Ukraine-in-a-thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

When you see all the accusations that the SNP have made about the English, with every non-SNP-affiliated body refuting their claims about a post-Yes Scotland, only to be met by accusations of bias and whatnot, you'll see that the idea of a free and fair referendum has different interpretations around the world. In the recent British experience, free and fair according to the Yessers means an unlimited amount of crap thrown at those who live south of the border, and any response from the latter is an illegitimate intrusion into a purely Scottish process.

---

Yet with all that the pro-independence crowd is trailing the unionists by about ten points.

Quote:

---

So going by the Scottish experience, the best thing we can do regarding Ukraine is say that those parts that want a referendum should get one, then stand well clear until there are results. If we do or say anything more, it's the evil oppressive English intruding into what should be a purely Ukrainian matter.

---

Of course, gotta take care of Britain first, then look towards Ukraine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

Yet with all that the pro-independence crowd is trailing the unionists by about ten points.

Of course, gotta take care of Britain first, then look towards Ukraine.

---

There's more to the picture than the Yes campaign losing. The sheer amount and intensity of vitriol directed against the English by the Yes campaign has led to a reciprocal anti-Scottish feeling. Nowhere near as nasty as the Yessers (a No campaigner was roughed up a few weeks back and an SNP spokesperson directed the blame back at her), there is still an exasperation that the English can do no right and can only sit and take it, with the accompanying feeling that, if this is what it takes to keep us united, then maybe we might be better off without the Scots. Quite simply, in their desperation to win the campaign after getting all their facts wrong, the Yessers have sought to poison the England-Scotland relationship. Whatever the result of the referendum, there will probably be a lot of rebuilding work needed, and the stronger partner having been receiving all the crap throughout, may not feel inclined to initiate this.

There might be a lesson in here for Ukraine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

There's more to the picture than the Yes campaign losing. The sheer amount and intensity of vitriol directed against the English by the Yes campaign has led to a reciprocal anti-Scottish feeling. Nowhere near as nasty as the Yessers (a No campaigner was roughed up a few weeks back and an SNP spokesperson directed the blame back at her), there is still an exasperation that the English can do no right and can only sit and take it, with the accompanying feeling that, if this is what it takes to keep us united, then maybe we might be better off without the Scots. Quite simply, in their desperation to win the campaign after getting all their facts wrong, the Yessers have sought to poison the England-Scotland relationship. Whatever the result of the referendum, there will probably be a lot of rebuilding work needed, and the stronger partner having been receiving all the crap throughout, may not feel inclined to initiate this.

---

Happens here every four years. Half of the country is ready and willing to kill the other half. Dissipates within weeks after the election.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

Happens here every four years. Half of the country is ready and willing to kill the other half. Dissipates within weeks after the election.

---

Except the SNP have been building it for a decade - it's deliberate and it's racism, because they see themselves as ethnically or racially different. The English Democrats get pelted with the term "Racist" and "Fascist" but they're just the result of the SNP mud slinging.

And, in fact, England doesn't need Scotland for anything other than storing Nukes, and if it comes to it we might strike a deal with Norway to use their Fjords.

When your cousin keeps hitting you with a stick and claiming you're not REMOTELY related, you're entitled then to give up at some point.

Edit: Forgot to add, this is also relevant to Ukraine.

However, in this case it's primarily Russia slinging the mud.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

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

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

---

Why be such a jackass? Maybe my post was stupid and if it was I'd gladly be shown how, but there's no need to call me a "special kind of flower".

Anyways you've misunderstood me. I was not trying to wash "ourselves" clean of anything. What I meant was, a lot of critics of the US on this forum view it as hardly being a democracy at all, until it comes to foreign policy and then the US is a direct democracy so its citizens can be blamed for everything the US has done.

Your use of the word "yourselves" highlights the attitude I was complaining about. You are treating Americans like a collective and I disagree with that. Yes a lot of Americans think the US can do no wrong, but many of the Americans on this forum disapprove of US foreign policy. Attacking people for views they don't even hold doesn't add much to the discussion.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...-military-base

1 dead - shots fired - conflicting reports (sounds like Kiev over-estimated the dead vs the wounded) and nobody's quite sure how well armed the "protesters" were.

So, it's really starting to kick off - because the US is also offering "non lethal" military aid - advisers in body armour are likely on the way.

Edit: Putin's "right" to send troops into Ukraine: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27065782

I really hate that these people are being made a political football, but I still blame Putin in the end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...-military-base

1 dead - shots fired - conflicting reports (sounds like Kiev over-estimated the dead vs the wounded) and nobody's quite sure how well armed the "protesters" were.

So, it's really starting to kick off - because the US is also offering "non lethal" military aid - advisers in body armour are likely on the way.

---

Doubt it. This President will send stuff, money, information...not people (at least until 10 November or so)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

You know as well as I, that even though protests originally started as few hundred people were protesting against Yanukovich's decision to abandon a deal with EU but the majority of people later were involved in because they were tired of corruption and poverty. Those protest were hijacked and turned into an anti-Russian/pro-western issue, bringing a different batch of corrupt politicians with a sprinkle of nazis in power. And those militant protesters were responsible for provoking the police, trying to take over government buildings violently and quite likely shot other protesters to incite them to more violence. After a deal was made, the most militant protesters broke it and performed a coup.

Instead of indirect support the west offered, Russia is supporting anti-government protesters directly, either by equipping them or throwing some of their experts in there. It's not just Russian agents, a few dozen armed men can not take control of ten towns and cities without support from local population.

That's not important because of "you did it, too", but to understand that western actions are part of the problem and must also be a part of the solution. The west feels it has got Ukraine now and that's why they've changed their tune from "no one must touch the protesters" from a few months ago to "send tanks against them" now. Even though a more federalized and politically neutral Ukraine would end the conflict, the west is encouraging the Maidan government to crush protesters in the east.

---

It took a couple of month for peaceful Maidan protests to turn into violent ones. Even then most weapons the protesters had were those of medieval type meant for close melee with policemen.
The protesters in the east are violent from the outset: they primarily (and almost simultaneously) attacked the buildings where they could get weapons - firearms mostly - and distributed them freely around. Moreover, they attacked a military unit permanently deployed in Mariupol (not sent there recently) with a demand "to share weapons", as they put it. The soldiers opened fire, killing one and wounding a dozen.
You were the one to advocate hanging those Nazi Maidan protesters for their violence, but you advocate negotiating with protesters in the east.
You claimed that Maidan did not represent the sentiment of the whole country, so it can't radically change its internal and esternal policy - but you are ready to acknowledge that protesters in the East represent the sentiment of the whole region bent on separating from Ukraine and aligning with Russia.
C'mon, show more consistency.
A curious episode which adds surrealism to the whole picture:
The most pro-Russian candidate for presidency Tsaryov participated in a talk show on TV and when leaving the TV center he was attacked by an angry crowd who threw eggs and zelenka (a bright green antiseptic liquid which is extremely hard to wash away) at him, and then they got their hands on him. Do you know who fended off the mob and accompanied him away? The Right Sector guys. Later that days Tsaryov THANKED the Right Sector for being saved. The curtain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

But if we're willing to back the principle of self-determination, even to the extent of losing a significant chunk of our already small territory, on what grounds do we send in troops to deny others the same?

---

You don't give the complete name to it: self-determination OF THE NATIONS.
People in the east of Ukraine (as well as in Crimea), unlike Catalans, Basques, Scots, don't form any distinct ethnic unity having their own language and history. Exception is Crimean Tatars but they were (and are) against any separation from Ukraine. So it is ridiculous to discuss self-determination of Donetsk region.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilrandir

You were the one to advocate hanging those Nazi Maidan protesters for their violence, but you advocate negotiating with protesters in the east.

---

Politicians, nazis and tycoons, not people.

And not kill, hang them by their private parts. Maybe some would survive. I'm not a monster.

Quote:

---

You claimed that Maidan did not represent the sentiment of the whole country, so it can't radically change its internal and esternal policy - but you are ready to acknowledge that protesters in the East represent the sentiment of the whole region bent on separating from Ukraine and aligning with Russia.

---

And they didn't. Even though I imagine most Ukrainians were, and still are, fed up with corruption, I sincerely doubt most were even thinking about Ukrainian foreign policy at the time. The politicians who came to power tacked that on afterwards, after doing most to equate corruption with Yanukovich and pro-Russian stance, which is patently false, as corruption was just as widespread during Timoshenko.

Quote:

---

C'mon, show more consistency.

---

I'm being consistent. I've said several years ago something like this might happen if Ukraine tries to join NATO. It doesn't get more consistent than that.

Quote:

---

A curious episode which adds surrealism to the whole picture:
The most pro-Russian candidate for presidency Tsaryov participated in a talk show on TV and when leaving the TV center he was attacked by an angry crowd who threw eggs and zelenka (a bright green antiseptic liquid which is extremely hard to wash away) at him, and then they got their hands on him. Do you know who fended off the mob and accompanied him away? The Right Sector guys. Later that days Tsaryov THANKED the Right Sector for being saved. The curtain.

---

And this makes the Right Sector the good guys? That's... rich.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilrandir

You don't give the complete name to it: self-determination OF THE NATIONS.
People in the east of Ukraine (as well as in Crimea), unlike Catalans, Basques, Scots, don't form any distinct ethnic unity having their own language and history. Exception is Crimean Tatars but they were (and are) against any separation from Ukraine. So it is ridiculous to discuss self-determination of Donetsk region.

---

So? Nations evolve. A hundred years ago there was no distinction between Germans and Austrians. A few hundred years ago Americans, Canadians and Australians didn't exist. A few hundred more, and there was no distinction between Russians and Ukrainians. Thousand and some years ago, there was no difference between Croats and Serbs. Fifty years ago, Montenegrins didn't exist. 10 years ago, Kosovars didn't exist.

Stuff change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

And this makes the Right Sector the good guys? That's... rich.

---

Again you jump to your own conclusions: I didn't say who is good and who is bad; I just exemplified how closely and curiously intertwined are the participants of modern Ukrainian politics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

A hundred years ago there was no distinction between Germans and Austrians.

---

How do you know? They lived in different states and may well have considered themselves distinct peoples. A hundred and fifty years ago Germans themselves were not a unified nation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

Stuff change.

---

So? Now we can speak of Donetskians? Things do not change so that the nation that didn't exist a month ago suddenly came into being.
As for Balkan nations, I don't know much of how different they are. I always believed that Serbs and Croats are the same people speaking the same language and divided only confessionally. That's what they taught us at Soviet schools.
And as for Montenegrins, if they were not a nation fifty years ago, what was the reason for carving them a separate republic within Yugoslavia?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

I'm being consistent. I've said several years ago something like this might happen if Ukraine tries to join NATO. It doesn't get more consistent than that.

---

I mean consistency in treating any violent protesters equally. Or if you are just violent - oh, well, just stop it, will ya, if you are a violent nazi - you should be hanginig by your PPs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilrandir

Again you jump to your own conclusions: I didn't say who is good and who is bad; I just exemplified how closely and curiously intertwined are the participants of modern Ukrainian politics.

---

Duly noted and understood. It doesn't take a genius to know that Ukrainian policy making at the moment is chaos in its purest form.

Quote:

---

How do you know? They lived in different states and may well have considered themselves distinct peoples. A hundred and fifty years ago Germans themselves were not a unified nation.

---

Because that's how they referred to themselves.

Quote:

---

So? Now we can speak of Donetskians? Things do not change so that the nation that didn't exist a month ago suddenly came into being.

---

No. It takes a bit longer. But, political divisions can create new nations in the long term.

It will stop when we all speak Chinese and look like Brazilians.

Quote:

---

As for Balkan nations, I don't know much of how different they are. I always believed that Serbs and Croats are the same people speaking the same language and divided only confessionally. That's what they taught us at Soviet schools.

---

Sort of.

Quote:

---

And as for Montenegrins, if they were not a nation fifty years ago, what was the reason for carving them a separate republic within Yugoslavia?

---

Political reasons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilrandir

I mean consistency in treating any violent protesters equally. Or if you are just violent - oh, well, just stop it, will ya, if you are a violent nazi - you should be hanginig by your PPs?

---

Not protesters! Protesters are people, who were fed up with corruption and poverty. They are, for the most part, innocent. Their ringleaders need to be hanged - a few selected politicians, nazis and tycoons.

