Ukraine-in-a-thread

[Sarmatian]

On Maidan there were people from all over Ukraine, not only from Kyiv or western Ukraine (not all of which were nationalists). And you forgot the abominable nazis and Right Sector. Oh, my bad, it is Brenus who is to keep watch so that we shouldn't forget about them.
And not 50 million Ukrainians voted for Yanukovych. The margin between him and Tymoshenko in the second round was about 3% - 12 481 266 (48,95%) against 11 593 357 (45,47%).

Even if the margin was one single vote, he was still democratically elected by 50 million Ukrainians. That doesn't mean that 50 million of Ukrainians voted for him, it means they were all allowed to cast their vote and after all those that wished to, did, he was the one they elected. Democracy 101.

On the other hand, there were a few hundred thousand people on Maidan, mostly from Kiev and western Ukraine who decided that the entire electoral process is bad because they really don't like Yanukovich.

There was this women in ancient Greece, called Pandora and she found a box... I trust you see where I'm going with this.

[Greyblades]

Only Brittish party that actually does have common sense. I would vote for then in an instant if I could, Nigel Farrage is a boss.

Oh yes, in the midst of an economic downturn a nationalistic party gains traction thanks to a charismatic leader who rails at the restictions imposed by the rest of europe. Oh sure he talks a good talk and he's right about a lot of things but it's hard to ignore the fact that he's backed by a lot of people so extreme the other parties didnt want anything to do with them, and wouldn't be even considered without that leader to hide behind. I am hardly enthused.

Best case scenario is that farage is naiively thinking he can do the good thing while at the same time keeping the rest of his party from turning Britain into greece, he will fail.

[Pannonian]

Oh yes, in the midst of an economic downturn a nationalistic party gains traction thanks to a charismatic leader who rails at the restictions imposed by the rest of europe. Oh sure he talks a good talk and he's right about a lot of things but it's hard to ignore the fact that he's backed by a lot of people so extreme the other parties didnt want anything to do with them, and wouldn't be even considered without that leader to hide behind. I am hardly enthused.

Best case scenario is that farage is naiively thinking he can do the good thing while at the same time keeping the rest of his party from turning Britain into greece, he will fail.

I've received lots of campaign leaflets from UKIP, BNP and other right wing wingnuts. I will vote against them with pleasure in the next election.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Cor, only a 3% majority for Yanukovich? Churchill's Tories actually won less votes than Attlee's Labour on a turnout of over 82% in the 1951 general election, but won more parliamentary seats due to the first past the post system. The British people accepted this result because, well, those were the rules before the election, and the time to change that was to wait for the next election. That's not the Ukrainian way obviously. The Ukrainian way is to go out and get what you want right now, regardless of the rules of democracy. Pity it's only fair when one side does it, and when the other side tries their hand at it, it's corruption and whatnot.

A classic concern throughout the world. Parliamentary/Representative legislatures seem to work well only where the concept of such has been institutionalized. Otherwise it degenerates to the same-old same-old cliques and warlordism with different trappings.

[Pannonian]

A classic concern throughout the world. Parliamentary/Representative legislatures seem to work well only where the concept of such has been institutionalized. Otherwise it degenerates to the same-old same-old cliques and warlordism with different trappings.

Hence my belief that a belief in the sanctity of democracy is more important than whoever gets into power. Whoever gets elected holds office until the next election. That's the bedrock of any democracy. Tamper with that, and you don't believe in democracy.

[Fragony]

Hence my belief that a belief in the sanctity of democracy is more important than whoever gets into power. Whoever gets elected holds office until the next election. That's the bedrock of any democracy. Tamper with that, and you don't believe in democracy.

Is there are democracy to believe in then? We aren't a democracy anymore. We only have a say in local matters but no country in the EU can overrule the EU. Might seem like we can, but that simply isn't true.

[Viking]

I'd say the defining moment was when some 100 000 people from Kiev, supported by nationalists from western regions, decided they can use violence to change electoral will of 50 million Ukrainians.

Well, we can agree to disagree.

So, if a few thousand anti-Obama protesters turned up outside the White House; a fraction of them violent, we should expect Obama to travel to Seattle and then become impeached by the Congress? Somehow, the focus on the behaviour of the protesters seems a bit misguided when it comes to what happened in Kyiv..

It's the responsibility of the law enforcement to make sure that violence does not threaten basic democratic process. If it is unable to do that, then something somewhere is probably quite messed up.

Cor, only a 3% majority for Yanukovich? Churchill's Tories actually won less votes than Attlee's Labour on a turnout of over 82% in the 1951 general election, but won more parliamentary seats due to the first past the post system. The British people accepted this result because, well, those were the rules before the election, and the time to change that was to wait for the next election. That's not the Ukrainian way obviously. The Ukrainian way is to go out and get what you want right now, regardless of the rules of democracy. Pity it's only fair when one side does it, and when the other side tries their hand at it, it's corruption and whatnot.

It's not too uncommon for controversial issues to force a government out of office. In Ukraine, the controversial issue was European integration.

[Pannonian]

Is there are democracy to believe in then? We aren't a democracy anymore. We only have a say in local matters but no country in the EU can overrule the EU. Might seem like we can, but that simply isn't true.

Well, whatever democracy we have left allows me to vote against these UKIP s when the time comes.

[Sarmatian]

So, if a few thousand anti-Obama protesters turned up outside the White House; a fraction of them violent, we should expect Obama to travel to Seattle and then become impeached by the Congress? Somehow, the focus on the behaviour of the protesters seems a bit misguided when it comes to what happened in Kyiv..

It's the responsibility of the law enforcement to make sure that violence does not threaten basic democratic process. If it is unable to do that, then something somewhere is probably quite messed up.

That's a flawed comparison.

It is quite hard to enforce it when you have a collection of the world's wealthiest and most powerful nations cheering the protesters on and enforcing sanctions if you try. In the end, it was solved through a dialogue, early elections agreed, government of national unity in the meantime, constitutional reform... but it wasn't good enough. It had to be a revolution. Well, now they have their revolution and it came back to bite them in the ***

[Viking]

That's a flawed comparison.

It is quite hard to enforce it when you have a collection of the world's wealthiest and most powerful nations cheering the protesters on and enforcing sanctions if you try. In the end, it was solved through a dialogue, early elections agreed, government of national unity in the meantime, constitutional reform... but it wasn't good enough. It had to be a revolution. Well, now they have their revolution and it came back to bite them in the ***

Sanctions and foreigners cheering are irrelevant. In a healthy democracy, violent protesters cannot force a change in government. It's not happening. Quite a few of them would end up in prison instead.

[Sarmatian]

Sanctions and foreigners cheering are irrelevant. In a healthy democracy, violent protesters cannot force a change in government. It's not happening.

If you say so.

[Pannonian]

Sanctions and foreigners cheering are irrelevant. In a healthy democracy, violent protesters cannot force a change in government. It's not happening. Quite a few of them would end up in prison instead.

So why the hell were we funding them, if there were no prospect of anything happening to our benefit in Ukraine? And if things were happening because Ukraine wasn't a healthy democracy, why were we cheering them on rather than help them towards becoming a healthy democracy? Going by your reasoning, western backers were either wasting our money (which deserves formal censure) or exploiting the Ukrainians (which deserves condemnation for its amorality, although I'd be slightly easier with that than the charge of wasting our money).

[Viking]

If you say so.

Look around in the world and tell me when and where it is happening. How do you do it? In a functioning and healthy democracy.

[Sarmatian]

Look around in the world and tell me when and where it is happening. How do you do it? In a functioning and healthy democracy.

According to the same principle, eastern protesters get off the hook,too, because it wouldn't be possible to do what they did in a healthy democracy, and apparently there is nothing wrong with using violence for a political goal in an unhealthy democracy.

[GenosseGeneral]

It's not too uncommon for controversial issues to force a government out of office. In Ukraine, the controversial issue was European integration.

Nope, it was shameless corruption and abuse of power by Yanukovich and his buddies. What then brought hundreds of thousands on the street, was the fear that they could NOT get rid of them in the next election. People began to see this as a real possibility after the Belarus-like, insanely brutal breaking up of the Euromajdan on Nov 30th last year.

Actually I was somewhat surprised by the reaction of Moscow to the appeal by Strelkov towards Russia to lead "peace keepers" into the Donbass. It was rather mild, the Russian ministry of forreign affairs just said, the current conflict should be solved by negotiations between Kyiv, Donetsk and Luhansk.
Still, I do not think the final decision has been made and I can imagine, that there are a lot of different opinions on how to proceed between the various ministries and subdivisions.

Meanwhile, a commander of a national guard battalion asked Ukrainian media to concentrate more on the success of the ATO, "[because] already 54 terrorists have been eliminated" over the course of the fights. That is the kind of situation Ukraine is facing right now, where a good proportion of the country is in open, armed revolt against its government. I guess even from the Kremlin's perspective things have gotten out of hand lately, yet it is hard to say whether this will just strengthen the hardliners.

[Sarmatian]

Nope, it was shameless corruption and abuse of power by Yanukovich and his buddies. What then brought hundreds of thousands on the street, was the fear that they could NOT get rid of them in the next election. People began to see this as a real possibility after the Belarus-like, insanely brutal breaking up of the Euromajdan on Nov 30th last year.

Shameless corruption and abuse of power? Compared to Switzerland, sure. Compared to Ukrainian opposition, no difference at all.

[Brenus]

“The majority of the current unrest is because of Russia's tacit support of the Rebels, if Russia refused to countenance the breakup of Ukraine the unrest following the political crisis in February would be managable.”
You do know that I can easily fixed it for you: “The majority of the current unrest is because of EU/USA tacit support of the Rebels, if EU/USA refused to countenance the putsch in Ukraine the unrest following the political crisis in February would be manageable.” There you go.

“As for the percentage according to me, it would be quite easy for you to check” I don’t question it. It makes the present of Nazi in your executive even worst. You even can tell they are only 2% if you want. Less they are representative of the Ukrainians, more it is difficult for you to justify their presence in the Ukrainian executive (and I don’t say Parliament).

“On Maidan there were people from all over Ukraine, not only from Kyiv or western Ukraine” and they were not here to have what they’ve got. I presume they wanted a better life (jobs, pensions, schools for the kids etc.) in a united Ukraine and in peace with all their neighbours… They’ve got racist corrupted thugs instead of corrupted thugs.

“abominable Nazis” Funny that, you really think that Nazi are not THAT abominable, do you?

[Viking]

So why the hell were we funding them, if there were no prospect of anything happening to our benefit in Ukraine? And if things were happening because Ukraine wasn't a healthy democracy, why were we cheering them on rather than help them towards becoming a healthy democracy? Going by your reasoning, western backers were either wasting our money (which deserves formal censure) or exploiting the Ukrainians (which deserves condemnation for its amorality, although I'd be slightly easier with that than the charge of wasting our money).

Which specific funding are you talking about now? People have their reasons for cheering/not cheering the Euromaidan protesters; I have mine.

Generally speaking, it's of course possible to view Yanukovych himself as an obstacle (one of many) to a healthier democracy; such that as long as the alternative is better, getting him out of the picture or forcing him to change would benefit Ukrainian democracy. Whether or not this actually is the case is a topic of its own.

According to the same principle, eastern protesters get off the hook,too, because it wouldn't be possible to do what they did in a healthy democracy, and apparently there is nothing wrong with using violence for a political goal in an unhealthy democracy.

That a small number of gunmen is able to take over a number of cities by force does indeed show that something is not as it should be - that much is obvious.

That still doesn't mean that violent protesters anywhere in the world automatically could "get off the hook". What it means is that the system doesn't work.

[Pannonian]

Which specific funding are you talking about now? People have their reasons for cheering/not cheering the Euromaidan protesters; I have mine.

Generally speaking, it's of course possible to view Yanukovych himself as an obstacle (one of many) to a healthier democracy; such that as long as the alternative is better, getting him out of the picture or forcing him to change would benefit Ukrainian democracy. Whether or not this actually is the case is a topic of its own.

The British newspaper The Guardian once ran a campaign against GW Bush for his second term. Those Americans who heard of this said the Brits should shut up and mind their own business. As a Guardian reader, I felt the Americans were entirely correct. If a Norwegian newspaper tried to intervene in British politics, I would not take it kindly.

[Viking]

The British newspaper The Guardian once ran a campaign against GW Bush for his second term. Those Americans who heard of this said the Brits should shut up and mind their own business. As a Guardian reader, I felt the Americans were entirely correct. If a Norwegian newspaper tried to intervene in British politics, I would not take it kindly.

As a principle, it clearly doesn't work because countries can declare war on other countries (GWB is an excellent example here..) - if you are unlucky, your country is next. In that case, the politics of that country clearly is your business.

Morally, it is also dubious. Should we not try to interfere with what goes on in North Korea because it's not our country?

[Pannonian]

As a principle, it clearly doesn't work because countries can declare war on other countries (GWB is an excellent example here..) - if you are unlucky, your country is next. In that case, the politics of that country clearly is your business.

Morally, it is also dubious. Should we not try to interfere with what goes on in North Korea because it's not our country?

If you're willing to put up with the consequences, then go ahead and interfere. In this case, you interfered, but you didn't like the consequences and are crying foul because the other side followed your lead and took it further. You wanted Yanukovich deposed, and he was. Now you should be able to stomach the consequences of seeing Yanukovich deposed and not whine about the game being unfair. No-one forced you to play the game in the first place.

[Fragony]

If you're willing to put up with the consequences, then go ahead and interfere. In this case, you interfered, but you didn't like the consequences and are crying foul because the other side followed your lead and took it further. You wanted Yanukovich deposed, and he was. Now you should be able to stomach the consequences of seeing Yanukovich deposed and not whine about the game being unfair. No-one forced you to play the game in the first place.

What's this then

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rQnXo2HMriQ

Who provoked who?

[Viking]

If you're willing to put up with the consequences, then go ahead and interfere. In this case, you interfered, but you didn't like the consequences and are crying foul because the other side followed your lead and took it further. You wanted Yanukovich deposed, and he was. Now you should be able to stomach the consequences of seeing Yanukovich deposed and not whine about the game being unfair. No-one forced you to play the game in the first place.

I did not condone the use of violence against security forces in Kyiv. In theory and principle, I am all for secessionist referendums; but we have to be sure that they are actually measuring the will of the people rather than being mere propaganda pieces for vocal and eager minorities. I don't suppose I have to create a list of issues with the polls in Crimea and Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts.

[Fragony]

I did not condone the use of violence against security forces in Kyiv. In theory and principle, I am all for secessionist referendums; but we have to be sure that they are actually measuring the will of the people rather than being mere propaganda pieces for vocal and eager minorities. I don't suppose I have to create a list of issues with the polls in Crimea and Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts.

Let them have it. It's too dangerous. This is all the doing of some extremily stupid eurocrats who gave Russia a perfect excuse, Russia can't be blamed for making the best out of it, it just works that way. Idiots.

[Gilrandir]

The British people accepted this result because, well, those were the rules before the election, and the time to change that was to wait for the next election. That's not the Ukrainian way obviously. The Ukrainian way is to go out and get what you want right now, regardless of the rules of democracy.

I have answered it: the Ukrainian people accepted the result in 2010, but

it was shameless corruption and abuse of power by Yanukovich and his buddies. What then brought hundreds of thousands on the street, was the fear that they could NOT get rid of them in the next election. People began to see this as a real possibility after the Belarus-like, insanely brutal breaking up of the Euromajdan on Nov 30th last year.

“As for the percentage according to me, it would be quite easy for you to check” I don’t question it. It makes the present of Nazi in your executive even worst. You even can tell they are only 2% if you want. Less they are representative of the Ukrainians, more it is difficult for you to justify their presence in the Ukrainian executive (and I don’t say Parliament).

According to the returned constitution, the parties who got the greatest support can form the government.

“On Maidan there were people from all over Ukraine, not only from Kyiv or western Ukraine” and they were not here to have what they’ve got. I presume they wanted a better life (jobs, pensions, schools for the kids etc.) in a united Ukraine and in peace with all their neighbours… They’ve got racist corrupted thugs instead of corrupted thugs.

Now we have your hatred gathering momentum: you tell us that THE WHOLE new government are nazis and that they are not only nazis but racists as well. What next - a picture of a concentration camp for Russian speakers being built in Donetsk?
Meanwhile in Hungary THE PRIME MINISTER FROM JOBBIK demands autonomy and double citizenship for Hungarians in Transcarpathia. Will we hear any denouncing words about a democratically elected nazi prime minister?

[HoreTore]

If you want to write something IN ALL CAPS, make damned sure it's correct.

Victor Orban is the prime minister of Hungary, and he's the leader of the Fidesz party. All the other ministers are also from Fidesz. Jobbik is not part of the government coalition. While they do offer some support for Fidesz, they remain an opposition party.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

That's a flawed comparison.

It is quite hard to enforce it when you have a collection of the world's wealthiest and most powerful nations cheering the protesters on and enforcing sanctions if you try. In the end, it was solved through a dialogue, early elections agreed, government of national unity in the meantime, constitutional reform... but it wasn't good enough. It had to be a revolution. Well, now they have their revolution and it came back to bite them in the ***

It wasn't Maidan that forced the change, it was the people who died at Maidan. The protesters themselves were, all said and done, a more rowdy version of the Occupy movement - the authorities could have just ignored them, but they offended Yanakovych, so Berkut opposed them with violence, and stationed snipers around the Maidan.

What happened on that day in February still isn't clear, but even if it was not government snipers, the prior actions of the government allowed people to believe it was.

Now, in the East we have Cossacks and armed insurrection.

You want to talk about faulty comparisons?

Start with the two Ukrainian protest movements, they share very little in common.

[Husar]

It wasn't Maidan that forced the change, it was the people who died at Maidan. The protesters themselves were, all said and done, a more rowdy version of the Occupy movement - the authorities could have just ignored them, but they offended Yanakovych, so Berkut opposed them with violence, and stationed snipers around the Maidan.

What happened on that day in February still isn't clear, but even if it was not government snipers, the prior actions of the government allowed people to believe it was.

So at first you present something as a fact and then you say it may not be a fact but that doesn't matter apparently since you agree with the outcome. So maybe no Russian speakers were hunted and killed by west-ukrainian neo nazis but the prior actions of the Maidan-movement and -government allowed people to believe it was actually happening. And what now?

Now, in the East we have Cossacks and armed insurrection.

You want to talk about faulty comparisons?

Start with the two Ukrainian protest movements, they share very little in common.

Really?
As for filthy, dirty separatists who want to destroy the country, the pro-western Ukrainians had their own: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ukraine-fac...h-rule-1437092

[Pannonian]

It wasn't Maidan that forced the change, it was the people who died at Maidan. The protesters themselves were, all said and done, a more rowdy version of the Occupy movement - the authorities could have just ignored them, but they offended Yanakovych, so Berkut opposed them with violence, and stationed snipers around the Maidan.

What happened on that day in February still isn't clear, but even if it was not government snipers, the prior actions of the government allowed people to believe it was.

Now, in the East we have Cossacks and armed insurrection.

You want to talk about faulty comparisons?

Start with the two Ukrainian protest movements, they share very little in common.

So those who died at Maidan at the hand of the then Kiev government are martyrs, while those who died in eastern Ukraine at the hands of the now Kiev government are insurrectionists.

Captain Darling: So you see, Blackadder, Field Marshall Haig is most anxious to eliminate all these German spies.
General Melchett: Filthy hun weasels, fighting their dirty underhand war!
Captain Darling: And fortunately, one of our spies...
General Melchett: Splendid fellows, brave heroes risking life and limb for Blighty!

[Brenus]

“Now we have your hatred gathering momentum:” Ma ma ma, it was a figure of speech, a rhetoric effect. Just one small word of difference… *sight*
By the way Nazi equals racist, that is the all point of the ideology (killing Russian, Jews etc).

“it was the people who died at Maidan.” Including the police officers who died of massive wave of heart attacks if you believe that the “people” in Maidan didn’t use weapons. Probably something in their diet in the Cantina…

"If you want to write something IN ALL CAPS, make damned sure it's correct." You are asking too much. Our friend prefers headlines to facts.