This is an amazingly low tech revolution. The primary weapons of the protestors are: smoke, flammable liquid, rocks, shields and giant slingshots. These tools could have been used in the Peloponeasian War as easily as in 2014. It really says something about the character of the revolutionaries that they are willing to fight without modern weapons or equipment. I don't know enough about the Urkaine to asses the merit…
They also use Molotov cocktails to burn/kill police officers and some of them are using those air(?) guns.
Two things that especially amaze about the actual 'street part' of Ukrainian revolution are complete absence of plundering or looting of local shops and that no firearms have been used by protesters.
I think mostly because the protest are very localized. Apart from that street, the city( and country ) is operating as usual. Shops and businesses are operating and civilians are going to work. The protest are mostly after work activity. That is why the largest fights take place in the evening and night.
Locking manhole covers (or welding them shut) prevents assassins from easily placing bombs under them, and makes it harder for people to enter the sewers. Also, manhole covers may be used as weapons or shields.
Aha! That bombs thing does make sense. It wouldn't be that hard to enter the sewers outside that 'government sector', and place a bomb under a manhole cover welded shut, but I guess would-be terrorists would not want to carry a few hundred pounds or so of explosives through the sewers.
Assuming the sewers are even navigable for a human.
The photography here is absolutely incredible. This situation is really frightening to me. I so hope that the Ukraine can get out from underneath her oppressors (yes I mean Yanukovitch and Putin) without descending any further into chaos.
Ukraine isn't under oppression from Yanukovitch and Russia. Current president of Ukraine won last elections being in opposition, after revolution of 2004 showed that nothing changed. But as last government could do any good, current is also considered bad (by people). The core problem is Ukraine consists of two parts - East and West. Both parts are about the same size and population. West part gravitates to west and east part gravitates to Russia. That's understandable, east part has many ties with Russia, because it's almost the same people (same history till 1350-1400 CE) with hundreds years living near. There's families divided by border, they often go to visit each other, there's economical ties etc. Of course Russia wants to see Ukraine as a friend. Imagine Canada would decide to go into union with China and shut down it's border for USA. That's kinda similar.
Anyway, Ukraine stays being two-headed and I don't know how all that will end, but I hope they will find good solution.
Man, the amount of disdain people have for protesters in the comments to this story is really shocking. I do not exactly understand where it's coming from. Yanukovych is a corrupt petty thief and rapist, turned politician, who has very close ties with Russia, and is stealing from the Ukrainian people through corruption. He rigged an election in 2004 and only massive riots prevented him from coming into power then by…
Let me respectfully disagree with what the real problem is. The real problem is not Russia. You are absolutely right that Russia wants influence in Ukraine. You are right that Yanukovych is a thief. But the real problem is people believing they need someone to reign over them. You think you can elect better politicians, who can put your interest in front of their own self-interest; who will not steal while chanting a…
> The only true worthwhile revolution comes when people realize they don't need anyone to rule them. When the majority realizes that, no more revolutions and violence can follow.
Indeed, in an anarchy, you don't have any regime to stage revolutions against. But violence? Oh, you'd get plenty of that. It would just be distributed, instead of organized: survival of the fittest.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvlFhr-TPZw Keep throwing that molotov!
Yeah, that definitely justifies setting someone on fire. The protesters are just this peaceful bunch of people who would never do something like that, hurt other people who are just standing there... /s http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=959_1390672028 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuO53xeZkm8
These police are just standing there, shielding people who previously happily allowed the police to brutalize peacefully protesting civilians and even tried to poison political enemies. So no, they are not simply standing there.
Further, the protesters in the liveleak video only hit police armed with riot gear and once they're rid of that largely leave them alone. That is astonishing control.
This is an amazingly low tech revolution. The primary weapons of the protestors are: smoke, flammable liquid, rocks, shields and giant slingshots. These tools could have been used in the Peloponeasian War as easily as in 2014. It really says something about the character of the revolutionaries that they are willing to fight without modern weapons or equipment. I don't know enough about the Urkaine to asses the merit…
that plus bravery and the (correct?) hope that the police and military will basically be unwilling to pull triggers a handful of tanks and people willing to fire on their fellow citizens would probably rout the protests
The military has refused any involvement (which is probably why he fired the general about a week ago).
Let me respectfully disagree with what the real problem is. The real problem is not Russia. You are absolutely right that Russia wants influence in Ukraine. You are right that Yanukovych is a thief. But the real problem is people believing they need someone to reign over them. You think you can elect better politicians, who can put your interest in front of their own self-interest; who will not steal while chanting a…
> The only true worthwhile revolution comes when people realize they don't need anyone to rule them. When the majority realizes that, no more revolutions and violence can follow. Indeed, in an anarchy, you don't have any regime to stage revolutions against. But violence? Oh, you'd get plenty of that. It would just be distributed, instead of organized: survival of the fittest.
States did a great job convincing people that anarchy == violence. Yet what is the evidence for that? If you look at history, an average state over the course of, say, 10 years, murdered more people than the bloodiest of all anarchists did over his lifetime.
And then you should also understand that anarchy doesn't mean no laws and policing. It means that people choose to live by the laws they want (and not by voting, but by becoming customers of different law firms) and people choose private protection agencies to pay to instead of being bitten by state police troopers if they disobey. If people decide they don't like the service, they stop paying and go to a competitor. Now try doing that with a state and taxation.