Ukraine burns

[Fighter]

My friend explained this as the unfortunate result of widespread political apathy and disenchantment after Yuschchenko pissed away his political capital.

 

 

That's exactly what it was. And also there was a long stalemate in parliament and infighting amongst the opposition which left the government basically unable to function.

 

Thing is, nothing has changed. I will be surprised if it doesn't turn into a big mess and people wont get tired of it again.

[Mor]

Btw, those who are unfamiliar with the topic can find some info here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euromaidan

Edited February 21, 2014 by Mor

[Tagaziel]

Yes, protest. But the tipping point wasn't reached with protests, it was reached by an unacceptable bodycount.

Which tells you more about the Ukrainian government and foreign countries than it does about the protesters. The primary cause of the unacceptable bodycount are government forces firing at mostly unarmed protesters with high powered weapons and automatics.

 

That's exactly what it was. And also there was a long stalemate in parliament and infighting amongst the opposition which left the government basically unable to function.

 

Thing is, nothing has changed. I will be surprised if it doesn't turn into a big mess and people wont get tired of it again.

We'll see. Just because something can go wrong doesn't mean you shouldn't do it, else there'd be no point to having surgeons or ER specialists.

[BruceVC]

 

We'll see. Just because something can go wrong doesn't mean you shouldn't do it, else there'd be no point to having surgeons or ER specialists.

 

 

That is an excellent point and I doubt anyone will challenge its logic

[Fighter]

That is an excellent point and I doubt anyone will challenge its logic.

 

That's easy to say when your personal life isn't affected by reform.

[BruceVC]

 

That is an excellent point and I doubt anyone will challenge its logic.

 

That's easy to say when your personal life isn't affected by reform.

 

 

That's not quite true, I lived through the end of Apartheid and I experience social changes in our fledgling Democracy regularly.

[obyknven]

Meanwhile Poles dreamed in Internets abot partition of Ukraine.

[Fighter]

That's not quite true, I lived through the end of Apartheid and I experience social changes in our fledgling Democracy regularly.

 

Fair enough. But I've seen people end up with nothing and I can understand how they don't want to sacrifice for the "greater good".

[BruceVC]

 

That's not quite true, I lived through the end of Apartheid and I experience social changes in our fledgling Democracy regularly.

 

Fair enough. But I've seen people end up with nothing and I can understand how they don't want to sacrifice for the "greater good".

 

 

I hear you, you saying that sometimes a social change isn't worth what people can lose. And that does make sense in some cases

[Tagaziel]

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-crisis/ukraine-president-backs-down-signs-peace-pact-protesters-n35171

 

A deal has been signed. Assuming Yanukovych doesn't back out and try to make life tough for the Maidan or that the right wingers manage to stir up crap, looks like the political goals of the Euromaidan are at least partially met. Yanukovych is done either way, out of friends and out of support, with government forces starting to openly mutiny against him.

[obyknven]

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-crisis/ukraine-president-backs-down-signs-peace-pact-protesters-n35171

 

A deal has been signed. Assuming Yanukovych doesn't back out and try to make life tough for the Maidan or that the right wingers manage to stir up crap, looks like the political goals of the Euromaidan are at least partially met. Yanukovych is done either way, out of friends and out of support, with government forces starting to openly mutiny against him.

Nazi group "Right sector" reject this deal. Maidan send all other opposition leaders GTFO. Now its pure Nazi mutiny. Tomorrow they plan begin armed sturm of president palace. Many victims are expected. If they win Ukraine become Nazi country (it's not joke, really). Also dissolving of Ukraine and civil war are expected. Western politicans too long play with fire. We prepare huge amount of popcorn (yeah its not our problem seriously).

[213374U]

Funny what BruceVC said is that "Venezuela hasn't been running their economy well for years. There has been a slow clampdown of institutions like the free press and despite the fact the country has natural resources there are shortages of food and a break down of certain basic services." leading him to conclusion that the socialist experiment has failed.

While you addressing the comment that "The socialist experiment has failed" [summarizing] noted the increase in Venezuela quality of life after it tapped the arguably biggest oil reserve in the world, and agreed that the economy is unbalanced.

 

You think that's funny?

