Ukraine V: You'll join Russia and like it!

[Velo]

So, Ukraine will re-arms itself with nukes now, and after them, the entire neighborhood, yes?

[Solmyr]

With Russian troops on the ground and Russian cronies running the election how can we ever be sure the result wasn't fixed

With armed, violent, fascist protesters on the streets and within government buildings in Kiev, how can we ever be sure the result of 'impeaching' the president and electing a new one wasn't fixed?

Frankly, the situation in Kiev, right before the change of government, looked a lot more prone towards manipulation of results than the current situation in Crimea looks like. In Kiev there was open fighting, one step shy of civil war. Then you get a change in government based on the votes of members of parliament, not on a vote by the people. In Crimea you have a peaceful population, who go to the ballots and vote. Which do you find more democratic?

[Shryke]

With armed, violent, fascist protesters on the streets and within government buildings in Kiev, how can we ever be sure the result of 'impeaching' the president and electing a new one wasn't fixed?

Frankly, the situation in Kiev, right before the change of government, looked a lot more prone towards manipulation of results than the current situation in Crimea looks like. In Kiev there was open fighting, one step shy of civil war. Then you get a change in government based on the votes of members of parliament, not on a vote by the people. In Crimea you have a peaceful population, who go to the ballots and vote. Which do you find more democratic?

:rofl:

You haven't been paying the least bit of attention, have you?

Even the results are a joke. They didn't even try to pretend it was legitimate. The numbers are Third-World Dictator levels of laughable.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Solmyr,

The change that occured without an invasion, occupation by foreign troops, and the leader of the foreign occupiers referencing the laws of States that ceased to exist more than twenty years ago to justify their actions.

Putin will get the Crimea but I sincerely hope it comes at the price of future economic and international isolation for Russia. Annexing chunks of your neighbors territiory is not okay and I don't want it to become okay or commonly accepted.

Velo,

If I were Ukrainian I would see no reason not to now that we know what "security assurances" are actually worth. Further, if I were a post Soviet State not in NATO I'd be banging on the door to get in as that appeara to be the only thing stopping Russia from reassembing the Soviet Empire.

[Shryke]

And this sounds like western propaganda. Again, I ask, how is a coup in which half the country did not participate a popular coup? Do you think Crimeans participated in this coup? Or the people of Donetsk and Kharkiv? Don't do they have a say in who governs them? Why should they put up with the overthrow of a government they voted for and replaced by right wing elements.

You seem very bad at understanding what propaganda looks like. It's not "reports you don't like". That's not "western propaganda", it's what happened. Read the news. Lots of them for perspective. That's what's been going on.

Really, you seem to just want to whinge about what the term "popular coup" means. When people use the term, what happened in Ukraine is exactly what they have always been talking about. Large scale protests that overthrow the government. It's messy and nasty, but that's what a popular coup looks like.

You can question the legitimacy of the new government, but you know how that gets resolved? In an election. Which was both part of the deal struck before Yanukovych fled and what the new government is still pushing for, which is the right way to do things.

Sometimes, though, large scale demonstrations and shows of public power can be somewhere between necessary or inevitable if you want to achieve change, especially in cases of ridiculously corrupt regimes like the Ukrainian one. That's what the oft discussed right to political demonstration is about.

And you can't condemn the protesters that ousted Yanukovych without doing the same for the protesters you yourself claim are doing the same thing.

Finally, your claims about who overthrew the government are incredibly skewed. Support for the protests was both widespread and quite diverse.

And the west certainly played a part instigating the protests including meddling in the affairs of a soverign nation as the leaked tapes clearly indicate.

What leaked tapes are you referring to here? And what extent is this supposed influence?

And how does that negate that there was, you know, actual Ukrainians on the streets, in huge numbers, doing the actual protesting/fighting/dying/etc.

Those were real Ukrainians fighting for what they believed in. You don't have to agree with their actions or their beliefs, but they aren't western plants.

And you don't have any issues with hard right members (Who are anti-jewish and anti-russian) providing the muscle? They are the reason the protests turned violent and the riot police had to step in to protect the legally elected government holed up inside parliment. What, did you want the mob to go in there and hurt these ministers?

Yeah, no. This is just bullshit. The hard-right were not the reason the protests turned violent. I mean, firstly, major protests turning violent is just a fairly common thing and secondly, it's the polices job to not, say, respond with deadly force against unarmed protesters.

Can you link to these reports please?

Can you read the thread please?

There's been no shortage of them in here.

For all your accusations and your hiding of elements of it behind distaste for the way the revolution went down, you are the one actually quoting propaganda in this thread.

[jurble]

Putin will get the Crimea but I sincerely hope it comes at the price of future economic and international isolation for Russia. Annexing chunks of your neighbors territiory is not okay and I don't want it to become okay or commonly accepted.

Eh, Russia's annexation of Crimea was bloodless. If everyone starts holding annexation plebiscites, we'd live in a more interesting world. Wars of conquest are still dead, I think. But if Russia's actions renormalize border changes of the expansive sort rather than the balkanization sort, I'm all for it. South Tyrol into Austria! Neo-Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth!

[Jackson5tributeband]

:rofl:

You haven't been paying the least bit of attention, have you?

Even the results are a joke. They didn't even try to pretend it was legitimate. The numbers are Third-World Dictator levels of laughable.

I think the numbers are accurate. The opposition, notably the Tartar minority, boycotted. Besides there's little doubt that most Russians in the Crimea want to join Russia. After Kosovo the United States, and it's NATO allies, are really in no position to complain or protest about stuff like this. Personally I think it a disgrace that a sovereign nation has been invaded and one of it's provinces annexed, but I thought the same thing when it came to the ex Yugoslavia and at the time I was called an apologist for a blood thirsty dictator. What goes around comes around.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Jon,

Galcia and East Prussia back to Germany? Transylvania to Hungary?

Jackson,

That's how Russia justified its actions in Abkasia and South Ossetia. How many times will they use that justification before it rings empty as opposed to just hollow?

[Shryke]

I think the numbers are accurate. The opposition, notably the Tartar minority, boycotted. Besides there's little doubt that most Russians in the Crimea want to join Russia.

Yeah, most of a plurality, not most. Many boycotted or stayed home because the election is beig held under duress, with lots of intimidation going on and with a ballot that only has "Yes" and "Basically Yes" on it. It's a sham and the boycotting only makes it more so.

And even then, the numbers they are quoting are suspect. 96%? Fucking please.

After Kosovo the United States, and it's NATO allies, are really in no position to complain or protest about stuff like this. Personally I think it a disgrace that a sovereign nation has been invaded and one of it's provinces annexed, but I thought the same thing when it came to the ex Yugoslavia and at the time I was called an apologist for a blood thirsty dictator. What goes around comes around.

The fuck?

Like, dude, there's a wee bit of difference between those 2 situations. Also, mass graves.

[Jackson5tributeband]

Solmyr,

The change that occured without an invasion, occupation by foreign troops, and the leader of the foreign occupiers referencing the laws of States that ceased to exist more than twenty years ago to justify their actions.

Putin will get the Crimea but I sincerely hope it comes at the price of future economic and international isolation for Russia. Annexing chunks of your neighbors territiory is not okay and I don't want it to become okay or commonly accepted.

Velo,

If I were Ukrainian I would see no reason not to now that we know what "security assurances" are actually worth. Further, if I were a post Soviet State not in NATO I'd be banging on the door to get in as that appeara to be the only thing stopping Russia from reassembing the Soviet Empire.

Speaking from a European perspective I will have to disappoint you. There is no way that an EU, ever more dependent on Russian capital, will bring anything but the most tokenistic form of sanctions forward. The British Tory Party reacted in abject horror at even the suggestion of sanctions. You have no idea the extent to which the elites in countries like the UK and Germany have allowed themselves to be corrupted by the seemingly never ending flow of Russian hot money.

[jurble]

Jon,

Galcia and East Prussia back to Germany? Transylvania to Hungary?

If it's in an honest vote, why not? Though I doubt the current inhabitants of East Prussia would vote for joining Germany. And Galicia was part of Austria-Hungary (and Poland). And I doubt they'd vote for that too. Transylvania to Hungary would be hilarious. I'm not sure that there's enough Székelies to vote the entirety of Transylvania out, but a Hungarian enclave in Romania would be so weird.

[Jackson5tributeband]

Yeah, most of a plurality, not most. Many boycotted or stayed home because the election is beig held under duress, with lots of intimidation going on and with a ballot that only has "Yes" and "Basically Yes" on it. It's a sham and the boycotting only makes it more so.

And even then, the numbers they are quoting are suspect. 96%? Fucking please.

The fuck?

