On April 16 2014 02:12 accela wrote: soooo, the same army that few days ago was killing civilians protesting at Kiev are now attacking protesters again, but somehow back then they were the bad guys but now it's ok-ish to do so? heh...
a) The Ukrainian army wasn't involved in the violence at Euromaidan. b) There is plenty of evidence that these are not protesters but rather people attacking government buildings with weapons used by Russian special forces, under the direction of Russian military and intelligence officials. - A tad bit different from shooting at unarmed protesters...
a)ok, "ukrainian security forces" better? ^^ b)there are plenty of footage with protesters at Kiev, mostly the fascist groups that were armed.
BTW it's extremely funny this "a la carte" ethnicity that (western) media provide. Back to the Kosovo it was just "the albanians", now you will hear about "russian speaking people" or "people with russian ancestry"and so on.
not sure what you mean by a la carte ethnicity, in kosovo and the larger post-yugoslavia break-up conflicts with the western media it was the croats, the bosnians, the serbs, the kosovars, the albanians, etc., it wasn't just "the albanians." western media didn't pick out random ethnicities in the region and identify them erroneously or to the exclusion of all the others or anything.
i think he is implying that western media - when it "suited them" - called ethnic Albanians from Serbia just that (Albanians), while now with Russians from Ukraine, they speak of "russian speaking people" instead of calling them for what they are ethnicly...
i presume his point would be that the media in a way legitimized Kosovo's claim for independence by openly acknowledging its people are in fact not Serbian, and now they are doing the exact opposite by trying to portrait the people in Crimea that seek the same level of independence as something they are not...
edit: i find it fascinating that pro-putin people in this thread arrive mostly from orthodox countries, i seriously didnt expect that to be an issue in 2014
That exactly! Well there are plenty of issues that still hold nowdays, like for example a huge amount of illiterate right wing conservatives who still believe that they have to deal with the communistic Russia while the modern version is a pure child of the western capital, baptized by the best economists of IMF
btw i'm an atheist and certainly don't give a damn about political oligarchs (the west or east version of them)
On April 16 2014 02:12 accela wrote: soooo, the same army that few days ago was killing civilians protesting at Kiev are now attacking protesters again, but somehow back then they were the bad guys but now it's ok-ish to do so? heh...
a) The Ukrainian army wasn't involved in the violence at Euromaidan. b) There is plenty of evidence that these are not protesters but rather people attacking government buildings with weapons used by Russian special forces, under the direction of Russian military and intelligence officials. - A tad bit different from shooting at unarmed protesters...
a)ok, "ukrainian security forces" better? ^^ b)there are plenty of footage with protesters at Kiev, mostly the fascist groups that were armed.
BTW it's extremely funny this "a la carte" ethnicity that (western) media provide. Back to the Kosovo it was just "the albanians", now you will hear about "russian speaking people" or "people with russian ancestry"and so on.
not sure what you mean by a la carte ethnicity, in kosovo and the larger post-yugoslavia break-up conflicts with the western media it was the croats, the bosnians, the serbs, the kosovars, the albanians, etc., it wasn't just "the albanians." western media didn't pick out random ethnicities in the region and identify them erroneously or to the exclusion of all the others or anything.
i think he is implying that western media - when it "suited them" - called ethnic Albanians from Serbia just that (Albanians), while now with Russians from Ukraine, they speak of "russian speaking people" instead of calling them for what they are ethnicly...
i presume his point would be that the media in a way legitimized Kosovo's claim for independence by openly acknowledging its people are in fact not Serbian, and now they are doing the exact opposite by trying to portrait the people in Crimea that seek the same level of independence as something they are not...
edit: i find it fascinating that pro-putin people in this thread arrive mostly from orthodox countries, i seriously didnt expect that to be an issue in 2014
That exactly! Well there are plenty of issues that still hold nowdays, like for example a huge amount of illiterate right wing conservatives who still believe that they have to deal with the communistic Russia while the modern version is a pure child of the western capital, baptized by the best economists of IMF
btw i'm an atheist and certainly don't give a damn about political oligarchs (the west or east version of them)
You talk about a lot of things you haven't a clue about.
Well then the Western media hasn't done that, Russians who are Ukrainian citizens taking arms against the Kiev government have been identified mostly as "pro-Russian protesters" without their ethnicity or citizenship being mentioned.
There are still plenty of issues that hold today, like dime-store propagandists calling people illiterate and making up fantasies of what exists in those people's heads to mock stupid arguments no one is making. Russia the modern version is a pure child of oligarchism just as it was in 1907 and just as it was in 1927 or 1957 or 1997. Vladimir Putin's gang created by the IMF lololol
On April 16 2014 03:55 DeepElemBlues wrote: Well then the Western media hasn't done that, Russians who are Ukrainian citizens taking arms against the Kiev government have been identified mostly as "pro-Russian protesters" without their ethnicity or citizenship being mentioned.
There are still plenty of issues that hold today, like dime-store propagandists calling people illiterate and making up fantasies of what exists in those people's heads to mock stupid arguments no one is making. Russia the modern version is a pure child of oligarchism just as it was in 1907 and just as it was in 1927 or 1957 or 1997. Vladimir Putin's gang created by the IMF lololol
Maybe they should be identified with their ethnicity? Like, called what they are... Russians? That was even more important during the events at Crimea.
On April 16 2014 03:55 DeepElemBlues wrote: Well then the Western media hasn't done that, Russians who are Ukrainian citizens taking arms against the Kiev government have been identified mostly as "pro-Russian protesters" without their ethnicity or citizenship being mentioned.
There are still plenty of issues that hold today, like dime-store propagandists calling people illiterate and making up fantasies of what exists in those people's heads to mock stupid arguments no one is making. Russia the modern version is a pure child of oligarchism just as it was in 1907 and just as it was in 1927 or 1957 or 1997. Vladimir Putin's gang created by the IMF lololol
On April 16 2014 02:12 accela wrote: soooo, the same army that few days ago was killing civilians protesting at Kiev are now attacking protesters again, but somehow back then they were the bad guys but now it's ok-ish to do so? heh...
a) The Ukrainian army wasn't involved in the violence at Euromaidan. b) There is plenty of evidence that these are not protesters but rather people attacking government buildings with weapons used by Russian special forces, under the direction of Russian military and intelligence officials. - A tad bit different from shooting at unarmed protesters...
a)ok, "ukrainian security forces" better? ^^ b)there are plenty of footage with protesters at Kiev, mostly the fascist groups that were armed.
BTW it's extremely funny this "a la carte" ethnicity that (western) media provide. Back to the Kosovo it was just "the albanians", now you will hear about "russian speaking people" or "people with russian ancestry"and so on.
not sure what you mean by a la carte ethnicity, in kosovo and the larger post-yugoslavia break-up conflicts with the western media it was the croats, the bosnians, the serbs, the kosovars, the albanians, etc., it wasn't just "the albanians." western media didn't pick out random ethnicities in the region and identify them erroneously or to the exclusion of all the others or anything.
edit: i find it fascinating that pro-putin people in this thread arrive mostly from orthodox countries, i seriously didnt expect that to be an issue in 2014
I have seen this not only in this thread but on various youtube videos I've watched of other issues too. Serbs + Greeks are the first ones to rally towards a pro-Russian pov. Then its various leftists from the West who are still in the old mentality of USA = Russia, but worse.
Which is pretty silly btw. I would consider myself pretty left on the political spectrum, but to me pretty much any sensible political ideology involves being against countries invading other countries. There are few exceptions, which usually involve very extraordinary situations and a multilateral consensus that something needs to be done. Pretty much the only reason i can see off the top of my head is if some sort of genocide is going on. Sure, it would be nice if there was a way of easily turning corrupt undeveloped countries into a western-style democracy, but the exploits of the US in Afghanistan and Iraq have very obviously demonstrated that war does not help in that process.
I don't see why me being against the USA invading countries would mean that i need to be in favor of Russia invading countries. Or the other way around. That just does not make any sense. I am very capable of being against both at the same time.
On April 16 2014 03:55 DeepElemBlues wrote: Well then the Western media hasn't done that, Russians who are Ukrainian citizens taking arms against the Kiev government have been identified mostly as "pro-Russian protesters" without their ethnicity or citizenship being mentioned.
There are still plenty of issues that hold today, like dime-store propagandists calling people illiterate and making up fantasies of what exists in those people's heads to mock stupid arguments no one is making. Russia the modern version is a pure child of oligarchism just as it was in 1907 and just as it was in 1927 or 1957 or 1997. Vladimir Putin's gang created by the IMF lololol
Maybe they should be identified with their ethnicity? Like, called what they are... Russians? That was even more important during the events at Crimea.
Probably because they don't want to be accused by people that by calling them "Russians" they are trying to create the impression that they are controlled by the Kremlin. Which while obviously true to non-demagogues doesn't have enough verifiable evidence backing it up to simply say so in a news report.
I am very capable of being against both at the same time.
And constantly bringing up US invasions of countries when it is currently Russia that invaded a country shows that capability very well. Can't go five posts in this thread without someone bitching about the US as if it has any relevance except simplistic rhetorical point-scoring that has no benefit to any kind of principle; the only benefit is to the Russian position, mostly through misdirection. Whatbout the US and then the conversation is not about Russia anymore even if it is just for the briefest of moments.
It's pretty clear that most people are not as sophisticated as you say you are.
For those of you who haven't watched yet, VICE has done a really amazing documentary in 24 (so far) short videos documenting the situation first in Crimea, then in E. Ukraine. They interview people from both sides and are giving a really good first hand perspective of what happened and what is going on.
On April 16 2014 02:06 Simberto wrote: I highly doubt that. It is not like this is some genius secret strategy that noone knows about. Everyone knows what is going on.
It goes without saying. Taking over ammo depots, blocking major transportation links, destroying telecom towers, attempting to seize airports is basically what you do to create chaos before you invite your main army to roll over the invaded country.
On April 16 2014 03:55 DeepElemBlues wrote: Well then the Western media hasn't done that, Russians who are Ukrainian citizens taking arms against the Kiev government have been identified mostly as "pro-Russian protesters" without their ethnicity or citizenship being mentioned.
There are still plenty of issues that hold today, like dime-store propagandists calling people illiterate and making up fantasies of what exists in those people's heads to mock stupid arguments no one is making. Russia the modern version is a pure child of oligarchism just as it was in 1907 and just as it was in 1927 or 1957 or 1997. Vladimir Putin's gang created by the IMF lololol
Maybe they should be identified with their ethnicity? Like, called what they are... Russians? That was even more important during the events at Crimea.
Probably because they don't want to be accused by people that by calling them "Russians" they are trying to create the impression that they are controlled by the Kremlin. Which while obviously true to non-demagogues doesn't have enough verifiable evidence backing it up to simply say so in a news report.
Pretty sure they do not have a word on how western media (should) call them. Let's be open here ok? Calling them by their ethnicity can certainly weight in favor of Kremlin's obvious support and getting independent, something that west apparently do not wish, in contrast of what happened in Kosovo. It would also create certain questions like why Russians in Ukraine shouldnt be controlled by Kremlin while Kiev (and partially euromaidan) this days is controlled by US and EU, a certainly far more "incompatible" relation.
On April 16 2014 03:55 DeepElemBlues wrote: Well then the Western media hasn't done that, Russians who are Ukrainian citizens taking arms against the Kiev government have been identified mostly as "pro-Russian protesters" without their ethnicity or citizenship being mentioned.
There are still plenty of issues that hold today, like dime-store propagandists calling people illiterate and making up fantasies of what exists in those people's heads to mock stupid arguments no one is making. Russia the modern version is a pure child of oligarchism just as it was in 1907 and just as it was in 1927 or 1957 or 1997. Vladimir Putin's gang created by the IMF lololol
Maybe they should be identified with their ethnicity? Like, called what they are... Russians? That was even more important during the events at Crimea.
Probably because they don't want to be accused by people that by calling them "Russians" they are trying to create the impression that they are controlled by the Kremlin. Which while obviously true to non-demagogues doesn't have enough verifiable evidence backing it up to simply say so in a news report.
Pretty sure they do not have a word on how western media (should) call them. Let's be open here ok? Calling them by their ethnicity can certainly weight in favor of Kremlin's obvious support and getting independent, something that west apparently do not wish, in contrast of what happened in Kosovo. It would also create certain questions like why Russians in Ukraine shouldnt be controlled by Kremlin while Kiev (and partially euromaidan) this days is controlled by US and EU, a certainly far more "incompatible" relation.
Remind me again which one just annaxed Crimea, the US/EU or Russia?
Tho I suppose those military helicopters/tanks used by "concerned citizens" in the Crimea were bought at the local supply store.
Pretty sure they do not have a word on how western media (should) call them. Let's be open here ok?
In the West most people especially in professional positions actually care when you question their integrity.
Calling them by their ethnicity can certainly weight in favor of Kremlin's obvious support and getting independent, something that west apparently do not wish, in contrast of what happened in Kosovo.
People were also being oppressed and murdered because of their ethnicity and religion in Kosovo. The UN human rights office in Geneva has stated that there is no evidence of "widespread or systematic" repression of Russian-speakers in the Ukraine.
It would also create certain questions like why Russians in Ukraine shouldnt be controlled by Kremlin while Kiev (and partially euromaidan) this days is controlled by US and EU, a certainly far more "incompatible" relation.
If the US and EU control Kiev why is Svoboda in the Kiev government the US and EU if in control of Kiev would have had them kicked out to counter Russian propaganda about fascists controlling the Ukraine. Among many other things the US and EU would have made Kiev do if they really controlled it.
If the US and EU control Kiev why is Svoboda in the Kiev government the US and EU if in control of Kiev would have had them kicked out to counter Russian propaganda about fascists controlling the Ukraine. Among many other things the US and EU would have made Kiev do if they really controlled it.
If the US and EU control Kiev why is Svoboda in the Kiev government the US and EU if in control of Kiev would have had them kicked out to counter Russian propaganda about fascists controlling the Ukraine. Among many other things the US and EU would have made Kiev do if they really controlled it.
because they need the bloodshed
read some Zbigniew Brzezinski
to what end? This is a ridiculous statement.
How would bloodshed in Ukraine benefit the west in anyway? The best outcome for the west is for there to be no violence, and for Ukraine to become a close partner with the west politically and economically (as it would've, if Russia didn't intervene). Obviously Russia the one who feels pressure to resort to violence provocation and potential bloodshed to achieve its ends.
Ukrainian First Vice Prime Minister Vitaliy Yarema claims Russian military unit working in Donetsk region has been identified. In Russian it's called "45-й гвардейский полк воздушно-десантных войск Купянка-1", a military airborne unit that is stationed near Moscow.
If the US and EU control Kiev why is Svoboda in the Kiev government the US and EU if in control of Kiev would have had them kicked out to counter Russian propaganda about fascists controlling the Ukraine. Among many other things the US and EU would have made Kiev do if they really controlled it.
because they need the bloodshed
read some Zbigniew Brzezinski
The EU needed bloodshed.
Thats why there was no violence in the Ukraine after EuroMadian ended and before Russia started there invasion. They way the EU manipulated Russia into providing the bloodshed that we so desperately need is nothing short of genius.
On April 16 2014 05:53 PaleMan wrote: srsly you must educate yourself better since Brzezinski is your fellow countryman
it is critical for US to oppose Ukraine to Russia
you still did not realise that US an their allies benefit from chaos, conflicts and wars all around the world? and they create em if needed
The EU needed bloodshed.
Thats why there was no violence in the Ukraine after EuroMadian ended and before Russia started there invasion. They way the EU manipulated Russia into providing the bloodshed that we so desperately need is nothing short of genius.
On April 16 2014 05:53 PaleMan wrote: srsly you must educate yourself better since Brzezinski is your fellow countryman
it is critical for US to oppose Ukraine to Russia
you still did not realise that US an their allies benefit from chaos, conflicts and wars all around the world? and they create em if needed
seriously I don't understand why people even bother talking to you. You've made up your mind and completely ignore everything that doesn't fit your worldview.
EPT
