|
|
On March 17 2014 12:03 YasonDinAlt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 11:55 Simberto wrote:On March 17 2014 11:11 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 10:32 m4ini wrote:On March 17 2014 10:28 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 10:09 m4ini wrote:On March 17 2014 10:06 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 09:39 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 17 2014 09:22 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 09:11 Gorsameth wrote:
[quote]
You deny an invasion that has clear proof.
Yes Russia is allowed troops inside Crimea. No those Troops are not allowed to set up roadblocks and blockade Ukraine military installations.
Therefor there is little point arguing with yet another victim of Russian propaganda.
I even don`t see a reason for arguing, because we are both wictims of propaganda, me-of Russian, you-of Ucranian/European. Journalistic objectiveness is a myth. All that concerns to reality - is a media policy. Be sure I do not neglect the influence of local interpretation. I just try to show to anyone interested the other point of wiev. And by the way, those blocks you mentioned - there are no Russian military forces around there. That motion pictures from Ucranian media fill me with healthy laughter. They remind me books of Tom Clancy. Then everything is slime and there's no point in discussing anything. Enjoy that bleak world. I prefer to scrutinize sources and to choose which ones are trustworthy, and which are not. Like people from every other country except for Russia, (and Zeo  ), I choose independent media in this case. And their reports contradict what you said. The fact that it's more likely that your perception is warped rather than ours is supported by the UN security council vote. Even China didn't support Russia's position, every other country there voted in favour of the US resolution. This includes such `Western Countries' such as Chad, Argentina, Chile, Nigeria, Jordan and Rwanda. Face it, Russia is the only country that's actively distorting facts (such as claiming that Russian troops are not Russian troops, you can just by howitzers from any local shop....), and all other countries are calling Russia out on its bullshit. You don`t want to catch the fact that is screaming from the fragment you just qouted - we are wery alike. I also choose media sources carefully. But I repeat, there is no objectiveness in media. There is editorial policy. It`s the same thing that if you come to you girlfriend and say "My relation to you is objective". Are you a robot? Doubt that. Same with the journalists. Pray you catch an example. According to that UN security council vote on resolution.... well, I get in my mind a country, who didn`t give a sh.. on that restrictive resolutions and bombed European cities with thiusands victims of civillians three times for the last 10 years. Russia? Nope. USSR? Mistake again. The country of objective journalists. the country which fight for peace inpiring war crysises - USA! Applause to the last stronghold of freedom! USA inspired takeover in Ucraine, not Russia. It`s US who invested 5 billion in Ucranian nationalizm since 1991. But it is Rissia who will deal with it. Just like with Syria. What? Your objective media don`t have a string about that? Sorry. There's more media than just american. Some are even independant, who would've thought. What's your opinion on the videos showing totally not russian soldiers? Indeed they are. And I saw that video a week ago, and a dosen of other videos, very alike. I allready told that I can use YouTube. But again: what is your opinion on Crimea`s newly elected government request to Russian government to provide security diring the preparations to referendum? Why do you neglect that the right of Crimea people to be independent from Kiev could be guarded by Russia? And towards all that hater with thei sarcastic murmuring "Putin sad that`s true so thats true... next lvl troll" - when speaking about the invasion I mean the invasion into continental part of Ucraine, with which Ucranian media and government frightens sitizens of the South-East of the country. By the way, those sitizens are avaiting the invasion thmselves, for they are 70% Russian and are fed up woth that mess in Kiev. So how do you sell it as "fact" that there's no russian soldiers in crimea? The russians are allowed 26k soldiers in their bases, true - but i bet they're not allowed to block military installations. That, my friend, is an act of aggression. And that started long before there was a referendum. And no, it's not russias right to invade (yes, blocking military installations, laying minefields, shipping howitzers which are an offensive part of the military is an invasion). PS: it's 58% russians, not 70. But since 100 is close enough to 50, i suppose it's fair enough. But since you're so in favor of legitimations etc, we had that just a couple of pages ago: what do you think about the fact that this referendum is illegal based on the constitution? Wait, don't answer, i pretty much know where this is going. What I sold as a fact was just the statement that there is no Russian troops in Ucraine. For me, being Russian, Ucraine consists of 26 continental regions of Ucraine itself AND an autonomous republic of Crimea. See the difference? This is amazing. "There are no russian troops in Ukraine because the part of Ukraine that they invaded is actually not part of the Ukraine anymore after they invaded it. " Next in: Germany never started WW2 because there was no invasion of Poland, because Poland does not exist, only some additional german and soviet provinces. or remain in your world of brainwashed illusion of nazi Germany.
Did something in your brain just melt or something?
|
On March 17 2014 12:05 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 12:03 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 11:55 Simberto wrote:On March 17 2014 11:11 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 10:32 m4ini wrote:On March 17 2014 10:28 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 10:09 m4ini wrote:On March 17 2014 10:06 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 09:39 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 17 2014 09:22 YasonDinAlt wrote:
[quote]
I even don`t see a reason for arguing, because we are both wictims of propaganda, me-of Russian, you-of Ucranian/European. Journalistic objectiveness is a myth. All that concerns to reality - is a media policy.
Be sure I do not neglect the influence of local interpretation.
I just try to show to anyone interested the other point of wiev.
And by the way, those blocks you mentioned - there are no Russian military forces around there. That motion pictures from Ucranian media fill me with healthy laughter. They remind me books of Tom Clancy.
Then everything is slime and there's no point in discussing anything. Enjoy that bleak world. I prefer to scrutinize sources and to choose which ones are trustworthy, and which are not. Like people from every other country except for Russia, (and Zeo ), I choose independent media in this case. And their reports contradict what you said. The fact that it's more likely that your perception is warped rather than ours is supported by the UN security council vote. Even China didn't support Russia's position, every other country there voted in favour of the US resolution. This includes such `Western Countries' such as Chad, Argentina, Chile, Nigeria, Jordan and Rwanda. Face it, Russia is the only country that's actively distorting facts (such as claiming that Russian troops are not Russian troops, you can just by howitzers from any local shop....), and all other countries are calling Russia out on its bullshit. You don`t want to catch the fact that is screaming from the fragment you just qouted - we are wery alike. I also choose media sources carefully. But I repeat, there is no objectiveness in media. There is editorial policy. It`s the same thing that if you come to you girlfriend and say "My relation to you is objective". Are you a robot? Doubt that. Same with the journalists. Pray you catch an example. According to that UN security council vote on resolution.... well, I get in my mind a country, who didn`t give a sh.. on that restrictive resolutions and bombed European cities with thiusands victims of civillians three times for the last 10 years. Russia? Nope. USSR? Mistake again. The country of objective journalists. the country which fight for peace inpiring war crysises - USA! Applause to the last stronghold of freedom! USA inspired takeover in Ucraine, not Russia. It`s US who invested 5 billion in Ucranian nationalizm since 1991. But it is Rissia who will deal with it. Just like with Syria. What? Your objective media don`t have a string about that? Sorry. There's more media than just american. Some are even independant, who would've thought. What's your opinion on the videos showing totally not russian soldiers? Indeed they are. And I saw that video a week ago, and a dosen of other videos, very alike. I allready told that I can use YouTube. But again: what is your opinion on Crimea`s newly elected government request to Russian government to provide security diring the preparations to referendum? Why do you neglect that the right of Crimea people to be independent from Kiev could be guarded by Russia? And towards all that hater with thei sarcastic murmuring "Putin sad that`s true so thats true... next lvl troll" - when speaking about the invasion I mean the invasion into continental part of Ucraine, with which Ucranian media and government frightens sitizens of the South-East of the country. By the way, those sitizens are avaiting the invasion thmselves, for they are 70% Russian and are fed up woth that mess in Kiev. So how do you sell it as "fact" that there's no russian soldiers in crimea? The russians are allowed 26k soldiers in their bases, true - but i bet they're not allowed to block military installations. That, my friend, is an act of aggression. And that started long before there was a referendum. And no, it's not russias right to invade (yes, blocking military installations, laying minefields, shipping howitzers which are an offensive part of the military is an invasion). PS: it's 58% russians, not 70. But since 100 is close enough to 50, i suppose it's fair enough. But since you're so in favor of legitimations etc, we had that just a couple of pages ago: what do you think about the fact that this referendum is illegal based on the constitution? Wait, don't answer, i pretty much know where this is going. What I sold as a fact was just the statement that there is no Russian troops in Ucraine. For me, being Russian, Ucraine consists of 26 continental regions of Ucraine itself AND an autonomous republic of Crimea. See the difference? This is amazing. "There are no russian troops in Ukraine because the part of Ukraine that they invaded is actually not part of the Ukraine anymore after they invaded it. " Next in: Germany never started WW2 because there was no invasion of Poland, because Poland does not exist, only some additional german and soviet provinces. or remain in your world of brainwashed illusion of nazi Germany. Did something in your brain just melt or something? He is trolling you guys hard. And all of you are falling for it. Come on.
|
On March 17 2014 12:05 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 12:03 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 11:55 Simberto wrote:On March 17 2014 11:11 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 10:32 m4ini wrote:On March 17 2014 10:28 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 10:09 m4ini wrote:On March 17 2014 10:06 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 09:39 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 17 2014 09:22 YasonDinAlt wrote:
[quote]
I even don`t see a reason for arguing, because we are both wictims of propaganda, me-of Russian, you-of Ucranian/European. Journalistic objectiveness is a myth. All that concerns to reality - is a media policy.
Be sure I do not neglect the influence of local interpretation.
I just try to show to anyone interested the other point of wiev.
And by the way, those blocks you mentioned - there are no Russian military forces around there. That motion pictures from Ucranian media fill me with healthy laughter. They remind me books of Tom Clancy.
Then everything is slime and there's no point in discussing anything. Enjoy that bleak world. I prefer to scrutinize sources and to choose which ones are trustworthy, and which are not. Like people from every other country except for Russia, (and Zeo ), I choose independent media in this case. And their reports contradict what you said. The fact that it's more likely that your perception is warped rather than ours is supported by the UN security council vote. Even China didn't support Russia's position, every other country there voted in favour of the US resolution. This includes such `Western Countries' such as Chad, Argentina, Chile, Nigeria, Jordan and Rwanda. Face it, Russia is the only country that's actively distorting facts (such as claiming that Russian troops are not Russian troops, you can just by howitzers from any local shop....), and all other countries are calling Russia out on its bullshit. You don`t want to catch the fact that is screaming from the fragment you just qouted - we are wery alike. I also choose media sources carefully. But I repeat, there is no objectiveness in media. There is editorial policy. It`s the same thing that if you come to you girlfriend and say "My relation to you is objective". Are you a robot? Doubt that. Same with the journalists. Pray you catch an example. According to that UN security council vote on resolution.... well, I get in my mind a country, who didn`t give a sh.. on that restrictive resolutions and bombed European cities with thiusands victims of civillians three times for the last 10 years. Russia? Nope. USSR? Mistake again. The country of objective journalists. the country which fight for peace inpiring war crysises - USA! Applause to the last stronghold of freedom! USA inspired takeover in Ucraine, not Russia. It`s US who invested 5 billion in Ucranian nationalizm since 1991. But it is Rissia who will deal with it. Just like with Syria. What? Your objective media don`t have a string about that? Sorry. There's more media than just american. Some are even independant, who would've thought. What's your opinion on the videos showing totally not russian soldiers? Indeed they are. And I saw that video a week ago, and a dosen of other videos, very alike. I allready told that I can use YouTube. But again: what is your opinion on Crimea`s newly elected government request to Russian government to provide security diring the preparations to referendum? Why do you neglect that the right of Crimea people to be independent from Kiev could be guarded by Russia? And towards all that hater with thei sarcastic murmuring "Putin sad that`s true so thats true... next lvl troll" - when speaking about the invasion I mean the invasion into continental part of Ucraine, with which Ucranian media and government frightens sitizens of the South-East of the country. By the way, those sitizens are avaiting the invasion thmselves, for they are 70% Russian and are fed up woth that mess in Kiev. So how do you sell it as "fact" that there's no russian soldiers in crimea? The russians are allowed 26k soldiers in their bases, true - but i bet they're not allowed to block military installations. That, my friend, is an act of aggression. And that started long before there was a referendum. And no, it's not russias right to invade (yes, blocking military installations, laying minefields, shipping howitzers which are an offensive part of the military is an invasion). PS: it's 58% russians, not 70. But since 100 is close enough to 50, i suppose it's fair enough. But since you're so in favor of legitimations etc, we had that just a couple of pages ago: what do you think about the fact that this referendum is illegal based on the constitution? Wait, don't answer, i pretty much know where this is going. What I sold as a fact was just the statement that there is no Russian troops in Ucraine. For me, being Russian, Ucraine consists of 26 continental regions of Ucraine itself AND an autonomous republic of Crimea. See the difference? This is amazing. "There are no russian troops in Ukraine because the part of Ukraine that they invaded is actually not part of the Ukraine anymore after they invaded it. " Next in: Germany never started WW2 because there was no invasion of Poland, because Poland does not exist, only some additional german and soviet provinces. or remain in your world of brainwashed illusion of nazi Germany. Did something in your brain just melt or something?
Activists in Western Ukraine commonly display the swastika as a symbol of their views.
Though it might not be a comparison that you find tasteful, it isn't without merit.
|
Russian Federation15 Posts
On March 17 2014 11:59 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 11:58 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 11:36 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:34 LegalLord wrote:
West Ukranians are commonly referred to by Russians, Crimeans, East Ukranians etc. as "fascists."
That's not anything out of the ordinary for a show of support for joining Russia. It's possibly some propaganda to come up with an excuse to go further than Crimea. You know, "to protect people" from those imaginary fascists. Russia is not afraid to mislead people to achieve its aims. What is a state if not an institute of legal violence. We, Russian, have seen a lot of suffering of the Ucraine during 23 years of "independence" since the collapse of the USSR. We want it to be stopped. Now our president wants to regain the borders which will suit cultural, economical, religious and historical reasons. You wouldn`t beleive in that, but the support of this decision among a nation is about 75%. And we would not care about the UN resolutions and sanctions. We live in interesting time. The world crysis repeats as 100 and 200 years ago. Let`s see whose balls are harder. My stake is on Putin. And yes, we are aware of the nuclear conflict and we realise the consequences. So let us regain our country, I you`re aware too. Now you are showing your real colours.
I do have eyes and brain and see where the situation can lead us, and I am ready for it. Least I could care is colours of what you see my text.
During last couple of months I`ve seen texts of such colours, concerning Russia, that you can hardly imagine that.
|
How the West will answer to the immoral annexation of Crimea? When to wait for democratic bombs and brave NATO marines in shining armor to free poor Crimean citizens from ruthless dictatorship?
|
On March 17 2014 12:07 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 12:05 m4ini wrote:On March 17 2014 12:03 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 11:55 Simberto wrote:On March 17 2014 11:11 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 10:32 m4ini wrote:On March 17 2014 10:28 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 10:09 m4ini wrote:On March 17 2014 10:06 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 09:39 Ghanburighan wrote:[quote] Then everything is slime and there's no point in discussing anything. Enjoy that bleak world. I prefer to scrutinize sources and to choose which ones are trustworthy, and which are not. Like people from every other country except for Russia, (and Zeo ), I choose independent media in this case. And their reports contradict what you said. The fact that it's more likely that your perception is warped rather than ours is supported by the UN security council vote. Even China didn't support Russia's position, every other country there voted in favour of the US resolution. This includes such `Western Countries' such as Chad, Argentina, Chile, Nigeria, Jordan and Rwanda. Face it, Russia is the only country that's actively distorting facts (such as claiming that Russian troops are not Russian troops, you can just by howitzers from any local shop....), and all other countries are calling Russia out on its bullshit. You don`t want to catch the fact that is screaming from the fragment you just qouted - we are wery alike. I also choose media sources carefully. But I repeat, there is no objectiveness in media. There is editorial policy. It`s the same thing that if you come to you girlfriend and say "My relation to you is objective". Are you a robot? Doubt that. Same with the journalists. Pray you catch an example. According to that UN security council vote on resolution.... well, I get in my mind a country, who didn`t give a sh.. on that restrictive resolutions and bombed European cities with thiusands victims of civillians three times for the last 10 years. Russia? Nope. USSR? Mistake again. The country of objective journalists. the country which fight for peace inpiring war crysises - USA! Applause to the last stronghold of freedom! USA inspired takeover in Ucraine, not Russia. It`s US who invested 5 billion in Ucranian nationalizm since 1991. But it is Rissia who will deal with it. Just like with Syria. What? Your objective media don`t have a string about that? Sorry. There's more media than just american. Some are even independant, who would've thought. What's your opinion on the videos showing totally not russian soldiers? Indeed they are. And I saw that video a week ago, and a dosen of other videos, very alike. I allready told that I can use YouTube. But again: what is your opinion on Crimea`s newly elected government request to Russian government to provide security diring the preparations to referendum? Why do you neglect that the right of Crimea people to be independent from Kiev could be guarded by Russia? And towards all that hater with thei sarcastic murmuring "Putin sad that`s true so thats true... next lvl troll" - when speaking about the invasion I mean the invasion into continental part of Ucraine, with which Ucranian media and government frightens sitizens of the South-East of the country. By the way, those sitizens are avaiting the invasion thmselves, for they are 70% Russian and are fed up woth that mess in Kiev. So how do you sell it as "fact" that there's no russian soldiers in crimea? The russians are allowed 26k soldiers in their bases, true - but i bet they're not allowed to block military installations. That, my friend, is an act of aggression. And that started long before there was a referendum. And no, it's not russias right to invade (yes, blocking military installations, laying minefields, shipping howitzers which are an offensive part of the military is an invasion). PS: it's 58% russians, not 70. But since 100 is close enough to 50, i suppose it's fair enough. But since you're so in favor of legitimations etc, we had that just a couple of pages ago: what do you think about the fact that this referendum is illegal based on the constitution? Wait, don't answer, i pretty much know where this is going. What I sold as a fact was just the statement that there is no Russian troops in Ucraine. For me, being Russian, Ucraine consists of 26 continental regions of Ucraine itself AND an autonomous republic of Crimea. See the difference? This is amazing. "There are no russian troops in Ukraine because the part of Ukraine that they invaded is actually not part of the Ukraine anymore after they invaded it. " Next in: Germany never started WW2 because there was no invasion of Poland, because Poland does not exist, only some additional german and soviet provinces. or remain in your world of brainwashed illusion of nazi Germany. Did something in your brain just melt or something? He is trolling you guys hard. And all of you are falling for it. Come on.
It may not be trolling. There are a lot of Russians who think Ukraine and Russia should be one due to historical reasons, possibly because of USSR times as well. There was a saying during USSR times "Vechnaya druzhba" which means "Eternal friendship" (or union). However, Russia needs to wipe out this aim. It's like Germany trying to annex Austria because the former may think they should be one. Yes, I know that Hitler did it. That doesn't make it any better for Russia.
|
Russian Federation15 Posts
On March 17 2014 12:05 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 12:03 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 11:55 Simberto wrote:On March 17 2014 11:11 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 10:32 m4ini wrote:On March 17 2014 10:28 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 10:09 m4ini wrote:On March 17 2014 10:06 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 09:39 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 17 2014 09:22 YasonDinAlt wrote:
[quote]
I even don`t see a reason for arguing, because we are both wictims of propaganda, me-of Russian, you-of Ucranian/European. Journalistic objectiveness is a myth. All that concerns to reality - is a media policy.
Be sure I do not neglect the influence of local interpretation.
I just try to show to anyone interested the other point of wiev.
And by the way, those blocks you mentioned - there are no Russian military forces around there. That motion pictures from Ucranian media fill me with healthy laughter. They remind me books of Tom Clancy.
Then everything is slime and there's no point in discussing anything. Enjoy that bleak world. I prefer to scrutinize sources and to choose which ones are trustworthy, and which are not. Like people from every other country except for Russia, (and Zeo ), I choose independent media in this case. And their reports contradict what you said. The fact that it's more likely that your perception is warped rather than ours is supported by the UN security council vote. Even China didn't support Russia's position, every other country there voted in favour of the US resolution. This includes such `Western Countries' such as Chad, Argentina, Chile, Nigeria, Jordan and Rwanda. Face it, Russia is the only country that's actively distorting facts (such as claiming that Russian troops are not Russian troops, you can just by howitzers from any local shop....), and all other countries are calling Russia out on its bullshit. You don`t want to catch the fact that is screaming from the fragment you just qouted - we are wery alike. I also choose media sources carefully. But I repeat, there is no objectiveness in media. There is editorial policy. It`s the same thing that if you come to you girlfriend and say "My relation to you is objective". Are you a robot? Doubt that. Same with the journalists. Pray you catch an example. According to that UN security council vote on resolution.... well, I get in my mind a country, who didn`t give a sh.. on that restrictive resolutions and bombed European cities with thiusands victims of civillians three times for the last 10 years. Russia? Nope. USSR? Mistake again. The country of objective journalists. the country which fight for peace inpiring war crysises - USA! Applause to the last stronghold of freedom! USA inspired takeover in Ucraine, not Russia. It`s US who invested 5 billion in Ucranian nationalizm since 1991. But it is Rissia who will deal with it. Just like with Syria. What? Your objective media don`t have a string about that? Sorry. There's more media than just american. Some are even independant, who would've thought. What's your opinion on the videos showing totally not russian soldiers? Indeed they are. And I saw that video a week ago, and a dosen of other videos, very alike. I allready told that I can use YouTube. But again: what is your opinion on Crimea`s newly elected government request to Russian government to provide security diring the preparations to referendum? Why do you neglect that the right of Crimea people to be independent from Kiev could be guarded by Russia? And towards all that hater with thei sarcastic murmuring "Putin sad that`s true so thats true... next lvl troll" - when speaking about the invasion I mean the invasion into continental part of Ucraine, with which Ucranian media and government frightens sitizens of the South-East of the country. By the way, those sitizens are avaiting the invasion thmselves, for they are 70% Russian and are fed up woth that mess in Kiev. So how do you sell it as "fact" that there's no russian soldiers in crimea? The russians are allowed 26k soldiers in their bases, true - but i bet they're not allowed to block military installations. That, my friend, is an act of aggression. And that started long before there was a referendum. And no, it's not russias right to invade (yes, blocking military installations, laying minefields, shipping howitzers which are an offensive part of the military is an invasion). PS: it's 58% russians, not 70. But since 100 is close enough to 50, i suppose it's fair enough. But since you're so in favor of legitimations etc, we had that just a couple of pages ago: what do you think about the fact that this referendum is illegal based on the constitution? Wait, don't answer, i pretty much know where this is going. What I sold as a fact was just the statement that there is no Russian troops in Ucraine. For me, being Russian, Ucraine consists of 26 continental regions of Ucraine itself AND an autonomous republic of Crimea. See the difference? This is amazing. "There are no russian troops in Ukraine because the part of Ukraine that they invaded is actually not part of the Ukraine anymore after they invaded it. " Next in: Germany never started WW2 because there was no invasion of Poland, because Poland does not exist, only some additional german and soviet provinces. or remain in your world of brainwashed illusion of nazi Germany. Did something in your brain just melt or something?
My country and people ended the WW2. Remember that next time when you try to compare your dick with your finger.
|
On March 17 2014 12:11 darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 12:07 Sub40APM wrote:On March 17 2014 12:05 m4ini wrote:On March 17 2014 12:03 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 11:55 Simberto wrote:On March 17 2014 11:11 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 10:32 m4ini wrote:On March 17 2014 10:28 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 10:09 m4ini wrote:On March 17 2014 10:06 YasonDinAlt wrote:
[quote]
You don`t want to catch the fact that is screaming from the fragment you just qouted - we are wery alike. I also choose media sources carefully. But I repeat, there is no objectiveness in media. There is editorial policy.
It`s the same thing that if you come to you girlfriend and say "My relation to you is objective". Are you a robot? Doubt that. Same with the journalists. Pray you catch an example.
According to that UN security council vote on resolution.... well, I get in my mind a country, who didn`t give a sh.. on that restrictive resolutions and bombed European cities with thiusands victims of civillians three times for the last 10 years.
Russia? Nope. USSR? Mistake again. The country of objective journalists. the country which fight for peace inpiring war crysises - USA!
Applause to the last stronghold of freedom!
USA inspired takeover in Ucraine, not Russia. It`s US who invested 5 billion in Ucranian nationalizm since 1991.
But it is Rissia who will deal with it. Just like with Syria.
What? Your objective media don`t have a string about that? Sorry.
There's more media than just american. Some are even independant, who would've thought. What's your opinion on the videos showing totally not russian soldiers? Indeed they are. And I saw that video a week ago, and a dosen of other videos, very alike. I allready told that I can use YouTube. But again: what is your opinion on Crimea`s newly elected government request to Russian government to provide security diring the preparations to referendum? Why do you neglect that the right of Crimea people to be independent from Kiev could be guarded by Russia? And towards all that hater with thei sarcastic murmuring "Putin sad that`s true so thats true... next lvl troll" - when speaking about the invasion I mean the invasion into continental part of Ucraine, with which Ucranian media and government frightens sitizens of the South-East of the country. By the way, those sitizens are avaiting the invasion thmselves, for they are 70% Russian and are fed up woth that mess in Kiev. So how do you sell it as "fact" that there's no russian soldiers in crimea? The russians are allowed 26k soldiers in their bases, true - but i bet they're not allowed to block military installations. That, my friend, is an act of aggression. And that started long before there was a referendum. And no, it's not russias right to invade (yes, blocking military installations, laying minefields, shipping howitzers which are an offensive part of the military is an invasion). PS: it's 58% russians, not 70. But since 100 is close enough to 50, i suppose it's fair enough. But since you're so in favor of legitimations etc, we had that just a couple of pages ago: what do you think about the fact that this referendum is illegal based on the constitution? Wait, don't answer, i pretty much know where this is going. What I sold as a fact was just the statement that there is no Russian troops in Ucraine. For me, being Russian, Ucraine consists of 26 continental regions of Ucraine itself AND an autonomous republic of Crimea. See the difference? This is amazing. "There are no russian troops in Ukraine because the part of Ukraine that they invaded is actually not part of the Ukraine anymore after they invaded it. " Next in: Germany never started WW2 because there was no invasion of Poland, because Poland does not exist, only some additional german and soviet provinces. or remain in your world of brainwashed illusion of nazi Germany. Did something in your brain just melt or something? He is trolling you guys hard. And all of you are falling for it. Come on. It may not be trolling. There are a lot of Russians who think Ukraine and Russia should be one due to historical reasons, possibly because of USSR times as well. There was a saying during USSR times "Vechnaya druzhba" which means "Eternal friendship" (or union). However, Russia needs to wipe out this aim. It's like Germany trying to annex Austria because the former may think they should be one. Yes, I know that Hitler did it. That doesn't make it any better for Russia. I dont think he is an actual Russian, I think he is on here to make other Russians look bad.
|
On March 17 2014 12:02 darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 11:58 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 11:53 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:46 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 11:41 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:38 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 11:36 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:34 LegalLord wrote:
West Ukranians are commonly referred to by Russians, Crimeans, East Ukranians etc. as "fascists."
That's not anything out of the ordinary for a show of support for joining Russia. It's possibly some propaganda to come up with an excuse to go further than Crimea. You know, "to protect people" from those imaginary fascists. Russia is not afraid to mislead people to achieve their aims. They don't need convincing. The Ukranian government over the past 20 years speaks for itself. While I'm not knowledgeable about the Ukrainian government for this period, I actually meant that Russia tries to come up with a reason to expand their invasion, e.g. by keep calling others fascists. Crimeans call the Ukranian government fascist too. So do a surprising number of western sources, if you look around. About the Ukranian government I will simply say this: those of non-Russian ethnicity have good reason to vote yes on the referendum. Russia is a much more stable country than Ukraine and the past 20 years have shown that. Back when the USSR collapsed, Crimea voted to join Ukraine. Now they don't, and with good reason. While a referendum itself is democratic, I personally don't think the time was right for one, especially with Russian military's presence. That's not democratic, and it smells like rigged elections. I suppose the pro-Russian enthusiasm throughout Crimea is rigged as well? There was never a question of how Crimea would vote. Not among those familiar with the situation, at any rate. I understand the majority of population is ethnic Russian, but you are ignoring the bigger picture. Russia's military presence and Ukraine's political crisis should lead to unstable, not credible elections. For a referendum to happen, all other matters should be resolved first in order to produce 'straight' votes. I hope anyone reasonable would agree with this. Just think about it. Possible analogy: 1) You vote for something. 2) You vote for something while you're at a state of anger. Which one is better? Obviously the first because you're calmed down, hence my view.
Sure, we have a few decades to spare. Never mind that the longer Russia waits, the worse off Crimea becomes under the rotten Ukranian government, and even those who aren't ethnically Russian agree. Russians aren't the only pro-Russians in Crimea, not by a long shot.
On March 17 2014 12:09 mimmo wrote:
How the West will answer to the immoral annexation of Crimea? When to wait for democratic bombs and brave NATO marines in shining armor to free poor Crimean citizens from ruthless dictatorship?
As a serious answer: they won't. US citizens are strongly against any involvement, so when it comes to a vote it's going to be over. Europe doesn't really have any initiative on this matter, so they'll drop it when the US does. No one else in the world really cares - China, Japan, MidEast, etc want to sit this one out.
|
On March 17 2014 12:14 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 12:02 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:58 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 11:53 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:46 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 11:41 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:38 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 11:36 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:34 LegalLord wrote:
West Ukranians are commonly referred to by Russians, Crimeans, East Ukranians etc. as "fascists."
That's not anything out of the ordinary for a show of support for joining Russia. It's possibly some propaganda to come up with an excuse to go further than Crimea. You know, "to protect people" from those imaginary fascists. Russia is not afraid to mislead people to achieve their aims. They don't need convincing. The Ukranian government over the past 20 years speaks for itself. While I'm not knowledgeable about the Ukrainian government for this period, I actually meant that Russia tries to come up with a reason to expand their invasion, e.g. by keep calling others fascists. Crimeans call the Ukranian government fascist too. So do a surprising number of western sources, if you look around. About the Ukranian government I will simply say this: those of non-Russian ethnicity have good reason to vote yes on the referendum. Russia is a much more stable country than Ukraine and the past 20 years have shown that. Back when the USSR collapsed, Crimea voted to join Ukraine. Now they don't, and with good reason. While a referendum itself is democratic, I personally don't think the time was right for one, especially with Russian military's presence. That's not democratic, and it smells like rigged elections. I suppose the pro-Russian enthusiasm throughout Crimea is rigged as well? There was never a question of how Crimea would vote. Not among those familiar with the situation, at any rate. I understand the majority of population is ethnic Russian, but you are ignoring the bigger picture. Russia's military presence and Ukraine's political crisis should lead to unstable, not credible elections. For a referendum to happen, all other matters should be resolved first in order to produce 'straight' votes. I hope anyone reasonable would agree with this. Just think about it. Possible analogy: 1) You vote for something. 2) You vote for something while you're at a state of anger. Which one is better? Obviously the first because you're calmed down, hence my view. Sure, we have a few decades to spare. Never mind that the longer Russia waits, the worse off Crimea becomes under the rotten Ukranian government, and even those who aren't ethnically Russian agree. Russians aren't the only pro-Russians in Crimea, not by a long shot.
Maybe America should rescue Russia, after all, after 300 years of Russian government, the worse off Russians become under the rotten Russians, and even those who arent ethnically Russian agree.
|
On March 17 2014 12:14 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 12:02 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:58 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 11:53 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:46 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 11:41 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:38 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 11:36 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:34 LegalLord wrote:
West Ukranians are commonly referred to by Russians, Crimeans, East Ukranians etc. as "fascists."
That's not anything out of the ordinary for a show of support for joining Russia. It's possibly some propaganda to come up with an excuse to go further than Crimea. You know, "to protect people" from those imaginary fascists. Russia is not afraid to mislead people to achieve their aims. They don't need convincing. The Ukranian government over the past 20 years speaks for itself. While I'm not knowledgeable about the Ukrainian government for this period, I actually meant that Russia tries to come up with a reason to expand their invasion, e.g. by keep calling others fascists. Crimeans call the Ukranian government fascist too. So do a surprising number of western sources, if you look around. About the Ukranian government I will simply say this: those of non-Russian ethnicity have good reason to vote yes on the referendum. Russia is a much more stable country than Ukraine and the past 20 years have shown that. Back when the USSR collapsed, Crimea voted to join Ukraine. Now they don't, and with good reason. While a referendum itself is democratic, I personally don't think the time was right for one, especially with Russian military's presence. That's not democratic, and it smells like rigged elections. I suppose the pro-Russian enthusiasm throughout Crimea is rigged as well? There was never a question of how Crimea would vote. Not among those familiar with the situation, at any rate. I understand the majority of population is ethnic Russian, but you are ignoring the bigger picture. Russia's military presence and Ukraine's political crisis should lead to unstable, not credible elections. For a referendum to happen, all other matters should be resolved first in order to produce 'straight' votes. I hope anyone reasonable would agree with this. Just think about it. Possible analogy: 1) You vote for something. 2) You vote for something while you're at a state of anger. Which one is better? Obviously the first because you're calmed down, hence my view. Sure, we have a few decades to spare. Never mind that the longer Russia waits, the worse off Crimea becomes under the rotten Ukranian government, and even those who aren't ethnically Russian agree. Russians aren't the only pro-Russians in Crimea, not by a long shot.
So why a referendum now during a political crisis? Why not a few years ago or similar? As I said, Russia is being opportunistic. And if Russia was so "good" and "here to rescue", why did it order invasion in 1944? Bulgaria had a perfectly legitimate government back then which had to be overthrown so some dumb communists could force their regime.
|
On March 17 2014 12:13 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 12:11 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 12:07 Sub40APM wrote:On March 17 2014 12:05 m4ini wrote:On March 17 2014 12:03 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 11:55 Simberto wrote:On March 17 2014 11:11 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 10:32 m4ini wrote:On March 17 2014 10:28 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 10:09 m4ini wrote:
[quote]
There's more media than just american. Some are even independant, who would've thought.
What's your opinion on the videos showing totally not russian soldiers? Indeed they are. And I saw that video a week ago, and a dosen of other videos, very alike. I allready told that I can use YouTube. But again: what is your opinion on Crimea`s newly elected government request to Russian government to provide security diring the preparations to referendum? Why do you neglect that the right of Crimea people to be independent from Kiev could be guarded by Russia? And towards all that hater with thei sarcastic murmuring "Putin sad that`s true so thats true... next lvl troll" - when speaking about the invasion I mean the invasion into continental part of Ucraine, with which Ucranian media and government frightens sitizens of the South-East of the country. By the way, those sitizens are avaiting the invasion thmselves, for they are 70% Russian and are fed up woth that mess in Kiev. So how do you sell it as "fact" that there's no russian soldiers in crimea? The russians are allowed 26k soldiers in their bases, true - but i bet they're not allowed to block military installations. That, my friend, is an act of aggression. And that started long before there was a referendum. And no, it's not russias right to invade (yes, blocking military installations, laying minefields, shipping howitzers which are an offensive part of the military is an invasion). PS: it's 58% russians, not 70. But since 100 is close enough to 50, i suppose it's fair enough. But since you're so in favor of legitimations etc, we had that just a couple of pages ago: what do you think about the fact that this referendum is illegal based on the constitution? Wait, don't answer, i pretty much know where this is going. What I sold as a fact was just the statement that there is no Russian troops in Ucraine. For me, being Russian, Ucraine consists of 26 continental regions of Ucraine itself AND an autonomous republic of Crimea. See the difference? This is amazing. "There are no russian troops in Ukraine because the part of Ukraine that they invaded is actually not part of the Ukraine anymore after they invaded it. " Next in: Germany never started WW2 because there was no invasion of Poland, because Poland does not exist, only some additional german and soviet provinces. or remain in your world of brainwashed illusion of nazi Germany. Did something in your brain just melt or something? He is trolling you guys hard. And all of you are falling for it. Come on. It may not be trolling. There are a lot of Russians who think Ukraine and Russia should be one due to historical reasons, possibly because of USSR times as well. There was a saying during USSR times "Vechnaya druzhba" which means "Eternal friendship" (or union). However, Russia needs to wipe out this aim. It's like Germany trying to annex Austria because the former may think they should be one. Yes, I know that Hitler did it. That doesn't make it any better for Russia. I dont think he is an actual Russian, I think he is on here to make other Russians look bad.
I'd say he's a shill.
|
On March 17 2014 12:12 YasonDinAlt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 12:05 m4ini wrote:On March 17 2014 12:03 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 11:55 Simberto wrote:On March 17 2014 11:11 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 10:32 m4ini wrote:On March 17 2014 10:28 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 10:09 m4ini wrote:On March 17 2014 10:06 YasonDinAlt wrote:On March 17 2014 09:39 Ghanburighan wrote:[quote] Then everything is slime and there's no point in discussing anything. Enjoy that bleak world. I prefer to scrutinize sources and to choose which ones are trustworthy, and which are not. Like people from every other country except for Russia, (and Zeo ), I choose independent media in this case. And their reports contradict what you said. The fact that it's more likely that your perception is warped rather than ours is supported by the UN security council vote. Even China didn't support Russia's position, every other country there voted in favour of the US resolution. This includes such `Western Countries' such as Chad, Argentina, Chile, Nigeria, Jordan and Rwanda. Face it, Russia is the only country that's actively distorting facts (such as claiming that Russian troops are not Russian troops, you can just by howitzers from any local shop....), and all other countries are calling Russia out on its bullshit. You don`t want to catch the fact that is screaming from the fragment you just qouted - we are wery alike. I also choose media sources carefully. But I repeat, there is no objectiveness in media. There is editorial policy. It`s the same thing that if you come to you girlfriend and say "My relation to you is objective". Are you a robot? Doubt that. Same with the journalists. Pray you catch an example. According to that UN security council vote on resolution.... well, I get in my mind a country, who didn`t give a sh.. on that restrictive resolutions and bombed European cities with thiusands victims of civillians three times for the last 10 years. Russia? Nope. USSR? Mistake again. The country of objective journalists. the country which fight for peace inpiring war crysises - USA! Applause to the last stronghold of freedom! USA inspired takeover in Ucraine, not Russia. It`s US who invested 5 billion in Ucranian nationalizm since 1991. But it is Rissia who will deal with it. Just like with Syria. What? Your objective media don`t have a string about that? Sorry. There's more media than just american. Some are even independant, who would've thought. What's your opinion on the videos showing totally not russian soldiers? Indeed they are. And I saw that video a week ago, and a dosen of other videos, very alike. I allready told that I can use YouTube. But again: what is your opinion on Crimea`s newly elected government request to Russian government to provide security diring the preparations to referendum? Why do you neglect that the right of Crimea people to be independent from Kiev could be guarded by Russia? And towards all that hater with thei sarcastic murmuring "Putin sad that`s true so thats true... next lvl troll" - when speaking about the invasion I mean the invasion into continental part of Ucraine, with which Ucranian media and government frightens sitizens of the South-East of the country. By the way, those sitizens are avaiting the invasion thmselves, for they are 70% Russian and are fed up woth that mess in Kiev. So how do you sell it as "fact" that there's no russian soldiers in crimea? The russians are allowed 26k soldiers in their bases, true - but i bet they're not allowed to block military installations. That, my friend, is an act of aggression. And that started long before there was a referendum. And no, it's not russias right to invade (yes, blocking military installations, laying minefields, shipping howitzers which are an offensive part of the military is an invasion). PS: it's 58% russians, not 70. But since 100 is close enough to 50, i suppose it's fair enough. But since you're so in favor of legitimations etc, we had that just a couple of pages ago: what do you think about the fact that this referendum is illegal based on the constitution? Wait, don't answer, i pretty much know where this is going. What I sold as a fact was just the statement that there is no Russian troops in Ucraine. For me, being Russian, Ucraine consists of 26 continental regions of Ucraine itself AND an autonomous republic of Crimea. See the difference? This is amazing. "There are no russian troops in Ukraine because the part of Ukraine that they invaded is actually not part of the Ukraine anymore after they invaded it. " Next in: Germany never started WW2 because there was no invasion of Poland, because Poland does not exist, only some additional german and soviet provinces. or remain in your world of brainwashed illusion of nazi Germany. Did something in your brain just melt or something? My country and people ended the WW2. Remember that next time when you try to compare your dick with your finger.
edit: not worth it, guess you're too obvious anyway
|
On March 17 2014 12:16 darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 12:14 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 12:02 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:58 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 11:53 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:46 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 11:41 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:38 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 11:36 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:34 LegalLord wrote:
West Ukranians are commonly referred to by Russians, Crimeans, East Ukranians etc. as "fascists."
That's not anything out of the ordinary for a show of support for joining Russia. It's possibly some propaganda to come up with an excuse to go further than Crimea. You know, "to protect people" from those imaginary fascists. Russia is not afraid to mislead people to achieve their aims. They don't need convincing. The Ukranian government over the past 20 years speaks for itself. While I'm not knowledgeable about the Ukrainian government for this period, I actually meant that Russia tries to come up with a reason to expand their invasion, e.g. by keep calling others fascists. Crimeans call the Ukranian government fascist too. So do a surprising number of western sources, if you look around. About the Ukranian government I will simply say this: those of non-Russian ethnicity have good reason to vote yes on the referendum. Russia is a much more stable country than Ukraine and the past 20 years have shown that. Back when the USSR collapsed, Crimea voted to join Ukraine. Now they don't, and with good reason. While a referendum itself is democratic, I personally don't think the time was right for one, especially with Russian military's presence. That's not democratic, and it smells like rigged elections. I suppose the pro-Russian enthusiasm throughout Crimea is rigged as well? There was never a question of how Crimea would vote. Not among those familiar with the situation, at any rate. I understand the majority of population is ethnic Russian, but you are ignoring the bigger picture. Russia's military presence and Ukraine's political crisis should lead to unstable, not credible elections. For a referendum to happen, all other matters should be resolved first in order to produce 'straight' votes. I hope anyone reasonable would agree with this. Just think about it. Possible analogy: 1) You vote for something. 2) You vote for something while you're at a state of anger. Which one is better? Obviously the first because you're calmed down, hence my view. Sure, we have a few decades to spare. Never mind that the longer Russia waits, the worse off Crimea becomes under the rotten Ukranian government, and even those who aren't ethnically Russian agree. Russians aren't the only pro-Russians in Crimea, not by a long shot. So why a referendum now during a political crisis? Why not a few years ago or similar? As I said, Russia is being opportunistic. And if Russia was so "good" and "here to rescue", why did it order invasion in 1944? Bulgaria had a perfectly legitimate government back then which had to be overthrown so some dumb communists could force their regime.
Bulgaria was allied with the Nazis in 1944. That's a pretty good reason for military intervention, especially during a war as big as WWII.
|
LIke guys you have to understand from my perspective France isn't actually a country. It's more like two countries of which half belongs to me.
What's happening in this thread
|
The talk of ukraine government being "fascists" is very saddening to me. I have 2 great grandfathers who died in WWII and 1 who was wounded but did not die, all fighting on the USSR side, fighting against the fascists as I was told as a kid. It makes me sad that a country that I as a kid considered myself part of (although now I know better) is calling the ukraine government the same thing that 3 great grandfathers fought against, 2 of which died in the war. I see russia as no better than nazi germany now with the blatantly wrong name calling. Perhaps russians should look at their own government to find the true fascists, before they point the finger at ukraine, and before they point the finger at the west who is being very patient with their bullshit.
|
On March 17 2014 12:26 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 12:16 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 12:14 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 12:02 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:58 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 11:53 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:46 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 11:41 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:38 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 11:36 darkness wrote:
[quote]
It's possibly some propaganda to come up with an excuse to go further than Crimea. You know, "to protect people" from those imaginary fascists. Russia is not afraid to mislead people to achieve their aims. They don't need convincing. The Ukranian government over the past 20 years speaks for itself. While I'm not knowledgeable about the Ukrainian government for this period, I actually meant that Russia tries to come up with a reason to expand their invasion, e.g. by keep calling others fascists. Crimeans call the Ukranian government fascist too. So do a surprising number of western sources, if you look around. About the Ukranian government I will simply say this: those of non-Russian ethnicity have good reason to vote yes on the referendum. Russia is a much more stable country than Ukraine and the past 20 years have shown that. Back when the USSR collapsed, Crimea voted to join Ukraine. Now they don't, and with good reason. While a referendum itself is democratic, I personally don't think the time was right for one, especially with Russian military's presence. That's not democratic, and it smells like rigged elections. I suppose the pro-Russian enthusiasm throughout Crimea is rigged as well? There was never a question of how Crimea would vote. Not among those familiar with the situation, at any rate. I understand the majority of population is ethnic Russian, but you are ignoring the bigger picture. Russia's military presence and Ukraine's political crisis should lead to unstable, not credible elections. For a referendum to happen, all other matters should be resolved first in order to produce 'straight' votes. I hope anyone reasonable would agree with this. Just think about it. Possible analogy: 1) You vote for something. 2) You vote for something while you're at a state of anger. Which one is better? Obviously the first because you're calmed down, hence my view. Sure, we have a few decades to spare. Never mind that the longer Russia waits, the worse off Crimea becomes under the rotten Ukranian government, and even those who aren't ethnically Russian agree. Russians aren't the only pro-Russians in Crimea, not by a long shot. So why a referendum now during a political crisis? Why not a few years ago or similar? As I said, Russia is being opportunistic. And if Russia was so "good" and "here to rescue", why did it order invasion in 1944? Bulgaria had a perfectly legitimate government back then which had to be overthrown so some dumb communists could force their regime. Bulgaria was allied with the Nazis in 1944. That's a pretty good reason for military intervention, especially during a war as big as WWII.
Or it was Russia's imperialistic aim but with a cover-up? Either way, I wonder if China is going to be pissed off soon. I doubt they approve if Russia keeps expanding their territory right in their face.
|
Or it was Russia's imperialistic aim but with a cover-up? Either way, I wonder if China is going to be pissed off soon. I doubt they approve if Russia keeps expanding their territory right in their face.
Russia would never do such thing.
|
On March 17 2014 12:33 darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 12:26 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 12:16 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 12:14 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 12:02 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:58 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 11:53 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:46 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 11:41 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:38 LegalLord wrote:
[quote]
They don't need convincing. The Ukranian government over the past 20 years speaks for itself. While I'm not knowledgeable about the Ukrainian government for this period, I actually meant that Russia tries to come up with a reason to expand their invasion, e.g. by keep calling others fascists. Crimeans call the Ukranian government fascist too. So do a surprising number of western sources, if you look around. About the Ukranian government I will simply say this: those of non-Russian ethnicity have good reason to vote yes on the referendum. Russia is a much more stable country than Ukraine and the past 20 years have shown that. Back when the USSR collapsed, Crimea voted to join Ukraine. Now they don't, and with good reason. While a referendum itself is democratic, I personally don't think the time was right for one, especially with Russian military's presence. That's not democratic, and it smells like rigged elections. I suppose the pro-Russian enthusiasm throughout Crimea is rigged as well? There was never a question of how Crimea would vote. Not among those familiar with the situation, at any rate. I understand the majority of population is ethnic Russian, but you are ignoring the bigger picture. Russia's military presence and Ukraine's political crisis should lead to unstable, not credible elections. For a referendum to happen, all other matters should be resolved first in order to produce 'straight' votes. I hope anyone reasonable would agree with this. Just think about it. Possible analogy: 1) You vote for something. 2) You vote for something while you're at a state of anger. Which one is better? Obviously the first because you're calmed down, hence my view. Sure, we have a few decades to spare. Never mind that the longer Russia waits, the worse off Crimea becomes under the rotten Ukranian government, and even those who aren't ethnically Russian agree. Russians aren't the only pro-Russians in Crimea, not by a long shot. So why a referendum now during a political crisis? Why not a few years ago or similar? As I said, Russia is being opportunistic. And if Russia was so "good" and "here to rescue", why did it order invasion in 1944? Bulgaria had a perfectly legitimate government back then which had to be overthrown so some dumb communists could force their regime. Bulgaria was allied with the Nazis in 1944. That's a pretty good reason for military intervention, especially during a war as big as WWII. Or it was Russia's imperialistic aim but with a cover-up? Either way, I wonder if China is going to be pissed off soon. I doubt they approve if Russia keeps expanding their territory right in their face.
I dont think it was a cover up, I mean there is this thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percentages_agreement
I am sure China loves Putin distracting the US and Europe yet again, and meantime the population of Chinese colonists in Siberia grows and grows. It will be interesting what happens if they declare 'self defense' against 'fascists in Moscow' and ask for 'historical return to the motherland'
|
On March 17 2014 12:33 darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2014 12:26 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 12:16 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 12:14 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 12:02 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:58 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 11:53 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:46 LegalLord wrote:On March 17 2014 11:41 darkness wrote:On March 17 2014 11:38 LegalLord wrote:
[quote]
They don't need convincing. The Ukranian government over the past 20 years speaks for itself. While I'm not knowledgeable about the Ukrainian government for this period, I actually meant that Russia tries to come up with a reason to expand their invasion, e.g. by keep calling others fascists. Crimeans call the Ukranian government fascist too. So do a surprising number of western sources, if you look around. About the Ukranian government I will simply say this: those of non-Russian ethnicity have good reason to vote yes on the referendum. Russia is a much more stable country than Ukraine and the past 20 years have shown that. Back when the USSR collapsed, Crimea voted to join Ukraine. Now they don't, and with good reason. While a referendum itself is democratic, I personally don't think the time was right for one, especially with Russian military's presence. That's not democratic, and it smells like rigged elections. I suppose the pro-Russian enthusiasm throughout Crimea is rigged as well? There was never a question of how Crimea would vote. Not among those familiar with the situation, at any rate. I understand the majority of population is ethnic Russian, but you are ignoring the bigger picture. Russia's military presence and Ukraine's political crisis should lead to unstable, not credible elections. For a referendum to happen, all other matters should be resolved first in order to produce 'straight' votes. I hope anyone reasonable would agree with this. Just think about it. Possible analogy: 1) You vote for something. 2) You vote for something while you're at a state of anger. Which one is better? Obviously the first because you're calmed down, hence my view. Sure, we have a few decades to spare. Never mind that the longer Russia waits, the worse off Crimea becomes under the rotten Ukranian government, and even those who aren't ethnically Russian agree. Russians aren't the only pro-Russians in Crimea, not by a long shot. So why a referendum now during a political crisis? Why not a few years ago or similar? As I said, Russia is being opportunistic. And if Russia was so "good" and "here to rescue", why did it order invasion in 1944? Bulgaria had a perfectly legitimate government back then which had to be overthrown so some dumb communists could force their regime. Bulgaria was allied with the Nazis in 1944. That's a pretty good reason for military intervention, especially during a war as big as WWII. Or it was Russia's imperialistic aim but with a cover-up? Either way, I wonder if China is going to be pissed off soon. I doubt they approve if Russia keeps expanding their territory right in their face.
There is nothing to be gained for China either by supporting or opposing Russia. They are sitting this one out, as any country in their position would do.
On March 17 2014 12:31 hunts wrote:
The talk of ukraine government being "fascists" is very saddening to me. I have 2 great grandfathers who died in WWII and 1 who was wounded but did not die, all fighting on the USSR side, fighting against the fascists as I was told as a kid. It makes me sad that a country that I as a kid considered myself part of (although now I know better) is calling the ukraine government the same thing that 3 great grandfathers fought against, 2 of which died in the war. I see russia as no better than nazi germany now with the blatantly wrong name calling. Perhaps russians should look at their own government to find the true fascists, before they point the finger at ukraine, and before they point the finger at the west who is being very patient with their bullshit.
Activist groups in West Ukraine wear swastikas and (occasionally) express support for the Nazis. Though it's not the kind of thing that is exactly tasteful, calling them fascists is not an unfounded position.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
