Printable View
More nonsense, padawan. Avoid the nonsense you must.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
Smart people were buying privatization vouchers from stupid people. Then they took those vouchers and turned them in to get shares in Russian oil, gas and other industries dealing primarily with extraction of minerals. They got fabulously rich. The stupid were left with nothing. Smart > stupid. That's an axiom and it has nothing to do with lawlessness.
Well, if you consider that normal, than I understand your position.Quote:
Originally Posted by rvg
Of course I consider it normal. The vouchers were given evenly to the entire country, each family got one. It's not Yeltsin's fault that 95% of people are idiots who would sell their voucher for a case of booze. C'est la vie.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
Quote:
I can hardly believe the general lawlessness of Yeltsin era, when selected people were buying companies worth billions for literally two cases of vodka was better than Putin's.
So it's just like I said. There's more corruption now, it's just that Putin orchestrates or oversees the biggest bits himself.Quote:
That was showing off.
As for the underdevelopment of Sochi, well, well-known Putin cronies got multi-billion-dollar contracts to build up infrastructure - they didn't do jack.
See, that's the difference between American and Russian corruption/patronage: America is much more multipolar, so the money gets spread out much more.
Of course there are differences, I was talking mostly about foreign policy and how other countries are treated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency
Internally the USA are preferable but not exactly great either IMO. The Daily Show made a nice comparison: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/we...better-off-red
I haven't seen a single tangible argument on why I should prefer US foreign policy over the Russian one from a relatively neutral POV.Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency
From eavesdropping on my elected government officials to "**** the EU" comments I find it a little hard to see the US government as my best and mostest well-meaning friends. Please show me what I am overlooking. The Marshall plan? That only came about because we were supposed to serve as pincushions against the "red tide".
Is it that what the increasing wealth gap proves? Maybe we're just slower.Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency
When it comes to corruption, America is light years ahead of Russia (ahead in a positive sense), there's no contest there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency
We're comparing Yeltsin era corruption to Putin era, and I believe Yeltsin era was worse.
As a German, you are in a good position to contemplate it. Germany and Russia have been getting close lately, and recent German assertiveness, both in general and towards Russia (over Ukraine) in particular is interesting. Clearly, the German government does not want to get too close to Russia for the time being.Quote:
why I should prefer US foreign policy over the Russian one from a relatively neutral POV.
Anyway, the US' foreign policy is preferable: the US views Germany as a useful economic and political partner, and the two are separated by thousands of miles. Russia and Germany have recent mutual acrimony, and ultimately Russia will always view Germany and Western Europe as a national-security threat (at least on par that of America, nukes notwithstanding). Russia wants buffers between itself and its heartland, so it will continually attempt to push its borders as close to Germany as possible - and I figure that might make you sweat more than the contempt of the Americans and their spies.
It really wasn't. There was less corruption. As far as lawlessness goes, Russia is still lawless. The big difference is that before people were victimized by the gangsters, now they are victimized by the police. Russia used to have freedom of speech and more or less free elections. Gone and gone. One thing that improved was the price of oil and gas. That's it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
Sure, but I'm just noting that they're not unrelated (i.e. polarity and relative corruption).Quote:
When it comes to corruption, America is light years ahead of Russia (ahead in a positive sense), there's no contest there.
Yeltsin vs Putin:
Putin has cleaned up low-level corruption where it suits him, which is what I think you have in mind, but as a tool of governance he's just gathered all the chaotic strings toward his chest. But I'm mostly just repeating myself. If we're to get anywhere, then we need to be more specific than just "corruption".
That would be a hard call.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
The whole corruption index is perceived corruption. It is hard to actually quantify.
During Yeltsin it was more from the top. Today it could be just more general.
Russians seem to see their civil servants and Bureaucracy as corrupt but not their media and politicians.
If the civil servants are corrupt, those above them are also. Bet on it. They can’t get away with it if those above them are not getting a cut too.
Corruption brought down the Soviets. Today I think it is more managed. Even centralized.
That of the Yeltsin era was certainly more destructive to the nation.
Germany is a part of NATO and at the moment and short-term future considers US a more important partner. The other side of the coin is that Germany was the strongest opponent of tough measures against Russia, blocking the idea of kicking Russia out of G8. That tells me that Germany consider Russia a very important partner in the long term. More important, less important or of equal importance as US, that is hard to say.Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency
Some political analysts in Germany are openly wondering would it be better for German and EU interests to "substitute UK for Russia". Obviously, this crisis over Ukraine has and will spoil relations, but in the long term, I believe it will prove to be a minor bump.
I don't believe so. I think Russia sees Germany as potential best bud in Europe, and that becoming best buds with Germany is the best possible course for safety and stability of Russia.Quote:
Anyway, the US' foreign policy is preferable: the US views Germany as a useful economic and political partner, and the two are separated by thousands of miles. Russia and Germany have recent mutual acrimony, and ultimately Russia will always view Germany and Western Europe as a national-security threat (at least on par that of America, nukes notwithstanding). Russia wants buffers between itself and its heartland, so it will continually attempt to push its borders as close to Germany as possible - and I figure that might make you sweat more than the contempt of the Americans and their spies.
Maybe, but on the other hand I don't think Russia will stop seeking an Eastern-European sphere of influence with that expectation, and maybe there will be regional tensions, and militarization, and after all Germany and Poland are also going for the "best buds" deal, and if Europeans begin replacing Russian spot-oil with locally-fracked natural gas, and Russia after Putin becomes less stable and more unpredictable...
It's complicated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube
Again, to simplify. Are you willing to kill a few thousands of your own soldiers to demonstrate your willpower in this confrontation. If not, then do what you can with words, but remember Pompeus Magnus' reminder to Cato.
Can you remind me of this reminder? It's been quite a while since I last read the texts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
You've not played enough EB. It was a reminder to stop quoting law, for the audience carried swords.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Do you actually think Russia could try to annex Poland or any other EU member country just like that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency
Ukraine works because it's far away and most people here think it's Russia anyway, or thought so before the current crisis.
But I do not think that Russia can just touch an EU member with the rest of the EU just voicing protest.
Instead, we would congratulate our new member Russia and Brussels would force all kinds of nonsense on them until they just whinge and wish they had never done that.
Or WW3, without popcorn.
I don't even see why Russia would want to have that many buffers when better relations could make buffers completely unnecessary.
I knew of the quote, but didn't know he'd said it to Cato.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios
Well, no - I was speaking of their geopolitical imperatives, not a specific near-term goal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
If only the path to OWG were that easy...Quote:
I don't even see why Russia would want to have that many buffers when better relations could make buffers completely unnecessary.
Of course, everybody has goals for the long term:Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency
https://i.imgur.com/H9XyOHI.jpg
http://www.europeanleadershipnetwork...rope_1167.html
It's usually harder to integrate than it is to separate but we will keep fighting the good fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Montmorency
Problem is, Russia would dominate the Union, especially if it joins as a single-bloc, the current nation-state hegemony doesn't work that well as check and balance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
Only way for the EU to be more balanced is the breakdown of the Nation States into NUTS level 1 borderies or similar. That would look similar to this. The United Kingdom was actually done like this under labour, but unfortunately, the North-East referendum screw-up failed to implement it correctly, as it gives regions more control as per devolution. Instead we ended up with Wales, Northern Ireland, Scotland and London getting the benefits and not the rest.
The joining Russian Federation would have to be broken down like this as well.
Screw up?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiaexz
You mean where they voted the "wrong" way?
This thread isn't about the democratic deficit in the EU, it's about the democratic deficit in Russia and the Ukraine.
But lets us digress for a moment - the reason the EU doesn't work as a democracy is that there is absolutely no unified polity - the fact that parts of France, the UK and Spain keep trying to break away should tell you something about how bolting NUTS together works in practice, just barely if at all.
Ultimately no amount of internal re-organisation will keep a country together, it didn't work for Russia (Ukraine was historically part of the Russian Empire, mostly) and it hasn't worked all that well for Ukraine - there's enough ill feeling about Kiev that some people would rather be Russian than Ukrainian.
No, given that many Russians don't want to be Russian - you have to ask just what the Crimeans think about Kiev.
Here's a piece: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26503476
Sounds like the Welsh or the Scots.Quote:
Does he believe the allegations of Russians here that those from western Ukraine are out to harm them?
"It's a myth", he tells me. "We just spent a couple of months in the western city of Lviv. People there are extremely polite and kind. There is no violence to Russian people - I was speaking Russian with no problems. The fear comes from propaganda on television.
"When I went to the west, my mother told me not to say I was from Sevastopol - and she watches a lot of TV. People in western Ukraine are united to build a new country without corruption and without criminals. We are looking forward to helping them."
