Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Do political pundits who deny the Russian invasion of Crimea deserve to be taken seriously at DU? [View all]geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)56. The lease is per a 1934 treaty.
Certainly it should be re-negotiated or even voided by mutual discussion.
But, the US complying with the Guantanamo treaty is not comparable to Russia wiping its ass with the various treaties it signed with Ukraine.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
74 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Do political pundits who deny the Russian invasion of Crimea deserve to be taken seriously at DU? [View all]
Tommy_Carcetti
Mar 2015
OP
If we did that we would have to deny everybody who is divorced from reality a voice here.
Agnosticsherbet
Mar 2015
#2
What makes it worse is when an individual who once had respectable journalistic credentials....
Tommy_Carcetti
Mar 2015
#9
Video: A Russian soldier from Siberia talks about his service in Donetsk. (link to DU thread)
Agnosticsherbet
Mar 2015
#65
they should be treated like Alex Jones and be shunted to the Creative Speculation forum
uhnope
Mar 2015
#32
No, there are a lot of falsehoods in the second. Putin has admitted Russian troops' role in Crimea
stevenleser
Mar 2015
#20
There is no dispute. Having bases somewhere doesnt greenlight invasion. That's dishonest to the core
stevenleser
Mar 2015
#30
So if the US sent troops from Guantanamo towards Havana, seizing territory
geek tragedy
Mar 2015
#41
Exactly. Using that persons same logic, it's OK for us to takeover whatever countries in which we
stevenleser
Mar 2015
#47
This is hilarious. It's not unique. Invading another country is invading. We invaded Panama.
stevenleser
Mar 2015
#68
Yes, they are. And Putin has admitted they were terribly wrong or lying about this. nt
stevenleser
Mar 2015
#48
If Cohen and Chomsky have claimed that there was no Russian invasion of Crimea, then yes.
Tommy_Carcetti
Mar 2015
#63
Back in the 1930's, these people would have excused Germany for annexing Austria too.
FLPanhandle
Mar 2015
#19
As I wrote in my #20, Putin has already shown what Parry and Pilger wrote to be wrong (or a lie) on
stevenleser
Mar 2015
#21
So because I called out one of your favorite sources, I'm suddenly Dr. Strangelove?
Tommy_Carcetti
Mar 2015
#23
Buddy, I served with Dr. Strangelove. Dr. Strangelove was a friend of mine. I knew Dr. Strangelove.
Octafish
Mar 2015
#28
Pilger is pretty much on Team Putin when it comes to GLBT rights. Fuck him.
geek tragedy
Mar 2015
#26
I've seen that framed as 'the 1% doesn't care about civil rights, only money.' So we don't either?
freshwest
Mar 2015
#71
No, there was no foreign funding or arming of the citizens who revolted at Yanukovych's
geek tragedy
Mar 2015
#37
Stand trial in Ukraine means very different than stand trial mostly anywhere else
JonLP24
Mar 2015
#50
So because Russia is not as bad as the US, that makes Russia's behavior just fine.
NuclearDem
Mar 2015
#52
Interesting argument as to why we shouldn't object to what Russia is doing nt
geek tragedy
Mar 2015
#58
And so if we invade those countries where the bases are, it's not really an invasion?
stevenleser
Mar 2015
#69
Yanukovich was elected in 2010 on a platform of closer integration with Europe, not "closer ties
pampango
Mar 2015
#54
The Soviet sympathizer has been the disgrace of the left for a century
Sen. Walter Sobchak
Mar 2015
#66