Ukraine

T

TheDude

Dudesicle
|K3| Member
A good question, Mike, but it has nothing to do with Venezuela. I don't support USA involvement in Ukraine. I also don't support Russian involvement in Ukraine.

I also think Yanukovich (and his peeps) is a piece of shit and ran that country into the ground for his own benefit. Revolutions happen in situations like that.

Make up your mind. You can't give the USA shit for not intervening in Venezuela and at the same time give them shit for being involved in Ukraine, whilst also supporting Russia's involvement in Ukraine.

You can love your country and condemn its leaders and the actions they take. My country is first and foremost made up of my fellow men, not congressman and politicians. I'm tired of catching flak for the actions of those few in my country which have gained such power. They do not represent me, and I think i make that quite clear, as many many Americans do.

So Russia annexed Crimea. The work is done, right? Unless Putin wants more.

The reason everyone can't get along is because the moment someone lets their guard down, Putin jumps in and tries to get more power back. The world really really doesn't need the return of the USSR.

The USA also throws its weight around in ways I condemn. However, we have another election coming up. We have local elections coming up. There is a huge lack of trust for our own government and dissatisfaction with the state of our country among the public. Things will change.

Oh yea, and Obama is out. He doesn't get to get elected 10 million times in a row. One of the USA's many protections against fascism.
 
MikeK

MikeK

Vodka supplier
|K3| Member
TheDude said:
You can love your country and condemn its leaders and the actions they take. My country is first and foremost made up of my fellow men, not congressman and politicians. I'm tired of catching flak for the actions of those few in my country which have gained such power. They do not represent me, and I think i make that quite clear, as many many Americans do.
So Russia annexed Crimea. The work is done, right? Unless Putin wants more.
Click to expand...

I know. I condemn most actions by the Russian government and Putin, too. I never voted for him and never will. The only action I don't condemn is the Crimea annexation. Why? Because the people of Crimea (including Tatars and Ukranians) and the people of Russia wanted it to happen. Crimeans really didn't want the new Ukrainian government to govern them. Under the previous government Crimea only used 10% of their tax inside the region, 90% were spent by Kiev elsewhere. Everything would be even worse now, if they didn't proceed with the secession.

And the ties are really too tight. Like my dad spent all his summers in Crimea when he was a child, every second family has some relatives or close friends there and so on. It used to be a part of Russia forever and it was changed in the USSR just to simplify administration.. For us, it's more than logical. For NATO... well they obviously planned to control the region and replace our bases with NATO's. They failed and now they feel hurt..

Actually, NATO is a NORTH ATLANTIC organization. Dafaq are you doing in subtropics located so far to the east?
If you form an international regional defence organization, it should stick to the damn region.
^ And that's not my words. That's international law theory on international governmental organizations..
 
Last edited:
MikeK

MikeK

Vodka supplier
|K3| Member
TheDude said:
How bout we stop building military bases????
Click to expand...
They wouldn't get a chance to make money then.
In other words, they would have to spend your tax on something that you need, like education or medicine.
And that's boring.
Or there would be no reason to impose sanctions.
And sanctions are fun.
Wooo.
 
MikeK

MikeK

Vodka supplier
|K3| Member
TheDude said:
by "we" i meant the human race.
Click to expand...
by 'they' I mean all people who make money on military actions.
BuckRogers said:
@MikeK

Not 'Actually' Mike

- http://www.nato.int/nato-welcome/

NATO is mandated by the United Nations, and 1 of its founding principles is 'to safeguard the freedom and security of its members through political and military means.' This does not allow for geographic boundaries.
Click to expand...
Sorry, sir. Your argument is invalid. Twice.

1. I'm not sure what the exact terminology is in English, but all organiztions are basically classified into three types. Local -> Regional -> Worldwide. The first two types ARE bound by the region they stated. If you want it to be spread elsewhere, reform it or form a new one. Collective self-defence is an international law right. And it is limited to regional organizations. Which are limited with their protection of whatever they like to their regions.

2. If ANY organization (commercial national Ltd / Inc / any other company OR international organization) acts above its powers (even if it's stated on their site), in theory, it's illegal. Not that NATO cares about theory, though.

Also, thanks for linking NATO's site. I've been studying law of international governmental organizations since September and can navigate NATO, UN, WTO and a few other sites blindly. Actually I could make their copies if I knew how to make sites.
 
BuckRogers

BuckRogers

Staff Sergeant
|K3| Member
@MikeK

Considering the repressive acts that the Russian / USSR government has carried out over decades and decades, from tanks in Prague in the Spring of '68 right thro to Ballerinas in handcuffs in January of this year, its a bit rich for you to lecture on rights and wrongs of international law.

Continued Russian expansionism forms a potentially very real threat to each and every member of NATO. Russian expansionism being the very reason that NATO was formed in the first place.

Concern over other countries possible breaches of International law would be better expressed in 6 months time when Russia has been as good as its word, not annexed any further territory and ceased its sabre rattling - we'll see.

For you to suggest that NATO 'planned to control the region' shows an advanced level of paranoia and a monumental misunderstanding of what drives the member States of NATO (or their capacity for that action)
 
MikeK

MikeK

Vodka supplier
|K3| Member
@BuckRogers would you let me rephrase this a bit?

Considering the repressive acts that the US government has carried out over decades and decades, from bombing Serbia and annexing Kosovo to spying on US citizens and Merkel, its a bit rich for you not to listen to my lecture on rights and wrongs of international law.

Continued NATO expansionism (from IRAQ to North Africa and to military bases in Chech Republic where people voted against the bases) forms a potentially very real threat to Russia.

Concern over other countries possible breaches of International law would be better if the treaty signed by the protest leaders, Yanukovich and three foreign ministers of NATO member States was not breached by the protesters and NATO member States' foreign ministers.

For you to suggest that Russia is 'a potentially very real threat to each and every member of NATO' shows an advanced level of paranoia and a monumental misunderstanding of what driven Russia to let Crimea in.[DOUBLEPOST=1395689427][/DOUBLEPOST]Oh, sorry. You are British.
How about the two British bases in Cyprus which Britain simply stopped paying for right after the eastern part of Cyprus was seized by Turkey ("we can go if you want us to go, but be aware that in this case Turkey might seize some more land and you already barely have any" - the new border is right in front of the two bases) ?
 
T

TheDude

Dudesicle
|K3| Member
Are you suggesting that US spying on its citizens is any different from Russian practices??

The only reason you know about it is because a US citizen leaked information about it and the media exploded. Have you looked at congressional reaction to it, also? There are big movements to change US intelligence policies and to create more oversight and transparency.

The difference here is that the public has the right and opportunity to protest and change policy in a very real way. When that right is infringed upon in the slightest, it goes all over the media. Back to that study I posted from a bunch of ivy league schools. That kind of study would be shut down in Russia.

The USA is a big, powerful country, and NATO is a big, powerful organization. However, it's an organization that tries to promote human rights (and in our view, Free Speech and Religion is a basic human right), despite your examples of where it has failed.


My point is, here in the USA, we constantly battle corruption and its peers. It's terrible and there is a lot of evil going on.

However, it seems that countries like Ukraine under Yanukovich and Russia under Putin are instead driven and function through corruption. Needs to change. How is the public supposed to rise up and stop it when the system depends on it?

BTW, there are no plans to take over Russia. That's crazy.

Also, US involvement in Iraq was initiated by a select group of people in power and their involement with the military industrial complex here. There were huge protests about any involvement with Iraq. Most Americans simply condemn the war completely. It has destroyed our economy and our trust in our government.

I wouldn't really call it "annexing" iraq....

Involvement is also due to fear of Iran. Which is also a very real thing. Big powerful fascist countries, run by muslim extremists, trying to obtain nuclear power.......
 
Last edited:
BuckRogers

BuckRogers

Staff Sergeant
|K3| Member
Not going to bother responding to your rants further @MikeK beyond this - Its clear that you want an argument rather than a debate.

But I think you should just think about what you write before you post - your very last line - think you've got your Russias and Crimeas the wrong way round - substantially changes the meaning

You misquote me - its Russian expansionism that Nato might percieve as a threat, not Russia per se.

I'm out.
 
MikeK

MikeK

Vodka supplier
|K3| Member
TheDude said:
1. Are you suggesting that US spying on its citizens is any different from Russian practices??

2. The only reason you know about it is because a US citizen leaked information about it and the media exploded. Have you looked at congressional reaction to it, also? There are big movements to change US intelligence policies and to create more oversight and transparency.

3. The difference here is that the public has the right and opportunity to protest and change policy in a very real way. When that right is infringed upon in the slightest, it goes all over the media. Back to that study I posted from a bunch of ivy league schools. That kind of study would be shut down in Russia.

4. The USA is a big, powerful country, and NATO is a big, powerful organization. However, it's an organization that tries to promote human rights (and in our view, Free Speech and Religion is a basic human right), despite your examples of where it has failed.


5. My point is, here in the USA, we constantly battle corruption and its peers. It's terrible and there is a lot of evil going on.

6. However, it seems that countries like Ukraine under Yanukovich and Russia under Putin are instead driven and function through corruption. Needs to change. How is the public supposed to rise up and stop it when the system depends on it?

7. BTW, there are no plans to take over Russia. That's crazy.

8. Also, US involvement in Iraq was initiated by a select group of people in power and their involement with the military industrial complex here. There were huge protests about any involvement with Iraq. Most Americans simply condemn the war completely. It has destroyed our economy and our trust in our government.

9. I wouldn't really call it "annexing" iraq....

10 Involvement is also due to fear of Iran. Which is also a very real thing. Big powerful fascist countries, run by muslim extremists, trying to obtain nuclear power.......
Click to expand...

1. No.
2. Yes I have. Still, you don't know if anything will be that much different but again, I know that it's pretty much the same in every country.
3. Yes, unfortunatelly, maybe it would be shut down, maybe not.
4. I know.
5. People do try to battle corruption here, too. Not as much as in the USA, but it does happen.
6. Singapore and Georgia are the examples. It was done by the leaders, though.
7. I never said there were.
8. As I said before, a lot of people here condemn government's actions and there are protests and some things are changed.
9. Neither did I.
10. Wait, you said muslim? What abuot freedom of religion?? Just kidding ;)
 
T

TheDude

Dudesicle
|K3| Member
I'm sorry mike. I'm not saying Russia is bad.

I might be thinking too much with my gut (which is afraid of big power) and not enough with my brain (which doesn't know enough about to world)
 
MikeK

MikeK

Vodka supplier
|K3| Member
TheDude said:
I'm sorry mike. I'm not saying Russia is bad.

I might be thinking too much with my gut (which is afraid of big power) and not enough with my brain (which doesn't know enough about to world)
Click to expand...
There's nothing to be sorry about.
Same here. Im not saying that America as a nation is bad, Im not saying that any other NATO member state is bad as a nation, Im not saying that any other nation as a whole is bad.
Actually, at many points, obviously, Russian government is bad for Russia as a nation (it is more corrupt than most european gvmts and it does violate fundamental human rights) and for other countries (even though on this side it looks like Russian foreign policy is less agressive and Russia is involved in less military conflicts).

@BuckRogers you made a number of pointless arguments and, in other words, stated that if some ballerinas were handcuffed in Russia (another action that I condemn), it is rich fior me to lecture on rights.

I was not lecturing (it's quite useful to listen to a lecture on a topic that you don't know sometimes, though) and my government does not represent me, but if you are going to state some old facts about the USSR (a country which I never lived in), I might always state some facts about other countries.

Also, speaking about paranoia... is not very nice, at the very least and you cannot expect a respectful debate after that.
And here are two more things on the 'paranoia' issue.
globalresearch.ca said:
The number of US military men at the two bases is not going to be large, but who can say that it will not be doubled, tripped or quadrupled in the future? Furthermore, the appearance of NATO bases on the Black Sea coast will come as an addition to the US military deployments in the Baltic region. As a result, Russia will find itself trapped.
Click to expand...
as you might have noticed, globalresearch.ca is not putinsnews.ru

s0e48Gaxoak.jpg
 
MikeK

MikeK

Vodka supplier
|K3| Member
The real number should be somewhere in the middle.
All the Crimeans I've talked to did support the annexation and say that most people in Crimea do, too.
But I can't deny that 97% is some crazy number. I honestly expected it to be about 75%.

Also, if you want to listen to the most biased person in the whole story, listen to Tymoshenko.
She was imprisoned because Putin told Yanukovich to do so, basically, for stealing russian gas (and she did steal it) that was being transported to Germany, so...
And her phone call (if it's not made up) was leaked today with her saying something like: "I will do everything to make sure this fucking russia and its leader is destroyed"
She formally said that she did not say it and said hi to KGB.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom