|
|
On March 12 2014 01:31 MikeMM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2014 01:25 cSc.Dav1oN wrote:
Is anybody belives in fair referendum results here? I honestly belive that most part of population of Crimea wants to be part of Russia.
How much of that population is under threat currently? Are you only counting legal residents that actually hold citizenship in Ukraine? Is your belief grounded in any fact? Do you have current polling data that follows psychology's standard for self reporting? You do realize that Crimea has a large Russian involvement because Ukraine has agreed for Russia to operate out of Crimea. Like any other area with large foreign military bases such as the many US bases around the world just because you can find a change in opinion around that area doesn't mean that opinion reflects the whole region esp when you take out those who aren't actual citizens.
|
It's not really a surprise that the side that is yelling about fascists and ethnicities being in danger is going back to its old ways of fascism and threatening minorities, is it? (click first link to bypass paywall)
A few chetnik volunteers from Serbia who turned up in recent days to support "brother" Russians raised the specter of Balkan-style ethnic cleansing. Some Tatar houses in the group's historic capital of Bakhchisara were marked with an X, while Russian homes were left alone.
zeo, you getting that Crimean vacation in?
|
Russian Federation221 Posts
On March 12 2014 01:33 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2014 01:23 MikeMM wrote:On March 12 2014 01:18 DeepElemBlues wrote:On March 12 2014 01:16 MikeMM wrote:On March 11 2014 21:07 Big J wrote:On March 11 2014 20:57 kukarachaa wrote:On March 11 2014 19:53 Big J wrote:On March 11 2014 19:28 kukarachaa wrote:On March 11 2014 18:10 Big J wrote:On March 11 2014 18:02 SilentchiLL wrote:
The referendum couldn't be stopped anymore anyway I think, no matter what the EU or america would do. I think it could be stopped by a military action against the Crimean paramilitary terrorists. Of course initiated by the Ukraine and not the EU or US. The problem is that time is running up, after the referendum Russia will claim to protect its territory. Before that, they are at least in a more difficult position. Well if you gonna call Crimean militia paramilitary terrorists, wouldn't that make Ukraine's current government paramilitary terrorists as well. Why? Noone forced Yanukovich to run away. I mean sure, he may have been imprisoned, but that's like saying you "force a bankrobber and murderer to run away by trying to imprison him for the things he has done". Yanukovich ran and the parliament did what it has to do when their leaders have become unable to rule. But even if we say the true president is still Yanukovich, the current government in the Ukraine does not and has not used paramilitairs for their cause. They are now using the legitim executive and army powers, none of which are of terroristic or paramilitary origin. So yeah, you may call the government illegimate, but not not paramilitary terrorists. Meanwhile the Russian troops on Crimea are paramilitairs because they are a military organisation that wears no official signs and small groups of people overtaking military posts from the legimate army is a very terroristic act as far as I know. (unlike a large group of demonstrants overtaking a parliament, which is not a terroristic act, that's a revolution) I think you misunderstood me, I never said Yanukovich is the true president. Just seems hypocritical that you think its ok to raise arms against Yanukovich government, but if you raise arms against the government that overthrew him its not ok. That's not waht I said. I already said that what happened in Kiev is completely different from what is happening on Crimea. The first one was a people's revolution, the second one is foreign guys with guns taking over power. Im curious why you and all other people dont give a damn what people will say on referendum? Because people who aren't sheep or sheepherders rightly don't give a damn about a fake referendum where the two choices are 'yes, join Russia now,' and 'yes, join Russia later.' Maybe in Russia the definition of referendum is different from the definition everywhere else in the world that isn't run by fascist gangsters. You are lying. So in Europe and USA is OK to lie to prove its point? Or is it not? Maybe you are just ignorant? The second choise is to admit Crimea as part of Ukraine and return to constitution of 1992. And can you explain why that is the second option? Why is there no option "things stay like they are?" You might not be used to usual democratic procedures considering where you live, but that is how a referendum usually looks like. Also, a fair democratic referendum usually does NOT involve a lot of foreign guys with guns on the streets and in control of the information given to the population. This might seem really weird to you. People would accept a referendum under the following circumstances: a) options are "things stay like they are now" and "something else" not "join russia now" or "allow the parliament who wants to join russia and which is under control of russian soldiers to join russia in a few months" b) There are no russian troops around, and there are some sort of non-biased observers making sure the vote is actually fair.
a) Its written crystal and clear confirm Crimea as part of Ukraine. As far as constitution 92 part is concerned I am not sure.
b) I dont mind observers. I would welcome them even. The problem is USA and EU dont accept referendum thererfore they dont want to send observers.
|
a) Its written crystal and clear confirm Crimea as part of Ukraine.
So? The 1994 treaty was written crystal clear as well, Russia guarantees the territorial integrity of the Ukraine. We see how much "crystal clear" is worth in Russian.
|
Russian Federation221 Posts
On March 12 2014 01:42 semantics wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2014 01:31 MikeMM wrote:On March 12 2014 01:25 cSc.Dav1oN wrote:
Is anybody belives in fair referendum results here? I honestly belive that most part of population of Crimea wants to be part of Russia. How much of that population is under threat currently? Are you only counting legal residents that actually hold citizenship in Ukraine? Is your belief grounded in any fact? Do you have current polling data that follows psychology's standard for self reporting? You do realize that Crimea has a large Russian involvement because Ukraine has agreed for Russia to operate out of Crimea. Like any other area with large foreign military bases such as the many US bases around the world just because you can find a change in opinion around that area doesn't mean that opinion reflects the whole region esp when you take out those who aren't actual citizens.
That you belief is based on then? We both can agree than that our beliefs and beliefs of other people on this forum are biased. Therefore I suggest to wait until results of referendum are released.
|
On March 12 2014 01:46 DeepElemBlues wrote:It's not really a surprise that the side that is yelling about fascists and ethnicities being in danger is going back to its old ways of fascism and threatening minorities, is it? (click first link to bypass paywall)Show nested quote +A few chetnik volunteers from Serbia who turned up in recent days to support "brother" Russians raised the specter of Balkan-style ethnic cleansing. Some Tatar houses in the group's historic capital of Bakhchisara were marked with an X, while Russian homes were left alone. zeo, you getting that Crimean vacation in?
and you are part of the blackwater soldiers currently in ukraine or what?
seriously wtf man, at least get some quality posts when you want to call people out. and for sure don't blame them for being part of a group that's "ethnic cleansing" without any reason. there is some more depth to this topic.
but how could you know about europe/russia on your far away continent with 0 relations to ukraine.
|
On March 12 2014 01:46 DeepElemBlues wrote:It's not really a surprise that the side that is yelling about fascists and ethnicities being in danger is going back to its old ways of fascism and threatening minorities, is it? (click first link to bypass paywall)Show nested quote +A few chetnik volunteers from Serbia who turned up in recent days to support "brother" Russians raised the specter of Balkan-style ethnic cleansing. Some Tatar houses in the group's historic capital of Bakhchisara were marked with an X, while Russian homes were left alone. zeo, you getting that Crimean vacation in?
|
Therefore I suggest to wait until results of referendum are released.
Which you can then declare as the expression of the Crimean people's will so no one has any standing to object blah blah blah it's the same tired old dictator script we've seen it before two dozen times.
|
Russian Federation221 Posts
On March 12 2014 01:52 DeepElemBlues wrote:So? The 1994 treaty was written crystal clear as well, Russia guarantees the territorial integrity of the Ukraine. We see how much "crystal clear" is worth in Russian.
So you just dont care that people in Crimnea want?
|
On March 12 2014 01:50 MikeMM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2014 01:33 Simberto wrote:On March 12 2014 01:23 MikeMM wrote:On March 12 2014 01:18 DeepElemBlues wrote:On March 12 2014 01:16 MikeMM wrote:On March 11 2014 21:07 Big J wrote:On March 11 2014 20:57 kukarachaa wrote:On March 11 2014 19:53 Big J wrote:On March 11 2014 19:28 kukarachaa wrote:On March 11 2014 18:10 Big J wrote:
[quote]
I think it could be stopped by a military action against the Crimean paramilitary terrorists. Of course initiated by the Ukraine and not the EU or US.
The problem is that time is running up, after the referendum Russia will claim to protect its territory. Before that, they are at least in a more difficult position. Well if you gonna call Crimean militia paramilitary terrorists, wouldn't that make Ukraine's current government paramilitary terrorists as well. Why? Noone forced Yanukovich to run away. I mean sure, he may have been imprisoned, but that's like saying you "force a bankrobber and murderer to run away by trying to imprison him for the things he has done". Yanukovich ran and the parliament did what it has to do when their leaders have become unable to rule. But even if we say the true president is still Yanukovich, the current government in the Ukraine does not and has not used paramilitairs for their cause. They are now using the legitim executive and army powers, none of which are of terroristic or paramilitary origin. So yeah, you may call the government illegimate, but not not paramilitary terrorists. Meanwhile the Russian troops on Crimea are paramilitairs because they are a military organisation that wears no official signs and small groups of people overtaking military posts from the legimate army is a very terroristic act as far as I know. (unlike a large group of demonstrants overtaking a parliament, which is not a terroristic act, that's a revolution) I think you misunderstood me, I never said Yanukovich is the true president. Just seems hypocritical that you think its ok to raise arms against Yanukovich government, but if you raise arms against the government that overthrew him its not ok. That's not waht I said. I already said that what happened in Kiev is completely different from what is happening on Crimea. The first one was a people's revolution, the second one is foreign guys with guns taking over power. Im curious why you and all other people dont give a damn what people will say on referendum? Because people who aren't sheep or sheepherders rightly don't give a damn about a fake referendum where the two choices are 'yes, join Russia now,' and 'yes, join Russia later.' Maybe in Russia the definition of referendum is different from the definition everywhere else in the world that isn't run by fascist gangsters. You are lying. So in Europe and USA is OK to lie to prove its point? Or is it not? Maybe you are just ignorant? The second choise is to admit Crimea as part of Ukraine and return to constitution of 1992. And can you explain why that is the second option? Why is there no option "things stay like they are?" You might not be used to usual democratic procedures considering where you live, but that is how a referendum usually looks like. Also, a fair democratic referendum usually does NOT involve a lot of foreign guys with guns on the streets and in control of the information given to the population. This might seem really weird to you. People would accept a referendum under the following circumstances: a) options are "things stay like they are now" and "something else" not "join russia now" or "allow the parliament who wants to join russia and which is under control of russian soldiers to join russia in a few months" b) There are no russian troops around, and there are some sort of non-biased observers making sure the vote is actually fair. a) Its written crystal and clear confirm Crimea as part of Ukraine. As far as constitution 92 part is concerned I am not sure. b) I dont mind observers. I would welcome them even. The problem is USA and EU dont accept referendum thererfore they dont want to send observers.
The UN keeps trying to send observers, but the Russians keep turning them back and preventing them from entering. Too bad the referendum is illegal in the first place.
On March 12 2014 01:54 MikeMM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2014 01:52 DeepElemBlues wrote:a) Its written crystal and clear confirm Crimea as part of Ukraine. So? The 1994 treaty was written crystal clear as well, Russia guarantees the territorial integrity of the Ukraine. We see how much "crystal clear" is worth in Russian. So you just dont care that people in Crimnea want?
The whole problem is the referendum doesn't allow the Crimean people to show what they want. "I win" or "you lose" isn't a fair referendum.
|
Russian Federation221 Posts
On March 12 2014 01:54 DeepElemBlues wrote:Which you can then declare as the expression of the Crimean people's will so no one has any standing to object blah blah blah it's the same tired old dictator script we've seen it before two dozen times.
Its up to USA and EU. First of all they must accept referendum as legitimate and send observers.
|
On March 12 2014 01:56 MikeMM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2014 01:54 DeepElemBlues wrote:Therefore I suggest to wait until results of referendum are released. Which you can then declare as the expression of the Crimean people's will so no one has any standing to object blah blah blah it's the same tired old dictator script we've seen it before two dozen times. Its up to USA and EU. First of all they must accept referendum as legitimate and send observers.
they won't accept the referendum. same as russia won't accept the current governemnt of ukraine.
both are "illegitimate" from a neutral perspective. but this is all about power. and one thing (an illegitimitate government signing treaties that it is not allowed to) lead to another (an illegitimate independance declaration by a part of the country).#
blaming doesn't help in this case cuz both sides are wrong. lol.
|
Russian Federation221 Posts
On March 12 2014 01:56 Saryph wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2014 01:50 MikeMM wrote:On March 12 2014 01:33 Simberto wrote:On March 12 2014 01:23 MikeMM wrote:On March 12 2014 01:18 DeepElemBlues wrote:On March 12 2014 01:16 MikeMM wrote:On March 11 2014 21:07 Big J wrote:On March 11 2014 20:57 kukarachaa wrote:On March 11 2014 19:53 Big J wrote:On March 11 2014 19:28 kukarachaa wrote:
[quote]
Well if you gonna call Crimean militia paramilitary terrorists, wouldn't that make Ukraine's current government paramilitary terrorists as well. Why? Noone forced Yanukovich to run away. I mean sure, he may have been imprisoned, but that's like saying you "force a bankrobber and murderer to run away by trying to imprison him for the things he has done". Yanukovich ran and the parliament did what it has to do when their leaders have become unable to rule. But even if we say the true president is still Yanukovich, the current government in the Ukraine does not and has not used paramilitairs for their cause. They are now using the legitim executive and army powers, none of which are of terroristic or paramilitary origin. So yeah, you may call the government illegimate, but not not paramilitary terrorists. Meanwhile the Russian troops on Crimea are paramilitairs because they are a military organisation that wears no official signs and small groups of people overtaking military posts from the legimate army is a very terroristic act as far as I know. (unlike a large group of demonstrants overtaking a parliament, which is not a terroristic act, that's a revolution) I think you misunderstood me, I never said Yanukovich is the true president. Just seems hypocritical that you think its ok to raise arms against Yanukovich government, but if you raise arms against the government that overthrew him its not ok. That's not waht I said. I already said that what happened in Kiev is completely different from what is happening on Crimea. The first one was a people's revolution, the second one is foreign guys with guns taking over power. Im curious why you and all other people dont give a damn what people will say on referendum? Because people who aren't sheep or sheepherders rightly don't give a damn about a fake referendum where the two choices are 'yes, join Russia now,' and 'yes, join Russia later.' Maybe in Russia the definition of referendum is different from the definition everywhere else in the world that isn't run by fascist gangsters. You are lying. So in Europe and USA is OK to lie to prove its point? Or is it not? Maybe you are just ignorant? The second choise is to admit Crimea as part of Ukraine and return to constitution of 1992. And can you explain why that is the second option? Why is there no option "things stay like they are?" You might not be used to usual democratic procedures considering where you live, but that is how a referendum usually looks like. Also, a fair democratic referendum usually does NOT involve a lot of foreign guys with guns on the streets and in control of the information given to the population. This might seem really weird to you. People would accept a referendum under the following circumstances: a) options are "things stay like they are now" and "something else" not "join russia now" or "allow the parliament who wants to join russia and which is under control of russian soldiers to join russia in a few months" b) There are no russian troops around, and there are some sort of non-biased observers making sure the vote is actually fair. a) Its written crystal and clear confirm Crimea as part of Ukraine. As far as constitution 92 part is concerned I am not sure. b) I dont mind observers. I would welcome them even. The problem is USA and EU dont accept referendum thererfore they dont want to send observers. The UN keeps trying to send observers, but the Russians keep turning them back and preventing them from entering. Too bad the referendum is illegal in the first place.
Illegal then? Was revolution in Ukraine legal then?
Guys If you want observers you must accept that referendum is legal.
Im really surprised by your double standarts. You think that revolution in which many people on both sides died in Ukraine is OK but peaceful referendum shouldnt be allowed.
|
On March 12 2014 01:54 fleeze wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2014 01:46 DeepElemBlues wrote:It's not really a surprise that the side that is yelling about fascists and ethnicities being in danger is going back to its old ways of fascism and threatening minorities, is it? (click first link to bypass paywall)A few chetnik volunteers from Serbia who turned up in recent days to support "brother" Russians raised the specter of Balkan-style ethnic cleansing. Some Tatar houses in the group's historic capital of Bakhchisara were marked with an X, while Russian homes were left alone. zeo, you getting that Crimean vacation in? and you are part of the blackwater soldiers currently in ukraine or what? seriously wtf man, at least get some quality posts when you want to call people out. and for sure don't blame them for being part of a group that's "ethnic cleansing" without any reason. there is some more depth to this topic. but how could you know about europe/russia on your far away continent with 0 relations to ukraine.
blackwater soldiers in ukraine roflmao
there was no connection of the chetniks with "ethnic cleansing" in the article except an unsupported connection made by the author of the editorial and "ethnic cleansing" was not written anywhere so why is it in quotes? zeo's been very vocal and harsh about how the "fascists" in ukraine deserve a beating so in the same vein as people asking "why aren't you over in ukraine fighting russia then" i ask hey zeo you over there fighting the fascists now that some serbs have shown up to help their big brother slav russia?
i don't know how i could know about some far away continent that apparently has 0 links to mine, maybe i'm not an idiot and can read. maybe the year is 2014 not 1314. maybe that's how?
this is the level of intellectual and rhetorical quality you get from russian flunkies and other assorted anti-americans and anti-westerners. you can't possibly know anything about this country, it's so far away! there are blackwater soldiers in ukraine! (hey guess what buddy it's not called blackwater anymore, the name of the company is Xe! it's been like that for about 7 years at least now. i guess that propaganda you're regurgitating needs some updating) how dare you ask the guy who's been talking up giving the fascists a beatdown if he's doing it personally? now calling some westerner a chickenhawk is just fine... asking some russian stooge if he's putting his money where his mouth is is just so wrong.
|
On March 12 2014 02:01 MikeMM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2014 01:56 Saryph wrote:On March 12 2014 01:50 MikeMM wrote:On March 12 2014 01:33 Simberto wrote:On March 12 2014 01:23 MikeMM wrote:On March 12 2014 01:18 DeepElemBlues wrote:On March 12 2014 01:16 MikeMM wrote:On March 11 2014 21:07 Big J wrote:On March 11 2014 20:57 kukarachaa wrote:On March 11 2014 19:53 Big J wrote:
[quote]
Why? Noone forced Yanukovich to run away. I mean sure, he may have been imprisoned, but that's like saying you "force a bankrobber and murderer to run away by trying to imprison him for the things he has done".
Yanukovich ran and the parliament did what it has to do when their leaders have become unable to rule.
But even if we say the true president is still Yanukovich, the current government in the Ukraine does not and has not used paramilitairs for their cause. They are now using the legitim executive and army powers, none of which are of terroristic or paramilitary origin.
So yeah, you may call the government illegimate, but not not paramilitary terrorists. Meanwhile the Russian troops on Crimea are paramilitairs because they are a military organisation that wears no official signs and small groups of people overtaking military posts from the legimate army is a very terroristic act as far as I know. (unlike a large group of demonstrants overtaking a parliament, which is not a terroristic act, that's a revolution) I think you misunderstood me, I never said Yanukovich is the true president. Just seems hypocritical that you think its ok to raise arms against Yanukovich government, but if you raise arms against the government that overthrew him its not ok. That's not waht I said. I already said that what happened in Kiev is completely different from what is happening on Crimea. The first one was a people's revolution, the second one is foreign guys with guns taking over power. Im curious why you and all other people dont give a damn what people will say on referendum? Because people who aren't sheep or sheepherders rightly don't give a damn about a fake referendum where the two choices are 'yes, join Russia now,' and 'yes, join Russia later.' Maybe in Russia the definition of referendum is different from the definition everywhere else in the world that isn't run by fascist gangsters. You are lying. So in Europe and USA is OK to lie to prove its point? Or is it not? Maybe you are just ignorant? The second choise is to admit Crimea as part of Ukraine and return to constitution of 1992. And can you explain why that is the second option? Why is there no option "things stay like they are?" You might not be used to usual democratic procedures considering where you live, but that is how a referendum usually looks like. Also, a fair democratic referendum usually does NOT involve a lot of foreign guys with guns on the streets and in control of the information given to the population. This might seem really weird to you. People would accept a referendum under the following circumstances: a) options are "things stay like they are now" and "something else" not "join russia now" or "allow the parliament who wants to join russia and which is under control of russian soldiers to join russia in a few months" b) There are no russian troops around, and there are some sort of non-biased observers making sure the vote is actually fair. a) Its written crystal and clear confirm Crimea as part of Ukraine. As far as constitution 92 part is concerned I am not sure. b) I dont mind observers. I would welcome them even. The problem is USA and EU dont accept referendum thererfore they dont want to send observers. The UN keeps trying to send observers, but the Russians keep turning them back and preventing them from entering. Too bad the referendum is illegal in the first place. Illegal then? Was revolution in Ukraine legal then? Guys If you want observers you must accept that referendum is legal. Im really surprised by your double standarts. You think that revolution in which many people on both sides died in Ukraine is OK but peaceful referendum shouldnt be allowed. If you think that a referendum in present day Crimea could be described as "peaceful", then I am inclined to think that you are either deliberately ignoring the actions of Russia or are simply ignorant. Being critical of a referendum being pushed while troops fill the countryside does not mean that one necessarily approves of how things went down in Kiev.
|
On March 12 2014 02:02 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2014 01:54 fleeze wrote:On March 12 2014 01:46 DeepElemBlues wrote:It's not really a surprise that the side that is yelling about fascists and ethnicities being in danger is going back to its old ways of fascism and threatening minorities, is it? (click first link to bypass paywall)A few chetnik volunteers from Serbia who turned up in recent days to support "brother" Russians raised the specter of Balkan-style ethnic cleansing. Some Tatar houses in the group's historic capital of Bakhchisara were marked with an X, while Russian homes were left alone. zeo, you getting that Crimean vacation in? and you are part of the blackwater soldiers currently in ukraine or what? seriously wtf man, at least get some quality posts when you want to call people out. and for sure don't blame them for being part of a group that's "ethnic cleansing" without any reason. there is some more depth to this topic. but how could you know about europe/russia on your far away continent with 0 relations to ukraine. blackwater soldiers in ukraine roflmao there was no connection of the chetniks with "ethnic cleansing" in the article except an unsupported connection made by the author of the editorial and "ethnic cleansing" was not written anywhere so why is it in quotes? zeo's been very vocal and harsh about how the "fascists" in ukraine deserve a beating so in the same vein as people asking "why aren't you over in ukraine fighting russia then" i ask hey zeo you over there fighting the fascists now that some serbs have shown up to help their big brother slav russia? i don't know how i could know about some far away continent that apparently has 0 links to mine, maybe i'm not an idiot and can read. maybe the year is 2014 not 1314. maybe that's how? this is the level of intellectual and rhetorical quality you get from russian flunkies and other assorted anti-americans and anti-westerners. you can't possibly know anything about this country, it's so far away! there are blackwater soldiers in ukraine! (hey guess what buddy it's not called blackwater anymore, the name of the company is Xe! it's been like that for about 7 years at least now. i guess that propaganda you're regurgitating needs some updating) how dare you ask the guy who's been talking up giving the fascists a beatdown if he's doing it personally? now calling some westerner a chickenhawk is just fine... asking some russian stooge if he's putting his money where his mouth is is just so wrong.
i think they are called "academi" know. but blackwater is the name they are known for, so i use it.
btw, nice arguments you got there bro. not.
|
|
|
Russian Federation221 Posts
On March 12 2014 01:56 Saryph wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2014 01:50 MikeMM wrote:On March 12 2014 01:33 Simberto wrote:On March 12 2014 01:23 MikeMM wrote:On March 12 2014 01:18 DeepElemBlues wrote:On March 12 2014 01:16 MikeMM wrote:On March 11 2014 21:07 Big J wrote:On March 11 2014 20:57 kukarachaa wrote:On March 11 2014 19:53 Big J wrote:On March 11 2014 19:28 kukarachaa wrote:
[quote]
Well if you gonna call Crimean militia paramilitary terrorists, wouldn't that make Ukraine's current government paramilitary terrorists as well. Why? Noone forced Yanukovich to run away. I mean sure, he may have been imprisoned, but that's like saying you "force a bankrobber and murderer to run away by trying to imprison him for the things he has done". Yanukovich ran and the parliament did what it has to do when their leaders have become unable to rule. But even if we say the true president is still Yanukovich, the current government in the Ukraine does not and has not used paramilitairs for their cause. They are now using the legitim executive and army powers, none of which are of terroristic or paramilitary origin. So yeah, you may call the government illegimate, but not not paramilitary terrorists. Meanwhile the Russian troops on Crimea are paramilitairs because they are a military organisation that wears no official signs and small groups of people overtaking military posts from the legimate army is a very terroristic act as far as I know. (unlike a large group of demonstrants overtaking a parliament, which is not a terroristic act, that's a revolution) I think you misunderstood me, I never said Yanukovich is the true president. Just seems hypocritical that you think its ok to raise arms against Yanukovich government, but if you raise arms against the government that overthrew him its not ok. That's not waht I said. I already said that what happened in Kiev is completely different from what is happening on Crimea. The first one was a people's revolution, the second one is foreign guys with guns taking over power. Im curious why you and all other people dont give a damn what people will say on referendum? Because people who aren't sheep or sheepherders rightly don't give a damn about a fake referendum where the two choices are 'yes, join Russia now,' and 'yes, join Russia later.' Maybe in Russia the definition of referendum is different from the definition everywhere else in the world that isn't run by fascist gangsters. You are lying. So in Europe and USA is OK to lie to prove its point? Or is it not? Maybe you are just ignorant? The second choise is to admit Crimea as part of Ukraine and return to constitution of 1992. And can you explain why that is the second option? Why is there no option "things stay like they are?" You might not be used to usual democratic procedures considering where you live, but that is how a referendum usually looks like. Also, a fair democratic referendum usually does NOT involve a lot of foreign guys with guns on the streets and in control of the information given to the population. This might seem really weird to you. People would accept a referendum under the following circumstances: a) options are "things stay like they are now" and "something else" not "join russia now" or "allow the parliament who wants to join russia and which is under control of russian soldiers to join russia in a few months" b) There are no russian troops around, and there are some sort of non-biased observers making sure the vote is actually fair. a) Its written crystal and clear confirm Crimea as part of Ukraine. As far as constitution 92 part is concerned I am not sure. b) I dont mind observers. I would welcome them even. The problem is USA and EU dont accept referendum thererfore they dont want to send observers. The UN keeps trying to send observers, but the Russians keep turning them back and preventing them from entering. Too bad the referendum is illegal in the first place. Show nested quote +On March 12 2014 01:54 MikeMM wrote:On March 12 2014 01:52 DeepElemBlues wrote:a) Its written crystal and clear confirm Crimea as part of Ukraine. So? The 1994 treaty was written crystal clear as well, Russia guarantees the territorial integrity of the Ukraine. We see how much "crystal clear" is worth in Russian. So you just dont care that people in Crimnea want?
The whole problem is the referendum doesn't allow the Crimean people to show what they want. "I win" or "you lose" isn't a fair referendum.
It seems to me that there is misunderstanding somewhere. Could you post link where questions of referendum are written in English? I read them in Russian and Its clear to me that by voting 2 Crimea will stay in Ukraine.
|
On March 12 2014 02:05 fleeze wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2014 02:02 DeepElemBlues wrote:On March 12 2014 01:54 fleeze wrote:On March 12 2014 01:46 DeepElemBlues wrote:It's not really a surprise that the side that is yelling about fascists and ethnicities being in danger is going back to its old ways of fascism and threatening minorities, is it? (click first link to bypass paywall)A few chetnik volunteers from Serbia who turned up in recent days to support "brother" Russians raised the specter of Balkan-style ethnic cleansing. Some Tatar houses in the group's historic capital of Bakhchisara were marked with an X, while Russian homes were left alone. zeo, you getting that Crimean vacation in? and you are part of the blackwater soldiers currently in ukraine or what? seriously wtf man, at least get some quality posts when you want to call people out. and for sure don't blame them for being part of a group that's "ethnic cleansing" without any reason. there is some more depth to this topic. but how could you know about europe/russia on your far away continent with 0 relations to ukraine. blackwater soldiers in ukraine roflmao there was no connection of the chetniks with "ethnic cleansing" in the article except an unsupported connection made by the author of the editorial and "ethnic cleansing" was not written anywhere so why is it in quotes? zeo's been very vocal and harsh about how the "fascists" in ukraine deserve a beating so in the same vein as people asking "why aren't you over in ukraine fighting russia then" i ask hey zeo you over there fighting the fascists now that some serbs have shown up to help their big brother slav russia? i don't know how i could know about some far away continent that apparently has 0 links to mine, maybe i'm not an idiot and can read. maybe the year is 2014 not 1314. maybe that's how? this is the level of intellectual and rhetorical quality you get from russian flunkies and other assorted anti-americans and anti-westerners. you can't possibly know anything about this country, it's so far away! there are blackwater soldiers in ukraine! (hey guess what buddy it's not called blackwater anymore, the name of the company is Xe! it's been like that for about 7 years at least now. i guess that propaganda you're regurgitating needs some updating) how dare you ask the guy who's been talking up giving the fascists a beatdown if he's doing it personally? now calling some westerner a chickenhawk is just fine... asking some russian stooge if he's putting his money where his mouth is is just so wrong. i think they are called "academi" know. but blackwater is the name they are known for, so i use it. btw, nice arguments you got there bro. not.
Isn't the whole thing about blackwater like one video on youtube where some unknown people are walking around a city, and someone says 'they must be blackwater!' ? That seems a little different than serbs showing up, the Russians holding a rally for them, and they go on to give their speeches while under black skull and crossbones banner.
|
On March 12 2014 02:07 MikeMM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2014 01:56 Saryph wrote:On March 12 2014 01:50 MikeMM wrote:On March 12 2014 01:33 Simberto wrote:On March 12 2014 01:23 MikeMM wrote:On March 12 2014 01:18 DeepElemBlues wrote:On March 12 2014 01:16 MikeMM wrote:On March 11 2014 21:07 Big J wrote:On March 11 2014 20:57 kukarachaa wrote:On March 11 2014 19:53 Big J wrote:
[quote]
Why? Noone forced Yanukovich to run away. I mean sure, he may have been imprisoned, but that's like saying you "force a bankrobber and murderer to run away by trying to imprison him for the things he has done".
Yanukovich ran and the parliament did what it has to do when their leaders have become unable to rule.
But even if we say the true president is still Yanukovich, the current government in the Ukraine does not and has not used paramilitairs for their cause. They are now using the legitim executive and army powers, none of which are of terroristic or paramilitary origin.
So yeah, you may call the government illegimate, but not not paramilitary terrorists. Meanwhile the Russian troops on Crimea are paramilitairs because they are a military organisation that wears no official signs and small groups of people overtaking military posts from the legimate army is a very terroristic act as far as I know. (unlike a large group of demonstrants overtaking a parliament, which is not a terroristic act, that's a revolution) I think you misunderstood me, I never said Yanukovich is the true president. Just seems hypocritical that you think its ok to raise arms against Yanukovich government, but if you raise arms against the government that overthrew him its not ok. That's not waht I said. I already said that what happened in Kiev is completely different from what is happening on Crimea. The first one was a people's revolution, the second one is foreign guys with guns taking over power. Im curious why you and all other people dont give a damn what people will say on referendum? Because people who aren't sheep or sheepherders rightly don't give a damn about a fake referendum where the two choices are 'yes, join Russia now,' and 'yes, join Russia later.' Maybe in Russia the definition of referendum is different from the definition everywhere else in the world that isn't run by fascist gangsters. You are lying. So in Europe and USA is OK to lie to prove its point? Or is it not? Maybe you are just ignorant? The second choise is to admit Crimea as part of Ukraine and return to constitution of 1992. And can you explain why that is the second option? Why is there no option "things stay like they are?" You might not be used to usual democratic procedures considering where you live, but that is how a referendum usually looks like. Also, a fair democratic referendum usually does NOT involve a lot of foreign guys with guns on the streets and in control of the information given to the population. This might seem really weird to you. People would accept a referendum under the following circumstances: a) options are "things stay like they are now" and "something else" not "join russia now" or "allow the parliament who wants to join russia and which is under control of russian soldiers to join russia in a few months" b) There are no russian troops around, and there are some sort of non-biased observers making sure the vote is actually fair. a) Its written crystal and clear confirm Crimea as part of Ukraine. As far as constitution 92 part is concerned I am not sure. b) I dont mind observers. I would welcome them even. The problem is USA and EU dont accept referendum thererfore they dont want to send observers. The UN keeps trying to send observers, but the Russians keep turning them back and preventing them from entering. Too bad the referendum is illegal in the first place. On March 12 2014 01:54 MikeMM wrote:On March 12 2014 01:52 DeepElemBlues wrote:a) Its written crystal and clear confirm Crimea as part of Ukraine. So? The 1994 treaty was written crystal clear as well, Russia guarantees the territorial integrity of the Ukraine. We see how much "crystal clear" is worth in Russian. So you just dont care that people in Crimnea want?
The whole problem is the referendum doesn't allow the Crimean people to show what they want. "I win" or "you lose" isn't a fair referendum. It seems to me that there is misunderstanding somewhere. Could you post link where questions of referendum are written in English? I read them in Russian and Its clear to me that by voting 2 Crimea will stay in Ukraine.
The second option restores them to a previous 1992 constitution, one that is not currently being used, that gives the parliament more autonomy and power, including the one they say they have already carried out, voting to join Russia.
Like I said, the biggest problem with the referendum (besides the Russians invading) is that there is NO option for the status quo. Right now it is 'Join Russia' or 'give me more power so I can carry out my desire, which is to join Russia'
P.S. Hey mike, what is your opinion on the Russians planting minefields on the border?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://scontent-b-cdg.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/t1/1780745_685778278135833_1434014397_n.jpg)
