|
|
I dont have source but Im sure I have heared several times on the news during this week that crimean tatars were going to boycott the referendum.
|
On March 17 2014 06:39 nunez wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 06:09 Sub40APM wrote:On March 17 2014 06:00 nunez wrote:On March 17 2014 05:18 DeepElemBlues wrote:On March 17 2014 05:05 nunez wrote:On March 17 2014 04:46 Sub40APM wrote:On March 17 2014 03:57 nunez wrote:On March 17 2014 02:53 Sub40APM wrote:On March 17 2014 00:41 nunez wrote:On March 16 2014 16:22 Sub40APM wrote:
....what? Since its independence in 1991, the American people have supported Ukraine’s transition to democracy and a free market economy with over $5 billion in assistance. srcOn March 16 2014 16:56 semantics wrote:
Conspiracy crap taking really out of context words into suggesting money the US foreign aid and investments over the year somehow equates to money used for a coup. By that shitty out of context not factually backed up logic Putin was offering the yanukovych Ukraine "assistance" money only to take Ukraine into Russia as a puppet state of moscow. Because apparently all you have to do is take words out of context and spew random crap for it to be true. As if a person would flaunt CIA involvement for a speech at a nonprofit event. thinking this skrill isn't spent empowering whatever political party that is willing to bend over for it (in this case the opposition) and labelling it as 'conspiracy crap' is dellusional. why do you think f.ex NED-money is flowing into ukraine? charity work? boy scouts? NED was founded in 1983 at the initiative of Cold War hardliners in the Reagan administration, including then-CIA Director William J. Casey. Essentially, NED took over what had been the domain of the CIA, i.e. funneling money to support foreign political movements that would take the U.S. side against the Soviet Union. src Which one of your sources proves that the US has built up the Right Sector using 5 billion dollars, I might need a bit more hand holding than a link showing that the US spends money on foreign aid -- Canada does too, where are their fascists coups ? -- and the right sector. I'd also like some evidence showing that the national endowment for democracy's programs to strengthen things like rule of law or freedom of expression translated into fascist coups, perhaps one that doesnt make unsubstantiated claim that the NED caused the coup or that relies on who the founders of the NED were to prove NED is forever tainted by evil. NED's raison d'être seems to be empowering foreign groups that will allow american vampires, not commie vampires, to extract precious bodily fluids from their countries. far-right and fascists definately fits the bill in ukraine (or usually in general). you don't think NED money is included in the 5 billion figure? Are you being serious here or edgy? both. This indicates that NED may be using its grant making program to help open foreign markets to U.S. companies that were previously closed and to help promote the U.S.’s geopolitical and economic interests by financially supporting its military and economic partners.
...
This research does not find evidence that NED was successful at promoting democracy and economic freedom during the 1990s src Calling people vampires has a long and distinguished history with a certain set of people, nunez is just unconsciously carrying on a fine blood-soaked tradition dating back over a thousand years. The particular one he's consciously carrying on is over a hundred years old and was and is one of the favorite insults of a certain globally failed and murderous ideology. How calling people vampires accomplishes anything but self-satisfaction at being "edgy" is a mystery, but that is the point isn't it. what do your posts accomplish do you think? self-satisfaction maybe? On March 17 2014 05:20 Sub40APM wrote:On March 17 2014 05:05 nunez wrote:On March 17 2014 04:46 Sub40APM wrote:On March 17 2014 03:57 nunez wrote:On March 17 2014 02:53 Sub40APM wrote:On March 17 2014 00:41 nunez wrote:On March 16 2014 16:22 Sub40APM wrote:
....what? Since its independence in 1991, the American people have supported Ukraine’s transition to democracy and a free market economy with over $5 billion in assistance. srcOn March 16 2014 16:56 semantics wrote:
Conspiracy crap taking really out of context words into suggesting money the US foreign aid and investments over the year somehow equates to money used for a coup. By that shitty out of context not factually backed up logic Putin was offering the yanukovych Ukraine "assistance" money only to take Ukraine into Russia as a puppet state of moscow. Because apparently all you have to do is take words out of context and spew random crap for it to be true. As if a person would flaunt CIA involvement for a speech at a nonprofit event. thinking this skrill isn't spent empowering whatever political party that is willing to bend over for it (in this case the opposition) and labelling it as 'conspiracy crap' is dellusional. why do you think f.ex NED-money is flowing into ukraine? charity work? boy scouts? NED was founded in 1983 at the initiative of Cold War hardliners in the Reagan administration, including then-CIA Director William J. Casey. Essentially, NED took over what had been the domain of the CIA, i.e. funneling money to support foreign political movements that would take the U.S. side against the Soviet Union. src Which one of your sources proves that the US has built up the Right Sector using 5 billion dollars, I might need a bit more hand holding than a link showing that the US spends money on foreign aid -- Canada does too, where are their fascists coups ? -- and the right sector. I'd also like some evidence showing that the national endowment for democracy's programs to strengthen things like rule of law or freedom of expression translated into fascist coups, perhaps one that doesnt make unsubstantiated claim that the NED caused the coup or that relies on who the founders of the NED were to prove NED is forever tainted by evil. NED's raison d'être seems to be empowering foreign groups that will allow american vampires, not commie vampires, to extract precious bodily fluids from their countries. far-right and fascists definately fits the bill in ukraine (or usually in general). you don't think NED money is included in the 5 billion figure? Are you being serious here or edgy? both. This indicates that NED may be using its grant making program to help open foreign markets to U.S. companies that were previously closed and to help promote the U.S.’s geopolitical and economic interests by financially supporting its military and economic partners.
...
This research does not find evidence that NED was successful at promoting democracy and economic freedom during the 1990s src Did you even read your source or did it come up through a quick google search? Ill put it below the fold if you care, but the actual thing you cite paints a pretty contradictory picture, one that stands in contrast to the assured and unsubstantiated tone of the original article you posted as evidence that NED was a vehicle through which 5 billion dollars was funneled to the right sector by America + Show Spoiler +Even though NED grant money appears to have been appropriately awarded to countries based on their
need, the grant money did not have a significant impact on political and economic freedom. This calls into question the wisdom of using the U.S. government’s scarce resources to promote democracy and economic freedom – not only through NED, but in any similar manner. The thesis is against all American foreign aid. Officially, the U.S. government was neutral about the Chilean plebiscite, but it
recognized that the plebiscite was an opportunity for Chile to take a large step toward
democracy. Seizing the moment, the U.S. became involved in Chile through NED. From
its own funds, NED sent $600,000 to opposition groups in Chile. Many of these groups
were reluctant to accept the money because they were uncomfortable using foreign
money to influence Chile’s domestic politics. However, most groups did eventually
accept the money because they recognized that their chances of winning without it were
unlikely (Christian 15 June 1988, A1). Congress later gave NED another $1 million to
distribute in Chile. Pinochet’s government made U.S. support for its opposition a central
campaign issue, but was unable to win the plebiscite (Christian 15 June 1988, A14).
NED supports pro-Democracy, anti-Military government forces in Chile -- you know, the military dictatorship they helped to create in the first place --- In reaction to the Clinton administration’s request, the House voted to eliminate
all funding for NED by a vote of 243-181 (Corn 1993b, 57; Doherty 1993, 1672).
NED’s defeat in the House was bipartisan – two-thirds of Republicans and a slight
36
majority of Democrats voted for its elimination NED appears not to be a tool the government actual wants... Critics have described NED as a “political sacred cow” (Corn 1997, 27), valued
as a source of pork-barrel projects and lavish political junkets abroad for Washington’s
elites (Carothers 1994, 123; Corn 1992, 648). These elites include high-level
“Republican and Democratic party activists, conservative trade unionists, and free
marketeers” who use the organization to further their own agendas (Corn 1993b, 57).
Critics further allege that NED provides its spoils systematically in an attempt to gain
friends that can help it politically (Samuels 1995, 53). In essence, the elites use NED for
generous perks, and the organization uses the elites for political gain and protection. This
type of “inside-the-beltway political logrolling,” according to critics, makes it the type of
program that needs to be abolished (Conry 1994, 16). or it turns out NED is some sort of corruption mechanism inside DC without any actual foreign interests at all Look at his top recipients, Ukraine received less money than Poland, Russia and China and slightly more than Cuba and Romania i think you are confused. nobody is saying 5 billion dollars was funelled through NED, but feel free to make the case that the NED's spending in ukraine is not included in that figure, Well his original claim was that 5 billion was spent by the US to create neo-nazis, so I am still waiting for support for that argument.
the paper corroborates both the robert parry article(~ cold war relic fund that generally supports a neocon agenda often at cross-purposes with the Obama administration’s foreign policy)
All it corroborates from the Parry article was that its inception the NED was filled with Reagen types. and xM(Z's claim that ukraine's right are able to throw their weight around because of it (the right of ukraine aligns with this agenda). There is 0 support in the paper you quoted for this claim. All it shows is that Ukraine receives money from NED. Neither the right sector nor Svoboda are mentioned in the paper, and neither were relevant until the late 2000s, Your paper covers a period between 1990 and 1999 when Ukraine was dominated by Kuchma, an authoritarian pragmatist who at best was neutral if not outright Russian leaning. Finally, the paper you cited comes to the conclusion that this help is mostly useless and a waste of American tax payers money and all foreign aid that look to build democratic institutions should be cut. Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 03:28 xM(Z wrote:
US because it was their $5billions that made the right sector of ukraine politics able to stage the ousting of Yanukovych here's the part you bolded that sparked this. yup, that's claiming that 5 billion was spent by the us to create neo-nazis. guess you still gotta keep waiting for 'proof' (gl getting your hands on cia's nazi-creation budget xmz).
Uh ya.
and it corroborates perry's points about it being is a vehicle for neolibs agenda, not the us govt's (facilitating us coorp profit is what they're aiming for).
The final assessment of thesis that you linked is that NED doesnt work and is a waste of tax payers money.
For it to support the original article you linked claiming that a neo-con coup happened in Ukraine you would have to explain why for -- the duration of the paper you cited 1990 - 99 -- the neocons not only failed to accomplish anything but saw the rise of an authoritarian, anti-reformist president who dominated politics pretty totally. Then youd have to explain how the neocons then managed -- after what seems like total incompetence in their quest for whatever it is that their nefarious goals are -- they suddenly succeed so spectacularly and so rapidly.
|
On March 17 2014 06:45 radiatoren wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 06:40 m4ini wrote:On March 17 2014 06:39 radiatoren wrote:On March 17 2014 06:35 m4ini wrote:
Why do you think every russian went to vote, but none of the tatars? That's your first flaw (tatars would vote as much as russians do, just not for the "join now" option since they, oops, can't vote "no").
Saying that every russian voted yes is as delusional, as was stated many times (polls).
And you doubt the 93% number, what? So you assume something is rigged, but it's "fair enough"? Well I think you need to make a distinction between russians and russians living in Crimea. I also said "tatars" and not "crimean tatars". I assumed stating the obvious wasn't neccessary. With 8 year old voter lists and a liberal write in, sending extra people from the motherland would be an easy way to make the numbers seem more convincing.
I didn't go into this, since i don't have proof for it. Even though i wouldn't rule it out, quite the opposite.
|
On March 17 2014 06:44 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:
But it's 55% and it's reasonable, considering amount of things which major did for Moscow, how did city grow in last and how good is it looking right now.
well lets get real, for there to have been real elections in Moscow, its not navalny challenging a sitting mayor, it should be sobyanin vs luzhkov, with sobyanin being the challenger.
|
The land of freedom23126 Posts
On March 17 2014 06:51 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 06:44 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:
But it's 55% and it's reasonable, considering amount of things which major did for Moscow, how did city grow in last and how good is it looking right now. well lets get real, for there to have been real elections in Moscow, its not navalny challenging a sitting mayor, it should be sobyanin vs luzhkov, with sobyanin being the challenger.
You can just get the fuck out finally from "i hate dislike Russia and everything which is there because they're simply retarded" bandwagon and start being reasonable at least once.
Thanks.
|
On March 17 2014 06:46 Fjodorov wrote:
I dont have source but Im sure I have heared several times on the news during this week that crimean tatars were going to boycott the referendum.
yes, but the fucking math doesn't check out even if we assume the 'worst case' :
80% voted
there are 40% non ethnic-russian voters
let's say everyone who abstained the vote belonged to that group. That means that 20% of the voters were still non-russian. But only 5% of people did not vote in favor of joining Russia
=> 3 out of 4 non Russians would have needed to vote in favor of joining Russia. That's absurd.
|
There is a new anecdote.
Two ukrainian jews are having a conversation:
- Fima, I've been afraid of speaking Russian language lately.
- Why? Afraid of ukrainian nationalists?
- No, I'm afraid that russians will come to save me.
|
The land of freedom23126 Posts
On March 17 2014 06:53 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 06:46 Fjodorov wrote:
I dont have source but Im sure I have heared several times on the news during this week that crimean tatars were going to boycott the referendum. yes, but the fucking math doesn't check out even if we assume the 'worst case' : 80% voted there are 40% non ethnic-russian voters let's say everyone who abstained the vote belonged to that group. That means that 20% of the voters were still non-russian. But only 5% of people did not vote in favor of joining Russia => 3 out of 4 non Russians would have needed to vote in favor of joining Russia. That's absurd.
But if 80% voted, then everyone who voted had not 1 vote basically but 1.2.
And if Crimean Tatars ignored, then there are just 28% of non-ethnic russians.
|
On March 17 2014 06:52 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 06:51 Sub40APM wrote:On March 17 2014 06:44 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:
But it's 55% and it's reasonable, considering amount of things which major did for Moscow, how did city grow in last and how good is it looking right now. well lets get real, for there to have been real elections in Moscow, its not navalny challenging a sitting mayor, it should be sobyanin vs luzhkov, with sobyanin being the challenger. You can just get the fuck out finally from "i hate Russia and everything which is there because they're simply retarded" bandwagon and start being reasonable at least once. Thanks.
Huh?
Luzhkov was mayor -- elected mayor -- of Moscow. Then in 2010 he starts criticizing the government and is removed by decree of president and Sobyanin is appointed instead.
|
The land of freedom23126 Posts
On March 17 2014 06:55 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 06:52 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:On March 17 2014 06:51 Sub40APM wrote:On March 17 2014 06:44 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:
But it's 55% and it's reasonable, considering amount of things which major did for Moscow, how did city grow in last and how good is it looking right now. well lets get real, for there to have been real elections in Moscow, its not navalny challenging a sitting mayor, it should be sobyanin vs luzhkov, with sobyanin being the challenger. You can just get the fuck out finally from "i hate Russia and everything which is there because they're simply retarded" bandwagon and start being reasonable at least once. Thanks. Huh? Luzhkov was mayor -- elected mayor -- of Moscow. Then in 2010 he starts criticizing the government and is removed by decree of president and Sobyanin is appointed instead.
Luzhkov was dropped by president and rightly so.
And they're from same party so they can't go both.
|
On March 17 2014 06:53 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 06:46 Fjodorov wrote:
I dont have source but Im sure I have heared several times on the news during this week that crimean tatars were going to boycott the referendum. yes, but the fucking math doesn't check out even if we assume the 'worst case' : 80% votedthere are 40% non ethnic-russian voters let's say everyone who abstained the vote belonged to that group. That means that 20% of the voters were still non-russian. But only 5% of people did not vote in favor of joining Russia => 3 out of 4 non Russians would have needed to vote in favor of joining Russia. That's absurd.
where did you get that number from? I have heard Crimean Tatars representative give a 30-50% estimation.
|
On March 17 2014 06:58 Cheerio wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 06:53 Nyxisto wrote:On March 17 2014 06:46 Fjodorov wrote:
I dont have source but Im sure I have heared several times on the news during this week that crimean tatars were going to boycott the referendum. yes, but the fucking math doesn't check out even if we assume the 'worst case' : 80% votedthere are 40% non ethnic-russian voters let's say everyone who abstained the vote belonged to that group. That means that 20% of the voters were still non-russian. But only 5% of people did not vote in favor of joining Russia => 3 out of 4 non Russians would have needed to vote in favor of joining Russia. That's absurd. where did you get that number from? I have heard Crimean Tatars representative give a 30-50% estimation.
I just went with the official numbers. (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26598832)
There are 1.5 million eligible voters and election officials put the turnout in Sunday's vote at more than 80%.
|
On March 17 2014 06:54 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 06:53 Nyxisto wrote:On March 17 2014 06:46 Fjodorov wrote:
I dont have source but Im sure I have heared several times on the news during this week that crimean tatars were going to boycott the referendum. yes, but the fucking math doesn't check out even if we assume the 'worst case' : 80% voted there are 40% non ethnic-russian voters let's say everyone who abstained the vote belonged to that group. That means that 20% of the voters were still non-russian. But only 5% of people did not vote in favor of joining Russia => 3 out of 4 non Russians would have needed to vote in favor of joining Russia. That's absurd. But if 80% voted, then everyone who voted had not 1 vote basically but 1.2. And if Crimean Tatars ignored, then there are just 28% of non-ethnic russians.
You are bad at maths.
|
On March 17 2014 06:57 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 06:55 Sub40APM wrote:On March 17 2014 06:52 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:On March 17 2014 06:51 Sub40APM wrote:On March 17 2014 06:44 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:
But it's 55% and it's reasonable, considering amount of things which major did for Moscow, how did city grow in last and how good is it looking right now. well lets get real, for there to have been real elections in Moscow, its not navalny challenging a sitting mayor, it should be sobyanin vs luzhkov, with sobyanin being the challenger. You can just get the fuck out finally from "i hate Russia and everything which is there because they're simply retarded" bandwagon and start being reasonable at least once. Thanks. Huh? Luzhkov was mayor -- elected mayor -- of Moscow. Then in 2010 he starts criticizing the government and is removed by decree of president and Sobyanin is appointed instead. Luzhkov was dropped by president and rightly so. And they're from same party so they can't go both.
Is that even legal under Russian laws, that mayors can be removed by decree?
I am not sure what you mean by that second sentence. Luzhkov quit United Russia in March and was removed in September.
|
The 80% figure is difficult to pin down at the moment according to a google search ( https://www.google.pl/?#q=crimea voter turnout ). I see articles say 73% 79% 80+% 70%. If it is 80% though, then the result of 95% voting for secession seems quite suspicous. I guess if it's 73% it's still suspicious.
Vladimir enjoys rubbing it in I guess.
|
On March 17 2014 06:14 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:It's fucking North Korea, i was speaking about countries with intelligent leaders.
And russia is better than north korea? Do go on...
|
On March 17 2014 07:05 hunts wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 06:14 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:It's fucking North Korea, i was speaking about countries with intelligent leaders. And russia is better than north korea? Do go on...
I dont think thats fair. Russia is better than North Korea. Obviously the fact that Wonderful can post on here settles that debate.
|
On March 17 2014 06:20 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +what do your posts accomplish do you think? self-satisfaction probably right? whatever floats your boat imo, it's good imagery. I was talking about you calling people vampires, not everything you post. Escalation! What does calling people vampires in a politico-economic context accomplish? It has a very bad and ugly history and it seems careless to me. The underlying thesis is also flawed - America and Europe (and Japan/SK) dominate the global economy, the global economy is allegedly a vampire feeding system for these rich vampire countries, yet global poverty in the last 20 years was halved and for most of the planet's poor other progress in the material quality of their lives was achieved to varying, sometimes great, degrees. How does that circle get squared? This vampire system that runs the world is sucking the life out of countries while those countries are also - somehow - seeing poverty fall and life expectancy, access to education, clean food and water, decent housing, etc. increase.
see, your posts are getting more enjoyable to read already. it's hard to be precise when it comes to shady dealings and covert business employed by rich to keep extorting poor, hence a mysterious, evil thing like vampire is fitting.
On March 17 2014 06:48 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 06:39 nunez wrote:On March 17 2014 06:09 Sub40APM wrote:On March 17 2014 06:00 nunez wrote:On March 17 2014 05:18 DeepElemBlues wrote:On March 17 2014 05:05 nunez wrote:On March 17 2014 04:46 Sub40APM wrote:On March 17 2014 03:57 nunez wrote:On March 17 2014 02:53 Sub40APM wrote:On March 17 2014 00:41 nunez wrote:[quote] [quote] src[quote]thinking this skrill isn't spent empowering whatever political party that is willing to bend over for it (in this case the opposition) and labelling it as 'conspiracy crap' is dellusional. why do you think f.ex NED-money is flowing into ukraine? charity work? boy scouts? [quote] src Which one of your sources proves that the US has built up the Right Sector using 5 billion dollars, I might need a bit more hand holding than a link showing that the US spends money on foreign aid -- Canada does too, where are their fascists coups ? -- and the right sector. I'd also like some evidence showing that the national endowment for democracy's programs to strengthen things like rule of law or freedom of expression translated into fascist coups, perhaps one that doesnt make unsubstantiated claim that the NED caused the coup or that relies on who the founders of the NED were to prove NED is forever tainted by evil. NED's raison d'être seems to be empowering foreign groups that will allow american vampires, not commie vampires, to extract precious bodily fluids from their countries. far-right and fascists definately fits the bill in ukraine (or usually in general). you don't think NED money is included in the 5 billion figure? Are you being serious here or edgy? both. This indicates that NED may be using its grant making program to help open foreign markets to U.S. companies that were previously closed and to help promote the U.S.’s geopolitical and economic interests by financially supporting its military and economic partners.
...
This research does not find evidence that NED was successful at promoting democracy and economic freedom during the 1990s src Calling people vampires has a long and distinguished history with a certain set of people, nunez is just unconsciously carrying on a fine blood-soaked tradition dating back over a thousand years. The particular one he's consciously carrying on is over a hundred years old and was and is one of the favorite insults of a certain globally failed and murderous ideology. How calling people vampires accomplishes anything but self-satisfaction at being "edgy" is a mystery, but that is the point isn't it. what do your posts accomplish do you think? self-satisfaction maybe? On March 17 2014 05:20 Sub40APM wrote:On March 17 2014 05:05 nunez wrote:On March 17 2014 04:46 Sub40APM wrote:On March 17 2014 03:57 nunez wrote:On March 17 2014 02:53 Sub40APM wrote:On March 17 2014 00:41 nunez wrote:[quote] [quote] src[quote]thinking this skrill isn't spent empowering whatever political party that is willing to bend over for it (in this case the opposition) and labelling it as 'conspiracy crap' is dellusional. why do you think f.ex NED-money is flowing into ukraine? charity work? boy scouts? [quote] src Which one of your sources proves that the US has built up the Right Sector using 5 billion dollars, I might need a bit more hand holding than a link showing that the US spends money on foreign aid -- Canada does too, where are their fascists coups ? -- and the right sector. I'd also like some evidence showing that the national endowment for democracy's programs to strengthen things like rule of law or freedom of expression translated into fascist coups, perhaps one that doesnt make unsubstantiated claim that the NED caused the coup or that relies on who the founders of the NED were to prove NED is forever tainted by evil. NED's raison d'être seems to be empowering foreign groups that will allow american vampires, not commie vampires, to extract precious bodily fluids from their countries. far-right and fascists definately fits the bill in ukraine (or usually in general). you don't think NED money is included in the 5 billion figure? Are you being serious here or edgy? both. This indicates that NED may be using its grant making program to help open foreign markets to U.S. companies that were previously closed and to help promote the U.S.’s geopolitical and economic interests by financially supporting its military and economic partners.
...
This research does not find evidence that NED was successful at promoting democracy and economic freedom during the 1990s src Did you even read your source or did it come up through a quick google search? Ill put it below the fold if you care, but the actual thing you cite paints a pretty contradictory picture, one that stands in contrast to the assured and unsubstantiated tone of the original article you posted as evidence that NED was a vehicle through which 5 billion dollars was funneled to the right sector by America + Show Spoiler +Even though NED grant money appears to have been appropriately awarded to countries based on their
need, the grant money did not have a significant impact on political and economic freedom. This calls into question the wisdom of using the U.S. government’s scarce resources to promote democracy and economic freedom – not only through NED, but in any similar manner. The thesis is against all American foreign aid. Officially, the U.S. government was neutral about the Chilean plebiscite, but it
recognized that the plebiscite was an opportunity for Chile to take a large step toward
democracy. Seizing the moment, the U.S. became involved in Chile through NED. From
its own funds, NED sent $600,000 to opposition groups in Chile. Many of these groups
were reluctant to accept the money because they were uncomfortable using foreign
money to influence Chile’s domestic politics. However, most groups did eventually
accept the money because they recognized that their chances of winning without it were
unlikely (Christian 15 June 1988, A1). Congress later gave NED another $1 million to
distribute in Chile. Pinochet’s government made U.S. support for its opposition a central
campaign issue, but was unable to win the plebiscite (Christian 15 June 1988, A14).
NED supports pro-Democracy, anti-Military government forces in Chile -- you know, the military dictatorship they helped to create in the first place --- In reaction to the Clinton administration’s request, the House voted to eliminate
all funding for NED by a vote of 243-181 (Corn 1993b, 57; Doherty 1993, 1672).
NED’s defeat in the House was bipartisan – two-thirds of Republicans and a slight
36
majority of Democrats voted for its elimination NED appears not to be a tool the government actual wants... Critics have described NED as a “political sacred cow” (Corn 1997, 27), valued
as a source of pork-barrel projects and lavish political junkets abroad for Washington’s
elites (Carothers 1994, 123; Corn 1992, 648). These elites include high-level
“Republican and Democratic party activists, conservative trade unionists, and free
marketeers” who use the organization to further their own agendas (Corn 1993b, 57).
Critics further allege that NED provides its spoils systematically in an attempt to gain
friends that can help it politically (Samuels 1995, 53). In essence, the elites use NED for
generous perks, and the organization uses the elites for political gain and protection. This
type of “inside-the-beltway political logrolling,” according to critics, makes it the type of
program that needs to be abolished (Conry 1994, 16). or it turns out NED is some sort of corruption mechanism inside DC without any actual foreign interests at all Look at his top recipients, Ukraine received less money than Poland, Russia and China and slightly more than Cuba and Romania i think you are confused. nobody is saying 5 billion dollars was funelled through NED, but feel free to make the case that the NED's spending in ukraine is not included in that figure, Well his original claim was that 5 billion was spent by the US to create neo-nazis, so I am still waiting for support for that argument.
the paper corroborates both the robert parry article(~ cold war relic fund that generally supports a neocon agenda often at cross-purposes with the Obama administration’s foreign policy)
All it corroborates from the Parry article was that its inception the NED was filled with Reagen types. and xM(Z's claim that ukraine's right are able to throw their weight around because of it (the right of ukraine aligns with this agenda). There is 0 support in the paper you quoted for this claim. All it shows is that Ukraine receives money from NED. Neither the right sector nor Svoboda are mentioned in the paper, and neither were relevant until the late 2000s, Your paper covers a period between 1990 and 1999 when Ukraine was dominated by Kuchma, an authoritarian pragmatist who at best was neutral if not outright Russian leaning. Finally, the paper you cited comes to the conclusion that this help is mostly useless and a waste of American tax payers money and all foreign aid that look to build democratic institutions should be cut. On March 17 2014 03:28 xM(Z wrote:
US because it was their $5billions that made the right sector of ukraine politics able to stage the ousting of Yanukovych here's the part you bolded that sparked this. yup, that's claiming that 5 billion was spent by the us to create neo-nazis. guess you still gotta keep waiting for 'proof' (gl getting your hands on cia's nazi-creation budget xmz). Uh ya. Show nested quote +
and it corroborates perry's points about it being is a vehicle for neolibs agenda, not the us govt's (facilitating us coorp profit is what they're aiming for).
The final assessment of thesis that you linked is that NED doesnt work and is a waste of tax payers money. For it to support the original article you linked claiming that a neo-con coup happened in Ukraine you would have to explain why for -- the duration of the paper you cited 1990 - 99 -- the neocons not only failed to accomplish anything but saw the rise of an authoritarian, anti-reformist president who dominated politics pretty totally. Then youd have to explain how the neocons then managed -- after what seems like total incompetence in their quest for whatever it is that their nefarious goals are -- they suddenly succeed so spectacularly and so rapidly.
ok, so where in that bolded part does it say that the us spent 5 B to create neo-nazis? is it before or after the part where it says "their 5 billions made the right sector of ukraine politics able to stage the ousting of yanu"?
nope, it just needs to show that NED is a vehicle for various agendas besides that of the us govt to support it. and it does.
|
The land of freedom23126 Posts
On March 17 2014 07:00 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 06:54 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:On March 17 2014 06:53 Nyxisto wrote:On March 17 2014 06:46 Fjodorov wrote:
I dont have source but Im sure I have heared several times on the news during this week that crimean tatars were going to boycott the referendum. yes, but the fucking math doesn't check out even if we assume the 'worst case' : 80% voted there are 40% non ethnic-russian voters let's say everyone who abstained the vote belonged to that group. That means that 20% of the voters were still non-russian. But only 5% of people did not vote in favor of joining Russia => 3 out of 4 non Russians would have needed to vote in favor of joining Russia. That's absurd. But if 80% voted, then everyone who voted had not 1 vote basically but 1.2. And if Crimean Tatars ignored, then there are just 28% of non-ethnic russians. You are bad at maths.
1.25, because i'm not thinking after 30 STM.
Does it really matter? Even better for final result.
On March 17 2014 07:02 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 06:57 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:On March 17 2014 06:55 Sub40APM wrote:On March 17 2014 06:52 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:On March 17 2014 06:51 Sub40APM wrote:On March 17 2014 06:44 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:
But it's 55% and it's reasonable, considering amount of things which major did for Moscow, how did city grow in last and how good is it looking right now. well lets get real, for there to have been real elections in Moscow, its not navalny challenging a sitting mayor, it should be sobyanin vs luzhkov, with sobyanin being the challenger. You can just get the fuck out finally from "i hate Russia and everything which is there because they're simply retarded" bandwagon and start being reasonable at least once. Thanks. Huh? Luzhkov was mayor -- elected mayor -- of Moscow. Then in 2010 he starts criticizing the government and is removed by decree of president and Sobyanin is appointed instead. Luzhkov was dropped by president and rightly so. And they're from same party so they can't go both. Is that even legal under Russian laws, that mayors can be removed by decree? I am not sure what you mean by that second sentence. Luzhkov quit United Russia in March and was removed in September.
Yes it is legal. Putin is going ham last few years and removing bad mayors a lot.
Seems like it does even help a bit.
I don't remember whole situation, but i guess, there were something like Luzhkov can't sit more as mayor because law about mayor's elections instead of just president putting them on places came.
And he was fucked because he went out of favour as well.
On March 17 2014 07:05 hunts wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 06:14 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:It's fucking North Korea, i was speaking about countries with intelligent leaders. And russia is better than north korea? Do go on...
Those democrats, eh.
On March 17 2014 07:07 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 07:05 hunts wrote:On March 17 2014 06:14 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:It's fucking North Korea, i was speaking about countries with intelligent leaders. And russia is better than north korea? Do go on... I dont think thats fair. Russia is better than North Korea. Obviously the fact that Wonderful can post on here settles that debate.
LEGIT.
|
I have a suspicion Russia will not accept Crimea into Russia right away. Allow them to be an independent nation for a few years, and accept them then. That way they can avoid sanctions while the West's anger dissapates. Putin plays his cards well, and the only consolation we get is that he is screwing over Russia in the long-term... and that's only for people who hate actual Russians, rather than people who hate Russian politics :/
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
