|
|
On April 09 2014 21:03 Simberto wrote:
Of course they are interested in Eastern Ukraine, it's land, and Putin needs Lebensraum for the russian people.
Russian land:
6.602 million sq miles (17.1 million km²)
I think they have enough bro. I think that (and following Nazi German ideologies) are the last things they're worrying about.
|
Russian Federation38 Posts
On April 09 2014 20:54 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2014 20:52 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On April 09 2014 20:50 Simberto wrote:On April 09 2014 20:40 Dlash23 wrote:On April 09 2014 17:43 Fjodorov wrote:On April 09 2014 17:29 Salazarz wrote:
For all the silly things in this thread, the one thing I totally can't get over is this burning convinction people have that Russia is so eager to invade and annex whatever country it can get to. Do people seriously not get what a unique case Crimea is, and why Russia is so adamantly determined to do whatever they can to make sure it will never fall under the Western influence? It's not like Russia is looking for reasons to invade some country or the other because they are developing WMDs or they want to bring the light of democracy to them or something... Putin is not done with Ukraine. If he cant get more parts of Ukraine he will make sure chaos rules. And I wish I could say it was unique for one country to annex a part of another country but sadly it isnt. What if I say you that Russia is the last country who benefit from this situation in Ukraine as it is now? Who needs an unstable neighbor? I hope you can think So are you saying that Russia will take additional chunks out of the Ukraine to change this situation with an unstable neighbor that they don't want, and that they themselves caused? And further that that is actually an ok thing to do? What we have here is Russia invading a neighboring country, destabilizing it, then continuing to destabilize the non-invaded parts of that country even further. If you say that they don't want an unstable neighbor, that only leaves the conclusion that they will want to take more out of that so that unstability is only a temporary thing leading to some goal. I think he's saying that Ukraine is unstable, so Russia would not want to conquer it. Is that why conquered unstable Crimea? Which they themselves btw made unstable. Is that why they are doing the same thing to eastern Ukraine now?
Russia didn't conquered unstable Crimea
I don't know what your news are saying but crimeans are happy that they had a chance to leave from Ukraine's occupation(sarcasm =) ask them
And you think EuroMaidan is done by Russia who made Ukraine unstable? lol
On April 09 2014 21:05 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2014 21:03 Simberto wrote:
Of course they are interested in Eastern Ukraine, it's land, and Putin needs Lebensraum for the russian people. Russian land: 6.602 million sq miles (17.1 million km²) I think they have enough bro. I think that (and following Nazi German ideologies) are the last things they're worrying about.
I hope he is kidding 
|
On April 09 2014 21:08 Dlash23 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2014 20:54 Gorsameth wrote:On April 09 2014 20:52 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On April 09 2014 20:50 Simberto wrote:On April 09 2014 20:40 Dlash23 wrote:On April 09 2014 17:43 Fjodorov wrote:On April 09 2014 17:29 Salazarz wrote:
For all the silly things in this thread, the one thing I totally can't get over is this burning convinction people have that Russia is so eager to invade and annex whatever country it can get to. Do people seriously not get what a unique case Crimea is, and why Russia is so adamantly determined to do whatever they can to make sure it will never fall under the Western influence? It's not like Russia is looking for reasons to invade some country or the other because they are developing WMDs or they want to bring the light of democracy to them or something... Putin is not done with Ukraine. If he cant get more parts of Ukraine he will make sure chaos rules. And I wish I could say it was unique for one country to annex a part of another country but sadly it isnt. What if I say you that Russia is the last country who benefit from this situation in Ukraine as it is now? Who needs an unstable neighbor? I hope you can think So are you saying that Russia will take additional chunks out of the Ukraine to change this situation with an unstable neighbor that they don't want, and that they themselves caused? And further that that is actually an ok thing to do? What we have here is Russia invading a neighboring country, destabilizing it, then continuing to destabilize the non-invaded parts of that country even further. If you say that they don't want an unstable neighbor, that only leaves the conclusion that they will want to take more out of that so that unstability is only a temporary thing leading to some goal. I think he's saying that Ukraine is unstable, so Russia would not want to conquer it. Is that why conquered unstable Crimea? Which they themselves btw made unstable. Is that why they are doing the same thing to eastern Ukraine now? Russia didn't conquered unstable Crimea I don't know what your news are saying but crimeans are happy that they had a chance to leave from Ukraine's occupation(sarcasm =) ask them And you think EuroMaidan is done by Russia who made Ukraine unstable? lol
How Crimeans felt is irrelevant. Crimea was technically Ukrainian territory and was made to become Russian territory via the entrance of Russian forces outside of their allotted bounds (their bases). That is conquest, whatever way you spin it.
