• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A Profile of the Russian seperatist ideology

My focus is on Western intrigue while criticising Russian intrigue. Ukraine, IOW, must do as it pleases, not as the west pleases. And it makes no difference to me what that is, so long as its done without the hardball we saw beginning late last year.

So you want an end to Russian intervention? If the Russians all go home there will be no more "Seperatists". Their entire "Govt." is headed by Russian special forces people.
 
In May, there was a free and fair election in Ukraine. The people could have voted the Maidan people away if they wanted. They voted in favor of Poroshenko. What else do you want?

Yanukovich was a traitor. He was elected because he promised closer ties with the EU. Then he did the exact opposite. He was even about moving his people into outright slavery and tyranny. And this guy, you say, was legitimate? Just because he once was elected, when he still said the exact opposite of what he did later?

Well then you finally describe politicians the world over. Slavery and tyranny huh.
 
So you want an end to Russian intervention? If the Russians all go home there will be no more "Seperatists". Their entire "Govt." is headed by Russian special forces people.

Russian actions in Ukraine are a response to western intrigue before.
 
Well then you finally describe politicians the world over. Slavery and tyranny huh.

There is a significant difference between the way the West and Russia run their governments and the degree of freedom people enjoy on both sides.

I understand when you feel much is going wrong in the West and about Western governments. Fair enough. But everything you can criticize about our governments is multitudes worse in Russia. Both sides are *not* the same.
 
There is a significant difference between the way the West and Russia run their governments and the degree of freedom people enjoy on both sides.

I understand when you feel much is going wrong in the West and about Western governments. Fair enough. But everything you can criticize about our governments is multitudes worse in Russia. Both sides are *not* the same.

Well that's fair enough, but in my interest of seeing my country better, respecting international law ALL the time and not just when we think Hussein, Putin or Anyone else is violating it, its no argument at all to say, we are better then they, so were good.
 
Well that's fair enough, but in my interest of seeing my country better, respecting international law ALL the time and not just when we think Hussein, Putin or Anyone else is violating it, its no argument at all to say, we are better then they, so were good.

I understand the sentiment, and I agree that true collective security on international level would be a great thing.

Unfortunately, we don't have an institution yet that can enforce international law. And as long as that is the case, all strong sides will meddle with the sovereignty of weaker countries to some extent. Some do it in ways that might be less sinister and still okay, such as financial aid for political organizations, others are even funding and equipping militias. If the US unilaterally decided not to ever meddle anymore anywhere, these places would immediately fall prey to those others who still do meddle. And the sovereignty of the victims would still not be better protected, the only difference being they're not on the side of the US, but in the hands of some other power.

Another problem with sovereignty, as currently defined by international law, doesn't say anything about the situation inside a country. By international law standards, nobody would be allowed to interveen from the outside, when some genocidal dictator committed a Holocaust, as long as he just did it inside his own borders. Do you think that is okay? Isn't letting it happen even the same as contributing to it, from a moral point of view?
 
I understand the sentiment, and I agree that true collective security on international level would be a great thing.

Unfortunately, we don't have an institution yet that can enforce international law. And as long as that is the case, all strong sides will meddle with the sovereignty of weaker countries to some extent. Some do it in ways that might be less sinister and still okay, such as financial aid for political organizations, others are even funding and equipping militias. If the US unilaterally decided not to ever meddle anymore anywhere, these places would immediately fall prey to those others who still do meddle. And the sovereignty of the victims would still not be better protected, the only difference being they're not on the side of the US, but in the hands of some other power.

Another problem with sovereignty, as currently defined by international law, doesn't say anything about the situation inside a country. By international law standards, nobody would be allowed to interveen from the outside, when some genocidal dictator committed a Holocaust, as long as he just did it inside his own borders. Do you think that is okay? Isn't letting it happen even the same as contributing to it, from a moral point of view?

I can agree with you there. Nice to find common ground. I hope that becomes the case in Ukraine and Gaza/Israel. It's midnight here bud, gotta go!:2wave:
 
Russian actions in Ukraine are a response to western intrigue before.

The RUSSIAN response was to the new Govts. desire to become a member of the Euro union. There were no "seperatists" before that. Yanukovich was a thief and a traitor who was smuggling billion$ out of the country.
 
The RUSSIAN response was to the new Govts. desire to become a member of the Euro union. There were no "seperatists" before that. Yanukovich was a thief and a traitor who was smuggling billion$ out of the country.

No! The Russians were responding to the US and others participation in the overthrow of the elected government (if corrupt). Have you any idea the numbers of times that the US has facilitated "regime change" around the world. No one stays on top for ever, hasn't ever happened!! Should be a consideration. Recent polling shows a more isolationist attitude developing in America, that suits me fine.
 
The RUSSIAN response was to the new Govts. desire to become a member of the Euro union. There were no "seperatists" before that. Yanukovich was a thief and a traitor who was smuggling billion$ out of the country.

Before what "that"? Before the second in the Ukrainian history West-backed coup d'etat? Before the powers supported by the West overthrew the legitimate power?
 
Arming people unable to properly manage dangerous weapons would be at least Criminally Negligent Homicide, or just as likely in this case, 'accessory to murder' as Putin shares the goals of the 'separatists', who may even be "volunteer" Russian nationals.

Thx for the interesting Spiegel OP.

They may have gotten them directly from Russia. It's not like there's no Russian made weapons in Ukraine anyway. This particular system is a Cold War relic, so they idea that they'd be in Ukraine anyway is not out of the question.
 
Hmmm, what happened to all the Russian agents in this forum? They seem to have all gone quiet these past few days... ;)

As for me, I'm just tired of the waterfall of sh*t that is going on in western media towards Russia. Human's power is not limitless.
 
On Malaysian Crash, Obama's Case Against Russia Disintegrates

Tuesday the US government admitted it had been bluffing about its certainty that Russia was behind the downing of Malaysian Air Flight MH-17 over Ukraine.

This dramatic turn of events started with State Department Spokeswoman Marie Harf claiming Monday that the State Department's certainty of Russian involvement in the apparent downing of the plane was primarily based on "social media" evidence.

That means with a likely budget of more than $100 billion, the US Intelligence Community is making decisions that may involve global nuclear war based on people's Tweets and YouTubes!

Asked in Monday's State Department briefing about US government evidence for its claims of Russian government involvement and separatist direct blame for the shooting down of the plane, Harf said:

You saw the Secretary yesterday speak very clearly about our assessment that this was an SA-11 fired from Russian-backed, separatist-controlled territory; that we know – we saw in social media afterwards, we saw videos, we saw photos of the pro-Russian separatists bragging about shooting down an aircraft.

She added:

Based on open information which is basically common sense, right – we know where it was fired from, we know who has this weapon

Who needs evidence — it's "common sense"! Right?

The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity : On Malaysian Crash, Obama's Case Against Russia Disintegrates
 
I see lots of the first, not so much of the second. Still, we all have our biases, mine which I freely admit is pro-West.



See below.

You clearly misunderstood my intent, sorry for the confusion, but I was attempting to point out the hypocrisy of the US criticising Russian intrigue while simultaneously engaging in it.
 
I don't see what the big problem is here. Some poorly trained Russian backed Rebel pushed the fire button before he even knew what he was shooting at for sure. It is a command and control failure and to expected by quickly trained no experienced people. And whoever was tracking the flight on radar is just as inept as the button pusher on the launcher. Putin made this his issue now he can sleep in this bed he made.
 
I don't see what the big problem is here. Some poorly trained Russian backed Rebel pushed the fire button before he even knew what he was shooting at for sure. It is a command and control failure and to expected by quickly trained no experienced people. And whoever was tracking the flight on radar is just as inept as the button pusher on the launcher. Putin made this his issue now he can sleep in this bed he made.

Well now, What was Victoria Nuland cooking up with Yat's in Kiev, back in the fall of 2013?
 
Before what "that"? Before the second in the Ukrainian history West-backed coup d'etat? Before the powers supported by the West overthrew the legitimate power?

Yankovitch promised to join the Euro Union and reneged on his promise that was the cause of his overthrow. Ukrainians no longer want to be slaves to Russia or stand by while their President pilfers the treasury . The separatists are nothing but a Russian lie and you are being Putin's patsie. That has got to be the lowest on can get.
 
Yankovitch promised to join the Euro Union and reneged on his promise that was the cause of his overthrow. Ukrainians no longer want to be slaves to Russia or stand by while their President pilfers the treasury . The separatists are nothing but a Russian lie and you are being Putin's patsie. That has got to be the lowest on can get.

Yanukovich was the legitimate president. Neither he nor anybody else promised "to join the Euro Union", that was talks about assosiation agreement what is not equal to "joining". And stop your primitive propaganda. It's not interesting.
 
Back
Top Bottom