221–230 of 255 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Russians have this kind of force prepared because of their naval base at Sevastopol. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_Fleet
Without logos on uniforms, carriers or tanks? Did they think people would not know?
As to who, most like Russian special forces, no identification is case it goes tits up
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's some pile of bullshit. Who are "we" that set up the riots? Those people stayed there since November, with wide popular support, risking life and limb. It is unbelievably obtuse to echo Kremlin propaganda that those were but the agents of US State Department. One has to be either exceptionally ignorant or exceptionally motivated to find a way to blame America to believe this canard. >>> Question is - who is the…
If today, you just came back from a year long vacation in a country without papers, internet access or TV, had no idea what happened in Syria, and was unaware of the back-and-forth struggle to get Ukraine to align with the EU ... Woke up today for the first day back in civilization, opened the papers, and see that Putin was mobilizing forces ... then I guess yes, my whole argument is a "pile of bullshit" and the guy…
And of course whatever happened in Iraq means it's OK for Putin to invade Ukraine. Because US wouldn't like it and since US is evil obviously Putin is a good guy here. See your logic now, you've pieced it all together perfectly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Big difference. Serbians under Milosevic were committing mass murder and ethnic cleansing (as they had done with Bosnia and Croatia few years earlier), while here, Ukrainians are not kicking people from Crimea out. This is just a land grab.
>Ukrainians are not kicking people from Crimea out. Not yet. Still, the first act of the new regime was to revoke language rights from ethnic minorities, i.e. Russians in Crimea. When this sort of thing happens, ethnic cleansing is not far away.
[1] http://www.unian.ua/society/669726-progolosovaniy-zakon-pro-...
[2] http://www.vaadua.org/news/zayavlenie-vaada-ukrainy-po-povod...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pawnd? WTF? So, Obama is an imperialist if he sends in troops or supports the Ukrainian government (and there's zero chance of the former happening) or he's a dunce who gets pawnd by Putin? Seems like you've been suckered in by the cult of tough guy macho Putin.
He is a tough guy. He just invaded a country by force and effectively told Obama to shutup up and sit down. It's Obama's move now. If he does nothing now, will he also do nothing when North Korea rolls into the South? The thugs are watching and learning.
Er, no, its the Ukraine's move now.
> If he does nothing now, will he also do nothing when North Korea rolls into the South?
Does the US have a mutual defense treaty with and prepositioned large military forces in the Ukraine? How about South Korea? Seems to me, the two situations aren't comparable.
See what happened in Ukraine's neighboring country, Moldova, 24 years ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_Transnistria Moldova had a population of ethnic Russians that lived on the Eastern bank of the river D'niest'r. (Similar to the Crimean region in Ukraine.) Eventually a civil war broke out, and Russia stepped in to back the ethnically Russian region (sound familiar?). The end result was a stalemate. A ceasef…
That would actually an optimistic scenario. More pessimistic one would be if you notice Putin got approval to use Russian military in Ukraine, not just in Crimea. Which means he can also use it it Kharkov, Donetsk, Lugansk and other places where there is a majority Russian population. And try to split Ukraine along language-ethnic lines and destroy it as an independent state as a punishment for defying them. Note tha…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are you talking about???? Bush kept building US bases in plenty of ex-USSR republics day and night. He kept Putin by the balls. I'm an US citizen in Poland now. Bush wanted to build anti-ballistic shield in Poland that would render this country along Czech Republich untouchable by the Ruskies. First decision Obama made? He scrapped the whole deal in order not to make Russia feel bad. You have no idea how pissed…
How does an anti-ballistic shield help against tanks then? The plan for anti-ballistic launchers in eastern europe are to protect the USA against long range launches, not to protect eastern europe from ground troops.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh no, definitely not. Now it's too late. For years this weakling (Obama) have been porting an image of a weakling and that's the problem. There are plenty of examples: Syria and the red-line with chemical weapons usage. That was a red-line, we were supposed to do something once it's crossed. So it was crossed and what Obama did? Listened to Putin who said don't invade!!! He listened to Putin! So Syria is lost becaus…
"None of that (shield in Eastern Europe, Syria) would ever happen with McCain or Bush leading the country." How are you so certain? =\
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are placing me in an uncomfortable position of spewing pro-Kremin propaganda. Ok. >Presenting this as if it is some sinister technique freshly invented Well, I didn't go into details, and I'm not an expert, but Color revolutions in ex soviet countries have certain common qualities to them. The main is "nonviolent action" of Gene Sharp. Holding a square for weeks, and waiting for violence to discredit government w…
>>> Holding a square for weeks, and waiting for violence to discredit government wasn't a normal normal way to make a revolution before this method was used. Protest which turns out violent is a normal way of revolution to happen. The protest can either end up in nothing - in which case it is called protest and forgotten soon - or can turn out violent and spread, in which case it is called civil war, or revolution, o…
It's indeed sinister, when the government spends money of taxpayers, billions of dollars over years, on democracy in foreign states, especially considering the US has supported brutal dictators when that was advantageous to their their interests or overall foreign policy. More reasonable explanation is that democracy is not their primary goal.
>but I'm sure you'll explain it to me soon.
Western education (payed for by fellowship from the United States State Department) or Reagan staffer wife for 40-50 year olds in ex Soviet Block countries is very very very uncommon thing. Please tell me how it's a historical coincidence and there's no involvement of the US, that exactly these people lead successful revolutions and installed anti-Russian policies.
>a lot of people liked Stalin or Lenin or Hitler too.
They didn't vote for Stalin or Lenin or Mao. A crucial difference.
>but it is false. Russia is not democratic because it is convenient for the ruling clique
It's convenient for ruling clique indeed. But the situation when there's potential foreign involvement in democratic process, meaning that (historically adversarial) foreign interest takes side in internal politics, is not conducive for really open democracy in eyes of sovereignty minded citizens.
>If the US didn't exist at all, Putin were the same dictator,
Similarly baseless statement you accuse me of. Putin's persona was certainly affected/formed by 2004 Orange revolution in Ukraine.
>As for assisting the forces, the assistance has been mainly in words
I'm sure that in 50+ years FOIA request will reveal what the assistance was in detail.
The fact is that US is supporting undemocratic coup, ignores interests of eastern regions that voted for Party of Regions and Yanukovich. That is not exactly pro-Democracy, it's more about supporting "our" guy.
>US is to blame for "meddling"
Even if Putin is not a democratic leader, US is certainly "meddling". One would be dumb not to see that.
>pro-Liberty Russians spend their time
I mentioned before that much of this position is not exactly mine. It's more like knee-jerk sophistry reaction to people who believe that US can do no bad with covert foreign actions, is not involved anywhere where pro-US governments suddenly pop up, and such actions have no negative destabilizing effects. I don't like rabid patriots who condone foreign interventions. While I'm really for these actions, because these actions indirectly are in my interests, I can't deny that these actions undermine sovereignty of independent states, provoke authoritarian states to became even more authoritarian, and it's an example of the US acting as World Police, which many view in a negative light(not me in this particular case).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As if somebody would be intervening. EU bureaucrats plan to hold "emergency meeting" on Monday - because occupation of a foreign country and potential war near their borders is not a reason to work on Sunday, you see. One can be sure nothing would come out of it on Monday either but empty "we are very worried" declarations.
> As if somebody would be intervening. EU bureaucrats plan to hold "emergency meeting" on Monday - because occupation of a foreign country and potential war near their borders is not a reason to work on Sunday, you see. Or because the actual work to develop options and brief on the facts prior to the emergency meeting of decision makers is going to happen through Sunday. Most of the work related to any meeting of dec…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, they can call it however they want. Technically they're the same language. There are only minor lexicographical differences, the grammar being roughly the same. Blame Stalin for the confusion.
Technically, they're different, which makes the question of whether they should have a different name a political one, not a linguistic one. As the saying goes, a language is a dialect with an army and a navy.