The difference with Ukraine is that the conflict there is far more ideological than it is ethnic. There's 50 million Ukrainian citizens and most of the do not want to be Putin's slaves. I would hate to see them getting turned into slaves while we sit around and twiddle our thumbs.
Not to mention that the 1994 memorandum morally obligates us to act.
Do they have a linguistically-representative chant for the EU stormtroopers yet? :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
Yeah - America was literally founded on broken treaties.Quote:
Originally Posted by rvg
With regard to the corruption issue, Russia scores highly today because Putin uses patronage and favours as political tools - that registers as "corruption" on indices calibrated against Germanic democracies, but it makes perfect sense in what is a semi-feudal Tyranny.
I doubt Putin sees the Russian people as "slaves" any more than Lenin did, or the Tsar for that matter. Actually - Tsar Nicholas might be a good comparison, save that he lacked Putin's political agility and the correct atmosphere to reform Russia in.
Yeah, but that doesn't obligate us to keep breaking them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
I think this is exactly what Russia is today.Quote:
With regard to the corruption issue, Russia scores highly today because Putin uses patronage and favours as political tools - that registers as "corruption" on indices calibrated against Germanic democracies, but it makes perfect sense in what is a semi-feudal Tyranny.
I don't think he sees them as slaves, he just treats them as such. I don't think he goes out of his way to hurt the people, he simply doesn't care, they are not present in any of his calculations. If they benefit, that's okay, if they get hurt -- no big deal. People outside of Putin's inner circle and his bureaucratic pyramid simply do not matter.Quote:
I doubt Putin sees the Russian people as "slaves" any more than Lenin did, or the Tsar for that matter. Actually - Tsar Nicholas might be a good comparison, save that he lacked Putin's political agility and the correct atmosphere to reform Russia in.
Can anyone link to the text of the memorandum?Quote:
Originally Posted by rvg
Yesterday I've read in an article from some American newspapers that the wording of the memorandum is such that US, UK, Russia are only obligated to defend Ukraine in case of nuclear attack.
Ask, and...
Quote:
The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,
Welcoming the accession of Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as a non-nuclear-weapon State,
Taking into account the commitment of Ukraine to eliminate all nuclear weapons from its territory within a specified period of time,
Noting the changes in the world-wide security situation, including the end of the Cold War, which have brought about conditions for deep reductions in nuclear forces.
Confirm the following:
The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act, to respect the Independence and Sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.
The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defense or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act, to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind.
The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.
The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm, in the case of the Ukraine, their commitment not to use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, except in the case of an attack on themselves, their territories or dependent territories, their armed forces, or their allies, by such a state in association or alliance with a nuclear weapon state.
The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland will consult in the event a situation arises which raises a question concerning these commitments.
This Memorandum will become applicable upon signature.
Signed in four copies having equal validity in the English, Russian and Ukrainian languages.
“Not to mention that the 1994 memorandum morally obligates us to act” Err, that is a stretch: text is saying: “reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine”. So the seek the UNITED NATIONS, not NATO or EU or USA or whatever other bodies.
Morally…. Right…
Ukraine may have to go nuclear, says Kiev lawmaker
Well if Israel can make nukes, why not Ukraine? Hell, I'd like everyone to have at least one nuke. A lot less democracy policing will happen.
They should ask Russia for one.
The truth is that Ukraine didn't return the nuclear weapons because they felt like it, but because they didn't have the funds or the expertise to properly maintain them. There would have been a bigger chance of a nuclear leak than a successful launch. The corruption and instability of the country would have made it extremely dangerous for nuclear weapons.Quote:
Originally Posted by Myth
I'd like less nuclear weapons in the world, not more.
