Ukraine-in-a-thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

I've been browsing a few fascist forums lately -

---

Find a hobby, son.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name

Find a hobby, son.

---

I actually call that part of my daily routine "work". ~;)

Well, if the US can’t manage a good war in Syria they are willing to jump in there too.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...A1I1AJ20140219

I guess he was listening here and decided it was no joke.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

I fail to see how Russia has a "better position" - in fact: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26284505

Russia stands more to lose, and are therefore Russia may send tanks.

---

Simple. It can offer a better deal to Ukraine and follow it through.

Let's look at the crux of the issue, without the traditional bollox about democracy and human rights.

Democratically elected government of the country made a foreign policy decision. A part of the population doesn't like that decision and they're doing anything they can to reverse it, including using violence and trying to take over institutions of the country forcibly. That's the exact opposite of a democratic principle, which would be to vote for someone else in the next elections. On the other hand, I totally agree with Lincoln that if the people don't like the government, they can exercise their democratic right to change it, or their revolutionary right to overthrow it.

The problem here is that this group doesn't represent all, or even the majority of population of Ukraine. Ukraine is a deeply divided country, and placating one group of protesters means another will rise up. If it isn't balanced, I don't find it totally unforeseeable for the country to be divided.

Quote:

---

Such a government will lose said backing if it demonstrates it's can't resist killing protesters - doesn't play well in France or Germany when the EU is seen to back such people. As to Kosovo - it has been censured several times, but the West recognises self-determination and if Kosovo is a mess it's the fault of Serbia.

---

Riiiight. And that, children, is how you wash your hands.

Quote:

---

The Arab spring showed the foolishness of the West backing dictators, and it is no longer palatable domestically. These days you need to be at least moderately democratic to get Western backing.

---

This isn't really about backing dictators. There are two currents of roughly equal strength. Both won the elections in the recent past, democratically for the most part. Previous government sought NATO membership, even though the support for that was less than 10% among the population. There were no mass protests or attempts at revolution. They just voted in a different government. If the current government in Kiev is overthrown now, and the course reset, I don't think the eastern part will again do nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

I've been browsing a few fascist forums lately - and they claim to have chased out "lefties" from Madian... I'm guessing "left" means anyone supporting democracy, whether conservative, liberal or socialist.

Fortunately, fascist forums are of course notoriously unreliable and I don't trust them for a second. Still, it's certainly worrisome if the protest movement now consists of skinheads wanting independence(isolation) and a strong Führer in charge...

---

The situation is ripe for extreme groups to get involved. This what they're waiting for, after all.

Sniper shooting at unarmed civilians.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjUzaw5pIBY

A bunch of photos from yesterday got on facebook - dead bodies on both sides. But they have been taken down.

I think the situation at Ukraine has several layers of problems and is extremely problematic to foreign powers. This could turn out to be extremely dangerous and in worst case scenario can escalate to full blown civil war. It is just not about citizens against the government, but also about factions within the country. If the Pro West rioters will be able to topple the government. I am quite sure we are going to witness a backlash from the Pro Russian elements, while the situation is very problematic to both EU and Russia, while both of the powers simply do not want a crisis in their relationship because of Ukraine. I think many do not understand how dangerous this crisis can turn out to be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaka_Khan

The main part of anti-Russianism in Ukraine goes back to Stalin when he oppressed the entire Soviet Union with his extreme collectivism policy that was the cause for a nation-wide famine. Ukraine was the main sufferer of that policy. There was also Stalin's Great Purge in the Soviet Union. It was in fact Khrushchev who first condemned Stalin's purging policies in Khrushchev's Secret Speech to the Congress of the Communist Party (although Khrushchev originally supported Stalin during the Great Purge). You can find his speech on youtube. Many people misunderstand the old photos of Ukrainians cheering for German invaders during WWII. The Ukrainians had suffered under Stalin's policies before WWII, so they considered the Germans as liberators. There were actually a lot of Ukrainians who remained loyal to the Soviet Union. After experiencing German occupation, more Ukrainians joined the Soviet Union side in large numbers.

---

Yet another example of the Nazis screwing the pooch. If they had been vaguely positive towards the Ukraine, much of it would have gone anti-Stalin and produced agro for the Germans while minimizing the need to interdict partisan efforts. Talk about ideology trumping common sense.

The latest word on developments in the Ukraine.

So, will this result in contested elections that are ultimately accepted, continued semi=-anarchy, or civil war?

It is difficult to predict whether opposition leaders will be able to contain and pacify the protesters.

If they don't, the country may very well descend into violence and retribution towards those seen as collaborating with the previous regime which may bring civil war in the end. Seen it in Serbia in 2000, was very ugly but it was relatively unopposed as Milosevic by that time lost almost all support.

It is interesting that the President has moved out to Kharkiv, an eastern city where he will have a lot of support. Could this mean he is trying to establish a base for his faction to mount opposition to any new, pro-Western government?

I don't think this conflict it one of good v evil. Certainly, I would be concerned for the Russophone population if a pro-Western government took charge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

It is interesting that the President has moved out to Kharkiv, an eastern city where he will have a lot of support. Could this mean he is trying to establish a base for his faction to mount opposition to any new, pro-Western government?

I don't think this conflict it one of good v evil. Certainly, I would be concerned for the Russophone population if a pro-Western government took charge.

---

Far more likely he is runing for the hills before he is charged with basically being a kleptocrat.

All the best dictators have a petting zoo out the back of there gaff

If it's kleptocracy what it's about, then you can safely lock up both pro western and pro russian ones. Preferably together.

Meanwhile, in eastern Ukraine...

Quote:

---

“We, the local authorities of all levels, the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, Sevastopol region decided to take responsibility for ensuring the constitutional order and the rights of citizens on their territory,” their resolution said.

The Kharkov public gathering has announced a number of measures local authorities should take in response to the developments in Kiev. They should take full responsibility for all decision in respective regions with no regard to authorities in Kiev until the constitutional order in Ukraine is restored, a resolution of the gathering says.

They authorities should take measures to protect arms depots and prevent their take-over and looting by radical opposition activists.

The deputies have criticized the decision adopted by the Parliament (Verkhovna Rada) in the last few days, saying they are raising doubts about its legitimacy.

The gathering says the legislative acts may have been passed involuntary and are neither legitimate nor lawful.

The resent decisions of the national parliament were taken in conditions “of terror, threats of violence and death,” the resolution says.

---

Quote:

---

"My colleagues and I have been personally threatened. But today we have gathered to change the situation,” he said. “We will not give in; we will fight till the end.”

The statement has been echoed by Rada’s Party of Regions deputy, Vadim Kolesnichenko, who also said that politicians are being threatened and “their families are basically hostages [of the situation].”

---

This may prove to be the worst move of the opposition so far. They won't have any control in the east, and have taken away any incentive Yanukovich might have had to deal with them. They're now rebels who performed a coup to oust legally and democratically elected president and government.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

This may prove to be the worst move of the opposition so far. They won't have any control in the east, and have taken away any incentive Yanukovich might have had to deal with them. They're now rebels who performed a coup to oust legally and democratically elected president and government.

---

Careful now....

The rebels didn't perform a coup. Yanukovich was voted out by the parliament. That move was just as legal and democratic as his election.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Careful now....

The rebels didn't perform a coup. Yanukovich was voted out by the parliament. That move was just as legal and democratic as his election.

---

Well, he wasn't elected by the parliament but rather but by majority of the citizens directly. Just because the citizens of the capital city are unhappy with him, that doesn't legitimize or legalize their actions. Even if we agree that the capital city represents the entire population, there still remains a big question - can parliament function democratically under threats of violence?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

Well, he wasn't elected by the parliament but rather but by majority of the citizens directly. Just because the citizens of the capital city are unhappy with him, that doesn't legitimize or legalize their actions. Even if we agree that the capital city represents the entire population, there still remains a big question - can parliament function democratically under threats of violence?

---

Can you be considered a democratically elected president when you have used widespread fraud and jailed opposition candidates?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Can you be considered a democratically elected president when you have used widespread fraud and jailed opposition candidates?

---

You mean, by the method used by every politician in Ukraine since the independence? Ideally, no. In reality, he's as legitimate and as democratically elected as every single one that came before him.

Yanukovich is a political corpse. He may agonize about what came to be and how it came to be, but as a politician he is finished. I am thankful to him for one thing: he didn't engage the military in this confrontation. Had the military gotten involved, things would have been a lot bloodier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

You mean, by the method used by every politician in Ukraine since the independence? Ideally, no. In reality, he's as legitimate and as democratically elected as every single one that came before him.

---

So.... Let's just skip the "democratically elected president"-thing altogether, shall we?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

Yanukovich is a political corpse. He may agonize about what came to be and how it came to be, but as a politician he is finished. I am thankful to him for one thing: he didn't engage the military in this confrontation. Had the military gotten involved, things would have been a lot bloodier.

---

I imagine you said the same thing after the Orange revolution?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

I imagine you said the same thing after the Orange revolution?

---

You imagine wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

So.... Let's just skip the "democratically elected president"-thing altogether, shall we?

---

Fine if we agree that the opposition is exaclty the same as that regard. Now we're stuck with two undemocratically elected and corrupt regimes at odds with each other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

Fine if we agree that the opposition is exactly the same as that regard. Now we're stuck with two undemocratically elected and corrupt regimes at odds with each other.

---

Not sure I would go this far.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

I imagine you said the same thing after the Orange revolution?

---

After the Orange Revolution, it was a figure of speech. In the next few days it may be a factual statement.

Anyone who says that Revolutions cannot be fought and won with small arms should remind themselves that they can be won with sticks, stones, and petrol bombs.
Americans have the distinct right to keep and bear arms. Hopefully they will avail themselves of these rights while they still have a representative government and are able to. Civilian owned firearms rate is 6.6% in Ukraine and they've done this in 3 months. In the US, the civilian owned firearms rate it is 110%.

I'm just glad that I live in a country where non-violent protest, lawsuits, and reform is still possible.


BTW - you can always count on Sarmatian to defend totalitarian former soviet states. Like clockwork. Serbs see themselves as a tiny Soviet Union. They go nuts when satellite Slavs declare independence anywhere in the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

BTW - you can always count on Sarmatian to defend totalitarian former soviet states. Like clockwork. Serbs see themselves as a tiny Soviet Union. They go nuts when satellite Slavs declare independence anywhere in the world.

---

Which is ironic considering how little Russia has actually done for Serbia. They talk a lot about friendship and brotherhood, but when time comes to walk the walk there's hardly anything to show.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

After the Orange Revolution, it was a figure of speech. In the next few days it may be a factual statement.

Anyone who says that Revolutions cannot be fought and won with small arms should remind themselves that they can be won with sticks, stones, and petrol bombs.
Americans have the distinct right to keep and bear arms. Hopefully they will avail themselves of these rights while they still have a representative government and are able to. Civilian owned firearms rate is 6.6% in Ukraine and they've done this in 3 months. In the US, the civilian owned firearms rate it is 110%.

I'm just glad that I live in a country where non-violent protest, lawsuits, and reform is still possible.


BTW - you can always count on Sarmatian to defend totalitarian former soviet states. Like clockwork. Serbs see themselves as a tiny Soviet Union. They go nuts when satellite Slavs declare independence anywhere in the world.

---

Congrats - you made this about you. It isn't.

The current Regime was dead the moment they employed Police Snipers. If there's anything to take away from this, it's that Ukraine has progressed far enough along the road to democracy that cops shooting people is no longer something that can happen without serious consequences.

Sarmation may feel that the Deputies voted to out the President because they were threatened, but all evidence is that even his own supporters are losing enthusiasm. pro-Kiev protests have broken out in the South and East and the Police are protecting them from pro-Russian counter-protesters.

The Ukrainians have worked it out - the guy who backs the West might not be great, but the guy who backs Russia has his important opponents locked up and the unimportant ones shot.

This is about all of us together in an abstract way making logical connections. Ukraine is just the latest example in a long line of economically depressed, devolving countries. Around the world, powerful interests are entrenching and people are beginning to realize that no one has any authority over anyone else. Ukrainians are economically disadvantaged and intelligent and as a result of their government's unwillingness to bend, it has broken.

All of these occurrences should teach everyone a lesson of what the future holds until governments embrace minarchism. I take it that because we live in the west, we should feel like we live "at the end of history" and are merely waiting for everyone to catch up to us? I don't buy that. Americans are just as prone to corruption and interested in power accumulation and abuse. Technology will just make it more lethal to protest against them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

Americans have the distinct right to keep and bear arms.

---

The thread title is Ukraine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

the guy who backs the West might not be great

---

"He" just looks great. ~D

I like your analysis and sincerely hope it is true. If the majority of a country's population is not willing to tolerate dictatorial behaviour, that's usually a rather good sign.

In the U.S., lethal force would be warranted against protesters who were using the level of force that these protesters were using. Destruction of property and imminent threat of bodily harm causes police to open fire in public places, often killing subjects and pedestrians for much less than throwing petrol bombs and shooting at police. The US government would have acted more brutally within the first few days of a similar protest. I was actually blown away by the restraint of the Ukrainian government over the last 3 months, as corrupt as they were.

Additionally, the order to use lethal force came well after sporadic government fire opened up on protesters. It has been argued that the government gave this order after the situation had spiraled completely out of control in a manner intended to reclaim some legitimacy and control over police who were acting like scared grade-schoolers by that point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

The thread title is Ukraine.



"He" just looks great. ~D

I like your analysis and sincerely hope it is true. If the majority of a country's population is not willing to tolerate dictatorial behaviour, that's usually a rather good sign.

---

I saw Tymoshenko - the two and a half years in prison have not been kind.

Whatever she may have done, and she's not squeaky clean, she was locked up BECAUSE she was a political problem.

So while I don't blame Sarmation for his Cynicism, I think this is more about the abuse of Power the current President has undertaken. We know the next President will have less power, whoever he is. The current one is definitely toast, after they broke into his compound and discovered him living like a King.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

In the U.S., lethal force would be warranted against protesters who were using the level of force that these protesters were using. Destruction of property and imminent threat of bodily harm causes police to open fire in public places, often killing subjects and pedestrians for much less than throwing petrol bombs and shooting at police. The US government would have acted more brutally within the first few days of a similar protest. I was actually blown away by the restraint of the Ukrainian government over the last 3 months, as corrupt as they were.

Additionally, the order to use lethal force came well after sporadic government fire opened up on protesters. It has been argued that the government gave this order after the situation had spiraled completely out of control in a manner intended to reclaim some legitimacy and control over police who were acting like scared grade-schoolers by that point.

---

I have consistently said that the US is governed like a Third World Country, and I stand by that.

Statues of Lenin toppled:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26306737

Looks like the Kievan Russ are sending the Muscovites a clear message.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

I have consistently said that the US is governed like a Third World Country, and I stand by that.

---

Then why would you demean the connection that I was trying to make? I suggest that authorities all over the world become paranoid when they see these things happen. The riots and protests that have been sweeping the eurasian/north african region are metastatic and getting closer to our own capitals by the day. Neglect of this reality suggests western "end of history" chauvanism. Lessons should be learned now, before we are forced to learn them in the field.

Don't imagine that the factors that encouraged uprisings in the European periphery are extant in Western Europe or even the US - it's pure fantasy.

Even more fantastic than the notion that protests in the world are driven by "minarchism" or "devolution".

Go back to Tweeting about Tibor Machan or whatever.

Protesters breached the private estate of the now ex-president and took pictures of it all. The dude had a really nice place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

After the Orange Revolution, it was a figure of speech. In the next few days it may be a factual statement.

Anyone who says that Revolutions cannot be fought and won with small arms should remind themselves that they can be won with sticks, stones, and petrol bombs.
Americans have the distinct right to keep and bear arms. Hopefully they will avail themselves of these rights while they still have a representative government and are able to. Civilian owned firearms rate is 6.6% in Ukraine and they've done this in 3 months. In the US, the civilian owned firearms rate it is 110%.

I'm just glad that I live in a country where non-violent protest, lawsuits, and reform is still possible.


BTW - you can always count on Sarmatian to defend totalitarian former soviet states. Like clockwork. Serbs see themselves as a tiny Soviet Union. They go nuts when satellite Slavs declare independence anywhere in the world.

---

Lol! Civilians can outfight an organized army. Really give me a break will you...Put some US civilians with their semi autos against company of regular army or Marines with indirect fire support and all you will see is lots of dead civilians and fire support is not even needed.

Only way revolutions will happen is that the authorities that have the real monopoly of violence refuse to use or hamper themselves in using full force. Your statement is simply ridiculous. Yes civilians can make life hard for soldiers, but that is that, nothing more.

And just to keep repeating myself. What we are witnessing is not a simple revolution, but a pro western faction taking over by force. While they dont by far represent the whole country and dont have such support. It may sound fine and dandy in partisan political rhetoric that a peoples revolution is happening in Ukraine and while its the pro western faction taking over it is somehow "good" guys taking over, but you really need to take a second look to understand the full situation..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kagemusha

And just to keep repeating myself. What we are witnessing is not a simple revolution, but a pro western faction taking over by force. While they dont by far represent the whole country and dont have such support. It may sound fine and dandy in partisan political rhetoric that a peoples revolution is happening in Ukraine and while its the pro western faction taking over it is somehow "good" guys taking over, but you really need to take a second look to understand the full situation..

---

Isn't every revolution some faction taking over by force? There was a fair percentage of the population in the colonies that were loyalists when the US Revolution occurred...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name

Isn't every revolution some faction taking over by force? There was a fair percentage of the population in the colonies that were loyalists when the US Revolution occurred...

---

This is not a rhetoric but real life. If this will go down south as i am afraid it will. The Eastern and Western part of Ukraine will be soon in war and at that point who is "right" or "wrong" does not mean anything when we will be witnessing a human tragedy at really disturbing level. While EU and Russia will be in a really difficult spot and US just cant sail to Black Sea and cruise missile everything back to stone age bringing "freedom" in the process.

Can someone explain to ignorant me how there is such a thing as a western and a Russian part. I have been watching this with amazement, I have no idea what's going on over there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kagemusha

This is not a rhetoric but real life. If this will go down south as i am afraid it will. The Eastern and Western part of Ukraine will be soon in war and at that point who is "right" or "wrong" does not mean anything when we will be witnessing a human tragedy at really disturbing level. While EU and Russia will be in a really difficult spot and US just cant sail to Black Sea and cruise missile everything back to stone age bringing "freedom" in the process.

---

All uprisings and revolutions are tragic. They are, by definition, the result of a collapsing state. There was never a conflict where the sides played out like a Tolkien book. But that does not mean that we should have tried our best to prevent this conflict from happening or that we should refuse to pick sides. Personally, if there really is such a staunch divide between west Ukraine and east, I would support simply dividing the two and erring on the side of self determination.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

I think it's been proven thoroughly over the last dozen years that while the power of poorly armed and poorly trained people isn't enough to win all the time, it is certainly enough to win.

---

No. The "power" of poorly armed and trained people is never enough to win. However, they may die in such numbers that the powers that be gets tired of killing them, as is what happened in Ukraine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Can someone explain to ignorant me how there is such a thing as a western and a Russian part. I have been watching this with amazement, I have no idea what's going on over there.

---

Think Wallonia and Flanders. Very different historical backround of course, but the same principle of a division within a country.

ICantSpellDawg, to give a few scenarios:

Guy in charge goes "use the military". The military/other power players goes, "No". Usually a revolution. Gun ownage irrellevant.
Guy in charge goes "use the military". The military/other power players goes, "Sure thing". Very bloody suppression. Gun ownage insuffient.
Guy in charge goes "use the military". The military/other power players goes, "Sure thing", but they lack a large enough army. Civil war. Gun ownage matters.
Guy in charge goes "use the military". The military/other power players splits and say both "No and Sure thing". Civil war. Gun ownage matters, but less the stronger the the army is.

What it tells you are that if you don't have an army that can massacre your own population, gun ownage is irrelevant. And that the US, with its very strong army is a country were gun ownage matters little, because the US military strength will overshadow the civilian gun ownership.

Really tired of this hypothetical coming up all the time. You really have no idea how effective an armed populace will be until an actual revolution happens. Talking about what would happen is the equivalent to talking about the results of hypothetical wars. We don't all sit around and speak confidently about the tactics that would be used in a US-China fight, the amount of people that would die on each side and who would win in what amount of time and then go, "Yep and that is what would happen, your suggestion is wildly unrealistic!".

Give it a rest guys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

C
Sarmation may feel that the Deputies voted to out the President because they were threatened, but all evidence is that even his own supporters are losing enthusiasm. pro-Kiev protests have broken out in the South and East and the Police are protecting them from pro-Russian counter-protesters.

The Ukrainians have worked it out - the guy who backs the West might not be great, but the guy who backs Russia has his important opponents locked up and the unimportant ones shot.

---

Where's the evidence? I'd really like to see it. Factually, the Rada wasn't willing to depose Yanukovych until protesters took control of it. Which means, either they were afraid of Yanukovych government or they are afraid of the rebels now.

Former chairman of Rada, Volodymyr Rybak, claims he was beaten up after he resigned his position, which, if true, doesn't lend credibility to the opposition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

I saw Tymoshenko - the two and a half years in prison have not been kind.

Whatever she may have done, and she's not squeaky clean, she was locked up BECAUSE she was a political problem.

So while I don't blame Sarmation for his Cynicism, I think this is more about the abuse of Power the current President has undertaken. We know the next President will have less power, whoever he is. The current one is definitely toast, after they broke into his compound and discovered him living like a King.

---

Timoshenko was a byword for corruption during her term, and that, coupled with some disastrous moves she tried to pull and failed was the reason she lost the election.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Can someone explain to ignorant me how there is such a thing as a western and a Russian part. I have been watching this with amazement, I have no idea what's going on over there.

---

Ukraine was a part of the Russian Empire. Some parts of it also belonged to other empires, namely Austria and Poland in the past. Over the years, they developed their separate national identity. After the dissolution of the Russian Empire, Ukraine was recognized as a separate entity and joined the SU. In the 1950's, Ukraine was ceded what is now southeastern part of Ukraine by Russia. Since it was a single country, it was just an administrative change. Those parts were never part of Ukraine before and very little Ukrainians lived there. After the USSR dissolved, Ukraine was recognized as an independent country with those borders. Additionally, Russians are a majority in the eastern part of Ukraine.

So, the eastern part is more pro-Russian while the western is more pro-EU.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name

All uprisings and revolutions are tragic. They are, by definition, the result of a collapsing state. There was never a conflict where the sides played out like a Tolkien book. But that does not mean that we should have tried our best to prevent this conflict from happening or that we should refuse to pick sides. Personally, if there really is such a staunch divide between west Ukraine and east, I would support simply dividing the two and erring on the side of self determination.

---

I think your solution is a solid one, but the thing is that it is really not our hands to resolve this. EU cant support such solution because of two folded reasoning. First it really does not want to mess up relations with Russia which is realpolitiks and secondary, because of the fragmenting tendencies like Scotland, Catalonia and Basque country within EU, as it would give an unwanted precedent for such. When it comes to Russia, who knows. Russia is Russia and if anything unpredictable and Russia has substantially lower treshold to interfere by military means compared to EU countries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

I have no idea

---

That's not unusual lately. I recommend you watch some quality media news because they explain it in almost every video on the subject.

What baffles me is why ICSD thinks Western governments should militarize their police forces more so they can kill civilians faster once this inevitably happens here, too. Because it's nowhere near going to happen here. People from the respective countries come here because even they know the situation is much better in the west than it is in their countries.

The whole armed populace thing is rubbish, with 6% weapons per household or what that figure was the Ukrainians did just fine, only proves that the population doesn't need guns. If the government wants to kill everyone and rule an empty country that's their choice, not sure what the point of that would be though. McDonald's is much better at keeping people away from revolutions anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name

Really tired of this hypothetical coming up all the time. You really have no idea how effective an armed populace will be until an actual revolution happens. Talking about what would happen is the equivalent to talking about the results of hypothetical wars. We don't all sit around and speak confidently about the tactics that would be used in a US-China fight, the amount of people that would die on each side and who would win in what amount of time and then go, "Yep and that is what would happen, your suggestion is wildly unrealistic!".

Give it a rest guys.

---

Blah,blah keep on dreaming.. How effective are insurgents in Iraq? The fact is that armed rising needs substantial support from organized military force either from within or outside. The days of musket are long gone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

So, the eastern part is more pro-Russian while the western is more pro-EU.

---

The impression I've got over the last month or so, is that the western part is more anti-russian and pro-independence than it is pro-EU...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

That's not unusual lately.

---

Ah yes, I forgot the [insert snide remarks here] part. Should have seen it comming.

Pro-independence? From whom? Ukrainians wishing independence from independent Ukraine?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

Pro-independence? From whom? Ukrainians wishing independence from independent Ukraine?

---

That's my impression, yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

That's my impression, yes.

---

While it would be interesting to discuss metaphysical aspect of it, let's stick to reality in this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Ah yes, I forgot the [insert snide remarks here] part. Should have seen it comming.

---

The division of Ukraine in terms of western and eastern preferences was even discussed in this thread and it's certainly being discussed in the media. I just couldn't resist when you said you have no idea what it's about because it seems really easy to get this information, even accidentally. If your typical sources did not cover this then you may want to look for better sources.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

That's my impression, yes.

---

Same here, without really knowing what I am talking about, just an impression. Europhiles kinda freak me out here (don't mind the Dutch, it's about the video)
http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven...rhofstadt.html

Wut?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

The division of Ukraine in terms of western and eastern preferences was even discussed in this thread and it's certainly being discussed in the media. I just couldn't resist when you said you have no idea what it's about because it seems really easy to get this information, even accidentally. If your typical sources did not cover this then you may want to look for better sources.

---

Resist this :daisy:. There is obviously more going on here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

While it would be interesting to discuss metaphysical aspect of it, let's stick to reality in this thread.

---

It is indeed reality. It's my impression that the west seek some kind of independence/detachment from the east. Now, whether that means splitting the country in two, chasing out the russians, assimilation of the russians, turning the russians into second-class citizens or something else, I'm quite unsure...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

Pro-independence? From whom? Ukrainians wishing independence from independent Ukraine?

---

Percieved and actual Russian influence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name

Really tired of this hypothetical coming up all the time. You really have no idea how effective an armed populace will be until an actual revolution happens. Talking about what would happen is the equivalent to talking about the results of hypothetical wars. We don't all sit around and speak confidently about the tactics that would be used in a US-China fight, the amount of people that would die on each side and who would win in what amount of time and then go, "Yep and that is what would happen, your suggestion is wildly unrealistic!".

Give it a rest guys.

---

Mildly topic relevant. How much money and how would you need to transfer it to topple Putin in a popular rebellion, while keeping it moderatly secret?

The answer is that for the moment, it's impossible. Because we know from historical experience a dim understanding on how strong influence something like that can do and can't. We don't need actual numbers. Can Sweden conquer the US before the end of 2014? We have no idea on the exact details of such a war, but we do know enough to say that the answer is no.

It's similar with my statements. We do know how successful revolutions have looked like, so we got a vague picture. Could a more militant response, possible by high firearm ownership, from getting shot by police sniper cause enough room to provoke a military response? Maybe, but that's an example of we not knowing enough.

We do know the combat efficiency of US troops, from Afghanistan and Iraq. Are the average American civilian with firearms going to be more dangerous than a similar person in those countries? No.
Were they even close to defeat the US troops so much that the US troops surrendered to them? Hell NO! And that's the situation. In such a suppression of a full rebellion, the troops can't simply withdraw, and the leaders in charge won't care about minor losses.

Can a vastly superior number of untrained troops defeat trained troops with similar weaponry? Yes, in particular through attrition.
Are advanced weaponry extremely influencial were it exists? Yes. Would allowance to use such weaponry completely change the picture? Yes. Does the US military have an abundance of such weaponry? Yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ironside

Think Wallonia and Flanders. Very different historical backround of course, but the same principle of a division within a country.

ICantSpellDawg, to give a few scenarios:

Guy in charge goes "use the military". The military/other power players goes, "No". Usually a revolution. Gun ownage irrellevant.
Guy in charge goes "use the military". The military/other power players goes, "Sure thing". Very bloody suppression. Gun ownage insuffient.
Guy in charge goes "use the military". The military/other power players goes, "Sure thing", but they lack a large enough army. Civil war. Gun ownage matters.
Guy in charge goes "use the military". The military/other power players splits and say both "No and Sure thing". Civil war. Gun ownage matters, but less the stronger the the army is.

What it tells you are that if you don't have an army that can massacre your own population, gun ownage is irrelevant. And that the US, with its very strong army is a country were gun ownage matters little, because the US military strength will overshadow the civilian gun ownership.

---

You've seen generals resign and defect in Ukraine, resisting the call to use forces to expel the protestors. Do you think the entirety of the US military would back the regime? Would there be defections? You can pretend that some form of social collapse is impossible in the west, but I don't believe it.
Attrition by the military and sabotage of the means by which the technology functions are always key in successful insurrections. Currently, the US military can't win against a people that they don't care about, using endless resources to fight them, in a small area of the world. The US military could control an an area the size of the United States with a tremendous number of relatively intelligent people who are family members with dwindling and sabotaged resources and dramatic attrition?

The smugness that comes out of you guys, in spite of the countless wars, coups, revolutions, civil wars that are the hallmark of human progress and history, even within the past 100 years - is breathtaking.

Obviously, violent insurrection in the US would be pointless and terrible as things are otherwise progressing slowly but well. Still, one or 2 more terrible administrations and who knows what to think. They keep getting worse, even as we continue to grow as a country. I don't feel like the US is as stable as they suggest it is.

Maybe I'm just getting older, but it seems like no one has any respect for the absurd laws that govern them and tax rates are skyrocketing as incomes decrease. Unemployment is not getting better, people are dropping out of the workforce or employed at part time jobs. The status of the US has dropped precipitously in the world. Revolution in the next 10 years? Nah - but if stagnation stays where it is, it could get pretty bad in the longer term, turning the country into a corrupt backwater.

The situation is complicated, definitely, mostly because a majority of population identify itself as Ukrainian, except in some areas, notably those ceded to Ukraine by Russia during the Soviet era, like Crimea.

Almost entire population of Ukraine is bilingual. The Russian language dominates on a national level - 60% of the newspapers are in Russian and 80% of the magazines. On radio, 3% of the songs are in Ukrainian, 60% are in Russian. Even in Kiev, most of people use Russian in informal communication. Yet, the Ukrainian government doesn't recognize Russian as an official language, but only as a minority language.

The number of people saying Russian language is their first language, or, let's say, those considering themselves ethnic Russians is
Attachment 12314

The map showing the actual usage of language.
Attachment 12315

So, it's not really Russians, but Russophone Ukrainians.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

The situation is complicated, definitely, mostly because a majority of population identify itself as Ukrainian, except in some areas, notably those ceded to Ukraine by Russia during the Soviet era, like Crimea.

Almost entire population of Ukraine is bilingual. The Russian language dominates on a national level - 60% of the newspapers are in Russian and 80% of the magazines. On radio, 3% of the songs are in Ukrainian, 60% are in Russian. Even in Kiev, most of people use Russian in informal communication. Yet, the Ukrainian government doesn't recognize Russian as an official language, but only as a minority language.

The number of people saying Russian language is their first language, or, let's say, those considering themselves ethnic Russians is
Attachment 12314

The map showing the actual usage of language.
Attachment 12315

So, it's not really Russians, but Russophone Ukrainians.

---

The majority of the Irish spoke English when they broke away. Language does not imply political leaning - for example, Kiev is primarily Russian speaking, and look where that took them. I've understood the divide to be more nuanced than an East/West thing, with pockets here and there supporting the opposition. However, while opposition support is not limited to the west, party of regions support seems to be limited to the South and East.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

The majority of the Irish spoke English when they broke away. Language does not imply political leaning - for example, Kiev is primarily Russian speaking, and look where that took them. I've understood the divide to be more nuanced than an East/West thing, with pockets here and there supporting the opposition. However, while opposition support is not limited to the west, party of regions support seems to be limited to the South and East.

---

Politically, no. On page 2 I posted election results. click. The east firmly behind Yanukovych, the west firmly behind Timoshenko.

That was Tymoshenko. I dont trust her either. I'm not convinced that she didn't belong in prison.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

The situation is complicated, definitely, mostly because a majority of population identify itself as Ukrainian, except in some areas, notably those ceded to Ukraine by Russia during the Soviet era, like Crimea.

Almost entire population of Ukraine is bilingual. The Russian language dominates on a national level - 60% of the newspapers are in Russian and 80% of the magazines. On radio, 3% of the songs are in Ukrainian, 60% are in Russian. Even in Kiev, most of people use Russian in informal communication. Yet, the Ukrainian government doesn't recognize Russian as an official language, but only as a minority language.

The number of people saying Russian language is their first language, or, let's say, those considering themselves ethnic Russians is
Attachment 12314

The map showing the actual usage of language.
Attachment 12315

So, it's not really Russians, but Russophone Ukrainians.

---

....And it's this situation I believe the western part wants to change, and turn the entire Ukraine into the Ukraine they want it to be(ie. no smelly Russian culture).

It's nationalism, Sarmatian, it's not a rational feeling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

Then why would you demean the connection that I was trying to make? I suggest that authorities all over the world become paranoid when they see these things happen. The riots and protests that have been sweeping the eurasian/north african region are metastatic and getting closer to our own capitals by the day. Neglect of this reality suggests western "end of history" chauvanism. Lessons should be learned now, before we are forced to learn them in the field.

---

Errrrr London riots?

You need to stop living in a fish bowl.

The Ukrainian government was toppled by its own use of worse, which robbed it of legitimacy. Imagine if the US Govt have besieged the occupy camp for months, then opened fire with snipers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kagemusha

This is not a rhetoric but real life. If this will go down south as i am afraid it will. The Eastern and Western part of Ukraine will be soon in war and at that point who is "right" or "wrong" does not mean anything when we will be witnessing a human tragedy at really disturbing level. While EU and Russia will be in a really difficult spot and US just cant sail to Black Sea and cruise missile everything back to stone age bringing "freedom" in the process.

---

This is highly unlikely, Ukraine is wedged between Russia and the EU - and war would see Peacekeeper troops on the ground in days. While war is not impossible there are, as yet, no indications that anyone thinks it is going to happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

Where's the evidence? I'd really like to see it. Factually, the Rada wasn't willing to depose Yanukovych until protesters took control of it. Which means, either they were afraid of Yanukovych government or they are afraid of the rebels now.

Former chairman of Rada, Volodymyr Rybak, claims he was beaten up after he resigned his position, which, if true, doesn't lend credibility to the opposition.

---

Well, looks like he and his Guard fled - and then he was impeached. Yanukovych realised he had lost control and was going to lose power, word is he tried to escape to Russia. I think the Rada saw that once the government ordered the use of lethal force it had lost legitimacy and they needed to stop backing it. It's not like it's only the opposition, or like they have guns to their heads. His own party have started to desert him!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

Well, looks like he and his Guard fled - and then he was impeached. Yanukovych realised he had lost control and was going to lose power, word is he tried to escape to Russia. I think the Rada saw that once the government ordered the use of lethal force it had lost legitimacy and they needed to stop backing it. It's not like it's only the opposition, or like they have guns to their heads. His own party have started to desert him!

---

Except there was brawling, threats of force and violence in the parliament before the vote.

I don't know whose "word" it is, but every news agency reported he is in Kharkov and he said he isn't thinking about leaving the country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

I don't know whose "word" it is, but every news agency reported he is in Kharkov and he said he isn't thinking about leaving the country.

---

He isn't thinking about it because he tried and failed. The border guards did not allow his plane to take off.

Perhaps the results here and in Egypt will lead more rulers to negotiate earlier in hopes of staving off this sort of result.

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Perhaps the results here and in Egypt will lead more rulers to negotiate earlier in hopes of staving off this sort of result.

---

Yeah, none of this would have happened if he didn't send in the riot police to disperse the protests back on November 30.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

The Ukrainian government was toppled by its own use of worse, which robbed it of legitimacy. Imagine if the US Govt have besieged the occupy camp for months, then opened fire with snipers.

---

Occupy was a peaceful protest. There is no question that if the protestors began throwing Molotov's at police that snipers would have been employed to shoot and kill anyone armed with more than a twig. Just watching the level off hyper violence employed by US police on unarmed peaceful protestors could lead you to no other conclusion, you have admitted as much. If the brutality of the police in Ukraine was the breaking point of the governments power after 3 months, and you know that the US would employ similar if not more brutal tactics, what then would the result in the US be?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

Occupy was a peaceful protest.

---

So was the initial Ukrainian protest, until the police decided to give the protesters a thumping.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

So was the initial Ukrainian protest, until the police decided to give the protesters a thumping.

---

I don't remember it that way. In the US, when riot police arrive, protestors mostly yell and get pissed, but seldom fight back when police advance. The worst that you see them do is resist arrest. In Ukraine, protestors physically fought riot police when moved in upon, which would make force against them legitimate by western standards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

In Ukraine, protestors physically fought riot police when moved in upon, which would make force against them legitimate by western standards.

---

Only if the "move in" was legitimate.

It certainly wasn't by western standards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Only if the "move in" was legitimate.

It certainly wasn't by western standards.

---

OK, but as a leftist activist, are you or are you not impressed by the level of restraint used by Ukrainian riot police over the past 3 months? It would have been much more brutal a suppression in Russia, Belarus, Venezuela, and the USA. In the US it would have become brutal for the sheer fact that no permit was approved, whatever the hell that means.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

OK, but as a leftist activist, are you or are you not impressed by the level of restraint used by Ukrainian riot police over the past 3 months? It would have been much more brutal a suppression in Russia, Belarus, Venezuela, and the USA. In the US it would have become brutal for the sheer fact that no permit was approved, whatever the hell that means.

---

When the cops in Kiev brutally dispersed the first (very small) anti-government meeting putting a bunch of 20-something students in hospital with broken limbs, they opened themselves up for retaliation and the country for a revolution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Only if the "move in" was legitimate.

It certainly wasn't by western standards.

---

Debatable. During Occupy Wall Street, protesters were given an area where they can stand and protest. Moving from that area, or, God forbid, trying to interfere with anyone's day would have brought a response from the police.

You may like their goals or not, but what protesters did would have brought a response by the police in any western country.

Meanwhile, in another dictatorship, France, police used tear gas and water cannons to disperse protesters. EU and US are threatening sanctions to France and calling Hollande to back down. Oh, wait....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

Debatable. During Occupy Wall Street, protesters were given an area where they can stand and protest. Moving from that area, or, God forbid, trying to interfere with anyone's day would have brought a response from the police.

You may like their goals or not, but what protesters did would have brought a response by the police in any western country.

Meanwhile, in another dictatorship, France, police used tear gas and water cannons to disperse protesters. EU and US are threatening sanctions to France and calling Hollande to back down. Oh, wait....

---

Granted. But would a western nation have used live ammo and snipers on them? No, even if some were armed, they'd have used water cannons and tear gas. At most rubber bullets. You know weapons and tactics designed to not kill 100 civilians. And make the government look like goons ordering around gangs of thugs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

OK, but as a leftist activist

---

Wut?

Anyway, I have a simple standard for unnecessary use of force:

Did the police use any kind of force? If yes, then it was unnecessary. If no, then they used the appropriate amount.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

You may like their goals or not, but what protesters did would have brought a response by the police in any western country.

---

I love how you specify exactly what actions they committed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lars573

Granted. But would a western nation have used live ammo and snipers on them? No, even if some were armed, they'd have used water cannons and tear gas. At most rubber bullets. You know weapons and tactics designed to not kill 100 civilians. And make the government look like goons ordering around gangs of thugs.

---

BS - no american would dare start firing on the government else they would be annihilated. The US government would use lethal force to halt a violent protest where firearms were present or being used

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lars573

Granted. But would a western nation have used live ammo and snipers on them? No, even if some were armed, they'd have used water cannons and tear gas. At most rubber bullets. You know weapons and tactics designed to not kill 100 civilians. And make the government look like goons ordering around gangs of thugs.

---

It's all about context. Is it murder if you shoot someone who throws a Molotov cocktail on you? If you read comments from "camp commanders", you'd see that protesters were constantly provoking the police, using makeshift slings to propel Molotov cocktail and rocks at the police, and that they were armed with live ammo. Now, rocks aren't that dangerous for a riot police officer in all that armour but getting hit by a Molotov cocktail can really ruin your day.
You'd also see that many of them simply ignored the truce and talks and and continued their attacks on the police and that they used live ammo. Opposition leaders were losing control and the mob mentality took over. They were capturing police officers and taking them hostage.

It was a revolution, and a violent one. As I've said previously, I totally agree with Lincoln in regard of people's right to overthrow their government. The problem here is that they don't have support of the entire population. Some may agree with them, but calling them peaceful protesters, is totally out.

The saddest part, which Ukrainians are going to realize in the coming years, if this succeeds, is that they've just installed the same criminals with a different foreign policy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

I love how you specify exactly what actions they committed.

---

Is this enough or do you want more specification?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

BS - no american would dare start firing on the government else they would be annihilated. The US government would use lethal force to halt a violent protest where firearms were present or being used

---

The moment cops shoot up a demonstration is the moment when people will go home, get their guns and make those cops pay. Cops are only brave when they know they're facing an unarmed crowd. The moment the crowd fires back cops will run with their tails between their legs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

Is this enough or do you want more specification?

---

No, you did not specify what actions justified the police crackdown on the pro-EU demonstration back in November.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

The moment cops shoot up a demonstration is the moment when people will go home, get their guns and make those cops pay. Cops are only brave when they know they're facing an unarmed crowd. The moment the crowd fires back cops will run with their tails between their legs.

---

It takes months before police back down. Ukrainian opposition engaged in hyper violence with a successful PR campaign which overwhelmed the government and broke the siege, causing a catastrophic rout and total collapse of the regime. Most people wouldn't have predicted this result in 3 months time, that's why decisions were made in the way that they were by the regime.

The US government has quite a bit more hold out time in reserve. It would be unlikely that the people in the US who have protested would be able to match the hyper violence that the government would employ. The government has, of late, been picking fights with segments of the population that would employ hyper violence. This is where the Party of Regions screwed up and invited ruin. It is one thing to pick fights with peaceniks, another entirely to pick fights with paramilitary, or populist nutjubs that number in the hundreds of thousands, if not millions - many with military training.

People are dangerous animals. Never underestimate the power of the simple human being to devastate his environment, if we've
learned anything. I believe in peaceful protest and reform, especially where we are fortunate enough to have the ability to engage in it. Violence solves arithmetical problems, but creates exponential ones in its wake.

I am also not naive and I don't expect governments to roll over when threatened or powerful interests to respect the lives or dignity of civilians anywhere in the world - not even the West. There are monsters waiting for their turn to rule, either on the throne or from behind the curtain.

In a country where armed, no knock swat raids and shootings are deemed legitimate in non violent, personal use marijuana cases - is it far fetched to think that thrown stones during a protest wouldn't elicit a deadly response?