volgr
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2012
- Messages
- 8,126
- Likes
- 8,449
Right, but their perceptions about alliances were based on their reality. Their reality was creating a nation of a former colony that was isolated by oceans, power dynamics of 18th century Europe, and an agricultural export economy. Their reality did not include the industrial revolution, WWII, oil dependence, a post-industrial consumer economy, getting anywhere on the globe in less than a day, the Internet, cell phones, or thousands of other eventualities.Crossing the Atlantic went from an impossibility to a regular thing, even if it took months.
Warfare went from men stabbing each other with swords, to muskets.
It's not like there was no innovation, or that none of them were inventive themselves. They would have known change is coming even if they couldnt predict the outcome.
Political parties were already forming in their time, that was no giant leap and didn’t require much foresight.They knew that entangling alliances would be a determinant to us. They were right about that.
They knew political parties would be a determinant to us even though they didnt exist. They were right about that.
How the russians got access to the nukes while all the other soviet equipment wound up with the host nations? The ukrainians may not have been able to launch. But that doesnt mean they couldnt have used the warheads on other ICBMs or missiles, or made them dirty bomb landmines along the russian border.I explained that.
Your “explanation” was total bull **** and completely rejected as it had no merit just like the rest of your body of work Larry.
Yes the source that participated in the negotiations and clearly stated that while US lawyers did what lawyers do and soft sold it we clearly as well as the UK have obligations on assistance including lethal aid. And you’re still assigning ownership of Ukrainian property to an entity that no longer existed while totally ignoring the fact that the follow on closest replacement in fact agreed to and signed the memorandum… and then broke it in royal fashion at least three times 20 years later. And I don’t see any assertion of the follow on entity claiming those nukes either thus your useless assignment 20 years later rewriting history is rather stupid. I’m not interested in your rationalizing why they could break the agreement they are irrelevant. They signed it then tore it up.You mean your source that said, "while not explicitly stated" or your non-rebuttal to my proving Ukraine didnt have nukes to give up as they were Soviet nukes under Soviet control to which Ukraine had no ability nor infrastructure to use or maintain them. Yeah, as usual your confident stupidity got the best of you.