CooperRedArmyDog

joined 3 years ago
[–] CooperRedArmyDog@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I use the website for mobile, and it works really well

[–] CooperRedArmyDog@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] CooperRedArmyDog@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago

If a dog who is an enlisted member of the Red Army of the USSR takes me out 1) what was I doing, 2) I probably deserved it at that point and 3) this means the USSR has been reformed

Barring a few obvious questions I think this outcome is a net positive fpr the world

[–] CooperRedArmyDog@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I would agree with a per user or per instance

[–] CooperRedArmyDog@lemmy.ml -3 points 2 years ago (4 children)

I disagree because it makes the more narrowly focused topic or theme based instances more daluted, makes everything blur together more, I also see it as a detrament to the smaller intances because they will now there local comunity will have less traffic

[–] CooperRedArmyDog@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

At the time of the request first the DPR abd LPR had declared independence

Second and most importantly regardless of what the UK wants to do barring a renegotiation of the good friday accords, Northern Ireland at any time can vote to change between the 2 nations and is in a limbo, but is currently administred as a part wholy ubder UK law, because the treaty is bilateral tye UK cannot just leave, it was one of the biggest road blocks to brexit.

If treaties worked the way you think they did they would be worth less than just words on a paper, because they would all be lies and no nation would be able to trust any other

[–] CooperRedArmyDog@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago (4 children)

It does when by breaking the treaty there is a reforendom 2 nations break away (DPR and LPR) and then request assistance from an ally to the east.

It would be the same as if northern ireland voted to become part of ireland, the UK said no and started to attack it, Ireland would be well within its rights to enter and protect nothern ireland

[–] CooperRedArmyDog@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago (6 children)

You are correct but because this acted as a defacto peace agreement, Ukraine Violating it is tantimount to breaking the peace, that is what happens when you break a peace treaty. Actions have consiquinces.

[–] CooperRedArmyDog@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago (8 children)

First treaty violations have different outcomes, tye new START treaty was a renegotation and surplanted the previous one, a treaty that said "Hey maybe dont shell donotesk and luhonsk" that was violated and attempt to peacefully remind Ukraine of their treaty obligations for 8 years calls for a little more

[–] CooperRedArmyDog@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It was Ukraine that violated the Minsk Accords not Russia

[–] CooperRedArmyDog@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (10 children)

First the difference is that in the Great Patrotic War the US was a party to the war, as of right now the US is not a party to the war and fighting through someone else

Second, how exactly did Russia instigate the war, when it was Ukraine not Russia who violated the Minsk Accords?

view more: ‹ prev next ›