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.
Every day Ukraine will become stronger and Russia weaker. Let's go back to our conversation a year or two.
Really? Ukraine has accepted IMF loans, which dictate it how to run segments of their economy; Ukraine's economy is in free-fall with a contraction of 18% this year alone; Ukraine's number one economic area is in ruins because of the war and Kiev does not even have control over it; in this economic area are the resources the second largest economic area in Ukraine needs to function which will impact that economic zone; Ukraine owes billions and billions of dollars that is is unable to pay; and Ukraine has not even begun to sort out the mess it is in.
He decided that he has the right instead of the Ukrainians to decide with whom and when they were friends.
Russia can not allow for you to become member of NATO. Putin will do everything to Ukraine remained outside NATO. And Sevastopol should remain Russian military base. It is a question of survival of Russia.
It is important to understand that the Soviet Union is no more. Moscow must abandon their ambitions to improve their position at the expense of Ukraine.
I will remind you that Ukraine was ready to cooperate with Russia and Europe. Putin did not like it. He decided that he has the right instead of the Ukrainians to decide with whom and when they were friends.
Yes, everyone is aware the USSR does not exist anymore, except for some radical zealots in the US.
Ukraine's problems are because of Ukraine, not because of Moscow. All the corruption and mis-management of Ukraine is due to Ukraine only. As I mentioned, your own Orange Revolution resulted in even worst conditions for Ukraine, even though this was suppose to be some "pro-Ukrainian" regime that was swept into power.
Many Ukrainians are too blind to see the reality on the ground, in which the oligarchs are using the nationalist ideology for their own gains. The common Ukrainian is not going to get anything out of this, just as they did not after the Orange Revolution. People in east Ukraine saw this and wanted no part of Ukraine anymore, especially after the EU deal was going to severely damage their economy in the east (thus undermine their own political power in Ukraine).
By the way, Yanukovich was elected by a fair election, yet ousted not in accordance with the constitution, yet you want to blame Putin for this? Ukrainians did decide who was going to lead during an election, and well, we saw how these fair elections turned out; obviously there are elements of Ukrainian society that does not believe in fair elections.
As I stated numerous times before; if Ukraine would have just taken the constitutional route on removing Yanukovich, none of this would have happened. People tend to react when a leader they voted for in a fair election is illegally removed from office. The Orange revolt was legitimate because Yanukovich was not fairly elected into office, and we saw the results of a relatively accepting society of this revolt. But when any society illegally removes a fairly elected leader, there is going to be a reaction.
"He decided that he has the right instead of the Ukrainians to decide with whom and when they were friends."
No, but Russia will decide on what is a national security issue and what is not, has national security of Russia is Russia's number one priority. This is not unique, the US for example operated for years under the "Monroe Doctrine" which basically forbid any foreign powers, mainly Europe, to occupy North and South America and would view so as an act of aggression, even if a country, for example Mexico, agreed with a foreign power being there. Look at the Cuban Missile Crisis for example; the US blockaded Cuba even though Cuba was an independent country making its own decisions; why? Because the US felt the placement of Soviet missiles on Cuba was a national security issue.
This same scenario is repeated by numerous powers throughout human history. So Russia, acting in its own self interest with Ukraine, is hardly a new concept. Ukraine is and has been free to do what it wants, but what Russia will not allow it to do is become a host to a Russian national security threat; no country in the world would allow a country next to it to host a national security threat if it had the ability. Do you think the US would allow Mexico to host a Chinese military base? Or a Soviet military base back during the Cold War?
The only thing that has happened in Ukraine since its independence is quarreling among each other. Whether it is two revolutions over the last ten years, physical fighting in the Rada, or the current war, all Ukraine has done is quarreled among each other. Ukraine has of yet stood on its own since independence.
This is the first stage of parliamentary any country. These are good signs of the evolution of democracy.
Quote:
Another thing; your posts are a great reflection of the fact that Ukraine, mainly ethnic Ukrainians, have dismissed the fact that there are non-ethnic Ukrainians living in Ukraine, and who have resided there much longer than Ukraine has been a state. This has created the constant friction within the country, making it difficult to progress. In contrast, Russia has numerous ethnic groups and their economy and standard of living is way above Ukraine's.
I note the fact that I personally am a Russian-speaking Ukrainians in the east of Ukraine. But if you have to choose between Russia and Ukraine, I will choose the Ukraine.
By the way, the situation is similar with Georgia. I would not be surprised if Abkhazia and South Ossetia have been separated order to Georgia did not join NATO. According to the charter of NATO, the country can not join NATO, if it is disputed territory. Similarly Crimea - is a disputed territory in Ukraine.
+ Perhaps this is the reason why Putin does not recognize the Donetsk and Lugansk. Disputed territory enough one (Crimea). Donetsk and Lugansk should put pressure on Kiev inside Ukraine.
I think that Poroshenko is a normal politician, not a radical one. He is ready to give more rights to the regions. How it will be named - federation or not - doesn't matter. Spain isn't a federation, but regions there have a lot of rights.
What people in Donbass want, we don't know. Probably, they don't know it themselves. But they didn't ask for a succession (a separation) in 2004. It's kinda strange that they asked in 2014. Probably, they don't.
Yanukovich was fired from his office in a rough way. I don't like such methods. But they elected a new president, who at least knows English language and has a business experience.
Probably, we should have given our neighbours a chance... But we sent there some strange rebels... We can't deny that at least their leaders aren't the locals.
Even if they made a mistake, it's their mistake and their country, and I don't see how the rebels will improve the life in Donbass. The rebels can't build anything, they can only kill or to be killed.
Last edited by Muscovite; 10-18-2014 at 12:36 PM..
UA_Valery
You are mindlessly parroting your ukrainian nationalist propaganda blaming Putin and Russia, so I'd like to ask you directly - have you ever heard Putin's political statements regarding Ukraine? Do you know his policy about Ukraine from his own words? Did you try to understand what Putin really wants and what he really offered to Ukraine? Did you try to make out and analyse this matter independently?
Or you are just thoughtlessly swallowing all of the kievan junta misinformations, fakes and manipulations and are frantically jumping on your cities streets with the crowd of the same thoughtless brainwashed sheeps?
Just give me any Putin's quotation of where he said anything against Ukraine or ukrainian people.
I think that Poroshenko is a normal politician, not a radical one.
A normal politician?
Ukrainian army bombed citizens of the Donbass by his immediate order!
He is a war criminal along with Turchinov, Avakov and Yatsenuk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muscovite
Yanukovich was fired from his office in a rough way. I don't like such methods. But they elected a new president, who at least knows English language and has a business experience.
So, English language makes Poroshenko a good president? Wow! It's really odd criteria to estimate the political relevance of a "independent" country president.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muscovite
Probably, we should have given our neighbours a chance... But we sent there some strange rebels... We can't deny that at least their leaders aren't the locals.
Please don't tell nonsense! Nobody sent "rebels" to Ukraine. Rebels are home guard militia and people's volunteer corps of the East Ukraine who didn't want to recognize kievan junta and who didn't want to obey the neo-nazis criminal actions. And A.Zacharchenko is local! He was born in Donetsk, Ukraine in 1976.
Or, yeah, and the paratroopers? They were Russian.
Well, Putin, such admired by you, knows foreign languages.
He speaks German, Poroshenko speaks English. Good.
Yanukovich was quite illiterate. I don't like how they fired him. But they didn't make a dictator. Now, they elected a new president. If they fired him and no elections afrer that - well, my attitude would have been different. But they done the elections.
There is no Civil War in Russian speaking Kharkiv. Why? Because there are no "mysterious" rebels.
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.
