Ukraine-in-a-thread

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

“This is why I have no problem with Romanians or Poles coming to the UK for work or education - because the UK is substantially responsible for the subsequent half-century of misery.” First, what could have been done?
Second, Stalin paid back in letting the Greece communist to die in the mountains in allowing the English to reinstall the King.

It is amusing we just forget this little detail.

Follow World War II to it's logical rhetorical conclusion?

[Gilrandir]

Stable and prosperous Ukraine, out of NATO, is in Russian best interests. From Ukrainian standpoint, the only logical move is figure out how to turn angry bear to a friendly bear.
So, the conclusion is: keep the bear friendly disregarding what you may want? Russia may want to see stable and prosperous Ukraine under their sway. The moment Yanukovych proclaimed a course towards EU, stabiltity and prosperity of Ukraine stopped being interesting for Russia. Russia wants Ukraine to opt for Customs Union and turn away from EU choosing to forget that some countries (Turkey, Israel) have free trade agreements both with Russia and EU. Ukraine is denied such a future. All arguments of the then (and current) Ukrainian authorities that Ukraine may successfully cooperate with both were disregarded by Russia.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

A part of the problem is that the US has practiced a containment policy toward Russia since the end of the cold war.

They have sought to bring former Soviet Republics and other nations on Russia’s borders heavily under their influence.

While it may be good to establish closer relations to these states, it should not be at Russia’s expense.

It only increases their paranoia and leads to things like Crimea.


I have read nothing to suggest that a containment policy for post cold war Russian has been in place. I freely admit that our actions supporting former Soviet bloc states -- which I think were viewed more as efforts to help these states achieve their own goals (and maybe expiate a little guilt from 1945) -- may have created a de facto sense that containment was being practiced. Memberships in NATO etc. are not the same in US eyes as they were. Until recently, there was little expectation that anything would come of it other than Latt MPs assisting in the WonT etc.

[Fisherking]

It isn’t getting better, is it. What happened to the withdrawal?

Some 25 or so Ukrainians have been arrested by the Russian in connection with alleged terror acts to prevent the vote in Crimea.

The Ukrainians have been accused of taking photographs of Russian troop movements and of trying to make contact with extremist elements in Russia.
I thought there were no Russian troops in Crimea before the vote? Keep the lies straight guys!

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26878193

Other than that, the coverage is getting a lot like the airline thing. Mostly filler and no real news.


From Russia: http://english.pravda.ru/news/russia/04-04-2014/127270-mcdonalds_zhirinovsky-0/

I am sure that will make the west think twice. NOT!

Otherwise, someone should tell the acting PM of Ukraine that retaliate is a bad word to use just now, when talking about Russia.

In a years time it may be the IMF you would want to retaliate against anyway.

[rvg]

Practical answer 1: Because it most probably can not be done, and it would bring the opposite effect. Instead of a restless bear, you'd have an angry one.
So let him be angry. An angry bear behind an electric fence is less dangerous than a friendly bear without a fence.


Practical answer 2: Even if it could be done, the price of doing so is much higher than anyone is willing to pay.
Can you substantiate this claim?


Practical answer 3: It's not a proper long-term solution, and the same issues will reappear in not too distant future.
You are right about the same issues reappearing in the future, which is precisely why a fence is a good idea: it secures Ukraine's future.

[Kagemusha]

I appreciate the almost poetic tones taken by both sides of debate towards history of Finno- Russian relations, but i cant completely agree towards either. The main point with the relationship between Russia and Finland is that we are situated right next to each other and that is something we cant escape.

If we talk about Winter War. I have to disagree with the assessment of Sarmatian. What happened at Poland, Finland and Baltci countries prior 1941 was World politics, not a vicious cycle. Via Ribbentrop- Molotov pact, Nazi Germany and Soviet Union divided those states situated between each other and said countries fell victim to the big players decision.

Still i have to disagree also with some of the pro Western voices as well, specially some of our friends from the other side of the pond. Russian raw materials have benefited European countries for a long time and such is case also with Finland like many other European countries. EU countries constitute 47.1 % of Russian foreign trade, while for example US 3.7%. Such is reality. Russian raw materials are one key aspect for European economies and as such isolating Russia will do as more harm then good. So in such situation we must find common ground with Russia. If US would to embargo Russia completely. It would have minimal effect on either economies, but if EU would do the same. It would have devastating effects towards both.

So in the end my point is that we should not accept everything from Russia, but still should not ignore it. Similarly we should not neither bow down to it, but find means of partnership benefiting both sides, while making clear that we will not be bullied by it either.

[Brenus]

"I thought there were no Russian troops in Crimea before the vote? Keep the lies straight guys!" Err, Russia had a military naval base (and others by treaty) in Ukraine/Crimea. So how did you get the idea there were no Russian Troops before the vote? Please explain.

[Fisherking]

"I thought there were no Russian troops in Crimea before the vote? Keep the lies straight guys!" Err, Russia had a military naval base (and others by treaty) in Ukraine/Crimea. So how did you get the idea there were no Russian Troops before the vote? Please explain.

Read the article.

Troop movements usually pertaining to truck convoys and ground troops. There were no naval convoys on the streets were there?

And was photographing them unlawful?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

A part of the problem is that the US has practiced a containment policy toward Russia since the end of the cold war.

They have sought to bring former Soviet Republics and other nations on Russia’s borders heavily under their influence.

While it may be good to establish closer relations to these states, it should not be at Russia’s expense.

It only increases their paranoia and leads to things like Crimea.

I have to say, I agree with Seamus. Bringing Poland et al into NATO is actually much more about our shared European conciousness and the trauma of having some of the Allies trapped behind the Iron curtain.

In the UK, WWII begins with the UK and France failing the Central European democracies, and so does the Cold War. That's our story - bring those same countries into NATO is about "uplifting" them, giving them the boost to be able to get to where we are.

[Brenus]

“Read the article.” Done. Your point is?
“Troop movements usually pertaining to truck convoys and ground troops. There were no naval convoys on the streets were there?” Well, that is a tank on a railway platform, as all tank going for a training or maneuver. Hardly in combat readiness.
12697



That is mine going a train.
And, perhaps you don’t know, there were other units (as Air Forces) allowed in Crimea by treaty. So ground forces were in Crimea.
“And was photographing them unlawful?” I don’t know, but I remember taking bridges in picture was illegal in Yugoslavia in the 1990.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

“Read the article.” Done. Your point is?
“Troop movements usually pertaining to truck convoys and ground troops. There were no naval convoys on the streets were there?” Well, that is a tank on a railway platform, as all tank going for a training or maneuver. Hardly in combat readiness.
12697



That is mine going a train.
And, perhaps you don’t know, there were other units (as Air Forces) allowed in Crimea by treaty. So ground forces were in Crimea.
“And was photographing them unlawful?” I don’t know, but I remember taking bridges in picture was illegal in Yugoslavia in the 1990.

Russia claims no Russian troops moved during the Crimea crisis, those were all "self-defence" forces, and any movements would have been in violation with Russia's treaty with Ukraine. Those photographs are embarrassing, because movement of armour demonstrates that these were, in fact, Russian troops.

Stop being difficult for the sake of it, Brenus.

[GenosseGeneral]

About the photographing: Ukrainian and Russian laws on this are still based on Soviet anti-spy laws. Taking photos of 'strategic objects' can be punished with quote long prison sentences. Also, the definition of 'strategic object' is rather wide, as under this term fall not only military bases and installations, but also railway stations or the metro.
However, I don't think moving troop columns are included in this and it certainly does not justify terrorism charges. They were arrested for propaganda purposes, probably as revenge for the arrest and deportation of suspicious Russians on various parts of Ukraine, who were allegedly organising separatist provocations (pro-Russian meetings).

Given that a rather large contigent of Russian as well as Ukrainian forces has always been stationed Sevastopol and elsewhere in Crimea, I guess military trucks have always been a common sight there. Given that there always has been stationed Naval Infantry, this columns likely include ground forces as well. And it was very likely this Naval Infantry units, which were deployed first.
When the "little green men" stopped in front of official buildings in Simferopol and got of their trucks there, was when the situation became unusual.
This special situation of Crimea certainly helped the Russians taking it so quickly and with almost no bloodshed. Attacking elsewhere in Ukraine would be a completely different, way bloodier type of operation (not that the Russians would be afraid of bloodshed, though).

[Kagemusha]

Everybody knows by now that majority of the "unidentified armed men" were mostly Russian Black Sea fleet marines more specifically forces from 810th Naval Infantry Brigade and 382nd independent Naval Infantry Battalion and yes they were at Crimea before the crisis and yes they are mechanized / motorized. After these forces secured key objectives together with Russian special forces. Motor rifle mechanized infantry started pouring into the Crimea.

[Sarmatian]

I have read nothing to suggest that a containment policy for post cold war Russian has been in place. I freely admit that our actions supporting former Soviet bloc states -- which I think were viewed more as efforts to help these states achieve their own goals (and maybe expiate a little guilt from 1945) -- may have created a de facto sense that containment was being practiced. Memberships in NATO etc. are not the same in US eyes as they were. Until recently, there was little expectation that anything would come of it other than Latt MPs assisting in the WonT etc.

I wouldn't say there was ever a codified policy of containment. Once could say that US policy towards Russia was on auto-pilot and simply a continuation of cold war era policies.

There are plenty of practical example. Since NATO celebrated its 65th birthday yesterday, it is probably fitting to start with that. After 1990, NATO almost doubled in size, going from 16 to 28 members. Most new members were in Russian/Soviet sphere of influence before. Multiple times Russians voiced their concern, only to be ignored. They drew the line with Ukraine and Georgia very clearly. US put enormous pressures on its European allies to agree to Georgian and Ukrainian membership. They even demanded specific dates to be set. Germany put up fierce resistance, but Merkel eventually bowed to pressure, with the only change being that Ukraine and Georgia aren't given specific dates but would admitted "eventually". It can't really be argued that no one could have expected this. Russian officials unambiguously said it wouldn't be tolerated in any way, shape or form. European NATO members also understood that, which is way many of them were against it.

Wider public in the US didn't know about it, I'd agree with that, but there's no way that decision makers were unaware.

Another point which spells containment is the pipeline, which is supposed to transport gas to Europe from somewhere outside Russia. Problem with that there is no gas outside Russian sphere of influence - only country in the vicinity with large gas reserves is Iran. The plan involved getting central Asian republics into NATO sphere, which would, along with Caucasus countries and ultimately Iran (when pro-western government is installed) be used to transport natural gas to Europe.

It is a long-term goal, specifically as Russian influence is much higher than US influence in central Asia and Iran's future is still an enigma.

Third important reason was the missile shield in Europe and all its variants. The way it was supposed to be situated, it was clear it is actually a shield against Russian strategic potential, not against potential threats from NK or Iran. Under enormous Russia pressure, the plan was shelved, but not abandoned.

Munich security conference in 2007 was especially illustrative in that regard. You can find Putin's speech with English subtitles on Youtube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlY5aZfOgPA). He clearly explained the principal Russian objections:

1) Objection to unipolar world and one centre of power and decision-making (USA)
2) Enlargement of NATO, especially concerning countries bordering Russia
3) Use of international fora to promote interest of one, or small group of nations
4) Global issues being addressed only according to the interest of a small group of nations (USA/NATO/EU)

This was in 2007. After 2008, he became totally disillusion by USA policies of NATO enlargement at all costs, that he finally warned them that Ukraine and Georgia are the last straw.

From 1999 to 2014, one can he see his transformation from someone who tried to level the playing field, use diplomacy and set standards for dealing with global issues to someone who is totally disillusioned with western foreign politics that he doesn't even pretend to care about western opinion.

[gaelic cowboy]

What a load of :daisy: so we should accede to Russian thuggery in the east cos some russian conquered them back in the day.

Cop yerself on man ye keep spouting all this geo-political stuff but all your really saying is you want these people to live in a cage.

[Sarmatian]

What a load of :daisy: so we should accede to Russian thuggery in the east cos some russian conquered them back in the day.

Yes, that's what I said... :rolleyes:

[gaelic cowboy]

Yes, that's what I said... :rolleyes:

actually thats exactly what your saying everyday.

You defense of all sort of crypto-fascist thuggery in Russia and Eastern Europe is truly frightening.

[rvg]

Cop yerself on man ye keep spouting all this geo-political stuff but all your really saying is you want these people to live in a cage.

Some people do not wish to be free.

[Sarmatian]

My name is Sarmatian (Hi, Sarmatian), and I have a problem - I hate freedom.


actually thats exactly what your saying everyday.

You defense of all sort of crypto-fascist thuggery in Russia and Eastern Europe is truly frightening.

Your inability to understand thuggery from Russia is an answer to thuggery from the west is what's truly frightening. Your inability to even begin to comprehend that there is thuggery from the west is the most dangerous of all.

It's precisely such ignorant points of view that led to this and will lead to more of the same.

[gaelic cowboy]

My name is Sarmatian (Hi, Sarmatian), and I have a problem - I hate freedom.



Your inability to understand thuggery from Russia is an answer to thuggery from the west is what's truly frightening. Your inability to even begin to comprehend that there is thuggery from the west is the most dangerous of all.

It's precisely such ignorant points of view that led to this and will lead to more of the same.

:daisy: Your basically trying to defend this using relativism.

Russian actions deserve only contempt, just because you understand a thing does not mean you should cheerlead it as you have.





Will people be more or less free to express contrary political ideas in Putins Neo-Soviet customs union?

If a country expressed the intention to leave would it be allowed too?

Will independent media be allowed in this hellhole the kremlin wishes to build?



We already know that the answer is NO.

[Sarmatian]

:daisy: Your basically trying to defend this using relativism.

This is not relativism by any stretch of imagination. I'm talking about a cause and a consequence. It's a very simple concept (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality).


Russian actions deserve only contempt, just because you understand a thing does not mean you should cheerlead it.

You have a right to a simplified view of a situation.

Russia considers its "near abroad" as its sphere of influence. US-led NATO considers most of the world its sphere of influence, and neither give a :daisy: about Ukraine, for the most part. Unfortunately, conflicts of such magnitude usually involve third parties, irrespective of their willingness to be a part of it. I have absolutely zero desire to be involved in it, and, to minimize damage to my personal way of life (or life itself) I'd rather remove the cause of conflict than pick a side and cheerlead it.

[gaelic cowboy]

This is not relativism by any stretch of imagination. I'm talking about a cause and a consequence. It's a very simple concept (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality).



You have a right to a simplified view of a situation.

Russia considers its "near abroad" as its sphere of influence. US-led NATO considers most of the world its sphere of influence, and neither give a :daisy: about Ukraine, for the most part. Unfortunately, conflicts of such magnitude usually involve third parties, irrespective of their willingness to be a part of it. I have absolutely zero desire to be involved in it, and, to minimize damage to my personal way of life (or life itself) I'd rather remove the cause of conflict than pick a side and cheerlead it.


If Ukraine did get in NATO/EU then ALL its people would be better off both economically and politically ten yrs down the road.

There is no scenario where the reverse with the customs union would even be remotely true.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

My name is Sarmatian (Hi, Sarmatian), and I have a problem - I hate freedom.



Your inability to understand thuggery from Russia is an answer to thuggery from the west is what's truly frightening. Your inability to even begin to comprehend that there is thuggery from the west is the most dangerous of all.

It's precisely such ignorant points of view that led to this and will lead to more of the same.

Well, I don't know - after 13 years of NATO thuggery, Afghans are participating in the first ever democratic transfer of power in the region.

After slightly more Russian thuggery, Chechens are doing what exactly?

[Brenus]

It is amazing how the NATO lovers people like free debates. Insults and personal attacks, that is their idea of freedom: No place for analyse, different point of view and mixing a military alliance (allegiance) for a tool of democracy.
Reminder: Greek. Turkey, Spain, Portugal were dictatorships and part of NATO. So stop the :freak:, please.

And about the freedom to leave, any country trying trying to be free of big powers influences is and was roughly put back in place, under the pretext of fighting communism. They were allowed to be free in our conditions and in our terms, as few elected (and murdered) leaders learned it, or even when frightening bid company interest as in Iran (Gal. Hamid Mosadegh).

Cuba is still under USA embargo because USA don't like the Political Regime.

Yeah, and the "enemy of Freedom" (was it "why do you hate Freedom"?) has been done and tested.

"Afghans are participating in the first ever democratic transfer of power in the region." BIG LAUGH!!! I have friends working there. You wanted to ease the tension in making joke.? Success, I can't stop laughing... Karzai will abandon power?:laugh4:
It is so true that you wonder why all the translators for the UK Army (or French) want to come in the country by fear of reprisal.

[Husar]

Will independent media be allowed in this hellhole the kremlin wishes to build?

Hellhole is a strong word, will it be worse than North Korea or Somalia? How afraid of it are the Russians? Do they want a hellhole? Are they perhaps all demons?


It is so true that you wonder why all the translators for the UK Army (or French) want to come in the country by fear of reprisal.

I think all the helpers who helped our armies begged us to be allowed to come here but most of our really nice countries, including Germany, told them to bugger off. That was actually in the mainstream media here at the time, not necessarily front page though.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Hellhole is a strong word, will it be worse than North Korea or Somalia? How afraid of it are the Russians? Do they want a hellhole? Are they perhaps all demons?

Hellhole might be a strong word, but we're talking about a Tyrant who admires Stalin and calls the Collapse of the Soviet Union a "tragedy", and also a man who has twice launched illegal wars to annex territory from his neighbours.

At best, Russians are less free than ten years ago, more wealth is concentrated in fewer hands and the entire economy is hostage to the price of oil and gas.

There's certainly great "hell hole" potential there if Putin miss-steps or goes crazy (as Tyrants are wont to do).

I think all the helpers who helped our armies begged us to be allowed to come here but most of our really nice countries, including Germany, told them to bugger off. That was actually in the mainstream media here at the time, not necessarily front page though.[/QUOTE]

Quite true, and that is terrible. However, today women voted in a national election and their faces were uncovered so you could see them smiling. Karzai has been kept in power by the Americans, Brenus can laugh as hard as he likes but the guy isn't going to become a local Warlord - he was still a stupid choice for the Americans, rather than the Afghan King, but there you go.

Afghanistan can only be said to be better off after the occupation, because it couldn't have been much worse before.

[Sarmatian]

If Ukraine did get in NATO/EU then ALL its people would be better off both economically and politically ten yrs down the road.

There is no scenario where the reverse with the customs union would even be remotely true.

Really?

Estonia GDP per capita in 2000 = 14 480
Estonia GDP per capita in 2013 = 16 717
15.44% increase

Kazakhstan GDP per capita in 2000 = 7 165
Kazakhstan GDP per capita in 2013 = 12 116
69.09% increase


20 years of NATO control, and Bosnia is more corrupt and dysfunctional than it used to be. Kept floating because the west keeps pumping in just enough money to stop it from collapsing. Not a single serious issue has been tackled. For all its idiocy in support of corrupt thugs, NATO may eventually unite Bosniaks, Serbs and Croats living in Bosnia, so maybe something good can come of it.

Next "accurate" statement please.

[Gilrandir]

It is amazing how the NATO lovers people like free debates. Insults and personal attacks, that is their idea of freedom: No place for analyse, different point of view and mixing a military alliance (allegiance) for a tool of democracy.

Now that reminds me of something... Wasn't I treated the same way? No, of course not. As Brenus is fond of saying, I'm having a laugh, it is a ridiculous thought.

[Gilrandir]

Will people be more or less free to express contrary political ideas in Putins Neo-Soviet customs union?

If a country expressed the intention to leave would it be allowed too?

Will independent media be allowed in this hellhole the kremlin wishes to build?

The new constitution is being prepared in Crimea. According to the draft, Crimea's head will be forwarded by the president of Russia and approved by a special body (don't remember its name) consisting of some 5-6 especially appointed members of the Crimean parliament. Among Russian regions the same system functions only in some North Caucasian republics where the threat of what Russians call terrorism is ever imminent.

[Sarmatian]

Now that reminds me of something... Wasn't I treated the same way? No, of course not. As Brenus is fond of saying, I'm having a laugh, it is a ridiculous thought.

Stop playing the victim. Your arguments were attacked and not you. What did you except when you compared the situation in Ukraine to Lord of the Rings? Applause for vivid imagination?

[Husar]

At best, Russians are less free than ten years ago, more wealth is concentrated in fewer hands and the entire economy is hostage to the price of oil and gas.
And how is this not the case in the West? Ten years ago I was still free to buy incandescents, there was less wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, Iraq had just been conquered for the oil and fewer people could set their taps on fire due to fracking for cheap gas, which America incidentally now offers to sell to Europe to "help" us avoid Putin's gas, what a surprise....


However, today women voted in a national election and their faces were uncovered so you could see them smiling. Karzai has been kept in power by the Americans, [...]

Point taken.
http://www.tagesschau.de/multimedia/bilder/afghanistan-wahl126~_v-videowebm.jpg

[Brenus]

“At best, Russians are less free than ten years ago, more wealth is concentrated in fewer hands and the entire economy is hostage to the price of oil and gas.” Err, that is capitalism at work for you. Same situation here in UK.

“a man who has twice launched illegal wars” How many illegal wars between the various US administration? No need to go to Vietnam, Granada, Panama, no just recently, from Clinton to nowadays?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Really?

Estonia GDP per capita in 2000 = 14 480
Estonia GDP per capita in 2013 = 16 717
15.44% increase

Kazakhstan GDP per capita in 2000 = 7 165
Kazakhstan GDP per capita in 2013 = 12 116
69.09% increase


20 years of NATO control, and Bosnia is more corrupt and dysfunctional than it used to be. Kept floating because the west keeps pumping in just enough money to stop it from collapsing. Not a single serious issue has been tackled. For all its idiocy in support of corrupt thugs, NATO may eventually unite Bosniaks, Serbs and Croats living in Bosnia, so maybe something good can come of it.

Next "accurate" statement please.

Since the breakup of Yugoslavia - Croatia has raced ahead and now has one of the highest human development indexes in Europe.


And how is this not the case in the West? Ten years ago I was still free to buy incandescents, there was less wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, Iraq had just been conquered for the oil and fewer people could set their taps on fire due to fracking for cheap gas, which America incidentally now offers to sell to Europe to "help" us avoid Putin's gas, what a surprise....

Ah - so you advocate a race to the bottom?

The West has problems but our direction of travel is not universally "down", being German (and therefore well educated and analytically intelligent) I know that you know that a recession hurts the poor more than the rich, concentrates wealth etc...

We have had an extended recession - Russia has not and yet Russia is in a much worse state, politically, than we are. If meaningful political discourse in the West has become somewhat sickly, in Russia the discourse is in cardiac arrest.



Point taken.
http://www.tagesschau.de/multimedia/bilder/afghanistan-wahl126~_v-videowebm.jpg

Counter: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26908464

34% of voters were women - for a country were women had no right not all that long ago, that's a big deal.

Also - note images of women counting votes and the female MP interviewed.

[Hax]

Newsflash: Iraq wasn't invaded because of oil, Iraq was invaded because the American government was incompetent



Estonia GDP per capita in 2000 = 14 480
Estonia GDP per capita in 2013 = 16 717
15.44% increase

Kazakhstan GDP per capita in 2000 = 7 165
Kazakhstan GDP per capita in 2013 = 12 116
69.09% increase


Yes, because Estonia also has huge gas reserves!

Oh..wait, no they don't.

[Husar]

Ah - so you advocate a race to the bottom?

The West has problems but our direction of travel is not universally "down", being German (and therefore well educated and analytically intelligent) I know that you know that a recession hurts the poor more than the rich, concentrates wealth etc...

We have had an extended recession - Russia has not and yet Russia is in a much worse state, politically, than we are. If meaningful political discourse in the West has become somewhat sickly, in Russia the discourse is in cardiac arrest.

Everything hurts the poor more than the rich, even a boom, that's the great thing about capitalism, recessions hurt the poor more than the rich and booms let the rich profit more than the poor. After all, how much can the poor invest into an upstart enterprise during a boom? And I don't count getting a job that pays less than unemployment benefits as a gain. Getting a 1.5% pay raise is also not a gain if the same year saw 2% inflation.


Counter: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26908464

34% of voters were women - for a country were women had no right not all that long ago, that's a big deal.

Also - note images of women counting votes and the female MP interviewed.

Yes, if it stays that way and we don't boycott them for electing someone we don't like that's great.
Also well done on ignoring that you yourself said that America installed and held a puppet in power there until now.


Newsflash: Iraq wasn't invaded because of oil, Iraq was invaded because the American government was incompetent

Why did it get reelected then?
Putin told them there are no WMDs in Iraq and they still invaded because noone believed Putin even back then. Guess who turned out to be telling the truth on that one...


Yes, because Estonia also has huge gas reserves!

Oh..wait, no they don't.

Neither do we, but we still had a GDP increase of 18%.
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/germany/gdp-per-capita

[Sarmatian]

Yes, because Estonia also has huge gas reserves!

Oh..wait, no they don't.

Pretty much all ex Warsaw Pact countries that stayed in the Russian sphere did better, in terms of growth in percentages, than did those that moved to the western sphere.

The problem is, of course, that there's huge difference in starting position - Estonia was much more developed than, say, Tajikistan even back than, so it's hard to compare in terms of raw numbers, but it is indicative enough that countries that did move or tried to move to western sphere didn't do better in terms of economic growth.

I did make a mistake, those weren't numbers from 2000-2013, but from 2009 to 2013.

Belarus, which has no huge gas reserves, had a growth of 28% in GDP per capita in the same period.



Since the breakup of Yugoslavia - Croatia has raced ahead and now has one of the highest human development indexes in Europe.


I don't know where you're getting your numbers from, but a quick check show that in 2011 they were 32nd out of 47 European countries.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Everything hurts the poor more than the rich, even a boom, that's the great thing about capitalism, recessions hurt the poor more than the rich and booms let the rich profit more than the poor. After all, how much can the poor invest into an upstart enterprise during a boom? And I don't count getting a job that pays less than unemployment benefits as a gain. Getting a 1.5% pay raise is also not a gain if the same year saw 2% inflation.

I don't disagree - but Putin actively suppresses his populace - and it is "his" populace, because he is a ruler and not a politician.


Yes, if it stays that way and we don't boycott them for electing someone we don't like that's great.
Also well done on ignoring that you yourself said that America installed and held a puppet in power there until now.

"Held in power" and "puppet" are both very strong terms which obfuscate the reality. Karzai is not a NATO puppet, and has not been for some time. He retained power after a NATO monitored election, where NATO provided the security. This time, the Afghan army provided the majority of the security and they seem to have done a bang up job.


Why did it get reelected then?
Putin told them there are no WMDs in Iraq and they still invaded because noone believed Putin even back then. Guess who turned out to be telling the truth on that one...

Telling the truth or accidentally right?

And the US administration didn't invade for oil or because it was incompetent, it did it for idealogical reasons.


Neither do we, but we still had a GDP increase of 18%.
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/germany/gdp-per-capita

That's because the Euro provides Germany with an artificially favourable export market - and you have a better industrial base - and Estonia is still only 2.66% behind you.

[gaelic cowboy]

Really?

Estonia GDP per capita in 2000 = 14 480
Estonia GDP per capita in 2013 = 16 717
15.44% increase

Kazakhstan GDP per capita in 2000 = 7 165
Kazakhstan GDP per capita in 2013 = 12 116
69.09% increase


20 years of NATO control, and Bosnia is more corrupt and dysfunctional than it used to be. Kept floating because the west keeps pumping in just enough money to stop it from collapsing. Not a single serious issue has been tackled. For all its idiocy in support of corrupt thugs, NATO may eventually unite Bosniaks, Serbs and Croats living in Bosnia, so maybe something good can come of it.

Next "accurate" statement please.

Kazakhstan yer having a laugh man, your going to compare that cental asian autocracy to estonia.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Isn't that the country where the ruler and his daughter had a falling out, and now she's disappeared - nobody knows where she is?

[Brenus]

“Croatia has raced ahead and now has one of the highest human development indexes in Europe.” You should share this opinion with the Croats. That probably why they had massive demonstration recentlly:” Croatia has an unemployment rate of more than 22 percent, and the figure is close to 50 percent among young people, according to Al Jazeera.”

[gaelic cowboy]

“Croatia has raced ahead and now has one of the highest human development indexes in Europe.” You should share this opinion with the Croats. That probably why they had massive demonstration recentlly:” Croatia has an unemployment rate of more than 22 percent, and the figure is close to 50 percent among young people, according to Al Jazeera.”

Amazing a country has an high unemployment during a large global recession.




By the way the one thing we know about recessions is that they END.

[gaelic cowboy]

Isn't that the country where the ruler and his daughter had a falling out, and now she's disappeared - nobody knows where she is?

no thats uzbekistan

[gaelic cowboy]

Pretty much all ex Warsaw Pact countries that stayed in the Russian sphere did better, in terms of growth in percentages, than did those that moved to the western sphere.

The problem is, of course, that there's huge difference in starting position - Estonia was much more developed than, say, Tajikistan even back than, so it's hard to compare in terms of raw numbers, but it is indicative enough that countries that did move or tried to move to western sphere didn't do better in terms of economic growth.

I did make a mistake, those weren't numbers from 2000-2013, but from 2009 to 2013.

Belarus, which has no huge gas reserves, had a growth of 28% in GDP per capita in the same period.




I don't know where you're getting your numbers from, but a quick check show that in 2011 they were 32nd out of 47 European countries.


Yes Belarus another noted bastion of freedom and democracy???

[Husar]

I don't disagree - but Putin actively suppresses his populace - and it is "his" populace, because he is a ruler and not a politician.

So does Erdogan, and he's a NATO ally, we even stationed missiles there to defend him.


"Held in power" and "puppet" are both very strong terms which obfuscate the reality. Karzai is not a NATO puppet, and has not been for some time. He retained power after a NATO monitored election, where NATO provided the security. This time, the Afghan army provided the majority of the security and they seem to have done a bang up job.

Karzai has been kept in power by the Americans

Your words, unless "held" and "kept" somehow have a completely different meaning in Britain that I'm not aware of.
I will also be very happy if Afghanistan can actually become a democracy where people actually live together in peace and harmony but it's a stretch to say that what we know now somehow justifies the invasion. And we can't yet be sure that it will actually stay this way.
Especially if the same reasoning applied to Iraq makes it a whole lot worse, ignoring that the lack of WMDs was already known at the time.


Telling the truth or accidentally right?

And the US administration didn't invade for oil or because it was incompetent, it did it for idealogical reasons.

I'm pretty sure the US administration admitted to flat out lying about a few of the reasons for the invasion and having had no real intelligence regarding the WMDs. The crusades were also done for ideological reasons but that didn't stop some noblemen from profiting heavily from them. Sometimes there is more than the obvious and what people admit ten years later doesn't have to be true either. The USA call us allies while their NSA performs more surveillance here than in any other European country:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5b/Boundless_Informant_data_collection.svg/842px-Boundless_Informant_data_collection.svg.png

And to assume that the US government acted in good faith while Putin was "only accidentally right" shows a very heavy bias already.
Those stories about mobile WMD labs were a bit far fetched even back then, and they only came up with that when the "evidence" of stationary sites was believed to be bogus or nonexistant by everyone.


That's because the Euro provides Germany with an artificially favourable export market - and you have a better industrial base - and Estonia is still only 2.66% behind you.

Except Sarmatian just said he got the numbers wrong, so the comparison is moot. We're still leeching off all the poor Euro countries though and Merkel is still Hitler.

[Hax]

Why did it get reelected then?
Putin told them there are no WMDs in Iraq and they still invaded because noone believed Putin even back then. Guess who turned out to be telling the truth on that one...

You go ahead and tell me. All I know is that oil production in Iraq fell dramatically after the 2003 invasion and it has only very recently (one or two years ago) managed to climb back up to pre-1990 levels.


Pretty much all ex Warsaw Pact countries that stayed in the Russian sphere did better, in terms of growth in percentages, than did those that moved to the western sphere.

The problem is, of course, that there's huge difference in starting position - Estonia was much more developed than, say, Tajikistan even back than, so it's hard to compare in terms of raw numbers, but it is indicative enough that countries that did move or tried to move to western sphere didn't do better in terms of economic growth.

Well, I don't know why you're that interested in making sweeping statements about the economics of either countries without really knowing the economic history of both the Baltics and Central Asia. Interestingly, one of the European countries that has experienced the most economic growth in the last few years has been Poland, and I don't think they've necessarily grown closer to Russia.

Additionally, I know for a fact the administrations under Toomas Hendrik Ilves have generally had a tendency towards austerity measures, which might (partially) explain the slow growth of GDP per capita. Interestingly, in contrast to states like Portugal and Greece, the Baltic states have not been endlessly borrowing money, which might explain why they haven't gone bankrupt.

Additionally -- leaving the economic argument behind for a second -- can't you think of any reason why the Baltic states maybe don't want to be all buddy-buddy with Russia? Anything at all?

[Gilrandir]

Stop playing the victim. Your arguments were attacked and not you.

Both. Do you forget calling me a nationalist? Or was it not a personal insult?


What did you except when you compared the situation in Ukraine to Lord of the Rings?
Stop reminding everybody your misinterpretation of what I made clear long ago. Yet I may repeat it again: I compared NOT THE SITUATION IN UKRAINE, but THE EFFECT RUSSIAN PROPAGANDA HAD (AND HAS) ON THOSE WHO TRUST IT.


Applause for vivid imagination?
Now I will remember that vivid imagination is another sin worth hanging by private parts.

[Sarmatian]

Well, I don't know why you're that interested in making sweeping statements about the economics of either countries without really knowing the economic history of both the Baltics and Central Asia. Interestingly, one of the European countries that has experienced the most economic growth in the last few years has been Poland, and I don't think they've necessarily grown closer to Russia.

Considering how many times in the thread alone was teh evil empire mentioned, I'd say my "sweeping statement" aren't really the problem.

Furthermore, I never said that there was no growth outside Russian zone. In the same period, Poland had 12.5% growth, and smaller GDP per capita than Kazakhstan. Those numbers are all according to the World Bank, btw.

The point I tried to make was "it is indicative enough that countries that did move or tried to move to western sphere didn't do better in terms of economic growth", which as an answer to Gaelic Cowboy's point that Ukraine will do much better economically if in western sphere. I understand if you missed it, his posts are getting harder and harder to decipher after the obligatory yer having a laugh start.


Additionally, I know for a fact the administrations under Toomas Hendrik Ilves have generally had a tendency towards austerity measures, which might (partially) explain the slow growth of GDP per capita. Interestingly, in contrast to states like Portugal and Greece, the Baltic states have not been endlessly borrowing money, which might explain why they haven't gone bankrupt.

No need to get defensive. I wasn't attacking the Baltic states or Estonia specifically, I just took the numbers from the world bank site and compared them to each other.


Additionally -- leaving the economic argument behind for a second -- can't you think of any reason why the Baltic states maybe don't want to be all buddy-buddy with Russia? Anything at all?

They have their reasons, but we're talking about economy at the moment.


So does Erdogan, and he's a NATO ally, we even stationed missiles there to defend him.

And supplied him with weapons to make the Kurds disappear quicker.

Hopefully, KurdishSpartacus isn't reading this thread

[Brenus]

“amazing a country has an high unemployment during a large global recession.” I know, especially of one which “has raced ahead and now has one of the highest human development indexes in Europe”.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

no thats uzbekistan


So does Erdogan, and he's a NATO ally, we even stationed missiles there to defend him.

He *tries* and more importantly *fails*. Not even the Turkish president supports him. He may want to be like Putin, he isn't.

And the missiles were there long before he was in power.


Your words, unless "held" and "kept" somehow have a completely different meaning in Britain that I'm not aware of.
I will also be very happy if Afghanistan can actually become a democracy where people actually live together in peace and harmony but it's a stretch to say that what we know now somehow justifies the invasion. And we can't yet be sure that it will actually stay this way.
Especially if the same reasoning applied to Iraq makes it a whole lot worse, ignoring that the lack of WMDs was already known at the time.

I meant primarily - prevented the Taliban from cutting his head off. He has been "difficult" for the West to deal with for some time and we stopped giving him real political support before the LAST election, irrc.

Ultimately - the invasion was punitive, that objective was achieved once we had ousted the Taliban. All the NATO lives spent since have been about putting the country back together. Something that would have been easier without Iraq.

The key point is that the Western democracies have matured to the point that they no longer install dictators or support them AGAINST their populace. Iraq showed that instigating their fall doesn't work to well - but Libya and Syria have shown that helping to topple them is preferable to not doing so.


I'm pretty sure the US administration admitted to flat out lying about a few of the reasons for the invasion and having had no real intelligence regarding the WMDs. The crusades were also done for ideological reasons but that didn't stop some noblemen from profiting heavily from them. Sometimes there is more than the obvious and what people admit ten years later doesn't have to be true either. The USA call us allies while their NSA performs more surveillance here than in any other European country:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5b/Boundless_Informant_data_collection.svg/842px-Boundless_Informant_data_collection.svg.png

And to assume that the US government acted in good faith while Putin was "only accidentally right" shows a very heavy bias already.
Those stories about mobile WMD labs were a bit far fetched even back then, and they only came up with that when the "evidence" of stationary sites was believed to be bogus or nonexistant by everyone.

Yes - I remember - I also remember that back in 2003 it was all a lot foggier. Papa said he thought what Sadam was hiding was that he DIDN'T have any WMD's. That was only really apparent after, though.


Except Sarmatian just said he got the numbers wrong, so the comparison is moot. We're still leeching off all the poor Euro countries though and Merkel is still Hitler.

Merkel's off the hook - Putin is Hitler now. According to Nick Clegg at least - can't believe that man's a serious politician.

***************************

Anyway - while we have been arguing this, it looks like FSB groundwork may be paying off: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26910210

Russian tanks roll in in 3...2...1...

[Brenus]

Yes, of course. You have legitimate storming by freedom lovers crowds, and the ones guided by the FSB.

"I also remember that back in 2003 it was all a lot foggier." Not really: French, Germans and Belgium (and Russian, but they can't be trusted) secret services were telling there were no WMD. And the UN. The USA helped by UK agencies distorted reports until they launched an illegal invasion on a false pretense. And yes, Saddam couldn't admit he hadn't some, it could have been seen as a weak point by his neighbors he attacked few times.
No fog at all, Bush and his administration wanted a war against Iraq and did everything to have it.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Yes, of course. You have legitimate storming by freedom lovers crowds, and the ones guided by the FSB.

"I also remember that back in 2003 it was all a lot foggier." Not really: French, Germans and Belgium (and Russian, but they can't be trusted) secret services were telling there were no WMD. And the UN. The USA helped by UK agencies distorted reports until they launched an illegal invasion on a false pretense. And yes, Saddam couldn't admit he hadn't some, it could have been seen as a weak point by his neighbors he attacked few times.
No fog at all, Bush and his administration wanted a war against Iraq and did everything to have it.


But I thought you said WE stirred up the Kyiv protesters?

So - logically - this MUST be the FSB.

[gaelic cowboy]

delete


found the figures i was looking for

[Husar]

He *tries* and more importantly *fails*. Not even the Turkish president supports him. He may want to be like Putin, he isn't.

By that standard you can't blame Hitler for trying to conquer Europe and exterminating the Jews because he failed with both.
We already mentioned though that Turkey and some other countries were already in NATO when they actually were dictatorships.


And the missiles were there long before he was in power.

The German Patriot missiles that are supposed to defend him from Syria?
The nukes are different, stationing them there was just an act of American aggression towards the USSR, different topic.


I meant primarily - prevented the Taliban from cutting his head off. He has been "difficult" for the West to deal with for some time and we stopped giving him real political support before the LAST election, irrc.

And yet you think our choice of allies and people to support is always perfect?


Ultimately - the invasion was punitive, that objective was achieved once we had ousted the Taliban. All the NATO lives spent since have been about putting the country back together. Something that would have been easier without Iraq.

Yes, more flawless decision-making from the West. Why is America allowed to take revenge and other countries are not?


The key point is that the Western democracies have matured to the point that they no longer install dictators or support them AGAINST their populace.

Some would argue that this does not apply to the EU, but somehow it went from undemocratic dictatorship that takes our incandescents away to arbiter of freedom and democracy within a few days.


Yes - I remember - I also remember that back in 2003 it was all a lot foggier. Papa said he thought what Sadam was hiding was that he DIDN'T have any WMD's. That was only really apparent after, though.

If WMDs are such a great reason to invade, why is North Korea still a country?
And how does not knowing jack make the reasoning for the invasion any better? They still invented loads of whacky theories to justify it in public.

[gaelic cowboy]

World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/BG.GSR.NFSV.GD.ZS/countries)


I found this and essentially kazachstan is not better off than estonia.


in fact estonia is classified high income by the world bank as opposed to upper middle income for kazachstan


seeing as how one is 12.5 times bigger and full of oil and gas its funny how its not 12.5 times better off.



even life expectancy is better, prob has summit to do with the fact estonia is a democracy and kazachstan is not.


i notice russia itself has a smaller gdp per capita than estonia

in fact you picked the best former republic that's not in the eu, and its still less than estonia

most of these "sphere of influence" or "near abroad" places are around 6000 or less


GDP per capita figures

kirgyzstan 1160
kazachstan 12116
turkmenistan 6798
uzbebekistan 1717
georgia 3490
ukraine 3867
moldova 2038
belarus 6685
Azerbaijan 7164
armenia 3351

russia 14037


estonia 16717
latvia 14008
lithuania 14183
poland 12708
chech republic 18683
slovakia 16847
hungary 12531
romania 9036
bulgaria 6978
croatia 13881
slovenia 22000


romania bulgaria are worst however i expect there gdp will get better now there allowed freedom of movement.

also even the 2 worst are still better than the majority of the ex soviet countries that are not in the eu.

[Sarmatian]

World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/BG.GSR.NFSV.GD.ZS/countries)


I found this and essentially kazachstan is not better off than estonia.


in fact estonia is classified high income by the world bank as opposed to upper middle income for kazachstan


seeing as how one is 12.5 times bigger and full of oil and gas its funny how its not 12.5 times better off.



even life expectancy is better, prob has summit to do with the fact estonia is a democracy and kazachstan is not.


i notice russia itself has a smaller gdp per capita than estonia

in fact you picked the best former republic that's not in the eu, and its still less than estonia

most of these "sphere of influence" or "near abroad" places are around 6000 or less

romania bulgaria are worst however i expect there gdp will get better now there allowed freedom of movement.

also even the 2 worst are still better than the majority of the ex soviet countries that are not in the eu.

Even during the Soviet era, the Baltic states had much higher GDP per capita than Kyrgyzstan or Uzbekistan, so it's not really useful if comparing how the countries developed economically after the Soviet era. That's why I compared the increase of GDP per capita. In 2009, Estonia had twice (100%) the GDP per capita of Kazakhstan. In 2013, only around 20% better. At this rate, in 2017, Kazakhstan will race ahead of Estonia.

In 1990, Ukraine and Belarus had comparable GDP per capita, 1597 and and 1705 respectively. In 2013, Ukraine's got 3867 and Belarus 6685.

[Brenus]

“But I thought you said WE stirred up the Kyiv protesters?” Me? When?
I said the movement was a social protest because the Ukrainian Government was unable to answer social requests. As shown in the Arabian Spring (and in other countries), these movements lead to political changes. The movement then was high jacked by the Ukrainian Extreme-Right and the former leaders. The support to the movement (i.e. US & various E.U. Ambassador and Representatives) and the storming of the Parliament left the Russian Minorities (but probably some others) excluded from the decisions making. The anti-Russian and pro-European stance by our media probably didn’t help to calm down these minorities. The past of some leaders and the un-answered questions about what happened created a vacuum. The interim government (not recognised by Moscow as explained) took some decisions that shouldn’t been its first priorities. Then we know what happened.

So, where did I say the movement was guided by the CIA? Yes, we did stirred-up the situation by inflammatory comments.
YOU are saying that the Russian masses are so stupid that they want to be enslaved by Putin, elected dictator, thanks to the FBS, as they watch only the Russian TV, which pre-supposed they were brain-washed even before. Again, some stupid stupid people who prefer enslavement than freedom... When this will be ended? Let's bomb them to free them. Freedom (well our view of freedom) or death!!!

[Husar]

YOU are saying that the Russian masses are so stupid that they want to be enslaved by Putin, elected dictator, thanks to the FBS, as they watch only the Russian TV, which pre-supposed they were brain-washed even before. Again, some stupid stupid people who prefer enslavement than freedom... When this will be ended? Let's bomb them to free them. Freedom (well our view of freedom) or death!!!

Not only, this, we want freedom for them, but please only within their own country. If they want the freedom to live and work in our country, we demand that our governments keep them out. A lot of poor people want money and a proper standard of living more than a democratic government, which is why financial reasons motivated a lot of the arab spring and the ukrainian uprising. A lot of the North Africans tried to escape to Europe to have a better life as soon as their dictators couldn't prevent that anymore. But our European arbiters of freedom wouldn't grant them that freedom however.

http://www.gisti.org/spip.php?article3261

12753

[HoreTore]

That's why I compared the increase of GDP per capita. In 2009, Estonia had twice (100%) the GDP per capita of Kazakhstan. In 2013, only around 20% better. At this rate, in 2017, Kazakhstan will race ahead of Estonia.

Lies, damned lies and statistics...

Estonia was hit extremely hard by the financial crisis, amongst the hardest hit in the world. However, they have made a massive recovery from it, and are fast-tracking back to where they were pre-2008.

In other words, the decrease seen relative to Kazakhstan is unlikely to continue.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

By that standard you can't blame Hitler for trying to conquer Europe and exterminating the Jews because he failed with both.
We already mentioned though that Turkey and some other countries were already in NATO when they actually were dictatorships.

IRRC, Turkey was a democracy when it joined NATO - and that was yesterday, not today. Which European countries WERE Dictatorships is not at issue, what is happening in Russia is. The whole argument is a strawman, as are the vacillations of the current Turkish PM.

Turkey's institutions have thus far managed to prevent him doing serious or permanent harm, and if he continues like this he really does risk impeachment.


The German Patriot missiles that are supposed to defend him from Syria?
The nukes are different, stationing them there was just an act of American aggression towards the USSR, different topic.

Oh, yes, sorry. How is this relevant, providing cover for the residents of Turkey and their democratically elected government?

Weren't you the one saying we should be consistent and not just back the democracies we like?


And yet you think our choice of allies and people to support is always perfect?

No. I never said any such thing.


Yes, more flawless decision-making from the West. Why is America allowed to take revenge and other countries are not?

Al Qaeda declared war on the US, killed thousands of US Citizens, and the Taliban supported them. So the US invaded Afghanistan - because what else were they going to do?


Some would argue that this does not apply to the EU, but somehow it went from undemocratic dictatorship that takes our incandescents away to arbiter of freedom and democracy within a few days.

I take no issue with the stated purpose of the EU - I take issue with it's structure. While it does force members to conform to its mandate - it doesn't force anyone to join. The Eastern Bloc countries went in knowing what they were being sold, it's the older members that got fleeced.

This is still really nothing to do with Putin.


If WMDs are such a great reason to invade, why is North Korea still a country?
And how does not knowing jack make the reasoning for the invasion any better? They still invented loads of whacky theories to justify it in public.

Well - it wasn't about annexing Iraq - Putin is clearly making a show of invading Ukraine for just that reason.

Why are we still arguing this?

Is it right for Putin to roll tanks into Eastern Ukraine and annex it?

Was it right to annex Crimea?

Was it right to (informally) annex South Ossetia?

[Rhyfelwyr]

Protesters declars Donetsk Republic (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26919928)

It is unclear I think at this stage who the gunmen were that stormed the building. Could be a popular revolt or it could be unmarked Russian soldiers as in Crimea. Will be interesting to see Putin's stance on this.

[Gilrandir]

Lies, damned lies and statistics...

Estonia was hit extremely hard by the financial crisis, amongst the hardest hit in the world. However, they have made a massive recovery from it, and are fast-tracking back to where they were pre-2008.

In other words, the decrease seen relative to Kazakhstan is unlikely to continue.
I don't understand all this fuss about GDP per capita, economic growth percentage and stuff like that. I am sure the figures don't convey anything of what is really going on in the country nor reflect the life conditions of each person. There is a joke: I ate a whole chicken for dinner and my neighbor went to bed hungry, so statistically each of us ate half a chicken on the average. Getting personally, my (and my parents') financial situation was much worse in 2003-2004 when Ukraine was reported to be displaying the economic growth of 9-11% (according to different assessments) then it is now with the negative growth. Any conclusions and comparisons based on this statistical bullsh... are especially wrong when it goes about the former USSR countries since most of the money such a country makes doesn't reach the ordinary people. Corruption, embezzlement, frauds in those countries leave the ordinary people in lurch and those at power enjoy all the benefits they may. As Sarmatian demonstrated, statistically Kazakhstan is better off then Estonia. But have you heard of hunger riots in Estonia? Well, there were some in Kazakhstan a couple of years ago. In Genauzen (or Novy Uzen) oilers were not paid for quite a long time and when they demanded the wages their protests were severely suppressed with some casualties. Perhaps nobody told them how statistically fine their lives were.
So when politicians boast of economic growth percentage, they remind me of guys who try to measure whose D.I.C.K., oops, I should say GDP is longer. They are not interested (or keep it hush) who enjoys the inches, oops, the figures.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Protesters declars Donetsk Republic (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26919928)

It is unclear I think at this stage who the gunmen were that stormed the building. Could be a popular revolt or it could be unmarked Russian soldiers as in Crimea. Will be interesting to see Putin's stance on this.

Third photo down - two guys clean shaven, nondescript clothes, quiet, the guy next to them with longer hair doing the talking.

Looks like two soldiers and an Officer.

[HoreTore]

I don't understand all this fuss about GDP per capita, economic growth percentage and stuff like that. I am sure the figures don't convey anything of what is really going on in the country nor reflect the life conditions of each person. There is a joke: I ate a whole chicken for dinner and my neighbor went to bed hungry, so statistically each of us ate half a chicken on the average. Getting personally, my (and my parents') financial situation was much worse in 2003-2004 when Ukraine was reported to be displaying the economic growth of 9-11% (according to different assessments) then it is now with the negative growth. Any conclusions and comparisons based on this statistical bullsh... are especially wrong when it goes about the former USSR countries since most of the money such a country makes doesn't reach the ordinary people. Corruption, embezzlement, frauds in those countries leave the ordinary people in lurch and those at power enjoy all the benefits they may. As Sarmatian demonstrated, statistically Kazakhstan is better off then Estonia. But have you heard of hunger riots in Estonia? Well, there were some in Kazakhstan a couple of years ago. In Genauzen (or Novy Uzen) oilers were not paid for quite a long time and when they demanded the wages their protests were severely suppressed with some casualties. Perhaps nobody told them how statistically fine their lives were.
So when politicians boast of economic growth percentage, they remind me of guys who try to measure whose D.I.C.K., oops, I should say GDP is longer. They are not interested (or keep it hush) who enjoys the inches, oops, the figures.

There are several measurements, and others measure what you talk about here.

[Sarmatian]

Lies, damned lies and statistics...

Estonia was hit extremely hard by the financial crisis, amongst the hardest hit in the world. However, they have made a massive recovery from it, and are fast-tracking back to where they were pre-2008.

In other words, the decrease seen relative to Kazakhstan is unlikely to continue.

Nah. 2009-2013 was the best possible time period to compare it, because Estonian economy started recovering from a huuuge dip.

12754

2007 to 2013 would make the difference much greater, again in favour of Kazakhstan.


IRRC, Turkey was a democracy when it joined NATO - and that was yesterday, not today. Which European countries WERE Dictatorships is not at issue, what is happening in Russia is. The whole argument is a strawman, as are the vacillations of the current Turkish PM.

Turkey's institutions have thus far managed to prevent him doing serious or permanent harm, and if he continues like this he really does risk impeachment.


Not really true. Even though I admire Turkey for standing up republican values, being practically the only predominantly Muslim country that did, calling Turkey a democracy is pushing it. Human rights, women rights, minority rights, killing off undesirables... Hopefully they won't turn their back to Ataturk's legacy, but even if they do, they won't be expelled from NATO.


Protesters declars Donetsk Republic (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26919928)

It is unclear I think at this stage who the gunmen were that stormed the building. Could be a popular revolt or it could be unmarked Russian soldiers as in Crimea. Will be interesting to see Putin's stance on this.

Read Russia Today (http://rt.com/news/donetsk-republic-protestukraine-841/), that's as close as it gets.

Further moves into Ukraine are unlikely. It will be used for propaganda purposes to show that decentralization of Ukraine is the only solution otherwise the country could collapse.

[HoreTore]

Read Russia Today (http://rt.com/news/donetsk-republic-protestukraine-841/), that's as close as it gets.

Should we also watch Jerry Falwell's network to see what the gays are up to?

[Sarmatian]

Should we also watch Jerry Falwell's network to see what the gays are up to?

I don't know what you're talking about. Russia Today is totally legitimate voice of Put... er, Russia, so if Rhy wants to know Putin's stance, it's next best thing.

[Fisherking]

what the Ukrainian government thinks: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26917335

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Should we also watch Jerry Falwell's network to see what the gays are up to?

Robertson and Schuller have access to networks. Falwell did for a time, but that was sold off even before his death. Falwell was not a fan of the LGBT equality movement, though he did end up funding a rec/info center for them.

[Sarmatian]

Rather interesting fact.

Only 1 in 6 of Americans can point accurately to where's Ukraine on the world map. (http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-where-americans-think-ukraine-is-2014-4)

12761


What's more is that the farther a respondents' guesses were from Ukraine, the more they wanted the U.S. to intervene with military force, according to the researchers. This is despite the fact that two-thirds of Americans report following the conflict in Ukraine "somewhat closely."

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Not really true. Even though I admire Turkey for standing up republican values, being practically the only predominantly Muslim country that did, calling Turkey a democracy is pushing it. Human rights, women rights, minority rights, killing off undesirables... Hopefully they won't turn their back to Ataturk's legacy, but even if they do, they won't be expelled from NATO.

Ahhh - then neither is France a democracy!

Good to know.

[Fisherking]

Rather interesting fact.

Only 1 in 6 of Americans can point accurately to where's Ukraine on the world map. (http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-where-americans-think-ukraine-is-2014-4)

12761


That will only derail the thread. Better start another if you really want answers.

[HoreTore]

Ahhh - then neither is France a democracy!

Good to know.

I see you're standing in a nice house made of glass; here, have some stones.

[Sarmatian]

That will only derail the thread. Better start another if you really want answers.

I'm not trying to say Americans are ignorant in general. The point is this part - What's more is that the farther a respondents' guesses were from Ukraine, the more they wanted the U.S. to intervene with military force, according to the researchers. This is despite the fact that two-thirds of Americans report following the conflict in Ukraine "somewhat closely."


The problem is those that are advocating military solution are those who know the least about the situation.


Ahhh - then neither is France a democracy!

Good to know.

We've already established that France is a dictatorship.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I see you're standing in a nice house made of glass; here, have some stones.

France is a Republic, and so is Turkey - Syria is a Dictatorship and Russia is a Tyranny - Iran is a Theocratic Republic, the UK is a Theocratic Monarchy and Norway is a Constitutional Monarchy.

Of course - we like to pretend Turkey is a Dictatorship, Russia a Republic, Syria a Tyranny, Iran a Rogue State, the UK a Constitutional Monarchy and Norway a Democracy.

In general parlance, however, France and Turkey are both "democracies" in that they have elections periodically to boot out their incumbent rulers.

Now... back to discussing his Imperial Majesty Vladimir I.

[rvg]

Now... back to discussing his Imperial Majesty Vladimir I.

By the grace of the Lord, Vladimir the First, Emperor and Autocrat of All Russia, Moscow, Kiev, Vladimir, Novgorod; Tsar of Kazan, Tsar of Astrakhan, Tsar of Poland, Tsar of Siberia, Tsar of Taurica, Tsar of Georgia, Lord of Pskov, Grand Duke of Smolensk, Lithuania, Volhynia, Podolia, and Finland; Prince of Estlandia, Liftland, Courland and Semigalia, Samogitia, Byalostok, Korela, Tver, Ugra, Perm, Vyatka, Bolgar and others; Lord and Grand Duke of Lower Novgorod, Chernigov, Ryazan, Polotsk, Rostov, Yaroslavl, Beloozero, Udor, Obdor, Konda, Vitebsk, Mstislav and all northlands, Lord and Ruler of Iverian, Kartlian, and Kabardinian lands, and Armenian provinces; Hereditary Lord and Master of Circassian and Mountain Princes; Lord of Turkestan, Heir of Norway, Duke of Schleswig-Holstein, Stornmarn, Ditmar, and Oldenburg, and others, and others, and others.


Putin has his work cut out for him in the years to come.

[Sir Moody]

the UK is a Theocratic Monarchy

we are?

Since when did the Church of England take over the state... last I checked it was the other way round - we are a Constitutional Monarchy.

In a Theocracy the Church runs the state (either indirectly like Iran or directly) - in our system the state runs the Church.

[rvg]

we are?

Since when did the Church of England take over the state... last I checked it was the other way round - we are a Constitutional Monarchy.

In a Theocracy the Church runs the state (either indirectly like Iran or directly) - in our system the state runs the Church.

Because the British Monarch is the Head of the Church and the Head of State.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Rather interesting fact.

Only 1 in 6 of Americans can point accurately to where's Ukraine on the world map. (http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-where-americans-think-ukraine-is-2014-4)

12761

As to geography, the average Yank is pretty much ignorant. The number you cite is actually HIGHER than our average on most things.

For example, as a for fun extra credit question, I asked 100 students to name the longest river that meets the sea somewhere on the East coast of the USA [btw it is the Susquehanna at the top of Chesapeake Bay]. Please note that I live and teach on that coast. A third didn't try to even answer, about half said the Mississippi River, and one student even answered The Nile.

Be honored, those of you interested in the Ukraine, you have caused 100s of thousands of Yanks to actually learn a little geography and pushed back our general level of ignorance a touch...at least for now.

[Sarmatian]

France is a Republic, and so is Turkey - Syria is a Dictatorship and Russia is a Tyranny - Iran is a Theocratic Republic, the UK is a Theocratic Monarchy and Norway is a Constitutional Monarchy.

Of course - we like to pretend Turkey is a Dictatorship, Russia a Republic, Syria a Tyranny, Iran a Rogue State, the UK a Constitutional Monarchy and Norway a Democracy.

In general parlance, however, France and Turkey are both "democracies" in that they have elections periodically to boot out their incumbent rulers.


You're stretching and narrowing the definition of democracy when it suits your point. If periodic elections are all it takes, than Russia is also a democracy. I'd also like to say that some of the political systems you mentioned don't really exist in reality.

And UK is most certainly NOT a theocratic monarchy.


Now... back to discussing his Imperial Majesty Vladimir I.

This is about Ukraine. There's another thread for Vladimir, of the house Putin, first of his name.

[Sir Moody]

Because the British Monarch is the Head of the Church and the Head of State.

That doesn't make us a theocracy - the Church has no say in the running of Government - it is a separate hierarchy.

In order to be a Theocracy the civil Government would have to be subordinate to the Church not the Monarch - the fact that the heads of both "chains of command" are the same is neither here nor there

[HoreTore]

Because the British Monarch is the Head of the Church and the Head of State.

So is the Norwegian inbredmonarch, but PVC referred to Norway as a constitutional monarchy...

[rvg]

That doesn't make us a theocracy...

Technically it does. This is only a technicality for course.

[Sarmatian]

Technically it does. This is only a technicality for course.

No it doesn't, not even technically.

Theocracy is when religious leaders rule directly or through an intermediary, and religious laws are state laws (Vatican, Iran...). In the case of UK, there's a constitution, there's a parliament and and there's a government. Just because British monarch happens to be a head of the church, that's not enough to label it a theocracy.

[Sarmatian]

To try and steer the thread back to the topic.

Ukrainian parliament meeting devolves into a brawl, again. (http://news.yahoo.com/ukrainian-parliament-meeting-devolves-brawl-again-142634756.html)

Member of the communist party was speaking how the current government in Kiev contributed to escalating tensions and is guilty of setting a precedent which the Crimea followed. Later he said: You are today doing everything to intimidate people. You arrest people, start fighting people who have a different point of view.

As if to prove his point, two Svoboda MP's stood up and tried to violently drag him away, which ended in a brawl as more MP's involved.
https://i.imgur.com/x9NWI1H.jpg (http://imgur.com/x9NWI1H)


Where's Klitschko when you need him?

[Brenus]

“Ahhh - then neither is France a democracy!” Can you develop? I suspect you mixed up 2 notions: Democracy (political status) and Regime (form of government).
Now, I agree that nowadays France is far from being a democracy but is still a Republic.

“In general parlance, however, France and Turkey are both "democracies" in that they have elections periodically to boot out their incumbent rulers.” True. The last 15 years we had 3 different Presidents who are doing the same politic. So the USA, UK and all others countries… And you shoot your own foot: France is now part of NATO (against the will of the population).

“By the grace of the Lord, Vladimir the First” Err, Vlad Tepes, that is in Romania (Dracula)…

“Vladimir” Harkonen…:laugh4:

[rvg]

No it doesn't, not even technically.

Theocracy is when religious leaders rule directly or through an intermediary, and religious laws are state laws (Vatican, Iran...). In the case of UK, there's a constitution, there's a parliament and and there's a government. Just because British monarch happens to be a head of the church, that's not enough to label it a theocracy.

Iran also has a constitution, a parliament, heck, even a president. Are you suggesting that Iran is not a Theocracy?

[HoreTore]

Iran also has a constitution, a parliament, heck, even a president. Are you suggesting that Iran is not a Theocracy?

Iran's constitution specifies that a council of religious leaders have ultimate control of all of those institutions - thus a theocracy.

[rvg]

Iran's constitution specifies that a council of religious leaders have ultimate control of all of those institutions - thus a theocracy.

And Britain doesn't even have a constitution - thus a theocracy.

[Sarmatian]

And Britain doesn't even have a constitution - thus a theocracy.

I don't know about Sven, but I'm convinced.

[Pannonian]

In practice, I suspect a publicly atheist person has a far greater chance of achieving power as the leader of government in the UK than in the US. The heir to the throne has married a member of the church which his own church is supposedly opposed to, and has reached out to other major religions in the UK, and scarcely anyone cares a jot, as religion is generally seen as a hobby at best, and one of those (like shooting guns) that's best kept private and not proselytised to others.

If anyone wants to argue that the British are ruled by religion, football would be a much better place to start.

[HoreTore]

I don't know about Sven, but I'm convinced.

I agree with Ivan.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I don't know about Sven, but I'm convinced.

In the UK the monarch is Crowned by the Church, of which they become head on ascension, and they are officially chosen by God (the UK operates according to the theory of the Divine Right of Kings, by which the Monarch is appointed by God (via the Church) to serve the people.)

Power is then delegated to Parliament, in which the bishops sit, and of all the Dukes in the Realm - who comes first?

why, the Archbishop of Canterbury of course.

Thus - Constitutionally - the UK is a theocratic Monarchy de jure, but not de facto.

Now, Constitutionally, Russia is a Republic but Putin has subverted the Constitution, which makes him a Tyrant.

So - the question is what is the Tyrant going to do to Ukraine next, because war is currently inching closer.

[HoreTore]

Now, Constitutionally, Russia is a Republic but Putin has subverted the Constitution, which makes him a Tyrant.

In order for him to be a tyrant, must he not have gained power through unlawful means - which he did not do?

[Brenus]

In a real theocracy, you can't swear an oath on other book than the one recognized by the theocracy. Working for the crown Court, I have to be sworn for Jury Services, and I do it on an atheist form.
So, no, England is not ruled by religions. That is the definition of Theocracy, ruled by God (or his/her representatives as the Guy/Girl is not often seen....).

[Brenus]

"Tyrant": Leto Atreides II. The Golden Path. :laugh4:

[HoreTore]

Wouldn't that depend on just how fair you think Putin's election schemes have been?

His initial election was far, far better than the scams we see today.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

In order for him to be a tyrant, must he not have gained power through unlawful means - which he did not do?

Well, he needs to HOLD power against the Constitution.

There are examples of Putin manipulating State TV, imprisoning opponents, ensuring nobody is in a position to challenge him in an election - but the most obvious example is him engineering his "election" as Prime Minister by a party to which he does not actually belong whilst his protege becomes President and then decides to spontaneously cede powers to the Prime Minister - said Protege then switch jobs, and you here nary a pepe when Putin takes those same powers "back".

Putin is a textbook Tyrant - which means he has the textbook problem of being stuck, barring a transformative event in Russia that allows him to declare himself a Monarch he's reliant on these same tactics, and paying off the Civil Service, to stay in power. If he relaxes his grip or steps down he risks being drowned by a coup or a revolution. Either of which could well see him dead.

[HoreTore]

Well, he needs to HOLD power against the Constitution.

Which of the Greek states are you thinking of here? Can't be Syracuse?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Which of the Greek states are you thinking of here? Can't be Syracuse?

Athens, perhaps?

I'm really thinking of Aristotle's Politics, the literal textbook on the subject.

The definition of "Tyrannos" is a ruler who rules illegally, the definition of "Dictator" is an autocrat who is not a King, but rules legally.

Neither is a morally biased term in Classical philosophy - they only acquired that connotation in the medieval period when we all had Kings anointed by God and the "Tyrant" was either a King gone mad, or someone who had seized power from the King.

[HoreTore]

Athens, perhaps?

I'm really thinking of Aristotle's Politics, the literal textbook on the subject.

Then why was not the Thirty referred to as tyrants by contemporaries like Lysias?

Or are you thinking of a different Athenian tyrant? If so, who?

EDIT: And note that I'm genuinly asking, I'm not trying to argue anything...

[Kralizec]

"Tyrant": Leto Atreides II. The Golden Path. :laugh4:

All rebellions are ordinary and an ultimate bore.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Then why was not the Thirty referred to as tyrants by contemporaries like Lysias?

Or are you thinking of a different Athenian tyrant? If so, who?

EDIT: And note that I'm genuinly asking, I'm not trying to argue anything...

The Thirty were Oligarchs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peisistratos_(Athens)

Ask, and ye shall receive.

[Gilrandir]

By the grace of the Lord, Vladimir the First, Emperor and Autocrat of All Russia, Moscow, Kiev, Vladimir, Novgorod; Tsar of Kazan, Tsar of Astrakhan, Tsar of Poland, Tsar of Siberia, Tsar of Taurica, Tsar of Georgia, Lord of Pskov, Grand Duke of Smolensk, Lithuania, Volhynia, Podolia, and Finland; Prince of Estlandia, Liftland, Courland and Semigalia, Samogitia, Byalostok, Korela, Tver, Ugra, Perm, Vyatka, Bolgar and others; Lord and Grand Duke of Lower Novgorod, Chernigov, Ryazan, Polotsk, Rostov, Yaroslavl, Beloozero, Udor, Obdor, Konda, Vitebsk, Mstislav and all northlands, Lord and Ruler of Iverian, Kartlian, and Kabardinian lands, and Armenian provinces; Hereditary Lord and Master of Circassian and Mountain Princes; Lord of Turkestan, Heir of Norway, Duke of Schleswig-Holstein, Stornmarn, Ditmar, and Oldenburg, and others, and others, and others.

You forgot the Patriarch of Moscow and Whole Russia.

[Gilrandir]

There are examples of Putin manipulating State TV

I saw a video that reported on what is going on in Russian schools with regard to Crimean situation. Special classes are held where kids are explained what has happened in Crimea and how right everything Russia did (and does) was. When a boy said that Crimea was joined to Russia he was immediately corrected that it was not joined but reunified. In the corridors of the school there are TV screens (sounds too much like Orwell's 1984) that broadcast Russian TV news between the classes. I wonder what would happen if any of the kids expressed a dissident opinion. I imagine his/her parents would be secretly marked as "of doutful loyalty" or something after that.

[HoreTore]

The Thirty were Oligarchs.

They suspended the constitution, so how are they not tyrants?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peisistratos_(Athens)

Ask, and ye shall receive.

The early tyrants took power by unlawful means... Putin didn't.

[Strike For The South]

tyranny originally referred to the singular.

On a less semantic note, oligarchy does not necessarily entail the same stripping of rights that tyranny does.

A constitution has no bearing on the meaning if those two words

[HoreTore]

On a less semantic note, oligarchy does not necessarily entail the same stripping of rights that tyranny does.

The thing is that the Thirty did strip the Athenians of nearly all rights, carried out executions without trial, exiled a bunch, and so on...

Something a few other tyrants did not do.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

The thing is that the Thirty did strip the Athenians of nearly all rights, carried out executions without trial, exiled a bunch, and so on...

Something a few other tyrants did not do.

I think Strike is just noting that Tyranny is, classically, absolute rule by one person who has seized but not been voluntarily/traditionally granted power. He is not arguing that the oligarchy's behavior was not [adjective application] tyrannical.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

They suspended the constitution, so how are they not tyrants?

Tyranny is not synonymous with bad rule in the Classical sense, that connotation was added by medieval Christian philosophers. In fact, suspension of the Constitution makes them *not* Tyrants - had they kept the Constitution in place and done everything else, then they would be like Tyrants.


The early tyrants took power by unlawful means... Putin didn't.

Debatable - while Putin has not used violence to remain in power - any impartial reading of the Russian Constitution would make is clear he's not meant to be in charge now.

[HoreTore]

Tyranny is not synonymous with bad rule in the Classical sense, that connotation was added by medieval Christian philosophers. In fact, suspension of the Constitution makes them *not* Tyrants - had they kept the Constitution in place and done everything else, then they would be like Tyrants.

Suspension of a constitution doesn't mean "bad rule".

Anyway, Dionysius I of Syracuse did suspend the constitution and law of Syracuse until he was whacked by his son. He was a Tyrant, you claim Putin is, so why not the Thirty?


Debatable - while Putin has not used violence to remain in power - any impartial reading of the Russian Constitution would make is clear he's not meant to be in charge now.

He has definitely stayed in power by dubious means, but his 1999 election was lawful.

[lars573]

Tyranny is not synonymous with bad rule in the Classical sense, that connotation was added by medieval Christian philosophers. In fact, suspension of the Constitution makes them *not* Tyrants - had they kept the Constitution in place and done everything else, then they would be like Tyrants.
It was equated with bad-ish governance by the Greeks. Not wholly rotten but dangerous and unpredictable. In fact one of the main definitions of Tyrant (all the way back to the Greeks) is a populist absolute ruler. Who operates without laws to guide or restrain his actions. Who uses thuggery to maintain his power.




Debatable - while Putin has not used violence to remain in power - any impartial reading of the Russian Constitution would make is clear he's not meant to be in charge now.
Which apparently you haven't read. The term limits on the president are 2 successive terms, NOT 2 terms total. Putin has followed the exact letter of the Russian constitution. He can be elected President 2 times in a row as many times as it please him.

[Ironside]

Which apparently you haven't read. The term limits on the president are 2 successive terms, NOT 2 terms total. Putin has followed the exact letter of the Russian constitution. He can be elected President 2 times in a row as many times as it please him.

Letter legal, spirit breaking. Term limits are there to prevent people from sitting too long, not for their buddy to take the post temporarly to keep the letter of the law. It's not like term limits are essential for a democracy to work. Tage Erlander was prime minister for 23 years, and we often have had people sitting more than two terms.

I suspect that total term limits weren't added because if you have a proper opposition, then they can take power, breaking up terms.

[HoreTore]

It was equated with bad-ish governance by the Greeks. Not wholly rotten but dangerous and unpredictable. In fact one of the main definitions of Tyrant (all the way back to the Greeks) is a populist absolute ruler. Who operates without laws to guide or restrain his actions. Who uses thuggery to maintain his power.

A ruler without law was a despot, not a tyrant.

And the Tyrants of Syracuse weren't considered bad rulers, or even illegitimate rulers, even though tyrants on the greek mainland were routinely toppled by Athens and Sparta.

[Sarmatian]

Letter legal, spirit breaking. Term limits are there to prevent people from sitting too long, not for their buddy to take the post temporarly to keep the letter of the law. It's not like term limits are essential for a democracy to work. Tage Erlander was prime minister for 23 years, and we often have had people sitting more than two terms.

I suspect that total term limits weren't added because if you have a proper opposition, then they can take power, breaking up terms.

No. If the idea was to set a limit on overall number presidential mandates the same person could have, the word "consecutive" wouldn't have been used at all. The fact that it was used clearly shows that the lawmakers' intention was to set limit on consecutive, not total number of terms. We can argue whether it's a good thing, but the wording and the meaning is clear and unambiguous.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

A ruler without law was a despot, not a tyrant.

And the Tyrants of Syracuse weren't considered bad rulers, or even illegitimate rulers, even though tyrants on the greek mainland were routinely toppled by Athens and Sparta.

The word "Despot" just means "Lord" like the Latin Dominus.

Have some Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Despot_(court_title)


No. If the idea was to set a limit on overall number presidential mandates the same person could have, the word "consecutive" wouldn't have been used at all. The fact that it was used clearly shows that the lawmakers' intention was to set limit on consecutive, not total number of terms. We can argue whether it's a good thing, but the wording and the meaning is clear and unambiguous.

Well - it could be an oversight - more negligent things have been written into law.

[HoreTore]

The word "Despot" just means "Lord" like the Latin Dominus.

Have some Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Despot_(court_title)

Yes, it meant "lord".

At one point in history, in one given context. ~;)

In the context we have here, though, Despot was the term used by the greeks to describe the strongmen ruling in Asia, who did not have laws the ruler had to adhere to.

[Myth]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-bLHGZwQ_5w

Also, can a swede translate this:

http://www.svd.se/nyheter/inrikes/sapo-varnar-for-ryskt-spionage_3442778.svd

[Seamus Fermanagh]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-bLHGZwQ_5w

Tough target with all that sloping. Probably can get pen on the cupola below the observation device and/or the driver slit though those are both pretty thin targets. I'd really look for him going up slope and take a try at that large lower front glacis -- angled or not it would be my best

er, this isn't the Arena is it. Ooops, sorry.

[HoreTore]

Also, can a swede translate this:

http://www.svd.se/nyheter/inrikes/sapo-varnar-for-ryskt-spionage_3442778.svd

Sweden fears Russia will pwn their neutral behinds, and recommends building up the army.

[rvg]

Sweden fears Russia will pwn their neutral behinds, and recommends building up the army.

I'm sure Putin can find within Swedish borders a few Russians in dire need of protection.

[Ironside]

Also, can a swede translate this:

http://www.svd.se/nyheter/inrikes/sapo-varnar-for-ryskt-spionage_3442778.svd

Russia has bought in maps, in particular on sensitive strategical areas and made a few bombing drills with explicit Swedish targets. They've also increased their espionage towards Sweden. Combined with your current situation, Russia got upgraded to being an invasive threat.

All military cooperation with Russia has gotten suspended or canceled and they recommend strengthening the defense (or to be exact, getting the now all volonteer army up to supposed numbers).

[Brenus]

"home of the milk drinking surrender goats." No no no no. That is clearly a sweedisation of the "cheese eaters surrendering monkeys". Too easy, find something else.

"Russia has bought in maps" Their satellites are broken?

[Fisherking]

Yes, who could have a use for up-to-date maps. I am sure every Russian infantryman carries his own satellite display today, with a flashing dot to tell him where he is.

Naturally, noting could possibly interfere with the links…

[Sarmatian]

In other news, Seychelles parliament also expressed concern (http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&docid=1uVvKhsj32d8iM&tbnid=1FeO7gItO7JiJM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.planetreg.com%2Fe922122446123836&ei=oPVGU8rfJ8jUtAbFxoHwBg&bvm=bv.64507335,d.Yms&psig=AFQjCNGxzqbMVcVpX4Ney7I9PByjxOwAIA&ust=1397245701038957) about potential Russian invasion

[Brenus]

“I am sure every Russian infantryman carries his own satellite display today” Oh, so the Russian Infantryman needs the last Pedestrian Path in Norway before invading… Wonder why we bother with compass and level lines (and North(s), Geographic, Magnetic and declination) you can buy in any good sport shops or clubs.

“Russia would discover that the Air Force has the world's largest Space Program for a reason” I think they know it as the Program uses Soyuz as launchers…

[Husar]

Tough target with all that sloping. Probably can get pen on the cupola below the observation device and/or the driver slit though those are both pretty thin targets. I'd really look for him going up slope and take a try at that large lower front glacis -- angled or not it would be my best

er, this isn't the Arena is it. Ooops, sorry.

AFAIK real tank crews don't really aim for weak-spots and are usually happy to hit at all. It's probably more useful to hit the tank at all than to aim for the lower glacis and hit the ground instead. In reality that is, where your death is a little more permanent usually.
But they do have pretty good gear, yes.


I'm sure Sweden will just open their borders and declare nuetrality. All the easier then to make it to Norway, home of the milk drinking surrender goats.

Don't let Sigurd hear that, he'll rip you a new one and show you what a real viking is. :whip:


Sent from my L33T AC-130W
[...]
Sent from the inner bowels of the Death Star
[...]
Sent from the flaming wreckage of a MiG

:laugh4:


I think in the event of a world war, Russia would discover that the Air Force has the world's largest Space Program for a reason. To think any Sats but ours (and maybe not even ours) are reliable tools in Total War would be mistaken.

http://www.space.com/20139-china-s-anti-satellite-weapon-test-debris-orbit-animation.html

Yeah, even ignoring that other nations can destroy satellites, imagine this times all the satellistes the Air Force blows up.
Of course they may have the technology to just disable them, but then there is still the fact that US satellites are probably not safe either. It's a tough decision whether or not to touch them I guess.

[Brenus]

That depends on to which level you want the war to escalate. Shooting down others satellites can lead to unwanted retaliations...

[Ironside]

"Russia has bought in maps" Their satellites are broken?

Satellites are poor to discover hight differences and things dug into a cliff or hidden underground, inside a forest. They've been abondoned for decades, but I know several old military installations that you can't spot by satellites, but can by thorough reading of orienteering maps (usually through the very suspect voids).

Why the Russian would want that extra information is probably what triggered that suspicion.

[totalkimbrough]

I would rather have Ukraine join the West than stick with Russia obviously. Someone said that corruption is everywhere in the West as well, it is just better hidden. Well, maybe Ukrainians at least want a government culture where they have to hide their corruption. Paying lip service to an ideal is one step closer to that ideal than simply letting politicians be brazen with their misdeeds.

This is true, but I also think that the ethnic Russians who watn closer ties with Russia should be listen to. In the case to Crimea, from what I see most of them want to be part of Russia, and that should be taken seriously. Just without Russian forces bristling on the border ...

[Myth]

Oh, not sure if this was posted in this thread:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/04/russian-ambassadors-catalonia-venice-scotland-alaska-annex-crimea

[Rhyfelwyr]

We've seen trebuchets, drawbridges and testudo formations, and now apparently they have gone all out and are wearing full chain mail suits and medieval helmets (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26984799).

I think it is good to see that the revolutionary government is willing to negotiate with the ethnic Russias, hopefully the Svoboda types will not ruin this.

[Sarmatian]

We don't really know what they've been offered. I don't think government in Kiev is ready to offer anything substantial and anything even remotely acceptable to the separatists.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

“I am sure every Russian infantryman carries his own satellite display today” Oh, so the Russian Infantryman needs the last Pedestrian Path in Norway before invading… Wonder why we bother with compass and level lines (and North(s), Geographic, Magnetic and declination) you can buy in any good sport shops or clubs.…

If they all have cell phones, attack their morale. Block all porn downloads....that'll leave the wallowing in self pity.


“[“Russia would discover that the Air Force has the world's largest Space Program for a reason” I think they know it as the Program uses Soyuz as launchers…

The lassies and laddies at Vandenberg are still in business...they just don't talk about it much. So far, space has not been militarized...officially. Unofficially, they are testing improved shuttles etc., with potential military uses. For all we know, their could already be a deployed KEW system up there with recon sats doing double duty. The USAF does not talk about the program much at all.

Civilian NASA has had their budget gutted and their long term plans put on hold in favor of SpaceX and the like.

I wonder if this is mirroring our recent overseas deployments: high end military units with uber-gear and big ticket weapon systems supplemented by civilian contractors for the day-to-day stuff....

[Seamus Fermanagh]

We've seen trebuchets, drawbridges and testudo formations, and now apparently they have gone all out and are wearing full chain mail suits and medieval helmets (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26984799).

Leather and chain, at least that using modern metallurgy, would probably do a pretty good job at minimizing low velocity round damage and shrapnel effect. Wouldn't work with high-power firearms, but then again very little armor does unless it comes with a motor and a turret.

[rvg]

Russian propaganda machine suffers a mishap (http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-26986657)...

[Brenus]

Unlike the old woman the western media claimed she was the same but in fact wasn't...

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Ya real tank gunners aim center mass. Sometimes you lead it, but you generally don't aim for weak spots. Not to say you couldn't though... As for being happy to hit at all, that's not true. Modern tanks will hit almost every time under almost all circumstances. With a good crew and a well maintained tank anyway...

As for the sats I'm sure in a real war with Russia or China taking out our Sats would be priority one. Or it should be. How ready we are for that, or just what defenses we have, is a matter of speculation.

One notes that "centre-mass" usually means aiming for the turret, roughly where it meats the hull. The front of the Soviet tanks is a shell-trap, presumably created to increase the slope of the upper turret. So it's either a design flaw, doctrine that says their gunners are better or them relying on armour they think we can't penetrate with SABOT.

*Shrug*

I'll go for design flaw - given that the Germans did the same in the middle of WWII with their Tiger II.

The turret looks cool,and menacing, and I suspect that's the point.


This is true, but I also think that the ethnic Russians who watn closer ties with Russia should be listen to. In the case to Crimea, from what I see most of them want to be part of Russia, and that should be taken seriously. Just without Russian forces bristling on the border ...

One notes that the provisional government is being forced to do things it shouldn't have to - but the same people who complained about that before, are silent now.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Couldn't say really on the turret design. It is very much taken for granted that the Abrams can one hit kill anything there is, and I am inclined to agree. Survivability is a myth when you're talking about modern rounds.

Its all in the propellant. The difference between a Sabot and a Super Sabot is just more propellant. Not enough armor in the world to protect against a sabot going fast enough.

I don't know about that, we won't know until we actually get down to tank combat - one suspects that in a real war, after the initial bang, the grind will be a lot more low-tech and inclined towards using less "super" stuff and more pointy stiocks.

[Kadagar_AV]

Russia has bought in maps, in particular on sensitive strategical areas and made a few bombing drills with explicit Swedish targets. They've also increased their espionage towards Sweden. Combined with your current situation, Russia got upgraded to being an invasive threat.

All military cooperation with Russia has gotten suspended or canceled and they recommend strengthening the defense (or to be exact, getting the now all volonteer army up to supposed numbers).

I honestly think I am the lover of one of them.

She works at the Russian embassy, talks little to none about work, IQ level is skyrocketing... And she is a damn lioness in bed. Extremely fit, I might add.

Don't get me wrong, she has a great cover story of course. But I am very seriously getting suspicious.

I met her when I was out jogging with my dog, and she sought contact because of him (he looks like Ghost in Game of Thrones), not so much me...

Still though, I kind of feel all James Bond going to bed these days...

What I am trying to say is, Russia is clearly stepping up their game!! Not that it had any ill effects to my life (...I stress to add that, if she has me monitored). Between having a dog with 40x better sense of smell than I do, and a hyper intelligent GF potentially monitoring me... I am being a VERY good boy these days. I don't even know who would discover or frown first, had I smoked weed or suchlike.

EDIT: First girl to beat me in chess... EVER :shame:

[Kadagar_AV]

The Abrams hasn't had any serious Armor upgrades in long time (aside from an Urban survivability kit for defending against RPGs and such) but the best Sabot rounds have never been used and are kept in secret warehouses somewhere. The Army believes in offense first in an eventual tank war, placing all the faith in the rounds. The Abrams and most modern tanks can take hits from last generation tanks all day, but even the Abrams is another piece of scrap metal if a modern Leo or whatever gets the first shot. Like you say though, won't know for sure until something unfortunate happens.

You havent had any serious upgrades because you haven't met any serious enemies.

If the enemy has the ammo to actually pierce you, of course offense first is the way to go.

What all tank heads (no insult implied) seem to forget is that communication and target identification is what will matter in a first world vs first world war.

Why do you think rangers such as I got laser painters already back in the millennium shift?

The conflicts where you base your observations from has nothing to do with the tactical landscape WWIII would be fought on. Not of course, as Einstein agreed, that WWIV would be completely different once again, fought with sticks and stones this time.

Can't we just literary **** the Russians and move the world forward instead?

[Kadagar_AV]

The heck are you on about? Modern tanks use Lasers for everything. That's why they don't often miss unless the fire control is knocked out and you need to aim old school style.
Modern tank warfare is fast and highly coordinated, like all modern warfare.

Well, I flamed you for being obvious... and you flamed back that what I said was obvious...

I then tried to direct it into a more philosophical point, but you seem to have skimmed that part.

[Kadagar_AV]

I was making the point that the survivability of all modern tanks in a real war against eachother is very poor, despite that being a big selling point of the Challenger, Leo, and even Abrams. Then you said something about tankers and communication that was anachronistic, so I corrected you.

What part of what I said was anachronistic?

I think all tankers dismiss the selling point and come to terms with themselves being one-shot-killed when up against tanks, airforce, infantry or artillery in a fight against anything but sheepherders.

Heck, even the infantry carries robots these days (they sure are hell to drag on a sledge through snow though!!)

EDIT: I forgot to mention the navy. Yeah, the navy would also absolutely kick a tanks behind.

[Kadagar_AV]

Uh this bit



All modern tanks have the rounds to pierce each other. In fact all countries still have classified rounds. The best Sabots are still secret, while the armor in these vehicles is better and better understood. Defensive developments these days are more to do with counter-lasers, missile defense systems, and such. I'm not even sure if the Abrams armor itself is classified anymore.

Communication and Target Identification are literally the only things tankers do. Modern tanks move very fast and shoot very fast. Your statement about tankers "forgetting" these things is baseless unless you are thinking of ww1, hence anachronistic. But I wouldn't expect Infantry to know much about what goes on in the metal death boxes. Silly crunchies. :no:

As for laser rangefinders, Tanks have had those forever. When infantry were first painting distant targets with a lazer, contemporary main battle tanks already came standard with an LRF. They are vital for the firing computer. Lots of people don't realize a coaxially mounted M240 is as deadly accurate as any Sniper Rifle, thanks to the laser.

...err /derail :creep:



No argument there.

OK, I think I initially read you wrong then. We seem to be saying pretty much the same thing - even though having a mindless debate (that I confessedly started).

EDIT: You BBQ bait (as response to "silly chrunchies").

[Seamus Fermanagh]

.... Not enough armor in the world to protect against a sabot going fast enough.

Force equals mass times acceleration. You could knock out the Abrams with a ripe strawberry if you can get it going fast enough.

[Kadagar_AV]

Force equals mass times acceleration. You could knock out the Abrams with a ripe strawberry if you can get it going fast enough.

Alternatively, you could wave it around in front of the tank, and have the fat engine-propelled sorry excuses for human beings make a bidding war for it:creep:

EDIT: Yes, intra-military dislike runs deep. Don't even get us started on the navy or airforce.

[Husar]

One notes that "centre-mass" usually means aiming for the turret, roughly where it meats the hull. The front of the Soviet tanks is a shell-trap, presumably created to increase the slope of the upper turret. So it's either a design flaw, doctrine that says their gunners are better or them relying on armour they think we can't penetrate with SABOT.

*Shrug*

I'll go for design flaw - given that the Germans did the same in the middle of WWII with their Tiger II.

The turret looks cool,and menacing, and I suspect that's the point.

How is it a Shell-trap? And how does the Tiger II have a shell-trap?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/59/Bovington_Tiger_II_grey_bg.jpg

You'd probably also think that the Leopard 2A5+ introduced a shell-trap that wasn't on the 2A4 but that's misleading because there is no shell-trap there unless you mean that the shell gets trapped and can't penetrate.

2A4: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c3/Leopard_2A4_Austrian.jpg

2A5: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/24/Leopard_2_A5_der_Bundeswehr.jpg

T-90A: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/79/2013_Moscow_Victory_Day_Parade_%2828%29.jpg

T-90MS: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/52/T-90MS_main_battle_tank_at_Engineering_Technologies_2012.jpg

No shell-traps there.

The Challenger 2 may actually have a small one if you look at this picture: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fb/Challenger_2_Tank_During_Amphibious_Demonstration_MOD_45152080.jpg

Quite a bit of space there to deflect a shell from the upper glacis right into the area underneath the turret or the gun mantlet, although they may as well be strong enough to take it. If the following armor scheme is somewhat correct though, the entire area below the gun, the center of the mass is a glaring weakspot though: http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/images/e/e3/Challenger2protection.jpg


Couldn't say really on the turret design. It is very much taken for granted that the Abrams can one hit kill anything there is, and I am inclined to agree. Survivability is a myth when you're talking about modern rounds.

Its all in the propellant. The difference between a Sabot and a Super Sabot is just more propellant. Not enough armor in the world to protect against a sabot going fast enough.

Americans take a lot of things for granted until Putin just annexes Crimea...
I have no idea how exactly your modern Sabots fare against ERA but ERA isn't just the same as steel or composite armor.
And while propellant is of course important, there's also penetrator length and a few other things. Some modern German penetrators have breakaway parts to get behind the ERA for example, I suppose otherwise the explosion of the ERA blocks would divert and defeat the entire penetrator rod...

I will agree though that noone can be sure of anything and there are a lot of factors involved. Like there usually are in the real world.

[Sarmatian]

Only WW2 tanks are cool and worthy of discussion. These modern POS are children's toys. Ooh, look at this one, so many buttons. I'm just waiting to see which modern tank will advertize possibility to play MMORPG while driving.

[Kadagar_AV]

In the modern battlefield parade, the tanks are the ones swirling the flaming batons...

[Brenus]

“One notes that the provisional government is being forced to do things it shouldn't have to”: Forced? By whom? If forced, so these decisions are illegal and illegitimate, unlawful.
So you do acknowledge the actual Ukrainian government being all as describe above.:yes:

“the same people who complained about that before, are silent now.” That is because you don’t shoot at ambulances. When proved right, you don’t need to add humiliation to injuries to your opponent(s).:yes:

[Ironside]

Only WW2 tanks are cool and worthy of discussion. These modern POS are children's toys. Ooh, look at this one, so many buttons. I'm just waiting to see which modern tank will advertize possibility to play MMORPG while driving.

They're already playing World of Tanks, with real life graphics and lvl XXXV tanks.

[Sarmatian]

WW2 Tanks were slow and clumsy. One Platoon of Abrams, or Challengers, or Leos could hold off the entire German Army of ww2 until they ran out of ammo, or the space time continuum got wise to the escapade.

I'm aware of that. I'm speaking strictly about coolness factor, which is off the charts.

[Husar]

I don't think a single platoon of modern tanks would last long against an entire WW2 army.

[lars573]

An armoured division would be more realistic.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Only WW2 tanks are cool and worthy of discussion. These modern POS are children's toys. Ooh, look at this one, so many buttons. I'm just waiting to see which modern tank will advertize possibility to play MMORPG while driving.

I'm not certain the tanks have this ability, but the Army's AFV simulators can do precisely that -- in fact I believe it is a portion of their regular training regimen.


As to a platoon of Challengers stopping WW2 armor, I think Gelcube is failing to spell out that the stopping power of the modern platoon would be more moral than physical as Napoleon suggested. Getting brewed up in your concealed position by a shot that had to go through the hut you were behind to do it would likely have a bit of a moral effect. This would be compounded when some of the ranges involved became obvious.

Physically stop them all? No. Make the "Tiger in the bocage" frights of Normandy look like a picnic? Heck yeah.

[Husar]

As to a platoon of Challengers stopping WW2 armor, I think Gelcube is failing to spell out that the stopping power of the modern platoon would be more moral than physical as Napoleon suggested. Getting brewed up in your concealed position by a shot that had to go through the hut you were behind to do it would likely have a bit of a moral effect. This would be compounded when some of the ranges involved became obvious.

Physically stop them all? No. Make the "Tiger in the bocage" frights of Normandy look like a picnic? Heck yeah.

Maybe they would cry a little louder for the inevitable artillery barrage then, but an entire-army-size artillery barrage would probably make short work of those modern tanks. In case of the Wehrmacht they'd also have to deal with the Sturmtiger and its 380mm rocket launcher once the Wehrmacht would know their position. And that's only counting ground troops, if the entire army also has air support and your modern tanks have only their AA machine guns to defend themselves, they will be done for even faster. Maybe the kinetic energy weapons of the time cannot penetrate the front of a modern tank, but the optics, tracks etc. are all vulnerable, the sides and rear might be as well, especially once the tracks are gone. And explosives from artillery, bombs and rockets were and still are dangerous if they hit the top armor or are big enough to turn the 70 ton monster upside down. Given the artillery and bombs of an entire army or even some battallions, the tanks might get showered in explosions and mud. In a real engagement, there are usually plenty of other targets the enemies can distribute their fire on, but in this scenario I'd see our little platoon in big trouble.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Maybe they would cry a little louder for the inevitable artillery barrage then, but an entire-army-size artillery barrage would probably make short work of those modern tanks. In case of the Wehrmacht they'd also have to deal with the Sturmtiger and its 380mm rocket launcher once the Wehrmacht would know their position. And that's only counting ground troops, if the entire army also has air support and your modern tanks have only their AA machine guns to defend themselves, they will be done for even faster. Maybe the kinetic energy weapons of the time cannot penetrate the front of a modern tank, but the optics, tracks etc. are all vulnerable, the sides and rear might be as well, especially once the tracks are gone. And explosives from artillery, bombs and rockets were and still are dangerous if they hit the top armor or are big enough to turn the 70 ton monster upside down. Given the artillery and bombs of an entire army or even some battallions, the tanks might get showered in explosions and mud. In a real engagement, there are usually plenty of other targets the enemies can distribute their fire on, but in this scenario I'd see our little platoon in big trouble.

Oh, agreed. The Tigers got flanked or airpowered or arty'd too -- the same principle would apply. I was just saying the pucker factor would be huge at first.

[Gilrandir]

We don't really know what they've been offered. I don't think government in Kiev is ready to offer anything substantial and anything even remotely acceptable to the separatists.
I don't think separatists themselves want to negotiate. They are just obeying commands from the East (or from local business elites, or both). Whenever their masters tell them to stop, they will do. Trying to capture administrative buildings of Donetsk region (especially local police stations to get hold of the weapons) by gunmen is what we have seen in Crimea. Curiously, if the the policemen offer any resistance the gunmen withdraw. It happened when some of them stormed a chemical plant in Donetsk (explosive is produced there) or the police station in Kramatorsk. In Krasny liman locals stood between the separatists and the police station so the attackers withdrew.

[Brenus]

"They are just obeying commands from the East" I am sure they do. Only the true Ukrainians can think and dream of freedom.

[Husar]

Yeah, looks like the interim government is far more willing to use violence against protesters than Yanukovich ever was.

[Brenus]

“If the Self Defense Forces here are just Russians who crossed the border”: If.

From when an Ambassador (even US) is a specialist: “It's professional, co-ordinated. Nothing grass-roots about it," ambassador Samantha Power told ABC News.” Whao. That is a proof or not. It is organised so it can't be grass-root. Hey, this Saturday a massive demonstration in Paris, 100.000 people in Paris, organised by Unions and Political Parties. Well, tell the Ambassador it was grass-root and professionally organised. Massive demonstrations in Athens against Merkel, well organise as well by the Unions and the leftist parties. Madame Ambassador, the plebe sometimes knows how to organise things.

Where are the detainees and the evidences? About media and evidences, by the way, where is the sniper, the one from the Police who shoot at the demonstrators who are now in power? As he was a policeman, he did it following orders, signed when he got his SVT and bullets; it is how all forces work. So, where is he?

[Sarmatian]

Did you read the Article? If the Self Defense Forces here are just Russians who crossed the border, they're not protesters at all. At the very least they've been armed by Russia, which is quite a bit more than the west did to Yanukovich.

The protesters in the east use the same modus operandi as Maidan protesters did a few months ago - armed militant organized groups among protesters, makeshift barricades made of wood, scrap metal and tyres, organized food supplies and they target government buildings for takeover.

Don't forget that there are 8 million Russians living in Ukraine, and quite a few pro-Russian Ukrainians. Conscription ended only in 2013, so practically all those involved had at least a year of military training. Local depots would be enough to arm them.

The fact that most of takeovers are bloodless and with relatively little violence suggest that there is sympathy for the cause amoung the population. Not the level there was in Crimea, sure, but enough to trigger a civil war, God forbid.

Kiev's been repeating the same mistakes over and over again and it doesn't look like it will stop.

[Myth]

Started thread about Ukraine. Keep reading it because I like learning about tanks. I have no regrets.

[Slyspy]

Which mistakes in particular?

[Husar]

which is quite a bit more than the west did to Yanukovich.

The Maidan protesters were on the Maidan for months, day after day, they didn't go to work and were supplied with food every day. To say they had little or no support is quite a stretch, unless they were all oligarchs who could easily finance that out of their pockets. I've heard about people who went to visit Ukraine from Germany and had their bags stuffed full of money...

[Sarmatian]

Which mistakes in particular?

First and foremost, refusing to recognize reality. They've taken power based on support from one part of the population and now they're trying to force it on the rest of the population and they simply can't pull it off.

Instead of recognizing that they failed, and attempt to save what can be saved, they're digging an even bigger hole for themselves. Presuming they find someone in the army willing to go to eastern regions and kill Ukrainians and Russians there (and they most probably won't), that would like handing Russia an invitation to move their army to eastern Ukraine.

For all the tough talk from Kiev, reality is that they have lost the control of a big part of the country, that they don't have control of the army and that they don't have the means to change that.

Now it's time for the bitter pill, but any politician doing so would commit political suicide, so no one dares.
The best solution now is to legalize Russian annexation of Crimea in exchange for clearing the debt and additional long term gas discounts and other benefits. Create a new constitution, give more power to regional governments, proclaim political and military neutrality. The longer they wait, the worse it will get.

[Sir Moody]

Now it's time for the bitter pill, but any politician doing so would commit political suicide, so no one dares.
The best solution now is to legalize Russian annexation of Crimea in exchange for clearing the debt and additional long term gas discounts and other benefits. Create a new constitution, give more power to regional governments, proclaim political and military neutrality. The longer they wait, the worse it will get.

the problem is they don't have a mandate to do any of this until the elections - the East has really jumped the gun on this - had they waited until after the election they could have negotiated any or all of this, the current Government shouldn't be doing anything except laying the foundations for immediate elections

Of course that is why they have jumped the gun - to sabotage the elections... if troops are sent in the current government can wave their political careers good bye, and if they don't they will lose a good chunk of the country (in addition to the chunk already taken) and wave their political careers goodbye - Kiev is stuck between a rock and a hard place...

[GenosseGeneral]

The protesters in the east use the same modus operandi as Maidan protesters did a few months ago - armed militant organized groups among protesters, makeshift barricades made of wood, scrap metal and tyres, organized food supplies and they target government buildings for takeover.

Don't forget that there are 8 million Russians living in Ukraine, and quite a few pro-Russian Ukrainians. Conscription ended only in 2013, so practically all those involved had at least a year of military training. Local depots would be enough to arm them.

The fact that most of takeovers are bloodless and with relatively little violence suggest that there is sympathy for the cause amoung the population. Not the level there was in Crimea, sure, but enough to trigger a civil war, God forbid.

Kiev's been repeating the same mistakes over and over again and it doesn't look like it will stop.

It is definitely a different modus operandi. Just look at this, for instance:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdd5LX2T69U
(Note: Was initially published on a different account and with a different title, is now private; taken in Kramatorsk).

What we can see is a group of 10-20 people who have a clear objective. Compare to the numerous other assaults of government buildings in Ukraine throughout the last months.

Or look at this, the second group of pictures:
http://korrespondent.net/ukraine/politics/3349215-pod-kontrolem-separatystov-fotoreportazhy-yz-slavianska-horlovky-maryupolia-makeevky-y-kramatorska
Compare the guys in the first pictures with those in the later pictures of that series.
The first group wears Russia-made uniforms as well as shiny, new AK74M and as you can see in the vid, they have not only military experience but also seem to have received some training as a group.
Now compare to the other guys: They wear various kinds of camouflage and equipment, their arms are AK74SUs and PM Makarovs. Those are the guns which would be available from local depots, as those are the guns issued to Ukrainian law enforcement. The way they are dressed indeed resembles the Maidan self-defence/right sector, typical stuff from surplus/hunting stores. So we can conclude, that this group is composed of locals, likely veterans of Ukraine's various military and paramilitary units, maybe even of the Soviet war in Afghanistan.

Now lets compare that to the first group, assaulting the police station in the video. Those guys wear all the same uniforms, all rather new. Their guns are shiny new AK74M. From what I know, there are indeed some AK74M in service with the Ukrainian army, but only in small numbers since most soldiers still use older AK74s. I think we can easily assume, that the Ukrainian army would issue its soldiers more modern firearms, if they had those in abundance in their depots. Yet the AK74M is the standard rifle of the Russian army as you can see in pictures from Crimea.
Also I do not think a true self-defence unit would care so much for its homogenity, that they all buy shiny new camo suits for 40-50 euros per piece if they can get others for 5-10 euros on their local markets.
This seems to be the type of suit worn: http://frontowiec.com/index.php?p2648,kostium-maskujacy-030-01-bojec-sumrak-56-5
There is some variance in load bearing equipment worn, but also not too much.
After all, I think it save to assume that those assault squads got their guns and equipment from a Russian government source. Also the almost simultanous attacks on 4 targets in the same manner makes clear, that this is not a local armed protest, but a campaign organised by professionals - the GRU. There is also other evidence for this.

I agree with you on the possibility of a civil war, as sad as it is. I also agree on the Kyiv government having lost control over the East.

[Husar]

Also I do not think a true self-defence unit would care so much for its homogenity, that they all buy shiny new camo suits for 40-50 euros per piece if they can get others for 5-10 euros on their local markets.

If Ukrainians can't afford that, how could Maidan protesters afford not to go to work for 3-4 months and protest in Kiev every day instead?

[GenosseGeneral]

I was not saying they can't afford it, but that they would not bother, as other stuff is not only cheaper but also more widely available. Regarding the Maidan: A major group of supporters were owner of small bussinesses as they are the ones suffering most from corruption. A lot of them provided goods for free. Also you must notice, that the group of people permanently residing on the Maidan was comparably small (5000-10.000, not more, maybe less). And most people from other cities went there for maybe a week, then returned home, so it were not always the same 5.000 people. Feeding someone with Borshtsh costs maybe 1-2 euros a day.
Yes, there were likely also Western-funded entities involved, since some organisations of Ukrainian civil society receive funds from the EU.

If you want to, I can provide you some in-depth sociological analysis of the Maidan and its supporter groups inside the Ukrainian society. (Unfortunately this information is in German so there is no point in linking it here).

[Sarmatian]

Compare the guys in the first pictures with those in the later pictures of that series.
The first group wears Russia-made uniforms as well as shiny, new AK74M and as you can see in the vid, they have not only military experience but also seem to have received some training as a group.
Now compare to the other guys: They wear various kinds of camouflage and equipment, their arms are AK74SUs and PM Makarovs. Those are the guns which would be available from local depots, as those are the guns issued to Ukrainian law enforcement. The way they are dressed indeed resembles the Maidan self-defence/right sector, typical stuff from surplus/hunting stores. So we can conclude, that this group is composed of locals, likely veterans of Ukraine's various military and paramilitary units, maybe even of the Soviet war in Afghanistan.


I bow to your superior knowledge of firearms. I barely know a pistol from a rifle so AK74 and AK74M look the same to me.

So, what you're saying is that Russian professionals are mixed with local militia groups?


If Ukrainians can't afford that, how could Maidan protesters afford not to go to work for 3-4 months and protest in Kiev every day instead?

Of course they were funded by the west, but there were no foreign troops among them, to the best of our knowledge.

[HopAlongBunny]

Not revolution yet, but both sides are laying bets on the answer to that classic question of legitimacy:

When they knock on your front door
How ya gonna come?
With yer hands on your head
Or on the trigger of your gun?

(the Clash: Guns of Brixton)

[Fisherking]

I bow to your superior knowledge of firearms. I barely know a pistol from a rifle so AK74 and AK74M look the same to me.

So, what you're saying is that Russian professionals are mixed with local militia groups?



Of course they were funded by the west, but there were no foreign troops among them, to the best of our knowledge.

The main difference visually is that the AK-74M has black polymer parts rather than wooden on the stock, grip, and fore arm. The weapons seen in the video are also equipped with what looks like the Picatinny rail system, which is a newer improvement for easier mounting of accessories and attachments.

today
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27017707

[Myth]

Well the Russian consuls did say they ain't stopping with Crimea. And with the rest of the world being so tip-toey, I can't say I blame them. Crimea was the demo version. It worked well enough. Now East Ukraine is the real deal, and that's where the money's at anyway.

[GenosseGeneral]

What I am saying is that local radicals with military exlerience have been recruited by Russian intelligence (most likely the GRU) into these strike groups. They were trained, equipped and armed to carry out attacks.
Last weekend their commanders decided that time is riped and launched the campaign we are currently observing.
After taking these police stations, they quickly distribituded the looted guns to pro-Russian protestors, who then also build the Maidan-like barricades.

So unlike in Crimea, they are not necessarily Russian troops on Ukrainian soil, but at least those strike commandos were raised by Russia and receive their orders from there.

[Sarmatian]

Well the Russian consuls did say they ain't stopping with Crimea. And with the rest of the world being so tip-toey, I can't say I blame them. Crimea was the demo version. It worked well enough. Now East Ukraine is the real deal, and that's where the money's at anyway.

I wouldn't trust Russian consuls from Malawi and Zimbabwe to have insight into Kremlin politics.

Crimea was different. They already had 10000-20000 troops on the ground and more than just implicit support from the local population.

Eastern Ukraine is different. While they may be pro-Russian enough to demand greater autonomy from Kiev and closer ties with Russia, I doubt Russia could pull of what it did in Crimea, that is, taking control of the territory without firing a shot.

[Brenus]

“the problem is they don't have a mandate to do any of this until the elections”: Well they did sign agreement with EU. So, they can do better than threatening to go to war against their own citizens. Calling them “terrorists” doesn’t help and resolves nothing.

It is a mess.
The Western Policy of containment as in the good time of the Cold War without any restrain is now showing the bill, and unfortunately Ukraine will pay the bill. Of course the Russian are sending specialists, I have no doubts, like the US were sending specialists to the Kosovars and the Croats (or how can you explain that in 2/3 years, under arms embargo, the Croats succeeded to have an army able to launch 2 major offensive combining all forces, equipped with material they were familiar with)?

Who want a war in Ukraine (I think 6 nuclear plants and one of them is Chernobyl)? Are you ready for the nuclear dust going freely in the atmosphere?

Time to think politic, and stop playing with Ukraine populations, start talking.

[Sarmatian]

merely offering moral support to certain elements of a popular movement that was already underway. Not the same thing at all.


The west has been funding and organizing opposition for a long time and basically hijacked a popular protest that was about corruption and poverty and turned it to a anti-Russian/pro-western thingy.

It's about influence in Ukraine, let's not pretend it was ever about Ukrainians.

While I agree that Russia is more hands-on with their approach, the basic idea is the same.

[Sarmatian]

It is not the same. It just isn't. In principle maybe, but absolutely not in proportion. :no:

You mean, the original protests were about control of the entire country, and the current are only about the eastern part?

C'mon, you're intelligent enough to discern the truth from bull - just go and read news articles from January, February and March...

[Brenus]

“What Russia is doing is actually fomenting revolution with men, arms, and command and control.” What Russia is doing is exploiting the Western weakness, as the west did exploit the Eltsine’s times to grab what it could. I went in Russia at these times, when the name of the prostitutes in Istanbul was Natasha and when Russia had to swallow adder after adder (not sure, translated from French).

The political mistake of Ukrainian Nazis opened the gates for pay-back, and until now, as for the West few years ago, no blood (from the aggressors, US/EU or Russian) is spilled. Do you notice that Russia use the same vocabulary than John Kerry or, before him, Madeleine Albright? Same pretexts for interventions, same manners and like years ago, same victims, the populations.

The fact is I don’t like what Putin is doing. I didn’t like it when we were doing it. I didn’t like NATO bombers dropping bombs on various countries, and NATO supporting some Ethnic Cleansing when pretending to stop others. And I don’t like shocks of Civilisations and others Bushism that become Putinism.

But it is highly hypocritical to blame Putin and to paint him as a dictator as he is doing exactly what we did, against international laws, against UN resolutions.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Eh, not Russia, Putin.

There is no Russia right now, just Putin's Empire.

Brenus is correct that the West is weak and unprepared, but that is because we have spent twenty years operating a policy of assimilation rather than containment - after the collapse of the Soviet Union the EU and NATO expanded eastwards not to CONTAIN Russia but TOWARD Russia - I remember the 90's, and the prevailing feeling then was that eventually we would make the Russians "like us" just as we have with the Czechs, Slovaks, and Poles, and as we are with Romania and Bulgaria. More to the point - these countries have actively sought inclusion in the Western Sphere, the aspire to closer integration, no provocateurs or manipulation was required.

Ukraine has been a somewhat different story, but there is a sharp difference between the EU offering moral and financial support to "pro-Western" (read: anti-corruption/reform) movements in Ukraine and actively arming Right Sector, isn't there?

Russia is not fomenting civil disobedience, or mass-protests. It is funding and equipping para-military units who are capturing arsenals and police stations.

[rvg]

This thread is starting to remind me of Baghdad Bob. Back in the 2003 campaign even after the American troops entered Baghdad, he kept on raving about "heroes of Umm Qasr" still holding the border. It seems that no matter what Putin does, to the local Bobs he's just a swell guy, no worse than the West and in some ways even better. Heck, let him take all of Ukraine, Umm Qasr will still stand.

[Montmorency]

I hear East Ukraine's about to be annexed...

[Sarmatian]

Ukraine has been a somewhat different story, but there is a sharp difference between the EU offering moral and financial support to "pro-Western" (read: anti-corruption/reform) movements in Ukraine and actively arming Right Sector, isn't there?

Russia is not fomenting civil disobedience, or mass-protests. It is funding and equipping para-military units who are capturing arsenals and police stations.

I'm gonna go full Tribesman on this :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

When protesters in Kiev were attacking police stations and taking over government building they were peaceful protesters, who are to be given financial, organizational and moral support, plus political pressure would be applied to the government.
When the western part of the country declared "self-rule", they were still peaceful protesters. When they stormed and took control of police stations and other government building in Lviv they were still peaceful protesters. When they set Ministry of the Interior buidling on fire they were still peaceful protesters. When they've gone full medieval in Lutsk and tied regional governor in the central city square they were still peaceful protesters.

Everyone was going on about snipers until it became clear it wasn't Yanukovich who ordered it. After that, it was swept under the rug and no one talks about it anymore.

When Kerry and Fuelle (and scores of other western politicians) were talking about constitutional changes that Ukraine needs while Yanukovich was still in power, that was perfectly acceptable and normal. When Lavrov says the same things, it's meddling in internal affairs of Ukraine. It was also perfectly acceptable to send foreign ministers to put pressure on Ukraine to accept protesters' demands. Sanctions are also perfectly acceptable. None of it is meddling in internal affairs of a country.

Before anyone mentioned the army, western politicians preemptively warned against it, threatening sanctions and consequences for Ukraine and Yanukovich if that happens. When Maidan government actually threatens to use the army or sends police units to combat protesters in the east, everyone's silent.

While they were still opposition, they had the mandate to talk about constitutional changes. After they've seized power, they had the mandate to immediately pledge themselves to EU and NATO. They've had the mandate ban Russian language and to start procedures to ban Communist Party and the Party of Regions. They had the mandate to try to violently expel governors and regional administrations they didn't like. But, now they don't have the mandate to talk about constitutional changes. Anyone mentioning it is meddling in internal affairs.

It's ironic how they're getting a taste of their own medicine and how they're proving to be worse thugs than Yanukovich. They've gambled and they lost, but no one has to cojones to admit that, so they're plunging the country deeper into the chaos of civil war and inevitable bankruptcy.

[Brenus]

“but there is a sharp difference between the EU offering moral and financial support to "pro-Western" (read: anti-corruption/reform) movements in Ukraine and actively arming Right Sector, isn't there?” Can you explain the “sharp” difference in carving others borders, toppling leaders and invading others in both cases? As much as I know, the actual leaderships in Bosnia and Kosovo are more related to mafia than democratic governance. And the “anti-corruption/reform” movement in Ukraine just put the corrupted from the previous administration in power.

The West just took from the Ukrainian movement its meaning, its reason. During the movement itself, there was no move from the Russian Parts as they were probably (that before to be brain-washed by RT. Of course) agree with the demonstrators. Then the Nazi came out of the woods, and stupid decision were made. It was not a pro-western or anti-Russian demonstration, it was a social movement against poverty and thanks to the Nazi it is now an “ethnic” struggle with very big chance to become a civil war.
So the Russian population in Ukraine saw a still corrupted government but with an addition of leaders who openly want to kill them and glorify the ones who did it in the past. What are they supposed to do? To wait until it happens?
No need of “agents”, no need of RT brain-washing, just memory will do the job.

“Russia is not fomenting civil disobedience or mass-protests”: No, because the Ukrainian and the EU/US are not treating the problem as internal. Read what the anti-Putin wrote and write in this forum: It is Russia. They don’t consider the Russian Ukrainians as Ukrainian Citizens. They are Russians. And they complain that the Russians considered themselves as Russians. Well, they are at least in agreement with themselves. They considered Russia as an enemy and are surprised when finally Russia is reacting as an enemy.
I still don’t understand why you are denying the fact that the Russian populations in Ukraine have a real subject of concern. Why are you seeing them as tools or brainless zombies? Why can’t you give them a little bit of consideration, and treat then as human beings with fear and feelings? You can put as much as you want of agents provocateurs in France or other more democratic countries, you won’t have an ethnic division.
A nation shouldn’t be ethnic or a pseudo identity, but build on a civic contract. And you are denying to the Russian component the right to have it.

[Fragony]

This looks bad, stay safe Gilrandir

[Pannonian]

This thread is starting to remind me of Baghdad Bob. Back in the 2003 campaign even after the American troops entered Baghdad, he kept on raving about "heroes of Umm Qasr" still holding the border. It seems that no matter what Putin does, to the local Bobs he's just a swell guy, no worse than the West and in some ways even better. Heck, let him take all of Ukraine, Umm Qasr will still stand.

I didn't care that much about Iraq, and I don't care that much about Ukraine either. Except that in both cases, I want(ed) us to stay the hell out of it. It's hard to argue that I was wrong over Iraq.

[Sarmatian]

You've drunk the Kool Aid man, if you think the West was behind the Snipers or that we had paramilitary units inserted amongst the agitators.


I'm not saying west was behind sniper attacks, I believe far-right extremists are most likely culprits.

From all the reports, you can't tell me the official version sounds right.

I do agree west didn't send paramilitary units in Ukraine. They just funded local ones, and provided them with political and organizational support, which is what Russia is doing, the only difference being Russia is supplying some of them weapons directly, instead of funds to acquire them.

[Fisherking]

Right, but Russia has a higher profile in its efforts. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27030365

Regardless of who started what Russia is making good use of the disturbances for their own ends.

[Fragony]

Right, but Russia has a higher profile in its efforts. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27030365

Regardless of who started what Russia is making good use of the disturbances for their own ends.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQnXo2HMriQ Nice excuse no. Russia couldn't possibly not react.

Does that Flemish idiot even know who his audience is.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I still don’t understand why you are denying the fact that the Russian populations in Ukraine have a real subject of concern. Why are you seeing them as tools or brainless zombies? Why can’t you give them a little bit of consideration, and treat then as human beings with fear and feelings? You can put as much as you want of agents provocateurs in France or other more democratic countries, you won’t have an ethnic division.

Who said I don't care about the Russian speakers?

Yes, there is a legitimate concern - it's broadly the same legitimate concern as the Ukrainian speakers feel. The Russians have exploited the anger at corruption in Ukraine, made the ethnic Russians feel it is a Kievan problem, which can be fixed by becoming Russian.

It can't.


A nation shouldn’t be ethnic or a pseudo identity, but build on a civic contract. And you are denying to the Russian component the right to have it.

So, you want the Ethnic Russians to be able to build an exclusive Civil Contract? Separate from the Ethnic Ukrainians?

That sounds like an ethnically based society to me, and France only has a "Civil Contract" because after the Revolution you forcibly suppressed ethnic difference in favour of a society modelled on the culture of the Ille de France.

Comparing Russia and the US is apples and oranges.

What the EU and the US were funding in Ukraine were Civil Rights groups, which is what they (at least the EU) do quite openly everywhere. Some of that money probably did trickle down to the militias, but that's was very clearly NOT the intention.

Russia, by contrast, is now openly importing "Cossacks".

[Husar]

Comparing Russia and the US is apples and oranges.

I think it's more like two sides of the same coin.

[Montmorency]

In other news, a majority of the whole country wants Ukraine to take a middle course between Europe and Russia, and one third of Eastern Ukrainians want to secede.

[Montmorency]

I think it's more like two sides of the same coin.

So you're saying OWG already exists, controlling both Russia and the US, and all this controversy and conflict is a show to distract the sheeple?

[Fragony]

In other news, a majority of the whole country wants Ukraine to take a middle course between Europe and Russia, and one third of Eastern Ukrainians want to secede.

The third biggest shale-gas supply has been recently discovered in the western part, don't think uncle Putin is short on ambition when it comes to that. Let him have it I say. There are some really dubious characters in western-ukraine you shouldn't even consider calling an ambulance for.

[Husar]

So you're saying OWG already exists, controlling both Russia and the US, and all this controversy and conflict is a show to distract the sheeple?

No, not really, I thought of it in a more abstract way but I'm not good at thinking or communicating.

[Brenus]

“That sounds like an ethnically based society to me, and France only has a "Civil Contract" because after the Revolution you forcibly suppressed ethnic difference in favour of a society modelled on the culture of the Ille de France.”
Well I understand now. If you have the same level of understanding of the French Revolution that you have of the Ukrainian situation I understand you are missing something…

[Fragony]

No, not really, I thought of it in a more abstract way but I'm not good at thinking or communicating.

Well yeah, you never saw the greater pictcure of what was pretty obvious. But quality media provided me just fine, thx. At least admit it when you have been terribly terribly wrong. Insert here [here].

[Sarmatian]

Kiev started a military operation against protesters in the east. Several killed and injured.

Tanks have been noticed around Slavyansk and army took control of an airfield between Kramatorsk and Slavyansk.

[Husar]

Well yeah, you never saw the greater pictcure of what was pretty obvious. But quality media provided me just fine, thx. At least admit it when you have been terribly terribly wrong. Insert here [here].

Ok, I admit that I was wrong about the OWG and it does indeed exist and is in full control of both the USA and Russia.

[Sarmatian]

I just love that according to the White House, batons used against protesters were enough to impose sanctions on Ukraine, while now, tanks, armoured vehicles and gunships are "measured" response...

Who's crazy in this situation, I don't know anymore...

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Early on in this thread, prior to the Crimean vote, I opined that the Russians might be moving to annex Crimea and everything East of the Dnieper. Bedamned if it isn't trending that way.

[Sarmatian]

Did you even watch the video? How you continue to equate the situations is mind boggling.

But ya.. this white house dismantled occupy wall st. like it was a vital national interest, what do you expect?

Russian agitation or western agitation, these are still Ukrainian citizens.

I'm just amazed how both sides change their tunes depending on whether they favour the protesters or those in power, and not over a long period of time but over several weeks...

It just illustrates my point how it was never really about Ukrainians. They're caught in a tug of war and no one gives a :daisy: about them.

[Fisherking]

Governments are always willing to hold the other guy to a higher standard of civil treatment of citizens and upholding the rights of citizens than they do themselves.

I don’t think there is a shortage of examples of this in either the US or Russia, or just about anywhere else.

Besides, the US may be wanting to use armored vehicles and attack helicopters in Nevada in a week or so.

[Sarmatian]

No, you're just refusing to assimilate new information. The West never sent special forces in to storm police stations, the west never paid agitators $50 a day, the west doesn't have an invasion force on the border, and the west didn't annex crimea.

You really are clueless, aren't you?

Let me tell you a little story. Back in 2000, I was a part of student association called Student Union of Serbia, or SUS for short. SUS was created as a student organization to counter Student's Alliance which was seen as a remnant of communist times, generally corrupt and disinterested in politics. They preferred status quo. SUS, together with Otpor, which was the militant arm, was instrumental in organizing mass protests against Milosevic. Both were financed and organized from Washington. I was high enough to know where's the money coming from, but I wasn't high enough to know how much, sadly.
We were never directly financed by the US government. Instead, we were financed through several other organizations, including various NGO's and other student's organizations, but it was clear SUS was getting much more money than a student organization was supposed to. Additionally, Otpor was receiving even more money and also organizational support. For example, this was the pamphlet that was giving the guidelines on how to dress properly.
This one for protests against Milosevic in 2000.
12777

And these are the pamphlets used in Egypt in 2011 and in Kiev in 2014
12778

Notice the similarities. You will also notice that's exactly how those on the forefront of protests during Maidan were dressed, if you watch the video.

It was a well rehearsed and properly funded and organized action. The basic idea is to have a relatively small group, that is highly motivated, properly trained and instructed, and given generous funding, which will then "channel" the public dissent and steer it in the way it's supposed to go, working together with opposition politicians.

The scenario was actually perfected during 2000 protests against Milosevic and is now used as a blueprint. The only difference is that there were less violence in Serbia, probably because far-right organizations weren't involved. Football hooligans were used instead to form shock troops, but only at the very end.

Now, Kiev is again recruiting those far-right extremists and putting them in uniform to combat anti-government protesters in the east. It will get ugly.

So, save your preaching for someone who's more gullible.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

“That sounds like an ethnically based society to me, and France only has a "Civil Contract" because after the Revolution you forcibly suppressed ethnic difference in favour of a society modelled on the culture of the Ille de France.”
Well I understand now. If you have the same level of understanding of the French Revolution that you have of the Ukrainian situation I understand you are missing something…

:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

After the Revolution, the new government standardised everything, including language - in much the same way that Ukraine only allows the use of Ukrainian to conduct official business, France only allowed French. This put you at a disadvantage if you spoke Provence or Gascon, or Breton.


You really are clueless, aren't you?

Let me tell you a little story. Back in 2000, I was a part of student association called Student Union of Serbia, or SUS for short. SUS was created as a student organization to counter Student's Alliance which was seen as a remnant of communist times, generally corrupt and disinterested in politics. They preferred status quo. SUS, together with Otpor, which was the militant arm, was instrumental in organizing mass protests against Milosevic. Both were financed and organized from Washington. I was high enough to know where's the money coming from, but I wasn't high enough to know how much, sadly.
We were never directly financed by the US government. Instead, we were financed through several other organizations, including various NGO's and other student's organizations, but it was clear SUS was getting much more money than a student organization was supposed to. Additionally, Otpor was receiving even more money and also organizational support. For example, this was the pamphlet that was giving the guidelines on how to dress properly.
This one for protests against Milosevic in 2000.
12777

And these are the pamphlets used in Egypt in 2011 and in Kiev in 2014
12778

Notice the similarities. You will also notice that's exactly how those on the forefront of protests during Maidan were dressed, if you watch the video.

It was a well rehearsed and properly funded and organized action. The basic idea is to have a relatively small group, that is highly motivated, properly trained and instructed, and given generous funding, which will then "channel" the public dissent and steer it in the way it's supposed to go, working together with opposition politicians.

The scenario was actually perfected during 2000 protests against Milosevic and is now used as a blueprint. The only difference is that there were less violence in Serbia, probably because far-right organizations weren't involved. Football hooligans were used instead to form shock troops, but only at the very end.

Now, Kiev is again recruiting those far-right extremists and putting them in uniform to combat anti-government protesters in the east. It will get ugly.

So, save your preaching for someone who's more gullible.

You've got some mileage there - but until Poland sweeps into Ukraine and annexes the Oblasts that were once Polish, I'm still not buying into the comparison. We're talking about channelling, or even stirring up, unrest to affect a change WITHIN a country, and it's a momentary thing - the change comes and protests subside. Sometimes, the change doesn't stick because either the locals don't want it, or the politicians in question lack the acumen to see it through.

Putin is trying to exert direct[ control. That's fundamentally different.

[Brenus]

“After the Revolution, the new government standardised everything, including language - in much the same way that Ukraine only allows the use of Ukrainian to conduct official business, France only allowed French. This put you at a disadvantage if you spoke Provence or Gascon, or Breton.”

Well done, you just prove my point.
So, can you explain why the languages you mention still exist? And by the way, the French as language of the Republic was voted by the parliament, in all the 5 constitutions, not imposed.
For your improvement, I suggest checking when and who created the Academie Française. All right I give it: 1635 by a King Louis XIII and the Cardinal de Richelieu (yes, the bad guy of the 3 musketeers, probably your source of French History, one of) in order to unite the Kingdom after the Religious Wars.
Now, because it is late, I suggest you read about the Fete de la Federation 1790)… and comparing events from 1789 and 2014 is the high in disinformation.
You can as well refer to the Traité de Verdun between Louis le Germanique and Charles le Chauve (843)…

Really hoping your knowledge and analyse of the Ukrainian situation is based on strongest bases.:rolleyes:

[Montmorency]

And so it begins. Now Putin will have no choice but to intervene militarily - just as he planned...

[gaelic cowboy]

And so it begins. Now Putin will have no choice but to intervene militarily - just as he planned...


To say he has "no choice" seems overblown to me.

He is merely choosing the stabby option because he is a raving fascist autocrat.

[Beskar]

He was fabricating his callus belli.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

“After the Revolution, the new government standardised everything, including language - in much the same way that Ukraine only allows the use of Ukrainian to conduct official business, France only allowed French. This put you at a disadvantage if you spoke Provence or Gascon, or Breton.”

Well done, you just prove my point.
So, can you explain why the languages you mention still exist? And by the way, the French as language of the Republic was voted by the parliament, in all the 5 constitutions, not imposed.
For your improvement, I suggest checking when and who created the Academie Française. All right I give it: 1635 by a King Louis XIII and the Cardinal de Richelieu (yes, the bad guy of the 3 musketeers, probably your source of French History, one of) in order to unite the Kingdom after the Religious Wars.
Now, because it is late, I suggest you read about the Fete de la Federation 1790)… and comparing events from 1789 and 2014 is the high in disinformation.
You can as well refer to the Traité de Verdun between Louis le Germanique and Charles le Chauve (843)…

Really hoping your knowledge and analyse of the Ukrainian situation is based on strongest bases.:rolleyes:

"Suppression of Breton Language" into Google, produced this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vergonha

Congrats, we don't have a word for what we did to the Welsh.

My point, people in France speak French because there was a sustained campaign, most especially under the Republic, to eliminate alternative languages and thence alternative cultures. If you cannot read Breton, you cannot read Breton romances or poems, you do not have access to the culture. Likewise Occitan dialects.

Now, this was a national project to create a national "French" character in order that all the people would be part of the same "Civil Contract."

This was not a natural process, as you implied, it was enforced top-down just as it was in Britain or Germany.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

He was fabricating his callus belli.

See - I just declared Holy War on the local Pagan Tartars.

[Husar]

Still not the same thing. Sarmation and Husar both use this logic that proportion can be ignored if events are similar in principle.

What kind of proportion? How many government changes have the USA supported by now, how many people have been enslaved by US-supported dictators? How many people have been killed directly and indirectly through US meddling in other countries' affairs and how does that compare to Putin annexing a small peninsula without any real blood shed?

Even if we agree that it wasn't nice, it was still somehow genius in terms of execution. Just like all these "popular revolts" that are heavily funded and fueled by the West, don't necessarily lead to anything good but usually make sure that a lot of people die in the process.


Whatever, its not my backyard. :shrug:

If only your government would adopt that view more often.

[Husar]

That's just devil's advocacy out of spite.

Great argument. :rolleyes:

Also 11111 !!!

[Strike For The South]

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

FREEEEDDDDOOOOOMMMMMM. Funny this is exactly oppisite of what the Russian ambassador said on BBC this morning

Fascist apes.
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/russian-paramilitary-leaders-in-eastern-ukraine-caught-on-tape-communicating-with-moscow-343644.html

[Tuuvi]

That's just devil's advocacy out of spite.

I don't understand why we can't just talk about Putin and Ukraine without bringing the West into it. Whenever this board discusses US politics or compares the US to Europe the US is seen as a corrupt oligarchy that barely represents the interest of its citizens. Now in this thread all of a sudden the US is a direct democracy and every American on this forum agrees with everything the US has ever done, so therefore no one is allowed to say anything bad about Putin because that would be hypocritical.

[Crazed Rabbit]

I don't understand why we can't just talk about Putin and Ukraine without bringing the West into it. Whenever this board discusses US politics or compares the US to Europe the US is seen as a corrupt oligarchy that barely represents the interest of its citizens. Now in this thread all of a sudden the US is a direct democracy and every American on this forum agrees with everything the US has ever done, so therefore no one is allowed to say anything bad about Putin because that would be hypocritical.

Obviously, if the Putin apologists here had to defend Putin's causing a civil war in his neighboring state without bringing up every bad thing America has done as some sort of Chewbacca defense they'd have absolutely no arguments. They pout out an avalanche of logical fallacies in Putin's defense, and they would, it seems, continue to do so even if Russian tanks roll into Kiev.

CR

[a completely inoffensive name]

Europeans in here are just trying to stick to their time honored tradition of refusing to believe that two wrongs do not make a right.

[Brenus]

“Suppression of Breton Language” Except of course there is not 1 Breton language but at least 2. So, which one do we speak of?

Was it natural but imposed: both. My grand-father spoke a local dialect (probably base on Occitan) but my mother didn’t so I don’t, because we were not taught at home. Did we lose culture? No, as the traditions were passed to as, but modern life was more efficient in destroying the local social aspect of the old tribes living where I born (the village has traces of settlement before Roman Invasion). In this matter, Christianity was more efficient.
It was seen as bad manners to speak local languages, and as my Grand-Father (and grand-mother) were communists, it was probably part of the ideology (against nationalism source of conflict sort of and united –so understanding each other’s - workers will not be fool by international capitalism, capitalism bearing war like black clouds carry storms, etc). But I admit it is a interpretation from me.
The imposition of compulsory school, but much more efficient military service did the job. The following regimes didn’t need to impose things. They just to put in place the structures and it went the way. The pre-revolution parliaments were taking notes in French.
So, no, it was not the French Revolution that imposed French, and in this matter, the victory of the King of France on the Count of Toulouse was probably much more efficient.
In fact, the most spoken local language spoken in France is probably Alsatian. They have a newspaper, learn it and keep it alive. But the Bretons were not interested, nor the Catalans, the Basques, the Cannois, and others.
You fall in the trap believing that there is one unique French identity and the Breton were not part of it. Nope. As I said, France is a social or political contract. France can’t be based on languages as there is/was more than one. Not on territory as borders always changed (Savoie and Nice became French in the 1860’), The Parliament of Trevoux ( La Bombes- my birthplace) was annexed by Louis XV. Certainly not on ethnicities as northern populations have more links with England and Belgium than with the Provenciaux. Not on religion grounds, we had enough civil wars to prove it.

“Likewise Occitan dialects”: So I never heard of Tritan and Isseult. Ooops, but I did. I even study the book at school, alongside Du Bellay, Ronsard, Racine, Ruteboeuf , Rabelais, and Guillaume de Poitiers.

The season removed his coat
Of wind, cold an drain,
And put on embroidery,
Gleaming sunshine, bright and beautiful.
There is neither animal nor bird
That doesn’t tell in it’s own tongue:
The season removed his coat.
Rivers, fountains and brooks
Wear, as handsome garments,
Silver drops of goldsmith’s work;
Everyone puts on new clothing:
The season removed his coat.

Charles de Poitiers 1394-1465.

This is why French as language, won.

[Brenus]

"Obviously, if the Putin apologists here had to defend Putin's causing a civil war": Well, in my view, if the Ukrainian would have follow a democratic process, Putin wouldn't have the opportunity to move in Crimea.
Because, perhaps I am wrong, but if I remember well, it was not the Ethnic Russian who storm the Parliament (and this I can understand) and then started to threaten the Ukrainian populations. It is not within the Russian Ukrainian Populations that leaders are openly Nazi and openly promote the killing of the Ukrainians.

However, you can carry on to pretend it is a Putin manipulation (and the Russian minorities in Ukraine are just stupid and brainless who don't know what is good for them so let's kill them) if it makes you feel better.

So, now, when saying that the West actions (and not only in Ukraine) are part of the problem, and underlining the West hypocrisy in this matter is becoming to be "Putin apologists", we can see propaganda in action.

Well, I am not a Putin Apologist. I am not a West blindly apologist as well. I am just fed-up of Western propaganda and "we kill people for good reasons" and "they killed people for bad reasons".

[Sarmatian]

:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
You've got some mileage there - but until Poland sweeps into Ukraine and annexes the Oblasts that were once Polish, I'm still not buying into the comparison. We're talking about channelling, or even stirring up, unrest to affect a change WITHIN a country, and it's a momentary thing - the change comes and protests subside. Sometimes, the change doesn't stick because either the locals don't want it, or the politicians in question lack the acumen to see it through.

Putin is trying to exert direct[ control. That's fundamentally different.

That's true. Americans are much more subtle when they're trying to achieve the same goal. Unification of Germany was a Godsend for that. Huge amount of weapons in East Germany and all of it Soviet made. They used it to arm Croatian separatists. After they trained them and organized them, provided intelligence, logistical support and even air strikes just before the attack. Never directly, mind you, it was done through a "consulting company" owned by several retired American generals.
During Kosovo, Americans trained KLA fighters in camps in Albania.

So, similar stuff has happened and will happen in the future. US never directly annexed territory in the last several decades and instead just installed puppet regimes dependent on US for everything, I agree with that, but Crimea was unique in that regard as it was a part of Russia for several centuries and population really did want re-unification, regardless of sham referendum.


Europeans in here are just trying to stick to their time honored tradition of refusing to believe that two wrongs do not make a right.

Which is the eternal excuse for US foreign policy blunders and military invasions.

We made a mistake, but don't question us or oppose us - two wrongs don't make a right.

Maybe US should stop making mistakes instead asking everyone no to oppose them on the grounds that two wrongs don't make a right.

[Gilrandir]

In fact, the most spoken local language spoken in France is probably Alsatian. They have a newspaper, learn it and keep it alive. But the Bretons were not interested, nor the Catalans, the Basques, the Cannois, and others.
How do you know they were not interested? Did you ask them?
We must admit that there are stronger and weaker languages. The task of the governments is to make sure weaker languages are getting more support from them. It is the easiest way to say: "They are not interested in keeping their language" than to provide conditions for people to keep whatever small interest they may have.
As for Ukraine, Russian is definitely the stronger language (there are several reasons why, but I don't expect you are interested in them) and I gave proofs on how it was promoted in the times of the Soviet Union. Now it is under no theat of extinction in Ukraine. So supporting it now more than (or at least equally with) Ukrainian will ensure its further domination and eventual ousting of Ukrainian from many social spheres. It is Ukrainian that needs support now.

[Gilrandir]

"Obviously, if the Putin apologists here had to defend Putin's causing a civil war": Well, in my view, if the Ukrainian would have follow a democratic process, Putin wouldn't have the opportunity to move in Crimea.
Because, perhaps I am wrong, but if I remember well, it was not the Ethnic Russian who storm the Parliament (and this I can understand) and then started to threaten the Ukrainian populations. It is not within the Russian Ukrainian Populations that leaders are openly Nazi and openly promote the killing of the Ukrainians.

However, you can carry on to pretend it is a Putin manipulation (and the Russian minorities in Ukraine are just stupid and brainless who don't know what is good for them so let's kill them) if it makes you feel better.

So, now, when saying that the West actions (and not only in Ukraine) are part of the problem, and underlining the West hypocrisy in this matter is becoming to be "Putin apologists", we can see propaganda in action.

Well, I am not a Putin Apologist. I am not a West blindly apologist as well. I am just fed-up of Western propaganda and "we kill people for good reasons" and "they killed people for bad reasons".
In all the attempts to equate Maidan and Donetsk region protesters there is one thing no one mentioned: Maidan and its followers in different regions NEVER proclaimed any quasi-states and NEVER declared their wish to separate from Ukraine and become a part of any other country. This is the crucial difference which allows to
brand protesters in the East as separatists and treat them correspondingly.

[Sarmatian]

In all the attempts to equate Maidan and Donetsk region protesters there is one thing no one mentioned: Maidan and its followers in different regions NEVER proclaimed any quasi-states and NEVER declared their wish to separate from Ukraine and become a part of any other country. This is the crucial difference which allows to
brand protesters in the East as separatists and treat them correspondingly.

Didn't Lviv proclaim self-rule before Yanukovuch was toppled?

Also, the protesters are asking for a greater autonomy and instead of negotiations, they got tanks...

[Gilrandir]

Didn't Lviv proclaim self-rule before Yanukovuch was toppled?

Self-rule is not a new independent state state with its flag, its own armed forces and claims for an independent foreign policy and appeal to the UNO and other international bodies.


Also, the protesters are asking for a greater autonomy and instead of negotiations, they got tanks...
The central government is ready to negotiate more rights delegated locally, only the protesters are not. They are set on issuing demands and ultimatums. Indeed, Yatsenyuk spoke of an administrative reform and changes in the constitution it would neccessitate. The constitutional committee is already drawing some drafts for it - but the protesters seem to think that it can be done overnight. Many analysts in Ukraine (and those from the East most of all) believe that the instigators of the protests (alongside with the Kremlin and the esapees of the previous regime) are local elites who are thus bargaining for the preservation of their status in the region.
As for tanks, they were sent against the GRU force in Slavyansk not against the protesters in other towns of Donetsk region. At least, not yet.

[Husar]

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

FREEEEDDDDOOOOOMMMMMM. Funny this is exactly oppisite of what the Russian ambassador said on BBC this morning

Fascist apes.
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/russian-paramilitary-leaders-in-eastern-ukraine-caught-on-tape-communicating-with-moscow-343644.html

Send me the 20$ they want and I will read it...
After all you Americans are more rich, clever and prosperous than us so I cannot afford that.


All we can do now is wait for the I Told Ya So's. America plays the great game, but Russia is eating its neighbor.

Are drone strikes on weddings part of that "great game"? Sounds "great" indeed. No wait, actually it sounds brainwashed when you say the country that invaded countless other countries in recent history is just playing the "great game", that's pure whitewashing that reminds me of WW1 rhetoric...


I don't understand why we can't just talk about Putin and Ukraine without bringing the West into it.

You're a very special flower, aren't you? How many topics about European politics ended up as discussions about US politics? But when it's about bringing America's faults into a topic then we should rather not bring America into the topic, eh?


Whenever this board discusses US politics or compares the US to Europe the US is seen as a corrupt oligarchy that barely represents the interest of its citizens. Now in this thread all of a sudden the US is a direct democracy and every American on this forum agrees with everything the US has ever done, so therefore no one is allowed to say anything bad about Putin because that would be hypocritical.

It's all correct regarding the American posters until "so therefore", which should read "so therefore America has the moral highground and all the right in the world to advocate and push for a war against the Russian Federation on European soil.". If you had written that, you'd have represented the stance of some Americans very well. The attempt to wash yourselves clean by saying America is not a direct democracy is really lame by the way.


Obviously, if the Putin apologists here had to defend Putin's causing a civil war in his neighboring state without bringing up every bad thing America has done as some sort of Chewbacca defense they'd have absolutely no arguments. They pout out an avalanche of logical fallacies in Putin's defense, and they would, it seems, continue to do so even if Russian tanks roll into Kiev.

CR

"Putin apologists" is just loaded propaganda that doesn't reflect what people have said, but thanks for trying. You may want to try again when you have actually read peoples' arguments through something other than a pro-Muricah-lens.


Its the opposite, the way I see it. What we've done in the past to all kinds of countries has no bearing on what's happening now, but because we did those things its all of a sudden not so bad that Putin is doing something much bigger and more overt?

Then stop talking about Crimea, that was in the past. So basically the Ukrainian Nazi usurper government is trying to violently oppress protesters in the East, what should anyone do?


Europeans in here are just trying to stick to their time honored tradition of refusing to believe that two wrongs do not make a right.

This would have more value if you had said it after 9/11, but back then you were far more fond of the time-honored American tradition of wanting revenge, which only ended with the murder of bin Laden. Crimea river dude.

[Sarmatian]

Self-rule is not a new independent state state with its flag, its own armed forces and claims for an independent foreign policy and appeal to the UNO and other international bodies.

That is true, but they basically declared themselves independent from Kiev until they get the government they want.


The central government is ready to negotiate more rights delegated locally, only the protesters are not. They are set on issuing demands and ultimatums. Indeed, Yatsenyuk spoke of an administrative reform and changes in the constitution it would neccessitate. The constitutional committee is already drawing some drafts for it - but the protesters seem to think that it can be done overnight. Many analysts in Ukraine (and those from the East most of all) believe that the instigators of the protests (alongside with the Kremlin and the esapees of the previous regime) are local elites who are thus bargaining for the preservation of their status in the region.
As for tanks, they were sent against the GRU force in Slavyansk not against the protesters in other towns of Donetsk region. At least, not yet.

They didn't get a serious proposal or a serious delegation. Only vague talk that there might be decentralization, but no guarantees or mentions of what and when.

No EU ministers flew to Kiev to force the government to negotiate with protesters or create a binding document like they did when Yanukovich was in power.

[Strike For The South]

Send me the 20$ they want and I will read it...
After all you Americans are more rich, clever and prosperous than us so I cannot afford that.
.

Haha I don't buy into that line of thinking

I think most of you are 6 years old screaming "WELL YOU KIND OF DID IT ONCE TOO"

Which is fine, I realize the lot of you are malcontents with no hope, and no idea of how people actually interact

My only solace is that many of you will never have an effect on policy besides bitching to the people at your job who think youre strange

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

“Suppression of Breton Language” Except of course there is not 1 Breton language but at least 2. So, which one do we speak of?

All of them?

That's a daft question to be asking.


“Likewise Occitan dialects”: So I never heard of Tritan and Isseult. Ooops, but I did. I even study the book at school, alongside Du Bellay, Ronsard, Racine, Ruteboeuf , Rabelais, and Guillaume de Poitiers.

*Very deep calming breath.*

It is not a "Book" it is a Breton Lay, a sung poem, like a ballard - it survives in Norman, not Occitan, fragments and was later translated into French, prosified etc.

Tristan has an S in.

I give up, I'm going to go away and have a cry.

[Sarmatian]

Haha I don't buy into that line of thinking

I think most of you are 6 years old screaming "WELL YOU KIND OF DID IT ONCE TOO"

Which is fine, I realize the lot of you are malcontents with no hope, and no idea of how people actually interact

My only solace is that many of you will never have an effect on policy besides bitching to the people at your job who think youre strange

Can't you read? It's not about you kind of did it once (it's should be you did worse many times but that's beside the point), but you're doing it now. Disregarding western influence in Maidan protest and their eventual effect is stupid or ignorant, I'm not really sure which one is it always. It doesn't of course ezcuse Russian actions but it must be taken into account when talking about a solution.

[Fisherking]

Drop the ideology. This is not good vs. bad. It is two thugs who want the kid in their gang. One wants him whole the other will take whatever body parts he can get.

Spooks are like the guys on Madison Ave. They want to beat the competition.

They are promoting a product at the expense of the other company. Market share.

Which side is ultimately the worst is just a matter of opinion.

Personally I am for the people of Ukraine. The best thing that could happen is they keep their borders and get money to help out from both sides.

Interests in the west and Russia have gotten what they want, more defense spending and at least a mini cold war that will prove profitable.

Putin however, is a patriot and true believer who wants to return to the glory days with more people under his thumb. That is the problem now.

[Husar]

Haha I don't buy into that line of thinking

I think most of you are 6 years old screaming "WELL YOU KIND OF DID IT ONCE TOO"

Which is fine, I realize the lot of you are malcontents with no hope, and no idea of how people actually interact

My only solace is that many of you will never have an effect on policy besides bitching to the people at your job who think youre strange

Ad hominem is always the best kind of argument when you run out of actual arguments.


Unbelievable apologism from the Europeans in here. Guess anything goes, because America has done bad things. Throw out the rule book and give Putin a fucking medal. :rolleyes: Ukraine will be two countries at best a month from now.

Yeah, just ignore my last post and repeat what you said before. How about quoting what people actually say instead of blanket statements that do not contain any arguments and only show you misunderstood what others are posting?


Drop the ideology. This is not good vs. bad. It is two thugs who want the kid in their gang. One wants him whole the other will take whatever body parts he can get.

Indeed.


Personally I am for the people of Ukraine. The best thing that could happen is they keep their borders and get money to help out from both sides.

There are two problems, both sides want Ukraine for themselves and the people of Ukraine have chosen such extremes that their unity as Ukrainians broke apart.


Putin however, is a patriot and true believer who wants to return to the glory days with more people under his thumb. That is the problem now.

Maybe, but then NATO is playing into his hands.

[Gilrandir]

They didn't get a serious proposal or a serious delegation. Only vague talk that there might be decentralization, but no guarantees or mentions of what and when.


Two representatives of the law-enforcement part of the government - Parubiy and Yarema - were there. Parubiy stated that it was hard to parley with the protesters: in the evening they agree on some decision, in the morning they forward new claims. It is evident that protesters are not the decision makers.

[Brenus]

“How do you know they were not interested?” This is easy to answer as local languages are taught in schools on voluntary basis. Not too many attendants.

“Maidan and its followers in different regions NEVER proclaimed any quasi-states and NEVER declared their wish to separate from Ukraine and become a part of any other country.” True. They just claimed to speak for the entire Ukraine.

“Tristan has an S in.” Yeap, typing mistake. But I can understand it is a great and constructive critic of what I am saying… But read Blaise Pascal on the “divertissement” (basically, if a preacher is half shaved, nobody cares of what he says).

“ballard” Ballad. About typing mistake and distraction… It is still in a book. After the Romans slaughtered all the Druids who were transmitting knowledge by learning by heart, we went for printing form, even songs…

“I'm going to go away and have a cry.” Hopefully you will feel better. And you have a lot of reading to catch-up.

[Kagemusha]

Unbelievable how much this thread has deteriorated during this last week. Does anyone actually anymore care what is happening in Ukraine or is the blame game and mud slinging too important to be disturbed by anything else?

[Fisherking]

Maybe, but then NATO is playing into his hands.

I just see Ukraine trying to do what ever it can to stop the unrest.

NATO and the EU can hardly agree on the day of the week. I don’t see them doing anything, helpful or otherwise.

All this is just Vlad’s game ATM.

[Sarmatian]

Unbelievable apologism from the Europeans in here. Guess anything goes, because America has done bad things. Throw out the rule book and give Putin a fucking medal. :rolleyes:

You're again misinterpreting what's been said but after 10 times, I don't have an inclination to try to explain it once again.


Ukraine will be two countries at best a month from now.

That's what I said will happen, on these boards four or five years ago, if Ukraine is pushed into NATO.

[Kagemusha]

Claiming moral high ground is useless. Nevertheless the situation is worrisome. Take a look at this video filmed during Pro Russian "activist" takeover of the police HQ of Kramatorsk and make up your own mind if there are or are not Russian regular troops at Eastern Ukraine already:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1090871/Firefight-pro-Russian-separatists-Kramatorsk-police-HQ.html

[Sarmatian]

How am I misinterpreting anything? You've posted at great length how you believe what the west has done to rally students and give moral support to some of the Maidain crowd is somehow morally and legally equivalent to what Putin is doing now

More than just moral support. You know as well as I, that even though protests originally started as few hundred people were protesting against Yanukovich's decision to abandon a deal with EU but the majority of people later were involved in because they were tired of corruption and poverty. Those protest were hijacked and turned into an anti-Russian/pro-western issue, bringing a different batch of corrupt politicians with a sprinkle of nazis in power. And those militant protesters were responsible for provoking the police, trying to take over government buildings violently and quite likely shot other protesters to incite them to more violence. After a deal was made, the most militant protesters broke it and performed a coup.

Instead of indirect support the west offered, Russia is supporting anti-government protesters directly, either by equipping them or throwing some of their experts in there. It's not just Russian agents, a few dozen armed men can not take control of ten towns and cities without support from local population.

That's not important because of "you did it, too", but to understand that western actions are part of the problem and must also be a part of the solution. The west feels it has got Ukraine now and that's why they've changed their tune from "no one must touch the protesters" from a few months ago to "send tanks against them" now. Even though a more federalized and politically neutral Ukraine would end the conflict, the west is encouraging the Maidan government to crush protesters in the east.

Just like how they put pressure on Yanukovich to deal with protesters through diplomacy instead of violence, they now should put pressure on Maidan government to do the same, instead of applauding armoured vehicles and gunships being sent.

Because, just like you said, Ukrainian military can't do anything. The army is very pro-Russian and also, naturally, quite disinclined to fire on their own people. They can shuffle defense ministers through eternity, there's no chance the army will do it. That's why they're talking about creating a national guard type of thing, which will mostly be made up of western nationalists and fascists who will have no qualms about killing Russians or Ukrainian traitors. If those guys are sent in, all hell will break loose and civil war will be inevitable. The cart blanche Kiev got from the west needs to be withdrawn.

That's the only solution that may stop the conflict before it passes the point of no return and Ukraine really ends up in a bloody civil war and totally dismembered.

[Gilrandir]

“How do you know they were not interested?” This is easy to answer as local languages are taught in schools on voluntary basis. Not too many attendants.

What if Latin was taught on voluntary basis? Still low attendance? A good excuse to stop any attempts of helping the weaker languages. People were not interested because they can't see any prospects of a language being used some time in future. Will you be interested in learning driving if you knew that you will never see a car after you finish your study (except on the screen)? It has to be something else than asking people: "Which of you don't want to bother yourselves with learning that useless stuff?" Any newspapers, TV channels, University courses, books translated, dictionaries published, popularization campaigns or any other activities in those languages to report?

[Pannonian]

Unbelievable apologism from the Europeans in here. Guess anything goes, because America has done bad things. Throw out the rule book and give Putin a fucking medal. :rolleyes: Ukraine will be two countries at best a month from now.

And past experience shows that, once we intervene, we'll be there years from now being hated by both sides for intervening. I'd rather we weren't part of that. If we're going to be hated, at least let us be hated for not doing something and saving ourselves money in the process. Ukraine has no special claim on us that we need to do something for them, and if we do "help" them, a significant chunk of the country who see themselves as Russians will hate us for being there, and I'd wager a significant chunk of those who see themselves as not-Russians will hate us as well, either for not doing as they want us to do, or for simply being there. Why throw ourselves into that?

[rvg]

Why throw ourselves into that?

To prevent 50 million people from losing their freedom, I guess.

[Montmorency]

The biggest takeaway is that, in all likelihood, a European power will dismember a fellow European state and annex some of its core constituent territories in what is no less than the name of ethnic irredentism. Aside from the Godwin, this is a return to form that nevertheless carries huge implications for the international system. Increasingly over the past couple of decades, the post-war order of stiff and stable borders has been deteriorating. This might prove a death-knell. And just because most of Europe has dropped whatever territorial claims they once held doesn't mean they can't invent new ones. In the medium-term, if the EU collapses, if the far-rightists take over, if Germany falters - we will see a continental war within our lifetimes.

And the second, more immediate, concern is Putin annexing the East and/or turning it into a client state or independent region is possibly the only thing mitigating against a Ukrainian civil war.

[Brenus]

“What if Latin was taught on voluntary basis?” Err, Latin is taught on voluntary basis.

“Still low attendance?” Better than Breton, for sure.

“A good excuse to stop any attempts of helping the weaker languages” To stop any attempts? Err, when and where?

“Any newspapers, TV channels, University courses, books translated, dictionaries published, popularization campaigns or any other activities in those languages to report?” Yeah, universities, newspapers and all the lot. Not really picking-up and without massive subsidies from government, they would have cease to breath. Something else? Well, we can oblige unwilling pupils to learn useless languages, for sure, but you can’t force adults to use them.

[Husar]

Kind of like how "The US drones the occasional wedding" is the best argument you have? You guys are using this as an excuse to air grievances about the US, while Russia dismantles your neighbor before your eyes.

It's just an argument I repeat when US-boys ride into the room on their exceptionally large moral horses again and again.
The only reason Russia dismantles that neighbor is because a bunch of people teamed up with Nazis to topple the democratically elected president and didn't take into consideration what their neighbors both inside and outside the country thought of it. Instead they announced to change the country's course 180° and celebrated that with their western buddies while their ignored neighbors who had their elected president expelled obviously got angrier and angrier. The result is a huge mess and I refuse to run around on a high horse and shift all blame to the other side, which is what most pro-Western posters here did. And just because I refuse to celebrate our way of life as the nonplusultra of ways of living and see that we made a big mistake there by blatantly supporting only half of the country and celebrating that the other half lost, I'm not a Putin apologist. Is that so hard to understand? And is it so hard to understand that "making up" for our mistake by starting WW3 now is a bloody idiotic idea?


I just see Ukraine trying to do what ever it can to stop the unrest.

NATO and the EU can hardly agree on the day of the week. I don’t see them doing anything, helpful or otherwise.

All this is just Vlad’s game ATM.

Yes, just like Afghanistan, we went in cheering for ourselves and then found out that we have neither a clue nor a plan.

[Pannonian]

To prevent 50 million people from losing their freedom, I guess.

Would those 50 million include those who see themselves as Russians? Or do they not count, and freedom only applies to those who appeal to us, and those who aren't included get our version of freedom imposed on them? We Brits have lots of experience in sending troops to places where there are multiple groups of people who disagree with each other on how things should go, and we sent them in to enforce some kind of peace and order. And we've got loads of crap for it, including on many occasions from Americans who see this as yet more British imperialism.

Just to name a couple of instances, we got kicked for it in Palestine until we turned tail and ran, and there are probably still Americans who blame us for being there in the first place, and we're still hated by both Jews and Arabs for being there, not completely backing their side, and whatever else is related to the fact that it was us who were there. And more recently, there's Northern Ireland, and that phenomenon called the plastic paddy, Americans who've never been near Ireland or the British Isles but who find it glamorous to pretend to be Irish and define their "Irishness" as a hatred of the British. Who were, once again, only over there to keep two sides from killing each other.

At least in Northern Ireland there's a status quo of Britishness and the basic principle of self-determination to justify us being there. There's scant Britishness in Ukraine, and we'd be there to prevent self-determination. Why go there and pour money and blood down the drain for the end result of being hated by both sides?

[rvg]

Would those 50 million include those who see themselves as Russians?

Of course they count. Won't those Russians be free as well? Russian or not, if they're absorbed by Putin's blob they can bid farewell to freedom. Russia is rapidly crossing from your run of the mill authoritarian state into full scale totalitarianism.

[Pannonian]

Of course they count. Won't those Russians be free as well? Russian or not, if they're absorbed by Putin's blob they can bid farewell to freedom. Russia is rapidly crossing from your run of the mill authoritarian state into full scale totalitarianism.

But if they choose that, what right do we have to stop them? Britain's position on Northern Ireland, Gibraltar, Falklands and all those other places where we're the primary occupying power is based on the principle of self-determination. They're British because they choose to be. If they choose to not be British, that's their right too, and we'll respect that too. The Scots are getting a referendum on that as they wanted, and we'll respect the result of that too. Do you know any Americans who want the Scots to choose "freedom", as one in the eye for the English?

[Sarmatian]

All I see is apologism. Sarmation and Husar both write paragraph after paragraph to denigrate American foreign policy, as though its both relevant and some kind of super point.


Most of the time, I do, indeed, and in this case in particular.

I'd understand if you didn't agree with the point I made but I can't really accept that you don't understand that point and call it apologism

[Greyblades]

Do you know any Americans who want the Scots to choose "freedom", as one in the eye for the English?

It's the internet so there's bound to be a couple.

[Husar]

All I see is apologism. Sarmation and Husar both write paragraph after paragraph to denigrate American foreign policy, as though its both relevant and some kind of super point.

1. I include EU foreign policy in this

2. All I see is whining about how America cannot do what it wants and have everyone cheer for it. Did you think Putin/Russia would applaud your efforts to get yet another NATO member right on his borders? Your argument boils down to America being the lesser evil and that's why we should be happy to be allied to America. My argument is that it's no reason to be happy but maybe to be a little bit less sad. It's almost like some Americans refuse to believe that someone could actually not love their nation and not be an enemy of it. :dizzy2: