Gorth

No disagreement there...

Besides my grammar being bad and should read I doubt (rather than do not doubt)... not angry. Just rolling my eyes. What happened to let people decide for themselves? You have a monopoly on the truth? Then you're turning into the wolf you decry. YT is YT. It's a business. I think we established a long time ago, businesses have no ethics. If it's profitable, anything goes. Not that I wouldn't ban it if I were YT, but I would do for different reasons (ethics rather than profit). Or as @Elerond pointed out, for being in breach of their TOS.

I do not doubt for a moment YouTube is doing out of the goodness of their heart or anything resembling ethics. It’s a business decision based on what gives the most shareholder value and dividends in the long term. I stand by, that it’s not not the governments job to censor things based on likes and dislikes. If the government is in a state of war, actively participating in a war, maybe different rules apply (seems reasonable), but last time I checked, only Ukraine and Russia are part of the armed conflict

…and that’s how it begins. Someone deciding what it’s best for others to see and not to see. Mentioning book burnings would be a cheap shot, but the thought did cross my mind. edit: YouTube is a private company and as such has a lot of say over what goes on their platform and what not. Now if a government order them to selectively remove content, you have some real issues with censorship

Still waiting for the announcement of the heroic death of Navalny at the front... after his parachute failed to unfold during his airborne "assault" on Kiev

Having fun with the new Guild Wars 2 expansion... Seitung Province Echowald Forest (with skyscraper sized trees) ...and I finally got my Siege Turtle mount A lot of effort that one was too

Just to try something completely new... Rammstein! No, seriously. A new single and the video premiered 8 hours ago at the time of writing

Gaming history in the making... in a new thread

Moved the tail end of previous thread to this shiny new thread

Thanks to YouTube and it’s obscure algorithms I ended up watching a few minutes of something called Gleipnir… looked weird enough that I dug up the first episode and watched. Truly bizarre and fun. I might watch more of it

What is his goal isn't (and never really was) occupying Ukraine? Just remembering whatshisname the guy whose analysis was casually dismissed, that the goal would be to destroy Ukraine. You know, if we can't have it, make sure nobody else wants it.

Until it can't be milked any further in opinion polls?

Interesting perspective... are you saying it's fine to beat the crap out of kids, because they don't have any friends? I never said such a thing. What I'm saying is, there are a number of European countries, that would prefer not to put themselves at risk in a conflict for the benefit of their neighbours, because they don't really feel any "kinship" with the victims. Europeans are still very tribal in some regards. Eastern Slavs, Western Slavs, Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant, Latin, Lombard, Frisian, Germanic, Anglo-Saxon... their interests in helping their neighbours goes as far as considering it if it may benefit themselves long term. Edit: Never mind nationalist divides Edit2: As an experiment, try telling Americans that America sucks! They might get angry with you. Tell Europeans that Europe sucks!... and they'll start pondering which part of Europe you're referring to. They might just agree with you. Edit3: Tl;dr; Europeans don't necessarily have a "European Identify"

That's based on the misconception, that Europe is somehow unified. Hint... it isn't. Not by a long shot.

It's probably still easier to hand over a bit of cash (in rubles) when buying a few vegetables and sausages, than a handful chickens and a goat

A bit more complicated than that... (messy, right?) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Crimean_referendum At this point, it looks like (the wiki is very sparse on detail and background) patience with 'Autonomous Republic of Crimea' was wearing thin, turning from being "friendly" towards Crimea to becoming "less friendly". The outright hostility towards all things Russia wasn't until after the 2014 elections, at which point the general unrest in eastern Ukraine also happened in Crimea with things happening very fast (you couldn't write an action book, where events happened this fast I think). Edit: Tl;dr; Ukraine started unilaterally dismantling the Crimean autonomy and being the one with the military presence on the peninsula (outside the Russian naval base that is), the Crimeans had to suck it up, that their autonomy was removed.

My bad, it didn't transfer it "to" Russia, it transferred it "away" from Ukraine. An independent S.S.R. like Lithuania, Estonia, Ukraine etc. Sadly google is useless at the moment as any search with the word crimea or ukraine leads to 10+ pages of history starting in 2014... Washington Post simply describes it as "a brief tussle" (Crimea having no military). Details being notoriously hard to come by atm because of the popularity of related and more recent events, forcing just about anything else out of the search results... https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/02/27/to-understand-crimea-take-a-look-back-at-its-complicated-history/ Following a brief tussle with the newly independent Ukrainian government, Crimea agreed to remain part of Ukraine, but with significant autonomy (including its own constitution and legislature and – briefly – its own president). In 1997, Ukraine and Russia signed a bilateral Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership, which formally allowed Russia to keep its Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol. So far, so good (and frankly, Yeltzin did NOT inspire a lot of confidence in the early 1990's). Things changed as the conflict of interest between west and east Ukraine heated up (you mentioned yourself, governments coming and going at some point)... an interesting map from WP that sort of shows *why* there could be a problem the way the country was created post Soviet Union. The darkest blue areas are "lost causes", the people there never going to identify as Ukrainians.... at least as long as the government isn't an inclusive type of government, toning down the nationalist rhetoric a bit. The lighter blue areas may not go into open rebellion, but probably just be grumpy for many decades to come (hypothetical situation if there had been no war). edit: trying a twitter source rather than the WP website

What could have been done depends on what stage in the sequence of events we're talking about. The west could have objected to the Ukrainian invasion and occupation of Crimea. To this day, most western media (most likely out of complete ignorance) talks about Crimea as if was once part of Ukraine, the nation. Hint, it never was. The same Soviet legislative authority that assigned it from the Russian S.S.R to the Ukrainian S.S.R. also removed it again before the collapse of the Soviet Union. If you accept the Soviet Union had the authority to hand it to Ukraine, you also have to accept that it had to authority to remove it again. If you don't accept it had the authority to remove it from Ukraine, you're by the same token also rejecting it had the authority to move it to the Ukrainian S.S.R in the first place. Whichever one, Crimea was never part of Ukraine post 1991. Only because it got invaded and direct Ukrainian military control imposed. You could argue as a nation, with it's old internal Soviet administration borders suddenly resulting in a significant land grab containing a really significant amount of Russians, which ended up on the receiving end of a lot of stick and persecution from a new nationalist government in Kiev in 2014. It's not coincidence **** started hitting the fan that year. It was never going to be a stable country and secessionist movements were written on the wall already 1991 because of some really nonsensical border drawing. So, what does the west do? Instead of putting pressure on Ukraine to respect the rights of ethnic minorities and cease the occupation of Crimea, they encourage them by dangling a EU membership under the noses of western Ukraine (where the population is predominantly Ukrainian), regardless of Ukraine not meeting any criteria whatsoever of EU membership. Especially corruption is rampant and no election so far has been without it's problems. Oh yeah, and the treatment of ethnic minorities. No other country would have gotten into the EU in the shape Ukraine was through the 2010's The war in the Donetsk region is recent history. The Minsk accord was agreed upon as the future, but when NATO suddenly hinted at Ukrainian membership, Zelenskyy suddenly felt brave and publicly declared, that Ukraine no longer had any intention of honouring it's commitment to the accord. With visible results. The people in eastern Ukraine declared themselves independent (the people in Crimea were already independent and held a valid referendum asking to be accepted as part of the Russian Federation). So many places this could have been nipped in the bud, but western countries with typical arrogance simply decided what is best for all other countries, regardless of realities on the ground. So, stage one, the west should never have accepted Ukraine's original claims to it's new national borders, regardless of ethnic composition. We saw that in the 1920's too int he middle east (the Kurds sends their "regards"). Stage two, The west should have put sanctions in place against Ukraine over the invasion of Crimea, demanding the removal of Ukrainian troops. Stage three, If more effort had been put into seeing Ukraine and former parts of Russia in as neutral territory rather than advanced military outposts to encroach on Russia in it's own backyard, a lot of paranoia and suspicion could have been avoided. Last but not least (my pet peeve), done more to integrate Russia too into the western " cultural hemisphere" and let cultural change seep in gradually, rather than being handed to them, ultimatum by ultimatum. Proud people don't respond well to threats and holier than thou attitudes.

You're right, that was your neighbour to the west... but I suppose the Habsburgs still count as "German"?

He might have been thinking about The Holy Roman Empire wanting Slovakia back...

I think the 1991 border drawing showed how bad an idea it is to chew off a large chunk of people who are not "compatible", rather than agreeing that maybe it would be best for now if Russians lived in Russia and Ukrainians in Ukraine? I.e. you're never going to have peace and growth as long as you have a large minority that is being subjugated... as the Ukrainians found out the hard way at the moment.

I hope you'll forgive me for paying more attention to BBC and Al Jazeera than ZeroHedge. The latter may be perfectly fine, I'm just not familiar with it

On a more serious note, the BBC is predicting doom and gloom for the world’s food supply effectively from this summer and onwards (because of the war) with the food supplies dropping up to 50% in some cases https://www.bbc.com/news/business-60623941 Edit: reading between the lines, prepare for famine and social unrest

The Taliban even has Black Hawks now

For some reason, Russia always seems to have been a "slow learner" when it came to warfare. During Napoleons invasion, he made it to Moscow without too much trouble. Winter saved the day for the Russians and France got spanked good on the way out. Don't get me started on the Russo-Japanese War! During WWI, after initial success against the woeful Austro-Hungarian empire, Germany showed them how it's done. Not only that, Germany deployed Lenin as the tactical nuke of the time, destabilizing the country. The war was however effectively decided after the battle of Tannenberg (losing Finland, the Baltic territories and what became then east Poland). Enter WWII and Russia again got repeated ass kicking the first two years, despite German forces almost disintegrating during the first winter (because, everybody, not just Russia, seems to underestimate the challenges of logistics on those huge, open plains). They did eventually shape up though, not at least due to a blatant disregard of the cost in human lives and ended up giving as good as they took, but they always seems to be a few years behind?