|
In order to maintain some kind of respectable thread quality and to show some respect for those who lost friends in this tragedy, we're forced to enact a hard line policy for this thread. Any posts holding an opinion on who is responsible or making an accusation that is not held by neutral media will be banned. Policy is in effect from page 27 onwards. Specifically, citing a Ukrainian or Russian source for your claims is going to get you banned. Opinions/facts/accusations arising from neutral media sources (i.e. media whose country of origin is not Ukraine, Russia or one of its puppet states) will be permitted. This policy extends to all forms of media; if a youtube video or picture has not come through a neutral media source then don't post it or you'll be banned. If you wish to discuss this policy please use this website feedback thread. Updated policy on aggressive posting and insults. |
On July 28 2014 18:44 DrCooper wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2014 08:15 BlueSpace wrote:On July 28 2014 07:07 DrCooper wrote:On July 28 2014 02:19 Nyxisto wrote:On July 28 2014 02:11 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On July 28 2014 01:32 Gorsameth wrote:Unless it directly relates to the topic can you take it to the other Ukraine thread please. Don't need to drag the overarching war into this thread. The other Ukraine thread got closed a long time ago, but I agree with you. However, what I'm curious about is why are the Russians using any amount of force (they're imitating the US too much), and if they're planning on using force, why so little? It doesn't make sense from a military context. Within hours they could clear Ukrainian forces near the border just with artillery/missile strikes. I realize I can't condemn the Russians without being the most self-righteous asshat alive (see my country), but I'll do it anyways. I think it is time for the nazis in the Kremlin to stop. It certainly is not helping them in any manner by continuing anything, so why continue?. In addition, Ukraine is an impoverished, failed state, made further worse by this civil war. Shouldn't that be enough for their sinister plans? Because Russia has created this new kind of dirty warfare that is a weird mix of indirectly supporting paramilitary troops, holding fake elections while having military without nationality markings present, spreading misinformation through the media and just trying to confuse everyone about what is actually happening. They're applying enough force to get what they want over a certain amount of time, but Russia does it in a way for which no real precedent exists. It kind of works because no one really knows how to react. Money on RT was well spent because there is a ridiculous amount of support for Putin in Western nations, and because it is not completely clear what Russia is trying to achieve the US and Europe have trouble coordinating their efforts. It really isn't a new kind of dirty warfare. Only the annexation. (However, it doesn't seem that far fetched that on an island, where most people speak russian, have russian ancestry and people who feel russian want to be part of russia. Afterall we support self determination of peoples) The U.S has bolstered extremist groups before (in Central America for example) 1. Russia knew that the Krim was mainly Russian when they gave it to Ukraine initially. Furthermore as has been pointed out before in this thread, the borders of Ukraine were accepted after the fall of the Soviet Union in exchange for their nuclear arsenal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances). Yep Show nested quote +
2. Russia doesn't give a shit about the self-determination of people. Or please explain in that context Russia's policy regarding the Caucasus. The Americans also don't give a shit about that, but that's another issue. And during the cold war Russia and US both supported plenty of extremist organizations in order to hinder each other, but again off-topic.
Oh they care about self determination of peoples, but only if it works in their favour. But shouldn't we all care, truly, without hypocrisy? Isn't that one of the pillars of democracy? That peoples have the right to self determine their destiny? Show nested quote +
3. Talking about Russia's respect for the self-determination of people and the Crimean peninsula at the same time shows a complete lack of historic knowledge on your side. You do realize, that before the 20th century the majority of population there was Muslim, the so called Crimean Tatars. All of them were deported by Stalin, which is the only reason why the population there is mainly Russian. They ethnically cleansed the region around 80 years ago and use that now as an argument to annex it. Only some of the Crimean Tatars returned which by the way (big surprise) don't really trust the Russians. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea#Culture)
Glad we are on the same page.
We are actually not on the same page. The Crimean invasion was illegal and only because there is a majority of Russians in that particular region doesn't give them the right to call in their "Big Brother" and force everyone there including the non-russians to "join" the Russian federation. Or what happened to the right to self-determination of the non-russians?
You're misusing the word people in this context by the way. In a democracy "the people" is not an ethnically and culturally homogeneous group, but everyone including the people that have a different opinion/origin/culture. And by voting to secede from a country, you're basically saying that you want to divide "the people". With this argument, "the people" could also decide to oppress everyone that does not belong to their chosen subset of "people". This is specifically not democratic or commonly referred to as tyranny of the majority. With that kind of logic a number of horrible historic crimes suddenly become fully justified.
