James O'Brien argues with caller over Putin's motivations | LBC 

Bit harsh on pineapples?? 🍍 🤣

Or America

or lettuce

The worst enemy of the British people are the Tories. Given the option, they would save their own party first, ahead of the UK. That's what they are like. They spent the best part of two decades 'cosying' up to the Russians; and now because the British people, and the British media are watching them, they're back pedalling furiously. Now they've positioned themselves as Ukraine's 'saviour' by boasting that they're training Ukrainian soldiers more than anyone else. This is nonsense, when the EU has actually done alot more. Individual countries in it have also helped Ukrainian citizens more than we have. That's a fact....it's not opinion.

A very dim pineapple.

James isn’t one of them :) his opinion prevails over hard reality .. for now :)

you can prove anything with facts.

That is your opinion😂

I take it your talking about O'Brien there?

Though your point is clever it fails to acknowledge the fact that LBC is opinion based radio and that James skillfully sets up very specifically worded questions so that his ego is safeguarded. He also insists on those questions being adhered to rigidly.

There were two referendums in Macedonia to join NATO, and both times it failed as majority of people voted against NATO, but puppet government under USA pressure decided illegally to join NATO against will of Macedonian people and Montenegro joined NATO without any referendum while President of Montenegro admitted in the public that about 80% of Montenegrins didn’t want to join NATO. Now, when it is a Russia, in question, everyone from West screaming out loud, how NATO is defensive organisation…. in 1999 NATO aggression on Yugoslavia without approval of UN security Council, 19 NATO countries attacked Yugoslavia even Yugoslavia, never threaten any NATO country. On the paper, NATO was 400 times stronger than Yugoslavian army, and of course with a lot of lies using western media. The first demonised Yugoslavia then bombed for 78 days… they bombed hospitals, schools, national TV buildings, trains they even use cluster bombs wait depleted uranium, which is forbidden by Geneva convention. as NATO started losing the war against Yugoslavia, they begged Yeltsin to put pressure on Yugoslavia for peace talk. And of course, after peace was signed and UN resolution, 1244, needed to start implementing., all western countries ignored every single ward from peace resolution from very next day

Also interesting how, even before the Feb 2022 invasion, many educated or wealthier Russians opted to emigrate from Russia to Europe or North America; but relatively few people have migrated in the other direction. What does that tell you?

@@srdjankovacevic5854 If you want to rewrite history, you'll need to do a better job, sorry. The war in Kosovo was not as cut and dry as you make out and NATO was hardly the aggressor. The Macedonia situation is again, a lot more complex than you make it out to be. I realise it's easy to just repeat rhetoric you've been told or heard over the years, but some basic research on these kinds of subjects would enable you to make much more cohesive and legitimate arguments. Finally, anyone trying to support Slobodan Milosevic is just doomed to failure, frankly.

Honestly, I think it's even simpler than that - Ukraine had at one point talked about joining NATO, but this was shelved in 2010 and confirmed in 2014 that it would not go ahead. However Russia in 2014 decided to take military action and forced their hand. If Russia didn't want people joining a defensive pact then Russia shouldn't have gotten military belligerent with independent nations - they forced Ukraine to turn to NATO for assistance. Russia literally brought NATO to it's doorstep.

@@srdjankovacevic5854 what absolute nonsense…NATO losing the war, so they begged for help. If NATO wanted to use its full military it would completely annihilate Yugoslavia. The difference your making is that NATO wouldn’t use the tactics Putin uses which is completely flatten civilians populations. Its quite clear by your comments that you believe the total nonsense Putin speaks to his fellow Russians about his terrible war.

Big power politics is not about what the little nations want. Just ask Iraq, Syria and Libya.

The narrative that Putin doesn't want NATO on it's borders doesn't make sense. You 3xpand towards NATO countries, surprise, your border is now closer to NATO countries

@@grandemaestro3820 Sometimes you’re correct. But consider the Baltic states for example. They wilfully joined NATO, and it’s more beneficial to them than it is for USA, UK, France Germany etc.

