TO: Mark Rutte, Secretary General of NATO, c/o Estonian government, press@riik.ee FROM: Paul Edwards, Chairman of Liberators Without Borders SUBJECT: Ukraine DATE: 2025-08-18 Greetings Mark, you mealy-mouthed faggot. Let me explain the world situation so that even a jackass like you can understand it. Ok, so the Soviet dictator lied and said that Ukraine was an independent country, and deserved its own seat at the UN. It was no more independent than any of the other countries, like Poland, that the communist dictator was enslaving (on top of enslaving the Russian people themselves - who don't speak - and never did speak - with one voice - no group does). Putin is right - the USSR was always just "the Russian empire". Now - in 1991, Yeltsin unilaterally decided that Ukraine et al could secede. I do not recognize any such authority to unilaterally surrender Russian territory. Don't get me wrong - I am glad he did that - especially as it gave the Baltics the opportunity to secure their freedom that they so desperately wanted - but Yeltsin's piece of paper is as meaningless as the piece of paper that Chamberlain was waving around. The Baltics were smart enough to know that. At some level, Chamberlain was smart enough to know that too - he built up the UK military instead of relying on a piece of paper to protect him. Churchill went to war with the military that Chamberlain built. So the Baltics scrambled as fast as they could to join NATO, so that their (nominal) sovereignty became ACTUAL sovereignty, as their physical security was guaranteed. The jackass Ukrainians meanwhile chose to sell their soul for free/cheap gas. Besides which - they had not just one, but TWO pieces of paper to "protect" them (the second one was in exchange for giving up nukes - that they didn't have the codes for). As if that wasn't enough, the jackasses of Ukraine were actively opposed to joining NATO, as seen here in 2011: https://www.dw.com/ru/dw-trend-%D0%B1%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%88%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%BE-%D1%83%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%86%D0%B5%D0%B2-%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%B2-%D0%B2%D1%81%D1%82%D1%83%D0%BF%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F-%D0%B2-%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%BE/a-15097919 In the west of the country, the majority of respondents (51 percent) are in favor of joining NATO. Residents of eastern Ukraine strongly reject the prospect of their country joining NATO: 75 percent of respondents oppose it. Only 12 percent support the idea of joining NATO. The solution here is obvious - western Ukraine should have seceded from the jackasses in the east. Instead, they chose to sat on their fat asses and play pattycake with their physical security - MORONS. Regardless, until/if any part of Ukraine manages to secure its physical independence of Russia, the entire Ukraine remains sovereign Russian territory. Regardless of what various pieces of paper say, or who is sitting on stools, wanking, at the UN General Assembly. I'm not saying that Ukraine shouldn't secede from Russia. Russia has some "issues" that I won't get into here - so I understand the desire. But by the same token, the wankers in eastern Ukraine, who don't think that freedom has any value - or even exists as a concept - nevermind needs to be secured - have equal (read: none) right to secede from Ukraine. Ok, so that's the starting position. Wankers and jackasses everywhere. So long as noone actually made a move to test the "theory of independence", nothing would have happened. But Ukraine made a premature (although it did have useful side-effects) move - trying to join NATO, where - if successful - it would be too late for Russia to contest the move. So Russia's hand was forced - now or never. But - why are we in this position in the first place? All this hostility. Let us go back to shortly before 1991. A decent guy - Gorbachev - was in power. But he wasn't even agreeing for East Germany to become part of NATO - nevermind anywhere else. And let us be clear - Russia did not lose a war. If you want Russian troops to withdraw from East Germany - or anywhere else - you need to NEGOTIATE. And at the time, NATO was an honest, decent, force for freedom. NATO cared more about the human rights of the Russian people than their pre-Gorbachev dictators ever did. Although Australia wasn't a member of NATO (we were a member of ANZUS though), I considered myself to still be part of the free world, and you can call it "western culture" or "free world culture" or any other name - there's no very good name. And I was (in spirit) telling Gorbachev that we are not your enemy - we have never been your enemy - you can trust us. Let eastern Europe have their freedom! But Gorbachev wouldn't listen, and he was likely constrained in his actions anyway. But events overtook him, and Yeltsin was the one who took the leap of faith to trust NATO, and withdrew all Russian troops. You cannot imagine how happy I was seeing eastern Europe freed. There is a joke among pro-Israeli people along the lines of the Palestinians believe there should be give and take in negotiations - specifically Israel gives and Palestinians take. Well in this case - Russia gave and NATO took, as most of eastern Europe joined NATO. I was watching with bated breath to see if the Baltics would be secured without Russia contesting the move. They didn't, and on 2004-03-29, it happened. Now, up until then, I understood why the West needed to take a pretty hard-nosed approach to relations with Russia. The Baltics couldn't be allowed into NATO with conditions set by Russia. They had to be unconditionally free - zero concessions. And no different from any other member of NATO. Not second class citizens. Not exactly the same, but the Japanese were trying to get a conditional surrender in WW2 where they got to keep their emperor. The US didn't want to be bound by any agreement - and insisted on unconditional surrender. But then - they didn't particularly mind the Japanese having an emperor. So they got to keep the emperor anyway. I was in contact with a Russian at the time, and I confidently told him - watch what happens now - the West is going to be extremely friendly to Russia. Again, not exactly the same, but you will recall the Marshall Plan after WW2. The Americans have a philosophy that the best way to defeat an enemy is to turn him into a friend. But it turns out that I was full of shit. Any Russian who trusted my judgement was let down. And believe me - that irks me no end. Which is why I am currently flying the Russian flag. Because I wish to go to war with NATO as the slimy faggots that they are. But first - one step back. In 2000, Putin asked NATO Secretary General George Robertson when NATO was going to issue an invitation to Russia to join NATO. If I had been in Robertson's position, I would have literally knelt down and kissed Putin's feet. Russia wants to be our friend and ally!!! Europe will never be secure until Russia is at minimum a neutral. I know that. Moron Robertson apparently either doesn't know, or doesn't care about the freedom and security of hundreds of millions of people. That's not to say that I would have let Russia into NATO any time soon. As I previously alluded to, Russia has "issues". But kissing Putin's feet (FROM A POSITION OF STRENGTH) is a GREAT WAY to get the ball rolling. NATO should have updated its charter to say that the primary goal of NATO is to set the conditions such that Russia would be able to not just join NATO, but replace the US's role. Or as an alternative - the NATO Secretary General should always be a Russian. OR BOTH. YOU FUCKWITS SHOULD BE FALLING OVER YOURSELVES TRYING TO BE NICE TO RUSSIA. Faggots! Instead, what did we see from Robertson? His reply was something like "Get in the queue, Putin - Russia is no-one special - you're no more important than Estonia - you need to grovel if you want to be accepted by me!". I mean - did none of you jackasses read "How to Win Friends and Influence People" by Dale Carnegie? Is that because you can't afford it? Good news! It comes out of copyright on 2026-01-01. So if the world can survive (read: not have a nuclear war) for 4 more months, we may be able to get out of this thing alive. Wouldn't that be ... cool? And that's the thing - Russia IS special. Just as special as the US was when it was put permanently in charge of NATO's military. And that's the goal - to make Russia just as good as the US as a guarantor of freedom. What possible downside is there to treating Russia specially? After all that territory that they VOLUNTARILY turned over (I don't want to use the word "surrendered", even if it is grammatically correct), you can't give them some sort of Mickey Mouse Award - country of the century - anything? I'll tell you what I would have done - I would have found some pro-NATO ethnic Russian woman in Estonia and put her in charge of NATO, instead of some western European male. And all NATO negotations with Russia to take place in Russian. Not only that - make the NATO press conferences in Russian too. Obviously the Estonian woman will know English too, but if a reporter asks her any question in English, she should respond with "Sorry - I don't know a word of English - that was totally lost on me", and demand them to provide