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.
I don't support the Ukrainian government, Tymoshenko, hooligans, Banderists, Svoboda, Right Sector or anything like that. I don't want war, I don't want that the Russian minority on the Crimea is suppressed or harassed, I don't want Ukraine to split up.
I only support the brave volunteer activists on Maidan who want a democratic, lawful and independent Ukraine. Saying that, I don't support those activists who want to kill.
This video clearly shows the Ukrainians ( whoever they are- Russians or Ukrainians) attending the meeting of protest with their mayor, when the radicals start taunting them from the administration building, throwing rocks and sticks out of the windows. ( Apparently they hate seeing pro-Russian signs that people of Kharkov so clearly display - "Russia - help," "Russians are our brothers" and "For Holly Orthodox Russia" ) The meeting organizers are asking the crowd to not to be provoked by the actions of the radicals, but the crowd was determined to get them out of the building.
Its' all here, all in Russian.
But of course this part of the story is disregarded by you; all YOU want to see is "humiliation of pro-Ukrainian activists."
And that's how the truth is twisted.
Well in fact I saw that second video. But as I don't understand the language, it's always a bit difficult to tell. I know many people don't support the Maidan, but in Kharkiv there was also a huge pro-maidan protest which attracted 30,000 people, the KharkivMaidan, and it was actually peaceful in the beginning. But why would Kharkiv residents use Russian buses in their own city?
Who had the building first is debatable. RSA buildings have been stormed or attempted to storm in every province.
I don't WANT to see that. I don't want to see any violence in Ukraine, but peaceful democratic elections. Tensions are very tight, and both sides have made mistakes and can appear violent. I don't have any agenda to show the Russians as bad, but they aren't really the peace-loving freedom fighters liberating from fascists either.
In any case, a couple of my friends were quite shocked (men) when they saw that. We're not really used seeing those kinds of things. And that video had maybe 2000 views this morning, now it has 179,000, so I'm not the only one who saw it.
Anyway, I'm not part of the Western media, so I don't have the obligation to fact-check everything when I post a video.
edit: In fact today the National TV and at least two big newspapers reported that "The Russians are seen as liberators on the Crimea - many Ukrainian soldiers have defected", and "The Russian deadline ultimatum possibly only propaganda" so at least here we don't have a hateful anti-Russian propaganda going on.
Russian ambassador to the UN Vitaly Churkin said Moscow is permitted to
deploy up to 25,000 soldiers in Crimea according to a bilateral treaty.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
is that the justification, why Putin said they won't violate international law ?
The problem is that there are tons of violations of the international law by the US and the EU.
They both break that international law all the time. USA is illegally killing people around the world (for example). The EU is forcibly landing the airplane of the President of Venezuela to ransack his airplane. But everyone is ok with it. Why is that? Why is all so called free world silent? Prabably it is because of either double standards and rotten hypocrisy or this free world is NOT that free to say anything.
Maybe that's the reason why Putin acts like he believes that he have right to do, since USA and the EU are breaking international law themselves?
But speaking of this particular case, I believe that Putin acts correctly here. Why?
Well, Russia still recognizes Yanukovich as a legit and lawful president of Ukraine. And Yanukovich officially asked help from Putin. Yes, we all understand that Yanukovich is a very bad guy and he deserves jail. But for a while, he is still the president. That's it.
As I mentioned in another thread; a lot of events have led up to this. As known, leaked diplomatic wires clearly showed the US position, the money going to the opposition (US intervening, of course it is), McCain's visit, etc.
Example is Libya, in Gates' book Duty, he states Russia felt betrayed by the US because the US promised that is Russia abstained from the vote, there will be a very limited no-fly-zone. Of course the US broke this problem, and expanded the no-fly-zone strikes up to the point of striking Gaddafi's convoy and numerous other targets. Russia's concern was Gaddafi would fall and an Islamic gov would take over, obviously the US did not share this concern about the expansion of radical Islam.
Another example is the US involvement in Latin American politics, and Operation Ajax. Now is a great time to review this operation, and compare and contrast to the current situation. The fallacy is there is no way to prove the issues, but the fact is the proof often comes many years later.
So, with this; does Russia feel like a cornered animal? Has the last 20 years of neglecting Russia and its concerns finally blowback? Did Putin take this time to draw the firm line in the sand for actual national security reasons? Has Russia actually violated any agreements, at least violate to the severity in which everyone makes it out to believe?
There are been great points regarding the legitimacy of Yanukovich and the new gov; the issue is, these points go both directions. Perhaps the international community should address this because they are actually ignoring it, at least in public, this is yet another lack of acknowledging the concerns of Russia.
Again and again and again with trying to change the subject off Ukraine with the anti-Americanism propaganda.
