⚡️#BREAKING Putin: Russia suspends participations in strategic arms treaty

I knew that was going to happen.

To those who don't understand, it simply means: Don't know what I do and I don't want to know what you do.

Nice move by Russia and for those who don't know it's interpretation , this is it : have WMD but you can't come and see what I'm using in my future battles.

Who gives a damm about Putin, who cares who is inspecting small Israel nukes nobody, even North Korea,
Putin can cry all he want..
The west is marching on, Ukraine is marching on.
One year ago a fool lunch an invasion to take over a sovereign nation, many fools predicted a quick battle, one year on Kiev is standing, president zelenzky is still in command, the Ukrainian government is still in power, the Ukrainian amry are still standing,
More nations are joining NATO, NATO countries have increased their defense spending,
All Putin aim and objectives have failed woefully

All hail pro-Putin l*natics!!!

Putin's frustration knows no bounds 🤣

I heard Russia inspect nato own then bar nato from inspecting Russia own lol.

Kingsnairaland:
I heard Russia inspect nato own then bar nato from inspecting Russia own lol.

Go and research about the deal, before commenting, so you can make a valid point, so you don't have to write such abominable quotes.

It a agreement between the USA and the old Soviet Union to bar some certain ranges of nukes from the arsenal of each nations.. And allow inspectors from the UN nuclear watch dog to monitor.. And to reduce the stockpile of each nukes
I don't know were you saw NATO, everything NATO.

obedience4:
Who gives a damm about Putin, who cares who is inspecting small Israel nukes nobody, even North Korea,
Putin can cry all he want..
The west is marching on, Ukraine is marching on.
One year ago a fool lunch an invasion to take over a sovereign nation, many fools predicted a quick battle, one year on Kiev is standing, president zelenzky is still in command, the Ukrainian government is still in power, the Ukrainian amry are still standing,
More nations are joining NATO, NATO countries have increased their defense spending,
All Putin aim and objectives have failed woefully

...and Don Bass has been annexed ? Wow, Ukraine is really winning...

obedience4:



Go and research about the deal, before commenting, so you can make a valid point, so you don't have to write such abominable quotes.

It a agreement between the USA and the old Soviet Union to bar some certain ranges of nukes from the arsenal of each nations.. And allow inspectors from the UN nuclear watch dog to monitor.. And to reduce the stockpile of each nukes
I don't know were you saw NATO, everything NATO.

Continue to white wash the issue calling Soviet union makes no meaning because the treaty is still with Russia and USA.

USA not talking about Soviet lol.

Jashub:
...and Don Bass has been annexed ? Wow, Ukraine is really winning...

Which annexed?
If you are current, you will know that the 4 region Putin claims to annexed he doesn't even control the administrative headquters of those reqions, the last been the kherson region which Russia lost last year
Please my question to you is this how can you say you annexed a part of a country when you don't have control of such parts 100%
Be deceiving yourselves..

Jashub:
...and Don Bass has been annexed ? Wow, Ukraine is really winning...

They say kyiv is standing shame did not permit them to say Ukraine is standing because Mariupol is gone other part is gone lol.

Kingsnairaland:


Continue to white wash the issue calling Soviet union makes no meaning because the treaty is still with Russia and USA.

White wash how, you said the Russian checked NATO and NATO can't check Russian own,
I was just giving you a break down of what the treaty is and how it came about.
So you get a perfect clue on what to write

obedience4:


White wash how, you said the Russian checked NATO and NATO can't check Russian own,
I was just giving you a break down of what the treaty is and how it came about.
So you get a perfect clue on what to write

USA was bared from checking Russia arms if you want me to break it down for you

That after Russia check USA own lol. .

obedience4:



Which annexed?
If you are current, you will know that the 4 region Putin claims to annexed he doesn't even control the administrative headquters of those reqions, the last been the kherson region which Russia lost last year
Please my question to you is this how can you say you annexed a part of a country when you don't have control of such parts 100%
Be deceiving yourselves..

You're just delusional. Go and mount troops in Don Bass na...

obedience4:



Go and research about the deal, before commenting, so you can make a valid point, so you don't have to write such abominable quotes.

It a agreement between the USA and the old Soviet Union to bar some certain ranges of nukes from the arsenal of each nations.. And allow inspectors from the UN nuclear watch dog to monitor.. And to reduce the stockpile of each nukes
I don't know were you saw NATO, everything NATO.

See as you ignorantly disgraced yourself while trying to educate someone else!!!
New start treaty was not between US and old Soviet Union but rather between US and Russia itself. Signed by Obama and Medvedev in 2010

And it was not to bar the range of nukes, because you can’t cap the range of an ICBM. Rather to reduce the number of strategic deployed nuke capable ICBM.

Good make everybody dey their dey. Make any weapons you want and I do same. You don't have to know what kinda weapon I'm making.


To those of you saying russian nukes are not working, let this be an eye opener to y'all. USA and UN people who inspector both of thems nukes know what's up and this is the reason none of them will attack each other.

If you feel Russias nukes are not working na your Wahala be that o NATO sabi say it dey work wella

b4ball:

See as you ignorantly disgraced yourself while trying to educate someone else!!!
New start treaty was not between US and old Soviet Union but rather between US and Russia itself. Signed by Obama and Medvedev in 2010

And it was not to bar the range of nukes, because you can’t cap the range of an ICBM. Rather to reduce the number of strategic deployed nuke capable ICBM.

You don't have sense, the start treaty was gotten from where?? , it was renogatied by the Obama administration base on the existing treaty signed by the Soviet and the USA, which the Russian withdrew from,
So you don't know that they ranges of intercontinental ballistic missile, so you haven't heard of a middum ICBM

Why did the Soviet asked the USA to limit the ranges of it ballistic missile stationed in Poland during the Cuba crisis

Jashub:
You're just delusional. Go and mount troops in Don Bass na...

I knew I was talking to an idiot, Mumu don't know that even this moment the war is raging on in the donbass, I guess the Russians are fighting themselves

obedience4:



You don't have sense, the start treaty was gotten from where?? , it was renogatied by the Obama administration base on the existing treaty signed by the Soviet and the USA, which the Russian withdrew from,
So you don't know that they ranges of intercontinental ballistic missile, so you haven't heard of a middum ICBM

Why did the Soviet asked the USA to limit the ranges of it ballistic missile stationed in Poland during the Cuba crisis

Stop disgracing yourself!
1)You can’t cap an ICBM with a treaty. You are confusing yourself with the INF treaty, which Trump pulled out from. ICBMs are built according to ranges desired by the developer based on his own technical know how.

2)I repeat, START was between US and Russia because START signed by the soviets never came into force. Simply because USSR dissolved months later without ratification. START 1 officially came into force in 1994, and START 2 in 2010.
You have learnt something today, because you have edited your comment on range to stockpile.

b4ball:

Stop disgracing yourself!
1)You can’t cap an ICBM with a treaty. You are confusing yourself with the INF treaty, which Trump pulled out from. ICBMs are built according to ranges desired by the developer based on his own technical know how.

2)I repeat, START was between US and Russia because START signed by the soviets never came into force. Simply because USSR dissolved months later without ratification. START 1 officially came into force in 1994, and START 2 in 2010.

This one Obama signed was a renogatied one of the previous treaty
The treaty was always there before the Soviet Union withdrew, the Obama administration simply reactivated the old one..
If for example Putin dies a new president comes and wants to restart the treaty he can activated it they may name it start3 but it was just the old treaty which has now been started..


During the Iran nuclear deal, one of the major point of the deal was that Iran should limit the ranges of it ICBM..

Or don't you know the Japanese self defense forces are under treaty by the USA base on the USA Japan defense pact not to field some certain ranges of ICBM

obedience4:


This one Obama signed was a renogatied one of the previous treaty
The treaty was always there before the Soviet Union withdrew, the Obama administration simply reactivated the old one..
If for example Putin dies a new president comes and wants to restart the treaty he can activated it they may name it start3 but it was just the old treaty which has now been started..


During the Iran nuclear deal, one of the major point of the deal was that Iran should limit the ranges of it ICBM..

Or don't you know the Japanese self defense forces are under treaty by the USA base on the USA Japan defense pact not to field some certain ranges of ICBM

You are still confusing the issue with INF treaty. It would not hurt to research this. Ranges of 500-1000km are not ICBMs.
1)Iran does not possess an ICBM because it does not have the know how. US, Russia, France, China, NK and Isreal are the only nations with this know how.
2) Japan also does not possess an ICBM.
For the records, ICBMs are not capped by treaties, you build your range according to your know how. You can only cap the numbers deployed.

As for START, I will explain with another ideology. The US signed the Rome statue that created the ICC, but it was not ratified, as a result, the US is not a party to ICC. Reason it’s not bound and it’s people can’t be tried by ICC.

Same with START, Soviets signed in 1991, but USSR collapsed months later without ratification. So it never existed until it came into force in 1994 when it was ratified. A treaty cannot come into force if it’s not ratified.

Lastly, the Soviet Union did not withdraw from it because there was no treaty to withdraw from when it was not ratified. Rather the Soviet dissolved. If USSR did not dissolve, it would have ratified it.

obedience4:



I knew I was talking to an idiot, Mumu don't know that even this moment the war is raging on in the donbass, I guess the Russians are fighting themselves

Go and mount troops in Don Bass idiot ...

Jashub:
...and Don Bass has been annexed ? Wow, Ukraine is really winning...

You dont know how delusional these western media bots are

obedience4:


This one Obama signed was a renogatied one of the previous treaty
The treaty was always there before the Soviet Union withdrew, the Obama administration simply reactivated the old one..
If for example Putin dies a new president comes and wants to restart the treaty he can activated it they may name it start3 but it was just the old treaty which has now been started..


During the Iran nuclear deal, one of the major point of the deal was that Iran should limit the ranges of it ICBM..

Or don't you know the Japanese self defense forces are under treaty by the USA base on the USA Japan defense pact not to field some certain ranges of ICBM

The reason I did not argue with you yesterday was because you have little to no knowledge of the topic of discussion.

That was why I told you to study.

Read up
I'll try not to engage you in an argument for now, until I feel you are lettered enough.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/wap.business-standard.com/article-amp/international/putin-vs-biden-what-is-new-start-treaty-here-s-all-you-need-to-know-123022101257_1.html


https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/INFtreaty

Masterviolence:

The reason I did not argue with you yesterday was because you have little to no knowledge of the topic of discussion.

That was why I told you to study.

Read up
I'll try not to engage you in an argument for now, until I feel you are lettered enough.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/wap.business-standard.com/article-amp/international/putin-vs-biden-what-is-new-start-treaty-here-s-all-you-need-to-know-123022101257_1.html


https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/INFtreaty

Shift joor, I don't engage kids,

obedience4:



Shift joor, I don't engage kids,

How old are you?

obedience4:



Shift joor, I don't engage kids,

You don't have to come up with this, try to study.

Read up

I might be far older than you, but education is not by age.

b4ball:


You are still confusing the issue with INF treaty. It would not hurt to research this. Ranges of 500-1000km are not ICBMs.
1)Iran does not possess an ICBM because it does not have the know how. US, Russia, France, China, NK and Isreal are the only nations with this know how.
2) Japan also does not possess an ICBM.
For the records, ICBMs are not capped by treaties, you build your range according to your know how. You can only cap the numbers deployed.

As for START, I will explain with another ideology. The US signed the Rome statue that created the ICC, but it was not ratified, as a result, the US is not a party to ICC. Reason it’s not bound and it’s people can’t be tried by ICC.

Same with START, Soviets signed in 1991, but USSR collapsed months later without ratification. So it never existed until it came into force in 1994 when it was ratified. A treaty cannot come into force if it’s not ratified.

Lastly, the Soviet Union did not withdraw from it because there was no treaty to withdraw from when it was not ratified. Rather the Soviet dissolved. If USSR did not dissolve, it would have ratified it.

First of all, I am not disputing your claim. All I was saying to that guy was that the origin of the start treaty was with the Soviet Union and the USA and even when the Soviet Union dissolved Russia for years tried to distance it self from the treaty until the Obama administration. I was only schooling that guy that for you to know what the present start treaty you have to know we're it started and it started with the Soviet Union and the USA..
If you study the both treaties they are almost the same.

Also it's common knowledge that the Iranian are now into the ICBM game

Also I told you that they are different types of ICBM and their ranges,

Masterviolence:

How old are you?

Lol, was teasing you,..
Don't take it too serious

Kingsnairaland:


They say kyiv is standing shame did not permit them to say Ukraine is standing because Mariupol is gone other part is gone lol.

Those guys are dreamers dreaming on in Disney Land waiting like a hopeless waitress for Ukraine to win against Russia.

In deed, delusion is a disease that's worse than ALS.

b4ball:

See as you ignorantly disgraced yourself while trying to educate someone else!!!
New start treaty was not between US and old Soviet Union but rather between US and Russia itself. Signed by Obama and Medvedev in 2010

And it was not to bar the range of nukes, because you can’t cap the range of an ICBM. Rather to reduce the number of strategic deployed nuke capable ICBM.

You have time schooling him.