|
|
On March 04 2014 09:15 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 09:05 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 08:06 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 08:06 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 03:50 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 03:49 Kamille wrote:
David Chamberlain's government has already decided for the EU. Confirmed: Anyone leading Great Britain with the last name Chamberlain has no backbone. European leaders are doing exactly what their populations want from them, which definitely is not a war. Democracy in action. US will do exactly the same. Few warmongering fanatics that never experienced war, yet would love to plunge the continent in it are just pathetic. Something tells me that the people in England didn't want to get bombed every night either. I don't want war, but sometimes you go to war to avoid a worse war. The politics of avoidance of war is why WW2 was so terrible. It didn't have to be that way. Letting Putin just take Crimea is a tragedy for those in Crimea and Ukraine who don't want it. And it's wrong. People already pointed out how bad analogy with 1938-9 this is. Actually no one has presented any argument about how the analogy is wrong. Let me make it real simple though, to further the understanding of it. Let's play a game! To make a historically accurate story, replace the parts in quotes with all letters or all numbers using the code below! A = Hitler B = Germany C = Czechoslovakia D = German E = 1938 1 = Putin 2 = Russia 3 = Ukraine 4 = Russian 5 = 2014 (A or 1) ordered (D or 4) troops into the sovereign country of (C or 3) in March of (E or 5). His reasoning was that (D or 4) speakers and natives were being threatened and needed protection. There was no evidence for this claim. The governing body of (B or 2) then decided the annex the country.
Last sentence did not happen, so even that pat of your analogy fails. But people pointed out how nicely you ignore the changed geopolitical situation.
|
On March 04 2014 09:09 oneofthem wrote:
seems like by basic negotiation game theory you don't make your public position a soft one, but you'd rather try going in as hard as possible. not sure what advantages are offered by clearly indicating that you don't want war, even if you really do not want war.
Depends on what game you use as a model.
First no one wants war, not even John McCain. Actually threatening Russia with war is not credible anyway. What is credible is using economic sanctions and that isn't an all-or-nothing decision. In a sense threats have little meaning because sanctions are fairly easy to implement and repeal. This is in contrast to war where once it starts it's impossible to stop.
|
On March 04 2014 09:12 mcc wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 09:05 Sub40APM wrote:On March 04 2014 09:01 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 08:03 Sub40APM wrote:On March 04 2014 08:00 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 03:43 Sub40APM wrote:On March 04 2014 03:40 Saumure wrote:On March 04 2014 03:20 Sub40APM wrote:On March 04 2014 03:16 Saumure wrote:lol, do you really think Russia would invade Poland or something? Putin blocked the invasion of Syria (and what would have followed) and nobody finds it strange that another riot escalates next to russia immediatly after that?  Its all a Western plot, I knew it. Democracy always has such a dirty Western bias and must be prevented at all costs. Please, tell me more about how you brought democracy to Iraq, Afghanistan and Lybia. How about Poland, Czehia, Slovakia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia instead?
And tell me how is democracy working out for you? Every x years (don't know where you live), you get the chance to vote for one out of two parties. Both will do basically the same thing, except for a couple of unimportant issues. You really don't get a say about anyting.
And however shitty it is, its still better than the one party, one tsar state built by Russians. Oh, now I understand Rubio's words, already history is being rewritten and we were given democracy by the West. We were just standing there not knowing what to do and good guys came and taught us democracy, because we never knew such a thing. You knew it. Then you lost it to the Germans and the Russians. And the Americans removed first the one then the other for you. One took much longer but your own attempt, like all small but proud democratic countries in the face of tanks, stalled. American's did not remove the Soviets. They just outlasted them, I see no reason to give them any credit for our current democracy. The Soviets wouldnt have withdrawn without the Americans or the CFE Treaty pressure. Your opinion, Soviets were done anyway. Simple existence of US is not enough reason to give them credit. Any existing adversary of the Soviet Union would achieve the same without ever lifting a finger. uh, the only other existing adversary of soviet union occupying your country were the nazis...and i dont mean the ukrainan junta of evil but the real deal, efficiently german
|
On March 04 2014 09:17 mcc wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 09:15 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 09:05 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 08:06 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 08:06 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 03:50 BronzeKnee wrote:Confirmed: Anyone leading Great Britain with the last name Chamberlain has no backbone. European leaders are doing exactly what their populations want from them, which definitely is not a war. Democracy in action. US will do exactly the same. Few warmongering fanatics that never experienced war, yet would love to plunge the continent in it are just pathetic. Something tells me that the people in England didn't want to get bombed every night either. I don't want war, but sometimes you go to war to avoid a worse war. The politics of avoidance of war is why WW2 was so terrible. It didn't have to be that way. Letting Putin just take Crimea is a tragedy for those in Crimea and Ukraine who don't want it. And it's wrong. People already pointed out how bad analogy with 1938-9 this is. Actually no one has presented any argument about how the analogy is wrong. Let me make it real simple though, to further the understanding of it. Let's play a game! To make a historically accurate story, replace the parts in quotes with all letters or all numbers using the code below! A = Hitler B = Germany C = Czechoslovakia D = German E = 1938 1 = Putin 2 = Russia 3 = Ukraine 4 = Russian 5 = 2014 (A or 1) ordered (D or 4) troops into the sovereign country of (C or 3) in March of (E or 5). His reasoning was that (D or 4) speakers and natives were being threatened and needed protection. There was no evidence for this claim. The governing body of (B or 2) then decided the annex the country. Last sentence did not happen, so even that pat of your analogy fails. But people pointed out how nicely you ignore the changed geopolitical situation.
You left out the word "yet." But it is coming.
http://news.firedoglake.com/2014/03/03/russia-annexes-part-of-ukraine-as-president-obama-warns-of-consequences/
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/02/28/Ukraine-Turmoil-Russian-Legislators-Present-Bill-To-Facilitate-Annexation-Of-Crimea
And what geopolitical change makes what Russia did right compared to what Germany did?
|
On March 04 2014 09:17 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 09:15 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:On March 04 2014 09:08 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 08:29 mahrgell wrote:On March 04 2014 08:27 Cheerio wrote:On March 04 2014 08:06 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 03:50 BronzeKnee wrote:Confirmed: Anyone leading Great Britain with the last name Chamberlain has no backbone. European leaders are doing exactly what their populations want from them, which definitely is not a war. Democracy in action. US will do exactly the same. Few warmongering fanatics that never experienced war, yet would love to plunge the continent in it are just pathetic. Right, that's why all kinds of concessions need to be made to local dictators. I think it is for the better of Ukraine, if there is no war between Europe and Russia  So better be thankful, that not everyone on the world is that triggerhappy What did you think about the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq in 1990? Did you think the response, which eventually led to a military force invading and removing Iraqi forces from Kuwait was "trigger happy"? Did you think it was the wrong thing to do? Was it acceptable to you that Kuwait was occupied by a foreign army? If you don't think the invasion was acceptable, and didn't think the coalition forces were too "trigger happy", then your logic is inconsistent. Even if your logic is consistent, the argument you presented is that of humans beings who have no moral fortitude and only care for themselves. It is the argument of "well, as long as my home town isn't invaded and occupied I don't care" and "as long as it happens to someone else but not to me..." Frankly, It is absolutely disgusting and I'm ashamed that people still think this way. What if this were your home town? What if it was you and your family, your life? Does that make a difference? The people of Crimea deserve better. Your attitude that other people in Europe or Russia are somehow more important than those in Crimea is revolting and stinks of elitism. In fact, it is just purely elitist. Russia invaded a sovereign country and has occupied a region there. That is unacceptable. Just like when Iraq invaded Kuwait. Totally unacceptable and the world responded then the correct way. With military force to free the people of Kuwait after a political solution was tried. In this instance, are we scared because Russia is stronger? Or do we simply not care for those in Ukraine? Are human rights being trampled in nations other than NATO nations acceptable but because Ukraine never signed on the dotted line? If the political solution does not work, the world must responds with force. The people of Crimea and Ukraine deserve it. We should not have one set of rules for this group of humans, and another set for another group of humans. That is elitism, and we are all children of the earth. There is a clear right and wrong here. What Russia did is wrong. We've got to make it right. It is just really sad that people present the argument that you did. The people of Crimea and Ukraine deserve better. You are overreacting. It would be a very bad thing for people in the krim if a large scale war would result from this. Don't try to make it seem that would make them happy. Yeah, it'd be terrible to free people from a military occupation and defend their freedom if it means war. Better have peace, and let them be slaves. Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 09:16 zeonmx wrote:On March 04 2014 09:08 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 08:29 mahrgell wrote:On March 04 2014 08:27 Cheerio wrote:On March 04 2014 08:06 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 03:50 BronzeKnee wrote:Confirmed: Anyone leading Great Britain with the last name Chamberlain has no backbone. European leaders are doing exactly what their populations want from them, which definitely is not a war. Democracy in action. US will do exactly the same. Few warmongering fanatics that never experienced war, yet would love to plunge the continent in it are just pathetic. Right, that's why all kinds of concessions need to be made to local dictators. I think it is for the better of Ukraine, if there is no war between Europe and Russia So better be thankful, that not everyone on the world is that triggerhappy What did you think about the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq in 1990? Did you think the response, which eventually led to a military force invading and removing Iraqi forces from Kuwait was "trigger happy"? Did you think it was the wrong thing to do? Was it acceptable to you that Kuwait was occupied by a foreign army? If you don't think the invasion was acceptable, and didn't think the coalition forces were too "trigger happy", then your logic is inconsistent. Even if your logic is consistent, the argument you presented is that of humans beings who have no moral fortitude and only care for themselves. It is the argument of "well, as long as my home town isn't invaded and occupied I don't care" and "as long as it happens to someone else but not to me..." Frankly, It is absolutely disgusting and I'm ashamed that people still think this way. What if this were your home town? What if it was you and your family, your life? Does that make a difference? The people of Crimea deserve better. Your attitude that other people in Europe or Russia are somehow more important than those in Crimea is revolting and stinks of elitism. In fact, it is just purely elitist. Russia invaded a sovereign country and has occupied a region there. That is unacceptable. Just like when Iraq invaded Kuwait. Totally unacceptable and the world responded then the correct way. With military force to free the people of Kuwait after a political solution was tried. In this instance, are we scared because Russia is stronger? Or do we simply not care for those in Ukraine? Are human rights being trampled in nations other than NATO nations acceptable but because Ukraine never signed on the dotted line? If the political solution does not work, the world must responds with force. The people of Crimea and Ukraine deserve it. We should not have one set of rules for this group of humans, and another set for another group of humans. That is elitism, and we are all children of the earth. There is a clear right and wrong here. What Russia did is wrong. We've got to make it right. It is just really sad that people present the argument that you did. The people of Crimea and Ukraine deserve better. In all fairness, since you brought up Iraqi-Kuwait war, what about American invasion of Iraq? American government made up bogus proof and completely ignored UN's rational plea and invaded Iraq. The US invasion was terrible and a joke. I'm ashamed the US did that and I stood against it. Still, it doesn't mean Russia can do this.
Russia has no ethical grounds for intervention. But let us not pretend that American adventures post-Cold War (and even before) that also were "clear violations of territorial integrity of other nations and international law" did not influence Russia's ability to diplomatically manouevre and point fingers.
|
On March 04 2014 09:08 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 08:29 mahrgell wrote:On March 04 2014 08:27 Cheerio wrote:On March 04 2014 08:06 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 03:50 BronzeKnee wrote:Confirmed: Anyone leading Great Britain with the last name Chamberlain has no backbone. European leaders are doing exactly what their populations want from them, which definitely is not a war. Democracy in action. US will do exactly the same. Few warmongering fanatics that never experienced war, yet would love to plunge the continent in it are just pathetic. Right, that's why all kinds of concessions need to be made to local dictators. I think it is for the better of Ukraine, if there is no war between Europe and Russia So better be thankful, that not everyone on the world is that triggerhappy What did you think about the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq in 1990? Did you think the response, which eventually led to a military force invading and removing Iraqi forces from Kuwait was "trigger happy"? Did you think it was the wrong thing to do? Was it acceptable to you that Kuwait was occupied by a foreign army? If you don't think the invasion was acceptable, and didn't think the coalition forces were too "trigger happy", then your logic is inconsistent. Even if your logic is consistent, the argument you presented is that of humans beings who have no moral fortitude and only care for themselves. It is the argument of "well, as long as my home town isn't invaded and occupied I don't care" and "as long as it happens to someone else but not to me..." Frankly, It is absolutely disgusting and I'm ashamed that people still think this way. What if this were your home town? What if it was you and your family, your life? Does that make a difference? The people of Crimea deserve better. Your attitude that other people in Europe or Russia are somehow more important than those in Crimea is revolting and stinks of elitism. In fact, it is just purely elitist. Russia invaded a sovereign country and has occupied a region there. That is unacceptable. Just like when Iraq invaded Kuwait. Totally unacceptable and the world responded then the correct way. With military force to free the people of Kuwait after a political solution was tried. In this instance, are we scared because Russia is stronger? Or do we simply not care for those in Ukraine? Are human rights being trampled in nations other than NATO nations acceptable but because Ukraine never signed on the dotted line? If the political solution does not work, the world must responds with force. The people of Crimea and Ukraine deserve it. We should not have one set of rules for this group of humans, and another set for another group of humans. That is elitism, and we are all children of the earth. There is a clear right and wrong here. What Russia did is wrong. We've got to make it right. It is just really sad that people present the argument that you did. The people of Crimea and Ukraine deserve better.
If it were my hometown, I would certainly hope, that not some idiot across an ocean decides, that it should be the next battlefield... And my allies tries to negotiate a way out of it first... Tanks can roll, if all is lost.
It may be unknown to you, but some people think of violence and military escalation as the absolute last resort measure. But of course armchair general from the US, who have not experienced any modern war on their own soil, and invaded a dozen countries post WW2, knows how things are done... Seriously, I just wish sevastopol was your own home town... Maybe the idea of bombs on your own head would cool you down, great desperado.
Sanctioning stuff now basically finishes the issue... Russia gets it's territoroies, the west made it's sanction, story over... Neither side has any reason to move from this position anymore, the results are in place.
Leaving the final position of the west open, also allows to get changes to the Russian one by negotiations, And if those fail, and the Russians finalize their position(e.g. by annexing crimea or creating a puppet nation), it won't take a week to sign those sanctions...
|
On March 04 2014 09:21 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 09:17 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 09:15 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 09:05 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 08:06 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 08:06 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 03:50 BronzeKnee wrote:Confirmed: Anyone leading Great Britain with the last name Chamberlain has no backbone. European leaders are doing exactly what their populations want from them, which definitely is not a war. Democracy in action. US will do exactly the same. Few warmongering fanatics that never experienced war, yet would love to plunge the continent in it are just pathetic. Something tells me that the people in England didn't want to get bombed every night either. I don't want war, but sometimes you go to war to avoid a worse war. The politics of avoidance of war is why WW2 was so terrible. It didn't have to be that way. Letting Putin just take Crimea is a tragedy for those in Crimea and Ukraine who don't want it. And it's wrong. People already pointed out how bad analogy with 1938-9 this is. Actually no one has presented any argument about how the analogy is wrong. Let me make it real simple though, to further the understanding of it. Let's play a game! To make a historically accurate story, replace the parts in quotes with all letters or all numbers using the code below! A = Hitler B = Germany C = Czechoslovakia D = German E = 1938 1 = Putin 2 = Russia 3 = Ukraine 4 = Russian 5 = 2014 (A or 1) ordered (D or 4) troops into the sovereign country of (C or 3) in March of (E or 5). His reasoning was that (D or 4) speakers and natives were being threatened and needed protection. There was no evidence for this claim. The governing body of (B or 2) then decided the annex the country. Last sentence did not happen, so even that pat of your analogy fails. But people pointed out how nicely you ignore the changed geopolitical situation. You left out the word "yet." But it is coming. http://news.firedoglake.com/2014/03/03/russia-annexes-part-of-ukraine-as-president-obama-warns-of-consequences/ And what geopolitical change makes what Russia did right compared to what Germany did?
Who talks about "right"? You were claiming that if we do not intervene militarily against Russia we will have Russia invading NATO countries in no time. And based that prediction on superficial similarities between today and start of WW2, while ignoring everything else that makes tat scenario rather far fetched.
|
Germany's foreign policy is fucked up to the point where they would rather supply tanks to Saudi-Arabia than actually stand up for whats right. Either german voters don't care or don't know. Same for the UK and my own country. Maybe its time to start throwing rocks here too.
|
On March 04 2014 09:21 mahrgell wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 09:08 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 08:29 mahrgell wrote:On March 04 2014 08:27 Cheerio wrote:On March 04 2014 08:06 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 03:50 BronzeKnee wrote:Confirmed: Anyone leading Great Britain with the last name Chamberlain has no backbone. European leaders are doing exactly what their populations want from them, which definitely is not a war. Democracy in action. US will do exactly the same. Few warmongering fanatics that never experienced war, yet would love to plunge the continent in it are just pathetic. Right, that's why all kinds of concessions need to be made to local dictators. I think it is for the better of Ukraine, if there is no war between Europe and Russia So better be thankful, that not everyone on the world is that triggerhappy What did you think about the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq in 1990? Did you think the response, which eventually led to a military force invading and removing Iraqi forces from Kuwait was "trigger happy"? Did you think it was the wrong thing to do? Was it acceptable to you that Kuwait was occupied by a foreign army? If you don't think the invasion was acceptable, and didn't think the coalition forces were too "trigger happy", then your logic is inconsistent. Even if your logic is consistent, the argument you presented is that of humans beings who have no moral fortitude and only care for themselves. It is the argument of "well, as long as my home town isn't invaded and occupied I don't care" and "as long as it happens to someone else but not to me..." Frankly, It is absolutely disgusting and I'm ashamed that people still think this way. What if this were your home town? What if it was you and your family, your life? Does that make a difference? The people of Crimea deserve better. Your attitude that other people in Europe or Russia are somehow more important than those in Crimea is revolting and stinks of elitism. In fact, it is just purely elitist. Russia invaded a sovereign country and has occupied a region there. That is unacceptable. Just like when Iraq invaded Kuwait. Totally unacceptable and the world responded then the correct way. With military force to free the people of Kuwait after a political solution was tried. In this instance, are we scared because Russia is stronger? Or do we simply not care for those in Ukraine? Are human rights being trampled in nations other than NATO nations acceptable but because Ukraine never signed on the dotted line? If the political solution does not work, the world must responds with force. The people of Crimea and Ukraine deserve it. We should not have one set of rules for this group of humans, and another set for another group of humans. That is elitism, and we are all children of the earth. There is a clear right and wrong here. What Russia did is wrong. We've got to make it right. It is just really sad that people present the argument that you did. The people of Crimea and Ukraine deserve better. If it were my hometown, I would certainly hope, that not some idiot across an ocean decides, that it should be the next battlefield... And my allies tries to negotiate a way out of it first... Tanks can roll, if all is lost. It may be unknown to you, but some people think of violence and military escalation as the absolute last resort measure. But of course armchair general from the US, who have not experienced any modern war on their own soil, and invaded a dozen countries post WW2, knows how things are done... Seriously, I just wish sevastopol was your own home town... Maybe the idea of bombs on your own head would cool you down, great desperado. Sanctioning stuff now basically finishes the issue... Russia gets it's territoroies, the west made it's sanction, story over... Neither side has any reason to move from this position anymore, the results are in place. Leaving the final position of the west open, also allows to get changes to the Russian one by negotiations, And if those fail, and the Russians finalize their position(e.g. by annexing crimea or creating a puppet nation), it won't take a week to sign those sanctions...
You went from saying that you'd negotiate and if that didn't get you what was right and if that didn't work, then tanks could roll, to sanctioning stuff finishes the issue! What?
Russia just gets it territory! That is absolutely the worse scenario! I wish you were a citizen of Sevastopol too, so you could understand exactly what that means.
This isn't a joke. This isn't some political game. This is people's lives and self determination. Read the UN charter.
You're just so willing to give up on people because your an elitist. I am ashamed people think the way you do.
|
On March 04 2014 09:24 mcc wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 09:21 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 09:17 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 09:15 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 09:05 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 08:06 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 08:06 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 03:50 BronzeKnee wrote:Confirmed: Anyone leading Great Britain with the last name Chamberlain has no backbone. European leaders are doing exactly what their populations want from them, which definitely is not a war. Democracy in action. US will do exactly the same. Few warmongering fanatics that never experienced war, yet would love to plunge the continent in it are just pathetic. Something tells me that the people in England didn't want to get bombed every night either. I don't want war, but sometimes you go to war to avoid a worse war. The politics of avoidance of war is why WW2 was so terrible. It didn't have to be that way. Letting Putin just take Crimea is a tragedy for those in Crimea and Ukraine who don't want it. And it's wrong. People already pointed out how bad analogy with 1938-9 this is. Actually no one has presented any argument about how the analogy is wrong. Let me make it real simple though, to further the understanding of it. Let's play a game! To make a historically accurate story, replace the parts in quotes with all letters or all numbers using the code below! A = Hitler B = Germany C = Czechoslovakia D = German E = 1938 1 = Putin 2 = Russia 3 = Ukraine 4 = Russian 5 = 2014 (A or 1) ordered (D or 4) troops into the sovereign country of (C or 3) in March of (E or 5). His reasoning was that (D or 4) speakers and natives were being threatened and needed protection. There was no evidence for this claim. The governing body of (B or 2) then decided the annex the country. Last sentence did not happen, so even that pat of your analogy fails. But people pointed out how nicely you ignore the changed geopolitical situation. You left out the word "yet." But it is coming. http://news.firedoglake.com/2014/03/03/russia-annexes-part-of-ukraine-as-president-obama-warns-of-consequences/ And what geopolitical change makes what Russia did right compared to what Germany did? Who talks about "right"? You were claiming that if we do not intervene militarily against Russia we will have Russia invading NATO countries in no time. And based that prediction on superficial similarities between today and start of WW2, while ignoring everything else that makes tat scenario rather far fetched.
When did I say that? All I said is what Hitler did to Czechoslovakia was wrong, and therefore what Putin is doing to Ukraine is wrong.
I certainly did not claim that if we do not intervene militarily against Russia we will have Russia invading NATO countries in no time. Do not put words in my mouth, you made that assumption.
My guess that Putin will annex Crimea is based on the laws going through the Duma right now...
|
On March 04 2014 09:21 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 09:12 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 09:05 Sub40APM wrote:On March 04 2014 09:01 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 08:03 Sub40APM wrote:On March 04 2014 08:00 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 03:43 Sub40APM wrote:On March 04 2014 03:40 Saumure wrote:On March 04 2014 03:20 Sub40APM wrote:On March 04 2014 03:16 Saumure wrote:lol, do you really think Russia would invade Poland or something? Putin blocked the invasion of Syria (and what would have followed) and nobody finds it strange that another riot escalates next to russia immediatly after that? Its all a Western plot, I knew it. Democracy always has such a dirty Western bias and must be prevented at all costs. Please, tell me more about how you brought democracy to Iraq, Afghanistan and Lybia. How about Poland, Czehia, Slovakia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia instead?
And tell me how is democracy working out for you? Every x years (don't know where you live), you get the chance to vote for one out of two parties. Both will do basically the same thing, except for a couple of unimportant issues. You really don't get a say about anyting.
And however shitty it is, its still better than the one party, one tsar state built by Russians. Oh, now I understand Rubio's words, already history is being rewritten and we were given democracy by the West. We were just standing there not knowing what to do and good guys came and taught us democracy, because we never knew such a thing. You knew it. Then you lost it to the Germans and the Russians. And the Americans removed first the one then the other for you. One took much longer but your own attempt, like all small but proud democratic countries in the face of tanks, stalled. American's did not remove the Soviets. They just outlasted them, I see no reason to give them any credit for our current democracy. The Soviets wouldnt have withdrawn without the Americans or the CFE Treaty pressure. Your opinion, Soviets were done anyway. Simple existence of US is not enough reason to give them credit. Any existing adversary of the Soviet Union would achieve the same without ever lifting a finger. uh, the only other existing adversary of soviet union occupying your country were the nazis...and i dont mean the ukrainan junta of evil but the real deal, efficiently german
You misunderstand. I meant that if there was not US, but some other opponent of USSR in Cold War and that opponent would not lift a finger to do anything, but protect itself and its allies, Soviet Union would still dissolve its empire due to economic and social issues.
|
On March 04 2014 09:27 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 09:21 mahrgell wrote:On March 04 2014 09:08 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 08:29 mahrgell wrote:On March 04 2014 08:27 Cheerio wrote:On March 04 2014 08:06 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 03:50 BronzeKnee wrote:Confirmed: Anyone leading Great Britain with the last name Chamberlain has no backbone. European leaders are doing exactly what their populations want from them, which definitely is not a war. Democracy in action. US will do exactly the same. Few warmongering fanatics that never experienced war, yet would love to plunge the continent in it are just pathetic. Right, that's why all kinds of concessions need to be made to local dictators. I think it is for the better of Ukraine, if there is no war between Europe and Russia So better be thankful, that not everyone on the world is that triggerhappy What did you think about the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq in 1990? Did you think the response, which eventually led to a military force invading and removing Iraqi forces from Kuwait was "trigger happy"? Did you think it was the wrong thing to do? Was it acceptable to you that Kuwait was occupied by a foreign army? If you don't think the invasion was acceptable, and didn't think the coalition forces were too "trigger happy", then your logic is inconsistent. Even if your logic is consistent, the argument you presented is that of humans beings who have no moral fortitude and only care for themselves. It is the argument of "well, as long as my home town isn't invaded and occupied I don't care" and "as long as it happens to someone else but not to me..." Frankly, It is absolutely disgusting and I'm ashamed that people still think this way. What if this were your home town? What if it was you and your family, your life? Does that make a difference? The people of Crimea deserve better. Your attitude that other people in Europe or Russia are somehow more important than those in Crimea is revolting and stinks of elitism. In fact, it is just purely elitist. Russia invaded a sovereign country and has occupied a region there. That is unacceptable. Just like when Iraq invaded Kuwait. Totally unacceptable and the world responded then the correct way. With military force to free the people of Kuwait after a political solution was tried. In this instance, are we scared because Russia is stronger? Or do we simply not care for those in Ukraine? Are human rights being trampled in nations other than NATO nations acceptable but because Ukraine never signed on the dotted line? If the political solution does not work, the world must responds with force. The people of Crimea and Ukraine deserve it. We should not have one set of rules for this group of humans, and another set for another group of humans. That is elitism, and we are all children of the earth. There is a clear right and wrong here. What Russia did is wrong. We've got to make it right. It is just really sad that people present the argument that you did. The people of Crimea and Ukraine deserve better. If it were my hometown, I would certainly hope, that not some idiot across an ocean decides, that it should be the next battlefield... And my allies tries to negotiate a way out of it first... Tanks can roll, if all is lost. It may be unknown to you, but some people think of violence and military escalation as the absolute last resort measure. But of course armchair general from the US, who have not experienced any modern war on their own soil, and invaded a dozen countries post WW2, knows how things are done... Seriously, I just wish sevastopol was your own home town... Maybe the idea of bombs on your own head would cool you down, great desperado. Sanctioning stuff now basically finishes the issue... Russia gets it's territoroies, the west made it's sanction, story over... Neither side has any reason to move from this position anymore, the results are in place. Leaving the final position of the west open, also allows to get changes to the Russian one by negotiations, And if those fail, and the Russians finalize their position(e.g. by annexing crimea or creating a puppet nation), it won't take a week to sign those sanctions... You went from saying that you'd negotiate and if that didn't get you what was right and if that didn't work, then tanks could roll, to sanctioning stuff finishes the issue! What? Russia just gets it territory! That is absolutely the worse scenario! I wish you were a citizen of Sevastopol too, so you could understand exactly what that means. This isn't a joke. This isn't some political game. This is people's lives and self determination. Read the UN charter. You're just so willing to give up on people because your an elitist. I am ashamed people think the way you do.
You are the one thinking war is a joke. There is a reason Ukraine has not intervened itself yet. This ís exactly a political game.
|
On March 04 2014 09:27 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 09:21 mahrgell wrote:On March 04 2014 09:08 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 08:29 mahrgell wrote:On March 04 2014 08:27 Cheerio wrote:On March 04 2014 08:06 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 03:50 BronzeKnee wrote:Confirmed: Anyone leading Great Britain with the last name Chamberlain has no backbone. European leaders are doing exactly what their populations want from them, which definitely is not a war. Democracy in action. US will do exactly the same. Few warmongering fanatics that never experienced war, yet would love to plunge the continent in it are just pathetic. Right, that's why all kinds of concessions need to be made to local dictators. I think it is for the better of Ukraine, if there is no war between Europe and Russia So better be thankful, that not everyone on the world is that triggerhappy What did you think about the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq in 1990? Did you think the response, which eventually led to a military force invading and removing Iraqi forces from Kuwait was "trigger happy"? Did you think it was the wrong thing to do? Was it acceptable to you that Kuwait was occupied by a foreign army? If you don't think the invasion was acceptable, and didn't think the coalition forces were too "trigger happy", then your logic is inconsistent. Even if your logic is consistent, the argument you presented is that of humans beings who have no moral fortitude and only care for themselves. It is the argument of "well, as long as my home town isn't invaded and occupied I don't care" and "as long as it happens to someone else but not to me..." Frankly, It is absolutely disgusting and I'm ashamed that people still think this way. What if this were your home town? What if it was you and your family, your life? Does that make a difference? The people of Crimea deserve better. Your attitude that other people in Europe or Russia are somehow more important than those in Crimea is revolting and stinks of elitism. In fact, it is just purely elitist. Russia invaded a sovereign country and has occupied a region there. That is unacceptable. Just like when Iraq invaded Kuwait. Totally unacceptable and the world responded then the correct way. With military force to free the people of Kuwait after a political solution was tried. In this instance, are we scared because Russia is stronger? Or do we simply not care for those in Ukraine? Are human rights being trampled in nations other than NATO nations acceptable but because Ukraine never signed on the dotted line? If the political solution does not work, the world must responds with force. The people of Crimea and Ukraine deserve it. We should not have one set of rules for this group of humans, and another set for another group of humans. That is elitism, and we are all children of the earth. There is a clear right and wrong here. What Russia did is wrong. We've got to make it right. It is just really sad that people present the argument that you did. The people of Crimea and Ukraine deserve better. If it were my hometown, I would certainly hope, that not some idiot across an ocean decides, that it should be the next battlefield... And my allies tries to negotiate a way out of it first... Tanks can roll, if all is lost. It may be unknown to you, but some people think of violence and military escalation as the absolute last resort measure. But of course armchair general from the US, who have not experienced any modern war on their own soil, and invaded a dozen countries post WW2, knows how things are done... Seriously, I just wish sevastopol was your own home town... Maybe the idea of bombs on your own head would cool you down, great desperado. Sanctioning stuff now basically finishes the issue... Russia gets it's territoroies, the west made it's sanction, story over... Neither side has any reason to move from this position anymore, the results are in place. Leaving the final position of the west open, also allows to get changes to the Russian one by negotiations, And if those fail, and the Russians finalize their position(e.g. by annexing crimea or creating a puppet nation), it won't take a week to sign those sanctions... You went from saying that you'd negotiate and if that didn't get you what was right and if that didn't work, then tanks could roll, to sanctioning stuff finishes the issue! What? Russia just gets it territory! That is absolutely the worse scenario! I wish you were a citizen of Sevastopol too, so you could understand exactly what that means. This isn't a joke. This isn't some political game. This is people's lives and self determination. Read the UN charter. You're just so willing to give up on people because your an elitist. I am ashamed people think the way you do.
FFS read what people say, not just substitute your own caricature.
|
|
|
On March 04 2014 09:30 hypercube wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 09:27 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 09:21 mahrgell wrote:On March 04 2014 09:08 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 08:29 mahrgell wrote:On March 04 2014 08:27 Cheerio wrote:On March 04 2014 08:06 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 03:50 BronzeKnee wrote:Confirmed: Anyone leading Great Britain with the last name Chamberlain has no backbone. European leaders are doing exactly what their populations want from them, which definitely is not a war. Democracy in action. US will do exactly the same. Few warmongering fanatics that never experienced war, yet would love to plunge the continent in it are just pathetic. Right, that's why all kinds of concessions need to be made to local dictators. I think it is for the better of Ukraine, if there is no war between Europe and Russia So better be thankful, that not everyone on the world is that triggerhappy What did you think about the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq in 1990? Did you think the response, which eventually led to a military force invading and removing Iraqi forces from Kuwait was "trigger happy"? Did you think it was the wrong thing to do? Was it acceptable to you that Kuwait was occupied by a foreign army? If you don't think the invasion was acceptable, and didn't think the coalition forces were too "trigger happy", then your logic is inconsistent. Even if your logic is consistent, the argument you presented is that of humans beings who have no moral fortitude and only care for themselves. It is the argument of "well, as long as my home town isn't invaded and occupied I don't care" and "as long as it happens to someone else but not to me..." Frankly, It is absolutely disgusting and I'm ashamed that people still think this way. What if this were your home town? What if it was you and your family, your life? Does that make a difference? The people of Crimea deserve better. Your attitude that other people in Europe or Russia are somehow more important than those in Crimea is revolting and stinks of elitism. In fact, it is just purely elitist. Russia invaded a sovereign country and has occupied a region there. That is unacceptable. Just like when Iraq invaded Kuwait. Totally unacceptable and the world responded then the correct way. With military force to free the people of Kuwait after a political solution was tried. In this instance, are we scared because Russia is stronger? Or do we simply not care for those in Ukraine? Are human rights being trampled in nations other than NATO nations acceptable but because Ukraine never signed on the dotted line? If the political solution does not work, the world must responds with force. The people of Crimea and Ukraine deserve it. We should not have one set of rules for this group of humans, and another set for another group of humans. That is elitism, and we are all children of the earth. There is a clear right and wrong here. What Russia did is wrong. We've got to make it right. It is just really sad that people present the argument that you did. The people of Crimea and Ukraine deserve better. If it were my hometown, I would certainly hope, that not some idiot across an ocean decides, that it should be the next battlefield... And my allies tries to negotiate a way out of it first... Tanks can roll, if all is lost. It may be unknown to you, but some people think of violence and military escalation as the absolute last resort measure. But of course armchair general from the US, who have not experienced any modern war on their own soil, and invaded a dozen countries post WW2, knows how things are done... Seriously, I just wish sevastopol was your own home town... Maybe the idea of bombs on your own head would cool you down, great desperado. Sanctioning stuff now basically finishes the issue... Russia gets it's territoroies, the west made it's sanction, story over... Neither side has any reason to move from this position anymore, the results are in place. Leaving the final position of the west open, also allows to get changes to the Russian one by negotiations, And if those fail, and the Russians finalize their position(e.g. by annexing crimea or creating a puppet nation), it won't take a week to sign those sanctions... You went from saying that you'd negotiate and if that didn't get you what was right and if that didn't work, then tanks could roll, to sanctioning stuff finishes the issue! What? Russia just gets it territory! That is absolutely the worse scenario! I wish you were a citizen of Sevastopol too, so you could understand exactly what that means. This isn't a joke. This isn't some political game. This is people's lives and self determination. Read the UN charter. You're just so willing to give up on people because your an elitist. I am ashamed people think the way you do. FFS read what people say, not just substitute your own caricature.
I did.
He wrote "Sanctioning stuff now basically finishes the issue... Russia gets it's territoroies, the west made it's sanction, story over... "
What am I missing? Don't stand there and berate me, educate me.
|
On March 04 2014 09:28 mcc wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 09:21 Sub40APM wrote:On March 04 2014 09:12 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 09:05 Sub40APM wrote:On March 04 2014 09:01 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 08:03 Sub40APM wrote:On March 04 2014 08:00 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 03:43 Sub40APM wrote:On March 04 2014 03:40 Saumure wrote:On March 04 2014 03:20 Sub40APM wrote:
[quote]
Its all a Western plot, I knew it. Democracy always has such a dirty Western bias and must be prevented at all costs. Please, tell me more about how you brought democracy to Iraq, Afghanistan and Lybia. How about Poland, Czehia, Slovakia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia instead?
And tell me how is democracy working out for you? Every x years (don't know where you live), you get the chance to vote for one out of two parties. Both will do basically the same thing, except for a couple of unimportant issues. You really don't get a say about anyting.
And however shitty it is, its still better than the one party, one tsar state built by Russians. Oh, now I understand Rubio's words, already history is being rewritten and we were given democracy by the West. We were just standing there not knowing what to do and good guys came and taught us democracy, because we never knew such a thing. You knew it. Then you lost it to the Germans and the Russians. And the Americans removed first the one then the other for you. One took much longer but your own attempt, like all small but proud democratic countries in the face of tanks, stalled. American's did not remove the Soviets. They just outlasted them, I see no reason to give them any credit for our current democracy. The Soviets wouldnt have withdrawn without the Americans or the CFE Treaty pressure. Your opinion, Soviets were done anyway. Simple existence of US is not enough reason to give them credit. Any existing adversary of the Soviet Union would achieve the same without ever lifting a finger. uh, the only other existing adversary of soviet union occupying your country were the nazis...and i dont mean the ukrainan junta of evil but the real deal, efficiently german You misunderstand. I meant that if there was not US, but some other opponent of USSR in Cold War and that opponent would not lift a finger to do anything, but protect itself and its allies, Soviet Union would still dissolve its empire due to economic and social issues.
some sort of imaginary power that isnt the Germans who would be the only other rival to the Soviets in Europe?
|
On March 04 2014 09:30 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 09:27 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 09:21 mahrgell wrote:On March 04 2014 09:08 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 08:29 mahrgell wrote:On March 04 2014 08:27 Cheerio wrote:On March 04 2014 08:06 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 03:50 BronzeKnee wrote:Confirmed: Anyone leading Great Britain with the last name Chamberlain has no backbone. European leaders are doing exactly what their populations want from them, which definitely is not a war. Democracy in action. US will do exactly the same. Few warmongering fanatics that never experienced war, yet would love to plunge the continent in it are just pathetic. Right, that's why all kinds of concessions need to be made to local dictators. I think it is for the better of Ukraine, if there is no war between Europe and Russia So better be thankful, that not everyone on the world is that triggerhappy What did you think about the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq in 1990? Did you think the response, which eventually led to a military force invading and removing Iraqi forces from Kuwait was "trigger happy"? Did you think it was the wrong thing to do? Was it acceptable to you that Kuwait was occupied by a foreign army? If you don't think the invasion was acceptable, and didn't think the coalition forces were too "trigger happy", then your logic is inconsistent. Even if your logic is consistent, the argument you presented is that of humans beings who have no moral fortitude and only care for themselves. It is the argument of "well, as long as my home town isn't invaded and occupied I don't care" and "as long as it happens to someone else but not to me..." Frankly, It is absolutely disgusting and I'm ashamed that people still think this way. What if this were your home town? What if it was you and your family, your life? Does that make a difference? The people of Crimea deserve better. Your attitude that other people in Europe or Russia are somehow more important than those in Crimea is revolting and stinks of elitism. In fact, it is just purely elitist. Russia invaded a sovereign country and has occupied a region there. That is unacceptable. Just like when Iraq invaded Kuwait. Totally unacceptable and the world responded then the correct way. With military force to free the people of Kuwait after a political solution was tried. In this instance, are we scared because Russia is stronger? Or do we simply not care for those in Ukraine? Are human rights being trampled in nations other than NATO nations acceptable but because Ukraine never signed on the dotted line? If the political solution does not work, the world must responds with force. The people of Crimea and Ukraine deserve it. We should not have one set of rules for this group of humans, and another set for another group of humans. That is elitism, and we are all children of the earth. There is a clear right and wrong here. What Russia did is wrong. We've got to make it right. It is just really sad that people present the argument that you did. The people of Crimea and Ukraine deserve better. If it were my hometown, I would certainly hope, that not some idiot across an ocean decides, that it should be the next battlefield... And my allies tries to negotiate a way out of it first... Tanks can roll, if all is lost. It may be unknown to you, but some people think of violence and military escalation as the absolute last resort measure. But of course armchair general from the US, who have not experienced any modern war on their own soil, and invaded a dozen countries post WW2, knows how things are done... Seriously, I just wish sevastopol was your own home town... Maybe the idea of bombs on your own head would cool you down, great desperado. Sanctioning stuff now basically finishes the issue... Russia gets it's territoroies, the west made it's sanction, story over... Neither side has any reason to move from this position anymore, the results are in place. Leaving the final position of the west open, also allows to get changes to the Russian one by negotiations, And if those fail, and the Russians finalize their position(e.g. by annexing crimea or creating a puppet nation), it won't take a week to sign those sanctions... You went from saying that you'd negotiate and if that didn't get you what was right and if that didn't work, then tanks could roll, to sanctioning stuff finishes the issue! What? Russia just gets it territory! That is absolutely the worse scenario! I wish you were a citizen of Sevastopol too, so you could understand exactly what that means. This isn't a joke. This isn't some political game. This is people's lives and self determination. Read the UN charter. You're just so willing to give up on people because your an elitist. I am ashamed people think the way you do. You are the one thinking war is a joke. There is a reason Ukraine has not intervened itself yet. This ís exactly a political game.
The reason Ukraine hasn't intervened to defend itself, is because of people who think think "well as long as it doesn't happen to me I don't care" which this thread if full of. If Ukraine knew the west would support them, then Russian troops would have been getting shot at when they tried to cross the border.
|
On March 04 2014 09:27 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 09:21 mahrgell wrote:On March 04 2014 09:08 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 08:29 mahrgell wrote:On March 04 2014 08:27 Cheerio wrote:On March 04 2014 08:06 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 03:50 BronzeKnee wrote:Confirmed: Anyone leading Great Britain with the last name Chamberlain has no backbone. European leaders are doing exactly what their populations want from them, which definitely is not a war. Democracy in action. US will do exactly the same. Few warmongering fanatics that never experienced war, yet would love to plunge the continent in it are just pathetic. Right, that's why all kinds of concessions need to be made to local dictators. I think it is for the better of Ukraine, if there is no war between Europe and Russia So better be thankful, that not everyone on the world is that triggerhappy What did you think about the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq in 1990? Did you think the response, which eventually led to a military force invading and removing Iraqi forces from Kuwait was "trigger happy"? Did you think it was the wrong thing to do? Was it acceptable to you that Kuwait was occupied by a foreign army? If you don't think the invasion was acceptable, and didn't think the coalition forces were too "trigger happy", then your logic is inconsistent. Even if your logic is consistent, the argument you presented is that of humans beings who have no moral fortitude and only care for themselves. It is the argument of "well, as long as my home town isn't invaded and occupied I don't care" and "as long as it happens to someone else but not to me..." Frankly, It is absolutely disgusting and I'm ashamed that people still think this way. What if this were your home town? What if it was you and your family, your life? Does that make a difference? The people of Crimea deserve better. Your attitude that other people in Europe or Russia are somehow more important than those in Crimea is revolting and stinks of elitism. In fact, it is just purely elitist. Russia invaded a sovereign country and has occupied a region there. That is unacceptable. Just like when Iraq invaded Kuwait. Totally unacceptable and the world responded then the correct way. With military force to free the people of Kuwait after a political solution was tried. In this instance, are we scared because Russia is stronger? Or do we simply not care for those in Ukraine? Are human rights being trampled in nations other than NATO nations acceptable but because Ukraine never signed on the dotted line? If the political solution does not work, the world must responds with force. The people of Crimea and Ukraine deserve it. We should not have one set of rules for this group of humans, and another set for another group of humans. That is elitism, and we are all children of the earth. There is a clear right and wrong here. What Russia did is wrong. We've got to make it right. It is just really sad that people present the argument that you did. The people of Crimea and Ukraine deserve better. If it were my hometown, I would certainly hope, that not some idiot across an ocean decides, that it should be the next battlefield... And my allies tries to negotiate a way out of it first... Tanks can roll, if all is lost. It may be unknown to you, but some people think of violence and military escalation as the absolute last resort measure. But of course armchair general from the US, who have not experienced any modern war on their own soil, and invaded a dozen countries post WW2, knows how things are done... Seriously, I just wish sevastopol was your own home town... Maybe the idea of bombs on your own head would cool you down, great desperado. Sanctioning stuff now basically finishes the issue... Russia gets it's territoroies, the west made it's sanction, story over... Neither side has any reason to move from this position anymore, the results are in place. Leaving the final position of the west open, also allows to get changes to the Russian one by negotiations, And if those fail, and the Russians finalize their position(e.g. by annexing crimea or creating a puppet nation), it won't take a week to sign those sanctions... You went from saying that you'd negotiate and if that didn't get you what was right and if that didn't work, then tanks could roll, to sanctioning stuff finishes the issue! What? Russia just gets it territory! That is absolutely the worse scenario! I wish you were a citizen of Sevastopol too, so you could understand exactly what that means. This isn't a joke. This isn't some political game. This is people's lives and self determination. Read the UN charter. You're just so willing to give up on people because your an elitist. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Okay, I will quote the first two line of the UN charter just for you:
WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED
to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind,
And no, I'm not ashamed, sorry.
|
On March 04 2014 09:31 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 09:30 hypercube wrote:On March 04 2014 09:27 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 09:21 mahrgell wrote:On March 04 2014 09:08 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 04 2014 08:29 mahrgell wrote:On March 04 2014 08:27 Cheerio wrote:On March 04 2014 08:06 mcc wrote:On March 04 2014 03:50 BronzeKnee wrote:Confirmed: Anyone leading Great Britain with the last name Chamberlain has no backbone. European leaders are doing exactly what their populations want from them, which definitely is not a war. Democracy in action. US will do exactly the same. Few warmongering fanatics that never experienced war, yet would love to plunge the continent in it are just pathetic. Right, that's why all kinds of concessions need to be made to local dictators. I think it is for the better of Ukraine, if there is no war between Europe and Russia So better be thankful, that not everyone on the world is that triggerhappy What did you think about the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq in 1990? Did you think the response, which eventually led to a military force invading and removing Iraqi forces from Kuwait was "trigger happy"? Did you think it was the wrong thing to do? Was it acceptable to you that Kuwait was occupied by a foreign army? If you don't think the invasion was acceptable, and didn't think the coalition forces were too "trigger happy", then your logic is inconsistent. Even if your logic is consistent, the argument you presented is that of humans beings who have no moral fortitude and only care for themselves. It is the argument of "well, as long as my home town isn't invaded and occupied I don't care" and "as long as it happens to someone else but not to me..." Frankly, It is absolutely disgusting and I'm ashamed that people still think this way. What if this were your home town? What if it was you and your family, your life? Does that make a difference? The people of Crimea deserve better. Your attitude that other people in Europe or Russia are somehow more important than those in Crimea is revolting and stinks of elitism. In fact, it is just purely elitist. Russia invaded a sovereign country and has occupied a region there. That is unacceptable. Just like when Iraq invaded Kuwait. Totally unacceptable and the world responded then the correct way. With military force to free the people of Kuwait after a political solution was tried. In this instance, are we scared because Russia is stronger? Or do we simply not care for those in Ukraine? Are human rights being trampled in nations other than NATO nations acceptable but because Ukraine never signed on the dotted line? If the political solution does not work, the world must responds with force. The people of Crimea and Ukraine deserve it. We should not have one set of rules for this group of humans, and another set for another group of humans. That is elitism, and we are all children of the earth. There is a clear right and wrong here. What Russia did is wrong. We've got to make it right. It is just really sad that people present the argument that you did. The people of Crimea and Ukraine deserve better. If it were my hometown, I would certainly hope, that not some idiot across an ocean decides, that it should be the next battlefield... And my allies tries to negotiate a way out of it first... Tanks can roll, if all is lost. It may be unknown to you, but some people think of violence and military escalation as the absolute last resort measure. But of course armchair general from the US, who have not experienced any modern war on their own soil, and invaded a dozen countries post WW2, knows how things are done... Seriously, I just wish sevastopol was your own home town... Maybe the idea of bombs on your own head would cool you down, great desperado. Sanctioning stuff now basically finishes the issue... Russia gets it's territoroies, the west made it's sanction, story over... Neither side has any reason to move from this position anymore, the results are in place. Leaving the final position of the west open, also allows to get changes to the Russian one by negotiations, And if those fail, and the Russians finalize their position(e.g. by annexing crimea or creating a puppet nation), it won't take a week to sign those sanctions... You went from saying that you'd negotiate and if that didn't get you what was right and if that didn't work, then tanks could roll, to sanctioning stuff finishes the issue! What? Russia just gets it territory! That is absolutely the worse scenario! I wish you were a citizen of Sevastopol too, so you could understand exactly what that means. This isn't a joke. This isn't some political game. This is people's lives and self determination. Read the UN charter. You're just so willing to give up on people because your an elitist. I am ashamed people think the way you do. FFS read what people say, not just substitute your own caricature. I did. He wrote "Sanctioning stuff now basically finishes the issue... Russia gets it's territoroies, the west made it's sanction, story over... " What am I missing? Don't stand there and berate me, educate me.
Everything. What he meant:
"Using sanctions now would lead to Russia annexing Crimea. It's better to withold threats now and try to get them to back down. IF that doesn't work there will be plenty of time for sanctions later."
Yes, it wasn't particularly clear, not everyone is a native English speaker. But it wasn't that hard to figure out.
|
its interesting because this is what the governor of Donetsk was saying last week
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/02/26/ukraine-crisis-east-idUKL6N0LU4AN20140226
Andrey Shishatsky, governor of Donetsk region and a senior figure in the Party of Regions, said he accepted Yanukovich's dismissal by parliament and that the ousted president was responsible for the bloodshed, the worst upheaval in Ukraine since it gained independence from the Soviet Union in 1991.
"We have to face the truth," Shishatsky told a conference in Donetsk this week. "Very many mistakes were made, including tragic ones that led to people dying."
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