@@grandemaestro3820 Has the territorial integrity of Iraq, Syria or Libya been threatened? The answer is no. Was Libya rid of one of the nastiest dictators around? Yes. Is Iraq now a democracy, however flawed, where the fate of the Iraqis is in their own hands, not a dictator? Yes. Of course Syria is all about Russia's ambitions in the Middle East which it exercises through its despicable puppet dictator, Assad.

​@@grandemaestro3820 What do these three countries want...carry on as dysfunctional dictatorships on the verge of anarchy.?

2014

1456

2014

Yep. And the Ukraine started it

@@lordsummerisle852sure thing, Vatnik.

Lololololololol

Its just a shame the ignorant host obrien was not able to allow the caller to respond. If a homeowner was taking a decision to allow a lion into his home his neighbours rightly would have security concerns. Which is why the home owner should never have carte blanch to make his own decisions when it affects his neighbours.

@@Balenza345 Having a lion in your house requires a license. The government make the law for the license. The people vote for the government. Russia has not signed an agreement among said countries where countries who want to join NATO cannot join NATO. Not only is that not Russia's decision to make for other countries, but also one that wouldn't get enough signatures in the first place. Thus Ukraine is allowed to join NATO if it so wishes to.

@@jimmyt_1988 Ukraine is not allowed to join nato if it wishes to do so. Its a direct threat to Russia and violates russias legitimate security concerns. Russia asked for a gurantee from the american war mongers back in 2021 that nato would stay out of ukraine and the nato war mongers refused. Hence we have war. Laws made suitable for the west are irrelevant to Russia. The west is not called the "empire of lies" for nothing. Russia will decide the fate of ukraine on the battle field as the western war mongers gave them no choice. Natos lion will be subdued. Make no mistake. Just as your neighbour has a right to subdue your lion when it poses a threat to his well being or his families well being.

FAKE PROFILE!

@@Balenza345 The home owner most certainly made no decision to allow a lion into his own home. If you are referring to Sevastopol that was a commercial agreement to extend the status quo, and was rather generous but probably unwise of Ukraine. You have torpedoed your own argument.

unfortunately its his job

“Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience” -also Mark Twain. He really saw social media coming.

O'brien who I usually agree with is wrong on this one.

@@utredutredson1686 He's not. He treated that guy's arguments more favorably than he deserved.

@@utredutredson1686 funny Someone else's comment was the complete opposite So many perspectives So little time...😱

They certainly did.

Also Moldova East chechna Uzbekistan Syria

If the west guarantees Ukraine's sovereignty why didn't they help retake crimea when that happened.

@@Dashzer0 because they wanted to avoid the war that is currently happening. Now Russia has left the west no choice but to aid Ukraine

Russia was never going to allow the West to control Crimea . It is far too strategic. The US has the Monroe Doctrine. It would never allow an enemy country to control Mexico, for instance.

What's the socialist worker got to do with it?

Nothing wrong with the socialist worker lol

I've no idea what stance socialist worker have taken, but if it escalates to nuclear war, just before we disintegrate, we may be thinking "I wish we'd just said no, you can't join NATO". As it is, if it remains conventional and remains within the borders of Ukraine, with thousands dead and a countries infrastructure in ruins.....is that a price worth paying just to join NATO?

@@pablohanc isn't that the price of not being in NATO? If they were a member already the thousands dead would still be alive and the country's infrastructure would be intact.

@@Klinsmann1985 we don't know that. When was the last time NATO went to war with a nuclear armed nation with a big army? It may have meant war breaking out sooner. It may have meant that nuclear war that I mention could happen happening 20 years ago instead and therefore my children never being born. Either way, when you have a huge nuclear armed nation with a paranoid leader we already knkw is not afraid to flex his muscles, yeah, let's poke him with a stick!!!

The Soviet pretext for the 1939 invasion of Finland was that is too close to Leningrad and the city could be theoretically shelled from Finland. The problem with that argument is that if you move the border, some freshly acquired towns may be the object of potential Finnish attack so you need to move it all the way to Sweden.But then, you have the same problem with Sweden. I think that if Putin succeeded in conquering Ukraine, next he would have territorial claims towards Poland, and later Germany. It would never stop.

He only cares about Moscow and St Petersburg.

This. Is. Brilliant. 😂😂😂

That made me spit my coffee! Funy!

But if you want to make changes to your house, you need to talk to your neighbours and council right?

@@hugoprh666 changes _inside_ your house?

Love it!

We sent you Chris hitchens and you went and killed him with cancer :p

“If my grandmother had wheels she’d be a bicycle.”

Very funny, bet you have loads of mates

Right.Difficult to negotiate in front of an attack.

Because the US and the rest of the west will lose business for their retired hardware

Nothing new, the Palestinians have been asked to negotiate a peace from a position of being subject to illegal occupation and apartheid for half a century.

They dont because Russia will never allow an American Navy in Sevastapol, much like we would never allow a Chinese Navy in Plymouth. Without the Donbas to secure Crimea Russia will remain under threat of a Ukrainain, armed by NATO, taking Crimea by force for the US. This simple fact of geography and power needs to be addressed and settled so as not to reduce Russia. That is why people who argue for peace will almost always insist Russia gets to keep Crimea and a defensible portion of the Donbas. To argue otherwise is not to argue for peace but a future war or continued American imperialism. I know that is almost impossible for people to understand but it is the brute reality of global power.

@@jamesmarlow5517 if Russia wants to keep Donbas and Crimea then it needs to offer concessions in exchange, guarantee against future aggression against Ukraine along with some form of compensation. As it is, you are just saying to give putin what he wants and just take his word that will be the end of it. And I dare you to tell the Ukrainians to do do and get nothing for it after all they have been through and sacrificed.

Because russia is a terrorist state

Why shouldn't ukraine be allowed to join nato!

Cyba has them but they are very low key.

Kruschev played his cards well. He wanted the US missiles removed from Turkey; and before even installing nukes in Cuba, he was able to negotiate a "quid-pro-quo", where in return for turning the Russian fleet around, USA agreed to remove its missiles from Turkey, but later so that the USA did not lose face. Result: both USA and Russia became a bit safer, and some basic channels of dialogue opened between Russia and USA. Its a pity that Putin resorts to annexation or war far too easily.

@@silversurfer8278 Mr K knew what a devastating war was as he was tge main Political Commissar at Stalingrad in 1942/3. Putin was, still is, a KGB officer, thus closer to Beria. Different mind set.

Great, then please dont complain when Russia takes action.

@@ppo2424 And what does that mean?

@@thecomputingchronicles Can't you read english?

@@ppo2424 Jeez you could be more polite. Yes i can speak English. I'll spell it out to you. What action do you believe Ukraine will take on NATO countries in the East? What is justified in your humble opinion PP. Is that a real name? PPO2?

​@@ppo2424 "Great, then please dont complain when Russia decides to roll tanks into someone else's country and kills tens of thousands of people" Why not?

Yes, when Ukraine did not fall under the US influence after the Maïdan coup !

Crimea has been Russian for hundreds of years

​@@Hide_and_silk Britain was conquered by Rome and was occupied for just short of 500 years. Does that make Britain part of Rome. Could Italy lay claim upon Britain? No is the appropriate answer to you.

They uhh...also expanded their contract in Crimea and Bakhmut lol.

Actually Ukraine very justifiably cancelled it.

that's why it's called borders you want Russia to swallow the whole world. I guess your against the two state solution too

@DoubtingThomas ukraine never in its history has said it would attack russia it just wants to be left alone

@DoubtingThomas But the military alliance NATO hasn't encroached into Russian territory.

@@doubtingthomas136 Surrounded on one side? Not sure that counts as surrounded. Besides, you end up with somewhat cyclic logic; the Russians claim that they had to invade Ukraine to stop NATO expansion, the Ukrainians say they wanted to join NATO out of fear of Russian aggression....so which came first? How should Ukraine respond to things like the the occupation of Crimea, the Russian backed seperatist movements or an invasion if not by finding allies?

