• 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!

For First Time, Kremlin Signals It Is Prepared to Annex Crimea [W:153]

Thats not what I asked, I asked if they were justified in your "view", and I use that term loosely.

In the mean time, Russia is expanding its military spending by 40%.
Putin has transformed Russian army into a lean, mean fighting machine - Washington Times

No, of course not. The present Ukrainian government is illegitimate. And of course Russia's military expenditures are up as is China's, and so should other countries watching US belligerence and imperialism over the last couple decades, they'd be fools not to.
 
I hear ya man, I just really don't see the comparisons on this being drawn between Putin, Hitler, Stalin, etc. it's not as though Putin just decided to start marching west. He is responding to a border country in crisis, a crisis of US and perhaps EU making. At this point, I see little about Putin's actions troubling and quite understandable.

Again, I hope you are right. And indeed that seems most likely.

However, as the historical examples are showing, sometimes we're dealing with leaderships that think in terms of "everything or nothing". That happens. Is Putin such a person? No idea.

However, what I read about that "geostrategic game" about Eurasia, or at least the Russian perception of that alleged game, makes me think at least some people in the Russian elite actually believe it's either using any chance they get to break free once and for all, or the end of the Russian people. In that case, it doesn't matter whether the West is actually playing that "game", or if the crucial Russian officials just believe we are.
 
No, of course not. The present Ukrainian government is illegitimate. And of course Russia's military expenditures are up as is China's, and so should other countries watching US belligerence and imperialism over the last couple decades, they'd be fools not to.

Thanks.
 
I agree. But I doubt that a hasty referendum at the gunpoint of Russian soldiers who don't allow any independent international observers in has much value.

The ideal solution for the problem would be if Russia and Kiev agreed to let an international force into Crimea, while the Russians troops withdraw, and this international force then organizes a referendum both sides agree to respect.

But as it looks at the moment, Putin doesn't seem interested in such a solution.

I agree with your ideal solution, and a referendum should be conducted under neutral circumstances and under the supervision of international observers. But unfortunately, secessions seldom occur under such ideal and neutral circumstances. (Such a referendum in 1776 might well have seen the American colonies remain under the British Crown.)

And it must be remembered that the majority population in Crimea is ethnic Russian, so the motivation for secession did not come with the entry of Russian troops. It is a matter of self-determination, but I doubt the new, perhaps illegitimate, Ukrainian government will support it upon that basis.

Apart from my belief in the principle of self-determination, I do not know enough of the situation to take a firm stand on either rampart. But I find this information troubling -

Listening to the US media, even the most diligent news junkie would find it difficult to know that the U.S. State Department played not only a vital role in the violence and chaos underway in Ukraine but was also complicit in creating the coup that ousted democratically elected President Viktor Yanuyovch. Given the Russian Parliament’s approval of Putin’s request for military troops to be moved into Crimea, Americans uninformed about the history of that region might also be persuaded that Russia is the aggressor and the sole perpetrator of the violence.

Let’s be clear about what is at stake here: NATO missiles on the adjacent Ukraine border aimed directly at Russia would make that country extremely vulnerable to Western goals and destabilization efforts while threatening Russia’s only water access to its naval fleet in Crimean peninsula, the Balkans, the Mediterranean Sea and the Middle East – and not the least of which would allow world economic dominance by the US, the European Union, the IMF, World Bank and international financiers all of whom had already brought staggering suffering to millions around the globe.

The fact is that democracy was not a demand on the streets of Kiev. The current record of events indicates that protests of civil dissatisfaction were organized by reactionary neo-Nazi forces intent on fomenting a major domestic crisis ousting Ukraine’s legitimate government. As events continue to spiral out of control, here is the chronology of how the coup was engineered to install a government more favorable to EU and US goals.
Chronology of the Ukrainian Coup » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names
 
I agree with your ideal solution, and a referendum should be conducted under neutral circumstances and under the supervision of international observers. But unfortunately, secessions seldom occur under such ideal and neutral circumstances. (Such a referendum in 1776 might well have seen the American colonies remain under the British Crown.)

