We support Ukraine

[mmmPI]

Putin not respecting the Russian law is pretty bad no ?

Why do you keep talking about the USA in the thread in support for Ukraine that is being invaded by Russia ?

You have registered and posted all your post on this thread only doing this, and sometimes even posting videos that call to murder people, i've not forgotten that.

Because what is happening now is not 1+1=2 . Now happens this : 0.456×3454÷654+12-8765

Russia's attack on Ukraine is not as simple as everyone writes. If you needed a war, you can always attack Finland (which defeated the USSR in a war in the last century) or capture Georgia. Quick and easy wars that will raise Putin's rating well

At least you said it's morally wrong

And you called it an unofficial war

there's some progress

[Djmixxx]

Sorry i just realized meduza had to move away from Russia, it actually happened in 2014, i wonder why, you have any idea ?

Is it difficult to you easy accept your jambs? Learn. After graduation, you will need this skill.

[mmmPI]

Sorry i just realized meduza had to move away from Russia, it actually happened in 2014, i wonder why, you have any idea ?

Is it difficult to you easy accept your jambs? Learn. After graduation, you will need this skill.

You said "many expert" you cited 1 that said the opposite of your lie, it was on meduza, which is a Russian based media, moved away from Russia after the crackdown on the press in 2014 during Crimea invasion.

still waiting for explanation of why you would post this kind of content 650 + times on this thread ?

[Djmixxx]

At least you said it's morally wrong

And you called it an unofficial war

there's some progress

It doesn't matter how you call it. Now this is a place where a sadist can brutally kill another person on camera with impunity by sticking a knife in his eye. And the person who is being killed does not understand at all what he is doing in this place.

[Djmixxx]

still waiting for explanation of why you would post this kind of content 650 + times on this thread ?

For the same reason why you post here. Iyou have your opinion, I have my opinion

[mmmPI]

At least you said it's morally wrong
And you called it an unofficial war
there's some progress

It doesn't matter how you call it. Now this is a place where a sadist can brutally kill another person on camera with impunity by sticking a knife in his eye. And the person who is being killed does not understand at all what he is doing in this place.

You posted a video that was calling to murder Ukrainian people, and you removed it afterward editing your post with "wrong post".

It is highly doubful that you are sincere now when you seem to realize part of the consequences unfolding from the Russia invasion attempt on Ukraine

[mmmPI]

For the same reason why you post here. Iyou have your opinion, I have my opinion

You support Ukraine ?

You said you were posting here for mo ney to send to Russian soldier twice , and said you were a bot 3 time

You don't know why i post here

[mmmPI]

What not to do :

The trick is that legally Russia did everything right. But morally, no.

Many experts write about this trick like this:
Russia used this provision of international law, but it cannot be used like that. This is called the duality of the interpretation of the law.

What expert are you talking about ?

https://meduza.io/feature/2022/02/24/pu ... ochemu-net

Inside the article :

Однако в том или ином случае тот факт, что какое-то государство в прошлом поступало неправомерно — что Запад точно делал — не дает права другим государствам тоже действовать неправомерно Особенно настолько неправомерно, как это делает сейчас Россия.

Translation :

However, in one case or another, the fact that a state has acted wrongly in the past—which the West certainly has done—does not entitle other states to act wrongfully as well. Especially as illegal as Russia is doing now.

( doesn't prevent djmix from using the very same argument that is considered not-valid by the person he cites himself )

По моему мнению, юридически это очень однозначный случай — Россия абсолютно четко нарушила международное право, так что Генассамблея примет соответствующую резолюцию.

Translation :

Russia absolutely clearly violated international law, so the General Assembly will adopt an appropriate resolution.

ICJ and UN general assembly both condemning the invasion as the expert quoted by djmixxx has predicted.

By the way, you still only provided 1 name of a person that is not saying the same thing as you did, why did you say MANY EXPERTS ?

[Djmixxx]

You posted a video that was calling to murder Ukrainian people, and you removed it afterward editing your post with "wrong post".

I can only post YouTube links here. so you should have a link to that video if you saw it and YouTube did not block it (you can see this link in your YouTube history). So why write so much about it, just post it once. After all, I constantly call on this forum to kill on the basis of a national sign.

[mmmPI]

You posted a video that was calling to murder Ukrainian people, and you removed it afterward editing your post with "wrong post".

I can only post YouTube links here. so you should have a link to that video if you saw it and YouTube did not block it (you can see this link in your YouTube history). So why write so much about it, just post it once. After all, I constantly call on this forum to kill on the basis of a national sign.

Wrong post

This time

[Djmixxx]

By the way, you still only provided 1 name of a person that is not saying the same thing as you did, why did you say MANY EXPERTS ?

