Ukraine-in-a-thread

[Husar]

What I believe could be done is utilizing other levers than warfare. When the West introduced sanctions against Yanukovych and his posse his supporters fell off almost at once. They were more afraid to lose their fortunes and estates abroad than to call Yanukovych a traitor and a criminal. So, what I would hope to see is economic sanstions and traveling limitations. Since this war is waged not by one person (with his friends) but by the armed forces of the whole country (though unidentified still) it would be logical to freeze all financial operations of all people who have Russian citizenship and forbid them all to enter the countries that agree to introduce sanctions. I think within a couple of hours after that Putin will have very unpleasant talks with Abramovich, Deripasko and other Russian billionaires having business and property abroad. Plus thousands of Russians fuming at airports and railway stations whose trips have been cancelled would notify their president of their dissatisfaction and annoyance. It will make him more easy to persuade in the neccessity of negotiations, to say the least.

I'm not sure whether that would have the effect you desire or just increase the distance between Europe and Russia, making negotiations even less likely/more hostile.

[Sarmatian]

These three dominate any comment you make aimed at me. You highly doubt anything I say, you disregard (through mistrust) examples I provide, you deny my having intelligence enough to contradict you.
Like I said: the picture is rigid, you don't want anything to spoil it.

Intelligence? Can't say that. Understanding? Yes.

Iterating and reiterating specific and limited examples doesn't change the whole picture. For example, I may say that Norway is not a corrupt country. Someone may come and start citing examples of corruption - one, two, three.... ten or more, it doesn't matter. The basic truth still remains that Norway is not a corrupt country. That doesn't mean there isn't or that there has never been some acts of corruption in Norway, it means that there is very little corruption overall.

Likewise with elections - I don't pretend to know how elections in Ukraine are performed, other than common sense, but I do know how elections are monitored. Counting of the votes is just as important as casting of the votes and I know that organizations like OSCE wouldn't have judged the elections "honest, professional and transparent" if they couldn't verify the count itself. In that regard, yes, I trust OSCE a little more than I do you. So, unless, you have a good explanation how and why OSCE and other foreign observers all decided to cover up Yanukovich's scam, I'll continue to have little more faith in their than yours opinion. But, like in Norway example, that doesn't mean that there haven't been any local cases of someone trying to rig the elections. It means that on the whole, elections were fair and honest.

Call it rigid or however you like, I don't mind really.


It was a coup as far as expelling yanukovych is concerned. Then the legal and legitimate parliament (which had been hitherto cheated of its rights) stepped in.

I love how you managed to contradict yourself just a few posts apart.

[Fisherking]

What happened in Ukraine is important to everyone. It is more important that they follow through and get a working government that reduces corruption and reflects the will of the people to a better degree.

Unfortunately, I am not over optimistic on the outcome.

But it is dangerous to governments. It is a major threat to Russia, who has to make it about neo-Nazis and other fearful things. Else, Putin’s population would look around and see the same things that drove the Ukrainians.

It is not just about the Eurasian trading sphere, though that is part of it too.

Leaders and governments are about increasing their power, prestige, money, and influence. They think they reward the people by being able to bask in the reflected glory of their accomplishments. And the people seem to accept that.

That is the major thing that has to change.

[rvg]

But it is dangerous to governments. It is a major threat to Russia, who has to make it about neo-Nazis and other fearful things. Else, Putin’s population would look around and see the same things that drove the Ukrainians.


Exactly. Out of the three Russian states on the map (Russia, Ukraine and Belarus) only the people of Ukraine have maintained some semblance of freedom. Putin doesn't like that, as it sets a bad example for his biomass. He likes his biomass quiet, docile, obedient and unquestionably loyal to the great leader. So far I must say that he has done a superb job of moving the country in that direction.

[Fisherking]

I love how you managed to contradict yourself just a few posts apart.

I read that a bit differently.


It was a coup as far as yanukovych is concerned. expelling just tells what happened to him. But just my reading.

[Gilrandir]

I'm not sure whether that would have the effect you desire or just increase the distance between Europe and Russia, making negotiations even less likely/more hostile.
Could be.

[Gilrandir]

Call it rigid or however you like, I don't mind really.

You really don't mind because in your picture the dark forces (as Yanukovych called them at his last briefing) have the highest concentration on and around Maidan. As you move farther from the governmental quarters in Kyiv neo-nazis become more and more scarce and are turned into Nazi-fighters as soon as you approach Eastern Ukraine and those nazi-fighters become abundant the moment you cross the border into Russia. You choose to turn a blind eye on witch-hunting for Bandera-followers in Russia, on kidnapping, robbing and tormenting journalists in the Crimea, on shutting down all Ukrainian TV channels there, on bullying Ukrainian soldiers with threats to massacre their families. As long as those cases are not attributed to Maidanian neo-nazis, you highly doubt them and call them specific examples that prove nothing.
It is giving the dog a bad name and hanging it. Until (or unless) the name is given the dog may bite at will.

[Gilrandir]

For example, I may say that Norway is not a corrupt country. Someone may come and start citing examples of corruption - one, two, three.... ten or more, it doesn't matter.


Yo, Hore Tore, it seems too soon to disband your army. You may need it to combat corruption. Well, no, I'm sorry it could be considered a neo-nazi way. You should first hold a debate on how legal/legitimate your army is and only then you can send it on any mission. Well, no, let me see: are there any neo-nazis from Maidan enlisted? No? Then you may sure advance against any enemy (neo-nazis from Maidan are recommended).

[Sarmatian]

I read that a bit differently.


How did you read that?



Who do you consider protest leaders? Yatsenyuk, Klitschko and Tyagnybok? They were not. It was hard for them to control Maidan, they shuttled between Maidan and Yanukovych acting more like go-betweens than protest leaders. Very often Maidan expressed dissatisfaction with what they did stating that their protests were not aimed at any politician getting a new job. When the agreement with Yanukovych was reached it was Maidan that did not accept it. So it was the other way around: parliamentary opposition leaders after having consulatations brought the list of the ministers for Maidan to approve and then it was voted for officially in the parliament. And this approval by Maidan (by way of acclamation) did not satisfy Maidan. There are ministers who are held suspicious by Maidan and Yatsenyuk as a prime minister is not what the majority of Maidan likes. But Maidan agreed to it like an unpleasant neccessity liable to change if ministers start to abuse power.

This part tells that it was the Maidan protesters that approved the government which was afterwards practically just ratified in the Rada. And the protesters promised, or threatened or however you want to call it, to replace the PM if they don't like him.



It was a coup as far as expelling yanukovych is concerned. Then the legal and legitimate parliament (which had been hitherto cheated of its rights) stepped in.

This part says the government was set up according to democratic principles by the Rada.


How do you not see the contradiction between these two statements?

What's the highest legislative body in Ukraine? Who sets up the government? The Maidan protesters or the parliament?

[Myth]

So will Putin get eastern Ukraine? Also, let's not demonize him. The westerners are no better, and the western "biomass" is just as brainwashed and docile. Especially in the USA where your major headlines are usually related to the skank of the day, be it Paris Hilton, Kim Kardashian or Miley Cyrus and some celebrity couple or other.

[Sarmatian]

You really don't mind because in your picture the dark forces (as Yanukovych called them at his last briefing) have the highest concentration on and around Maidan. As you move farther from the governmental quarters in Kyiv neo-nazis become more and more scarce and are turned into Nazi-fighters as soon as you approach Eastern Ukraine and those nazi-fighters become abundant the moment you cross the border into Russia. You choose to turn a blind eye on witch-hunting for Bandera-followers in Russia, on kidnapping, robbing and tormenting journalists in the Crimea, on shutting down all Ukrainian TV channels there, on bullying Ukrainian soldiers with threats to massacre their families. As long as those cases are not attributed to Maidanian neo-nazis, you highly doubt them and call them specific examples that prove nothing.
It is giving the dog a bad name and hanging it. Until (or unless) the name is given the dog may bite at will.

You're getting boring quickly with your childish behavior.

Go back and look in the thread where said Yanukovich was corrupt and where I wouldn't mind seeing him hanged by his private parts.
Go back and look in the thread where I said Russia was using propaganda to blow the nazi thing out of proportions.
Go back and look in the thread where I said I hope and wish Ukraine gets out of this in one piece
Go back and look in the thread where I said Crimean referendum would be illegitimate.

Even if I do see all that, I can not pretend to not see what was happening during the protests and after. You ousted one corrupt bastard and placed three persons in his place - one who's the first deputy of a corrupt bastard, one whose only previous job experience was getting hit in the head repeatedly, and a nazi. That's enough on its own to seriously screw up anyone but you've managed also to piss off your much larger and much more powerful neighbour.

Good luck getting out of that mess, and excuse me if I don't jump on the bandwagon.

[Fisherking]

So will Putin get eastern Ukraine? Also, let's not demonize him. The westerners are no better, and the western "biomass" is just as brainwashed and docile. Especially in the USA where your major headlines are usually related to the skank of the day, be it Paris Hilton, Kim Kardashian or Miley Cyrus and some celebrity couple or other.


Will Putin go that far? Wish I knew.

Putin is an excellent leader. A lot of the things he does are brilliant. He runs circles around the western ones.

He has a much better situational grasp than any of them. He can inspire and motivate. He can organize and excruciate a plan while the rest are still trying to get explained to them by their expert staff.

He does his job well. I just don’t think he is right. At least this time.

Meantime, the US is only making a little squeaky noises and most of the sheepole are watching the news to find out what happened to “ The Plane”. That would mostly be because the response from the west is so embarrassing. Better to cover it as “and also in the news”.

Putin can likely get away with what ever he wants this time because the US and the EU have their heads in a place with no sunlight.

[rvg]

Putin can likely get away with what ever he wants this time because the US and the EU have their heads in a place with no sunlight.
Maybe before Monday Obama will miraculously grow a spine?

[HoreTore]

Putin can likely get away with what ever he wants this time because the US and the EU have their heads in a place with no sunlight.

So does Putin. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/07/putin-butt-plug_n_4919509.html)

[Fisherking]

Maybe before Monday Obama will miraculously grow a spine?

No, I hope not. It would only be something more stupid than what has gone before.

Besides, Arms dealers and the pentagon need another cold war. Terrorists don’t sell big hardware. Tens of thousands of drones are about all they can expect from that. The real money is in tanks, planes , and ships.

With the pay and benefit cuts they may not have any troops, but they won’t let that stop them.

This means big money for the defense and surveillance sectors.



So does Putin. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/07/putin-butt-plug_n_4919509.html)

roflol

[Husar]

So does Putin. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/07/putin-butt-plug_n_4919509.html)

Noone does that to our leaders and then we wonder why the Russians do not think we have a lot of credibility.
Even our newspapers make fun of their elected president.

[HoreTore]

Noone does that to our leaders and then we wonder why the Russians do not think we have a lot of credibility.
Even our newspapers make fun of their elected president.

Not a sex toy, but a hell of a lot creepier. (http://metro.co.uk/2009/02/10/at-last-its-angela-merkel-barbie-439897/)

[Husar]

Not a sex toy, but a hell of a lot creepier. (http://metro.co.uk/2009/02/10/at-last-its-angela-merkel-barbie-439897/)

Why creepy? Looks just like her.

[rvg]

So will Putin get eastern Ukraine? Also, let's not demonize him. The westerners are no better, and the western "biomass" is just as brainwashed and docile. Especially in the USA where your major headlines are usually related to the skank of the day, be it Paris Hilton, Kim Kardashian or Miley Cyrus and some celebrity couple or other.

Kim Kardashian doesn't lead to annexations though. Neither does Paris Hilton.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Do you believe that the majority ever wants war?

Spanish-American War due to the Maine sinking. WW2 due to Pearl Harbor. War on Terror due to 9/11.

Try harder.

[a completely inoffensive name]

So will Putin get eastern Ukraine? Also, let's not demonize him. The westerners are no better, and the western "biomass" is just as brainwashed and docile. Especially in the USA where your major headlines are usually related to the skank of the day, be it Paris Hilton, Kim Kardashian or Miley Cyrus and some celebrity couple or other.

Such wisdom. Westerners are on par with a power hungry dictator because we like our celebrity gossip.

I think I understand why Strike is so frustrated every time he chimes in.

[Kadagar_AV]

Such wisdom. Westerners are on par with a power hungry dictator because we like our celebrity gossip.

I think I understand why Strike is so frustrated every time he chimes in.

Alcohol?

Lack of damsels?

TELL US!?

[Montmorency]

Too soon? :creep:

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Kim Kardashian doesn't lead to annexations though. Neither does Paris Hilton.

Not directly. They are strictly "panem et circenses" stuff to distract the masses from asking/thinking about substantive issues. Of themselves, they are celebrities for being celebrities -- a highly profitable form of intellectual onanism.

[rvg]

Not directly. They are strictly "panem et circenses" stuff to distract the masses from asking/thinking about substantive issues. Of themselves, they are celebrities for being celebrities -- a highly profitable form of intellectual onanism.
Celebrities only distract those who wish to be distracted. Those are a lost cause anyway.

[Husar]

power hungry dictator

Ridiculous!


Ich glaube ihm das, und ich bin davon überzeugt, dass er das ist.
I believe him, and I'm convinced that he is.
responding to the question Ist Putin ein lupenreiner Demokrat? (Is Putin an exemplary democrat?)

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Gerhard_Schröder

[Montmorency]

Celebrities only distract those who wish to be distracted. Those are a lost cause anyway.

You are referring to millions here, millions of fellow-citizens, as a "lost cause". One way or another, isn't that kind of troubling?

[Gilrandir]

This part tells that it was the Maidan protesters that approved the government which was afterwards practically just ratified in the Rada. And the protesters promised, or threatened or however you want to call it, to replace the PM if they don't like him.

The procedure of ratification (as you call it) was performed in accordance with all constitutional (legal) principles.
As for replacing the PM (or other members of the cabinet) who will start to be involved into some corruption schemes, protesters are afraid that politicians will forget too soon what they have promised (as it was after the Orange revolution).

[Gilrandir]

Go back and look in the thread where said Yanukovich was corrupt and where I wouldn't mind seeing him hanged by his private parts.

And if he is, you would raise hue and cry that it was illegitimate, illegal and didn't take into account the opinion of Russian-speakers of the South-east.


Go back and look in the thread where I said Russia was using propaganda to blow the nazi thing out of proportions.

You contribute to the blowing out. The head of the Crimean parliament declared that when Crimea joins Russia they will have two official languages - Russian and Tatar. Up till now (under the "neo-nazi rule" from Kyiv) they have three - Russian, Ukrainian and Tatar. Will we hear from you any lamentation on how the minority (which is second largest in Crimea) was deprived of their constitutional and lanuage rights and of the advent of a neo-nazi regime in Crimea? Or is it just another specific example that proves nothing?
I can't fail to see that you consider the same faults worth condemnation if they are attributed to neo-nazis in Kiyv (like bullying the opponents) and not worth mentioning (like bullying the besieged Ukrainian soldiers and thier families in Crimea) if it is otherwise.

And finally. We seem to disagree on some (perhaps many) points, but in all my posts I NEVER called the arguments of the opponent quote bollocks unquote or proclaimed him childish for trying to defend his stance. If I lack understanding the main principles of democracy (as you claim), I still follow the main principles of politeness and respect to your opponent's opinion.
:bow:

[Brenus]

“Try harder.” Viet-Nam, Cambodia, Granada, Nicaragua (let’s say Central and South America for Condor Operation), Cuba, Kosovo, Mexico and Canada (as you went to the 19th), Annexing of Hawaii, Iraq (can you remind me why?), Somalia and list is too long. Some with reasons, some with not.

[Gilrandir]

Just wondering.

Since the Crimean parliament has declared their independence even before the referendum and the vote leaves no choice to remain within Ukraine, is it not time to pull the plug on their electricity and close the water tap?

It cannot be done until Ukraine acknowledges the departure of the Crimea officially. You can't claim the territory for your own and treat it like the enemy's. Russia will be the first to blame Ukraine for imposing a humanitarian disaster onto Russian-speakers.

[Brenus]

EU Parliament (13-DEC-2013) ” is concerned about the rise of nationalist sentiment in Ukraine, which led to support for the party "Svoboda", which is thus being one of the two new parties to make their entrance in the Verkhovnaz Rada; recalls that the opinion racist, anti-Semitic and xenophobic are contrary to the values and fundamental principles of the European Union, and therefore to urge democratic parties represented in the Verkhovna Rada to not to associate with this party, or to approve or form coalition with the latter”

“Russia does not violate any law, whether international or another. According to the agreements signed with the Ukraine, the Federation is authorized to have a force of 25,000 men on the territory of Ukraine. Currently, even with the last movements of troops, Russian forces do not amount to more than 15,000 troops in Crimea. We are still far from the account. And the Ukraine may not participate of the EU or NATO; thus, neither the EU nor NATO are willing or permitted to intervene in Ukraine.” According to a French General (not really pro-Russian).

Just a note before to go to work.

[Brenus]

" You can't claim the territory for your own and treat it like the enemy's." So start to speak to the Crimean (not you, but the new authorities). Listen and expel the 4 Nazi of your executive.

[Gilrandir]

“[I]Russia does not violate any law, whether international or another. According to the agreements signed with the Ukraine, the Federation is authorized to have a force of 25,000 men on the territory of Ukraine.
As far as I know (yet I may be wrong) the stipulated number is 12 000 (or is it 16 000?) but definitely less than 25 000. But the number does not matter greatly as there no Russian troops in the Crimea (as Putin claims).

[Gilrandir]

" You can't claim the territory for your own and treat it like the enemy's." So start to speak to the Crimean (not you, but the new authorities).
The Crimean authorities (as well as Russia) don't want to. They don't consider Kyiv government legal (the same could be said the other way around, though) so it is a deadlock.


Listen and expel the 4 Nazi of your executive.

I thought the number mentioned here was 5. And you can't expel anyone if the party is official. Calling names is not a ground for expelling.

[Gilrandir]

EU Parliament (13-DEC-2013) ” is concerned about the rise of nationalist sentiment in Ukraine, which led to support for the party "Svoboda", which is thus being one of the two new parties to make their entrance in the Verkhovnaz Rada; recalls that the opinion racist, anti-Semitic and xenophobic are contrary to the values and fundamental principles of the European Union, and therefore to urge democratic parties represented in the Verkhovna Rada to not to associate with this party, or to approve or form coalition with the latter”


I don't like Svoboda (as I said). But the West seems to be ready to deal with them and condone their presence in the bodies of power. At least at present. The American ambassador to Ukraine admitted the other day that "Svoboda has made a great progress" in terms of its stance and commended the party on that progress. This at least was the esssence of his speech, can't guarantee I gave it verbatim.

[a completely inoffensive name]

“Try harder.” Viet-Nam, Cambodia, Granada, Nicaragua (let’s say Central and South America for Condor Operation), Cuba, Kosovo, Mexico and Canada (as you went to the 19th), Annexing of Hawaii, Iraq (can you remind me why?), Somalia and list is too long. Some with reasons, some with not.

Some of those are correct. Some are not. I would say that many 20th century "military excursions" would not fall under a perceived war by the public which gained majority public support.

[Sarmatian]

And finally. We seem to disagree on some (perhaps many) points, but in all my posts I NEVER called the arguments of the opponent quote bollocks unquote or proclaimed him childish for trying to defend his stance. If I lack understanding the main principles of democracy (as you claim), I still follow the main principles of politeness and respect to your opponent's opinion.
:bow:

I don't respect anyone's opinion a priori. I respect everyone's right to have an opinion, though and to say it out loud.

This is a forum, people debate here. We challenge each other and learn new stuff. So far, thins I've learned from discussion with you:

1) You don't know history

2) You don't know how elections are monitored

3) You think you know more about elections frauds than relevant international organizations and monitors who are experts in that field

3) You don't know the difference between elected government and a coup

4) You like to contradict yourself, claiming that the government was set up by the protesters and by the parliament at the same time

And after all that you expect me to change my position and somehow I'm "rigid" because I don't subscribe to your opinion.

My opinion is very simple - when it comes to internal politics, you expelled a bad government and set up another, just as bad. In the end, you disregarded democratic principles for naught. As for foreign politics, you managed to prove that you're highly unstable and that it is useless to deal with you the normal way, thus giving Russia the reason and an excuse to do what it did.

So, it boils down to this - Can you fight of Russia? Yes/No? Can you ally with someone who can fight off Russia? Yes/No?

If you circled No both times, your solution is: Deal with Russia diplomatically! Standing in the corner, crying foul won't get you very far.

[Fisherking]

Since WWII countries have not been legally entitled to enter or occupy other lands to protect ethnic minorities of the home country. It is a Nazi excuse.

What is the real political situation in Ukraine, regarding Neo-Nazis etc? Who the :daisy: can tell! It is all filled with emotional appeal and propaganda.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26546083

http://www.stopfake.org/en/ (also in Ukrainian and Russian)

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/12/ukraine-western-media-coverages-bias-should-be-held-into-account (western media bias)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/13/us-ukraine-crisis-crimea-putin-idUSBREA2C0KA20140313


The wise thing for Putin to do is to say the vote is for independence, and join Russia later, since the only two choices are to join now or later.

One thing for sure, whether the government has neo-Nazis in it, Russia is not making that better by going into Crimea or threatening force. That is a sure way to make it worse.

Ukrainians upset Putin’s plans for an economic union. This is his payback.

No the Interim government should not be pushing the country east or west. Let the people speak.

Wait for elections! But that is ever harder to do with Russia breathing down their necks.

Both the EU & Russia need to back off and give them time to catch their breath. But a country in crisis is ever so much easier to manipulate and carve up than one that is more stable.

[rvg]

If you circled No both times, your solution is: Deal with Russia diplomatically! Standing in the corner, crying foul won't get you very far.

Will wait and see what happens this weekend. There's a chance (albeit still quite slight) that by Tuesday we'll be in a state of an armed conflict with Russia.

[Fisherking]

If you circled No both times, your solution is: Deal with Russia diplomatically! Standing in the corner, crying foul won't get you very far.


I don’t think that is an option. From the sample ballot I looked at you check one or check the other. Yes and No is not an option. People opposed to the idea are simply not voting. That pretty much assures the outcome ahead of time. It is only a matter of becoming independent or joining Russia.



Also this: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26543464

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2014/03/vladimir-putin-press-censorship-galina-timchenko.html


Having different views than the government in Russia can cost you.

[Husar]

Apparently Gerhard Schöder criticized how the EU handled Ukraine and forced the country to choose between the EU and Russia instead of being allowed a more neutral position.

In return, some conservative and green MEPsare now trying to forbid him to talk on the issue. Is this type of censorship why we represent the free world?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Apparently Gerhard Schöder criticized how the EU handled Ukraine and forced the country to choose between the EU and Russia instead of being allowed a more neutral position.

In return, some conservative and green MEPsare now trying to forbid him to talk on the issue. Is this type of censorship why we represent the free world?

Well, if wiki quote and my memory serve at all, he tends to put his foot in it. Recriminations within the EU about how they shouldn't have "forced" Ukraine to do something strengthen Putin position.

Reality Check: Putin is an enemy of the West, he doesn't want war because war is expensive, but he opposes the West on a political and economic level. This is not because Putin is evil, it is because his goals are not compatible with Europe's.

When Rommey said that Russia was the US's no.1 one enemy, not "terrorists" this is what he meant.

In other news, Ukraine votes to form a "National Guard" it's unclear whether this is going to be a paramilitary force or a reserve.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26558288

[Sarmatian]

Will wait and see what happens this weekend. There's a chance (albeit still quite slight) that by Tuesday we'll be in a state of an armed conflict with Russia.

That's not gonna happen.

I fully support Kage's suggestion, though - Putin vs. Obama free style. That's not fair, actually - Obama, Kerry and McCain vs. Putin.

[rvg]

That's not gonna happen.

That's what I thought about Russia stealing Crimea from Ukraine if you asked me 3 months ago.

[Kagemusha]

Well, if wiki quote and my memory serve at all, he tends to put his foot in it. Recriminations within the EU about how they shouldn't have "forced" Ukraine to do something strengthen Putin position.

Reality Check: Putin is an enemy of the West, he doesn't want war because war is expensive, but he opposes the West on a political and economic level. This is not because Putin is evil, it is because his goals are not compatible with Europe's.

When Rommey said that Russia was the US's no.1 one enemy, not "terrorists" this is what he meant.

In other news, Ukraine votes to form a "National Guard" it's unclear whether this is going to be a paramilitary force or a reserve.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26558288

I think it is more complicated then that. Putin´s government is a bunch of corrupted autocrats and oligarchs, with common interest of retaining as much power as possible. Still perceiving Russia as general enemy of Europe is false. Russia or at least the most populous parts of Russia are Europe.Europe ends at Ural mountains.
Both Russia and US are great powers and they have conflict of interests when it comes to foreign politics as both want to expand their sphere of influence, thus it is only natural that those spheres of interest collide and cause friction between each other. But generalizing Russia as default enemy of Europe is not true.

Russia and Europe are bond to each other mainly via trade. Russia provides natural resources and raw materials for European industry and trade between Russia and Europe is pivotal to both. For example for Finland, Russia is the greatest foreign trade partner followed closely by Sweden and Germany. While the trade with Sweden and Germany is more or less balanced. Russian trade is clearly biased towards Russia importing resources to Finland twice as much as Finland imports anything to Russia, thus we make money from Russian trade and it benefits us.

While we have had our fare share of problems with Russia, we simply cant overwrite Russia as our enemy and forget our geographical position. It does not mean that we have to bow down before Russia either, but it does not have to mean automatic hostility. Russia is simply not going anywhere from where it is located and we have to live with it. I think this sentiment is shared by all European nations that have more dealings with Russia and as one moves further West, more easy it is to take more hard line, as less effect it has to anything in those countries.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I think it is more complicated then that. Putin´s government is a bunch of corrupted autocrats and oligarchs, with common interest of retaining as much power as possible. Still perceiving Russia as general enemy of Europe is false. Russia or at least the most populous parts of Russia are Europe.Europe ends at Ural mountains.
Both Russia and US are great powers and they have conflict of interests when it comes to foreign politics as both want to expand their sphere of influence, thus it is only natural that those spheres of interest collide and cause friction between each other. But generalizing Russia as default enemy of Europe is not true.

Russia and Europe are bond to each other mainly via trade. Russia provides natural resources and raw materials for European industry and trade between Russia and Europe is pivotal to both. For example for Finland, Russia is the greatest foreign trade partner followed closely by Sweden and Germany. While the trade with Sweden and Germany is more or less balanced. Russian trade is clearly biased towards Russia importing resources to Finland twice as much as Finland imports anything to Russia, thus we make money from Russian trade and it benefits us.

While we have had our fare share of problems with Russia, we simply cant overwrite Russia as our enemy and forget our geographical position. It does not mean that we have to bow down before Russia either, but it does not have to mean automatic hostility. Russia is simply not going anywhere from where it is located and we have to live with it. I think this sentiment is shared by all European nations that have more dealings with Russia and as one moves further West, more easy it is to take more hard line, as less effect it has to anything in those countries.

I stand by what I said - if you are a Western Democracy and you ascribe to that type of government and society, Putin is your political enemy.

You said, "Putin´s government is a bunch of corrupted autocrats and oligarchs, with common interest of retaining as much power as possible." which I agree with, and this is the type of government he want in Kiev - I doubt he sees it as corrupt, but you do and that means your worldview is not compatible with his.

[Kagemusha]

I stand by what I said - if you are a Western Democracy and you ascribe to that type of government and society, Putin is your political enemy.

You said, "Putin´s government is a bunch of corrupted autocrats and oligarchs, with common interest of retaining as much power as possible." which I agree with, and this is the type of government he want in Kiev - I doubt he sees it as corrupt, but you do and that means your worldview is not compatible with his.

So different values make one automatically enemies? Should we also stop dealing with all the other non democratic or corrupted countries as well? China? South East Asia? South America? Arabia? Africa?

Putin is not Russia, Putin is Putin. How does Putin differ from the Oligarch´s and Autocrats of government in Kiev? Why one is our enemy and one not, if their values are similar?

[Fisherking]

I stand by what I said - if you are a Western Democracy and you ascribe to that type of government and society, Putin is your political enemy.

You said, "Putin´s government is a bunch of corrupted autocrats and oligarchs, with common interest of retaining as much power as possible." which I agree with, and this is the type of government he want in Kiev - I doubt he sees it as corrupt, but you do and that means your worldview is not compatible with his.


I don’t mean to bust your bubble but it is only about the money and the power.

His moneyed interests are incompatible with our moneyed interests because they don’t want others to get, what they fell is, their cash.

A renewal of the cold war means a lot of cash for the arms industry on both sides.

Syria was about short term relief. This is about long term profits.

[HoreTore]

I don’t mean to bust your bubble but it is only about the money and the power.

I'm sorry to say, but that's a highly simplified and naive view of international relations.

[Kagemusha]

I'm sorry to say, but that's a highly simplified and naive view of international relations.

Please do educate the rest of us. How is Fisherkings view naive?

[HoreTore]

Please do educate the rest of us. How is Fisherkings view naive?

Because it ignores all other aspects of human life besides money and power...? It also implies a perfect rationality in international politics, which is, to put it mildly, highly debatable.

Take pride, for example. You don't believe pride has an influence on relations?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I don’t mean to bust your bubble but it is only about the money and the power.

His moneyed interests are incompatible with our moneyed interests because they don’t want others to get, what they fell is, their cash.

A renewal of the cold war means a lot of cash for the arms industry on both sides.

Syria was about short term relief. This is about long term profits.

That's not entirely accurate.

It's rather like saying the Crusades was "all about land", that was a factor for some but it wasn't why they went there.

Libya was not about oil, oil just made it much easier to mobalise.

Afghanistan and Iraq were about revenge and settling old scores respectively.

The question is - is Crimea about Russia, or the Soviet Reunion?

If I were Estonian or Latvian I would be feeling very twitchy right now.

[rvg]

The question is - is Crimea about Russia, or the Soviet Reunion?

If I were Estonian or Latvian I would be feeling very twitchy right now.

Crimea is about Putin testing the waters, it's about seeing how far can he can go before he runs into solid opposition.

[Beskar]

Please do educate the rest of us. How is Fisherkings view naive?

He missed out "ideology", thus it is "money, power and ideology".

I would place his example of 'pride' under the label of ideology. There are many other sub-constructs too, but in a simplified manner, this works.

[Kagemusha]

Because it ignores all other aspects of human life besides money and power...? It also implies a perfect rationality in international politics, which is, to put it mildly, highly debatable.

Take pride, for example. You don't believe pride has an influence on relations?

Everything of course have an influence, but at least how i read Fisherkings post. I think he means what it boils down into. Reaching to emotions is essence of politics, as what is power? And money comes in when something is deemed worthwhile or not. But i am sure the original poster will fill in soon enough.

[rvg]

He missed out "ideology", thus it is "money, power and ideology".

Russian ideology of today is simple: "For the God-Emperor!" Anyone who disagrees is a heretic.

[Sarmatian]

Because it ignores all other aspects of human life besides money and power...? It also implies a perfect rationality in international politics, which is, to put it mildly, highly debatable.

Take pride, for example. You don't believe pride has an influence on relations?

Human life has little meaning in global politics...

[Fisherking]

I'm sorry to say, but that's a highly simplified and naive view of international relations.

It may be cynical but it is not naïve.

Those in power stay there by helping the rich get what they want.

The rich get richer by keeping their guy in power.

Right now Putin wants to start his own trading block and needed Ukraine. The EU wants to expend their trading block.

Western arms manufactures are seeing an end to the latest crop of wars and lean times. Putin is expanding his military. Why? What was the threat? It just makes the right people happy.

Look around at past wars. Any of them, and tell me no one profited. Much of the time the war was over particular trade issues. You can dress it up anyway you want and it usually comes down to who gets the concession for what commodity.

As for pride, prestige, and patriotism, they are food for the masses. Part of the reflected glory. Go back to the British Empire. It was about trade. The rest just stirred the people in to working for their goals.

I’m sorry. I earned my cynicism in the service to their cause.

Here is someone else who came to the same conclusion: http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html

You won’t find the book long at all but what was true in the 1930s is still true today.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Celebrities only distract those who wish to be distracted. Those are a lost cause anyway.

I don't think you are fully correct in this. There have been, throughout history, some who will always choose distraction over substance. With those persons in mind, I agree with your assessment. They have chosen ignorance and will reap the benefits thereof.

However, in a mass communication era, I think the "agenda setting" function of the media greatly exacerbates this kind of "least common denominator" focus and makes it a problem for a broader segment of the society than otherwise would choose ignorance.

In the past, you had to actively avoid substance for distraction. Now, you must work to avoid distraction and seek substance.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Human life has little meaning in global politics...

It is one of the currencies of exchange in global politics.

[rvg]

In the past, you had to actively avoid substance for distraction. Now, you must work to avoid distraction and seek substance.

Sure, but that's not very difficult to do. Nor does it take much effort.

[HoreTore]

He missed out "ideology", thus it is "money, power and ideology".

I would place his example of 'pride' under the label of ideology. There are many other sub-constructs too, but in a simplified manner, this works.

....And tradition? Where do you place that? The likelihood of a national leader acting in a certain way is heavily influenced by how former leaders have acted in similar situations, even if there are otherwise no ties between the current and former leaders. I can't see how you can place this under "power, money and ideology". And now we've already doubled the original list...

The main issue with "power and money" is something else, however. It's usually tied to the old "follow the money"-type "arguments", which is a line of thinking which bungles up cause and effect and leads us down the murky waters of functionalist explanations. Besides functionalist explanations not being explanations at all, they also open the gateway to all sorts of nonsense, like thinking OBL was not responsible for 9/11. He didn't profit, so obviously he can't be responsible?!?!

[Beskar]

....And tradition? Where do you place that? The likelihood of a national leader acting in a certain way is heavily influenced by how former leaders have acted in similar situations, even if there are otherwise no ties between the current and former leaders. I can't see how you can place this under "power, money and ideology". And now we've already doubled the original list...
Tradition comes under ideology. So there is no issue. National pride and tradition are part of the national ideology, there is no list doubling. Even concepts such as facism, democracy, human rights and others come under ideology too. Even religious thought. It pretty much covers the bases. Yes, you can break down ideology into more sub-categories, but it works as the catch-all.

[Fisherking]

Come on guy, that is for recruiting posters.

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


https://i.imgur.com/7mHBHVd.gif

[rvg]

Yvan eht nioj.

[HoreTore]

Tradition comes under ideology. So there is no issue. National pride and tradition are part of the national ideology, there is no list doubling. Even concepts such as facism, democracy, human rights and others come under ideology too. Even religious thought. It pretty much covers the bases. Yes, you can break down ideology into more sub-categories, but it works as the catch-all.

I am not talking about the ideological kind of tradition, I am talking of the psychological kind, ie. the (unconscious) desire not to act in ways contrary to what has been done before.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Yvan eht nioj.


PARTY POSSE!

[Brenus]

`“by Tuesday we'll be in a state of an armed conflict with Russia.” Not a chance: Military exercises in Poland were cancelled due to bad weather…
And I hope for your troops in Afghanistan you will not, or the Taliban might have access to modern weapons faster than you think…

“That's what I thought about Russia stealing Crimea from Ukraine if you asked me 3 months ago.” That is because, like me, you underestimated the Extreme-Right Stupidity in Ukraine.
However, I never even imagine that Putin would forget Kosovo and the Encirclement Strategy from the West. He did react for Georgia, and I even don’t understand why some would think he wouldn't in Ukraine.

[Fisherking]

Free elections, free opinions. Guess again!

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26552066

More provocative:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26564846

[Brenus]

So NATO exercises (cancelled, due to bad weather) were legitimate but Russian are provocations.... Hmm, I see you point.

[Sarmatian]

So NATO exercises (cancelled, due to bad weather) were legitimate but Russian are provocations.... Hmm, I see you point.

That point aside, what does it say about the army which cancels its exercises due to bad weather? What's next? No fighting on weekends and after five?

[Fisherking]

So NATO exercises (cancelled, due to bad weather) were legitimate but Russian are provocations.... Hmm, I see you point.


It is meant to be provocative.

Do the troops in Poland prove a threat to Ukraine? Are they likely to launch an incursion into Russia?

[Fisherking]

That point aside, what does it say about the army which cancels its exercises due to bad weather? What's next? No fighting on weekends and after five?

That has to be some very weak excuse. I have never seen an exercise canceled due to weather.

Is the maneuver zone under 2m of water?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

That point aside, what does it say about the army which cancels its exercises due to bad weather? What's next? No fighting on weekends and after five?

Maybe it says they're bad at excuses.

Russia doesn't want war - that's reassuring.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26564851

[HoreTore]

Exercises are frequently halted due to bad weather. The Cold Response(the NATO exercise in Norway) 2006 was halted for a day or so when the temperature crept below -40.


There's a pretty big difference between peacetime and wartime.

[Sarmatian]

Maybe it says they're bad at excuses.


My thoughts exactly.

So, what was the real reason?

[Fisherking]

Exercises are frequently halted due to bad weather. The Cold Response(the NATO exercise in Norway) 2006 was halted for a day or so when the temperature crept below -40.


There's a pretty big difference between peacetime and wartime.

How things do change.

I was on an exercise that stopped movement when temperatures dipped below -60F and vehicles could no longer be refueled, but the troops had to remain in the field. In icy conditions armored vehicles usually drop their track pads or even reverse some center guides to gain traction. The attitude was always to train as you fight so foul weather was only a training enhancement.
:shrug:

[Husar]

I know you're not all as sentimental as I am, but I looked up some good quotes from comrade Putin and thought I'd share them:


A superpower is a cold war term. When people today say that Russia aspires to have this status, I interpret it in the following way: they want to undermine trust in Russia, to portray Russia as frightening, and create some kind of image of an enemy. ... Russia is in favor of a multipolar world, a democratic world order, strengthening the system of international law, and for developing a legal system in which any small country, even a very small country, can feel itself secure, as if behind a stone wall. ... Russia is ready to become part of this multipolar world and guarantee that the international community observes these rules. And not as a superpower with special rights, but rather as an equal among equals.


People are always teaching us democracy but the people who teach us democracy don't want to learn it themselves.

Oh yeah, and to finally prove how untrustworthy and out of his mind the man really is:


Russia does not have in its possession any trustworthy data that supports the existence of nuclear weapons or any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and we have not received any such information from our partners as yet.

There's more good stuff on wikiquote of course: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Vladimir_Putin

[Gilrandir]

This is a forum, people debate here. We challenge each other and learn new stuff.


I have learned some new thing as well: challenge means giving evaluative judgements calling the opponent "boring", "childish" and his arguments "bollocks". Other people here even if they may disagree with me don't resort to snobbery.


So far, thins I've learned from discussion with you:

1) You don't know history

I'm not a historian. If I dabble in history my interests lie in medieval period. So I don't deny that I'm not a great specialist in WWII history, at least not in the warfare waged outside the Soviet Union. But you generalize things basing your judgement on the mistake(s) you may have spotted in my posts. Those mistake(s) (which Hore Tore corrected, and not you, by the way) were caused by my excessive trust to a British documentary. Adopting your approach I may claim that you don't know English (look at your quote above). Or is it a specific example that proves nothing?

One more thing I have learned from discussion with you: you see disregard of democratic principles only if the "illegal/illegitimate" government in Kyiv is guilty of it (and blame personally me in it) and are OK with it if the opposite side resorts to it as well. You give advice (unsolicited, by the way) expecting personally me to follow it and start parleying with Putin. I have told it several times: Russia does not want to have any negotiations with any representatives of contemporary Ukrainian government.

[HoreTore]

I have learned some new thing as well: challenge means giving evaluative judgements calling the opponent "boring", "childish" and his arguments "bollocks". Other people here even if they may disagree with me don't resort to snobbery.

Grow a thicker skin. As long as the arguments support it, calling a position "bollocks" is perfectly justified. Still, Sarmatians posts in this thread have been a bit more emotional than they usually are...


were caused by my excessive trust to a British documentary.

Completely off topic, but:

British WW2 documentaries tend to suck. They rarely give a full picture, choosing to focus on "action elements" instead. They are also extremely etnocentric, and rarely does much to attempt the reasonings of non-Brits.

The French ones are much, much better.

[Sarmatian]

I have learned some new thing as well: challenge means giving evaluative judgements calling the opponent "boring", "childish" and his arguments "bollocks". Other people here even if they may disagree with me don't resort to snobbery.

Well, after I've explained at least 5 times why your arguments are factually incorrect, your response was to continue spouting propaganda and jump on high horse how I don't respect your opinion, feeling almost insulted that I don't want accept your arguments as correct ones. What did you expect?


I'm not a historian. If I dabble in history my interests lie in medieval period. So I don't deny that I'm not a great specialist in WWII history, at least not in the warfare waged outside the Soviet Union. But you generalize things basing your judgement on the mistake(s) you may have spotted in my posts. Those mistake(s) (which Hore Tore corrected, and not you, by the way) were caused by my excessive trust to a British documentary. Adopting your approach I may claim that you don't know English (look at your quote above). Or is it a specific example that proves nothing?

One more thing I have learned from discussion with you: you see disregard of democratic principles only if the "illegal/illegitimate" government in Kyiv is guilty of it (and blame personally me in it) and are OK with it if the opposite side resorts to it as well. You give advice (unsolicited, by the way) expecting personally me to follow it and start parleying with Putin. I have told it several times: Russia does not want to have any negotiations with any representatives of contemporary Ukrainian government.

You don't have to be a historian to know that there was no chance Soviets would allow German planes on their airfields in 1940. You stated it as a fact. It was bollox. HoreTore was just nice enough to explain it to you in detail.

On account of the second part, you're wrong, but it doesn't matter much. We're not Putin and Obama, we can press the reset button.

Here's a very simplified overview of my opinion concerning Ukraine crisis and you tell me where you disagree with me and we will go from there:

1) Protesters overthrew democratically elected president and government
2) Both president and the government were corrupt, greedy bastards
3) Protesters then set up a new government, by bullying and threatening MP's who didn't agree with them, giving it a facade of legality
4) New government started pulling anti-Russian moves and fundamentally altering domestic and foreign policies
5) Russians started sabre-rattling and the new government withdrew most anti-Russian moves, at least for the moment
6) Russians decide Ukraine is too unstable to be considered a dependable enough partner and moved to get control of Crimea, which is vital for their strategic interests
7) They start spouting propaganda and plan to hold a referendum to give their unlawful occupation of Crimea a facade of legality
8) The only thing Ukraine can do at the moment is to try and placate Russia

On which points you disagree with me and why?

[Gilrandir]

Grow a thicker skin.

I will try. I have got used to a different type of dialogue on TW forums.

[Sarmatian]

I will try. I have got used to a different type of dialogue on TW forums.

Concerning TW stuff, sure, but not in the backroom :soapbox:. This is the big league. Consider it your baptism of fire. :whip: ~;)

[HoreTore]

1) Protesters overthrew democratically elected president and government

3) Protesters then set up a new government, by bullying and threatening MP's who didn't agree with them, giving it a facade of legality

Revolutions are, by their nature, illegal actions. A legal revolution is an absurdity.

[Gilrandir]

there was no chance Soviets would allow German planes on their airfields in 1940.

Why not if both countries were allies at that time? They cooperated in dividing Poland and the Soviet Union was actively trading with Germany the last Soviet trains with grain to cross the border with Gemany as late as 21 June 1941.




3) Protesters then set up a new government, by bullying and threatening MP's who didn't agree with them, giving it a facade of legality

The bullying was there, though how extensive, I don't know. But by that time (and even before) many Party of Regions' MPs had started to realize that


Both president and the government were corrupt, greedy bastards

so something must be done. Some didn't want to be associated with Yanukovych any more. Plus some MPs controlled by tycoons were swayed by their "masters" to change their stance. So in shaping this "facade of legality" (as you call it) bullying was not the desicive incentive. The parliament now is more factioned than it was - you can't form and keep the factions functioning by bullying.


4) New government started pulling anti-Russian moves and fundamentally altering domestic and foreign policies

I would rather say that those moves were considered anti-Russian by Russia. Nothing was further from the mind of the new government than getting Russia's hackle up and seeking a new enemy. I agree, though, that some of the moves (such as lanuage law) were bad and untimely calls. I don't see any fundamental change in foreign politics as EU association had been proclaimed, pursued and "relegated until some time later" by Yanukovych. As for domestic change I don't know what you mean - aspiring to put an end to corruption?


7) They start spouting propaganda and plan to hold a referendum to give their unlawful occupation of Crimea a facade of legality

They started spouting propaganda as far back as December 2013. It has been gathering momentum and now is in full swing.
On other points I completely agree with your vision of the situation.

[Gilrandir]

Consider it your baptism of fire. :whip: ~;)
The only arsonist I encountered here was you.:sweatdrop:

[Myth]

Concerning TW stuff, sure, but not in the backroom :soapbox:. This is the big league. Consider it your baptism of fire. :whip: ~;)

As if any of you BR patrons still play TW. Heck, I bet most of you don't have a single TW game installed even.

http://d24w6bsrhbeh9d.cloudfront.net/photo/aPv10vK_460s.jpg

[Husar]

I'm not sure my last post came across correctly.

Putin was actually right about WMDs in Iraq, but as usual, America dismissed him as a crazy dictator who just wants to support his dictator friends, went into the war only to be proven wrong and regret it in the end. The point being that if you dismiss Putin just for being Putin that neither makes you right nor does it guarantee that you won't regret doing that.

As for the Nazi thugs, their medieval bludgeoning tools and so on, apparently Ukraine wants to recruit 60,000 of them for a national guard to support the army, which currently has only about 6,000 soldiers ready to fight due to "years of mismanagement". Some might say that's how all armies recruit but I do not see it as a very positive sign to recruit the people who set policemen on fire who weren't shooting back.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Why hasn't Ukraine thought of having their own referendum on the secession of Crimea? This would strengthen their legal claim that the secession is illegal.

Also Husar, it was a revolution. It was miraculous that more firearms weren't used. The people who fought against the Berkut are soldiers, so if the government needs soldiers it would stand to reason.

[Myth]

Why hasn't Ukraine thought of having their own referendum on the secession of Crimea? This would strengthen their legal claim that the secession is illegal.

Also Husar, it was a revolution. It was miraculous that more firearms weren't used. The people who fought against the Berkut are soldiers, so if the government needs soldiers it would stand to reason.

No, they were rebel scum.

http://www.horsetrackhooligans.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/rebel_scum.jpg

[ICantSpellDawg]

So were our Founding fathers. We even made one of the ringleaders our first President.

Contempt for "authority" and the realization that your government is made up of confused mere mortals is a healthy basis for a nation

[Husar]

Also Husar, it was a revolution. It was miraculous that more firearms weren't used. The people who fought against the Berkut are soldiers, so if the government needs soldiers it would stand to reason.

Was it a revolution or a coup?

http://www.fair.org/blog/2014/03/07/denying-the-far-right-role-in-the-ukrainian-revolution/


The new deputy prime minister, Oleksandr Sych, is from Svoboda; National Security Secretary Andriy Parubiy is a co-founder of the neo-Nazi Social-National Party, Svoboda's earlier incarnation; the deputy secretary for National Security is Dmytro Yarosh, the head of Right Sector. Chief prosecutor Oleh Makhnitsky is another Svoboda member, as are the ministers for Agriculture and Ecology (Channel 4, 3/5/14). In short, if the prospect of fascists taking power again in Europe worries you, you should be very worried about Ukraine.
[...]
"Are there Neo-Nazis in Ukraine?" writes Satell. "Sure, just as there are in Chicago and every other major American city. Are some politically active? Yes, as is David Duke in our own country. Do they have any power to shape policy or events? Categorically no." Unless you count leading the fighting that overthrew the government as shaping events, or getting to run the military and justice system as affecting policy.

It is really hard to find even a single article in a "respected" media outlet in English that would even dare to attempt s abalanced review of the situation. I just searched al Jazeera only to see that the only expert opinions they offer are from professors of US Universities. On Google, every article headline you find is already anti-russian. The mere thought that Russia could have a point is nowhere to be found and all articles are based on the idea that Russia is the enemy. Do you consider that balanced reporting? Is it okay to arrive at a conclusion without even considering the counterpoints?
I've seen some Germans being rather enraged about that as well:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdrBMRSFqOg
http://www.cashkurs.com/kategorie/cashkurs-tv/beitrag/tagesausblick-ukraine-was-steckt-wirklich-hinter-den-unruhen/

They make their own little mistakes but at least they do offer a counter argument that people can consider, I see little of that when I search on Google using English terms. Except if you go to outlets that most here will probably decry as fringe nutters and refuse to read in the first place:

Such as socialists: http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/03/04/pers-m04.html

Monday’s lead editorial (“Russia’s Aggression”) in the New York Times does not contain a trace of analysis. It consists entirely of denunciations, saber-rattling and limitless hypocrisy.

Or this guy, who also links to the wsws site halfway down the article: http://www.opednews.com/articles/American-propaganda-stokes-by-Patrice-Greanville-Agents_Destabilization_Government_Plutocracy-140204-580.html


Nuland noted that the fate of Ukraine was warranted not only because it lay "at the center of Europe" but also because it was also a "valued" and "important" partner to the United States.In his own report to the meeting, Melia announced that the US had "invested" over $5 billion in Ukraine since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, with $815 million of this total going directly to pro-US NGOs. Melia also reported that, since 2009, the Obama administration had donated $184 million to various programs aimed at implementing political change in Ukraine. Both Nuland and Melia underlined that the "US stands with the Ukrainian people in solidarity in their struggle for fundamental human rights". Their comments were then supplemented by a report by former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, who warned many years ago of the central importance of Ukraine on the Eurasian chess board.

Of course we all know that the US would never do such things while Putin has a really bad history of being bad and just has to be bad as a consequence. :rolleyes:

Oh and here is another perspective: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-06/russian-perspective-there-will-be-war-ukraine

Will there be war in Ukraine? I am afraid so. After all, the extremists who seized power in Kiev want to see a bloodbath. Only fear for their own lives might stop them from inciting such a conflict. Russia is prepared to move its forces into southern and eastern Ukraine if repressive measures are used against the Russian-speaking population or if a military intervention occurs. Russia will not annex Crimea. It has enough territory already. At the same time, however, it will also not stand by passively while Russophobic and neo-Nazi gangs hold the people of Crimea, Kharkiv and Donetsk at their mercy.

Of course I wouldn't pretend that this is entirely without bias or entirely correct either, I do however not condone the Western media releasing nothing but propaganda that is absolutely nowhere below the level of Russian propaganda and possibly even more sophisitcated and clever than that.

[ICantSpellDawg]

By most standards, when a government has been overthrown by huge mobs of people firebombing police and taking over the government - that is a revolution.

The parliament may have altered procedure in a coup, but the government had already abdicated by force when they did this. People were walking around the Presidents private grounds when parliament broke the news.

There will almost certainly be war in Ukraine. Russia is doing whatever it can to bus provocateurs into the east and create a shooting war so that he has cause to intervene further. It is his interest to secure and annex the East and South now that the West has ceded the entire Black Sea region to the Russian Empire. This may have happened anyway, but invading Crimea and promising to swoop in and protect Russian thugs a from Ukrainian has definitely given thugs the cover that they need to act with impunity.

The tree of liberty occasionally requires the blood of patriots and tyrants. Like South Carolina supported Massachusetts in breaking free of their government, I support my Ukrainian brothers in arms.

I haven't called the Maidan movement a peaceful protest since it first began. Since then it has been an insurrection. I didn't call it a revolution until they started using firebombs and taking over police stations, stripping police naked to take their arms.

[Pannonian]

So were our Founding fathers. We even made one of the ringleaders our first President.

Contempt for "authority" and the realization that your government is made up of confused mere mortals is a healthy basis for a nation

And your Founding Fathers were opposed by one or more factions who were equally convinced of the righteousness of their side, who were only defeated in argument through defeat in war. Why were the Loyalists wrong and the Patriots right? Because the Patriots won the war and expelled or otherwise silenced the Loyalists. Reverse the outcome, and you have the Unionists who were right under Lincoln and the Rebels who were wrong under Davis. After the Maidan-led revolution overturned the previous rules of democracy, it is now up to the current Ukrainian government to prove that they're right. If they can't, then it means whoever can uphold their version of right must by definition be right.

[ICantSpellDawg]

And your Founding Fathers were opposed by one or more factions who were equally convinced of the righteousness of their side, who were only defeated in argument through defeat in war. Why were the Loyalists wrong and the Patriots right? Because the Patriots won the war and expelled or otherwise silenced the Loyalists. Reverse the outcome, and you have the Unionists who were right under Lincoln and the Rebels who were wrong under Davis. After the Maidan-led revolution overturned the previous rules of democracy, it is now up to the current Ukrainian government to prove that they're right. If they can't, then it means whoever can uphold their version of right must by definition be right.

Might makes power, not right.

vice news has had great coverage. Their most recent video Russian roulette dispatch 8 is pretty brutal

[Husar]

Russia is doing whatever it can to bus provocateurs into the east and create a shooting war so that he has cause to intervene further. It is his interest to secure and annex the East and South now that the West has ceded the entire Black Sea region to the Russian Empire. This may have happened anyway, but invading Crimea and promising to swoop in and protect Russian thugs a from Ukrainian has definitely given thugs the cover that they need to act with impunity.

Claims the country that spent $184 million on supporting local Nazi thugs?

[Sarmatian]

Revolutions are, by their nature, illegal actions. A legal revolution is an absurdity.

Exactly. To move from square 1, we need to establish whether it was a revolution or a legal change of government. Western politicians maintain it was a legal change of government - the parliament simply withdrew backing of the existing government and chose a new one. That works because then all is well and the current government is legal and legitimate.
Unfortunately, facts say that it was protesters who chose the government and MP's who were against were bullied and threatened into accepting it. That makes this a revolution, makes the current government illegal and illegitimate and all rules are off the table, giving Russia perfectly fine legal footing not to recognize the current government. It happened many times in history. For example for quite a long time Taiwan was considered China, while the communist China was unrecognized by many countries. Taiwan even had a permanent security council seat for quite some time.


Why not if both countries were allies at that time? They cooperated in dividing Poland and the Soviet Union was actively trading with Germany the last Soviet trains with grain to cross the border with Gemany as late as 21 June 1941.

They were never allies. They had a non-aggression pact. Everything Stalin did, he did it to buy time. He used the pact to reclaim territories lost to Poland earlier. Those territories were mainly inhabited by Ukrainians and Belarussians, and in the north, Lithuanians.


The bullying was there, though how extensive, I don't know. But by that time (and even before) many Party of Regions' MPs had started to realize that

so something must be done. Some didn't want to be associated with Yanukovych any more. Plus some MPs controlled by tycoons were swayed by their "masters" to change their stance. So in shaping this "facade of legality" (as you call it) bullying was not the desicive incentive. The parliament now is more factioned than it was - you can't form and keep the factions functioning by bullying.

Ok, now we're getting somewhere. In the honour of a new breakthrough, I will leave the discussion of how widespread bullying was for some other time.


I would rather say that those moves were considered anti-Russian by Russia. Nothing was further from the mind of the new government than getting Russia's hackle up and seeking a new enemy. I agree, though, that some of the moves (such as lanuage law) were bad and untimely calls. I don't see any fundamental change in foreign politics as EU association had been proclaimed, pursued and "relegated until some time later" by Yanukovych. As for domestic change I don't know what you mean - aspiring to put an end to corruption?

The changes with language opened a pretty big can of worms, and gave Russia a reason and a pretext, especially concerning how influential are the far-right parties and movements in the new government, and I'm not entirely convinced the Maidan government would have stopped there were it not for Russian forces armed to the teeth looking them across the border.

The domestic policies issue refer to try to ban the communist party and to encourage and organize people to repeat the Maidan scenario in the east.

The change in foreign policy wasn't official, but implied. Western diplomats noted how new Ukrainian government was making overtures to NATO. EU membership wouldn't be a problem by itself. I believe the sentiment in Moscow would have been "unfortunate, but tolerable". NATO membership, on the other hand, isn't. That means another 1000 km on NATO border, loss of strategic Crimean bases and NATO forces within swimming distance of the new pipeline.

That is the crux of the issue here. Putin isn't performing a land grab, in my humble opinion. If he wanted, he could have taken a huge chunk of eastern Ukraine under the same pretext as Crimea, there was no one to stop him. Obviously, Putin (correctly or incorrectly) believed the bases in Crimea are under threat.

[Gilrandir]

As for the Nazi thugs, their medieval bludgeoning tools and so on, apparently Ukraine wants to recruit 60,000 of them for a national guard to support the army, which currently has only about 6,000 soldiers ready to fight due to "years of mismanagement". Some might say that's how all armies recruit but I do not see it as a very positive sign to recruit the people who set policemen on fire who weren't shooting back.
The stipulated quantity of the national guard is 30 000 most of which (about 20 000) are to be the former "internal armed forces". If any voulnteers wish to join they are welcome.

[HoreTore]

That makes this a revolution, makes the current government illegal and illegitimate and all rules are off the table

No.

That a revolution is inherently illegal, as in not allowed by the current laws, does not make it either illegal, illegitimate nor does it mean that all rules are off the table.

A law does not have to be written for it to be a real law. As you boast about your democratic knowledge, you should know this. In fact, an unwritten law can take precedence over a written law, and adhering to a written law over an unwritten one can be illegal.

[Gilrandir]

They were never allies. They had a non-aggression pact. Everything Stalin did, he did it to buy time. He used the pact to reclaim territories lost to Poland earlier. Those territories were mainly inhabited by Ukrainians and Belarussians, and in the north, Lithuanians.

Sometimes this pact is (though not very correctly) called Nazi-Soviet alliance. What else would you make of a treaty which essentially divides eastern Europe into spheres of influence? It is naturally expected to consider such parties allies.
Everything Hitler did had the same aim in view.
It also gave to Stalin the Baltic states lost pretty much at the same time as mentioned by you. Having lost something does not make the invasion of Poland (or any other country) justified. Why, the argument of retrieving the loss is a good one for Putin to make today.



Ok, now we're getting somewhere. In the honour of a new breakthrough, I will leave the discussion of how widespread bullying was for some other time.

I never denied the bullying. I wanted you to see that bullying was (and is) there from both sides (now applied in Crimea). And I insist: what is now going on within the parliament testifies to the fact that the Party of Regions faction was not a homogeneous entity having more than one center of influence (both within and without). The rift was evident (for me at least) as early as January 22 when the most violent clashes started. Tygypko group (about 30 deputies) and Akhmetov group (about 40 deputies) openly denounced the violence and were ready to depart from the faction and only a personal visit (and bullying) from Yanukovych to the parliament mended the rift (albeit temporarily). So bullying was among other factors (and not the dominant one, as you seem to believe) in reshaping the parliamentary roster.




Putin isn't performing a land grab, in my humble opinion. If he wanted, he could have taken a huge chunk of eastern Ukraine under the same pretext as Crimea, there was no one to stop him.
He wasn't, you mean. Now Crimea-grabbing looks more like whetting his appetite.
And grabbing Crimea was easier since he had troops deployed in Sevastopol so he just had to order them out. In Eastern Ukraine he would have had to send tanks across the border (I don't think he would have had the cheek to use artillery and planes) which would have been a blunt iniquity. But who knows we may still live to see that scenario in view of what is happening in Donetsk. You know, a man was killed in clashes yesterday (you may find out yourself who attacked who since you wouldn't believe me anyway) and he was a Svoboda member (one Nazi less, as you would probably say). Russia reacted at once, saying that there are victims among Russian-speakers.:dizzy2:

[Gilrandir]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26552066
Sarmatian, what do you now think of the voice-of-Saruman effect I spoke of? A choice offered between going down to the hell of suffering with nazis from Kyiv and ascending blissful heaven with fraternal Russia.

[Husar]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26552066
Sarmatian, what do you now think of the voice-of-Saruman effect I spoke of? A choice offered between going down to the hell of suffering with nazis from Kyiv and ascending blissful heaven with fraternal Russia.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-0hwa2H9agVI/UGdxHD3sosI/AAAAAAAAJ_A/e-T9WH_X-Ik/s1600/Obama+vs+romney+AMERICA+4+blog.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-p02spN8ScC0/T_64z275xOI/AAAAAAAATIA/Gg2U9VBxLeY/s640/OBAMA+VERSUS+ROMNEY+THE+CHOICE+IS+CLEAR.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-xE0W68G02KE/T9Dj6DpmVaI/AAAAAAAAE-U/QpviMdVqQ18/s1600/ObamaSocialistMarxist.png

And just because it's funny:
http://1jux.com/-23J

I mean, it can't be wrong if America does it.

[Sarmatian]

No.

That a revolution is inherently illegal, as in not allowed by the current laws, does not make it either illegal, illegitimate nor does it mean that all rules are off the table.

Actually, it means just that. You can't hide behind the same principles you've just violated.


A law does not have to be written for it to be a real law. As you boast about your democratic knowledge, you should know this. In fact, an unwritten law can take precedence over a written law, and adhering to a written law over an unwritten one can be illegal.

That's so extremely rare it exists basically only in legal theory.

I never boasted about my knowledge of democracy, I merely pointed out lack of it in some other cases.
Anyway, law and democracy aren't the same thing, I don't understand why you're equating them. Law should be based on democratic (among many other) principles and values, but democracy must also be bound by law, otherwise it may become a case of two wolves and a sheep voting what they're gonna have for dinner.


Sometimes this pact is (though not very correctly) called Nazi-Soviet alliance. What else would you make of a treaty which essentially divides eastern Europe into spheres of influence? It is naturally expected to consider such parties allies.
Everything Hitler did had the same aim in view.
It also gave to Stalin the Baltic states lost pretty much at the same time as mentioned by you. Having lost something does not make the invasion of Poland (or any other country) justified. Why, the argument of retrieving the loss is a good one for Putin to make today.

Hardly the same, but that's too much off-topic to discuss here. Feel free to start another thread where we can discuss it.


I never denied the bullying. I wanted you to see that bullying was (and is) there from both sides (now applied in Crimea). And I insist: what is now going on within the parliament testifies to the fact that the Party of Regions faction was not a homogeneous entity having more than one center of influence (both within and without). The rift was evident (for me at least) as early as January 22 when the most violent clashes started. Tygypko group (about 30 deputies) and Akhmetov group (about 40 deputies) openly denounced the violence and were ready to depart from the faction and only a personal visit (and bullying) from Yanukovych to the parliament mended the rift (albeit temporarily). So bullying was among other factors (and not the dominant one, as you seem to believe) in reshaping the parliamentary roster.

Of course, but the fact is that Crimea would be calm and still a part of Ukraine for the foreseeable future had it not been for the revolution and several bad moves afterwards.


He wasn't, you mean. Now Crimea-grabbing looks more like whetting his appetite.
And grabbing Crimea was easier since he had troops deployed in Sevastopol so he just had to order them out. In Eastern Ukraine he would have had to send tanks across the border (I don't think he would have had the cheek to use artillery and planes) which would have been a blunt iniquity. But who knows we may still live to see that scenario in view of what is happening in Donetsk. You know, a man was killed in clashes yesterday (you may find out yourself who attacked who since you wouldn't believe me anyway) and he was a Svoboda member (one Nazi less, as you would probably say). Russia reacted at once, saying that there are victims among Russian-speakers.:dizzy2:

Nah, I don't believe he is. At least if the Maidan government doesn't make a couple more huge blunders and give him a pretext. So far they've shown they've come to their senses. That's still in the hands of Kiev. If they'd played it differently from the start, maybe Crimea would have still been.


http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26552066
Sarmatian, what do you now think of the voice-of-Saruman effect I spoke of? A choice offered between going down to the hell of suffering with nazis from Kyiv and ascending blissful heaven with fraternal Russia.

What do you expect them to say? We're holding a referendum because of all the flowers we're expecting from Kiev? Their propaganda is fully in tune with their rhetoric.

[HoreTore]

That's so extremely rare it exists basically only in legal theory.

Nonsense, it's extremely common. I can take an example from the Norwegian constitution:

According to our constitution, we do not have a parliamentary system. Our constitution builds on the theory of separation of power, where the executive does not answer to the legislative. Since 1885, however, we have had a parliamentary system. Our executive does answer to our legislative. Yet, this is not written in any law. It simply is by the power of existing.

If a government tried to follow the law of the constitution and refuse to answer to the legislative, they would break the constitution, in effect doing a coup d'état. In order to follow the law of the constitution, a Norwegian government would have to write a new constitution.

[Sarmatian]

Nonsense, it's extremely common. I can take an example from the Norwegian constitution:

According to our constitution, we do not have a parliamentary system. Our constitution builds on the theory of separation of power, where the executive does not answer to the legislative. Since 1885, however, we have had a parliamentary system. Our executive does answer to our legislative. Yet, this is not written in any law. It simply is by the power of existing.

If a government tried to follow the law of the constitution and refuse to answer to the legislative, they would break the constitution, in effect doing a coup d'état. In order to follow the law of the constitution, a Norwegian government would have to write a new constitution.

Ok, colour me confused and send me a pm full of links.

[Husar]

Sounds like Norway is very weird.

How can no law say that the executive has to follow the legislative and yet the executive would break the law if they didn't?
If there is no law, they can't break it. I suppose it means that there is no written law and they'd break an unwritten one. It basically sounds like the constitution has become superflufous, but then why would they break the law of the constitution it if they do not follow an unwritten law that contradicts the constitution?

[HoreTore]

Sounds like Norway is very weird.

How can no law say that the executive has to follow the legislative and yet the executive would break the law if they didn't?
If there is no law, they can't break it. I suppose it means that there is no written law and they'd break an unwritten one. It basically sounds like the constitution has become superflufous, but then why would they break the law of the constitution it if they do not follow an unwritten law that contradicts the constitution?

Welcome to the world of state law.

An illegal act becomes legal once they have managed to pull off said act. More legal than the constitution itself, actually.

[Sarmatian]

Welcome to the world of state law.

An illegal act becomes legal once they have managed to pull off said act. More legal than the constitution itself, actually.

So, Crimea voting for secession is legal if they pull it off?


I'm afraid it doesn't work that way and I'm slightly skeptical about your interpretation of Norwegian politics... Links, please.

[HoreTore]

So, Crimea voting for secession is legal if they pull it off?

Actually, I'm not sure. Territorial changes are handled by international and not national law(regime change is handled by national law).

I have much in Norwegian (http://snl.no/konstitusjonell_sedvanerett), but since I don't know the specific term in English, I haven't found much... The first paragraph of this blog (http://constitutionalism.wordpress.com/2008/09/15/common-law-and-the-constitution/) discusses what I'm talking about though.

[gaelic cowboy]

That is the crux of the issue here. Putin isn't performing a land grab, in my humble opinion. If he wanted, he could have taken a huge chunk of eastern Ukraine under the same pretext as Crimea, there was no one to stop him. Obviously, Putin (correctly or incorrectly) believed the bases in Crimea are under threat.



I just wanted to quote that to let it sink into my brain.


You REALLY believe the statement that Putin is not performing a landgrab.

[Sarmatian]

Actually, I'm not sure. Territorial changes are handled by international and not national law(regime change is handled by national law).

I have much in Norwegian (http://snl.no/konstitusjonell_sedvanerett), but since I don't know the specific term in English, I haven't found much... The first paragraph of this blog (http://constitutionalism.wordpress.com/2008/09/15/common-law-and-the-constitution/) discusses what I'm talking about though.

From what I've been able to gather using google translate, that's a very special case since Norway has a very weird mix of common law and civil law, including constitutional customs.

BUT, you interpretation wasn't correct. The current mix up was due to the fact that the old constitutional custom said that council of state (government) is appointed by the king and new laws basically gave the parliament the power to disband the government. It's clever workaround that didn't require the complex change of constitutional law and had the effect of giving parliament de facto the power to appoint the government as any government appointed by the king could be disbanded instantly by the parliament. In practice that means that basically parliaments appoints the government through the monarch. So, it's not that "your executive branch both answers and doesn't answer to the legislative" - executive branch answers to the legislative branch which can disband it, but it is (de jure) appointed by the monarch (de facto by the parliament).

Irregardless, that's a very weird case and in most countries with civil law, including Ukraine, it doesn't work that way.


I just wanted to quote that to let it sink into my brain.
You REALLY believe the statement that Putin is not performing a landgrab.

Yes, I do. Why's that so hard to believe? Why would he go for Crimea and not for eastern Ukraine which is a much juicier target? Crimea doesn't have anything going for it except geography and naval infrastructure.

[gaelic cowboy]

Yes, I do. Why's that so hard to believe? Why would he go for Crimea and not for eastern Ukraine which is a much juicier target? Crimea doesn't have anything going for it except geography and naval infrastructure.


Come off it Sarmatian he grabbed Crimea cos it was easier to grab and keep hold of naturally.

Eastern Ukraine while more productive would have been a bit harder to grab than Georgia.

[HoreTore]

BUT, you interpretation wasn't correct. The current mix up was due to the fact that the old constitutional custom said that council of state (government) is appointed by the king and new laws basically gave the parliament the power to disband the government. It's clever workaround that didn't require the complex change of constitutional law and had the effect of giving parliament de facto the power to appoint the government as any government appointed by the king could be disbanded instantly by the parliament. In practice that means that basically parliaments appoints the government through the monarch. So, it's not that "your executive branch both answers and doesn't answer to the legislative" - executive branch answers to the legislative branch which can disband it, but it is (de jure) appointed by the monarch (de facto by the parliament).

Not quite. The key is not in who appoints the executive, but rather who throws it. There was no law in Norway concerning a vote of no confidence. Neither our constitution nor any other law regulates a vote of no confidence. According to the written law, the executive is under no obligation to follow a vote of no confidence. It's happened twice, and if those governments had followed the law, they would have broken the law(which doesn't exist) and would be considered to have done a coup d'état. They would then need to write a new constitution.

What you refer to, by the way, is the amendments(actually rewriting) necessary for Norway to enter the union with Sweden in November 1814. A Swedish King was accepted on the condition that the Norwegian government was recommended by Parliament and then formally appointed by the king.


Irregardless, that's a very weird case and in most country with civil law, including Ukraine, it doesn't work that way.

The larger point was that the letter of the written law is not the only law, nor is it the actual law. English law, for example, isn't what the text says. English law is what the courts have ruled over the centuries.

Further, the Ukrainian state Yanukovich ruled no longer exists. The new government does not rule on the basis of its laws, they have adopted a different constitution.

By the way:


The people are the bearers of sovereignty and the only source of power in Ukraine. The people exercise power directly and through bodies of state power and bodies of local self-government.

The right to determine and change the constitutional order in Ukraine belongs exclusively to the people and shall not be usurped by the State, its bodies or officials.

[Sarmatian]

Come off it Sarmatian he grabbed Crimea cos it was easier to grab and keep hold of naturally.

Eastern Ukraine while more productive would have been a bit harder to grab than Georgia.

So, you believe he's that much of an idiot to piss off most of the western world and potentially lose long term support in Ukraine for 0.1% increase in territory and 1.5% increase in population? He's just that power-hungry and unreasonable?


The people are the bearers of sovereignty and the only source of power in Ukraine. The people exercise power directly and through bodies of state power and bodies of local self-government.

The right to determine and change the constitutional order in Ukraine belongs exclusively to the people and shall not be usurped by the State, its bodies or officials.

The bolded part doesn't pertain to revolution, but should be seen in conjunction with the first paragraph. It means that only the people can change the constitution, through their representatives.

[rvg]

So, you believe he's that much of an idiot to piss off most of the western world and potentially lose long term support in Ukraine for 0.1% increase in territory and 1.5% increase in population? He's just that power-hungry and unreasonable?

He's very reasonable. By annexing Crimea he's looking to solidify support within Russia and completely silence the opposition. He is doing that as we speak. For that he is willing to pay the price, after he personally won't be paying anything, it's the people who will bear the brunt of what's coming ahead.

[Sarmatian]

He's very reasonable. By annexing Crimea he's looking to solidify support within Russia and completely silence the opposition. He is doing that as we speak. For that he is willing to pay the price, after he personally won't be paying anything, it's the people who will bear the brunt of what's coming ahead.

Well, average salary in Russia increased several times since he first came to power and GDP increased 2.5-3 times. Do you want to rethink your statement?



What you refer to, by the way, is the amendments(actually rewriting) necessary for Norway to enter the union with Sweden in November 1814. A Swedish King was accepted on the condition that the Norwegian government was recommended by Parliament and then formally appointed by the king.


Well, wiki, which isn't always the most reliable of sources, I admit, says you're wrong.


1884: Parliamentarism has evolved since 1884 and entails that the cabinet must not have the parliament against it (an absence of mistrust, but an express of support is not necessary), and that the appointment by the King is a formality when there is a clear parliamentary majority. This parliamentary rule has the status of constitutional custom. All new laws are passed and all new governments are therefore formed de jure by the King, although not de facto. After elections resulting in no clear majority, the King appoints the new government de facto

[gaelic cowboy]

So, you believe he's that much of an idiot to piss off most of the western world and potentially lose long term support in Ukraine for 0.1% increase in territory and 1.5% increase in population? He's just that power-hungry and unreasonable?


Why not

It fits all his patterns since he started turning Russia into a crypto fascist state.



he needs to dominate Ukraine but he is losing that influence.

he is paranoid enough to believe its a CIA plot so the solution is to create a frozen conflict.

A frozen conflct which would deter EU/USA from influencing Ukraine into NATO/EU.



but it has got a bit more out of control than previous attempts.

[rvg]

Well, average salary in Russia increased several times since he first came to power and GDP increased 2.5-3 times. Do you want to rethink your statement?
Ignorance, padawan. Not speak without understanding you must.

The lion's share of the wealth increase falls on the state bureaucracy and upper management.
Example: the average monthly salary of a nurse in Russia fluctuates between $200-$600 (closer to $600 in large cities)
average monthly salary of a surgeon is between $700-$1700
average monthly salary of a hospital administrator is between $8000-$12000

So, while surgeons and nurses today do make more than they did in the 90s, they are getting robbed.

Understanding, padawan. Come to you it will. With time.

[Sarmatian]

Why not

It fits all his patterns since he started turning Russia into a crypto fascist state.



he needs to dominate Ukraine but he is losing that influence and he is paranoid enough to believe its a CIA plot.

The solution is to create a frozen conflict which would deter EU/USA from influencing Ukraine into NATO/EU.



but it has got a bit more out of control than previous attempts.

I won't say that's it's not a possibility, but it's pretty far fetched to me.

Putin spent better part of his time(s) in office sucking up and repairing relations with the west, increase trade volume many times and pushing long term deal and even more economic cooperation. That he would risk all that on piece of useless territory just because he wan't moar land is a little hard to believe.


Ignorance, padawan. Not speak without understanding you must.

The lion's share of the wealth increase falls on the state bureaucracy and upper management.
Example: the average monthly salary of a nurse in Russia fluctuates between $200-$600 (closer to $600 in large cities)
average monthly salary of a surgeon is between $700-$1700
average monthly salary of a hospital administrator is between $8000-$12000

So, while surgeons and nurses today do make more than they did in the 90s, they are getting robbed.

Understanding, padawan. Come to you it will. With time.

Yeah, I'm calling bollox on that and would like to see the source. Only area where salaries of 8000-12000$ for hospital administrators are possible are in some big private medical complexes and even there only in a few biggest. In state hospitals (which are 99,99% of all hospitals in Russia) there's no way they have such salaries.

[HoreTore]

Well, wiki, which isn't always the most reliable of sources, I admit, says you're wrong.

It doesn't, really.

1884 changed what was an important decision into a mere formality. But that's not the end of the story, the introduction of a vote of no confidence is far more important. After all, Norwegian governments are never affirmed, they are only thrown. So, who has the power to throw the government is extremely important. That the legislative could do that, was not written in law until the constitutional changes in 2007. Still, the two votes of no confidence('28 and '63) were legally binding with no written law covering it, and indeed disallowed by the constitution.

The last sentence from wiki, about the King de facto appointing the government after an election without a majority(which is the rule, majorities are an exception) is pure rubbish. The writer of that wiki page seems to have very little understanding of how government functions....

[gaelic cowboy]

I won't say that's it's not a possibility, but it's pretty far fetched to me.

Putin spent better part of his time(s) in office sucking up and repairing relations with the west, increase trade volume many times and pushing long term deal and even more economic cooperation. That he would risk all that on piece of useless territory just because he wan't moar land is a little hard to believe.


Its not about land Sarmatian its far more likely to be about power. (to ensure the security of Russia)

Rightly or wrongly he and they probably believe that Russia is in a strugle for the post soviet world.

Im guessing the kremlin believes Russia could even unravel if they dont fight such things.

[rvg]

Yeah, I'm calling bollox on that and would like to see the source. Only area where salaries of 8000-12000$ for hospital administrators are possible are in some big private medical complexes and even there only in a few biggest. In state hospitals (which are 99,99% of all hospitals in Russia) there's no way they have such salaries.

Trust in the master put you must. Not contradict the master you must. Bad padawan.

The source is of course in Russian, but that's your problem.
http://www.kprfkh.ru/index.php/254-chudesa-zdravookhraneniya-khakasii-mesyachnyj-dokhod-glavvracha-381-8-tys-rublej-srednyaya-zarplata-v-otrasli-16-1-tys-rublej

[Pannonian]

Its not about land Sarmatian its far more likely to be about power. (to ensure the security of Russia)

Rightly or wrongly he and they probably believe that Russia is in a strugle for the post soviet world.

Im guessing the kremlin believes Russia could even unravel if they dont fight such things.

In that case, wouldn't we have been better off not encouraging the kind of stupid revolutioneering that happened in Ukraine, and encouraged instead an at least stable electoral cycle that Russia can be comfortable with and which could change for the better with gradual reform? The idiotically short-sighted thought it would be a good idea to topple the Yanukovich government because he was pro-Russia, so that he could be replaced by a pro-west government. Well, Russia can afford to decisively lose control of Ukraine less than we can, and a we've shown that we have no desire to play fair by established rules, they aren't inclined to do so either. And those short-sighted idiots forgot that Russia are in a better position to play unfair than we are.

I was comfortable with the previous situation before we started upping the ante, which I thought was stupid from the off. My assessment of its stupidity has largely been corroborated by events since the revolution, and still these fools urge us to press on because we are on the side of right. Well, we shouldn't have been playing this game in the first place, and my preference is to drop out of it until we get some stable rules again. War with Russia over this :daisy: up in the Ukraine which we shouldn't have indulged in in the first place? :daisy: that.

[Pannonian]

Revolution is great if you're just trying to destabilize Russia's sphere of influence. I'm sure that's as far as anyone thought it out, and as long as nobody takes Putin's bait that's how it'll play out.

Why destabilise it though? Both the EU and Russia were onto a good thing with periodically cycling governments, a predictable electoral cycle, roughly 50% vote either way, and a stable trading environment. It was never a zero sum game, or at least it should never have been played as such when there was a win-win alternative. Are the evangelising liberal democrats going to push for influence within Russian borders next?

[Pannonian]

I think its more like Ukrainians did this themselves and the west just took the opportunity for a pot shot at Russia. :shrug:

The revolution was going to happen anyway and Putin was just waiting for the chance to do something on his end too.

AIUI we've been giving a fair bit of political and financial support to the anti-Yanukovich cause. However much it was, I'm inclined to drop it to zero until Ukraine and Russia patch things up and we have a stable environment again. We're not in much need of Ukraine if it means we're at odds with Russia.

[rvg]

We're not in much need of Ukraine if it means we're at odds with Russia.

The problem is not Ukraine as much as the fact that you're likely to have to repeat the "We're not in much need of X" spiel many times over before the bear is satisfied. If the bear can be satisfied. Are you willing to bear that risk? I find it unbearable.

[Kadagar_AV]

According to Swedish media, a drone has been hi-jacked in Crimea.

It seems like amateur work.

I do believe that we some pages back discussed drones, and I claimed that modern states would have no problem swatting them out of the air. I for a fact know that Sweden had a hush-hush program already in the very early millenium, I am sure we have perfected it since.

So for anyone believing drones will have an impact against anything but the third-world bashing USA is so famous for, think again.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I forgot about this thread for 2 days because I was busy keeping track of the Kardashians. Literally Putin over here.

[Kadagar_AV]

I forgot about this thread for 2 days because I was busy keeping track of the Kardashians. Literally Putin over here.

Putin is now a grammatical term?

Have you decided how to conjugate it yet?

Russia's president just PUTINED the US president... Did I do it right?

[rvg]

Is this what it means to get putined?

12460

He keesed him like a keeten.

[Pannonian]

The problem is not Ukraine as much as the fact that you're likely to have to repeat the "We're not in much need of X" spiel many times over before the bear is satisfied. If the bear can be satisfied. Are you willing to bear that risk? I find it unbearable.

I think there needn't have been this question in the first place if we'd been content with the rotating government which both sides were settling for before this current mess. Russia didn't try to topple the pro-western government Ukraine had before, or at least not before election time, and Yanukovich had been in power before. Change is for elections. Once elections are over, you're stuck with the government a majority of your countrymen voted for.

My current government wasn't voted in by a majority of voters, nor even a majority of constituencies, and I certainly didn't vote for them. But they got a plurality of seats, which gave them the greatest authority to form a government, and whatever my disagreements with them, more of my countrymen agreed with them than agreed with me. So I accept it, and wait for the next election. I don't throw a tantrum and demand their immediate exit.

[rvg]

My current government wasn't voted in by a majority of voters, nor even a majority of constituencies, and I certainly didn't vote for them. But they got a plurality of seats, which gave them the greatest authority to form a government, and whatever my disagreements with them, more of my countrymen agreed with them than agreed with me. So I accept it, and wait for the next election. I don't throw a tantrum and demand their immediate exit.
But what if you didn't? Would France come in and occupy Cornwall?

[Pannonian]

But what if you didn't? Would France come in and occupy Cornwall?

If we were fool enough to undergo a revolution while a predatory neighbour was nearby, I shouldn't be surprised if said predatory neighbour lived up to their reputation. However, Britain has a tradition of stability and conservatism, and one that we're proud of. Through all the revolutions on the continent in the 18th and 19th centuries, we've kept our governmental processes with gradual adjustments here and there. Whatever fools we may have been, we've never been revolutionary fools.

[rvg]

If we were fool enough to undergo a revolution while a predatory neighbour was nearby, I shouldn't be surprised if said predatory neighbour lived up to their reputation.

So let's forget Ukraine for a moment. Would Britain be okay with sharing the neighborhood with a known predator?

[Tellos Athenaios]

Not keeping up with the times more like. Luddite. ~;)

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

If we were fool enough to undergo a revolution while a predatory neighbour was nearby, I shouldn't be surprised if said predatory neighbour lived up to their reputation. However, Britain has a tradition of stability and conservatism, and one that we're proud of. Through all the revolutions on the continent in the 18th and 19th centuries, we've kept our governmental processes with gradual adjustments here and there. Whatever fools we may have been, we've never been revolutionary fools.

Those who do not read history are doomed to repeat it.

This is the 21st Century, not the 19th.

Putin's language of £protecting ethnic Russians" is the reason given by Hitler for invading Czechoslovakia - he took the German bit first, then the rest.

Putin has troops in Crimea, NATO should be preparing to move troops into Western Ukraine - Ukraine's first president has already said Ukraine should join NATO ASAP, and once Crimea is annexed many more Ukrainians will feel that way. Georgia, likewise, will be looking nervously East.

Time to recognise history hasn't ended and to arm up. NATO doctrine should move to holding a Baltic-Romanian line, and matching Russia's land warfare capability.

War with Putin seems merely now to be a matter of time. I for one am going to start exercising more for the inevitable draft.

[GenosseGeneral]

Last news are exremely worrying. 1 death during riots in Donetsk, a couple of hours ago two policemen were shot in a streetfight in the centre of Kharkiv. I really hope, none of the "Right sector" fighters decide to go East, probably armed and ready to "protect the protestors" there. Or they are even sent there: The new government has recently decided to create a new national guard out of the self-defence forces and other volunteers.
Or the Russians stage something; the mob which stormed the administration of Kharkiv Oblast and put a Russian flag ontop of the building came at least partially from Russia, as their busses' license plates proved.
It does not even have to be Moscow's will; a couple of days ago, a source (though one of mediocre reliability imo), reported the arrest of a known FSB agent carrying explosives and fuses. Have some hawkish agents taking action on their own - staging an anti-Russian terror attack - and an overzealous military commander at the border, and voila, you got a war.

If these guys clash with Titushki (thugs, employed by pro-Russian forces - a notorious example is the Oplot "civil organisation" in Kharkiv; if you google it, you will find a MMA-fighting club of that name - the shared name is no coincidence), then Russia has the civil unrest and bloodshed it needs to be "invited" also into Donetsk, Luhansk, or maybe even Kharkiv.
They could take Crimea by surprise, as movements for secession were expected, but not a blatant military invasion. However, if the Russians try to take the East as well, I don't doubt that there will be a full-scale war between Kyiv and Moscow, and nobody will be able to tell whether the Russian tanks stop at the borders of Donetsk Oblast, the Dnejpr or way behind Kyiv.

Sure, at this all is just speculation; but watch our for news from the Eastern Ukrainian cities. Kyiv might grudgingly accept the secession of Crimea, but it will not give up any Ukraine's major cities and integral parts of the country.

[Sarmatian]

Trust in the master put you must. Not contradict the master you must. Bad padawan.

The source is of course in Russian, but that's your problem.
http://www.kprfkh.ru/index.php/254-chudesa-zdravookhraneniya-khakasii-mesyachnyj-dokhod-glavvracha-381-8-tys-rublej-srednyaya-zarplata-v-otrasli-16-1-tys-rublej

Bad rvg! That's the website of Communist party of Russia. Are you getting information from pinko websites now? I didn't agree with you before but at least I respected you...

Kidding aside, the article doesn't say that. The article is about salaries of some managers and it also includes ministers. It lists the salaries of about 10 people in health and their salaries vary from 10,000$ to 1,000$ per month.

Also, it isn't about Russia, it's about Khakasia.
12462

[Brenus]

"Would Britain be okay with sharing the neighborhood with a known predator?" Do you mean, like Mexico does?:laugh4:

"Revolution is great if you're just trying to destabilize Russia's sphere of influence" Or US in South/Central America, as Venezuela is actually experiencing...

"Putin's language of £protecting ethnic Russians" is the reason given by Hitler for invading Czechoslovakia - he took the German bit first, then the rest." NATO attacked Serbia to protect Ethnic Albanian Minority, so NATO=Hitler=Putin?. Or just straw-man?

[Husar]

Putin's language of £protecting ethnic Russians" is the reason given by Hitler for invading Czechoslovakia - he took the German bit first, then the rest.

Hitler also cited hunger as the reason he had breakfast in the morning.


Putin has troops in Crimea, NATO should be preparing to move troops into Western Ukraine

To "protect ethnic Ukrainians"?


"Would Britain be okay with sharing the neighborhood with a known predator?" Do you mean, like Mexico does?

:laugh4:

[ICantSpellDawg]

Those who do not read history are doomed to repeat it.

This is the 21st Century, not the 19th.

Putin's language of £protecting ethnic Russians" is the reason given by Hitler for invading Czechoslovakia - he took the German bit first, then the rest.

Putin has troops in Crimea, NATO should be preparing to move troops into Western Ukraine - Ukraine's first president has already said Ukraine should join NATO ASAP, and once Crimea is annexed many more Ukrainians will feel that way. Georgia, likewise, will be looking nervously East.

Time to recognise history hasn't ended and to arm up. NATO doctrine should move to holding a Baltic-Romanian line, and matching Russia's land warfare capability.

War with Putin seems merely now to be a matter of time. I for one am going to start exercising more for the inevitable draft.

I agree with you, why do you think I am an isolationist? Accession to NATO would stop Russian irredentism in it's tracks. If Russia attacks NATO ally, we would annihilate them. Ukraine qualifies as a nation that we have been interested bringing into the fold for many years, that means we believe there is a security interest there. Why are we prevaricating here?

I am in favor of moving F16s into Poland and a second CDG into the Black Sea, but this is not enough. We should be preparing to blockade St. Petersburg and Kalingrad if they attack further. We should be working to make the Russian Federation a pariah state.

[Husar]

If Russia attacks NATO ally, we would annihilate them.

Nuclear apocalypse, yay!
I can totally see how that would save Ukraine.


We should be working to make the Russian Federation a pariah state.

Your media is already tirelessly doing that job. They don't even attempt balanced reporting anymore.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Nuclear apocalypse, yay!
I can totally see how that would save Ukraine.



Your media is already tirelessly doing that job. They don't even attempt balanced reporting anymore.

Why would conflict turn nuclear? Can't people decimate some military capacity without going nuclear?

[ICantSpellDawg]

Why would conflict turn nuclear? Can't people decimate some military capacity without going nuclear?

Balanced reporting? I've been watching balanced reporting. What is the imbalance that you speak of? Fox news is entertainment, not news. I do t get my news from TV. That is your first mistake.

Do you love RT or something? That is like Russian Fox News or MSNBC

[Husar]

Balanced reporting? I've been watching balanced reporting. What is the imbalance that you speak of? Fox news is entertainment, not news. I do t get my news from TV. That is your first mistake.

Do you love RT or something? That is like Russian Fox News or MSNBC

It's that they base every article the write on Russia being wrong and the revolution being a noble effort of the people. They downplay or ignore the neo nazis in government and automatically side with the West on the issue. If they are supposed to be neutral on internal affairs, why do they have to side with their government on external affairs automatically? They don't even give any good reasons, they just parrot what Merkel and Obama said.

Russia Today is the same on the other side of the issue. A balanced article would not see the strategic needs of Russia as unimportant while the strategic needs of the USA are the holy grail. Russia is not just Putin and he represents the people of Russia as much as Obama represents Americans. Fair and balanced (and I do not just mean Fox News) is about weighing both sides of an argument and giving both sides a chance. What the media does in this and most other s choose a side and then argue for that side. That's propaganda.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I have made the objective decision in my own understanding of events that Russian military involvement in Ukraine is not justified. If there were legitimate reports of Svoboda killing ethnic Russians, it might be called for, but until that time it is unreasonable. Annexing Crimea when 40% of the population is not Russian is not reasonable. Busing or encouraging provocateurs to cross the border and cause additional civil strife by attacking unarmed civilians is not reasonable.

Are people making legitimate allegations that the US and EU bused in protesters?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=s0UkU-DpKe6T0gHS5YGYBg&url=https://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DffYW3nlBwZk&cd=1&ved=0CCkQtwIwAA&usg=AFQjCNFBYt-SpwiwP1nl-OCxpqw_42uq5w&sig2=vBZEXuB63cicr91vY-IjMg

Vice is providing some great anecdotal experiences

[Sarmatian]

I agree with you, why do you think I am an isolationist? Accession to NATO would stop Russian irredentism in it's tracks. If Russia attacks NATO ally, we would annihilate them. Ukraine qualifies as a nation that we have been interested bringing into the fold for many years, that means we believe there is a security interest there. Why are we prevaricating here?


I'm guessing two reasons

1) Most of NATO doesn't wish it
2) Most of the Ukrainian population doesn't wish it

So, unless you apply an enormous amount of pressure on European NATO members it's not gonna happen. It must coincide with a very pro-western government (quite like this one) but if they try to do that officially, they'd have on their hands such a crisis that this Crimea thing would look like a small misunderstanding between friends. If they try to hold a referendum on NATO, it wouldn't pass.

And - before you say it - yes, even after this experience.


I have made the objective decision in my own understanding of events that Russian military involvement in Ukraine is not justified. If there were legitimate reports of Svoboda killing ethnic Russians, it might be called for, but until that time it is unreasonable. Annexing Crimea when 40% of the population is not Russian is not reasonable. Busing or encouraging provocateurs to cross the border and cause additional civil strife by attacking unarmed civilians is not reasonable.

Are people making legitimate allegations that the US and EU bused in protesters?

No, the US and EU financed the protesters. They bused in themselves.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I'm guessing two reasons

1) Most of NATO doesn't wish it
2) Most of the Ukrainian population doesn't wish it

So, unless you apply an enormous amount of pressure on European NATO members it's not gonna happen. It must coincide with a very pro-western government (quite like this one) but if they try to do that officially, they'd have on their hands such a crisis that this Crimea thing would look like a small misunderstanding between friends. If they try to hold a referendum on NATO, it wouldn't pass.

And - before you say it - yes, even after this experience.

We will see. If Russia annexes Crimea, the likelihood of accession talks will probably increase. Former Yugoslav republics are next.

[rvg]

Also, it isn't about Russia, it's about Khakasia.
12462

Khakasia is Russia.

But there's more. So much more. Go ahead and dismiss it all as commie propaganda, padawan. Truly blind you are.
http://ura.ru/content/chel/20-02-2012/articles/1036257620.html
http://primamedia.ru/news/health/10.10.2013/307816/eks-glavvrach-hasanskoy-tsrb-uvolenniy-so-skandalom-vozglavil-druguyu-bolnitsu-v.html

Know shit padawan does not.
Know his shit the master does.

Whether you wish to admit it or not, corruption has permeated Russia to a degree unseen in most countries. The common folk are paying for that corruption.

[HoreTore]

Bad language, Yoda use would not.

To the Dark Side, these terms belong.

[Husar]

Are people making legitimate allegations that the US and EU bused in protesters?

Just paid for them, as Sarmatian already said.
I actually agree that Russia is going a bit far but it's not something I'd start a war over.
If 40% of Scots do not want independence from GB, should NATO send troops to force them to stay?
I'm aware that the Crimean president is a Russian shill but that's not my problem. I don't think it is illegal to leave Russia if it's that bad.
Syrians also don't all like their president or the rebels and people actually die there. If we want to protect people from horrible things we could start there or in Africa. So far it hasn't worked too well anyway though. Usually a lot of people die and everybody is left with a sour taste while the next dictator rises to power.


Whether you wish to admit it or not, corruption has permeated Russia to a degree unseen in most countries. The common folk are paying for that corruption.

After the 2008 crisis I'm not so sure anymore...

[Gilrandir]

Putin is now a grammatical term?

Have you decided how to conjugate it yet?

Russia's president just PUTINED the US president... Did I do it right?
Ukraine has been severely putinized lately.

[Gilrandir]

Change is for elections. Once elections are over, you're stuck with the government a majority of your countrymen voted for.


Unless it loses the touch with reality and starts behaving Yanukovych style.

[Gilrandir]

If we were fool enough to undergo a revolution while a predatory neighbour was nearby, I shouldn't be surprised if said predatory neighbour lived up to their reputation.
In the case of Ukraine the predatory neighbor is always there. When shall we then find time for a revoultion or two?

[Sarmatian]

Khakasia is Russia.

But there's more. So much more. Go ahead and dismiss it all as commie propaganda, padawan. Truly blind you are.
http://ura.ru/content/chel/20-02-2012/articles/1036257620.html
http://primamedia.ru/news/health/10.10.2013/307816/eks-glavvrach-hasanskoy-tsrb-uvolenniy-so-skandalom-vozglavil-druguyu-bolnitsu-v.html

Know shit padawan does not.
Know his shit the master does.

Whether you wish to admit it or not, corruption has permeated Russia to a degree unseen in most countries. The common folk are paying for that corruption.

Again??? Do I really have to go through with you what I've already went through with Gilrandir?

1) I never claimed that there is no corruption in Russia.

2) I called bollox on your statement that the average salary for a hospital administrator is 8000-12000$ per month

There are hundreds of thousands of hospitals in Russia and more than a million doctors. Statistics please, not individual examples, and quick, before I link to news articles about 5 Serbian billionares and claim it proves entire population is that rich.

And, btw, Khakasia is a part of Russia, not entire Russia. It's indicative of the entire Russia about as much as Monte Carlo is indicative of Europe (size comparison).

We're talking about Russian Federation. You know, the largest country on earth, can be found easily on most maps.

[Brenus]

NATO has to attack to force the Ethnic Russians to stay in Ukraine against their will.

[Pannonian]

Unless it loses the touch with reality and starts behaving Yanukovych style.

Not even then would I seek to overthrow the government before its time. I took pride in voting out the Tories in 1997. People organised themselves to more effectively vote out the Tory candidate, by voting for whichever Labour or LibDem candidate was most likely to beat the Tory. The supposedly natural party of government was reduced to its lowest number of seats in living memory. We threw out the party we saw as corrupt, through legitimate electoral process. And when we changed our mind over time, we voted them back in through legitimate electoral process. Well I didn't vote them in, but I accept that I'm part of the we, as the process was correctly followed and they ended up with the greatest right to form a government. Going by the polls, they'll be voted out in the next election, and that too will be correct. That's how democracy works.


In the case of Ukraine the predatory neighbor is always there. When shall we then find time for a revoultion or two?

Er, by the 19th century when revolutions were all the rage in continental Europe, we'd been at odds with France for nearly 800 years, while we'd been carrying on an on-off global struggle with them for 100 years with constant threats of invasion in either direction (there's a reason why Portsmouth is possibly the most heavily fortified area that size in the world). What was Ukraine's history 800 years ago? Hell, what was Ukraine's history 100 years ago?

[rvg]

2) I called bollox on your statement that the average salary for a hospital administrator is 8000-12000$ per month

You called bollox because you have no clue. I'm trying to give you a clue, but it seems all for naught.
Here's one more article (http://prodoctorov.ru/scalpel/2012/4/), this time with national statistics. It's a comparison between US and Russian hospital staff salaries. The gist of it is that Russian hospital staff make a tiny fraction of money of their U.S. counterparts except (drumbeat!) general managers, who make about the same on both sides.

If this is not enough, then I'm washing my hand off you, padawan.

[Gilrandir]

Some people here spoke of ideology as one of the main incentives (alongside money and power) to seek international domination. I thought I could inform you about some ideological background which is quite obvious for Ukraine-Russia relations in those countries but may not be so obvious to outsiders. Perhaps you would understand why 58% of Russians (according to the poll which claims to be objective, though it goes for all of them) support Putin in his attitude to Ukrainian crisis.
The traditional view (which is agressively propelled now) of Ukrainians in Russia is that they are not a people apart. Ukrainians, Russians and Belorussians have common (east) Slavic roots. They all come from Kyivan Rus which fell apart due to the lack of unity among contending princes but common people of it always felt united. Then Ukrainians and Belorussians were incorporated into Poland and Lithuania. Under those their language, traditions and faith have suffered and have been mauled and distorted. Thus Russians are the only successors of Kyivan Rus who kept the purity of (east) Slavs, their independence, language and orthodox faith intact. Moreover, it is a historic mission of Russia to deliver their long-sundered kindred from all kinds of oppression and even thraldom and bring them all to be united again. This deliverance movement has been termed "gathering of all Russian lands". Most Ukrainians crave for this reunification and there is no sensible reason why they shouldn't.
Many of those tenets could be called incorrect. In the times of Kyivan Rus there were no Russians or Ukrainians. Its territory was inhabited by a dozen tribes which only started to amalgamate when the state was divided into principalities. So this amalgamation was locally limited, there is no sense to claim that inhabitants of southern principalities (Kiyv, Pereyaslavl, Chernigov, Halych, Volyn), which now constitute Ukraine, formed a single people with citizens of Vladimir and Suzdal, now the core Russian lands. Moreover, the lands were Moscow is now situated were originally inhabited by Finno-Ugric tribes assimilated by Slavs pushing north (so much for Slavic purity). The very name "Rus" or "Russia" refered to what is now called Ukraine while modern Russia has always been called "Muscovy" until the reign of Peter I (1682-1725). So much for succession.
As a linguist I can say, that Ukrainian is closer than Russian in its vocabulary and phonetic structure to Old Russian. I can't deny a significant influence of Polish, yet many words which in Russian are obsolete or considered as belonging to Old Church Slavonic (as the only literary language of Eastern Slavs) are preserved in modern Ukrainian. I would say that under specific historic conditions Old Russian got stagnated in Ukraine (turning into modern Ukrainian) while it developed in Russia into modern Russian. The same, I believe, happened to Old Norse which "got stagnated" in Iceland (due to limited contacts with the continent) while on the continent it developed into modern Norwegian. Well, Hore Tore will correct me, if I'm wrong in that respect (I wonder how much mutually understandable Icalandic and Norwegian (in any of its forms) are). So much for Russian as a lingustic successor of the Old Russian.
I'm sorry for such a lengthy post, but I hope it will explain much of the popular sentiment in Russia today. History and tradition are much considered, discussed and referred to in Russia (as well as in Ukraine, I should say) while dealing with the Slavic neighbors.

[Gilrandir]

Again??? Do I really have to go through with you what I've already went through with Gilrandir?


How can you say that after all we have been through? ~:mecry:

[Gilrandir]

What was Ukraine's history 800 years ago? Hell, what was Ukraine's history 100 years ago?
You can find that out yourself if you are really interested. Ukraine was there OK, but was divided and incorporated into empires. The absence of the independent state cannot undo centuries of history. Many countries lost and gained independence agian (Poland, Lithuania, Ireland, to name the few) but that didn't interrupt their history.

[Pannonian]

You can find that out yourself if you are really interested. Ukraine was there OK, but was divided and incorporated into empires. The absence of the independent state cannot undo centuries of history. Many countries lost and gained independence agian (Poland, Lithuania, Ireland, to name the few) but that didn't interrupt their history.

Did historical Ukraine circa 100 years ago include Crimea?

[rvg]

Did historical Ukraine circa 100 years ago include Crimea?

Of course not. Does historical Poland ca 100 years ago include Breslau? Hell no. Does historical Russia ca 100 years ago include Koenigsberg? Nope. Revisionism is a dangerous path.

[HoreTore]

Of course not. Does historical Poland ca 100 years ago include Breslau? Hell no. Does historical Russia ca 100 years ago include Koenigsberg? Nope. Revisionism is a dangerous path.

I demand a return of Jemtland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jemtland) and Herjedalen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H%C3%A4rjedalen)!!!

[Gilrandir]

Did historical Ukraine circa 100 years ago include Crimea?
Crimea was "given" to Ukraine by Khruschev in 1954 - but not for naught. In exchange Ukraine "relinqushed" a densely populated (1.2 million people) strip of land to the east of modern Lugansk region (including the city of Taganrog). Since that time Crimea (which, as one of the then leaders of Ukrainian Communist Party admitted, presented a deplorable picture) had received its water canal system providing water from the Dnipro, electricity was provided from hydroelectric power plants on the said Dnipro and many other things to boot.

[rvg]

I demand a return of Jemtland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jemtland) and Herjedalen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H%C3%A4rjedalen)!!!

And Vinland!

[HoreTore]

And Vinland!

Keep it, I drink beer.

[Pannonian]

Crimea was "given" to Ukraine by Khruschev in 1954 - but not for naught. In exchange Ukraine "relinqushed" a densely populated (1.2 million people) strip of land to the east of modern Lugansk region (including the city of Taganrog). Since that time Crimea (which, as one of the then leaders of Ukrainian Communist Party admitted, presented a deplorable picture) had received its water canal system providing water from the Dnipro, electricity was provided from hydroelectric power plants on the said Dnipro and many other things to boot.

So if the Ukrainisation of Crimea is a recent thing, and Crimea depends on Ukraine so much, should it not be a matter between Ukraine, Crimea and whoever else is interested, on how Crimea should be? Why should the EU get involved?

[rvg]

So if the Ukrainisation of Crimea is a recent thing, and Crimea depends on Ukraine so much, should it not be a matter between Ukraine, Crimea and whoever else is interested, on how Crimea should be? Why should the EU get involved?
Same reason why the EU intervened in Libya: it was the right thing to do.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Secession can only come from national referendum as per the law. Local referendums are allowed, but not on the union

[Pannonian]

Same reason why the EU intervened in Libya: it was the right thing to do.

You mean it's claimed that it's the right thing to do.

[Pannonian]

Secession can only come from national referendum as per the law. Local referendums are allowed, but not on the union

Tell that to the Scots. The pro-independence side have been banging the anti-English drum for all it's worth, and even a single comment by an Englishman (not even a vote), has them complaining about us sticking our noses where it doesn't belong.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Just paid for them, as Sarmatian already said.
I actually agree that Russia is going a bit far but it's not something I'd start a war over.
If 40% of Scots do not want independence from GB, should NATO send troops to force them to stay?
I'm aware that the Crimean president is a Russian shill but that's not my problem. I don't think it is illegal to leave Russia if it's that bad.
Syrians also don't all like their president or the rebels and people actually die there. If we want to protect people from horrible things we could start there or in Africa. So far it hasn't worked too well anyway though. Usually a lot of people die and everybody is left with a sour taste while the next dictator rises to power.



After the 2008 crisis I'm not so sure anymore...

I am in favor of action in Syria. I am becoming more in favor of some military bolstering of Ukrainian forces by the day.

Regarding Scotland, they have a legal right to leave the Union. If their referendum allows it, they will become a sovereign country and this will be recognized by what's left of the UK. Crimea has no such legal right, neither do States in the United States. Should countries be able to declare independence? Maybe, but not with a simple majority. What about the 40% of people who will now be second class citizens?

[ICantSpellDawg]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=3owkU_ONNcqV0QHIoYHYAw&url=https://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DSKxRJ6Zqzdc&cd=1&ved=0CCkQtwIwAA&usg=AFQjCNGvkzd_uUa2sn2YcLEhlGpPp5Jmfw&sig2=7nRh-EwnlghYs4Yz3q1IwA

This is important to watch. This isn't an independence movement, it is a creepy fascist annexation movement. The people currently supported by Russia in Crimea want to live under a dictatorship and an empire. They don't want to be free in any way. Everyone in the West should be alarmed by this.

[rvg]

You mean it's claimed that it's the right thing to do.

Claimed by most. Disputed by some. It would have been far easier to just let Muammar crush the rebels and get things back to how they used to be. Not sure it would have been the right thing to do though.

[Brenus]

Watch the video;: Err, what is your point?

"What about the 40% of people who will now be second class citizens?" Didn't bother the US and EU in Kosovo.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Watch the video;: Err, what is your point?

"What about the 40% of people who will now be second class citizens?" Didn't bother the US and EU in Kosovo.

These people are using hypernationalistic violence against unarmed citizens. This is different from Kiev. In Kiev citizens used violence against the armed and oppressive state. Do you see the difference?

[Sarmatian]

You called bollox because you have no clue. I'm trying to give you a clue, but it seems all for naught.
Here's one more article (http://prodoctorov.ru/scalpel/2012/4/), this time with national statistics. It's a comparison between US and Russian hospital staff salaries. The gist of it is that Russian hospital staff make a tiny fraction of money of their U.S. counterparts except (drumbeat!) general managers, who make about the same on both sides.

If this is not enough, then I'm washing my hand off you, padawan.

Unfortunately, dear friend, this article doesn't mention hospital administrators anywhere. It says that the salaries of general managers or CEO's are comparable (CEO's of Exxon and Gazprom have comparable salaries, that sort of thing) while there a big difference in salaries of American and Russian doctors and medical staff.

Third strike, you're out.

[rvg]

Unfortunately, dear friend, this article doesn't mention hospital administrators anywhere. It says that the salaries of general managers or CEO's are comparable (CEO's of Exxon and Gazprom have comparable salaries, that sort of thing) while there a big difference in salaries of American and Russian doctors and medical staff.

Third strike, you're out.

And who do you think I was talking about when I mentioned "government bureaucrats and upper management"? Believe what you wish, padawan. You have failed.

[Sarmatian]

And who do you think I was talking about when I mentioned "government bureaucrats and upper management"? Believe what you wish, padawan. You have failed.

Do I really need to quote what you said yesterday?



average monthly salary of a hospital administrator is between $8000-$12000


...and now that you've shown you have no source whatsoever to back it up, you try to change your original statement so that you would appear correct? That's just rude...

[rvg]

...and now that you've shown you have no source whatsoever to back it up, you try to change your original statement so that you would appear correct? That's just rude...

And who do you think the Hospital Administrator is? Somebody who administers the frigging hospital, i.e. the upper management, i.e. the general manager.

[Pannonian]

These people are using hypernationalistic violence against unarmed citizens. This is different from Kiev. In Kiev citizens used violence against the armed and oppressive state. Do you see the difference?

Did we find out in the end who it was that ordered their snipers to fire?

[rvg]

Did we find out in the end who it was that ordered their snipers to fire?

For sure? No.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Congrats for the new site/forum !!!, old patrons start pouring in !!

Metha

------------------
"...Violence is the last resort of the incompetent...

I have no idea. The snipers had a right to fire to protect others from bodily harm. Some police could have just had enough, independent of an order.

[Pannonian]

For sure? No.

So we never bothered to follow up the suspicion that it was someone in the current Kiev government. In that light, ICantSpellDawg's explanation sounds remarkably like that in Blackadder Goes Forth.

[rvg]

So we never bothered to follow up the suspicion that it was someone in the current Kiev government. In that light, ICantSpellDawg's explanation sounds remarkably like that in Blackadder Goes Forth.

Ultimately what does it change? Snipers are men, they could have been a part of some grand conspiracy or one of them could have sneezed and accidentally pulled the trigger. We don't know. What we do know is that the people in Kiev had had enough of the corrupt government and that the Ukrainian president jumped ship.

[ICantSpellDawg]

So we never bothered to follow up the suspicion that it was someone in the current Kiev government. In that light, ICantSpellDawg's explanation sounds remarkably like that in Blackadder Goes Forth.

It could have been a conspiracy, I don't know what you are implying. I am regularly astounded that more guns don't go off when governments and legal systems collapse.

[Sarmatian]

And who do you think the Hospital Administrator is? Somebody who administers the frigging hospital, i.e. the upper management, i.e. the general manager.

You're projecting your idea of how hospital work in the USA and assume it's the same way in Russia. Russia inherited the health system of the Soviet Union in which all the hospitals were owned and directed by the state. They were (and 99,9% still are) considered a public institution which don't operate (pun not intended) on a budget or answer to investors and shareholders, but were/are allocated funds according to their need. Hospital administrators are basically head doctors with slightly more paperwork. They deal with requesting what they need from the Ministry of Health, make some organizational decisions here and there but they're basically doctors with some extra duty, contrary to the American system where quite a few of hospital administrators aren't even doctors by trade and they deal mostly with keeping the hospital within the budget and deal with the public and investors.

So, saying that hospital administrators in Russia are upper management is like saying school principals in Russia are upper management.

Another huge mistake on your part is that most of the CEO's with huge salaries are privately owned, and just how high a salary a privately owned business decides to give to its upper management is their decision and it's not corruption.


So, if you you didn't mean hospital administrators but upper management in general you chose a bad example to prove your point.

There's widespread corruption in Russia.
Average salary of a nurse - 600$
Average salary of a doctor - 1000$
Average salary of a CEO's of Coca Cola Russia and Gazprom - 12000$

That's quite nonsensical. So, you have a choice of being wrong or being silly. Personally, I'd go for wrong, but whatever you think is best.

[rvg]

You're projecting your idea of how hospital work in the USA and assume it's the same way in Russia. Russia inherited the health system of the Soviet Union in which all the hospitals were owned and directed by the state. They were (and 99,9% still are) considered a public institution which don't operate (pun not intended) on a budget or answer to investors and shareholders, but were/are allocated funds according to their need. Hospital administrators are basically head doctors with slightly more paperwork. They deal with requesting what they need from the Ministry of Health, make some organizational decisions here and there but they're basically doctors with some extra duty, contrary to the American system where quite a few of hospital administrators aren't even doctors by trade and they deal mostly with keeping the hospital within the budget and deal with the public and investors. Actually, over 80% of all U.S. hospitals are public non-profit organizations. What's happening is that you are projecting what you think the U.S. health system is like and obviously making wrong conclusions because you don't have a clue about what the U.S. health system is like.


So, saying that hospital administrators in Russia are upper management is like saying school principals in Russia are upper management.
Of course they are upper management, and they are paid like the upper management.


Another huge mistake on your part is that most of the CEO's with huge salaries are privately owned, and just how high a salary a privately owned business decides to give to its upper management is their decision and it's not corruption.
I'm not talking about CEO's of multibillion dollar corporations. I'm talking about the people who are heads of hospitals. Call them general managers, hospital administrators, whatever. Them.


So, if you you didn't mean hospital administrators but upper management in general you chose a bad example to prove your point.

There's widespread corruption in Russia.
Average salary of a nurse - 600$
Average salary of a doctor - 1000$
Average salary of a CEO's of Coca Cola Russia and Gazprom - 12000$

and also... Average salary of a guy who heads a hospital - 12000$


That's quite nonsensical. So, you have a choice of being wrong or being silly. Personally, I'd go for wrong, but whatever you think is best.
Oh, you are wrong, there's no doubt about that.

[Pannonian]

Ultimately what does it change? Snipers are men, they could have been a part of some grand conspiracy or one of them could have sneezed and accidentally pulled the trigger. We don't know. What we do know is that the people in Kiev had had enough of the corrupt government and that the Ukrainian president jumped ship.

People like ICanSpellDawg (and PVC, among others) are telling us we're right to intervene because the Yanukovich-led state was oppressing the people with arms. If it turns out the state that's been oppressing the people with said arms is part of the government we're being asked to back, how sound is that justification? Why does it not matter?

[rvg]

People like ICanSpellDawg (and PVC, among others) are telling us we're right to intervene because the Yanukovich-led state was oppressing the people with arms. If it turns out the state that's been oppressing the people with said arms is part of the government we're being asked to back, how sound is that justification? Why does it not matter?

Oh, I don't know, because Russia is stealing land?

[Pannonian]

Oh, I don't know, because Russia is stealing land?

Let's see how it turns out then. The Crimean referendum is supposed to be happening tomorrow.

[rvg]

Let's see how it turns out then. The Crimean referendum is supposed to be happening tomorrow.

Wiser words could not be said. Let's wait 24 hours and find out.

[Sarmatian]

Actually, over 80% of all U.S. hospitals are public non-profit organizations. What's happening is that you are projecting what you think the U.S. health system is like and obviously making wrong conclusions because you don't have a clue about what the U.S. health system is like.

No, I pretty much don't and I thank you for the correction. See how easy it is? Now you try it. If you don't like it, you don't have to do it again.


Of course they are upper management, and they are paid like the upper management.

Ok, so now, in addition to hospital administrators, school principals are upper management and paid like upper management, between 8000-12000$??? :dizzy2:


I'm not talking about CEO's of multibillion dollar corporations. I'm talking about the people who are heads of hospitals. Call them general managers, hospital administrators, whatever. Them.

and also... Average salary of a guy who heads a hospital - 12000$

Oh, you are wrong, there's no doubt about that.

Then you still haven't provided a source for you claim, since the comparison in your last link included CEO's of multi-million dollar companies.

[rvg]

Ok, so now, in addition to hospital administrators, school principals are upper management and paid like upper management, between 8000-12000$???
Hospital admins are upper management, as for school principals, their salaries vary quite a bit from $1500 to $8000 and more. Depends on how rich their school district is.


Then you still haven't provided a source for you claim, since the comparison in your last link included CEO's of multi-million dollar companies.
This is not true. Perhaps something got lost in translation of your part, but my last link deals specifically with the headofhospital guys.

[Husar]

I don't think there is enough money left for hospital managers:

http://www.rferl.org/content/russia-billionaire-wealth-inequality/25132471.html


The annual global wealth study published by the financial services group Credit Suisse says a mere 110 Russian citizens now control 35 percent of the total household wealth across the vast country.

The Swiss have to know, they probably keep all their blood diamonds and nazi gold safe. :sweatdrop:

[Sarmatian]

Hospital admins are upper management, as for school principals, their salaries vary quite a bit from $1500 to $8000 and more. Depends on how rich their school district is.


This is not true. Perhaps something got lost in translation of your part, but my last link deals specifically with the headofhospital guys.

No. The link analyzes Forbes list of highest paid position within the US on which doctors dominate and CEO's and general managers of various companies are placed 9th or 8th, I can't remember. Then it compares it to the situation in Russia and findd that CEO's and managers in Russia have similar salaries as their American counterparts while doctors have much lower salaries than their American counterparts.


I don't think there is enough money left for hospital managers:

http://www.rferl.org/content/russia-billionaire-wealth-inequality/25132471.html

The Swiss have to know, they probably keep all their blood diamonds and nazi gold safe. :sweatdrop:

Interesting. That would make Russia worse than USA (and practically all other countries) in income (in)equality.
Gini index, according to the CIA research for 2013, still places Russia as better than USA and slightly above average.

[rvg]

No. The link analyzes Forbes list of highest paid position within the US on which doctors dominate and CEO's and general managers of various companies are placed 9th or 8th, I can't remember. Then it compares it to the situation in Russia and findd that CEO's and managers in Russia have similar salaries as their American counterparts while doctors have much lower salaries than their American counterparts.

We've been over this already. Just about any government bureaucrat or upper manager in Russia is swimming in money.

[Husar]

http://www.payscale.com/research/RU/Country=Russia/Salary

http://www.aebrus.ru/upload/iblock/c2d/c2df3451455ca1a01708cffd68ad32d6.pdf

The pdf seems especially interesting if one is to draw any conclusions. I don't have the time to take a detailed look or even convert it into Dollars, but maybe you'd like to base this debate on some actual numbers by trustworthy western companies.

Edit: Page 23 may be interesting.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Meanwhile - on the ground - Russia is pushing into Ukraine-proper

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/15/ukraine-russia-invade-crimea-referendum

Nope, not an invasion, Putin is a democrat!

At what point are some people here going to stop pretending?

[rvg]

At what point are some people here going to stop pretending?

Probably as soon as Russian armored divisions cross into Ukraine proper. So...Wednesday?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Probably as soon as Russian armored divisions cross into Ukraine proper. So...Wednesday?

At this rate - quite possibly.

[rvg]

At this rate - quite possibly.

I find the rate of escalation to be disturbingly scary. Haven't had that "are we heading into WW3" feeling since the morning of 9/11. Now that feeling is creeping back.

[ICantSpellDawg]

World War is bound to happen again because too many people want it so badly. The only thing that people want more than peace is to tear their enemies apart.

Putin wants to play general. He has mustered the balls to do it and wants to see how his combat troops will stack up against ours. Eventually, we will probably show him. One side or the other is deluding themselves into believing that their forces and tactics are superior.

His fears of a NATO on his doorstep are already reality. His borders are already full of NATO members. Any fright at new members is paranoia. Russia sees NATO as a threat, and I understand why, but it is really a threat against Iran and China. Russia is making itself threatened and it is becoming a target.

[Gilrandir]

Secession can only come from national referendum as per the law. Local referendums are allowed, but not on the union
In my opinion, it is not only the legality of the referendum that matters, but also HOW you arrange it, HOW people will vote and HOW FAIR will the count be. I'm sure the hurry, the armed people in the streets, the highly lopsided propaganda, the absence of access to alternative view media and previous public discussion would make any referendum illegitimate even if it were allowed by law.
I'm sure that in this particular case the results have been already drafted in the Kremlin: the turnout about 80%, the yeses about 75%. Why, I even saw a video where they unloaded stacks of ballots in which the neccessary box had been already ticked.

[Gilrandir]

Hospital administrators are basically head doctors with slightly more paperwork.

I would say that they tend to drop out of actual treatment of patients. Their management duties prevent them from pursuing their practice as doctors. So eventually they become administrators with an education of a doctor.


There's widespread corruption in Russia.
Average salary of a nurse - 600$
Average salary of a doctor - 1000$
Average salary of a CEO's of Coca Cola Russia and Gazprom - 12000$

You can't prove the spread of corruption going by simple mathematics. I don't know how much you are aware of prices for goods and services in Russia. It is the comparison of those with the salary that should be taken as a grounds for conclusions.
For example, in Ukraine (where the situation is pretty close to a Russian one) to fill a tooth costs 20-30$. Bread loaf is 50 cent (no pun intended). How much is it in the USA? I'm sure it is more.

[Gilrandir]

I have no idea. The snipers had a right to fire to protect others from bodily harm. Some police could have just had enough, independent of an order.
They mostly shot people who were outside the actual battlefield. And as far as I know, there is some international agreement that prohibits snipers in supressing riots within the country.

[Gilrandir]

Ultimately what does it change? Snipers are men, they could have been a part of some grand conspiracy or one of them could have sneezed and accidentally pulled the trigger.
It must have been an epidemic of flu - most casualties out of those shot were attributed to snipers.
There is a joke: a guy is trialed for murder and he is asked by the judge to give his account of what has happened. So he says: "I didn't stab the victim. He just slipped and fell on my knife. And did it seven times".
Your explanation sound like that.

[Brenus]

“I'm sure the hurry, the armed people in the streets, the highly lopsided propaganda, the absence of access to alternative view media and previous public discussion would make any referendum illegitimate even if it were allowed by law.” That is a description of the Maiden Revolution, but you find it legitimate…

“Probably as soon as Russian armored divisions cross into Ukraine proper. So...Wednesday?” Ohhh, you won’t be ready…

Joke apart, I start to be worried. The Russian populations in the North/East Ukraine are now joining the movement. But I am sure it is only Putin’s manipulation as they have access only Russian TV and communication…. Err, guys, what did Ukraine did for them in the last 20 years for the Ukrainian Russian Minorities having no access to news? Perhaps it would be time to send some Ukrainian Officials to tell the Ukrainian Russian Minority that they are full and complete citizens of Ukraine, and the 4 Nazi in the Government is a mistake and they will be expel.
But it might be faster to send NATO (well, it would but not really possible but lack of means) and obliged them to stay in Ukraine. Then, as we did in Kosovo, Croatia and Bosnia, we organise an ethnic cleansing under the eyes of the Peace Forces and with the approbation of EU and US, telling everybody they are living voluntarily, then that is the end. Well, except of course that we can’t do this because err, Russia is bigger than Serbia.

[Sarmatian]

http://www.payscale.com/research/RU/Country=Russia/Salary

http://www.aebrus.ru/upload/iblock/c2d/c2df3451455ca1a01708cffd68ad32d6.pdf

The pdf seems especially interesting if one is to draw any conclusions. I don't have the time to take a detailed look or even convert it into Dollars, but maybe you'd like to base this debate on some actual numbers by trustworthy western companies.

Edit: Page 23 may be interesting.

According to that, difference in salaries between professionals and executives in Russia is comparable to the difference in Poland, Czech Republic and Hungary, significantly better than in Slovakia and Romania and significantly worse than Italy, Austria and Germany.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

World War is bound to happen again because too many people want it so badly. The only thing that people want more than peace is to tear their enemies apart.

Putin wants to play general. He has mustered the balls to do it and wants to see how his combat troops will stack up against ours. Eventually, we will probably show him. One side or the other is deluding themselves into believing that their forces and tactics are superior.

Nobody wants war - war will happen when Putin miscalculates. That is getting more likely as he ups the stakes.

Both WWI and WWII happened because leaders miscalculated.


“I'm sure the hurry, the armed people in the streets, the highly lopsided propaganda, the absence of access to alternative view media and previous public discussion would make any referendum illegitimate even if it were allowed by law.” That is a description of the Maiden Revolution, but you find it legitimate…

“Probably as soon as Russian armored divisions cross into Ukraine proper. So...Wednesday?” Ohhh, you won’t be ready…

Joke apart, I start to be worried. The Russian populations in the North/East Ukraine are now joining the movement. But I am sure it is only Putin’s manipulation as they have access only Russian TV and communication…. Err, guys, what did Ukraine did for them in the last 20 years for the Ukrainian Russian Minorities having no access to news? Perhaps it would be time to send some Ukrainian Officials to tell the Ukrainian Russian Minority that they are full and complete citizens of Ukraine, and the 4 Nazi in the Government is a mistake and they will be expel.
But it might be faster to send NATO (well, it would but not really possible but lack of means) and obliged them to stay in Ukraine. Then, as we did in Kosovo, Croatia and Bosnia, we organise an ethnic cleansing under the eyes of the Peace Forces and with the approbation of EU and US, telling everybody they are living voluntarily, then that is the end. Well, except of course that we can’t do this because err, Russia is bigger than Serbia.


Except - your post reflects real life the way Russian TV does.

We didn't "organise" ethnic cleansing, the fact that we were crap at Peace Keeping it is a different issue.

Maidan included no occupation by foreign powers and the first thing the new government did was call elections in MAY, which is still two months away now.

Russia invaded Crimea, at the behest of a specific segment of the political class there, surrounded the Ukrainian military and got the government to declare a referendum on joining Russia with undue speed.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Apparently the only two options in the referendum are for greater autonomy within Ukraine, or to join Russia. There is no option for the status-quo, which is presumably what the Crimean Ukrainian/Tatar population and maybe some of the Russian population would want. Since there does not seem to have been any real consultation to provide for major viewpoints in the referendum, I do not see how it can be seen as legit.

I say this as somebody who sympathizes with the Crimean Russians, they have already had their languages official status removed by a part neo-Nazi government. When the only option is them or Putin, I feel for the more moderate Crimean Russians who are stuck between a rock and a hard place.

[rvg]

This referendum was a sham anyway. We'll see what sanctions materialize by tomorrow.

[Sarmatian]

Like it was ever in doubt. There hasn't been a single secession referendum in the modern history of the world where the population in question decided against secession. Scottish may be the first one actually, if they decide to stay in the UK.

At least now we can can go back to Kardashians and mystery plane disappearances.

[Sarmatian]

Why wait? I'll tell you now: No sanctions worth talking about, but a few paltry sanctions not worth talking about that everyone will talk about.

Visas for some senior Russian officials, delay of some investment programs, rudimentary diplomacy for a while and so on... Crimea remains a disputed territory for a loooong time.

[Strike For The South]

Like it was ever in doubt. There hasn't been a single secession referendum in the modern history of the world where the population in question decided against secession. Scottish may be the first one actually, if they decide to stay in the UK.

At least now we can can go back to Kardashians and mystery plane disappearances.

Quebec

Whatever, Russians have always been very naughty boys.

[rvg]

At least now we can can go back to Kardashians and mystery plane disappearances.

Haven't you heard? They have discovered even more areas where the plane did not land. Isn't that exciting?

*vomits*

[Brenus]

“We didn't "organise" ethnic cleansing, the fact that we were crap at Peace Keeping it is a different issue.” Yeah. So that is your explanation. We are crap. We liberated countries when people end to shoot at us because we are crap. We de facto, all right, not organise, but supervised Ethnic Cleansing because we are crap. So, just a suggestion, perhaps after all this “crapness”, it is time to think.

“Except - your post reflects real life the way Russian TV does” Except – no. I see things like I saw them 20 years ago, when with the same reasons, the ones like you were explaining that borders have to be change for the right of people to decide what they want to be, I saw NATO attacking countries without Mandate (so breaking international law) and out of its purpose (defensive alliance, not offensive against an absolutely not menacing Foreign Country), I saw the double standard rolling, the manipulation of media at a scale never seen before. I am seen thing like the USA and EU were seeing it when it suited them.
And I see what might happen.
I don’t know if Crimea should be obliged to stay in Ukraine. But at least I ask the question. You don’t. You don’t ask what the population opinion is, because you want Putin to be a tyrant. You refuse to see that the Russian didn’t shoot ONE bullet in annexing Crimea.
So, perhaps, perhaps, it is because they are really welcome.
You see manipulation because you have a deep disdain for the Russians, in Russia and in Ukraine. Read the comments of the pro-war: The Russian Minorities are manipulated, under propaganda… You never ask about the populations and why they feel frighten. Why the Russians in Ukraine would be sensible to Russian Propaganda if they didn’t feel there is a piece of truth in it. You dismiss their opinion as none important because they are Russians.

[Sarmatian]

Quebec

Yeah, I forgot about that. Twice rejected, even.

[rvg]

Yeah, I forgot about that. Twice rejected, even.
Puerto Rico as well...

[Sir Moody]

Puerto Rico as well...

and the Falklands - again twice if memory serves

[Kadagar_AV]

Quebec

Whatever, Russians have always been very naughty boys.

This is a new drunken low even for you.

[rvg]

and the Falklands - again twice if memory serves

I'm beginning to notice a pattern...

[Husar]

I'm beginning to notice a pattern...

Exactly. Two wrongs do indeed make a right, thus proving Sarmatian's point. ~;)

[Beskar]

Falklands is a British issue where the British do not really want it but they have an obligation to uphold the safety and security of those on the island. Also, Argentina keeps messing things up everytime they try to implement things such as 'shared sovereignty' or recognition of independence for the isles. Gibraltar too.

Also, those areas are fiercely patriotic when it comes to things British which makes it even more awkward.

[Myth]

I hear that Flanders wants to similarly become independent. Frags, can you shed some light? Apparently they want to take 200 billion of your debt, but they want to be a separate country from Wallonia and that Brussels can become a nation-state.

I also hear that southern Italy and Sicilly wants to be separate from northern Italy. And that Venice wants to be completely independent.

Also Catalonia in spain wants to be independent AFAIK.

I personally am more a fan of the return of the free Greek City States. Who wouldn't want to live in the democratic city state of Sparta?

But seriously though, this cessation business: are we to expect a new map of Europe in a year or two?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Falklands is a British issue where the British do not really want it but they have an obligation to uphold the safety and security of those on the island. Also, Argentina keeps messing things up everytime they try to implement things such as 'shared sovereignty' or recognition of independence for the isles. Gibraltar too.

Also, those areas are fiercely patriotic when it comes to things British which makes it even more awkward.

Speak for yourself.

Most Brits I know, when asked about handing Argentina the Falklands respond with "over our dead bodies".

Part of the reason these territories want to remain British is because we give a fig for them.

[rvg]

Most Brits I know, when asked about handing Argentina the Falklands respond with "over our dead bodies".

Argentina made a huge mistake by trying to use force back in '82. They won't see "Islas Malvinas" again for as long as Great Britain exists. This is now a matter of principle.

[Gilrandir]

I say this as somebody who sympathizes with the Crimean Russians, they have already had their languages official status removed by a part neo-Nazi government.
Crimea has its own constitution, according to which Crimea HAS THREE OFFICIAL LANGUAGES: Ukrainian, Russian, Crimean Tatar. They are planning to remove Ukrainian - a very anti-Nazi move.

[Gilrandir]

Like it was ever in doubt. There hasn't been a single secession referendum in the modern history of the world where the population in question decided against secession. Scottish may be the first one actually, if they decide to stay in the UK.


What about the one in Quebec?
Well, should have read the thread to the end.

[Sarmatian]

Crimea has its own constitution, according to which Crimea HAS THREE OFFICIAL LANGUAGES: Ukrainian, Russian, Crimean Tatar. They are planning to remove Ukrainian - a very anti-Nazi move.

Hmm, I've read about two, Ukrainian and Russian. I haven't seen Tatar mentioned anywhere officially.

[drone]

Why wait? I'll tell you now: No sanctions worth talking about, but a few paltry sanctions not worth talking about that everyone will talk about.

Maybe the FA can seize Chelski.

[Kagemusha]

EU applies sanctions towards 21 individual Russians and Ukrainians, while US towards 11 individual Russian and Ukrainians, because of the application of Crimea to join Russia. Oh how the Russian bear must be trembling now..:laugh4:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/17/us-ukraine-crisis-idUSBREA1Q1E820140317

[rvg]

Let's see if more follows. This is just a beginning both in terms of sanctions and in terms of the crisis escalation. There are still Ukrainian army units in Crimea, and they aren't going anywhere.

[Kagemusha]

Let's see if more follows. This is just a beginning both in terms of sanctions and in terms of the crisis escalation. There are still Ukrainian army units in Crimea, and they aren't going anywhere.

Completely possible, but my guess is that once Russia ratifies the Crimean application, Ukrainian troops either submit or Russians allow those who do not wish to join Russians to leave with all their insignia and weapons. I guess we will have to wait and see.
Meanwhile Maidan goverment announced mobilization of 40K reservist, while they already declared a full mobilization of all reserves couple weeks a go. Didnt anybody show up the last time?

[Sir Moody]

Speak for yourself.

Most Brits I know, when asked about handing Argentina the Falklands respond with "over our dead bodies".

Part of the reason these territories want to remain British is because we give a fig for them.

I am of a different opinion myself - as far as i am concerned they can remain British as long as they wish to remain British - if they have a referendum (and i mean a proper one not the farce the Russians pulled) and decide they want to become either Independent or Argentinian then I am all for them leaving - so far all indications are that wont happen any time soon

[Sarmatian]

Completely possible, but my guess is that once Russia ratifies the Crimean application, Ukrainian troops either submit or Russians allow those who do not wish to join Russians to leave with all their insignia and weapons. I guess we will have to wait and see.
Meanwhile Maidan goverment announced mobilization of 40K reservist, while they already declared a full mobilization of all reserves couple weeks a go. Didnt anybody show up the last time?

I think I read somewhere only 1.5% reported for duty.

[HoreTore]

It's quite easy to get a referendum to say what you want when you've got armed thugs driving around killing the opposition. (http://www.hrw.org/news/2014/03/14/crimea-attacks-disappearances-illegal-forces)


Yeah, the interrim government are the real fascists./sarcasm

[Kagemusha]

It's quite easy to get a referendum to say what you want when you've got armed thugs driving around killing the opposition. (http://www.hrw.org/news/2014/03/14/crimea-attacks-disappearances-illegal-forces)


Yeah, the interrim government are the real fascists./sarcasm

And who said there was good or bad guys in this crisis?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Those who do not read history are doomed to repeat it.

This is the 21st Century, not the 19th.

Putin's language of £protecting ethnic Russians" is the reason given by Hitler for invading Czechoslovakia - he took the German bit first, then the rest.

Putin has troops in Crimea, NATO should be preparing to move troops into Western Ukraine - Ukraine's first president has already said Ukraine should join NATO ASAP, and once Crimea is annexed many more Ukrainians will feel that way. Georgia, likewise, will be looking nervously East.

Time to recognise history hasn't ended and to arm up. NATO doctrine should move to holding a Baltic-Romanian line, and matching Russia's land warfare capability.

War with Putin seems merely now to be a matter of time. I for one am going to start exercising more for the inevitable draft.

I noted above that this was the Sudetanland with more stonefacing and less hysterical ranting. Neither Europe nor the USA is willing to bleed to stop this so just shut up and deal with it when Putin and company redraw the border.

International relations come down to "Put up, or shut up" far more often then our diplodunks would care to admit.

[Brenus]

"Yeah, the interrim government are the real fascists." Of course not. They are freedom fighters who never ever assault opposition, throw Cocktail Molotov or stormed official buildings. Their celebration of SS and their racist, anti-Semitic rant and calls for murders are just part of a nice and lovely folklore. Can't wait the Report of Human Right Watch showing how nice they are... Under the Swastika is a golden heart.

"I for one am going to start exercising more for the inevitable draft." All benefit anyway, as even if no draft (most likely), you will in better shape after.:2thumbsup:

[GenosseGeneral]

I think I read somewhere only 1.5% reported for duty.

I read that they had thousands of volunteers who wanted to enlist. But from what I know, they first put these people on lists and did not directly put them into army uniforms. Given the low state of readiness and ill-funding the Ukrainian armed forces have suffered from over the last 25 years, I guess they are structurally not prepared for mobilisation. Honestly, who would have expected a mobilisation of the Ukrainian army 6 months ago?
There is also a lot of information, indicating the relocation of army units to the Russian border. Most garrisons are still in the West, since they were established in Soviet times.
Here is a number of vids (http://korrespondent.net/ukraine/politics/3320762-kak-zhytely-donbassa-reahyruuit-na-ukraynskye-tanky-vydeopodborka). Note the first two: They show locals of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions attempting to block the movement of armor.
Also note the absolutely poor condition of the soldiers' equipment. Looks at least as bad the Russians in Chechnya in the 1990s. Compare that to the Russians in Crimea... although the equipment of those hinted towards spetznas as well as marines or maybe airborne troops, since especially the latter are highly prestigious elites and have received even more prioritised funding over the last years.
The same for the armored vehicles shown. Looks even more like 60s and 70s material than like 80s. I am not an expert on Soviet tanks, though, but I know that Ukraine has only marginally modernised its military over the last decades, despite the existence of a fairly developed arms industry.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I am not an expert on Soviet tanks...

I am clearly not an expert either. I can handle the MS-1 pretty well, but the KV-1s still keep stomping my Hetzer flat despite switching to the 105. Stacks up better against the Churchills though.

[Myth]

I am clearly not an expert either. I can handle the MS-1 pretty well, but the KV-1s still keep stomping my Hetzer flat despite switching to the 105. Stacks up better against the Churchills though.
Which game are we discussing here?

[rvg]

Soooo, looks like Obama has given his so-called "response". Quite honestly he would have been better off proclaiming nothing at all. These "sanctions" are a joke. Now, if I were an optimist I'd say that he's just starting and needs time to prepare a coherent and stinging package of response measures, but given the fact that the man has no spine I have no reason to feel optimistic.
Sorry Ukraine, my heart aches for you. Let's just hope that Putin either does nothing further on this front or does something monumentally stupid. I'm rooting for the "nothing further" route, but once again no reason to feel optimistic.

[Husar]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Ground_Forces

Wikipedia has a list, not very detailed though regarding the versions they have. Since their T-64s and T-80 have a different ERA layout, I would assume the tanks in the videos are mosty T-72s, which would mean they have taken some tanks out of storage.

What's weird is that the tanks in the first video look like the BMD-2 (especially the slight chevron-shape of the front armor), although that one has 5 road wheels while the ones in the video have 6, which is the number the BMPs have. BMPs have a flat front though. I have no idea what they are, maybe BMDs with a BMP chassis or whatever....okay, got it, has to be some kind of BTR-D, it has 6 roadwheels and is a stretched BMD, not liked on Wikipedia though. I also can't find anything about a variant with a turret.

Maybe they should have kept these: http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/03/05/tank-graveyard-in-ukraine/

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Which game are we discussing here?

Just a bit of a joking reference to World of Tanks.

[GenosseGeneral]

Maybe they should have kept these: http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/03/05/tank-graveyard-in-ukraine/
Guess how many of those the Russians have... Ukraine does not stand that much of a chance in an all-out-war against Russia. But I think it is unlikely, as long as things in Eastern Ukraine don't become too bad. It makes sense for them to move troops there, though. Better the Russians would have at least to fight to take that area. And that is something so unpopular, I doubt Putin would risk it.

The ministry of defence of Ukraine lists BMP1-3 as well as the BMD2. MBTs are mainly upgraded T64s and some T72s. They produce also a further developed T80, sold as T84 "Oplot". Their army has bought about 10 but failed to pay for the contract. I read that 97% of the production of Ukraine's arms industry are exported. i don't have numbers to compare it to, but that sounds fairly high to me.

Fun fact: A Russian friend of mine has just told me, that the government has made cuts on the scholarship she as a student receives. As a reason she states Crimea. I wonder, I thought Putins coffers were full gas money, so helping out some soon-to-be independent Russian brothers with 5 or 10 billion USD should'nt be too much of a problem?

[CBR]

Soooo, looks like Obama has given his so-called "response". Quite honestly he would have been better off proclaiming nothing at all. These "sanctions" are a joke. Now, if I were an optimist I'd say that he's just starting and needs time to prepare a coherent and stinging package of response measures, but given the fact that the man has no spine I have no reason to feel optimistic.
The US/EU approach has been pretty good so far with lots of face saving diplomacy. Unfortunately it appears that Putin is following Hitler's play book and the West need to stand united and deliver stronger sanctions very soon. That or we are looking at another Munich agreement.