And it must be remembered that the majority population in Crimea is ethnic Russian, so the motivation for secession did not come with the entry of Russian troops. It is a matter of self-determination, but I doubt the new, perhaps illegitimate, Ukrainian government will support it upon that basis.

Apart from my belief in the principle of self-determination, I do not know enough of the situation to take a firm stand on either rampart. But I find this information troubling -


Chronology of the Ukrainian Coup » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

The US backed overthrow of the Ukrainian government, wasn't conducted under neutral circumstances, can't understand why anyone would expect it with this.
 
The US backed overthrow of the Ukrainian government, wasn't conducted under neutral circumstances, can't understand why anyone would expect it with this.

So you do or don't believe nations can decide which sides inside a nation they can support or not?

I just...I wonder how it is that you consistently come to decide that what the US does is "bad". It's so...hilarious?
 
So you do or don't believe nations can decide which sides inside a nation they can support or not?

I just...I wonder how it is that you consistently come to decide that what the US does is "bad". It's so...hilarious?

Ask him about Pearl Harbor. Its always America's fault.
 
Ask him about Pearl Harbor. Its always America's fault.

Oh, I've seen that. It's awesome!

"Pearl Harbor? The US forced Japan to act in that way, it's the US' fault!"

but then...

"Nagasaki and Hiroshima? The US was wrong to attack!"

Of course, if you're going to make one argument, you could easily make the converse, too...he just never manages to make them. It's always the US being the devil in Monte's religion.

Seriously, I highly doubt Monte is paid because...no one would pay for that. Truly, if he was being paid, it probably would be the US IC, because reading his posts actually makes criticism of the US- which of course can be just as legit as the criticism of any country- look absolutely retarded. But then...even for disinfo he'd be too dumb and heavy-handed.

I'm forced to conclude Monte is just an actual real person. Well, just like a real person but...slower.
 
So you do or don't believe nations can decide which sides inside a nation they can support or not?

I just...I wonder how it is that you consistently come to decide that what the US does is "bad". It's so...hilarious?

Wtf. Dude do you ever think.
 
I've always suspected Montecresto is not a U.S. citizen and isn't simply critical of America, he is anti-American as in he hates everything we do and wants us to fail at all times.
 
Oh, I've seen that. It's awesome!

"Pearl Harbor? The US forced Japan to act in that way, it's the US' fault!"

but then...

"Nagasaki and Hiroshima? The US was wrong to attack!"

Of course, if you're going to make one argument, you could easily make the converse, too...he just never manages to make them. It's always the US being the devil in Monte's religion.

Seriously, I highly doubt Monte is paid because...no one would pay for that. Truly, if he was being paid, it probably would be the US IC, because reading his posts actually makes criticism of the US- which of course can be just as legit as the criticism of any country- look absolutely retarded. But then...even for disinfo he'd be too dumb and heavy-handed.

I'm forced to conclude Monte is just an actual real person. Well, just like a real person but...slower.

Aren't paid propagandists real people. Anyway, I think that it's another type of paid individual that apologizes for failed and corrupt US foreign policy.
 
Wtf. Dude do you ever think.

lol! I think we long ago established that I do more research in a year than you've done in your lifetime. You still confuse "not all" with "none".
 
I've always suspected Montecresto is not a U.S. citizen and isn't simply critical of America, he is anti-American as in he hates everything we do and wants us to fail at all times.

Lol. I want our foreign policy to fail, absolutely. It is menacing, it violates human rights, international law, and creates unnecessary enemies. My citizenship is irrelevant to whether or not US foreign policy is legitimate, too funny.
 
I've always suspected Montecresto is not a U.S. citizen and isn't simply critical of America, he is anti-American as in he hates everything we do and wants us to fail at all times.

I dunno. I just know the standard changes depending upon what position the US holds in any event. Attacked? They goaded it. Attacker? They were wrong to attack. Attack a nation that is being influenced by a third nation? The attack is wrong. Influence a nation and then a third nation attacks that one? The influence was what was wrong.

