|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On August 24 2016 21:55 a_flayer wrote:
It's like 90% ethnic Russians living there, which alone is reason enough for me to think that they'd want to join Russia considering the vast majority of ethnic Russians in Russia actually like Russia... Crimea has requested to join Russia in the past and wanted to be part of the Soviet union just before it collapsed. As far as I know there were no shots fired and no casualties while the Russian troops were there. And correct me if I'm mistaken, but I believe the NATO forces were in the Ukraine there before the Russian troops were in Crimea to keep the peace during the referendum? And if NATO didn't talk to Russia before sending troops there, or ignored the Russian objection to sending troops to Ukraine... I don't see how we have any legitimacy in refuting the referendum. We were there first to protect our "prospective EU partner" after the legitimately chosen president was bullied out of the country and when another country comes in to protect its prospective citizens from a rebellion that had already been going on suddenly its unjustified? Come on... Again. It's like 90% ethnic Russians. Duress or no duress, believe wholeheartedly that they wanted to join with Russia and we should have respected that.
Now I might be remembering this wrong so by all means provide sources but I do not believe any NATO forces were in the Crimea at the time of the Russian invasion.
The fact Russians didn't shoot people during the invasion is meaningless. If I walk up to you on a quiet street, casually holding a weapon (not pointing it at you) and tell you to consider giving me your wallet is that a robbery or did you just decide to be friendly and give me your wallet?
It doesn't matter how badly the Crimea wanted to join Russia. A referendum made while occupied by foreign troops will always be disputed.
|
your whole argument banks on the occupied by foreign troops and it's meaning.
you have 28k US troops in SK and some 50k in Japan; are they occupying troops?.
who decides who's an occupier and who's not?.
you just have a bad argument so rather than that, look at Ukraine laws and see if they allow secession of member regions.
|
On August 24 2016 22:13 xM(Z wrote:
your whole argument banks on the occupied by foreign troops and it's meaning.
you have 28k US troops in SK and some 50k in Japan; are they occupying troops?.
who decides who's an occupier and who's not?.
The government of the country they are in.
The US has permission to be in SK and Japan.
Russia did not have permission in the Crimea (aside from those stationed at the Russian naval base).
Try harder.
|
the Black Sea Fleet was legally stationed in Crimea as per the controversial Kharkiv Pact signed in 2010.
The treaty allows for Russia to station a limited number of troops in Crimea, 25,000 maximum.
|
lol yes, go ahead and copy an uncited line from the wiki on the pact as proof...
|
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/03/ukraine-crisis-russia-control-crimea-live The Ukrainian ambassador to the UN said 16,000 Russian troops have arrived in Crimea since 26 February. The Russian ambassador retorted that treaties allow 25,000. The Ukrainian envoy argued that the legal cap was 11,000. there are more links from there arguing on numbers: 25, 16, 11 .. etc.
but, do you even know how many russian troops were there?
|
On August 24 2016 22:04 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2016 21:55 a_flayer wrote:
It's like 90% ethnic Russians living there, which alone is reason enough for me to think that they'd want to join Russia considering the vast majority of ethnic Russians in Russia actually like Russia... Crimea has requested to join Russia in the past and wanted to be part of the Soviet union just before it collapsed. As far as I know there were no shots fired and no casualties while the Russian troops were there. And correct me if I'm mistaken, but I believe the NATO forces were in the Ukraine there before the Russian troops were in Crimea to keep the peace during the referendum? And if NATO didn't talk to Russia before sending troops there, or ignored the Russian objection to sending troops to Ukraine... I don't see how we have any legitimacy in refuting the referendum. We were there first to protect our "prospective EU partner" after the legitimately chosen president was bullied out of the country and when another country comes in to protect its prospective citizens from a rebellion that had already been going on suddenly its unjustified? Come on... Again. It's like 90% ethnic Russians. Duress or no duress, believe wholeheartedly that they wanted to join with Russia and we should have respected that. Now I might be remembering this wrong so by all means provide sources but I do not believe any NATO forces were in the Crimea at the time of the Russian invasion. The fact Russians didn't shoot people during the invasion is meaningless. If I walk up to you on a quiet street, casually holding a weapon (not pointing it at you) and tell you to consider giving me your wallet is that a robbery or did you just decide to be friendly and give me your wallet? It doesn't matter how badly the Crimea wanted to join Russia. A referendum made while occupied by foreign troops will always be disputed.
I see I didn't remove the word "there" in my edit (before you responded). I meant NATO in the Ukraine, not Crimea specifically. And as has been made clear, Russia did have rights to be there, while NATO violated an agreement that had been made when they put forces there (regardless of whether or not Ukraine wanted those forces there). Two wrongs certainly don't make a right, but NATO is not blameless in this matter at all.
