On May 12 2014 02:03 LegalLord wrote: Wait till the votes on the 25th are finished and the proposed laws for federalization have been passed. Then talk to the government in Kiev and figure out what people should vote about. This vote has no legitimization at all. As Bavaria can't just simply vote itself out of Germany , administrative regions can't just simply vote itself out of Ukraine. I would agree that this vote would be better on the 25th. But they refused to move it, so it comes down to one of two possibilities: either refuse to represent absentee voters, or allow
The only reasonable solution would have been for Russia to ignore the vote and support the presidential elections and encourage the people in Eastern Ukraine to stop doing what they're doing. Instead they're again trying to escalate the situation by supporting an illegitimate vote.
That possibility went out the window when Ukraine refused to cease military operations in the East. There is no chance of a legitimate vote and so Russia's actions are definitely reasonable, if unpopular with other countries.
According to that article, voting in Russia requires a valid Ukranian passport.
That means alot in one of the most corrupt countries in the world, renown for their pinpoint accuracy coming to any kind of voting.
You don't think it's extremely weird in the first place to have votings regarding political decisions in a foreign country? Don't take it personally, but are all russians that delusional, to think this is "legitimate"? All this does, is adding another variable that nobody can confirm, is not monitored, is easy to manipulate. People in the ukraine already can vote more than once, how often do you think can someone in moscow vote?
So essentially your point is that you don't trust Russia, and therefore you don't trust the results of a legitimate voting procedure (absentee voting)? That's fine, but it all boils down to the fact that you yourself do not trust Russia, not that there is anything inherently wrong about that procedure.
By the way, I'm a US citizen and live in the US - you can dispense with the whole "brainwashed by Russian propaganda" BS that you keep spouting. I hardly watch Russian news.
On May 12 2014 01:11 m4ini wrote:Let me ask you this, and i'd like you to answer honestly and direct - do you actually think this is even close to a voting that could have any legitimate outcome? As in, any result other than being a farce beyond anything i personally have ever seen?
Do I think that these elections will run without any questionable procedures? No. Do I think that these elections will have a legitimate outcome? Maybe. We'll see the general public reaction after the vote, because that isn't very easy to fake. Do I think that this is a farce beyond anything you have ever seen? Look no further than the May 25 elections, which essentially have no representation for East Ukranians because any pro-Russian candidates were chased out of Kiev by mob violence.
Uhhhh, there are plenty of pro-Russian candidates remaining in Ukraine. Just because Yanukovych fled, doesn't mean that all pro-Russian politicians have fled. The party of regions still exists and still holds a lot of seats in parliament (I think about 25% if you read wiki).
How about a faction leader of the party of regions Oleksandr Yefremov? He is clearly pro-Russian and clearly still in Ukraine ( link)
So the fact that the only pro-Russian candidate is gaining 4% in opinion polls means that the election is a farce? wtf? The people don't want to vote pro-Russian (according to numerous opinion polls you cited), so the election is a farce? Nice logic. Pro-Russian politicians are eligible to run in the elections. The fact that no one wants to vote for them, doesn't make it a farce. It seems like most Ukrainian's want a non-extreme politician that is for fighting corruption and working with the West to develop the economy/democracy.
Just take a look at how much votes Tyahnybok from Svoboda is getting (2%!!!). It seems like Ukrainian's don't want a right-sector/nationalist president and don't want a pro-Russian president. That would make sense given the past few years.
I would believe that only 4% of Ukranians are pro-Russian as I would believe an opinion poll that said that 90% of Americans are planning to vote for the Democratic candidate. Demographically, that just makes no sense.
I didn't forget about Tihipko - I just think that the circumstances under which he was expelled from his own party are suspect enough to question what happened in that situation. In any case, significantly more than 15% (giving you the most generous number by those estimates) of actual Ukraine supports Russia. The fact that the polls don't represent this makes the polls themselves inaccurate.
I do see your point but I think there are other factors at play:
1.) the polls seem to be accurate at portraying Yanukovych's support (20~30%), until he fled the country. 2.) the fact that Yanukovych left the country clearly leaves a void that has not yet been filled by a pro-Russian candidate, which explains the lack of clear support for pro-Russian candidates. 3.) the fact that most Ukrainians see Russia as manipulating Ukraine (crimea annexation, destabilization in the East), would lead to lower support for pro-Russian candidates. 4.) you don't factor in the "other candidates" that account for *20%* 4.1) I assume a lot of the communist party is anti-Europe/pro-Russian (they are 5% of vote) 5.) Crimea accounts for 2.5/45 million of the population, which is over 5% of the population. Their votes were clearly going to go pro-Russia and I doubt these polls took into account Crimea.
On May 12 2014 02:37 LegalLord wrote: That possibility went out the window when Ukraine refused to cease military operations in the East. There is no chance of a legitimate vote and so Russia's actions are definitely reasonable, if unpopular with other countries.
What was the Ukrainian government supposed to do? Just let armed separatists occupy buildings as they please? We can argue about how these military operations happen, but no government would just sit there while people are taking over public buildings. If that stuff would have happened in Russia I bet it wouldn't have taken a day until the Russian military would have intervened.
I disagree with this. Usually every country would send police and not military to bring the situation under control. The problem in eastern Ukraine being that police is mostly loyal to the separatists and illoyal to kiev.
Yet this situation imo was not inevitable. The government in Kiev should know about their country and how important it is to take the ordinary eastern Ukrainian with them on the decisions they take. So the thugs don't get support from the rest of the population. As things seem to be now many ordinary citizens seem to be in support of separatist action.
They could have proposed more rights for the regions from the start or maybe send trustworthy people to negotiate, find out what their population wants if they don't know already and act according to that. Ignore the thugs but bring the ordinary citizen to your side. Sadly it seems to be too late for stuff like this now?!
The moment they send in military they give up on talking and want to restore order by force thus alienating their own population further in the east with what happened in Mariupol, Odessa and elsewhere. The biggest risk being that they fail to restore power.
On May 12 2014 03:18 Banaora wrote: They could have proposed more rights for the regions from the start or maybe send trustworthy people to negotiate, find out what their population wants if they don't know already and act according to that. Ignore the thugs but bring the ordinary citizen to your side. Sadly it seems to be too late for stuff like this now?! .
They did already. Over a month ago (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26997224) The problem is the Eastern Ukrainians have been brainwashed so hard into believing that their country is overrun by Nazis that they won't listen to anyone.
On May 12 2014 03:22 Cheerio wrote: According to SBU around ten thousand "yes" ballots were being transported to Mariupol. Prevented by SBU.
The whole thing is a farce, and anyone trying to legitimize it when they've found tens/hundreds of thousands of pre-filled ballots is insane. Not to mention what Russia itself is doing in Moscow for example.
Ukrainian national guardsmen opened fire Sunday on a crowd outside a town hall in eastern Ukraine and an official for the region's insurgents said there were fatalities.
The bloodshed in the town of Krasnoarmeisk occurred hours after dozens of guardsmen shut down voting in a referendum on sovereignty for the region.
An Associated Press photographer who witnessed the shooting said two people were seen lying unmoving on the ground and insurgent leader Denis Pushilin was quoted by the ITAR-Tass news agency as saying there were an unspecified number of deaths.
Several hours earlier, guardsmen came to the town about 30 kilometers (20 miles) from the regional capital, Donetsk, and dispersed referendum voting that was taking place outside the town hall and they took control of the building. In the evening, more guardsmen arrived in a van and a scuffle broke out with people who were gathered around the building. Then the guardsmen fired shots.
There goes any chance for a peaceful resolution to this...
So all I can confirm is one person being shot in the leg after some of the more 'assertive' protestors kept encroaching the soldiers. This was also after multiple warning shots were fired. I don't see any video/solid-evidence of anybody being killed.
If someone was actually killed, I'd be welcome to evidence. I'm just not convinced *yet*.
edit: by the amount of first hand evidence we are getting from this situation, it seems that lots of people have camera's/video and anytime there is a crowd of people, we can get enough evidence to see shootings. The fact that it appears like that was the situation (lot's of people + camera's/video), and we only have this video leads me to doubt that there were actual fatalities.
edit2: Another man appears to be shot, not in the leg. I'm analyzing the video at the moment.
yap, it's legit. There are photos of him posing as MMM volonteer, this MMM page with his short biography (dated 2013), and other evidence. Nice find.
P.S. a deputy to self-proclaimed governor of Donetsk Republic Gubarev, Denis Pushilin, appears to have been an active MMM volunteer. MMM was the biggest financial fraud in CIS countries (and one of the largest in the world's history). In 2011 it's creator launched another scheme, which somehow still worked under the same MMM brand.
To put aside all the sensationalist propoganda from both sides, if someone wants a classic case of a diplomatic rape just give him the Ukranian crisis. The US foreign policy in comparison to Putin is like a 1st grader trying to oursmart his teacher.
At the end of the day, after much screamimg and shouting, putin has effectively managed to annex a warm sea por back to Russia,and what looks like an almost foregone conclusion, annexed himself the productive part of Ukraine. For those who dont know, kiev and the western regions of Ukraine whom are mostly pro-EU have been pretty much piggyback riding on the eastern regions industrial power.
I would like to see how "generous". and friendly the west will be when they realize western ukraine is a bottomless drain of taxpayer money. This is a catastrophe for the west/western region of ukraine. Also to add onto all this pain, IMF will effectively take back their 17billion loan and consider it void in the event ukraine breaks up.
On May 12 2014 06:40 mahrgell wrote: so the official ' result' is that 89% voted for the seperation... what did they actually count? ^^ Sounds like RNG...
Didn't someone post a video last week of someone connected to the Russian government telling the guys in Ukraine over the phone to make the number 89%?
On May 12 2014 06:40 mahrgell wrote: so the official ' result' is that 89% voted for the seperation... what did they actually count? ^^ Sounds like RNG...
that number seems familiar
On May 08 2014 02:01 Cheerio wrote: Another intercepted discussion from SBU
A talk between separatist Boycov Dmitriy and Russian coordinator Barkashov A.P. (wiki)
Boycov says literally that if Russia doesn't help them, they are f***ed. And that there is no way to hold the referendum. In return Barkashov is lecturing him that they are out of their mind out there and nobody needs to run around counting f***ing papers. He insists they should just say the numbers whichever they like, suggesting 89%. Boycov says ok, we have a vote for Donetsk Republic, what's next? Barkashov replies it depends on what Ukraine will do, and that everyone in Russia is worked up (especially Kadyrov) and they don't understand what Putin is waiting for. Boycov says if Putin doesn't help, everyone in Ukraine, Russia and Belarus will be alienated against him.
P.S. the discussion took place yesterday. P.P.S. there is a translated version + Show Spoiler +
@sekritzz Russia achieved it's aims through propaganda,subterfuge, and military force. It wasn't a level playing ground since Russia had so much more influence in Ukraine. The annexation of E. Ukraine is very unlikely, given that the Ukrainian army is in that region at the moment and Russia hasn't made any moves to annex/invade so far.
On May 12 2014 06:16 sekritzzz wrote: To put aside all the sensationalist propoganda from both sides, if someone wants a classic case of a diplomatic rape just give him the Ukranian crisis. The US foreign policy in comparison to Putin is like a 1st grader trying to oursmart his teacher.
Uh, no it's not. Putin decided to use military force to annex Crimea, and the U.S. did not choose to use military force in response, opting for sanctions instead. What else was there to be done? The result is that Russia's economy is considerably hurting, and that what soft power Russia had on the international scene has evaporated. Putin might have bolstered support domestically, but Russia is more isolated on the international scene than it's been in years. The current situation in Ukraine is actually evidence of the failure of Putin's foreign policy - not only because of what I just mentioned, but because Putin was incapable of being subtle enough to allow for a government friendly to him to remain in power in the country.
On May 12 2014 06:16 sekritzzz wrote: To put aside all the sensationalist propoganda from both sides, if someone wants a classic case of a diplomatic rape just give him the Ukranian crisis. The US foreign policy in comparison to Putin is like a 1st grader trying to oursmart his teacher.
Uh, no it's not. Putin decided to use military force to annex Crimea, and the U.S. did not choose to use military force in response, opting for sanctions instead. What else was there to be done? The result is that Russia's economy is considerably hurting, and that what soft power Russia had on the international scene has evaporated. Putin might have bolstered support domestically, but Russia is more isolated on the international scene than it's been in years.
Russia is seeking help from China for collaboration and is trying to rely less on the "west".
On May 12 2014 06:52 Mc wrote: @sekritzz Russia achieved it's aims through propaganda,subterfuge, and military force. It wasn't a level playing ground since Russia had so much more influence in Ukraine. The annexation of E. Ukraine is very unlikely, given that the Ukrainian army is in that region at the moment and Russia hasn't made any moves to annex/invade so far.
sekritzz should actually take a look at the distribution. Lugansk oblast is not rich at all by Ukrainian standards. And Donetsk oblast is only one of 5 rich ones. The thing about Donbass is not that it's so rich, it's just very densely populated (by Ukrainian standrards), so they have high GDP total compared to others.
On May 12 2014 06:16 sekritzzz wrote: To put aside all the sensationalist propoganda from both sides, if someone wants a classic case of a diplomatic rape just give him the Ukranian crisis. The US foreign policy in comparison to Putin is like a 1st grader trying to oursmart his teacher.
Uh, no it's not. Putin decided to use military force to annex Crimea, and the U.S. did not choose to use military force in response, opting for sanctions instead. What else was there to be done? The result is that Russia's economy is considerably hurting, and that what soft power Russia had on the international scene has evaporated. Putin might have bolstered support domestically, but Russia is more isolated on the international scene than it's been in years. The current situation in Ukraine is actually evidence of the failure of Putin's foreign policy - not only because of what I just mentioned, but because Putin was incapable of being subtle enough to allow for a government friendly to him to remain in power in the country.
Russia is seeking help from China for collaboration and is trying to rely less on the "west".
Yes, and? How does that change what I just said? Russia could have continued to foster its ties with China without the current mess in Ukraine, and it would have been better off then. We've also seen that China did not support Russia's move in Crimea, notably because they are themselves completely opposed to such appeals to self-determination with regards to parts of their territory (and of what they consider to be their territory - see Taiwan, for example).
EPT![[image loading]](http://news.liga.net/upload/medialibrary/d97/d97a1b7b1a491017628f1c8394e85432.jpg)
