We now have the Russian propaganda machine on TL,lol. It's sad to see how this stupid brainwashing actually works on people.
The new quality Russian news anchor mentioned before also made the brilliant statement that Germany's foreign minister is obviously only supporting the opposition because he's gay and thinks Klitschko is hot.
And regarding these video clips. There are over 100k people demonstrating at the moment, and a lot of them are getting beaten up by the military/police for days. So just posting a clip of a bunch of protesters doing something aggressive is hugely selective and manipulative, and disregards the context and size of the demonstration.
On December 12 2013 00:32 Dangermousecatdog wrote: Paleman logic: Ukranian protests are no longer peaceful. Ukranian police are brutal. American police are brutal too. This makes police brutality an ok thing to do.
yeah right, except it was the other way around.
Yanukovich decides police brutality is ok (for whatever reason, be it Russian example or any other) Ukrainian police get brutal. Ukrainian people respond with some violent incidents but overwhelmingly peacefully
Reminded me of the Russian journalist Kiselyov and a prank that Ukrainians did on him for his coverage. During a live coverage a Russian journalist (not Kiselyov) was presented with the Oscar for Kiselyov's lies and "non-sential" coverage of the events.
One of the examples of Kiselyov's coverage.
In it the journalist gives numerous negative emotional characteristics of the protests (example: protesters "have emptiness and fear in their eyes"). Described Guido Westerwelle during his visit to Maydan as "warmed up or overheated by the bodies of brothers Klitchko". But the main outrage was caused by the twisted timeline of the events. The report shows that the violent dispersal of Maydan on the 30th of November was the result of violence against police on the 1st of December, i.e. that it was caused by the events from the future. There was violence against police on the 1st of December. Partially as a revenge by the people for the beatings 1 day ago, but partially as a result of provocations by police (dressed as civilians) and pro governmental activists. In the following video a man near the excavator can be seen crying "To the siege!" [of the Presidential Administration]. He is later recognized as the officer of "Berkut" police unit.
The officer, Sergiy Kusyuk, is notorious in Ukraine as he is often seen when Berkut forces are used to disperse demonstrations (sometimes in his uniform but often dressed as a civilian).
Also. Dmytro Korchynskyy, whose people organized the highjacking of the excavator and controlled it, has recently fled to Russia.
So as you can see from the quoted post (at the very top), Kiselyov's work hasn't gone unnoticed by the Russians and many do believe that the violence of police was provoked by violence of protestants, and not the other way around. Should be also noted that apparently Putin has been pleased with Kiselyov's recent work and has ordered the creation of news agency "Russia Today" which will be headed by Kiselyov. What's funny is that the new creation is aimed not at the internal Russian audience but at an external one as it is meant to "address what it perceives as a comprehension gap in the world's perception of Russian policy". So watch out everyone, Kiselyov is coming for you. http://www.pravda.com.ua/rus/news/2013/12/9/7005525/
I am quoting myself to prove that I'm not against Ukraine to enter the European Union. However, I've heard that US considers sanctions against Ukraine. I don't think it's appropriate because they're on a different continent. Why are they involved?
On December 05 2013 14:54 PaleMan wrote: I wish all the best to our ukraininan brothers, but they want to buy a ticket to Titanic which EU is
Am I surprised that a Russian is against EU? Not at all. You and that moron Putin just want to control the East. Sorry but you're losing hard. Bulgaria got into EU a long time ago, Ukraine doesn't want you either. Sure Russia still has puppets in the eastern countries. However, slowly but surely countries become more independent.
On December 12 2013 00:32 Dangermousecatdog wrote: Paleman logic: Ukranian protests are no longer peaceful. Ukranian police are brutal. American police are brutal too. This makes police brutality an ok thing to do.
yeah right, except it was the other way around.
Yanukovich decides police brutality is ok (for whatever reason, be it Russian example or any other) Ukrainian police get brutal. Ukrainian people respond with some violent incidents but overwhelmingly peacefully
Reminded me of the Russian journalist Kiselyov and a prank that Ukrainians did on him for his coverage. During a live coverage a Russian journalist (not Kiselyov) was presented with the Oscar for Kiselyov's lies and "non-sential" coverage of the events. + Show Spoiler +
In it the journalist gives numerous negative emotional characteristics of the protests (example: protesters "have emptiness and fear in their eyes"). Described Guido Westerwelle during his visit to Maydan as "warmed up or overheated by the bodies of brothers Klitchko". But the main outrage was caused by the twisted timeline of the events. The report shows that the violent dispersal of Maydan on the 30th of November was the result of violence against police on the 1st of December, i.e. that it was caused by the events from the future. There was violence against police on the 1st of December. Partially as a revenge by the people for the beatings 1 day ago, but partially as a result of provocations by police (dressed as civilians) and pro governmental activists. In the following video a man near the excavator can be seen crying "To the siege!" [of the Presidential Administration]. He is later recognized as the officer of "Berkut" police unit. + Show Spoiler +
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWpLIxm0h0s
The officer, Sergiy Kusyuk, is notorious in Ukraine as he is often seen when Berkut forces are used to disperse demonstrations (sometimes in his uniform but often dressed as a civilian).
Also. Dmytro Korchynskyy, whose people organized the highjacking of the excavator and controlled it, has recently fled to Russia.
So as you can see from the quoted post (at the very top), Kiselyov's work hasn't gone unnoticed by the Russians and many do believe that the violence of police was provoked by violence of protestants, and not the other way around. Should be also noted that apparently Putin has been pleased with Kiselyov's recent work and has ordered the creation of news agency "Russia Today" which will be headed by Kiselyov. What's funny is that the new creation is aimed not at the internal Russian audience but at an external one as it is meant to "address what it perceives as a comprehension gap in the world's perception of Russian policy". So watch out everyone, Kiselyov is coming for you. http://www.pravda.com.ua/rus/news/2013/12/9/7005525/
My Russian is rusty at best now, but from what I understood he said that Europe and US are very happy that protesters are beating up with chains and metal objects the poor militia dressed in plastic helmets? LOL
On December 12 2013 09:54 darkness wrote: I am quoting myself to prove that I'm not against Ukraine to enter the European Union. However, I've heard that US considers sanctions against Ukraine. I don't think it's appropriate because they're on a different continent. Why are they involved?
On December 05 2013 14:54 PaleMan wrote: I wish all the best to our ukraininan brothers, but they want to buy a ticket to Titanic which EU is
Am I surprised that a Russian is against EU? Not at all. You and that moron Putin just want to control the East. Sorry but you're losing hard. Bulgaria got into EU a long time ago, Ukraine doesn't want you either. Sure Russia still has puppets in the eastern countries. However, slowly but surely countries become more independent.
US considers sanctions against the Ukrainian officials.
Seems to me like the Ukrainian government is trying to play off Russia against the EU. Latest new I read was that their government was willing to ratify the (earlier rejected) "association treaty" with the EU if it was granted a 20 billion € credit by the EU. When Janukowitsch rejected the treaty, Russia agreed to increase the delivery of natural gas (important in the upcoming winter). It's a dangerous game they are playing, let's hope this gets resolved without any (further) bloodshed.
On December 13 2013 02:12 bartofslaves wrote: let's hope Ukraine will never make it to EU
it would be bad for economy of countries that joined EU recently
my few words
EU is about much more than economy. With how the world is shaping now (countries forming alliances and building "blocks" other than east-west or communist-capitalist) it's bad for countries to be left out. Since Russia can't hold its stuff together and is desperately trying to keep whatever hold it has left out of the old USSR due to some of those countries having rich natural resources etc. it's pretty tense. I really wish the best for Ukraine, especially that we share quite a lot of history together.
For Ukraine, EU is practically the only option for development boost and getting out of old Russian influence that's been dragging them down. Although it might lead to some internal problems (seeing how Ukraine is practically split in half, east supporting Russia and west supporting EU).
Economically speaking taking the Ukraine into the EU isn't really a problem. National debt compared to other major European players is really low, and with their overall size (GDP approximately 180 billion) the Ukraine is relatively small anyway.
Politically and socially i think the Ukraine would probably profit a lot from becoming a EU member. Sure the EU isn't exactly perfect but probably still a lot better than being dependent on Putin's Russia.
On December 13 2013 02:12 bartofslaves wrote: let's hope Ukraine will never make it to EU
it would be bad for economy of countries that joined EU recently
my few words
EU is about much more than economy. With how the world is shaping now (countries forming alliances and building "blocks" other than east-west or communist-capitalist) it's bad for countries to be left out. Since Russia can't hold its stuff together and is desperately trying to keep whatever hold it has left out of the old USSR due to some of those countries having rich natural resources etc. it's pretty tense. I really wish the best for Ukraine, especially that we share quite a lot of history together.
For Ukraine, EU is practically the only option for development boost and getting out of old Russian influence that's been dragging them down. Although it might lead to some internal problems (seeing how Ukraine is practically split in half, east supporting Russia and west supporting EU).
Other than protections from a bullying Russia, I don't see how the benefits to Ukraine would be anything other than wholly economic in nature. What other benefits non-economic in nature does Ukraine need and gain by EU membership? It really appears to be East-West Version 2: Putin Edition; chief benefit of more available markets and a corresponding decrease in Russian economic influence/power.
The biggest problems of Ukraine are corruption and other barriers on economic markets that don't let them function in effective ways. Ukraine is pretty poor but prices on most goods are higher than in EU. Dependence on EU is a good way to force authorities to work towards removing those market barriers, which will improve economy and welfare even if EU does nothing to help financially. We need political reformations much more than loans. I'm not afraid of a default, we've had a number of those in my lifetime, and life doesn't stop after those. But what terrifies me is that Ukraine might be stuck in this state of corrupted market economy for a very long time. And to change this we need help, not just a change in leadership (as the events after 2004 have proved).
On December 13 2013 04:03 Danglars wrote: Other than protections from a bullying Russia, I don't see how the benefits to Ukraine would be anything other than wholly economic in nature.
Well there would be the whole human rights thing for starters... If you're part of any kind of minority or if you have the desire to express a political opinion which is not in line with the mighty governing overlords i would think twice about allying with Russia.
People in Ukraine suffer from the same illness that affect many transitional countries (including Serbia). Everybody want a better future but nobody wants to work for it, so the EU is shown as a golden beacon of light where, 'we just have to get in' and gold will flow from the heavens and everyone lived happily ever after. Meanwhile all the other problems are swept aside, all other thing 'we will fix once we get into the EU'. Ukraine should do whats best for them, fix their country and when they are a stable normal society not dependent on anyone chose which side will benefit Ukraine more. Especially when we are talking about a country where a huge chunk of it wants Russia, the other chunk wants EU
On December 13 2013 04:40 zeo wrote: People in Ukraine suffer from the same illness that affect many transitional countries (including Serbia). Everybody want a better future but nobody wants to work for it, so the EU is shown as a golden beacon of light where, 'we just have to get in' and gold will flow from the heavens and everyone lived happily ever after. Meanwhile all the other problems are swept aside, all other thing 'we will fix once we get into the EU'. Ukraine should do whats best for them, fix their country and when they are a stable normal society not dependent on anyone chose which side will benefit Ukraine more. Especially when we are talking about a country where a huge chunk of it wants Russia, the other chunk wants EU
You are probably correct about that facter. But there are many other things at play here too: Entering EU is not on the table and frankly I would be surprised if they can make it in before 2024. The Euro is many years further down that line... What they will be given is a small lump of money with a promise for targeted advantages down (To avoid too much of it going to corruption), a lower trade barrier, some lessened visa restrictions and a horde of specific reform-demands.
Ukraine is forced to choose but they cannot afford either side. Turning down Russia may worsen their future conditions for buying gas considerably and they still rely heavily on Russia in that regard. On the other hand, EU is demanding a lot without upfronting the money (in fear of them going to corruption). Both choices will hurt a lot, but just defaulting and trying to continue playing both sides will be almost impossible. If they say no to EU, they lose a lot of trade and the relations will be severely severed for the foreseeable future. If they say yes to EU they will get punished by Russia and their need for russian resources will be a lot harder to meet, just as the trade relations likely will suffer. It they keep saying nothing EU will have to put a new deadline up and if conditions aren't met, they have to take the answer of Ukraine as a no. Letting Ukraine do nothing on this issue is not acceptable.
On December 13 2013 04:40 zeo wrote: People in Ukraine suffer from the same illness that affect many transitional countries (including Serbia). Everybody want a better future but nobody wants to work for it, so the EU is shown as a golden beacon of light where, 'we just have to get in' and gold will flow from the heavens and everyone lived happily ever after. Meanwhile all the other problems are swept aside, all other thing 'we will fix once we get into the EU'. Ukraine should do whats best for them, fix their country and when they are a stable normal society not dependent on anyone chose which side will benefit Ukraine more. Especially when we are talking about a country where a huge chunk of it wants Russia, the other chunk wants EU
You are probably correct about that facter. But there are many other things at play here too: Entering EU is not on the table and frankly I would be surprised if they can make it in before 2024. The Euro is many years further down that line... What they will be given is a small lump of money with a promise for targeted advantages down (To avoid too much of it going to corruption), a lower trade barrier, some lessened visa restrictions and a horde of specific reform-demands.
Ukraine is forced to choose but they cannot afford either side. Turning down Russia may worsen their future conditions for buying gas considerably and they still rely heavily on Russia in that regard. On the other hand, EU is demanding a lot without upfronting the money (in fear of them going to corruption). Both choices will hurt a lot, but just defaulting and trying to continue playing both sides will be almost impossible. If they say no to EU, they lose a lot of trade and the relations will be severely severed for the foreseeable future. If they say yes to EU they will get punished by Russia and their need for russian resources will be a lot harder to meet, just as the trade relations likely will suffer. It they keep saying nothing EU will have to put a new deadline up and if conditions aren't met, they have to take the answer of Ukraine as a no. Letting Ukraine do nothing on this issue is not acceptable.
Did not see it like that, makes sense. But if they are screwed either way, protests (and the violence that goes with/against it) accomplish nothing. A referendum would be the civil way to go about this, that way when they get fucked over everyone can say 'well we can't blame anyone but ourselves'. The politicians on the Ukrainian scene today are the same ones that were there ten years ago, somehow they are all still getting fat paychecks by leading the country into perpetual revolutions and counter-revolutions. Also populism and cult of personality, it plagues all of the Slavic peoples.
On December 13 2013 06:17 radiatoren wrote: Ukraine is forced to choose but they cannot afford either side. Turning down Russia may worsen their future conditions for buying gas considerably and they still rely heavily on Russia in that regard. On the other hand, EU is demanding a lot without upfronting the money (in fear of them going to corruption). Both choices will hurt a lot, but just defaulting and trying to continue playing both sides will be almost impossible. If they say no to EU, they lose a lot of trade and the relations will be severely severed for the foreseeable future. If they say yes to EU they will get punished by Russia and their need for russian resources will be a lot harder to meet, just as the trade relations likely will suffer. It they keep saying nothing EU will have to put a new deadline up and if conditions aren't met, they have to take the answer of Ukraine as a no. Letting Ukraine do nothing on this issue is not acceptable.
Well that depends. I have heard it on the news today that EU is promising "energetical safety" to those eastern neighbors who started the EU integration process. If gas prices for EU countries are negotiated by one authority they can just include Ukraine in it and negotiate the prices for us too. Currently Ukraine is paying more than Lithuania does.
On December 13 2013 06:17 radiatoren wrote: Ukraine is forced to choose but they cannot afford either side. Turning down Russia may worsen their future conditions for buying gas considerably and they still rely heavily on Russia in that regard. On the other hand, EU is demanding a lot without upfronting the money (in fear of them going to corruption). Both choices will hurt a lot, but just defaulting and trying to continue playing both sides will be almost impossible. If they say no to EU, they lose a lot of trade and the relations will be severely severed for the foreseeable future. If they say yes to EU they will get punished by Russia and their need for russian resources will be a lot harder to meet, just as the trade relations likely will suffer. It they keep saying nothing EU will have to put a new deadline up and if conditions aren't met, they have to take the answer of Ukraine as a no. Letting Ukraine do nothing on this issue is not acceptable.
Well that depends. I have heard it on the news today that EU is promising "energetical safety" to those eastern neighbors who started the EU integration process. If gas prices for EU countries are negotiated by one authority they can just include Ukraine in it and negotiate the prices for us too. Currently Ukraine is paying more than Lithuania does.
They are not, every country negotiates the gas prices by itself. I don't know of any plans of this being changed in the future and I doubt this will change, but maybe they try to work something out. The only way EU can step in now, is to check the contract if it is within bounds of EU law, like they did with Poland, when an idiot tried to give the Gazprom an exclusive deal for 40 years and EU stopped it citing anti-monopoly law.
In broader perspective, probably the best thing going for EU-Ukraine relationship is warming on Iran-USA line. Perhaps US will stop sabotaging EU attempts to acess Irans oil, and therfore lower EU depandancy on Russias resources. Which in turn will give EU much more maneuver space.
I'm glad that someone cares about us here. We had a panel discussion today - nodody decided anything. (Oh if you only knew our prime minister - the ukrainian language he's speaking is a thing everyone make jokes about.) Euromaidan is not about EU anymore. It's about freedom! Freedom of Yanuko**ch clan first of all. Slava Ukraini!
What makes me curious however is if this would be a good idea for both nations seeing how the dream was not exactly fulfilled in Bulgaria and Greece and given that this is still a scary time for the Eurozone.
What the hell do you mean by "dream was not exactly fullfiled"? Do you have any idea how dramaticaly has life changed in the past 15 years in Bulgary, for the large part thanks to the investments from the EU and the pressure from EU to cut down on corruption and establish a woking system of law?
I have not too much personal experience with Bulgary, but I now personaly some Romanians and the fate of the two countries is very similiar - 15 years ago, some parts of Romania weren't really safe to walk around. I was there back then and talked with people who lived off $100 a month and whatever they were able to grow in the garden and shoot in the forest. Today it is, for the most part, a standart european country. Yes, they are not Germany-rich, but it really doesn't make any sense to expect such a level of equalisation after losing half a century to a corrupt authoritative regime. And Greece, which has been living off European money for decades until the bubble bursted?
If anything, these experiences show that enetering the EU is extremely beneficial for a poor country. The only problem is when you become too greedy on "social comforts" without putting in the work to back it up, but after the Greek lesson, people are much more careful about that. Yes, I have a long list of things that I hate about the EU and at the moment (meaning, after we got bilions of Euro in sturctural support) I won't mind getting out of it, but for Ukraine, it is the one and only saving grace.
Rose-tinted glasses. "Do you have any idea how dramatically has life changed in the past 15 years in..." goes both ways. I'd say in Russia it changed even more dramatically. Bulgaria is not doing too good. Lets not bring up Spain and Greece either, I don't see how Ukraine will outperform these integral parts of European Union.
I'm not taking sides but you have to consider the consequences. It is very likely that what Russia currently offers is a better deal. Borrowing money doesn't always work well.
EPT