Besides, I only brought up the Crimea situation as a comparison to Iraq where America clearly went for a full-blown invasion without justification and there were zero consequences for them (and there weren't even any attempts at a referendum for the Iraqi people, or at least I don't recall). They ultimately executed Saddam Hussein for the murder of 150 Iraqi people because they couldn't prove any ties with Al Queada nor did they find any WMDs (both of which were falsely used as justification). I'm pretty sure more than 150 Iraqi people died as a result of the invasion.
Again, my point was that Europe needs to united to stand against the more-or-less tyranny of the US. Just treat the US and Russia according to the same standard, instead of allowing the US to basically lord over everyone and declare war with this and that, placing weapon systems everywhere and then putting economic sanctions on the Russians when they show the slightest sign of... well, basically just bringing their own people back into their country. And just to be clear: I'm certainly not suggesting anything war-like on either front. I don't think that the US nor Russia would have a genuine interest in going to war with Europe, and I sure as hell don't want to start any wars.
I mean, I heard the other day that the US was trying to sell their corn-polluted beef to us and then try to deny the EU to perform their own tests on the beef to make sure it is fine according to our own standards. Some trade agreement or something... We need the European Union to have a proper voice together, or we won't be able to pull any weight to get agreements where we are properly represented. That is why the European Union is important, and that is why none of us should leave, and that is why we should take care of our fellow European countries when they are in a rut (like Greece).
+ Show Spoiler +But good thing you pointed out some hyperbole in my Crimean argument. That's almost as useful as having that plane being shot down dominate the news and sway the opinions of people once more against Russia. Fuck me, now I'm doing it too. I'm gonna spoiler this just to take the emphasis away from this part of the conversation
|
Add some sources please. I don't know where NATO ever invaded Ukraine. You can make the point that we're defending our geopolitical interest in Ukraine (both Europe and the US) but an invasion is in the realm of conspiracy theories.
European countries are also hardly puppets of the US. Otherwise they would've joined the Iraq war for example of they wouldn't have joined the Chinese development bank more recently. Europe falls under its sphere of influence (if that) but that is also due to the fact that interests and viewpoints are often aligned.
Edit: sorry I missed some of the earlier discussion. You can ignore the first part.
Edit2: your argument is flawed. There are no NATO troops in Ukraine and Russia did not have the right to take ovwr Crimea. US troops beibg allowed on Dutch soil after ww2 didn't mean they were allowed to occupy.
Your comparison with the Iraq war is again flawed. Except for the UK everyone was against it. You're right that we don't condemn it as much as the invasion against Ukraine but that's because they're our allies. Not to mention that we're letting Russia do whatever it wants in Syria as well.
|
On August 24 2016 23:34 RvB wrote:
Add some sources please. I don't know where NATO ever invaded Ukraine. You can make the point that we're defending our geopolitical interest in Ukraine (both Europe and the US) but an invasion is in the realm of conspiracy theories.
European countries are also hardly puppets of the US. Otherwise they would've joined the Iraq war for example of they wouldn't have joined the Chinese development bank more recently. Europe falls under its sphere of influence (if that) but that is also due to the fact that interests and viewpoints are often aligned.
Edit: sorry I missed some of the earlier discussion. You can ignore the first part.
Edit2: your argument is flawed. There are no NATO troops in Ukraine and Russia did not have the right to take ovwr Crimea. US troops beibg allowed on Dutch soil after ww2 didn't mean they were allowed to occupy.
Your comparison with the Iraq war is again flawed. Except for the UK everyone was against it. You're right that we don't condemn it as much as the invasion against Ukraine but that's because they're our allies. Not to mention that we're letting Russia do whatever it wants in Syria as well.
They're not my allies is kind of my point. Maybe that's where I think the focus of the EU should be. More independence as opposed to being "allied" with a bunch of warmongers.
|
On August 24 2016 23:45 a_flayer wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2016 23:34 RvB wrote:
Add some sources please. I don't know where NATO ever invaded Ukraine. You can make the point that we're defending our geopolitical interest in Ukraine (both Europe and the US) but an invasion is in the realm of conspiracy theories.
European countries are also hardly puppets of the US. Otherwise they would've joined the Iraq war for example of they wouldn't have joined the Chinese development bank more recently. Europe falls under its sphere of influence (if that) but that is also due to the fact that interests and viewpoints are often aligned.
Edit: sorry I missed some of the earlier discussion. You can ignore the first part.
Edit2: your argument is flawed. There are no NATO troops in Ukraine and Russia did not have the right to take ovwr Crimea. US troops beibg allowed on Dutch soil after ww2 didn't mean they were allowed to occupy.
