Ukraine Crisis - Page 531

On May 14 2014 07:55 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
Primarily, I want to see how Putin responds to the revolutionary leaders' appeals to join Russia.

On May 14 2014 08:36 nunez wrote:


i think it largely depends on how commited kiev is to asserting its legitimacy in south and east and how much leeway they are going to give to their henchmen. until then (if they commit) we'll get to see hooke's law in action.

On May 14 2014 09:00 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:


It also largely depends on how much Putin wants sanctions. We are putting on sanctions without Russia doing anything. We are placing the entirety of the [successful] actions of the revolutionaries against Ukrainian political and military efforts on Russia, which is little more than an extremely immature justification to put sanctions. I mean, it isn't Crimea anymore. It's not like Russia conquered Kiev, that we are pushing for more sanctions.
But I don't think the sanctions were ever a matter of "justice." The insurgents hurt US interests (or more specifically, help Russian interests which is against US policy), and putting the blame on Russia, and we're using its toy poodles in NATO to push sanctions with it. Fortunately for us, we are unsanctionable. We can cause any degree of death and destruction for the most twisted of reasons and not face any repercussions. Unfortunately for Russia, they don't run most of Europe to some degree or another. We can sanction them without them even doing anything. hahaha. If Putin understood this, he would be a wiser man.

On May 14 2014 09:06 Gorsameth wrote:

Don't forget the fake troop withdraw from the border. I would say there continued presence is one of the main reasons why sanctions are continuing without any apparent action from Russia.

Or Putin asking for the vote to be postponed only to allow votes in Moscow.

ect ect.

On May 14 2014 09:15 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:

The push for sanctions appear to come whenever the separatists gain more ground. That's about it.

IMHO the overwhelmingly reason is just that we want to hurt Russia, plain and simple. These sanctions are because the separatists are successful. Unsurprisingly considering how terribly unintelligent most politicians are, this translates to "Russia is directly backing the separatists with tons of arms and money and therefore this is Russia's doing", which is laughably false. So Russia is getting sanctions because Ukraine has one of the most most pathetic military forces I've seen. The reality is, even US politicians are not THAT stupid. Rather, conspiracy theories about direct Russian intervention are a good excuse to hurt Russia, so why not. Maybe it's the non-partisan, non-jingoist person in me, but I'd be yelling at Ukraine for having a shit military, not at the Russians for laughing at Ukraine's military having serious problems with random losers with literally nothing better to do with their time. It's literally like someone punching someone else in the face because the assailant had an argument with his girlfriend.

Maybe we should sanction the separatists themselves? At least that option is far more logical.

On May 14 2014 09:29 Jormundr wrote:

Without Russian involvement there wouldn't be enough separatists to take over a McDonalds, let alone cities. A lot of people rely on Russian state media for their news, so all they hear is basically what Paleman keeps repeating over and over. Junta this, holocaust for russian speakers that.

On May 14 2014 09:40 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:


Ah, so the culprit is Russian media. Perhaps we should have sanctioned them then. Maybe replace them with Fox news or something, why not. But, we're blaming the media of a foreign country (foreign to Ukraine) for practically mind-controlling tons and tons of people. People in Ukraine must be dumb as nails to believe absurd things from the news from a foreign country like that.

So, you have discovered the whole problem. Russian media. Well, let's sanction the Russian media. Wait, Ukrainian media is about as bad. We may as well sanction Ukrainian media too. lol. But that would be being fair. I'd make a horrible politician.

lol you didn't have to mention him. That's a summon sign ya know.

But seriously, I don't think Russian media that has existed there since radio/TV did is to blame. There's probably other Russian 'actions' more prominent than have media exist, so this was a bit confusing. But I say, why not sanction the separatists? They are the ones doing things. We shouldn't use the incompetence of Ukraine as a justification to slap Russia. We should either sanction the separatists or tell Ukraine to get its shit together (it seriously needs to). These are by far the most significant factors at ply here in this revolutionary scenario.

On May 14 2014 10:20 Jormundr wrote:

You're vastly underestimating the power of propaganda. By acknowledging and hailing the 'separatists', they have turned opportunist terrorists into heroic freedom fighting thugs and turned any possible Ukrainian government (other than one approved by old Vladdy) into a terrifying machine which eats people who speak russian.

Granted, I doubt that Russia really realized how effective this would be when they started their propaganda war. All they needed was a few hundred people asking for help in Crimea and they could move in, gain a new military port and then promptly forget that the more worthless parts of Ukraine exist. Unfortunately they stirred the beehive too much and Russia is stuck between a rock and a hard place. Russia will likely never have favorable ties with western Ukraine again, which was apparently worth it so they could compare military dick sizes with the US in the Black Sea.

On May 14 2014 10:31 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:

In case you didn't see the place next to my name, I live in America. I know the power of propaganda first-hand. When I was in my early teens, I was pretty " 'Murican ", entirely the result of media, before I grew a brain.

But you're putting the entire burden on Russian media. Not on a million other factors that influenced the separatists. This was Russian propaganda for Russians, at that. If people in Ukraine prefer Russian media to their own, that's fine. Not to say Ukraine hasn't had infinite propaganda themselves, and they use the "T" word more than George Bush did, but it's just that they suck at it, even within their own country, so much so, that as you claim, foreign media (Russian) for a foreign country (Russia) is mind-controlling tons and tons of guys in Ukraine. I guess we can also say Libyan Islamic terrorists (I'll use the same word you did) were inspired to overthrow a secular regime because American media painted them as heroes? That must be American media's fault! The US must also be responsible for the civil war in Syria as well, by this line of logic! (Hmm, or maybe it was because they were jihadists and a secular govt. of any form is the greatest evil in their eyes)
So apparently Russians have secret mind-control powers that no one else has, that even after telling separatists time and time again to go fuck themselves whenever they ask for help (which they do all the time, and complain to journalists all the time about how Russians don't help them), they continue to serve Rodina-mat because the Russians have mind-control power.

Yeah, the separatists have ZERO other motivations... right. This is all a Russian conspiracy. The Russians set up everything. Had nothing to do with the timeline of events in the country that upset a lot of people, including a lot of impoverished guys like these who were already pissed off as is.

You forget that the separatists were out and about before any media knew anything about them. You can't paint anyone as "heroes" until they're already doing stuff. By the time that happened, those separatists had already taken a ton of land and were digging in to defend against Ukrainian forces. It's obvious which came first. Unless you're implying that Russian media can also predict the future, and was calling the separatists heroes before there were separatists?

Because the fact of the matter is, because anyone knew there were separatists, there were more than enough separatists to capture a bunch of cities, not just a McDonald's. That's when others, including Russian media, actually took notice of them.

So tell me, why don't we sanction Russian media? I myself am terrified at this revelation of their mind-control and future-telling abilities.

On May 14 2014 10:35 LegalLord wrote:

For every time the Russian media brands the Kiev government fascists, the government does something to prove the Russian media right.
They can choose to listen or not listen to what Russian media says, but not as many people can ignore what is actually happening.

On May 14 2014 10:53 Jormundr wrote:

Did I ever say that Russia was the sole actor responsible for separatism in Eastern Ukraine? If I did, I was wrong and I apologize. Strawmanning on that front yields you nothing. Yes I know the country you're from, which is why I know you have to be naive to think that Russia ended up with Crimea by coincidence; they're playing the same game we are.

Would you care to explain your views on how the separatist movement started and and grew such a large foothold?

the new Ukrainian government has adopted American rhetoric by calling everyone they don't like (eg. these separatists) "terrorists". lol

On May 14 2014 11:30 m4ini wrote:


In all fairness, people capturing and beating up journalists, red cross members, observers and whatnot while attacking military targets "guerilla/insurgentstyle" with heavy weaponry fits pretty well in the definition of "terrorists".

On May 14 2014 11:35 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:

In all fairness, they'd be calling them terrorists if they were jacking off in the bathroom. Political rhetoric is political rhetoric, and this is the rhetoric they adopted.

Also, guerilla warfare is not terrorism. Guerilla warfare is what you do when you don't have AFVs, aircraft, and hundreds of thousands of uniformed infantry. Despite that, guerilla warfare has been happening for centuries. But if guerilla warfare was terrorism, you are saying that America was founded by terrorists XD

On May 14 2014 11:39 Saryph wrote:


The part of his post that you ignored, would you call that terrorism?

On May 14 2014 11:46 marigoldran wrote:
Gee, I wonder where the separatists are getting their heavy weaponry from. Since we obviously have no photographic proof of Russia giving them these weapons, we must conclude that Russia is not doing it.

On May 14 2014 11:35 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:

In all fairness, they'd be calling them terrorists if they were jacking off in the bathroom. Political rhetoric is political rhetoric, and this is the rhetoric they adopted.

Also, guerilla warfare is not terrorism. Guerilla warfare is what you do when you don't have AFVs, aircraft, and hundreds of thousands of uniformed infantry. Despite that, guerilla warfare has been happening for centuries. But if guerilla warfare was terrorism, you are saying that America was founded by terrorists XD The revolutionaries also didn't do nice things to Loyalists, their own fellow colonials, at that. We're not even talking about foreign journalists and observers from the "enemy" side who could be associated with espionage as far as the separatists know. But meanwhile, the Loyalists mostly kept quiet and were minimal participants one way or the other in the Revolution, while bands of Patriots were wrecking anything to do with Britain.

It's almost as if we can apply the word "terrorist" to anything, and you just called the American Revolution a bunch of terrorists. lol

But a simple direct mapping led him to describe the American Revolution as terrorists. It says enough.

Yeah, all those police stations/armories captured didn't have any weapons at all.

Also, guerilla warfare is not terrorism. Guerilla warfare is what you do when you don't have AFVs, aircraft, and hundreds of thousands of uniformed infantry.