There is no president in Crimea. At least not yet. They have a parliament which appoints the cabinet of ministers and the prime minister. If present Crimean authorities don't recognize the new government in Kyiv it would be logical to proclaim allegiance to Yanukovych and invite him to rule the part of the country which still considers him a legal/legitimate/any-other-L-word-you-like president. They don't do that: they neither acknowledge the new government nor insist on the old one to return.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherking
Firstly, I didn't know you were a Brit. Secondly, I don't call for GB to interfere military-wise. Thirdly, I don't call for any country to interfere military-wise. Fourthly, I don't blame anyone for their present stance. I am aware of a complex nature of the crisis. I just draw some historical parallels.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
What I believe could be done is utilizing other levers than warfare. When the West introduced sanctions against Yanukovych and his posse his supporters fell off almost at once. They were more afraid to lose their fortunes and estates abroad than to call Yanukovych a traitor and a criminal. So, what I would hope to see is economic sanstions and traveling limitations. Since this war is waged not by one person (with his friends) but by the armed forces of the whole country (though unidentified still) it would be logical to freeze all financial operations of all people who have Russian citizenship and forbid them all to enter the countries that agree to introduce sanctions. I think within a couple of hours after that Putin will have very unpleasant talks with Abramovich, Deripasko and other Russian billionaires having business and property abroad. Plus thousands of Russians fuming at airports and railway stations whose trips have been cancelled would notify their president of their dissatisfaction and annoyance. It will make him more easy to persuade in the neccessity of negotiations, to say the least.
I know that many of you will say that it is too great a price to pay to help Ukraine. I know that other countries have first of all their interests to think of. But that is the only way I see that can somehow influence Russia without any military involvement of the West.
Just wondering.
Since the Crimean parliament has declared their independence even before the referendum and the vote leaves no choice to remain within Ukraine, is it not time to pull the plug on their electricity and close the water tap?
The logistics of replacing those services would drive the Russians mad.
The Navy could provide some of the power, if it is a nuclear fleet, but would mean they could only remain in port hooked to the grid, but the water would be one hell of a problem
Those representatives are not allowed to monitor the counting of votes. They are sent home after the voting is done.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
I don't deny it. But I can update you on the electoral tactics used by the Party of Regions. In the places where they were sure to win (South-East) it was all pretty much fair and square. The places they were sure to lose (Western Ukraine) got the same treatment: you can't fraud so much. I live in central Ukraine which (together with Kyiv) accounts for a third of the electorate. It is here that the violations were most outrageous. In five constituencies elections were held void as the results "couldn't be identified", as the officials said. In my city the head of the electoral board (when she saw that the candidate supported by the Party of Regions didn't win) took the seal of the board and the final protocol with the election results and disappeared. The ballots were destroyed so that re-counting could not be performed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
Who do you consider protest leaders? Yatsenyuk, Klitschko and Tyagnybok? They were not. It was hard for them to control Maidan, they shuttled between Maidan and Yanukovych acting more like go-betweens than protest leaders. Very often Maidan expressed dissatisfaction with what they did stating that their protests were not aimed at any politician getting a new job. When the agreement with Yanukovych was reached it was Maidan that did not accept it. So it was the other way around: parliamentary opposition leaders after having consulatations brought the list of the ministers for Maidan to approve and then it was voted for officially in the parliament. And this approval by Maidan (by way of acclamation) did not satisfy Maidan. There are ministers who are held suspicious by Maidan and Yatsenyuk as a prime minister is not what the majority of Maidan likes. But Maidan agreed to it like an unpleasant neccessity liable to change if ministers start to abuse power.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
So if you are a political winner in the election you can disregard the view of another half of the counrty. That's how political compomise works, I see.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
The other side of the coin: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26531310
If your leader gives you a war everyone is going to rise to the patriotic cause and not look at what is happening at home.
I doubt that the west does any sanctions and Putin will be emboldened to do it all again, at least until everyone has had enough.
If he doesn’t get his fingers burned this time, what will the next time bring?
It is not about having buffers. Or not only about having buffers. Putin is:Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
1) angry because things in Ukraine have gotten out of his control and it was not him who rode the storm. His bet Yanukovych was evicted too soon before he could play him to the full extent. In his 11 of March appearance to the public in Rostov Yanukovych was introduced to the audience not as "the President of Ukraine" but just his full name was recited. That says that Putin has now other cards to play, he needs Yanukovych little any more;
2) afraid because if Russians new about true reasons and nature of the protests something like that might happen in Russia, for, whatever Sarmatian the Omniscient may claim, curruption is still endemic in Russia, only it is more centralized and supervised.
So I believe it is emotions that goad Putin now rather than logical calculations and cold reason.
Do you believe that the majority ever wants war? Where one man in 1000 desires war, there it is. Horetore wants to disband his nations military in response to this crisis. How will he enforce his social and economic policies on those who won't listen? Probably by militarizing his police force.Quote:
Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name
Personally, I share the hopeful expectation that by 2025 the Russian Federation will be in some sort of defensive/economic cooperative with NATO and the EU in the face of growing Chinese irredentist pressure. I would like to see a relatively stable Northern Hemisphere with devolved political controls at the lower level. Putin and his allies in the Duma are probably the greatest opponents of this.
I highly doubt that, as there must be some mechanisms to for all involved parties and foreign observers to verify the counting of the votes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilrandir
You can cite specific examples to you heart's desire. The bottom line is that everyone except Timoshenko confirmed that elections were honest. OSCE said the elections were "professional, transparent and honest", and it was confirmed by an army of other observers.Quote:
I don't deny it. But I can update you on the electoral tactics used by the Party of Regions. In the places where they were sure to win (South-East) it was all pretty much fair and square. The places they were sure to lose (Western Ukraine) got the same treatment: you can't fraud so much. I live in central Ukraine which (together with Kyiv) accounts for a third of the electorate. It is here that the violations were most outrageous. In five constituencies elections were held void as the results "couldn't be identified", as the officials said. In my city the head of the electoral board (when she saw that the candidate supported by the Party of Regions didn't win) took the seal of the board and the final protocol with the election results and disappeared. The ballots were destroyed so that re-counting could not be performed.
I know, which complicates things further.Quote:
Who do you consider protest leaders? Yatsenyuk, Klitschko and Tyagnybok? They were not.
With this, and especially this last sentence, you hit the nail right on the head. Some western governments, happy that there's a chance that Ukraine shifts into their sphere of influence, started pouring tons of manure on the entire thing, hoping something beautiful will grow out of it. Most notably - the idea it was the Rada who threw Yanukovich out and that it was the Rada who elected a new government, like PVC and some others here mentioned. That allowed them to shroud everything in a veil of democracy and pretend it's all fine and dandy.Quote:
It was hard for them to control Maidan, they shuttled between Maidan and Yanukovych acting more like go-betweens than protest leaders. Very often Maidan expressed dissatisfaction with what they did stating that their protests were not aimed at any politician getting a new job. When the agreement with Yanukovych was reached it was Maidan that did not accept it. So it was the other way around: parliamentary opposition leaders after having consulatations brought the list of the ministers for Maidan to approve and then it was voted for officially in the parliament. And this approval by Maidan (by way of acclamation) did not satisfy Maidan. There are ministers who are held suspicious by Maidan and Yatsenyuk as a prime minister is not what the majority of Maidan likes. But Maidan agreed to it like an unpleasant neccessity liable to change if ministers start to abuse power.
What the Russians have been saying is that it was a coup by protesters, and that this government can not be considered legal and legitimate for that reason.
At the end of the day, no matter how corrupt or hated the politicians are, 100,000, 200,000 or 300,000 protesters in Kiev don't have the right to decide for 50 million Ukrainians.
You obviously don't understand the basic principles of democracy or the purpose of the elections.Quote:
So if you are a political winner in the election you can disregard the view of another half of the counrty. That's how political compomise works, I see.
Hey, thanks, I like the sound of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilrandir
These three dominate any comment you make aimed at me. You highly doubt anything I say, you disregard (through mistrust) examples I provide, you deny my having intelligence enough to contradict you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
Like I said: the picture is rigid, you don't want anything to spoil it.
It was a coup as far as expelling yanukovych is concerned. Then the legal and legitimate parliament (which had been hitherto cheated of its rights) stepped in.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
I'm not sure whether that would have the effect you desire or just increase the distance between Europe and Russia, making negotiations even less likely/more hostile.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilrandir
Intelligence? Can't say that. Understanding? Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilrandir
Iterating and reiterating specific and limited examples doesn't change the whole picture. For example, I may say that Norway is not a corrupt country. Someone may come and start citing examples of corruption - one, two, three.... ten or more, it doesn't matter. The basic truth still remains that Norway is not a corrupt country. That doesn't mean there isn't or that there has never been some acts of corruption in Norway, it means that there is very little corruption overall.
Likewise with elections - I don't pretend to know how elections in Ukraine are performed, other than common sense, but I do know how elections are monitored. Counting of the votes is just as important as casting of the votes and I know that organizations like OSCE wouldn't have judged the elections "honest, professional and transparent" if they couldn't verify the count itself. In that regard, yes, I trust OSCE a little more than I do you. So, unless, you have a good explanation how and why OSCE and other foreign observers all decided to cover up Yanukovich's scam, I'll continue to have little more faith in their than yours opinion. But, like in Norway example, that doesn't mean that there haven't been any local cases of someone trying to rig the elections. It means that on the whole, elections were fair and honest.
Call it rigid or however you like, I don't mind really.
I love how you managed to contradict yourself just a few posts apart.Quote:
It was a coup as far as expelling yanukovych is concerned. Then the legal and legitimate parliament (which had been hitherto cheated of its rights) stepped in.
What happened in Ukraine is important to everyone. It is more important that they follow through and get a working government that reduces corruption and reflects the will of the people to a better degree.
Unfortunately, I am not over optimistic on the outcome.
But it is dangerous to governments. It is a major threat to Russia, who has to make it about neo-Nazis and other fearful things. Else, Putin’s population would look around and see the same things that drove the Ukrainians.
It is not just about the Eurasian trading sphere, though that is part of it too.
Leaders and governments are about increasing their power, prestige, money, and influence. They think they reward the people by being able to bask in the reflected glory of their accomplishments. And the people seem to accept that.
That is the major thing that has to change.
Exactly. Out of the three Russian states on the map (Russia, Ukraine and Belarus) only the people of Ukraine have maintained some semblance of freedom. Putin doesn't like that, as it sets a bad example for his biomass. He likes his biomass quiet, docile, obedient and unquestionably loyal to the great leader. So far I must say that he has done a superb job of moving the country in that direction.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherking
I read that a bit differently.Quote:
I love how you managed to contradict yourself just a few posts apart.
expelling just tells what happened to him. But just my reading.Quote:
It was a coup as far as yanukovych is concerned.
Could be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
You really don't mind because in your picture the dark forces (as Yanukovych called them at his last briefing) have the highest concentration on and around Maidan. As you move farther from the governmental quarters in Kyiv neo-nazis become more and more scarce and are turned into Nazi-fighters as soon as you approach Eastern Ukraine and those nazi-fighters become abundant the moment you cross the border into Russia. You choose to turn a blind eye on witch-hunting for Bandera-followers in Russia, on kidnapping, robbing and tormenting journalists in the Crimea, on shutting down all Ukrainian TV channels there, on bullying Ukrainian soldiers with threats to massacre their families. As long as those cases are not attributed to Maidanian neo-nazis, you highly doubt them and call them specific examples that prove nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
It is giving the dog a bad name and hanging it. Until (or unless) the name is given the dog may bite at will.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
Yo, Hore Tore, it seems too soon to disband your army. You may need it to combat corruption. Well, no, I'm sorry it could be considered a neo-nazi way. You should first hold a debate on how legal/legitimate your army is and only then you can send it on any mission. Well, no, let me see: are there any neo-nazis from Maidan enlisted? No? Then you may sure advance against any enemy (neo-nazis from Maidan are recommended).
How did you read that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherking
This part tells that it was the Maidan protesters that approved the government which was afterwards practically just ratified in the Rada. And the protesters promised, or threatened or however you want to call it, to replace the PM if they don't like him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilrandir
This part says the government was set up according to democratic principles by the Rada.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilrandir
How do you not see the contradiction between these two statements?
What's the highest legislative body in Ukraine? Who sets up the government? The Maidan protesters or the parliament?
So will Putin get eastern Ukraine? Also, let's not demonize him. The westerners are no better, and the western "biomass" is just as brainwashed and docile. Especially in the USA where your major headlines are usually related to the skank of the day, be it Paris Hilton, Kim Kardashian or Miley Cyrus and some celebrity couple or other.
You're getting boring quickly with your childish behavior.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilrandir
Go back and look in the thread where said Yanukovich was corrupt and where I wouldn't mind seeing him hanged by his private parts.
Go back and look in the thread where I said Russia was using propaganda to blow the nazi thing out of proportions.
Go back and look in the thread where I said I hope and wish Ukraine gets out of this in one piece
Go back and look in the thread where I said Crimean referendum would be illegitimate.
Even if I do see all that, I can not pretend to not see what was happening during the protests and after. You ousted one corrupt bastard and placed three persons in his place - one who's the first deputy of a corrupt bastard, one whose only previous job experience was getting hit in the head repeatedly, and a nazi. That's enough on its own to seriously screw up anyone but you've managed also to piss off your much larger and much more powerful neighbour.
Good luck getting out of that mess, and excuse me if I don't jump on the bandwagon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Myth
Will Putin go that far? Wish I knew.
Putin is an excellent leader. A lot of the things he does are brilliant. He runs circles around the western ones.
He has a much better situational grasp than any of them. He can inspire and motivate. He can organize and excruciate a plan while the rest are still trying to get explained to them by their expert staff.
He does his job well. I just don’t think he is right. At least this time.
Meantime, the US is only making a little squeaky noises and most of the sheepole are watching the news to find out what happened to “ The Plane”. That would mostly be because the response from the west is so embarrassing. Better to cover it as “and also in the news”.
Putin can likely get away with what ever he wants this time because the US and the EU have their heads in a place with no sunlight.
Maybe before Monday Obama will miraculously grow a spine?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherking
So does Putin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherking
No, I hope not. It would only be something more stupid than what has gone before.Quote:
Originally Posted by rvg
Besides, Arms dealers and the pentagon need another cold war. Terrorists don’t sell big hardware. Tens of thousands of drones are about all they can expect from that. The real money is in tanks, planes , and ships.
With the pay and benefit cuts they may not have any troops, but they won’t let that stop them.
This means big money for the defense and surveillance sectors.
roflolQuote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Noone does that to our leaders and then we wonder why the Russians do not think we have a lot of credibility.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Even our newspapers make fun of their elected president.
Not a sex toy, but a hell of a lot creepier.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
Why creepy? Looks just like her.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Kim Kardashian doesn't lead to annexations though. Neither does Paris Hilton.Quote:
Originally Posted by Myth
Spanish-American War due to the Maine sinking. WW2 due to Pearl Harbor. War on Terror due to 9/11.Quote:
Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg
Try harder.
Such wisdom. Westerners are on par with a power hungry dictator because we like our celebrity gossip.Quote:
Originally Posted by Myth
I think I understand why Strike is so frustrated every time he chimes in.
Alcohol?Quote:
Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name
Lack of damsels?
TELL US!?
Too soon? :creep:
Not directly. They are strictly "panem et circenses" stuff to distract the masses from asking/thinking about substantive issues. Of themselves, they are celebrities for being celebrities -- a highly profitable form of intellectual onanism.Quote:
Originally Posted by rvg
Celebrities only distract those who wish to be distracted. Those are a lost cause anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
Ridiculous!Quote:
Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Gerhard_SchröderQuote:
Originally Posted by Gerhard Schröder
You are referring to millions here, millions of fellow-citizens, as a "lost cause". One way or another, isn't that kind of troubling?Quote:
Celebrities only distract those who wish to be distracted. Those are a lost cause anyway.
The procedure of ratification (as you call it) was performed in accordance with all constitutional (legal) principles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
As for replacing the PM (or other members of the cabinet) who will start to be involved into some corruption schemes, protesters are afraid that politicians will forget too soon what they have promised (as it was after the Orange revolution).
And if he is, you would raise hue and cry that it was illegitimate, illegal and didn't take into account the opinion of Russian-speakers of the South-east.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
You contribute to the blowing out. The head of the Crimean parliament declared that when Crimea joins Russia they will have two official languages - Russian and Tatar. Up till now (under the "neo-nazi rule" from Kyiv) they have three - Russian, Ukrainian and Tatar. Will we hear from you any lamentation on how the minority (which is second largest in Crimea) was deprived of their constitutional and lanuage rights and of the advent of a neo-nazi regime in Crimea? Or is it just another specific example that proves nothing?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
I can't fail to see that you consider the same faults worth condemnation if they are attributed to neo-nazis in Kiyv (like bullying the opponents) and not worth mentioning (like bullying the besieged Ukrainian soldiers and thier families in Crimea) if it is otherwise.
And finally. We seem to disagree on some (perhaps many) points, but in all my posts I NEVER called the arguments of the opponent quote bollocks unquote or proclaimed him childish for trying to defend his stance. If I lack understanding the main principles of democracy (as you claim), I still follow the main principles of politeness and respect to your opponent's opinion.
:bow:
“Try harder.” Viet-Nam, Cambodia, Granada, Nicaragua (let’s say Central and South America for Condor Operation), Cuba, Kosovo, Mexico and Canada (as you went to the 19th), Annexing of Hawaii, Iraq (can you remind me why?), Somalia and list is too long. Some with reasons, some with not.