Your comparison with the Iraq war is again flawed. Except for the UK everyone was against it. You're right that we don't condemn it as much as the invasion against Ukraine but that's because they're our allies. Not to mention that we're letting Russia do whatever it wants in Syria as well. They're not my allies.
Your government says otherwise.
|
On August 24 2016 17:03 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2016 16:46 Laurens wrote:On August 24 2016 15:32 OtherWorld wrote:On August 24 2016 13:54 IgnE wrote:On August 24 2016 05:03 WhiteDog wrote:On August 24 2016 04:46 Nyxisto wrote:
Well a lot of growth was pushed by rapidly rising debt and wages that increased a lot faster than productivity. Sure the Euro enabled it in the first place but it's not like it would've been sustainable or as if Greece could've reached the same standard of living without the currency and without making any policy changes.
The flaw in design was to start out with the currency and just hope that all countries will converge towards same standards in governance and productivity, but Greece isn't going to be better off if they drop out. Even Syriza acknowledges it.
And sure austerity makes it probably worse but there is no political capital left in the rest of Europe to just change policy purely based on belief again. Not only in Germany but especially in Eastern Europe who are pretty staunchly opposed to "free-rider" policies. You say one thing then contredict it the next sentence. 1) Greece would never reached same standard of living without the euro : absurb assertion. In fact Greece would have reached the same situation ; 2) Yes ! The flaw in design is indeed the euro, because it do not help convergence it actually increase divergence, as was forecast by many economist years before the euro (by people such as Krugman and the geographic economics in 1993), and as is now proved by every measure we have ; 3) "Greece isn't going to be better off if they drop out" : we don't know but what we know for sure is that Greece can't get out without dropping from the euro or without a huge fiscal transfer from the north to Greece. Aside from that, everything is rubbish. Your assertion is similar to a "remain" arguing that London cannot grow out of europe - we now know the brexit didn't have any major negative effect. The euro will be similar. So you are for Frexit. Le Pen offers it. Free France from German tyranny. at most she'd just call for a referendum and the Leave would lose. This sounds very familiar... Eh d; no, but I mean, although the EU isn't very popular in France, it's still reasonably popular because it's strongly linked to our history. Unlike the UK, which was never really European, France has been at the core of the European project from the beginning, and I think people are aware of that. To give you an idea, the FN, in its never-ending search for efficient populist propositions, dropped what was at the beginning one of their core points : dropping the euro. They realized that while it's all good to blame the communist/ultra-liberal/dictatorial/technocrat/undemocratic/whatever EU for all of France's problems, French people are, culturally, too afraid and inertia-loving to consider taking a decision with that many unknown consequences. Thus why I think it would be a good 55+% in favor of Remain.
remember maastricht ? i honestly think that a yes about a frexit would win it quite easily, specially today where you can find numerous easy argument against the european union
|
On August 24 2016 23:34 RvB wrote:
Add some sources please. I don't know where NATO ever invaded Ukraine. You can make the point that we're defending our geopolitical interest in Ukraine (both Europe and the US) but an invasion is in the realm of conspiracy theories.
European countries are also hardly puppets of the US. Otherwise they would've joined the Iraq war for example of they wouldn't have joined the Chinese development bank more recently. Europe falls under its sphere of influence (if that) but that is also due to the fact that interests and viewpoints are often aligned.
Edit: sorry I missed some of the earlier discussion. You can ignore the first part.
Edit2: your argument is flawed. There are no NATO troops in Ukraine and Russia did not have the right to take ovwr Crimea. US troops beibg allowed on Dutch soil after ww2 didn't mean they were allowed to occupy.
Your comparison with the Iraq war is again flawed. Except for the UK everyone was against it. You're right that we don't condemn it as much as the invasion against Ukraine but that's because they're our allies. Not to mention that we're letting Russia do whatever it wants in Syria as well.
So the blue hats I saw on the news when they were talking about the pro-Russian president that was being thrown out were just images of some other location and unrelated to the events happening Ukraine? And my only point was that we did not condemn the war in Iraq in the same way that we condemned the events of Crimea, not that we weren't technically against it.
I just really don't like how Russia is still being portrayed as an enemy, and I believe this is mostly coming from the US, which is part of why I think we (as the EU) should separate ourselves more from them. Open trade relations with Russia again, they're a fine people, and Putin is not the devil himself. He may be somewhat authoritarian (although he was certainly democratically elected and clearly has the support of the Russian people), and yeah, there's some domestic things that I certainly disagree with as well (just as much as I disagree with some Chinese domestic policies), but the Cold War is behind us and the commies aren't out to get us.
I think we would do well to stop this resentful attitude towards Russia. I'm not talking about bringing them into the EU, as they would definitely not want that for themselves, but just be fair and respectful. I think it would be best if we, as the EU, would treat both Russia and the US in the same manner and trade with them on equally fair terms, essentially.
|
Opening trade with Russia will just give her more resources to spend on bullying Ukraine and her other neighbours.
|
On August 25 2016 01:34 a_flayer wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2016 23:34 RvB wrote:
Add some sources please. I don't know where NATO ever invaded Ukraine. You can make the point that we're defending our geopolitical interest in Ukraine (both Europe and the US) but an invasion is in the realm of conspiracy theories.
European countries are also hardly puppets of the US. Otherwise they would've joined the Iraq war for example of they wouldn't have joined the Chinese development bank more recently. Europe falls under its sphere of influence (if that) but that is also due to the fact that interests and viewpoints are often aligned.
Edit: sorry I missed some of the earlier discussion. You can ignore the first part.
Edit2: your argument is flawed. There are no NATO troops in Ukraine and Russia did not have the right to take ovwr Crimea. US troops beibg allowed on Dutch soil after ww2 didn't mean they were allowed to occupy.
Your comparison with the Iraq war is again flawed. Except for the UK everyone was against it. You're right that we don't condemn it as much as the invasion against Ukraine but that's because they're our allies. Not to mention that we're letting Russia do whatever it wants in Syria as well. So the blue hats I saw on the news when they were talking about the pro-Russian president that was being thrown out were just images of some other location and unrelated to the events happening Ukraine? And my only point was that we did not condemn the war in Iraq in the same way that we condemned the events of Crimea, not that we weren't technically against it. I just really don't like how Russia is still being portrayed as an enemy, and I believe this is mostly coming from the US, which is part of why I think we (as the EU) should separate ourselves more from them. Open trade relations with Russia again, they're a fine people, and Putin is not the devil himself. He may be somewhat authoritarian (although he was certainly democratically elected and clearly has the support of the Russian people), and yeah, there's some domestic things that I certainly disagree with as well (just as much as I disagree with some Chinese domestic policies), but the Cold War is behind us and the commies aren't out to get us. I think we would do well to stop this resentful attitude towards Russia. I'm not talking about bringing them into the EU, as they would definitely not want that for themselves, but just be fair and respectful. I think it would be best if we, as the EU, would treat both Russia and the US in the same manner and trade with them on equally fair terms, essentially.
Its easy to get democratically elected when every opposition leader is under house arrest, in jail or dead.
I have no problems being on friendly terms with Russia but they would have to earn it and their not doing that.
From a lack of democracy to civil rights to force of arms they have not earned the friendship of the west.
Not to say America is a saint, their not but they have repeatedly shown they are willing to be our ally and they share our own moral and ethical beliefs.
Yes a united Europe is good on an international level but the problem is what the EU wants to achieve and what the people are are willing to accept.
As a trade union the EU has done a lot of good for the continent and the combined position certainly helps in dealing with global markets but the people have made it very clear they have no interest in a political union. A United States of Europe is not wanted and the EU needs to accept that or it will tear itself apart.
|
On August 25 2016 01:53 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2016 01:34 a_flayer wrote:On August 24 2016 23:34 RvB wrote:
Add some sources please. I don't know where NATO ever invaded Ukraine. You can make the point that we're defending our geopolitical interest in Ukraine (both Europe and the US) but an invasion is in the realm of conspiracy theories.
European countries are also hardly puppets of the US. Otherwise they would've joined the Iraq war for example of they wouldn't have joined the Chinese development bank more recently. Europe falls under its sphere of influence (if that) but that is also due to the fact that interests and viewpoints are often aligned.
Edit: sorry I missed some of the earlier discussion. You can ignore the first part.
Edit2: your argument is flawed. There are no NATO troops in Ukraine and Russia did not have the right to take ovwr Crimea. US troops beibg allowed on Dutch soil after ww2 didn't mean they were allowed to occupy.
