Have you heard of notifications? Fancy new feature some phones have

Good question. USSR should have supported independence of Ireland and place some nukes there. Then Scotland. Isn't it about freedom and such?

Context. There is no point in me answering proximity again. I, and others, have repeatedly answered the same questions from him and all we get back is abuse or the same question reiterated. i.e. a lesson in insanity.

This sub-forum and website is not really moderated. The only things that really get moderated in this section are:

1. posting extreme images (Death / tasteless images) or videos.
2. repeatedly and overtly targeting and attacking an individual or individuals.
3. links to websites on the "no no list" will be removed.

What I would suggest is, if YOU have any questions that you want me to answer, relating to the conflict, just ask them and I will respond. I am not saying I will give you the answer that you want to hear or is palatable, but it will be an answer, and without personal attack. I can do yes / no answers or with context. this applies to most users. This sub section is a debating subsection, and people have different views. the idea should be to argue the view, not the person, ideally with supporting links / images to defend your position.

As an example:

your question: If Russias red line was any nation existing apart from them, would you accept that red line as legitimate?
my response: I dont recognize that as Russia's red line, but if that was Russia's red line it may be legitimate in their eyes, but not acceptable to every other country in the world, and, living in another country, I would not accept that red line.

do you want to rephrase your question or ask a more realistic one?

TLDR: if russia's red line was any nation existing apart from them, then they would have invaded western europe a long time ago and before that the USSR would not have broken up. the fact is, russia recognizes nato's red lines, and borders, noting russia is not busy invading or encroaching on western europe. conversely, as demonstrated, nato does not recognize russia's red lines as related to Ukraine. This is fact. I have to refer you back to what I said: i will answer the question but you might not like the answer. but not liking the answer, disagreeing with the answer, is not a reason not to ask the question.

This post was edited by ferdia on Mar 28 2024 08:25am

So this is not at all related to my question, and I don't know why you are answering questions nobody asked or trying to give me some strange advice.

"I would not accept that red line." - You answered my question though and i appreciate that. If you would not accept that red line, why would you accept Russias completely illegitimate claim for Ukraine and Chrimea? You keep refering to this Russian "red line" that has to be respected, but it really doesn't. The claim isn't legitimate and as such it is a pretty ridiculous claim, just as ridiculous as the example i gave. None of the two are legitimate claims.

"the fact is, russia recognizes nato's red lines, and borders," - But not Ukraines, which is a sovereign nation with rights to self determination. You are the one obsessing over NATO/NATO borders, I'm just interested in Ukraine.

I'll take completely irrelevant information from a schizoid said nobody ever. Yet here you are.

if you just want brief and open to interpretation answers then fine:

question: If you would not accept that red line, why would you accept Russias completely illegitimate claim for Ukraine and Chrimea
answer: i would not accept it.

providing answers without context is open to misunderstandings, for example, am i answering the first part of your question or the second part? you should ask more straight forward questions if you just want a straight forward yes/no answer. not allowing me the latitude to fully answer your question is like fishing, you never know what you are going to catch but you can tell the folks back home whatever you want.

This post was edited by ferdia on Mar 28 2024 09:06am

Lol don't be sour just because you made yourself look silly, you should be used to it by now.

Dear ChatGPT: write a short comparison in the troubled history between ireland and england and between ukraine and russia.

The troubled histories between Ireland and England, and Ukraine and Russia, share some similarities in terms of colonialism, cultural differences, political conflicts, and struggles for independence. However, they also have unique aspects that distinguish one from the other.

Ireland and England:
Colonialism and Conquest: England's involvement in Ireland dates back to the 12th century, with the Norman invasion. This was followed by centuries of English colonization and the imposition of English rule over Ireland.
Religious Conflict: A significant aspect of the Ireland-England conflict has been the religious divide between Catholics and Protestants, particularly during the period of English rule. This division fueled tensions and conflicts, notably during the Protestant Ascendancy in Ireland.
Struggle for Independence: The Irish War of Independence (1919-1921) was a pivotal moment in Irish history, leading to the establishment of the Irish Free State (later Republic of Ireland) in 1922, although Northern Ireland remained part of the United Kingdom.
Northern Ireland Troubles: The latter half of the 20th century saw intense violence and political upheaval in Northern Ireland, primarily between Unionists (who wanted to remain part of the UK) and Republicans (who sought Irish unification). The Good Friday Agreement in 1998 helped bring an end to much of the violence and established a power-sharing government in Northern Ireland.

Ukraine and Russia:
Imperial and Soviet Rule: Ukraine has a long history of being under the control of various powers, including the Russian Empire and later the Soviet Union. Ukrainian territories were incorporated into the Russian Empire in the 18th century, and Ukraine experienced significant oppression and Russification policies under Soviet rule.
Ethnic and Cultural Differences: Ukraine has a distinct cultural identity from Russia, with its own language, traditions, and historical narratives. Despite centuries of coexistence, tensions between Ukrainian nationalism and Russian influence have been persistent.
Recent Conflict: The annexation of Crimea by Russia in 2014 and the ongoing conflict in Eastern Ukraine, primarily in the Donbas region, have heightened tensions between the two countries. The conflict has been fueled by issues of Ukrainian identity, Russian expansionism, and geopolitical struggles.
International Involvement: The conflict in Ukraine has drawn significant international attention, with Western countries supporting Ukraine's sovereignty and condemning Russian aggression. Economic sanctions have been imposed on Russia, and diplomatic efforts have been made to find a resolution to the crisis.

In summary, while both the Ireland-England and Ukraine-Russia conflicts have roots in colonialism, cultural differences, and struggles for independence, the specific historical contexts and dynamics of each situation have led to distinct patterns of conflict and resolution. The Ireland-England conflict has seen a path towards political reconciliation through agreements like the Good Friday Agreement, while the Ukraine-Russia conflict remains unresolved and continues to have significant implications for regional and international stability.

Dear ChatGPT: what was the root cause of the annexation of crimea

The annexation of Crimea by Russia in 2014 stemmed from a complex combination of historical, cultural, political, and strategic factors. However, one of the primary immediate triggers was the political unrest in Ukraine, particularly the ousting of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych following widespread protests known as the Euromaidan movement. Here are some key factors contributing to the annexation:

Historical Context: Crimea has a long history of being part of Russia, having been annexed by the Russian Empire in 1783. It remained part of Russia until 1954 when Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev transferred it to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic within the Soviet Union. Many Russians viewed Crimea as an integral part of their historical and cultural identity.

Ethnic Composition: Crimea has a significant ethnic Russian population, making up the majority of its inhabitants. This demographic factor has led to a sense of affinity with Russia among many Crimean residents.

Strategic Importance: Crimea is strategically significant due to its access to the Black Sea and its geopolitical position, hosting Russia's Black Sea Fleet in the port city of Sevastopol. Control over Crimea provides Russia with crucial military and economic advantages in the region.

Political Instability in Ukraine: The annexation occurred against the backdrop of political turmoil in Ukraine, particularly the ousting of President Yanukovych in February 2014. Yanukovych, who was closely aligned with Russia, was removed from power following mass protests calling for closer ties with the European Union and accusing him of corruption and authoritarianism.

Desire for Influence and Expansion: The annexation of Crimea can be seen as part of Russia's broader geopolitical strategy to assert its influence in the post-Soviet space and maintain control over territories it perceives as historically or strategically important. President Vladimir Putin's government portrayed the annexation as protecting Russian interests and supporting ethnic Russians in Crimea.

International Response: The annexation of Crimea was widely condemned by the international community, with many countries viewing it as a violation of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. The United States, European Union, and other Western powers imposed sanctions on Russia in response to the annexation, exacerbating tensions between Russia and the West.

Overall, while the immediate trigger for the annexation was the political unrest in Ukraine, the root causes are deeply embedded in historical, cultural, and strategic factors, as well as broader geopolitical dynamics in the region.

finally, dear ChatGPT: you wrote this:

Desire for Influence and Expansion: The annexation of Crimea can be seen as part of Russia's broader geopolitical strategy to assert its influence in the post-Soviet space and maintain control over territories it perceives as historically or strategically important. President Vladimir Putin's government portrayed the annexation as protecting Russian interests and supporting ethnic Russians in Crimea.

but didnt Russia already have its navy there ? if Ukraine became pro-western, is it not true that Russia would have been forced to move its fleet from Crimea, with it now being a western port ?

ChatGPT

You raise a valid point. The presence of Russia's Black Sea Fleet in Crimea was indeed a significant factor in the annexation. If Ukraine had moved towards closer ties with the West, there could have been pressure on Russia to relocate its naval base from Crimea, potentially to another Black Sea port, or even to Russia itself. This scenario would have been undesirable for Russia strategically, as it would have meant losing its foothold in Crimea and possibly having to relocate its fleet to a less advantageous location.

The desire to maintain control over the strategic naval base in Sevastopol and to prevent Ukraine from aligning more closely with Western institutions like NATO were certainly factors in Russia's decision to annex Crimea. By annexing Crimea, Russia secured its military presence in the region and ensured that the Black Sea Fleet remained under its control, regardless of Ukraine's political orientation.

So, while the presence of the Black Sea Fleet in Crimea was a crucial consideration, the broader geopolitical motivations for asserting influence in the region and preventing Ukraine's drift towards the West also played significant roles in Russia's decision to annex Crimea.


look, even an AI can concede a point. I would suggest if poeple dont like human answers, they can just ask Chatgpt.

This post was edited by ferdia on Mar 28 2024 09:20am