It cannot be done until Ukraine acknowledges the departure of the Crimea officially. You can't claim the territory for your own and treat it like the enemy's. Russia will be the first to blame Ukraine for imposing a humanitarian disaster onto Russian-speakers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherking
EU Parliament (13-DEC-2013) ” is concerned about the rise of nationalist sentiment in Ukraine, which led to support for the party "Svoboda", which is thus being one of the two new parties to make their entrance in the Verkhovnaz Rada; recalls that the opinion racist, anti-Semitic and xenophobic are contrary to the values and fundamental principles of the European Union, and therefore to urge democratic parties represented in the Verkhovna Rada to not to associate with this party, or to approve or form coalition with the latter”
“Russia does not violate any law, whether international or another. According to the agreements signed with the Ukraine, the Federation is authorized to have a force of 25,000 men on the territory of Ukraine. Currently, even with the last movements of troops, Russian forces do not amount to more than 15,000 troops in Crimea. We are still far from the account. And the Ukraine may not participate of the EU or NATO; thus, neither the EU nor NATO are willing or permitted to intervene in Ukraine.” According to a French General (not really pro-Russian).
Just a note before to go to work.
" You can't claim the territory for your own and treat it like the enemy's." So start to speak to the Crimean (not you, but the new authorities). Listen and expel the 4 Nazi of your executive.
As far as I know (yet I may be wrong) the stipulated number is 12 000 (or is it 16 000?) but definitely less than 25 000. But the number does not matter greatly as there no Russian troops in the Crimea (as Putin claims).Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
The Crimean authorities (as well as Russia) don't want to. They don't consider Kyiv government legal (the same could be said the other way around, though) so it is a deadlock.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
I thought the number mentioned here was 5. And you can't expel anyone if the party is official. Calling names is not a ground for expelling.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
I don't like Svoboda (as I said). But the West seems to be ready to deal with them and condone their presence in the bodies of power. At least at present. The American ambassador to Ukraine admitted the other day that "Svoboda has made a great progress" in terms of its stance and commended the party on that progress. This at least was the esssence of his speech, can't guarantee I gave it verbatim.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
Some of those are correct. Some are not. I would say that many 20th century "military excursions" would not fall under a perceived war by the public which gained majority public support.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
I don't respect anyone's opinion a priori. I respect everyone's right to have an opinion, though and to say it out loud.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilrandir
This is a forum, people debate here. We challenge each other and learn new stuff. So far, thins I've learned from discussion with you:
1) You don't know history
2) You don't know how elections are monitored
3) You think you know more about elections frauds than relevant international organizations and monitors who are experts in that field
3) You don't know the difference between elected government and a coup
4) You like to contradict yourself, claiming that the government was set up by the protesters and by the parliament at the same time
And after all that you expect me to change my position and somehow I'm "rigid" because I don't subscribe to your opinion.
My opinion is very simple - when it comes to internal politics, you expelled a bad government and set up another, just as bad. In the end, you disregarded democratic principles for naught. As for foreign politics, you managed to prove that you're highly unstable and that it is useless to deal with you the normal way, thus giving Russia the reason and an excuse to do what it did.
So, it boils down to this - Can you fight of Russia? Yes/No? Can you ally with someone who can fight off Russia? Yes/No?
If you circled No both times, your solution is: Deal with Russia diplomatically! Standing in the corner, crying foul won't get you very far.
Since WWII countries have not been legally entitled to enter or occupy other lands to protect ethnic minorities of the home country. It is a Nazi excuse.
What is the real political situation in Ukraine, regarding Neo-Nazis etc? Who the :daisy: can tell! It is all filled with emotional appeal and propaganda.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26546083
http://www.stopfake.org/en/ (also in Ukrainian and Russian)
http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...d-into-account (western media bias)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...A2C0KA20140313
The wise thing for Putin to do is to say the vote is for independence, and join Russia later, since the only two choices are to join now or later.
One thing for sure, whether the government has neo-Nazis in it, Russia is not making that better by going into Crimea or threatening force. That is a sure way to make it worse.
Ukrainians upset Putin’s plans for an economic union. This is his payback.
No the Interim government should not be pushing the country east or west. Let the people speak.
Wait for elections! But that is ever harder to do with Russia breathing down their necks.
Both the EU & Russia need to back off and give them time to catch their breath. But a country in crisis is ever so much easier to manipulate and carve up than one that is more stable.
Will wait and see what happens this weekend. There's a chance (albeit still quite slight) that by Tuesday we'll be in a state of an armed conflict with Russia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian