Ukraine Redux

[Mor]

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/in-response-to-president-putins-address-to-the-russian-parliament

 

Thank you, UK.

Nice, it covers many of the misconceptions voiced here.

[Mor]

 

While noting the economic interests of waging war is important, dismissing other root causes as "manufactured for the general public" is silly. There are plenty of reasons war is fought and economics is just a part of them, not the sole reason. Ideology and religion are just two of the most notable.

 

There are exceptions to what I stated, hence me writing 'almost never' but they are rare in modern times, and absent from most if not all major conflicts western nations have been involved in. Ideology/religion have played almost no role in almost all wars in the last half century other than to galvanize some support amongst the masses.

...

 

It is no secret that economic conditions(and other interrelated factors) is one of the triggers for unrest and political instability, which in many cases leads to or deflected by conflicts. Which is why it has been one of the corner stones of policy makers for long time within or without( e.g. most of the developed world countries has been giving Foreign Aid to improve situation around the world )

 

It is also not a secret that many conflicts has an economic component to them, reality isn't a comics book we can't fix all world problems on our dime, we have too many of our own. so of course countries would be more inclined to act in Iraq which was the cause of two previous wars and major rise of oil prices leading to world wide economic instability and enrichment of backwater dictatorial s***holes which usually contribute to it, then some "insignificant" country in Africa.

 

As for your argument about wars being primarily about resources, let step aside from global to domestic arena for the sake of the argument, you can easily observe that resources is major component of every implemented policy, so would you argue that resources are the sole or guiding reason behind our policies?

 

Also i am still interested to see how your argument relates to the current issue, are you underlying that Russian invasion of Ukraine Crimea region had an economically driven? ( i.e. all the stuff we already mentioned New real estate, securing their black see headquarter, arm wrestling Ukraine into submission maintaining the buffer zone, possible resources in Crimea etc, btw we also mentioned things such as fear that the toppling of Yanukovych would counterwent their years of arm wrestling and put off their interest in Ukraine and their Eurasianist ambitions, or reinforcing Putin deteriorating image of strong macho leader on which rose on wining Chechnya 2 and riding the economic crisis of 1998 on energy resource revenue, an image which was flattering since his second term.) Any of that or are you like few others here who are pro war, trying to excuse Russian invasion?

 

Not only that though, Russia isn't playing the great 'central banking / convert our nations into fiefdoms based on debt slavery' game that the Europeans and the U.S. are anywhere near as much as those pulling the strings in the EU and the U.S. would like. Which not only shows how little Russia is under their thumb and how little sanctions will likely matter, but also how good a position Russia is to thumb their nose at the Euro and Dollar.

What about the Jews, someone have to poll the string no? sorry, but that rhetoric resembles some old school stuff:

 

 

 

 

Also I always wondered why in those western fiefdoms, the slaves have far more purchasing power and enjoy better services and generally their life is ranked better in all categories then those people in Russia who enjoys soo much freedom

[Sarex]

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/in-response-to-president-putins-address-to-the-russian-parliament

 

Thank you, UK.

 

Pretty much everything the UK answered was already told in this thread and if you look you can find a counter response to every paragraph.

[Valsuelm]

@Valsuelm, I read your latest posts and I agree with most of it, though none of it is out of the ordinary for general discussion about war, what I didn't see is you making a point in relation to the topic at hand.

 

Much of what I've stated recently in this thread is a tangent, yes, but it is related and that tangent grew out of discussion being had. You'll see that if you read back.

 

 

 

Informative links, I hope this puts to rest any further discussion that the Russian economy has been, and will continue to be,  negatively impacted by the Crimean invasion.

 

I don't want to mention any names (2133, Sarex, Oby and Valsuelm  ) but the debate around the state of the Russian economy is not subjective. Its not like we need to discuss the reasons for Putin's drive for Russian hegemony. Living in a global and interconnected world the reality of any countries economy is easy to see and its irrefutable as we have facts through websites like Bloomberg who track movements of major stock indexes

 

 

Umm... anyone who thinks the stock market's daily wobblings or even it's yearly wobblings is a sound indicator of the health or unhealth of any economy fundamentally doesn't understand economics or has a very narrow view of what economic health of a nation's economy is. Of course I realize that's what most talking heads on TV would have you believe, but stock portfolios is not a good indicator of what's happening to everyone else. For one of the most blatant examples of this: ever hear of the term 'bubble'?

