Ongoing discussion of Ukraine

[Mor]

On the "Proof" bit, there is an update in that article, if a screenshot and one article counts as proof in your book. I don't know if Russia lied on the results, but the circumstances in which the vote and been conducted is not news.

[Zoraptor]

That still isn't proof or even evidence really, since what he's actually quoting is a post election survey and not the election results. The figures don't even match the ones he used earlier.

 

Hey Zor and Mor, can you guys just **** already? All this sassy foreplay is getting old.

 

I'm holding out for a certain virile Russian politician. Surely with my posts on an obscure video games board it's only a matter of time until he notices me?

[obyknven]

 

Chechen Leader  has given coup government a 72 hour deadline to stop massacre Russians or he says Chechens will enter Ukraine & clean things up. Allahu Akbar!

http://en.itar-tass.com/russia/730366

r00fles

 

Why? They are serious, last pack of volunteers arrived to Ukraine consisted from 450 Cossacs and 250 Chechens. IDF squad Alyia ( they have reputation of bloody bastards, Palestinians fear them and IDF fear them too ) do want help to Odessa also.

 

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/chechnya-veterans-serve-as-idf-snipers-1.100833

http://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=ru&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.ru&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://www.odessit.ua/news/odessa/28187-izrailskiy-batalon-aliya-gotov-idti-na-zaschitu-sozhzhennoy-odessy.html

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I'm holding out for a certain virile Russian politician. Surely with my posts on an obscure video games board it's only a matter of time until he notices me?

I'm afraid if that certain Russian politician happens to be well known for riding horses shirtless, then we've already shipped him oby to use as a plaything. Sometimes you just have to settle, as most married men will tell you.

[BruceVC]

So the fact the guy is a neocon is more discrediting than the fact he didn't have proof? I'm sorry Bruce, but that just stinks of bat****.

 

In my view yes it is. I have followed the ideological perspectives of the neocons since the invasion of Iraq. I would consider there opinions on matters as relevant as the Tea Party which is not very relevant at all.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

So the fact the guy is a neocon is more discrediting than the fact he didn't have proof? I'm sorry Bruce, but that just stinks of bat****.

 

In my view yes it is. I have followed the ideological perspectives of the neocons since the invasion of Iraq. I would consider there opinions on matters as relevant as the Tea Party which is not very relevant at all.

 

So you view proof as less important than ideology. That certainly explains a lot.

[BruceVC]

 

 

So the fact the guy is a neocon is more discrediting than the fact he didn't have proof? I'm sorry Bruce, but that just stinks of bat****.

 

In my view yes it is. I have followed the ideological perspectives of the neocons since the invasion of Iraq. I would consider there opinions on matters as relevant as the Tea Party which is not very relevant at all.

 

So you view proof as less important than ideology. That certainly explains a lot.

 

 

Look at you..catching me out with logic. Well played Sir !!!

 

No you right, ideological view is important to me but proof is obviously more important. So let me rephrase " I generally don't take what neocons say seriously "

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Look at you..catching me out with logic. Well played Sir !!!

 

No you right, ideological view is important to me but proof is obviously more important. So let me rephrase " I generally don't take what neocons say seriously "

But in this articular instance, you dismissed someone's statement not because of lack of factual evidence, but because they are ideologically opposed to you.

 

I wonder, is the reverse of this true? Are you willing to accept something because someone you are ideologically aligned with stated it, even no proof to support it exists?

 

If so, I would recommend reexamining how you form beliefs.

[Mor]

@Zoraptor, sorry I have no interest in continuing dubling in this demagoguery and KaineParker is right this take too much time from other (and more importantly from me). So here is my bottom line summary for "you" (its actually leftover from few other posts from couple of days ago, that I filled the gaps in between).

 

As I said from the start, I am generally against violent revolutions, preferring gradual change. Following unfortunate events that took place in the Independence square, I said that once a solution provided and stability restored, all relevant parties should be held accountable and dealt with (including those you exclusively feature). However, lets be honest the internal Ukrainian issue wasn't the reason why this event drew so much attention. The real reason was Russia rhetoric/propaganda machine going into high gear as it did in a recent chain of Russian power moves in the region to assert its dominance.Here is summary of the points, on which I based my opinion on the issue:

Russia still has the Cold War mentality, blaming the loss of power and status following the break up of the Soviet Union on the west, which portrayed some times almost as its "arch enemy". Russia showed desire to return to the old days, and repeatedly warned against NATO enlargement/expanded cooperation with former Soviet republics. Russia ended up intervening under various pretexts in all those Soviet republics who cooperated with NATO and haven't been brought to heel (i.e. Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, and other seem to brewing), creating "breakaway" region and making direct real estate grabs in tightly grouping in the Black-sea region, which Russia considers as pivotal connector between central Europe and the Balkans in its revival mood.

 

Russia has vested strategic interest in Ukraine joining their Euroasian economic union, playing the buffer zone, playing their energy export pipeline and playing their forward base in the black sea. I recent years Ukraine tried to assert its sovereignty, to become more than a satellite state like Belarus, this caused contention in all the above aspects and Russia using its regional uncontested monopoly power to pressure them in line.

 

Russia has been supporting the president Yanukovych since before 2004. While the orange revolution led to deterioration of the relations between Russia and Ukraine. Notably for Ukraine choosing to go with "western development" and opening the prospect of joining NATO and EU, which was seen as dangerous and against Russian interest. But despite Russia applying pressure for years, Kiev has given little in terms of political concessions to Moscow, until Ukraine put its own head in the noose, bogged down by mismanagement and corruption(despite the big proclamations during the orange revolution) unable to fix its economical problems and unwilling to make unpopular reforms Yanukovych was ready to make 180 for a big pile of cash from Russia. But the popular movement against Yanukovych which led to him being deposed put end to Russia hopes.

 

Russian government control all of its major mass media outlets, in what can be characterized as state-run one-sided affair, at least in relation to issues critical of the government. To put thing in perspective, on the world arena Russia is featured at the bottom of freedom of press ranks and at the top of censorship.(most recently using recent internet censorship laws against "pedophiles" to block opposition websites - as suspected). More importantly Ukraine has large ethnic Russian population, many of who used news in Russian

So yes in my opinion, Russia had exploited the crisis in Ukraine for its own gains. F***ing up Ukraine as it consolidated its losses by securing its strategic goals i.e. the real estate grab in Crimea, and possibly seeking to creating a new buffer zone in the East Ukraine. (Crimea is cut off from the main land and need either cooperative Ukraine or Eastern Ukraine in Russia pocket)

Edited May 7, 2014 by Mor

[Mor]

Meanwhile on the oby "team", (with which I more and more tend to associate you) from the start your the arguments pretty much followed along the line of what has been portrayed in Russia media (i.e. from Russia vs the west point of view)

 

 

..uromaiden movement was diminished to the few powerful pictures from the burning square in Kiev in the riot that took place after the violent dispersal, the Euromaiden movement and its goals were substituted with red sector radicals and some prosecution against ethnic Russians. Later the majority vote in Ukrainian house representing all parts of Ukraine (including East Ukraine and votes from president own party) and call for elections and peaceful resolution was played down, instead incitement commenced against "illegitimate" government( reads as: not in line with Russian interest), helped by Russian propaganda style with a complete 100% one sided picture of the situation, aggravated by accusation that has yet to manifest themselves outside of Putin Times, with convenient stories about red sector running in a loop. All of that helps to create the retarded perception that Euromaiden or the riot that took place in Kiev Independence square, is exact the same situation as it is now in East ukraine where there is a complete break of rule of law, with armed men taking control over several major cities, who set up check points, abduct, detain and abuse the rights of citizens, journalist and observers, who has military hardware and blown up helicopters on military bases -- which are played as "innocent civilians" who are being "massacred\murdered" by the military, brought by the Ukrainian "junta" who are "warmongering" and "blood thirsty" even though they have shown utmost restraint e.g. in Crimea they gave orders to go with disarmed weapons to avoid any chance of escalation..

 

Which instead of leading to a solution perpetuated the problem, and now we have thoroughly destabilized country, with armed militias with military hardware in east Ukraine, in control of a whole region, where we already seen armed attacks, torture, assassination and escalating military conflict..

 

Except that dirt slinging at anything dubbed "anti-Russian" (like the nazi stuff etc etc etc). We have dubled in a lot in excuses for Russia actions with claims that "west" planed this crisis; that its the "Western media" that are the one who show completely one side picture of event; the they also do it stuff with mostly superficial comparisons; basically pointing the fingers at anything and anyone away from Russia. We also has a lot of popular tangent topics, where certain members of Oby team can vent about the west, such as whose ideologies\policies\whatever are better, who is the superpower, stronger or win world war; and now we are back to media\Serbs discussion which except reinforcing certain bias concerning the role of media in this conflict, has little todo with it.

 

 

Speaking off media, here are couple of relevant interesting/amusing headlines:

• Pro-Kremlin journalists win medals for 'objective' coverage of Crimea: Vladimir Putin gave 'Order of Service to the Fatherland' medals to 300 journalists known for Kremlin-friendly coverage - It reminds what happned in Chechnya, Pro-Kremlin journalists won medals, while many of those who didn't found rough treatment and even killed.
• Russia's Media Trolls

Edited May 7, 2014 by Mor

[BruceVC]

 

Look at you..catching me out with logic. Well played Sir !!!

 

No you right, ideological view is important to me but proof is obviously more important. So let me rephrase " I generally don't take what neocons say seriously "

But in this articular instance, you dismissed someone's statement not because of lack of factual evidence, but because they are ideologically opposed to you.

 

I wonder, is the reverse of this true? Are you willing to accept something because someone you are ideologically aligned with stated it, even no proof to support it exists?

 

If so, I would recommend reexamining how you form beliefs.

 

 

No you misunderstand me, I shouldn't have just dismissed the article because the journalist is  ideologically opposed to me.

