Russia is conducting a massive McDonald's purge

[SRBM2]

Well America did promise to "protect Ukraine's territorial sovereignty" in exchange for Ukraine giving up their nukes in 1994.

Except that they never respected any other country but themselfs and you can hardly speak of respecting the souvereignity of a country when using politicians on demonstrations to heat up the demonstrants and steer up the entire situation. That is a direct break of souvereignity of a country and a hostile act and actually even an act of war, by using agents with rifles shooting policemen and "civilians."

 

[flamer84]

Banning of McDonalds started before that robbery of a millioniare by italy. And it is not viciously fight it is retaliation and you can not blame russians for countering sanctions for retarded phony sanctions by USA and submissive NATO vassals for BRICS and refusing of Dollar.

And whishing disgusting fascists to have nukes that are controlled by the US already shows how degenerated the society in Romania is, completley indoctrinated trying to steer up shit against a Nuclear Power, but lick the arses of the EU further your living standards are decreasing anyway with FIAT Euro.

If you're not careful you might have a stroke with all that verbal diarhea.

Well America did promise to "protect Ukraine's territorial sovereignty" in exchange for Ukraine giving up their nukes in 1994.

So they did,so they did.So did Russia....the solemn treaties signed by superpowers,they're not worth the paper they're written on.

 

[Desertfalcon]

Anti-Russian "freedom fries" cannot be tolerated.

Except in some places...

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Except in some places...

That's done as a joint-venture with local companies, foreign companies have to carry out a joint-venture with local companies to get any kind of foothold in China's domestic market. Which means half the profits go to domestic firms.

Not the same as Chinese restaurants in America, which are usually started and owned by Americans of Chinese descent.

 

[Desertfalcon]

That's done as a joint-venture with local companies, foreign companies have to carry out a joint-venture with local companies to get any kind of foothold in China's domestic market. Which means half the profits go to domestic firms.

Not the same as Chinese restaurants in America, which are usually started and owned by Americans of Chinese descent.

That was not the point. It's still McDonald's and they still sell plenty of fries there that people gobble down!

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

That was not the point. It's still McDonald's and they still sell plenty of fries there that people gobble down!

Foreign multinationals aren't having a good time in China recently, they are complaining that the Government gives them unfair treatment. Not to mention having to give up half their profits to local partners.

(Not like America bans Chinese telecom companies like Huawei for instance.)

But still they desperately try to soldier on. I feel they are fighting a losing battle, but surely some profits is better than no profits.

 

[Desertfalcon]

Well America did promise to "protect Ukraine's territorial sovereignty" in exchange for Ukraine giving up their nukes in 1994.

So did China...

Memorandum on Security Assurances in Connection with the Republic of Belarus's Accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons;

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

So did China...

Memorandum on Security Assurances in Connection with the Republic of Belarus's Accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons;

We never signed the main agreement, just some weak (and non-binding) statement later. And we are allies with Russia too.

What is binding for example, would be a "mutual defence treaty", that is legally binding.

Like the mutual defence treaty America has with the Philippines.

The Philippines was of course disappointed in 2012, when we seized the Scarborough shoal from them. But America never turned up to help them, despite the binding nature of a mutual defence treaty.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

Well America did promise to "protect Ukraine's territorial sovereignty" in exchange for Ukraine giving up their nukes in 1994.

You keep saying that over and over and over in multiple threads and when I bring this up you go silent every time.

Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you are talking about the Budapest Memorandum I suggest you read it. It doesn't say anything about the US defending Ukraine.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

You keep saying that over and over and over in multiple threads and when I bring this up you go silent every time.

Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you are talking about the Budapest Memorandum I suggest you read it. It doesn't say anything about the US defending Ukraine.

You don't need any excuses not to intervene in the Ukraine.

Just say "I don't care" or "Why should I die for Ukrainians".

I will be the last one to blame you, I wouldn't want my countrymen to die for Ukraine either.

Also I think you didn't read the 2nd paragraph of the link you provided.

The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine as well as those of Belarus and Kazakhstan. As a result Ukraine gave up the world's third largest nuclear weapons stockpile between 1994 and 1996.

If losing Crimea (or the Philippines losing Scarborough) is not a loss of territorial integrity, then only Heaven knows what is.

 

[jaunty]

Good for their health I suppose.

 

[MarkovChain]

I wouldn't be surprised if the US did the same to McDonalds in a few years. Good for the Russians.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

You don't need any excuses not to intervene in the Ukraine.

Just say "I don't care" or "Why should I die for Ukrainians".

I will be the last one to blame you, I wouldn't want my countrymen to die for Ukraine either.

Also I think you didn't read the 2nd paragraph of the link you provided.



If losing Crimea (or the Philippines losing Scarborough) is not a loss of territorial integrity, then only Heaven knows what is.

Well you can at least stop making stuff up about how we are "supposed to defend Ukraine's territorial sovereignty".

 

[Desertfalcon]

We never signed the main agreement, just some weak (and non-binding) statement later. And we are allies with Russia too.

What is binding for example, would be a "mutual defence treaty", that is legally binding.

Like the mutual defence treaty America has with the Philippines.

The Philippines was of course disappointed in 2012, when we seized the Scarborough shoal from them. But America never turned up to help them, despite the binding nature of a mutual defence treaty.

1. China and France signed separately in affirming all of the provisions of the Budapest Memorandums.

2. The Budapest Memorandums are not binding, legally or otherwise, in any way. It was simply a statement of understanding and not a treaty. The only country that violated the provisions of the memorandums was Russia.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Well you can at least stop making stuff up about how we are "supposed to defend Ukraine's territorial sovereignty".

You need to read the 2nd paragraph of your own source:

The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine as well as those of Belarus and Kazakhstan. As a result Ukraine gave up the world's third largest nuclear weapons stockpile between 1994 and 1996.

And like I said before: If losing Crimea (or the Philippines losing Scarborough) is not a loss of territorial integrity, then only Heaven knows what is.