 

I put forth that just how many people are brainwashed to believe this is one of the stronger indicators of how precariously sitting on a ledge over an abyss the western economies are.

 

Regardless, even if sanctions take their toll on Russia or anyone else, the effects of that won't be seen in meaningful statistical numbers for awhile.

 

But really, when the only sanctions I've seen implemented so far are aimed at a couple individuals and a bank or two, it's certainly not something that is going to affect any nation's economy. Someone please link what other sanctions have been implemented, if any, as I haven't seen any others. So basically, so far the only sanctions even implemented are just a bunch of hot air, that in the long term will accomplish absolutely nothing as the individuals and banks sanctioned will just go around them (if they even want to).

Edited March 22, 2014 by Valsuelm

[obyknven]

Я джва года хочу такую игру

http://youtu.be/WNPmSHsamvI

[Hassat Hunter]

Sure, according to all the proper regulations Ukrain stands NO chance to enter the EU.

 

But, am I the only fearful that they are willing to cut a corner or 2,3,4, all just to reinforce their overblow ego that the mighty EU *saved* Ukrain from the evil Russia?

There seems to be some Cold War mentality going on that we need some border against the Red Evil, and accepting the cesspit of Europe into our midst to achieve that is a small price to pay.

And that... worries me.

[Zoraptor]

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/in-response-to-president-putins-address-to-the-russian-parliament

 

Thank you, UK.

 

Pretty much everything the UK answered was already told in this thread and if you look you can find a counter response to every paragraph.

 

Yeah, typical propaganda trash from the people that brought us "WMDs from Iraq can hit London in 45 minutes!!!!!!". Better check turnitin to see if it's plagiarised from a Master's Thesis as well this time. Must be nice living in the warm acritical embrace of knowing that you're right because some chap who was once used as a toilet warmer or toast rack while a turd at Harrow writes a press release. Still, because I can...

 

(tldr "everything the UK answered was already told in this thread and if you look you can find a counter response to every paragraph")

 

Response:

Not only did the change of government violate Ukraine’s constitution, it was not in line with internationally agreed democratic procedures and best practices. Right Sector armed forces had been in Kiev for several months, during which time they installed a pro-Europe puppet administration that voted through legislation via a parliamentary session under watch from armed, fascist gunmen, from which MPs opposed to Europe’s agenda were excluded or under threat. The legislation’s preparation – which was just 1 hour – was characterised by a complete lack of local electoral commissions, voters’ lists, and no ballot papers at all were issued - with no meaningful impartial observers. The circumstances of the legislation made it impossible for voters to express support for Ukraine's existing government – nor were there any questions on the legislation, nor was there a free public debate in Ukraine. There are credible reports of intimidation. The result is wildly out of kilter with the results of a representative opinion poll described as passably free and fair by international observers and OSCE, called a "Presidential Election" as recently as 2010, which indicated that only 47% of Ukrainian voters supported the Fatherland Party's candidate- and contrasts with the greater proportion who voted for Yanukovich as well as the 95% turnout for autonomy from Ukraine voted for by Crimea in 1991 and the parliamentary majority voting for independence in 1994.

 

Response:

Since President Yanukovych’s departure, the Ukrainian Parliament and interim government’s actions have been in violation of the Ukrainian Constitution. Numerous groups, including the United Nations, OSCE and the Ukrainian rabbinical association, have been completely fine with this and indeed insist that it isn't so despite it being a black and white issue. President Yanukovych’s own party, the Party of the Regions, supported measures implementing the interim Ukrainian government and calling for new elections while under threat from armed Right Sector militia providing security for the Rada. The single greatest destabilizing force in Ukraine right now is the Ukrainian 'government' whose first moves were naked triumphalism at having 'won'.

Euromaidan was composed of a cross-spectrum of ordinary Ukrainians with a common agenda to demonstrate their opposition to losing a fair (per OSCE) election and their desire to see the majority rather than them disenfranchised in order to become Germany's toilet cleaners once Poles or Bulgarians become too expensive, and actively fascist militia, which also violated the Ukrainian constitution and laws. It was remarkably disciplined in their preparation for violence, barricade building, building occupying, body armour creating and molotov asterisktail production. They acted in a premeditated way to overthrow the elected government after failing to win the election that international observers like the OSCE described as passably free and fair.

 

Response:

Ukraine’s government tried as one of its first acts and under threat of violence to enact legislation limiting the use of the Russian language at regional level, and it took days for it to be vetoed after it sparked unrest and they realised it didn't play well with the FREEEEEDOM (otoh it played extremely well with the other freedom, Svoboda) narrative. That the theoretically majority parties who had no interest at all in repealing it and indeed had already defeated various attempts to could not block this underscores how much duress they were under from the Right Sector militia working as Rada security.

 

Response:

There was clear legal and executive authority in Ukraine. The abandonment of office accusations against President Yanukovych was 'confirmed' by a non constitutional vote in Parliament under circumstances earlier deplored in this very document as unfair (threat of violence, duress, lack of preparation etc)– a Rada which remained unchanged except for the expulsion and exclusion of non compliant members (deplored in this very document, again, when applied to Crimea) and which was elected in a free vote of the people in Ukraine then set aside when inconvenient by Europe. The interim government was approved by an overwhelming majority (not a single dissenting vote! Wow, and they question the Crimea vote's 90+%) in a vote in the Ukrainian Parliament under circumstances described as not free earlier in this document, including representatives of Yanukovych’s Party of the Regions being 'protected' by Rada's Right Sector security.

 

Response:

The situations in Crimea and Kosovo are not comparable. THEYRE NOT THEYRENOT THEYRENOT!!!!1!!!1111!!!! WE DID KOSOVO ITS OK WE DID IT SO ITS OKOKOK JUST BECAUSE IT DOESN"T SET A PRECEDENT BECAUSE> BECASE BEACUSE!!!!! YOU CANT USE OUR PREVIOS LOGIC AGAINST US THATS NOT FAIR!!!! meanie

 

Kosovo’s eventual independence came about through a long, inclusive (Albanians and NATO), process under NATO occupation (this is, of course, bad and means the process is eeeevil if it's Russia doing it), under the auspices of a UN Security Council Resolution which did not specify independence the thing you're trying to justify you overbred Old Etonian muppet I know I've read the resolution, eventually reaching an agreed political settlement- we agreed, so by definition it was agreed! even if the other parties involved like Serbia and the Serbs in Kosovo didn't actually agree. The referendum in Crimea is attempting retrospectively to legitimise the unilateral action of one state which, as last weekend’s referendum and historical data shows, is acting in complete agreement with the wishes off the majority of the Crimean people just as much as it was in Kosovo. Of course, there isn't a single UNSC resolution supporting Kosovan independence, so it's actually exactly as legitimate in that sense. Oh, and no mention of the CoJ judgement this time? Could it be just a tad inconvenient in what it actually says?

Of course, Europe’s position on Crimea does seem to be inconsistent, unsurprisingly goalposts shift when it isn't in our interests.

[213374U]

Sure, according to all the proper regulations Ukrain stands NO chance to enter the EU.

 

But, am I the only fearful that they are willing to cut a corner or 2,3,4, all just to reinforce their overblow ego that the mighty EU *saved* Ukrain from the evil Russia?

There seems to be some Cold War mentality going on that we need some border against the Red Evil, and accepting the cesspit of Europe into our midst to achieve that is a small price to pay.

And that... worries me.

 

Well, the Cold War mentality is alive and well, thank you. For some at least. You don't need Cold War thinking to be wary of Russian imperialism, however. Pushing Russia is a bad idea if you are in Europe (or central Asia, for that matter...), and it has been since Peter the Great back in the 18th century. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, we Europeans had forgotten this, and Putin figured it's high time we were reminded that Russia is nobody's bitch. And, as usual, it's the little people getting shafted.

[Mor]

Sure, according to all the proper regulations Ukrain stands NO chance to enter the EU.

 

But, am I the only fearful that they are willing to cut a corner or 2,3,4, all just to reinforce their overblow ego that the mighty EU *saved* Ukrain from the evil Russia?

There seems to be some Cold War mentality going on that we need some border against the Red Evil, and accepting the cesspit of Europe into our midst to achieve that is a small price to pay.

And that... worries me.

We are aware of Ukraine situation, which is why I have been against EU and USA intervention from the start of the Ukrainian crisis, back when Zaptor(or sarex?) has been throwing BS assertions about Ukrainian finance crisis being a result of EU policies as oppose to being helped into it by Russia armwrestling and soviet style policies and corruption which bared its way into EU at that time.