When you heard that Putin invoked Article 51 of the UN Charter as a justification for the invasion, were you surprised?

— No, this is a very typical move. This could be expected after the recognition of the independence of the republics in the east of Ukraine. Many said that this step should legitimize the use of armed force against "big" Ukraine. This is what happened.

I don't have to find them all for you. use google

[Djmixxx]

This time

hard to find something that isn't there? good luck to you.

[mmmPI]

Let's focus on something simple :

What not to do :

The trick is that legally Russia did everything right. But morally, no.

Many experts write about this trick like this:
Russia used this provision of international law, but it cannot be used like that. This is called the duality of the interpretation of the law.

What expert are you talking about ?

https://meduza.io/feature/2022/02/24/pu ... ochemu-net

Inside the article :

Однако в том или ином случае тот факт, что какое-то государство в прошлом поступало неправомерно — что Запад точно делал — не дает права другим государствам тоже действовать неправомерно Особенно настолько неправомерно, как это делает сейчас Россия.

Translation :

However, in one case or another, the fact that a state has acted wrongly in the past—which the West certainly has done—does not entitle other states to act wrongfully as well. Especially as illegal as Russia is doing now.

( doesn't prevent djmix from using the very same argument that is considered not-valid by the person he cites himself )

По моему мнению, юридически это очень однозначный случай — Россия абсолютно четко нарушила международное право, так что Генассамблея примет соответствующую резолюцию.

Translation :

Russia absolutely clearly violated international law, so the General Assembly will adopt an appropriate resolution.

ICJ and UN general assembly both condemning the invasion as the expert quoted by djmixxx has predicted.

By the way, you still only provided 1 name of a person that is not saying the same thing as you did, why did you say MANY EXPERTS ?

Let's get done with this topic shall we, you said it was legally right and morally wrong, but you only linked to an article of someone that says it's legally wrong.

Why say "many" expert ?

that makes it 0 for now !

Why link one expert that says at least 2 times that the invasion is illegal ?

[mmmPI]

International Law and the Russian Invasion of Ukraine

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine violates Article 2(4) of the U.N. Charter, which prohibits the use of force against the territorial integrity of another state. Russian President Vladimir Putin cloaked Russia’s military action in legal justifications during his speech on Feb. 24. While the justifications were absurd, his speech highlights that international law retains some rhetorical significance while it simultaneously underscores how weak the legal restraints are in practice. An examination of Russia’s legal justifications shows that well-meaning (or apparently well-meaning) actions by the United States (and others) purportedly designed to promote humanitarian and human rights objectives have eroded international legal norms. The point is not to draw moral equivalents nor to justify Russia’s horrific actions against Ukraine. The point is that the international legal rules on territorial integrity are weakening—a dangerous development. In response, the international community should condemn the Russian invasion as a violation of international law in no uncertain terms. But also, the international community should promote a clear-eyed, restrained version of international law designed to generate interstate peace through territorial settlement, one that holds even in an increasingly dangerous world.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/internation ... on-ukraine

[mmmPI]

How Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine Violates International Law

An Illegal Invasion

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine violates Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, a central tenet of the charter that requires UN member states to refrain from the “use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.”

The suggestion by President Vladimir Putin and other Russian officials that Russia’s use of force is justified under Article 51 of the UN Charter has no support in fact or law. Article 51 provides that “nothing in the present charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a member of the United Nations.” However, Ukraine did not commit or threaten to commit an armed attack against Russia or any other UN member state. Even if Russia could show that Ukraine had committed or planned to commit attacks on Russians in the Ukrainian regions of Donetsk and Luhansk, Article 51 would not permit an action in collective self-defense, because Donetsk and Luhansk are not UN member states. Indeed, they do not even qualify as states under international law, despite their purported secession from Ukraine and Russia’s recognition of them as independent.


Putin’s statements that Ukraine was committing “genocide” against Russians in Donetsk and Luhansk, although a thinly veiled effort to justify Russia’s use of force in the language of international law, are also not supported by the facts and would not, in any case, give Russia a right to launch an invasion of Ukraine. The Genocide Convention defines genocide as certain, specified actions intended to destroy in whole or in part a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. There is no evidence that Ukraine engaged in any of the defined actions and certainly no evidence of an intent to destroy in whole or in part any group in eastern Ukraine. Even if the Ukrainian government had committed human rights abuses against Russians in eastern Ukraine, neither the Genocide Convention nor the UN Charter authorizes convention parties or UN member states to use force to remedy acts of genocide or serious human rights abuses.

https://www.cfr.org/article/how-russias ... tional-law

[mmmPI]

International law says Putin’s war against Ukraine is illegal. Does that matter?

