- Joined
- Feb 24, 2013
- Messages
- 34,999
- Reaction score
- 19,469
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
There's nothing in his post that addresses my remarks.
I'm not reading past the first paragraph.
Hmmmmmmm.
There's nothing in his post that addresses my remarks.
I'm not reading past the first paragraph.
Hmmmmmmm.
Whatever you think dude, you can waste your time with folks determined to waylay the point you're making, I choose not to. And by all appearances in the past year, I see exactly ZERO evidence that I should be anything like you. Thank you very much. Now do you have a point in the thread or are you trying to derail it by discussing me? There are a couple of really meaty discussions about the awfulness of Summerwind in the Dungeon, I suggest you head down there if you're determined to focus on me and not the topic.
Mubarak and Gaddafi were elected as well, were you sorry to see them go?
This is ludicrous. The "Russian Speaking Ukrainians" associate with a Russian thug who poisons reporters, jails musicians, invades his neighbors in the name of ethnic protection, and kills Ukrainian soldiers. How about you take a half second to actually look at this rationally? How about you look at the history of Russian rule over Ukraine and open your eyes to who really has reason for concern. The only reason there is a Russian majority in Eastern Ukraine is because the Soviets murdered the Ukrainians there.
The Russian Speaking Eastern Ukraine is just lucky that the Western Ukrainians are actually civilized and haven't paralleled the PLO in militant demands for their land back. The most the Western regions can muster in that direction is a few asshats who took over a TV station.
It's funny how the corrupt Russian lapdog Ukrainian government kills protesters, Russia invades and has now killed one Ukrainian soldier in the name of protecting "ethnic Russians" and you seem most concerned by the Ukrainian far right group who so far has only invaded a TV station.
Mubarak and Gaddafi were elected as well, were you sorry to see them go?
This is ludicrous. The "Russian Speaking Ukrainians" associate with a Russian thug who poisons reporters, jails musicians, invades his neighbors in the name of ethnic protection, and kills Ukrainian soldiers. How about you take a half second to actually look at this rationally? How about you look at the history of Russian rule over Ukraine and open your eyes to who really has reason for concern. The only reason there is a Russian majority in Eastern Ukraine is because the Soviets murdered the Ukrainians there.
The Russian Speaking Eastern Ukraine is just lucky that the Western Ukrainians are actually civilized and haven't paralleled the PLO in militant demands for their land back. The most the Western regions can muster in that direction is a few asshats who took over a TV station.
Russia has changed since the collapse of the USSR. People have a lot more freedom now, at least more than they are used to. However, Ukraine is still living in the past and in constant state of flux from having been a tug of war border state between Europe and Russia for over a hundred years. Ukraine means border. Where we in the US and now even Russia try to put our tainted history behind us...Ukraine is still living in theirs.From what I've read here, it was mostly posters on the right who were sorry to see them go.
The Russians in Ukraine were concerned about these "few asshats" getting into government and cleansing them from Ukraine. Which is pretty close to what you're advocating. The Soviets mostly murdered anybody regardless of ethnicity, and there are pockets of Russians all over the former USSR. My daughter's old gymnastics coach was a Russian from Kazakhstan (who's husband coached the USSR national team for a time). Their daughter in law, who does a lot of the business end there is a Russian from Ukraine. I almost wish I could hear her thoughts about this.
And too, when USSR collapsed everything happened so fast that many countries didn't know what to do...some wanted independence and some didn't and some didn't know what they wanted. It was under the chaos and uncertainty of the Soviet break up that Crimea ended up being attached to Ukraine and they shouldn't have been.At any rate, Crimea was never really populated by Ukrainians. Tatars, yes, and after them mostly Russians. It was only part of Ukraine because of Kruschev, and at the time transferring it to the Ukrainian SSR wasn't a big deal because everybody assumed that the USSR was permanent.
Russia has changed since the collapse of the USSR. People have a lot more freedom now, at least more than they are used to. However, Ukraine is still living in the past and in constant state of flux from having been a tug of war border state between Europe and Russia for over a hundred years. Ukraine means border. Where we in the US and now even Russia try to put our tainted history behind us...Ukraine is still living in theirs.
And too, when USSR collapsed everything happened so fast that many countries didn't know what to do...some wanted independence and some didn't and some didn't know what they wanted. It was under the chaos and uncertainty of the Soviet break up that Crimea ended up being attached to Ukraine and they shouldn't have been.
I don't think you have a complete understanding on what was happening there.
Yanukovych, under his watch, had over 37bil dollars "misplaced", by which I mean stolen, by him and his cronies. The total economy of Ukraine is around 170-180bil dollars. Ok? And then, he accepted a 15bil $ bribe from Russia to turn down the treaty for trade with the EU. That's not him going to Russia, that's him being bought by Russia and selling out his country.
Secondly, he got elected due to massive fraud and there are numerous other inconsistencies. If such an election, as the one in 2010, would happen in any western country, you'd be outraged. It'll be unacceptable as a democratic standard. So you saying he was "elected democraticaly" is a slap in the face to anything that is fair and democratic elections because if it had happened in your country, you'd be pulling out your pitchfork.
I'm sorry, I don't see how that is something desirable in an elected representative. So of course the people rioted against that and he got deposed.
The first thing the interim govt did is set elections in may. that's not the action of a corrupt administration.
Svoboda is a ukrainian nationalist group and is now part of the administration, yes, but they're a very minor partner. This make-shift alliance of convenience for the interim govt has to hold until election day in Ukraine or else the country will be plunged into chaos again. It's not an optimum scenario but the alternative is to put power back in the hands of the people who supported Yanukovych, of the former ruling regime. Maybe have a few dozen more ukrainian killed by snipers in the streets.
This is the real world. Political crises have consequences especially in less developed nations that are trying to escape the scars of communism.
If you don't understand that world, as clearly many don't, don't be a wise-ass. I think this isn't the first time I'm telling you about how the 2010 election went down in Ukraine and why stating the things you do is bollocks. And this isn't me making **** up, it's what actually happened. Look it up, ukraine 2010 elections.
I'm not reading past the first paragraph. Bush lost hells more than that in Iraq and Afghanistan corruption, we didn't oust Bush or either of our stooges in those countries. So don't try to turn this into some righteous bunch of bull crap.
Sorry, but the parliament did not oust Yanukovych, so regardless of any fraud or otherwise, his overthrow was illegitimate.
Yes Rainman, you're right in all those points.
But consider the fact that the US has lost a lot of it's morale.
Trying to bring the democracy with far right gangs, trying to overthrow a dictator with Al-Qaeda, with drones etc etc. made the US look so different of what it was used to be. And not only in the eyes of the skeptics but even among their friends.
Germany does not see US as it used to be.
UK does not take anymore risks for US.
We were used to see the US as the police of the world and we were all happy with that. During last 20 years, all the world didn't care a lot which country US bombed or attacked. It was fine for everyone.
I notice this even in my country. We used to be very very closed with US.
Lately, our relationships are so cold.
You know why?
We are tired of US Ambassadors who've been here. We are tired of those puppies drawing red lines to our governments, we are tired on interfering in our internal business.
US no longer see their allies as an ally.
You can't find me a good example of a healthy relationship of US with their allies or ex-allies lately, during Obama's administration.
We as simple people have seen so tiny parts of US spying issue with Germany. But who knows what else Russia has transmitted to US's allies.
If US has lost anything of it's morale, it came by itself not by any other part of the world or Snowden.
It is not so easy to judge Russia about Crimea now.
Some things have changed, some haven't. Depends on where in Russia you are.
But check your timeline. Crimea became part of Ukraine long before the end of the USSR. When the USSR collapsed, nobody really thought about what the borders should have looked like. All the republics just became independent as they were. It was probably too chaotic to sit and negotiate, and Yeltsin never would have thought to ask for Crimea. But Crimea, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Nagorno-Karabakh...all of these things have been simmering for at least the last 25 years.
It's funny how the corrupt Russian lapdog Ukrainian government kills protesters, Russia invades and has now killed one Ukrainian soldier in the name of protecting "ethnic Russians" and you seem most concerned by the Ukrainian far right group who so far has only invaded a TV station.
Factually incorrect.And too, when USSR collapsed everything happened so fast that many countries didn't know what to do...some wanted independence and some didn't and some didn't know what they wanted. It was under the chaos and uncertainty of the Soviet break up that Crimea ended up being attached to Ukraine and they shouldn't have been.
"Decree of the Presidium of the USSR Supreme Soviet transferring Crimea Province from the Russian Republic to the Ukraine Republic, taking into account the integral character of the economy, the territorial proximity and the close economic ties between Crimea Province and the Ukraine Republic, and approving the joint presentation of the Presidium of the Russian Republic Supreme Soviet and the Presidium of the Ukraine Republic Supreme Soviet on the transfer of Crimea Province from the Russian Republic to the Ukraine Republic."
I don't think you have a complete understanding on what was happening there.
Yanukovych, under his watch, had over 37bil dollars "misplaced", by which I mean stolen, by him and his cronies. The total economy of Ukraine is around 170-180bil dollars. Ok? And then, he accepted a 15bil $ bribe from Russia to turn down the treaty for trade with the EU. That's not him going to Russia, that's him being bought by Russia and selling out his country.
Secondly, he got elected due to massive fraud and there are numerous other inconsistencies. If such an election, as the one in 2010, would happen in any western country, you'd be outraged. It'll be unacceptable as a democratic standard. So you saying he was "elected democraticaly" is a slap in the face to anything that is fair and democratic elections because if it had happened in your country, you'd be pulling out your pitchfork.
I'm sorry, I don't see how that is something desirable in an elected representative. So of course the people rioted against that and he got deposed.
The first thing the interim govt did is set elections in may. that's not the action of a corrupt administration.
Svoboda is a ukrainian nationalist group and is now part of the administration, yes, but they're a very minor partner. This make-shift alliance of convenience for the interim govt has to hold until election day in Ukraine or else the country will be plunged into chaos again. It's not an optimum scenario but the alternative is to put power back in the hands of the people who supported Yanukovych, of the former ruling regime. Maybe have a few dozen more ukrainian killed by snipers in the streets.
This is the real world. Political crises have consequences especially in less developed nations that are trying to escape the scars of communism.
If you don't understand that world, as clearly many don't, don't be a wise-ass. I think this isn't the first time I'm telling you about how the 2010 election went down in Ukraine and why stating the things you do is bollocks. And this isn't me making **** up, it's what actually happened. Look it up, ukraine 2010 elections.
Time for Russia to kill more non-white Russians. It's a problem too, because so far Russia doesn't succeed in killing ALL of them, and those not killed act pissy creating "chaos" by virtue of existing. Maybe this time Russia will get genocide and subjugation right and finish the job. An all-white world is a perfect world, correct? Send all the others somewhere else or kill them, whichever.
So far, Putin said that this time against non-white Russians in Crimea he is only going to send those people (who actually are the indigenous people) elsewhere.
Time for some more Tartar Muslim ass-kicking!!!
Worked for Hitler and Germany. For all practical purposes Jews were eradicated from Western Europe permanently. So those of you praising Putin's saving "ethnic Russians" might be right that success is potentially possible.
There is a logic to his reasoning. If everyone of African-American dissent was sent elsewhere, then there would be no black-white problem in the USA.
Personally, I don't agree with doing that - but it appears many if not most on this forum do.
Why?Since Germany has never backed up the USA on anything, why the hell should we give a **** what Germany thinks? Germany's history is of being a huge pain the ass to the USA.
If Ukraine was part of the Russia empire then techncally Russia gifted Crimea to itself. Apparently, the gift was largely symbolic.Simpleχity;1063057442 said:Factually incorrect.
Crimea was given as a "gift" to Ukraine on 24 February 1954 by Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev ostensibly to mark the 300th anniversary of Ukraine's merger with the Russian empire. The transfer was reported in Pravda...
Thats pretty much what I've read, too. Do you think Khrushchev would have gifted a Russian territory to Ukraine if he thought it wouldn't belong to Russia anymore? I don't.Official reason notwithstanding, no one knows precisely why Khrushchev decided to do this. His wife Nina was Ukrainian and it could have been a form of repayment for the millions of Ukrainians murdered by Stalin during the Holodomor. Almost two years later to the day on 25 February 1956, Khrushchev delivered his "Secret Speech" denunciation of Stalin at the Communist Party's Twentieth Congress in Moscow. What Khrushchev never imagined or anticipated, was the dissolution of the USSR less than forty years later.
At the time of the dissolution of the USSR, the only items Russia wanted from Ukraine were its nuclear weapons on Ukrainian territory (the Budapest Memorandum) and a lease for the Black Sea Fleet port at Sevastopol (granted). At the time, Crimea was a financial sinkhole that Russia didn't want. As Putin is about to discover, Crimea remains a financial sinkhole and Ukraine is better off economically without it.
Crimea: Whose land is this? Part 1"....Since the canal passes mostly through Ukrainian territory, then the rest of it should, along with the whole of Crimea, pass from the supervision of Moscow to that of Kiev.
My father Nikita Khrushchev who headed the leadership of the Soviet Union, agreed with this argument, especially that an anniversary was approaching:
In February 1954, it was 300 years since Ukraine joined Russia. It was said - it was done. The Higher Council of the Russian Federation decided to pass Crimea over to Ukraine. In this way, Crimea came under the jurisdiction of Kiev, but just formally. In fact, it remained part of the Soviet Union and was our common holiday destination. ....
Boris Yeltsin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaIn early December 1991, Ukraine voted for independence from the Soviet Union. A week later, on 8 December, Yeltsin met Ukrainian president Leonid Kravchuk and the leader of Belarus, Stanislav Shushkevich, in Belovezhskaya Pushcha. In the Belavezha Accords, the three presidents announced the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the formation of a voluntary Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) in its place. According to Gorbachev, Yeltsin kept the plans of the Belovezhskaya meeting in strict secrecy and the main goal of the dissolution of the Soviet Union was to get rid of Gorbachev, who by that time had started to recover his position after the events of August. Gorbachev has also accused Yeltsin of violating the people's will expressed in the referendum in which the majority voted to keep the Soviet Union united....
Simpleχity;1063057630 said:To any interested (fluency in Ukrainian and Russian required), documents (many incriminating) found in the lavish presidential compound of Viktor Yanukovych at Mezhihirya are being scanned and archived online.
YanukovychLeaks National Project
These are the kinds of criminals the people from the Crimea want to be free from. I guess these are the same kinds of idiots who advised/forced the new "government" (because it was hardly a democratic process by which it got created) to ban Russian as a language in the Ukraine.