View Full Version : Ukraine Thread
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
06-03-2015, 12:59
I suppose the real question is, why does Brenus love Putin and Russia when Reussia is very clearly out to grab territory.
Perhaps he saw Reggie Yates' Extreme Russia: Episode 1, where a young girl in her twenties took a piece of paper, folded it in half and said "this is Russia now" then unfolded it and said "this is what Russia should be, and it's time to gather Russia back together".
Not an exact quote but the message was crystal clear - for many people in "Russia" their definition of "Russia" is actually the USSR. There are a significant number of people who see Russia as having a manifest destiny to rule a particular geographic region which is actually multi-ethnic, multi-cultural, and un-interested in being Russian.
GenosseGeneral
06-03-2015, 13:58
It seems like escalation is likely. It's not yet on Western sources (everyone is still busy with FIFA), but Ukrainian and separatist sources report new, heavy fights. Tensions had been growing over the past days, but this is possibly the worst we've seen since Debaltseve. Live ticker (in Russian, unfortunately):http://korrespondent.net/ukraine/3522769-boy-vokruh-donetska-y-marynky-onlain Under attack is a place called марьинка донецк область (just copy into google maps) It seems like the columns reported by Reuters last week were indeed heading to Ukraine.
Which is interesting in light of the fact, that the project Novorossiya, which claimed also other territories besides Luhansk and Donetsk, was only recently abandoned by the Kremlin. It also confirmed Donetsk and Luhansk's status as part of Ukraine.
Edit: Minsk is now fully dead. The Ukrainian General Staff just announced the return of heavy artillery to the frontline. According to them, the attack began at 4 a.m. this morning, using a two-digit number of tanks and more than a thousand soldiers, supported by heavy artillery.
This is bad. Really bad.
Sarmatian
06-03-2015, 15:03
Concerning MH-17:
https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and-europe/2015/05/31/mh17-forensic-analysis-of-satellite-images-released-by-the-russian-ministry-of-defence/
You'll never really stop to publish propaganda stories, will you?
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/mh17-satellitenbilder-bellingcat-betreibt-kaffeesatzleserei-a-1036874.html
Spiegel retracted the story. Analysts called it bogus. The person who created the site which belingcat used to "analyze" the data says belingcat analysis is an example "of how not to analyze satellite imagery"...
And you present it as some kind of fact? Why? There are thousands of dubious blogs we can link to that "prove" that this is all work of Illuminati, Zionists or aliens. Try to raise yourself above an average internet troll. This is one of the rare places where one can have a serious and rational political discussion (although nowhere near the level it used to be). Don't ruin that. Get some standards.
Gilrandir
06-03-2015, 16:11
Edit: Minsk is now fully dead.
It was dead a couple of days after it had been signed after Lugandoneans captured Debaltseve. Western powers turned a blind eye on it hoping that it will stay Putin's appetite.
But it really doesn't change anything. Do you think the West is going to do anything about it (except expressing grave concern, of course)? Lately I have been greatly concerned about Europe expressing no grave concerns for quite a time. I wonder where is the red line Europe is constantly talking about.
Edit: Strelkov reported Surkov's (Putin's aide) recent visit to Donetsk.
You'll never really stop to publish propaganda stories, will you?
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/mh17-satellitenbilder-bellingcat-betreibt-kaffeesatzleserei-a-1036874.html
Spiegel retracted the story. Analysts called it bogus. The person who created the site which belingcat used to "analyze" the data says belingcat analysis is an example "of how not to analyze satellite imagery"...
I saw an article and linked it. Do you want me to search the Internet for hours to prove or disprove it? I don't know how propagandistic you or others may find it. Take it or leave it.
"I suppose the real question is, why does Brenus love Putin and Russia when Reussia is very clearly out to grab territory." Well, it won't change much for you to try to answer to the wrong questions. It won't be the first time...
"Take it or leave it": All coming from your "sources" I leave it. When you will have more reliable sources than social media, I will reconsider.
Sarmatian
06-03-2015, 19:49
I wonder where is the red line Europe is constantly talking about.
Germany, where it has been for the last 80 years.
I saw an article and linked it. Do you want me to search the Internet for hours to prove or disprove it? I don't know how propagandistic you or others may find it. Take it or leave it.
There was no need to spend hours searching the internet. The link was in the second comment on that very blog, easily noticeable at even a glance.
Similarly, it was easily noticeable that it was a propaganda blog, with nothing of value to add. I know that linking dubious blogs/text as proof that aliens built the pyramids or whatever else is your thing is all the rage on the internet since its inception, this is one of the rare boards that tends to have a slightly higher standard of discussion. So, yes, you should take a minute or two to assess the quality of the content you're posting.
Strike For The South
06-04-2015, 02:07
It must be tough living in Eastern Europe. Every generation or so the number of drunks in Russia reaches critical mass and then get unleashed upon those poor people.
"Every generation or so the number of drunks in Russia reaches critical mass and then get unleashed upon those poor people."Hmm... In France (and in most European Countries) we though that was a German thingy (3 wars in less than 1 century, 2 World ones), the generational unleash... Well, obviously not because vodka... Well, we and the Germans worked on this, still on progress mind you, but we decided better to negotiate than to claim.
Gilrandir
06-04-2015, 11:20
"Take it or leave it": All coming from your "sources" I leave it. When you will have more reliable sources than social media, I will reconsider.
I don't remember my posts containing links to any of the social media. Even if there are, they are exceptional. Unless you understand "social media" in a different way.
this is one of the rare boards that tends to have a slightly higher standard of discussion.
You derail another thread (I thought it was my agenda) by offering a discussion on my style of posting. Probably you see it essential to take me down a peg or two. So now I have (at least) a double reputation: the Thread-derailer and the Forum-spoiler.
You present the Forum history as one of a downfall from the noble golden past (where sages exchanged their wisdom, their elusive discourse being unfathomable to other mortals) into the abyss of ignorance, cheap sensationalism and propaganda-mongering. And the only person who is responsible for it is me (since I never saw you criticize others for it). And the only person who stands guard on the brink of the abyss is you.
So perhaps it is one of the following: either it is wildly flattering for me as a person who is alone able to ruin an impregnable, solid and age-long edifice or the exceptional quality of discussion here is a delusion - it is no better and no worse than you may find elsewhere.
So, yes, you should take a minute or two to assess the quality of the content you're posting.
Mostly I try to do that. But in any case "quality" and "assessment" are subjective and arbitrary categories, so each should determine them himself.
a completely inoffensive name
06-04-2015, 11:35
Post #760 in this thread and somehow people here still believe that Putin is just misunderstood due to Western propaganda.
GenosseGeneral
06-04-2015, 12:57
It's post #761 into this thread and people still believe that's all about one individual's feelings.
Sarmatian
06-04-2015, 18:51
So perhaps it is one of the following: either it is wildly flattering for me as a person who is alone able to ruin an impregnable, solid and age-long edifice or the exceptional quality of discussion here is a delusion
Don't flatter yourself, you aren't ruining anything. Lowering the quality of the discussion in this thread, that you definitely do.
- it is no better and no worse than you may find elsewhere.
That is not my experience, but this is subjective, I'll give you that.
Mostly I try to do that. But in any case "quality" and "assessment" are subjective and arbitrary categories, so each should determine them himself.
There can be an honest mistake here or there, true, but you've posted a lot of links to propaganda blogs that support your narrative. It's happened to often to be considered an honest mistake, in my opinion, but do carry on, please.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
06-04-2015, 19:33
Post #760 in this thread and somehow people here still believe that Putin is just misunderstood due to Western propaganda.
Brenus especially - which I find really strange. I get being cynical about things, and about NATO, but I don't get how that translated to a refusal to accept basic facts on the ground.
It's post #761 into this thread and people still believe that's all about one individual's feelings.
It's not about Putin's feelings - it's about his vision of the world and Russia's place in it. Putin rules Russia and, for the moment, Russia will carry out his will.
As far as Gilandir's posting style goes - he's frequently off base but he is the guy living through a Civil War backed by Russia so I think we can probably cut him some personnal slack and play the ball but not the man?
“Brenus especially - which I find really strange” I find it very strange as well. I am one of the rare saying that he is not an evil genius trying to overtake the world by long planned mature manipulations but merely a good politician exploiting others mistake, and knowing what he wants. I am one of the rare who question the Russian capacity to roll to Berlin, and having doubts on the total capacity of Putin to control the Rebels.
“I don't get how that translated to a refusal to accept basic facts on the ground.”: Oh, I do accept fact on the grounds, you don’t. Your refusal to acknowledge the very nature of the Ukrainian Regime, even after the glorification of the Ukrainian Nazi Past, which was obvious after the Coup (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-hughes/the-neo-nazi-question-in_b_4938747.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-30414955
“I think we can probably cut him some personnal slack and play the ball but not the man?” says the man who posted “I suppose the real question is, why does Brenus love Putin”.
Sarmatian
06-04-2015, 20:53
Brenus especially - which I find really strange. I get being cynical about things, and about NATO, but I don't get how that translated to a refusal to accept basic facts on the ground.
Facts on the ground are not as clear cut as western/ukrainian politicians and media are portraying them, but, at the end of the day, there is no question that what Russia did and still does in Ukraine is wrong. I can understand their position - west tried to undermine their influence and Ukraine and they reacted like anyone who read a single article about global politics should have known they would react. That doesn't excuse their actions, because there is nothing that can justify that amount of human suffering. After that I blame Kiev politicians, which refuse to accept the current situation and make necessary political changes for it to stop. They've gambled, they've lost, they should walk away before they lose even more.
The bottom line is, this is not unique and West (and its satellites) has been doing stuff like that for many centuries. Russia is suddenly now a big bad wolf for doing what the West's been doing, many more times and on a much bigger scale. On that issue, I can only say -> Cry me a river.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
06-04-2015, 23:28
“Brenus especially - which I find really strange” I find it very strange as well. I am one of the rare saying that he is not an evil genius trying to overtake the world by long planned mature manipulations but merely a good politician exploiting others mistake, and knowing what he wants. I am one of the rare who question the Russian capacity to roll to Berlin, and having doubts on the total capacity of Putin to control the Rebels.
Well, I never said any of that, at least nine months ago I said that I thought Putin had made serious long-term strategic mistakes, and I pointed out that Putin needs the separatists to fight his dirty war for him, so although he could cut them off from gear and supplies he won't until he has to.
Having said that, I do not feel the need to repeat it.
“I don't get how that translated to a refusal to accept basic facts on the ground.”: Oh, I do accept fact on the grounds, you don’t. Your refusal to acknowledge the very nature of the Ukrainian Regime, even after the glorification of the Ukrainian Nazi Past, which was obvious after the Coup (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-hughes/the-neo-nazi-question-in_b_4938747.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-30414955
Well that symbol doesn't actually look a lot like the Wolf Cross, does it? Even allowing that the Azoz Battalion are very extreme and Right Wing (I recall some of their members claiming Putin is a Jew and it's all about protecting Russia from the Jews) it remains a fact that their are many more units in "New Russia" espousing the same beliefs.
The fact that their are Right-Wing Militias fighting for Ukraine and Right Wing Politicians in the parliament does not make it a Nazi coup or a NAZI government. The current government has included nothing even resembling Nazi's since the elections.
Turn it around - the French have been electing lots of Nazi's and Fascists over the last few years, and keep flighting with electing a Fascist president, but nobody would claim France has a Fascist or NAZI government.
“I think we can probably cut him some personnal slack and play the ball but not the man?” says the man who posted “I suppose the real question is, why does Brenus love Putin”.
Well, you have no excuse for being pro-Russian in this context, and I'm wondering if you're just trolling at this point.
Facts on the ground are not as clear cut as western/ukrainian politicians and media are portraying them, but, at the end of the day, there is no question that what Russia did and still does in Ukraine is wrong. I can understand their position - west tried to undermine their influence and Ukraine and they reacted like anyone who read a single article about global politics should have known they would react. That doesn't excuse their actions, because there is nothing that can justify that amount of human suffering. After that I blame Kiev politicians, which refuse to accept the current situation and make necessary political changes for it to stop. They've gambled, they've lost, they should walk away before they lose even more.
The bottom line is, this is not unique and West (and its satellites) has been doing stuff like that for many centuries. Russia is suddenly now a big bad wolf for doing what the West's been doing, many more times and on a much bigger scale. On that issue, I can only say -> Cry me a river.
I suppose a lot of this depends on perspective. You have to remember that immediately following the political crisis/coup that Russia occupied a the Crimea and the Ukrainians offered only non-violent resistance. They were lauded for it and it got them nothing. In view of that it's not hard to see why they're now fighting tooth and nail. If they had not best-case they would already have lost both of those provinces completely.
Well, you have no excuse for being pro-Russian in this context, and I'm wondering if you're just trolling at this point.
Post #766 and PVC is still seeing pro-russians where there aren't any.
a completely inoffensive name
06-05-2015, 02:48
Post #767 and there have been 766 posts before me.
a completely inoffensive name
06-05-2015, 02:53
In all seriousness, Ukraine has been destabilized and will continue to be destabilized for as long as the rebels have support. Putin has his port and has weakened a potential threat at his border. Nothing left to do other than keep counting the bodies and wonder where Putin wants to expand next. And yes, I believe this whole affair has shown how inept Europe is when it comes to defense. Putin now must be plotting how to save those "ethnic russians" that need saving in Estonia and Latvia.
Gilrandir
06-05-2015, 11:05
(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-hughes/the-neo-nazi-question-in_b_4938747.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-30414955
All I can add to PVC's post (indeed, it echoes what I have told not once) is that the two links you gave aim (as I see it) to call attention to the fact that THERE WERE nazis on Maidan. Who denies it? The question is how significant was their influence. As the later developments (parliamentary and presidential elections) show, their influence was rendered non-existent. And you claim that Maidan ended in a nazi coup. Strange are those nazis if AFTER A COUP which GAVE THEM ALL THE POWER (as you claim it) they peacefully step down and merge with the background. Meek nazis?
And the phrase "Ukrainian Nazi past" shows how unbiased and impartial is your attitude to Ukraine in general. One might as well claim that France has a Nazi past.
Facts on the ground are not as clear cut as western/ukrainian politicians and media are portraying them, but, at the end of the day, there is no question that what Russia did and still does in Ukraine is wrong.
After that I blame Kiev politicians, which refuse to accept the current situation and make necessary political changes for it to stop. They've gambled, they've lost, they should walk away before they lose even more.
So no blame on the Moscow Politician who refuses to make necessary political changes to stop? It looks that his gamble is not a victory either.
But again I see a failure to realize that whatever sensible concessions Kyiv politicians may offer, it is Putin who ultimately chooses the course of further development of the conflict. Once he has gone that far he can't just stop. In case he does (or, moreover, retracts) his all previous desicions and actions will seem fallacious which he will never suffer to admit. There are no face-saving steps for him but to push on till he gets what he wants.
But even if we imagine that a peace of some kind was made with Putin, who will ever believe that he will stick to the stipulated conditions? Not Ukraine, for sure. And not Russia's neighbors. Thus Putin is himself heading to where he has long been imagining himself in - to the besieged fortress state.
In all seriousness, Ukraine has been destabilized and will continue to be destabilized for as long as the rebels have support. Putin has his port and has weakened a potential threat at his border.
As I have remarked, tactically Russia looks to have won. Strategically, it has lost. It deprived itself of historically (more or less) friendly neighbor and gave it a decisive push EU- and NATO-wards, put on alert other neighbors, whether friendly (Belarus and Kazakhstan) or otherwise (the Baltic states), almost ruined its ties with the West, got its economy on decline... Is it a good exchange for a port and a heavily donated region with no land-bridge to the bulk of Russia? Let everyone answer the question himself.
An opinion of a Russian politilogist on Russia's current international stance:
http://www.the-american-interest.com/2015/06/02/humiliation-as-a-tool-of-blackmail/
“Well, I never said any of that, at least nine months ago” So, that makes you a Putin lover…
Well that symbol doesn't actually look a lot like the Wolf Cross, does it? Nope, it is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2nd_SS_Panzer_Division_Das_Reich
“Turn it around - the French have been electing lots of Nazi's and Fascists over the last few years” And? I will even play my Gilrandir and arguing about figures (2 MP in the National Parliament!), there is actually and in a recent past no openly Nazi in the French Government. And there are no official political parties openly claiming to be Nazi. And even if, that wouldn’t be an excuse.
“Well, you have no excuse for being pro-Russian in this context” This was answered by someone else.
“GAVE THEM ALL THE POWER (as you claim it)” Lies.
“One might as well claim that France has a Nazi past.” And one might be right. The difference between the nations who love Nazi and the none loving Nazi is that nor are the Germans or the French are proud of their Nazi, whereas in Ukraine they are now national heroes.
“Strategically, it has lost.” In keeping a harbour for its fleet, securing under-water pipelines and pushing potential NATO troops a little bit to the west? Few defeats like this and Putin take all Europe…
“to the besieged fortress state” You should follow more closely international politics. Without even mentioning China and India, USA and EU need Putin/Russia badly for Iran, Iraq, Syria and other little problems.
I think that the selling by Russia of AA missile to Iran is a “free” warning. Of course, it won’t really matter as everyone knows that Russian Material is crap as it is design and built by drunken corrupted stupid Russians in obsolete factories.~:)
Montmorency
06-05-2015, 19:27
whereas in Ukraine they are now national heroes.
So, like the Cetniks in Serbia?
In keeping a harbour for its fleet, securing under-water pipelines and pushing potential NATO troops a little bit to the west? Few defeats like this and Putin take all Europe…
Black Knight Syndrome (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eMkth8FWno)
USA and EU need Putin/Russia badly for Iran, Iraq, Syria and other little problems.
I'm very interested to hear the your basis for that interpretation.
Sarmatian
06-05-2015, 21:27
So, like the Cetniks in Serbia?
Cetniks are a disgrace (the ww2 and the nineties versions - original, Balkan War version was ok I guess).
The spent little time fighting the nazis and more time fighting the communists and killing civilians. They were small scale mostly. Not nearly UPA level, but still.
"I'm very interested to hear the your basis for that interpretation." Read your usual newspapers about Iran Nuclear Program, civil war in Syria, Isis and others points where the West need Russia for various reasons.
@ Montmorency ::laugh4: No: Marechal de Villars, after the battle of Malplaquet (French defeat against the English, but left the English incapable to exploit): “If it please God to give your majesty's enemies another such victory, they are ruined” to Louis the XIV.:book2:
Kagemusha
06-06-2015, 06:00
Let us see in three weeks whether if EU will renew sanctions against Russia. If the case will be such and the sanctions will be renewed. I dont see any reason for Russia to hold back at Ukraine any more.
What is the most disturbing to me is that effectively nobody is benefiting from the current situation, except maybe US for gaining more influence at Europe, while EU is only loosing from the situation, similar to Russia and Ukraine.
Yes, if you follow the money (a tried and tested method for finding the responsible person from US capitalists), this is all the fault of the US after all.
I am not saying that is the case though, I'm just asking questions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vE25wHQPHIE
Gilrandir
06-07-2015, 15:36
“Turn it around - the French have been electing lots of Nazi's and Fascists over the last few years” And? I will even play my Gilrandir and arguing about figures (2 MP in the National Parliament!), there is actually and in a recent past no openly Nazi in the French Government. And there are no official political parties openly claiming to be Nazi. And even if, that wouldn’t be an excuse.
As the latest local elections in France show, Le Pen's party is gaining votes not losing them (as it happened to Svoboda and Right Sector in Ukraine). Who knows, perhaps some elections later we will witness the greatest nightmare of Brenus come true.
“One might as well claim that France has a Nazi past.” And one might be right. The difference between the nations who love Nazi and the none loving Nazi is that nor are the Germans or the French are proud of their Nazi, whereas in Ukraine they are now national heroes.
Charges against UPA and Bandera are not of them being nazis, but of collaborationism and massacres of Poles. While the latter was true, the former (as I have shown) is disputable.
“Strategically, it has lost.” In keeping a harbour for its fleet, securing under-water pipelines and pushing potential NATO troops a little bit to the west? Few defeats like this and Putin take all Europe…
1. Keeping a harbor which can be used only defensively is a tactical gain.
2. What pipelines do you mean? The South Stream was suspended indefinitely, any others are still only nascent projects so far from implementation, that it is precarious to speak of them being "secured".
3. Before the Russian invasion started the NATO troops were on the borders of Russia in the north (so no pushing back happened there) and in Romania to the south. By doing what he has done Putin made it likely for the NATO troops to come closer to Russia in the south (Ukraine is unlikely to be averse to any NATO's overtures as to deployment of its forces), to be reinfoced in the north, moreover, Finland is much disturbed and is contemplating joining NATO. And you call it a strategic victory?
“to the besieged fortress state” You should follow more closely international politics. Without even mentioning China and India, USA and EU need Putin/Russia badly for Iran, Iraq, Syria and other little problems.
Somehow, they have been doing fine without Russia so far. So this "badly need" is only your wishful thinking.
As for Russia, the besieged state mentality has been actively propelled in it recently, so that it may unite the nation and not question Putin's aggressive politics.
The spent little time fighting the nazis and more time fighting the communists and killing civilians. They were small scale mostly. Not nearly UPA level, but still.
It is easy to judge from the age distance of 70 years and with modern awareness. You seem to be concerned about "average everyday people in the street". Let's imagine such a man in western Ukraine between the world wars.
He knows he is Ukrainian, but he sees his land being under Polish power. He wants to change it, but it is not likely to happen. And then, in September 1939 Poland falls apart and the Soviets "liberate" their land ostensibly to join it with "Greater Ukraine". He is glad and even inspired. But within less than 2 years, by massive repressions, executions and deportations the Soviets succeded in estranging the locals. When Nazis come, he feels enheartened and hopes to finally have an independent Ukrainian state. But again he is cheated of all hopes and promises. So he takes a gun and starts fighting everyone - the Poles (remembering his old grievances), the Soviets (remembering the recent grievances), the Nazis (seeing the current grievances). He may make temporary alliances with either of his enemies to fight another one.
Naturally, he is embittered and his heart is hardened in the continuous struggle against anyone who (as he thinks) is out to grab his land.
Having these considerations in mind and trying to put oneself in his place makes me wish to forgive such a man defending his native land against all odds.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/06/vladimir-putin-russia-threat-west-ukraine-nato-150606231638732.html
Russia President Vladimir Putin has told an Italian newspaper that his country was "not a threat to the West", and that he was still committed to a Ukraine peace deal despite a fresh flare-up in violence.
"I would like to say - there's no need to be afraid of Russia," Putin told Corriere della Sera in an interview published on Saturday, ruling out a major conflict between Russia and NATO member countries.
"The world has changed so much that people in their right mind cannot imagine such a large-scale military conflict today."
Only a sick person - and even then only in his sleep - can imagine that Russia would suddenly attack NATO.
There you have it, we can all calm down now.
Gilrandir
06-07-2015, 15:59
There you have it, we can all calm down now.
I'm not sure if you are serious. To believe Putin? You must be smarter than that.
Greyblades
06-07-2015, 16:18
We're not afraid of Russia attacking Nato, we're worried Russia will attack someone outside of it that we actually care about.
I'm not sure if you are serious. To believe Putin? You must be smarter than that.
So you think he would actually attack NATO?
We're not afraid of Russia attacking Nato, we're worried Russia will attack someone outside of it that we actually care about.
China is a bit too big and the Middle East too far away. Who else would we care about now that our sweatshops and our oil rigs are out of the question?
Montmorency
06-07-2015, 20:40
I say Russia can have Ukraine and Belarus if they evacuate Kaliningrad and give over the land to the sole ownership of the European Union.
Then the new EU capital province of Euro-Prussia can become a super-industrial state populated by hardcore unionists.
By 2050, the matter will be simple: integrate into a federalized European Union, or fight for your independence. Fighting alone would be impossible, so the only way to defeat the European Union would be to become client state of the US - or form an EU 2.0. Either way, we come that much closer to OWG.
...
'Scuse me, too much of the product again...
Sarmatian
06-07-2015, 21:05
It is easy to judge from the age distance of 70 years and with modern awareness. You seem to be concerned about "average everyday people in the street". Let's imagine such a man in western Ukraine between the world wars.
He knows he is Ukrainian, but he sees his land being under Polish power. He wants to change it, but it is not likely to happen. And then, in September 1939 Poland falls apart and the Soviets "liberate" their land ostensibly to join it with "Greater Ukraine". He is glad and even inspired. But within less than 2 years, by massive repressions, executions and deportations the Soviets succeded in estranging the locals. When Nazis come, he feels enheartened and hopes to finally have an independent Ukrainian state. But again he is cheated of all hopes and promises. So he takes a gun and starts fighting everyone - the Poles (remembering his old grievances), the Soviets (remembering the recent grievances), the Nazis (seeing the current grievances). He may make temporary alliances with either of his enemies to fight another one.
Naturally, he is embittered and his heart is hardened in the continuous struggle against anyone who (as he thinks) is out to grab his land.
Having these considerations in mind and trying to put oneself in his place makes me wish to forgive such a man defending his native land against all odds.
I know that time is relative, but hasn't it been 70 years in Ukraine also?
Anyway, past repressions are not a justification for mass-murdering civilians.
When you have an independent nation state and some groups think that the dominant ethnic group in that country isn't "free" (or free enough), that's when you should start suspecting they have strong nazi/fascist tendencies.
And, in classic nazi/fascist fashion, they aren't thinking of actually building a nation, they want to clean it. And, of course, there's the obligatory harkening back to the glory days when One Leader led a strongly motivated National Force against all enemies.
It's not even original.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=20&v=CqWcVkE5EiU
“Having these considerations in mind and trying to put oneself in his place makes me wish to forgive such a man defending his native land against all odds.” And killing Jews was helping in doing what? No, sorry, this man was and is still and for ever a war criminal and scum.
What pipelines do you mean? The South Stream was suspended indefinitely, any others are still only nascent projects so far from implementation, that it is precarious to speak of them being "secured".
Apparently, I am not the only one with this idea::laugh4:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2014/mar/06/ukraine-crisis-great-power-oil-gas-rivals-pipelines
http://qha.com.ua/crimean-enterprisebuilds-ukraine-s-longest-underwater-pipeline-119164en.html
Plus a bonus
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/18/world/europe/in-taking-crimea-putin-gains-a-sea-of-fuel-reserves.html
“And you call it a strategic victory?” Yeap, considering without it Russia would have NATO’s troops directly at one very long border more. And Ukraine have no chance to be part of NATO until peace is restored, and that is why Putin doesn’t push for, how you called it, Novorussia? What he needs is 2 or 3 “Russian” provinces with large autonomy (so my reference as Bosnianisation) that can block any attempt by the Ukrainian Government to join NATO. Is this so difficult to understand?
“Somehow, they have been doing fine without Russia so far” Really? Why Assad wasn’t bombed last year? Ah, yeah, Russia did oppose… As you said, US&EU manage very well the Iranian Nuclear Program with Russia… Oh no, they didn’t. They asked Russia for help…
“So this "badly need" is only your wishful thinking.” Unfortunately not, it is just a cold assessment of real politic, not distorted by nationalism and disillusion.
“Who knows, perhaps some elections later we will witness the greatest nightmare of Brenus come true.” You might be right, even if the splitting between the daughter and her father might have an impact on this.
I can see that the prospect to have more Nazi in power fills you of joy and pleasure. Why am I not surprise?
“as I have shown” As usual, you shown nothing. They had a Nazi lile ideology, they allied with the Nazi, and did all Nazi things. And today they proudly wear the insignia of the 2 SS Das Reich in their meeting and in the today Ukrainian Army unit as shown previously.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacres_of_Poles_in_Volhynia_and_Eastern_Galicia
GenosseGeneral
06-08-2015, 08:21
Whom do you have in mind when talking about Nazis, Brenus? Could you be more specific? because there are indeed forces in Ukraine which have little in common with European values: http://khpg.org/en/index.php?id=1433457163
I tell you, I have as much sympathy for the Right Sector, Svoboda and the Radical party, forr Yarosh and Lyashko, as I have for their Russian counterparts such as the LDPR, "Cossacks", Russian monarchists etc. As the article above shows, they share indeed more ideology-wise than they would ever admit: Homophobia, ethnonationalism, anti-Western positions. Heck, a good deal of Russian Nazis even shares their hatred for the Soviet Union.Yes, you read right: the "pro-European" stance of the Ukrainian far right is more a tactical mask it put on during Euromajdan. Before that, Svoboda for instance, wanted a block-free Ukraine following some kind of a "third way" (preferably secured by its own nuclear weapons).
If you talk about those Nazis, then yes, I agree with you that they exist. I also agree with you, that during the past year, the moderate political parties failed to clearly distance themselves by a cordon sanitaire from those lunatic forces. especially Yatseniuk has also an unhealthy habit of imitating their rhethorics.
However, they received fairly little of the vote in last year's parliamentary elections. The only true right-wing party which made it beyond the threshold was Lyashko's radical party, with 8-9 per cent iirc and even less seats, due to Ukraine's mixed majority/proportional system. Svoboda won three direct mandates.
Now let's compare it: No one here calls France a fascist state, although the Front National has won more of the vote. And i am sure I could dig out some more white supremacists/neonazis like the old Le Pen somewhere in the internet. Gilrandir: Don't be to apologetic for the UPA/OUN. Communism also had a noble cause, yet we denounce it last but not least because of its methods. Well, at least outside of Russia. Fun fact: in a 2010 survey, Bandera was less popular than Lenin or Brezhnev. In another survey, 52 per cent of all Ukrainians supported Yanukovich's revocation of the title "Heroe of Ukraine" for him, with 31 per cent opposing that move. The only macroregion which wanted him to keep that title was the West. Replacing Lenin with Bandera is definitely NOT the way to reunify Ukraine. Stick with Taras Shevchenko, Ivano Franko or Yaroslav the Wise if you want to build monuments. (Sources for the surveys: Ukraine-Analysen 75 and 81. Unfortunately in German :/ http://www.laender-analysen.de/ukraine/archiv.php )
Sarmatian
06-08-2015, 09:06
Whom do you have in mind when talking about Nazis, Brenus? Could you be more specific? because there are indeed forces in Ukraine which have little in common with European values: http://khpg.org/en/index.php?id=1433457163
I tell you, I have as much sympathy for the Right Sector, Svoboda and the Radical party, forr Yarosh and Lyashko, as I have for their Russian counterparts such as the LDPR, "Cossacks", Russian monarchists etc. As the article above shows, they share indeed more ideology-wise than they would ever admit: Homophobia, ethnonationalism, anti-Western positions. Heck, a good deal of Russian Nazis even shares their hatred for the Soviet Union.Yes, you read right: the "pro-European" stance of the Ukrainian far right is more a tactical mask it put on during Euromajdan. Before that, Svoboda for instance, wanted a block-free Ukraine following some kind of a "third way" (preferably secured by its own nuclear weapons).
If you talk about those Nazis, then yes, I agree with you that they exist. I also agree with you, that during the past year, the moderate political parties failed to clearly distance themselves by a cordon sanitaire from those lunatic forces. especially Yatseniuk has also an unhealthy habit of imitating their rhethorics.
However, they received fairly little of the vote in last year's parliamentary elections. The only true right-wing party which made it beyond the threshold was Lyashko's radical party, with 8-9 per cent iirc and even less seats, due to Ukraine's mixed majority/proportional system. Svoboda won three direct mandates.
Now let's compare it: No one here calls France a fascist state, although the Front National has won more of the vote. And i am sure I could dig out some more white supremacists/neonazis like the old Le Pen somewhere in the internet. Gilrandir: Don't be to apologetic for the UPA/OUN. Communism also had a noble cause, yet we denounce it last but not least because of its methods. Well, at least outside of Russia. Fun fact: in a 2010 survey, Bandera was less popular than Lenin or Brezhnev. In another survey, 52 per cent of all Ukrainians supported Yanukovich's revocation of the title "Heroe of Ukraine" for him, with 31 per cent opposing that move. The only macroregion which wanted him to keep that title was the West. Replacing Lenin with Bandera is definitely NOT the way to reunify Ukraine. Stick with Taras Shevchenko, Ivano Franko or Yaroslav the Wise if you want to build monuments. (Sources for the surveys: Ukraine-Analysen 75 and 81. Unfortunately in German :/ http://www.laender-analysen.de/ukraine/archiv.php )
Are you seriously going with the story of communism=nazism to justify that it is ok if some Ukrainians celebrate Bandera and UPA?
Anyway, far right forces played a disproportionally large role in Maidan revolution. They were brought en masse from Lvov to Kiev to be used as shock troops. They had the support of the Kiev government to conduct mini revolutions in the east afterwards. After that, far right politicians/activists were given important roles in the sphere of public safety (police, courts - precisely where they are most dangerous), and many of them are still there, and/or their influence is still felt.
This parliament continued the practice of glorifying Bandera/UPA, irrespective of the number of far right MPs in the parliament, which makes it even more dangerous as it means it is a main stream view.
Of course not all Ukrainians are like that. Like in any country, most of the population is moderate, but the country is currently heading to a cliff, and no one is changing course.
Gilrandir
06-08-2015, 12:07
“Having these considerations in mind and trying to put oneself in his place makes me wish to forgive such a man defending his native land against all odds.” And killing Jews was helping in doing what? No, sorry, this man was and is still and for ever a war criminal and scum.
Were there any Jews mentioned in all the arguments? But, as I have said, many of the figures which are glorified today (Bogdan Khmelnitsky or Ivan Gonta http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Gonta) don't have a clean record as far as Jews are concerned. I'm sure each country has such people in history. There are no only black or only white characters. I was trying to see the then situation through the eyes of an average citizen of Western Ukraine and explain his feelings.
What pipelines do you mean? The South Stream was suspended indefinitely, any others are still only nascent projects so far from implementation, that it is precarious to speak of them being "secured".
Apparently, I am not the only one with this idea::laugh4:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2014/mar/06/ukraine-crisis-great-power-oil-gas-rivals-pipelines
http://qha.com.ua/crimean-enterprisebuilds-ukraine-s-longest-underwater-pipeline-119164en.html
Plus a bonus
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/18/world/europe/in-taking-crimea-putin-gains-a-sea-of-fuel-reserves.html
All the articles you link speak of the Ukrainian pipelines near the Crimea now owned by Russia. They are of no transitional value for Russia, just another piece of confiscated Ukrainian property. I meant the pipelines that can help Russia to pump its gas westwards. Such pipelines were not secured by the Crimea annexation.
“And you call it a strategic victory?” Yeap, considering without it Russia would have NATO’s troops directly at one very long border more. And Ukraine have no chance to be part of NATO until peace is restored, and that is why Putin doesn’t push for, how you called it, Novorussia?
I called it? It was your friend Putin who disinterred the long-forgotten nomen.
But as for the rest, it is again misinterpretation. Did I speak of Ukraine joining NATO? I said that any NATO forces are now welcome to be deployed in Ukraine. And as joint military exercise in Lviv region show, the very fact of them got Russia furious:
http://news.yahoo.com/us-ukraine-start-military-training-defying-russian-fury-112519186.html
What he needs is 2 or 3 “Russian” provinces with large autonomy (so my reference as Bosnianisation) that can block any attempt by the Ukrainian Government to join NATO. Is this so difficult to understand?
I was the one who said that this very scenario is what Putin is aiming at now. And which he he'll never get. The public opinion in Ukraine would not tolerate it and all current powers that be realize it.
“Somehow, they have been doing fine without Russia so far” Really? Why Assad wasn’t bombed last year? Ah, yeah, Russia did oppose… As you said, US&EU manage very well the Iranian Nuclear Program with Russia… Oh no, they didn’t. They asked Russia for help…
And somehow the sky didn't fall on earth because all major decisions have been adopted without Russia for a year or so. Evidently Russia's help is not sine qua non so far.
“So this "badly need" is only your wishful thinking.” Unfortunately not, it is just a cold assessment of real politic, not distorted by nationalism and disillusion.
Stigmatizing people without a valid reason and explanation has always been a favorite game of yours. Carry on, dude.
I can see that the prospect to have more Nazi in power fills you of joy and pleasure. Why am I not surprise?
You see joy and pleasure where there are none. But everyone extrapolates his feelings on the feelings of others while trying to explain things beyond his comprehension. What I have paid attention to for more than a year is the fact that nazism in Ukraine is no more likely than nazism in France.
They had a Nazi lile ideology, they allied with the Nazi, and did all Nazi things. And today they proudly wear the insignia of the 2 SS Das Reich in their meeting and in the today Ukrainian Army unit as shown previously.
They do, as well as some Germans town on their coats of arms. But this discussion repeats itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacres_of_Poles_in_Volhynia_and_Eastern_Galicia
If you read the WHOLE text you linked carefully, you couldn't have missed this part:
Ukrainian casualties
Ukrainian casualties at the hands of Poles are estimated at 2,000-3,000 in Volhynia. Together with those killed in other areas, the number of Ukrainian casualties were between 10,000 and 15,000, with the bulk of these occurring in Eastern Galicia and present-day Poland. The numbers included those who died as part of communist repression in post-war Poland. According to Kataryna Wolczuk for all areas affected by conflict, the Ukrainian casualties are estimated as from 10,000 to 30,000 between 1943 and 1947.
Which again bears out my point: given the cruelty of the war, there were a lot of dirty deeds done at that time. Or do you think Western allies or Soviet troops committed no atrocities in liberated lands or in Germany? Yet everybody glorifies now the valiant armies who delivered the world from the nazi plague. We should acknowledge every little fact of such deeds and make peace. Let the past bury its dead.
I know that time is relative, but hasn't it been 70 years in Ukraine also?
Anyway, past repressions are not a justification for mass-murdering civilians.
Did I justify any? As for the years that have lapsed, it is the main point of the whole argument: why should the events of the 70-year-old past (however glorious or grievous all sides of the conflict may consider them) be a reason to sow hatred and wage a war today?
So you think he would actually attack NATO?
I mean that there is no reason to pay attention to what Putin says, still less to his promises - once a liar, always a liar.
Gilrandir
06-08-2015, 12:42
Don't be to apologetic for the UPA/OUN. Communism also had a noble cause, yet we denounce it last but not least because of its methods. Well, at least outside of Russia.
As I have said many times (and which Brenus refuses to see), I have no great sympathy for UPA and Bandera. I realize the limited and biased character of their worldview and dubious and/or criminal nature of some of their deeds. But they were products of their time. And if we speak of say, Volyn massacre, we can't say that ALL UPA MEMBERS participated in it. And Bandera spent most of his active political life in Poish prison and Sachsenhausen. Most of those who criticize UPA and Bandera don't know that. I would like people to know all bad and good sides of things they are so opinionated about before they can make sober conclusions. So I don't see the reason to hate the now old men who didn't take part in any atrocities, but fought all those who they considered invaders - both Germans and Soviets.
Stick with Taras Shevchenko, Ivano Franko or Yaroslav the Wise if you want to build monuments.
Do you know that Shevchenko wrote many poems (including Haidamakas)in which he glorifued those who massacred jews and the Polish?
http://www.ukrainianwinnipeg.ca/shevchenkos-image-jews-haidmakas/
Some modern historians believe that Yaroslav the Wise assasinated his brothers Boris and Gleb and later attributed their murder to another brother Svyatopolk (later nicknamed for it the Accursed).
http://ria.ru/history_tochki/20100801/260888588.html
Bottomline: ANY HISTORIC FIGURE has very shady sided to him. So what is to be done - no glorification of anyone?
My answer - we should know about both the glorious and the ignoble and then praise him for the former and condemn for the latter.
Anyway, far right forces played a disproportionally large role in Maidan revolution.
Of course, you have numerical data on general participation of people in Maidan events and on the number of far rightists among them so that we could confirm that your judgement is sound.
They were brought en masse from Lvov to Kiev to be used as shock troops.
Again, if you have the data on the number of people brought from Lviv to Kyiv and on the percentage of the far rightists among them and on their quantitative representation within the shock troops, we would consider them. Until then these are arbitrary claims.
Gilrandir
06-08-2015, 12:49
And Tagliavini resigned:
http://www.sott.net/article/297447-OSCE-representative-to-Ukraine-resigns
Does it spell the demise of negotiations?
I mean that there is no reason to pay attention to what Putin says, still less to his promises - once a liar, always a liar.
You have never lied or why should I listen to you?
Gilrandir
06-08-2015, 14:42
You have never lied or why should I listen to you?
Everybody lies, yet here we speak of the leader of a nuclear state who violates his nation's promises, then denies it, then admits he does.
Sarmatian
06-08-2015, 15:10
Of course, you have numerical data on general participation of people in Maidan events and on the number of far rightists among them so that we could confirm that your judgement is sound.
My judgement is sound. I didn't say they were majority, I said "they played disproportionally large role". Try to read.
Again, if you have the data on the number of people brought from Lviv to Kyiv and on the percentage of the far rightists among them and on their quantitative representation within the shock troops, we would consider them. Until then these are arbitrary claims.
There's been links to articles in this and previous thread. You can look for yourself. There are ample sources on the net. It is a matter of pride in Lviv that the Lviv State University was empty during Maidan, because all students were in Kiev.
Gilrandir
06-08-2015, 16:31
My judgement is sound. I didn't say they were majority, I said "they played disproportionally large role". Try to read.
To prove the soundness of your judgement of "disproportionally large role" you should give the said proportion and the disproportionate character of the role must be further demonstrated by respective figures. Moreover, you should explain what proportion you consider normal (10%, 20% or what) and why. Since no such proportion or any figures were offered, let me doubt the soundness of your judgement.
There's been links to articles in this and previous thread. You can look for yourself. There are ample sources on the net. It is a matter of pride in Lviv that the Lviv State University was empty during Maidan, because all students were in Kiev.
The latter claim is an overstatement. How do you know that ALL students were there? Do you have any data based on the class registers (manifesting attendance) and then another document vouching that all the absent at classes students of, say, the law school of Lviv University, asked for a leave to go to Maidan or put signatures under a solemn vow to go there and then still another one to show that all those who cut classes in Lviv were registered on Maidan? If I were you, I would say that this is a sensationalist claim (Russian TV showing a footage of empty classrooms whose attendants have gone to the nazi putsch in Kiev) and a cheap shot. But I wouldn't.
But it is not even important. No one denies that the Western regions of Ukraine were heavily represented on Maidan. What you do is claiming that ALL of their representatives were far rightists. To sustain such a claim one must produce proofs.
Sarmatian
06-08-2015, 17:00
To prove the soundness of your judgement of "disproportionally large role" you should give the said proportion and the disproportionate character of the role must be further demonstrated by respective figures. Moreover, you should explain what proportion you consider normal (10%, 20% or what) and why. Since no such proportion or any figures were offered, let me doubt the soundness of your judgement.
Do you really expect me to quantify something like that? Like say 36.47% overall influence? Seriously? You're not trolling, you're being serious here?
The latter claim is an overstatement. How do you know that ALL students were there? Do you have any data based on the class registers (manifesting attendance) and then another document vouching that all the absent at classes students of, say, the law school of Lviv University, asked for a leave to go to Maidan or put signatures under a solemn vow to go there and then still another one to show that all those who cut classes in Lviv were registered on Maidan?
It is a figure of speech. It is not meant to be taken literally. Surely some disagreed, some were injured or sick, some went home, some just abhorred violence, some supported it but were to cowardly... It doesn't mean EVERY. SINGLE. ONE. It means a majority, a very large number of them
If I were you, I would say that this is a sensationalist claim (Russian TV showing a footage of empty classrooms whose attendants have gone to the nazi putsch in Kiev) and a cheap shot. But I wouldn't.
Whatever makes you happy.
But it is not even important. No one denies that the Western regions of Ukraine were heavily represented on Maidan. What you do is claiming that ALL of their representatives were far rightists. To sustain such a claim one must produce proofs.
Aaaaaaand thank you!!! We have a winner! Give the man a cigar!
Precisely my point. And you knew that from the beginning and you could have just agreed with me two posts ago and save us this trouble.
Everybody lies, yet here we speak of the leader of a nuclear state who violates his nation's promises, then denies it, then admits he does.
So what? Nothing in the part after the first comma makes him special. In fact he told the truth about WMDs in Iraq (or the lack thereof) for example while the other side lied about it, then denied it and then admitted it. Oh wait, they never admitted it, that makes them better and more trustworthy.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
06-09-2015, 02:18
Anybody else notice how Putin said they wouldn't "suddenly" attack NATO?
Also, unlike the West, Russians feel it is entirely appropriate to lie through your teeth in politics.
"Also, unlike the West, Russians feel it is entirely appropriate to lie through your teeth in politics." WMD in Iraq? Bringing Democracy in Balkans (remember Jamie Shea and the horse shoes operation?)? Liberation of Women in Afghanistan? Iraq is a better place now? Saudi Arabia potentially elected as Human Right President? Closing Guantanamo Bay? Ignoring Referendum (EU one)? That is a lot of Russian politician in USA & EU politics!:laugh4:
"As I have said many times (and which Brenus refuses to see)" You are not very convincing. Each time you come back with good reasons to explain why it was not entirely the Nazis fault to slaughter, you know, "well, sure the killing of Polish population is due to historical factors due to the fact that they are Polish and Polish are from Poland, so surely it was a good reason enough to kill them based on the fact they were Polish" kind of explanation, which are very convincing.
"Everybody lies, yet here we speak of the leader of a nuclear state who violates his nation's promises" Do you mean like a signed treaty reassuring that Kosovo is part of Serbia?
"Or do you think Western allies or Soviet troops committed no atrocities in liberated lands or in Germany?" The Soviets did (Kathyn (Sp) as we know) and as well a massive rape campaign (but to be fair, the Yugoslav complain about it and they were allied with the Russians), but I failed to have German, Italian, Hungarian or other Germans Allies villages rounded-up and burned alive in their Churches, house, warehouses or lined-up to be executed with a bullet in the head, and organising a pictures competition (the winner in the Nazi side was the guy killing the mother with her baby in her arm with ONE bullet!).
"Stigmatizing people without a valid reason and explanation" Not a stigmatisation, an explanation, ...dude. You admitted yourself, as a Ukrainian you are not impartial (don't remember the exact wording you used). And to be delusional is how I qualify your analyse on Putin and Ukrainian crisis. Nothing about your person... I explained each time why and when.
"Whom do you have in mind when talking about Nazis, Brenus" All openly Nazi. You see, I have no sympathy for this movement, whatever the nationality of the followers, Russians, French, Ukrainian, Norwegian or US. And in all this debate, the ones not following blindly NATO/EU/US propaganda are labelled a Putin's friends (as illustrated once again by Gilrandir who then complain about personal attack). All my political opinion is against Putin's political stance, from the Anti-Gay, pro-religious and lands annexation (I can prolong the list). In fact, as Ukraine is banning the Gay Parade in Kiev (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22648210), the actual Kiev Government is probably closer to Putin than I am.
"No one here calls France a fascist state, although the Front National has won more of the vote." There are no openly Fascist nor Nazi Party is France. It is banned by law as to wear Nazi insignia or Uniform (with few exception i.e. in movies making). The danger is still there, but again, 2 MP... It Le Pen comes to power, and if she get a Parliament, she will still have to change the Constitution to create a Fascist State. We had this before in France, and, well, the Fascists failed. We had a demonstration of more than 4 millions in the street to defend freedom against religious fanatics murderers. so we will defeat Fascism as we did in the past. It would be a great help if EU started to be democratic, but we will mange without.
Anybody else notice how Putin said they wouldn't "suddenly" attack NATO?
Also, unlike the West, Russians feel it is entirely appropriate to lie through your teeth in politics.
More nonsense without supporting facts?
GenosseGeneral
06-09-2015, 10:41
"Whom do you have in mind when talking about Nazis, Brenus" All openly Nazi. You see, I have no sympathy for this movement, whatever the nationality of the followers, Russians, French, Ukrainian, Norwegian or US. And in all this debate, the ones not following blindly NATO/EU/US propaganda are labelled a Putin's friends (as illustrated once again by Gilrandir who then complain about personal attack). All my political opinion is against Putin's political stance, from the Anti-Gay, pro-religious and lands annexation (I can prolong the list). In fact, as Ukraine is banning the Gay Parade in Kiev (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22648210), the actual Kiev Government is probably closer to Putin than I am.
"No one here calls France a fascist state, although the Front National has won more of the vote." There are no openly Fascist nor Nazi Party is France. It is banned by law as to wear Nazi insignia or Uniform (with few exception i.e. in movies making). The danger is still there, but again, 2 MP... It Le Pen comes to power, and if she get a Parliament, she will still have to change the Constitution to create a Fascist State. We had this before in France, and, well, the Fascists failed. We had a demonstration of more than 4 millions in the street to defend freedom against religious fanatics murderers. so we will defeat Fascism as we did in the past. It would be a great help if EU started to be democratic, but we will mange without.
The article you linked is from 2 years ago - when non-fascist Yanukovich was still in power. There was one, however, last week, I actually posted an article about it above, and it was attacked by right wingers, yet the police protected it. In other words, it did what you expect from a democratic state: protecting a minority's rights. And before you decry how this again shows Ukraine's naziness - unfortunately, homophobia is a problem in all Eastern European societies, whether it be Serbia, Poland or Russia. The Russian case is only in so far special, as that the government does nothing to protect LBGT people against it, quite on the contrary, it follows the majority's opinion and pushes minorities into hiding.
You see, then there is also fairly little reason to call the current government of Ukraine "nazi" or "fascist", as you continue to do. Ukrainians clearly voted against nationalist parties. There are some positions in the political discourse which are more nationalist than what we are used to in Western Europe, but again, this is a phenomena observed in many Eastern European states such as Poland, the Baltic states or Russia. Did you know that Zhirinovsky's LDPR holds actually quite a number of seats in the Russian Duma? And trust me, that party's positions are about as Nazi as those of Svoboda in 2010, they only avoid the Swastikas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LDPR_%28political_party%29
Correct me if I am wrong, Gilrandir, but from what I know, the Rada has recently passed a law prohibiting both Nazi and Soviet symbols as signs of totalitarianism.
Gilrandir
06-09-2015, 11:26
Do you really expect me to quantify something like that? Like say 36.47% overall influence? Seriously? You're not trolling, you're being serious here?
I learned your teachings well, oh Exalted Master. You said that this is a place for serious debates, and that I should corroborate my statements with proofs.
What if I now claim that among the separatists there is a disproportionally large number of Russian and European nazis? You would surely demand proofs and receiving an answer like you gave you would again stick on my forehead the label of a sensationalist liar.
I won't do this regarding your claims. But until I see proofs, I wouldn't buy them.
All you can claim without doubt is that there were far rightists among the Maidaners and that they became especially conspicuous after the conflict grew really violent (the second half of February). The other claim (about their disproportional numbers) is arbitrary and questionable.
It is a figure of speech. It is not meant to be taken literally. Surely some disagreed, some were injured or sick, some went home, some just abhorred violence, some supported it but were to cowardly... It doesn't mean EVERY. SINGLE. ONE. It means a majority, a very large number of them
You go by stereotypes (deliberately or accidentally echoing those of Russian mass media):
1. All people/students from Western Ukraine are nationalists.
2. All of these nationalists are nazis/far-rightists.
3. All of them went to Maidan.
4. Maidan consisted solely of people from Western Ukraine.
All stereotypes tend to generalize conlusions made on a limited data thus are not true. What if I claim that all Muslims are terrorists or all blacks in the USA are athletes, entertainers or gangsters? Would it be true?
It seems to me that you are the one here who is vehemently against such generalizations. Well, perhaps, I am wrong. Or things change and in discussions (measured, serious and sober, mind you) you resort to such methods.
Aaaaaaand thank you!!! We have a winner! Give the man a cigar!
Precisely my point. And you knew that from the beginning and you could have just agreed with me two posts ago and save us this trouble.
Perhaps your memory cheats you, but I never claimed the opposite. At the same time I paid your attention that Madian consisted of people from ALL OVER UKRAINE. If you find where I claimed the opposite, I will share your "joy and pleasure" (cited after Brenus 2015, post 784 in the current thread).
So what? Nothing in the part after the first comma makes him special.
So what's the use of quoting him? You might as well leave a blank space after "Putin said that".
"As I have said many times (and which Brenus refuses to see)" You are not very convincing. Each time you come back with good reasons to explain why it was not entirely the Nazis fault to slaughter, you know, "well, sure the killing of Polish population is due to historical factors due to the fact that they are Polish and Polish are from Poland, so surely it was a good reason enough to kill them based on the fact they were Polish" kind of explanation, which are very convincing.
First of all, UPA were not nazis. Your sources call them collaborationists.
Second of all, I denounced the Volyn massacre.
Third af all, if you think that the convincing power of these statements is abated by claims that atrocities were abundant at the time of the war, it is your problem.
"Or do you think Western allies or Soviet troops committed no atrocities in liberated lands or in Germany?" The Soviets did (Kathyn (Sp) as we know) and as well a massive rape campaign (but to be fair, the Yugoslav complain about it and they were allied with the Russians), but I failed to have German, Italian, Hungarian or other Germans Allies villages rounded-up and burned alive in their Churches, house, warehouses or lined-up to be executed with a bullet in the head, and organising a pictures competition (the winner in the Nazi side was the guy killing the mother with her baby in her arm with ONE bullet!).
As I have said, a distant relative of mine (he was the husband of my grandmother's sister, died a decade ago) told me stories of the behavior of Soviet liberators abroad, which are different from the canonized ones. And, on the other hand, my mother told me about German occupation (although being only 4-6 years old back then) and she can't remember any maltreatment or misconduct by soldiers billeted in their house. So speaking about the unpleasant subject of atrocities one can't be guided by official sources only since not all of such cases found their way there.
Of course, the Nazi's scale of atrocities was much greater, yet there is no denying the fact that all belligerents didn't fight in white gloves.
"Stigmatizing people without a valid reason and explanation" Not a stigmatisation, an explanation, ...dude. You admitted yourself, as a Ukrainian you are not impartial (don't remember the exact wording you used). And to be delusional is how I qualify your analyse on Putin and Ukrainian crisis. Nothing about your person... I explained each time why and when.
So, to your mind, being not impartial=nationalist?
Then I have the full right to use your logics: claiming that Russia is not involved in Donbas conflict=Putin's supporter.
And in all this debate, the ones not following blindly NATO/EU/US propaganda are labelled a Putin's friends.
You humiliate others by denying them critical thinking while believing your stance to be sober and balanced. Others do the same and think you are "blindly following" Russian propaganda. So the whole discussion has turned into implicit recriminations (whatever Sarmatian may say about the seriousness of the debate here).
In fact, as Ukraine is banning the Gay Parade in Kiev (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22648210), the actual Kiev Government is probably closer to Putin than I am.
Again a lie (as it was the case with the Communist ban). The march WAS HELD and PROTECTED BY THE KYIV POLICE from those who attacked it.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/06/ukraine-lgbt-idUSL5N0YS07R20150606
"No one here calls France a fascist state, although the Front National has won more of the vote." There are no openly Fascist nor Nazi Party is France. It is banned by law
The same in Ukraine and, I believe, in all countries. So, logically, those who you consider Ukraininan nazis are not.
We had a demonstration of more than 4 millions in the street to defend freedom against religious fanatics murderers.
:laugh4: What a verve! You believe that freedom is defended by marching and chanting slogans? Then why does France spend more on security measures? It could just take people into the streets every time something like CH happens.
Gilrandir
06-09-2015, 11:31
And before you decry how this again shows Ukraine's naziness - unfortunately, homophobia is a problem in all Eastern European societies, whether it be Serbia, Poland or Russia.
The public order in a country is determined not by the existence of criminals, but by the ability of the authorities to neutralize them.
Correct me if I am wrong, Gilrandir, but from what I know, the Rada has recently passed a law prohibiting both Nazi and Soviet symbols as signs of totalitarianism.
I would gladly confirm it, but if I do, some people are sure to call it propaganda or bias. If someone is interested, he may find the law, read it and make his own conclusions. I don't doubt what conclusions Brenus would make, though.
So what's the use of quoting him? You might as well leave a blank space after "Putin said that".
The same use as quoting Merkel, Obama or any journalist on the issue.
The greeks have plenty of evidence that Merkel is like Hitler by the way.
Gilrandir
06-09-2015, 11:48
This is pathetic:
http://en.glavnoe.ua/news/n229277
This is pathetic:
http://en.glavnoe.ua/news/n229277
The automatic translation is really pathetic, I am not sure what it is trying to tell me.
To link to a biased Ukrainian source is just as pathetic, it's a deeply divided partisan country where both sides use propaganda to the max.
Gilrandir
06-09-2015, 12:49
The automatic translation is really pathetic, I am not sure what it is trying to tell me.
To link to a biased Ukrainian source is just as pathetic, it's a deeply divided partisan country where both sides use propaganda to the max.
This source quotes LIFENEWS, which can be called a biased Russian source.