Then you can start building a functioning country. Trust me, we've been through this. We made the mistake of not hanging anyone in 2000 and we're still paying for that.

Ok, I guess those less guilty could be hanged by their thumbs instead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilrandir

You don't give the complete name to it: self-determination OF THE NATIONS.
People in the east of Ukraine (as well as in Crimea), unlike Catalans, Basques, Scots, don't form any distinct ethnic unity having their own language and history. Exception is Crimean Tatars but they were (and are) against any separation from Ukraine. So it is ridiculous to discuss self-determination of Donetsk region.

---

To give that a little more context "England", while being more homogeneous now than 100 years ago still plays host to at least 3 cultural groups - those primarily descended from Saxons, those from the North and the Cornish down in Cornwall. That's after a sustained campaign of "leveling" that succeeded in wiping out Cornish speakers. There have been some, not many, calling for "the North" of England to break away with Scotland.

There are also lots of English people in Scotland - and Scots in Engalnd, but we're still having a referendum on dissolving the Union.

All of this is academic though - I'm sure the EU would be happy to support referendums in Crimea etc. after a new President is elected. However, it seems the pro-Russian faction is trying to prevent that from happening.

What are the chances that Putin will receive a message akin to the following:

"We, the undersigned nations of the North Atlantic Alliance, require the return of Crimea to Ukrainian control, a withdrawal of all Russian military forces from Crimea (aside from the Naval base at Sebastopol), and the public repudiation of separatist efforts by Ethnic Russians living in Ukraine. These requests must be complied with no later than the 1st of June, 2014. Failure to comply with these requests will result in a state of war between the NATO alliance and the Russian Federation."

And, if such an ultimatum cannot be made, what -- if anything -- might actually curtail Russia's current expansionism?



My thoughts are that such an ultimatum is not forthcoming, but that anything less will curtail Putin not at all.

"We, the undersigned nations of the North Atlantic Alliance, require the return of Crimea to Ukrainian control, a withdrawal of all Russian military forces from Crimea (aside from the Naval base at Sebastopol), and the public repudiation of separatist efforts by Ethnic Russians living in Ukraine. These requests must be complied with no later than the 1st of June, 2014. Failure to comply with these requests will result in a state of war between the NATO alliance and the Russian Federation." And will received the same answer that the Russian Federation had after Kosovo... Or Iraq.
Now, in term of politic, that not what you want (war) if you want to pretend to be successful in Afghanistan...

If I read this right, Europeans are under forum terms attacking USAnians of accusing Russia for doing just what USA have done all along.

USAnians then read it as defense of Russia, alternatively reading it as two Devils diminishes the whole Devil thingy of it all.


I can assure you, that the vast majority of Europe has grown up during the cold war era. We simply see no white hat cowboys on the international scene. We see USA acting in their best interest, and we see Russia acting in their best interest.

The only difference is that the US propaganda is way more accessible around European parts of the world - It thus also get laughed at a lot more.

This is a English speaking political forum, OF COURSE Europeans will flame USAnians hard for their unfortunate political decisions. You think Europeans on a Russian speaking board (then drawing Europeans from Latvia, Estonia, Slovakia aso will have less of a go on a Russian speaking political forum - on Russians?

We can debate Russia's evil all day here. But what's the point? There's not many Russians around, you know.

Much better us Europeans spend our time dismantling the utterly insane belief USAnians have of being "The Good Guys", on this very specific board - As that is the target audience here.

USAnians have to come to terms with the fact that the more educated western world see you as an absolute disgrace. Not in your intentions, but in the way you allow your leaders to use those good intentions to mold an absolutely insane international political landscape.

USA is of course very young as a nation. Your mother and father countries say: GROW THE **** UP.

I unfortunately believe you absolutely need an actual war on your own soil, before you USAnians understand why. Heck, you live in a world view where a terrorist attack some 10-15 years ago (killing mere thousands) still dictate your politics, because it happened at home. You live in a world where it's something to cry over when some 10 body bags of soldiers gets filled in a day of actual warfare.

I'm not saying it isn't sad when 10 soldiers die.

I am saying that we come from a background where 19k died and 35k were wounded - with 2k missing. In one day of combat.

And that is still only counting the British troops, their allies and the actual opponents (also European) ain't even counted here.

Did we learn from such mistakes? No, it took another damn World War to finally humble our ambitions, not to mention psyche to throw away lives for very vague actual gains.

The US, in comparison, have absolutely no serious history of warfare on home turf. You need to get your nose bloodied before you will start understanding an European view of the world and its politics.

CRIMEA RIVER.

It's 8:27 in Texas and Vladimir Putin is still a fascist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

It's 8:27 in Texas and Vladimir Putin is still a fascist.

---

Do you mean Mark 8:27... Or Roman 8:27... Or Matthew 8:27?

Cheers for the point though, I didn't dare go that way...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Do you mean Mark 8:27... Or Roman 8:27... Or Matthew 8:27?

Cheers for the point though, I didn't dare go that way...

---

As much as you dislike America (which you have valid reasons for. Hell I would agree with you on most of them) At the end of the day you know America is 100x what Putins Russia is and you know he is scum

The same goes for the rest of you. Complain, but when it comes down to brass tax, I know where all of you will be

tacks, dear boy, not tax.

Erm: http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...t-us-russia-eu

I struggle to see how this will help Putin's agenda - unless the "talks" on devolving Powers break down - igniting fresh, bloodier protests ets...

Yeah - I'mm going with that - designed to fail.

Any takers?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

tacks, dear boy, not tax.

Erm: http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...t-us-russia-eu

I struggle to see how this will help Putin's agenda - unless the "talks" on devolving Powers break down - igniting fresh, bloodier protests ets...

Yeah - I'mm going with that - designed to fail.

---

That's because you still imagine that Russia has any other goal but world domination.

This deal will probably stop Ukraine from joining NATO, we can't say for sure because we don't know how well defined constitutional is, and that's pretty much that for Russia.

Great news. Civil war was averted at the last moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

That's because you still imagine that Russia has any other goal but world domination.

This deal will probably stop Ukraine from joining NATO, we can't say for sure because we don't know how well defined constitutional is, and that's pretty much that for Russia.

Great news. Civil war was averted at the last moment.

---

It's more because he recently used the Tsarist name for Ukraine, New Russia

Edit: It's already failing: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27076226

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

Not protesters! Protesters are people, who were fed up with corruption and poverty. They are, for the most part, innocent. Their ringleaders need to be hanged - a few selected politicians, nazis and tycoons.

Then you can start building a functioning country. Trust me, we've been through this. We made the mistake of not hanging anyone in 2000 and we're still paying for that.

Ok, I guess those less guilty could be hanged by their thumbs instead.

---

Yet, notwithstanding all the turmoils of the last week I stay optimistic. There are a lot of things people here may not know or fail to perceive.
There is a huge patriotic upsurge in eastern (predominantly Russian-speaking) regions bordering on Donetsk. All the roads from the west and north to the latter region are blocked by checkpoints where locals from Dnipropetrovsk, Kharkiv and Zaporizhya regions are on duty. Regional administrations of those regions call for all voulnteers who have military experience (and many of them come without any call) and form local units to patrol borders with Donetsk region. Dnipropetrovsk local administration (headed by a tycoon who you hate so much) initiated a system of prizes: for handing in a machine gun - 1000$, a grenade gun - 2000$, a separatist - 10 000$ and so on up to freeing an administrative building for 200 000$. The money is to be paid in cash anonymously at the checkpoints on the border of Dnipropetrovsk region. All the developments testify to the fact that we can no more speak of Ukraine separated along the linguistic divide marked on maps (which was inaccurate as I have argued). Even in Russian-speaking regions people realize that whatever bones they may have to pick with Kyiv authorities they have no wish for any militant upheavals still less for Russian troops on their land.
In Donetsk and Lugansk regions the situation has also changed. Yesterday pro-Ukrainian people held demonstrations in Donetsk, Lugansk and Kramatorsk. It is true, they were not numerous - about 1000 in each city, but the reason of it is that many people are just scared - separatists are violent when they spot any dissidents within their reach. Moreover, as SBU reports, many of the active participants on the separatistic side are ex-criminals. For instance, 90% of those arrested in Mariupol after the attempt to storm the military base had had problems with the law - either administrative or criminal. By the way, many of those were arrested with the active paticipation of locals who hunted them around the vicinity. Curiously, after that the number of separatists inside the captured city hall decreased drastically and is now about 100 people. About 500 Donetsk region inhabitants with peviuos military experience came to Dnipropetrovsk and offered to form a special force to deal with separatists in Donetsk region as local authorities are afraid to do that on their territory. One more factor that no one seems to have reckoned with so far - the pitmen. Donetsk is a coal mining region so pitmen are the most popular trade there. They know that in adjacent Rostov region of Russia with similar coal deposits only THREE mines are functioning. If Donetsk joins Russia all the mines will be closed - Russia has another source of coal in Kuzbass (Syberia) where coal is extracted without mining - it is on the surface and consequently much cheaper.
I have a colleague who moved to work here from Maruipol last year and she knows the mindset of people in the east. For them the most crucial thing is stability and they start to realize that separatistic turmoils will never bring it. As the mayor of Slovyansk admitted, before the invasion about 30% of locals were Russian-oriented and now it is barely 0.5%. Of course, we may doubt the accuracy of figures, but the overall trend is obviuos.
We can't deny that a significant portion of the population there is still pro-Russian or/and separaristic, but according to the recent survey they number about 28%. The others don't want to see the remake of the Crimea plan enacted on their land.
Having all this in view, the Donetsk region deputies from the Party of Regions (which is supposed to represent the local sentiment) held a convention the result of which was forwarding conditions to central authorities in Kyiv. The major three of them are: decentralization of power, the ability to elect governors locally, Russian as the second official language of the country. The first two are indeed within the framework of reforms the central government has in view. The third, I believe is a negotiation issue to push the former two faster.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

Edit: It's already failing: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27076226

---

Like I said, the separatists are shifting their demands constantly - before that there was no talk of Kyiv gonernment stepping down.

That is all very interesting. It still doesn't change the fact that even if Russia did send a few dozen professional agents, they couldn't take control of the region without local support.

People are naturally wary of conflicts, especially anything resembling a civil war. It's good that both sides show restraint. Ukrainian army, for the most part, doesn't want to shoot protesters and more than they, for the most part, want to shoot the army (there are always hotheads, but they appear to be in a minority). Army, unlike the police, is associated with country as a whole, while police is often associated with those in power. If, however, army or militia starts shooting on the protesters, that will change.

Working with Party of Regions and Russia is the key. There won't be a solution overnight, but it is a significant step in the right direction.

If those are indeed Party of Regions' demand, they are very reasonable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

That is all very interesting. It still doesn't change the fact that even if Russia did send a few dozen professional agents, they couldn't take control of the region without local support.

---

The local support is their OK, but it is actively stimulated from Russia. In the regions where it is not (or not so intense) you can't see those building capturings and arsenal burglaries. The majoirity of people all over the east are not inclined towards separation or even federalization.

Kadagar:

Your attitude may be more or less a perfect distillation of the European "holier/wiser than thou" attitude that makes many Americans say "Stick it up [I will leave the rest unwritten].

A number of the points you make are fair criticisms -- there are any number of those who are politically "awake" in the USA who are angered at the manifold inconsistencies of our foreign policy, for example -- but you are failing to think one aspect of it through.

If our inconsistencies (many of which are caused by our do-gooder intentions, however haphazard) are removed, the end result would not likely be a large "nationalism sucks, let us just be citizens of a brave new atheistic world" extension of Europe -- we'd be a more coldly selfish power state like the Russians or the Chinese. That would very likely make us consistent and predictable at long last, but I am happy that we have not trended that way.

It's so nice and heartwarming to see the real, unrestrained fascism coming out of eastern Ukraine these days.

I used to think Svoboda were insane, but boy are Putin's lapdogs outshining them!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

It's so nice and heartwarming to see the real, unrestrained fascism coming out of eastern Ukraine these days.

I used to think Svoboda were insane, but boy are Putin's lapdogs outshining them!

---

I does have the virtue of simplicity. No subterfuge or persiflage to confuse things.