In any case, none of this happened in Crimea. Russia admittedly send troops into the area before the election took place. This was an invasion plain and simple. The vote afterwards was just a way for Russia to legitimize their actions. It's like breaking into someone's house and then asking them to vote on gun point, if you would like them to stay.
|
On July 28 2014 20:45 BlueSpace wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2014 18:44 DrCooper wrote:On July 28 2014 08:15 BlueSpace wrote:On July 28 2014 07:07 DrCooper wrote:On July 28 2014 02:19 Nyxisto wrote:On July 28 2014 02:11 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On July 28 2014 01:32 Gorsameth wrote:Unless it directly relates to the topic can you take it to the other Ukraine thread please. Don't need to drag the overarching war into this thread. The other Ukraine thread got closed a long time ago, but I agree with you. However, what I'm curious about is why are the Russians using any amount of force (they're imitating the US too much), and if they're planning on using force, why so little? It doesn't make sense from a military context. Within hours they could clear Ukrainian forces near the border just with artillery/missile strikes. I realize I can't condemn the Russians without being the most self-righteous asshat alive (see my country), but I'll do it anyways. I think it is time for the nazis in the Kremlin to stop. It certainly is not helping them in any manner by continuing anything, so why continue?. In addition, Ukraine is an impoverished, failed state, made further worse by this civil war. Shouldn't that be enough for their sinister plans? Because Russia has created this new kind of dirty warfare that is a weird mix of indirectly supporting paramilitary troops, holding fake elections while having military without nationality markings present, spreading misinformation through the media and just trying to confuse everyone about what is actually happening. They're applying enough force to get what they want over a certain amount of time, but Russia does it in a way for which no real precedent exists. It kind of works because no one really knows how to react. Money on RT was well spent because there is a ridiculous amount of support for Putin in Western nations, and because it is not completely clear what Russia is trying to achieve the US and Europe have trouble coordinating their efforts. It really isn't a new kind of dirty warfare. Only the annexation. (However, it doesn't seem that far fetched that on an island, where most people speak russian, have russian ancestry and people who feel russian want to be part of russia. Afterall we support self determination of peoples) The U.S has bolstered extremist groups before (in Central America for example) 1. Russia knew that the Krim was mainly Russian when they gave it to Ukraine initially. Furthermore as has been pointed out before in this thread, the borders of Ukraine were accepted after the fall of the Soviet Union in exchange for their nuclear arsenal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances). Yep
2. Russia doesn't give a shit about the self-determination of people. Or please explain in that context Russia's policy regarding the Caucasus. The Americans also don't give a shit about that, but that's another issue. And during the cold war Russia and US both supported plenty of extremist organizations in order to hinder each other, but again off-topic.
Oh they care about self determination of peoples, but only if it works in their favour. But shouldn't we all care, truly, without hypocrisy? Isn't that one of the pillars of democracy? That peoples have the right to self determine their destiny?
3. Talking about Russia's respect for the self-determination of people and the Crimean peninsula at the same time shows a complete lack of historic knowledge on your side. You do realize, that before the 20th century the majority of population there was Muslim, the so called Crimean Tatars. All of them were deported by Stalin, which is the only reason why the population there is mainly Russian. They ethnically cleansed the region around 80 years ago and use that now as an argument to annex it. Only some of the Crimean Tatars returned which by the way (big surprise) don't really trust the Russians. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea#Culture)
Glad we are on the same page. We are actually not on the same page. The Crimean invasion was illegal and only because there is a majority of Russians in that particular region doesn't give them the right to call in their "Big Brother" and force everyone there including the non-russians to "join" the Russian federation. Or what happened to the right to self-determination of the non-russians? You're misusing the word people in this context by the way. In a democracy "the people" is not an ethnically and culturally homogeneous group, but everyone including the people that have a different opinion/origin/culture. And by voting to secede from a country, you're basically saying that you want to divide "the people". With this argument, "the people" could also decide to oppress everyone that does not belong to their chosen subset of "people". This is specifically not democratic or commonly referred to as tyranny of the majority. With that kind of logic a number of horrible historic crimes suddenly become fully justified. In any case, none of this happened in Crimea. Russia admittedly send troops into the area before the election took place. This was an invasion plain and simple. The vote afterwards was just a way for Russia to legitimize their actions. It's like breaking into someone's house and then asking them to vote on gun point, if you would like them to stay.
Yes, I agree. The way they annexed Crimea was illegal. However, my basic assumption is that if the people in Crimea had a legit referendum, a vast majority would be in favour of an annexation. While you're saying, correct me if I'm wrong, that they did not want to be annexed.
|
On July 28 2014 21:06 DrCooper wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2014 20:45 BlueSpace wrote:On July 28 2014 18:44 DrCooper wrote:On July 28 2014 08:15 BlueSpace wrote:On July 28 2014 07:07 DrCooper wrote:On July 28 2014 02:19 Nyxisto wrote:On July 28 2014 02:11 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On July 28 2014 01:32 Gorsameth wrote:Unless it directly relates to the topic can you take it to the other Ukraine thread please. Don't need to drag the overarching war into this thread. The other Ukraine thread got closed a long time ago, but I agree with you. However, what I'm curious about is why are the Russians using any amount of force (they're imitating the US too much), and if they're planning on using force, why so little? It doesn't make sense from a military context. Within hours they could clear Ukrainian forces near the border just with artillery/missile strikes. I realize I can't condemn the Russians without being the most self-righteous asshat alive (see my country), but I'll do it anyways. I think it is time for the nazis in the Kremlin to stop. It certainly is not helping them in any manner by continuing anything, so why continue?. In addition, Ukraine is an impoverished, failed state, made further worse by this civil war. Shouldn't that be enough for their sinister plans? Because Russia has created this new kind of dirty warfare that is a weird mix of indirectly supporting paramilitary troops, holding fake elections while having military without nationality markings present, spreading misinformation through the media and just trying to confuse everyone about what is actually happening. They're applying enough force to get what they want over a certain amount of time, but Russia does it in a way for which no real precedent exists. It kind of works because no one really knows how to react. Money on RT was well spent because there is a ridiculous amount of support for Putin in Western nations, and because it is not completely clear what Russia is trying to achieve the US and Europe have trouble coordinating their efforts. It really isn't a new kind of dirty warfare. Only the annexation. (However, it doesn't seem that far fetched that on an island, where most people speak russian, have russian ancestry and people who feel russian want to be part of russia. Afterall we support self determination of peoples) The U.S has bolstered extremist groups before (in Central America for example) 1. Russia knew that the Krim was mainly Russian when they gave it to Ukraine initially. Furthermore as has been pointed out before in this thread, the borders of Ukraine were accepted after the fall of the Soviet Union in exchange for their nuclear arsenal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances). Yep
2. Russia doesn't give a shit about the self-determination of people. Or please explain in that context Russia's policy regarding the Caucasus. The Americans also don't give a shit about that, but that's another issue. And during the cold war Russia and US both supported plenty of extremist organizations in order to hinder each other, but again off-topic.
Oh they care about self determination of peoples, but only if it works in their favour. But shouldn't we all care, truly, without hypocrisy? Isn't that one of the pillars of democracy? That peoples have the right to self determine their destiny?
3. Talking about Russia's respect for the self-determination of people and the Crimean peninsula at the same time shows a complete lack of historic knowledge on your side. You do realize, that before the 20th century the majority of population there was Muslim, the so called Crimean Tatars. All of them were deported by Stalin, which is the only reason why the population there is mainly Russian. They ethnically cleansed the region around 80 years ago and use that now as an argument to annex it. Only some of the Crimean Tatars returned which by the way (big surprise) don't really trust the Russians. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea#Culture)
Glad we are on the same page. We are actually not on the same page. The Crimean invasion was illegal and only because there is a majority of Russians in that particular region doesn't give them the right to call in their "Big Brother" and force everyone there including the non-russians to "join" the Russian federation. Or what happened to the right to self-determination of the non-russians? You're misusing the word people in this context by the way. In a democracy "the people" is not an ethnically and culturally homogeneous group, but everyone including the people that have a different opinion/origin/culture. And by voting to secede from a country, you're basically saying that you want to divide "the people". With this argument, "the people" could also decide to oppress everyone that does not belong to their chosen subset of "people". This is specifically not democratic or commonly referred to as tyranny of the majority. With that kind of logic a number of horrible historic crimes suddenly become fully justified. In any case, none of this happened in Crimea. Russia admittedly send troops into the area before the election took place. This was an invasion plain and simple. The vote afterwards was just a way for Russia to legitimize their actions. It's like breaking into someone's house and then asking them to vote on gun point, if you would like them to stay. Yes, I agree. The way they annexed Crimea was illegal. However, my basic assumption is that if the people in Crimea had a legit referendum, a vast majority would be in favour of an annexation. While you're saying, correct me if I'm wrong, that they did not want to be annexed.
I don't know what the outcome of a "free" referendum would have been. My point is that there are people living there, that didn't want to be annexed. So saying this is simply an issue of self-determination is in my opinion a bit to simplistic.
|
That's off topic guys, if you want to see Crimean opinion polls from before the invasion, take a look in the (now closed) Ukraine Crisis thread. But you shouldn't discuss that here according to thread rules.
|
On July 22 2014 00:13 shannn wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2014 23:28 myminerals wrote:On July 21 2014 23:22 Conti wrote:On July 21 2014 23:15 myminerals wrote:On July 21 2014 23:07 Conti wrote:On July 21 2014 23:02 myminerals wrote:On July 21 2014 22:32 ImFromPortugal wrote:On July 21 2014 22:14 myminerals wrote:
I actually hope the this tragedy was a horrible mistake of the rebels because if it's not and the plane was hit by the order of the Ukrainian government whose decisions are under US control, this whole region have all chances of becoming another war zone.
I am not saying that Russia is not adding fuel to fire by supplying the rebels with weapons, it does, I just hope it was a mistake and not a planned action. Why the Ukrainian gov ? what would they have to gain from doing that? ... It will give Ukraine more international support and money. There's no way the Ukraine could've done that without anyone noticing, so at the very least you'd have to be so paranoid to assume that this was a joint operation between the Ukraine, the US and probably a few other countries. You have too much trust in goverment, it has already happened actually see: Ukrainian international reserves in 2014 year (in US dollars) 01.01.2014 20415,7 +1603.8 +8.5% 01.02.2014 17805,6 -2610.1 -12.8% 01.03.2014 15462,3 -2343.3 -13.2% 01.04.2014 15085,5 -376.8 -2.4% 01.05.2014 14226,3 -859.3 -5.7% 01.06.2014 17898,6 +3672.3 +25.8% <--- where did all these money come from? Well if that doesn't prove everything I'll be damned. Thank you for showing me the light. Do you have any facts to support your version? Before you put data and then make your own facts try to put up sources before actually claming anything. IMF payed Ukraine 3.2 billion dollars from a 17.1 billion dollar loan starting in May. So the money comes from a IMF loan for economic reforms for Ukraine. src
IMF the organization which is located in US with US having the largest quota share in it. Yeah, right.
Solid and proven schema for giving the financial support to the loyal ones.
My argument is of course debatable, but I shall stick to it.
|
On July 22 2014 01:34 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2014 22:46 myminerals wrote:On July 21 2014 22:17 zlefin wrote:
please don't talk nonsense like the Ukraine government being under US control.
Even if it wasn't the rebels who shot down the plane; it was still likely an accident.
And Donetsk region shale gas deposits are completely out of the picture here, right? And the fact that there were rumours about Yatsenyuk transferring monetary gold to US is also just rumours. And if we look at the reserves balance during that time we won't see anything strange, right? Ukrainian international reserves (gold) from 2010 to 2014 years (in US dollars) 01.01.2011 1249,0 +301.0 +31.751% 01.01.2012 1385,3 +136.3 +10.912% 01.01.2013 1890,4 +505.1 +36.460% 01.01.2014 1640,2 -250.2 -13.236% 01.06.2014 1618,2 -21.9 -1.336% taken from http://index.minfin.com.ua/I am not hiding that I don't like the current Ukrainian government, I didn't like the former as well, but at least planes did not fell and towns were not bombed. 1. I am a native Russian speaker too, First Channel on the 18th led with the Beoing shut down. The story begins with interviews of various rebels putting forward their various claims: Trying to kill Putin, trying to set up Russia and so forth. 2. Pravda -- what you may call yellow press but that receives a significant number of readers that would put it in top 5 papers in Russia -- ran with the various conspiracies. They ran the gamut from Ukraine is trying to hide that freedom fighters are about to invade Kiev to Americans did it to its just like the other Malaysia flight that was being used to try to frame Russia. 3. Argumenti i fakti -- a 'more serious' paper -- front story right now is 'Russian Federation detected Ukrainian fighter jets following the Malaysian liner" TODAY. 4. lenta.ru -- whose editor was fired by the Kremlin and replaced by a loyalst during this crisis -- the lead story is "Poroshenko denies Ukrainian Fighter jet responsible for Boeing" in the side window a story goes "Ukrainian Boeing was in the same space!" Fair enough, you let your bias now and quite honestly I think we should salute you for stating repeatedly that you do believe the rebels did it or that Russian press stinks but please then also accept the fact that there is a tremendous amount of conspiracy theories floated by media outlets that would be classified as 'main stream' in other countries in Russia and that you've inadvertently could have picked some of those conspiracies up. + Show Spoiler +
Just some other points: The "Donestk" shalegas field lies over both Kharkiv and Northern Donetsk oblast. Its true that a small percentage of it lies in rebel territory but so does a large part of Soviet-era industry that eats that gas up. Letting the rebels kidnap two provinces would be energy net positive.
And about the gold: Yanukovich ran down the economy to the point where Ukraine was out of hard currency, Russia offered to supply it and then when he went out the IMF offered to supply it but with stringent reform requirements -- including depositing some of the gold with the IMF. When the first tranche of Ukrain's IMF loan was cleared the gold stocks were re-stocked.
The sad truth is that the Western media stinks no less than the Russian one. Russian media at least has the guts to show dead bodies lying in the streets of Lugansk as well as other war horrors be it the Russian rebels or Ukrainians who do it.
|
Still offtopic. But just to point out that Western media isn't like RT, Life news and other Kremlin mouthpieces, here's a tweet from Kyiv Post (supposedly pro-Ukraine :S) showing the bloody killing of civilians from GRAD fire:
+ Show Spoiler [graphic] +
And here's another report from the kings of bias, Fox news, detailing the possibility of war crimes being committed by bombing civilian areas:
The report by the U.N.'s team of 39 field monitors in Ukraine says there has been an alarming buildup of heavy weaponry in civilian areas of Donetsk and Luhansk — including artillery, tanks, rockets and missiles that are being used to inflict increasing casualties and damage to civilian infrastructure. The report says such attacks could amount to violations of international humanitarian law. Gianni Magazzeni, head of the U.N. office's branch that oversees Ukraine, told reporters in Geneva that all governments must respect "the presumption of innocence of civilians." "There is an increase in the use of heavy weaponry in areas that are basically surrounded by public buildings," he said. "All international law needs to be applied and fully respected." Can't believe I'm linking to Fox news
So, please don't make such claims about Western media, even their worst are (provably) better than Kremlin channels.
|
On July 28 2014 23:21 myminerals wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 00:13 shannn wrote:On July 21 2014 23:28 myminerals wrote:On July 21 2014 23:22 Conti wrote:On July 21 2014 23:15 myminerals wrote:On July 21 2014 23:07 Conti wrote:On July 21 2014 23:02 myminerals wrote:On July 21 2014 22:32 ImFromPortugal wrote:On July 21 2014 22:14 myminerals wrote:
I actually hope the this tragedy was a horrible mistake of the rebels because if it's not and the plane was hit by the order of the Ukrainian government whose decisions are under US control, this whole region have all chances of becoming another war zone.
I am not saying that Russia is not adding fuel to fire by supplying the rebels with weapons, it does, I just hope it was a mistake and not a planned action. Why the Ukrainian gov ? what would they have to gain from doing that? ... It will give Ukraine more international support and money. There's no way the Ukraine could've done that without anyone noticing, so at the very least you'd have to be so paranoid to assume that this was a joint operation between the Ukraine, the US and probably a few other countries. You have too much trust in goverment, it has already happened actually see: Ukrainian international reserves in 2014 year (in US dollars) 01.01.2014 20415,7 +1603.8 +8.5% 01.02.2014 17805,6 -2610.1 -12.8% 01.03.2014 15462,3 -2343.3 -13.2% 01.04.2014 15085,5 -376.8 -2.4% 01.05.2014 14226,3 -859.3 -5.7% 01.06.2014 17898,6 +3672.3 +25.8% <--- where did all these money come from? Well if that doesn't prove everything I'll be damned. Thank you for showing me the light. Do you have any facts to support your version? Before you put data and then make your own facts try to put up sources before actually claming anything. IMF payed Ukraine 3.2 billion dollars from a 17.1 billion dollar loan starting in May. So the money comes from a IMF loan for economic reforms for Ukraine. src IMF the organization which is located in US with US having the largest quota share in it. Yeah, right. Solid and proven schema for giving the financial support to the loyal ones. My argument is of course debatable, but I shall stick to it.
If you had followed the leadup to Euromaidan you would know IMF had demanded certain reforms from Ukraine to support them economically and the loans had been on the table under those conditions for years! The pension reforms the intermittent president made was a part of it. The 17 billion dollars had been circulated in western media, though the specific rates and when they were being paid demanded that you looked at the original source. It is not a secret and it is not a conspiracy between IMF and USA to bankroll "anti-terror operations". It is a loan, not free money and payment of future rates will rely on further reforms of the ukrainian gas subsidy system ao.
Your argument that the ukrainian government would have something to gain from a black flag operation of shooting down a civilian plane seems thin. It would mean that USA would be controlling the "western propaganda". So far the official USA has been very specific in their wordings and the few publically available official ressources have contained no specific factual errors. The russian response has only been about making the public doubt western sources on account of "lack of evidence". That is a bit thin without providing atleast circumstantial evidence for something else, and the secret service pictures they provided did nothing to give that impression, unless you held it together with the clearly leading questions and the narrative at the time, which cleverly relied on not providing a specific alternative theory.
|
On July 28 2014 23:31 myminerals wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 01:34 Sub40APM wrote:On July 21 2014 22:46 myminerals wrote:On July 21 2014 22:17 zlefin wrote:
please don't talk nonsense like the Ukraine government being under US control.
Even if it wasn't the rebels who shot down the plane; it was still likely an accident.
And Donetsk region shale gas deposits are completely out of the picture here, right? And the fact that there were rumours about Yatsenyuk transferring monetary gold to US is also just rumours. And if we look at the reserves balance during that time we won't see anything strange, right? Ukrainian international reserves (gold) from 2010 to 2014 years (in US dollars) 01.01.2011 1249,0 +301.0 +31.751% 01.01.2012 1385,3 +136.3 +10.912% 01.01.2013 1890,4 +505.1 +36.460% 01.01.2014 1640,2 -250.2 -13.236% 01.06.2014 1618,2 -21.9 -1.336% taken from http://index.minfin.com.ua/I am not hiding that I don't like the current Ukrainian government, I didn't like the former as well, but at least planes did not fell and towns were not bombed. 1. I am a native Russian speaker too, First Channel on the 18th led with the Beoing shut down. The story begins with interviews of various rebels putting forward their various claims: Trying to kill Putin, trying to set up Russia and so forth. 2. Pravda -- what you may call yellow press but that receives a significant number of readers that would put it in top 5 papers in Russia -- ran with the various conspiracies. They ran the gamut from Ukraine is trying to hide that freedom fighters are about to invade Kiev to Americans did it to its just like the other Malaysia flight that was being used to try to frame Russia. 3. Argumenti i fakti -- a 'more serious' paper -- front story right now is 'Russian Federation detected Ukrainian fighter jets following the Malaysian liner" TODAY. 4. lenta.ru -- whose editor was fired by the Kremlin and replaced by a loyalst during this crisis -- the lead story is "Poroshenko denies Ukrainian Fighter jet responsible for Boeing" in the side window a story goes "Ukrainian Boeing was in the same space!" Fair enough, you let your bias now and quite honestly I think we should salute you for stating repeatedly that you do believe the rebels did it or that Russian press stinks but please then also accept the fact that there is a tremendous amount of conspiracy theories floated by media outlets that would be classified as 'main stream' in other countries in Russia and that you've inadvertently could have picked some of those conspiracies up. + Show Spoiler +
Just some other points: The "Donestk" shalegas field lies over both Kharkiv and Northern Donetsk oblast. Its true that a small percentage of it lies in rebel territory but so does a large part of Soviet-era industry that eats that gas up. Letting the rebels kidnap two provinces would be energy net positive.
And about the gold: Yanukovich ran down the economy to the point where Ukraine was out of hard currency, Russia offered to supply it and then when he went out the IMF offered to supply it but with stringent reform requirements -- including depositing some of the gold with the IMF. When the first tranche of Ukrain's IMF loan was cleared the gold stocks were re-stocked.
The sad truth is that the Western media stinks no less than the Russian one. Russian media at least has the guts to show dead bodies lying in the streets of Lugansk as well as other war horrors be it the Russian rebels or Ukrainians who do it.
What you say is neither sad nor the truth; propaganda's success hinges on the universalization of false equivalencies in confidence, and you've just taken the bait hook, line, and sinker.
|
On July 29 2014 00:22 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2014 23:31 myminerals wrote:On July 22 2014 01:34 Sub40APM wrote:On July 21 2014 22:46 myminerals wrote:On July 21 2014 22:17 zlefin wrote:
please don't talk nonsense like the Ukraine government being under US control.
Even if it wasn't the rebels who shot down the plane; it was still likely an accident.
And Donetsk region shale gas deposits are completely out of the picture here, right? And the fact that there were rumours about Yatsenyuk transferring monetary gold to US is also just rumours. And if we look at the reserves balance during that time we won't see anything strange, right? Ukrainian international reserves (gold) from 2010 to 2014 years (in US dollars) 01.01.2011 1249,0 +301.0 +31.751% 01.01.2012 1385,3 +136.3 +10.912% 01.01.2013 1890,4 +505.1 +36.460% 01.01.2014 1640,2 -250.2 -13.236% 01.06.2014 1618,2 -21.9 -1.336% taken from http://index.minfin.com.ua/I am not hiding that I don't like the current Ukrainian government, I didn't like the former as well, but at least planes did not fell and towns were not bombed. 1. I am a native Russian speaker too, First Channel on the 18th led with the Beoing shut down. The story begins with interviews of various rebels putting forward their various claims: Trying to kill Putin, trying to set up Russia and so forth. 2. Pravda -- what you may call yellow press but that receives a significant number of readers that would put it in top 5 papers in Russia -- ran with the various conspiracies. They ran the gamut from Ukraine is trying to hide that freedom fighters are about to invade Kiev to Americans did it to its just like the other Malaysia flight that was being used to try to frame Russia. 3. Argumenti i fakti -- a 'more serious' paper -- front story right now is 'Russian Federation detected Ukrainian fighter jets following the Malaysian liner" TODAY. 4. lenta.ru -- whose editor was fired by the Kremlin and replaced by a loyalst during this crisis -- the lead story is "Poroshenko denies Ukrainian Fighter jet responsible for Boeing" in the side window a story goes "Ukrainian Boeing was in the same space!" Fair enough, you let your bias now and quite honestly I think we should salute you for stating repeatedly that you do believe the rebels did it or that Russian press stinks but please then also accept the fact that there is a tremendous amount of conspiracy theories floated by media outlets that would be classified as 'main stream' in other countries in Russia and that you've inadvertently could have picked some of those conspiracies up. + Show Spoiler +
Just some other points: The "Donestk" shalegas field lies over both Kharkiv and Northern Donetsk oblast. Its true that a small percentage of it lies in rebel territory but so does a large part of Soviet-era industry that eats that gas up. Letting the rebels kidnap two provinces would be energy net positive.
And about the gold: Yanukovich ran down the economy to the point where Ukraine was out of hard currency, Russia offered to supply it and then when he went out the IMF offered to supply it but with stringent reform requirements -- including depositing some of the gold with the IMF. When the first tranche of Ukrain's IMF loan was cleared the gold stocks were re-stocked.
The sad truth is that the Western media stinks no less than the Russian one. Russian media at least has the guts to show dead bodies lying in the streets of Lugansk as well as other war horrors be it the Russian rebels or Ukrainians who do it. What you say is neither sad nor the truth; propaganda's success hinges on the universalization of false equivalencies in confidence, and you've just taken the bait hook, line, and sinker.
While I wouldn't go that far, a lot of western media is just downright shameful. Even at its worst though, it's a step up from being the propaganda arm of our government.
At that point, you no longer care about having the tiniest amount of truth and validity in your programs. You deliberately distort, even outright ignore the truth, while crafting whatever lie, frame job or logical fallacy you can in order to make people think the way you want them to think. At that point, telling the truth is as far down on your priority list as it can possibly be.
|
If you want to discuss how bad western media is, create a thread for it.
|
|
|
|
|
The European Union on Tuesday agreed to place sanctions on broad sectors of the Russian economy, EU diplomats said, marking a significant escalation of the bloc's response to allegations that Moscow is fueling the violent conflict in eastern Ukraine. The measures will target four economic sectors; finance, militarily sensitive equipment, arms and oil production equipment. They will sharply restrict the ability of Russia's state-owned banks from raising financing on European markets. The measures will also place an embargo on the arms trade and restrictions on exports of militarily sensitive goods and technology used in unconventional oil drilling and exploration. Source.
|
|
|
With a walrus moustache, a fiery temper and a reputation for brutality, Igor Bezler is the most feared of all the rebel leaders in eastern Ukraine. Nicknamed Bes, or “the Demon”, he is regarded as something of a loose cannon, even by other rebels, who speak about him in hushed tones. If the Ukrainian security services, the SBU, are to be believed, the Demon and a group of his men were responsible for shooting down Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 over the region a fortnight ago. Read the entire interview by Shaun Walker here
EU sanctions on Russia:
Today the European Union has agreed a package of significant additional restrictive measures targeting sectoral cooperation and exchanges with the Russian Federation. These decisions will limit access to EU capital markets for Russian State-owned financial institutions, impose an embargo on trade in arms, establish an export ban for dual use goods for military end users, and curtail Russian access to sensitive technologies particularly in the field of the oil sector. This package reinforces the recently expanded listing of persons and entities undermining Ukrainian territorial integrity and sovereignty, including the so-called "cronies", the suspension of EIB and EBRD financing, the restriction of investment and trade with Crimea and Sevastopol and the reassessment of the Russia EU bilateral cooperation with a view to reducing the level of the cooperation. The package responds to directions given by the European Council of 16 July. It is meant as a strong warning: illegal annexation of territory and deliberate destabilisation of a neighbouring sovereign country cannot be accepted in 21st century Europe. Furthermore, when the violence created spirals out of control and leads to the killing of almost 300 innocent civilians in their flight from the Netherlands to Malaysia, the situation requires urgent and determined response. The European Union will fulfil its obligations to protect and ensure the security of its citizens. And the European Union will stand by its neighbours and partners. Read more.
In order to restrict Russia's access to EU capital markets, EU nationals and companies may no more buy or sell new bonds, equity or similar financial instruments with a maturity exceeding 90 days, issued by state-owned Russian banks, development banks, their subsidiaries and those acting on their behalf. Services related to the issuing of such financial instruments, e.g. brokering, are also prohibited. In addition, an embargo on the import and export of arms and related material from/to Russia was agreed. It covers all items on the EU common military list. Coreper also reached agreement on a prohibition on exports of dual use goods and technology for military use in Russia or to Russian military end-users. All items in the EU list of dual use goods are included (see latest list in annex to regulation 428/2009). Finally, exports of certain energy-related equipment and technology to Russia will be subject to prior authorisation by competent authorities of Member States. Export licenses will be denied if products are destined for deep water oil exploration and production, arctic oil exploration or production and shale oil projects in Russia. The measures will apply to new contracts. These restrictions will now be formally adopted by the Council through a written procedure. They will apply from the day following their publication in the EU Official Journal, which is scheduled for late on 31 July. Read more.
So no Mistral sale disruption...
Edit: One more:
On the last day of May, a surface-to-air rocket was signed out of a military base near Moscow where it had been stored for more than 20 years. According to the ornate Cyrillic handwriting in the weapon's Russian Defence Ministry logbook, seen by Reuters, the portable rocket, for use with an Igla rocket launcher, was destined for a base in Rostov, some 50 km (31 miles) from the Ukrainian border. In that area, say U.S. officials, lies a camp for training Ukrainian separatist fighters. Three weeks later the rocket and its logbook turned up in eastern Ukraine, where government troops seized them from pro-Russian separatists. Source.
|
>EU sanctions on Russia
Looks like a double-edged sword, at least for now. Don't really know how to react to this, but I am not on Ukranian side, that's for sure.
|
On July 30 2014 03:16 ForTehDarkseid wrote:
>EU sanctions on Russia
Looks like a double-edged sword, at least for now. Don't really know how to react to this, but I am not on Ukranian side, that's for sure.
On which side are you on ?
|
On July 30 2014 03:16 ForTehDarkseid wrote:
>EU sanctions on Russia
Looks like a double-edged sword, at least for now. Don't really know how to react to this, but I am not on Ukranian side, that's for sure.
What I am gathering is that the experts claim the deal is very well constructed. It will actually hurt the russian economy hard while EUs will be only lightly affected. When that is said, the experts I have heard commenting on the issue also agree that this kind of sanction will never make Putin rethink his positions. Take it as you will. Ukraine doesn't have that much of a stake riding on those sanctions. It is honestly mostly an issue between EU and Russia. That is what started the thing in the first place. EU and Russias trade dispute is just escalating.
|
On July 30 2014 04:27 ImFromPortugal wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2014 03:16 ForTehDarkseid wrote:
>EU sanctions on Russia
Looks like a double-edged sword, at least for now. Don't really know how to react to this, but I am not on Ukrainian side, that's for sure. On which side are you on ?
on the side "plz end this shit already that's embarrasing for all other countries to watch".
The sad truth is that Ukrainan government forces and social representatives failed so many times I don't care what happens with them anymore.
@radiatoren, http://euobserver.com/economic/125118.
98 vs 90 millions loses prognosed by both sides. Is it really worth it? Some European countires could enter stage of economic recession for that.
http://news.investors.com/investing-stock-market-today/072914-710769-stock-market-today-reverses-lower.htm. The effect would be felt worldwide, as usual.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.metronews.ru/_internal/gxml!0/r0dc21o2f3vste5s7ezej9x3a10rp3w$qmlo8rwljid7n7amdgul7ewhsg91wtz/ad_141490776.jpeg)
