|
|
On February 28 2014 23:33 xDaunt wrote:
Hah, that's hilarious that the Russian media service left out the part where Yanukovic says that he does not support Russian military action in the Ukraine. Were you listening to russian broadcast? I doubt, because ru-media didn't leave it out as you said.
On March 01 2014 01:00 zeo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2014 00:54 Derez wrote:On March 01 2014 00:43 PaleMan wrote:On March 01 2014 00:37 xDaunt wrote:On March 01 2014 00:13 Gorsameth wrote:
Putin is playing a very dangerous game here. Gambling that the West doesn't want to risk an armed conflict over the Ukraine.
Assuming he actually go's trough it it that is.
Be a good boy Putin and don't start WW3 on my birthday.... As for an American/NATO response, I'd probably support the creation and enforcement of a no-fly zone over the Ukraine along with some ancillary naval support (like submarines). I don't think anyone is interested in a more generalized conflict with Russia. ![[image loading]](http://cs607522.vk.me/v607522244/1ee7/-xE7AUIvSlI.jpg) Should be a russian flag. Haven't seen any reports of american paratroopers arriving. But we all saw foreign diplomats come to Kiev and give their support for the then peaceful Maidan, in doing so giving them the all-clear to create chaos in the country. This is what happens when the eye of NATO quasi-democracy turns your way. Before you know it extremists install a junta and civilized society goes down the drain. Yes and these "diplomats" are responsible for violence too.
On February 28 2014 22:57 Warfie wrote:
He just said he thinks Russia has the right to act - and that they must act. He was surprised Putin had remained so restrained up until now. Didn't quite understand what he meant by 'act' By 'act' he means to call those officials from EU who signed a paper in Kiev and did not fulfill the conditions of the agreement - to stop violence, to return seized guns, disarm radical forces and free Kiev streets and buildings. None of these happened. And naive Yanukovich believed that opposition could control nationalist forces and diplomats won't cheat him.
On March 01 2014 03:05 xDaunt wrote:
I feel like the terms "nazi" and "fascist" are being thrown about a little too loosely as descriptors of the new Ukranian government. Maybe I've missed it, but I haven't seen anything to indicate that the new government is about to start persecuting minorities. On March 01 2014 03:06 farvacola wrote:
You haven't missed it, there are simply folks that think that repeatedly labeling something affirms said label. Of course a non-russian, non-ukranian knows a lot better of whom consists the armed part of opposition... when western media doesn't give a * about who is taking control there as it's anyway against communism or Russia or something else.
On the waves of uncontrolled revolution, nationalist forces gain a lot of popularity and grow. EU does not realize who they are dealing with, when main activists claim that they want to take "their" in Poland.
Moreover that politicians that now sit in Kiev government buildings are same corrupted as the previous or even more.
MyrMindservant's last post has logic and truth. Just the current situation in Rada is so that it represents only oppositional parties, many of which did their nationalist slogans at Maidan square.
+ Show Spoiler +On March 01 2014 10:20 Cheerio wrote:
So can the mods explain to me why Crimean crisis does not deserve it's own thread? This is the beginning of something that can become the biggest conflict in Europe since Yugoslavia. Maybe I'm wrong but sounds like you want this conflict.
|
On March 01 2014 11:14 Liman wrote:
There are some people here,mostly from west,who dont realize that their countries and alliances which they are in behave exactly same as Russia.
.
¨
Not everyone in the west was for an invasion of Irak, there was massive protests in most of the European nations.
The difference is that we didn't get beaten down by our own police and we even got neutral media attention.
|
On March 01 2014 17:29 AleXoundOS wrote:
By 'act' he means to call those officials from EU who signed a paper in Kiev and did not fulfill the conditions of the agreement - to stop violence, to return seized guns, disarm radical forces and free Kiev streets and buildings. None of these happened. And naive Yanukovich believed that opposition could control nationalist forces and diplomats won't cheat him.
