1·
4 days agoAbsolutely wild equivocations made here. “One could argue” Yes, one could argue that invading another country could violate a peace treaty… I hope you’re trolling and not really this cooked.
https://treaties.un.org/Pages/showDetails.aspx?objid=0800000280401fbb
It was not “explicitly prohibited” by the agreement. Stop spreading misinformation. This is a quick read to find out how obviously wrong you are.
Your language alone is suspicious. “Budapest Memorandum WAS made null and void” for something that wasn’t disallowed by the agreement. Meanwhile, “One can argue that Russian actions (passive language) on 2014” for something that was EXPLICITLY forbidden.
I wonder how Puerto Rico feels having Canada be referred to as a state before them.