Whatever the US does, Monte finds a way to call it wrong. It's too bad he's just so obvious about it.
 
lol! I think we long ago established that I do more research in a year than you've done in your lifetime. You still confuse "not all" with "none".

Actually, you and your pocket mouse have established absolutely nothing. You two confuse Russia's actions to secure their assets in the Crimea with a 1938 nazi invasion. :roll:
 
I dunno. I just know the standard changes depending upon what position the US holds in any event. Attacked? They goaded it. Attacker? They were wrong to attack. Attack a nation that is being influenced by a third nation? The attack is wrong. Influence a nation and then a third nation attacks that one? The influence was what was wrong.

Whatever the US does, Monte finds a way to call it wrong. It's too bad he's just so obvious about it.

:lamo you thought I was trying to hide something. Just ****ing rich.
 
Actually, you and your pocket mouse have established absolutely nothing. You two confuse Russia's actions to secure their assets in the Crimea with a 1938 nazi invasion. :roll:

Is this now the fifteenth? fiftieth? fifty-fifth? five hundredth? horrible mistake and/or lie you've made?

When did I ever compare Putin to Hitler, the USSR to Nazi Germany, or this to 1938? Quote me or admit you're lying.
 
:lamo you thought I was trying to hide something. Just ****ing rich.

...No...I didn't. When did I say that? Again, words mean things and this is a forum where you can just go back and see what I said. Why do you continue to lie? lol so strange. Like...everyone can see your posts, dude. lol
 
Lol. I want our foreign policy to fail, absolutely. It is menacing, it violates human rights, international law, and creates unnecessary enemies. My citizenship is irrelevant to whether or not US foreign policy is legitimate, too funny.

Your citizenship is relevant because you describe yourself as an American on these forums, I do not believe you.

There is a difference between being critical and anti-American. I am strongly critical of the U.S. because I believe in critical self reflection, we should always look at ourselves as how we can be better rather than focusing on disparaging the enemy. However it take it way too far, it seems you think the U.S. is universally evil in everything it does. I think it certainly has done some questionable things and is often a bully, but we also do a lot of good too. If we won't be the world's bully and influence everything to our favor as much as we can, there are other countries that gladly will. If I have a choice between the U.S. being the bully or someone else, I choose us.
 
...No...I didn't. When did I say that? Again, words mean things and this is a forum where you can just go back and see what I said. Why do you continue to lie? lol so strange. Like...everyone can see your posts, dude. lol

You said I was so obvious, as a criticism, as though I was trying to be incognito about my views somehow.
 
Actually, you and your pocket mouse have established absolutely nothing. You two confuse Russia's actions to secure their assets in the Crimea with a 1938 nazi invasion. :roll:

LoL, wtf is a pocket mouse? Lenny? John Coffee? Who are you?

I've actually been posting about how Putin isn't Hitler, this isn't WWII, and I don't think Russia taking Crimea is incredibly surprising. What I've been posting against is people suggesting we should be going full out against Russia trying to assert our military dominance, its madness.
 
Your citizenship is relevant because you describe yourself as an American on these forums, I do not believe you.

There is a difference between being critical and anti-American. I am strongly critical of the U.S. because I believe in critical self reflection, we should always look at ourselves as how we can be better rather than focusing on disparaging the enemy. However it take it way too far, it seems you think the U.S. is universally evil in everything it does. I think it certainly has done some questionable things and is often a bully, but we also do a lot of good too. If we won't be the world's bully and influence everything to our favor as much as we can, there are other countries that gladly will. If I have a choice between the U.S. being the bully or someone else, I choose us.

But I don't believe you've seen me criticizing good things America does. Like when we use our military to bring food, water and medical aid to the Philippines after a hurricane. And not that it matters, but how would I prove my citizenship to you? If I rationalized failed and corrupt US foreign policy?
 
Back
Top Bottom