From the website of the German foreign ministry:
Signatories:
President of Ukraine: Viktor Yanukovych
For the Opposition: Vitaliy Klichko, UDAR, Oleh Tyahnibok, Svoboda, Arsenij Yatseniuk, Batkivshchyna
Witnessed by:
For the EU – Poland: foreign minister Radoslaw Sikorski; Germany: foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier; France: foreign minister Laurent Fabius
For the Russian Federation – Vladimir Lukin, special envoy
The treaty was witnessed by foreign ministers from the EU and a special envoy from Russia. It's not like any of the outside parties signed the treaty or that the EU was in any position to enforce the treaty. There was no signed agreement the EU didn't fulfil.
|
To the people thinking America will act, wish Obama good luck in getting congressional approval for a war with Russia over Ukraine because there is 0% chance of that happening. As for the EU, watch Russia turn off the supply of gas and see how long these governments hold together when fuel prices go over 5 euro a liter. I mean does anyone really think any country (Russia/China included) has enough money for war? Just ask NATO how much Iraq and Afghanistan cost. Silly.
Crimea will have a referendum the same day the illegal junta in Kiev plans to rob the elections and that is that. I just feel sorry for the rest of eastern Ukraine, hope federalization can help them protect themselves from the crazies.
|
On March 01 2014 18:40 Maenander wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2014 17:29 AleXoundOS wrote:
By 'act' he means to call those officials from EU who signed a paper in Kiev and did not fulfill the conditions of the agreement - to stop violence, to return seized guns, disarm radical forces and free Kiev streets and buildings. None of these happened. And naive Yanukovich believed that opposition could control nationalist forces and diplomats won't cheat him.
From the website of the German foreign ministry: Show nested quote +Signatories:
President of Ukraine: Viktor Yanukovych
For the Opposition: Vitaliy Klichko, UDAR, Oleh Tyahnibok, Svoboda, Arsenij Yatseniuk, Batkivshchyna
Witnessed by:
For the EU – Poland: foreign minister Radoslaw Sikorski; Germany: foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier; France: foreign minister Laurent Fabius
For the Russian Federation – Vladimir Lukin, special envoy
The treaty was witnessed by foreign ministers from the EU and a special envoy from Russia. It's not like any of the outside parties signed the treaty or that the EU was in any position to enforce the treaty. There was no signed agreement the EU didn't fulfil.
And there is no signature of the Russian envoy on the document. Seriously, this whole rhetoric picking on the agreement Russia did not sign gives Kremlin <0 credibility.
|
On March 01 2014 18:40 Maenander wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2014 17:29 AleXoundOS wrote:
By 'act' he means to call those officials from EU who signed a paper in Kiev and did not fulfill the conditions of the agreement - to stop violence, to return seized guns, disarm radical forces and free Kiev streets and buildings. None of these happened. And naive Yanukovich believed that opposition could control nationalist forces and diplomats won't cheat him.
From the website of the German foreign ministry: Show nested quote +Signatories:
President of Ukraine: Viktor Yanukovych
For the Opposition: Vitaliy Klichko, UDAR, Oleh Tyahnibok, Svoboda, Arsenij Yatseniuk, Batkivshchyna
Witnessed by:
For the EU – Poland: foreign minister Radoslaw Sikorski; Germany: foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier; France: foreign minister Laurent Fabius
For the Russian Federation – Vladimir Lukin, special envoy
The treaty was witnessed by foreign ministers from the EU and a special envoy from Russia.
Vladimir Lukin didn't sign but anyway it doesn't matter here.
It's not like any of the outside parties signed the treaty or that the EU was in any position to enforce the treaty.
When european politics visited Maidan almost every day, they must be responsible for enforcing the treaty, that was later signed by foreign ministers.
There was no signed agreement the EU didn't fulfil.
The agreement was witnessed by foreign ministers as a guarantor for fulfillment of it from both sides. Yanukovich fulfilled. But now EU does not care and completely silent about the other side.
So in other words, you disclaim the responsibility of the agreement from european officials.
|
On March 01 2014 20:10 AleXoundOS wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2014 18:40 Maenander wrote:On March 01 2014 17:29 AleXoundOS wrote:
By 'act' he means to call those officials from EU who signed a paper in Kiev and did not fulfill the conditions of the agreement - to stop violence, to return seized guns, disarm radical forces and free Kiev streets and buildings. None of these happened. And naive Yanukovich believed that opposition could control nationalist forces and diplomats won't cheat him.
