The West’s Cowardice is Killing Ukraine | Burning Questions
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 вер 2024
- The so-called "red lines" exist only in the minds of Western politicians - they limit Ukraine, but never the aggressor, Russia. In this interview with Ukrainian diplomat Oleksandr Khara, we reveal how these imaginary boundaries are used to justify withholding vital support from Ukraine. While Russia crosses every line without consequence, Ukraine pays the price for Europe’s hesitation. How long will the West’s fear allow Russia to act with impunity?
----------------------------
Please keep discussions on this channel clean and respectful and refrain from using racist or sexist slurs and personal insults.
#TheGaze #Ukraine #UkraineNews #UkraineWarUpdates #UkraineBreakingNews
Great conversation.
Hesitating to do what needs to be done, allows Putin to escalate as much as he wants.
Putin wasn't escalating, all battles was on the Frontline recently... Until ukraine attacked inside Russia
@@glintongordon6811lol all battles. What about daily carpet bombing cities? Oh right, thats fine in your mind. Why is putin in Ukraine to begin with
@@Yewleea carpet bombing is what was done in Iraq and Afghanistan.
@@Yewleea Russia has not ever carpet bombed, they would be moving forward faster in the east.
This is spot on. But the UN is the key. That's the US red line that Ukraine must break.
Excellent dissertation.
Brava Yewleea 🤗
Western experts made Russia what it is. Not a good recommendation.
I'm a westerner, I remember when the cold war ended and we got to inspect the soviet stockpile, about 90% of the weapons either had manufacturing defects or maintenance problems so bad they would have prevented the nuclear warhead from detonating correctly.
They would either have failed completely or fizzled out (produced a thousand times smaller explosion).
Prior to the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the USA spent more money on nuclear weapons maintenance than the entire Russian military budget.
So I have to ask, given how unbelievably corrupt the Russian military has become, do you really think the nuclear forces have magically become the only honest people in Russia?
If you were the Russian general in charge of the nukes, would you think these weapons will never be tested and never be used, if they ever are used we will all die so why shouldn't I cut all the corners, take all the money and buy a yacht like the other generals are doing?
You can't build a nuclear weapon and put it on a shelf for 30 years, they require constant, expensive and dangerous maintenance.
This is a lie, Russia was poor but militarily better than the USA especially in jets and rocket development, Russia tested nukes before also.
USA literally had to steal Russian plane at one point, and since then Russia rockets were taking usa astronauts to and from the iss.
It was common knowledge that sarmat was better than minutemen
Well you got one TROLL really wired up. Also though the US and the EU had and still were spending millions on disposing of over 2500 TNP mini plants scattered all over the old Soviet Union and alot of them still in Russia. They were used to power almost everything remote Military. They were litteraly just laying around and the cores had rusted through and well you can imagine.
Lol ok, Ivan 🤪@@glintongordon6811
Ukraine as peacekeepers in Russia 💯. And consultants in building strong democracy and removing corruption.
But first - is your new MFA going to table the resolution to remove the R representatives from the U N and recognise the true legal situation, as per 1947 6th Committee determination, that USSR's memberships expired when it was internationally recognised that USSR ceased to exist? Because otherwise you won't be able to.
*Here’s how to reclaim the UN (self explanatory; passed by a simple majority of General Assembly votes* _[Article 18(3) UN Charter];_ *(not* members - abstentions aren't counted _[GA R126];_ *cannot be vetoed - it's outside the SC delegated jurisdiction which is limited to Articles 4-6):*
*_Recalling_* the principles of the Charter of the United Nations,
*_Considering_* that compliance with the Charter of the United Nations is essential both for the protection of the Charter and for the cause that the United Nations must serve under the Charter,
*_Recognising_* that "the USSR as a subject of international law and a geopolitical reality no longer exists", as acknowledged and declared by Russia on 8 December 1991, in the Belavezha Accord (confirmed on 21 December 1991 in the Alma Ata Declaration), and accordingly the USSR memberships of the United Nations and all organisations related to it, have lapsed and no longer exist _[1947 6th Committee determination]._
*_Recognising_* that states cannot continue memberships of other states that have ceased to exist _[A/RES/47/1, SC/RES/777, 1992],_ and accordingly the entire foundation of Russia's claim of membership (namely a letter, dated 24 December 1991, from Boris Yeltsin, president of a country which was not even a member of the UN), is without any legal authority, meaningless and of no effect,
*_Recognising_* that Russia is not and has never been a member of the United Nations, and it's presence is a violation of the United Nations Charter _[Articles 4, 23],_
*_Decides_* to expel forthwith the representatives of Russia from the place which they unlawfully occupy at the United Nations and in all the organisations related to it.” _[A/RES/2758, passed by 59% UNGA vote, 1971]_
Excellent - we only need one member state to propose it and another to second it so that it can proceed to a vote.
Although are you saying that this has already been passed, resolution 2758 in 1971?
If so, how does it get enforced?
@@phillee2814 2758 expelled ROC representatives. I guess enforcement was PRC reps sitting in the chair at the table. In Russia's case it would be taking the chair away. :)
@@phillee2814 More detail in 'Chat w/ Talaria'. Share it!
@@W_Bin So the major difference is that it is actually justifiable this time, and if support for the resolutions condemning the atrocities of the terrorist federation is anything to go by, should pass with a far greater majority.
@@phillee2814 Yes- but if it was "justifiable" at any time for R, we would have voted to change the permanent member and admit R. It was never supported so US and R resorted to trickery. I've got a couple of videos with details.
What ask a Ukrainian to get a balanced view...just propaganda
Great Interview in substance.
Some hyper-critical nitpicking that I focused on.. Throw that t-shirt away, why did you wear it to work? much less show on camera. Also when interviewing, you are talking to him like a regular off-camera conversation ..Meaning we can hear you say "ummhmm" and "yea" over and over.. Dont do that next time😉 -I know you can be spicy and might be defensive of my criticism but know it's given in the spirit of wanting you to become even better.