Euromaidan was obviously the root of instability in Ukraine, but Gorsameth appears to be stating that Russia influenced more instability.
|
On April 09 2014 21:00 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2014 20:54 Gorsameth wrote:On April 09 2014 20:52 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On April 09 2014 20:50 Simberto wrote:On April 09 2014 20:40 Dlash23 wrote:On April 09 2014 17:43 Fjodorov wrote:On April 09 2014 17:29 Salazarz wrote:
For all the silly things in this thread, the one thing I totally can't get over is this burning convinction people have that Russia is so eager to invade and annex whatever country it can get to. Do people seriously not get what a unique case Crimea is, and why Russia is so adamantly determined to do whatever they can to make sure it will never fall under the Western influence? It's not like Russia is looking for reasons to invade some country or the other because they are developing WMDs or they want to bring the light of democracy to them or something... Putin is not done with Ukraine. If he cant get more parts of Ukraine he will make sure chaos rules. And I wish I could say it was unique for one country to annex a part of another country but sadly it isnt. What if I say you that Russia is the last country who benefit from this situation in Ukraine as it is now? Who needs an unstable neighbor? I hope you can think So are you saying that Russia will take additional chunks out of the Ukraine to change this situation with an unstable neighbor that they don't want, and that they themselves caused? And further that that is actually an ok thing to do? What we have here is Russia invading a neighboring country, destabilizing it, then continuing to destabilize the non-invaded parts of that country even further. If you say that they don't want an unstable neighbor, that only leaves the conclusion that they will want to take more out of that so that unstability is only a temporary thing leading to some goal. I think he's saying that Ukraine is unstable, so Russia would not want to conquer it. Is that why conquered unstable Crimea? Which they themselves btw made unstable. Is that why they are doing the same thing to eastern Ukraine now? The matter is whether Russia is interested in eastern Ukraine. It's a different scenario from Crimea, and of significantly less strategic and military value than Crimea obviously. This is why in my edit I'd be extremely surprised if Russia did anything further. But at least in looking at Russian strategic interests, Crimea makes a lot of sense. Eastern Ukraine does not at all. And while it's rather possible Russia may be directly responsible for at least some of the unrest in eastern Ukrainian cities, I have not seen anything conclusive on the matter, so let's not immediately conclude this is a Kremlin konspiracy.
Right because Russia has 100% nothing to do with what is happening in East Ukraine
“As you know, we saw groups of pro-Russian demonstrators take over government buildings in the eastern cities of Kharkiv, Donetsk and Luhansk, and there is strong evidence suggesting some of these demonstrators were paid and were not local residents,” White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said at a Monday press briefing.
|
On April 09 2014 21:11 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2014 21:00 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On April 09 2014 20:54 Gorsameth wrote:On April 09 2014 20:52 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On April 09 2014 20:50 Simberto wrote:On April 09 2014 20:40 Dlash23 wrote:On April 09 2014 17:43 Fjodorov wrote:On April 09 2014 17:29 Salazarz wrote:
For all the silly things in this thread, the one thing I totally can't get over is this burning convinction people have that Russia is so eager to invade and annex whatever country it can get to. Do people seriously not get what a unique case Crimea is, and why Russia is so adamantly determined to do whatever they can to make sure it will never fall under the Western influence? It's not like Russia is looking for reasons to invade some country or the other because they are developing WMDs or they want to bring the light of democracy to them or something... Putin is not done with Ukraine. If he cant get more parts of Ukraine he will make sure chaos rules. And I wish I could say it was unique for one country to annex a part of another country but sadly it isnt. What if I say you that Russia is the last country who benefit from this situation in Ukraine as it is now? Who needs an unstable neighbor? I hope you can think So are you saying that Russia will take additional chunks out of the Ukraine to change this situation with an unstable neighbor that they don't want, and that they themselves caused? And further that that is actually an ok thing to do? What we have here is Russia invading a neighboring country, destabilizing it, then continuing to destabilize the non-invaded parts of that country even further. If you say that they don't want an unstable neighbor, that only leaves the conclusion that they will want to take more out of that so that unstability is only a temporary thing leading to some goal. I think he's saying that Ukraine is unstable, so Russia would not want to conquer it. Is that why conquered unstable Crimea? Which they themselves btw made unstable. Is that why they are doing the same thing to eastern Ukraine now? The matter is whether Russia is interested in eastern Ukraine. It's a different scenario from Crimea, and of significantly less strategic and military value than Crimea obviously. This is why in my edit I'd be extremely surprised if Russia did anything further. But at least in looking at Russian strategic interests, Crimea makes a lot of sense. Eastern Ukraine does not at all. And while it's rather possible Russia may be directly responsible for at least some of the unrest in eastern Ukrainian cities, I have not seen anything conclusive on the matter, so let's not immediately conclude this is a Kremlin konspiracy. Right because Russia has 100% nothing to do with what is happening in East Ukraine Show nested quote +“As you know, we saw groups of pro-Russian demonstrators take over government buildings in the eastern cities of Kharkiv, Donetsk and Luhansk, and there is strong evidence suggesting some of these demonstrators were paid and were not local residents,” White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said at a Monday press briefing.
I was never saying they had nothing to do it, just that it was not entirely conclusive. I'm glad to see evidence surfacing.
|
On April 09 2014 21:08 Dlash23 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2014 20:54 Gorsameth wrote:On April 09 2014 20:52 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On April 09 2014 20:50 Simberto wrote:On April 09 2014 20:40 Dlash23 wrote:On April 09 2014 17:43 Fjodorov wrote:On April 09 2014 17:29 Salazarz wrote:
For all the silly things in this thread, the one thing I totally can't get over is this burning convinction people have that Russia is so eager to invade and annex whatever country it can get to. Do people seriously not get what a unique case Crimea is, and why Russia is so adamantly determined to do whatever they can to make sure it will never fall under the Western influence? It's not like Russia is looking for reasons to invade some country or the other because they are developing WMDs or they want to bring the light of democracy to them or something... Putin is not done with Ukraine. If he cant get more parts of Ukraine he will make sure chaos rules. And I wish I could say it was unique for one country to annex a part of another country but sadly it isnt. What if I say you that Russia is the last country who benefit from this situation in Ukraine as it is now? Who needs an unstable neighbor? I hope you can think So are you saying that Russia will take additional chunks out of the Ukraine to change this situation with an unstable neighbor that they don't want, and that they themselves caused? And further that that is actually an ok thing to do? What we have here is Russia invading a neighboring country, destabilizing it, then continuing to destabilize the non-invaded parts of that country even further. If you say that they don't want an unstable neighbor, that only leaves the conclusion that they will want to take more out of that so that unstability is only a temporary thing leading to some goal. I think he's saying that Ukraine is unstable, so Russia would not want to conquer it. Is that why conquered unstable Crimea? Which they themselves btw made unstable. Is that why they are doing the same thing to eastern Ukraine now? Russia didn't conquered unstable Crimea I don't know what your news are saying but crimeans are happy that they had a chance to leave from Ukraine's occupation(sarcasm =) ask them And you think EuroMaidan is done by Russia who made Ukraine unstable? lol Show nested quote +On April 09 2014 21:05 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On April 09 2014 21:03 Simberto wrote:
Of course they are interested in Eastern Ukraine, it's land, and Putin needs Lebensraum for the russian people. Russian land: 6.602 million sq miles (17.1 million km²) I think they have enough bro. I think that (and following Nazi German ideologies) are the last things they're worrying about. I hope he is kidding
Try reading this thread before responding in it. Your points have been adressed a 100 times already.
Funny how they need to be restated every time a new russian comes here to proclaim the glory of mother russia.
|
I cannot believe people still doubt Russian interests in seizing back Ukraine. They are openly demanding `federalization' (read any comment by Lavrov in the next few weeks); what this means is that each region will be made independent and it can then seek unification with Russia if it wishes, or receive a semi-controlled status like Transnistria or South-Ossetia, etc. If that doesn't work, they have an invasion force waiting. But make no mistake, this is about controlling Ukraine, the methods are inconsequential.
Also, to say (without arguing the point, I might add) that Russia is not interested in its near abroad is to ignore all the strategic foreign policy and military planning documents drawn up by the Kremlin in the last decade.
Also, there is substantial evidence that Russia is at least preparing for further moves (some more probable, others less so). For example, Moldova is also suffering from Russian destabilization efforts. Swedish intelligence services just revealed Russian plans for attacking Sweden (i.e., military designs on how it is done, not `when' it is done). Just as with Crimea, it is unclear how and when decisions regarding these prepared moves are made, but when they were made to take control of South-Ossetia and Abkhazia, the West wasn't prepared, and when Russia annexed Crimea, the West wasn't prepared. To assume that Putin, after seeing that the West is weak in responding, would never try the same again is dangerously irresponsible.
|
Yeah, a few hundred pages ago when the first protests against the government were happening in places like Donetsk there were posts about the people who were tearing down the flags and raising Russian flags over government buildings. They were Russian citizens, many from Moscow, who were doing it, even posting pictures on their vk pages of them doing it.
You have to wonder how homegrown a protest is when it's being led by Russian citizens bused in from Moscow, or for example the reports of Russian citizens getting removed from Ukraine in places like Odessa for being caught with nazi material and explosives and kalashnikovs. All while the Russians keep massing troops on the border.
|
Russian Federation38 Posts
On April 09 2014 21:13 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2014 21:08 Dlash23 wrote:On April 09 2014 20:54 Gorsameth wrote:On April 09 2014 20:52 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On April 09 2014 20:50 Simberto wrote:On April 09 2014 20:40 Dlash23 wrote:On April 09 2014 17:43 Fjodorov wrote:On April 09 2014 17:29 Salazarz wrote:
For all the silly things in this thread, the one thing I totally can't get over is this burning convinction people have that Russia is so eager to invade and annex whatever country it can get to. Do people seriously not get what a unique case Crimea is, and why Russia is so adamantly determined to do whatever they can to make sure it will never fall under the Western influence? It's not like Russia is looking for reasons to invade some country or the other because they are developing WMDs or they want to bring the light of democracy to them or something... Putin is not done with Ukraine. If he cant get more parts of Ukraine he will make sure chaos rules. And I wish I could say it was unique for one country to annex a part of another country but sadly it isnt. What if I say you that Russia is the last country who benefit from this situation in Ukraine as it is now? Who needs an unstable neighbor? I hope you can think So are you saying that Russia will take additional chunks out of the Ukraine to change this situation with an unstable neighbor that they don't want, and that they themselves caused? And further that that is actually an ok thing to do? What we have here is Russia invading a neighboring country, destabilizing it, then continuing to destabilize the non-invaded parts of that country even further. If you say that they don't want an unstable neighbor, that only leaves the conclusion that they will want to take more out of that so that unstability is only a temporary thing leading to some goal. I think he's saying that Ukraine is unstable, so Russia would not want to conquer it. Is that why conquered unstable Crimea? Which they themselves btw made unstable. Is that why they are doing the same thing to eastern Ukraine now? Russia didn't conquered unstable Crimea I don't know what your news are saying but crimeans are happy that they had a chance to leave from Ukraine's occupation(sarcasm =) ask them And you think EuroMaidan is done by Russia who made Ukraine unstable? lol On April 09 2014 21:05 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On April 09 2014 21:03 Simberto wrote:
Of course they are interested in Eastern Ukraine, it's land, and Putin needs Lebensraum for the russian people. Russian land: 6.602 million sq miles (17.1 million km²) I think they have enough bro. I think that (and following Nazi German ideologies) are the last things they're worrying about. I hope he is kidding Try reading this thread before responding in it. Your points have been adressed a 100 times already. Funny how they need to be restated every time a new russian comes here to proclaim the glory of mother russia.
peace man.
I hate all this situation at all.
I live in Russia but I'm ethnic from Belarus and have friends and relatives in Ukraine...
I know what's going on from many angles. It's just funny to see some opinions like Russia is evil and so on.
|
On April 09 2014 21:22 Dlash23 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2014 21:13 Gorsameth wrote:On April 09 2014 21:08 Dlash23 wrote:On April 09 2014 20:54 Gorsameth wrote:On April 09 2014 20:52 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On April 09 2014 20:50 Simberto wrote:On April 09 2014 20:40 Dlash23 wrote:On April 09 2014 17:43 Fjodorov wrote:On April 09 2014 17:29 Salazarz wrote:
For all the silly things in this thread, the one thing I totally can't get over is this burning convinction people have that Russia is so eager to invade and annex whatever country it can get to. Do people seriously not get what a unique case Crimea is, and why Russia is so adamantly determined to do whatever they can to make sure it will never fall under the Western influence? It's not like Russia is looking for reasons to invade some country or the other because they are developing WMDs or they want to bring the light of democracy to them or something... Putin is not done with Ukraine. If he cant get more parts of Ukraine he will make sure chaos rules. And I wish I could say it was unique for one country to annex a part of another country but sadly it isnt. What if I say you that Russia is the last country who benefit from this situation in Ukraine as it is now? Who needs an unstable neighbor? I hope you can think So are you saying that Russia will take additional chunks out of the Ukraine to change this situation with an unstable neighbor that they don't want, and that they themselves caused? And further that that is actually an ok thing to do? What we have here is Russia invading a neighboring country, destabilizing it, then continuing to destabilize the non-invaded parts of that country even further. If you say that they don't want an unstable neighbor, that only leaves the conclusion that they will want to take more out of that so that unstability is only a temporary thing leading to some goal. I think he's saying that Ukraine is unstable, so Russia would not want to conquer it. Is that why conquered unstable Crimea? Which they themselves btw made unstable. Is that why they are doing the same thing to eastern Ukraine now? Russia didn't conquered unstable Crimea I don't know what your news are saying but crimeans are happy that they had a chance to leave from Ukraine's occupation(sarcasm =) ask them And you think EuroMaidan is done by Russia who made Ukraine unstable? lol On April 09 2014 21:05 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On April 09 2014 21:03 Simberto wrote:
Of course they are interested in Eastern Ukraine, it's land, and Putin needs Lebensraum for the russian people. Russian land: 6.602 million sq miles (17.1 million km²) I think they have enough bro. I think that (and following Nazi German ideologies) are the last things they're worrying about. I hope he is kidding Try reading this thread before responding in it. Your points have been adressed a 100 times already. Funny how they need to be restated every time a new russian comes here to proclaim the glory of mother russia. peace man. I hate all this situation at all. I live in Russia but I'm ethnic from Belarus and have friends and relatives in Ukraine... I know what's going on from many angles. It's just funny to see some opinions like Russia is evil and so on.
I have no ill will towards Russia. But when they invade another nation, and the Crimea was nothing but an invasion, then yes they are the evil party
And before you bring it up, no the US is no better.
|
On April 09 2014 21:11 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2014 21:00 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On April 09 2014 20:54 Gorsameth wrote:On April 09 2014 20:52 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On April 09 2014 20:50 Simberto wrote:On April 09 2014 20:40 Dlash23 wrote:On April 09 2014 17:43 Fjodorov wrote:On April 09 2014 17:29 Salazarz wrote:
For all the silly things in this thread, the one thing I totally can't get over is this burning convinction people have that Russia is so eager to invade and annex whatever country it can get to. Do people seriously not get what a unique case Crimea is, and why Russia is so adamantly determined to do whatever they can to make sure it will never fall under the Western influence? It's not like Russia is looking for reasons to invade some country or the other because they are developing WMDs or they want to bring the light of democracy to them or something... Putin is not done with Ukraine. If he cant get more parts of Ukraine he will make sure chaos rules. And I wish I could say it was unique for one country to annex a part of another country but sadly it isnt. What if I say you that Russia is the last country who benefit from this situation in Ukraine as it is now? Who needs an unstable neighbor? I hope you can think So are you saying that Russia will take additional chunks out of the Ukraine to change this situation with an unstable neighbor that they don't want, and that they themselves caused? And further that that is actually an ok thing to do? What we have here is Russia invading a neighboring country, destabilizing it, then continuing to destabilize the non-invaded parts of that country even further. If you say that they don't want an unstable neighbor, that only leaves the conclusion that they will want to take more out of that so that unstability is only a temporary thing leading to some goal. I think he's saying that Ukraine is unstable, so Russia would not want to conquer it. Is that why conquered unstable Crimea? Which they themselves btw made unstable. Is that why they are doing the same thing to eastern Ukraine now? The matter is whether Russia is interested in eastern Ukraine. It's a different scenario from Crimea, and of significantly less strategic and military value than Crimea obviously. This is why in my edit I'd be extremely surprised if Russia did anything further. But at least in looking at Russian strategic interests, Crimea makes a lot of sense. Eastern Ukraine does not at all. And while it's rather possible Russia may be directly responsible for at least some of the unrest in eastern Ukrainian cities, I have not seen anything conclusive on the matter, so let's not immediately conclude this is a Kremlin konspiracy. Right because Russia has 100% nothing to do with what is happening in East Ukraine Show nested quote +“As you know, we saw groups of pro-Russian demonstrators take over government buildings in the eastern cities of Kharkiv, Donetsk and Luhansk, and there is strong evidence suggesting some of these demonstrators were paid and were not local residents,” White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said at a Monday press briefing.
i hope you realize the implications of making the case that this backing makes them directly responsible for the unrest? i do argee.
On April 09 2014 21:13 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2014 21:11 Gorsameth wrote:On April 09 2014 21:00 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On April 09 2014 20:54 Gorsameth wrote:On April 09 2014 20:52 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On April 09 2014 20:50 Simberto wrote:On April 09 2014 20:40 Dlash23 wrote:On April 09 2014 17:43 Fjodorov wrote:On April 09 2014 17:29 Salazarz wrote:
For all the silly things in this thread, the one thing I totally can't get over is this burning convinction people have that Russia is so eager to invade and annex whatever country it can get to. Do people seriously not get what a unique case Crimea is, and why Russia is so adamantly determined to do whatever they can to make sure it will never fall under the Western influence? It's not like Russia is looking for reasons to invade some country or the other because they are developing WMDs or they want to bring the light of democracy to them or something... Putin is not done with Ukraine. If he cant get more parts of Ukraine he will make sure chaos rules. And I wish I could say it was unique for one country to annex a part of another country but sadly it isnt. What if I say you that Russia is the last country who benefit from this situation in Ukraine as it is now? Who needs an unstable neighbor? I hope you can think So are you saying that Russia will take additional chunks out of the Ukraine to change this situation with an unstable neighbor that they don't want, and that they themselves caused? And further that that is actually an ok thing to do? What we have here is Russia invading a neighboring country, destabilizing it, then continuing to destabilize the non-invaded parts of that country even further. If you say that they don't want an unstable neighbor, that only leaves the conclusion that they will want to take more out of that so that unstability is only a temporary thing leading to some goal. I think he's saying that Ukraine is unstable, so Russia would not want to conquer it. Is that why conquered unstable Crimea? Which they themselves btw made unstable. Is that why they are doing the same thing to eastern Ukraine now? The matter is whether Russia is interested in eastern Ukraine. It's a different scenario from Crimea, and of significantly less strategic and military value than Crimea obviously. This is why in my edit I'd be extremely surprised if Russia did anything further. But at least in looking at Russian strategic interests, Crimea makes a lot of sense. Eastern Ukraine does not at all. And while it's rather possible Russia may be directly responsible for at least some of the unrest in eastern Ukrainian cities, I have not seen anything conclusive on the matter, so let's not immediately conclude this is a Kremlin konspiracy. Right because Russia has 100% nothing to do with what is happening in East Ukraine “As you know, we saw groups of pro-Russian demonstrators take over government buildings in the eastern cities of Kharkiv, Donetsk and Luhansk, and there is strong evidence suggesting some of these demonstrators were paid and were not local residents,” White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said at a Monday press briefing. I was never saying they had nothing to do it, just that it was not entirely conclusive. I'm glad to see evidence surfacing.
taking an us official talking about evidence for evidence is farsical, not that i doubt russia also backing agreeable groups inside ukraine.
|
On April 09 2014 21:22 Saryph wrote:
Yeah, a few hundred pages ago when the first protests against the government were happening in places like Donetsk there were posts about the people who were tearing down the flags and raising Russian flags over government buildings. They were Russian citizens, many from Moscow, who were doing it, even posting pictures on their vk pages of them doing it.
You have to wonder how homegrown a protest is when it's being led by Russian citizens bused in from Moscow, or for example the reports of Russian citizens getting removed from Ukraine in places like Odessa for being caught with nazi material and explosives and kalashnikovs. All while the Russians keep massing troops on the border.
Well when most of the local police refuse to help the newly appointed officials and idly stand by as the government buildings are being taken over, I think that makes it pretty obvious that the protests are homegrown.
|
On April 09 2014 21:50 kukarachaa wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2014 21:22 Saryph wrote:
Yeah, a few hundred pages ago when the first protests against the government were happening in places like Donetsk there were posts about the people who were tearing down the flags and raising Russian flags over government buildings. They were Russian citizens, many from Moscow, who were doing it, even posting pictures on their vk pages of them doing it.
You have to wonder how homegrown a protest is when it's being led by Russian citizens bused in from Moscow, or for example the reports of Russian citizens getting removed from Ukraine in places like Odessa for being caught with nazi material and explosives and kalashnikovs. All while the Russians keep massing troops on the border. Well when most of the local police refuse to help the newly appointed officials and idly stand by as the government buildings are being taken over, I think that makes it pretty obvious that the protests are homegrown.
Because no policeman in Ukraine has ever taken a bribe 
Honestly, how can the protests be home-grown if identical protests occur in three different cities simultaneously. And this naturally disregards the identities of some of the arrested individuals which demonstrates that some participants and coordinators were from Russia.
And just to provide the icing on the cake, these `locals' stormed the bloody opera building, thinking it's an administrative building. I'm sure they just got lost in their own home town
You literally need to take the position that all media sources except for those originating directly from the Kremlin have lied all along to be able to sustain the opinion that these are home grown protests.
|
On April 09 2014 21:22 Dlash23 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2014 21:13 Gorsameth wrote:On April 09 2014 21:08 Dlash23 wrote:On April 09 2014 20:54 Gorsameth wrote:On April 09 2014 20:52 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On April 09 2014 20:50 Simberto wrote:On April 09 2014 20:40 Dlash23 wrote:On April 09 2014 17:43 Fjodorov wrote:On April 09 2014 17:29 Salazarz wrote:
For all the silly things in this thread, the one thing I totally can't get over is this burning convinction people have that Russia is so eager to invade and annex whatever country it can get to. Do people seriously not get what a unique case Crimea is, and why Russia is so adamantly determined to do whatever they can to make sure it will never fall under the Western influence? It's not like Russia is looking for reasons to invade some country or the other because they are developing WMDs or they want to bring the light of democracy to them or something... Putin is not done with Ukraine. If he cant get more parts of Ukraine he will make sure chaos rules. And I wish I could say it was unique for one country to annex a part of another country but sadly it isnt. What if I say you that Russia is the last country who benefit from this situation in Ukraine as it is now? Who needs an unstable neighbor? I hope you can think So are you saying that Russia will take additional chunks out of the Ukraine to change this situation with an unstable neighbor that they don't want, and that they themselves caused? And further that that is actually an ok thing to do? What we have here is Russia invading a neighboring country, destabilizing it, then continuing to destabilize the non-invaded parts of that country even further. If you say that they don't want an unstable neighbor, that only leaves the conclusion that they will want to take more out of that so that unstability is only a temporary thing leading to some goal. I think he's saying that Ukraine is unstable, so Russia would not want to conquer it. Is that why conquered unstable Crimea? Which they themselves btw made unstable. Is that why they are doing the same thing to eastern Ukraine now? Russia didn't conquered unstable Crimea I don't know what your news are saying but crimeans are happy that they had a chance to leave from Ukraine's occupation(sarcasm =) ask them And you think EuroMaidan is done by Russia who made Ukraine unstable? lol On April 09 2014 21:05 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On April 09 2014 21:03 Simberto wrote:
Of course they are interested in Eastern Ukraine, it's land, and Putin needs Lebensraum for the russian people. Russian land: 6.602 million sq miles (17.1 million km²) I think they have enough bro. I think that (and following Nazi German ideologies) are the last things they're worrying about. I hope he is kidding Try reading this thread before responding in it. Your points have been adressed a 100 times already. Funny how they need to be restated every time a new russian comes here to proclaim the glory of mother russia. peace man. I hate all this situation at all. I live in Russia but I'm ethnic from Belarus and have friends and relatives in Ukraine... I know what's going on from many angles. It's just funny to see some opinions like Russia is evil and so on.
Perhaps when people in Belarus start to protest against corruption, Russia will annex a part of it too, but it's not rly possible as the situation is worse than the one in Ukraine (in terms of corruption, individual freedom and the dictator hold on the state).
But yeah Putin is an evil being, when he dies he will be remembered as the mad fascist and nationalist he was. And it's not rly Russia bashing but Putin and his supporters bashing.
If I had to guess, his supporters are mostly white Slav Russians or Russian born expatriates, the ones that benefit from his regime or others like Al Assad supporters, Serb nationalists, some US-haters etc... They like to be victimized too: "You don't like Russia!", "You don't like Syria", "You don't like Serbia"... But no, only the dictators and the supporters of their crimes are hated by most of the world because they tend to forget that we are all human beings.
|
|
|
On April 09 2014 21:10 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2014 21:08 Dlash23 wrote:
Russia didn't conquered unstable Crimea
I don't know what your news are saying but crimeans are happy that they had a chance to leave from Ukraine's occupation(sarcasm =) ask them
And you think EuroMaidan is done by Russia who made Ukraine unstable? lol How Crimeans felt is irrelevant. Crimea was technically Ukrainian territory and was made to become Russian territory via the entrance of Russian forces outside of their allotted bounds (their bases). That is conquest, whatever way you spin it. Euromaidan was obviously the root of instability in Ukraine, but Gorsameth appears to be stating that Russia influenced more instability.
If I got this right the argument from the Russian perspective goes like this:
Crimea was Russian until 1954 when the Ukrainian leader of the Soviet Union Nikita Chruschtschow gave it to Ukraine as a present without asking the mostly Russian population on Crimea if they want this. It didn't really matter at that time because the Soviet Union was one entity after all. But can a state leader legally just give away part of one state to another state without asking the population if they want this?
The people on Crimea now held a referendum where the absolute majority voted to become part of the Russian Federation. The argument they were forced with weapons to vote in favor is bullshit - when you get a notable increase in pensions or salary just by joining the Russian Federation which they get because living standards are far higher in Russia than in Ukraine, being ethnic Russian yourself well what would you vote if you just want to have a better life? Many of the soldiers on Crimea deserted to join the Russian forces.
And why does it matter what the people in Kiev want but doesn't matter what the people in Sevastopol want? It's not logical.
On April 09 2014 21:19 Ghanburighan wrote:
I cannot believe people still doubt Russian interests in seizing back Ukraine. They are openly demanding `federalization' (read any comment by Lavrov in the next few weeks); what this means is that each region will be made independent and it can then seek unification with Russia if it wishes, or receive a semi-controlled status like Transnistria or South-Ossetia, etc. If that doesn't work, they have an invasion force waiting. But make no mistake, this is about controlling Ukraine, the methods are inconsequential.
Oh and what is so bad about being a federation? Russia is a federation. Germany is a federation. The U.S. is a federation, Belgium too with a flamish speaking part and a frensh speaking part. It's a matter how the federation is designed to guarantee the same rights for all people living there.
|
Being A federation isn't that bad, being the `federation' that Russia is demanding would take away Bavaria's ability to threaten to declare independence. Lavrov directly demands the right for regions act as independent countries: taxation, currency, economic policy, foreign relations, membership of organizations for countries like the OSCE, etc etc.
The Russian state doesn't use words the same way other people do...
|
On April 09 2014 23:18 Ghanburighan wrote:
Being A federation isn't that bad, being the `federation' that Russia is demanding would take away Bavaria's ability to threaten to declare independence. Lavrov directly demands the right for regions act as independent countries: taxation, currency, economic policy, foreign relations, membership of organizations for countries like the OSCE, etc etc.
The Russian state doesn't use words the same way other people do...
Oh I didn't know he is demanding that. Well usually you never get all you demand. Do you have an english source where I can read up on Russian demands?
|
On April 09 2014 23:23 Banaora wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2014 23:18 Ghanburighan wrote:
Being A federation isn't that bad, being the `federation' that Russia is demanding would take away Bavaria's ability to threaten to declare independence. Lavrov directly demands the right for regions act as independent countries: taxation, currency, economic policy, foreign relations, membership of organizations for countries like the OSCE, etc etc.
The Russian state doesn't use words the same way other people do... Oh I didn't know he is demanding that. Well usually you never get all you demand. Do you have an english source where I can read up on Russian demands?
http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/kerry-lavrov-agree-ukraine-needs-diplomatic-fix-1.1752548
Plz before trying to give counter arguments use google.
The funny thing is that Russian authorities wants Ukraine to be a loose federation because "Ukrainians want it" but look at the federation of Russia, it would have exploded long ago (with all the minorities and ethnicity that have been asking for Independence since the tsar days) if it had the same model they want with Ukraine.
|
Russian Federation1953 Posts
On April 09 2014 22:52 Acertos wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2014 21:22 Dlash23 wrote:On April 09 2014 21:13 Gorsameth wrote:On April 09 2014 21:08 Dlash23 wrote:On April 09 2014 20:54 Gorsameth wrote:On April 09 2014 20:52 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On April 09 2014 20:50 Simberto wrote:On April 09 2014 20:40 Dlash23 wrote:On April 09 2014 17:43 Fjodorov wrote:On April 09 2014 17:29 Salazarz wrote:
For all the silly things in this thread, the one thing I totally can't get over is this burning convinction people have that Russia is so eager to invade and annex whatever country it can get to. Do people seriously not get what a unique case Crimea is, and why Russia is so adamantly determined to do whatever they can to make sure it will never fall under the Western influence? It's not like Russia is looking for reasons to invade some country or the other because they are developing WMDs or they want to bring the light of democracy to them or something... Putin is not done with Ukraine. If he cant get more parts of Ukraine he will make sure chaos rules. And I wish I could say it was unique for one country to annex a part of another country but sadly it isnt. What if I say you that Russia is the last country who benefit from this situation in Ukraine as it is now? Who needs an unstable neighbor? I hope you can think So are you saying that Russia will take additional chunks out of the Ukraine to change this situation with an unstable neighbor that they don't want, and that they themselves caused? And further that that is actually an ok thing to do? What we have here is Russia invading a neighboring country, destabilizing it, then continuing to destabilize the non-invaded parts of that country even further. If you say that they don't want an unstable neighbor, that only leaves the conclusion that they will want to take more out of that so that unstability is only a temporary thing leading to some goal. I think he's saying that Ukraine is unstable, so Russia would not want to conquer it. Is that why conquered unstable Crimea? Which they themselves btw made unstable. Is that why they are doing the same thing to eastern Ukraine now? Russia didn't conquered unstable Crimea I don't know what your news are saying but crimeans are happy that they had a chance to leave from Ukraine's occupation(sarcasm =) ask them And you think EuroMaidan is done by Russia who made Ukraine unstable? lol On April 09 2014 21:05 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On April 09 2014 21:03 Simberto wrote:
Of course they are interested in Eastern Ukraine, it's land, and Putin needs Lebensraum for the russian people. Russian land: 6.602 million sq miles (17.1 million km²) I think they have enough bro. I think that (and following Nazi German ideologies) are the last things they're worrying about. I hope he is kidding Try reading this thread before responding in it. Your points have been adressed a 100 times already. Funny how they need to be restated every time a new russian comes here to proclaim the glory of mother russia. peace man. I hate all this situation at all. I live in Russia but I'm ethnic from Belarus and have friends and relatives in Ukraine... I know what's going on from many angles. It's just funny to see some opinions like Russia is evil and so on. But yeah Putin is an evil being, when he dies he will be remembered as the mad fascist and nationalist he was. And it's not rly Russia bashing but Putin and his supporters bashing. If I had to guess, his supporters are mostly white Slav Russians or Russian born expatriates, the ones that benefit from his regime or others like Al Assad supporters, Serb nationalists, some US-haters etc... They like to be victimized too: "You don't like Russia!", "You don't like Syria", "You don't like Serbia"... But no, only the dictators and the supporters of their crimes are hated by most of the world because they tend to forget that we are all human beings.
According to media it all went like this:
"Mr.Yanukovoch was a Pitin's agent and did his best to ruin Ukraine, but he was dethroned by the agents of Putin from Right Sector that wanted to ruin Ukraine. After that the power was taken by the agents of Putin from local oligarch and corrupted politicians who planned to ruin Ukraine. This caused a riot of agents of Putin in the East of Ukraine - with a definite purpose of ruining Ukraine. Yet Mme Timoshenko, an old agent of Putin, interfered with their plans in order to ruin Ukraine..."
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
