|
|
On March 03 2014 06:30 Feartheguru wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 06:29 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:28 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:25 m4ini wrote:On March 03 2014 06:23 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:10 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:08 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:04 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 05:59 zeo wrote:On March 03 2014 05:56 Twoflowers wrote:
[quote]
Too bad that the Ukraine government didn't organize a joint military excercise at the eastern border during the crisis. That would have been helpful The junta in Kiev don't have any real control over the armed forces of Ukraine. That is why there was absolutely no attempt to organize any kind of defense of Crimea, or indeed any kind of military activity outside of their barracks. if evil fascist genociders of Kiev who wish to exterminate all glorious and free Russian victims of evil fascism have no control of the Ukrainian army then why are Ukrainian army barracks being surrender by Russian troops and Ukrainian soldiers forced to surrender their arms? If the Kiev government doesn't have control over the Ukrainian army, Russian troops cannot surround Ukrainian barracks? Mind = poof Invasion of Crimea is justified based on 'threat' to Russians. Since the Ukrainian army -- according to zeo -- is not responding to the evil genocide promoting fascists then the Russian troops threatening the Ukrainian barracks are not doing so to protect the one pure Russian race. So only the Ukrainian army can hurt people? Random hooligans can't? Trying to logic with a little kid spouting random shit is really hard. So you need to invade countries now to deal with random hooligans, that's what you're saying? I might not agree to what Sub40 is saying, but you're not an ounce better. Wtf? I'm saying his logic that "Kiev government must have control of the Ukrainian army, otherwise why would Russian forces surround Ukrainian bases" makes no sense. No, my logic is "why would Russian forces surrounded Ukrainian bases except as an act of war" No, it's not buddy, the quote chain I responded no dealt ONLY with whether the current government is in control of the army.
Picking out a sentence out of a paragraph doesnt make it a conversation.
Zeo and Putin believe that the one true Russian race is threatened with eminent extermination and have to be protected by the Russian army. Zeo and Putin also believe that the Ukrainian Army is not listening to the orders of the fascist genocide junta exterminationists who overthrew the peaceful and democratic government in Kiev. If they arent listening to the evil genocide loving exterminationist in kiev now then they will probably not listen to the evil junta of death when they inevitably begin their extermination of Russians campaign. If they arent going to listen to orders to exterminate the one true Russian race then why are they being surrounded and forced to surrender their arms to a foreign army? Whats the word for that other than invasion?
|
On March 03 2014 06:31 Twoflowers wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 06:23 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:10 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:08 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:04 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 05:59 zeo wrote:On March 03 2014 05:56 Twoflowers wrote:On March 03 2014 05:49 Tobblish wrote:On March 03 2014 05:36 r.Evo wrote:On March 03 2014 05:18 Tobblish wrote:
And people say that Russia is not capable anymore to commit stupid acts like these because of NATO and UN.
Are there any reports on how many troops Russia have inside of the Crimean territory?
I honestly can't see any other outcome other than Crimea going into Russian hands. (or at least a major part of it)
No force will be used by either side, it have potential to change the world. (Israel would be screwed instantly) Once more: 1) NATO has nothing to do with this. Period. Ukraine is not a member state. Unless Russia shows aggression towards the territory of a member state it's literally none of their business. 2) The UN is as useless as usual. Just like the US veto'd most anti-US resolutions in the past Russia will veto any resolution against them. All the security council is good for is declaring some form of "We don't really like this and the Russians veto'd us!" NATO actually has a very important role in all of this, Ukraine do have treaties with NATO and have even asked them directly for help in this conflict. It is also one of NATO's top interest to see that Russia doesn't get a grip on Europe. So to simply say that NATO have nothing at all to do in this conflict is absurd. Too bad that the Ukraine government didn't organize a joint military excercise at the eastern border during the crisis. That would have been helpful The junta in Kiev don't have any real control over the armed forces of Ukraine. That is why there was absolutely no attempt to organize any kind of defense of Crimea, or indeed any kind of military activity outside of their barracks. if evil fascist genociders of Kiev who wish to exterminate all glorious and free Russian victims of evil fascism have no control of the Ukrainian army then why are Ukrainian army barracks being surrender by Russian troops and Ukrainian soldiers forced to surrender their arms? If the Kiev government doesn't have control over the Ukrainian army, Russian troops cannot surround Ukrainian barracks? Mind = poof Invasion of Crimea is justified based on 'threat' to Russians. Since the Ukrainian army -- according to zeo -- is not responding to the evil genocide promoting fascists then the Russian troops threatening the Ukrainian barracks are not doing so to protect the one pure Russian race. So only the Ukrainian army can hurt people? Random hooligans throwing molotovs can't? Trying to logic with a little kid spouting random shit is really hard. Also random hooligans should be dealt with by the local police force. And if the police should somehow not be able to calm down (the nonexistent) violence: Why didn't Putin consult the organisation that could actually give him (and other parties ) a mandate for the peacekeeping operation? An organisation in which his nation is a veto-holder, btw.
Hard to take over a part of a nation when your pretending to be a peace force ^^
|
On March 03 2014 06:31 unigolyn wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 06:29 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:26 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:23 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:10 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:08 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:04 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 05:59 zeo wrote:On March 03 2014 05:56 Twoflowers wrote:On March 03 2014 05:49 Tobblish wrote:
[quote]
NATO actually has a very important role in all of this, Ukraine do have treaties with NATO and have even asked them directly for help in this conflict.
It is also one of NATO's top interest to see that Russia doesn't get a grip on Europe.
So to simply say that NATO have nothing at all to do in this conflict is absurd. Too bad that the Ukraine government didn't organize a joint military excercise at the eastern border during the crisis. That would have been helpful The junta in Kiev don't have any real control over the armed forces of Ukraine. That is why there was absolutely no attempt to organize any kind of defense of Crimea, or indeed any kind of military activity outside of their barracks. if evil fascist genociders of Kiev who wish to exterminate all glorious and free Russian victims of evil fascism have no control of the Ukrainian army then why are Ukrainian army barracks being surrender by Russian troops and Ukrainian soldiers forced to surrender their arms? If the Kiev government doesn't have control over the Ukrainian army, Russian troops cannot surround Ukrainian barracks? Mind = poof Invasion of Crimea is justified based on 'threat' to Russians. Since the Ukrainian army -- according to zeo -- is not responding to the evil genocide promoting fascists then the Russian troops threatening the Ukrainian barracks are not doing so to protect the one pure Russian race. So only the Ukrainian army can hurt people? Random hooligans throwing molotovs can't? Trying to logic with a little kid spouting random shit is really hard. By this logic the US should have invaded Canada during the Stanley Cup riots. By what logic, the one you made up in your head? Where do I even mention anything to do with invading anything? What are you even talking about? You're implicitly saying that the Russian position of "we need to defend ethnic Russians" is correct because of "hooligans throwing molotovs".
No such thing was implied except in your head, the fact that you put those words in my mouth right after I specifically said I disagree with that view shows you care more about a victory in your head than an actual discussion.
|
On March 03 2014 06:31 Twoflowers wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 06:23 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:10 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:08 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:04 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 05:59 zeo wrote:On March 03 2014 05:56 Twoflowers wrote:On March 03 2014 05:49 Tobblish wrote:On March 03 2014 05:36 r.Evo wrote:On March 03 2014 05:18 Tobblish wrote:
And people say that Russia is not capable anymore to commit stupid acts like these because of NATO and UN.
Are there any reports on how many troops Russia have inside of the Crimean territory?
I honestly can't see any other outcome other than Crimea going into Russian hands. (or at least a major part of it)
No force will be used by either side, it have potential to change the world. (Israel would be screwed instantly) Once more: 1) NATO has nothing to do with this. Period. Ukraine is not a member state. Unless Russia shows aggression towards the territory of a member state it's literally none of their business. 2) The UN is as useless as usual. Just like the US veto'd most anti-US resolutions in the past Russia will veto any resolution against them. All the security council is good for is declaring some form of "We don't really like this and the Russians veto'd us!" NATO actually has a very important role in all of this, Ukraine do have treaties with NATO and have even asked them directly for help in this conflict. It is also one of NATO's top interest to see that Russia doesn't get a grip on Europe. So to simply say that NATO have nothing at all to do in this conflict is absurd. Too bad that the Ukraine government didn't organize a joint military excercise at the eastern border during the crisis. That would have been helpful The junta in Kiev don't have any real control over the armed forces of Ukraine. That is why there was absolutely no attempt to organize any kind of defense of Crimea, or indeed any kind of military activity outside of their barracks. if evil fascist genociders of Kiev who wish to exterminate all glorious and free Russian victims of evil fascism have no control of the Ukrainian army then why are Ukrainian army barracks being surrender by Russian troops and Ukrainian soldiers forced to surrender their arms? If the Kiev government doesn't have control over the Ukrainian army, Russian troops cannot surround Ukrainian barracks? Mind = poof Invasion of Crimea is justified based on 'threat' to Russians. Since the Ukrainian army -- according to zeo -- is not responding to the evil genocide promoting fascists then the Russian troops threatening the Ukrainian barracks are not doing so to protect the one pure Russian race. So only the Ukrainian army can hurt people? Random hooligans throwing molotovs can't? Trying to logic with a little kid spouting random shit is really hard. Also random hooligans should be dealt with by the local police force. And if the police should somehow not be able to calm down (the nonexistent) violence: Why didn't Putin consult the organisation that could actually give him (and other parties ) a mandate for the peacekeeping operation? An organisation in which his nation is a veto-holder, btw.
Because the UN Security Council is known to be utterly useless when it comes to things of high interest to any of the permanent member states.
http://www.un.org/depts/dhl/resguide/scact_veto_en.shtml
e: Here is the list of passed solutions. Feel free to find any issue in this century that was originally veto'd and check how long it takes until a non-veto'd solution is found, that should explain things reasonably enough.
|
On March 03 2014 06:33 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 06:30 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:29 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:28 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:25 m4ini wrote:On March 03 2014 06:23 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:10 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:08 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:04 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 05:59 zeo wrote:
[quote]
The junta in Kiev don't have any real control over the armed forces of Ukraine. That is why there was absolutely no attempt to organize any kind of defense of Crimea, or indeed any kind of military activity outside of their barracks. if evil fascist genociders of Kiev who wish to exterminate all glorious and free Russian victims of evil fascism have no control of the Ukrainian army then why are Ukrainian army barracks being surrender by Russian troops and Ukrainian soldiers forced to surrender their arms? If the Kiev government doesn't have control over the Ukrainian army, Russian troops cannot surround Ukrainian barracks? Mind = poof Invasion of Crimea is justified based on 'threat' to Russians. Since the Ukrainian army -- according to zeo -- is not responding to the evil genocide promoting fascists then the Russian troops threatening the Ukrainian barracks are not doing so to protect the one pure Russian race. So only the Ukrainian army can hurt people? Random hooligans can't? Trying to logic with a little kid spouting random shit is really hard. So you need to invade countries now to deal with random hooligans, that's what you're saying? I might not agree to what Sub40 is saying, but you're not an ounce better. Wtf? I'm saying his logic that "Kiev government must have control of the Ukrainian army, otherwise why would Russian forces surround Ukrainian bases" makes no sense. No, my logic is "why would Russian forces surrounded Ukrainian bases except as an act of war" No, it's not buddy, the quote chain I responded no dealt ONLY with whether the current government is in control of the army. Picking out a sentence out of a paragraph doesnt make it a conversation. Zeo and Putin believe that the one true Russian race is threatened with eminent extermination and have to be protected by the Russian army. Zeo and Putin also believe that the Ukrainian Army is not listening to the orders of the fascist genocide junta exterminationists who overthrew the peaceful and democratic government in Kiev. If they arent listening to the evil genocide loving exterminationist in kiev now then they will probably not listen to the evil junta of death when they inevitably begin their extermination of Russians campaign. If they arent going to listen to orders to exterminate the one true Russian race then why are they being surrounded and forced to surrender their arms to a foreign army? Whats the word for that other than invasion?
Okay this is the last time I'm gonna respond if you keep spouting random shit. I said your argument on why you believe the current government is in control of the Ukrainian army doesn't make sense, no where did I disagree that what Russia is doing is an invasion. If you want to keep making up imaginary argument for me just to refute them yourself, by all means.
|
On March 03 2014 06:33 Feartheguru wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 06:28 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:26 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:23 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:18 zeo wrote:On March 03 2014 06:14 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:13 zeo wrote:On March 03 2014 06:10 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:08 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:04 Sub40APM wrote:
[quote]
if evil fascist genociders of Kiev who wish to exterminate all glorious and free Russian victims of evil fascism have no control of the Ukrainian army then why are Ukrainian army barracks being surrender by Russian troops and Ukrainian soldiers forced to surrender their arms? If the Kiev government doesn't have control over the Ukrainian army, Russian troops cannot surround Ukrainian barracks? Mind = poof Invasion of Crimea is justified based on 'threat' to Russians. Since the Ukrainian army -- according to zeo -- is not responding to the evil genocide promoting fascists then the Russian troops threatening the Ukrainian barracks are not doing so to protect the one pure Russian race. The role of the civilian defense force in Crimea is to protect the rights of the people in Crimea, what don't you understand? There is no legitimate control over the country, people need to protect themselves. From the Army you just said the evil fascist nazi genociders who clearly will begin to exterminate the one pure russian race at any moment dont control? That is why the army isn't listening to Kiev. They don't want to attack innocent citizens of Ukraine who's only crime is not listening to the illegal government in Kiev. Could you please stop being a propagandist? The government isn't illegal, it isn't a junta, and your obvious pro-fascist bias coupled with your country of origin gives you less than zero moral authority. It's not a junta but the current government is the definition of illegal. Unless you take the view that legality is purely dependent on recognition by foreign entities, and only ones you believe are in the "right" How is it illegal? If it was appointed by the parliament, it's legal. In what way is it illegal? It's illegal in the same way I consider the current Crimean government illegal (4% support in the latest election). An armed group takes over the government building, the parliament approves a new government under an implied threat. Do you also consider that Crimean government legal? (I'm not saying there's anything wrong with considering both of them legal, legality is a matter of debate, but collectively here we can't eat our cake and have it too)
No, I don't consider the Crimean government legal because Crimea is not a sovereign country and his appointment was not legal. Ukraine is a sovereign country. Your claim that the Rada acted under gunpoint is baseless. This is how dissolution of governments happens in democratic, parliamentary systems.
|
On March 03 2014 06:34 Feartheguru wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 06:31 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:29 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:26 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:23 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:10 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:08 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:04 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 05:59 zeo wrote:On March 03 2014 05:56 Twoflowers wrote:
[quote]
Too bad that the Ukraine government didn't organize a joint military excercise at the eastern border during the crisis. That would have been helpful The junta in Kiev don't have any real control over the armed forces of Ukraine. That is why there was absolutely no attempt to organize any kind of defense of Crimea, or indeed any kind of military activity outside of their barracks. if evil fascist genociders of Kiev who wish to exterminate all glorious and free Russian victims of evil fascism have no control of the Ukrainian army then why are Ukrainian army barracks being surrender by Russian troops and Ukrainian soldiers forced to surrender their arms? If the Kiev government doesn't have control over the Ukrainian army, Russian troops cannot surround Ukrainian barracks? Mind = poof Invasion of Crimea is justified based on 'threat' to Russians. Since the Ukrainian army -- according to zeo -- is not responding to the evil genocide promoting fascists then the Russian troops threatening the Ukrainian barracks are not doing so to protect the one pure Russian race. So only the Ukrainian army can hurt people? Random hooligans throwing molotovs can't? Trying to logic with a little kid spouting random shit is really hard. By this logic the US should have invaded Canada during the Stanley Cup riots. By what logic, the one you made up in your head? Where do I even mention anything to do with invading anything? What are you even talking about? You're implicitly saying that the Russian position of "we need to defend ethnic Russians" is correct because of "hooligans throwing molotovs". No such thing was implied except in your head, the fact that you put those words in my mouth right after I specifically said I disagree with that view shows you care more about a victory in your head than an actual discussion.
Look at the quote you were responding to. If you don't want to be misunderstood, speak plainly instead of in sarcastic quips.
|
On March 03 2014 06:36 unigolyn wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 06:33 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:28 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:26 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:23 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:18 zeo wrote:On March 03 2014 06:14 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:13 zeo wrote:On March 03 2014 06:10 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:08 Feartheguru wrote:
[quote]
If the Kiev government doesn't have control over the Ukrainian army, Russian troops cannot surround Ukrainian barracks?
Mind = poof
Invasion of Crimea is justified based on 'threat' to Russians. Since the Ukrainian army -- according to zeo -- is not responding to the evil genocide promoting fascists then the Russian troops threatening the Ukrainian barracks are not doing so to protect the one pure Russian race. The role of the civilian defense force in Crimea is to protect the rights of the people in Crimea, what don't you understand? There is no legitimate control over the country, people need to protect themselves. From the Army you just said the evil fascist nazi genociders who clearly will begin to exterminate the one pure russian race at any moment dont control? That is why the army isn't listening to Kiev. They don't want to attack innocent citizens of Ukraine who's only crime is not listening to the illegal government in Kiev. Could you please stop being a propagandist? The government isn't illegal, it isn't a junta, and your obvious pro-fascist bias coupled with your country of origin gives you less than zero moral authority. It's not a junta but the current government is the definition of illegal. Unless you take the view that legality is purely dependent on recognition by foreign entities, and only ones you believe are in the "right" How is it illegal? If it was appointed by the parliament, it's legal. In what way is it illegal? It's illegal in the same way I consider the current Crimean government illegal (4% support in the latest election). An armed group takes over the government building, the parliament approves a new government under an implied threat. Do you also consider that Crimean government legal? (I'm not saying there's anything wrong with considering both of them legal, legality is a matter of debate, but collectively here we can't eat our cake and have it too) No, I don't consider the Crimean government legal because Crimea is not a sovereign country and his appointment was not legal. Ukraine is a sovereign country. Your claim that the Rada acted under gunpoint is baseless. This is how dissolution of governments happens in democratic, parliamentary systems.
Countries appoint a federal government, provinces appoint a provincial government. You're arguing based on a hilariously arbitrary difference to justify two different views on two almost identical events.
Dissolution of governments in democratic, parliamentary systems happens by a mob ousting the previous president in fear of his life then voting to approve a new government when no such procedure exists in the system, your mental gymnastics are amazing.
|
On March 03 2014 06:25 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 06:23 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:18 zeo wrote:On March 03 2014 06:14 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:13 zeo wrote:On March 03 2014 06:10 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:08 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:04 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 05:59 zeo wrote:On March 03 2014 05:56 Twoflowers wrote:
[quote]
Too bad that the Ukraine government didn't organize a joint military excercise at the eastern border during the crisis. That would have been helpful The junta in Kiev don't have any real control over the armed forces of Ukraine. That is why there was absolutely no attempt to organize any kind of defense of Crimea, or indeed any kind of military activity outside of their barracks. if evil fascist genociders of Kiev who wish to exterminate all glorious and free Russian victims of evil fascism have no control of the Ukrainian army then why are Ukrainian army barracks being surrender by Russian troops and Ukrainian soldiers forced to surrender their arms? If the Kiev government doesn't have control over the Ukrainian army, Russian troops cannot surround Ukrainian barracks? Mind = poof Invasion of Crimea is justified based on 'threat' to Russians. Since the Ukrainian army -- according to zeo -- is not responding to the evil genocide promoting fascists then the Russian troops threatening the Ukrainian barracks are not doing so to protect the one pure Russian race. The role of the civilian defense force in Crimea is to protect the rights of the people in Crimea, what don't you understand? There is no legitimate control over the country, people need to protect themselves. From the Army you just said the evil fascist nazi genociders who clearly will begin to exterminate the one pure russian race at any moment dont control? That is why the army isn't listening to Kiev. They don't want to attack innocent citizens of Ukraine who's only crime is not listening to the illegal government in Kiev. Could you please stop being a propagandist? The government isn't illegal, it isn't a junta, and your obvious pro-fascist bias coupled with your country of origin gives you less than zero moral authority. thats not fair. Just because Serbia is the only other modern European country next to Russia to pursue foreign policy based on race and not national boundaries doesnt mean zeo wasnt opposed to the Serbian dictator who did so.
You have just proven that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, nor what you are fighting for. Your whole pathetic ad hominem and strawman crusade against me, and indeed your obsession with me just goes to show how scared you are of the truth.
The fact that I am a Serb makes no difference, I can put my country next to my name (unlike you). Justice has no nationality, truth has no nationality, and those are the things that are important to me. So I don't give a flying fuck where you are from nor would that have any influence in how I view your post. I don't care if you are getting payed 10c a post by the NSA to shitpost here, I don't care if you are obsessed with me for free. Just stop with the ad hominem and strawman's
|
On March 03 2014 06:36 Feartheguru wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 06:33 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:30 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:29 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:28 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:25 m4ini wrote:On March 03 2014 06:23 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:10 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:08 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:04 Sub40APM wrote:
[quote]
if evil fascist genociders of Kiev who wish to exterminate all glorious and free Russian victims of evil fascism have no control of the Ukrainian army then why are Ukrainian army barracks being surrender by Russian troops and Ukrainian soldiers forced to surrender their arms? If the Kiev government doesn't have control over the Ukrainian army, Russian troops cannot surround Ukrainian barracks? Mind = poof Invasion of Crimea is justified based on 'threat' to Russians. Since the Ukrainian army -- according to zeo -- is not responding to the evil genocide promoting fascists then the Russian troops threatening the Ukrainian barracks are not doing so to protect the one pure Russian race. So only the Ukrainian army can hurt people? Random hooligans can't? Trying to logic with a little kid spouting random shit is really hard. So you need to invade countries now to deal with random hooligans, that's what you're saying? I might not agree to what Sub40 is saying, but you're not an ounce better. Wtf? I'm saying his logic that "Kiev government must have control of the Ukrainian army, otherwise why would Russian forces surround Ukrainian bases" makes no sense. No, my logic is "why would Russian forces surrounded Ukrainian bases except as an act of war" No, it's not buddy, the quote chain I responded no dealt ONLY with whether the current government is in control of the army. Picking out a sentence out of a paragraph doesnt make it a conversation. Zeo and Putin believe that the one true Russian race is threatened with eminent extermination and have to be protected by the Russian army. Zeo and Putin also believe that the Ukrainian Army is not listening to the orders of the fascist genocide junta exterminationists who overthrew the peaceful and democratic government in Kiev. If they arent listening to the evil genocide loving exterminationist in kiev now then they will probably not listen to the evil junta of death when they inevitably begin their extermination of Russians campaign. If they arent going to listen to orders to exterminate the one true Russian race then why are they being surrounded and forced to surrender their arms to a foreign army? Whats the word for that other than invasion? Okay this is the last time I'm gonna respond if you keep spouting random shit. I said your argument on why you believe the current government is in control of the Ukrainian army doesn't make sense, no where did I disagree that what Russia is doing is an invasion. If you want to keep making up imaginary argument for me just to refute them yourself, by all means.
okay.
|
On March 03 2014 06:39 zeo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 06:25 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:23 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:18 zeo wrote:On March 03 2014 06:14 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:13 zeo wrote:On March 03 2014 06:10 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:08 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:04 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 05:59 zeo wrote:
[quote]
The junta in Kiev don't have any real control over the armed forces of Ukraine. That is why there was absolutely no attempt to organize any kind of defense of Crimea, or indeed any kind of military activity outside of their barracks. if evil fascist genociders of Kiev who wish to exterminate all glorious and free Russian victims of evil fascism have no control of the Ukrainian army then why are Ukrainian army barracks being surrender by Russian troops and Ukrainian soldiers forced to surrender their arms? If the Kiev government doesn't have control over the Ukrainian army, Russian troops cannot surround Ukrainian barracks? Mind = poof Invasion of Crimea is justified based on 'threat' to Russians. Since the Ukrainian army -- according to zeo -- is not responding to the evil genocide promoting fascists then the Russian troops threatening the Ukrainian barracks are not doing so to protect the one pure Russian race. The role of the civilian defense force in Crimea is to protect the rights of the people in Crimea, what don't you understand? There is no legitimate control over the country, people need to protect themselves. From the Army you just said the evil fascist nazi genociders who clearly will begin to exterminate the one pure russian race at any moment dont control? That is why the army isn't listening to Kiev. They don't want to attack innocent citizens of Ukraine who's only crime is not listening to the illegal government in Kiev. Could you please stop being a propagandist? The government isn't illegal, it isn't a junta, and your obvious pro-fascist bias coupled with your country of origin gives you less than zero moral authority. thats not fair. Just because Serbia is the only other modern European country next to Russia to pursue foreign policy based on race and not national boundaries doesnt mean zeo wasnt opposed to the Serbian dictator who did so. You have just proven that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, nor what you are fighting for. Your whole pathetic ad hominem and strawman crusade against me, and indeed your obsession with me just goes to show how scared you are of the truth. The fact that I am a Serb makes no difference, I can put my country next to my name (unlike you). Justice has no nationality, truth has no nationality, those are the things that are important to me. I don't care if you are getting payed 10c a post by the NSA to shitpost here, I don't care if you are obsessed with me for free. Just stop with the ad hominem and strawman's Poor zeo, everyone here misunderstands you and your need to photoshop the truth against the villainy of NSA activists who support fascist neo nazi genocide junta in kiev.
Why are Ukrainian Army bases -- of an army you agree will not listen to neo nazi fascist exterminators of the one pure Russian race -- being invaded by Russian troops?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On March 03 2014 06:38 Feartheguru wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 06:36 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:33 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:28 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:26 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:23 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:18 zeo wrote:On March 03 2014 06:14 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:13 zeo wrote:On March 03 2014 06:10 Sub40APM wrote:
[quote]Invasion of Crimea is justified based on 'threat' to Russians. Since the Ukrainian army -- according to zeo -- is not responding to the evil genocide promoting fascists then the Russian troops threatening the Ukrainian barracks are not doing so to protect the one pure Russian race.
The role of the civilian defense force in Crimea is to protect the rights of the people in Crimea, what don't you understand? There is no legitimate control over the country, people need to protect themselves. From the Army you just said the evil fascist nazi genociders who clearly will begin to exterminate the one pure russian race at any moment dont control? That is why the army isn't listening to Kiev. They don't want to attack innocent citizens of Ukraine who's only crime is not listening to the illegal government in Kiev. Could you please stop being a propagandist? The government isn't illegal, it isn't a junta, and your obvious pro-fascist bias coupled with your country of origin gives you less than zero moral authority. It's not a junta but the current government is the definition of illegal. Unless you take the view that legality is purely dependent on recognition by foreign entities, and only ones you believe are in the "right" How is it illegal? If it was appointed by the parliament, it's legal. In what way is it illegal? It's illegal in the same way I consider the current Crimean government illegal (4% support in the latest election). An armed group takes over the government building, the parliament approves a new government under an implied threat. Do you also consider that Crimean government legal? (I'm not saying there's anything wrong with considering both of them legal, legality is a matter of debate, but collectively here we can't eat our cake and have it too) No, I don't consider the Crimean government legal because Crimea is not a sovereign country and his appointment was not legal. Ukraine is a sovereign country. Your claim that the Rada acted under gunpoint is baseless. This is how dissolution of governments happens in democratic, parliamentary systems. Countries appoint a federal government, provinces appoint a provincial government. You're arguing based on a hilariously arbitrary difference to justify two different views on two almost identical events.
If you honestly think the difference between the formation of the interim government and the shotgun appointment of Aksyonov is "arbitrary", I see no point in talking to you further.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot
|
On March 03 2014 06:44 unigolyn wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 06:38 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:36 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:33 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:28 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:26 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:23 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:18 zeo wrote:On March 03 2014 06:14 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:13 zeo wrote:
[quote]
The role of the civilian defense force in Crimea is to protect the rights of the people in Crimea, what don't you understand? There is no legitimate control over the country, people need to protect themselves. From the Army you just said the evil fascist nazi genociders who clearly will begin to exterminate the one pure russian race at any moment dont control? That is why the army isn't listening to Kiev. They don't want to attack innocent citizens of Ukraine who's only crime is not listening to the illegal government in Kiev. Could you please stop being a propagandist? The government isn't illegal, it isn't a junta, and your obvious pro-fascist bias coupled with your country of origin gives you less than zero moral authority. It's not a junta but the current government is the definition of illegal. Unless you take the view that legality is purely dependent on recognition by foreign entities, and only ones you believe are in the "right" How is it illegal? If it was appointed by the parliament, it's legal. In what way is it illegal? It's illegal in the same way I consider the current Crimean government illegal (4% support in the latest election). An armed group takes over the government building, the parliament approves a new government under an implied threat. Do you also consider that Crimean government legal? (I'm not saying there's anything wrong with considering both of them legal, legality is a matter of debate, but collectively here we can't eat our cake and have it too) No, I don't consider the Crimean government legal because Crimea is not a sovereign country and his appointment was not legal. Ukraine is a sovereign country. Your claim that the Rada acted under gunpoint is baseless. This is how dissolution of governments happens in democratic, parliamentary systems. Countries appoint a federal government, provinces appoint a provincial government. You're arguing based on a hilariously arbitrary difference to justify two different views on two almost identical events. If you honestly think the difference between the formation of the interim government and the shotgun appointment of Aksyonov is "arbitrary", I see no point in talking to you further. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot
Don't be so hard on yourself, you're not an idiot, just a little slow.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
In Istanbul on 19 November 1999, the OSCE ended a two-day summit by calling for a political settlement in Chechnya and adopting a Charter for European Security. According to then Minister of Foreign Affairs Igor Ivanov, this summit marked a turning point in Russian perception of the OSCE, from an organization that expressed Europe's collective will, to an organization that serves as a Western tool for "forced democratization".[4]
|
On March 03 2014 06:39 zeo wrote:
The fact that I am a Serb makes no difference, I can put my country next to my name (unlike you). Justice has no nationality, truth has no nationality, and those are the things that are important to me.
See, we're trying to give you an out. We're assuming, based on your nationality, that you've been brainwashed into accepting this perversion of history, and aren't actually a terrible human being by supporting a fascist regime.
|
On March 03 2014 06:46 Feartheguru wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 06:44 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:38 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:36 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:33 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:28 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:26 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:23 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:18 zeo wrote:On March 03 2014 06:14 Sub40APM wrote:
[quote]
From the Army you just said the evil fascist nazi genociders who clearly will begin to exterminate the one pure russian race at any moment dont control?
That is why the army isn't listening to Kiev. They don't want to attack innocent citizens of Ukraine who's only crime is not listening to the illegal government in Kiev. Could you please stop being a propagandist? The government isn't illegal, it isn't a junta, and your obvious pro-fascist bias coupled with your country of origin gives you less than zero moral authority. It's not a junta but the current government is the definition of illegal. Unless you take the view that legality is purely dependent on recognition by foreign entities, and only ones you believe are in the "right" How is it illegal? If it was appointed by the parliament, it's legal. In what way is it illegal? It's illegal in the same way I consider the current Crimean government illegal (4% support in the latest election). An armed group takes over the government building, the parliament approves a new government under an implied threat. Do you also consider that Crimean government legal? (I'm not saying there's anything wrong with considering both of them legal, legality is a matter of debate, but collectively here we can't eat our cake and have it too) No, I don't consider the Crimean government legal because Crimea is not a sovereign country and his appointment was not legal. Ukraine is a sovereign country. Your claim that the Rada acted under gunpoint is baseless. This is how dissolution of governments happens in democratic, parliamentary systems. Countries appoint a federal government, provinces appoint a provincial government. You're arguing based on a hilariously arbitrary difference to justify two different views on two almost identical events. If you honestly think the difference between the formation of the interim government and the shotgun appointment of Aksyonov is "arbitrary", I see no point in talking to you further. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot Don't be so hard on yourself, you're not an idiot, just a little slow.
Keep shilling for dictators and mass murderers, I'm sure the karmic debt will be repaid somehow.
|
On March 03 2014 06:38 Feartheguru wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 06:36 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:33 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:28 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:26 Feartheguru wrote:On March 03 2014 06:23 unigolyn wrote:On March 03 2014 06:18 zeo wrote:On March 03 2014 06:14 Sub40APM wrote:On March 03 2014 06:13 zeo wrote:On March 03 2014 06:10 Sub40APM wrote:
[quote]Invasion of Crimea is justified based on 'threat' to Russians. Since the Ukrainian army -- according to zeo -- is not responding to the evil genocide promoting fascists then the Russian troops threatening the Ukrainian barracks are not doing so to protect the one pure Russian race.
The role of the civilian defense force in Crimea is to protect the rights of the people in Crimea, what don't you understand? There is no legitimate control over the country, people need to protect themselves. From the Army you just said the evil fascist nazi genociders who clearly will begin to exterminate the one pure russian race at any moment dont control? That is why the army isn't listening to Kiev. They don't want to attack innocent citizens of Ukraine who's only crime is not listening to the illegal government in Kiev. Could you please stop being a propagandist? The government isn't illegal, it isn't a junta, and your obvious pro-fascist bias coupled with your country of origin gives you less than zero moral authority. It's not a junta but the current government is the definition of illegal. Unless you take the view that legality is purely dependent on recognition by foreign entities, and only ones you believe are in the "right" How is it illegal? If it was appointed by the parliament, it's legal. In what way is it illegal? It's illegal in the same way I consider the current Crimean government illegal (4% support in the latest election). An armed group takes over the government building, the parliament approves a new government under an implied threat. Do you also consider that Crimean government legal? (I'm not saying there's anything wrong with considering both of them legal, legality is a matter of debate, but collectively here we can't eat our cake and have it too) No, I don't consider the Crimean government legal because Crimea is not a sovereign country and his appointment was not legal. Ukraine is a sovereign country. Your claim that the Rada acted under gunpoint is baseless. This is how dissolution of governments happens in democratic, parliamentary systems. Countries appoint a federal government, provinces appoint a provincial government. You're arguing based on a hilariously arbitrary difference to justify two different views on two almost identical events. Dissolution of governments in democratic, parliamentary systems happens by a mob ousting the previous president in fear of his life then voting to approve a new government when no such procedure exists in the system, your mental gymnastics are amazing.
Err, you're shouting, not making arguments. As far as I can tell you are trying to say: a) the transitional govt. in Ukraine (with acting president Yatsenyuk) is illegal because it was appointed at gunpoint. b) the impeachment was illegal.
On point (a) you forgot to add proof. In fact, pretty much every news source on the planet except for those under the control of the Kremlin disagree with you. There were plenty of people in the Rada to witness the fact that there was no coercion. Furthermore, there hasn't been an armed mob in the center of Kyiv for many days, so who's stopping the Rada from undoing their votes? Yet, many of the Party of Regions now support the transitional govt.
Furthermore, Yanukovich wasn't ousted, he disappeared in the middle of the night and escaped the country. For him to have an argument in his favour, he would have needed to actually witness some wrong-doing before abandoning his post.
Regarding transitional govt's, there are standard in cases where there's a political crisis. We've had those in many countries, most famously in recent memory in Italy. They are not illegal, they are transitional. As they have already set the date for a national election, I don't see why there shouldn't be a caretaker government.
On the topic of (b), the impeachment, I have heard multiple versions, and I won't argue for either. But if the impeachment was illegal, Yanukovich should be able to turn to he constitutional court and have himself reinstated. After all, the court is full of people he recently appointed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