a Russian translator. All of these symbolic things are COMPLETELY HARMLESS. The physical security provided by planes and tanks is unchanged. COMPLETELY UNCHANGED. MAKE A FUCKING EFFORT!!! Pursue peace as vigorously as you prepare for war. BTW, I'm not claiming that I follow Carnegie's book myself. I have my own style of diplomacy: https://hermit.org/Blakes7/Episodes/scripts/Warlord.html Avon's idea of diplomacy is like breaking someone's leg then saying, "Lean on me." Estonia in particular should be tasked with being friends with Russia. They don't need to piss about with their silly little army. They just have one job to do - RUSSIAN OUTREACH. And I emphasize - from a position of strength and security. This is completely unlike the situation prior to 2004-03-29 where any such Russian outreach would be a form of humiliation or second-class citizen due to weakness. A form of slavery. I don't want anyone to be in that position. I especially don't want the weak to feel intimidated. (I am writing this aggressive letter to you in the full knowledge that you could easily kill me if there was some sort of physical conflict as you are far stronger than me - I wouldn't do the same to a weaker party - that's what bullies do - I'm not a bully, I'm an agitator with an inimitable style). If I kissed Putin's feet - I wouldn't feel humiliated. I know I am in a position to moon him if I prefer. And I will go to a lot of effort - an enormous amount of effort - to ensure that I retain the right to moon Putin should I CHOOSE to do so. But I CHOOSE to show fealty (or something like that) to Putin instead. That's my war. To give the maximum deference possible to Russia WITHOUT jeopardizing the security of any NATO member state. Anyway, did NATO do any of that? No it did not. You know what it actually did instead? It recognized Kosovo in 2008. BETRAYING A WRITTEN AGREEMENT that it had with Russia. That's like - unthinkable. I wouldn't have believed that it was technically possible for the West to betray a written agreement. Their entire identity and self-worth rests on being someone that respects written agreements. That's as insane as suggesting that there would ever be a US president that disputed the integrity of - wait for it - US - yes - you heard that right - US - elections. It's totally insane. It'll never happen. Oops. There is a Penn and Teller Bullshit episode "World Peace" where they say if you can find just one person advocating war, Teller will stick something up his ass. And Teller ends up having to stick something up his ass! So - don't get me wrong - I supported the 1999 NATO bombing of the Serbian dictatorship. But by 2008, Serbia was no longer a dictatorship - it was actually a better place (I'm hesitant to drop the word "liberal") than Kosovo. There was absolutely no urgency to declare independence. No urgency to recognize that. Just sit pat. Everyone is under a democracy. Everyone has their human rights not just protected, but guaranteed by NATO. So what did NATO do? Poke a finger in Russia's eye - that's what. A completely unprovoked assault. GO FUCK YOURSELVES. You annexed territory from a liberal democracy (there - I said it), ie Serbia, to give to a bunch of racist religious bigots, ie the Kosovars? THAT was your priority? Instead of falling over yourselves to win over the Russians?! What can I say? GO FUCK YOURSELVES. If I was in charge of NATO, I would have lived up to the terms of the agreement and allow the Serbs to deploy their troops around the statues and borders. Again - NATO set it up perfectly fine. The written agreement actually gives NATO the final say on who can be deployed. Which is fine. Position of strength. But then - I don't know if you want to call it "western values" or "Christian values" - no idea - but what you SHOULD have done is be AS GENEROUS AS POSSIBLE (from that position of strength). So I'm talking like 100,000 unarmed Serbs patrolling the border with Albania. And given full air support and Gurkha support that they may need. The Gurkhas can be tasked with killing as many Kosovars as they can, if they look like they're threatening the (unarmed) Serbs. Airports have something called "security theater". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_theater This is what was required in this situation. FALL OVER YOURSELVES trying to make clear that this is disputed/nominal Serbian territory, but at the same time, the Kosovars have NATO security guarantees. Instead, what did we get? NATO being their usual faggoty selves. That's what. If the entire West gets nuked out of existence by Putin - we fucking deserve it. In case you missed it before - GO FUCK YOURSELVES. Please shoot yourself now. Thanks. Paul.