 

But since Russia intervened in Ukraine Crimea pulling of "anschluss" land grab, after doing the same in Georgia recently the situation has certainly changed. Before there were some tensions (e.g. over Syria, Russia energy blackmail etc), but now there will be no more "reset"s for a while, with international community taking measure against Russia actions. Although the change could be better characterized as realization, because even though Obama tried to rest the situation nothing here has changed in regard to Russia actions (see this article from last Russian intervention in Ukraine) and as you can see from our Russian peer it doesn't seem they left cold war mentality, reliving its soviet "glory" days, petulant kids motivated by revanchism and nationalism with huge nuclear club.

 

Also recent cold war themed batch:

 

 

 

 

Edited March 23, 2014 by Mor

[Zoraptor]

We are aware of Ukraine situation, which is why I have been against EU and USA intervention from the start of the Ukrainian crisis, back when Zaptor(or sarex?) has been throwing BS assertions about Ukrainian finance crisis being a result of EU policies as oppose to being helped into it by Russia armwrestling and soviet style policies and corruption which bared its way into EU at that time.

Wasn't me, and I'd question if it was anyone at all. I presume no link will be forthcoming, indeed it sounds rather like strawmanning of what several people did say- that Europe offered a pittance bail out as part of its association agreement with big conditions (including ending gas subsidies which would completely trash anyone old and poor) while Russia offered a larger one with few conditions. And of course, the person who made it a one or other affair was a certain Ivan Juan Manuel Barrosovich, of Russia Europe. Still it is kind of ironic that the west of Ukraine wants the far more prosperous eastern part to both subsidise it financially and to not be able to retain their elected representatives if the west don't like them. Should fit in to the greater western fold swimmingly with that attitude.

 

Before there were some tensions (e.g. over Syria, Russia energy blackmail etc), but now there will be no more "reset"s for a while, with international community taking measure against Russia actions. Although the change could be better characterized as realization, because even though Obama tried to rest the situation nothing here has changed in regard to Russia actions (see this article from last Russian intervention in Ukraine) and as you can see from our Russian peer it doesn't seem they left cold war mentality, reliving its soviet "glory" days, petulant kids motivated by revanchism and nationalism with huge nuclear club.

There was Libya of course, where the west 'interpreted' the resolution protecting civilians into regime change (again, with the most mealy mouthed and rubbish interpretations as justification, rather like claiming Kosovan independence had a UN mandate when it didn't) and not protecting civilians in, say, Bani Walid or Sirte- indeed, there were persistent accusations that the freedom loving Misratans used gas there. Nor should we forget presidential candidate Wesley Clark actually ordered an attack on Russia during the Kosovo crisis, an order that the British commander it was given to fortunately disregarded as utterly insane. Poor old Russia could not even gain much appreciation for bailing Obama out of the corner he'd boxed himself in to over the opposition's use of nerve gas in Syria. And, again, Russia disbanded the Warsaw Pact, its cold war alliance, while NATO, the west's cold war alliance is still going strong. But of course it's Russia that has the Cold War attitude... Nah. They just worked out that the west was perfectly happy to take advantage of any leeway given, when Russia was led by a drunken incompetent sot like Yeltsin or when lead by Putin. Took them a decade or so to do it, but there comes a point when assuming good faith from those who clearly don't have it means the old proverb applies "fool me once shame on you, fool me twice... I won't get fooled again"

 

(there's no evidence that oby is russian, btw)

[AGX-17]

Russia, and stuff. Super relevant. Still think Obama's nose should be buried in Chinese ass (nonexistant as it may be, ZIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIING!)

[obyknven]

Capitalistic agressive Russia capture some amount of property for making money.  Why Westlings talks about Cold War and USSR ressurection? It's some sort of irony, but modern Russia looks more capitalistic than EU ( socialists everywhere ) and US ( this country strongly remind me last days of USSR ).

[Mor]

what several people did say- that Europe offered a pittance bail out as part of its association agreement with big conditions (including ending gas subsidies which would completely trash anyone old and poor) while Russia offered a larger one with few conditions.

In that particular exchange it was a person(singular), and he spoke of policies in past tense in relation to Ukraine's economic crisis. But while we know that EU put forward several reforms (to address political and economical issues in Ukraine. Deal with corruption and stimulate its crumbling economy which under performed for the last ~two decades ) as prerequisite for membership, which Ukraine didn't adopt (thus why the process was ~suspended). The on thing that we do know which had a direct adverse effect on Ukraine economy (on top of recession) was Russian involvement trying to bully Ukraine into adopting pro-russian policies and join its own trade union. Notably adjusting the gas prices and the closing of its border to Ukrainian exports on which Ukraine depended. So their generous offer came as carrot after the club.

 

There was Libya of course, where the west 'interpreted' the resolution protecting civilians into regime change

Again deflecting with apple and oranges scenarios, I have weird filling of deja vu addressing similar intellectual dishonest argument by you before(Iraq was it?) and saying that you engage in verbal masturbation.

 

First you deflected to Iraq where a belligerent dictator who kept starting wars with his neighbors one after another(2 in span of 10 years, 8 of which he was at war) trying to annex another country, causing world instability. A dictator who possessed and used his WMDs against his neighbors and his own populace. Who surrendered and agreed to disarm of WMDs and UN weapons inspectors, and decade later he still refused to flly comply with his obligations and allow full inspection, then one after another UN resolutions leading to unfortunate expansive unpopular war.

 

Wow with Libya, of course it was a regime change, I was against it since the beginning rejecting the misguided notions of the arab spring being a rise of democracy and the humanitarian impulse for NATO intervention to help bring said democracy and protect civilians. Nevertheless, the intervention came in the middle of a popular uprising in the arab world, which was seen as country wide out break of lawlessness, stop of civil services and war crimes. Gaddafi who previously crushed similar uprising had a loong history of documented abuses against civilians. The intervention was under the auspices of a UNSC and widely supported including by the Arab world.

 

However, setting aside all my objections and disagreements with NATO about the way things were handled in Libya and Iraq, comparing it to Russian involvement in Crimea(and Georgia) are nothing but demagogy riding on superficial similarities. Even in decade old link I posted above(to make a point about Putin Russia) the exact same scenario/pretext that Russia used to arm wrestle the small former USSR states into compliance with its policies was outlined, explaining how Russia would perceive the Rose(Georgia) and Orange(Ukraine) revolutions as a threat and surprise surprise few year later that exactly what happened(remember the map I drew in the first thread with a nice grouping of Moldova\Georgia\Ukraine all of which Russia conveniently helped with the same pretext?), and here you shamelessly try to claim that Russia actions are anything, but unilateral revanchism and irredentism; Trying to feed us with Russian propaganda that wasn't substantiated anywhere else, asserting that Russia motivation were innocent and noble - because Russia is known for its care for humanitarian need, civil rights and what majority that disagree with Russia think (e.g. in Chechnya, in Russia in general or Syria) and when none of that fly you default to the same deflection to look they are no different then..

 

Bottom line after all your pseudo intellectual arguments, you simply support Russia actions (Which has nothing but a land grabs by petulant bully who wasn't happy people don't like him anymore, with no real justification international support or any attempt to help anyone but Russia to some new real estate in Ukraine) and try to put a pretty spin on this, labeling everyone else as "west" and claiming that "westerners" are all biased.

Edited March 23, 2014 by Mor

[obyknven]

How Cold War-Hungry Neocons Stage Managed RT Anchor Liz Wahl’s Resignation

http://www.truthdig.com/report/page2/how_cold_war-hungry_neocons_stage_managed_liz_wahls_resignation_20140319

 

Just over an hour later, an exclusive interview with Wahl appeared at The Daily Beast. It was authored by James Kirchick, a 31-year-old writer whose work has appeared in publications from the neoconservative Commentary to the liberal Israeli paper Haaretz.

Kirchick acknowledged having been in contact with Wahl since August, but cast himself as a passive bystander to the spectacle, claiming that they merely “stayed in touch periodically over the past 6 months, and I always encouraged her to follow her conscience in making a decision about her professional future.”

Kirchick wrote that by quitting, Wahl paid “the price real reporters—not Russian-government funded propagandists—have to pay if they are concerned with quaint notions like objectivity and the truth.”

Later that evening, Kirchick tweeted a photo of himself with Wahl, calling it a “Freedom selfie.” The two had apparently gathered to celebrate.

So who was Kirchick, and what sort of commitment did he maintain to “objectivity and the truth?

 

In fact, Kirchick was a senior fellow at FPI, the neoconservative think tank that had hyped up Wahl’s resignation minutes before she quit. Launched by Weekly Standard founder William Kristol and two former foreign policy aides to Mitt Romney, Dan Senor and Robert Kagan (the husband of Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland), FPI grew directly out of the Project for a New American Century that led the public pressure campaign for a unilateral U.S. invasion of Iraq after the Bin Laden-orchestrated 9/11 attacks.

In 2010, when FPI rose from the ashes of PNAC, whose name had become synonymous with warmongering, mendacity and strategic blundering, it pivoted away from Iraq toward “rising resurgent powers, including China and Russia,” according to its mission statement. Through a series of letters and manifestos urging President Barack Obama to take a more confrontational stance toward Russia, FPI has assiduously sought to establish the groundwork for a new Cold War.

 

 

No comments.

[Malcador]

So those words from the UK have any affect? Hm when are elections in the UK again?

[Mor]

Interesting two tidbits concerning possible sanctions\actions:

In the last decade or more, Putin has consolidated control over both the Russian state and its business leadership. Russia’s oligarchs are now handpicked by the Kremlin or, at a minimum, must hew closely to it. That concentration of economic and political power creates a target-rich environment for U.S. sanctions.

...

Putin is an autocrat who will be prepared to accept considerable pain without a flinch. Autocracies can, however, be weakened by transparency. For that reason, any U.S. sanctions program aimed at Russia’s political-economic nexus should be accompanied by a public awareness campaign focused on the corruption of the ruling Russian clique. It is widely understood, for example, that massive corruption has accompanied the consolidation of economic and political power in Putin’s Kremlin. All told, tens of billions of dollars have likely been diverted from the Russian natural resource sector alone and into the bank accounts of Kremlin insiders, including Putin. Much of that money has been squirreled away outside Russia, and the United States knows where to find a lot of it. The United States could publicize this information to undermine Putin in the eyes of the Russian public. link

[Zoraptor]

So those words from the UK have any affect?

Nope, I'm afraid not, people are still disregarding their obvious wisdom.

 

The french just had local body elections and they were riven with despicableness! They used transparent ballot boxes and printed more ballots than were used. Stop buying Citroen, Peugeot and Renault everyone to protest this hopelessly undemocratic travesty. New York hipsters can stop buying FIATs instead, I hear the F stands for France!

 

 

Again deflecting with apple and oranges scenarios, I have weird filling of deja vu addressing similar intellectual dishonest argument by you before(Iraq was it?) and saying that you engage in verbal masturbation.

Ah, I note you didn't link to anything to show your economic argument was not a strawman though, as I predicted. Nevermind.

 

(I should ask you about your support for Israel and their unilateral annexations, colonial immigration policies and repression of the indigenous (as much as the tartars are) population in those regions, plus of course their hiding behind a single veto at the UNSC. But I really don't need another long post which is a long winded way of saying "it's different, because I say it is and because I like those doing it!")

[Mor]

Funny, I wasn't aware I made any economic argument at that point, as oppose to recalling a long practice of trying to present Russian invasion in the most attractive way possible i.e. even though Putin have been crudely interfering and bulling those former USSR states for a while, stated that Russia will never tolerate Georgia and Ukraine choosing to become part of NATO(as if they have a say), and came up with old ww2 style BS pretext's borrowed from Brezhnev Doctrine, all of which happened in tight grouping in place where Russia perceived forces hostile to Russian polices took root(i.e. Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine). You --and I say you in very general terms because honestly "your" little Quintet rhetoric has been pretty much the same and hard to track-- have been going along with Russian state media cynical excuses and propaganda as if their farts smell of roses; deflecting or crap flinging against the designated enemy of Russia; and or implying as if Ukraine will be better off this way. For example as you just did in your previous post

 

 

that Europe offered a pittance bail out as part of its association agreement with big conditions (including ending gas subsidies which would completely trash anyone old and poor) while Russia offered a larger one with few conditions.

You ignore the preceding Russian brawl beating that helped Ukraine into the crisis, before they offered that ohh soo generous offer and ignoring that regardless of what you think was the better choice for Ukraine, it has nothing todo with topic at hand since it is Ukraine choice to make...

 

Also here is the post that I refereed to above, the memory was brought about by Valsuelm comment about "Russia isn't playing the great 'central banking / convert our nations into fiefdoms based on debt slavery' game that the Europeans and the U.S". Like I said "your" posts generally has the same theme and keep getting meshed together, which is why I wasn't sure which one of you made it or the specifics more commenting on the theme. Also the "economical" arguments or at least the tangent topic in which I mentioned them was Russia resemblance to Wiemar Germany (or if you wish cold war era Brezhnev, who like Putin fueled his expansion on literately fuel), Russia possible energy interest in Crimea as suggested by someone and Russian previous meddling in Ukraine since the Orange revolution - which you are welcome to address.

Edited March 24, 2014 by Mor

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Huh, I'm surprised this is still going on. Don't see the point of arguing over a largely insignificant track of land seized from an imploding state. You pseudo-intellectuals do seem to love lobbing **** at each other though.

[Oerwinde]

 

Huh, I'm surprised this is still going on. Don't see the point of arguing over a largely insignificant track of land seized from an imploding state. You pseudo-intellectuals do seem to love lobbing **** at each other though.[/quote

 

Yeah, its done. Referendum was deemed free and fair by international observers, no one is going to do anything about it, so meh. I know the Russian people in east Ukraine are clamorung for their own referendum on joining Russia, but I don't think they're a majority so I doubt it would pass.

[Mor]

Huh, I'm surprised this is still going on. Don't see the point of arguing over a largely insignificant track of land seized from an imploding state. You pseudo-intellectuals do seem to love lobbing **** at each other though.

Your comment lends perfectly into "History tend to repeat itself", and the reason why the various ww2 and cold war parallels concerning Putin Russia and its actions are so relevant. You might want to read my previous post and about Brezhnev Doctrine I mentioned.

 

 

Putin have been crudely interfering and bulling those former USSR states for a while, stated that Russia will never tolerate Georgia and Ukraine choosing to become part of NATO(as if they have a say), and came up with old ww2 style BS pretext's borrowed from Brezhnev Doctrine, all of which happened in tight grouping in place where Russia perceived forces hostile to Russian polices took root(i.e. Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine).

 

 

Also I doubt those consecutive incident by Putin Russia will be forgotten, like in Georgia, I assure you that oby is going to rant about "western" bias well deserved attention to it for a long a while.

Edited March 24, 2014 by Mor

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

It is mostly obligatory finger-waging from entities who really don't give a ****. Despite angry rants from folks like John McCain, the Ukraine isn't very important to the Western world. Frankly, there is a higher likelihood of Alan Moore writing a rape-free story than the US or EU taking any drastic action over the Ukraine situation.

 

Although, it will be interesting to see if the finger-waging is reversed the next time the US gets involved in a conflict.

 

 

Huh, I'm surprised this is still going on. Don't see the point of arguing over a largely insignificant track of land seized from an imploding state. You pseudo-intellectuals do seem to love lobbing **** at each other though.

Your comment lends perfectly into "History tend to repeat itself", and the reason why the various ww2 and cold war parallels concerning Putin Russia and its actions are so relevant. You might want to read my previous post and about Brezhnev Doctrine I mentioned.

 

Putin is just trying in vain to relive the glory days of the USSR. It isn't going to happen, because Russia isn't actually relevant to the US anymore aside from a target to rail against to appease certain voters.

Edited March 24, 2014 by KaineParker

[BruceVC]

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/in-response-to-president-putins-address-to-the-russian-parliament

 

Thank you, UK.

 

 

So those words from the UK have any affect?

Nope, I'm afraid not, people are still disregarding their obvious wisdom.

 

 

 

 

So those words from the UK have any affect? Hm when are elections in the UK again?

 

Thats an excellent article and summarizes exactly the situation in Crimea.  Malc Russia won't change its direction around the Crimea despite the veracity of these words. This information just highlights the obvious contradictions in Putin's reason for the annexing of Crimea

 

@ Zora

 

Yes we know that some of the justification for the invasion of Iraq was false, but that has nothing to do with the  majority of statements from the UK being accurate and valid. Like this article

[obyknven]

Meanwhile EU leaders betray own people and sign trade pact with US. It's means end of independence of Europe and begin of transformation into US colony. Elected governments of EU members can't do nothing against this.

http://www.dw.de/free-trade-as-a-weapon-against-putin/a-17514971

[Valsuelm]

 

Yes we know that some of the justification for the invasion of Iraq was false, but that has nothing to do with the  majority of statements from the UK being accurate and valid. Like this article

 

 

Something tells me that if it were 2003, you would be arguing that the UK and US government officials wouldn't be lying about the 'WMDs' in Iraq and would buy the manufactured hogwash that Saddam was the antichrist of Arabia and the greatest enemy on earth of freedom and democracy who must be 'stopped'. And yes, if you forget, at the time, there were people, myself being one, saying they were lying and going to war under completely false pretenses. How many times do you need to be lied to before you stop believing the source?

Edited March 24, 2014 by Valsuelm