@@1man1bike1road ur missing the point. It's not ukraine it was about nato and particularly America on Russian doorstep, further and further despite promises as the caller said

Isn't it a case of that old trope, that if you repeat a lie often enough...

It wouldn't really matter regardless and btw you do not know if it's true or not, plus the minsk agreements ignored. Now imagine Scotland gets independence and they join a pact with Russia instead of the eu and nato, now would England feel threatened and retaliate especially if they'd been told it wouldn't happen plus a Russia nuclear warhead directly across from your country. .. now how would you feel?

There was even talk at one point about the possibility of Russia joining NATO. I'm not sure how we would achieve that without NATO having a common border with Russia.

@@bereal6590 why couldn’t you have rang in?

@@BaalsMistress Exactly both with Yeltsin and Putin discussions were held about how that could happen.

Ukraine had an identity before. It had it's own language and had a history of independence movements previous. However Putin never saw Ukraine as a separate nation or people. They had no right to be anything but Russian.

Except Victoria Nuland and the American war machine.

I'm sorry, you say that history is complex, yet you repeat some misinformation yourself. Firstly, as already stated above, Ukrainian identity is not "ex-soviet", since Ukrainian identity, with separate language and culture existed long before the Soviet Union was created. Shevchenko wrote high literature in Ukrainian language in mid 19th century. In 1804 Russian Empire banned Ukrainian language from schools, because it wanted to russify the population. Secondly, there was never any agreement made that required Ukraine's "complete demilitarization", that's pure propaganda. Can you name the agreement you speak of? There were several agreements however, in which Russia specifically promised to respect Ukraine's sovereignty and acknowledged that both Crimea and all of Donbas belong to Ukraine (1991 Belovezha Accords, 1994 Budapest Memorandum, 1997 Russo-Ukrainian Frienddship Treaty). Please try not to repeat misinformation in the future, it matters.

Yes and ukraine is on Russian border so what do you think would then be placed the. .... The uk and america have been involved in ukraine for years. America has hundreds of bases around the world and nato was meant for peace but I don't think the iraqis and afghans are seeing it that way. It's a con, putins mistake was to fall for it

Lol, i have a bridge you can buy if you beleive that.

Please what is the name of that deal ?

@@bereal6590 Not nuclear weapons because only Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey have US tactical nuclear weapons stored on their territory as has been the case since 1993.

In 1991 after the break up of the USSR, NATO stated it would not move "one inch further Eastwards". So you are wrong in your understanding of NATO accepting new members.

But were set to join the EU after the illegal and arranged coup in 2014

Russia (as a government) assumes that everyone else's word is as valid as theirs...

@@DunedainAkkarin And they're right.

@PP O2 no, they are not. Which isn't to say that other governments are particularly trustworthy, more that the Russian government is so spectacularly untrustworthy, they make other governments look trustworthy by comparison

@@DunedainAkkarin In your opinion, not one i share.

O'Brien says they can put what they like in their house,well what if they put machine guns into the property?

I hope not in that order

@TheKlaun9 Ukraine already has the glory, victory is coming, and then there will be peace

@@janethompson5153 loads of people will die, lose their homes, relatives or economic foundation if you prioritize like that. What's the use in winning if their entire existence is destroyed? Nice to have won a war, but the ordinary Ukrainian can buy nothing with victory or glory.

@TheKlaun9 To stop invaders belief that they can take what is not theirs.

America can't declare war on a Nato member.

Indeed. Why?

nato is a terrorist org

O Brian should consider why Russia sees NATO as a threat.

So as not to be bombed by NATO?

This is a terrible analogy. This was not James' finest work.

@@egamruf Was keeping it simple for a simple caller. Can't go into expansive ideas when you know the listener won't understand. It was a fine point well made.

@@ThisandThat___ He wasn't keeping it simple; he was ignoring the caller's points. Lots of callers say that he does that (when he isn't) but here the caller DIDN'T say he was doing it, and he was. I in no way agree with Putin or Russia, but many "Great Power"-style academics have observed that if China had been permitted to (and started) building military bases in, say, Mexico, on the US border we might have seen a similar kind of military 'intervention' by the US. Because Great Powers (the US, China, Russia - possibly India in the future) don't have to play by the same rules as everyone else. Because they're not like normal countries. And a better analogy would have been "Here is your house, you are wearing a shirt that says "I hate you and everything you stand for" and building a catapult, pointed at your neighbour and inviting all your friends around who wear the same shirt to load it." (end analogy - because the real question is "should your neighbour wait for you to fire, or not?"). Even having observed that as the situation... it still (to my mind) doesn't justify an invasion. I don't know what would... but I'm not the final arbiter of 'justice' in the geopolitical world, and the caller is absolutely spot on saying James is merely making value judgments of his own.

@@egamruf Nice one 👍

@@egamruf This is nonsense. And I pity you.

I don't _want_ to take the trash out, but I still do it.

Because he bought into the whole "Poor Putin has been forced to this" propaganda.

2014 the war started dumbo

Lots of things lead to wars. Great Britain has started a few in the last twenty odd years.

It was unwise to take Putin at his word. There have always been risks of an escalation. It is best that Europe sticks together and is always prepared. I have always though Finland have been wise in how they operate and make decisions when it comes to Russia.

Obviously not, both China and North Korea are aggressive countries. NATO on the other hand is a defensive alliance. It’s not going to attack first.

Jon, if you live on the Moon then it will be legitimate questions of yours. Before you does that please stop posting nonsense.

You do know that Russia has armed their Western borders over the decades even with medium range nukes? Also Russia has nuclear bomber bases in Venezuela and most of Latin- America are allied with Russia? So you have your answer, though it might disapoint you. Also that brainfart logic works both ways, do keep that in mind.

...though his usefulness is somewhat debatable.

He did that in reply to the Euromaidan coup.

@@andrewbevan3974 what coup? The one that only exists in the minds of bellends?

@@MiningForPies Really !! Is that your full grasp of history ?

"Not one inch further Eastwards" That's what Russia was told after the break up of the USSR . It would seem that the West can't be trusted to keep their word.

@@MiningForPies the one in Kyiv (Kiev at the time). 2014 when it occurred.

Ever since Russia sold it to the US.

When people started believing men could get pregnant...

when feminsme took over the left

With the advent of (anti)social media.

That's a conservative thing

Bot 😏

​@@Marco_Polo790 Slava Ukraine

Ukraine is not actually a sovereign nation.

I presume this is just a Russian troll account @@lifeofdan9156? Ukraine was a sovereign nation even in the days of the USSR: The UN is based on the ‘principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members’ (Art. 2(1) of the UN Charter). Ukraine retained its membership in the UN at the dissolution of the USSR, having been one of the founding members of the UN as the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.

I think zelenski is more dangerous than putin, giving him nato aircraft to attack Russia is not what you might call a cunning plan.

How so? Geo politics isnt your thing then.

@@robuk3723 they just can’t get it at all ... like sheep being led to a butcher’s house by a goat

@@vladlast5507 true, no nuance or appreciation of history. Unless its something done longer ago by whites like slavery, then its different.

He wasn’t given a chance

No,it's an indication he feels O Brainless isn't getting the point he is trying to make.

James just showered him with bla bla bla non stop and shouted over the caller luke a toddler in the kindergarten over new toy

@@vladlast5507 He does it all the time.

@@ppo2424 So you agree that Russia can Dictate what Ukraine does? If not, then what are whinging about - the caller was mega dumb for suggesting it.

Yeah sorry thats not how sovereign nations work. You don’t get to attack someone then say ‘well im a bear and they poked me’ simpleton.

I bet she knows better than to argue and fobs him off with stuff like "Yea yea. Whatever.. of course dear" and he thinks he's clever because she doesn't call him out.

Jimbo handpicks his callers, he won't allow anyone on who might give him a tough time

@@terry6985 does he? Why don’t you call him and give him a “tough” time.

Unfortunately it’s not an equal conversation since he often mutes people and speaks over them. Then goes on a ten minute rant after he kicks them off. Hardly a conversation. People shouldn’t bother going on shows when there isn’t equal editorial control. RU-vid is great because people can have calm sensible long form conversations. Something that’s been missing from traditional media since the 1970s

@@MiningForPies I might just do that, I'd start by asking him personal questions like, how many hours a week does he work, where was he educated , where does he live & how well does know the ordinary man in the street, why is he so obsessed with Brexit & and a newspaper???

@@uraharasshop3547 there used to be a similar type of phone in in my local radio, once again it was hosted by a privately educated middle class presenter , lived in a well heeled predominantly white neighbourhood. When a caller started getting the better of him he would mock & mimick that person, Jimbo probably learnt the job from him ..

The same propaganda machines they feed on like chickens

Talking about propaganda? 😂@@BrofessorDG

yes, sheeple@@Gezira

A simple case of projection, dear professor. We project our fears, our image onto others. It's a way to try to push them away.@@BrofessorDG

So in a US subject state, with how many military bases? Surely more weapons from the masters than from them,. Well, in this country, people are fed like chickens by Russian propaganda. Of course, it makes perfect sense.😆 See? Projection@@BrofessorDG

No bro, because most of that territory is borderline uninhabitable.

@@allydea There were people inhabiting it and they turned up and murdered them.

@@belindathorne9784 So if they murdered them, why is the the Russian Federation so ethnically diverse?

@@belindathorne9784 Not in the middle of the Taiga they didn't. After the Tunguska explosion, it took the Russians about three weeks to find where it was.

@@allydea Resource rich though eh.

The caller knows more about what's going on than you do .

@@trytellingthetruth.2068 Can you please elaborate on your claim

@@trytellingthetruth.2068 There might be some pages in that colouring book not used yet that you can use.

Your right. 😆

and,,,,,,,,,, sold Alaska to the USA, so what if they say, we never got enough/ we never agreed to it, the guys before us years ago did, we change our minds. it's russian world and we want it back.

2.4 miles and a whole day away.

More pressingly it has actual land borders with Estonia and Latvia, both EU and NATO countries

@@skua675 And now Finland and Sweden joining NATO. Just goes to show his nonsensicaly claim about Ukriane joining NATO was always a thinly veiled excuse for territorial expansion

An interesting comment. There, the consequence of the Russians sending a fleet to install missiles in Cuba - then under threat of military action, turning that fleet around - had beneficial military effects for both sides. No Russian nuclear missiles sited in Cuba; and the US missiles in Turkey were later removed. Both USA and Russia became safer - win, win!

Or more recently he Solomon islands. Funny that this "right to decide for themselves" only applies when it suits America

@@see6052 That's a fair point - however, a massive invasion of Ukraine by Russian forces, with huge resulting numbers of civilian deaths, is on an entirely different scale. I hope that you would agree with that?

@Silver Surfer well don't forget, the US by their own admission came to within something like a half hour of launching a nuclear strike on russia. Hence the ships turned back. Kind of makes the russian attack on ukraine seem pretty small fry if you think about it mate. The Solomon islands is a new case and is currently ongoing. Veiled threats have been made to the government of these islands that if they use their right of self determination to form an alliance with China. Its complete hypocrisy. And it also shows that all major powers will become agressive if they feel the presence of another major power encroaching upon their interests or borders. The big difference here is that the Solomon islands are actually thousands of miles from the USA. On the other hands the US wanted and has worked to create a new strategic base less than 300 miles from Moscow. Right on their border.

What has that to do with anything Happening today?

They can be called invasions, see Iraq and Afghanistan

@@gHGhej What about Iraq and Afghanistan. Are you suggesting both those countries were peaceful democracies that had never threatened the security of the nations that invaded them. No, you've jogged on now.

@@Mark-Haddow They were sovereign states, how they are run are not our business if how Ukraine is run is not Russia's business. Unless you support double standards or only killing a certain type of person 🤷

Like Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Libya etc. Ok mate

@@gHGhej So fecking what. One was guilty of harbouring terrorists that were training for further attacks on the USA, after already being complicit in the attack on 9/11. The other had threatened the West directly, due to its failures in Kuwait and Iran. Launching revengeful attacks on the minority kurds who had helped the West during the Kuwait war (Dessert Storm) Trying to compare two vastly different situations to suit your moronic agenda won't actually alter reality.

He has a better understanding of the situation than you.

@@trytellingthetruth.2068 No he doesn't. He's laughably uneducated about this topic and none of his arguments stand up to any critic whatsoever.

@@MyGraveDancer I take it you are referring to Me O'Brien.

@@trytellingthetruth.2068 Obviously, I was talking about the caller

@@MyGraveDancer Then I refer you to my original post.

And how many countries are being destroyed by NATO and gang of willing 😄

sadly no remote control button to electro shock the caller into a somewhat better understanding.

It would of taken decades to join nato now Putin get more nato than he knows what to do with

I guess he doesn't start wars. I don't either. Do you?

@@raymondo6665 who are you talking to?

Oh right. The history of a nation doesn't allow todays citizens to have an opinion that contradicts the past actions of that nation without some clown criticising. You are as dumb as he is. Yeah, the mind does indeed.

So you forget WW1 and 2 then, oh dear.

@@ppo2424 again, you addressing me? So you think Tzarist Russia started WW1 and Soviet Russia started WW2? Is that the implication of your "comment"??? "Oh dear"...indeed. Also, who says "oh dear"?? Aul biddies and "know it all's" that know nothing. That's who.

Difference is, King Canute was actually smart, and demonstrating the point that no-one can stand against the tide and waves. His actions have often been misinterpreted by oversimplification.

Do ? Get very peed off, for a guess.

Didn't that happened with Cuba? No?

Has Mexico indicated that it would welcome such a thing? No. So, it would only happen, as a result of a Sino-Soviet invasion. NATO hasn't invaded any of Russia's neighbours. That is the difference.

Well when they put Russian missiles in Cuba or tried to , US took the world to the brink of nuclear war . One law for the west another for the east

@@rolandhawken6628 hmmm ..

@DoubtingThomas wait so your proposal is to force Ukraine to not join things like NATO or EU or anything like that?

Exactly. Do u remember when Russian boats passed through the English Channel can you remember Britain reaction. James is playing the game.

Or perhaps, "He should have asked, "Would it be ok if Russia put its military in Ireland?" James would have been like, "huh ,huh, em, em."

If you have an agreement with your neighbour that you won't step one foot inside his garden, then there would be no need for anyone to get upset.

Environmental health might disagree.

If you plant a leylandii tree, your neighbour would have and exercise his right to object... If you allow a raucous all night party in your house, or grow a marijuana crop, most certainly, there would be a knock on your door...

And if you don’t have evidence, you get rightly torn to shreds.

He doesn’t like opposite opinions- if in doubt - cut them out

@@anonomous8719 😂 his whole career is based on people phoning him up and telling them their opinions, often opposite to him! You literally couldn’t be more wrong.

@@anonomous8719 Wrong. He just points out discrepancies between the facts and what the caller says.

​ @doubtingthomas136 By that logic, if just getting closer to a treaty organisation is so threatening, NATO would have been justified in invading Belarus then when it first became a dialogue partner of the SCO (a 'political, economic, International security and defence organization') circa 2010 (19 years after their neighbour Poland had joined NATO) and or maybe when they progressed to become an observer of the SCO circa 2015 if moving closer (i.e. not a member; just like Ukraine is not a member of NATO) to an existing alliance is considered grounds for invasion. "how would someone else feel if we did this" If we are going down that route, I wonder how Poland feel about the near permanent existence of warmongering Russian troops in Belarus. Should they be invading Belarus or is that different somehow? Or how the Moldovans and Romanians feel about the Russian occupation of Transnistria..... or how the Georgians feel about the Russian occupation of South Ossetia and Abkhazia? Funny how Russia keeps finding itself in the territory of former USSR members; it's 'almost' like Putin is trying to rebuild the USSR (the fall of which he considered "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century") and will come up with any pre-text for invading them. I wonder if Putin has asked himself "how would someone else feel if we did this" and whether ongoing military adventures might be driving those countries towards NATO and away from him?

@DoubtingThomas "Expanding a military alliance", right. NATO doesn't expand onto countries, countries join it (and have to go through some HOOPS to actually get in - Ukraine before the war got through exactly none). Perhaps if Russia wasn't making its neighbors want to join for some reason, they wouldn't do that.

@DoubtingThomas Maybe the neighbour should reflect on why countries want to join different military and trading blocs (and it's important to remember, they apply for membership) instead of forging closer ties with the neighbour.

@DoubtingThomas If Russia really reflected, they would understand why these former Soviet and/or Warsaw Pact countries see their path aligned with the EU and NATO. And I think the reality is simple: the Kremlin govt has not been kind to them. And that Russia still uses military force to impose their will at the expense of other countries' sovereignty it's easy to sympathise. Russia's concerns tend to be even more selfish than for most countries, and their actions even more heavy handed, so I take a dim view of people trying to defend what is causing a lot of suffering for a lot of people just because Russia is paranoid and stuck in the past.

@DoubtingThomas Russia's actions more heavy-handed evidence: *Gestures at Ukraine*. Selfish? You mention them wanting a buffer state, so they want other nations to pay for Russia security with their land and sovereignty. That's selfish. And they think nothing of escalating conflicts for their own benefit. At the cost of this country's citizens.

Yup, agreed. Perhaps it's something Big Pharma could tackle - then again, maybe not!

It is an expanding Russian Empire that is constantly being provocative. Nato has grown simply because countries in Eastern Europe feel threatened by Russian bullying and provocative expansion, so they seek shelter and protection against the "evil Empire ".

😂😂😂

Nicking that, thanks!

If I got nuts for christmas I wouldn't be happy.

Sanctions are not the same as bombarding Havana with cruise missiles. If Russia had only gone as far as their full-on trade sanctions on Ukraine in 2013, they'd be comparable situations. They're both unpleasant moves, but if you can't tell the difference, I don't know what to say.

Are you saying that Russia invading Ukraine is a fast and strong pushing Ukraine to join NATO? Compared to economy diplomacy?

@@advorak8529 I'm saying it's not an incentive to join Russia willingly. Economically or any other way. If the response is join us or fight, people will usually fight to Not join

@@sovelissskirata8105 Well, Russia is doing its best to make the Ukraine join NATO ASAP and make NATO members want the Ukraine to join.

Gee, you’ve been wrong a lot in the past then.

@@oggyoggy1299 James is not infallible mate, he gets it wrong as well…

@@quentinjalapeno1344 James is wrong here, Russia was assured nato would not be on its border ukraine wanted to join nato and UN counsel debate confirmed ukraine had chemical plants. Biden also stated he would sabotage the Nordstream pipeline. James is being pathetic, he was wrong on the vaccine the evidence is now there and he feels entitled to speak like to this to a man who has looked at this

@@quentinjalapeno1344 Not usually though. But if you're pro brexit, anti vax and pro Putin, you're an idiot.

@@quentinjalapeno1344 He does. But on the balance on things, he's more right than he's wrong.

It was.

It's simple the real people who control the world ( individuals from USA, UK ) Want rid of people like Putin. Can't have a new world order with people like Putin still around

The caller knows more about why this war started than you, it would seem.

@@trytellingthetruth.2068Is it 2 for 1 day?

@@jasonk7072 Only if you say so.