Julian Assange Unlawfully Detained

[Fungus]

Wow, and I thought I'd aged recently...

 

[SollysLeftFoot]

Yet. Of course the US and Europe want to surround Russia at every possible location. Unless you are speaking on behalf of NATO it is ludicrous to believe this is not the case.

Yet, despite this; NATO has not invited Ukraine into NATO and invoked A.5. The reason Georgia and Ukraine are not in NATO is purely because they are the ones at most risk of war with Russia. Policy makers in the background have prevented their membership time and time again.

So Eastern European states were FORCED to join NATO after the fall of the USSR? They didn't think that they needed additional protection from Russian aggression? Russia has of course, never provoked Abkhazian rebels, Ossettian rebels, Eastern Ukrainian rebels, never warned other neighboring countries of their 'treatment' of ethnic Russians - absolutely not. It is evidently all because of Western aggression.

Conscription bought back into many Baltic states must be because of NATO aggression, rather then Russia being a genuine threat to them.

I don't think you quite understand the purpose of NATO.

https://qz.com/871975/aleksandr-dugin-putins-favorite-philosopher-is-a-big-fan-of-donald-trump/

Perhaps you need to clue yourself up with Russian IR academics...

 

[dingodan]

At the moment, but 69% of Ukrainians want to join NATO. Their government also want to join the EU. This link is from February 2019.

https://112.international/ukraine-a...onstitution-on-eu-nato-integration-36782.html

The reunification and Germany and the end of the Cold War was predicated on the promise of no NATO expansion east.

U.S. Secretary of State James Baker’s famous “not one inch eastward” assurance about NATO expansion in his meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev on February 9, 1990, was part of a cascade of assurances about Soviet security given by Western leaders to Gorbachev and other Soviet officials throughout the process of German unification in 1990 and on into 1991, according to declassified U.S., Soviet, German, British and French documents posted today by the National Security Archive at George Washington University

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-...on-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early

Gorbachev only accepted German reunification—over which the Soviet Union had a legal right to veto under treaty—because he received assurances that NATO would not expand after he withdrew his forces from Eastern Europe from James Baker, President George H.W. Bush, West German foreign minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher, West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, the CIA Director Robert Gates, French President Francois Mitterrand, British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, British foreign minister Douglas Hurd, British Prime Minister John Major, and NATO secretary-general Manfred Woerner.

Indeed, as late as March 1991, the British were reassuring Gorbachev that they could not foresee circumstances under which NATO might expand into Eastern and Central Europe. As former British Ambassador to the Soviet Union recounted in March 5, 1991, Rodric Braithwaite, both British foreign minister Douglas Hurd and British Prime Minister John Major told the Soviet that NATO would not expand eastwards.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/t...d-documents-gorbachev-told-nato-wouldnt-23629

If the Cold War can be said to be back on, then make no mistake, this is why.

 

[SollysLeftFoot]

At the moment, but 69% of Ukrainians want to join NATO. Their government also want to join the EU. This link is from February 2019.

https://112.international/ukraine-a...onstitution-on-eu-nato-integration-36782.html

I'm not sure what point you're making here. NATO isn't just a club you can join, you have to be accepted. I also think you're completely misunderstanding why Ukrainians want to join NATO and EU.

 

[symyjym]

Yet, despite this; NATO has not invited Ukraine into NATO and invoked A.5. The reason Georgia and Ukraine are not in NATO is purely because they are the ones at most risk of war with Russia. Policy makers in the background have prevented their membership time and time again.

So Eastern European states were FORCED to join NATO after the fall of the USSR? They didn't think that they needed additional protection from Russian aggression? Russia has of course, never provoked Abkhazian rebels, Ossettian rebels, Eastern Ukrainian rebels, never warned other neighboring countries of their 'treatment' of ethnic Russians - absolutely not. It is evidently all because of Western aggression.

Conscription bought back into many Baltic states must be because of NATO aggression, rather then Russia being a genuine threat to them.

I don't think you quite understand the purpose of NATO.

https://qz.com/871975/aleksandr-dugin-putins-favorite-philosopher-is-a-big-fan-of-donald-trump/

Perhaps you need to clue yourself up with Russian IR academics...

I am judging us by our bad behaviour as the aggressor in Iraq, Libya and Syria and financing coups to unsettle governments, so whilst you write excuses you are avoiding reality.

 

[Weststander]

To be fair; what is the excuse for the UK not sanctioning Saudi Arabia for the Khashoggi Kebab incident and continuing to sell arms in a war that has been discredited in Yemen. We as a country are still very happy to fill the pockets of the Clown Prince's brutal regime, and arguably a lot worse than Putin's one.

We have to be objective and critisise our own government first, and unless we do we are not really in a position to critisise others especially after our undemocratic invasion of Iraq, contributing to the the mob lynching of Gaddafi and distruction, and supporting the extremists Wahhbi rebels in Syria who divided into 100 factions that led to almost total distruction of that country too. The mess in the world today has a lot to do with our own governments contribution.

A whataboutism post, I suspect from a lover of Trump. Am I correct?

 

[Tom Bombadil]

The reunification and Germany and the end of the Cold War was predicated on the promise of no NATO expansion east.



https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-...on-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early



https://nationalinterest.org/blog/t...d-documents-gorbachev-told-nato-wouldnt-23629

If the Cold War can be said to be back on, then make no mistake, this is why.

And then the soviet union broke up and everything changed because it didn't exist anymore.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I'm not sure what point you're making here. NATO isn't just a club you can join, you have to be accepted. I also think you're completely misunderstanding why Ukrainians want to join NATO and EU.

I know NATO isn't a club. By its definition it is a Treaty Organisation. I have worked with NATO.

 

[symyjym]

A whataboutism post, I suspect from a lover of Trump. Am I correct?

Yes of course this Whataboutism is just a weak deflection that hypocrites use when trying to be a smart arses. Using anythingisms is quite fashionable these days but nice try in avoiding the bigger picture.

Edit: What's with the Trump lover comment? Just proving how childish you are. Thanks I have taken note

 

[dingodan]

And then the soviet union broke up and everything changed because it didn't exist anymore.

You think deteriorating relations between the West and Russia has nothing to do with NATO expanding east? It has everything to do with it. The issue was that a Western military alliance expanding east was percieved as a potential threat to the Soviet Union, just like a Soviet military alliance expanding west would have been percieved as a threat by the West. Do you think that calculation changes whether we are talking about the Soviet Union or modern day Russia? It doesn't in the slightest.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

I thought he'd been living in the Ecuadorian Embassy for 7 years, now it appears he's been filming a remake of Castaway. I'm sure I saw one of the other coppers carrying out Wilson.

 

[Springal]

What has he been removed for?

Extradition because of the Sweden rape charges (Good)
Or to ship him back to the US (Bad)

 

[Ernest]

What has he been removed for?

Extradition because of the Sweden rape charges (Good)
Or to ship him back to the US (Bad)

Swedish charges have been dropped

 

[dingodan]

What has he been removed for?

Extradition because of the Sweden rape charges (Good)
Or to ship him back to the US (Bad)

He was arrested on behalf of the U.S. in response to an extradition request.

Julian Assange, 47, (03.07.71) has today, Thursday 11 April, been further arrested on behalf of the United States authorities, at 10:53hrs after his arrival at a central London police station. This is an extradition warrant under Section 73 of the Extradition Act. He will appear in custody at Westminster Magistrates’ Court as soon as possible.

- Scotland Yard.

 

[Springal]

He was arrested on behalf of the U.S. in response to an extradition request.

Shame on us then

 

[Thunder Bolt]

You think deteriorating relations between the West and Russia has nothing to do with NATO expanding east? It has everything to do with it. The issue was that a Western military alliance expanding east was percieved as a potential threat to the Soviet Union, just like a Soviet military alliance expanding west would have been percieved as a threat by the West. Do you think that calculation changes whether we are talking about the Soviet Union or modern day Russia? It doesn't in the slightest.

I think you will find that the Eastern European states, having been freed from the Soviet Union, wanted help especially once Putin had annexed Crimea.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

He was arrested on behalf of the U.S. in response to an extradition request.

- Scotland Yard.

He was originally arrested for failure to surrender to the courts according to the BBC. The request on the behalf of the US has come since the original arrest. I wonder what he did to piss of Ecuador?

 

[dingodan]

I think you will find that the Eastern European states, having been freed from the Soviet Union, wanted help especially once Putin had annexed Crimea.

I think you might find that it's a little more complicated than that. The Ukranian government (which wanted to closer ties with Russia) was overthrown. There were protests against the overthrow of the government. The new government (which wanted closer ties with the West) attacked protesters in Donetsk and started shelling the town.

According to the (2001 census), the ethnic makeup of Crimea's population consisted of the following self-reported groups: Russians:1.45 million (60.4%), Ukrainians: 577,000 (24.0%)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Crimea

That was when Russian forces entered the area.

I'm not particularly interested in arguing the rights and wrongs of such a complicated situation, I can see both sides of the argument (when it is had reasonably and based on what actually happened).

But I do find double standards annoying. Every few years we hear about bombs being dropped on people around the world and we want to send in our military forces. Whether you think what Russia did in Crimea was right or wrong, it was a mirror image of what we do around the world frequently. If Russia were an invading force in Crimea, then so are we in multiple theatres around the world. Likewise, if we are a great defender of people under attack, going in to these regions to protect and defend people, then so was Russia in Crimea. You can't have it both ways.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

At the moment, but 69% of Ukrainians want to join NATO. Their government also want to join the EU. This link is from February 2019.

https://112.international/ukraine-a...onstitution-on-eu-nato-integration-36782.html

I think you might find that it's a little more complicated than that. The Ukranian government (which wanted to closer ties with Russia) was overthrown. There were protests against the overthrow of the government. The new government (which wanted closer ties with the West) attacked protesters in Donetsk and started shelling the town.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Crimea

That was when Russian forces entered the area.

I'm not particularly interested in arguing the rights and wrongs of such a complicated situation, I can see both sides of the argument (when it is had reasonably and based on what actually happened).

But I do find double standards annoying. Every few years we hear about bombs being dropped on people around the world and we want to send in our military forces. Whether you think what Russia did in Crimea was right or wrong, it was a mirror image of what we do around the world frequently. If Russia were an invading force in Crimea, then so are we in multiple theatres around the world. Likewise, if we are a great defender of people under attack, going in to these regions to protect and defend people, then so was Russia in Crimea. You can't have it both ways.

My link is from February 2019.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Shame on us then

Indeed ..... if that's true. The BBC are reporting differently but now we have him I'm sure the discussion will come up about handing him over. Maybe we could use him to get a trade deal with the US ?

EDIT - the BBC now reporting "The Met Police said he was arrested for failing to surrender to the court and following a US extradition request." - so I'd stick with the 'shame on us' quote.