 

No, dude. In fact glossing over social advances, poverty reduction, huge investments in education, welfare, generous foreign aid and a steady net economic growth for the past twelve years, not to mention actual advances in democracy that we smug westerners could take notes from, to focus on the economic downturn of the last year to casually decree that "the socialist experiment has failed", that is funny. It becomes hilarious even, the apex of comedy, when you consider the fact that we here smug westerners have been in a crisis since 2008. I guess I have that much more reason to assert that "the capitalist experiment has failed"?

 

You laughing yet bud? No?

 

Okay then, you know what else is funny? The Press Freedom Index (one commonly cited figure when examining this issue) does not focus only on actual dissident journalist persecution, but rather on how easy it is for journalists to go about their work—including, but not limited to, public media independence, self-censorship and legislation. The questionnaire from which this index is derived also takes into consideration other factors influencing professional journalists, as in basically bribes and also how many really independent privately owned media companies exist, if any. This aggregate index puts Venezuela at roughly the same level as Israel and ahead of faithful western ally Turkey. For exactly what reasons? Impossible to know! Amusing, huh?

 

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-crisis/ukraine-president-backs-down-signs-peace-pact-protesters-n35171

 

A deal has been signed. Assuming Yanukovych doesn't back out and try to make life tough for the Maidan or that the right wingers manage to stir up crap, looks like the political goals of the Euromaidan are at least partially met. Yanukovych is done either way, out of friends and out of support, with government forces starting to openly mutiny against him.

 

Let's hope it lasts. From the link it seems like Yanukovych is gasping for air and trying to buy time however he can. No mention of whether he'll review his decision regarding the EU either.

Edited February 21, 2014 by 213374U

[Mor]

What funny is that other summarizing your long list of numbers, I haven't commented on either of the posts. But I am glad that you are able to entertain yourself

Edited February 21, 2014 by Mor

[213374U]

Uh, you aren't commenting on my posts even though you are directly quoting me? Exactly what are you doing, then? Posting out of a compulsion?

Edited February 21, 2014 by 213374U

[Zoraptor]

Am I saying it's squeaky clean?

Well, I'm barely seeing a word of criticism. If you're going on about Yanokivich's cronyism and corruption then surely you must think the alternative is better, I'm just showing that they consistently have not been better.

 

Your twisted vision of democracy as a tyranny of the majority is troubling. As is the implicit claim that winning in elections gives a free card to rule the country in any way they want to. Representative democracy is representative. Not an "elect your own dictator" type of affair.

What, and your twisted vision is that of tyranny of the minority? Maggie Thatcher decided to commit economic genocide on areas that didn't support the Conservatives, while elected by at most 43% of those who voted- or around a third of the actual population. Electoral dictatorship, indeed.

 

Oddly enough terms like electoral dictatorship are only banded around when it's someone the person doesn't like in power, doing things the person doesn't like. If you support them then it's legitimate power being exercised by the democratic representatives of the people.

 

Furthermore, polls show that the majority of Ukrainians supported association with the EU, which means that Yanukovych deliberately ignored the nation and made a decision that was beneficial to him, not the Ukraine.

Dealt with by numbersman already, though I guess it is telling that your example ends up being a plurality enforcing their views on the majority who is opposed or doesn't care- but on a topic you clearly support, instead of oppose.

 

And your logic can easily be used to dismiss every protest as "butthurt losers." Occupy? Butthurt losers. Opponents of the Iraq Invasion? Butthurt losers. Civil rights movements in the 1960s? Butthurt losers.

Of course it can, that's the whole point. Who is a butthurt loser depends almost entirely on whether you agree with them or not and whether they're your political allies or not. If they're your allies, brave protesters with legitimate grievance exercising cherished freedom; if not, dangerous violent thugs trying to inflict their vision on others.

 

Why wouldn't it be allowed? The Occupy movement you're so fond of using as an example is, well, an example of how they would be allowed. There are also numerous other examples of mass protests that did not turn violent, such as the Iraq war protests, massive in scale, yet peaceful. The common thread is that government forces did not brutally disperse them, unlike Ukrainian forces.

Oh please. Occupy, the Iraq war protesters etc did not try and occupy the centre of Washington or London for 3 months- and when Occupy did try and go somewhere important they got stomped pdq. Sitting in the grounds of St Pauls Cathedral for a few weeks or marching for a day through London ain't anywhere near equivalent to taking over the centre of a city, government buildings, beating up officials and forcing them to sign resignations and suchlike, and you know it.

 

Some of the protesters were spoiling for a fight, from the beginning. Tough luck for the peaceful protesters, but it was not overall a peaceful protest even from day 1.

 

You're clinging to the fiction you created in your own head that Euromaidan was a coup d'etat attempt from the very beginning, when it was a peaceful protest since the beginning. It ecame radicalized when government attempts to silence the protests became too brutal (Berkut was breaking up the protests from the very beginning in November).

Well, yes, someone's clinging to a fiction.

 

I would, same as I do for other protests that I feel are valid. However, they did not.

Nah, you wouldn't, and I rather suspect deep down you know you wouldn't even if you won't admit it. You wouldn't trot out 'electoral dictatorship' and you wouldn't keep calling them peaceful protesters because you think that Ukraine should sign the EU agreement, thus the complaints of any dissenters to that decision would not be, your word, 'valid'.

 

Then why weren't there dead protesters during Accampata Roma? You know, the 200,000 mass protest in Rome where a group of extremists started chucking Molotov ****tails in Rome, demolishing the city etc.? Or the ongoing Spanish protests?

And how many police died in those protests? Your problem is that when 26 people die and 40% of them are police you can hardly claim heavy handedness on the police's behalf, that's simply not police opening up on unarmed protesters with AKs level disparity. Next day, sure, but then it was confirmed by everyone- CNN (ffs CN asterisking N whose world view is stuck in an 80s action movie), AlJ, BBC- that the protesters broke the truce and attacked the police then.

 

It isn't a monolithic bureaucratic dictatorship. Y'see, the MEPs are elected directly by us. If you don't exercise that right, it's your choice, but don't bitch and moan that it's a dictatorship because you can't be bothered to participate in democracy.

Heh, you really think that MEPs run the EU? Cripes. Whenever EU 'democracy' doesn't throw up the 'right' decision they either ignore it, or subvert it. And, of course, since you support the EU I can practically guarantee that terms like 'electoral dictatorship' won't be trotted out for their decisions.

 

An implicit part of your logic is that winning democratic elections is a "be a dictator for free" card.

No it isn't, it's that winning an election gives 'democratic legitimacy'. Well, at least when the person winning is someone you agree with who makes decisions you agree with. If not, then suddenly it's 'electoral dictatorship'.

[Azdeus]

 

https://twitter.com/OlesyaZhukovska

 

I've posted her photo (taken after she was shot) earlier in the thread. There's a number of conflicting reports about her, she's either dead or heavily injured.

 

Unconfirmed reports put the number of protesters dead at around hundred, with many more wounded.

 

 

She actually survived.

[obyknven]

Ukrainian government leave capital. These Nazi control Kiev now. This guy must become Ukrainian fuhrer president.

http://youtu.be/-Inu_-0dcSU

 

[Walsingham]

While I'm wary of agreeing with Zor in general terms - and I'm sure this is reciprocated - I think he makes a valid point about the nature of protest. No British Government would allow Trafalgar square, let alone Parliament square, be occupied for this length of time in this way.

 

Having said that I still think the Ukrainian protesters are plucky chaps and welcome to marry my sister.

[BruceVC]

While I'm wary of agreeing with Zor in general terms - and I'm sure this is reciprocated - I think he makes a valid point about the nature of protest. No British Government would allow Trafalgar square, let alone Parliament square, be occupied for this length of time in this way.

 

Having said that I still think the Ukrainian protesters are plucky chaps and welcome to marry my sister.

 

You know the rules Walsie, we never agree with Zor under any circumstances..ever

 

You've raised a good point but I would argue that almost no Western government would have such a total disregard for there citizens wishes or be happy to unleash the level of violence we have seen to stop protests

 

In the UK I remember that story during the student protests where the police pushed that guy, he fell on the floor and he died of a heart attack. There was a massive investigation and inquiry and if I'm not mistaken some police officers were charged

Edited February 22, 2014 by BruceVC

[Hassat Hunter]

Remember, in the US, if you kill one police officer after a bombing (the Boston Bombers) you WILL be met with a 1000+ bulletrain.

Compared to that, the police in Ukrain was very forgiving for deaths. You wont get that leniecy in the West.

The primary cause of the unacceptable bodycount are government forces firing at mostly unarmed protesters with high powered weapons and automatics.

The deathtoll being almost 1:1 (especially tuesday) doesn't really support that that was the cause at all.

But go ahead and keep claiming the protesters were completely peaceful.

 

While the new agreemements and elections are good... I have a feeling nothing will change at all in Ukrain. They can't really turn their back on Russia, and the EU can't give them what they need, so if there's a new government that does exactly that, well, they're in far bigger troubles than they were under the current regime. And thus the new government will probably act as the old government out of neccessity, and nothing will change.

Edited February 22, 2014 by Hassat Hunter

[Walsingham]

On the other hand, you're talking about a very different situation. The juvenile and ill-formed nonsense of Occupy hardly compares with the _perceived_ situation of Russia strong-arming Ukraine into some sort of nightmarish satellite status. Particularly given their history.

[Mor]

While I'm wary of agreeing with Zor in general terms - and I'm sure this is reciprocated - I think he makes a valid point about the nature of protest. No British Government would allow Trafalgar square, let alone Parliament square, be occupied for this length of time in this way.

Neither would china or any dictatorship. So what exactly it says about the nature of the protests?

 

EDIT:

Also would the British Government use Militant groups such as Titushky?(which sound very much like Assad shabiha militia thugs who broke up protesters)

Edited February 22, 2014 by Mor

[Mor]

Meanwhile Poles dreamed in Internets abot partition of Ukraine.

 

 

poles?! I don't where you pulled this from, but it is Russia with its interest to regain a part of its former sphere of influence who has been steering the pot.

 

When Ukraine moved to signing up with the EU, Russia has put economic pressure on Ukraine(suspending loans, restricting trade). Russia backed the current President Yanukovych since 2004(when his election was ruled to have been fraudulent). Yanukovych the oligarch has since canceled the deal with EU and now Russia offering a lifeline loans and cheaper gas..

 

 

 

Why Russia backed Yanukovych:

btw, i bet that most of the native rusian speakers in eastern Ukraine are very exposed to Russian propaganda tv.

 

 

 

As for the protests, as far as I can see after the initial Police brutal raids didn't work nor Russia's carrot and stick measures, the Parliament has passed anti protest laws, which lead to the intense clashes you see today where police is shooting live rounds and protesters arming themself.

Edited February 22, 2014 by Mor

[Tagaziel]

Well, I'm barely seeing a word of criticism. If you're going on about Yanokivich's cronyism and corruption then surely you must think the alternative is better, I'm just showing that they consistently have not been better.

And? The alternative is not settled, because you might've missed the memo that the Ukrainians are pushing for snap elections (the constitution has been restored)

 

What, and your twisted vision is that of tyranny of the minority? Maggie Thatcher decided to commit economic genocide on areas that didn't support the Conservatives, while elected by at most 43% of those who voted- or around a third of the actual population. Electoral dictatorship, indeed.

 

Oddly enough terms like electoral dictatorship are only banded around when it's someone the person doesn't like in power, doing things the person doesn't like. If you support them then it's legitimate power being exercised by the democratic representatives of the people.

How is Thatcher even remotely relevant to this thread? "Hey, this woman did bad things in a country thousands of kilometers away, so what happens in Ukraine is bad."

 

Furthermore, you're consistently ignoring the fact that under Yanukovych, the situation on Ukraine has deteriorated, its human rights record worsened, and Berkut acted as de facto political police. Yanukovych did not exercise his power legitimately either, as he violated basic principles the Ukrainian Constitution.

 

Furthermore, you're contradicting yourself. Yanukovych is good because he's the democratically elected leader of the people, while Thatcher is bad because she's the democratically elected leader of the people. It's either-or, bro. You're applying double standards across the board.

 

Dealt with by numbersman already, though I guess it is telling that your example ends up being a plurality enforcing their views on the majority who is opposed or doesn't care- but on a topic you clearly support, instead of oppose.

While you oppose the topic and you're bunching up undecided and opposed parties into one, just to create a faux majority. Crutch mutch?

 

Of course it can, that's the whole point. Who is a butthurt loser depends almost entirely on whether you agree with them or not and whether they're your political allies or not. If they're your allies, brave protesters with legitimate grievance exercising cherished freedom; if not, dangerous violent thugs trying to inflict their vision on others.

 

Oh please. Occupy, the Iraq war protesters etc did not try and occupy the centre of Washington or London for 3 months- and when Occupy did try and go somewhere important they got stomped pdq. Sitting in the grounds of St Pauls Cathedral for a few weeks or marching for a day through London ain't anywhere near equivalent to taking over the centre of a city, government buildings, beating up officials and forcing them to sign resignations and suchlike, and you know it.

 

Some of the protesters were spoiling for a fight, from the beginning. Tough luck for the peaceful protesters, but it was not overall a peaceful protest even from day 1.

So in your world, there are no legitimate grievances to be had, just entirely relative groups of people pushing to impose their vision and interests of others? That's a pretty sad way to view the world and dismiss legitimate popular movements. I can only assume you consider the 1956 Poznań riots or the invasion of Czechoslovakia perfectly acceptable, because who was the victim depends "almost entirely on whether you agree with them or not and whether they're your political allies or not"?

 

Furthermore, you're exercising special pleading. Euromaidan, Occupy, and the war protests all had a single common element: Spontaneous, popular protests. You're also ignoring the fact that the radicalization of the former was a direct result of attempted crackdowns by the government, which took place from the very beginning of the protests in Kiev.

 

Well, yes, someone's clinging to a fiction.

 

Nah, you wouldn't, and I rather suspect deep down you know you wouldn't even if you won't admit it. You wouldn't trot out 'electoral dictatorship' and you wouldn't keep calling them peaceful protesters because you think that Ukraine should sign the EU agreement, thus the complaints of any dissenters to that decision would not be, your word, 'valid'.

I would. I might not like the result, but I don't contest people exercising their rights.

 

And how many police died in those protests? Your problem is that when 26 people die and 40% of them are police you can hardly claim heavy handedness on the police's behalf, that's simply not police opening up on unarmed protesters with AKs level disparity. Next day, sure, but then it was confirmed by everyone- CNN (ffs CN asterisking N whose world view is stuck in an 80s action movie), AlJ, BBC- that the protesters broke the truce and attacked the police then.

The current death toll (according to Wikipedia, which cites all of the sources) is 16 dead cops and over a hundred dead protesters, with nearly 2,000 injured (as opposed to 200 on the opposite side of the barricade). Trying to arbitrarily limit the timeframe to just the period where the numbers support your argument is bad form. Trying to skew them and pin the blame on protesters exercising their legitimate rights is even worse.

 

Heh, you really think that Congressmen run the U.S.? Cripes. Whenever U.S. 'democracy' doesn't throw up the 'right' decision they either ignore it, or subvert it. And, of course, since you support the U.S. I can practically guarantee that terms like 'electoral dictatorship' won't be trotted out for their decisions.

There, fixed that for you. Now, do you want a Minigun with your freedom hamburger?

 

No it isn't, it's that winning an election gives 'democratic legitimacy'. Well, at least when the person winning is someone you agree with who makes decisions you agree with. If not, then suddenly it's 'electoral dictatorship'.

Which, in your logic, gives total free reign to anyone who happens the election. Representative democracy is representative, power derived from the people's mandate, and accountability. Yanukovych's actions deprived him of legitimacy, specifically when he attempted to break up the protests, putting his own country to the torch.

 

Remember, in the US, if you kill one police officer after a bombing (the Boston Bombers) you WILL be met with a 1000+ bulletrain.

Compared to that, the police in Ukrain was very forgiving for deaths. You wont get that leniecy in the West.

 

The deathtoll being almost 1:1 (especially tuesday) doesn't really support that that was the cause at all.

But go ahead and keep claiming the protesters were completely peaceful.

Uh, no, it really isn't. The death toll is currently 5/6:1 against the protesters, with a similar distribution in terms of injured. Kind of a given when you have police armed with high powered rifles and automatics fire at mostly unarmed protesters.

 

While the new agreemements and elections are good... I have a feeling nothing will change at all in Ukrain. They can't really turn their back on Russia, and the EU can't give them what they need, so if there's a new government that does exactly that, well, they're in far bigger troubles than they were under the current regime. And thus the new government will probably act as the old government out of neccessity, and nothing will change.

So they should just lay down and die, watch their country spiral down into an authoritarian "democracy"?

[Walsingham]

I wasn't going to mention the suspension of loans and so forth, for the simple reason that I don't think an economic response to an economic question is disproportionate. Russia needs Ukraine in its sphere of influence if it wants to be a dominant economic force in the region.

 

This isn't the Women's Institute. This is international politics.

 

However, I think the scale of violence against the pro-Euro movement, whether Russian run or not, puts things in a different light.

 

Personally, I think  it's sad that Ukraine has no choice but to accept one megalomaniac agglomeration or another. They're big enough to be deserving of true independence.

Edited February 22, 2014 by Walsingham