Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are wrong. The ministers of France, Germany and Russia agreed with Yanukovych to hold early elections. He agreed to a new early election. It was a few days before the coup.
That only happened AFTER his guys massacred protesters. If he would have done this months ahead of time, none of the problems would have happened. You don't shoot people to stop elections in Europe. You think I don't know what happened, or you wish I don't, but its not working. Or you are spreading Russian fake news pretending that you can fool people into ignoring the cause and effect of Ukraine's revolution. Too late btw, in case you didn't notice Ukrainians a REALLY anti Russian now that they realize what is going on.
So what happened to this very Mr. Yanukovich down the road, that he changed his opinion so drastically?
I'll tell you the reason for that -
Pretty much sums up Russian mentality right there. It wasn't his decision to make whether Ukraine would chose to tie its future to Russia. He was elected to represent the will of the people. He can't tell people what they wanted was wrong and not expect political consequences. Or let me rephrase that, he can't in a normal democracy.
That only happened AFTER his guys massacred protesters. If he would have done this months ahead of time, none of the problems would have happened. You don't shoot people to stop elections in Europe. You think I don't know what happened, or you wish I don't, but its not working. Or you are spreading Russian fake news pretending that you can fool people into ignoring the cause and effect of Ukraine's revolution. Too late btw, in case you didn't notice Ukrainians a REALLY anti Russian now that they realize what is going on.
You have the right to think what you want.
But facts are facts. Whole Ukraine elected Yanukovych in 2010 in a full election. Protests were not in the whole of Ukraine. Yanukovych agreed to early elections. The protesters staged a coup.
My question: why did they arrange the coup after the agreement?
My answer: because they did not have a chance to win in a full election.
Pretty much sums up Russian mentality right there. It wasn't his decision to make whether Ukraine would chose to tie its future to Russia. He was elected to represent the will of the people. He can't tell people what they wanted was wrong and not expect political consequences. Or let me rephrase that, he can't in a normal democracy.
Wait a minute, are you telling me that freeze of salaries and pensions is what people *wanted*?
Or were they simply blissfully unaware that it was one of the conditions for the "EU association?" Along with other unsavory plans of raiding into the industries of the East, destroying them for the most part or distributing among the Western corporations?
If Western Ukrainians were dumb enough, watching what was happening in the neighboring Poland and imagining the same scenario in Ukraine, Eastern part of Ukraine was realistic about what was going to happen to their livelihood, to their industries and lands.
Yanukovich was elected to represent the "will of the people" as you've said, and he was first of all representing the interests of the Eastern part of the country, where his electorate base was. Therefore he made the only possible sound decision, based on the economic REALITIES of Ukraine, not some slimy promises of the EU\US, and blissful ignorance of the peasantry of the Western part of the country.
And of course what I am saying "sums up Russian mentality right here."
Not of Putin's bots minding you, but of Russians in sound mind.
Because Russians cut very well through all the BS of American corporate propaganda of "Freedom and Democracy" and see things for what they really are. They've already been "democratized" once by Americans, so as they say "fool me once..."
Wait a minute, are you telling me that freeze of salaries and pensions is what people *wanted*?
Or were they simply blissfully unaware that it was one of the conditions for the "EU association?" Along with other unsavory plans of raiding into the industries of the East, destroying them for the most part or distributing among the Western corporations?
If Western Ukrainians were dumb enough, watching what was happening in the neighboring Poland and imagining the same scenario in Ukraine, Eastern part of Ukraine was realistic about what was going to happen to their livelihood, to their industries and lands.
Yanukovich was elected to represent the "will of the people" as you've said, and he was first of all representing the interests of the Eastern part of the country, where his electorate base was. Therefore he made the only possible sound decision, based on the economic REALITIES of Ukraine, not some slimy promises of the EU\US, and blissful ignorance of the peasantry of the Western part of the country.
And of course what I am saying "sums up Russian mentality right here."
Not of Putin's bots minding you, but of Russians in sound mind.
Because Russians cut very well through all the BS of American corporate propaganda of "Freedom and Democracy" and see things for what they really are. They've already been "democratized" once by Americans, so as they say "fool me once..."
Poland is doing quite well these days. Their biggest problem is their demographic timebomb, but that's something that plagues a lot of EE countries and even fully industrialised ones like Japan and South Korea.
Russia wasn't fooled, they just failed to take advantage of the new economic liberties that came with the fall of socialism in the SU. How else do you explain why so many countries in the Western bloc have the highest standards of living in the world?