From the website of the German foreign ministry: Signatories:
President of Ukraine: Viktor Yanukovych
For the Opposition: Vitaliy Klichko, UDAR, Oleh Tyahnibok, Svoboda, Arsenij Yatseniuk, Batkivshchyna
Witnessed by:
For the EU – Poland: foreign minister Radoslaw Sikorski; Germany: foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier; France: foreign minister Laurent Fabius
For the Russian Federation – Vladimir Lukin, special envoy
The treaty was witnessed by foreign ministers from the EU and a special envoy from Russia. Vladimir Lukin didn't sign, but anyway it doesn't matter here. Show nested quote +It's not like any of the outside parties signed the treaty or that the EU was in any position to enforce the treaty. When european politics visited Maidan square almost every day, they must be responsible for enforcing the treaty, that was later signed by foreign ministers. The agreement was witnessed by foreign ministers as a guarantor for fulfillment of it from both sides. Yanukovich fulfilled. But now EU does not care and completely silent about the other side. So in other words, you disclaim the responsibility of the agreement from european officials.
If you really think the EU can control the opposition forces you are just as naïve as you claim we westerners are.
On March 01 2014 19:45 zeo wrote:
To the people thinking America will act, wish Obama good luck in getting congressional approval for a war with Russia over Ukraine because there is 0% chance of that happening. As for the EU, watch Russia turn off the supply of gas and see how long these governments hold together when fuel prices go over 5 euro a liter. I mean does anyone really think any country (Russia/China included) has enough money for war? Just ask NATO how much Iraq and Afghanistan cost. Silly.
A war between USA and Russia is unthinkable anyway. No minor strategic victory is worth the risk.
Neither the EU nor Russia can afford a breakdown of economical relations, and that's the beauty of the globalized world: War between larger fractions is no longer affordable.
|
On March 01 2014 20:21 Maenander wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2014 20:10 AleXoundOS wrote:On March 01 2014 18:40 Maenander wrote:On March 01 2014 17:29 AleXoundOS wrote:
By 'act' he means to call those officials from EU who signed a paper in Kiev and did not fulfill the conditions of the agreement - to stop violence, to return seized guns, disarm radical forces and free Kiev streets and buildings. None of these happened. And naive Yanukovich believed that opposition could control nationalist forces and diplomats won't cheat him.
From the website of the German foreign ministry: Signatories:
President of Ukraine: Viktor Yanukovych
For the Opposition: Vitaliy Klichko, UDAR, Oleh Tyahnibok, Svoboda, Arsenij Yatseniuk, Batkivshchyna
Witnessed by:
For the EU – Poland: foreign minister Radoslaw Sikorski; Germany: foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier; France: foreign minister Laurent Fabius
For the Russian Federation – Vladimir Lukin, special envoy
The treaty was witnessed by foreign ministers from the EU and a special envoy from Russia. Vladimir Lukin didn't sign, but anyway it doesn't matter here. It's not like any of the outside parties signed the treaty or that the EU was in any position to enforce the treaty. When european politics visited Maidan square almost every day, they must be responsible for enforcing the treaty, that was later signed by foreign ministers. There was no signed agreement the EU didn't fulfil. The agreement was witnessed by foreign ministers as a guarantor for fulfillment of it from both sides. Yanukovich fulfilled. But now EU does not care and completely silent about the other side. So in other words, you disclaim the responsibility of the agreement from european officials. If you really think the EU can control the opposition forces you are just as naïve as you claim we westerners are.
I do not think so.
And how European officials could witness that hard to fulfil agreement??
They cheated Yanukovich for the sake of their own interests.
|
On March 01 2014 18:26 Ramong wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2014 11:14 Liman wrote:
There are some people here,mostly from west,who dont realize that their countries and alliances which they are in behave exactly same as Russia.
. ¨ Not everyone in the west was for an invasion of Irak, there was massive protests in most of the European nations. The difference is that we didn't get beaten down by our own police and we even got neutral media attention.
still Irak was invaded
|
On March 01 2014 20:28 AleXoundOS wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2014 20:21 Maenander wrote:On March 01 2014 20:10 AleXoundOS wrote:On March 01 2014 18:40 Maenander wrote:On March 01 2014 17:29 AleXoundOS wrote:
By 'act' he means to call those officials from EU who signed a paper in Kiev and did not fulfill the conditions of the agreement - to stop violence, to return seized guns, disarm radical forces and free Kiev streets and buildings. None of these happened. And naive Yanukovich believed that opposition could control nationalist forces and diplomats won't cheat him.
From the website of the German foreign ministry: Signatories:
President of Ukraine: Viktor Yanukovych
For the Opposition: Vitaliy Klichko, UDAR, Oleh Tyahnibok, Svoboda, Arsenij Yatseniuk, Batkivshchyna
Witnessed by:
For the EU – Poland: foreign minister Radoslaw Sikorski; Germany: foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier; France: foreign minister Laurent Fabius
For the Russian Federation – Vladimir Lukin, special envoy
The treaty was witnessed by foreign ministers from the EU and a special envoy from Russia. Vladimir Lukin didn't sign, but anyway it doesn't matter here. It's not like any of the outside parties signed the treaty or that the EU was in any position to enforce the treaty. When european politics visited Maidan square almost every day, they must be responsible for enforcing the treaty, that was later signed by foreign ministers. There was no signed agreement the EU didn't fulfil. The agreement was witnessed by foreign ministers as a guarantor for fulfillment of it from both sides. Yanukovich fulfilled. But now EU does not care and completely silent about the other side. So in other words, you disclaim the responsibility of the agreement from european officials. If you really think the EU can control the opposition forces you are just as naïve as you claim we westerners are. I do not think so. And how European officials could witness that hard to fulfil agreement?? They cheated Yanukovich for the sake of their own interests.
International Politics 101: Fuck the other guy over before he fucks you over. Just be sure that the other guy can't do anything about it afterwards.
USA, Russia, Britain, China and every other major player does this all the time. Sign a deal that helps them and abandon it instantly once its usefulness has expired.
|
On March 01 2014 20:10 AleXoundOS wrote:
The agreement was witnessed by foreign ministers as a guarantor for fulfillment of it from both sides. Yanukovich fulfilled. But now EU does not care and completely silent about the other side.
So in other words, you disclaim the responsibility of the agreement from european officials.
And yet again I have to quote my earlier answer in this thread. I wish people would learn to do some research before making statements.
On February 24 2014 01:05 MyrMindservant wrote:
While rest of your post is sound, you are wrong about opposition breaking the agreement. Yanukovich is the one who broke it. He had to cooperate with opposition and parliament by signing laws that require his sign, but he fled from Kiev at the evening of the same day when the deal was signed. He did it without telling anyone and even tried to flee from Ukraine.
Yanukovich didn't even try to cooperate and people are still claiming that "it's the opposition who broke the agreement", sigh.
|
On March 01 2014 20:28 AleXoundOS wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2014 20:21 Maenander wrote:On March 01 2014 20:10 AleXoundOS wrote:On March 01 2014 18:40 Maenander wrote:On March 01 2014 17:29 AleXoundOS wrote:
By 'act' he means to call those officials from EU who signed a paper in Kiev and did not fulfill the conditions of the agreement - to stop violence, to return seized guns, disarm radical forces and free Kiev streets and buildings. None of these happened. And naive Yanukovich believed that opposition could control nationalist forces and diplomats won't cheat him.
From the website of the German foreign ministry: Signatories:
President of Ukraine: Viktor Yanukovych
For the Opposition: Vitaliy Klichko, UDAR, Oleh Tyahnibok, Svoboda, Arsenij Yatseniuk, Batkivshchyna
Witnessed by:
For the EU – Poland: foreign minister Radoslaw Sikorski; Germany: foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier; France: foreign minister Laurent Fabius
For the Russian Federation – Vladimir Lukin, special envoy
The treaty was witnessed by foreign ministers from the EU and a special envoy from Russia. Vladimir Lukin didn't sign, but anyway it doesn't matter here. It's not like any of the outside parties signed the treaty or that the EU was in any position to enforce the treaty. When european politics visited Maidan square almost every day, they must be responsible for enforcing the treaty, that was later signed by foreign ministers. There was no signed agreement the EU didn't fulfil. The agreement was witnessed by foreign ministers as a guarantor for fulfillment of it from both sides. Yanukovich fulfilled. But now EU does not care and completely silent about the other side. So in other words, you disclaim the responsibility of the agreement from european officials. If you really think the EU can control the opposition forces you are just as naïve as you claim we westerners are. I do not think so. And how European officials could witness that hard to fulfil agreement?? They cheated Yanukovich for the sake of their own interests.
I was a witness to 2 marriages, signature and all, that does not mean I can guarantee that the parties will be faithful lol.
And which interests are that exactly? The economic interests are minimal compared to Russia's, the Ukraine is an economical risk rather than an opportunity for the EU. The public isn't exactly supportive of the EU right now even without pumping billions of Euros into another non-functioning economy.
There are some countries with strategic interests, like Poland for example, but the EU is no monolith that orchestrates uprisings to get new members. Many current members actually do no want new members in the EU at all.
|
Pro-russian meeting started in Kharkov few hours ago, + Show Spoiler + people sturming gov. administration building, they raised Russian flag upon it, only a very few ukrainian flags were observed in those crowd.
Alghough it is still not that big crowd for such big city, which means they are also some kind of minority + Show Spoiler +
Lack of watercanons and tear gas I would say 
In addition, this is not acceptable for me, I will never support that kind of protests, and if someone will support this but will be against pro-eu strikes at the same time, it would mean this person is following double standars, which is stupid.
|
In Donetsk over 30k people have gathered in their central square:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/h7Labju.jpg)
Ukraine has obviously no intention of kneeling to the junta in Kiev
edit: Picture from Kharkiv:
+ Show Spoiler +
and a video:
+ Show Spoiler +
|
The pro-EU protest started the domino effect. This is no longer about pro-EU vs pro-Russia, now this is about pro-EU vs pro-Russia vs anti-Junta who are pro Russia vs anti-Junta who are pro-EU vs Nationalists. This will turn into clusterfuckery of a mess and possible civil war if one drop of blood is dropped in the street.
|
Pro-Russian Ukraine with Crimea
or
Anti-Russian Ukraine without Crimea
Which one benefits whom?
Russia may have lost the rest of Ukraine, but they may instead gain Crimea.
EU may have gained larger influence on the rest of Ukraine, but Crimea may not be a part of it any more.
|
Considering the fact it's the eastern part of Ukraine that makes most of Ukraine's economy, including Crimea (which plays biggest part in Ukraine's economy, since it exports huge chunks of agriculture, plus tourism and major port cities), losing Crimea would be a big fucking blow to Ukraine. Even if Ukraine would join EU, they will most likely be no use of a member without much of economic boost to speak of.
|
On March 01 2014 22:42 zeonmx wrote:
Considering the fact it's the eastern part of Ukraine that makes most of Ukraine's economy, including Crimea (which plays biggest part in Ukraine's economy, since it exports huge chunks of agriculture, plus tourism and major port cities), losing Crimea would be a big fucking blow to Ukraine. Even if Ukraine would join EU, they will most likely be no use of a member without much of economic boost to speak of.
There are several members in the EU that are pretty weak, they actually get a lot of money from the EU to try and build up the country, so the same could be done with Ukraine. If this would be a good thing I don't know.
|
Sucks to work in Ukrainian government buildings. It's like both sides are playing capture the building game. More buildings you have, more right you are!
|
On March 01 2014 22:42 zeonmx wrote:
Considering the fact it's the eastern part of Ukraine that makes most of Ukraine's economy, including Crimea (which plays biggest part in Ukraine's economy, since it exports huge chunks of agriculture, plus tourism and major port cities), losing Crimea would be a big fucking blow to Ukraine. Even if Ukraine would join EU, they will most likely be no use of a member without much of economic boost to speak of.
Agreed (not just because we have similar names)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/JDyvozT.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://cs7002.vk.me/c540100/v540100707/10900/AjBx73ww_2M.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://cs412226.vk.me/v412226707/b122/pgq3IBk6w90.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/G3lD6Np.jpg)