Like, dude, there's a wee bit of difference between those 2 situations. Also, mass graves.

Yes you're correct the war crimes in Kosovo were bad. Some examples (from Wiki..I'm being lazy)

• Lake Radonjić massacre – 34 individuals of Serb, Roma and Albanian ethnicity were discovered by a Serbian forensic team near the lake.^{[13][14][15][16]}

• Prison Camp Jablancia – 10 individuals were detained and tortured by KLA forces including: one Serb, three Montenegrins, one Bosnian, three Albanians, and two victims of unknown ethnicity.^[17][18]

Gnjilane massacre – The remains of 80 Serbs were discovered in mass graves after they were killed by Albanian militants.^[19]

Orahovac massacre – More than 100 Serbian and Roma civilians were kidnapped and placed in concentration camps, 47 were killed.^[20]

Staro Gračko massacre – 14 Serbian farmers were murdered by Albanian militants.^[21]

Klečka killings – 22 Serb civilians were murdered and their bodies were cremated.^[21][22]

Ugljare massacre – 15 Serbs were murdered by Albanian separatists.^[21]

Peć massacre – 20 Serbs were murdered and their corpses were thrown down wells.^{[citation needed]}

Volujak massacre – 25 male Kosovo Serb civilians were murdered by members of the KLA in July 1998

The UN has been searching for the mythical mass graves pupotedly containing thousands of Albanaian civillians and has found precisely....well none really. Remember at the time the US state department claimed up to 500,000 Albanians had disappeared and were feared dead. There were killings on both sides, the KLA in particular were brutal, but to claim a 'genocide' to justify an illegal invasion of a foreign country was a particularly shitty move by the US, but one us non Americans have become well used to from the Empire. A reminder from recent history, Iraq's mythical WMD, the Syrian government's chemical weapon attack which has now been proven to have been carried out by the US funded opposition (funny how we don't read about that in the newspaper). Putin has actually been quite honest in comaprison, what he probably should have done is to pay a bunch of pro Russian mercenaries to commit a massacre on Russian civillians and blame it on the Tartars. He'd then claim them to be 'Islamic terrorists' and use it as a pretext to invade. That'd be how the CIA/State Dept would roll, and when they'd finished bombing the fuck out of the place they'd give the rest of us lectures on democracy and human rights.

[Miodrag]

Like, dude, there's a wee bit of difference between those 2 situations. Also, mass graves.

Really: mass graves? Since you like to name others as propagandists, care to point to any example of a mass grave in Kosovo prior to NATO bombing? You know, like, before the NATO started bombing a sovereign nation on a false pretense? Are you aware that of all Serbian civil or military leaders that were tried for Kosovo, The Hague Tribunal included, not a single one of them was charged with anything that happened before the bombing? Even the infamous Racak incident, which was among the main reasons for the bombing as cited by the Western media at the time, was dropped out of charges against Serbs in The Hague? Do you know that Goran Guri Radosavljevic, the commander of the unit that undertook Racak operation, is a guest teacher in a number of military courses organized by NATO or NATO countries, where he lectures students precisely about Racak operation? Do you know that Helena Ranta, a Finish pathologist at the helm of the forensic team that investigated Racak incident in the name of UN, years later testified that William Walker, an American commanding the OEBS mission in Kosovo at the time, was pressuring her (shouting at her and throwing objects like pencils at her during their meetings, for example) to alter her initial report in order for it to suit his needs - which she finally did, but on her own and without the knowledge of the rest of her team?

We could also discuss crimes that occurred during the bombing, which Serbs were actually accused of in trials. Not to derail a thread too much, I'll just say here that the same courts and tribunals that put Serbs on trials on a very shady 'evidence', never ever charged anyone from NATO, even though the NATO bombed at least two refugee columns (one of which Albanian), one civilian train, residential areas in Serbia's towns and cities with cluster bombs, the Serbian national TV station (not surprisingly, only the center from which foreign correspondents were broadcasting their stuff was destroyed), firefighters that showed at the site of the bombing in downtown Belgrade to clear the damage, a Chinese embassy, water supplies and electric power of urban areas... But, all that aside, I'd really like to find out with what can you support official and unofficial reasons&justifications for the NATO bombing of Serbia. Since you're such an expert on recognizing propaganda, I guess it'll be no problem for you.

[Jackson5tributeband]

Really: mass graves? Since you like to name others as propagandists, care to point to any example of a mass grave in Kosovo prior to NATO bombing? You know, like, before the NATO started bombing a sovereign nation on a false pretense? Are you aware that of all Serbian civil or military leaders that were tried for Kosovo, The Hague Tribunal included, not a single one of them was charged with anything that happened before the bombing? Even the infamous Racak incident, which was among the main reasons for the bombing as cited by the Western media at the time, was dropped out of charges against Serbs in The Hague? Do you know that Goran Guri Radosavljevic, the commander of the unit that undertook Racak operation, is a guest teacher in a number of military courses organized by NATO or NATO countries, where he lectures students precisely about Racak operation? Do you know that Helena Ranta, a Finish pathologist at the helm of the forensic team that investigated Racak incident in the name of UN, years later testified that William Walker, an American commanding the OEBS mission in Kosovo at the time, was pressuring her (shouting at her and throwing objects like pencils at her during their meetings, for example) to alter her initial report in order for it to suit his needs - which she finally did, but on her own and without the knowledge of the rest of her team?

We could also discuss crimes that occurred during the bombing, which Serbs were actually accused of in trials. Not to derail a thread too much, I'll just say here that the same courts and tribunals that put Serbs on trials on a very shady 'evidence', never ever charged anyone from NATO, even though the NATO bombed at least two refugee columns (one of which Albanian), one civilian train, residential areas in Serbia's towns and cities with cluster bombs, the Serbian national TV station (not surprisingly, only the center from which foreign correspondents were broadcasting their stuff was destroyed), firefighters that showed at the site of the bombing in downtown Belgrade to clear the damage, a Chinese embassy, water supplies and electric power of urban areas... But, all that aside, I'd really like to find out with what can you support official and unofficial reasons&justifications for the NATO bombing of Serbia. Since you're such an expert on recognizing propaganda, I guess it'll be no problem for you.

I suspect you're wasting your breath. He/She, I'm assuming, is an American. They believe all kinds of nonsensical horsehit as fed to them by their government controlled media and public school system. They don't even know their own history but are happy to lecture the rest of us on supposed historical crimes. I honestly can't take the American government seriously when it gabbers on about Putin. Yes he's a pretty cold hearted shit, yes what the Russians are doing in Crimea is a bitch move, but Putin has a long. long. long way to go to match the U.S.A. when it comes to invading other countries under false petexts.

[Borque]

Yes he's a pretty cold hearted shit, yes what the Russians are doing in Crimea is a bitch move, but Putin has a long. long. long way to go to match the U.S.A. when it comes to invading other countries under false petexts.

Are you comparing Russia under Putin with the entire history of the USA? That's not entirely fair.

[Jackson5tributeband]

Are you comparing Russia under Putin with the entire history of the USA? That's not entirely fair.

You're right, and I apologise if it came over that way. Putin actually stopped a war in Syria, he is, for example, way more qualified to receive a Nobel than Obama.

[Miodrag]

I suspect you're wasting your breath <snip>

Looks like you're right and I am wasting my time and energy, but that's the least I can do, considering many of my countrymen - few of which I knew quite well - lost their lives fighting against the aggression on our homeland, aggression which NATO never renounced in any way (and considering your posts on the subject as well, for which I'm very grateful). In fact, NATO soldiers are terrorizing Serbs in Kosovo at this very moment, of which I wrote about in some of my previous posts, so I really have extremely hard time understanding all this high moral ground Russia-haters appear to claim in this debate. It's not like the last US/EU/NATO crime against a sovereign nation happened centuries ago. It's not like Kremlin is colonizing Latin America or India or Africa, justifying that with examples from 300 years ago. It's the very opposite: Kremlin is working inside the frameworks created by ongoing violations of international law committed by US&EU. Several legal experts even claim that, no matter how it can look from the perspective of a consumer of Western media and their biased reports or from ridiculous statements by Obama, the international law is clearly on Kremlin's side - provided Yanukovych, still the legal president, asked Moscow to intervene on his behalf (there are rumors about such a document, though I don't think any evidence on it was disclosed so far, so it's only a speculation at this point). Whatever Russia did in Ukraine so far, The West did clearly worse and way before Russians. Russia-haters continuously fail to name any historical example similar to what we saw at the beginning of Majdan protests: foreign diplomats attending the protest, spending nights with the protesters, giving inflaming speeches at the protest, providing food and drinks for the protesters... Nothing like that happened ever, as far as I know. It is an act of aggression. Any Western country would treat it as an act of aggression. Can you imagine a Russian or a Chinese or an Iranian diplomat attending and helping a protest in USA or France or Sweden? No way. It would never happen. Nobody would even consider anything like that, because of the expected response that would have to be understandably strong, resolute and hostile. Sending your diplomats to support an unrest in a foreign country is an act of aggression against that country. It's simple as that. Add all those threats The West was putting in front of Kiev right from the start of this mess, and all the very troubling aspects of the coup, and you get an even nastier picture that can't help but disturb Crimea people. Whatever Kremlin did in Crimea, it did against a country already and obviously violated by The West, and possibly with a legal justification.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Miodrag,

You should really start a thread to discuss NATO in Kosovo as that action is unrelated to Russian actions in Crimea.

[The Iceman of the North]

Really: mass graves? Since you like to name others as propagandists, care to point to any example of a mass grave in Kosovo prior to NATO bombing? You know, like, before the NATO started bombing a sovereign nation on a false pretense? Are you aware that of all Serbian civil or military leaders that were tried for Kosovo, The Hague Tribunal included, not a single one of them was charged with anything that happened before the bombing? Even the infamous Racak incident, which was among the main reasons for the bombing as cited by the Western media at the time, was dropped out of charges against Serbs in The Hague? Do you know that Goran Guri Radosavljevic, the commander of the unit that undertook Racak operation, is a guest teacher in a number of military courses organized by NATO or NATO countries, where he lectures students precisely about Racak operation? Do you know that Helena Ranta, a Finish pathologist at the helm of the forensic team that investigated Racak incident in the name of UN, years later testified that William Walker, an American commanding the OEBS mission in Kosovo at the time, was pressuring her (shouting at her and throwing objects like pencils at her during their meetings, for example) to alter her initial report in order for it to suit his needs - which she finally did, but on her own and without the knowledge of the rest of her team?

There were plenty of mass graves around the former Yugoslavia which gave the Serbs precious little leeway in this situation. The Racak incident you mention, together with past action by the Serbs, was the main motivation for initiating the NATO bombing. It's true that the veracity of the 'official version' of what really happened there have been disputed, and a proper, neutral investigation of the incident is sorely lacking.

Still, the comparison between Kosovo and Crimea are rather moot. You simply can't compare a quest for independence with a quest for being annexed by a foreign power while under the auspices of armed forces from said foreign power (regardless of whether they were invited by the proper local authorities or not, and regardless of what the result of a referendum held under democratic conditions would have been).

[Dicer]

I honestly can't take the American government seriously when it gabbers on about Putin.

No one does. They don't understand that the rest of the world is laughing at Kerry while he flaps his gums and barks about sanctions and what not. We have editorials in papers here highlighting the American hypocrisy and why no one cares what the Americans say at this point.

Are you comparing Russia under Putin with the entire history of the USA? That's not entirely fair.

Russia under Putin has done far less damage to the world than the US under any president has done. The United States is responsible for more death and destruction in this world than any other country. Obama is continuing that fine tradition with the murder of innocent children using drone attacks.

What leaked tapes are you referring to here? And what extent is this supposed influence?

Yeah, no. This is just bullshit. The hard-right were not the reason the protests turned violent. I mean, firstly, major protests turning violent is just a fairly common thing and secondly, it's the polices job to not, say, respond with deadly force against unarmed protesters.

First, I would suggest that you take your own advice and read some of the many links posted on these threads. There were clips from a BBC documentary posted here about the right wing nazi elements among the protestors who were responsible for taking on the police and burning down buildings. They were armed. There were interviews posted here (Democracy now) with people who knew the situation on the ground talking about how the police were trying to prevent the mob from getting inside parliment and attacking the ministers.

Several riot policemen were among those who died.

If you are in support of these armed anti-jewish, anti-russian, anti-polish armed nazis trying to violently overthrow an elected government and then criticise the peacefully held referendum in Crimea, then I don't have anything more to say to you. Clearly we see things differently and we are not going to come to an agreement here.

You can question the legitimacy of the new government, but you know how that gets resolved? In an election. Which was both part of the deal struck before Yanukovych fled and what the new government is still pushing for, which is the right way to do things.

Yes, but the newly formed government chose to throw out the deal to which the EU was a signatory and kicked Yanukovych out. They failed to honor their end of the bargain. Says something about the credibility of these guys.