Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-08-2022, 10:03 PM
 
4,482 posts, read 5,319,656 times
Reputation: 2966

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by EveryLady View Post
How exactly? Not following this closely before the invasion it's difficult to now locate some of the charges made on this forum. When did Putin speak to Zelenskyy? Literally, I can find nothing. Poor googling on my part? There is this, from October 2021:
I did not say Putin and Zelensky spoke before the war, although they did, of course.

I did however state that Zelensky brought this upon himself. He did not follow through with the Minsk agreements, and despite a ceasefire which was called for in 2019, he failed to rein in the troops from his side which continued to murder Donbass civilians.

The issue of Ukraine joining NATO being a no-no for Russia did not start in December 2021/January 2022, when U.S. and Russian envoys were meeting and discussing the issue. Russia has maintained, as far back as the Obama administration, that it opposed Ukraine's entry into NATO and it has never wavered from this position. Zelensky knew all this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EveryLady View Post
Instead Putin appears to have only wanted to talk to the United States and to NATO with responses to Putin demands coming from them. In late January, the US and NATO separately rejected Russian demands NATO retreat from Eastern Europe and legally bar Ukraine from ever entering NATO but proposed compromises. There appear to have been TWO draft treaties, one to the United States and one to NATO. Did a treaty only on the Russian demand that Ukraine not join NATO exist that did not incorporate broader demands involving other former Soviet bloc countries?
I commend you for doing this research - if all people who follow current events did this, it'd be much easier to discuss even if disagreements continued to exist.

Yes, there were drafts as you mentioned. The draft treaty that addresses your bolded question is the "Treaty Between The United States of America and the Russian Federation on security guarantees," and it's available for reading online (Russian government website). And this particular treaty's Article 4 states, "The United States of America shall undertake to prevent further eastward expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and deny accession to the Alliance to the States of the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics." It wasn't just Ukraine. This would include Georgia, for example.

The other draft treaty is one between Russia and NATO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EveryLady View Post
During Normandy Format meetings into February before the invasion, Putin continues to made demands of the West. Again the NATO withdrawal and western guarantees that Ukraine and this time Georgia will not join NATO.
Yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EveryLady View Post
At Russia's request, Zelenskyy in February withdraws a bill from the Ukrainian Parliament that covered transitional policies towards occupied Donetsk-Luhansk and Crimea territories. Macron runs back and forth. Putin refuses to accept his assurance NATO is a defensive not offensive organization. Putin still says he has no intention invading of Ukraine. Article 6 says "All member States of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization commit themselves to refrain from any further enlargement of NATO, including the accession of Ukraine as well as other States."
Did Macron or Merkel provide assurances that Ukraine wouldn't join NATO?

Quote:
Originally Posted by EveryLady View Post
In early February, Putin responds the the West is ignoring him. In mid-February, he continues saying the same to the Russian public along with apparent attempts to stir war fever (the Nazi rhetoric).

No draft treaties to Ukraine that I could find. Still he invades Ukraine? Without ever having been willing to negotiate with it?:

WHAT AM I MISSING? Clearly, Ukraine was nowhere near joining NATO, not that that gave Putin an inherent right to invade it as it does not, say, for Estonia.

If this is how it played out, it appears Oleksiy Arestovych's intelligence assessment was correct: Russia's longterm intention all along was to reabsorb Ukraine, perhaps with a puppet government since it drove military forces towards Kyiv. The demands to the West that it knew would not be meant a pretense?
The west did ignore him - his draft treaties went unaccepted. The U.S. had every right to revise/review the draft but refused. And NATO didn't sign the Russia-NATO draft either.

Putin had, among his reasons for this war, a major concern with the 8-year shelling/sniping of Russians in Donbass. 14k died. He asked Ukraine repeatedly since 2014 for that to stop. That, along with Ukraine failing to provide an ironclad commitment not to join NATO, forced Putin's hands.

Again, Zelensky knew ALL of this. He didn't act strongly enough to move Ukraine towards neutrality; he didn't, before the war, ever signal he would be committed to keep Ukraine out of NATO.

 
Old 04-08-2022, 10:16 PM
 
4,482 posts, read 5,319,656 times
Reputation: 2966
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
Ukrainians hit it, to prevent the evacuation of civilians. ( DNR warned people to evacuate.)

So Donbass has been hit by the Ukronazi again.

Kramatorsk is in Donbass.

Ukronazi hate Donbass.
The missile used was a Tochka-U missile, and the Tochka-U is a 30-year-old type from the Soviet era which Russia no longer even uses. The tail section of the missile shows it's a Tochka-U.

Ukraine, however, still has the Tochka-U missile.
 
Old 04-08-2022, 10:17 PM
 
8,489 posts, read 3,308,245 times
Reputation: 6914
There are a couple of things I'll say, where it is not too repetitive:

Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
Officially - no.
But unofficially
- NATO was already training and supplying Ukrainian army and building its bases on Ukrainian territory. And that's what Lavrov pointed at on numerous occasions.
Seems to me the unofficial vs official part is pretty important. Lavrov knows that. There is a REASON why NATO troops are not going into Ukraine. Why make me take the time to point that out?

I find Arestovych interesting but the man is not God, and then this is three years later. Commenters (to him today) then other analysts thought formal NATO accession to Ukraine increasingly unlikely that Putin was effectively blocking it by having a hissy fit. NATO is a defensive not an offensive union. Ukraine now damaged goods. The West would "sleep" with Ukraine but not "marry" her.

Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
Arestovich remained Zelensky's advisor and his government spokesperson.
This is another reason preventing serious discussion. Either you forgot I said he rejoined the government. Or you did not forget, and so wish to "correct" me that you do not care. If it is the former, I cannot keep repeating. Would you like a cite? I have one, of course.

Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
"Taiga union" is the "Custom Union" ( trading block) that I early referred to.
Why should I believe you. Is that phrase there? If so, please quote it not give me a long treatise on another term. The word taiga, of course, refers to the form of trees that cover Siberia. Trying to fully understand Arestovich - for this is only a conversation not an organized treatise - I'd already googled it. For all I know it might be Ukrainian slang. Arestovych is talking informally in a conversation, not at times being terribly specific.

The rest:

"So let me go over it slowly one more time." Erasure you are highly highly ideological and I simply do not accept you as the authority on all matters Ukrainian. Keep patronizing and there will be no response period. As for your analysis:

The Ukrainian move to the west economically was not viable over the long-term. Putin knew this. So, concerned, he then decides to invade the country destroying its infrastructure. Really?

But then this odd phrase: He: "let the WEST to deal with Russia militarily and financially." What in the world? Don't bother trying to explain it.

As to this constant refrain, the "Nationalist" government wanted it. Turns out Yanukovych also saw benefits to stronger economic ties with Western Europe. Until Putin pulled him up short, of course, sparking Maidan. Was Yanukovych also a "Nationalist."?

This is a waste of time, yours and mine.
 
Old 04-08-2022, 10:21 PM
 
20,627 posts, read 19,289,703 times
Reputation: 8229
Quote:
Originally Posted by brrabbit View Post
If you think about it - Ukraine started from Zaporizhska Sich (Zaporozhye), that is a paramilitary settlements on the border of the Ukrainian Prairie on the river Dnepr. The citizens of the settlement were mostly peasants would would dare to escape servitude from the land lords, cross the Prairie and had to constantly fight Turks and Poles and Russians. Where would they get much love towards Russia from?


Similar border settlements existed on the river Don, and Don Cossack did not consider themselves Russian either. So, one does not need to go too far. The history of Medieval Ukraine is history of changing alliances between Poles, Turks and Russians. That ended in 1650x (give or take) with Ukrainian Chief asking Moscow to protect Ukraine from Poles. Russian Tsar did not want to risk a full scale war with Poles (nor with Turks), but accepted it after several requests... Still, Western and Central Ukraine was never really too loyal to Russia (modern Eastern Ukraine was Russia until 1920is or so).

As far as Holodomor goes, I believe it's a combination of natural, economical, managerial and political disasters. Yet, it wasn't necessarily Stalin's and it was not necessarily targeted at Ukraine (and definitely not towards Ukrainian Nation).

I am pretty sure Stalin wanted to destroy Ukrainian independence. All that nativization stuff just does not make an empire and unfortunately socialists just don't seem to understand that all they really do is consolidate power and make despotism easy. Russian nationalism was already crushed in Russia and all nice and Soviet. so it was Ukraine's turn. He made sure the Kulacs did not make it to the factories because that is a great place to spread ideologies as they well knew because they just did it. Revolutionaries always close the window they just crawled through. So off to Siberia for some and starve them into compliance.


Quote:

Nationalistic attitudes in Ukraine were never going away. In 30ies and 40ies and 50ies - it would be Bandera and OUN. In 60ies and going forward - Khrushev and Brezhnev allowed Ukrainian authorities big deal of independence and allowed to retain most (if not all) taxes in Ukraine (Russian Federation was paying majority of the budget, with only Belarus and Azerbajan also contributing to it, Georgia, Ukraine and Baltic Republics were the biggest net recipients). So, local attitude was not unfriendly, but with a certain level of "we're smarter than you, and "we're handier than you". When USSR collapsed, Ukrainian local elites wanted independence, fully expecting to achieve economic success, after all - their economy was equal that of Germany. Fast forward 30 years...
Well if the Soviets had not cleansed the Poles from Lviv then I am not so sure how well that Ukrainian nationalism would have evolved. Ironically Ukrainian nationalism in the West is a product of Soviets to say nothing of the Austrians before it.

And yes of course Ukraine went no where since the 90s because the West looted both Ukraine and Russia with neoliberlaism . Lend money to corrupt politicians. Wait for the default , and then structurally adjusted with privatization and then sell water and gas to the locals and ship the hot money profits overseas.


https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015...d-ukraine.html
Yves here. Ukraine is going into an IMF program in even worse condition that Greece with its various loans from the Troika in 2010, and we can see how well borrowing more when you were already overindebted worked out for Greece. In addition, this interview with Michael Hudson makes clear that the loan to Ukraine is wildly out of line with IMF rules, making it painfully obvious that this “rescue” is all about propping up the government so it can continue to wage war rather than economic development.
And as i have mentioned elsewhere the IMF was even more blatant this time in a disregard for the national interest. Normally the money is squandered on white elephant that go bust like a port and then someone like say Argentina loses all their best vineyards to global corporations. But this time Ukraine got to spend the money on weapons, all out of line with IMF policy.

Quote:
I believe Putin had a very good reason to start the invasion. He could easily go to a comfortable retirement in a year. His personal finances would allow him to do anything he wanted. Now, he risked it all for good, and his personal life, as well as that of his children... Oh, yeah, there was a very serious reason. It could be one that he stated in his public speeches, or one we'll never hear. But it existed, and it was so important, that he had to risk it all.
Well if i were in the Kremlin and I read Pnac

https://web.archive.org/web/20101223...yi.org/node/15
Since Vladimir Putin became President in 2000, Russia has been on a downward spiral away from the democratic and economic reforms made in the 1990’s after the collapse of communism. Human rights activists, opposition political party leaders, lawyers and journalists are targets of brutal, even deadly attacks. Freedoms of speech and the media are increasingly limited by the state and the Kremlin has asserted growing authority over the economy, especially the energy sector.
You just got to love the appeal to humanity , ya know no gay parades en stuff and then here it comes, the energy sector. Human rights, liberty , speech and that energy sector. Shouldn't that be in the Bill of rights, energy sector? peace ,love and energy sectors

See its supposed to be private and all the profits go to banks and investors, just like the natives need to ship us bananas and shut up . Meanwhile in the US Alaska pays out oil money to the citizens.

I don't know about right or wrong but I know he knows about the scum in the US and the globalist that use them as puppets . I almost feel bad for them. They could have had trillions of easy money with a drunk Russian in office and think of all those poor Russian hoes they would have made for Epstein Island? Fresh organs form the dudes too...Now the Israelis have to use people form Kosovo. for their kidneys...


was that too cynical? Sometime i get carried away even if its all true.
 
Old 04-08-2022, 10:34 PM
 
26,733 posts, read 22,400,147 times
Reputation: 10022
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwynedd1 View Post
And as i have mentioned elsewhere the IMF was even more blatant this time in a disregard for the national interest. Normally the money is squandered on white elephant that go bust like a port and then someone like say Argentina loses all their best vineyards to global corporations. But this time Ukraine got to spend the money on weapons, all out of line with IMF policy.

Well if i were in the Kremlin and I read Pnac

https://web.archive.org/web/20101223...yi.org/node/15
Since Vladimir Putin became President in 2000, Russia has been on a downward spiral away from the democratic and economic reforms made in the 1990’s after the collapse of communism. Human rights activists, opposition political party leaders, lawyers and journalists are targets of brutal, even deadly attacks. Freedoms of speech and the media are increasingly limited by the state and the Kremlin has asserted growing authority over the economy, especially the energy sector.
You just got to love the appeal to humanity , ya know no gay parades en stuff and then here it comes, the energy sector. Human rights, liberty , speech and that energy sector. Shouldn't that be in the Bill of rights, energy sector? peace ,love and energy sectors

See its supposed to be private and all the profits go to banks and investors, just like the natives need to ship us bananas and shut up . Meanwhile in the US Alaska pays out oil money to the citizens.




That's pretty much how Russians perceived it all after the 90ies, and from that point on the deep distrust of the West settled in ( talking about the general public here.)

As in "fool me once."
 
Old 04-08-2022, 10:46 PM
 
8,489 posts, read 3,308,245 times
Reputation: 6914
Quote:
Originally Posted by brrabbit View Post
If you think about it - Ukraine started from Zaporizhska Sich (Zaporozhye), that is a paramilitary settlements on the border of the Ukrainian Prairie on the river Dnepr. The citizens of the settlement were mostly peasants would would dare to escape servitude from the land lords, cross the Prairie and had to constantly fight Turks and Poles and Russians. Where would they get much love towards Russia from?


Similar border settlements existed on the river Don, and Don Cossack did not consider themselves Russian either. So, one does not need to go too far. The history of Medieval Ukraine is history of changing alliances between Poles, Turks and Russians. That ended in 1650x (give or take) with Ukrainian Chief asking Moscow to protect Ukraine from Poles. Russian Tsar did not want to risk a full scale war with Poles (nor with Turks), but accepted it after several requests... Still, Western and Central Ukraine was never really too loyal to Russia (modern Eastern Ukraine was Russia until 1920is or so).

As far as Holodomor goes, I believe it's a combination of natural, economical, managerial and political disasters. Yet, it wasn't necessarily Stalin's and it was not necessarily targeted at Ukraine (and definitely not towards Ukrainian Nation).

Nationalistic attitudes in Ukraine were never going away. In 30ies and 40ies and 50ies - it would be Bandera and OUN. In 60ies and going forward - Khrushev and Brezhnev allowed Ukrainian authorities big deal of independence and allowed to retain most (if not all) taxes in Ukraine (Russian Federation was paying majority of the budget, with only Belarus and Azerbajan also contributing to it, Georgia, Ukraine and Baltic Republics were the biggest net recipients). So, local attitude was not unfriendly, but with a certain level of "we're smarter than you, and "we're handier than you". When USSR collapsed, Ukrainian local elites wanted independence, fully expecting to achieve economic success, after all - their economy was equal that of Germany. Fast forward 30 years...

I believe Putin had a very good reason to start the invasion. He could easily go to a comfortable retirement in a year. His personal finances would allow him to do anything he wanted. Now, he risked it all for good, and his personal life, as well as that of his children... Oh, yeah, there was a very serious reason. It could be one that he stated in his public speeches, or one we'll never hear. But it existed, and it was so important, that he had to risk it all.
Thank you for the summary. I read it carefully, only not certain of this: "(modern Eastern Ukraine was Russia until 1920is or so)." Poland, of course, was then further to the east until after ww2. Ukrainian peasants in the rural areas of Eastern Ukraine, more Russians and "citified" Ukrainians in the city. Our understand appears the same?

None of us, of course, can do more than speculate about Putin's decision. I do see him as a Russian "patriot" placing love of country and its heritage above personal advantage. That unfortunately clashes with this Ukrainian desire for independence paired with historical resentment towards Russia. As an American (no recent immigrant heritage) this focus on national identity to where it results in such wars is not one easily processed. At the same time, I appreciate it has deep personal and emotional significance both to individuals and to peoples.

I hesitate to say this, but what the h*ell. Back to the why: never underestimate the need of an aging man to leave a legacy. Historically that is the root of many misadventures. Or the need for self-importance, and here I'm not thinking of Putin but of meddling U.S. bureaucrats that do over involve themselves in the affairs of other nations. We Americans instead wander about the world creating those misadventures.
 
Old 04-08-2022, 10:55 PM
 
26,733 posts, read 22,400,147 times
Reputation: 10022
Quote:
Originally Posted by EveryLady View Post
Thank you for the summary. I read it carefully, only not certain of this: "(modern Eastern Ukraine was Russia until 1920is or so)." Poland, of course, was then further to the east until after ww2. Ukrainian peasants in the rural areas of Eastern Ukraine, more Russians and "citified" Ukrainians in the city. Our understand appears the same?

None of us, of course, can do more than speculate about Putin's decision. I do see him as a Russian "patriot" placing love of country and its heritage above personal advantage. That unfortunately clashes with this Ukrainian desire for independence paired with historical resentment towards Russia. As an American (no recent immigrant heritage) this focus on national identity to where it results in such wars is not one easily processed. At the same time, I appreciate it has deep personal and emotional significance both to individuals and to peoples.

I hesitate to say this, but what the h*ell. Back to the why: never underestimate the need of an aging man to leave a legacy. Historically that is the root of many misadventures. Or the need for self-importance, and here I'm not thinking of Putin but of meddling U.S. bureaucrats that do over involve themselves in the affairs of other nations. We Americans instead wander about the world creating those misadventures.

Mhmm...
Let's just say that I wouldn't be in a hurry to characterize him this way.

There are certain things in his past that make me think of him quite the opposite.
 
Old 04-08-2022, 11:20 PM
 
8,489 posts, read 3,308,245 times
Reputation: 6914
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
Mhmm...
Let's just say that I wouldn't be in a hurry to characterize him this way.

There are certain things in his past that make me think of him quite the opposite.
We are all flawed, for sure. That was the positive side, a lack of discord after having just fought with you some. Still, intrigued by Putin's love Russian imperial heritage. The Putin "human rights record" is far from stellar. A dictator. Not a fan of someone who invades another country, for sure. Who so misuses power.

I know you see him as the betrayer, perhaps accepting that the invasion was not for the benefit of ethnic Russians, not really. Why can't you see that that power, search for Russian legacy (whatever is in the mind) turned both the Donbass and "opposing" Ukraine into turmoil, creating hatreds from what previously were resentments.

Others were so in the wrong, the corruptions, of course. Sick bullies playing policemen. Greedy corporations circling, of course again. Those American pompous bureaucrats. But let it play out, as these things do in profound imperfection. Outside of this war.

Instead, this horror. The battle of people looking at bodies trying to figure out - God, that's terrible. We fool ourselves thinking there is a civilization, a stability that it is only "the other" where such things occur.
 
Old 04-08-2022, 11:33 PM
 
Location: Western PA
10,476 posts, read 4,302,955 times
Reputation: 6508
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
"Such" what?

I don't understand half of your writings, because of all these "debs" and god knows what else you like to throw in there from time to time, to show apparently that you are "in the know" or possess some "special" kind of knowledge.

well I do these silly things like read, and watch, from reputable sources, not homemade youtube videos with bollywood actor rejects made deep inside russia.


You have your sources, I have mine. difference being, mine are all believable and if you would take 5 minutes from your daily 'wheres Nazi?' foaming and oh I dunno, LISTEN to what the various security councils are talking about (you know, UN, nato, etc) - and they do broadcast it - if there is one thing they like it is an audience...you would know, with no ambiguity what they are discussing in terms of "what did russia do today"


You may get some sort of satisfaction spewing this soviet propaganda on a website no one reads (I mean cmon, reddit has 100x the audience at any minute) and certainly no one in CHARGE (or at least has a colelction of Javs and stingers) reads, but the people who matter, the ones who are fed-exing the anti tank weapons and drooling over the prospect of hanging the soviets high - are not even aware you exist.



you and I are alike as in we are both paid by our respective governments but that is where it stops. technically, Im supposed to ignore you. But I certainly like messing with you. no reason this cannot be fun. when and if 'they' - whomever 'they' are - come for the war criminals its pretty clear what list they will be using. And here you sit doing everything in your power to get yourself on that list


as I said previously: I stopped posting about the 'war' (yanno, bombs, bullets etc) because no one else is and no one is reading it. In fact, I think over the last day or so your latest justification for why these mass civilian killings are ok was that someone in 1564 got butt hurt over a new horse or something or rather?


silly indeed.
 
Old 04-08-2022, 11:36 PM
 
Location: Western PA
10,476 posts, read 4,302,955 times
Reputation: 6508
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
Education.

Educated people usually like to avoid usage of certain cliches.

lol, no they dont, educated people make of game of using UNRELATED cliches to make a point. and they zoom right over your head like a 747 heading to brazil. THATS where the fun is.
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.


Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:05 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top