Yes, yes, yes, we know you think the United States is the source of all evil in this world, we get it, but its not the Americans who are invading Ukraine this time. Its RUSSIA - how about talking about Russia?
If the United States invades Ukraine and plans to annex a province or two, feel free to talk about Latin America or Gaddafi or any kind of anti-western blah blah blah. But until then can we stick o the subject of Ukraine and Russia please?
Again and again and again with trying to change the subject off Ukraine with the anti-Americanism propaganda.
Yes, yes, yes, we know you think the United States is the source of all evil in this world, we get it, but its not the Americans who are invading Ukraine this time. Its RUSSIA - how about talking about Russia?
If the United States invades Ukraine and plans to annex a province or two, feel free to talk about Latin America or Gaddafi or any kind of anti-western blah blah blah. But until then can we stick o the subject of Ukraine and Russia please?
Agreed! I pointed it out to him myself a couple of times, but he just doesn't get it. He just can't get enough of it. He still believes, the US bashing in every single post is VERY relevant to this thread. Whose army in the Ukraine at the moment, for God's sake?
At least 99% of his posts on this forum (called The Future of The Ukraine) are about the evil powers of the United States, as if THE US IS THE FOCUS OF THIS THREAD.
Why can't he start another thread if he needs to let off his steam is beyond me.
I think, the guy either lost control or doesn't know what else to say and still wants to post. Basically, all his posts are the same post recycled all over again.
Last edited by movingwiththewind; 03-03-2014 at 07:47 PM..
Interesting. Just a point. From post-war on Russia, Europe and the United States were locked in typically ideological issues in their quest for 'influence'. Each played and still plays in the other's respective 'gardens' so to speak to influence the political sphere. We can dispense with the naivete in what goes on this game. Fast forward to after the Soviet break up and even that did not negate the concept of continuing acitivity in pressing 'influence'. From the looks of it, it seems and, this is just an observation, but sometimes you win and sometimes you lose.
Putin I think hates to lose (he'd be great in owning, like the rich Arabs, a football team!). And when he loses he's a sore loser. So he will use ethnic nationalism as a basis of foreign policy as one insightful columnist here noted. It is the pretext for bandying about in the internal affairs of another independent country. With that logic then it follows that in some stupor he just might make the calculation to invade Brighton Beach (a nice place!) in Brooklyn NY USA because some are not 'pro-Russian' for the cause of the Motherland. The US will have to station sensors in Gravesend Bay (see Googlemaps)to watch out for Russian submarines.
Agreed! I pointed it out to him myself a couple of times, but he just doesn't get it. He just can't get enough of it. He still believes, the US bashing in every single post is VERY relevant to this thread. Whose army in the Ukraine at the moment, for God's sake?
At least 99% of his posts on this forum (called The Future of The Ukraine) are about the evil powers of the United States, as if THE US IS THE FOCUS OF THIS THREAD.
Why can't he start another thread if he needs to let off his steam is beyond me.
I think, the guy either lost control or doesn't know what else to say and still wants to post. Basically, all his posts are the same post recycled all over again.
Just letting off a little steam.
I understand people have their own world view on things but sometimes you need to step back and try to look at it from a neutral perspective. The United States and the European Union do have some responsibility in this. But the primary actors in this are the Ukrainians and the Russians, both of which are neither totally right or totally wrong.
Interesting. Just a point. From post-war on Russia, Europe and the United States were locked in typically ideological issues in their quest for 'influence'. Each played and still plays in the other's respective 'gardens' so to speak to influence the political sphere. We can dispense with the naivete in what goes on this game. Fast forward to after the Soviet break up and even that did not negate the concept of continuing acitivity in pressing 'influence'. From the looks of it, it seems and, this is just an observation, but sometimes you win and sometimes you lose.
Putin I think hates to lose (he'd be great in owning, like the rich Arabs, a football team!). And when he loses he's a sore loser. So he will use ethnic nationalism as a basis of foreign policy as one insightful columnist here noted. It is the pretext for bandying about in the internal affairs of another independent country. With that logic then it follows that in some stupor he just might make the calculation to invade Brighton Beach (a nice place!) in Brooklyn NY USA because some are not 'pro-Russian' for the cause of the Motherland. The US will have to station sensors in Gravesend Bay (see Googlemaps)to watch out for Russian submarines.
I actually like Putin from a foreign policy sense point of view, I think he is good for Russia. Russia needs a strong leader right now.
But I think he is taking a big risk right now in the Ukraine. I don't really blame Putin for trying to get Crimea, from the Russian POV it makes a lot of sense. The danger is that if the situation gets out of control somehow, Russians risks damaging her relations with the whole of Europe and the United States for a generation or more.
And there is a chance, a small chance that things can get out of control and it could lead to War. Just look at one World War 1. When the Archduke Ferdinand was assassinated, who knew that in less then 2 months a world war would start that would lead to millions of deaths, thrones toppled and empires crumpled?
Agreed! I pointed it out to him myself a couple of times, but he just doesn't get it. He just can't get enough of it. He still believes, the US bashing in every single post is VERY relevant to this thread. Whose army in the Ukraine at the moment, for God's sake?
At least 99% of his posts on this forum (called The Future of The Ukraine) are about the evil powers of the United States, as if THE US IS THE FOCUS OF THIS THREAD.
Why can't he start another thread if he needs to let off his steam is beyond me.
I think, the guy either lost control or doesn't know what else to say and still wants to post. Basically, all his posts are the same post recycled all over again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LINative
Again and again and again with trying to change the subject off Ukraine with the anti-Americanism propaganda.
Yes, yes, yes, we know you think the United States is the source of all evil in this world, we get it, but its not the Americans who are invading Ukraine this time. Its RUSSIA - how about talking about Russia?
If the United States invades Ukraine and plans to annex a province or two, feel free to talk about Latin America or Gaddafi or any kind of anti-western blah blah blah. But until then can we stick o the subject of Ukraine and Russia please?
As I stated, I am talking about the REACTION to the situation. You cannot talk about the situation without including the reaction from the world powers, and the background that may have influenced this turn of events; each event is not some bubble in its own making, global events are linked together through history.
I do not get where you think I ever stated I "think the United States is the source of all evil in this world". please quote me where I have ever stated this, considering I live in the US, established a great career here, and served 12 years in the military that included three combat tours. Not that some of the most anti-gov idiots have not been in the military and live here, but sorry, the US has involved itself plenty into this situation, so is open to critique, especially from a tax payer and voter. If the US would have just stayed neutral, then there would be no reason to include them.
Both of you also are bringing up reactions, but conveniently avoiding addressing my points, just continue to babble your fallacy arguments. With your logic, if we discussed why the US invaded Afghanistan, we would have to leave out the 9/11 attacks, the Soviet-Afghan War, and the first Gulf War; it would look like the US got bored and invaded some innocent country.
Ok, lets talk about just Ukraine and Russia, leave all others out.
Russia, right or wrong, states Yanukovich is still the president, and has requested assistance. Russia has sent thousands of troops, rather efficiently, into Crimea under the pretext (again, right or wrong), that they are securing their military assets and Russian population against a radical illegal gov. Russia also has another 150k troops with support along the Ukrainian border due to an earlier exercise that was planned months ago.
Russia also states they are well within the Kharkov Agreement of the deployment of troops in Crimea.
Ukraine's military is in poor condition, after inheriting about 1/3 of the Soviet military, economic conditions let this fall to the wayside. As of now, there is most likely no unity in the gov, only unified right now by the Russian threat. As of now, Russia has not made a move on Kiev, and seems not to be going to given the troop numbers. There are numerous, conflicting reports regarding who is supporting who and where, how many, and defections.
The next move? Who knows, still trying to figure out the current move by Russia. Perhaps it is due to info we do not have. As a coincidence, before the Georgian skirmish, Russia just completed exercises near there as well. It has came out Russia did know in advance regarding the deployment of heavy artillery towards Ossetia. I guess not too much of a secret since it is difficult to conceal such troop movements. It has also came out the US, EU, and Russia were talking before and during the crisis, with Russia letting know its objective.
UN deployment maybe, but the UN has never been effective, Rwanda proved this. Letting Crimea go? Maybe Ukraine does not want them to hold a referendum.
Speaking to relatives in Ukraine yesterday (ethnic Ukrainians, but raised elsewhere in the USSR, moved to Ukraine in the 90's), mis-info is everywhere; according to them, Russia has attacked and sunken a few ships, plus killed a few Ukrainian troops, and shot down some planes. They are mobilizing, but only people who have previously been in the Ukrainian military, and they have not seen any sings themselves of mass mobilization. They say check points are everywhere, started during the protests to keep people out of Kiev (they live in central Ukraine). They have really just stayed home.
Gsgsgs - I did not think China would support Russia that much either. Too much at stake with relations with the European Union and the Americans. Plus the Chinese probably wants a independent Ukraine. Its a country of 40 million plus people that China could trade with. Plus since Ukraine lies on the opposite of Russia, Ukraine could make a useful ally to China if relations between China and Russia ever decline.
Moving - I been wondering how the different groups play out myself. Do some of the most conservative Ukrainians support traditional "Mother Russia"? Do some of the more liberal Russians want the freedom of the West or simply like the EU economy better? I bet there is some crossover between the groups.
Why you bringing China into this?
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.
