're arguing that they are a "belligerent" (according to some vague definition) because they gave "too much" in money and resources. If that's your standard, then the US and Soviet Union were in a Hot War, not a Cold War, because they were belligerents.
Ask yourself: when did the US join WW2 as a belligerent? It wasn't 1942 because they were giving the British weapons, even destroyers!, money, and material as early as 1939. Every reasonable historian will think that's an r-slured argument.
Why be an ideologue about this?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Also forgot mentioned US giving intelligence to Ukraine to attack Russian targets that alone should be enough for NATO to be participating country with hostile action against Russia so a belligerent
https://opiniojuris.org/2022/07/20/u-s-and-allied-involvement-in-the-russo-ukrainian-war-the-belligerent-status-of-nato-states-and-its-implications
I hate the hypocrisy how west tries to paint it self innocent and tells Putin is wrong and that NATO don't takes part in this conflict and that west never lies. When Russia told there are nato generals in Ukraine west was telling no it's false
Last year Russia told Poland has given Ukraine jets and Poland was saying no and this year it flex with this
Same with NATO generals
So when US training Ukrainian army, equipped it and planning the operation with its intelligence/officers inside Ukraine and targeting himars at Russians operating patriots. US is not a belligerent ?
Also if Russia views western action hostile and belligerent can west be not belligerent ? It's similar question is if you views someone as friend and he views you as enemy, are you friends ? Getting a enemy status is enough for one side to declare but a friend need booth side.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Now you're just rambling.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Now you are out of counter arguments and lost the discussion.
And we conclude NATO is belligerent but is just kitty butt to admit it
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Your last post didn't address what I said. That's why I called it "rambling."
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I gave you source and the source is law maker.
And I don't know much about UK part of ww2 to talk about it.
But reality is US is targeting Russian assets and then destroying them with US weapons that's a direct hostile action and there are special nato forces in Ukraine and generals
I made already a post in June when Russia killed tons of foreigners operators in khramatorsk.
If all what nato does against Russia is not belligerent then that word has no meaning
What Belarus did is let Russian use its territory and sell some weapons its a lot less what west did and west says Ukraine destroyed NS2 so how could Ukraine do this from its own territory ?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Wasn't that politician kitty walking similar how now west is gating like kitty telling its not part of it ?
Also thank you for not answering my question because you have no arguments
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
The West was part of the Cold War....
I already repeated my argument. They're not belligerents in the commonly understood sense of that word.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context