The gist of the information (by Lifenews): Gubarev as well as other 15 people were detained in one of the high-rise bulidings in Donetsk because they started to shoot with a sniper rifle at a DNR military base near by.
There is a footage:
http://lifenews.ru/news/155318
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
06-09-2015, 15:03
More nonsense without supporting facts?
No - Putin's words, or rather thair translation said "suddenly invade". We would be crazy to think Russia would "suddenly invade" a NATO country like the Baltics.
Also, the Russians actually have a word for strategic lying in international politics, there was an article about it on the BBC - they consider it a craft and are very open about it.
So, Western leaders will try for "plausible deniability" and "nuances" of the truth. The Russians will just lie and set up more lies to support it, making it impossible to get to the truth.
So - for example - if NATO don't want to acknowledge tanks massing in Poland they will refuse to talk about it, if Russia doesn't want to talk about it's tanks in Ukraine it will deny they are there, then it will report they are in the North near Finland on exercises, or it will hold actual exercises in Russia to distract from the tanks in Ukraine, or it will say there are only "volunteers" in Russia.
See the difference?
"Again a lie" Complain to BBC.:laugh4:
See the difference?
Yes, the difference is that one lies at first and comes out with the truth later and is quite upfront about it while others hide behind euphemisms for the word lie and try to do so ad infinitum. Neither of them do actually act very differently however.
Also a relevant link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-schwarz/colin-powell-wmd-iraq-war_b_2624620.html
Powell played an intercept of a conversation between Iraqi army officers about the UN inspections. However, when he translated what they were saying, he knowingly embellished it, turning it from evidence Iraq was complying with U.N. resolutions to evidence Iraq was violating them.
So trustworthy, it almost moves me to tears.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
06-09-2015, 22:11
Yes, the difference is that one lies at first and comes out with the truth later and is quite upfront about it while others hide behind euphemisms for the word lie and try to do so ad infinitum. Neither of them do actually act very differently however.
Also a relevant link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-schwarz/colin-powell-wmd-iraq-war_b_2624620.html
So trustworthy, it almost moves me to tears.
And we never stop talking about Iraq, do we?
Russians will only tell the truth when it benefits them, otherwise they will lie, Western politicians will avoid lying because if they get caught they'll probably have to resign their position. That means you can sift Western leaders' statements for something close to the truth, where you have to assume the Russians are lying.
The point about this is that Russian politicians will, therefore, assume the West is lying just as much as they are, so when the West says it wants to partner with Russia and has no interest in encircling and confining Russia the assumption is that that is a lie, the West wants something else.
Basically, whatever you tell Putin he assumes you're lying because he's lying, so he'll act on his perception of the situation and not what you tell him; this helps to explain why he invaded Ukraine. The West wanted Ukraine as a bridge to Russia, geographically and culturally (like the UK is a bridge between the US and Europe) and told Russia so. Russia concluded from this that the West wanted Ukraine to join NATO, therefore when a pro-Western government supplanted a pro-Russian one during the crisis last year this was seen as something engineered by Western leaders specifically to drive a wedge between Ukraine and Russia, despite everything the West had said.
So Putin ordered an invasion to counter what he was as NATO aggression.
And we never stop talking about Iraq, do we?
If I bring up something older you will probably tell me that it's outdated again and the newest lies have not been exposed yet, so yeah, Iraq it is. I'm sorry that I cannot bring up any western lies you would enjoy reading about.
As for western leaders having to step down over lies, eh, first of all name one.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
06-10-2015, 02:54
If I bring up something older you will probably tell me that it's outdated again and the newest lies have not been exposed yet, so yeah, Iraq it is. I'm sorry that I cannot bring up any western lies you would enjoy reading about.
As for western leaders having to step down over lies, eh, first of all name one.
Uh, not I meant we never stop talking about Iraq because we know they lied.
Both Bush and Blair have been made mud by it.
As to Western Leaders lying and resigning after being caught...
Watergate?
Also - every British politician who has resigned, ever?
Gilrandir
06-10-2015, 15:49
"Again a lie" Complain to BBC.:laugh4:
When you doubt anything I post or link, it is all about bias, unrealiability and propaganda-mongering.
When your sources lie, it is just :laugh4:
Quod licet Jovi, non licet bovi?
As for western leaders having to step down over lies, eh, first of all name one.
B. Clinton almost did it. Almost. Well, many wanted him to.
Why am I not surprised?
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=2b8_1433894594
Uh, not I meant we never stop talking about Iraq because we know they lied.
Both Bush and Blair have been made mud by it.
With no real consequence though, neither of them stepped down. Can you explain why Clinton was impeached over lying about Lewinsky and Bush wasn't over sending people into their deaths to kill loads of foreigners? What kind of high standard is it that we're talking about?
As to Western Leaders lying and resigning after being caught...
Watergate?
Also - every British politician who has resigned, ever?
Watergate was too long ago; and how many of them resigned after lying about issues on foreign politics?
A lot of it is about internal issues where hardly anyone actually got hurt (compared to a war) and that do not affect other countries.
It's not comparable to Putin lying to/about the enemy.
B. Clinton almost did it. Almost. Well, many wanted him to.
Yes, as I said above, over an affair. The lie was less of a problem than the republican agenda to get rid of him for political reasons.
And it was still an internal problem. It is generally easier to accept a politician who lies to screw other nations than one who lies to you as a voter.
Gilrandir
06-12-2015, 16:06
It is June 12th and Putin is the Angel of Peace:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/06/10/putin-pope-meet-vatican/71007412/
It is June 12th and Putin is the Angel of Peace:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/06/10/putin-pope-meet-vatican/71007412/
"The Pope! How many divisions has he got?" - Josef Stalin
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin
Gilrandir
06-14-2015, 11:22
A poll on the attitude of Ukrainians to the war in Donbas:
http://news.rin.ru/eng/news///114736/
GenosseGeneral
06-14-2015, 19:39
Well, that makes actually sense. There was an episode a couple of months ago, when someone leaked that Putin allegedly in a closed meeting with business leaders told an anecdote in which Poroshenko had offered him the Donbass during the Minsk talks. Whether this contained any truth or not, it underlined the fact that no one really wants the Donbass anymore. That area's infrastructure is heavily damaged: bridges have been blown up, water and gas pipelines have been hit by artillery shells, tracked vehicles have ravaged roads. The most devastating example is probably Donetsk airport: rebuilt for Euro 2012, it not more than a heap of rubble after the fighting. Law enforcement is more or less defunct, as thugs on both sides do not really care about stuff like "property rights" and I highly doubt that Donetsk's militsiya has received any pay during the last year. On top of that, living space has been either destroyed or damaged (windows destroyed by shells' shockwaves) and businesses have effectively shut down. So whoever gets the Donbass ends up with a region which needs billions of USD to get infrastructure running, a population of 2-3 million completely dependent on social aid (currently more or less supplied by Russia), and, if Kiev regains control, is openly hostile to the central government.
That is a burden Ukraine alone cannot shoulder, especially not in light of the economic meltdown and the high likelyhood of a government default. Nevertheless, Western funding for reconstruction of the Donbass as part of a peace agreement would stabilize the region more than arms deliveries, military excercises and training for Kiev's forces.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
06-14-2015, 21:09
"The Pope! How many divisions has he got?" - Josef Stalin
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin
A quote that sounds clever until you stop to think about geopolitical realities and how religion is a factor.
Or China could take the Donbass. Might make them geographically eligible to join the EU.
A quote that sounds clever until you stop to think about geopolitical realities and how religion is a factor.
And here I thought this Stalin guy sounds as reasonable as Hitler, but thank you for opening my eyes.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
06-14-2015, 23:32
It's quoted because it's seen as a clever comment.
But you knew that.
It's quote because it's seen as a clever comment.
"I'm sure that Nero didn't set fire to Rome. It was the Christian-Bolsheviks who did that, just as the Commune set fire to Paris in 1871 and the Communists set fire to the Reichstag in 1932." - Adolf Hitler
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler
"Or China could take the Donbass. Might make them geographically eligible to join the EU." First join the European Song Contest: Apparently to be European(in geographical sense) is not a requirement. In an other hand not to be in part of the North Atlantic coast line is not required to be part of NATO either, so why not?
Gilrandir
06-15-2015, 14:34
I highly doubt that Donetsk's militsiya has received any pay during the last year.
Which militsiya do you mean? If the separatists' - it is true. But I doubt that the Ukrainian police (which is still called "militsiya") in parts of Donbas controlled by Kyiv is not paid any salaries.
Nevertheless, Western funding for reconstruction of the Donbass as part of a peace agreement would stabilize the region more than arms deliveries, military excercises and training for Kiev's forces.
If any financial infusions into the region's infrastructure and economy are made on behalf of the West, they are likely to be accepted (if they are) with hostility and curses. But since Minsk agreement is not observed, no infusions loom for Donbas (unless those from Russia which are just enough to keep the people afloat).
But you speak of economic and finacial considerations which are a care of the government. The poll rather reflects the popular attitude to the severed parts of Donbas. This attitude is more or less epitomized by the statement: "If they want so much to live apart, well, let them do it, and we'll see what will happen to them".
GenosseGeneral
06-15-2015, 17:29
Which militsiya do you mean? If the separatists' - it is true. But I doubt that the Ukrainian police (which is still called "militsiya") in parts of Donbas controlled by Kyiv is not paid any salaries.
If any financial infusions into the region's infrastructure and economy are made on behalf of the West, they are likely to be accepted (if they are) with hostility and curses. But since Minsk agreement is not observed, no infusions loom for Donbas (unless those from Russia which are just enough to keep the people afloat).
But you speak of economic and finacial considerations which are a care of the government. The poll rather reflects the popular attitude to the severed parts of Donbas. This attitude is more or less epitomized by the statement: "If they want so much to live apart, well, let them do it, and we'll see what will happen to them".
Yeah, I had in mind the police force. Have they now officially renamed it? I read about plans for a new national police, but I was not sure how far those plans are advanced. I guess I am gonna see those guys then next week then, as I will go back to Germany via Kharkov and Kiev.
Well, the average Ukrainian might not calculate how many billions rebuilding the Donbass' infrastructure costs, but he can easily calculate how much the war costs, for him/her personally. As you pointed already out, not every young man from Kiev, Odessa or Lvov is keen to die for Donetsk. And at least some of Donetsk's inhabitants showed, that they are also fed up with the fighting: http://tvrain.ru/teleshow/here_and_now/hotim_chtob_vy_seli_za_stol_peregovorov_chto_trebu-389196/
(Remarkable sentence: we want peace, we want a place at the negotiation table)
But of course any government making a decision to abandon the Donbass would face a Ukrainian version of the "stab-in-the-back myth" from the side of nationalist forces. And some of those nationalist forces are quite well-equipped and were quite hesitant to subordinate under formal command from Kiev.
Also, it is notable that the its industry played a key role for Ukraine's export - quite valuable for a country with a foreign trade deficit.
This sounds like an interesting reportage into the economic consequences the conflict has for the Donbass. Unfortunately, the full version is subscriber-only :/
https://slon.ru/special/donbass-economics
Gilrandir
06-16-2015, 15:36
Have they now officially renamed it? I read about plans for a new national police, but I was not sure how far those plans are advanced. I guess I am gonna see those guys then next week then, as I will go back to Germany via Kharkov and Kiev.
Both yes and no. The reform that is under way now is not about renaming the old bodies. The new police is to replace the old GAI, district poice officers and patrolmen and will embrace the duties of those. The reform is being implemented by the Georgean who did it in her own country. The first group of the new policemen finished their training about a week ago and are now being introduced to their duties in large cities (Kyiv, Odesa, Kharkiv and Lviv, IIRC). So I'm not sure they will have assumed thier duties soon enough for you to see them at large.
The rest of the old militsiya (for example, criminal police) is still there. I guess if the first reform turns out a success, they will move on to the other branches of the law enforcement system.
As you pointed already out, not every young man from Kiev, Odessa or Lvov is keen to die for Donetsk.
This is because they don't feel that people in Donetsk want to be a part of Ukraine.
And at least some of Donetsk's inhabitants showed, that they are also fed up with the fighting:
(Remarkable sentence: we want peace, we want a place at the negotiation table)
Let's not take too much stock in this event. First of all, only about half a thousand people rallied there. Second of all, they were only/mostly the inhabitants of the districts that suffer most from fighting. Third of all, they differed as to the way the war should be stopped and some of them urged Zakharchenko to start an offensive and chase the Ukrainian army away far from the city.
But even if there are people in Donbas who want a lasting peace, they have no chance to change anything - the region is rampant with armed people who will not brook any meddling. And Zakharchenko is not a person to do anything on his own since the decision-making center is the Kremlin.
But of course any government making a decision to abandon the Donbass would face a Ukrainian version of the "stab-in-the-back myth" from the side of nationalist forces. And some of those nationalist forces are quite well-equipped and were quite hesitant to subordinate under formal command from Kiev.
I'm not a great fan of Poroshenko and didn't vote for him a year ago, but I can't help sympathizing with his current plight. I would never like to be in his shoes. Making this reservation, I would like to say that he chose the best way he could in this situation. He claims that Donbas is and will always be an integral part of Ukraine. But seeing that immediate return of it will overtax the feeble Ukrainian economic and financial systems he insists on Minsk agreement to be implemented, namely on withrawal of the Russians from Donbas and Ukraine regaining control of the border which may be followed by local elections. He knows that Putin will never agree to it, so he is quite secure: on the one hand he never relinquishes Donbas, on the other hand he puts the burden of Donbas supplying and financing on Russia (or local separatists themselves). The situation is total stalemate and will take a different course when something changes inside Russian powers-that-be.
Also, it is notable that the its industry played a key role for Ukraine's export - quite valuable for a country with a foreign trade deficit.
Seeing you linking to articles in Russian I would venture to link this one on the nature and structure of Donbas industry.
http://nv.ua/opinion/Butko/chto-delat-s-ekonomikoy-donbassa-53395.html
If there are any difficulties, I can render the gist of it.
If even the US start to see it now!!!
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/06/17/hous-j17.html
because this one is buyer, other links...
http://www.embassynews.ca/news/2015/06/17/us-blocks-training-of-neo-nazis-in-ukraine/47251
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/06/12/u-s-house-admits-nazi-role-in-ukraine/
Don't worry any way, it never stop the US to work with Nazi...
GenosseGeneral
06-18-2015, 12:22
It's good to see the Georgians reforming the police. You can say about Saakashvili what you want to (and there is a lot of bad stuff to say), but the Georgian police reforms under Saakashvili were the most successful fight against corruption the CIS has seen. It's nevertheless a hard fight, as fighting a corrupt executive requires an independent and clean judiciary, which Ukraine is also lacking.
This article and those below sum up the steps planned and taken so far: http://khpg.org/en/index.php?id=1432213622
As to that article on the Donbass: The author has a point in saying that its industry structure is aged. Any restructuring of old heavy industry areas is difficult, look at the US' rust belt, the German Ruhr area or Britain's former industrial centers. The suggestion to turn it into an agricultural region does not make ANY sense AT ALL. First of all, Ukraine has already a huge agricultural sector. In fact, the majority of her central and Western Oblast' are considered to be agricultural. And those are Ukraine's poorest regions for a reason... plus, the soil of a region used by Soviet heavy industry for decades is very likely full of stuff you don't really want on your plate.
Gilrandir
06-18-2015, 16:18
If even the US start to see it now!!!
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/06/12/u-s-house-admits-nazi-role-in-ukraine/
What I like about Brenus is that he never links any sources which publish lies and propaganda. The one above included. The initial passage leaves no doubt about both (lies and propaganda):
The U.S. House of Representatives has admitted an ugly truth that the U.S. mainstream media has tried to hide from the American people – that the post-coup regime in Ukraine has relied heavily on Nazi storm troopers to carry out its bloody war against ethnic Russians, reports Robert Parry.
The very form of the phrase reeks of propaganda and the statement of the "war against ethnic Russians" is a lie - ethnic Russians are there on both sides of fighting, but the majority of Mariupol (as well as whole Donbas) population are ethnic Ukrainians. The "leaders" of both DPR and LPR (Zakharchenko and Plotnytsky) are ethnic Ukrainians. As I have said, this war lacks all the prerequisites neccessary to qualify it as ethnic, linguistic or confessional. I see that the author of the article has a grudge against "the mainstream American media", so his ire is aimed not so at nazis, but at NYT.
And as I have also said, nazis are on both sides of fighting. Be careful, the following article may cause a cognitive dissonance - Right Sector captures nazis: https://belsat.eu/en/articles/ukrainian-forces-capture-nazi-tattooed-russian-mercenary-shyrokyne/
Brenus, Brenus ....:no: I can't believe you to do what you so vehemently seem to detest - linking the articles the quality of which might have been the subject matter of your PhD thesis.
And where is Sarmatian with his righteous anger? He should have been the first to detect and swoop at a forum-spoiler. Or is a common view on things a justification for condoning sins?
Franklin D. Roosevelt (supposedly): "Somoza may be a son of a bitch, but he's our son of a bitch".
As to that article on the Donbass: The author has a point in saying that its industry structure is aged. Any restructuring of old heavy industry areas is difficult, look at the US' rust belt, the German Ruhr area or Britain's former industrial centers. The suggestion to turn it into an agricultural region does not make ANY sense AT ALL. First of all, Ukraine has already a huge agricultural sector. In fact, the majority of her central and Western Oblast' are considered to be agricultural. And those are Ukraine's poorest regions for a reason... plus, the soil of a region used by Soviet heavy industry for decades is very likely full of stuff you don't really want on your plate.
I am not sure argiculture will work well with Donbas, chemical industry seems a better option since there are (or were) some working facilities there, thus the qualified employees also. As for the old industries, I think they are as good as dead. Many enterprises are ruined and as for those that are not - Ukraine is unlikely to face East in the foreseeable future and the only market for such industries (given the low quality of the products) is there. That said, Donbas under current conditions has become a huge pain in the neck for Ukraine. So the real return of it will bring more harm than benefit to Ukraine.
By the way, how was your stay in Russia?
"I can't believe you to do what you so vehemently seem to detest - linking the articles the quality of which might have been the subject matter of your PhD thesis." You are right not to believe it. But you choose to ignore the "because this one is buyer, other links..."
You will never change... or learn...:2thumbsup:
Gilrandir
06-19-2015, 13:07
"I can't believe you to do what you so vehemently seem to detest - linking the articles the quality of which might have been the subject matter of your PhD thesis." You are right not to believe it. But you choose to ignore the "because this one is buyer, other links..."
You will never change... or learn...:2thumbsup:
It is good to know that you do, though. During my short sojourn on this forum I have seen you only once link an openly biased article, now was the time for the second. A tendency?
If you knew its nature than you had "an agenda" (as you like to call it) posting it. I can't see no other reason of it except an attempt to appear to sound more persuasive through linking several (instead of one) article and creating an effect "you see, so many sources corroborate what I claim". Nice try.
Gilrandir
06-20-2015, 16:24
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/06/19/russian-lawmakers-back-bill-holding-2016-parliamentary-election-to-several/
If Putin's grip on his counrty is so secure (polls give him 86% support), why so much fuss about moving the elections sooner?
And there are voices who want to do the same with the next presidential elections:
http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/kudrin-urges-early-presidential-ballot-in-russia-to-spawn-reform/41499004
Gilrandir
06-26-2015, 13:59
The mother of the captured Russian soldier has her say...
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idCAKBN0P520220150625?irpc=932
while PACE calls Russia names
http://xn--80ajgarobcee6b3h.xn--p1ai/finansyi-eng/pace-officially-recognized-russia-as-the-aggressor-in-a-resolution-on-ukraine/.
In its turn Russia gets nastier:
http://www.thelocal.dk/20150625/russia-rehearsed-takeover-of-denmark
Strike For The South
06-26-2015, 16:03
It's June 26th and Vladimir Putin is still a fascist.
Gilrandir
06-29-2015, 09:47
Now it's official:
http://sputniknews.com/russia/20150627/1023916532.html
Next comes the decision on illegality of the USSR dissolution?
Gilrandir
06-29-2015, 15:26
http://www.chathamhouse.org/publication/russian-challenge#
Gilrandir
06-30-2015, 17:28
Now it's official:
http://sputniknews.com/russia/20150627/1023916532.html
Next comes the decision on illegality of the USSR dissolution?
Almost bull's-eye:
http://news.rin.ru/eng/news///117521/
Gilrandir
07-09-2015, 12:26
Turkish Stream on a hiatus... again...
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-07-08/saipem-lost-gazprom-contract-on-black-sea-link-over-disputes
while the Crimea will become a place for ex-drug addicts.
http://www.unian.info/politics/1098733-russian-drug-addicts-to-be-sent-to-work-in-crimea.html
Shameless linkstealing ahead http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven/2015/07/fuut_fuuwski.html#comments
I absolutily think she has a point. Whatever it might be I don't understand anything she's saying.
Sarmatian
07-09-2015, 18:30
while the Crimea will become a place for ex-drug addicts.
http://www.unian.info/politics/1098733-russian-drug-addicts-to-be-sent-to-work-in-crimea.html
O Tempora, o mores. The pain, the physical pain. They're polluting Crimea. Giving jobs to former drug addicts. Only Putin can do something so inhumane...
CrossLOPER
07-09-2015, 22:19
...
while the Crimea will become a place for ex-drug addicts.
http://www.unian.info/politics/1098733-russian-drug-addicts-to-be-sent-to-work-in-crimea.html
"The issue of employment of drug addicts, who have already been rehabilitated, is the key to their successful return into society," according to the National Anti-Drug Union. "Nevertheless, many jobs are closed to people previously suffered from addiction. The factor of "social stigma of drug addiction" also complicates the process of job search for people suffering from addiction," says the Union's press service.
...
National Anti-Drug Union is an association set up to coordinate the activities of public and non-profit organizations in Russia on the prevention of drug abuse and drug-related crimes. The Union cooperates with the Federal Service for Drug Control, various authorities, religious, youth, sport and other organizations.
You should shell them, and then eat them. They're not human beings, anyway.
Gilrandir
07-10-2015, 05:57
O Tempora, o mores. The pain, the physical pain. They're polluting Crimea. Giving jobs to former drug addicts. Only Putin can do something so inhumane...
You should shell them, and then eat them. They're not human beings, anyway.
I gave the information, it is your right to make conclusions yourself.
Gilrandir
07-11-2015, 16:17
You should shell them, and then eat them. They're not human beings, anyway.
Only Putin can do something so inhumane...
I agree. Demonization was needless:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33445772
Just a glance from an outsider:
http://www.wrath-bearingtree.com/dispatches/
CrossLOPER
07-11-2015, 18:49
I agree. Demonization was needless:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33445772
Morally, an approval would have been right. They need to admit to it themselves. Someone was going to be pissed, regardless the decision. Russia chose to maintain good relations with a long-term allied government. It was going to be spun one way or another.
Just a glance from an outsider:
http://www.wrath-bearingtree.com/dispatches/
I am not sure what this is trying to argue. It's also filled with clichés.
The arguments are scattered. At one point, the author gains a fetishistic obsession with the hammer and sickle on the insignia on Aeroflot and suggests it is as unacceptable as Lufthansa displaying a Swastika on its insignia, and then proceeds to spend a great deal of time detailing why Nazi Romanticism might not be so bad.
"Morally, an approval would have been right." Why? Bosnian Forces killed war prisoners, few thousands, figures are still unknown... It is difficult to know, but if the Bosnian had 8,000 men in position to fight, the town would have never fallen.
In order to match the number of 8,000, the Bosnian Government and UN are taking all unidentified bodies, do DNA (as DNA can show religion), but as all Bosnian are related, it is quite a complex thing.
As part of a reconciliation process, it doesn't seems to work either, as shown during the commemoration...
Awful as it was, it is not a genocide, but a war crime (women and children were not killed). The Hague Tribunal took a political stance on this one.
More than 100,000 Serbs were expelled from Kosovo, Churches burned (not that I am against to destroy Churches but not during an ethnic cleansing...), few thousands killed, but this was not a genocide. Same in Croatia, same in Bosnia.
So, why Srebrenica differed from the others?
Gilrandir
07-12-2015, 15:19
Awful as it was, it is not a genocide, but a war crime (women and children were not killed). The Hague Tribunal took a political stance on this one.
War crimes are committed against indiscriminate people. Here only one ethnic/confessional group was targeted. This was enough to qualify it as genocide.
Sarmatian
07-12-2015, 18:43
That would mean that all wars between nation states were in fact a genocide.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
"This was enough to qualify it as genocide." Yeap, it is exactly how The Hague twisted the concept in order to fit the bill.
So my grand-father killing Germans was committing genocide as he didn't killed any English or American, he was clearly aiming at only one ethnic/confessional group which happened to be France's invaders.
Gilrandir
07-13-2015, 10:31
That would mean that all wars between nation states were in fact a genocide.
Again, in war you kill indisriminate people fighting against you without asking thier nationality.
"This was enough to qualify it as genocide." Yeap, it is exactly how The Hague twisted the concept in order to fit the bill.
So my grand-father killing Germans was committing genocide as he didn't killed any English or American, he was clearly aiming at only one ethnic/confessional group which happened to be France's invaders.
You mean he gathered all members of a community, chose German males among them and shot them? Wow, what details we learn!
Sarmatian
07-13-2015, 16:34
Again, in war you kill indisriminate people fighting against you without asking thier nationality.
And all men of military age were killed indiscriminately. Those men used the status of UN protected enclave to raid surrounding communities, only to fall back, hide behind UN troops and do it all over again. And again, and again, and again... After they were beaten, Bosnian Serb forces killed all POWs.
None of it makes it excusable.
None of it makes it a genocide. One could call it a massacre, a war crime, a crime against humanity, take your pick, but not a genocide...
If that is the definition of a genocide, Every.Single.Nation on earth has committed genocide multiple times. Ukrainians against the Poles and Jews, Poles against Ukrainians, English against Arabs, Americans against Native Americans, Vietnamis, Iraqis, Afghanis and Mexicans, Germany against just about every nation the conquered in ww2, Russians against Poles and various Asian tribes/countries, Greeks against the Turks, Turks against the Greeks, all European colonizers against native population on all continents and so on.
To label it a genocide is supposed to justify western policies and actions during the nineties. It is insulting to those who truly were victims of genocide to compare it.
"You mean he gathered all members of a community, chose German males among them and shot them?" Much better! The community identified itself in wearing green/grey uniforms (men and women),so the choice was easy to do, and gathered in buildings, train or lorries. He just have to blow-up the trains/lorries, then finish off the job with light machine-guns.
Gilrandir
07-14-2015, 15:55
And all men of military age were killed indiscriminately.
I heard that they weren't just men of military age, but Muslim/Bosniaks of military age.
Sarmatian
07-14-2015, 17:06
I heard that they weren't just men of military age, but Muslim/Bosniaks of military age.
So? When Americans bombed Japanase cities and villages, they should have hopped over to Thailand afterwards to kill an equal number of Thais, so they're not accused of bias?
Are you serious?
Gilrandir
07-15-2015, 15:16
So? When Americans bombed Japanase cities and villages, they should have hopped over to Thailand afterwards to kill an equal number of Thais, so they're not accused of bias?
Are you serious?
I'm trying to show that it was not indiscriminate slaughter, as you tried to convince us, but one ethnic/religious group was targeted. Whatever you might say, it reeks of genocide (on a small scale, of course, no match for the Armenian one, for instance).
Meanwhile, Russia proclaims itself above the international law.
http://rt.com/politics/273523-russia-court-rights-constitution/
One more reason to sign treaties wit Putin.
"Meanwhile, Russia proclaims itself above the international law.
http://rt.com/politics/273523-russia...-constitution/
One more reason to sign treaties wit Putin." EUROPEAN Human Right Court. USA always refused to sign on the Human Right Convention. One more reason to sign treaties with USA? And I think that was one point the UK Prime Minister promised during the last campaign, he wants to get rid as well of the European Human Right Convention.:yes:
And all men of military age were killed indiscriminately. Those men used the status of UN protected enclave to raid surrounding communities, only to fall back, hide behind UN troops and do it all over again. And again, and again, and again... After they were beaten, Bosnian Serb forces killed all POWs.
None of it makes it excusable.
None of it makes it a genocide. One could call it a massacre, a war crime, a crime against humanity, take your pick, but not a genocide...
If that is the definition of a genocide, Every.Single.Nation on earth has committed genocide multiple times. Ukrainians against the Poles and Jews, Poles against Ukrainians, English against Arabs, Americans against Native Americans, Vietnamis, Iraqis, Afghanis and Mexicans, Germany against just about every nation the conquered in ww2, Russians against Poles and various Asian tribes/countries, Greeks against the Turks, Turks against the Greeks, all European colonizers against native population on all continents and so on.
To label it a genocide is supposed to justify western policies and actions during the nineties. It is insulting to those who truly were victims of genocide to compare it.
Couldn't agree more. It's a simple matter of shooting first so you don't get shot. Remove kebab before kebab removes you.
Gilrandir
07-16-2015, 06:34
"Meanwhile, Russia proclaims itself above the international law.
http://rt.com/politics/273523-russia...-constitution/
One more reason to sign treaties wit Putin." EUROPEAN Human Right Court. USA always refused to sign on the Human Right Convention. One more reason to sign treaties with USA? And I think that was one point the UK Prime Minister promised during the last campaign, he wants to get rid as well of the European Human Right Convention.:yes:
Russia DID sign the Convention (although didn't ratify it) and now refuses to obey what it signed (as was the case with 1994 Budapest memorandum and 1997 Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation with Ukraine). If you don't see the difference, I do.
"(although didn't ratify it)" Key point. So it is not signed...
Sarmatian
07-16-2015, 08:21
Russia DID sign the Convention (although didn't ratify it) and now refuses to obey what it signed (as was the case with 1994 Budapest memorandum and 1997 Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation with Ukraine). If you don't see the difference, I do.
Country is not bound by the treaty until it has been ratified.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
Gilrandir
07-16-2015, 14:27
Country is not bound by the treaty until it has been ratified.
As the latest developments show, Russia is not bound even if it does ratify something. But if you don't ratify it, be honest to yourself and others and proclaim exit from the treaty. Russia is trying to sit on two chairs: it pretends to be a part of the European human rights system when it suits it and spurns it when it doesn't. The same it did to the two treaties I mentioned AND IT RATIFIED THEM too.
The USA is at least aboveboard in staying away from the treaty.
And another propulsion by Russia in the south.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/14/georgia-accuses-russia-of-violating-international-law-over-south-ossetia
"The USA is at least aboveboard in staying away from the treaty". Yeap. However USA (and others) did sign the International Treaty about Internationally recognised borders, and well, still didn't respected this treaty, as earlier than the Vietnam wars.
NATO countries didn't even respect the treaty they imposed upon Serbia which guaranteed Kosovo as part of Serbia.:laugh4:
If fact, Putin is taking advantage of these US violations of international treaties to justify his breaches of international laws. Germany by constitution can't sent troops in foreign country. However Germany did participate of Serbia's bombing campaign. How? Weellll, they changed the constitution (and international agreements)...
So Putin is doing what was done before (and as much as I remember, the war against Iraq, or the invasion of Afghanistan were not really following international laws neither)...
Gilrandir
07-18-2015, 12:46
"The USA is at least aboveboard in staying away from the treaty". Yeap. However USA (and others) did sign the International Treaty about Internationally recognised borders, and well, still didn't respected this treaty, as earlier than the Vietnam wars.
NATO countries didn't even respect the treaty they imposed upon Serbia which guaranteed Kosovo as part of Serbia.:laugh4:
If fact, Putin is taking advantage of these US violations of international treaties to justify his breaches of international laws. Germany by constitution can't sent troops in foreign country. However Germany did participate of Serbia's bombing campaign. How? Weellll, they changed the constitution (and international agreements)...
So Putin is doing what was done before (and as much as I remember, the war against Iraq, or the invasion of Afghanistan were not really following international laws neither)...
We might start a discussion on the niceties of the treaties you referred to and try to see if the treaties in question contained any stipulations the violation of which could result in what the US did or whether the breaches of international laws performed elsewhere were a just cause to violate these very treaties. Moreover, each of us (and perhaps others) would assess them differently: for some the violation of them would be a lesser evil done to protect/promote freedom/democracy, for others - dirty deeds done out of cynical spite; Germany changing its constitution might be considered catering to the shifting purposes of the pan-European tyrant by some and flexibility neccessary to address the challenges of today's world by others (which is being attempted by some ostensibly peaceful counrties, btw :
http://www.rt.com/news/273820-japan-troops-abroad-law/).
We may argue whether the prohibition of using German armed forces abroad covered the use of them as a part of NATO forces or whether this prohibition could be considered void if some international organization (like UNO) sanctioned it... It would be indeed a long and tiresome argument.
But, in my opinion, what differs the cases you mentioned and those connected with the topic is that yours had the vestiges of violations of "general principles of international law" which were usual in the "uncivilized past" and have been largely on the decline as the international relations are becoming "more civilized".
The ones violated by Russia in relation to Ukraine were "more personalized and specified" involving a limited number of parties to them agreeing on some specific point (Budapest memorandum of 1994) or being even a comprehensive bilateral act (1997 Ukraine-Russia treaty of friendship and cooperation). Violating them was a grosser misconduct, in my view. It is like your are going with a (legally registered and inherited from your father) gun along the street and suddenly you are surrounded by cops who say: "Now nice and slow put that gun down, make three steps back and you won't get hurt". You do that and when the gun has been impounded one of the cops (your cousin, btw) start shooting at you.
Still more grievous is the fact that the violations were done by Russia against Ukraine. I don't think you can fully gauge the enormity of what was done by Putin. He attacked the nation who has been considered the fraternal one in regard to Russians for 300 years at least and whose closeness in customs, language, religion, worldview has been emphasized and indeed fostered, especially during the Soviet era (the institute I graduated from was named after 300th anniversary of reunification Ukraine with Russia). All the conflicts that happened between Ukraine and Russia in the past were considered petty misunderstandings and those who were proclaimed to blame (the most well-known characters are Mazepa and Bandera) were stigmatized as traitors targeting the ever-lasting friendship and, forsooth, brotherhood of two closely related peoples (it is curious, though, that "traitors" were always found in Ukraine only).
Indeed, two peoples lived mostly peacefully, often intermingling in various places of both Ukraine and Russia and marrying into each other. I don't know what other international relations can those be likened to, perhaps I can loosely compare them with Canadians and Americans, or (in Europe) Czechs and Slovaks, or Germans and the Swiss.
When the Crimea was annexed, Ukrainians couldn't for quite a time credit what had happened. Can Canadians consider Americans capable of such a deed? Can Slovaks in their worst nightmares envision such a move from Czechs? Can the Swiss be afraid that Germany would some day annex Bodensee and lands to the south of it (to protect the German-speaking community)? Such was the impact of Russian invasion in 2014.
Ultimately it resulted in the pro-Russian stance in Ukraine suffering a seriuos setback. If some politicians start saying something about normalizing relations with Russia, reviving friendly ties with it, enhancing economic cooperation, entering any unions with it, there is always a sentence which they have no answer to: "You mean the Russia that stole the Crimea from us?" Strategically, it is a great defeat for Putin. He succeeded in estranging a large stratum of Russia-oriented Ukrainians.
But even worse is the anti-Ukrainian hysteria fomented by Putin. Russians are taught to believe in the fascist nazi people across the border who are ruled by junta aiming to kill Russians and Russian-speakers.
So, a bottomline: for Ukraine and Russia it was more than just a violation of some treaty, it was (and still is) a much deeper, palpitating and even gruesome issue, involving worldview shifts.
I understand what your are writing. But this war is not mine. So I can and I judge or analyse it differently. For me, your charge on Putin and respect of treaties is part of the same debate.
Western powers started in not respecting treaties and rules. Western powers started to invade others countries and to decide what was right and what was wrong.
Do you think that Serbs believed that France would bomb them? They have a monument in Belgrade saying "love France like France loved as".
And about Ukraine, what do you think Russians were feeling in watching anti-Russian chants and demonstration: betrayed?
Gilrandir
07-20-2015, 11:47
Western powers started in not respecting treaties and rules. Western powers started to invade others countries and to decide what was right and what was wrong.
I don't think one can put the blame of "starting" onto anyone in particular. Invading and violating treaties was older than division of Europe into Western vs Eastern powers. Yet with foreign relations becoming more and more civilized, such cases were hoped to become less frequent. As for annexing a part of another country, it hasn't happened in Europe since Austro-Hungary annexed Bosnia more than a hundred years before.
Do you think that Serbs believed that France would bomb them? They have a monument in Belgrade saying "love France like France loved as".
You again fail to understand. Serbs and the French don't have a history behind them which can even distantly remind the one behind Ukrainians and Russians.
And about Ukraine, what do you think Russians were feeling in watching anti-Russian chants and demonstration: betrayed?
As I have repeated many times, anti-Russian chants and demonstrations started only as a reaction to the Crimea annexation and further developments in Donbas. Maidan never adopted any anti-someone rhetoric (unless anti-Yanukovych, of course, and that was after some two months). There were Russians and Russian flags on Maidan. Russian media perverted it the way they were told to. And this, which amounted to whipping the whole people into anti-Ukrainian (and anti-Western) frenzy is the greatest iniquity of Putin.
Gilrandir
08-03-2015, 14:00
http://worldif.economist.com/article/2/what-if-russia-breaks-up-the-peril-beyond-putin
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
08-03-2015, 23:00
A Chechen friend of mine said more or less the same as that article - Russia is doomed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0ndz20w2Oc
Hooahguy
08-10-2015, 04:24
Does anybody ever sometimes feel that this whole thing is just Russia's revenge for Ukraine's Eurovision entry for 2007?
Link for the uninitiated (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfjHJneVonE), and its very, very weird. And possibly NSFW.
Gilrandir
08-10-2015, 06:36
Does anybody ever sometimes feel that this whole thing is just Russia's revenge for Ukraine's Eurovision entry for 2007?
