• 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!

Nuclear War and Clashing Ukraine Narratives

Is Investigative Reporter Parry's narrative accurate?

  • Total voters
    13
  • Poll closed .
DDD said:
No problem with that. Except, I believe the USA will independently wish to join with us also.
Click to expand...

Yeah well we're hoping not.
 
DDD said:
I would like to remind those whom even consider bowing down to Russian hegemony that it will not be pretty. Speaking of our countries historical experience, events occurring in Crimea, Chechnya and so on, people will be brutally bullied away from their wealth in a classical Slavic medieval way.
Click to expand...

Oh please, you've drank the cool-aid.

But this account is wrong: the United States and its European allies share most of the responsibility for the crisis. The taproot of the trouble is NATO enlargement, the central element of a larger strategy to move Ukraine out of Russia’s orbit and integrate it into the West. At the same time, the EU’s expansion eastward and the West’s backing of the pro-democracy movement in Ukraine -- beginning with the Orange Revolution in 2004 -- were critical elements, too. Since the mid-1990s, Russian leaders have adamantly opposed NATO enlargement, and in recent years, they have made it clear that they would not stand by while their strategically important neighbor turned into a Western bastion. For Putin, the illegal overthrow of Ukraine’s democratically elected and pro-Russian president -- which he rightly labeled a “coup” -- was the final straw. He responded by taking Crimea, a peninsula he feared would host a NATO naval base, and working to destabilize Ukraine until it abandoned its efforts to join the West.

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/artic...mer/why-the-ukraine-crisis-is-the-wests-fault
 
DDD said:
Nah, the article holds an extreme partisan position:



Pretty ill premised forecast.



Ukrainians want to be liberated from Russian bulliness. If it bothered Russians to have NATO on their doorsteps then they should have treated their partners in better fairness.

Now though Ukraine has made a choice and we are above that stage. Ukraine is European and the EU should back Ukrainians be set free from Russian hegemony and bulliness. The US is welcomed to help Ukraine be liberated just like it helped other European (i.e., not Asian or South American) countries such as former countries of former Yugoslavia.
Click to expand...

And Western medias aren't espousing a partisan position, lol.
 
MildSteel said:
We are committed to the defense of NATO countries. We need to honor those commitments. If our interests are better served by not honoring those commitments, we need to get out of them ASAP.
Click to expand...

Indeed, those restrictive entangling alliances Washington warned about.
 
Montecresto said:
Oh please, you've drank the cool-aid.

But this account is wrong: the United States and its European allies share most of the responsibility for the crisis. The taproot of the trouble is NATO enlargement, the central element of a larger strategy to move Ukraine out of Russia’s orbit and integrate it into the West. At the same time, the EU’s expansion eastward and the West’s backing of the pro-democracy movement in Ukraine -- beginning with the Orange Revolution in 2004 -- were critical elements, too. Since the mid-1990s, Russian leaders have adamantly opposed NATO enlargement, and in recent years, they have made it clear that they would not stand by while their strategically important neighbor turned into a Western bastion. For Putin, the illegal overthrow of Ukraine’s democratically elected and pro-Russian president -- which he rightly labeled a “coup” -- was the final straw. He responded by taking Crimea, a peninsula he feared would host a NATO naval base, and working to destabilize Ukraine until it abandoned its efforts to join the West.

John J. Mearsheimer | How the West Caused the Ukraine Crisis | Foreign Affairs
Click to expand...

Well nobody forced Ukraine to be with EU and USA. Why did they choose to do so if it was not to be free from Russian bulliness?

On those grounds, if Russia is against NATO expansion, why would it allow the opportunity of Ukraine to go Westwards by bullying its "strategically important ally?"
 
The problem is simple: Russia has erected an authoritarian regime since 2000 step by step, its elites are driven by an ideology of national independency and ethnic chauvinism, and the Russian people has still not accepted that Russia is no world power anymore since 1991.

Between Russia ca. 2000-2015 and Germany ca. 1933-1938, there are striking parallels. The Russian elites and government basically feel and believe the exact same thing as the German right in the 1920s and 30s, and their answers are the same -- allegedly, the West is after destroying them, and the ends justify all means to roll back and resist Western influence.

The fault is not with the West or Ukraine.

The fault is with Russia, which does not accept Ukraine's sovereignty, and Ukraine's right to choose the partner they want. They decided in favor of the West, and as a result, Russia invaded.

In Russia's eye, its neighbors have no rights or sovereignty, and violating it is perfectly legitimate as long as it serves Russian interests. So is breaking international law and all kinds of treaties Russia itself had signed post-1990. That's the same thinking the European powers displayed in 19th century power play and in the years leading up to WW1, and it is the same kind of thinking that was driving Nazi Germany.

This clearly is a Russian aggression, and ONLY a Russian aggression.

Russia's elites are driven by paranoia, an extreme nationalism and are stuck mentally in the 19th century.
 
Simpleχity;1064296190 said:
Indeed. Latvia for example. A NATO nation. It shares a border with the Russian Federation. Latvia's current population is ~25% ethnic Russian, a vestige from when Latvia was a Soviet SSR. As in Crimea and eastern Ukraine, it would be very easy for Putin to stir up trouble in Latvia and then threaten military action to "protect ethnic Russians, Russian-speakers, and compatriots" if the Latvian government tried to quell such subversion.
Click to expand...

Not so. Unlike Ukraine Latvia is not a failed state.
 
MildSteel said:
I think that you have to consider the context of Crimea in terms of it's history, the ethnicity of it's population, and it's strategic significance to Russia. When seen in that context, your characterization of "grab" is somewhat of a distortion, though not entirely inaccurate. As such, although it is bit of a stretch, it is not entirely inconsistent with the notion of the right of self determination. There is a reason why Russia can be effective in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine, and not Western Ukraine. That is simply that they have a significant amount of support from the population. When viewed in that light, the precedence is not entirely out of line with international norms like the right of self determination.
Click to expand...

Take Latvia. The Russian proportion of the population is higher there than in most of Eastern Ukraine and in Riga it is higher again.
 
DDD said:
Well nobody forced Ukraine to be with EU and USA. Why did they choose to do so if it was not to be free from Russian bulliness?

On those grounds, if Russia is against NATO expansion, why would it allow the opportunity of Ukraine to go Westwards by bullying its "strategically important ally?"
Click to expand...

Actually, in a very, very un-democratic fashion, the US and the EU supported a very angry and hostile mob of disgruntled Ukrainian citizens who went about burning government buildings and forced the president out of office, firing upon his motorcade as he fled for his life. I suppose you think the US or any Western country would be ok with that scenario in their country. And those pointing a finger at and accusing Russia of "bullying" might look at a dozen years of US/Western bullying in the Middle East just for starters.
 
German guy said:
The problem is simple: Russia has erected an authoritarian regime since 2000 step by step, its elites are driven by an ideology of national independency and ethnic chauvinism, and the Russian people has still not accepted that Russia is no world power anymore since 1991.

Between Russia ca. 2000-2015 and Germany ca. 1933-1938, there are striking parallels. The Russian elites and government basically feel and believe the exact same thing as the German right in the 1920s and 30s, and their answers are the same -- allegedly, the West is after destroying them, and the ends justify all means to roll back and resist Western influence.

The fault is not with the West or Ukraine.

The fault is with Russia, which does not accept Ukraine's sovereignty, and Ukraine's right to choose the partner they want. They decided in favor of the West, and as a result, Russia invaded.

In Russia's eye, its neighbors have no rights or sovereignty, and violating it is perfectly legitimate as long as it serves Russian interests. So is breaking international law and all kinds of treaties Russia itself had signed post-1990. That's the same thinking the European powers displayed in 19th century power play and in the years leading up to WW1, and it is the same kind of thinking that was driving Nazi Germany.

This clearly is a Russian aggression, and ONLY a Russian aggression.

Russia's elites are driven by paranoia, an extreme nationalism and are stuck mentally in the 19th century.
Click to expand...

OMG no, nothing about the relationships between Russia/EU and Russia/US is simple, and the comparisons between nazi Germany and present day Russia are nothing more than exaggerated paranoia.
 
Montecresto said:
Indeed, those restrictive entangling alliances Washington warned about.
Click to expand...

They definitely need to be re-evaluated. It appears that what was once a defense mechanism has become a vehicle for the expansion of western power. As such it may be that the world is not becoming a safer place but a more dangerous one. I understand that point is debatable, but it is indeed a concept worth examining.
 
joG said:
Take Latvia. The Russian proportion of the population is higher there than in most of Eastern Ukraine and in Riga it is higher again.
Click to expand...

That is interesting. I did not know that. Thanks for pointing that out.
 
Montecresto said:
Actually, in a very, very un-democratic fashion, the US and the EU supported a very angry and hostile mob of disgruntled Ukrainian citizens who went about burning government buildings and forced the president out of office, firing upon his motorcade as he fled for his life. I suppose you think the US or any Western country would be ok with that scenario in their country.
Click to expand...

That President was corrupt and stole Ukrainian tax money that pissed off the majority of Ukrainians. They then went westwards.

If a majority wants the EU and USA and not Russia than this is pretty democratic indeed.

Montecresto said:
And those pointing a finger at and accusing Russia of "bullying" might look at a dozen years of US/Western bullying in the Middle East just for starters.
Click to expand...

Seek out the other area in DP named "Middle East" for non European affairs please.
 
DDD said:
That President was corrupt and stole Ukrainian tax money that pissed off the majority of Ukrainians. They then went westwards.

If a majority wants the EU and USA and not Russia than this is pretty democratic indeed.



Seek out the other area in DP named "Middle East" for non European affairs please.
Click to expand...

Thank you for admitting your tacit support of mob rule and the overthrow of elected officials by means of violence and then characterising it as "democratic". And sorry, but the "Poll" section of DP is not topic specific.
 
DDD said:
That President was corrupt and stole Ukrainian tax money that pissed off the majority of Ukrainians. They then went westwards.

If a majority wants the EU and USA and not Russia than this is pretty democratic indeed.



Seek out the other area in DP named "Middle East" for non European affairs please.
Click to expand...

If a majority wants the EU and USA and not Russia than this is pretty democratic indeed.[/
Only 18% of eligible voters chose Poroshenko et al. Is that your idea of a majority?
 
DaveFagan said:
The Eastern Russians wanted to be annexed by Russia and Russia refused. Ukraine attacked Eastern Ukraine. Eastern Ukraine did not attack Ukraine. The Kiev coup, now in power with a vote of approval by 18% of eligible voters was not acceptable to Eastern Ukraine. Kiev attacked and is likely to get its' ass kicked instead of making serious efforts to negotiate a settlement. Brennan (US CIA) showed up in Kiev to reinforce the work done by CIA lackeys in installing the 18% gov't, and about 300 mercs' showed up to help out and Ukraine attacked its' own people. It only attacked the Russian speaking section where they tried to make the Russian language illegal. In Kiev, these Eastern Ukrainians are referred to as "colorados" (beetles) and a term similar to calling black people niggers. Just take a good look at the people in charge in Kiev to measure the quality of the gov't. A bunch of CIA assets and agents to administer the theft of the patrimony of the Ukrainian people. Pretty simple. You cant't for one moment believe there is any movement of liberty, freedom, justice or democracy unless one is common sense challenged. When the USA helps, we helps, don't ya' know, like Vietnam, Honduras, Libya, Syria, Iraq, Nicaragua, Egypt, Cuba, etc. Hot dam, mon, I sees the light and hope it's not a nuclear flash.
Click to expand...

Any more Putin Propaganda you'd like to spout Dave?

Regardless, I am curious if you think the compromise could work for both sides? Then again, if you are completely buying everything that Putin wants to sell you, I suppose you still think that Western Part of Ukraine are still Pro-Russia and gosh golly they'd like to go back to that. Despite all that shooting at protesters stuff that happened.

Be honest, the fall of the Berlin Wall was the saddest day in your life wasn't it?
 
Montecresto said:
Thank you for admitting your tacit support of mob rule and the overthrow of elected officials by means of violence and then characterising it as "democratic".
Click to expand...

You are welcome to interpret the post in anyway you choose. However it may take reading again if interested to know what was really meant.
 
Hamster Buddha said:
Any more Putin Propaganda you'd like to spout Dave?

Regardless, I am curious if you think the compromise could work for both sides? Then again, if you are completely buying everything that Putin wants to sell you, I suppose you still think that Western Part of Ukraine are still Pro-Russia and gosh golly they'd like to go back to that. Despite all that shooting at protesters stuff that happened.

Be honest, the fall of the Berlin Wall was the saddest day in your life wasn't it?
Click to expand...

I thought the fall of the Berlin wall was a wonderful thing. I still ponder why Poroshenko keeps
negotiating with Putin instead of the Novorussians. How does Kiev afford to keep operating an
aggressive war against its' own people when the Nation is broke. Wait, it's coming to me, the
war has something to do with collaterol and Central Banks that now run the Western oriented
World. By the way, did you vote for those banks?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom