|
|
16:48: Turkey will not "leave Crimean Tatars in the lurch," Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is quoted as saying by Turkey's Anadolu news agency.
"I have talked to Russian President Putin on the events in Crimea and told him that Russia should protect the rights of Crimean Tatars as they do with the Russian majority and other minorities in Crimea," he adds.
So what, will there be well equipped, "Turkish self defense" forces now in Crimea too?
|
On March 08 2014 03:27 nunez wrote:
@tolkien buzzword's a buzzword, ya bigot. i've previously used 'the west'-phrase, had to justify / attempt to be more precise, but guess i failed. tieing it to conspiracy is overboard. set of strings attached to money funnelled into opposition.
A conspiracy is a conspiracy. You are setting up a common goal and a willful action to illegally obtain a goal for the persons who have "strings attached to money" and the "oppositon". Whether or not it is a theory relies on sourcing, but it is a conspiracy regardless!
|
On March 08 2014 02:53 Passion wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2014 02:47 Lord Tolkien wrote:On March 08 2014 02:38 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2014 02:19 Lord Tolkien wrote:On March 08 2014 01:27 oneofthem wrote:
sure you can doubt the details of events, and it's not like ukraine is some well run model state with entirely politically virtuous people, but the basic situation is undoubtedly russian operated intrusion. the 'west', whatever that may mean, is certainly involved but that does not then mean their project is bad.
posters who claim relativism basically want to see the situation as two strong and shadowy figures dueling it out, while having no sense of the real lives affected by this fiasco that will certainly not benefit from putin's behavior.
not that choosing teh west will save ukraine automatically, but it certainly stands a better chance at reform if it is brought within actual civilization. The first bit: the West is a colloquial IR term that generally refers to the United States and NATO (specifically Western & Central Europe), and was used to backdrop against the Communist "East". East vs. West is a pretty classic Cold War dichotomy. There has been some general expansion of the term recently to include Japan and South Korea, which means it'll go the way of other Cold War relics like First/Second/Third world differentiation and lose it's relevant meaning. The highlighted bit amuses the fk out of me, and reminds me of, oh, something something over a century ago. There is so much...arrogance in that one sentence, I'm impressed. surely arrogance would not obscure the fact that the russian govt is not exactly good for its people. i don't have an anti-russian as culture bias so much as i have one against their failed state that holds the people back. And I have no love for Russia or it's government, but you just conflated the Europe as civilization and Russia as...a lack of civilization? There are enough negative connotations here. Fact of the matter is, Russia isn't very civil.
I would point out that this logic, leads you to statements like : US is not civilized enough, Europe is. Now imagine the storm after that statement, even though you can easily make that argument. Calling others generalized names of vague meaning is not a good idea, unless you follow up with specifics, and even then it might not be the best idea, if your goal is a discussion and not flamewar.
|
On March 08 2014 03:39 mcc wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2014 02:53 Passion wrote:On March 08 2014 02:47 Lord Tolkien wrote:On March 08 2014 02:38 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2014 02:19 Lord Tolkien wrote:On March 08 2014 01:27 oneofthem wrote:
sure you can doubt the details of events, and it's not like ukraine is some well run model state with entirely politically virtuous people, but the basic situation is undoubtedly russian operated intrusion. the 'west', whatever that may mean, is certainly involved but that does not then mean their project is bad.
posters who claim relativism basically want to see the situation as two strong and shadowy figures dueling it out, while having no sense of the real lives affected by this fiasco that will certainly not benefit from putin's behavior.
not that choosing teh west will save ukraine automatically, but it certainly stands a better chance at reform if it is brought within actual civilization. The first bit: the West is a colloquial IR term that generally refers to the United States and NATO (specifically Western & Central Europe), and was used to backdrop against the Communist "East". East vs. West is a pretty classic Cold War dichotomy. There has been some general expansion of the term recently to include Japan and South Korea, which means it'll go the way of other Cold War relics like First/Second/Third world differentiation and lose it's relevant meaning. The highlighted bit amuses the fk out of me, and reminds me of, oh, something something over a century ago. There is so much...arrogance in that one sentence, I'm impressed. surely arrogance would not obscure the fact that the russian govt is not exactly good for its people. i don't have an anti-russian as culture bias so much as i have one against their failed state that holds the people back. And I have no love for Russia or it's government, but you just conflated the Europe as civilization and Russia as...a lack of civilization? There are enough negative connotations here. Fact of the matter is, Russia isn't very civil. I would point out that this logic, leads you to statements like : US is not civilized enough, Europe is. Now imagine the storm after that statement, even though you can easily make that argument. Calling others generalized names of vague meaning is not a good idea, unless you follow up with specifics, and even then it might not be the best idea, if your goal is a discussion and not flamewar.
Aw, come on... I figured we could all agree that randomly sending your military into another nation isn't the most civil thing to do.
And no. This is quite a bit different from USA - Afghanistan / Iraq...
|
On March 08 2014 01:43 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2014 01:29 nunez wrote:On March 08 2014 01:14 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2014 01:11 Lord Tolkien wrote:On March 08 2014 01:01 oneofthem wrote:
the only thing we don't doubt is that we gotta doubt. not sure if this is worse than simple brainwashing. lol There are plenty of avenues to learn about the issue for yourself, outside of standard news sources. There's a great deal of history involved with the Crimea (if you were starting there, start with the Crimean War) that ties it to Russia ethnically, historically, and culturally (Tolstoy). In conjunction with major Russian security interests in the region (Sevastopol), and the events leading up the crisis, there's a nexus of interests that make intervention in the Crimea, though a heavy risk for Russia, entirely understandable and consistent. On above tweet: It's pretty expected, and is not necessarily the result of Russian pressure (and I'd actually be surprised if it was). My guess it was a localized decision and pressuring. sure. but posters in doubt are mostly already operating with a belief of western conspiracy/manipulation. doubting western manipulation or are you talking about its extent? i don't know what some people's conception of 'the west' even is. is it a caricature of Imperialist Pig Americans or something out of the Jewish Illuminati playbook like you hear in ny bars? either way it's this shadowy figure that combats the russians or another opposing actor in a game of risk. sure, the cia is there in some capacity no doubt. but if you take sides based purely on a framework of west vs russia, you are not looking at the content of their respective influence. the west, for example, may wish for some positive reforms, while putin is engaged in teh old nationalism to combat internal weakness routine.
Western media would be the example that I would point out. OF course they are not as manipulative as Russian ones, but their work with the sources they have is often rather creative and ow they pick their sources is also sometimes suspect.
And by West I mean in general EU(depending on the context it might exclude some/all post-communist countries) + the countries like Switzerland, Norway, Iceland,... + US, Canada, Australia,...
|
On March 08 2014 03:43 Passion wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2014 03:39 mcc wrote:On March 08 2014 02:53 Passion wrote:On March 08 2014 02:47 Lord Tolkien wrote:On March 08 2014 02:38 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2014 02:19 Lord Tolkien wrote:On March 08 2014 01:27 oneofthem wrote:
sure you can doubt the details of events, and it's not like ukraine is some well run model state with entirely politically virtuous people, but the basic situation is undoubtedly russian operated intrusion. the 'west', whatever that may mean, is certainly involved but that does not then mean their project is bad.
posters who claim relativism basically want to see the situation as two strong and shadowy figures dueling it out, while having no sense of the real lives affected by this fiasco that will certainly not benefit from putin's behavior.
not that choosing teh west will save ukraine automatically, but it certainly stands a better chance at reform if it is brought within actual civilization. The first bit: the West is a colloquial IR term that generally refers to the United States and NATO (specifically Western & Central Europe), and was used to backdrop against the Communist "East". East vs. West is a pretty classic Cold War dichotomy. There has been some general expansion of the term recently to include Japan and South Korea, which means it'll go the way of other Cold War relics like First/Second/Third world differentiation and lose it's relevant meaning. The highlighted bit amuses the fk out of me, and reminds me of, oh, something something over a century ago. There is so much...arrogance in that one sentence, I'm impressed. surely arrogance would not obscure the fact that the russian govt is not exactly good for its people. i don't have an anti-russian as culture bias so much as i have one against their failed state that holds the people back. And I have no love for Russia or it's government, but you just conflated the Europe as civilization and Russia as...a lack of civilization? There are enough negative connotations here. Fact of the matter is, Russia isn't very civil. I would point out that this logic, leads you to statements like : US is not civilized enough, Europe is. Now imagine the storm after that statement, even though you can easily make that argument. Calling others generalized names of vague meaning is not a good idea, unless you follow up with specifics, and even then it might not be the best idea, if your goal is a discussion and not flamewar. Aw, come on... I figured we could all agree that randomly sending your military into another nation isn't the most civil thing to do. And no. This is quite a bit different from USA - Afghanistan / Iraq...
He is not argueing how truthfull it may be, but how unneeded and damaging it is to make the generalization if you are trying to have an open discussion.
|
On March 08 2014 02:11 myminerals wrote:
Just bumped into the thread. I live in Belarus and most of my relatives are in Ukraine. We are all concerned about the situation and watch it closely despite tonnes of biased opinions, distorted facts and overstatements from either side, be it Russia or Europe.
From what I was told and what I always knew about Ukraine is that there has always been a deep and serious social split between people who support Russia and people who don't, people who speak Ukrainian and those who speak Russian. It may sound strange to you, but national identity in the former countries of USSR is something that has been constantly under heavy pressure to the extend that in some places it completely weared off. However there has always been a strong and zealous opposition to Moscow in Ukrainian West, a fat powder keg that needed just one thing, a spark. They really wanted this "revolution" or we'd rather call it a rebellion. I can't say the same for the others. The others certainly didn't like the way their lifes were shaped by the low level of living conditions and social insecurity, but they would never start throwing Molotov cocktails. Maidan though spontaneously summoned by people eventually fell under control of individual groups. Though it does not matter now, since the wave has been created. What's more important is what will East and South Ukrainians do? I know that most of them sympathize Moscow and literally hate their own fellow countrymen from the West. The problem is much more complex than the way it is being described in the news where Russia is "the evil oppressor" to free Ukrainian people OR "the good liberator and protector" against Western fascism. Both sides are so horribly biased.
Thousands of people, tend to associate themselves with Russia and Russian culture. We are very very close and I would never call myself a Belarussian just because I was born and live in Belarus. I speak Russian and I share Russian cultural legacy, there is so little Belarussian in me I can't even tell you how am I different? We share the same language and history we are much more close than most Europeans and especially North Americans imagine. I just hope things won't get worse over there, because, you know, when your cousin tells you that he had received a military draft notice you stop thinking about democratic liberation or protection of peaceful citizens in Crimea.
well writen, i believe thats how i felt and most of my friend feel .
|
On March 08 2014 03:31 oneofthem wrote:
the us supports all sorts of politically expedient dissident groups but that doesnt make these groups bad automatically. that involvement is just another actor in the arena not the sole actor
assuming this is directed at me.
politically expedient dissident groups, wink wink, nudge nudge, say no more.
but yes, sure, that's hyperbole and onesided on my part.
|
On March 08 2014 03:31 oneofthem wrote:
the us supports all sorts of politically expedient dissident groups but that doesnt make these groups bad automatically. that involvement is just another actor in the arena not the sole actor
I agree, that's a very important distinction to make.
|
Russian Federation117 Posts
Big guy taking a sweety from a small guy. Happens from time to time, let's be real.
The thing is nobody gives a shit about Crimea outside of the Crimea itself. And those poor Crimean guys are smart enough to take an opportunity to get some oily-oily dollars - who's gonna blame them for it?
I am not sure I completely understand the russian interest in taking Crimea into Russia beyond satisfying Putin's ego though. But he's got a big one so I guess it might be true reason.
|
On March 08 2014 03:43 Passion wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2014 03:39 mcc wrote:On March 08 2014 02:53 Passion wrote:On March 08 2014 02:47 Lord Tolkien wrote:On March 08 2014 02:38 oneofthem wrote:On March 08 2014 02:19 Lord Tolkien wrote:On March 08 2014 01:27 oneofthem wrote:
sure you can doubt the details of events, and it's not like ukraine is some well run model state with entirely politically virtuous people, but the basic situation is undoubtedly russian operated intrusion. the 'west', whatever that may mean, is certainly involved but that does not then mean their project is bad.
posters who claim relativism basically want to see the situation as two strong and shadowy figures dueling it out, while having no sense of the real lives affected by this fiasco that will certainly not benefit from putin's behavior.
not that choosing teh west will save ukraine automatically, but it certainly stands a better chance at reform if it is brought within actual civilization. The first bit: the West is a colloquial IR term that generally refers to the United States and NATO (specifically Western & Central Europe), and was used to backdrop against the Communist "East". East vs. West is a pretty classic Cold War dichotomy. There has been some general expansion of the term recently to include Japan and South Korea, which means it'll go the way of other Cold War relics like First/Second/Third world differentiation and lose it's relevant meaning. The highlighted bit amuses the fk out of me, and reminds me of, oh, something something over a century ago. There is so much...arrogance in that one sentence, I'm impressed. surely arrogance would not obscure the fact that the russian govt is not exactly good for its people. i don't have an anti-russian as culture bias so much as i have one against their failed state that holds the people back. And I have no love for Russia or it's government, but you just conflated the Europe as civilization and Russia as...a lack of civilization? There are enough negative connotations here. Fact of the matter is, Russia isn't very civil. I would point out that this logic, leads you to statements like : US is not civilized enough, Europe is. Now imagine the storm after that statement, even though you can easily make that argument. Calling others generalized names of vague meaning is not a good idea, unless you follow up with specifics, and even then it might not be the best idea, if your goal is a discussion and not flamewar. Aw, come on... I figured we could all agree that randomly sending your military into another nation isn't the most civil thing to do. And no. This is quite a bit different from USA - Afghanistan / Iraq...
It was not random. And true, Russians were invited, Americans were not  And even though you can make the argument about Afghanistan, no such luck with Iraq. Currently Iraq is action on such a different level of bad, that Russian occupation of Crimea is like child's play. Once hundred's of thousands or at least thousands (depends on your ethical analysis of Iraq) die in Ukraine due to Russian actions, then we can compare. And the empty proclamations how Iraq is somehow different is exactly the inherent cultural bias I described previously.
EDIT: Btw, my original point about criticizing America or Russia about being civilized was about internal politics, not international ones as I think that it was internal politics that the poster I replied to meant originally.
|
On March 08 2014 03:51 FatCat_13 wrote:
Big guy taking a sweety from a small guy. Happens from time to time, let's be real.
The thing is nobody gives a shit about Crimea outside of the Crimea itself. And those poor Crimean guys are smart enough to take an opportunity to get some oily-oily dollars - who's gonna blame them for it?
I am not sure I completely understand the russian interest in taking Crimea into Russia beyond satisfying Putin's ego though. But he's got a big one so I guess it might be true reason.
Don't you think the Russian populace would be very thankful if their country gets bigger?
There are countless examples in history where that worked, somehow annexing stuff makes people happy, especially if it's territory that was somehow lost.
|
On March 08 2014 03:39 radiatoren wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2014 03:27 nunez wrote:
@tolkien buzzword's a buzzword, ya bigot. i've previously used 'the west'-phrase, had to justify / attempt to be more precise, but guess i failed. tieing it to conspiracy is overboard. set of strings attached to money funnelled into opposition. A conspiracy is a conspiracy. You are setting up a common goal and a willful action to illegally obtain a goal for the persons who have "strings attached to money" and the "oppositon". Whether or not it is a theory relies on sourcing, but it is a conspiracy regardless!
i dunno about illegal tbh, literally no clue. in the context of oneofthem's post it seemed to be used as a means to ridicule, maybe justified ridicule in some cases. i guess i should have been more precise.
|
Russian Federation117 Posts
On March 08 2014 03:57 Maenander wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2014 03:51 FatCat_13 wrote:
Big guy taking a sweety from a small guy. Happens from time to time, let's be real.
The thing is nobody gives a shit about Crimea outside of the Crimea itself. And those poor Crimean guys are smart enough to take an opportunity to get some oily-oily dollars - who's gonna blame them for it?
I am not sure I completely understand the russian interest in taking Crimea into Russia beyond satisfying Putin's ego though. But he's got a big one so I guess it might be true reason. Don't you think the Russian populace would be very thankful if their country gets bigger? There are countless examples in history where that worked, somehow annexing stuff makes people happy.
Nah, I don't think so cause Russia is a country with huge territory but small population. Hey, we can't even seed all we have got already.
|
Russian Federation266 Posts
On March 08 2014 03:57 Maenander wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2014 03:51 FatCat_13 wrote:
Big guy taking a sweety from a small guy. Happens from time to time, let's be real.
The thing is nobody gives a shit about Crimea outside of the Crimea itself. And those poor Crimean guys are smart enough to take an opportunity to get some oily-oily dollars - who's gonna blame them for it?
I am not sure I completely understand the russian interest in taking Crimea into Russia beyond satisfying Putin's ego though. But he's got a big one so I guess it might be true reason. Don't you think the Russian populace would be very thankful if their country gets bigger? There are countless examples in history where that worked, somehow annexing stuff makes people happy, especially if it's territory that was somehow lost.
Russian population would be thankful if their government would have spent more time and money on solving internal problems instead of dumping it on propaganda and military operations. Russia already has many regions that recieve huge subsidies from the federal budget, national republics of Northen Caucasus above all, and Crimea's chances to surpass them on this matter are quite high.
|
On March 08 2014 03:57 Maenander wrote:
Don't you think the Russian populace would be very thankful if their country gets bigger?
There are countless examples in history where that worked, somehow annexing stuff makes people happy
Yes, in the history of the 18th century. But in today's age it doesn't help the people of Russia very much that they now have a new awesome peninsula if they're suffering economic sanctions and diplomatic damage that cripples their (barely existent) economy even further.
To be honest I think Putin's Russia is bound to collapse over the next few decades. And I'm a little scared about that scenario because under Gorbachev the USSR imploded, but under Putin it will probably end in a little more explosive fashion.
|
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/08/business/why-russia-cant-afford-another-cold-war.html?_r=0
The Russian economist agreed. “The pre-2008 social compact was that Putin would rule Russia while Russians would see growing incomes,” he said. “Now, the growth has stalled, and he needs ideology, coupled with propaganda and repressions. Apparently, the Soviet restoration is the only ideology he can come up with.”
"A propaganda war is completely feasible,” the Russian economist said. “The recent events were completely irrational, angering the West for no reason. This is what is most scary, especially for businesses. Instead of reforming the stagnating economy, Putin scared everybody for no reason and with no gain in sight. So it is hard to predict his next actions. But I think a real Cold War is unlikely.”
|
Well, there's reports coming in now of a ukrainian base being stormed, anyone got smth about that?
|
The land of freedom23126 Posts
On March 08 2014 03:57 Maenander wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2014 03:51 FatCat_13 wrote:
Big guy taking a sweety from a small guy. Happens from time to time, let's be real.
The thing is nobody gives a shit about Crimea outside of the Crimea itself. And those poor Crimean guys are smart enough to take an opportunity to get some oily-oily dollars - who's gonna blame them for it?
I am not sure I completely understand the russian interest in taking Crimea into Russia beyond satisfying Putin's ego though. But he's got a big one so I guess it might be true reason. Don't you think the Russian populace would be very thankful if their country gets bigger? There are countless examples in history where that worked, somehow annexing stuff makes people happy, especially if it's territory that was somehow lost.
We're not in middle ages.
Noone here wants to fucking war or other shit because of part of country who is collapsed anyway.
Of course, almost everyone has friends, relatives or some links to Ukraine but thing is that if Crimea could be like Taiwan for China, that could be way better.
And one more thing. We can't call it as annexy.
It's reunion and there is little difference :p.
About storms, i'm not so sure because there is absolutely nothing in my newsfeed. And it's not something that i can call "brainwashed" :D
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