Both international law and the United Nations Charter say that countries should not invade each other. But who has the ability to enforce those rules?

U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres put them to the test on Feb. 24, 2022, when he called on Russia to stop its fast-moving ground invasion of Ukraine.

“The use of force by one country against another is the repudiation of the principles that every country committed to uphold. This applies to the present military offensive. It is wrong. It is against the (United Nations) Charter. It is unacceptable. But it is not irreversible,” Guterres told reporters at U.N. headquarters in New York.

“Stop the military operation. Bring the troops back to Russia. We know the toll of war.”

As a professor of international law, I believe it is important to remember that Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is illegal. But enforcing the law is challenging, as armed conflicts around the world demonstrate all too clearly.

https://theconversation.com/internation ... ter-177438

[FuryoftheStars]

By the way, you still only provided 1 name of a person that is not saying the same thing as you did, why did you say MANY EXPERTS ?

When you heard that Putin invoked Article 51 of the UN Charter as a justification for the invasion, were you surprised?

— No, this is a very typical move. This could be expected after the recognition of the independence of the republics in the east of Ukraine. Many said that this step should legitimize the use of armed force against "big" Ukraine. This is what happened.

I don't have to find them all for you. use google

If you're going to make a claim, it's on you to back it up.

BTW, love how you took a day hiatus and then came back replying to other posts but ignored my question. Really skillful there.

And you seriously need to stop dredging up the past to justify the present. Yes, when the US invaded Iraq there was a public outcry because many knew the core reasons for going in were BS. But there were also many countries that joined it in support of its actions. 49, according to this. How many support Russia in what it's doing now? Not even a dozen. And yes, the US was directly attacked back then in the hijacking of 4 passenger airlines and using them as ballistic projectiles, killing almost all civilians. While it was the al-Qaeda that did it, the Taliban, the ruling power in Afghanistan at the time, protected them, and thus why the US "invaded" Afghanistan.

But this does not compare to now. Ukraine did not, nor a faction within Ukraine, attack Russia. Instead, Ukraine has been fighting with separatists within its own borders. Separatists, I might add, that only exist as they do because of Russian interference in the first place and their operations that they began back in 2014 (well, the operations we know about, anyway). Russia has purposely created the situation in Ukraine that they are now using as the excuse to invade.

IT. DOES. NOT. COMPARE.

[mmmPI]

This time

If you're going to make a claim, it's on you to back it up.

"This time" refers to the quote from March 11 that is saying "wrong post" that's where the video used to be. If you don't believe me it's fine, i didn't record the video and even if i did i would not re post it anyway, it's not the only reason i believe djmixx is dishonnest in its argumentation and is just attempting to spread narratives, the discussion following that moment when djmix removed its own post is illustrating ( imo) the behavior shown since registration, just lies, inconsistencies/contradiction from a week to the next, waiting the next day to start another lie on another topic when the previous one was too heavily debunked, posting random article contradicting his own statement happened several time.

I wasn't sure at first i thought it could be someone really lacking the ability to properly inform oneself, rather than malice, but when i saw the video, and then the removal, it was impossible to explain it in other way. Since March 11 djmix posted many times other things that would have ended up convincing me anyway.


Maybe i misunderstood you and you were just refering to the fact that djmix said "many expert are writing about this trick" and then when asked which expert ? the answer are both "google it up i don't have time to do it myself" and " hard to find something that doesn't exist eh ?" successively and ironically ? .

[FuryoftheStars]

This time

If you're going to make a claim, it's on you to back it up.

"This time" refers to the quote from March 11 that is saying "wrong post" that's where the video used to be. If you don't believe me it's fine, i didn't record the video and even if i did i would not re post it anyway, it's not the only reason i believe djmixx is dishonnest in its argumentation and is just attempting to spread narratives, the discussion following that moment when djmix removed its own post is illustrating ( imo) the behavior shown since registration, just lies, inconsistencies/contradiction from a week to the next, waiting the next day to start another lie on another topic when the previous one was too heavily debunked, posting random article contradicting his own statement happened several time.

I wasn't sure at first i thought it could be someone really lacking the ability to properly inform oneself, rather than malice, but when i saw the video, and then the removal, it was impossible to explain it in other way. Since March 11 djmix posted many times other things that would have ended up convincing me anyway.


Maybe i misunderstood you and you were just refering to the fact that djmix said "many expert are writing about this trick" and then when asked which expert ? the answer are both "google it up i don't have time to do it myself" and " hard to find something that doesn't exist eh ?" successively and ironically ? .

Whoops, I quoted the wrong post. Corrected!

[Djmixxx]

BTW, love how you took a day hiatus and then came back replying to other posts but ignored my question. Really skillful there.

Here more than half of the questions remain unanswered for everyone.