Link for the uninitiated (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfjHJneVonE), and its very, very weird. And possibly NSFW.
More wierd than this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaolVEJEjV4
or this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mh3hj9-J76Y
If you aren't initiated: at Eurovision freaks rule.
But there was a Russian-Ukrainian scandal after 2007 Eurovision, though:
Russians heard "Russia goodbye" instead of "Lasha tumbai" (which is said to be something in Mongolean) and the entertainer in question had a serious cut in his invitations to perform in Russia.
Hmm, doesn't this sound familiar?
There seems, indeed, a decided lack of sympathy for noncombatant men in war zones. Even reports by international human rights organizations speak of massacres as being directed almost exclusively against women, children, and, perhaps, the elderly. The implication, almost never stated outright, is that adult males are either combatants or have something wrong with them. (“You mean to say there were people out there slaughtering women and children and you weren’t out there defending them? What are you? Chicken?”)
Yes, it really does.
Those who carry out massacres have been known to cynically manipulate this tacit conscription: most famously, the Bosnian Serb commanders who calculated they could avoid charges of genocide if, instead of exterminating the entire population of conquered towns and villages, they merely exterminated all males between ages fifteen and fifty-five.
http://thebaffler.com/salvos/bullys-pulpit
To throw in a different perspective for the recent more-or-less-off-topic conversation.
Gilrandir
08-12-2015, 15:17
Saw a detailed documentary on TV about Russian-Georgean war of 2008. It is called August War and it is about 2 hours long. My skills don't allow me to find it in internet, so perhaps someone else will do it for others to see.
Gilrandir
08-13-2015, 08:46
One more clever and calculated step from Putin:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33818186
Gilrandir
08-14-2015, 12:37
On Azov and nazis:
http://dailysignal.com/2015/08/10/meet-the-former-neo-nazi-spokesman-who-now-fights-for-freedom-in-ukraine/
Interesting link.
“I’m not a Nazi, and I don’t believe in National Socialism,” Skillt says. “When I got to Ukraine 17 months ago, I was a real bastard. I had stereotypes against Jews, blacks, Arabs. But I’ve fought with them, and now they are like brothers. Before, some things were black and white. But now I know nothing is certain. Good and bad people come in all colors. The world is very gray.
The solution to racism: Make war, not love!
Gilrandir
08-16-2015, 14:46
An interview Purgin (one of DNR " top officials") gave in Donetsk. Never mind the language, the main events can be seen over his right shoulder.
http://fakty.ictv.ua/ru/index/read-news/id/1558831?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=lentainform&utm_campaign=ictv.ua&utm_term=8835&utm_content=1
It is August 12, Wednesday, evidently the middle of the day. It seems that Zakharchenko on May 9 gave his citizens a nice example to follow.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
08-17-2015, 01:14
Interesting link.
The solution to racism: Make war, not love!
Well, it worked for the US and segregation, didn't it?
Well, it worked for the US and segregation, didn't it?
Yes, and now Putin is curing Swedish racists.
Gilrandir
08-17-2015, 09:02
Yes, and now Putin is curing Swedish racists.
The hands of the king are the hands of a healer.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
08-17-2015, 09:59
The hands of the king are the hands of a healer.
Too Bad Putin is Emperor of All Russia, then.
Gilrandir
08-19-2015, 11:17
Russian court has OFFICIALLY admitted the existence of (at least one) troll factory in Russia:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/18/woman-who-sued-pro-putin-russian-troll-factory-gets-one-rouble-in-damages
And an intersting link - from 2008:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/aug/16/georgia.russia1
What makes it so interesting:
"An invasion of Ukraine by 'peacekeeping tanks' is just a question of time," wrote Aleksandr Sushko, director of Kiev's Institute of Euro-Atlantic Cooperation. "Weimar Russia is completing its transformation into something else. If Russia wins this war, a new order will take shape in Europe which will have no place for Ukraine as a sovereign state."
And another prediction made in 2008:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/12/europes-next-war/?page=all
That last one was the one that got the most of its precise predictions right:
Moscow’s main aim is to wrest the Crimean Peninsula from Kiev’s control. A majority of the Crimea’s inhabitants are ethnic Russians. More importantly, the Russian Black Sea Fleet is based in Sevastopol. Under a 1997 agreement between the two countries, the Russian navy is scheduled to leave by 2017. Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko refuses to extend the lease - rightly fearing Moscow plans to stay on indefinitely and eventually annex the entire Crimea. Russian officials have already said they will not abandon the base at Sevastopol and that Kiev’s maritime laws do not apply to them.
Moreover, Russia has been distributing thousands of Russian passports to supporters in the Crimea. The plan is to replicate what was done in South Ossetia and Abkhazia: Create a pretext to send in Russian “peacekeepers” to protect supposedly endangered Russian “citizens.”
But Ukraine is not Georgia; it is a large, militarily powerful country with long memories of Russian domination. Any attempt at partition by Moscow would be met by fierce resistance. It would spark a bloody Russo-Ukrainian war.
He just got it wrong that "peacekeepers" would take over Crimea - it was of course instead the rather unbelievable story of 'local self-defence forces'.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
08-20-2015, 03:10
That last one was the one that got the most of its precise predictions right:
He just got it wrong that "peacekeepers" would take over Crimea - it was of course instead the rather unbelievable story of 'local self-defence forces'.
He also underestimated the character of the Ukrainian forces, that they would put up such a determined but non-violent resistance.
18 months later the stories of men pinned in their barracks by what were obviously Russian forces and ships with mattresses lashed to the side to prevent boarding by divers are all but forgotten. None the less, it is important that we remember that Ukraine tried doing things the "right" way and it availed them nothing. If they are now shelling their own cities to deny Russia infrastructure and transport links we must remember the leadership was driven to this by Moscow.
Meanwhile, Putin was in a mini-sub in Crimea playing at Action Man again.
Gilrandir
08-21-2015, 14:08
If they are now shelling their own cities to deny Russia infrastructure and transport links we must remember the leadership was driven to this by Moscow.
The purpose of shelling is not the infrastructure (otherwise why the greatest in the region Debaltseve railway hub was not blown up by the Ukrainians before their withdrawal).
As even OSCE admits (http://en.censor.net.ua/news/346283/osce_admits_terrorist_attacks_from_donetsk_residential_areas_joint_centre_for_control_and_coordinati on), separatists often place their artillery in residential areas and open fire from there, so the Ukrainian army fires back to suppress it - and of course may hit the buildings and other objects in the vicinity.
Strike For The South
08-23-2015, 04:02
It's August 22nd and Putin is still a fascist.
Gilrandir
08-24-2015, 17:24
It's August 22nd and Putin is still a fascist.
Hardly looks that:
16044
Gilrandir
08-25-2015, 16:18
Russia's crackdown on Wikipedia:
http://www.smh.com.au/world/russia-orders-wikipedia-page-blocked-over-cannabis-link-20150824-gj6sty.html
Gilrandir
08-26-2015, 16:55
On Russia's casualties in Ukraine:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2015/08/25/kremlin-censors-rush-to-erase-inadvertent-release-of-russian-casualties-in-east-ukraine/
And Europe FINALLY identified the red line for Russia - not just vague "escalation", but elections in Donbas if held by DPR and LPR:
http://www.expatica.com/fr/news/country-news/Ukraine-says-EU-ready-to-toughen-stance-against-Russia_505223.html
http://www.wsj.com/articles/ukraine-secures-debt-relief-deal-finance-ministry-says-1440668275
Only a matter of time until Paul Singer completely ruins Ukraine now by buying the debt and demanding a full repayment while getting another country to hold Ukraine's military hostage until he gets his money. It's what he does in his righteous crusade against evil countries that don't repay their hedge funds.
And you were scared of Putin. :laugh4:
Strike For The South
08-27-2015, 19:04
It's August 27th and Putin is still a fascist.
Gilrandir
08-28-2015, 11:33
http://www.wsj.com/articles/ukraine-secures-debt-relief-deal-finance-ministry-says-1440668275
Only a matter of time until Paul Singer completely ruins Ukraine now by buying the debt and demanding a full repayment while getting another country to hold Ukraine's military hostage until he gets his money. It's what he does in his righteous crusade against evil countries that don't repay their hedge funds.
And you were scared of Putin. :laugh4:
I remember once you were suprised why people wanted you to pay for reading something that THEY wanted you to read. Same here.
Now to the point.
While Putin's aggression is what Ukraine is experiencing AT THE MOMENT, the Paul Singer prediction is only a wishful thinking for you. So, as the saying goes, the wolf that one hears is worse than the orc that one fears.
But meanwhile Ukraine got a breathing space with its debt situation and I think that this deal with the creditors is the best possible one that Ukraine could strike.
And Putin's popularity had a prodigious drop - from 89% support to meager 83%.
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/higher-prices-dent-putin/2082652.html
He must do something quickly, otherwise it may plummet to unthinkable 82% or even 81%.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-27/ruble-pain-threshold-seen-higher-as-oil-slump-ravages-economy
I remember once you were suprised why people wanted you to pay for reading something that THEY wanted you to read. Same here.
:laugh4:
Ah, yes, didn't read it myself, the headline will do. I just looked for an article in English real quick because I read about it in German.
You're also reading too much into the Paul Singer thing.
I'm waiting for the day where Putin gets 20% of the vote.
Gilrandir
08-29-2015, 14:20
I'm waiting for the day where Putin gets 20% of the vote.
Traditionally, Russian leaders must enjoy the maximum popularity. Until they are assasinated, deposed or die of senility. If either of this happens, you will see weeping crowds bemoaning the deceased, much as it was when Stalin died.
A picture from Heidenau where the anti-immigrant crowd sports a DPR flag. Now where do nazis live?
16166
And a shocking discovery. Zakharchenko, "the president of DPR", in spring 2014 took part in meetings in Donetsk ON PRO-UKRAINIAN SIDE.
http://ru.espreso.tv/news/2015/08/29/lyder_quotdnrquot_zakharchenko_god_nazad_podrabatyval_quottytushkoyquot_ukraynskoy_vlasty
He is rumored to have been a paid titushka who protected some official building from a crowd desiring to free Gubarev who had been arrested.
Gilrandir
09-08-2015, 12:43
I don't know if we should have a new thread on this or are such things just symptomatic for Putin and can be posted here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/11840713/Russian-troops-fighting-alongside-Assads-army-against-Syrian-rebels.html
Will we hear of paratroopers who got lost during the exercises in Rostov region and found themselves in Syria? Or has Putin abandoned the idea of Novorossia for the sake of Novosyria?
CrossLOPER
09-12-2015, 06:00
I don't know if we should have a new thread on this or are such things just symptomatic for Putin and can be posted here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/11840713/Russian-troops-fighting-alongside-Assads-army-against-Syrian-rebels.html
Will we hear of paratroopers who got lost during the exercises in Rostov region and found themselves in Syria? Or has Putin abandoned the idea of Novorossia for the sake of Novosyria?
What is wrong with defending strategic assets abroad?
wooly_mammoth
09-12-2015, 11:31
What's wrong with shooting terrorists?
Montmorency
09-12-2015, 13:05
What's wrong with imposing the will of God upon non-believers?
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
09-13-2015, 03:18
What's wrong with imposing the will of God upon non-believers?
That depends on whether it's the right God or not.
Speaking of which - anyone got a lead on the True Cross?
Gilrandir
09-13-2015, 09:33
What is wrong with defending strategic assets abroad?
There is everything wrong with defending strategic assests abroad and denying it. And that is the way Russia has adopted of late.
And the second wrong with it is defining what is "abroad". The current government of Russia seems to be at a loss when defining the boundaries of their own realm often including into it lands and peoples others (including those very lands and peoples) consider to be outside of it.
Gilrandir
09-19-2015, 15:10
http://joinfo.com/world/1008671_russian-troops-refused-to-go-to-syria-instead-of-the-donbas.html
Well, I liked that.
- Will you go to Donbas to kill your Ukrainian brethren?
- Alrighty.
- Sorry guys, there has been a change to the initial plan - you are going to Syria to kill those dirty (in the direct meaning - "nonhygienic") Arabs.
- Oh no. The deal is off.
Strike For The South
09-19-2015, 16:15
It's September 19th and Putin is still a fascist.
http://joinfo.com/world/1008671_russian-troops-refused-to-go-to-syria-instead-of-the-donbas.html
Well, I liked that.
- Will you go to Donbas to kill your Ukrainian brethren?
- Alrighty.
- Sorry guys, there has been a change to the initial plan - you are going to Syria to kill those dirty (in the direct meaning - "nonhygienic") Arabs.
- Oh no. The deal is off.
Syria seems super funny (if we ignore the actual human tragedies for a moment).
Lots of refugees noone wants,, lots of parties noone supports and now the only big power in the world that wants to get boots on the grounds to stop the islamists by supporting the similarly disliked dictator is so unorganized that it cannot even get its own soldiers to go.
Gilrandir
09-20-2015, 13:56
Syria seems super funny (if we ignore the actual human tragedies for a moment).
Lots of refugees noone wants,, lots of parties noone supports and now the only big power in the world that wants to get boots on the grounds to stop the islamists by supporting the similarly disliked dictator is so unorganized that it cannot even get its own soldiers to go.
After his "Russian spring" debacle, for Putin Syria seems to be the last chance to get his boots on the ground at least somewhere, to prove (to himself and to his supporters) that he is still a world player with a long reach and perhaps to exchange something in Donbas and Crimea for his Syrian (non)involvement.
Don't know if you heard this one:
http://www.rferl.org/content/ukraine-moscow-accuses-yatsenyuk/27233898.html
:smg:
According to Russian sources, the nickname Yatsenyuk used participating in Chechen war was ... ready? ... "Viking".
Hooahguy
09-20-2015, 21:47
Ok so slightly off topic to the immediate discussion, does anyone know what the official Greek position on the Ukraine crisis? I know that they voted for more sanctions on Russia after the annexation and they officially condemned Russian intervention, but then Alexis Tsipras said that the EU shouldnt be supporting the far-right Ukrainian government. Cant really find anything else on the topic though and I have to represent the Greek position on Ukraine tomorrow.
Ok so slightly off topic to the immediate discussion, does anyone know what the official Greek position on the Ukraine crisis? I know that they voted for more sanctions on Russia after the annexation and they officially condemned Russian intervention, but then Alexis Tsipras said that the EU shouldnt be supporting the far-right Ukrainian government. Cant really find anything else on the topic though and I have to represent the Greek position on Ukraine tomorrow.
Initially,SYRIZA commented positively on Russia, but they quickly changed their position and supported the EU's sanctions. It was more of a PR movement to please their leftist audience, not a conscious change of policy.
The only sympathetic towards Russia members of SYRIZA left the party and formed a new one, called Popular Unity, which failed to get in the Parliament in today's elections. So, SYRIZA Greece is not anything special, in fact, they are sometimes rather pro-NATO, with a very friendly stance towards Kosovo and a request to NATO to augment its military presence in the Aegean Sea.
Hooahguy
09-20-2015, 22:45
Gotcha. So while they are pro-NATO as you say, it kind of seems like in the other hand they are cozying up to Russia. I remember reading a while ago that they are thinking about letting Russia use some Greek bases. So it kinda seems like they arent really as pro-NATO as you say they are as if they were, then I dont think they would be as friendly to Russia as they are right now. Maybe not so much as not voting for sanctions or condemning the annexation of the Crimea, but considering that NATO needs a unanimous vote to take action should something happen, then a Greece that is friendly to Russia could be a dangerous thing.
Montmorency
09-20-2015, 23:08
It's called 'covering your bases'. See also: leverage.
Hooahguy
09-20-2015, 23:19
That is actually an interesting aspect I have not thought of: warming up to Russia could just be used as leverage, maybe to persuade the rest of the EU to ease off the pressure for the debt crisis. Or threaten them for relief.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
09-21-2015, 00:28
That is actually an interesting aspect I have not thought of: warming up to Russia could just be used as leverage, maybe to persuade the rest of the EU to ease off the pressure for the debt crisis. Or threaten them for relief.
Bingo.
On the other hand, remember that there are many stupid people on the Left who still think Russia is politically more left-wing than Western Europe or the US.
Like I said, they're stupid people.
Gotcha. So while they are pro-NATO as you say, it kind of seems like in the other hand they are cozying up to Russia. I remember reading a while ago that they are thinking about letting Russia use some Greek bases. So it kinda seems like they arent really as pro-NATO as you say they are as if they were, then I dont think they would be as friendly to Russia as they are right now. Maybe not so much as not voting for sanctions or condemning the annexation of the Crimea, but considering that NATO needs a unanimous vote to take action should something happen, then a Greece that is friendly to Russia could be a dangerous thing.
Their friendly towards Russia policy stopped only a month or two after they got elected. The ministry of defense even suggested to give an entire island to NATO (Carpathus) and join their fight against ISIS and ally ourselves with el-Sisi.
In my opinion, they leverage is NATO not Russia, they repeatedly tried to threaten Merkel, by approaching USA and planning something laughable, like replacing Puerto Rico as a new state of America. I'm not kidding, that scenario was seriously examined by some far-right nutjobs that participated in the government.
In what concerns our alliance with the US and membership of NATO, every part is in favour of them, with three exceptions:
Popular Unity (which broke away from SYRIZA) is the sort of stupid leftists who think that Russia is more progressive than the US.
Golden Dawn, not because Putin finances them, but the Greek nationalism was always tied with Russia and the third Constantinople. Same religion, anti-turkish foreign policy and we got independence and Thessaly thanks to them.
That is actually an interesting aspect I have not thought of: warming up to Russia could just be used as leverage, maybe to persuade the rest of the EU to ease off the pressure for the debt crisis. Or threaten them for relief.
Perhaps, that's an explanation for their behaviou, but when their approach to Putin failed (last spring), there was no point at continuing it. All the media attacked them very aggressively (just for visiting Moscow) and they probably realised that they lost not gained votes.
The Communist Party of Greece supports neither side in the Ukrainian Civil War, believing it is a fight between urban classes, one supporter of the West the other of Russia, so the Ukrainain people do not have common interests with them. There was an interesting article about a communist leader of some East-Russian partisans who got assassinated, probably by his fellow pro-Russian partisans, but it's not in English.
Hooahguy
09-21-2015, 11:08
Thanks for the info! You wouldn't happen to have any links to articles that I could read that talks about this, would you? Nothing I found is anywhere close to the kind of analysis you are giving. Or maybe my google-fu just sucks.
Montmorency
09-21-2015, 12:02
Don't forget economic ties. Aside from historic relationship or current Russian business presence/land ownership, t simply makes sense at this point for Greece to court Russian investment, not just because it creates potential political leverage in the EU - not because Greece is suddenly Russia's ally, but because Russia can improve its hopes of building that new pipeline - but also because, hey, capital investment either way (hopefully).
Montmorancy made a great point, SYRIZA made a half-hearted attempt to attract Russian investors, but they declined, in order not to piss Europe even more. The pipelines between Russia-Turkey-Greece and Burgos-Dedeagac have long been planned, but never materialised due to our conflicting interests with NATO.
A popular conspiracy theory. (http://www.keeptalkinggreece.com/2012/03/15/russian-spies-revealed-assassination-plot-against-former-pm-karamanlis/)
Thanks for the info! You wouldn't happen to have any links to articles that I could read that talks about this, would you? Nothing I found is anywhere close to the kind of analysis you are giving. Or maybe my google-fu just sucks.
Well, what I said is mainly based on mainstream greek newspapers, the communist newspaper "Radical" and my general knowledge about the pest of greek nationalism. So, I'll try to find some english-speaking sites, but don't expect much.
The only part that is easily sourceable is that we got Thessaly after the Berlin Conference* (1878) and that the Ottoman-Russian War of 1828-9, practically forced the Sultan to recognise the greek independence.
*In that war, Greece obviously wanted to ally herself with Russia, but her military weakness and the British fleet prevented her from doing so. Finally, they found the courage to declare war against the Ottoman Empire and when they did, they learnt that a ceasefire had been signed some hours ago between the Czar and the Sultan. Everyone panicked and feared that we would be steamrolled by the entire Ottoman military machine, but Russia, France and Britain intervened and stopped one of the shortest war in history...
Gilrandir
09-21-2015, 16:02
Montmorancy made a great point, SYRIZA made a half-hearted attempt to attract Russian investors, but they declined, in order not to piss Europe even more. The pipelines between Russia-Turkey-Greece and Burgos-Dedeagac have long been planned, but never materialised due to our conflicting interests with NATO.
I think if Russia had some money to spare at that moment Tsipras' shuttling between it and NATO/EU might have brought him more political dividends. He was wise enough to see the economic handicap of current Russia not to pin his hopes on any projects it promised to finance.
Hooahguy
09-22-2015, 17:15
Well, what I said is mainly based on mainstream greek newspapers, the communist newspaper "Radical" and my general knowledge about the pest of greek nationalism. So, I'll try to find some english-speaking sites, but don't expect much.
Thanks. Would you be able to post a few links? I dont read Greek but Im sure I can run some articles through Google translate and get some good up to date info.
Thanks. Would you be able to post a few links? I dont read Greek but Im sure I can run some articles through Google translate and get some good up to date info.
http://foreignaffairs.gr/articles/69389/aleksandra-ioannidoy/o-neos-ellinikos-ethnikismos?page=show
http://www.xryshaygh.com/enimerosi/view/ellas-rwsia-suriza-kai-chrush-augh
http://www.rizospastis.gr/story.do?id=8595498
http://www.novafm106.gr/articles/politics/2690-syriza-changes-everywhere-what-says-now-for-putin-immigration-and-terrorism.html
http://www.rizospastis.gr/story.do?id=7859910
http://www.rizospastis.gr/story.do?id=7851660
http://www.rizospastis.gr/page.do?publDate=7/9/2014&id=15399&pageNo=13
I'll try to find more. Be careful with the translation, because google is very problematic, when it comes to greek, due to the very complicated nature of our grammar.
Gilrandir
09-27-2015, 11:52
Just in case anyone is still interested and to keep people updated:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/09/22/ukrainian-tatars-blockade-russian-held-crimea/72629660/
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/09/alarmed-agencies-ordered-ukraine-luhansk-150925014154471.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/25/us-ukraine-crisis-airlines-idUSKCN0RP17O20150925
http://www.dw.com/en/poland-furious-after-russia-blames-them-for-starting-wwii/a-18743484
Gilrandir
09-30-2015, 16:29
Could it mean something?
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/pro-defense-farkas-wrightewing-214223
Gilrandir
11-04-2015, 15:40
Lavrov published an article.
http://en.mid.ru/en/web/guest/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/1913344
What attracts attention in it is:
1) official Russia uses "compatriot" in the unconventional sense "people of Russian origin who are citizens of OTHER countries " which gives it an official reason to meddle into the affairs of other countries;
2) extensive use of capitalized words.
Gilrandir
11-09-2015, 13:43
A valid comparison?
http://dailysignal.com/2015/11/05/what-i-learned-from-tibetan-and-ukrainian-freedom-fighters/
Gilrandir
11-11-2015, 16:21
Zakharchenko admits Surkov's participation in events in Donbas from the very first day. So much for rioting populaces.
http://www.unian.info/politics/1178340-dpr-leader-zakharchenko-praises-putins-aide-for-help-since-start-of-donbas-war.html
Gilrandir
11-24-2015, 11:37
On russia revisioning history:
http://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/moskau-wie-russland-sich-die-geschichte-zurechtbiegt-1.2742497
Gilrandir
01-06-2016, 10:26
A summary of the latest events:
http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/new-russian-management-of-the-donbas-signifies-putin-may-be-ready-to-negotiate
Strike For The South
01-06-2016, 21:25
It's 2016 and Putin is still a fascist.
It's 2016 and Putin is still a fascist.
So are some parts of the other side http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven/2016/01/vrienden_van_verhofstadt_maken_wraakvideo_tegen_geenpeil.html#comments (just the video's)
Oh noes LOL we already have jihadi's ruining our comfortable bliss, please no extreme rightists on tops
So are some parts of the other side http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven/2016/01/vrienden_van_verhofstadt_maken_wraakvideo_tegen_geenpeil.html#comments (just the video's)
Oh noes LOL we already have jihadi's ruining our comfortable bliss, please no extreme rightists on tops
Fake (http://www.interpretermag.com/ukraine-live-day-701-azov-denounces-video-threat-to-netherlands-as-fake/#11944).
If they belong to the right, it's probably the Russian right.
Fake (http://www.interpretermag.com/ukraine-live-day-701-azov-denounces-video-threat-to-netherlands-as-fake/#11944).
If they belong to the right, it's probably the Russian right.
Crossed my mind heh, probably
Hooahguy
01-19-2016, 23:22
It's 2016 and Putin is still a fascist.
https://i.imgur.com/uOURj1D.jpg
Gilrandir
01-20-2016, 07:24
Crossed my mind heh, probably
Don't you understand that it is aimed to influence the results of the April referendum in the Netherlands on AA with Ukraine? I believe more such stuff is to come from Russia, the sooner the referendum date is, the more fakes you will see.
Don't you understand that it is aimed to influence the results of the April referendum in the Netherlands on AA with Ukraine? I believe more such stuff is to come from Russia, the sooner the referendum date is, the more fakes you will see.
Of course it's about that. And yeah the chance it's fake is high
You two were most likely right.
It's getting kinda silly that referendum, CIA is investigating possible ties to Putin. That's pretty lol. Referendum was enfforced by the perfectly harmless weblog Geenstijl who urge those in favour to vote as well. It's not legally binding anyway, they can (and will) ignore the outcome.
Gilrandir
01-21-2016, 09:14
You two were most likely right.
It's getting kinda silly that referendum, CIA is investigating possible ties to Putin. That's pretty lol. Referendum was enfforced by the perfectly harmless weblog Geenstijl who urge those in favour to vote as well. It's not legally binding anyway, they can (and will) ignore the outcome.
How will you vote?
How will you vote?
Against, there is a civil war going on, it isn't just a trade treaty but also a military one. The EU shouldn't get too close to Russia. Ukraine is also very poor and pretty corrupt.
Gilrandir
01-22-2016, 07:43
Against, there is a civil war going on, it isn't just a trade treaty but also a military one.
This is the first time I hear of a military aspect of the treaty. Or is the EU a military organization?
The EU shouldn't get too close to Russia.
It may surprise you, but Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Finland are the EU members and are as close to Russia as you may want - they have a common border with Russia. And Georgia with which the EU signed AA is in the same situation.
Ukraine is also very poor and pretty corrupt.
That is true, but in some EU countries at the moment of their joining the EU corruption was similarly severe. Some say that in Bulgaria, for example, it is still not eradicated.
wooly_mammoth
01-22-2016, 08:51
^Romania and Bulgaria are still very bad in this department, but I don't think they compare with countries like Ukraine or the Republic of Moldova. At least we are making some headway, but those guys are taffed until the next ice age, in the optimistic estimation.
EU is no military organisation, I don't know the specifics but there certainly is a military aspect. Fair enough about other countries being just as close, but they aren't as devided, I think it's asking for trouble. But the treaty is going to come anyway, the EU has already said we can shove the outcome up our asses, good news for Ukraine but not for us, nor for our current government (that IS good for us), not the first time a referendum was just ignored.
Gilrandir
01-22-2016, 11:29
EU is no military organisation, I don't know the specifics but there certainly is a military aspect.
I doubt it, there is NATO for this purpose.
I doubt it, there is NATO for this purpose.
It's not what I say but what others say, but that is not the only reason to vote against this treaty, in the most egoistical form, it's going to cost a lot and there aren't any benefits, the billions that go to Greece are nothing compared to what will go to Ukraine, economic experts expect a 36% increase of inflation (yeah I know 'experts'). It's just not worth the trouble, nothing personal
I doubt it, there is NATO for this purpose.
IIRC, similar to NATO, an attack on an EU member state is seen as an attack on the EU or so...
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/glossary/mutual_defence.html
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/17/france-invokes-eu-article-427-what-does-it-mean
Of course if you ask me, I find it strange that France invoked the clause for armed aggression when there is a clause for terrorist attacks (see first link), but I assume in 10 years we are far enough to invoke a nuclear attack clause if a muslim so much as scratches someone.
I also like how you guys discussed this for several posts and noone spent the 2 minutes it took me to search and read up on it.
If it only took you two minutes to look it up then why didn't you already know it?
If it only took you two minutes to look it up then why didn't you already know it?
Because if I always look up everything that takes me only two minutes to look up, I will spend a lot of minutes in total, no?
And why would I do that if I'm not even part of the discussion other than to make the two of you stop talking about how you do not know anything about it for several pages?
And yes, I knew about it in general, I looked up the details so that I wouldn't have to join with yet another "I do not really know, but...."
So why would you ask these silly questions after I just helped you not to waste much more time discussing things you do not really know anything about but heard from others but do not really check yet talk about but maybe and perhaps?
Because you also didn't know about what your own police said, why you didn't ain't such a silly question to ask. I knew about Collogne day one, people who read quality media 4 days later when the rug was out of room
Because you also didn't know about what your own police said, why you didn't ain't such a silly question to ask. I knew about Collogne day one, people who read quality media 4 days later when the rug was out of room
Now you're changing the topic...
And yes, even a broken clock is right twice a day...
Now you're changing the topic...
And yes, even a broken clock is right twice a day...
I answered your question.
Yes, don't dare to attack the EU, unless you are prepared to be wrecked by the European Armada that obliterated 3rd world Libya in a matter of weeks!
Oh, wait...
Gilrandir
01-23-2016, 16:06
IIRC, similar to NATO, an attack on an EU member state is seen as an attack on the EU or so...
I also like how you guys discussed this for several posts and noone spent the 2 minutes it took me to search and read up on it.
Because if I always look up everything that takes me only two minutes to look up, I will spend a lot of minutes in total, no?
So why would you ask these silly questions after I just helped you not to waste much more time discussing things you do not really know anything about but heard from others but do not really check yet talk about but maybe and perhaps?
Funny enough, however hard you might have spent the two minutes you didn't help a tiny bit. We were speaking of ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT, not of MEMBERSHIP. Here is the text of the former:
http://ukraine-eu.mfa.gov.ua/en/page/open/id/2900
No mentioning of any military aspect.
But even if it were about EU membership and a possible attack on a member state - the EU doesn't have any (joined) armed forces. Evidently, since most of the EU states are also NATO states it would be NATO article 5 that would be enforced in such a case.
It's not what I say but what others say, but that is not the only reason to vote against this treaty, in the most egoistical form, it's going to cost a lot and there aren't any benefits, the billions that go to Greece are nothing compared to what will go to Ukraine, economic experts expect a 36% increase of inflation (yeah I know 'experts').
You can read the agreement and figure out yourself if it is that costly or resposibilities-fraught as experts believe.
Funny enough, however hard you might have spent the two minutes you didn't help a tiny bit. We were speaking of ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT, not of MEMBERSHIP.
EU is no military organisation, I don't know the specifics but there certainly is a military aspect.
I'm sorry that I overlooked the part where he said ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT, but it's okay, I forgive everyone.
Gilrandir
01-24-2016, 07:12
I'm sorry that I overlooked the part where he said ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT, but it's okay, I forgive everyone.
The starting point of the discussion of us two lazybones was the Dutch referendum on Ukraine-EU ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT. So everything said further bore on this issue. Perhaps you were too lazy to get to post # 930 from post # 937 (where you joined the discussion), but I forgive you.
Gilrandir
01-26-2016, 12:29
On the Dutch referendum:
http://euromaidanpress.com/2016/01/26/democracy-is-at-stake-in-dutch-referendum/
On the Dutch referendum:
http://euromaidanpress.com/2016/01/26/democracy-is-at-stake-in-dutch-referendum/
A very big boooohooohooo they don't want to play with us there. There are very good reasons to be against this treaty when it comes to geopolitics alone, but there are much more things that are simply unacceptable. Urkarians don't have to worry it has already been decided, as Juncker said 'we decide something, if there is no revolt we push it through, nobody knows what what we do anyway'. Drunks and children speak the truth. I would consider the chance of the UK and the Netherlands blowing up the EU pretty considerable, or at least looming, we have kinda had it with the EU all we do is paying.
Greyblades
01-26-2016, 18:03
People are asked to vote against or in favor of the Association Agreement between the EU and Ukraine. Yet in fact it is like asking people to give their opinion on the Collected Works of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin. It is not even important whether you read it – it is such a complex document that can be interpreted by laypersons in so many ways that it does not make sense.
Strange that gilrandir's article is presenting this as a reason not to do away with an agreement when it sounds like a great reason to get rid of it, or at least replace it..
People want to see strawberries on their Dutch table in December, but they do not want globalization. People want to be sure their yogurts are fresh and safe and with an appropriate expiration date, but they don’t want EU rules and regulations. People want to surf their smartphones 24 hours a day, but they don’t want modern technology to make jobs redundant. People want all the pleasures but not the other side of the coin. Quite normal, of course, but any intelligent person knows you can’t have one without the other. Yet the majority of those who will vote “no” on April 6 in Holland want only one, and not the other.
Yeesh what an elitist asshole, he'd fit right in here.
He also seems completely ignorant of the concepts of greenhouses, dutch rules and regulations, and protectionism
You can call Parliament a “fake Parliament”, male refugees “testosterone bombs” that need to be locked up in camps and shout “No more Maroccans” and somehow every time well-educated Dutchmen adjust their levels of acceptance and let him continue.
I take it back, he wouldnt fit in here, even the worst of us arent complaining about free speech in action.
However, by now he has reached a level that reminds me painfully of the gentlemen Joseph Goebbels and Julius Streicher, who had the same type of stereotype slogans regarding Jews in the 1930s. A person who would have hibernated for twenty years and wake up now would not believe his eyes and ears, yet we have basically accepted his sick behavior because it is a step by step process, every time a little bit further. Just like Hitler in the 1920s and early 1930s; don’t forget, Germany was a democracy then, and Hitler came to power in a democratic fashion, not through a coup d’état like the Soviets! Wow nazi comparison combined with historical ignorance of the night of long knives, this guy is a gift that keeps on giving.
The truth is that Europe is a war zone. Putin and his criminal buddies have brought the war to Europe. They stimulate discontent through their social media trolls, they support the earlier mentioned right-wing politicians because they are a destabilizing factor, they do anything to bring Merkel down (even if only because she is a “people’s traitor” from East Germany); they create havoc in Syria to keep the refugees coming.
http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/992/852/931.gif
This makes it very hard for the “yes-campaign”. How to make a population understand that this is not about Ukraine, but about something else? How to explain that by voting “no” they play right into the hands of a criminal state that is collapsing and as a result all the more dangerous? And I wonder, what would have happened if in the late 1930s Germans had a referendum vote on the Jews: how many would have voted against their expulsion?
Wait...Wouldnt the jewish community be better off right now if germany had expelled them before the nazis got into power?
Unfortunately, my political party D’66 created an instrument that is now fundamentally abused. My only hope is that it will open people’s eyes before it is too late. Democracy is in mortal danger, but it is not too late. We can still stop the process. This would carry more weight (which is to say any) if he had actually tried to explain to the supposedly ignorant masses what the agreement is.
I cant stresx enough that those behind the referendum insist that those in favour of this treaty vote in favour of it. But is as usual with the eurocrats, they mistake Europe with the EU, nothing but godwins and doom is what they can come up with. In the end the EU is nothing but a very expensive and intrusive overhead. It isn't even about the EU but about seeking trouble where it isn't needed.
Gilrandir
01-27-2016, 10:54
Strange that gilrandir's article is presenting this as a reason not to do away with an agreement when it sounds like a great reason to get rid of it, or at least replace it..
First of all, it is not MY article.
Second of all, whatever people here may think, I was not going to sway anyone here (or elsewhere) this or that way concerning the voting. I just came across an article by a Hollander who might be in the know of emotions and motifs within the Netherlands and dared to share it.
Third of all, he has a right to offer his reasons why he seconds Holland accepting the Ukraine-EU AA, now doesn't he?
Wow nazi comparison combined with historical ignorance of the night of long knives
The Night in question was a matter of internal strife within NSDAP, it had nothing to do with Hitler's party legally and legitimately winning in the election and Hitler becoming chancellor.
Greyblades
01-27-2016, 11:58
First of all, it is not MY article. You presented it; in this context it's yours.
Second of all, whatever people here may think, I was not going to sway anyone here (or elsewhere) this or that way concerning the voting.I gathered that and I didnt say you were trying to.
I just came across an article by a Hollander who might be in the know of emotions and motifs within the Netherlands and dared to share it. "In the know" is pushing it, he's a left wing pundit whinging how terrible the filthy plebs are for not toeing the line.
Third of all, he has a right to offer his reasons why he seconds Holland accepting the Ukraine-EU AA, now doesn't he?
Did I say he didnt?
The Night in question was a matter of internal strife within NSDAP, it had nothing to do with Hitler's party legally and legitimately winning in the election and Hitler becoming chancellor.I was tired and meant to say reichstag fire. Sue me.
Gilrandir
01-28-2016, 07:51
"In the know" is pushing it, he's a left wing pundit whinging how terrible the filthy plebs are for not toeing the line.
This is your own subjective opinion which doesn't cancel the fact of the author's being more aware of Hollanders' sentiment than you.
I was tired and meant to say reichstag fire. Sue me.
Again a miss. Still tired?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire
Adolf Hitler, who was sworn in as Chancellor of Germany four weeks before, on 30 January, urged President Paul von Hindenburg to pass an emergency decree to suspend civil liberties in order to counter the ruthless confrontation of the Communist Party of Germany. After passing the decree, the government instituted mass arrests of communists, including all of the Communist Party parliamentary delegates. With their bitter rival communists gone and their seats empty, the Nazi Party went from being a plurality party to the majority; this enabled Hitler to consolidate his power.
We spoke of Hitler legally COMING TO POWER, not of the things he did AFTERWARDS. Now what's your lawyer's email?
Greyblades
01-28-2016, 18:50
This is your own subjective opinion which doesn't cancel the fact of the author's being more aware of Hollanders' sentiment than you.
Actually I think that is the subjective opinion, one that is somewhat diminished by his naked disdane for his fellow dutchmen is; destroying any pretensions to objectivity his article may posess.
Again a miss. Still tired?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire
We spoke of Hitler legally COMING TO POWER, not of the things he did AFTERWARDS. Now what's your lawyer's email?
The nazis didnt come to power until they gained an overpowering majority, and your quote proved my point: He got his position in a plurality, meaning he was still restricted. Through the reichstag fire the nazis were able to replace the communist party members with their own, gain a true majority and thus COME TO POWER.
Gilrandir
01-29-2016, 15:59
The nazis didnt come to power until they gained an overpowering majority, and your quote proved my point: He got his position in a plurality, meaning he was still restricted. Through the reichstag fire the nazis were able to replace the communist party members with their own, gain a true majority and thus COME TO POWER.
Evidently, we have a different understanding of "power". I thought that any party having at least 1 seat majority in the parliament is at power. You seem to believe in the overwhelming majority needed to qualify a ruling party as a party at power. :shrug:
As it seems right now the M17 was shot down by Ukraine (no offence intended to Ukrainian members), but M17 seems to have been guided over hostile territory. Ukraine says the radar-stations were down, all? The Americans have the satelite-images nobody asked for here in the Netherlands, this is getting odd.
Allow me to be cynical, is the lives of over 200 innocent people worth less than an association treaty? Not looking at you Ukraine I am sure it was a mistake if it was you, just curious what really happened. Wouldn't call it a friend but someone I know (hardly) died there There were jets, there were high altitude weapon systems.
Sarmatian
02-08-2016, 16:26
This might be something new.
Dutch investigation a few months ago blamed Kiev in a sense that Ukraine should have closed the area off for civilian airlines, but couldn't prove who fired the missile.
Gilrandir
02-09-2016, 14:19
As it seems right now the M17 was shot down by Ukraine (no offence intended to Ukrainian members), but M17 seems to have been guided over hostile territory. Ukraine says the radar-stations were down, all? The Americans have the satelite-images nobody asked for here in the Netherlands, this is getting odd.
Allow me to be cynical, is the lives of over 200 innocent people worth less than an association treaty? Not looking at you Ukraine I am sure it was a mistake if it was you, just curious what really happened. Wouldn't call it a friend but someone I know (hardly) died there There were jets, there were high altitude weapon systems.
The source, please.
The source, please.
Can't do right now sorry, there is nothing credible to post. nothing is clear at ths moment. 'looks like' is not the same thing as 'it is', I walk carefully when something could be big. You can probably find most on google, I am not going to say anything at the moment. A few things stand out, the Dutch government never asked for the info the Americans were more than willing to share, and the nature of the damage (exit damage, not impact)
Not making any claims because I simply don't understand everything, but first video on top http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven/2016/02/kijk_gratis_campagnemateriaal_voor_het_nee_kamp.html#comments
-
You shall not pass?
Gilrandir
02-10-2016, 10:45
You can probably find most on google, I am not going to say anything at the moment.
Google? Brenus would have flagellated you. It is even worse than social media reliance.
Anyway, blaming Ukraine has a false premise at the outset since Ukraine didn't need any anti-jet facilities as the separatists didn't (and still don't) have any planes at their disposal and Russia was too clever to openly use planes because such facts of involvement could never be denied.
On a second thought, I guess Russia would come up with an explanation or other if such cases were spotted.
Not making any claims because I simply don't understand everything, but first video on top http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven/2016/02/kijk_gratis_campagnemateriaal_voor_het_nee_kamp.html#comments
-
You shall not pass?
Didn't dare to open the link as it asked me in Dutch to do something. One can't be too wary.
Don't worry it's safe, Dutch law dictates that it should be mentioned if a website uses cookies
Gilrandir
02-10-2016, 11:02
Don't worry it's safe, Dutch law dictates that it should be mentioned if a website uses cookies
What's cookies?
What's cookies?
Almost every website uses them, Dutch websites are just required to mention it. Is the same for the websites of all newspapers, they just have to mention it that they do if it is a .nl domain.Don't worry, Geenstijl.nl is perfectly secured, better than government-sites.
Sarmatian
02-10-2016, 12:46
Anyway, blaming Ukraine has a false premise at the outset since Ukraine didn't need any anti-jet facilities as the separatists didn't (and still don't) have any planes at their disposal and Russia was too clever to openly use planes because such facts of involvement could never be denied.
It is impossible to say who fired the missile with certainty. It is more likely that the rebels did it, but I'm pretty sure it was mistake whoever did it.
Overall, the blame is on Ukraine because it didn't close that area off for civilian air traffic, regardless of who fired the actual missile.
Don't worry it's safe, Dutch law dictates that it should be mentioned if a website uses cookies
Not just dutch: https://www.cookielaw.org/the-cookie-law/
I don't care who did it, mistakes happen. Can't say the Dutch government is very interested though, lots of myst here. America supposedly has the intell but to their amazement nobody asked for it.
Edit, I'll narrow it down for you a bit. Dutch government has the images of an area of 400 square km, America has much more precise images, 1 square kilometer. Nobody ever asked for these. Forensic evidence suggest that the plane was shot from behind because the front has exit-damage, not impact damage. Minister of justice-department has zero to say, he says the justice department told him they have enough, but there is no correspodance. Krazilec is the jurist so he might have to correct me, but I don't think the justice-department has a role in the international arena
Gilrandir
02-10-2016, 16:43
Overall, the blame is on Ukraine because it didn't close that area off for civilian air traffic, regardless of who fired the actual missile.
Who could have doubted that Ukraine is to blame.
First of all, IIRC other companies redirected their flight routes without waiting for anyone to tell them to do that. Only Malaysian airways didn't.
Second of all Ukraine didn't know the separatists had received from Russia weapons able to reach the altitude passenger planes fly at.
Gilrandir
02-10-2016, 16:48
Not making any claims because I simply don't understand everything, but first video on top http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven/2016/02/kijk_gratis_campagnemateriaal_voor_het_nee_kamp.html#comments
-
You shall not pass?
Can't hear what the guy says. No sound somehow.
http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven/2016/02/kijk_gratis_campagnemateriaal_voor_het_nee_kamp.html#comments should work, has nothing to do with that plane though
upper video, it's French but not hard to understand
Sarmatian
02-10-2016, 17:30
Who could have doubted that Ukraine is to blame.
That's the conclusion of the Dutch investigation, why are you angry at me for?
That's the conclusion of the Dutch investigation, why are you angry at me for?
No it isn't Sarmss, nobody is pointing any fingers at anyone. It's a big mystery why that plane was shot down and by who. Both the Dutch and Ukrainian governments are very unwilling to cooperate. I can't know of course but I think it's muffled down becacause of the association treaty and the Dutch being the concert on the Titanic (read EU) for a while
Sarmatian
02-10-2016, 22:54
No it isn't Sarmss, nobody is pointing any fingers at anyone. It's a big mystery why that plane was shot down and by who. Both the Dutch and Ukrainian governments are very unwilling to cooperate. I can't know of course but I think it's muffled down becacause of the association treaty and the Dutch being the concert on the Titanic (read EU) for a while
Well, it wasn't the criminal investigation, but Dutch Safety Board chairman explicitly stated that Ukraine had enough evidence to close the air space for civilian travel and should have done so.
Well, it wasn't the criminal investigation, but Dutch Safety Board chairman explicitly stated that Ukraine had enough evidence to close the air space for civilian travel and should have done so.
That's true of course, but the Dutch government was also warned and they seem to have done nothing with that warning. Minister of foreign afairs very quikly fled to Brussel for a freshly created function of being Junckers secretary
Sarmatian
02-11-2016, 10:18
That's true of course, but the Dutch government was also warned and they seem to have done nothing with that warning. Minister of foreign afairs very quikly fled to Brussel for a freshly created function of being Junckers secretary
No one needs to warn the government, there are international civilian aviation institutions that deal with that and they needed to be warned.
If someone warned the Dutch government, why only Dutch government? There were dozens of airplanes from many countries in that area on that day, three were in close proximity to MH117 at the time of detonation.
No one needs to warn the government, there are international civilian aviation institutions that deal with that and they needed to be warned.
If someone warned the Dutch government, why only Dutch government? There were dozens of airplanes from many countries in that area on that day, three were in close proximity to MH117 at the time of detonation.
The warnings were kinda specific, something should have been done with it. But I don't think we will get to know, without saying the investigation is unwanted I strongly suspect it is. I am not alone in that, America is kinda amazed that Dutch government never asked for their satelite-intell, acurate to a square km, not the 400 square km we have, so is Malesia. French airliners did change course by the way
Gilrandir
02-11-2016, 14:30
http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven/2016/02/kijk_gratis_campagnemateriaal_voor_het_nee_kamp.html#comments should work, has nothing to do with that plane though
upper video, it's French but not hard to understand
And what does it prove? The fact that there were nazis on Maidan? Never denied that one. I denied the premise that they formed the bulk of protesters, were the moving force behind all the actions and have ruled (are still ruling) the country ever since. Anyway, no one seemed very excited when nazis took important positions in the Russian government:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aI0eEH_ZuHE
The guy who is saluting at the end of the 2007 video (and the crowd around is following him) is Dmitry Rogozin - DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER of Russia.
As for the French movie - started to watch it but when I saw videos with Azov marching on Maidan (it was formed THREE MONTHS AFTER those events) and heard that in Odesa 46 people "of Russian origin" died (the total number of victims was 48 (6 of whom were pro-Ukrainian fotball fans killed at the march before the fire started), but the author CAN'T KNOW THEIR ORIGIN - all he can speculate on is their political stance) - gave it up. More on the film is here (it is in French, sorry):
http://www.lemonde.fr/televisions-radio/article/2016/01/31/les-lunettes-deformantes-de-moreira_4856732_1655027.html
Well, it wasn't the criminal investigation, but Dutch Safety Board chairman explicitly stated that Ukraine had enough evidence to close the air space for civilian travel and should have done so.
As I have mentioned, Ukraine DIDN'T HAVE enough evidence, the Stinger type missile launchers the separatists had couldn't reach the altitude used by passenger planes. The Buk could - but at that time Ukraine didn't know Russia provided it (with the crew) for them to use.
Never said you did, it's just one of the many reasons why I am going to vote against the treaty 6 april, not that it matters whatever I vote in post-democratic Europe.
Sarmatian
02-11-2016, 14:52
As I have mentioned, Ukraine DIDN'T HAVE enough evidence, the Stinger type missile launchers the separatists had couldn't reach the altitude used by passenger planes. The Buk could - but at that time Ukraine didn't know Russia provided it (with the crew) for them to use.
Why are you arguing with me? That is not my conclusion.
This is where you should send your explanations
Tel (+31) 70 333 70 00
Postal adress
Dutch Safety Board
PO Box 95404 25 09 CK The Hague
Visiting adress
Anna van Saksenlaan 50
2593 HT The Hague
or send them an email at info@onderzoeksraad.nl
Gilrandir
02-11-2016, 15:06
Why are you arguing with me? That is not my conclusion.
If you referred to them, you are lining up with them. Otherwise you would have mentioned that you don't agree.
Why are you arguing with me? That is not my conclusion.
This is where you should send your explanations
or send them an email at info@onderzoeksraad.nl
By all means do, at least 40% of it survived the black marker
Gilrandir
02-11-2016, 15:10
And Russian foreign office employees sport their trappings, very similar to Nazi one. A coincidence?
http://nv.ua/world/countries/polzovateli-vysmejali-natsistskuju-formu-elity-rossijskoj-diplomatii-%E2%80%93-reaktsija-sotssetej-96620.html
(It is in Russian, but the pictures speak for themselves).
Sarmatian
02-11-2016, 16:00
If you referred to them, you are lining up with them. Otherwise you would have mentioned that you don't agree.
I don't agree with them because of the report but because they are an authority (while you are not) and because they are impartial (while you are not). I see no reason why I should reject their conclusion.
I also don't think Ukraine is to blame in the classic sense of the word. Obviously, the guilty person is the one who fired that missile, but Kiev should have closed off that area, especially as the aircraft losses started happening on higher altitudes, over 6 km, which is the upper limit for most shoulder launched AA missiles.
Gilrandir
02-11-2016, 17:38
I don't agree with them because of the report but because they are an authority (while you are not) and because they are impartial (while you are not). I see no reason why I should reject their conclusion.
The reasons don't matter - you agree. Hence you can't pretend to ignore contrary arguments directed against the point of view you subscribe to.
I also don't think Ukraine is to blame in the classic sense of the word. Obviously, the guilty person is the one who fired that missile, but Kiev should have closed off that area, especially as the aircraft losses started happening on higher altitudes, over 6 km, which is the upper limit for most shoulder launched AA missiles.
MH 17 was the first aircraft loss at such an altitude, so before it Ukraine had had no reason to close off the area. And again, other companies had reshaped their routes without any tip or order.
Sarmatian
02-11-2016, 20:47
The reasons don't matter - you agree. Hence you can't pretend to ignore contrary arguments directed against the point of view you subscribe to.
You missed the point. This is way, way, waaaaaaay out of my area of expertise, so I defer to the conclusion made by (apparently unbiased) experts. You can not persuade me to contrary by pointing to flaws in their reasoning when I have literally no clue in that subject. If they change their report tomorrow, I'll accept their new conclusions.
MH 17 was the first aircraft loss at such an altitude, so before it Ukraine had had no reason to close off the area. And again, other companies had reshaped their routes without any tip or order.
Can't remember if they reported an actual number of planes, but the video showed very, very many dots flying around the area on that date.
Gilrandir
02-14-2016, 08:14
You missed the point. This is way, way, waaaaaaay out of my area of expertise, so I defer to the conclusion made by (apparently unbiased) experts. You can not persuade me to contrary by pointing to flaws in their reasoning when I have literally no clue in that subject. If they change their report tomorrow, I'll accept their new conclusions.
Then you are on the wrong boards (that is if there are other type of boards anywhere). Here (as much as elsewhere) frothing laymen discuss things they are not experts at and promote their opinions and even (God forbid) conclusions.
Anyway, clueless you (as you say) can nevertheless blame Ukraine for not closing its airspace and claim that the plane was shot down by mistake. So your deferring to the opinion of experts sometimes gives way to your personal attitudes.
And Russian foreign office employees sport their trappings, very similar to Nazi one. A coincidence?
http://nv.ua/world/countries/polzovateli-vysmejali-natsistskuju-formu-elity-rossijskoj-diplomatii-%E2%80%93-reaktsija-sotssetej-96620.html
(It is in Russian, but the pictures speak for themselves).
It's a diplomatic uniform that goes back to the Soviet Union. That's why it's less ostentatious than say a Commonwealth one.
17533
Papewaio
02-15-2016, 03:37
And Russian foreign office employees sport their trappings, very similar to Nazi one. A coincidence?
http://nv.ua/world/countries/polzovateli-vysmejali-natsistskuju-formu-elity-rossijskoj-diplomatii-%E2%80%93-reaktsija-sotssetej-96620.html
(It is in Russian, but the pictures speak for themselves).
Pfft it looks like a poorly fitted double blazer. More likely to be confused with an English naval officer or more likely postman if the colour was navy blue in the link.
One thing about the (Hugo Boss) Nazi Uniforms is that they looked sharp not baggy.
Hooahguy
02-15-2016, 05:21
Ok not super relevant but I want to post this somewhere: for my birthday my father got me one of those fabled Putin calendars. Wasnt able to get it signed by the man himself. Still an amazing gift.
17535
Gilrandir
02-15-2016, 10:28
It's a diplomatic uniform that goes back to the Soviet Union. That's why it's less ostentatious than say a Commonwealth one.
17533
The USSR official outfit and traditions are very often strikingly similar to those of nazi Germany. It doesn't reflect a great credit upon modern Russia (which claims to be the sole nazi-fighter in the world) to follow those trends.
The USSR official outfit and traditions are very often strikingly similar to those of nazi Germany. It doesn't reflect a great credit upon modern Russia (which claims to be the sole nazi-fighter in the world) to follow those trends.
The nazi's never pretended to be anything else other than those doing the exact same thing. I instinctively dislike Trump but the west still needs better relations with Russia, they seem to be the last sane man standing. Modern Russia might be just our best friends. The EU certainly isn't, the bullshit constrictor. They even are planning to abolish cash so that a negative interest on savings can be used when they screw up, what they always do, paying to save? Go team Putin
Gilrandir
02-15-2016, 12:22
The nazi's never pretended to be anything else other than those doing the exact same thing. I instinctively dislike Trump but the west still needs better relations with Russia, they seem to be the last sane man standing. Modern Russia might be just our best friends. The EU certainly isn't, the bullshit constrictor. They even are planning to abolish cash so that a negative interest on savings can be used when they screw up, what they always do, paying to save? Go team Putin
And you think your life will change for the better? Go team North Korea is what you will shout next.
And you think your life will change for the better? Go team North Korea is what you will shout next.
For your consideration, how could a Russian leader respond to this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjCOJoytLNY
I can see the name of the name of who posted it, and what's above the video, but it's pretty wtf. How could there not be a response?
Gilrandir
02-16-2016, 13:33
For your consideration, how could a Russian leader respond to this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjCOJoytLNY
I can see the name of the name of who posted it, and what's above the video, but it's pretty wtf. How could there not be a response?
I thought we were through with the discussion of who is more nazi/criminal/racist and so on. My argument was that every country has nutjobs, even embracing the highest positions. Pointing to them and trying to turn a blind eye upon other countries will not prove anything.
As a reply to the video you linked: the Russian leader allowed a nazi to be a deputy head of the parliament in 2003-2004:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aI0eEH_ZuHE
The same position is now held by Zhirinovsky - you can google yourself and find out about his bigotric lunatic ideas.
If you mean that Putin had a right to interfere into Ukrainian events after he had seen the video you refer to, then I will say that a sober- minded leader (of any country) ought to know better than to overreact after seeing nutjobs airing their views in public. Ohterwise Obama would have started a war with Russia each time he heard Zhirinovsky speaking. And he is not a random adventurer, but a deputy head of the parliament in 2000-2011.
I meant not respond, my bad. He just had to do something otherwise he would look weak.
"The USSR official outfit and traditions are very often strikingly similar to those of nazi Germany":laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
Gilrandir
02-17-2016, 11:41
"The USSR official outfit and traditions are very often strikingly similar to those of nazi Germany":laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
Just google for pictures (videos) of parades in both countries and you'll see.
Gilrandir
02-17-2016, 11:45
I meant not respond, my bad. He just had to do something otherwise he would look weak.
What he did exceeds the common sense (of a country leader) and looks like a knee-jerk reaction. Anyway, he together with his country are much weaker now. Was it worth it?
Sarmatian
02-17-2016, 13:26
Just google for pictures (videos) of parades in both countries and you'll see.
You do know that German officers were mostly responsible for training Russian army since Peter the Great, so it is quite normal for Russian and German military traditions to be similar.
As for similarity in uniforms, that's a laugh.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.