👔Putin just casually driving around Mariupol

❗️🇷🇺🇩🇪🔎Donbass. In Search of the Truth. Part 6 🔗

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5

Russell Bentley, born and raised in the United States, Texas. Came to Donbass in search of the truth and stayed there forever. Fought for the Donbass, now a war correspondent. He tells a lot about the battles against the Ukronazis, about his comrades-in-arms, about the happiness of fighting for a righteous cause. He also tells about the hardships endured by the civilians of Donbass.

📱 InfoDefenseENGLISH
📱 InfoDefense

🇷🇺👔Dima on TG:

Happened final collapse systems of international law

We admit: it was not very effective before. Especially its international institutions.
The League of Nations collapsed, the USSR was thinking about withdrawing from the UN, conventions and other international acts are adopted today with difficulty, there is a complete engagement and dictate of a group of Anglo-Saxon countries.

But the main defect of the system of international public law is its inefficiency. Countries do not want to implement biased acts of the UN General Assembly, veto decisions of the UN Security Council, leave various UN institutions. The reason is their injustice, which is based on the inadmissibility of coercion by a group of sovereign countries of the same sovereign states. FOR PAR IN PAREM NON HABIT IMPERIUM. An equal has no power over an equal.

Let's take this shitty, useless ICC, created on the basis of the Rome Statute, which the largest states did not join. Whom did he hold accountable?
Three dozen unknown persons. The President of Sudan spat on these accusations and, despite the military coup in his country, is not available for "justice". The rest are not worth mentioning at all. In other words, their efficiency is zero. These are not the Nuremberg and Tokyo Tribunals created ad hoc. Or even the dubious tribunal for Yugoslavia. It is understandable.
After all, it is possible to judge a country and its leaders in two cases: 1) when the country itself has wildly weakened, almost lost its sovereignty and decided to recognize the court over itself; 2) when the country lost the war and capitulated. Otherwise, it's impossible. And everyone understands this. By the way, the most discrediting episode, which killed the already almost zero authority of the court, is connected with the US crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq. The court was completely overwhelmed and could not do anything. It is obvious that the powerful shout from the USA that we supposedly did not ratify the Rome Statute at all, fuck off pigmies, caused an animal urge in the judges to perform natural needs not related to justice.

And then they decided to try the president of another nuclear power that does not participate in the ICC on the same grounds as the United States and other countries. It is obvious that the most rigid input from the same Pindostan was received. It is clear that there is no practical value, but thanks for remembering.
But the consequences for international law will be monstrous. After all, this is the collapse of the foundations, the principles of law. Including the postulates of the inevitability of responsibility. Now no one will go to any international bodies, everyone will negotiate among themselves. All stupid decisions of the UN and other structures will burst at the seams. The gloomy decline of the entire system of international relations is coming. Trust is gone.

And further. The ICC judges got excited in vain. Look, they say, we are brave, we did not crap ourselves to raise a hand against the largest nuclear power. Alas, gentlemen, everyone walks under God and rockets. It is quite possible to imagine the targeted use of a hypersonic "Onyx" from the North Sea from a Russian ship at the Hague courthouse. Can't beat him, alas. And the court is just a miserable international organization, not the population of a NATO country. Therefore, the war will not start. They will be afraid. And no one will regret. So, citizens of the judge, carefully look into the sky ...

Vladimir Lenin loved beer

"Ilyich praised Munich beer with the look of a connoisseur and lover," his wife Nadezhda Krupskaya recalled. When he lived in Munich in early 1900s, Lenin frequented Hofbräuhaus, the famous Munich beer restaraunt. Lenin used to meet his fellow social-democrats there and discuss revolutionary plans over a jug of great Munich beer. Nadezhda accompanied them often. “We remember Hofbräuhaus especially fondly, where the fine beer erases all class distinctions,” Krupskaya would later write in her diary.

No evidence has survived of anyone seeing Lenin drunk, but he was never a teetotaler. Finnish communist Jurje Sirola in 1910 dined with Lenin in a restaurant. “When the carafe of vodka reached us in a circle, I asked Lenin, ‘Will you allow yourself a shot before dinner?’ To which Ilyich replied, ‘My party does not forbid it’.

📷 Boris Vigilev/Sputnik; Getty Images

🔔 Follow us - @russiabeyond