 

And I generally only support ideological comments based on proof and what I know is true. And normally this is not a problem because the evidence is clear and aligned to my ideological view. For example the statement that the referendum in Crimea wasn't free or fair is true not just because the EU and the USA said so ( and I stand almost all the time aligned ideologically with them ) but because of all the other evidence such as the actually limited questions that were asked and that fact that certain segments of the Crimean population boycotted the referendum, like the Tatars

[Drowsy Emperor]

Shrug. I've got no particular fandom for Russian competence or incompetence, though I think Putin has played a weak hand well overall- but the west could only get their guys into power by 'cheating', and being antidemocratic, Putin's man was duly and fairly elected four years ago and pro Russians won the rada elections as well. Can't say the same of Turchenov and Yatsenyuk, who owe their positions entirely to, well, "uprising" and "revolution" per Tyanybok, rather than democratic process. You can't judge competence based on people breaking rules, else the most competent football team in the world would be the one that brought AKs to the game and shot the opposition team and referees during their 2134-0 victory and the most competent politician in the world is King Jong Un, with his 100% approval in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

 

But I'll concede the point, yes, the west is far more competent than Russia at getting their way undemocratically, and Putin/ Russia was naive thinking they'd honour results their own monitoring organ described as fair, rather than plot to overturn them. Their charming naivete and willingness to believe the best in the west despite the repeated betrayals is, most certainly, one of Russia's most endearing attributes.

 

Yanukovich wasn't Putin's man. His rethoric had its pro-russian moments to appease his pro-russian voting base in the east, but up until the very end the actual policy he was leading was totally pro-western, with typical extreme emphasis on the (never to come) EU membership and "quiet and slow" NATO integration. Regardless he wasn't a directly controlled yes man like Yanetsuk or Timoshenko which made him too unpredictable for the west. Putin didn't like him because he knew he couldn't depend on him either.

[obyknven]

 

• Russia's Media Trolls

 

 Nice, anyone who have different point of view in comparision with general line of NWO Party is a troll, liar and agent of KGB. Dude it's serious reason to worry about democracy in YOUR country.

[Hassat Hunter]

Damn, I agree with oby for a change... what the hell is going on that that is happening? 0_o

[Malcador]

Well, could be worse....he could be accusing you of being a shill for EA or Ubisoft.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Damn, I agree with oby for a change... what the hell is going on that that is happening? 0_o

Have you been doing drugs recently?

[BruceVC]

 

Damn, I agree with oby for a change... what the hell is going on that that is happening? 0_o

Have you been doing drugs recently?

 

 

Well he does live in the Netherlands...so the answer is obviously

[obyknven]

Lol, some poor guys from this forum really believe to politicians.

Edited May 7, 2014 by obyknven

[BruceVC]

Guys for the first time in ages it looks like there could be a peaceful solution to the eastern Ukrainian violence

 

 

Putin has said the election should be held and is important, he has asked the pro-Russian Ukrainians not to hold internal referendums and the Russian army is pulling away from the Ukrainian border. I cant predict what this definitely means but its good news as it cools down tensions in the region

[sorophx]

it doesn't cool down anything. on the contrary, presence of Russian troops in the region could've cooled down some hot heads. if you still don't understand that Western Ukraine is mostly nationalistic and in some instances openly antagonistic towards ethnic Russians there's no point in even taking part in this discussion for you. 

 

currently nationalists are actually the people in charge of taking power in the country, apparently both the Deputy Prime Minister and some high-up schmuck in the MOD are members of the social nationalist party (they actually pay homage to Hitler). 

 

regardless of what political goals Russia actually pursues, the threat to Russians living in Ukraine is very real.

 

also, just a sidenote: when I lived in PMR before the war I had a close friend my age. his family eventually moved to Odessa. yesterday I found out he was one of the 40 something people killed there. and his murderers will not be prosecuted any time soon. now, this doesn't make it personal for me, no. but it kind of reminds me of how close to home the event in Ukraine actually are. 

 

I am genuinely worried. and even though I don't like Putin's Russia, I'd take that over what's happening in Ukraine any day

Edited May 7, 2014 by sorophx

[obyknven]

Imperium of Man are coming.

Purity seal detected

[obyknven]

US find proof of Putin's agents presence in East Ukraine.

[213374U]

Is someone missing the fact that this is a story about a guy who got shoved in the back of a van, well the boot of a car, by balaclava clad gunmen and was taken to the police station or whatever and beaten up for being a reporter. 

 

How do you not see the connection. I mean ....

 

Hey, bro.

 

You might want to take a look at this, too. Only in Russia(n-speaking areas) right?

 

Wake up.

[Cultist]

Torturing prisoners is undemocratic and unethical. Of course, that rule does not apply to those, who deny democracy.

http://youtu.be/tTb7efoe89I

 

That guy, by the way, is a candidate for upcoming ukrainian presidential elections and one of the leaders of the riot.

[Hassat Hunter]

Torturing prisoners is undemocratic and unethical. Of course, that rule does not apply to those, who deny democracy.

 

Or Americans...

Edited May 8, 2014 by Hassat Hunter