Your comparison with the Iraq war is again flawed. Except for the UK everyone was against it. You're right that we don't condemn it as much as the invasion against Ukraine but that's because they're our allies. Not to mention that we're letting Russia do whatever it wants in Syria as well. So the blue hats I saw on the news when they were talking about the pro-Russian president that was being thrown out were just images of some other location and unrelated to the events happening Ukraine? And my only point was that we did not condemn the war in Iraq in the same way that we condemned the events of Crimea, not that we weren't technically against it. I just really don't like how Russia is still being portrayed as an enemy, and I believe this is mostly coming from the US, which is part of why I think we (as the EU) should separate ourselves more from them. Open trade relations with Russia again, they're a fine people, and Putin is not the devil himself. He may be somewhat authoritarian (although he was certainly democratically elected and clearly has the support of the Russian people), and yeah, there's some domestic things that I certainly disagree with as well (just as much as I disagree with some Chinese domestic policies), but the Cold War is behind us and the commies aren't out to get us. I think we would do well to stop this resentful attitude towards Russia. I'm not talking about bringing them into the EU, as they would definitely not want that for themselves, but just be fair and respectful. I think it would be best if we, as the EU, would treat both Russia and the US in the same manner and trade with them on equally fair terms, essentially. Its easy to get democratically elected when every opposition leader is under house arrest, in jail or dead. I have no problems being on friendly terms with Russia but they would have to earn it and their not doing that. From a lack of democracy to civil rights to force of arms they have not earned the friendship of the west. Not to say America is a saint, their not but they have repeatedly shown they are willing to be our ally and they share our own moral and ethical beliefs. Yes a united Europe is good on an international level but the problem is what the EU wants to achieve and what the people are are willing to accept. As a trade union the EU has done a lot of good for the continent and the combined position certainly helps in dealing with global markets but the people have made it very clear they have no interest in a political union. A United States of Europe is not wanted and the EU needs to accept that or it will tear itself apart.
Speaking of a lack of democracy... do I really need to bring up congressional districts, voting laws and corruption in states in terms of senators or whatever voting for their absent opposition by turning around and voting on their desk? Do I need to point out how Bush did not have the majority of Americans backing him when he got "elected" into office in 2000 due to these districts that are constantly changing and who knows what else? Republicans in charge of states have bragged in interviews about how voting laws that they passed they believe contributed to Obama getting fewer votes for his election in the second term. If that is not corruption, then I don't know what is. This is one example, but I've seen this stuff before on the Daily Show as well, with different people being interviewed. It is not a one-time thing, that's for sure.
You can say what you want about Putin and elections, but I believe he has the full support of the vast majority of the Russian people. At least, that what I've found. I remember some Dutch reporter (who has a Russian wife) in Moscow confirming this belief before he was moved to Israel by the news corporation that employed him. Of course, you will probably say the Russian people are coerced into this and don't actually like how he single-handedly brought Russia back from economic collapse and made them a strong unified country over the span of the last 15 years or whatever.
And speaking of civil rights... Do I really need to mention Guantanamo Bay? Also, we would have probably handed Snowden back to America, who should have been protected under the whistle-blower laws, but most certainly wouldn't have if he ever got back to America. I know a certain country that stood up for him when no one else would. I don't know about you, but America doesn't seem to share much of my moral and ethical beliefs. Aside from all the wars they keep starting... and weapons they keep sending to the Middle East which then get used against them (and us, and Russia).
And I'm definitely not suggesting a United States of Europe. I was going to type this earlier, but I figured it was a given. We should simply re-evaluate how we want to approach the EU. You and I seem to agree that its value as a trade union is of the utmost importance, and should be maintained. Besides that, I think we could definitely do things to help Greece other than sending money. Maybe send auditors to help prevent them from making mistakes (without coercing them into doing anything, but simply point out where the fault lies so that they can take their own action to correct the mistake). I dunno I'm just spit-balling here, I'm not educated in these things.
|
On August 25 2016 01:53 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2016 01:34 a_flayer wrote:On August 24 2016 23:34 RvB wrote:
Add some sources please. I don't know where NATO ever invaded Ukraine. You can make the point that we're defending our geopolitical interest in Ukraine (both Europe and the US) but an invasion is in the realm of conspiracy theories.
European countries are also hardly puppets of the US. Otherwise they would've joined the Iraq war for example of they wouldn't have joined the Chinese development bank more recently. Europe falls under its sphere of influence (if that) but that is also due to the fact that interests and viewpoints are often aligned.
Edit: sorry I missed some of the earlier discussion. You can ignore the first part.
Edit2: your argument is flawed. There are no NATO troops in Ukraine and Russia did not have the right to take ovwr Crimea. US troops beibg allowed on Dutch soil after ww2 didn't mean they were allowed to occupy.
Your comparison with the Iraq war is again flawed. Except for the UK everyone was against it. You're right that we don't condemn it as much as the invasion against Ukraine but that's because they're our allies. Not to mention that we're letting Russia do whatever it wants in Syria as well. So the blue hats I saw on the news when they were talking about the pro-Russian president that was being thrown out were just images of some other location and unrelated to the events happening Ukraine? And my only point was that we did not condemn the war in Iraq in the same way that we condemned the events of Crimea, not that we weren't technically against it. I just really don't like how Russia is still being portrayed as an enemy, and I believe this is mostly coming from the US, which is part of why I think we (as the EU) should separate ourselves more from them. Open trade relations with Russia again, they're a fine people, and Putin is not the devil himself. He may be somewhat authoritarian (although he was certainly democratically elected and clearly has the support of the Russian people), and yeah, there's some domestic things that I certainly disagree with as well (just as much as I disagree with some Chinese domestic policies), but the Cold War is behind us and the commies aren't out to get us. I think we would do well to stop this resentful attitude towards Russia. I'm not talking about bringing them into the EU, as they would definitely not want that for themselves, but just be fair and respectful. I think it would be best if we, as the EU, would treat both Russia and the US in the same manner and trade with them on equally fair terms, essentially. Its easy to get democratically elected when every opposition leader is under house arrest, in jail or dead. I have no problems being on friendly terms with Russia but they would have to earn it and their not doing that. From a lack of democracy to civil rights to force of arms they have not earned the friendship of the west.
Don't know about your country, but France, the UK or the USA don't give a damn about ethics in international relations. They have no problem working with obscurantist theocracies, medieval regimes and/or brutal, corrupt dictatorships. For instance, Saudi Arabia violates every single of your friendship criterias, yet they are our allies. The Turkey-European Union deal was concluded with a country involved in oil traffic with ISIS.
Not to say America is a saint, their not but they have repeatedly shown they are willing to be our ally and they share our own moral and ethical beliefs.
We saw that with Guantánamo, Abu Ghraib, all the civilians killed by drone attacks in the Middle East, their support to terrorist groups (or neonazis in Ukraine), or overall the millions of victims caused by their foreign policy. If our political elites weren't hardcore atlantists, they would at least urgently distance themselves from the neocon warmongers who try to build an open conflict with Russia.
Be careful with your views about Russia, there's a fairly insane russophobic propaganda raging in the mainstream media.
|
flayer -> Do you think Russia shares your morals more than America does?
dwf -> I find anyone who uses the term Russophobic like that is usually coming from a strong pro-russia bias. That's just my impression.
|
On August 25 2016 02:24 zlefin wrote:
flayer -> Do you think Russia shares your morals more than America does?
dwf -> I find anyone who uses the term Russophobic like that is usually coming from a strong pro-russia bias. That's just my impression.
I don't think so. I think they're about equally far removed (or nearby, for that matter). You can call me a socialist or something if you like in terms of my political views. I'll also say that I don't particularly like multinationals and especially dislike the power that corporations seem to hold over politics. I also don't like the domestic focus on religion in both Russia and the US.
And... I'll admit that only a couple of weeks ago I was also somewhat "Russophobic" (although I've never heard that term before). I had a bit of an epiphany when I started looking into things from a Russian perspective and found myself turning around my opinion rather harshly (maybe not 180, but 120 degrees?). I do think there is a narrative in the media against Russia that is coming from the US or from older views that simply don't hold true anymore. If that invalidates my opinion according to you (whoever might be reading this), then I'm really sorry.
|
On August 25 2016 02:22 a_flayer wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2016 01:53 Gorsameth wrote:On August 25 2016 01:34 a_flayer wrote:On August 24 2016 23:34 RvB wrote:
Add some sources please. I don't know where NATO ever invaded Ukraine. You can make the point that we're defending our geopolitical interest in Ukraine (both Europe and the US) but an invasion is in the realm of conspiracy theories.
European countries are also hardly puppets of the US. Otherwise they would've joined the Iraq war for example of they wouldn't have joined the Chinese development bank more recently. Europe falls under its sphere of influence (if that) but that is also due to the fact that interests and viewpoints are often aligned.
Edit: sorry I missed some of the earlier discussion. You can ignore the first part.
Edit2: your argument is flawed. There are no NATO troops in Ukraine and Russia did not have the right to take ovwr Crimea. US troops beibg allowed on Dutch soil after ww2 didn't mean they were allowed to occupy.
Your comparison with the Iraq war is again flawed. Except for the UK everyone was against it. You're right that we don't condemn it as much as the invasion against Ukraine but that's because they're our allies. Not to mention that we're letting Russia do whatever it wants in Syria as well. So the blue hats I saw on the news when they were talking about the pro-Russian president that was being thrown out were just images of some other location and unrelated to the events happening Ukraine? And my only point was that we did not condemn the war in Iraq in the same way that we condemned the events of Crimea, not that we weren't technically against it. I just really don't like how Russia is still being portrayed as an enemy, and I believe this is mostly coming from the US, which is part of why I think we (as the EU) should separate ourselves more from them. Open trade relations with Russia again, they're a fine people, and Putin is not the devil himself. He may be somewhat authoritarian (although he was certainly democratically elected and clearly has the support of the Russian people), and yeah, there's some domestic things that I certainly disagree with as well (just as much as I disagree with some Chinese domestic policies), but the Cold War is behind us and the commies aren't out to get us. I think we would do well to stop this resentful attitude towards Russia. I'm not talking about bringing them into the EU, as they would definitely not want that for themselves, but just be fair and respectful. I think it would be best if we, as the EU, would treat both Russia and the US in the same manner and trade with them on equally fair terms, essentially. Its easy to get democratically elected when every opposition leader is under house arrest, in jail or dead. I have no problems being on friendly terms with Russia but they would have to earn it and their not doing that. From a lack of democracy to civil rights to force of arms they have not earned the friendship of the west. Not to say America is a saint, their not but they have repeatedly shown they are willing to be our ally and they share our own moral and ethical beliefs. Yes a united Europe is good on an international level but the problem is what the EU wants to achieve and what the people are are willing to accept. As a trade union the EU has done a lot of good for the continent and the combined position certainly helps in dealing with global markets but the people have made it very clear they have no interest in a political union. A United States of Europe is not wanted and the EU needs to accept that or it will tear itself apart. Speaking of a lack of democracy... do I really need to bring up congressional districts, voting laws and corruption in states in terms of senators or whatever voting for their absent opposition by turning around and voting on their desk? Do I need to point out how Bush did not have the majority of Americans backing him when he got "elected" into office in 2000 due to these districts that are constantly changing and who knows what else? Republicans in charge of states have bragged in interviews about how voting laws that they passed they believe contributed to Obama getting fewer votes for his election in the second term. If that is not corruption, then I don't know what is. This is one example, but I've seen this stuff before on the Daily Show as well, with different people being interviewed. It is not a one-time thing, that's for sure. You can say what you want about Putin and elections, but I believe he has the full support of the vast majority of the Russian people. At least, that what I've found. I remember some Dutch reporter (who has a Russian wife) in Moscow confirming this belief before he was moved to Israel by the news corporation that employed him. Of course, you will probably say the Russian people are coerced into this and don't actually like how he single-handedly brought Russia back from economic collapse and made them a strong unified country over the span of the last 15 years or whatever. And speaking of civil rights... Do I really need to mention Guantanamo Bay? Also, we would have probably handed Snowden back to America, who should have been protected under the whistle-blower laws, but most certainly wouldn't have if he ever got back to America. I know a certain country that stood up for him when no one else would. I don't know about you, but America doesn't seem to share much of my moral and ethical beliefs. Aside from all the wars they keep starting... and weapons they keep sending to the Middle East which then get used against them (and us, and Russia). And I'm definitely not suggesting a United States of Europe. I was going to type this earlier, but I figured it was a given. We should simply re-evaluate how we want to approach the EU. You and I seem to agree that its value as a trade union is of the utmost importance, and should be maintained. Besides that, I think we could definitely do things to help Greece other than sending money. Maybe send auditors to help prevent them from making mistakes (without coercing them into doing anything, but simply point out where the fault lies so that they can take their own action to correct the mistake). I dunno I'm just spit-balling here, I'm not educated in these things.
I have frequently complained about the US election system in the US thread, no argument from me but it is definitely a difference between gerrymandering and imprisoning opposition.
Its easy to be the best option (Putin) when no competent opposition is allowed to develop. Yes he made good strides for Russia but there is still so so far to go and the chest beating and dreams of restoring the USSR is not helping the situation for the common people.
Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib have been heavily condemned by the rest of the world and they, combined with the Iraq invasion, have without a doubt seriously damaged America's standing in the world. Obama spend his entire first term trying to repair it.
I don't believe Greece is incompetent. They know what they can do to fix their situation but as others have said the public sector is a massive voting block, threaten them and they will run to someone else promising to keep them safe. The knowledge is there. The will is lacking and right now the money isn't there either anymore.
|
On August 25 2016 02:22 a_flayer wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2016 01:53 Gorsameth wrote:On August 25 2016 01:34 a_flayer wrote:On August 24 2016 23:34 RvB wrote:
Add some sources please. I don't know where NATO ever invaded Ukraine. You can make the point that we're defending our geopolitical interest in Ukraine (both Europe and the US) but an invasion is in the realm of conspiracy theories.
European countries are also hardly puppets of the US. Otherwise they would've joined the Iraq war for example of they wouldn't have joined the Chinese development bank more recently. Europe falls under its sphere of influence (if that) but that is also due to the fact that interests and viewpoints are often aligned.
Edit: sorry I missed some of the earlier discussion. You can ignore the first part.
Edit2: your argument is flawed. There are no NATO troops in Ukraine and Russia did not have the right to take ovwr Crimea. US troops beibg allowed on Dutch soil after ww2 didn't mean they were allowed to occupy.
Your comparison with the Iraq war is again flawed. Except for the UK everyone was against it. You're right that we don't condemn it as much as the invasion against Ukraine but that's because they're our allies. Not to mention that we're letting Russia do whatever it wants in Syria as well. So the blue hats I saw on the news when they were talking about the pro-Russian president that was being thrown out were just images of some other location and unrelated to the events happening Ukraine? And my only point was that we did not condemn the war in Iraq in the same way that we condemned the events of Crimea, not that we weren't technically against it. I just really don't like how Russia is still being portrayed as an enemy, and I believe this is mostly coming from the US, which is part of why I think we (as the EU) should separate ourselves more from them. Open trade relations with Russia again, they're a fine people, and Putin is not the devil himself. He may be somewhat authoritarian (although he was certainly democratically elected and clearly has the support of the Russian people), and yeah, there's some domestic things that I certainly disagree with as well (just as much as I disagree with some Chinese domestic policies), but the Cold War is behind us and the commies aren't out to get us. I think we would do well to stop this resentful attitude towards Russia. I'm not talking about bringing them into the EU, as they would definitely not want that for themselves, but just be fair and respectful. I think it would be best if we, as the EU, would treat both Russia and the US in the same manner and trade with them on equally fair terms, essentially. Its easy to get democratically elected when every opposition leader is under house arrest, in jail or dead. I have no problems being on friendly terms with Russia but they would have to earn it and their not doing that. From a lack of democracy to civil rights to force of arms they have not earned the friendship of the west. Not to say America is a saint, their not but they have repeatedly shown they are willing to be our ally and they share our own moral and ethical beliefs. Yes a united Europe is good on an international level but the problem is what the EU wants to achieve and what the people are are willing to accept. As a trade union the EU has done a lot of good for the continent and the combined position certainly helps in dealing with global markets but the people have made it very clear they have no interest in a political union. A United States of Europe is not wanted and the EU needs to accept that or it will tear itself apart. Speaking of a lack of democracy... do I really need to bring up congressional districts, voting laws and corruption in states in terms of senators or whatever voting for their absent opposition by turning around and voting on their desk? Do I need to point out how Bush did not have the majority of Americans backing him when he got "elected" into office in 2000 due to these districts that are constantly changing and who knows what else? Republicans in charge of states have bragged in interviews about how voting laws that they passed they believe contributed to Obama getting fewer votes for his election in the second term. If that is not corruption, then I don't know what is. This is one example, but I've seen this stuff before on the Daily Show as well, with different people being interviewed. It is not a one-time thing, that's for sure. You can say what you want about Putin and elections, but I believe he has the full support of the vast majority of the Russian people. At least, that what I've found. I remember some Dutch reporter (who has a Russian wife) in Moscow confirming this belief before he was moved to Israel by the news corporation that employed him. Of course, you will probably say the Russian people are coerced into this and don't actually like how he single-handedly brought Russia back from economic collapse and made them a strong unified country over the span of the last 15 years or whatever. And speaking of civil rights... Do I really need to mention Guantanamo Bay? Also, we would have probably handed Snowden back to America, who should have been protected under the whistle-blower laws, but most certainly wouldn't have if he ever got back to America. I know a certain country that stood up for him when no one else would. I don't know about you, but America doesn't seem to share much of my moral and ethical beliefs. Aside from all the wars they keep starting... and weapons they keep sending to the Middle East which then get used against them (and us, and Russia). And I'm definitely not suggesting a United States of Europe. I was going to type this earlier, but I figured it was a given. We should simply re-evaluate how we want to approach the EU. You and I seem to agree that its value as a trade union is of the utmost importance, and should be maintained. Besides that, I think we could definitely do things to help Greece other than sending money. Maybe send auditors to help prevent them from making mistakes (without coercing them into doing anything, but simply point out where the fault lies so that they can take their own action to correct the mistake). I dunno I'm just spit-balling here, I'm not educated in these things.
Give me a credible source on NATO troops in Ukraine and I'll believe you.
The problems with democracy in Europe and the US compared to the problems in Russia are in different leagues.
Putin gained a super majority in parliament with less than 38% of yhe vote in his first election. The last national elections was full of voting fraud. Yes he's popular but that's also because he controls the state and the media. That's not democracy. I'll agree witb you that the west has double standards but Russia deserves a lot of the shit it gets.
www.bloomberg.com
In general I can agree with you that the EU has to cooperate to defend its own interests better but the US should still be our ally regardless. They've been as good an ally as you can expect from a superpower.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
