Ukraine-in-a-thread [Archive] - Page 11

HoreTore

05-14-2014, 19:11

I can't remember, it's been some time between now and then. I think it was November. That of course doesn't have to be true, I wasn't there, I just read about it. I'm pretty sure there are conflicting reports as to "who threw the first punch".

It doesn't really matter, though. Anything that happened before February 18 was rather mild and reversible.

November 30th (http://rt.com/news/ukraine-police-disperse-protest-509/) was the date of Berkut's crackdown on the protesters. The stated reason for their crackdown was not "restore order" or anything like that, but to "clear the square for christmas decorations". If you think WMD's was a lame excuse for Iraq; this one doesn't even reach that one to the ankles. Don't take my word for it though, several of Yanu's ministers acknowledged that the Berkut response had been brutal.

The crackdown left 79 people injured, including some hospitalized. It took place in the middle of the night, with the police surrounding the square, jamming radio signals and moving in for the kill.

But surely, the protesters had been a rowdy bunch, right? Well yeah, if you consider holding hands (http://www.euronews.com/2013/11/29/ukraine-tension-in-kyiv-as-pro-and-anti-government-protesters-hold-rallies/) "rioting", they sure were.

You have also claimed that the revolution has been "hijacked by people who turned it into a pro-eu/anti-Russia thing". Up until this crackdown, the protests were only pro-EU. The ones who joined as a response to the crackdown were the ones who threw general corruption and mismanagement into the mix of issues. The protest started on the night of November the 21st as a direct response to the cancellation of the EU deal, and their demand was to restart it. There were EU flags flying on Maidan weeks before the first party flag was flown.

For someone who has a lot of opinions of Maidan, you sure don't have much knowledge.

Sarmatian

05-14-2014, 19:29

November 30th (http://rt.com/news/ukraine-police-disperse-protest-509/) was the date of Berkut's crackdown on the protesters.

So, AFTER the protesters tried to seize Government Building violently on November 24th (http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2013/11/ukraine-police-clash-with-pro-eu-protesters-20131124142743878664.html). For someone who's a teacher, you have far too much problems with numbers.

HoreTore

05-14-2014, 19:36

So, AFTER the protesters tried to seize Government Building violently on November 24th. For someone who's a teacher, you have far too much problems with numbers.

You forgot the quotation marks around "violently".

It was a standard "rush the gates/fire the tear gas"-situation you see every year in every properly civilized country. Way less than your average G8, for example.

The police response to it was also perfectly reasonable, and well within what is expected of any civilized government.

In other words, quite irrelevant. No sympathy was gained for either the protesters nor the government.

The Berkut surrounding, jamming and brutally assaulting Maidan in the dead of night, on the other hand, was what sparked the later violent turn of the revolution. That's what eventually attracted the protest elements you have the most problems with(the nazis). That was the reason the only two remaining options were the immediate resignation of Yanukovich or his violent overthrow. He chose the latter option.

Husar

05-14-2014, 19:40

Batista, Ne Win, Nasser, etc. The peoples of Cuba, Burma, Egypt and many more all employed a "let's just wait and see if he steps down"-attitude. It did not work out well.

That's unacceptable, Cuba is a great country with very happy citizens.

The fact for this to occur, is that people would have to take time off work, pay to be able to food and provide for themselves, be resident in subpar conditions. No one in their right mind would ever choose to do it unless things have simply gotten so bad, we are inherently lazy and people go everyday putting on a false smile just to get through the day without making it harder for themselves.

Come on, I brought that up before and was told it's not a big deal, you can feed a million protesters with Borscht for a month with a dollar.

Sarmatian

05-14-2014, 21:29

The Berkut surrounding, jamming and brutally assaulting Maidan in the dead of night, on the other hand, was what sparked the later violent turn of the revolution. That's what eventually attracted the protest elements you have the most problems with(the nazis). That was the reason the only two remaining options were the immediate resignation of Yanukovich or his violent overthrow. He chose the latter option.

It was after protesters tried to storm the seat of the Ukrainian government.

Nevertheless, nothing serious happened. No one was killed, no one was seriously injured. It is a bit much to demand resignation of the president for a few bruises, or we would be changing presidents on a weekly basis in most countries around the world. Resignation of the Berkut commander, at most minister of internal affairs, but even that is pushing it.

While we were protesting against Milosevic, many ended up with bruises. We managed to keep it non violent (at least until the very last moment), and we managed that because of a conscious effort to do so.

You're right that it was the snowflake that triggered an avalanche but it in no way justifies what the protesters did before or after.

HoreTore

05-14-2014, 21:46

It was after protesters tried to storm the seat of the Ukrainian government.

Nevertheless, nothing serious happened. No one was killed, no one was seriously injured. It is a bit much to demand resignation of the president for a few bruises, or we would be changing presidents on a weekly basis in most countries around the world. Resignation of the Berkut commander, at most minister of internal affairs, but even that is pushing it.

While we were protesting against Milosevic, many ended up with bruises. We managed to keep it non violent (at least until the very last moment), and we managed that because of a conscious effort to do so.

You're right that it was the snowflake that triggered an avalanche but it in no way justifies what the protesters did before or after.

Say what?

10-ish hospitalized civilians would have(and has) forced a score of resignation in any democratic country. Dispersal with tear gas? Sure, no problem. That happens every now and then, and is no big problem on either side. Sending an armed gang of security police to terrorize unsuspecting and peaceful civilians in the dead of night? Rather different.

Condoning their actions afterwards? Grounds for an overthrow.

Your comment that they "tried to storm the Ukrainian parliament" is one I take as a sign that you have nothing of substance to contribute with. Good night. The pre-30th protest was comparable to the Occupy/Tea party movements. It is rather funny how you cry in horror at a rowdy protest with an attempted break-in with no injuries at all as horrible atrocities, while shrugging of a crackdown which left 80 people injured, of which 10 were hospitalized. I get how you feel the need to counter the west, but it's time to scale it back a bit, no?

I am still waiting for the US to send in the SWAT team to rough them up. And if Obama did that, could you please explain how he could have survived the inevitable impeachment?

Husar

05-15-2014, 02:57

Say what?

10-ish hospitalized civilians would have(and has) forced a score of resignation in any democratic country. Dispersal with tear gas? Sure, no problem. That happens every now and then, and is no big problem on either side. Sending an armed gang of security police to terrorize unsuspecting and peaceful civilians in the dead of night? Rather different.

Condoning their actions afterwards? Grounds for an overthrow.

Your comment that they "tried to storm the Ukrainian parliament" is one I take as a sign that you have nothing of substance to contribute with. Good night. The pre-30th protest was comparable to the Occupy/Tea party movements. It is rather funny how you cry in horror at a rowdy protest with an attempted break-in with no injuries at all as horrible atrocities, while shrugging of a crackdown which left 80 people injured, of which 10 were hospitalized. I get how you feel the need to counter the west, but it's time to scale it back a bit, no?

I am still waiting for the US to send in the SWAT team to rough them up. And if Obama did that, could you please explain how he could have survived the inevitable impeachment?

???

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AdDLhPwpp4

Where's the inevitable impeachment? And I won't link to the video of the homeless guy getting shot in the back because he tried to run away from the police dog biting him in his best parts. Sure, a homeless guy is not a peaceful protest, so I guess there's no problem there, but either you have no point about democratic countries or the USA are a really bad example.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5t7LpZCS2s

The last one is really great, 200-300 people injured by the police, and the official just says they had to act because the peaceful protesters didn't separate themselves from the violent ones. Sounds familiar? Also Merkel is still in office, according to you the blockupy people should have kept going until her corrupt regime was overthrown or she should have resigned with 200+ injured protesters if Germany were a democracy, no?

Gilrandir

05-15-2014, 07:05

But all the vocabulary you use, all the pseudo-news you dispatch, shows that not your intention.
So other videos and links in this thread are an update, mine are pseudo-news. I think your vocabulary is at least no better than mine.

They were going to hold elections anyway just like the last time, and the people will vote in the government they want just like the last time. What will happen if a group doesn't like the government who's been voted in? The Maidan protesters have already set the precedent that people can force the overthrow of a government outside the electoral process if they want. What if protesters in another city demand that the newly elected government step down because they don't like the elected government? Would they have the same weight as the protesters did in Kiev?
You again fail to see an umportant thing: Maidan didn't protest against the government because it didn't like the latter. Maidan was a consequence of something the government DID. Protesting because the government were not beauty pageant winners was not the case. Governments now will know better before they start to behave like Yanukovych did.

It is a bit much to demand resignation of the president for a few bruises, or we would be changing presidents on a weekly basis in most countries around the world. Resignation of the Berkut commander, at most minister of internal affairs, but even that is pushing it.

The latter was what the Maidan wanted. At the beginning. No one ever demanded, believed in or even dreamt that Yanukovych could me made to step down. My personal idea is that if Mr Y. agreed to the resignations you mentioned and made a pretence of investigating the 30th of November events he could be still in possession of his golden breadloaf basking in his fabulous residence of Mezhigirya.

November 30th (http://rt.com/news/ukraine-police-disperse-protest-509/) was the date of Berkut's crackdown on the protesters. The stated reason for their crackdown was not "restore order" or anything like that, but to "clear the square for christmas decorations".
This is so wrong! It was "New Year decorations". Brenus would call it pseudo-news.~;)

Sarmatian

05-15-2014, 07:18

Say what?

10-ish hospitalized civilians would have(and has) forced a score of resignation in any democratic country. Dispersal with tear gas? Sure, no problem. That happens every now and then, and is no big problem on either side. Sending an armed gang of security police to terrorize unsuspecting and peaceful civilians in the dead of night? Rather different.

Condoning their actions afterwards? Grounds for an overthrow.

Personally, I look at the actions over a longer period of time, but you were the one who demanded we make it about "who started it". Protesters did.

Between then and February, there have been ample opportunities to deescalate the situation, protesters refused every time. On the whole, they're guilty just as much as Yanukovich for violence, if not more.

Your comment that they "tried to storm the Ukrainian parliament" is one I take as a sign that you have nothing of substance to contribute with. Good night. The pre-30th protest was comparable to the Occupy/Tea party movements. It is rather funny how you cry in horror at a rowdy protest with an attempted break-in with no injuries at all as horrible atrocities, while shrugging of a crackdown which left 80 people injured, of which 10 were hospitalized. I get how you feel the need to counter the west, but it's time to scale it back a bit, no?

I am still waiting for the US to send in the SWAT team to rough them up. And if Obama did that, could you please explain how he could have survived the inevitable impeachment?

I didn't pay too much attention to Occupy, but from the several pictures I saw, there were protesters standing behind an imaginary line. I don't remember them trying to storm and take control of Congress.

I don't condone police brutality, but I can not accept that it excuses everything the protesters did.

On a related note, what would you say is the proper action for the president and the government that have its soldiers shoot unarmed civilians?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SU3SD6oQ7KE

Gilrandir

05-15-2014, 08:17

On a related note, what would you say is the proper action for the president and the government that have its soldiers shoot unarmed civilians?

National guard or any other armed forces denied having been present (to say nothing of shooting) in Krasnoarmeysk. It is the zone controlled by DPR at present, AFAIK. There are also sporadic reports of separatists conflicting (often using firearms) between themselves. Some groups of them act on their own. All of this accounts for what we saw, I think.

HoreTore

05-15-2014, 08:42

The revolution is eating its children.

Sooner than usual.

GenosseGeneral

05-15-2014, 09:49

National guard or any other armed forces denied having been present (to say nothing of shooting) in Krasnoarmeysk. It is the zone controlled by DPR at present, AFAIK. There are also sporadic reports of separatists conflicting (often using firearms) between themselves. Some groups of them act on their own. All of this accounts for what we saw, I think.

It is hard to tell, those guys in the vid are certainly no regupar army unit and they also do not wear neither black nor US Army uniforms, both which can be frequently seen worn by National guard. (Yes, US army. Apparently, they supplied not only MREs but also surplus uniforms.)
Also, there are no APCs present, they arrived on a civilian vehicle.

Yet they still MIGHT be forces loyal to Kyiv, as the formation of various territorial defence units and "special battalions" have been announced recently.
At least from those 49 seconds, noone can tell who those guys are. We only have the vid's description.

Viking

05-15-2014, 09:51

On a related note, what would you say is the proper action for the president and the government that have its soldiers shoot unarmed civilians?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SU3SD6oQ7KE

You can't see that they are directly fired on in that video. Could just as well have been ricochet. You have to be really stupid to march on a bunch of people firing warning shots. Even more stupid to attempt to wrestle their automatic guns out of their hands.

The reason law enforcement has guns, is to stop people from going where they are not supposed to be going. That's how they were used here. Ideally, they should have had riot control measures, but that's not quite as relevant when there is an armed insurgency going on in the area.

If members of the crowd wouldn't have gone for phyiscal confrontation, this wouldn't have happened.

Husar

05-15-2014, 10:27

:laugh4:

When it were Yanukovich's police, it was clearly totally wrong what they did, with or without videos.

When they were Russian Spetsnaz, it was totally obvious by the small inscriptions on the insides of their guns that everyone could see.

When a video shows pro-russians getting shot, we do not have a clear picture of anything and the shooting guys could really be anyone, nothing can be told. Where are the experts we had previously?

Viking

05-15-2014, 10:30

Sarmatian

05-15-2014, 11:48

Its also RT. :rolleyes:

The best argument. The shooting, in fact, didn't happen because it was broadcasted by RT.

You can't see that they are directly fired on in that video.

I agree. This one is much better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKHFgYCbgvI

The situation is clear. Russian professional soldiers got to Krasnoarmeisk, pretending to be national guard of Ukraine, and started shooting in the air. Then the tape was cut, ketchup spilled on the asphalt and fake ambulance was called, taking away uninjured actor.

If members of the crowd wouldn't have gone for phyiscal confrontation, this wouldn't have happened.

Only tear gas is acceptable against unarmed civilians that try to take over a building, we've already established that.

Viking

05-15-2014, 12:27

I agree. This one is much better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKHFgYCbgvI

Where do you see that they took aim at the guy who was injured? I cannot see anything there that goes against the ricochet theory.

Check this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4joK6D_-Wc) version of the video and go HD. It looks like the guy in white T-shirt fires into the ground (look for the sparks - accidental discharge? irresponsible warning shot?) at around 39 seconds, and at 40 seconds the unarmed guy falls to the ground. It looks like they just as well could have shot one of their own.

Only tear gas is acceptable against unarmed civilians that try to take over a building, we've already established that.

I don't see anyone condoning this approach - was the building important enough? These weren't police and not trained/equipped for riot control, whoever they were. More information on the background story is needed.

Sarmatian

05-15-2014, 13:59

Gilrandir

05-15-2014, 14:09

I don't see anyone condoning this approach - was the building important enough? These weren't police and not trained/equipped for riot control, whoever they were. More information on the background story is needed.
I'm sorry, my information on Krasnoarmeysk wasn't correct. It was the armed forces and police that denied their presence there. At first it was held by separatists, then they left and the battallion "Dnepr" of National Guard (formed of the inhabitants of Dnipropetrovsk region) entered it and took control of the town hall, the town police department and stopped the "referendum" that was being held. The person in the video was wounded, not killed.
http://news.liga.net/video/politics/1707445-video_raneniya_napadavshego_na_boytsov_natsgvardii_v_krasnoarmeyske_.htm

Gilrandir

05-15-2014, 14:11

In hindsight, Yanukovich acted like a nurse to protesters compared to what Maidan government is now doing.
Yeah, right. Employing snipers is what the doctor ordered.
The government forces are acting meekly, for the most part, trying to avoid casualties (including those of civilians) as much as possible. If it was otherwise they could have levelled Slovaynsk with the ground. As I have remarked, they usually leave towns they freed from armed separatists. If the situation there remains stable they don't return. For instance, Mariupol is being patrolled by local police together with militia from local metallurgical plant (owned by Akhmetov). The situation there is stabilized so the separatists' barricades are being removed.

Sarmatian

05-15-2014, 14:37

Yeah, right. Employing snipers is what the doctor ordered.
The government forces are acting meekly, for the most part, trying to avoid casualties (including those of civilians) as much as possible. If it was otherwise they could have levelled Slovaynsk with the ground. As I have remarked, they usually leave towns they freed from armed separatists.

Based on reports we have, it is more likely the use of snipers wasn't ordered by Yanukovich. Medical report, leaked phone call, unwillingness of the new government to investigate. After the phone call was leaked, official investigation started and was finished in record breaking time. After that, the lawyers of the sniper victims complained they were being denied access to the information...

It stinks. We may never know for sure what happened, but it stinks big time.

It is debatable if the new government could level anything, as it appears the soldiers are more likely to surrender to than fight protesters. In the end, all those mechanisms were available to Yanukovich but he didn't use them. For the most of the duration, Maidan protesters fought aganst batons, water cannons and tear gas.

Protesters in the east were almost immediately faced with army, paramilitary formations and heavy weaponry.

If the situation there remains stable they don't return. For instance, Mariupol is being patrolled by local police together with militia from local metallurgical plant (owned by Akhmetov). The situation there is stabilized so the separatists' barricades are being removed.

And noone may screw with Akhmetov.

Kagemusha

05-15-2014, 14:37

Sarmatian

05-15-2014, 14:41

6. Who benefits?

China and Iran, for the most part.

Gilrandir

05-15-2014, 14:46

1. Russia sends in special forces and empowers local separatists to act against Maidan government in Eastern Ukraine.
2. Russian special forces take over government buildings in Eastern Ukraine and leave those buildings in the hands of Ukrainian separatists.
3. Maidan Government recruits troops that can be assured of their loyalty, with help of West and sends them to Eastern Ukraine.
4. Maidan government troops and Eastern separatists start clashing.
5. Ukrainians are killing Ukrainians.
6. Who benefits?
Russia. Putin wants to have a controlled Ukraine. Whether it could be done by destabilizing it generally, partitioning it, dividing into federal principalities, installing a lenient regime, blackmailing through gas prices or all of them in various degrees.

Kagemusha

05-15-2014, 14:47

China and Iran, for the most part.

Interesting point of view and i agree for the short term, since West and Russia are still both betting their own horses in the race. And who benefits the least?

Russia. Putin wants to have a controlled Ukraine. Whether it could be done by destabilizing it generally, partitioning it, dividing into federal principalities, installing a lenient regime, blackmailing through gas prices or all of them in various degrees.

To me this is still early to say. I agree that for Russia it is far more essential to have a cooperative government in Ukraine, compared to West. Their actions speak loudly in behalf of that. They are willing to go far more to the distance for it, using pretty much most means available. Still it is too early to say what the end result will be, but the same question to you also: Who benefits the least and what could be done about it?

Viking

05-15-2014, 15:14

Details don't really matter in the end.

Maidan government started accepting volunteers from the west in the National Guard as army proved reluctant to fire on the citizens it was sworn to defend. Acting president has been calling for creation of local militia units, not subordinated to anyone, to fight the "terrorists".

Mess like this was bound to happen. In hindsight, Yanukovich acted like a nurse to protesters compared to what Maidan government is now doing.

Doesn't matter? Russia has annexed a part of Ukrainian territory and has it's army ready on the borders. The Maidan uprising was a purely domestic event compared to what's going on in the east. The situation Yanukovich faced was completely different.

Protesters in the east were almost immediately faced with army, paramilitary formations and heavy weaponry.

Protesters stormed buildings in the east at the same time that the Crimea crisis was still on. Perhaps earlier too, I don't remember that for sure.

The army was only sent in after men armed with automatic rifles started storming police stations and taking control over entire cities (!); weeks after buildings were stormed for the first time.

Husar

05-15-2014, 15:46

The situation is clear. Russian professional soldiers got to Krasnoarmeisk, pretending to be national guard of Ukraine, and started shooting in the air. Then the tape was cut, ketchup spilled on the asphalt and fake ambulance was called, taking away uninjured actor.

Actually, I think they do similar things in Palestine sometimes. There was an uncut video once where you could see the ambulance was just waiting for the guy to pretend he'd been shot and then it turned on the siren and rushed into the picture of what was later shown in the news.

Sarmatian

05-15-2014, 17:12

Interesting point of view and i agree for the short term, since West and Russia are still both betting their own horses in the race. And who benefits the least?

You mean besides Ukraine?

Russia and EU.

Iran benefited on a short term. As soon as the crisis is over, everything will most probably go back to how it was. China, on the other hand, is a long term winner.

The worse relations between EU and Russia, the cheaper energy they get. And they didn't lift a finger.
a

Doesn't matter?

Details don't matter. Whether they shot a person with the intent to kill and missed, whether they shot him in the leg to stop him or the bullet ricocheted of the pavement is pretty much for academic discussion. The fact that the government sent in the army and paramilitary units to fight its own citizens is the crux of the issue. If Yanukovich deserved a revolution for Berkut beating up the protesters, these guys deserve to be forced to listen to Justin Bieber until they die or lose their mind, whichever comes first.

Kagemusha

05-15-2014, 17:56

You mean besides Ukraine?

Nope. Ukraine is the answer i am looking for. Ukrainians have to choose themselves what path to take. If the Maidan government will not start negotiating with the Eastern protesters and try to create unity within Ukraine, all they are going to achieve is Ukraine becoming a stage of proxy war between Russia and West. Most likely in the end Russia is going to win that proxy war as it is far more committed to Ukraine compared to West. I think we can be certain that if the current policies will continue, there will be a civil war in Ukraine. West is going to support the Maidan government and Russia the Eastern protesters. This will only mean suffering for the Ukrainians.

It is up to Ukrainians to find unity. If they cant achieve that, they will only remain tools of other powers on their own expense and their own suffering. Maidan government simply cant occupy Eastern Ukraine, because Russia with lot more resources is willing to support the anti government elements in the area and there is nothing that the Maidan government can do to stop it. West is ready to support Maidan government enough to keep the conflict going, but West is not going to commit itself seriously as war with Russia over Ukraine is out of the question. The current military approach of the Maidan government is only playing to the hand of Russians as more force they use, more divided Ukraine will become.

Viking

05-15-2014, 17:59

Details don't matter. Whether they shot a person with the intent to kill and missed, whether they shot him in the leg to stop him or the bullet ricocheted of the pavement is pretty much for academic discussion. The fact that the government sent in the army and paramilitary units to fight its own citizens is the crux of the issue. If Yanukovich deserved a revolution for Berkut beating up the protesters, these guys deserve to be forced to listen to Justin Bieber until they die or lose their mind, whichever comes first.

a) It's not clear who these people were.
b) It's pretty clear from the video that they were not there to shoot people; if so they would be doing a pretty bad job.
c) Whether or not people were shot with intent makes all the difference. It tends to do so generally..
d) If the police cannot deal with the situation, there are not that many options left other than the military. Regular police are neither trained nor equipped to fight an insurgency.

fight its own citizens

If these citizens are declaring their own republic at gunpoint, the fact that they are citizens of the country seems slightly less relevant, for some reason.

Brenus

05-15-2014, 18:20

“So other videos and links in this thread are an update, mine are pseudo-news” You should notice I rarely post youtube video. I did once to illustrate not an even, but the fact that someone pretended that Ukrainian Nazi were not.
If you want to know why, it is because my research in History Degree was about manipulation of images and building of self-conscience.

“Employing snipers is what the doctor ordered.” Still no news about the sniper by the way?

“The Maidan uprising was a purely domestic event compared to what's going on in the east. The situation Yanukovich faced was completely different.” Agree. It started well and the push from the Nazi and Ultra-nationalists (as Gilrandir kindly remind us of their existence) turn a social movement is an ethnic movement. Putin decide to move on a threat (perceived or real) by the Russian Minorities. Instead to go and talk to them, the provisional government took decisions it shouldn’t, playing in Putin’s hands. Ukraine was not helped by western Media opposing “pro-Western” movement and “Pro-Russian” as it was not possible to have both.
I don’t think Putin wants Ukraine, he want to neutralise it, to have a buffer zone. And he got it. Who want Ukraine and its decaying Nuclear Power stations, its debts and so on? Not EU, it looks. USA could have interested in implanting some Advanced Forward Posts, but even that is not sure.

Sarmatian

05-15-2014, 18:29

Nope. Ukraine is the answer i am looking for. Ukrainians have to choose themselves what path to take. If the Maidan government will not start negotiating with the Eastern protesters and try to create unity within Ukraine, all they are going to achieve is Ukraine becoming a stage of proxy war between Russia and West. Most likely in the end Russia is going to win that proxy war as it is far more committed to Ukraine compared to West. I think we can be certain that if the current policies will continue, there will be a civil war in Ukraine. West is going to support the Maidan government and Russia the Eastern protesters. This will only mean suffering for the Ukrainians.

It is up to Ukrainians to find unity. If they cant achieve that, they will only remain tools of other powers on their own expense and their own suffering. Maidan government simply cant occupy Eastern Ukraine, because Russia with lot more resources is willing to support the anti government elements in the area and there is nothing that the Maidan government can do to stop it. West is ready to support Maidan government enough to keep the conflict going, but West is not going to commit itself seriously as war with Russia over Ukraine is out of the question. The current military approach of the Maidan government is only playing to the hand of Russians as more force they use, more divided Ukraine will become.

Russia can not really win. The best result for Russia is not to lose. That is partly the reason why Russia is committed much more than the West. West doesn't have anything to lose here.

The best scenario for Russia is Ukraine that stays out of NATO.

The problem with the Ukraine is that neither side, even Kiev, wants united Ukraine. I mean truly united, where each opinion counts equally. Kiev wants Ukraine united under a single opinion. Not long ago pro-Russian forces wanted Ukraine united under a single opinion. Now they've scaled down and would be willing to accept two separate opinions. Not out of sense of democracy, but out if inability to force their opinion, at the moment. And not in a true sense of unity, where two (or more) opinions exist for the entire country. It's a situation of "you have your opinion on your side, we'll have ours on our side".

It might be best to neuter both sides. Impotent central government would mean there's less incentive to fight over it. No foreign policy might finally rid the corrupt politicians of excuses why there isn't enough economic growth. Both pro-Russian and pro-Western side would be forced to solve real problems instead of accusing each other of treason.

After 20 or 30 years, who knows what's gonna happen? Maybe Russia will disintegrate. Maybe EU will. Maybe Russia will join EU. Maybe Ukraine will become a healthy country with a healthy economy and won't be such a pushover.

The problem is, I don't see anyone in Kiev with cojones to pull it off.

For clarification, when I say Kiev, I mean the current government.

Kagemusha

05-15-2014, 18:45

Russia can not really win. The best result for Russia is not to lose. That is partly the reason why Russia is committed much more than the West. West doesn't have anything to lose here.

The best scenario for Russia is Ukraine that stays out of NATO.

The problem with the Ukraine is that neither side, even Kiev, wants united Ukraine. I mean truly united, where each opinion counts equally. Kiev wants Ukraine united under a single opinion. Not long ago pro-Russian forces wanted Ukraine united under a single opinion. Now they've scaled down and would be willing to accept two separate opinions. Not out of sense of democracy, but out if inability to force their opinion, at the moment. And not in a true sense of unity, where two (or more) opinions exist for the entire country. It's a situation of "you have your opinion on your side, we'll have ours on our side".

It might be best to neuter both sides. Impotent central government would mean there's less incentive to fight over it. No foreign policy might finally rid the corrupt politicians of excuses why there isn't enough economic growth. Both pro-Russian and pro-Western side would be forced to solve real problems instead of accusing each other of treason.

After 20 or 30 years, who knows what's gonna happen? Maybe Russia will disintegrate. Maybe EU will. Maybe Russia will join EU. Maybe Ukraine will become a healthy country with a healthy economy and won't be such a pushover.

The problem is, I don't see anyone in Kiev with cojones to pull it off.

For clarification, when I say Kiev, I mean the current government.

I agree about Russia. I think ever since Russia took Crimea, their main point of interest have been undermining the Maidan government and to ensure in any possible way that the current government will not stay in power for long. That is the "victory" they are looking for. Not occupying Ukraine completely like some others tend to believe. Well i guess future will show how these things will unravel, but i can only feel sorry for the common Ukrainians because of the state of affairs in their country.

Viking

05-15-2014, 20:03

More and more evidence that pro-Ukrainian militias are getting involved (https://twitter.com/ChristopherJM/status/467013438263529472).

Inside police HQ, Donbass Battalion fighters held police at gunpoint, then lectured them on duty to country, loyalty.

Now things have the potential to get really nasty in the east.

Viking

05-15-2014, 22:42

Interesting piece in NYT (http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/05/16/world/europe/ukraine-workers-take-to-streets-to-calm-Mariupol.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytimes&_r=0&referrer=) on Mariupol (and other cities):

MARIUPOL, Ukraine — In what could represent a decisive turning point in the Ukrainian conflict and a setback for Russia, thousands of steelworkers fanned out Thursday over the city of Mariupol, establishing control over the streets and routing the pro-Kremlin militants who seized control several weeks ago.

By late Thursday, miners and steelworkers had deployed in at least five cities, including the regional capital, Donetsk, though they had not yet become the dominant force there that they are in Mariupol, the region’s second largest city and the site just last week of bloody confrontations between Ukrainian troops and pro-Russian militants,.

The workers are employees of Rinat Akhmetov, Ukraine’s richest man and a recent convert to the side of Ukrainian unity, who on Wednesday issued a statement rejecting the separatist cause of the self-styled Donetsk People’s Republic but endorsing greater local autonomy. His decision to throw his weight fully behind the interim government in Kiev could inflict a body blow to the separatists, already reeling from Russian President Vladimir V. Putin’s withdrawal of full-throated support last week.

Things have BEEN nasty. People should post less propaganda videos in general, as I assure you all both sides will be pumping them out. :shrug:

And they can still get a lot worse. I've been watching a lot of original amateur footage on YouTube. Not always easy to confirm its authenticity (cannot immediately confirm that it was actually shot in Ukraine, for starters), but a lot of it seems quite reliable.

Gilrandir

05-16-2014, 07:09

The fact that the government sent in the army and paramilitary units to fight its own citizens is the crux of the issue.
What the government has to do is to separate the dissident citizens who must be talked to from terrorists who shouldn't (which I believe was done in Mariupol). How can you shake hands and sit down at the table with those who rip up bellies of unarmed and tied up peaceful enough people (like that local deputy who tried to pull down the DPR flag) or shoot a whole family just because they refused to let their car be searched or rape a woman who is guilty of taking cigarettes to Ukrainian military? In fact, they don't want to be talked to, they just aggressively push on their cause by any means.

Still no news about the sniper by the way?

Not that I heard of, though I must admit this has slipped out of my focus of attention. But I guess it is not hard for one with intelligence to figure out who is guilty if we know that snipers were working from behind Berkut lines and were given commands by someone who coordinated their activities with those of Berkut.

“[B]It started well and the push from the Nazi and Ultra-nationalists (as Gilrandir kindly remind us of their existence) turn a social movement is an ethnic movement.
It was and is never considered ethnic.
I have an idea: let's have a quest game. The first assignment: find a post by Brenus (perhaps even posts, you can never tell) where there is no mentioning of nazis. Racists and fascists count as well. Sorry, can't come up with a prize. Suggestions?
Edit: I got it: the prize is gonna be a copy of Brenus' history degree paper with the autograph of the author.

Brenus

05-16-2014, 17:54

Deal. Err, no deal. Why should I pay to send a copy when it is YOUR quest. So once again, you want others to pay for your actions.

All ready got two (2260, 2239). So, do I sent myself a memoir of my DEA?

Viking

05-16-2014, 21:07

Agree. It started well and the push from the Nazi and Ultra-nationalists (as Gilrandir kindly remind us of their existence) turn a social movement is an ethnic movement.

Looks like the nazis helped putting someone who is rumoured (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/04/who-governing-ukraine-olexander-turchynov)to be of Jewish heritage in the position of PM, Arseniy Yatsenyuk:

He has played down his Jewish-Ukrainian origins, possibly because of the prevalence of antisemitism in his party's western Ukraine heartland.

Also looks like the nazis in the Kremlin are onto it (http://forward.com/articles/196864/the-real-truth-about-those-anti-semitic-flyers-in/?p=all) already, and not just Yatsenyuk:

It all started with a Russian television “documentary” on former Ukrainian President Yulia Tymoshenko, aired on March 30. The film was a propaganda piece in the Soviet style – unrelenting character assassination with ominous, grating background music. Tymoshenko’s whole career, the narrator intoned, was one of embezzlement, criminality, back-stabbing of associates, and secretly ordering assaults and killings. Then, toward the end, the culminating “disclosure”: Tymoshenko was Jewish. “She completely hides her origin. But for many, it is no secret that the father of this woman with a hair-braid — Viktor Abramovich Kapitelman — has Jewish roots.”

The implication was that now, in light of that fact, her pattern of lies, theft and murder all made sense.

A few days earlier, the same documentary news program did a similar hatchet-job on Ukrainian Prime Minister Yatseniuk, and indulged in the rhetoric of the 1970s: Yatseniuk was not just a Jew, but a Zionist. “One must take into consideration his Jewish origin. He is a Jew on his mother’s side, and is one of the fifty most famous Zionists in Ukraine.” No wonder he was an enemy of Russia.

Brenus

05-16-2014, 23:08

Viking

05-16-2014, 23:45

Very convincing, especially after it was followed by "A mix of various types of Russians have entered Eastern Ukraine over the last month: specials forces, intelligence agents, and all kinds of political agitators and provocateurs.". Just the Title "the Real Truth" is a piece of information...

By the way "a Russian television" is a little bit vague, so linking it with the Kremlin is... a bit of stretch, a false news a la "Gilrandir".

"the nazis in the Kremlin": Hmmm... It looks like Gilrandir is not the only one who absolutely want the Russians as Nazi as well...

Trying to follow your lead on dubious use of words and evidence. In the end, it becomes a battle over semantics.

Not in the Kremlin, but there are a lot of weird characters (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/20/russia-journalist-stella-dubovitskaya-_n_5183432.html) in the Russian parliament (according to this (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/04/21/russian-politician-orders-aide-to-violently-rape-pregnant-journalist-on-live-tv/?tid=hp_mm), he is actually the deputy speaker):

According to RT, Zhirinovsky ordered his aides to "rape" the reporter, then told her that pregnant women shouldn't be working. He also reportedly used several homophobic slurs.

As for neo-nazis in Russia, I don't suppose that's any secret (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/video/neo-nazis-march-st-petersburg-165758282.html).

Brenus

05-17-2014, 09:49

No, it is not, nor the fact that antisemitism is rift in Eastern Europe in general. Pogroms came from there. It is a plague very difficult to eradicate.
In general, all Parliaments have weird characters, elected on programs like Hunters, Fishers and Traditions (hunters-gatherers) or Fascist/Nazi Ideologies, most of time elected because voters are fed-up with the usual bi-partism.
Last election in France was a massive abstention (around 70%) which gave the FN the impression of success, when in fact, they lost grounds in term of number of voices (thing that Gilrandir didn't realise in his attack on Le Pen coming-up in 2nd, but there...).

My point is not about Russians being nice and polite, my point is in my knowledge, the only openly Nazi in government are in the actual Ukrainian one. And even according Gilrandir figures, they don't need to be in, as they represent around 10 % of the voters.

Once again, I am French, so my Political up-raising is one and indivisible. A Republic and democratic Political Pact, based not on Religions, territories, ethnicity or languages, but on a political agreement on values (roughly Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité), this due to the French construction of National Identity, self-representation and History.

So, it makes me laugh when I am portrayed as a Putin's supporter.

Have to go shopping, will be back

Gilrandir

05-17-2014, 13:24

Deal. Err, no deal. Why should I pay to send a copy when it is YOUR quest. So once again, you want others to pay for your actions.

It is Brenus all over: putting his own thoughts into others' minds and blaming them for having such thoughts. Who said anything about Brenus wasting his hard-earned do-re-mi? Put an autograph on the front page, scan it and send it together with the rest of the paper via e-mail. Now let's play Brenus in response: "Why should I pay for the ink of the autograph and electricity my anti-nazi scanner will consume?" (To make the search for a nazi-free post even harder.)

Very convincing, especially after it was followed by "A mix of various types of Russians have entered Eastern Ukraine over the last month: specials forces, intelligence agents, and all kinds of political agitators and provocateurs.". Just the Title "the Real Truth" is a piece of information...

By the way "a Russian television" is a little bit vague, so linking it with the Kremlin is... a bit of stretch, a false news a la "Gilrandir".

"the nazis in the Kremlin": Hmmm... It looks like Gilrandir is not the only one who absolutely want the Russians as Nazi as well...
Quest assignment 2: Find a post by Brenus where "Gilrandir" is not mentioned (starting with the moment the latter began making a nuisance of himself in this thread).
And a comment: Whose false news is it? I never claimed Russians were nazis. I said that there were nazis among Russians (as well as among other nations - Hungarians, Austrians). And I said that Russian nazis have something to do with the events in Eastern Ukraine. You have studied manipulation techniques not for naught.

And even according Gilrandir figures, they don't need to be in, as they represent around 10 % of the voters.

I feel proud. It is not Central Electoral Board, but me, myself and I who is responsible for the results of the previous elections in Ukraine. Figures are mine, MINE, my precioussss.

Have to go shopping, will be back
The latter sounds as a threat.
Let's run over Brenus' shopping list:
1. Nazi scum detector.
2. Nazi filth evaporator.
3. A detergent to clean hands in case nazi entrails defile them in process of nazi evaporation.
A reminder: if I see any nazi-turtiums on the way, stamp them out.

Looks like the nazis helped putting someone who is rumoured (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/04/who-governing-ukraine-olexander-turchynov)to be of Jewish heritage in the position of PM, Arseniy Yatsenyuk:

Tymoshenko's maiden name is Grygian, so it is easier to suspect her of Armenian roots. But it is definitely not disgusting enough for the author of the article.

Beskar

05-17-2014, 14:12

This is a tense issue for some people, but please try to refrain from attacking each other personally.

Gilrandir

05-17-2014, 14:57

This is a tense issue for some people, but please try to refrain from attacking each other personally.
:bow:

Brenus

05-17-2014, 15:20

GenosseGeneral

05-18-2014, 00:01

Not in the Kremlin, but there are a lot of weird characters (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/20/russia-journalist-stella-dubovitskaya-_n_5183432.html) in the Russian parliament (according to this (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/04/21/russian-politician-orders-aide-to-violently-rape-pregnant-journalist-on-live-tv/?tid=hp_mm), he is actually the deputy speaker):

Zhirinowskiy is a clow; if you are up for a laugh, look for "Zhirinowskiy Bush" on Youtube. He also publicly sent a heavy armoured jeep to separatist militias in order to support them. They claim to have received the package.

However, the last days were not very good ones for the separatists. Akhmetov and his miners are now siding with the Ukrainian government, it seems as if they waited whether the referendum would lead to an invasion of Russian "peacekeepers" or not.
The separatist ultimatum to the government to withdraw its troops seems to have been an empty threat. Strelkov demanded just a couple of hours ago from the men of the Donbass to join the "Donbass Liberation Army". Seems like the support base is not broad enough for more than a guerrilla operation.
However, they still managed to free one of their leaders this morning when he was detained briefly at a borader checkpoint. They also continue to deploy heavy weaponry, including mortars, RPGs and heavier anti-tank rocket launchers, anti-material rifles, grenade launchers and some BMDs (presumably those taken from Ukrainian government forces about 2 weeks ago).
According to Strelkov's adress, they bought all that stuff from "black markets" or stole it from Ukrainian depots. I have my doubts…

Brenus

05-18-2014, 08:51

Gilrandir

05-18-2014, 09:18

Personal attacks are just smoke screen when there is no more else to answer.
I don't mind that much. It is a little bit hurting when someone question my Scholarship and degree, and it is not the first time that it happened. Our Kurdish Friend did the same.
The rest of his intervention is of a school play-ground level and need the same level of attention.

Thanks anyway.
Almost from the very first post here I've experienced those personal attacks. What you call personal attacks on my side never happen out of the blue: they are a response to the venom I feel aimed at me. Again you play the same game: inventing the ideas and ascribing them to me. I don't question any degree. The only comment on it I made is that you seem to find a good practical application of the manipulation tactics you have studied. Do you deny it? You use the same vocabulary (agenda, intervention, even Gilrandir, Gilrandir's figures) you condemned so vehemently in the articles you branded as biased.
You are not tired of reiterating one and the same idea (how you hate Ukrainian nazis) contributing nothing of moment to the discussion, but when I draw everybody's attention to it you call it "a school play-ground level" (a very neutral vocabulary, by the way).
Unlike you, I readily admit my mistakes and don't feel bad about apologizing. I deem it to be the spirit of a civilized disussion and I see plenty of examples of it here. You never acknowledge your slips, and if I detect them (claiming that Svoboda has a third of seats in Verkhovna Rada) you pass them over in silence. The same was with the le Pen situation: you tried to explain what happened in 2007 by low turnover, general passivity of voters, great amount of candidates and so on. I don't challenge the explanation. But as Sarmatian (who you seem to agree with on most occasions) claims, the fact is that 65 million French citizens voted a nazi into the second round of presidential election. Period. According to him, the turnover, the number of votes that each candidate received, the margin between them don't matter. Go ahead and argue with him.
:bow:
@ Tiaexz: I don't mind abiding by the laws of the forum, but I would dearly like to see the same attitude from others. I've seen here much worst things than the ones I'm charged with (like admissions of one making another sick) which were not condemned.

Gilrandir

05-18-2014, 09:28

“Akhmetov and his miners are now siding with the Ukrainian government” Not what I heard this morning on BBC: apparently they succeeded to intervene between Police and Separatists in order to avoid confrontation, to make them talk to each other.

To avoid confrontation it is, not to make them talk to each other. To start talking one has to find those who represent the sentiment of the majority of people of Donetsk and Lugansk regions. Kyiv is not going to talk either to terrorists in Slovyansk or members of DPR as they don't. The Party of Regions enjoys that no more. Perhaps the solution could be the oligarchs who have the employees of their enterprises at their command, the mayors of cities and towns of the regions and other respected and trusted citizens (university rectors, journalists, public figures).

Brenus

05-18-2014, 11:19

“Do you deny it?” Do I deny using speech tactic? No. It is part of debates.

“You use the same vocabulary (agenda, intervention, even Gilrandir, Gilrandir's figures”: Yes I do. In my opinion, you have all this. The figures are given by you, so I don’t see your point of contend here. As you are my opponent in this debate, I of course considered to your points and of course I will use them in my way.
I never attack you as a person, putting your intellectual or others capacities in doubts, never mocked you.
I disagree with you on your political view (and even not all of them) and what I considered as a bias, which I can understand as it is your country we spoke about, but this point doesn’t mean I have to accept it.

“I draw everybody's attention to it you call it "a school play-ground level"” That is because it is a major Political fact. You could have done it in a better way, e.g. “Brenus’ obsession of Ukrainian Nazi stop him to see (understand/ grasp/perceive) blab bla bla”.
But it is not up to me to give you tricks in debating.

“the fact is that 65 million French citizens voted a nazi into the second round of presidential election”: Right. I will explain you the twist I used: You are right on one point (except it not 65 millions of French voters, that would be the entire French Population, so Le Pen would have been elected with 100 % of the vote and it was the 1st round, so he got access to the 2nd round, where he was crushed, defeat confirmed in the next elections for Parliament: This is this kind of mistakes you have to avoid because whoever is your opponent will rush on them).
So I turned it against you (intellectual judo): A lot of French did vote for the FN, but at the Parliamentary elections they had no seats. So using the figures you gave (your Nazi having only 10 % of the vote –which, incidentally acknowledges my mistake) so less than in France, I turned it in question why do you have a need on them in your executive.

Sarmatian

05-18-2014, 13:15

But as Sarmatian (who you seem to agree with on most occasions) claims, the fact is that 65 million French citizens voted a nazi into the second round of presidential election. Period. According to him, the turnover, the number of votes that each candidate received, the margin between them don't matter. Go ahead and argue with him.

If you're being rude, at least don't twist my words. I've never said margins don't matter, I've said that 50% + 1 vote is enough to form a government in a democratic political system.

I understand this is a sensitive topic for you, but that doesn't mean that you shouldn't approach the discussion in a civilised manner. Attack the arguments, not the person.

Sir Moody

05-19-2014, 11:54

A lot of French did vote for the FN, but at the Parliamentary elections they had no seats. So using the figures you gave (your Nazi having only 10 % of the vote –which, incidentally acknowledges my mistake) so less than in France, I turned it in question why do you have a need on them in your executive.

Because excluding them may cause more violence - and the Ukrainian authorities are already stretched thin...

While included they have nothing to gain from violence and everything to lose (since they now have a veneer of legitimacy).

If they were excluded then they may go back to storming Government buildings and make the situation even worse...

Brenus

05-19-2014, 18:40

“Because excluding them may cause more violence - and the Ukrainian authorities are already stretched thin...
While included they have nothing to gain from violence and everything to lose (since they now have a veneer of legitimacy).
If they were excluded then they may go back to storming Government buildings and make the situation even worse...”
Interesting point of view. Does it make the fear of the Russian Minorities more substantial?

Myth

05-20-2014, 08:05

From a chat conversation with a girl from Ukraine. I know her from way back.

Me: Are you affected by the civil war?

Her: Yes... Lust week next to me around 200 m someone was shooting ...

Her: In town next to mine is real war, people die everyday... Government allowed this... They killing women and children and tells all world that is terrorists

Gilrandir

05-21-2014, 17:13

“You use the same vocabulary (agenda, intervention, even Gilrandir, Gilrandir's figures”: Yes I do. In my opinion, you have all this. The figures are given by you, so I don’t see your point of contend here. As you are my opponent in this debate, I of course considered to your points and of course I will use them in my way.
I never attack you as a person, putting your intellectual or others capacities in doubts, never mocked you.

Ok, you forced me to confess: I also have a degree, it is PhD in linguistics. Unlike you, I have never flaunted it (until now to prove my point). I have been teaching the stylistics of English for quite a while, I have been a research advisor of quite a number of students' papers so I know mocking for what it is. In stylistics it is called irony, an expressive means which under a word with positive (or neutral) connotation - "friend" - a negative attitude is concealed. I don't want to lecture you on other stylistic devices you use, but I must congratulate you on the subtle and workmanlike way you do this.
On a second thought: I think I haven't proved anything since you don't believe me anyway so you wouldn't believe I have a degree either.

“the fact is that 65 million French citizens voted a nazi into the second round of presidential election”: Right. I will explain you the twist I used: You are right on one point (except it not 65 millions of French voters, that would be the entire French Population, so Le Pen would have been elected with 100 % of the vote and it was the 1st round, so he got access to the 2nd round, where he was crushed, defeat confirmed in the next elections for Parliament: This is this kind of mistakes you have to avoid because whoever is your opponent will rush on them).

I am aware that the number of voters is less then the whole populace of France. It was not a mistake but a deliberate resorting to Sarmatian's arguments. Look at the posts below. Now the whole population of Ukraine is about 45 million. I don't believe that such an astute person as Sarmatian seems to be can fail to know it. So he deliberately used the enlarged figures to give more weight to his stance.

If you're being rude, at least don't twist my words. I've never said margins don't matter, I've said that 50% + 1 vote is enough to form a government in a democratic political system.

Just compare.

Even if the margin was one single vote, he was still democratically elected by 50 million Ukrainians. That doesn't mean that 50 million of Ukrainians voted for him, it means they were all allowed to cast their vote and after all those that wished to, did, he was the one they elected. Democracy 101.

Gilrandir

05-21-2014, 17:23

Sir Moody

05-21-2014, 17:25

Interesting point of view. Does it make the fear of the Russian Minorities more substantial?

possible - however this "fear" is largely manufactured - there have been no reports of Russian Minorities being harassed in Western Ukraine and for all there bluster the Neo-Nazis seem quite complacent...

In truth the current turn of events would have happened even if the Neo-Nazis were excluded from the process of selecting a new President - the East supported the ousted President and the Neo-Nazis are merely a convenient excuse to "protest" - had they been excluded another excuse would have been found.

Gilrandir

05-21-2014, 17:51

Strelkov addressed the people of Donbas.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIHdrSm6jrU
In his speech he sounded exasperated and rather distraught. He upbraids the locals for not being ready to stand by him and "protect their region". He says that he was promised and hoped for a much greater support. He is dissatisfied with the fact that the weapons that were freely distributed after capturing police stations eventually found their way into the hands of criminals. If men of Donbas are not ready to fight he promises to arm women.
Generally, I believe the table has turned. First of all, there is a rift between the most prominent groups of separatists: the Horlivka one and the Slovyansk one. Ponomarev is openly dissatisfied with DPR and promised to go to Donetsk and "deal with DPR".
Other minor groups had never seen eye to eye with each other even a month ago and now they are preoccupied with the division of power (and loot).
Secondly (and more importantly), Akhmetov openly declared his support for the integrity of Ukraine and called the inhabitants of Donbas to get rid of DPR. In response DPR announced nationalisation of Akhmetov's property in Donbas. It was the worst and (I think) fatal mistake of DPR. The so-called minister of fuel and energetics of DPR resigned disagreeing with the decision.There can be different explanations on the reasons of Akhmetov's behavior, but his declaration seemed to enhearten the pro-Ukrainian part of Donbas who didn't like what was going on but were mostly afraid to protest. Not all of them were, though.
http://www.pravda.com.ua/rus/news/2014/05/20/7025844/?attempt=1
In the video two women in Kramatorsk make a van with armed separatists leave the neighborhood.

Husar

05-21-2014, 18:12

Why do I always have to think of Strelok when I read Strelkov? :creep:

Brenus

05-21-2014, 18:23

“I don't know who is the person you mention but I guess he is one of the forumers whose "name" you are sure to know.”:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4: Err, the fact is his name (forum one) is KurdishSpartakus helps.:laugh4::laugh4:

I know you will hate it but did Tourtchinov asked the ban of the Communist Part under the pretext that a lot of Communists are engaged with the Separatists (according to him)? This comes after he proposed to forbid the Communist Representative Piotr Symonenko to talk to the Ukrainian Parliament.
Hmm, where are the people comparing Putin to Hitler? This reminds a lot of the Reichstag Crisis and the ban on the German Communist Party and A. Hitler coup d’état. Note: Tourtchinov declared the Communist Party acted “frankly unconstitutional”.
Is it the same constitution that allowed an Elected President to be ousted by force and storming official buildings (i.e. Parliament), or it is a New Constitution I didn’t heard about?
And this comes for someone who has no democratic mandate…

“First of all, there is a rift between the most prominent groups of separatists: the Horlivka one and the Slovyansk one. Ponomarev is openly dissatisfied with DPR and promised to go to Donetsk and "deal with DPR".
Otter minor groups had never seen eye to eye with each other even a month ago and now they are preoccupied with the division of power (and loot).”
How is it possible? Putin (the guy who organised everything) allows it? No more land grabbing, no more Russian tanks heating up, ready to cross the borders?

“the East supported the ousted President and the Neo-Nazis are merely a convenient excuse to "protest" - had they been excluded another excuse would have been found.” Why would they need a new excuse? The President they elected was evicted by force by a mob; they didn’t need a Nazi excuse. They could have disputed the legitimacy of the new Executive, and started the protest.
So, perhaps the Nazi fear was exploited, but it was there to be exploited.

"Unlike you, I have never flaunted it" "You hate nazis so much but you sport (read support, I suppose) the same attitude": There you go again...:no:

Sarmatian

05-21-2014, 18:52

Just compare.

1) 50 million is a ball park number. I didn't believe I had to cite exact census number, but ok. I was wrong. Population of Ukraine is 44,573,205. So, Yanukovich was democratically elected by 44,573,205 Ukrainians. It is a figure of speech. It means that all Ukrainians eligible to vote, had their chance to cast their votes in support of the candidate of their choosing. Majority of those who did choose to vote chose Yanukovich. Which part you don't understand?

2) Margins matter but not in the sense you're trying to twist them. A candidate with 50% +1 vote is democratically elected just as a candidate with 80% vote is.

3) Forcibly removing a democratically elected politician(s) is a coup or a putsch or a revolution. It doesn't matter if he was voted in with 50%+1 votes or 80% vote.

What are margins telling us is that Ukraine is a deeply divided country internally and under immense pressure externally, and that special care and attention should be taken not to have the entire country fall apart. Special care does not include forceful removal of elected politicians. Had you waited 6 months or so, you wouldn't have been in this mess.

Instead of trying to place the blame on external factors, which played a role definitely, you (as in Ukrainians) should look closer first. You are guilty of putting yourself in a situation where they could get involved in a way they did. Your revolutionary leaders took a gamble and lost. Now the entire country is paying the price. Not only that, but they are, in an ultimate example of Soviet style leadership, refusing to face the consequences of their actions and are trying to obfuscate the situation to avoid having to, ignoring the fact that the country is inching closer to the abyss while they don't have the cojones to change the direction.

Gilrandir

05-22-2014, 07:23

“First of all, there is a rift between the most prominent groups of separatists: the Horlivka one and the Slovyansk one. Ponomarev is openly dissatisfied with DPR and promised to go to Donetsk and "deal with DPR".
Otter minor groups had never seen eye to eye with each other even a month ago and now they are preoccupied with the division of power (and loot).”
How is it possible? Putin (the guy who organised everything) allows it? No more land grabbing, no more Russian tanks heating up, ready to cross the borders?

Putin was instrumental in fomenting things. As well as Akhmetov was responsible for acquiesing. But the situation has changed, as I have remarked. Or rather it got out of hand of Putin, Akhmetov or anyone else (including Strelkov, Ponomarev, Gubarev and Pushilin). No one is having it going the way they wanted it to. Putin didn't get the fire spreading all over the south east so he can't upset the elections on a major scale (unless he invades which, according to most estimations, is not an impossible option for him). Thus he has to revise his tactics and his lukewarm assessment of the "referendum" results shows it. He doesn't need Donbas alone, needy and much donated. But he is biding his time, we will hear from him again, I'm sure. Akhmetov has changed his position as well. I can only speculate on the reasons:
1) he was promised something by the current government (like not to interfere into his domain after the elections);
2) he felt his interests and his business threatened by DPR;
3) he fell out with DPR leaders;
4) all or some of the above taken together.
And finally, the separatists themselves: they don't know what to do with the "independence" they declared without any support from the Kremlin, they can't prevent marauding and havoc they caused in the region, they can't control criminals they armed.
All of this is at work now, no one knows how it will change even in a day or two.

"Unlike you, I have never flaunted it" "You hate nazis so much but you sport (read support, I suppose) the same attitude": There you go again...:no:
There you go again: supposing what wasn't written and meant.

Why do I always have to think of Strelok when I read Strelkov? :creep:
Strelok is his call signal, an alias that was used in intercepted communications so people supposed his real name to be Strelkov. But his real real name is Girkin, he was one of Aksyonov's aides and was supposed to report to him in the said intercepted call on the results of his actions. Before 2014 he was in and out of the Crimea and South-eastern Ukraine and in January 2014 he accompanied the gifts of the magi brought to the Crimea from Greece. This, I believe, points to the involvement of Patriarch Kiril into the situation. More on Aksyonov in
http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-126149144.html

1) 50 million is a ball park number. I didn't believe I had to cite exact census number, but ok. I was wrong. Population of Ukraine is 44,573,205. So, Yanukovich was democratically elected by 44,573,205 Ukrainians. It is a figure of speech. It means that all Ukrainians eligible to vote, had their chance to cast their votes in support of the candidate of their choosing. Majority of those who did choose to vote chose Yanukovich. Which part you don't understand?

I understand every word of it and agree with everything (except that the number of voters is less than the total population). But you should try to make Brenus see it, not me, I got all the figures of speech right.

2) Margins matter but not in the sense you're trying to twist them. A candidate with 50% +1 vote is democratically elected just as a candidate with 80% vote is.

Now you claim that margins do matter. The results of 2010 elections (second round): Yanukovych 48.95%, Tymoshenko 45.47%, support neither candidate 4.36%. Now where is 50%+1 vote you are talking about?

Brenus

05-22-2014, 22:18

Thread is dead. Bye, have fun

Sarmatian

05-22-2014, 22:43

Now you claim that margins do matter. The results of 2010 elections (second round): Yanukovych 48.95%, Tymoshenko 45.47%, support neither candidate 4.36%. Now where is 50%+1 vote you are talking about?

There are two possibilities at this point - either you really don't understand or you are playing dumb. I'm not sure which I prefer.

I echo Brenus' sentiment. Nothing interesting here anymore. Maybe I'll return if something triggers a meaningful discussion once again. Until then, bye bye.

Strike For The South

05-23-2014, 01:36

Prince Charles <3

Husar

05-23-2014, 02:20

Strelok is his call signal, an alias that was used in intercepted communications so people supposed his real name to be Strelkov. But his real real name is Girkin, he was one of Aksyonov's aides and was supposed to report to him in the said intercepted call on the results of his actions. Before 2014 he was in and out of the Crimea and South-eastern Ukraine and in January 2014 he accompanied the gifts of the magi brought to the Crimea from Greece. This, I believe, points to the involvement of Patriarch Kiril into the situation. More on Aksyonov in
http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-126149144.html

I don't think that was it... (http://stalker.wikia.com/wiki/Strelok)

Viking

05-23-2014, 12:22

Some interesting new footage has emerged that is supposed to be from the Donetsk region. A bunch of very professionally-looking soldiers (those with helmets) among the separatists:

https://i.imgur.com/9lKZFhc.png

They are from this video (http://youtu.be/9PMsIVjNXpI?t=28s). Be aware that there is some graphic stuff with a slaughtered neo-nazi in the first 17 seconds of the video.

Husar

05-23-2014, 12:41

Viking

05-23-2014, 16:22

And where does it say it's not faked like the video with the "russian officer" who turned out to be a ukrainian mafia guy?

On Wednesday the local radio interviewed a reporter who is currently in Ukraine for about an hour. He said he doesn't trust anything he didn't see himself anymore because this is an unprecedented information war in which both Russia and Ukraine are making stuff up left and right. Used to be that reporting was based largely on eyewitnesses and other interviews, but in this conflict you can apparently not trust anyone on either side.

In theory, you cannot trust anything anywhere in the world that you haven't seen yourself. You can't even trust what you see, because you can't know if it's been staged or manipulated.

There's a big difference between

a) a video that was staged; complete with actors and/or CGI
b) a video that is accompanied with an incorrect narrative

It's the first category that is truly dangerous because it is complete fiction; but it is not likely to be a common one since it takes a lot of effort, skill and resources in order to pull off something like that convincingly for most types of videos. The second category is not so dangerous because it can be avoided by making your own careful, rigorous interpretations rather than assuming that the one you are presented with is the correct one.

The video you refer to seems belong firmly in category b; and I never assumed that its narrative was correct. The more special the claim, the better the evidence needs to be to back it up. As long as necessary evidence is missing, don't jump to conclusions - it's not harder than that.

I do a lot of crosschecking; and indeed, since I posted the video, I have been able to more or less verify its authenticity indirectly.

Al Jazeera (http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/05/putin-says-ukraine-full-scale-civil-war-2014523105526315334.html):

Putin's remarks came on a day at least eight people were killed in fighting in the village of Karlivka, near Ukraine's eastern hub of Donetsk, Al Jazeera's John Wendle reported from the scene.

Four of the dead appeared to be members of the self-styled Vostok Battalion while one man with a swastika tattoo seemed to have fought for the Donbas Battalion.

BBC (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27542057) photo:

https://i.imgur.com/QO322qj.jpg

Husar

05-23-2014, 19:23

I was saying your video may be in category a. As for the quote, what exactly does it verify about the video?

And the word "unprecedented" wasn't there by accident.

Viking

05-23-2014, 19:47

I was saying your video may be in category a. As for the quote, what exactly does it verify about the video?

And the word "unprecedented" wasn't there by accident.

Then show us the evidence you got for staged high-quality videos.

As for the quote, what exactly does it verify about the video?

A guy with a swastika was killed in the same village that the video was shot in, on the same day the video was uploaded and the location shown in the video is confirmed by the BBC as relevant for the incident.

Husar

05-23-2014, 21:07

Then show us the evidence you got for staged high-quality videos.

What are you talking about?

A guy with a swastika was killed in the same village that the video was shot in, on the same day the video was uploaded and the location shown in the video is confirmed by the BBC as relevant for the incident.

Okay.
And this proves that the Indian government sent hindu killer squads or just that all pro-russians are russian soldier nazis who want to help Putin bring back the USSR?
What exactly is the point od showing us these "A bunch of very professionally-looking soldiers (those with helmets) among the separatists"? There were even Ukrainian soldiers who switched sides. Why did you say it is interesting? I found the video rather boring, but didn't watch the part you warned us of.

Viking

05-23-2014, 21:32

What are you talking about?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You said the video could be staged.

What exactly is the point od showing us these "A bunch of very professionally-looking soldiers (those with helmets) among the separatists"? There were even Ukrainian soldiers who switched sides. Why did you say it is interesting? I found the video rather boring, but didn't watch the part you warned us of.

I don't recall seeing professionally-looking soldiers among the separatists before; at least not in great numbers.

Husar

05-23-2014, 22:05

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You said the video could be staged.

I wouldn't say could if I had evidence, what's not to understand?
And it's not an extraordinary claim given that I earlier cited a newspaper report that mentioned at least one staged video plus a radio reporter who said there are a lot of fake messages and claims coming from both sides of the conflict.

I don't recall seeing professionally-looking soldiers among the separatists before; at least not in great numbers.

There are three people with helmets in your video, does that make great numbers?

Viking

05-23-2014, 23:30

I wouldn't say could if I had evidence, what's not to understand?

The invasion of Iraq could have been staged and Saddam Hussein is still in control of the country. Were you there to witness any of it?

And don't ask me for evidence supporting that it's staged; I'm just suggesting that it could be staged.

And it's not an extraordinary claim given that I earlier cited a newspaper report that mentioned at least one staged video plus a radio reporter who said there are a lot of fake messages and claims coming from both sides of the conflict.

That's some... seriously convincing stuff you got there. If you can link that in a convincing and relevant way to the video I posted, I'll make sure you'll get the next Nobel Peace Prize.

Was Igor Besler's video staged? That would need some evidence. According to RT (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWUheQ6k_YU), he was merely an imposter; not taking part in a conspiracy to create a fake video.

There are three people with helmets in your video, does that make great numbers?

The guys with helmets and/or black vests. They stand out. The BBC pic changes my assessments a bit; but they still seem more well-equipped than many separatists seen thus far. Those individuals look less ragtag.

Husar

05-24-2014, 09:39

The invasion of Iraq could have been staged and Saddam Hussein is still in control of the country. Were you there to witness any of it?

And don't ask me for evidence supporting that it's staged; I'm just suggesting that it could be staged.

That's some... seriously convincing stuff you got there. If you can link that in a convincing and relevant way to the video I posted, I'll make sure you'll get the next Nobel Peace Prize.

Was Igor Besler's video staged? That would need some evidence. According to RT (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWUheQ6k_YU), he was merely an imposter; not taking part in a conspiracy to create a fake video.

How about you provide some evidence that whatever you're claiming is the case? Of course that would require to stop twisting my words to come up with strawmen arguments that only distract from what you originally tried to say. Unless you're just claiming that guys with helmets are sitting on grass looking good.
Al Jazeera seems to have more on your incident: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/05/ukraine-checkpoint-ambush-leaves-eight-dead-201452314296448516.html

"What is this? This checkpoint was peaceful. They didn't bother us. Why did they attack it?" said a villager looking at the aftermath. "This is madness. There can be no peace here. I will join the Vostok Battalion now."

Quite obviously the Donbass guys are disturbing the peace in Eastern Ukraine, is that what you're saying?

The guys with helmets and/or black vests. They stand out. The BBC pic changes my assessments a bit; but they still seem more well-equipped than many separatists seen thus far. Those individuals look less ragtag.

We've had those well-equipped militias from Russia before, they were there because their local brothers invited them. If America (http://archive.adl.org/images/special_reports/rage-grows-in-america/christian-liberty-guard.jpg) can have organized militias, why can't Russia or Ukraine have them? There are enough oligarchs to fund them. All I see are racist stereotypes that say people in Russia and Ukraine have to look dirty or they are Kremlin-controlled.

Viking

05-24-2014, 10:16

How about you provide some evidence that whatever you're claiming is the case? Of course that would require to stop twisting my words to come up with strawmen arguments that only distract from what you originally tried to say. Unless you're just claiming that guys with helmets are sitting on grass looking good.
Al Jazeera seems to have more on your incident: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/05/ukraine-checkpoint-ambush-leaves-eight-dead-201452314296448516.html

Quite obviously the Donbass guys are disturbing the peace in Eastern Ukraine, is that what you're saying?

I made an observation more than I made any claim. I said that the footage was interesting, and that's what I meant.

We've had those well-equipped militias from Russia before, they were there because their local brothers invited them. If America (http://archive.adl.org/images/special_reports/rage-grows-in-america/christian-liberty-guard.jpg) can have organized militias, why can't Russia or Ukraine have them? There are enough oligarchs to fund them. All I see are racist stereotypes that say people in Russia and Ukraine have to look dirty or they are Kremlin-controlled.

It looks like that there has been a development in the separatists' equipment.

-----

Another observation:

A journalist and a photographer claim that there are Ossetians fighting for the separatists:

Julia Ioffe (https://twitter.com/juliaioffe/status/469760185674633216)

There are guys from Ossetia here in the Vostok batallion.

Max Avdeev (https://twitter.com/avdeev/status/469789777089560576):

За батальон ополчения Восток в Донецке воюют в том числе опытные осетины, они привезли гуманитарную помощь и их попросили остаться помощь.

bing translation: The militia battalion of the East in fighting including experienced Ossetians, they brought humanitarian aid and they were asked to stay.

Gilrandir

05-24-2014, 13:42

One more comparison to expose Sarmatian's consistency and politeness:

If you're being rude, at least don't twist my words. Attack the arguments, not the person.

There are two possibilities at this point - either you really don't understand or you are playing dumb. I'm not sure which I prefer.

@ Tiaexz: ??????

Sarmatian

05-24-2014, 14:49

Tiaexz

There you go. There's no need, though. Tiaexz reads the thread, nothing escapes his watchful gaze.

Gilrandir

05-26-2014, 06:45

They are from this video (http://youtu.be/9PMsIVjNXpI?t=28s). Be aware that there is some graphic stuff with a slaughtered neo-nazi in the first 17 seconds of the video.
Some people in the video speak Russian with a pronounced Caucasian accent: they are either Chechens or Ossetians.

Viking

05-26-2014, 09:27

Some people in the video speak Russian with a pronounced Caucasian accent: they are either Chechens or Ossetians.

CNN more or less confirms (http://edition.cnn.com/2014/05/25/world/europe/ukraine-crisis/index.html?hpt=hp_t1) that there are Chechens among the separatist militants:

On the back of some of the trucks were armed men who appeared to be Chechen. Two told a CNN team they were from the Chechen capital, Grozny, and one indicated that he was formerly a policemen in Chechnya and was in Donetsk to serve the Russian Federation.

The men, who as Chechens are Russian citizens, said they were there as "volunteers." But if their accounts were true, their presence in Donetsk would appear to indicate some kind of acquiescence by the Russian government at the least.

Gilrandir

05-26-2014, 16:55

CNN more or less confirms (http://edition.cnn.com/2014/05/25/world/europe/ukraine-crisis/index.html?hpt=hp_t1) that there are Chechens among the separatist militants:
I saw a video in which Ponomarev speaks to the people of Slovyansk assembled on a square or on a street. He is exasperated and dissatisfied with the locals and says that his "friends" who came from Russia, Belarus, Moldova and the Caucasus are more ready to fight Ukrainian army than they. To me, the presence of mercenaries from Russia (especially the Caucasus) and Crimea in Donbas is a proven fact.

Pannonian

05-26-2014, 17:53

I saw a video in which Ponomarev speaks to the people of Slovyansk assembled on a square or on a street. He is exasperated and dissatisfied with the locals and says that his "friends" who came from Russia, Belarus, Moldova and the Caucasus are more ready to fight Ukrainian army than they. To me, the presence of mercenaries from Russia (especially the Caucasus) and Crimea in Donbas is a proven fact.

Does this mean that you don't think of Crimea as Ukrainian any more?

Gilrandir

05-28-2014, 05:20

Does this mean that you don't think of Crimea as Ukrainian any more?
You should read more carefully: I wrote Russia AND Crimea, so it means that Crimea is different from Russia. In fact it is held by Russia, so physically it is Russia. But not so legally, legitimately and so on.
Mercenaries are trained (and also hired) there and then transported to Donbas. Plus Ukrainian border guards reported attempted breakthroughs from Russia: several Kamaz trucks, vans and cars carrying men and arms tried to cross the border with Lugansk region. Ukrainian foreign ministry officially protested to Russia. Very often the breakthroughs are supported by shooting from across the border. Sometimes the border guards repulse them, sometimes they manage to eventually breakthrough. Until the military closes ratholes in the border terrorists will be getting support from Russia AND Crimea.

Gilrandir

05-28-2014, 05:34

I heard that in France nazis obtained 25% votes at the Europarliament elections in fact winning them. Now will Brenus try to justify that by turnout, excess of candidates or anything else? Let's face the stark truth: the germ of nazism has taken root in rich and peaceful French soil and gives fruit now and then (2007, 2014, ...?).
And speaking of elections in Ukraine: they (both presidential and local) proved the fact I tried to get people pay attention to - South-eastern Ukraine is no more. I mean as an area of predominately Russian-speaking populace having a similar Russia-oriented sentiment and mindset, being at odds with the rest of the country and ready to sail away Russiawards if anything extraordinary happens. Well, perhaps, I should put it differently (since the mindset is not changed in a month or two): such South-eastern Ukraine never was. Like I have said: there are regional differences and peculiarities in Ukraine (as in many other countries), but there is no sense to speak of a "deeply divided nation", as some here do. The events show, that the "monolith" Southeast in fact is a collection of communities which differ from each other in many things and (significantly) in loyalty to Ukraine. There are regions with strong loyalty (Dnipropetrovsk, Zaporizhya, Kherson and Mykolayiv), moderate loyalty (Odesa and Kharkiv) and divided loyalty (Donetsk and Lugansk). Once again my conlusion is corroborated: Russian-speaking doesn't mean anxious to join Russia.

Brenus

05-28-2014, 06:39

"the germ of nazism has taken root in rich and peaceful French soil and gives fruit now and then (2007, 2014, ...?)." Yeah, but you are the country with openly Nazi in your executive. :yes:

Pannonian

05-28-2014, 10:23

You should read more carefully: I wrote Russia AND Crimea, so it means that Crimea is different from Russia. In fact it is held by Russia, so physically it is Russia. But not so legally, legitimately and so on.
Mercenaries are trained (and also hired) there and then transported to Donbas. Plus Ukrainian border guards reported attempted breakthroughs from Russia: several Kamaz trucks, vans and cars carrying men and arms tried to cross the border with Lugansk region. Ukrainian foreign ministry officially protested to Russia. Very often the breakthroughs are supported by shooting from across the border. Sometimes the border guards repulse them, sometimes they manage to eventually breakthrough. Until the military closes ratholes in the border terrorists will be getting support from Russia AND Crimea.

Surely any Crimeans protesting in Donbas are merely Ukrainians legitimately making their opinion known about the Ukrainian government, just as you lot did at Maidan. Or were all the Maidanistas native Kievans, who weren't shipped in from other parts of Ukraine, unlike these Crimeans at Donbas?

Gilrandir

05-28-2014, 14:45

"the germ of nazism has taken root in rich and peaceful French soil and gives fruit now and then (2007, 2014, ...?)." Yeah, but you are the country with openly Nazi in your executive. :yes:
As much as Hungary and Austria. But this is something finally. I'm satisfied with the "yeah". It is the first open admission of the fact that "something is rotten in the state of Denmark".

Surely any Crimeans protesting in Donbas are merely Ukrainians legitimately making their opinion known about the Ukrainian government, just as you lot did at Maidan. Or were all the Maidanistas native Kievans, who weren't shipped in from other parts of Ukraine, unlike these Crimeans at Donbas?
Protesting is the right word for what they are doing in Donbas. Most of the Crimeans are the local Berkut, Alfa and other spetznaz detachments. So they just go on with what they started at Maidan.

Viking

05-28-2014, 17:33

From interviewed (https://news.vice.com/article/fighting-in-ukraine-escalates-as-militia-groups-flock-to-donetsk)Chechen militants:

"Our president [Ramzan Kadyrov] gave the order. They called us and we came,” 33-year-old Zelimhan tells VICE News. The bearded fighter, a member of a unit known as the “Wild Division,” says he arrived a week ago with 34 Chechen men who volunteered to come and support their “brothers” in the People’s Republic of Donetsk.

The journey from their native Chechnya via Rostov to Donetsk was equally straightforward, Sayid, one of the Wild Division’s fighters told VICE News. The Chechen unit tells VICE News they are fighting alongside 16 “brothers” from Ossetia, who have been on site for around two months.

If the Ossetians actually have been there for 2 months, they could have played an important role in the early stages of the insurgency.

Starting to see a certain narrative building..

Brenus

05-28-2014, 17:54

"It is the first open admission of the fact that "something is rotten in the state of Denmark"." You obviously don't read all what I wrote. And 25 % of 45 % of the voter is.... 10 % of the total, which is roughly what the extreme Right historically does in France... And this is historical fact.

Viking

05-30-2014, 14:06

Surely any Crimeans protesting in Donbas are merely Ukrainians legitimately making their opinion known about the Ukrainian government, just as you lot did at Maidan. Or were all the Maidanistas native Kievans, who weren't shipped in from other parts of Ukraine, unlike these Crimeans at Donbas?

I don't see why it should matter that not everyone at Maidan was from Kyiv. They weren't trying to get rid of the city council of Kyiv, but the country's government. Anyone from outside Donbass fighting for separatism there are claiming to fight on the behalf of people other than themselves; namely the local population.

Gilrandir

05-30-2014, 14:22

If the Ossetians actually have been there for 2 months, they could have played an important role in the early stages of the insurgency.

I saw an interview of a Donetsk journalist who is well aware of what is going on among terrorists. He said that the number of locals among them is about 15%, they are now (unlike in the first days of the set-to) turned down when they come to participate. They are considered to be untrained and inexperienced so even if anyone is accepted he is usuallly given an assignment at one of the checkpoints far from the clash zone. Professional mercenaries are taking over. One more proof of it is what happened in Donetsk: battalion "Vostok" consisting of ex-poicemen and spetznaz tore down barricades in the downtown and tried to evict (I don't know how successful the attempt was) the representatives of DPR from administrative buildings on the pretext that they are only engaged in drinking, kidnapping and marauding contributing nothing to fighting and thus discrediting the separatist movement. That is why more and more locals voice their dissatisfaction with DPR.
http://news.bigmir.net/ukraine/819565-Zhiteli-Slavjanska-vozmucshajutsja-dejstvijami--mera--Ponomareva--video-
In the video an aged lady in Slovyansk defends Ponomarev claiming that he neither eats nor sleeps protecting them. A man opposes her saying that separatists place their missiles in a bedroom district and often start shooting at will without warning anyone (often hitting houses) so his wife with the baby in her arms had to find cover in a nearby cellar.

"It is the first open admission of the fact that "something is rotten in the state of Denmark"." You obviously don't read all what I wrote. And 25 % of 45 % of the voter is.... 10 % of the total, which is roughly what the extreme Right historically does in France... And this is historical fact.
Your figure-juggling can't change the fact: a quarter of places in Europarliament from France will belong to nazis. 10% support is what Svoboda got and it terrified you extremely, while the French nazi 10% is just a historical fact. If the turnout keeps at 45% (as you claim) then we may see them in the French bodies of power. By the way, the total support of Yarosh+Tyagnybok (about 2%) at the presidential elections equalled the one of Vadim Rabinovich - a jewish businessman. Now whose nation is in danger of nazi advent?

Pannonian

05-30-2014, 18:57

I don't see why it should matter that not everyone at Maidan was from Kyiv. They weren't trying to get rid of the city council of Kyiv, but the country's government. Anyone from outside Donbass fighting for separatism there are claiming to fight on the behalf of people other than themselves; namely the local population.

Gilrandir wasn't happy that there were Crimeans at Donbas, classing them with Russians as "mercenaries". This means that, in his eyes, Crimeans aren't legitimate protesters in Donbas.

Brenus

05-30-2014, 19:04

“Your figure-juggling can't change the fact: a quarter of places in Europarliament from France will belong to nazis. 10% support is what Svoboda got and it terrified you extremely, while the French nazi 10% is just a historical fact. If the turnout keeps at 45% (as you claim) then we may see them in the French bodies of power. By the way, the total support of Yarosh+Tyagnybok (about 2%) at the presidential elections equalled the one of Vadim Rabinovich - a jewish businessman. Now whose nation is in danger of nazi advent?” Yours, as you fail to see that they ARE in power.
And we speak of history, 2 years ago, without the sex-scandal in New-York, the French were near to elect a Jew as President of the Republic...
And what is the link between what happened in France and the situation on Ukraine? You can try again, you are just a smoke screen user...

Viking

05-30-2014, 19:28

This means that, in his eyes, Crimeans aren't legitimate protesters in Donbas.

Neither would Kyivans be.

Sarmatian

05-30-2014, 20:23

Neither would Kyivans be.

Not all of Donbas, or eastern and southeastern Ukraine, wishes separation. 30% at most. In a poll conducted earlier this month, iirc, about 80% of the population are for some kind of change, whether it is federalization, more regional autonomy, independence or joining Russia. Only less than 20% supports status quo.

Kiev doesn't see the forest from the trees. They ignored the silent majority and chose to deal only with militants. Using medical jargon, they treat the symptoms instead of the disease.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

05-30-2014, 23:20

Gilrandir wasn't happy that there were Crimeans at Donbas, classing them with Russians as "mercenaries". This means that, in his eyes, Crimeans aren't legitimate protesters in Donbas.

Well - given that they apparently consider themselves Russians, maybe they aren't.

I don't like the words coming out of this new President's mouth one bit, but the transformation of armed protesters into insurrectionists, and the failure of the provisional government's attempts at dialogue, made this outcome inevitable.

I recall a lecture I attended given by Gen. Sir Rupert Smith on insurrections where he said you need about 15% support of the whole thing falls apart - that's tacit rather than active material support. This does make the DPR etc look like a terrorist insurrection - though the extent of the terror was debatable.

Irony, of course, is that moderate Russian speakers will get nothing regardless of whether Kiev or Moscow wins - the insurrection has made sure of that.

Viking

05-31-2014, 13:48

Not all of Donbas, or eastern and southeastern Ukraine, wishes separation. 30% at most. In a poll conducted earlier this month, iirc, about 80% of the population are for some kind of change, whether it is federalization, more regional autonomy, independence or joining Russia. Only less than 20% supports status quo.

Kiev doesn't see the forest from the trees. They ignored the silent majority and chose to deal only with militants. Using medical jargon, they treat the symptoms instead of the disease.

What's going on in Ukraine is for me another excellent example on the dangers of multiculturalism: have more than one national identity larger than a certain size in a country, and the social fabric is likely to start to unravel when things turn for the worse. It's also a weakness for outside powers to exploit.

Gilrandir

05-31-2014, 13:56

Yours, as you fail to see that they ARE in power.

Keep your eyes shut to the tendency and keep coming to the elections the way you are and we will see.

And what is the link between what happened in France and the situation on Ukraine?

I drew attention to France to once again expose the truth of the proverb: we see a mote in our brother's eye and don't see a beam in our own.

You can try again, you are just a smoke screen user...
Let me quote Sarmatian: attack the arguments, not the person. You keep doing the latter which you resented so much when you suspected it aimed at you.

Gilrandir

05-31-2014, 13:58

What's going on in Ukraine is for me another excellent example on the dangers of multiculturalism: have more than one national identity larger than a certain size in a country, and the social fabric is likely to start to unravel when things turn for the worse. It's also a weakness for outside powers to exploit.

Now you are in for all kinds of accusations including those of fascism, nazism (possibly racism) and bigotry. Enter Brenus.

Gilrandir

05-31-2014, 14:01

Husar

05-31-2014, 14:23

Now you are in for all kinds of accusations including those of fascism, nazism (possibly racism) and bigotry. Enter Brenus.

No, just the question since when cultures equal national identities?

Viking

05-31-2014, 14:45

No, just the question since when cultures equal national identities?

There is no strict equivalence, but the two are very closely related. I used the word 'national identity' since saying that there is a different culture in Eastern Ukraine than in Western Ukraine might not fit that well with all of the more common concepts and definitions of 'culture'. That's largely semantics.

Husar

05-31-2014, 15:03

There is no strict equivalence, but the two are very closely related. I used the word 'national identity' since saying that there is a different culture in Eastern Ukraine than in Western Ukraine might not fit that well with all of the more common concepts and definitions of 'culture'. That's largely semantics.

So was/is Ukraine a multicultural country? And if not, why bring up multiculturalism as a problem that Ukraine is a good example for?
You wouldn't say that eastern ukraine has a different culture, but a different national identity and since culture and national identity are so related, Ukraine is a good example against multiculturalism even though you wouldn't say it has different cultures? :dizzy2:

Brenus

05-31-2014, 15:04

“I drew attention to France to once again expose the truth of the proverb: we see a mote in our brother's eye and don't see a beam in our own.” Nope. You try to divert attention that you have Nazi in your Government. Not in the French Government, in yours. Actually there are 2 members of the FN in the French Parliament (elected 2 years ago). As elections will go, perhaps you didn’t notice, but European Elections are not seen (unfortunately) as important in France, more like a free warning to the people in charge.
It might be a problem of Nazism in France in a near future, there is one actually in Ukrainian one, not in the future, right now…

“attack the arguments, not the person”: That is not a personal attack, that is a description of a diversion tactic you employ persistently. Trying to divert attention on unrelated subject in order to hind uneasy facts, so smokes screen. Where is the attack on the person here?

Gilrandir

05-31-2014, 15:15

Gilrandir

05-31-2014, 15:27

“attack the arguments, not the person”: That is not a personal attack, that is a description of a diversion tactic you employ persistently. Trying to divert attention on unrelated subject in order to hind uneasy facts, so smokes screen. Where is the attack on the person here?
When you use a noun ("smoke-screen user") it is to name a person not tactics. And I believe this discussion to be an acquisitive and ramifying thing so a subject broached may be developed further on and the discussion unexpectedly drift elsewhere. The subject in question here was the danger of nazis coming to power. I don't see why we should limit the talk to one country, so if I see any similarities I underscore them. Would you call an earlier argument about the similarity (or dissimilarity) of annexing Crimea and Anschluss of Austria an unrelated discussion aimed to divert attention from what was (and is) going on in Ukraine?
And I don't "hind" (is it hide or hinder?) anything, since all the facts you refer to persistently are generally known and universally acknowledged.

Viking

05-31-2014, 15:28

So was/is Ukraine a multicultural country? And if not, why bring up multiculturalism as a problem that Ukraine is a good example for?
You wouldn't say that eastern ukraine has a different culture, but a different national identity and since culture and national identity are so related, Ukraine is a good example against multiculturalism even though you wouldn't say it has different cultures? :dizzy2:

Again, that's a matter of semantics. One could say that culture is a subset of group identity, and that multiculturalism likewise is a subset of plurality in group identities. Then culture is not the problem, but group identities. This might be more accurate than getting stuck with the concept of 'culture'.

Alternatively, the concept of 'culture' is interpreted more liberally and broadly; such that you'd find different cultures in more or less every country on Earth (e.g. when you travel from one city to another, you find a new culture). With this definition, however, multiculturalism is only realistically likely to become a source of trouble when the cultures are distinct enough. With more conservative and rigid definitions of 'culture', cultures are distinct enough per definition to be able cause this kind of trouble.

Seamus Fermanagh

05-31-2014, 16:35

...How do you class people coming from another country to raise hell across the border?

As English "footie" fans...

Just sayin.'

Husar

05-31-2014, 16:40

There are no different cultures. There are regional differences in Ukrainian culture (same as I believe in Gemany's Bundesländer). Again you are making the same mistake as Sarmatian when he spoke of a deeply divided Ukrainian nation. But of course the question is what a culture comprises: holidays, traditions, literature, movies, history, art?

Again, that's a matter of semantics. One could say that culture is a subset of group identity, and that multiculturalism likewise is a subset of plurality in group identities. Then culture is not the problem, but group identities. This might be more accurate than getting stuck with the concept of 'culture'.

Alternatively, the concept of 'culture' is interpreted more liberally and broadly; such that you'd find different cultures in more or less every country on Earth (e.g. when you travel from one city to another, you find a new culture). With this definition, however, multiculturalism is only realistically likely to become a source of trouble when the cultures are distinct enough. With more conservative and rigid definitions of 'culture', cultures are distinct enough per definition to be able cause this kind of trouble.

And then how is the situation in Ukraine a good example for the problems of multiculturalism?

Brenus

05-31-2014, 17:20

“The subject in question here was the danger of nazis coming to power”: No. The subject is Ukraine having Nazi in position of Power. You can open a discussion on this subject if you wish, but on this one, we speak of why the Russian Minorities might have a good reason to be scared by a coup that brought Nazi in Power.

“When you use a noun ("smoke-screen user") it is to name a person not tactics” Err, so a driver is to name a person, not an actual user of car…? When I say you are a smoke-screen user, I describe actions you use in order to divert attention on fact you want to avoid to answer. When using a car, you become a driver.

“I don't see why we should limit the talk to one country” Well, no reason at all. No relation with the subject, I can as well open a discussion about the influence of the moon on the separatists minds, or Putin being a Satanist, or your actual President being related with Vlad Tepes… Be free.

“you refer to persistently are generally known and universally acknowledged.” Good, so you acknowledge you have open Nazi in the actual Ukrainian executive. We are progressing; you were telling us they were (only) extreme Nationalists.

Viking

05-31-2014, 17:28

And then how is the situation in Ukraine a good example for the problems of multiculturalism?

It's a spectrum. Whether you want to call the differences in the east and west as differences in culture or differences in identity - or whatever you want to call them - the mechanisms involved are exactly the same. Culture or group identity - it's semantics.

Husar

05-31-2014, 17:50

It's a spectrum. Whether you want to call the differences in the east and west as differences in culture or differences in identity - or whatever you want to call them - the mechanisms involved are exactly the same. Culture or group identity - it's semantics.

So you're saying the difference in group identity between West and East Ukraine is as big as the group identity difference between Norwegians and Kongolese? Gilrandir on the other hand says it's more like Saxonians and Bavarians, so why don't we have Bavarian separatists trying to join Austria? Or is that only to be expected once we start to complain about our government?

Viking

05-31-2014, 18:18

So you're saying the difference in group identity between West and East Ukraine is as big as the group identity difference between Norwegians and Kongolese? Gilrandir on the other hand says it's more like Saxonians and Bavarians, so why don't we have Bavarian separatists trying to join Austria? Or is that only to be expected once we start to complain about our government?

I don't know enough about neither Germany nor Ukraine to go into in-depth comparisons. Cultural differences do of course not automatically lead to chaos; that's absurd.

As I said, it takes certain circumstances to turn it into something messy. I can imagine that it's more likely to happen in a poorer country than a richer country, as "joining your own kind" can be seen as a tempting solution to the hardship. The state of integration with the rest of the country should also be important.

If a neighbouring country sends in agitators, like Russia with Ukraine, then such conditions can both be artificially created and enhanced.

Fisherking

05-31-2014, 18:25

So you're saying the difference in group identity between West and East Ukraine is as big as the group identity difference between Norwegians and Kongolese? Gilrandir on the other hand says it's more like Saxonians and Bavarians, so why don't we have Bavarian separatists trying to join Austria? Or is that only to be expected once we start to complain about our government?

Because Bavarians are waiting for Austria to join them. They are pretty sure they can leave when ever they want, they just worry that the rest would be lost without them.

Just ask them.

Besides, you need very little difference in groups to bring on conflicts. Look at sporting matches.

It may be childish but it is basic human nature.

Pannonian

05-31-2014, 21:57

De facto Crimea is Russia now. How do you class people coming from another country to raise hell across the border?

That's why I asked you, do you not think of Crimea as Ukrainian any more? To which you backtracked and denied they were other than Ukrainian. Until PVC pointed out that Crimea are legally not Ukrainian now, on which you came back with this. Which just illustrates my point. That you, thinking of yourself as Ukrainian, and Crimeans, thinking of themselves as Russians, class each other as different nationalities. So why were there arguments about the legitimacy of Crimea splitting away? You clearly didn't think you belonged to the same country.

Husar

05-31-2014, 22:14

I don't know enough about neither Germany nor Ukraine to go into in-depth comparisons. Cultural differences do of course not automatically lead to chaos; that's absurd.

As I said, it takes certain circumstances to turn it into something messy. I can imagine that it's more likely to happen in a poorer country than a richer country, as "joining your own kind" can be seen as a tempting solution to the hardship. The state of integration with the rest of the country should also be important.

If a neighbouring country sends in agitators, like Russia with Ukraine, then such conditions can both be artificially created and enhanced.

And that's an argument against multiculturalism how?
Who is more dangerous? The independent kingdom of bavaria separatists that get supported by Austrian soldiers who removed the insignia from their uniforms or the new Turkish Caliphate separatists who are supported by turkish airstrikes? When can I expect either or is there maybe no connection between the situation in Ukraine and multiculturalism in general?

Because Bavarians are waiting for Austria to join them. They are pretty sure they can leave when ever they want, they just worry that the rest would be lost without them.

Just ask them.

I know, they are our Texas. But they forget all the other Germans who work there and keep their industry running. Munich is a melting pot and a few farmers do not make a country.

Besides, you need very little difference in groups to bring on conflicts. Look at sporting matches.

It may be childish but it is basic human nature.

I'm not denying that, I'm saying Ukraine is not a good example for why multiculturalism is bad. Germany would be just as good an example for how it works and makes the country stronger. Which does not mean that we have perfected integration, but we don't have the aformentioned caliphatist separatists yet either.

Strike For The South

05-31-2014, 22:28

It's May 31st and Putin is still a fascist shit bag

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

05-31-2014, 23:12

Gilrandir

06-01-2014, 06:59

we speak of why the Russian Minorities might have a good reason to be scared by a coup that brought Nazi in Power.

It has been three months of the interrim government in power. I would like you to name practical steps of this government which can serve a good example why one shouldn't have nazis at power. Any nazi symbols adopted as the state ones? Any nazi salutations used at official ceremonies? Any Russian speakers executed for speaking Russian? Any ethnic-cleansing, jew-hunting, gypsy-murdering, land-grabbing or whatever you might expect from such scum? I don't see why Russian minorities (as you call them) might be scared of, say, the minister of agriculture from Svoboda. Is he trying to make farmers plant potatoes in the shape of swastika? Is it forbidden to speak Russian while milking cows? Are depredator insects branded as Jewish?
The current government is guilty of many things but I don't see how those things can be explained from the perspective you wish to adopt.

“When you use a noun ("smoke-screen user") it is to name a person not tactics” Err, so a driver is to name a person, not an actual user of car…? When I say you are a smoke-screen user, I describe actions you use in order to divert attention on fact you want to avoid to answer. When using a car, you become a driver.
Driver is a person who drives a car. If, for example, you are asked who was to blame in the accident - the driver or the pedestrian - and you say "the driver", don't you name a person?

“you refer to persistently are generally known and universally acknowledged.” Good, so you acknowledge you have open Nazi in the actual Ukrainian executive. We are progressing; you were telling us they were (only) extreme Nationalists.
I acknowledge having the representatives of Svoboda in the government. How to name them is a matter of semantics.

why don't we have Bavarian separatists trying to join Austria?
When Austria has a Kanzler called Putinhalter or Putingruber (or what is a typical Austrian last name) expect the trouble to brew.

So why were there arguments about the legitimacy of Crimea splitting away? You clearly didn't think you belonged to the same country.
What one thinks has nothing to do with the legitimacy of a chunk of a counrty changing its affiliation. Why, Belgium is split (linguistically, culturally, historically) in two almost equal parts yet they keep living together. The same was with Ukraine and Crimea.

Husar

06-01-2014, 08:34

When Austria has a Kanzler called Putinhalter or Putingruber (or what is a typical Austrian last name) expect the trouble to brew.

You mean after the Saxonians toppled the democratically elected chancellor who wanted the Anschluss with Austria in order to install a guy who instead asked to join the USSR instead?

What one thinks has nothing to do with the legitimacy of a chunk of a counrty changing its affiliation. Why, Belgium is split (linguistically, culturally, historically) in two almost equal parts yet they keep living together. The same was with Ukraine and Crimea.

Only because Stalin saved them. The Swiss also have four different languages, all of which are official languages. What they don't have is the pro-this, pro-that movement problem because they are mostly pro-Switzerland. Belgium actually has such problems from time to time or even all the time, they just don't topple governments over it.

Gilrandir

06-01-2014, 09:08

You mean after the Saxonians toppled the democratically elected chancellor who wanted the Anschluss with Austria in order to install a guy who instead asked to join the USSR instead?

At one of the round tables held a month ago, Kravchuk and Kuchma, the ex-presidents of Ukraine, shared their experience on handling problems similar to what Ukraine is having now. They claimed that in the 1990s they had faced situations fraught with no less danger (Transdniestria war when a whole Russian army was marching through Ukraine and Crimea's attempt of cessation in 1994). But what made the peaceful (for Ukraine) solution possible is the position taken by Yeltsin. He said that whatever happened in Ukraine was to be solved within the country without any interference from Russia. Putin is evidently of a different mind. Trucks with men and arms still keep breaking through the border into Lugansk region. Until that stops (or is stopped) the situation is unlikely to wind up.

Only because Stalin saved them. The Swiss also have four different languages, all of which are official languages. What they don't have is the pro-this, pro-that movement problem because they are mostly pro-Switzerland. Belgium actually has such problems from time to time or even all the time, they just don't topple governments over it.
Under Stalin Crimea was a part of Russia. And Yanukovych was toppled for different reasons, we have had this out.

Brenus

06-01-2014, 09:36

“I would like you to name practical steps of this government which can serve a good example why one shouldn't have nazis at power.” Not the point. The point is they are Nazi. Hitler gave jobs to Germans. The price to pay was segregation, pogroms followed by extermination. But I give you it didn't happened in the first 3 months.

“Any ethnic-cleansing, jew-hunting, gypsy-murdering, land-grabbing or whatever you might expect from such scum?” You mean like using attack helicopters on rioting populaces, or trying to ban a Political Party after spreading rumours?

“I don't see why Russian minorities (as you call them) might be scared of” Well, a good start is to try to understand, and if you can’t, ask them.

“don't you name a person” and… that makes it a personal attack? So, yes, I recognised you as a person when I write you are a smoke-screen user. So?

“matter of semantics.” Matter of politic and perception of it.

Husar

06-01-2014, 09:50

Crimea's attempt of cessation in 1994

So this isn't even a new issue, and yet we were told it's all about Russia scaring the Crimeans into cessation rather than the Crimeans wanting it.

But what made the peaceful (for Ukraine) solution possible is the position taken by Yeltsin. He said that whatever happened in Ukraine was to be solved within the country without any interference from Russia.

Didn't Yeltsin also let Russia fall into corruption and bankruptcy so deep that the Russian people elected the strongman Putin to clean up the mess?
As for influencing other countries, ask Greece about foreign influence or maybe Austria about electing Heider. The EU that is now trumpeted as the savior of Ukraine also forces countries to abide by its will. The methods may be different but all the UKIP voters can tell you that the EU is much worse than Putin.

Viking

06-01-2014, 10:24

And that's an argument against multiculturalism how?
Who is more dangerous? The independent kingdom of bavaria separatists that get supported by Austrian soldiers who removed the insignia from their uniforms or the new Turkish Caliphate separatists who are supported by turkish airstrikes? When can I expect either or is there maybe no connection between the situation in Ukraine and multiculturalism in general?

I have already given you examples of such conditions. If Bavaria drifts away culturally from Germany with Austria, then at some point Bavarians and Austrians might seriously suggest that they should join each other.

If ethnic Turks become the majority in almost every city and town in a sizeable area of Germany, they may at some point ask for federalisation or secession for their area.

If multiculturalism means that one part of the neighbourhood is occupied by one culture and another part by another culture, then the friction it causes will stay within the neighbourhood.

If multiculturalism means that one part of the city is occupied by one culture and another part by another culture, then the friction it causes will stay within the city.

If multiculturalism means that one part of the country is occupied by one culture and another part by another culture, then the friction it causes will be at a national level, and can during the right circumstances lead to separatism and nasty things for the whole country.

Gilrandir

06-01-2014, 10:48

“Any ethnic-cleansing, jew-hunting, gypsy-murdering, land-grabbing or whatever you might expect from such scum?” You mean like using attack helicopters on rioting populaces, or trying to ban a Political Party after spreading rumours?

The reason why "rioting populaces" are still there is that the government doesn't want to use anything of the kind you write about. Attack helicopters are used against armed terrorists who are a mixture of alien mercenaries, local criminals and local pro-Russian militants. The populaces which were rioting a month or two ago by now have realized what DPR and LPR are bringing to them so they are mostly scared, indifferrent or dissatisfied with shooting, shelling, looting, robbing and the like. As for the rumors, the head of a local Communist party organization in a Lugansk town (don't remember the name) moonlights the head of a band of terrorists who captured all administrative buildings there. The headquarters of Communist party in another town is at the same time the headquarters of "rioters". I don't like the idea of banning any party (including Svoboda), but I'm not sure what should be done with a party openly calling for division of the country or separating a part of it.

“I don't see why Russian minorities (as you call them) might be scared of” Well, a good start is to try to understand, and if you can’t, ask them.

You seem to have had a tour around Russian-speaking South-East, canvassed their opinion and formed yours to be able to proclaim the existence of a universal horror among "Russian minorities" (I still don't understand while they are in plural). So my asking them is of no importance to you any more.

“don't you name a person” and… that makes it a personal attack? So, yes, I recognised you as a person when I write you are a smoke-screen user. So?

You named a person and gave him (me) a characteristic employing conceptual metaphor with a negative connotation. I consider it as a personal attack. But our discussion is going too much linguistic. We have discussed vocabulary, grammar, what next - phonetics? :laugh4:

So this isn't even a new issue, and yet we were told it's all about Russia scaring the Crimeans into cessation rather than the Crimeans wanting it.

As you see this issue was peacefully approached and solved once and could have been solved again but for Russian propaganda and subsequent interference and annexation.

Didn't Yeltsin also let Russia fall into corruption and bankruptcy so deep that the Russian people elected the strongman Putin to clean up the mess?

Which you seem to believe he had done? I saw an interview with a Canadian citizen (working now for CBC, IIRC) who comes from Kharkiv. He had lived here in his childhood and now came to report on the events. Before visiting Ukraine he met some of his old friends in Russia. This friend started with the old "fascists on Maidan" rhetorics. But as their conversation veered towards Russian powers-that-be this friend said that Yanukovych's luxuries fall utterly short of what Putin and his close circle have. So this Russian ended his monologue with: "I wish Russia would have its Maidan".

Pannonian

06-01-2014, 11:17

What one thinks has nothing to do with the legitimacy of a chunk of a counrty changing its affiliation. Why, Belgium is split (linguistically, culturally, historically) in two almost equal parts yet they keep living together. The same was with Ukraine and Crimea.

You what? What do you think is self-determination, one of the founding principles of the post-colonial world, if not the identity of a nation being decided by its people? You don't think of Crimeans as Ukrainian, Crimeans don't think of themselves as Ukrainian, so why the arguments over them not being Ukrainian?

Husar

06-01-2014, 12:32

I have already given you examples of such conditions. If Bavaria drifts away culturally from Germany with Austria, then at some point Bavarians and Austrians might seriously suggest that they should join each other.

If ethnic Turks become the majority in almost every city and town in a sizeable area of Germany, they may at some point ask for federalisation or secession for their area.

If multiculturalism means that one part of the neighbourhood is occupied by one culture and another part by another culture, then the friction it causes will stay within the neighbourhood.

If multiculturalism means that one part of the city is occupied by one culture and another part by another culture, then the friction it causes will stay within the city.

If multiculturalism means that one part of the country is occupied by one culture and another part by another culture, then the friction it causes will be at a national level, and can during the right circumstances lead to separatism and nasty things for the whole country.

How is any of that multiculturalism instead of segregation? :dizzy2:

Gilrandir

06-01-2014, 12:39

You what? What do you think is self-determination, one of the founding principles of the post-colonial world, if not the identity of a nation being decided by its people? You don't think of Crimeans as Ukrainian, Crimeans don't think of themselves as Ukrainian, so why the arguments over them not being Ukrainian?
The talks goes round and round in circles. There is no Crimean nation: it is a mixture of (mostly) Russians and Ukrainians who moved there after WWII when the native Tatars were evicted. Then a part of Tatars returned. So the self-determination principle here may be (if at all) applied only to Tatars who voiced (and still do) there unwillingness to leave Ukraine and join Russia. In any case, Crimeans thinking either way does not make the referendum that was held (especially the way it was held) legal, legitimate of any other L-word you can think of.

Gilrandir

06-01-2014, 12:40

How is any of that multiculturalism instead of segregation? :dizzy2:

I warned Viking: be ready to be counted among THE MOST HATED ONES on this forum.

Husar

06-01-2014, 12:51

I warned Viking: be ready to be counted among THE MOST HATED ONES on this forum.

I'm merely arguing his point, not once have I said he is racist, I'm saying his definition of multiculturalism is completely off. In fact I agree with him that segregation is not the right way to go.

Why do you keep accusing me of hating Viking? If your sense for that is as good as your sense for what's going on in Ukraine, I can only assume the pro-russians are puppets of Washington... ~;)

Viking

06-01-2014, 13:35

How is any of that multiculturalism instead of segregation? :dizzy2:

Multiculturalism is intimately connected to segregation. Let's say you take 1000 people from a distant country an settle them in a new country with 400 million inhabitants. If you spread these people out thinly all over the country, such that there is no more than 1 person from that culture living in the same town/city; has this made the country multicultural? Hardly.

If you take those 1000 people and settle them in the same city of 100 000 inhabitants, is the city multicultural now? We're certainly getting somewhere.

If we stick with the previous scenario, and these people do not settle in the same part of town, they are very likely to gradually assimilate and no longer truly represent much of their original culture. 15 generations down, and there might literally be no traces left of the immigrants' original culture; thanks to things like intermarriage.

If they, on the other hand, settle in the same part of town, they are more likely to find mates within their own group, and even far into the future, this part of town can have a clearly distinct cultural identity.

If there is no segregation or relatively large numbers of representants for a minority culture, the minority culture, and the multiculturalism with it, is not likely to last that terribly long.

I warned Viking: be ready to be counted among THE MOST HATED ONES on this forum.

Not particularly worried about that.

Fisherking

06-01-2014, 14:13

How is any of that multiculturalism instead of segregation? :dizzy2:

Multiculturalism is a misnomer. People practice only one culture at a time. They may integrate aspects of other cultures over time but it is as a part of the prevailing culture.

Multiculturalism is just a buzz word for tolerance. Something most people lack, even while professing to embrace it.

The current situation in Ukraine is about seeing differences. The major difference is language, not really culture. How extensive a difference in religion and lifestyle do you think Russian speakers and Ukrainian speakers have? It is only appealing to a misguided sense of patriotism.

It may have begun with political problems of corruption but it has degenerated.

It does relate to Bavaria also. Were they tomorrow decide to enact a low making Bayrisch the official language you would wind up with Frankisch separatists and others.

Also, in reply to your quip about farmers; All real wealth springs from the land, either as produce or recourses. Everything else depends on that. Industries add value, markets and resale add cost, and banks create money from debt. Don’t think that those few farmers can be done without.

Gilrandir

06-01-2014, 14:33

I'm merely arguing his point, not once have I said he is racist, I'm saying his definition of multiculturalism is completely off. In fact I agree with him that segregation is not the right way to go.

Why do you keep accusing me of hating Viking? If your sense for that is as good as your sense for what's going on in Ukraine, I can only assume the pro-russians are puppets of Washington... ~;)
I don't accuse you of hating Viking. In fact, your arguing his point is the way it should be done - without getting personal. I expected aforementioned accusations to come from a different quarter. But either they are losing their touch or I was the favored object to practice venom-spitting.
Speaking of multiculturalism, I will express my opinion (though unsolicited, of course): I don't like people from Country 1 go and settle for good in Country 2 and the other way around. I don't like Ukrainians to migrate elsewhere and I don't like foreigners to root in Ukraine. Tourism is Ok but no migration.

Husar

06-01-2014, 15:30

Multiculturalism is a misnomer. People practice only one culture at a time. They may integrate aspects of other cultures over time but it is as a part of the prevailing culture.

Multiculturalism is just a buzz word for tolerance. Something most people lack, even while professing to embrace it.

Yes, it still doesn't occur to me though, how Ukraine is somehow an example for multiculturalism given how Russians and Ukrainians have the same roots and their cultures hardly differ. By that definition, every country today is multicultural and could break apart any time except North Korea.

It does relate to Bavaria also. Were they tomorrow decide to enact a low making Bayrisch the official language you would wind up with Frankisch separatists and others.

So you agree that this is not entirely Putin's fault and the interim government is also to blame?

Also, in reply to your quip about farmers; All real wealth springs from the land, either as produce or recourses. Everything else depends on that. Industries add value, markets and resale add cost, and banks create money from debt. Don’t think that those few farmers can be done without.

I didn't say that I think they can be done without, did I? I just said the farmers alone wouldn't produce the same amount of wealth as the farmers and all the other workers do together.

Speaking of multiculturalism, I will express my opinion (though unsolicited, of course): I don't like people from Country 1 go and settle for good in Country 2 and the other way around. I don't like Ukrainians to migrate elsewhere and I don't like foreigners to root in Ukraine. Tourism is Ok but no migration.

Why? I know all kinds of people who themselves or their parents have foreign roots, my father is dutch and does not have the german nationality to this day (although I never feel like a person with a migration background because, let's face it, I grew up here and the cultural differences are negligible anyway, even the language). Why should I not want all these people to be here? Would I somehow be happier if all my friends were pure Germans? I'll spare you the obvious comparison. ~;)

Fisherking

06-01-2014, 16:18

Husar

The point is that most people are xenophobic to one degree or another. They don’t trust anyone who is different. If they can find anything at all that can be enough.

Ukraine is just an example of it gone over the top, at the moment. It is being exploited, primarily by the Russians, but also by extreme Nationalists. You can’t call them fascism because that requires corporate-government collusion.

The problem started as political corruption but the mistrust of different groups has spiraled into this.