Russians lack a fundamental understanding of how freedom and democracy turn into higher standards of living. They are not at all uniquie to this lack of understanding as many countries with authoritarians at the helm keep their their populace ignorant about the relationship between liberal democracy and prosperity. They don't get how accountable governments create a system based on rules of law and how that turns into prosperity . Eastern Ukrainians probably don't get this either as they are kept in their ignorant world with Russian TV as their source. Western Ukrainians were more exposed to Europe and how prosperity washed over it after we brought them this system of government post WW2 (same system we brought to Japan, South Korea and Taiwan). So it does make sense that even now you have views that democracy is somehow bad in the areas where Russia is the source of knowledge.
Poland is doing quite well these days. Their biggest problem is their demographic timebomb, but that's something that plagues a lot of EE countries
I wonder why, keeping in mind how many Poles moved to Western European countries to get the livable salaries)))
Quote:
and even fully industrialised ones like Japan and South Korea.
Check the demographics for Poland ( asnd other E.E countries) during Soviet times and post-Soviet times. "Japan and South Korea" have got nothing to do with it.
Quote:
Russia wasn't fooled, they just failed to take advantage of the new economic liberties that came with the fall of socialism in the SU.
Surrrr.... failed. I already let you get acquainted with the kind of "economic liberties" Russians have got, with the help of American "economic advisers" and IMF, when all their country's treasures have been put in the hands of a few, while the rest were offered to take a hike or die of starvation, if they didn't fit in in the "economic reforms." Sort of like what you increasingly see in the US now, under Trump. How do Americans like it? Not so much I'd guess? It was much, much worse in the "new, democratic Russia."
Quote:
How else do you explain why so many countries in the Western bloc have the highest standards of living in the world?
I can easily explain to you the factors "why so many countries in the Western block have the highest standards of living," but that's not the point. The point is, that these very countries ( and the US in particular) were clearly against the idea of post- Soviet Russia joining the same "club." So they did everything possible to push her "off the cliff" - i.e. the way the OTHER countries of the world go - the countries of the third world. You can do such things you know, when you control world's money through the banking system - you give loans, you provide know-how, you set conditions and the rest. And THAT's how different countries dependent on these money/( loans or investments), end up in different categories - be that China, South Korea, Japan, or Russia.
That is not to say that there were no willing collaborators inside Russia - those on top for the most part, who were paid off by their new American overlords. Obviously, it takes two to tango.
But history will put everything in the right places, as usual.
Russians lack a fundamental understanding of how freedom and democracy turn into higher standards of living. They are not at all uniquie to this lack of understanding as many countries with authoritarians at the helm keep their their populace ignorant about the relationship between liberal democracy and prosperity. They don't get how accountable governments create a system based on rules of law and how that turns into prosperity . Eastern Ukrainians probably don't get this either as they are kept in their ignorant world with Russian TV as their source. Western Ukrainians were more exposed to Europe and how prosperity washed over it after we brought them this system of government post WW2 (same system we brought to Japan, South Korea and Taiwan). So it does make sense that even now you have views that democracy is somehow bad in the areas where Russia is the source of knowledge.
I see, more slogans and propaganda, and no ability to address my points made on realities of Ukraine's economic situation)))
If Ukrainians want to be part of EU, even if they turn out like Romania, Bulgaria, or Greece, why stop them. It's their country and they can do whatever they want with it. If they feel this is the only way to reduce corruption in Ukraine then so be it. Russia can still have friendly relationships with EU countries, from what I can tell Russia and Hungry are still pretty friendly with each other. Plus if it's as bad as you guys make it out to be they can always leave like the UK did, it's a long and costly proses, but possible non the less.
If Ukrainians want to be part of EU, even if they turn out like Romania, Bulgaria, or Greece, why stop them. It's their country and they can do whatever they want with it. If they feel this is the only way to reduce corruption in Ukraine then so be it. Russia can still have friendly relationships with EU countries, from what I can tell Russia and Hungry are still pretty friendly with each other. Plus if it's as bad as you guys make it out to be they can always leave like the UK did, it's a long and costly proses, but possible non the less.
I agree with that.
Except for not ALL Ukrainians unanimously want it, and the interests of the East are not the same as the interests of the West of the country.
So it was only logical to separate this country into two parts, and let the "Westerners" have the taste of "European Union."
But that's NOT what NATO and the US have in mind.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