You don’t need much difference in people for them to decide they have huge differences and insurmountable problems. The time was when being borne with red hair was enough to get you burned as a witch, or being left handed. Anything is enough.

But it is being exploited for political ends. Blame who you will! There is plenty to go round.

It all should have ended when the president agreed to withdraw the laws and again when he stepped down, or at any point when consolatory actions were taken. Just blame the latest agitator.

Putin is definitely at fault for Crimea. With all the rest you can blame the US, the EU, Ukraine, Russia, and all the varying groups with rectal cranial insertion.

On the side of the west, I would say it is about domestic weapons sales to boost corporate profits. The Russian side seems to be nationalistic expansion and for Ukraine political unrest is becoming a way of life.

Kadagar_AV

06-01-2014, 21:12

How is any of that multiculturalism instead of segregation? :dizzy2:

What is the difference between multiculturalism and segregation?

Do you find an example of a multicultural society that is not segregated?

Brenus

06-01-2014, 21:44

“You named a person and gave him (me) a characteristic employing conceptual metaphor with a negative connotation” Ohhh… Sorry, I am sooooo sorry.
However, a personnel attack is what you did. To qualify you as a smoke-screen user is just that, a qualification.

“Attack helicopters are used against armed terrorists who are a mixture of alien mercenaries” So, the expelled President was wrong. He should have qualified the movement in Kiev as terrorism them sent the attack helicopters. Then, you emphases on being a linguist: Alien is quite a strong word, not foreigner, no, alien… Brrr, I almost see their babies jumping at the face of the population.

“So my asking them is of no importance to you anymore.” I fully understood yet that others' opinion is not your concern. You have a population in your country rioting and you don’t want to know why…

“I don't like Ukrainians to migrate elsewhere and I don't like foreigners to root in Ukraine. Tourism is Ok but no migration”. Yeah, they are “alien”. Extreme nationalists, you said…

“As for the rumors, the head of a local Communist party organization in a Lugansk town (don't remember the name) moonlights the head of a band of terrorists who captured all administrative buildings there. The headquarters of Communist party in another town is at the same time the headquarters of "rioters"” Great, democracy is in move with this. 2 persons are perhaps in a separatist movement and they perhaps belong to one party (and the fact they use a building of this party is surely a proof, like a hat on a man) and it is o.k. to ban the party.

Husar

06-01-2014, 21:52

What is the difference between multiculturalism and segregation?

Do you find an example of a multicultural society that is not segregated?

IMO the difference is that multiculturalism is a peaceful coexistance with partial blending and cooperation while segregation may be peaceful, but severely lacks the cooperation and the partial blending of cultures and people.

As such, multiculturalism is more of an ideal that fails not just because of the immigrants, but also because the host countries often fail to implement it. The USA are actually a kind of multicultural society in some ways, less so in others. I also know some educated turkish people who fit very well into our society but have still retained quite a few parts of their turkish culture, I would see them as some ideal of multiculturalism. I am well aware that this is certainly not the case with all of them and becomes more problematic the "poorer" (or more criminal) the neighborhood gets.

And what I dislike about lamenting the failure of multiculturalism is that it's often exactly this defeatist attitude and these prejudices against the immigrants, the idea that "we will never get along anyway, so why talk to them?" that leads to a failure of multiculturalism. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

It's always easy to say "well, humans are just like that, they are xenophobic", yeah, nothing we can do. But humans also can't fly, did we give up on that as well or did we experiment until we managed to make it work? We love to praise ourselves for scientific advancements but when it comes to social advancements we shrug our soldiers and say "nothing we can do about it". IMO that simply speaks of unwillingness instead of inability because we look down on such defeatist attitudes in science and business.

GenosseGeneral

06-01-2014, 22:01

On the side of the west, I would say it is about domestic weapons sales to boost corporate profits. The Russian side seems to be nationalistic expansion and for Ukraine political unrest is becoming a way of life.

Well, Ukrainian buys domestic. The Ukrainian arms industry is probably the one profiting most from this mess, as there finally is a buyer for its products. It used to export somethingl ike 90% of its production. Although, Avakov also said something about helmets and protective vests coming from Europe this weekend and these guys (http://korrespondent.net/ukraine/politics/3372061-vtoroi-batalon-natshvardyy-zastupyl-na-boevye-posty-vokruh-slavianska) helmets remind me somehow of American or German helmets. I am not sure, though. Btw, the guys on the pictures are the proud second battaillon of the Ukrainian national guard. While this is not officially a civil war yet, all the ingredients are unfortunately there, including various and obscure armed formation on both sides.
This series of pics shows for instance a check point of the "Russian Orthodox Army". http://korrespondent.net/ukraine/politics/3372099-blok-post-russkoi-pravoslavnoi-armyy-na-donbasse
And there are more of this type, like the pro-Ukrainian "Donbass" or "Dnejpr" units.

I really like the coverage by VICE news. This one includes an interesting interview with a simple grunt of tha national guard, about his way into a trench somewhere in Donetsk Oblast'.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzAIXo9BeFA

Kadagar_AV

06-01-2014, 22:03

IMO the difference is that multiculturalism is a peaceful coexistance with partial blending and cooperation while segregation may be peaceful, but severely lacks the cooperation and the partial blending of cultures and people.

As such, multiculturalism is more of an ideal that fails not just because of the immigrants, but also because the host countries often fail to implement it. The USA are actually a kind of multicultural society in some ways, less so in others. I also know some educated turkish people who fit very well into our society but have still retained quite a few parts of their turkish culture, I would see them as some ideal of multiculturalism. I am well aware that this is certainly not the case with all of them and becomes more problematic the "poorer" (or more criminal) the neighborhood gets.

And what I dislike about lamenting the failure of multiculturalism is that it's often exactly this defeatist attitude and these prejudices against the immigrants, the idea that "we will never get along anyway, so why talk to them?" that leads to a failure of multiculturalism. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

It's always easy to say "well, humans are just like that, they are xenophobic", yeah, nothing we can do. But humans also can't fly, did we give up on that as well or did we experiment until we managed to make it work? We love to praise ourselves for scientific advancements but when it comes to social advancements we shrug our soldiers and say "nothing we can do about it". IMO that simply speaks of unwillingness instead of inability because we look down on such defeatist attitudes in science and business.

I asked you for an example of a multicultural society that isn't segregated.

USA was the closest you could do?

Seriously, the racial maps made on the US cities disagrees with that notion...

The Lurker Below

06-01-2014, 22:20

I asked you for an example of a multicultural society that isn't segregated.

USA was the closest you could do?

Seriously, the racial maps made on the US cities disagrees with that notion...

Does society have to include entire nations that cover half a continent? Would you care to check out Austin TX? The higher education there have led to cultures from around the world gathering, and frequently staying. Probably quite a few communities around the world that have similar experiences.

Kadagar_AV

06-01-2014, 22:39

Does society have to include entire nations that cover half a continent? Would you care to check out Austin TX? The higher education there have led to cultures from around the world gathering, and frequently staying. Probably quite a few communities around the world that have similar experiences.

If we talk about national levels, it would be prudent to exemplify on national levels, no?

Do you mean this Austin TX? (http://republicofaustin.com/2011/03/28/does-this-dot-map-show-austins-racial-divide-spoiler-white-people-prefer-north-and-west-austin/)

Husar

06-01-2014, 22:53

I asked you for an example of a multicultural society that isn't segregated.

USA was the closest you could do?

Seriously, the racial maps made on the US cities disagrees with that notion...

I said it mostly fails, there are examples where it works and examples where it clearly doesn't. That many humans do not want it to work does not make it a bad idea by the way. The USA are built upon immigration, just look at cities such as New York. The Afroamericans, the Italoamericans, the Judeoamericans and the Russoamericans may all have their own quarters and some of them are more intermixed than others but at the same time they are all proud to be Americans and they have also kept at least traces of their original culture usually.
You will always find problems and things that do not work, but you also find those in single cultures. If you have only one culture left, you start to get quibbles over other issues such as families or politics, finances and so on. Or should I say financial culture, political culture, family cultures etc.?

And that's why Ukraine is not a good example for the failures of multiculturalism, because no matter how close two cultures are, if people want to find a problem or a difference, they will find one and if they don't, they won't. Even if you had a 100% culturally German neighborhood, you could still get problems and issues between the socialists and the capitalists or between people who listen to rock music and people who listen to rap music. Some people go to court over garden gnome culture wars in their neighborhood, is it multiculturalism if a german who likes garden gnomes and a german who thinks they are ugly live side by side or is that segregation because they do not share a house?

Viking

06-01-2014, 23:05

It's always easy to say "well, humans are just like that, they are xenophobic", yeah, nothing we can do. But humans also can't fly, did we give up on that as well or did we experiment until we managed to make it work? We love to praise ourselves for scientific advancements but when it comes to social advancements we shrug our soldiers and say "nothing we can do about it". IMO that simply speaks of unwillingness instead of inability because we look down on such defeatist attitudes in science and business.

Some might say that misoxeny/xenophobia is what gives multiculturalism problems. And it sure does give multiculturalism problems.

But from my perspective, there is a completely unrelated and much more fundamental thing that makes multiculturalism a problem in itself. Yes, even if we designed "perfect" humans that are neither misoxenic nor xenophobic, multiculturalism would be a problem.

That's because of the role culture plays in human societies. An average human culture provides moral codes and identity. The purpose of culture is to be a glue for society, to keep it together. When different cultures meet, they'll either attempt to segregate or compete for dominance Two different cultures cannot keep a group of people together, because that is not how cultures work. You cannot think that something is both morally right and morally wrong at the same time, for example. Neither can you think that family is most important and that the individual is most important at the same time.

When two different groups of people who disagree on core principles of morality are creating laws that are valid for both, that does not fare the best. This is of course not a dilemma that requires multiculturalism; people from the same culture can still disagree on basic moral ideas.

My idea is something like that in a monocultural society, internal friction lies between 0.05-0.3 - while in a multicultural society, it's between 0.25-0.7. My idea is that no matter how hard you try to transform a multicultural society into the ideal society, it will still never function as well as a monocultural society can. Neither in practice nor theory.

- - -

If all of Ukraine spoke Ukrainian and considered itself as ethnic Ukrainian, it would take a lot more for separatism to even at all be noticeable. Even if Western Ukraine was capitalist, Eastern Ukraine socialist and Russia also socialist, it wouldn't be very likely that separatism would find a foothold in the east. That's because even if they considered themselves socialist or capitalist, they'd still consider themselves as Ukrainian, not Russian. They'd rather want to convert the other half into socialism than join socialist Russia.

Kadagar_AV

06-01-2014, 23:35

I said it mostly fails, there are examples where it works and examples where it clearly doesn't. That many humans do not want it to work does not make it a bad idea by the way. The USA are built upon immigration, just look at cities such as New York. The Afroamericans, the Italoamericans, the Judeoamericans and the Russoamericans may all have their own quarters and some of them are more intermixed than others but at the same time they are all proud to be Americans and they have also kept at least traces of their original culture usually.
You will always find problems and things that do not work, but you also find those in single cultures. If you have only one culture left, you start to get quibbles over other issues such as families or politics, finances and so on. Or should I say financial culture, political culture, family cultures etc.?

And that's why Ukraine is not a good example for the failures of multiculturalism, because no matter how close two cultures are, if people want to find a problem or a difference, they will find one and if they don't, they won't. Even if you had a 100% culturally German neighborhood, you could still get problems and issues between the socialists and the capitalists or between people who listen to rock music and people who listen to rap music. Some people go to court over garden gnome culture wars in their neighborhood, is it multiculturalism if a german who likes garden gnomes and a german who thinks they are ugly live side by side or is that segregation because they do not share a house?

As to the bolded part, yes, it was those examples I asked you to provide.

USA is segregated, end of story.

So don't try to whim it all up going on about how a segregated society could possibly still maybe perhaps work...

You argued against multiculturalism = segregation.

How is any of that multiculturalism instead of segregation? :dizzy2:

I asked you to provide a single case where multiple cultures within a national border has ever NOT led to segregation.

So far you have failed.

Also: what Viking said.

Husar

06-02-2014, 01:30

That's because of the role culture plays in human societies. An average human culture provides moral codes and identity. The purpose of culture is to be a glue for society, to keep it together. When different cultures meet, they'll either attempt to segregate or compete for dominance Two different cultures cannot keep a group of people together, because that is not how cultures work. You cannot think that something is both morally right and morally wrong at the same time, for example. Neither can you think that family is most important and that the individual is most important at the same time.

When two different groups of people who disagree on core principles of morality are creating laws that are valid for both, that does not fare the best. This is of course not a dilemma that requires multiculturalism; people from the same culture can still disagree on basic moral ideas.

Yes, so that's not really the issue, but you seem to think that multiculturalism is about us inviting the Taliban over and then arguing over who gets to make the laws. I think that is a fundamentally wrong assumption and while there may be fringe nutters who think that is what we should do, I'm pretty certain that most multiculturalists expect the immigrants who come here to respect and abide by our laws. Not every culture or every aspect of a culture has to mean that one favors completely different laws. Political refugees for example don't usually come here because they prefer the laws in their home country. Would you migrate to another country and then tell them all their laws are wrong and that you don't like to be there?

My idea is something like that in a monocultural society, internal friction lies between 0.05-0.3 - while in a multicultural society, it's between 0.25-0.7. My idea is that no matter how hard you try to transform a multicultural society into the ideal society, it will still never function as well as a monocultural society can. Neither in practice nor theory.

I think that this is very wrong because not all people always fit into the culture they are born into, as much as their parents and friends may try to make them fit. What if you are born gay in a homophobic culture? Will that not lead to problems? The more people get used to accepting other cultures and lifestyles and not forcing their own entirely onto others, the less friction there is.

If all of Ukraine spoke Ukrainian and considered itself as ethnic Ukrainian, it would take a lot more for separatism to even at all be noticeable. Even if Western Ukraine was capitalist, Eastern Ukraine socialist and Russia also socialist, it wouldn't be very likely that separatism would find a foothold in the east. That's because even if they considered themselves socialist or capitalist, they'd still consider themselves as Ukrainian, not Russian. They'd rather want to convert the other half into socialism than join socialist Russia.

And that's why the DDR needed only one party. Was it the ideal state?

As to the bolded part, yes, it was those examples I asked you to provide.

USA is segregated, end of story.

So don't try to whim it all up going on about how a segregated society could possibly still maybe perhaps work...

You argued against multiculturalism = segregation.

I asked you to provide a single case where multiple cultures within a national border has ever NOT led to segregation.

I mentioned big cities such as New York, where it has worked in some neighborhoods and less so in others. It doesn't have to work in every corner of a country to show that it can work.

So far you have failed.

Who made you the judge now and when did I enter a contest?
You have completely failed to get my argument because you always apply your own biased filter to it and expect me to answer your questions with black and white statements when grey is a far more apt response.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-02-2014, 15:33

Viking

06-02-2014, 15:51

Yes, so that's not really the issue, but you seem to think that multiculturalism is about us inviting the Taliban over and then arguing over who gets to make the laws. I think that is a fundamentally wrong assumption and while there may be fringe nutters who think that is what we should do, I'm pretty certain that most multiculturalists expect the immigrants who come here to respect and abide by our laws. Not every culture or every aspect of a culture has to mean that one favors completely different laws. Political refugees for example don't usually come here because they prefer the laws in their home country. Would you migrate to another country and then tell them all their laws are wrong and that you don't like to be there?

What you are effectively suggesting here, is the creation of second-class citizens. It would be a bit rude of first generetation immigrants to demand changes in the laws in their new country; but for second generation immigrants and further down? It's their country too, and of course they want to have a say in what the laws are like. This doesn't intrinsically have anything to do with the likes of Taliban and extremism; it has to do with disagreement over what is right and wrong, and over what the laws should and should not cover.

I think that this is very wrong because not all people always fit into the culture they are born into, as much as their parents and friends may try to make them fit. What if you are born gay in a homophobic culture? Will that not lead to problems? The more people get used to accepting other cultures and lifestyles and not forcing their own entirely onto others, the less friction there is.

This is a bit what multiculuralism is per default and per definition - and on a much greater scale. No society will be without friction, but you bet that given all other circumstances equal, the multicultural society will have the same level or more of friction than the monocultural one. Most often more.

I think we'll find both the most and the least tolerant people in multicultural areas. Or to put it this way: I think you'll find more cases of hate crime in multicultural areas than monocultural ones.

And that's why the DDR needed only one party. Was it the ideal state?

It "needed" only one party for the same reason North Korea does.

Husar

06-02-2014, 16:36

What you are effectively suggesting here, is the creation of second-class citizens.

Yes, why not?

It "needed" only one party for the same reason North Korea does.

North Korea IS the ideal state.

Fisherking

06-02-2014, 19:05

North Korea IS the ideal state.

So, you are Putin with a Kim hair cut, huh.:rolleyes3:

Greyblades

06-02-2014, 19:58

Huh, the guy who complained about germany still having to feel guilty about the Nazis is advocating segregation, probably should have seen that coming.

Viking

06-02-2014, 20:18

Yes, why not?

Guess what some of the inhabitants in Eastern Ukraine complained about. We've completed a circle, here, I think. ~D

Kadagar_AV

06-02-2014, 20:59

Yes, so that's not really the issue, but you seem to think that multiculturalism is about us inviting the Taliban over and then arguing over who gets to make the laws. I think that is a fundamentally wrong assumption and while there may be fringe nutters who think that is what we should do, I'm pretty certain that most multiculturalists expect the immigrants who come here to respect and abide by our laws. Not every culture or every aspect of a culture has to mean that one favors completely different laws. Political refugees for example don't usually come here because they prefer the laws in their home country. Would you migrate to another country and then tell them all their laws are wrong and that you don't like to be there?

The bolded quote might have been the most stupid thing you have posted as of yet.

The very essence of MULTIculturalism is that multiple cultures roam free in a nation.

If the immigrants adhere to existing culture, it's not MULTIculture, is it. Then it's just monoculture-with-some-immigrants-adhering-to-the-culture.

I mentioned big cities such as New York, where it has worked in some neighborhoods and less so in others. It doesn't have to work in every corner of a country to show that it can work.

Oh, you talk about NEW YORK, how silly of me.

Do you talk about this New York? (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Bpv9gqFrmLc/TJjgIHgg3UI/AAAAAAAADa4/U68mI3JFn7E/s1600/race+new+york.jpg), or is there some other New York I don't know about.

And yes, to prove that multiculturalism can work on a national level, you KIND OF have to exemplify on a national level. Not that I can't shoot your argument down on a city level, of course. I just mean for the discussions sake.

Will you reduce your argument to "believing multiculturalism mayhaps works in limited parts of New York"? For fairness sake?

Who made you the judge now and when did I enter a contest?
You have completely failed to get my argument because you always apply your own biased filter to it and expect me to answer your questions with black and white statements when grey is a far more apt response.

I just meant you have failed in my eyes, as well as probably on an more objective level.

Do know that I am more than well aware of grey scales, you just haven't provided much of anything I'm afraid.

Husar

06-02-2014, 21:37

So, you are Putin with a Kim hair cut, huh.:rolleyes3:

No, I'm just really good at what I do, so far at least two people believe my last post was dead serious.
If you are not joking we already have three!

I just don't feel like switching this thread over to an endless discussion about the fine distinctions between law and culture and to what degree one influences the other, mixed with explaining my previous posts several times over and so on and on...

It's simple, I enjoy living together with people of other cultures and Kadagar, Viking and Gilrandir want to send them back to where they came from so that their governments at home can finally chop their heads off. And people really shouldn't have the right to switch countries for longer than a few weeks or our precious convenient monocultures could get disturbed. Thankfully, the disturbing wrong-cultured Crimeans have already been taken back by their home culture, once Putin has annexed Eastern Ukraine, all our monoculturalists should be happy. I told you right from the start that Putin knows what he is doing, why does noone ever believe me?.....Except when I'm trolling....

Kadagar_AV

06-02-2014, 21:44

No, I'm just really good at what I do, so far at least two people believe my last post was dead serious.
If you are not joking we already have three!

I just don't feel like switching this thread over to an endless discussion about the fine distinctions between law and culture and to what degree one influences the other, mixed with explaining my previous posts several times over and so on and on...

It's simple, I enjoy living together with people of other cultures and Kadagar, Viking and Gilrandir want to send them back to where they came from so that their governments at home can finally chop their heads off. And people really shouldn't have the right to switch countries for longer than a few weeks or our precious convenient monocultures could get disturbed. Thankfully, the disturbing wrong-cultured Crimeans have already been taken back by their home culture, once Putin has annexed Eastern Ukraine, all our monoculturalists should be happy. I told you right from the start that Putin knows what he is doing, why does noone ever believe me?.....Except when I'm trolling....

The bolded part is just offensive.

1/20 of Swedish immigrants are refugees. Have I ever said I wanted to send them back to get their heads chopped? Seriously?

It's the social-wellfare-travelers-wanting-to-impose-their-failed-culture-on-Sweden I object to.

Also, you fail at sarcastic posts, why do you even keep trying? It's written form and you are German. That's two big no-no when it comes to that.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-02-2014, 22:00

I often get the sense that we'd all think Husar was riotously funny if we were German.

But I also think he should give up because we're obviously a slower form of comedically challenged life and he just confuses us.

Pannonian

06-02-2014, 22:24

No, it's about German society generally becoming progressively more Turkish as more Turks immigrate looking for work, rather than them creating segregated "Turkish" neighbourhoods in German Cities and being expected to follow all Germany's Laws.

Basically - in an English society it's expected that women can wear pretty, flouncy, dresses in summer and nobody will mind - in Saudi Arabia it's expected they be head-to-toe in black all year. In a multi-cultural society English girls might start wearing the Burkha and Saudi girls might start wearing flouncy dresses, or the dresses might become less flouncy.

In the reality of "multicultural" Britain both groups try to ignore each other, generally find the other distastful and we get periodic complaints about how the other is not civilised, or how someone is being forced to do something because of the other group.

That's not my experience in what's probably the most multicultural city in the world. People keep to themselves anyway, whether they're from different cultures or not, but when they interact, they do so in a way characteristic of the city rather than the culture. Whatever culture you want to categorise them into, they're all Londoners, which is a common experience that transcends everything else.

a completely inoffensive name

06-03-2014, 01:00

Back on the topic of Ukraine.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/maxseddon/documents-show-how-russias-troll-army-hit-america

Obviously this just confirms my suspicions that you are all paid shills for respective governments, that you are all aware of each other, and proceed to just generate inane statements for others to reply equally inanely so you all can fill your quota for the day.

Kadagar_AV

06-03-2014, 01:01

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-03-2014, 01:10

That's not my experience in what's probably the most multicultural city in the world. People keep to themselves anyway, whether they're from different cultures or not, but when they interact, they do so in a way characteristic of the city rather than the culture. Whatever culture you want to categorise them into, they're all Londoners, which is a common experience that transcends everything else.

I live in a smaller city with a march larger white population - in Devon all outsiders, be they white Saxons or otherwise are foreign - it's just obvious BEFORE you open you mouth if you're not white.

Even so, you see the Muslim women almost scurry about, avoiding the white men. It's depressing, and that alone makes me wish it was more like when I was a child and we'd never even see people from London, let alone Muslims.

Gilrandir

06-03-2014, 14:08

Why? I know all kinds of people who themselves or their parents have foreign roots, my father is dutch and does not have the german nationality to this day (although I never feel like a person with a migration background because, let's face it, I grew up here and the cultural differences are negligible anyway, even the language). Why should I not want all these people to be here? Would I somehow be happier if all my friends were pure Germans? I'll spare you the obvious comparison. ~;)
Somehow the Ukrainan proverb which can be rendered as "You are most useful where you are born" chimes with my worldview. For the same reason my support of Ukrainian football club teams on international arena is lukewarm, while I give my full energy to supporting national team. Whatever people here may claim, our perceiving the world and our place in it is determined by stereotypes to a great degree. By stereotypes I mean our expectations of how men/women should behave, what presidents may/may not do, what you may/may not speak about with your neighbors etc. The basic opposition social stereotypes are grounded on is "us vs them" ("ours vs theirs", "related vs alien"). One always evaluates "us" as positive or neutral and "them" as neutral or negative. It is hard to make one feel proud of neutral or negative, of "them" (not "us"). So I don't see any reason why I should cheer till I get hoarse supporting, say, Shakhtar if it mostly consists of Brazilian, Croatian, Romanian and so on players. What is their relation to Ukraine? Usually they don't speak any of the vernaculars of my country, know practically nothing of its culture and traditions and don't conceal their desire to leave it as soon as they are invited somewhere else. They came here to make money - why should I feel proud when they win or feel depressed when they lose? I miss the 1970s, when you could be sure that Ajax was a Dutch team, Bayern - German and Dynamo Kyiv - Ukrainian.

“Attack helicopters are used against armed terrorists who are a mixture of alien mercenaries” So, the expelled President was wrong. He should have qualified the movement in Kiev as terrorism them sent the attack helicopters. Then, you emphases on being a linguist: Alien is quite a strong word, not foreigner, no, alien… Brrr, I almost see their babies jumping at the face of the population.

If Maidan consisted of alien mercenaries then Yanukovych could have been justified.
"Alien" in this context means "those who have nothing to do with Donbas and its people". They come to make money so they don't care what will happen to the place where they fight. They loot supermarkets, kidnap people demanding ransom, set fire to the ice hockey arena, shell neighborhoods. Their interests are alien to those of the locals and the latter are starting to realize that.

You have a population in your country rioting and you don’t want to know why…

I know why and by now it is not the population but aliens, I thought I explained it.

“I don't like Ukrainians to migrate elsewhere and I don't like foreigners to root in Ukraine. Tourism is Ok but no migration”. Yeah, they are “alien”. Extreme nationalists, you said…

Yes, and Ukrainians are alien elsewhere.

“As for the rumors, the head of a local Communist party organization in a Lugansk town (don't remember the name) moonlights the head of a band of terrorists who captured all administrative buildings there. The headquarters of Communist party in another town is at the same time the headquarters of "rioters"” Great, democracy is in move with this. 2 persons are perhaps in a separatist movement and they perhaps belong to one party (and the fact they use a building of this party is surely a proof, like a hat on a man) and it is o.k. to ban the party.
I just gave two examples, they are much more numerous. But you again choose to see what you like: in the same post I said that I'm against banning any party.

And I have noted an interesting thing: you react to my posts only and the discussion which is going on among other forumers is of no interest to you. You seem to get your kicks communicating with me. I thought you said good-bye to the thread. In Ukraine they say that it is a typical English departure - to leave without saying good-bye. So can we say that yours is the case of a typical French departute - to say good-bye but never leave?:laugh4:

And that's why Ukraine is not a good example for the failures of multiculturalism, because no matter how close two cultures are, if people want to find a problem or a difference, they will find one and if they don't, they won't.
Most Ukrainians don't want to, moreover even after all we've been through (and are still being through) they don't consider Russians our enemies putting all the blame on Putin.

My idea is something like that in a monocultural society, internal friction lies between 0.05-0.3 - while in a multicultural society, it's between 0.25-0.7.

You didn't mention valor, charge, defense and morale.:laugh4:

once Putin has annexed Eastern Ukraine, all our monoculturalists should be happy.
I have said that eastern Ukraine does not have a different culture from the rest of the country so annexing it will make Russia more multicultural than now - again I won't be happy.

Viking

06-03-2014, 14:43

at least two people believe my last post was dead serious.

They did? :inquisitive:

It's simple, I enjoy living together with people of other cultures and Kadagar, Viking and Gilrandir want to send them back to where they came from so that their governments at home can finally chop their heads off. And people really shouldn't have the right to switch countries for longer than a few weeks or our precious convenient monocultures could get disturbed. Thankfully, the disturbing wrong-cultured Crimeans have already been taken back by their home culture, once Putin has annexed Eastern Ukraine, all our monoculturalists should be happy. I told you right from the start that Putin knows what he is doing, why does noone ever believe me?.....Except when I'm trolling....

If you want to oversimplify things, fine. View it as sitting in a boat and picking up lots of people floating in the sea, all the way to the point where your ship capsizes, leaving everybody screwed.

If it takes another thread to make you see the errors of your ways when it comes to multiculturalism, let's start one.

Gilrandir

06-03-2014, 17:47

And people really shouldn't have the right to switch countries for longer than a few weeks or our precious convenient monocultures could get disturbed.
Migration resulting in multiculturalism is but a single thread in the great tapestry of globalization. I don't like the latter. Why should I be afraid of diseases which start a thousand miles away? Why should the economy of my country suffer if something is wrong with dollar?
The Ukrainian crisis exposed another aspect of it: after WWII migration from Russia to Crimea started resulting in turning it into a predominantly Russian-populated area. 70 years later Putin speaks of protecting Russians and Russian-speakers and annexes Crimea. In vain did international missions try to persuade him that the rights of Russian-speakers were not infringed upon. The pretext is always there.
It is a dangerous precedent: exporting people to later be worried about their rights and begin capturing territories they inhabit.

Brenus

06-03-2014, 18:16

“You seem to get your kicks communicating with me” Yeap. Like it. See below.

“they don't consider Russians our enemies putting all the blame on Putin.” Your answer: “You seem to have had a tour around Russian-speaking South-East, canvassed their opinion and formed yours”:laugh4::2thumbsup:

Fisherking

06-03-2014, 18:23

No, I'm just really good at what I do, so far at least two people believe my last post was dead serious.
If you are not joking we already have three!

:laugh4: No, if you thought I was serious you are losing your touch and I know you well enough not to take much of what you say very seriously at all.

Husar

06-03-2014, 21:50

I have said that eastern Ukraine does not have a different culture from the rest of the country so annexing it will make Russia more multicultural than now - again I won't be happy.

I don't care, Viking said it's a perfect example for the problems of multiculturalism, you and Viking are both "them", if you two can't even agree on this, it just shows how unorganized "they" are. If you say Ukraine wasn't multicultural then why did you not agree that it was a bad example for the failures of multiculturalism?

If you want to oversimplify things, fine. View it as sitting in a boat and picking up lots of people floating in the sea, all the way to the point where your ship capsizes, leaving everybody screwed.

If it takes another thread to make you see the errors of your ways when it comes to multiculturalism, let's start one.

Not necessary.
I did make a mistake somewhere actually but I'm not sure whether anyone noticed and the definitions seem to differ a bit depending on who you ask anyway. What's more important is that you and Gilrandir seem to differe on whether Ukraine was a multicultural country. And I'd actually agree more with Gilrandir on that it was not.

:laugh4: No, if you thought I was serious you are losing your touch and I know you well enough not to take much of what you say very seriously at all.

I've never had any touch, I'm constantly high by nature. And I didn't think you took me entirely seriously.
Anyway, would you classify Ukraine as multicultural because of the russian-ukrainian differences?

Viking

06-03-2014, 22:11

Not necessary.
I did make a mistake somewhere actually but I'm not sure whether anyone noticed and the definitions seem to differ a bit depending on who you ask anyway. What's more important is that you and Gilrandir seem to differe on whether Ukraine was a multicultural country. And I'd actually agree more with Gilrandir on that it was not.

There is a spectrum here, with the multicultural society on one end, and the monocultural society on the other. This spectrum also has several sub-spectrums, one of which is language. So, I'd say that we can plot Ukraine in e.g. the following way:

multicultural society <-- -5 -4 -3 .. 0 1 2 4 (Ukraine) 5 --> monocultural society

multilingual society <-- -5 ... 1 (Ukraine) .. 5 --> monolingual society

So in one facet of multculturalism, I'll claim that Ukraine scores relatively high, namely language. But in other facets, not so much. So over all, I will not say that Ukraine is multicultural. Yet there is this one facet of multuculturalism where it does score relatively high, and this facet is causing some trouble and tension.

Kadagar_AV

06-03-2014, 22:31

There is a spectrum here, with the multicultural society on one end, and the monocultural society on the other. This spectrum also has several sub-spectrums, one of which is language. So, I'd say that we can plot Ukraine in e.g. the following way:

multicultural society <-- -5 -4 -3 .. 0 1 2 4 (Ukraine) 5 --> monocultural society

multilingual society <-- -5 ... 1 (Ukraine) .. 5 --> monolingual society

So in one facet of multculturalism, I'll claim that Ukraine scores relatively high, namely language. But in other facets, not so much. So over all, I will not say that Ukraine is multicultural. Yet there is this one facet of multuculturalism where it does score relatively high, and this facet is causing some trouble and tension.

Posts like these are the reason I keep coming back.

Absolutely brilliant Viking :2thumbsup:

Pannonian

06-03-2014, 22:38

I call BS.

Source?

Or are we suddenly discussing ones perceived experience here, facts notwithstanding?

Kad, what is your experience of living in a multicultural society? Have you read about it on the internets?

- - - Updated - - -

I call BS.

Source?

Or are we suddenly discussing ones perceived experience here, facts notwithstanding?

Kad, what is your experience of living in a multicultural society? Have you read about it on the internets?

Husar

06-04-2014, 00:15

So in one facet of multculturalism, I'll claim that Ukraine scores relatively high, namely language. But in other facets, not so much. So over all, I will not say that Ukraine is multicultural. Yet there is this one facet of multuculturalism where it does score relatively high, and this facet is causing some trouble and tension.

If Ukraine is almost in the center of the language scale, where are Switzerland and Belgium? How can you derive that multiculturalism is the reason for the country's failure if so many other countries score much higher in almost every regard and are doing just fine?

And which countries are or even were monocultural? I already mentioned North Korea, I cannot think of many others. The Third Reich certainly tried to be monocultural but they still had a few black people left. Or do a few people not count? At which point does a country turn from monoculture to multiculture?

Kadagar_AV

06-04-2014, 00:17

Kad, what is your experience of living in a multicultural society? Have you read about it on the internets?

- - - Updated - - -

Kad, what is your experience of living in a multicultural society? Have you read about it on the internets?

School in a multicultural ghetto. I had to run for my life chased by people with knives on some occasions, basically for the crime of being a Swede in Sweden.

I also live in Sthlm, going on the Subway here, you see way more Arabs and Africans than blondes.

I also live in a suburb with an African/Arab youth gang scaring the neighborhood...

I have to go by at least 10-15 begging gypsies just getting to work.

I live in a country that accepts MORE than 1% of their population a YEAR as immigrants, generally from the worlds most ****** up countries, like Afghanistan, Somalia, Syria...

Did you know there are more Iraqis in just one of the SUBURBS of Stockholm, than the US has accepted as refugees?

Sweden basically clean up the poo left by ill thought out politics and cultures.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-04-2014, 00:18

School in a multicultural ghetto. I had to run for my life chased by people with knives on some occasions, basically for the crime of being a Swede in Sweden.

I also live in Sthlm, going on the Subway here, you see way more Arabs and Africans than blondes.

I also live in a suburb with an African/Arab youth gang scaring the neighborhood...

I have to go by at least 10-15 begging gypsies just getting to work.

I live in a country that accepts MORE than 1% of their population a YEAR as immigrants, generally from the worlds most ****** up countries, like Afghanistan, Somalia, Syria...

Did you know there are more Iraqis in just one of the SUBURBS of Stockholm, than the US has accepted as refugees?

Sweden basically clean up the poo left by ill thought out politics and cultures.

And you got assaulted and robbed.

how's the finger, btw?

Kadagar_AV

06-04-2014, 00:21

And you got assaulted and robbed.

how's the finger, btw?

Yeah, that as well... Am too pissed off about that to bring it up for discussion here though...

About my finger, let's just say that my (non-existant) career as a computer game pro is over. I can bend it somewhat, but have no feel...

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-04-2014, 00:31

Yeah, that as well... Am too pissed off about that to bring it up for discussion here though...

About my finger, let's just say that my (non-existant) career as a computer game pro is over. I can bend it somewhat, but have no feel...

Here's hoping it gets better with time.

Kadagar_AV

06-04-2014, 00:47

Here's hoping it gets better with time.

What? No pray!? :inquisitive:

Gilrandir

06-04-2014, 13:17

“they don't consider Russians our enemies putting all the blame on Putin.” Your answer: “You seem to have had a tour around Russian-speaking South-East, canvassed their opinion and formed yours”:laugh4::2thumbsup:
In my sentence you quoted I didn't speak of the inhabitants of South-eastern Ukraine (they are sure to see no enemies in Russians) but of Ukrainians in general. Recent polls quite surprisingly (for many) show that on the average Russians are not perceived as enemies. Ukrainians are sure that we are to keep friendly relations and we will when Putin calms down (or steps down). In Russia Ukrainians are perceived mostly negatively. Russian TV may claim credit for it.
http://lb.ua/news/2014/05/25/267674_rossiyskiy_perviy_kanal_zayavil.html
In the video you can see the diagram in which Yarosh is shown to be winning presidential elections (in fact his support was around 1%).

I don't care, Viking said it's a perfect example for the problems of multiculturalism, you and Viking are both "them", if you two can't even agree on this, it just shows how unorganized "they" are. If you say Ukraine wasn't multicultural then why did you not agree that it was a bad example for the failures of multiculturalism?

I argued against Ukraine being considered multicultural. If you find where I said the contrary, I will be much obliged.

And which countries are or even were monocultural?
Japan? Iceland? Saudi Arabia?

Sir Moody

06-04-2014, 14:12

Japan? Iceland? Saudi Arabia?

Japan during the Imperial age is a good example of Monoculture (and how dangerous it is...)

Iceland... I dont really know enough about to say either way

Saudi Arabia is another good example - and is also a good example of why it isn't something you should desire...

Seamus Fermanagh

06-04-2014, 14:13

Iceland comes closest, though no culture has been without cross-cultural episodes from time to time.

Viking

06-04-2014, 18:38

If Ukraine is almost in the center of the language scale, where are Switzerland and Belgium? How can you derive that multiculturalism is the reason for the country's failure if so many other countries score much higher in almost every regard and are doing just fine?

I've already answered this, either directly or indirectly. Switzerland and Belgium are doing just fine economically, Ukraine not so much. Many places in Eastern Ukraine seem to be in a not-too-good state.

Multiculturalism is most likely to cause trouble during bad times and decline.

And which countries are or even were monocultural? I already mentioned North Korea, I cannot think of many others. The Third Reich certainly tried to be monocultural but they still had a few black people left. Or do a few people not count? At which point does a country turn from monoculture to multiculture?

There's a spectrum. Finding a completely monocultural society is not the point. The point is to be careful with things like mass-immigration, because they are likely to lay the foundation for large-scale multiculturalism for centuries ahead.

If a single neighbourhood is of a certain culture, that can't cause too much trouble; apart from the obvious examples, like that they are all part of organised criminality.

If, on the other hand, entire cities are split in half over culture, that's when things have a decent chance to turn nasty when the circumstances are right.

Japan during the Imperial age is a good example of Monoculture (and how dangerous it is...)

Iceland... I dont really know enough about to say either way

Saudi Arabia is another good example - and is also a good example of why it isn't something you should desire...

Japan was a country with imperial ambitions, currently isn't. Saudi Arabia is not a country with imperialistic ambitions. Japan was an authoritarian country and is currently a democratic country. Saudi Arabia is an authoritarian country.

What's the trend we're supposed to be seeing?

HoreTore

06-04-2014, 22:24

Did you know there are more Iraqis in just one of the SUBURBS of Stockholm, than the US has accepted as refugees?

lolwhat? Kadagar is as factual as ever (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_American).

Ironside

06-05-2014, 08:51

lolwhat? Kadagar is as factual as ever (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_American).

He's refering to post-"Iraqi freedom". Now that wiki is only going to 2008, but basically it's going 500> in 2002-2006, about 3000 in 2007 (with a goal of 7000) and estimated about 4500 for 2008.
I got no idea if still correct today, but under Bush that was correct.

HoreTore

06-05-2014, 12:56

He's refering to post-"Iraqi freedom". Now that wiki is only going to 2008, but basically it's going 500> in 2002-2006, about 3000 in 2007 (with a goal of 7000) and estimated about 4500 for 2008.
I got no idea if still correct today, but under Bush that was correct.

Then it's comparing apples and oranges, as the Iraqis in Sweden are not post-2003 refugees.

And even his morality argument is skewed. Yes, Sweden is thankfully taking its responsibilities in accepting refugees, while the US has a way to go.

However, the vast majority(about 1 mill) of Iraqi refugees are internally displaced refugees. And who's paying to run the refugee camps in Iraq? The USA.

In addition to all of this, the US actually accepts immigrants, while Sweden has banned immigration. So, every foreign person living in Sweden is a refugee or granted asylum, while this isn't the case in the US.

Gilrandir

06-05-2014, 13:20

Japan was a country with imperial ambitions, currently isn't. Saudi Arabia is not a country with imperialistic ambitions. Japan was an authoritarian country and is currently a democratic country. Saudi Arabia is an authoritarian country.

What's the trend we're supposed to be seeing?
As far as I can get, one can't determine a trend like "multicultural spells successful" or the other way around. Those were just the monocultural countries that came to my mind at once. I can add some more: Hungary, Albania, Armenia, Lithuania, Cambodia, Vietnam. There is no way one can group them all into successful or unsuccessful.

Sir Moody

06-05-2014, 13:41

As far as I can get, one can't determine a trend like "multicultural spells successful" or the other way around. Those were just the monocultural countries that came to my mind at once. I can add some more: Hungary, Albania, Armenia, Lithuania, Cambodia, Vietnam. There is no way one can group them all into successful or unsuccessful.

exactly this - like any political idea Monoculture is a double edged sword with a varying scale of success among the countries who have tried it out - Imperial Japan and Saudi Arabia are 2 of the Worst implementations of Monoculture that had (and continue to have) massive repercussions on either their own people or the surrounding area.

Monoculture can be implemented successfully, however it tends to be vulnerable to Xenophobia and rampant Nationalism both of which can be massively harmful.

I do personally favour the Multicultural model because it does model the "real" world better - even within distinct ethnic groups there are usually more than 1 cultural group and ideally a Multicultural model charts a course which is closest to what all groups want - the down sides as have been pointed out are generally more cultural tension and a tendency for Politicians to "suck up" to cultural groups they think they can score more votes from rather than trying to chart the middle ground as the model is designed to do...

Gilrandir

06-05-2014, 14:52

a tendency for Politicians to "suck up" to cultural groups they think they can score more votes from rather than trying to chart the middle ground as the model is designed to do...
It is what has been done in Ukraine by Party of regions and Communists - exploiting the topic of Russian as a second official language. They started to play this old record each time before the elections trying to cull votes in the South-east and forgot about it the moment they got what they wanted. They didn't want to really introduce it as this having been done would have rid them of a topic to propel during the election campaign.
Meanwile back to Ukraine. One more intercepted conversation was made public.
http://focus.ua/incident/307714/
Separatists in Ukraine talk to the ataman (something like the chieftain) of Don cossacks in Russia. The former claim that they captured OSCE mission and ask what is to be done with them. The ataman says that they are to take away their documents and keep them locked safe and sound. He adds that this is the order from quote far, far away unquote. Ruthless and cruel they are. Is there any doubt that here we are dealing with the dark side of the force? :laugh4:
One more symptomatic thing: separatists state that it is better for them to withdraw from Ukraine because they think they will be done in.

Pannonian

06-05-2014, 15:18

exactly this - like any political idea Monoculture is a double edged sword with a varying scale of success among the countries who have tried it out - Imperial Japan and Saudi Arabia are 2 of the Worst implementations of Monoculture that had (and continue to have) massive repercussions on either their own people or the surrounding area.

Monoculture can be implemented successfully, however it tends to be vulnerable to Xenophobia and rampant Nationalism both of which can be massively harmful.

I do personally favour the Multicultural model because it does model the "real" world better - even within distinct ethnic groups there are usually more than 1 cultural group and ideally a Multicultural model charts a course which is closest to what all groups want - the down sides as have been pointed out are generally more cultural tension and a tendency for Politicians to "suck up" to cultural groups they think they can score more votes from rather than trying to chart the middle ground as the model is designed to do...

Multiculturalism has led to better food in Britain. A 10 minute walk from Leicester Square to Soho provides all the argument you'd want for multiculturalism, with grocery stores and restaurants spanning the Americas all the way across Eurasia to east Asia. Go further east to East and West Ham, and you can cover Africa as well.

Viking

06-05-2014, 15:40

Gilrandir

06-05-2014, 15:44

Multiculturalism has led to better food in Britain. A 10 minute walk from Leicester Square to Soho provides all the argument you'd want for multiculturalism, with grocery stores and restaurants spanning the Americas all the way across Eurasia to east Asia. Go further east to East and West Ham, and you can cover Africa as well.
Diatologists claim that a person should consume whatever is grown or bred in his own country since (as a result of ancestral memory) his/her system has been adapting to digest this kind of food for generations. Food from "far, far away" may disagree with it for no apparent reason - because the system has no experience of dealing with it. So it is no better food but more variegated food.
And I think multiculturalism in Britain (as much as elsewhere) has led to doctors witnessing cases of diseases they had only read about before.

Gilrandir

06-05-2014, 15:50

I see no patterns when I look at monocultural countries. When I look at countries where subgroups are sizeable on a national level, I almost invariably see a lot of trouble. I see a trend for these countries.

Russia has seen a lot of trouble coming from it's largely non-Russian regional entities. Like Dagestan and Chechnya.

In fact the whole of Caucasus is full of conflicts, and most of these conflicts are between different ethnic groups (like Georgians vs. Abkhazians, Georgians vs. Ossetians, Armenians vs. Azeris).

I believe what Sir Moody and me are trying to say that you can find successful and troublesome countries irrespective of their mono/multicultural background. It is true that multiculturalism adds one more headache so that the country in question has to learn to deal with it. But even monocultural countries can have a lot of problems even without interethnic tensions (present day Syria, for example, or Cambodia where Pol Pot's regime massacred millions of Khmers).

Viking

06-05-2014, 16:06

I believe what Sir Moody and me are trying to say that you can find successful and troublesome countries irrespective of their mono/multicultural background. It is true that multiculturalism adds one more headache so that the country in question has to learn to deal with it. But even monocultural countries can have a lot of problems even without interethnic tensions (present day Syria, for example, or Cambodia where Pol Pot's regime massacred millions of Khmers).

Syria is a multiethnic/-religious country. There are Kurds vs. Arabs and there are Sunnis vs. Shias vs. Christians; and these divisions are most visible in the current civil war.

Monocultural countries are not immune to nasty things; but my hypothesis is that multicultural countries and societies are more likely to experience nasty things. Monocultural countries need to have both clear divides created before slaughter can commence (like through ideology) + the right conditions, while in multicultural countries, such divisions are always present and only the right conditions are needed.

Multicultural countries have weaker "defenses" against things like civil war.

Gilrandir

06-05-2014, 16:48

Monocultural countries are not immune to nasty things; but my hypothesis is that multicultural countries and societies are more likely to experience nasty things.
That's what I've been trying to say.

Sir Moody

06-05-2014, 17:00

Syria is a multiethnic/-religious country. There are Kurds vs. Arabs and there are Sunnis vs. Shias vs. Christians; and these divisions are most visible in the current civil war.

Monocultural countries are not immune to nasty things; but my hypothesis is that multicultural countries and societies are more likely to experience nasty things.

Id argue they are both vulnerable to "nasty things" but in different ways.

Viking

06-05-2014, 18:23

Started a new thread (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?147493-Multicultural-versus-monocultural-societies-and-countries) with my replies in case there's more to be said.

I wonder if things will change when Poroshenko is inaugurated on Saturday. Can we expect to see more aggressive military operations after that?

Seamus Fermanagh

06-06-2014, 14:15

I think he has to do so. The objectives will probably be tightly limited, but failure to do so will erode so much confidence that the whole thing could degenerate further.

Brenus

06-06-2014, 19:13

"The objectives will probably be tightly limited" I don't see why. He can bomb by airplanes, use attack-helicopters, sent troops as much he wants, even having being elected during a armed political crisis and only in the territory he controls, EU, US and the West in general won't say a word.

Sarmatian

06-06-2014, 20:05

I think he has to do so. The objectives will probably be tightly limited, but failure to do so will erode so much confidence that the whole thing could degenerate further.

Ironically, he's been preaching restraint, but as soon as it was clear he won, the attacks intensified.

You believe trying to defeat them militarily is the best course of action?

Sarmatian

06-06-2014, 21:49

Have you seen a map of the electoral results? Even if the entire Luhansk and Donetsk regions voted against him, or chose not to vote, he was still elected overwhelmingly in a democratic majority in a fair election.

Did anyone dispute this? And how did you come from that to this -

Face it: There's a good team, and a bad team, and you and Sarmatian just can't but help root for the bad team, for whatever reason. :shrug:

- and how his win affects the "goodness" and "badness" of sides?

Fisherking

06-06-2014, 22:42

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-07-2014, 01:13

Nope! GC you have the blinders on.

Russia had legitimate concerns. The West was complacent in unsettling and destabilizing the situation there. The west also looted quite a few assets from Ukraine during that time.

Still Russia did exacerbate the situation and bring it to the point of international war and produced civil war within the country.

So I would just say there were no good guys or bad guys. Just thugs lined up to take advantage of a desperate situation.

A Democratic Westward-looking Ukraine is only a threat to Russia if Russia has an irrational fear of democracy and the West.

Russian paranoia is not a legitimate Cassus Belli.

Everybody but Russia knows this.

Seamus Fermanagh

06-07-2014, 01:30

...You believe trying to defeat them militarily is the best course of action?

"Best" is debatable. I would label it political necessity. I think he loses too much support if he doesn't -- the West side of Ukraine is fed up with looking like patsies.

I think the objectives will be sharply limited because the Ukraine military cannot win a broad engagement.* A focused engagement with clearly defined goals (and max air support to achieve) would let him generate results without trying to take on the whole region. Carefully selected, the Ukraine military might even create a situation where the pro-Russian cadre withers on the vine -- while letting him claim "restraint" was what limited the military efforts.

*EDIT: This is not to cast aspersions on the bravery or individual skill of the average Ukrainian soldier. However, their equipment is antiquated, their trained manpower limited, and they are facing an insurgency -- and while most insurgencies fail, it is rarely brute force that beats them into submission.

Brenus

06-07-2014, 08:57

“There's a good team, and a bad team, and you and Sarmatian just can't but help root for the bad team, for whatever reason.” :laugh4: Here is the irony: you didn’t spot the fact I was describing…. Syria. Same facts, different Western reactions… Facts you even didn't think to deny...:laugh4:

“Ukraine has been invaded, occupied, and unsettled by counter-revolutionaries and an actual foreign power. It's all pretty self-evident by now.” You are having a laugh. So, Putin did initiate the Kiev ‘events, the Coup d’état, the Western’s intervention, the storming of official buildings and the seizure of power by the rioters, because all these events were pretty much what unsettled Ukraine. Then, thanks to all these, Putin played it.
Can I remind you once again that the “invasion” of Crimea cost less lives than the liberation of Iraq? But of course you agree that borders drawn by Communist Dictators are legitimate, well, except well it doesn’t suit as, of course i.e. former-Yugoslavia.
So can you tell me where you see all this as “self-evident”?

I “just” reminded people that these methods were used by the West in several occasions, so the indignation toward the Fascist Putin was a little bit far fetch. And I gave a list from Granada to Afghanistan, where it was done. So according to you, when you disagree with a coup, you suck-it up and accept all what you see as an illegitimate power come with, even if some in this government told before it was right to kill your kinds.
Well done, I congratulate you for your un-biased power of analyse.:2thumbsup:

Fisherking

06-07-2014, 08:58

A Democratic Westward-looking Ukraine is only a threat to Russia if Russia has an irrational fear of democracy and the West.

Russian paranoia is not a legitimate Cassus Belli.

Everybody but Russia knows this.

You know, for the most part I agree.

But it is childish to cite good guys and bad guys. This is something we need to get a handle on.

First democratic western governments did dump cash and manpower to destabilize and overthrow an elected democratic government.

Spheres of Influence = Monroe Doctrine. Remember Cuba? Grenada maybe?

It doesn’t excuse Russian actions but on the heals of the failed Syrian Intervention they mark them as much less paranoid.

It is not a clear good vs. bad issue and western democratic people need to get a tighter hand on the adventurism of their own governments.

Crandar

06-07-2014, 09:45

A Democratic Westward-looking Ukraine is only a threat to Russia if Russia has an irrational fear of democracy and the West.

Russian paranoia is not a legitimate Cassus Belli.

Everybody but Russia knows this.
That's quite a simplistic view of the international affairs.
Do you mean that Russia should not be worried about the Ukrainian resources being exploited by Western, instead of Russian, corporations?
Not worried about the fact that Ukraine will certainly be used as a military base to support the Western interests in the area?

GenosseGeneral

06-07-2014, 11:45

"Best" is debatable. I would label it political necessity. I think he loses too much support if he doesn't -- the West side of Ukraine is fed up with looking like patsies.

I think the objectives will be sharply limited because the Ukraine military cannot win a broad engagement.* A focused engagement with clearly defined goals (and max air support to achieve) would let him generate results without trying to take on the whole region. Carefully selected, the Ukraine military might even create a situation where the pro-Russian cadre withers on the vine -- while letting him claim "restraint" was what limited the military efforts.

*EDIT: This is not to cast aspersions on the bravery or individual skill of the average Ukrainian soldier. However, their equipment is antiquated, their trained manpower limited, and they are facing an insurgency -- and while most insurgencies fail, it is rarely brute force that beats them into submission.

It is definitely true that he would loose support, if the uprising is not surpressed. The heavy fighting of the last week has led to a sharply rising number of refugees. The best for the Ukrainian government now is a quick and decisive victory. This means taking back all the separatist strongholds and firm control of the border, since all recent attacks by separatists were aimed at border checkpoints and bases of the border troops. It is hard to tell whether the Ukrainian security forces will achieve this goal in a reasonable time. The separatists are very well armed and have shot down quite a number of helicopters and planes using MANPADS.
However, the Ukrainian government seems to have taken back a number of places around Slovyansk and now they try to retake that town as well. It hard to tell though, for how long they can continue that operation.

Gilrandir

06-07-2014, 14:30

“Ukraine has been invaded, occupied, and unsettled by counter-revolutionaries and an actual foreign power. It's all pretty self-evident by now.” You are having a laugh. So, Putin did initiate the Kiev ‘events, the Coup d’état, the Western’s intervention, the storming of official buildings and the seizure of power by the rioters, because all these events were pretty much what unsettled Ukraine. Then, thanks to all these, Putin played it.

... and that is why we can't speak of invasion, occupation and foreign power interference? You desribe the chain of events which happened before what GC is writing about. These events happening is no justification for Putin to play them.

Can I remind you once again that the “invasion” of Crimea cost less lives than the liberation of Iraq? But of course you agree that borders drawn by Communist Dictators are legitimate, well, except well it doesn’t suit as, of course i.e. former-Yugoslavia.
So can you tell me where you see all this as “self-evident”?

Whoever drew borders, Helsinki 1975 agreement stipulated that they are to stay. Disregarding it (and some others, including 1997 Ukrainian-Russian treaty on friendship and cooperation where both parties agreed to honor each other's integrity) is iniquitous. Now who will trust any agreements and treaties any more, especially if Russia is a party to them?
And you know, I'm getting positively jealous - you cheat on me answering others' posts! :laugh4:

It is definitely true that he would loose support, if the uprising is not surpressed. The heavy fighting of the last week has led to a sharply rising number of refugees. The best for the Ukrainian government now is a quick and decisive victory. This means taking back all the separatist strongholds and firm control of the border, since all recent attacks by separatists were aimed at border checkpoints and bases of the border troops. It is hard to tell whether the Ukrainian security forces will achieve this goal in a reasonable time. The separatists are very well armed and have shot down quite a number of helicopters and planes using MANPADS.
However, the Ukrainian government seems to have taken back a number of places around Slovyansk and now they try to retake that town as well. It hard to tell though, for how long they can continue that operation.
Besides what you write about, the main thing that hampers decisive measures is Ukrainian government's reluctance to cause civilian casualties and mass ruinations.
The first thing to be done is to lock the border since reinforcements and arms keep rushing it. And not just in cars or buses - I saw a photo of an APC having been destroyed by border guards. When planes came to help repulse the terrorist invasion from Russia their pilots reported spotting Russian fighters in the sky. The border being closed the fate of the separatists is forfeit.
Among the latest news: DPR expressed its dissatisfaction with Russian ambassador being present at Poroshenko's inauguration thus "legitimizing him as a president".

Brenus

06-07-2014, 15:05

“and that is why we can't speak of invasion, occupation and foreign power interference?” Where are the occupation forces and invasion forces (I don’t speak of men with silly hat) as apparently everybody agree that Crimea is now Russian (including you). As foreign power influence, or interference, who started it? Ah, yes, EU and US.

“Whoever drew borders, Helsinki 1975 agreement stipulated that they are to stay” And Kosovo was in? Can you remind me, I have a memory gap?

“Disregarding it (and some others, including 1997 Ukrainian-Russian treaty on friendship and cooperation where both parties agreed to honour each other's integrity) is iniquitous” Treaty signed by Serbia and NATO guarantied as well the Internationally Recognised Borders. You know what happened?

“Now who will trust any agreements and treaties any more, especially if Russia is a party to them?” Probably the same who trusted agreements and treaties made by any member of NATO.

“And you know, I'm getting positively jealous - you cheat on me answering others' posts” Oh, you were delusional…

“These events happening is no justification for Putin to play them.” No, but it explained it. Putin wouldn’t have been able to reclaim Crimea without the event before, nor a now separatist up-rising even foreseen if the Ukrainian Movement wouldn’t have move as it did, from social request to political and ethnical confrontations. The blindness of the ones pretending to see Putin behind all these movements didn’t help (and still don’t).
The actual Ukrainian power is using the same vocabulary than Assad in Syria and uses the same methods. Of course, the men of the West have the blessing of the West.

I was clear enough about my personal view on foreign intervention so I will not repeat myself.

Gilrandir

06-07-2014, 16:34

“and that is why we can't speak of invasion, occupation and foreign power interference?” Where are the occupation forces and invasion forces (I don’t speak of men with silly hat) as apparently everybody agree that Crimea is now Russian (including you).

So there was (and is) no Russian spetznaz and military in Crimea? Do you still believe that terrorists in Donbas are locals?

“Whoever drew borders, Helsinki 1975 agreement stipulated that they are to stay” And Kosovo was in? Can you remind me, I have a memory gap?
“Disregarding it (and some others, including 1997 Ukrainian-Russian treaty on friendship and cooperation where both parties agreed to honour each other's integrity) is iniquitous” Treaty signed by Serbia and NATO guarantied as well the Internationally Recognised Borders. You know what happened?
“Now who will trust any agreements and treaties any more, especially if Russia is a party to them?” Probably the same who trusted agreements and treaties made by any member of NATO.

Yugoslavia disintegrated (as well as the USSR). Separation of Kosovo and Serbia may be regarded as a stage of it. Annexation of Crimea is not about a country falling into several pieces but about one country (which emerged simultaneously with Ukraine and recognized the latter's integrity) suddenly forgetting about the official declaration. NATO didn't annex anything as it is not a country. BTW, Ukraine didn't officially recognize Kosovo as an independent state. What about France?

The actual Ukrainian power is using the same vocabulary than Assad in Syria and uses the same methods.

I will not repeat myself on how much Ukrainian government is reluctant to do what Assad is doing (and what Russia did to Grozny during the Chechen campaigns). The latest example: a Ukrainian transport aircrart was hit by a missile above Slovyansk and the pilots took it away so that it didn't fall on the city. As a result only half the crew jumped out and were saved while the other three died in the crash. Ukrainian military realize that average Donbas locals (whatever political preferences they may have) are not to suffer as much as it can be helped.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-08-2014, 01:04

That's quite a simplistic view of the international affairs.
Do you mean that Russia should not be worried about the Ukrainian resources being exploited by Western, instead of Russian, corporations?
Not worried about the fact that Ukraine will certainly be used as a military base to support the Western interests in the area?

The West has no military interests in the area, other than maintaining the territorial integrity of it's allies, currently we're most worried about the Baltics and Romania, also Poland.

As to Western Corporations vs Russian ones, that wasn't really a competition until the Tsar decided to start annexing Ukrainian territory and created bad feeling. Ukrainians would rather do business with Russians, I'm sure.

Putin and his Court and paranoid.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-08-2014, 02:19

I find the whole NATO encroachment argument to be a fallacy anyway. NATO never set up shop where it wasn't invited, and since when is self-determination something we look down on? If Russia's neighbors are constantly looking west for help, that's Russia's problem and not the West's. (of course, I still think NATO is a waste of money, and I do think we should let Europe deal with Russia on their own, but neither of those opinions changes the basic fact that Russia is the aggressor, and NATO is just a damned good response over time)

@Brenus (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/member.php?u=11130) Why do you bring up Yugoslavia every time western influence is discussed? They aren't the same by a long shot.

US spends too much on defence - Europe too little, yes, but it's important that a cowardly future US President be forced to join WWIII at the start to prevent it dragging on like the last two. Europe and the US together present a massive enough power Bloc that Russia cannot hope to challenge us. For the short term that it expedient.

As to NATO encroachment, the Russian in the USSR were taken by surprise when the Baltics et al. demanded independence and they still fail to understand that subjugation is NOT forgiven, even after almost a thousand year Spain, France and the UK continue to have problems internally for that very reason.

The Warsaw Pact Countries won independence from Russia and immediately requested NATO and EU membership. If Russians can't cope with the fact that the likes of Poland want to be plugged into the West and have ALWAYS wanted that then they're no use to the wider world anyway.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-08-2014, 02:58

Why should we join any such war at the start? We've been preventing such a war since 1945, to the detriment of everything but our defense sector. I am convinced that the only way to get Europe to pay for its own defense, and to carry its own international weight on its own power, is to be left high and dry. I am equally convinced that the only way we'll ever find the money to fix our broken country is to take it directly from our world police fund. We have no moral obligation to do any more than we've done, and we certainly don't have any obligation to join a war of nationalism in Europe for no other reason than that we kind of like one side better than the other. The irony, of course, is that we are more likely to start such a war than anyone else--thanks in large part to 60 years of post WW2 conditioning.

All stuff for a different thread though, I suppose. I agree with the rest of your post. :shrug:

How many tens of thousands of soldiers are you willing to spend to prove that point?

Yes, there's a problem, but now is NOT the time to be reducing NATO from anything other than "overwhelming force".

Gilrandir

06-08-2014, 06:26

@: To whom it may concern:
I don't like the new forum design. :no:
Before I could both see the author and the whole of the message. Now my sreen width does not permit it and if I dial down the scale the letters are far from convenient to read being too small. :furious3: :rtwno:

Brenus

06-08-2014, 07:22

“So there was (and is) no Russian spetznaz and military in Crimea? Do you still believe that terrorists in Donbas are locals?” Yeah, there are probably spetznaz (which are military) in Crimea. But Crimea declared Independence and now joined Russia. So problem solved.
The up-raising movement in Ukraine? Of course it is done by locals. To qualify them a foreign terrorist is just in order to use air force, army and attack-helicopters like Assad does. It is not a belief, as no one came with proof, and I say proof, of foreign mercenaries (in full and plain meaning of this word) on the side of the insurgents.

“What about France?” France did, as member of the pact that illegally bombed a country to illegally take a chunk of other sovereign country to give to other. And your point is?

“Ukrainian government is reluctant to do what Assad is doing” Lol. This actual government was faster to act violently than the former one, and much harder. The fact that it failed to have results is not by defaulting to try…

“Why do you bring up Yugoslavia every time western influence is discussed? They aren't the same by a long shot. Nor are Kosovo, Iraq, and the annexation of Crimea even remotely related.”
Well, it is because what Putin did was a direct replica of what NATO did there.
And if you think it is not related, look at a map and where US bases were in the 90’ and where they are now, closer and closer to Russia. Now, if you think that to install Missile stations in Poland was not considered as a threat by Russia, you should reconsider. If you think that having US troops and base that will remain in Afghanistan is not a threat for Russia, reconsider. If you think that the endless interventions and aggression by US and NATO these last decades are not considered as threats by Russia, rethink.
It is all right to dismiss Russia as paranoid, and very trendy. Well, we, the West, started WARS in Asia to counter the alleged “domino” effect, USA was near to launch a nuclear war because USSR was doing what USA did to USSR (installing nuclear weapons at the very door of the country).
And now we have people there speaking of Russia being paranoid? Well, we didn’t stop to give them reasons to be paranoid. So it looks to me, from the Russian point of view, they are under treat, there is a political will to put boots and weapons and puppet states around them.

Husar

06-08-2014, 09:55

Russia should just station nuclear missiles in the sovereign nation of Cuba again. If the Cubans want that protection from a country that's boycotted them for years and even tried an invasion.

Regarding the forum design, there is a dropdown menu on the bottom of the page, where a different design can be chosen if one does not like the default.

Brenus

06-08-2014, 10:06

"What a long winded way of saying two wrongs make a right" Yeah, I expected you to say so. Always the same answer: we did bad but hey, that was a loooong time ago, we are not like that anymore. The problem of course is it is not far in other' memories... And we still do the same thing. Why should it be forgotten? We provided weapons to the Taliban to help them to kill Russians, but hey, that was long time ago. We even made movies about it... Do you hope Russians having a Gold Fish memories? Why shouldn't they see the clear EU and USA strategy for these decades for what it is?

Crandar

06-08-2014, 10:50

The West has no military interests in the area, other than maintaining the territorial integrity of it's allies, currently we're most worried about the Baltics and Romania, also Poland.

As to Western Corporations vs Russian ones, that wasn't really a competition until the Tsar decided to start annexing Ukrainian territory and created bad feeling. Ukrainians would rather do business with Russians, I'm sure.

Putin and his Court and paranoid.
Exactly how do you know that the West has no military interests or that there was no conflict between Russian and Western corporations? Also, Ukraine is not an ally of either USA or the European Union, at least officially.

Blaming for this unfortunate situation the lack of reason on behalf of Putin and his advisors is a bit naive, isn't it?

Gilrandir

06-08-2014, 15:05

The up-raising movement in Ukraine? Of course it is done by locals. To qualify them a foreign terrorist is just in order to use air force, army and attack-helicopters like Assad does. It is not a belief, as no one came with proof, and I say proof, of foreign mercenaries (in full and plain meaning of this word) on the side of the insurgents.

Do you want to see a paylist of them or a terrorist in a live interview saying "I am a mercenary"? What other proof you need besides the fact that trucks after trucks (lately accompanied by APC and anti-aircraft artillery) filled with men and arms cross the border from Russia into Ukraine? Chechens in Donetsk admit being "Kadyrovtsy", Ponomarev speaks of his foreign friends fighting and upbraids locals for not doing so. The latest breakthrough force headed for Snizhny (south Donetsk region) and are now digging in and building escarpments and checkpoints. Oh, I forgot - you don't believe me. Carry on with the blinders on your eyes.

“What about France?” France did, as member of the pact that illegally bombed a country to illegally take a chunk of other sovereign country to give to other.

I don't get it: what other country got a piece of Serbia?

And your point is?

You are so proud of democratic principles your country is run according to, but it doesn't prevent it from Nazis winning elections and recognizing the chunks of illegitimately dismembered states as sovereign countries. Democracy doesn't work in practice?

And now we have people there speaking of Russia being paranoid? Well, we didn’t stop to give them reasons to be paranoid. So it looks to me, from the Russian point of view, they are under treat, there is a political will to put boots and weapons and puppet states around them.
OK, according to you Russia had justified reasons to feel unsafe and cheated so it had to react and it did. Now let's measure it against the outcome.
Does Russia feel safer now?
Does it have the trust of the world community?
Does it have friendly neighbors to the west?
Did it convince Ukraine that it shouldn't join Nato?
Did it stop Ukraine from signing AA with EU?
Did it install the government it wants in Ukraine?
Conclusion: whatever Russia did worsened its position as an international player (unless you enjoy it being an international outcast and bully).

Regarding the forum design, there is a dropdown menu on the bottom of the page, where a different design can be chosen if one does not like the default.
Thanks, I returned it the way it was.

Viking

06-08-2014, 15:45

Russia should just station nuclear missiles in the sovereign nation of Cuba again. If the Cubans want that protection from a country that's boycotted them for years and even tried an invasion.

Has Putin said that Ukraine should not look westwards because that would not be beneficial to the security situation of Russia led by his government? What's his narrative for what's going on in Ukraine? Remind us now.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-08-2014, 15:48

Exactly how do you know that the West has no military interests or that there was no conflict between Russian and Western corporations? Also, Ukraine is not an ally of either USA or the European Union, at least officially.

Blaming for this unfortunate situation the lack of reason on behalf of Putin and his advisors is a bit naive, isn't it?

This whole bloody mess is Putin's fault, it all comes back to his annexation of Crimea, which really wasn't necessary at all. If Putin was worried Ukraine would join NATO, his actions have only made that much more likely.

Husar

06-08-2014, 18:49

Has Putin said that Ukraine should not look westwards because that would not be beneficial to the security situation of Russia led by his government? What's his narrative for what's going on in Ukraine? Remind us now.

His narrative is that the communist people of Ukraine need to be saved by mother Russia.
The narrative for Cuba was that the capitalists of Cuba needed to be saved by mother America.

At least mother Russia sends her own soldiers while mother America only sent exiles who ended up as cannon fodder for nothing really.

Sarmatian

06-08-2014, 18:53

I find the whole NATO encroachment argument to be a fallacy anyway. NATO never set up shop where it wasn't invited,

Quite the contrary, Ukraine is the prime example. Even after Russian annexation of Crimea, Ukrainians would vote to stay out of NATO, according to the polls, although by a small majority.

Prior to this, support for joining NATO was between 5 and 20% over a long period of time, yet USA was constantly pushing Ukraine into NATO, exerting pressure on Ukraine and European NATO members. Huge amount of pressure, one could add. And that wasn't a whim, it was an official policy for at least two different administrations. You may recall how McCain used to emphasize the importance of Ukraine during his presidential campaign - "with Ukraine, Russia is a western power, without Ukraine, Russia is an eastern power".

It was slow, deliberate, methodical and calculated western strategy that culminated now. That doesn't excuse Russian actions, but it certainly makes a "good guys/bad guys" distinction impossible.

Viking

06-08-2014, 19:41

His narrative is that the communist people of Ukraine need to be saved by mother Russia.
The narrative for Cuba was that the capitalists of Cuba needed to be saved by mother America.

The nuclear missiles and the exiles invasion of Cuba are two separate narratives.

If Russia had equipped Ukrainian exiles and sent them into Ukraine and at least partially admit it; that would immediately be a lot cleaner. Talking about Russians needing protection is even more far-fetched than those fictional Iraqi WMDs.

Brenus

06-08-2014, 20:19

“You are so proud of democratic principles your country is run according to” I think that as usual you have not a clue. You project your own nationalism blindness on me. I am not you. When my country is wrong she is wrong. When the last SS fighting in Berlin happened to be French, I am not proud of France having SS.

“I don't get it: what other country got a piece of Serbia?” Yes, you don’t get it. Did I write country? I wrote other. Other party is being Kosovar/Albanian under the eyes of one of the biggest US Military Base in Europe.

“Democracy doesn't work in practice?” Are you against democracy?

“Do you want to see a paylist of them or a terrorist in a live interview saying "I am a mercenary"? What other proof you need besides the fact that trucks after trucks (lately accompanied by APC and anti-aircraft artillery) filled with men and arms cross the border from Russia into Ukraine? Chechens in Donetsk admit being "Kadyrovtsy", Ponomarev speaks of his foreign friends fighting and upbraids locals for not doing so. The latest breakthrough force headed for Snizhny (south Donetsk region) and are now digging in and building escarpments and checkpoints.” Well, yes, exactly that. Proofs, like what we have for the US mercenary in Iraq, Afghanistan and now Ukraine if German newspaper got it right. You know: proofs. In Bosnia, both sides were equipped with foreign volunteers but as much as I know none of them were mercenaries. And about the admission of the Chechen, that was denied by the Chechen themselves. So, they lied at one point. And yes, Russia will help the Rebels/insurgents, as we help the one in Syria, Of course it is easier for Putin as he doesn’t have to fear to arm the one who will blow-up our buildings later…
It is why I try to tell from the start, but you were blind by your nationalism: No one wants Ukraine. Nor Putin or EU and don’t even THINK of USA, no one wants to pay the bills. Putin wanted to neutralise it, and so he did. So he will sustain the rebels (I use your vocabulary to make it easy) just enough to destabilise Ukraine. No others countries will sent soldiers if they might be involve in potential inter-ethnic slaughters.

“Does Russia feel safer now?: After securing Naval Bases in Crimea, and stop NATO implementation: Yes
Does it have the trust of the world community? Never had it, so what changed?
Does it have friendly neighbours to the west? Never had it, so what changed. At least, Russia has now worried neighbours, reinforced by the absolute inaction of the West.
Did it convince Ukraine that it shouldn't join Nato? Ukraine won’t join NATO (or just on papers) if the Government wants one chance to get civil peace, Russia will take care of this.
Did it stop Ukraine from signing AA with EU? No, but this will help Ukraine to pay the gas bill. As you noticed, no one said Ukraine shouldn’t pay the bill.
Did it install the government it wants in Ukraine? No, so Russia has to make good with what happened (Crimea).
“Conclusion: whatever Russia did worsen its position as an international player” Err, on what results are you sustaining this claim? Russia lost her VETO in UN? Or something I missed in the news, a part the sanctions comedy?

Again, because you believe Putin organised every things, your “conclusion” is that he failed.
Mine is Putin reacted and saved what he could. So, an unstable Ukraine and Crimea in the pocket are not a that bad result, considering he was contemplating to have US bases at his borders and a direct threat to the undersea pipelines.
In supporting the separatist unrest, he pushed the borders westward and secured his naval bases. He sent a strong messages to neighbours tempted to believed NATO‘s words, showing this power being strong with the weak and weak with the strong. Message that was heard loud and clear by at least 2 of others neighbours.

Gilrandir

06-08-2014, 20:21

If Russia had equipped Ukrainian exiles and sent them into Ukraine and at least partially admit it; that would immediately be a lot cleaner.
In a way it did (and does). In this case exiles are Berkuts and other Crimean spetznaz first harbored on the peninsula and then (among others) sent into Donbas.

Furunculus

06-08-2014, 20:24

Putin hasn't failed. He got exactly what we wanted, and he was aware of the price it would cost.

Russia has a lease on Sevastopol that stretches out to ~2042, but the thing about sovereign nation states is that they are sovereign, and while a non-aligned Ukraine wouldn’t dare antagonise its more powerful neigbour this is not the problem Russia faced. No, Russia faced the prospect of a Ukraine in 2020 that was a small’ish EU nation subject to pressure of an EU foreign policy, with the security guarantee of NATO to let them act ‘unilaterally’. Even the potential that they might consider revoking the lease in the late twenties would be enough to scupper Russia’s certainty on it’s ability to forward project potential responses to future problems. This is the purpose of Sevastopol; to provide options for power projection.

As to it being boxed in by NATO, the sum of Russian foreign policy ambition does not boil down to warding off existential threats from its West (far from it). The Med is an important part of the world in its own right with unparalleled access to Southern Asia and Africa, areas otherwise difficult to reach (and thus influence), from a nation at the very top of the eurasian landmass.

Not Just a warm-water port. The return of the buffer-state:

In the cold war era when we had two hyper-dominant powers squaring off against each other the rest of us had to put up with the notion of spheres of influence, i.e, small peripheral nations that are subject to the will of their neighbouring hegemon. This helped give the hegemons:
1. Strategic depth
2. A casus belli to act beyond their own borders
You have Finland for the old USSR as one very good example.

Even with the end of the Cold War the victors were supposed to leave Russia with a buffer zone of non-aligned states between it and the West. We all know how chagrined Russia was to see NATO/Europe jump into the baltic states.
Russia still likes to see the world this way, and has worked hard to ensure that Ukraine and Belarus stay within its ‘fold’.

This has obviously become untenable in Ukraine, but what it has achieved with its recent chaos in the east of the country is to informally partition the country by forcing a federal structure with significant autonomy for the eastern provinces and confirmation of the countries non-aligned status. Oh, look what’s happened. And what guarantees the continued non-aligned status of a country that must continue to respect interests of its twin ethnic identities? Crimea. It will remain de-facto Russian territory, but not de-jure, and as long as that continues as a territorial dispute it will be difficult/impossible for it to join NATO or the EU. Kissinger has recently been conducting a little shuttle-diplomacy in Russia, you have to wonder whether his recent article isn’t communicating the reality of a done-deal rather than a wish…

If Putin succeeds in creating a federalised Ukraine with regional autonomy for russo-ethinic eastern regions, what might that say to Belarus? With a 13% ethnic russian population, 33% who believe they share a common history with Russia, and 70% who speak Russian langauge…“Keep you head down!” Putin gets the buffer between east and west that he seeks, even if it is intra-national boundary rather than supra-national one.

Never mind the quality, feel the width:

Surely this continued aggression on Europe’s doorstep will expose Russia’s dependence on Western cash for its gas? Without alternative markets for its petro-exports its economy would be toast. Well quite, that is exactly what Russia has done. Within the (extremely slow) time-frame that Europe can afford to wind down its gas dependence on Russia the rising eEast will more than suffice to soak up any Russian ‘surplus’.

Who do you think Russia perceives as the more important market for its products; a sclerotic Europe that will shrink to less than 15% of the world economy by 2030, or the worlds rising No2 power that will represent the largest economic bloc (including the peripheral nations that will become heavily integrated into China’s supply chain)?
Who do you think Russia perceives as the more important strategic partner/rival for its own future relevance; a post-RealistIR EU that continues to let its fascination with soft-power blind it to relevance of using hard-power, or the worlds rising No2 power with whom it share thousands of miles of border and an authoritarian government?

The fact that this has happened in Spring – as European gas-dependence declines with the warming weather – will also be seen as a good thing in the Kremlin, for it gives Europe the space to crystallise on less hysterical responses. In addition to which Germany is too sympathetic, and Southern europe apathetic, for any hard response to materialise from Europe. The US does have the power to utterly cripple Russia economically, by using legal instruments to taint vital Russian banks, but if there is any element of this crisis that is particularly clever it is the ‘threat’ to Eastern Ukraine. In demonstrating a credible military threat externally, and the will to create havoc internally, Russia is forcing the West to ignore Crimea and predicate dangerous sanctions on future action rather than actions past. A beautiful shell game, and for a part of Ukraine they have no intention of taking. If Eastern Ukraine is never absorbed into Russian territory they never get activated. One hopes that Russian nationalists in Eastern Ukraine realise they are Putin’s pawns before they shed too much blood in their cause…

Democracy is a biggest con in Foreign Policy, for it allows you to justify 180 degree turns in policy with no loss of face. In five years time when Putin steps away from (the front-line of ) Russian politics, there will dawn a bright new day when Russia will patch up rocky relations with its western neighbours. All ominous talk of consequences will evaporate, and we’ll all cheer; “Hooray for Western diplomacy!”

A good mark of whether Putin has succeeded or failed in this gambit is not the final status of Crimea, it is whether he can pull off this diplomatic reset before Finland, its northern frontier buffer-state reconsiders its options… The same holds true in reverse as the measure of success for Western diplomacy, can the Nordic countries be drawn more fully into the security architecture of the West?

Sarmatian

06-08-2014, 20:47

Kissinger has recently been conducting a little shuttle-diplomacy in Russia, you have to wonder whether his recent article isn’t communicating the reality of a done-deal rather than a wish…

What article? Link? Pretty please...

Gilrandir

06-08-2014, 21:05

“You are so proud of democratic principles your country is run according to” I think that as usual you have not a clue. You project your own nationalism blindness on me. I am not you. When my country is wrong she is wrong. When the last SS fighting in Berlin happened to be French, I am not proud of France having SS.

Yet you wriggled like an eel and juggled figures trying to deny quite a substantial support of Nazis in your country.

“I don't get it: what other country got a piece of Serbia?” Yes, you don’t get it. Did I write country? I wrote other. Other party is being Kosovar/Albanian under the eyes of one of the biggest US Military Base in Europe.

For me to get you better you should polish your grammar: instead of "other" you should have written "another" , "others" or "the other". In your case the antecedent of the word you used was not clear.

“Democracy doesn't work in practice?” Are you against democracy?

I just want you to see that democracy is not the answer to all the questions which you seem to believe.

In Bosnia, both sides were equipped with foreign volunteers but as much as I know none of them were mercenaries.

What do you consider the difference between mercenaries and volunteers? The latter don't get paid? Russia is reported to recriut those who have military experience with promises of generous payment and later refrigerators with "200" painted on them carry bodies back to Russia. How do you classify them?

“Does Russia feel safer now?: After securing Naval Bases in Crimea, and stop NATO implementation: Yes

With NATO reinforcing its detachments in Baltic states, Poland and Romania I would say no.

Does it have the trust of the world community? Never had it, so what changed?

And it added some reasons why the mistrust was and for a long time will be justified.

Does it have friendly neighbours to the west? Never had it, so what changed. At least, Russia has now worried neighbours, reinforced by the absolute inaction of the West.

Ukraine has stopped being a strategic partner and a friendly nation.

Did it convince Ukraine that it shouldn't join Nato? Ukraine won’t join NATO (or just on papers) if the Government wants one chance to get civil peace, Russia will take care of this.

Russia succeded in making Ukrainians feel unsafe. The percentage of those who look favorably upon joining NATO has increased.

Did it stop Ukraine from signing AA with EU? No, but this will help Ukraine to pay the gas bill. As you noticed, no one said Ukraine shouldn’t pay the bill.

The question is not in paying the bill but in the price which is the highest in Europe. Where before Russia put its foot firm insisting on 486$ or something, now it is ready to bargain.

Did it install the government it wants in Ukraine? No

The bold matters.

“Conclusion: whatever Russia did worsen its position as an international player” Err, on what results are you sustaining this claim? Russia lost her VETO in UN? Or something I missed in the news, a part the sanctions comedy?

You did. What about being kicked out of G8? What about "Southern stream" being suspended indefinetly?

Again, because you believe Putin organised every things, your “conclusion” is that he failed.
Mine is Putin reacted and saved what he could. So, an unstable Ukraine and Crimea in the pocket are not a that bad result, considering he was contemplating to have US bases at his borders and a direct threat to the undersea pipelines.

Yet bases he does have (which are now being reinforced). Plus a 46 million unstable and unfriendly country at his threshold is something which one can only dream of.
Putin overreacted and got a huge headache on his hands. Yeltsin had been wiser than that.

You again call me names perhaps again not considering it a personal attack (or pesonnel attack as you put it). Playing a hurt dignity you resort to insults. So I take it as reluctance to abide by the rules of the forum and consider responding likewise.

Sarmatian

06-08-2014, 21:39

For me to get you better you should polish your grammar: instead of "other" you should have written "another" , "others" or "the other". In your case the antecedent of the word you used was not clear.

personal attack (or pesonnel attack as you put it).

Grammar mistakes?

Congratulations, you've just found the world's thinnest argument. This show of force and rhetorical skill mean others will shudder in fear and run for cover at the mere notion of arguing with you.

I know I do, but for different reasons.

Gilrandir

06-08-2014, 22:06

Grammar mistakes?

Congratulations, you've just found the world's thinnest argument. This show of force and rhetorical skill mean others will shudder in fear and run for cover at the mere notion of arguing with you.

I know I do, but for different reasons.
I was explaining why I didn't understand the message of Brenus. Misunderstandings may happen, but he generalized concluding I don't get a thing in my "nationalism blindness". There was no need for him to practice venom-spitting . The same I may say in response to your mockery.

Furunculus

06-08-2014, 22:24

What article? Link? Pretty please...

hmmm, my comment is a little out of date, but i'd read it at the time (mid april).

all i can now find is this:

http://truth-out.org/news/item/23676-after-chaotic-autonomy-votes-negotiations-could-be-sole-path-to-prevent-ukraines-disintegration

Brenus

06-08-2014, 23:10

“Yet you wriggled like an eel and juggled figures trying to deny quite a substantial support of Nazis in your country” When and where? YOU deny having Nazi in YOUR executive. For clarity, I even don’t challenge that the FN is not a Nazi Party, as in France, it is illegal to be Nazi. Some of their members are Nazi, some are Royalists and you can find all kind of extreme-right in it. So, try again to derive the focus. YOU support the Nazi in YOUR executive. I made clear that I don’t the MP in my Assembly. YOU made clear you are not so mad about yours.

“What do you consider the difference between mercenaries and volunteers?” Mercenaries fight for the ones who pay them, volunteers fight for what they believe.

“How do you classify them?” As a joke at best, a rumour or a false news/pure propaganda.

“With NATO reinforcing its detachments in Baltic states, Poland and Romania I would say no.” Did war is upon Russia? No. So useless deployment…

“And it added some reasons why the mistrust was and for a long time will be justified.” And you should read about the Place Tienanmen, it will be instructive. And I think Russia will survive the 6 months period, until next winter…

“What about being kicked out of G8?” Joke and posture.

“You again call me names” Where?

"nationalism blindness": Is it what you think is calling names…? It is a description of your attitude and comments.

“I just want you to see that democracy is not the answer to all the questions which you seem to believe.” Democracy is the only way to answer. Of course, you have to know what democracy is.

Gilrandir

06-09-2014, 06:16

“Yet you wriggled like an eel and juggled figures trying to deny quite a substantial support of Nazis in your country” When and where?

In the posts where you tried to explain their victory in 2014 and Le Pen's runner up spot in 2007 by low turnout and peculiarities of election system.

“
YOU deny having Nazi in YOUR executive. For clarity, I even don’t challenge that the FN is not a Nazi Party, as in France, it is illegal to be Nazi.

I don't deny Svoboda's presence in the executive. I doubt them being nazi as (you may be asonished but) in Ukraine it is illegal to be nazi as well.

“
Some of their members are Nazi, some are Royalists and you can find all kind of extreme-right in it.

How do you know about the ideological background of all Svoboda members? I'm sure there is a whole gamut of extreme and non-extreme right over there as well.

“
YOU support the Nazi in YOUR executive. I made clear that I don’t the MP in my Assembly. YOU made clear you are not so mad about yours.

Quote at least one post (or even sentence) of mine where I support Svoboda. On the contrary, I more than once said that I don't like them, I didn't vote for them in 2012 (and earlier) and (now an eye-opener for you) I didn't vote for Tyagnybok (nor for Yarosh to boot) in 2014. Now who is blind (or should I say forgetful)? Oops, I fogot you don't believe me. Then you can imagine whatever you please.
The only thing that is true in all your post is that I'm not mad (as you put it) about Svoboda in the executive. Handsome is as handsome does, or in this case nazi is as nazi does. So far they haven't done anything to expose their abomonable essence. When they do I will consider starting being mad. Otherwise it will be (let me quote you)

useless deployment…

“What do you consider the difference between mercenaries and volunteers?” Mercenaries fight for the ones who pay them, volunteers fight for what they believe.
“How do you classify them?” As a joke at best, a rumour or a false news/pure propaganda.

Many Ukrainians volunteered to go to the east to fight terrorists. It doesn't mean they are not paid. The same with Russians, Chechens and the like. As for jokes and rumors:
http://censor.net.ua/photo_news/287986/40_naemnikov_putina_vernulis_v_rossiyu_v_odnom_refrijeratore_foto
Go on living in the imagined world you created for yourself.

“And it added some reasons why the mistrust was and for a long time will be justified.” And you should read about the Place Tienanmen, it will be instructive.
It may sound as a surprise to you, but I've heard about it.

“You again call me names” Where?
"nationalism blindness": Is it what you think is calling names…? It is a description of your attitude and comments.
“I just want you to see that democracy is not the answer to all the questions which you seem to believe.” Democracy is the only way to answer. Of course, you have to know what democracy is.
Your favorite tactics: you deny obvious things (calling me names) combined with arrogant comments meaning to show I don't know much of what is (and was) going on in the world and even if I could read about it somewhere I don't have wits enough to understand it (without your clairvoyant guidance).
As for democracy, I see your way of interpreting it:
Step 1. Hold democratic elections.
Step 2. Check whether there are any parties which you don't like.
Step 3. If there are some, disregard the results of the elections and the will of voters and exclude them from the government.
Why, you sound like the Ukrainian government (which you dislike so much) who want to ban Communists.
Conclusion: smells like nazi spirit. :laugh4:

Brenus

06-09-2014, 07:45

“In the posts where you tried to explain their victory in 2014 and Le Pen's runner up spot in 2007 by low turnout and peculiarities of election system.” You are right. I have to use simpler vocabulary. Right: A victory is when you won the majority (50 % + 1). Did the FN won 50 % + 1 majority: No. Did Le Pen (father) win the elections: No. Did his party got MP in the Parliament: No. Is there any majority of FN representative in actual French Parliament? No. So, what victory are you speaking about?

“I doubt them being nazi”; Astonishing indeed, when this party openly says it is, wearing Nazi Uniform in parades, and wanting to kill Jews and Russians…

“How do you know about the ideological background of all Svoboda members?” Err, when one of the leaders having a “think-tank” named after Nazi might be a clue, as having Nazi Symbolism and Nazi Uniforms in your parades.

“Handsome is as handsome does, or in this case nazi is as nazi does.” Good point. Let’s be aware of the danger when they will start to do what they preach for. Then, ooops, too late, sorry.

“Go on living in the imagined world you created for yourself.” And these pictures prove that the dead are (were in this case) mercenaries? I have to applaud your spirit of linking things totally irrelevant to each other. Pictures of coffins/body bags prove that the dead are mercenaries… Hmm, remind me the Post Vietnam period when all soldiers were seen as babies killers and mercenaries… 3 pictures of a warehouse, 1 lorry carrying coffins and crossing apparently the Ukrainian border, I am convinced: Hordes of mercenaries paid by someone in Russia are fighting against the nice and kind democratically elected popular Ukrainian Government that reluctantly uses bombers, attack-helicopters, APC (and probably tanks) and artillery in order to resolve a political crisis.

“I could read about it somewhere I don't have wits enough to understand it” Your interpretation of democracy is:
Step 1. Hold democratic elections.
Step 2. Check whether there are any parties which you don't like.
Step 3. If there are some, disregard the results of the elections and the will of voters and exclude them from the government.
Why, you sound like the Ukrainian government (which you dislike so much) who want to ban Communists.
Conclusion: smells like nazi spirit
I agree, it smell nazi. It is Nazi. You should change it.

Mine is:
Democracy is a political system of Government based on laws. Not perfect, but it works.
Parties that don’t follow the Laws and the Constitution or that are recognised Criminal Organisations are not legal. They don’t represent nor are/have Political Opinions but offence. Calling to murders is not a political opinion but an offence.
In democracy, Judiciary, Executive and Legislation Powers are separated and Independent (allegedly, I grant you that).
A government is nominated (not elected, you will notice) to manage the country following the result of elections won at a majority of 50% +1 of (actually) voters (or by coalition representing).
All parties that gain some representatives are represented in the Parliament (then we could have a debate about proportional vote or not).
Then few mechanisms and regulations to smooth the functioning…
That the idea.
No offence meant, or personal attack, I prefer my version.

Gilrandir

06-09-2014, 09:30

“In the posts where you tried to explain their victory in 2014 and Le Pen's runner up spot in 2007 by low turnout and peculiarities of election system.” You are right. I have to use simpler vocabulary. Right: A victory is when you won the majority (50 % + 1). Did the FN won 50 % + 1 majority: No. Did Le Pen (father) win the elections: No. Did his party got MP in the Parliament: No. Is there any majority of FN representative in actual French Parliament? No. So, what victory are you speaking about?

Victory in euroelections 2014. And victory it is when a party gets more votes than the others, 50% or no 50%. As for Le Pen, you can't carefully read what you try to cotradict two lines below: Le Pen's runner up spot in 2007.

“I doubt them being nazi”; Astonishing indeed, when this party openly says it is, wearing Nazi Uniform in parades, and wanting to kill Jews and Russians…
“How do you know about the ideological background of all Svoboda members?” Err, when one of the leaders having a “think-tank” named after Nazi might be a clue, as having Nazi Symbolism and Nazi Uniforms in your parades.

I don't follow Svoboda closely, but I believe (I may be mistaken) what you take as a nazi uniform is the one that was worn by UPA during WWII. I don't know what organization is named after a nazi. Do you mean Bandera?
As far as I know, in no documents of Nurnberg trial either UPA or Bandera are proclaimed nazis. Moreover, the Soviet representative at the trial brought forth nazi repressions against UPA as one of the charges.
I have already expressed my attitude to the issue: UPA and Bandera fought first with nazis against the Soviet army, then against both nazis and Soviets. Bandera spent most of the war in KZ-Lager, Sachsenhausen, IIRC.

“Handsome is as handsome does, or in this case nazi is as nazi does.” Good point. Let’s be aware of the danger when they will start to do what they preach for. Then, ooops, too late, sorry.

It was the attitude you advocated regarding having an army at peace time, remember?

“With NATO reinforcing its detachments in Baltic states, Poland and Romania I would say no.” Did war is upon Russia? No. So useless deployment…

“Go on living in the imagined world you created for yourself.” And these pictures prove that the dead are (were in this case) mercenaries? I have to applaud your spirit of linking things totally irrelevant to each other. Pictures of coffins/body bags prove that the dead are mercenaries… Hmm, remind me the Post Vietnam period when all soldiers were seen as babies killers and mercenaries… 3 pictures of a warehouse, 1 lorry carrying coffins and crossing apparently the Ukrainian border, I am convinced: Hordes of mercenaries paid by someone in Russia are fighting against the nice and kind democratically elected popular Ukrainian Government that reluctantly uses bombers, attack-helicopters, APC (and probably tanks) and artillery in order to resolve a political crisis.

They are foreign citizens who come to a different country with arms and participate in the war. Are you so naive that you believe this is done for purely altruistic reasons? A perfect world where money doesn't matter. Or are they soldiers you liken them to? And there are many more trucks like the one in the photo crossing for Russia every other day. I am surprised you admitted Russians in Donbas, though. This is some progress. Or are you still sure those are rioting populaces? And one more "mistake" from you (or perhaps from the sources you use): the planes used by Ukrainian military are fighters not bombers.

Mine is:
Parties that don’t follow the Laws and the Constitution or that are recognised Criminal Organisations are not legal.

I have to repeat over and over again: all parties elected to the Verkhovna Rada are legal and registerded. Period.

A government is nominated (not elected, you will notice) to manage the country following the result of elections won at a majority of 50% +1 of (actually) voters (or by coalition representing).
Then the Ukrainan democracy is what you ask for: the coalition of Udar, Batkivshchina and Svoboda was formed which nominated the government. It is logical that the latter included representatives of all three parties.

No offence meant, or personal attack, I prefer my version.

You see your version is implemented in current Ukrainian government. But you don't like it. :shrug:

Myth

06-09-2014, 13:59

This thread has me as its progenitor but I lost track around 50 pages ago :shrug:

Brenus

06-09-2014, 18:16

“Victory in euroelections 2014. And victory it is when a party gets more votes than the others, 50% or no 50%.” Nope. A victory is democracy is when your party comes to power. In the 50’s & 60's the Communist Party was the most numerous and powerful party in France but never won, because the rest was against them. Same for the FN. Even 30 % will still leave 70 % against. So the FN became the first party in the European elections, but is still not a winner. That is the rule of democracy, you see… 70 % trumps 30 %.

“Le Pen's runner up spot in 2007.” Sorry, I might become blind… Did Le Pen became French President and did his party won Parliamentary elections? Without me knowing it?

“I don't know what organization is named after a nazi.”: “One of the “Big Three” political parties behind the protests is the ultra-nationalist Svoboda, whose leader, Oleh Tyahnybok, has called for the liberation of his country from the “Muscovite-Jewish mafia.” After the 2010 conviction of the Nazi death camp guard John Demjanjuk for his supporting role in the death of nearly 30,000 people at the Sobibor camp, Tyahnybok rushed to Germany to declare him a hero who was “fighting for truth.” In the Ukrainian parliament, where Svoboda holds an unprecedented 37 seats, Tyahnybok’s deputy Yuriy Mykhalchyshyn is fond of quoting Joseph Goebbels – he has even founded a think tank originally called “the Joseph Goebbels Political Research Center.” You’ve got your answer: Joseph Goebbels.

“It was the attitude you advocated regarding having an army at peace time, remember?” Err, when and where?

“Are you so naive that you believe this is done for purely altruistic reasons?” You might not believe it, but there are some who are ready to fight and die for a cause. And still, nothing proving these are mercenaries. Crossing a border to a safe heaven is a common practice in guerrilla war fair, and that is why, if a political solution is not found, this can go for a long time.

“I am surprised you admitted Russians in Donbas” Well, you really should read what I wrote indeed, instead to translate it.

“Then the Ukrainan democracy is what you ask for: the coalition of Udar, Batkivshchina and Svoboda was formed which nominated the government. It is logical that the latter included representatives of all three parties.” So the actual Ukrainian includes Nazi. I never deny this, that the Ukrainian Parties formed a coalition with Nazi. I am against it, but I can’t deny the reality of the Ukrainian political life.

“But you don't like it” Nope, as I said I don’t like Nazi in a government.

"the planes used by Ukrainian military are fighters not bombers." Funny enough, when a plane drops bombs it becomes a bomber. It was probably a multi-role plane, as many air forces have. And it make no changes for the one receiving the bomb(s) or for the ones authorizing the use of these weapons system.

Seamus Fermanagh

06-09-2014, 20:13

This thread has me as its progenitor but I lost track around 50 pages ago :shrug:

DO catch back up, won't you. I've heard the OP is a bit of a hard-case and might post an exam at the end of summer term.

Seamus Fermanagh

06-09-2014, 20:21

Putin's Russia has NATO on its borders at the far North and at the Baltic already. Unless he is an idiot, he has little to no fear whatsoever of a NATO invasion -- the sea change required for Europe to head East for lebensraum again is hard to fathom.

So what does it matter if the Western portions of Ukraine go NATO? He's acquired Crimea with its great port and he is working on establishing functional control of as much of the industrialized portions East of the Dneiper that he can without over-extending his resources (and turning the Sea of Azov back into a Russian lake). Once he has this stretch he has a more "natural" border and most of the profitable end of things.

And NATO will not invade to counter it.

EDIT: Oh, and the staff at Time magazine will have plenty of time to write up this year's person of the year. Fortunately for US readers, the SI swimsuit edition is released in February, so they won't have to wade through all of that heavy reading for very long.

Brenus

06-09-2014, 20:59

Don't forget Afghanistan!

“For you, a thinly veiled Anti-Americanism is enough to justify any stupid view, so why bother arguing about it?” Ah yeah, if you are not with us, you are against us. I’ve got it few years ago when we became the “cheese eaters -surrendering monkeys” !!! If you disagree with the USA it is just because you are Anti-Americans… Not because they cheated and lied… Yeah, you’ve got a point…

“Your posts are full of tin-foil hat conspiracy notions that are required for your patently false view of the west to be valid.” One example? Or even two, as they are full of… Back-up your claim please!

“Oh ya, we gave weapons to the Taliban alright, because Russia gave weapons to the Vietcong.” So two wrong makes it right? Right? But, but, the Russians didn't provide weapons to the Taliban, did they? That may change...

“The US simply doesn't have a master plan, and neither does the EU.” Yeah, only Putin has master-plan. We just equipped powerful armies for the fun and parades. And of course we bombed and invaded to spread democracy and to protect the populations. Hold on; is it what Putin just said…? Hmm, am I anti-Russians as well…

“The fact that you vehemently believe that two wrongs makes a right” :laugh4: You are the believer in this. I don’t believe, I see the constant actions of the US and EU in their spheres of interest and give to them the same value than the ones of Russia. I don’t demonised a side and speak angel of the other. Countries have interested and play the same game. I have no sympathy for Putin when he annexed Crimea and is able to sustain a guerrilla campaign in Ukraine than I have for the US and EU doing the same in Former Yugoslavia (I know, it is looooong time ago) or in Africa, Asia or South America.
I even go further: I understand the struggle. I think USA has the right to have a US policy, but I give Russia the same

Brenus

06-09-2014, 22:22

Yeah, you can't... Wild accusations unfounded... :laugh4:

Husar

06-09-2014, 23:19

You mean just like we had ample evidence of Iraqi WMDs?
I'm not sure I can believe western governments when it comes to "ample evidence"...
And the head of the CIA visited Ukraine in the middle of the crisis on a "routine visit"...do you actually believe that?
There are even western corporations in the country spreading propaganda that rivals the one on the russian side, but it's hardly ever reported here. More likely it's just taken as the truth and reported without citing a source.

Our press is always good for accusing other countries' presses for being propaganda machines, but they hardly talk about being ones themselves. I wonder why. These days they don't even have the money to correct the countless grammar mistakes, much less to actually fact-check their stories.

Husar

06-09-2014, 23:37

Yes, they all go behind separatist lines, it only makes sense that they can't see the NATO shills operating in the West from there...

ICantSpellDawg

06-09-2014, 23:53

There's a specific VICE series that you can access for free on YouTube called "Russian Roulette." where a series of Reporters (including a few who speak Ukrainian and Russian) embed with both sides, before during and after combat. The people tell their own stories simply because the camera is there, and you can make up your own mind. For more formal news, I again recommend PBS--it is the only news agency in the USA that is legally obligated to tell the truth (seriously, FOX news won a law-suit years back where their whole defense was that they should be allowed to fudge the truth for narrative or "entertainment" value) and they too have reported from both sides, unflinchingly documenting the flaws on both sides. Educate yourselves. This thread has more speculation than the 2008 Housing market.

Russian Roulette (the vice series) is one of my favorite things in the world.
'
Remember this nugget from the early days? When we realized that it wasn't going to end well for the Yanukovych government?
People regularly attacking police stations/mayor's offices with fire and stripping all officers naked doesn't bode well for governments anywhere.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qudzP_fNiik

This video takes place after the car chase

Husar

06-10-2014, 00:00

And the police in the USA are legally obligated not to use police brutality. Why is the US government always the most corrupt and evil institution in internal debates and a saint in foreign policy debates?

It's simply as Brenus says, Russia has an interest in the region and sees it as its sphere of influence, just like the US saw all of South America as its sphere of influence a few decades ago and ran around changing governments there. Russia may be a bit backwards in terms of what western progressives deem the de-facto standard of foreign policy behavior, but I also think it should be a standard for foreign governments not to spy on me, yet the USA and UK do not give a poop. So why would I care when Russia doesn't give a poop what we think about their meddling in Ukrainian lives?

ICantSpellDawg

06-10-2014, 00:05

They've just installed a gigantic Russian Meat Grinder in Eastern Ukraine. I'm not sure that anyone has a problem with that in theory.
This is the closest we've gotten to them since Korea.

No matter how you cut it, after the annexation of Crimea, Russian-centric Ukrainians are in a terminal decline and will never win an election in the country again. Plus the economy in the East is in ruins. It's only a matter of time before they move to Russia, die in an anti-insurgency campaign, or stfu.

Fascists

Husar

06-10-2014, 00:08

Try answering me without a "But, the USA!" Just once. Try it.

There are fundamental differences between what a Democratically empowered government does in its over-reach and what a dictator does with his totalitarian resources. Its an absurd comparison that fails on its face, unless you are of the opinion that mistakes made by an aggressive democracy are just as bad as intentional atrocities committed by a knowing tyrant

What is the difference for the people on the receiving end?

Pannonian

06-10-2014, 00:38

That's dodging the question. The only thing the international community can judge on is intent, and legitimacy. It is high-minded stuff that obviously doesn't mix with the human toll of war. But who here is advocating war? Not the pro-westerners. Western intervention in Ukraine stops Russian aggression that has been underway for quite some time now. Western apathy will breed more war in Ukraine, not less war. Remember, my own opinion is that we should let them deal with Russia without our help. Ukraine is far from anything America has any right to care about, and Russia is Europe's problem--not ours. But, Objectively, I have to admit that Russia is the aggressor and that western intervention in terms of supplies and funding could make the situation better and not worse. Ukraine is not Syria, or Afghanistan, or Iraq. The minority in the east won't last long without Russian support once the new president's assault begins, and the majority of Ukrainians are ready to exact the kind of vengeance on the East that I honestly have trouble condoning. Only Russian support can prolong this, and only Russian support began this.

Unless, of course, you believe the West (or, lmao, the USA's special forces) overthrew Yanukovich--in which case anything is on the table because you believe in lies.

I believe that some idiot politicians, some from the US, some from the EU, played neocon games in Ukraine, thinking that they can push for the overthrow of the "other side" and put "their side" in power without repercussions. Their methods? Soft power, enhanced to their taste with directed political guff. Similar to the Guardian calling on the Americans to not re-elect Bush in 2004. In that case it was an idiot newspaper playing that game with no budget. In this case it was some idiot politicians playing that game with government money. In both cases everyone would have been better off if they'd kept their noses out of it.

Brenus

06-10-2014, 07:16

“There is no evidence that western mercenaries and special forces ousted Yanukovich,” Where did you find this in my interventions? I am the one advocating the fact that everybody reacted and was surprised (CIA included) by the Ukrainian development. I am the one disputing the theory of complot (including Putin’s one). You just make things up, as you can’t even give a shred of evidence of your accusation.

“there is ample evidence that Russian mercenaries and Russian special forces are inciting guerilla war in Ukraine.” So give them, give the name of the Company who pay them, the salaries etc. I can do this for Iraq. And by the way, I don’t dispute the presence of Russian Special Forces in Ukraine. You are the one disputing Western Involvement in the process.

“your entire argument is that the West has some secret fucking global agenda to screw Russia now and forever, instead of the totally reasonable reality that NATO is a defensive operation that gets sent to places where democratic sentiment sends them.” My entire argument is all countries have no secret agenda but clear goal to control their supply and influence/markets. And I am the one you accused to be a believer? NATO is a tool for democracy? Err, in the last NATO operations, can you give me 1 (or 2) example where democracy blossom? And true democracy, not based on Sharia law, if possible, with Citizens rights improved and no car-bombing weekly campaign? Please?

As the agenda to “screw” Russia as you wrote there is nothing secret about it, in words as in actions.

“Hell you don't even quote right” Funny this, I copy and paste.

“your lunatic non-sense.” You should read your own posts to have a clear view of what is a lunatic non-sense, you will learn a lot.
I like your style in writing…

“I honestly have trouble condoning.” In that I believe.

“Western intervention in Ukraine stops Russian aggression that has been underway for quite some time now.” This is because you believe in tin-foil hat conspiracy of Putin’s plot to invade Ukraine. Russia got what she could save (from Russian’s point of view), had never the intention to invade Ukraine (with what?) and succeeded to neutralize it. So, but I can make mistake, Russia has only to wait for negotiation to start, business to resume and if necessary, provide weapons to separatists to keep the things as they are.