Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Mar 14, 2014 2:28 pm UTC

I wish Chechnya would hold a referendum on whether to be in Russia. Because they clearly don't want to be, what with two bloody wars trying to escape. It's very hypocritical of Russia to steal Crimea "because the peeps totes wanna join, bro" but not let Chechens leave.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:27 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:I wish Chechnya would hold a referendum on whether to be in Russia. Because they clearly don't want to be, what with two bloody wars trying to escape. It's very hypocritical of Russia to steal Crimea "because the peeps totes wanna join, bro" but not let Chechens leave.


This is a western, liberal criticism. Russia is dominated by realpolitik, and an accusation of hypocracy isn't really going to matter to them. The expectation of consistency in different instances and incentives is...in practice, even a bit unrealistic here in the west, often, and is not universal.

Derek
Posts: 2181
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:15 am UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby Derek » Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:36 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:I wish Chechnya would hold a referendum on whether to be in Russia. Because they clearly don't want to be, what with two bloody wars trying to escape. It's very hypocritical of Russia to steal Crimea "because the peeps totes wanna join, bro" but not let Chechens leave.

What, and violate Russia's territorial integrity? Inconceivable!

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Mar 14, 2014 4:00 pm UTC

The long term consequences of this are that all of Eastern Europe and Central Asia is going to try to get their hands on delicious nuclear weapons. Because if Russia can invade Ukraine and the US/EU won't do jack shit, they can invade Belorussia or Poland or Khazakstan.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6816
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby sardia » Fri Mar 14, 2014 4:08 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:The long term consequences of this are that all of Eastern Europe and Central Asia is going to try to get their hands on delicious nuclear weapons. Because if Russia can invade Ukraine and the US/EU won't do jack shit, they can invade Belorussia or Poland or Khazakstan.

The alternative is how important actual NATO membership is. The halfass thing Ukraine had didn't warrent NATO mutual defense clause. The other Eastern europe countries will want to deepend their ties so the western important countries won't weasel out of defending them.

User avatar
bigglesworth
I feel like Biggles should have a title
Posts: 7461
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:29 pm UTC
Location: Airstrip One

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby bigglesworth » Fri Mar 14, 2014 4:09 pm UTC

Belarus or Kazakhstan maybe. Never Poland - it's a EU member.
Generation Y. I don't remember the First Gulf War, but do remember floppy disks.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Mar 14, 2014 4:19 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:The long term consequences of this are that all of Eastern Europe and Central Asia is going to try to get their hands on delicious nuclear weapons. Because if Russia can invade Ukraine and the US/EU won't do jack shit, they can invade Belorussia or Poland or Khazakstan.


Probably more conventional firepower as well. I'd imagine that the weapons industry is going to do good business to russian neighbors.

I'd also imagine it will be much less popular to allow citizens to get russian passports, etc.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Mar 14, 2014 5:12 pm UTC

Another issue. Got a bunch of Russians living in your country? Better get rid of them before Russia decides it needs to protect them.

Derek
Posts: 2181
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:15 am UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby Derek » Fri Mar 14, 2014 5:17 pm UTC

bigglesworth wrote:Belarus or Kazakhstan maybe. Never Poland - it's a EU member.

Belarus is already firmly in the pocket of Moscow. In the last "election" the opposition candidate won less than 3% of the vote.

User avatar
bigglesworth
I feel like Biggles should have a title
Posts: 7461
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:29 pm UTC
Location: Airstrip One

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby bigglesworth » Fri Mar 14, 2014 5:44 pm UTC

I must admit, Belarus is a country that I know absolutely nothing about.
Generation Y. I don't remember the First Gulf War, but do remember floppy disks.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Mar 14, 2014 6:03 pm UTC

I just know that parts of my family escaped from Minsk during one of its various episodes of ethnic cleansings.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10336
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby addams » Fri Mar 14, 2014 6:22 pm UTC

bigglesworth wrote:I must admit, Belarus is a country that I know absolutely nothing about.


(sigh) It is ok to not know everything.
If the US and Russia like two Weird-o parents get in to a fight over them....

You will learn about them when they War. Not one moment sooner!
And; That is a shame. Nations are not at their best during War.

In Peace people can learn all kinds of wonderful things about one another.
I may not agree with the Germans on the Ukraine Crisis 2014.

I Agree Whole Heartedly on the German Travel Ethic.
The Germans Go EveryWhere! So, they know stuff.

They may not all be Germans.
Those white people with the Musical Voices all look the same.

Not as individuals.
I can learn to tell one from the other.

They stand out in a crowd.
They stand out as a crowd, too.

Not in Germany? ok.
That is true.

They seem to fit right in, in Germany.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Mambrino
Posts: 388
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:45 pm UTC
Location: No we don't have polar bears. Except in zoos.

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby Mambrino » Fri Mar 14, 2014 9:46 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Another issue. Got a bunch of Russians living in your country? Better get rid of them before Russia decides it needs to protect them.


But if you actively begin 'getting rid of them', no doubt the Russian government would consider that the very proof they need to be protected by Russia.

User avatar
Carlington
Posts: 1588
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:46 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby Carlington » Fri Mar 14, 2014 11:59 pm UTC

Little bit OT, but Belarus is...somewhat unique, in that they are a rare part of Europe that seems to still be aiming for membership in the Soviet Union, rather than the European one. Or, at least, that's the impression we're given.
Kewangji: Posdy zwei tosdy osdy oady. Bork bork bork, hoppity syphilis bork.

Eebster the Great: What specifically is moving faster than light in these examples?
doogly: Hands waving furiously.

Please use he/him/his pronouns when referring to me.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6816
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby sardia » Sat Mar 15, 2014 6:17 am UTC

Carlington wrote:Little bit OT, but Belarus is...somewhat unique, in that they are a rare part of Europe that seems to still be aiming for membership in the Soviet Union, rather than the European one. Or, at least, that's the impression we're given.

Belarus isn't unique at all. Kleptocracy + hanging onto power= find friends any where you can, even if it's the Russians.

User avatar
Carlington
Posts: 1588
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:46 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby Carlington » Sat Mar 15, 2014 7:11 am UTC

Unique inasmuch as they are in Europe and trying to move away from the European Union, and towards Russia. But this is OT, and mostly irrelevant to the actual discussion anyway.
Kewangji: Posdy zwei tosdy osdy oady. Bork bork bork, hoppity syphilis bork.

Eebster the Great: What specifically is moving faster than light in these examples?
doogly: Hands waving furiously.

Please use he/him/his pronouns when referring to me.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby Diadem » Sat Mar 15, 2014 12:30 pm UTC

Belarus is firmly within Russia's sphere of influence, and I don't think Europe is even attempting to make any inroads there.

Likewise Poland and the Baltic states are already firmly within Europe's sphere of influence, and I think Russia recognizes that. They of course try to improve their influence, but they won't try to do what they did in Ukraine.

The 'battleground states' are Ukraine and Georgia.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
Wnderer
Posts: 640
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 9:10 pm UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby Wnderer » Sat Mar 15, 2014 1:56 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:Belarus is firmly within Russia's sphere of influence, and I don't think Europe is even attempting to make any inroads there.

Likewise Poland and the Baltic states are already firmly within Europe's sphere of influence, and I think Russia recognizes that. They of course try to improve their influence, but they won't try to do what they did in Ukraine.

The 'battleground states' are Ukraine and Georgia.

and Moldova.

http://www.ibtimes.com/moldova-another- ... ea-1560938
Last edited by Wnderer on Sun Mar 16, 2014 1:50 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6816
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby sardia » Sat Mar 15, 2014 3:14 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:Belarus is firmly within Russia's sphere of influence, and I don't think Europe is even attempting to make any inroads there.

Likewise Poland and the Baltic states are already firmly within Europe's sphere of influence, and I think Russia recognizes that. They of course try to improve their influence, but they won't try to do what they did in Ukraine.

The 'battleground states' are Ukraine and Georgia.

You do know there's more countries in Europe besides those you listed right?

User avatar
bigglesworth
I feel like Biggles should have a title
Posts: 7461
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:29 pm UTC
Location: Airstrip One

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby bigglesworth » Sat Mar 15, 2014 5:41 pm UTC

I'd imagine Diadem does. Your point?
Generation Y. I don't remember the First Gulf War, but do remember floppy disks.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6816
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby sardia » Sun Mar 16, 2014 12:44 am UTC

bigglesworth wrote:I'd imagine Diadem does. Your point?

I'm contesting the absolute statement that only Ukraine and Georgia are battleground territories

User avatar
Carlington
Posts: 1588
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:46 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby Carlington » Sun Mar 16, 2014 1:09 am UTC

A pretty good way of contesting that statement would be to provide some counterexamples. Maybe even in the same post you were making the claim in, if you felt like taking less than three posts to make your point. /snark

Really, though, I don't see any other country that you could really claim as being a "battleground" - certainly not Finland, nor the Baltics. The Balkans are probably going to keep pretty well clear of Russia, I'd imagine, and as has been mentioned, Belarus is firmly in Russia's sphere of influence, so there's really not going to be any contesting there. We're pretty rapidly running out of countries that border Russia, and we've already used up all the ones that you can really count as being part of Europe - unless you want to expang Europe to include Azerbaijan or Kazakhstan?
/offtopic

Back on topic, things are coming to a head saddeningly quickly. Russia has vetoed a UN resolution condemning the referendum, 70000 protestors marched in Russia, protesting against action in Ukraine, western powers are preparing sanctions, Belarus is mobilising troops on Russia's behalf and allowing Russian planes to transfer to their airfields, and troops are massing on both sides of the border, as Ukraine is rapidly trying to put together a defence force, with volunteers flocking from all corners of the country to join. A couple of weeks ago, I would have said that there was a way out of this without bloodshed. Today, I don't see any option that's not war.
Kewangji: Posdy zwei tosdy osdy oady. Bork bork bork, hoppity syphilis bork.

Eebster the Great: What specifically is moving faster than light in these examples?
doogly: Hands waving furiously.

Please use he/him/his pronouns when referring to me.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby Diadem » Sun Mar 16, 2014 12:45 pm UTC

Carlington wrote:A pretty good way of contesting that statement would be to provide some counterexamples. Maybe even in the same post you were making the claim in, if you felt like taking less than three posts to make your point. /snark

Really, though, I don't see any other country that you could really claim as being a "battleground" - certainly not Finland, nor the Baltics. The Balkans are probably going to keep pretty well clear of Russia, I'd imagine, and as has been mentioned, Belarus is firmly in Russia's sphere of influence, so there's really not going to be any contesting there. We're pretty rapidly running out of countries that border Russia, and we've already used up all the ones that you can really count as being part of Europe - unless you want to expang Europe to include Azerbaijan or Kazakhstan?

Well as Wnderer pointed out, Moldova should be counted one as well. Kazakhstan certainly is not one, since it isn't in Europe's radar, but I suppose you could count Azerbaijan and / or Armenia. I think international politics in those two countries is more determined by their hatred for each other than by the Russia / Europe dichotomy. So Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, and perhaps Azerbaijan en Armenia. All other countries in Europe are definitely firmly in either one or the other's sphere of influence, with all but Belarus being in Europe's.

Carlington wrote:Back on topic, things are coming to a head saddeningly quickly. Russia has vetoed a UN resolution condemning the referendum, 70000 protestors marched in Russia, protesting against action in Ukraine, western powers are preparing sanctions, Belarus is mobilising troops on Russia's behalf and allowing Russian planes to transfer to their airfields, and troops are massing on both sides of the border, as Ukraine is rapidly trying to put together a defence force, with volunteers flocking from all corners of the country to join. A couple of weeks ago, I would have said that there was a way out of this without bloodshed. Today, I don't see any option that's not war.

Yeah, I had not expected it escalate like this either. I really hope things can be deescalated again, because this is not looking good. Open war would of course be horrible for the region. But more than that, such an open war could easily escalate into a global conflict. I don't think the west can ignore an open war in Ukraine.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10336
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby addams » Sun Mar 16, 2014 2:57 pm UTC

Carlington wrote:Back on topic, things are coming to a head saddeningly quickly. Russia has vetoed a UN resolution condemning the referendum, 70000 protestors marched in Russia, protesting against action in Ukraine, western powers are preparing sanctions, Belarus is mobilising troops on Russia's behalf and allowing Russian planes to transfer to their airfields, and troops are massing on both sides of the border, as Ukraine is rapidly trying to put together a defence force, with volunteers flocking from all corners of the country to join. A couple of weeks ago, I would have said that there was a way out of this without bloodshed. Today, I don't see any option that's not war.

Carlington?
Do folk punch you a lot, because you make statements like that without leaving a link?
If you are making a joke by stating an imaginary extreme case, please, leave a spoiler or something.

Calington? Is that true?
http://www.haaretz.com/news/world/1.579995
Russia vetoed a UN Security Council resolution that declared the referendum invalid,

ok. That part is true. (well, Maybe. it makes sense.)

The rest of the sentence goes as follows:
as Ukraine's defense ministry scrambled aircraft and paratroopers to confront what it said was a Russian encroachment just beyond Crimea's formal regional boundary.


Just beyond Crimea's formal regional boundary?
I have learned a new respect for those kinds of Boundaries.

Of course, I, still, believe the difference between this side of The Line and that side of The Line should not be very large.
On this side of The Line, Russian is the first language on the DMV forms.
On that side of The Line, German is the first language on the DMV forms.

If you keep going, Russian is not on the DMV forms, at all.
And; French easier to read than it is to speak.

70000 thousand protesters?
Anti-War protesters?

No War, please.
A firm and polite, War over What?
18 feet and twelve sheep?

Apparently, I don't understand the issue.
What if, the outside agitators are from the US?

Well....Why not?
"If you can't win by playing fair,
win by playing unfair."

"All is fair in Love and War."

Cliche by Cliche we can march the world into War.
Or; The People can start being fucking Reasonable.

I don't want to fact check your post.
That is very bad news.

Is there another way to read the US World News Report?
Is this entertaining? A Media Blitz? Did you make PopCorn?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6816
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby sardia » Sun Mar 16, 2014 4:02 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:
Carlington wrote:Back on topic, things are coming to a head saddeningly quickly. Russia has vetoed a UN resolution condemning the referendum, 70000 protestors marched in Russia, protesting against action in Ukraine, western powers are preparing sanctions, Belarus is mobilising troops on Russia's behalf and allowing Russian planes to transfer to their airfields, and troops are massing on both sides of the border, as Ukraine is rapidly trying to put together a defence force, with volunteers flocking from all corners of the country to join. A couple of weeks ago, I would have said that there was a way out of this without bloodshed. Today, I don't see any option that's not war.

Yeah, I had not expected it escalate like this either. I really hope things can be deescalated again, because this is not looking good. Open war would of course be horrible for the region. But more than that, such an open war could easily escalate into a global conflict. I don't think the west can ignore an open war in Ukraine.

What part didn't you think would escalate? The troops taking Crimea? Or the troops massing on Ukraine's border? Because that happened a couple days after Kiev's government fell. Has anything changed beyond the voting today, and the propaganda machine shutting down opposition voices?

The probable causes of war will be when Ukraine starts it. Either the Russians take more land, or start killing people who resist. The reason to take more land, besides the obvious Russian speakers in Eastern Ukraine is that Crimea is dependent on land routes to Ukraine to sustain itself.
There's only so much aggression and humiliation an army will take before someone makes the emotional decision to fight back and die.

As for the way that doesn't lead to war, what the West is doing now is decent enough. Threaten to bleed Russia dry with sanctions, but promise no military help to Ukraine. So Putin takes as much as he dares, while the West starts sanctioning them. Remember, the real sanctions haven't even started yet, the West still wants to threaten sanctions so that Putin can keep Crimea, but go no further. The idea is to make it unpalatable to seize all/more of Ukraine. A good scenario for the West would be the economy + allies in Russia falters due to sanctions, and Putin backs off by keeping Crimea but going after no more. Then they can spend the next decade hashing out the details of what should happen peacefully.

War itself isn't inevitable, you just have to be really coldhearted. If Russia annexes Crimea, sanction them + complain, and no more. If Russia grabs some more land to support Crimea, sanction them more and complain. If Russia grabs Eastern Ukraine, same. etc etc with Ukraine fighting and losing to Russia. For those of you who think that the West would never let this happen without coming to their aid, think about what Diadem said: "Ukraine isn't and never was part of the EU... Charging the EU with abandoning one of its own is not justified." That is stone cold realpolitik.
Note: Still trying to find who said it in this thread.

Mambrino
Posts: 388
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:45 pm UTC
Location: No we don't have polar bears. Except in zoos.

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby Mambrino » Sun Mar 16, 2014 5:32 pm UTC

Carlington wrote:A pretty good way of contesting that statement would be to provide some counterexamples. Maybe even in the same post you were making the claim in, if you felt like taking less than three posts to make your point. /snark
))
Really, though, I don't see any other country that you could really claim as being a "battleground" - certainly not Finland, nor the Baltics. (...)


Offtopic:

Spoiler:
I don't know about 'battleground', but since the recent turn of events in Ukraine, just the hypothetical possibility is considered worrisome enough that the prospect of applying for Nato membership is now discussed seriously by serious politicians, which has not happened in years.

Tchebu
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 12:42 am UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby Tchebu » Sun Mar 16, 2014 6:25 pm UTC

I haven't kept up with this as much over the past couple of weeks as I would have liked, so I have a question to the people who have. Last I checked, Russia was calling the troops in Crimea "self-defence" forces and denies that they have anything to do with the Russian military, which is presumably sitting quietly at their Crimean bases that they're allowed to have (but are of course prepared to come to the aid of the Crimean people, should the need arise). Pretty much no one believes that, and the news basically seem to be talking about "Russian forces occupying Crimea" as an obvious fact. While that's probably the case "de facto", I was wondering if there was any official "de jure" confirmation of this that popped up while I wasn't looking.

If not, how are the west justifying the sanctions?

And I don't mean some interview with a soldier that goes "yeah, we're Russian", or having "Tigers" with Russian license plates. I don't think that really counts when it comes to international law (does it?...)
Our universe is most certainly unique... it's the only one that string theory doesn't describe.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10336
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby addams » Sun Mar 16, 2014 6:50 pm UTC

Mambrino wrote:
Carlington wrote:A pretty good way of contesting that statement would be to provide some counterexamples. Maybe even in the same post you were making the claim in, if you felt like taking less than three posts to make your point. /snark
))
Really, though, I don't see any other country that you could really claim as being a "battleground" - certainly not Finland, nor the Baltics. (...)


Offtopic:

Spoiler:
I don't know about 'battleground', but since the recent turn of events in Ukraine, just the hypothetical possibility is considered worrisome enough that the prospect of applying for Nato membership is now discussed seriously by serious politicians, which has not happened in years.

Offtopic, too.
Spoiler:
oh! oh!
What a wonderful idea.
Everyone become NATO members.
NATO can't attack NATO members.

I'll Join!
Where is that PaperWork?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby CorruptUser » Sun Mar 16, 2014 7:12 pm UTC

And exit polls say 93% in favor of Russian union. Good ol' vote rigging to the rescue.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6816
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby sardia » Sun Mar 16, 2014 7:51 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:And exit polls say 93% in favor of Russian union. Good ol' vote rigging to the rescue.

Isn't this more voter intimidation?

Tchebu:
Why would you need for Russia to admit they are invading and annexing Crimea before you start punishing them? If an accused robber is convicted of robbery but refused to admit it, he would still go to jail. Given that international politics isn't a court, cept for the court of public opinion, that's how the west is justifying sanctions.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby CorruptUser » Sun Mar 16, 2014 8:29 pm UTC

International politics is best described as anarcho-capitalist. And you have Ancaps that think we should apply that to individuals.

Tchebu
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 12:42 am UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby Tchebu » Sun Mar 16, 2014 8:55 pm UTC

I'm not looking for admission on Russia's part, just some legitimate official level evidence that justifies the accusation of military aggression. My point is that there doesn't seem to be a "conviction" as such. As it is, Russia is basically constructing the following narrative, and has held to it consistently throughout the whole affair:
1) Ukraine's new government is illegitimate because the proper impeachment procedure hasn't been observed.
2) Crimean "local self-defense forces" have been organized against the new government. Yeah they happen to have our military equipment, but they're not actually our troops. Our troops are sitting on the border and in the Crimean bases that we're allowed to have. We're understandably concerned with the situation, so we're taking steps to be prepared for the worst case scenario, hence our mobilization.
3) Crimea seems to want to join us, we're happy to comply. Let them decide.

And the response from the west seems to be
1) There was some kind of parlamentary vote thing against Yanukovich. That's good enough. Let's just move on and deal with the new guys in charge.
2) No... we think it's you. Here's a youtube video that proves it. And here are some sanctions against you.
3) You're just gonna rig the referendum.

The obvious problem is that my impression of the western narrative sounds like a caricature, and I don't want it to be that way. Is there any well-articulated position from the west and not just "come on, man, this is Putin we're talking about...". Am I naive to expect something like in international politics? Can anyone just point to troops without insignia and just accuse whatever country these troops happen to support of military occupation? Aren't such accusations a big deal as far as global peacekeeping goes?
Our universe is most certainly unique... it's the only one that string theory doesn't describe.

User avatar
bigglesworth
I feel like Biggles should have a title
Posts: 7461
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:29 pm UTC
Location: Airstrip One

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby bigglesworth » Sun Mar 16, 2014 10:44 pm UTC

Well, there's the point that troops without insignia that do this sort of thing... don't really exist, I don't think. Can anyone tell me when a well-drilled militia of non-state soldiers has come out of the woodwork to occupy a country before?
Generation Y. I don't remember the First Gulf War, but do remember floppy disks.

engr
Posts: 322
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2010 3:08 am UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby engr » Sun Mar 16, 2014 11:27 pm UTC

omgryebread wrote:Turchynov vetoed that bill, so Russian remains an official language. And it's worth remembering (I'm gonna keep saying this) that part of the reason that Crimea is so predominately ethnic Russian is that the Soviet Union shipped Crimean Tatars to Uzbekistan, with almost half of them dying in the process.


Question of "shipping Tatars" aside (the situation was far from "genocidal Russians vs. innocent Tatars" picture you seem to have), you are still incorrect.
Here's an ethnic map of Ukraine per 1897 census:

Image

Legend:
Red = Russians, Yellow = Ukrainians, Blue = Belorussians, Red = Poles, Light blue = Jews, Grey = Germans, Orange = Romanians and Moldovans, Navy blue = Hungarians, Dark green = Bulgarians, Lighter Green = Tatars, Light green = Kazakhs, Black = Chechens, Purple = Ingushs.


Elections were only a few months away (almost a year) because the protests forced Yanukovych to move them forward.


The fact is that Yanukovich has been elected in 2010 under constitutional countrywide elections which were found legal by EU observers. Unlike in 2004 elections, it was largely recognized even by the opposition, not to mention the West, that he was in power legally. Next constitutional elections were supposed to be in 2015. Yanukovich made an agreement with opposition that non only the elections will be in 2014, but that he would restore the old constitution, but the extremists decided to continue with the coup anyway.

Yes, the overthrow was out of bounds of the Ukrainian constitution. Which is an odd thing to argue since Yanukovych's government essentially proved the worthlessness of the Constitution. (Amendments weakening the power of the president were made in 2004. In 2010, under somewhat suspicious circumstances, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine overturned those amendments. Yes, the court decided the Constitution was unconstitutional.)


So now you want to pick and choose which unconstitutional actions you like and which you don't.
Court decision = bad. Violent overthrow of legal government in Kiev = good. Non-violent overthrow of local gov't in Crimea = bad.

That's some false-equivalency bullshit. Tymoshenko and her party were ineffective, sure. Corrupt, yeah, to some extent, that seems really likely. But it's a pretty bold claim to say the opponents of Yanukovych, with at least a modicum of support for anti-corruption measures and some rule of law aren't better than he was.


Yeah, it's not like they were stealing money from the budget. Timoshenko was obviously a politisal prisoner, because Timoshenko and Yuschenko said so. Their anti-corruption measures are, as a Russian saying goes, "bees protesting against honey".

Nationalists or radicals play a role in pretty much every revolution. The massacres in post-independence India don't give Britain a right to invade.


Funny that you mentioned Britain, but never the US interventions in Yugoslavia (in early 90's and in 1999), in Somalia, French intervention in Mali, NATO bombings of Libya and support of rebels in Syria.

Out of curiosity, do you believe that intervention to prevent or stop a genocide is never justified? Say, in WWII it was enough to push out Germans and Japanese out of the conquered territories, but it was not OK to fight them In their respective territories, because it was their business whom they were massacring on their territory? Or that Vietnamese should not have overthrown Pol Pot?

Given that Putin rigs elections seemingly for the fun of it, not sure this matters. The vote isn't legitimate anyway, unless you think France would be justified in invading Canada and implementing a referendum in Quebec.


If Anglophones overthrew a gov't in Ottawa, declared Oswald Mosley their new national hero and promised to massacre Francophones, I don't think I would condemn Quebecian separatism, or its support by the French.

I mean, they're a bit hypocritical, sure.


Understatement of the year.

They're also right. Worth noting is that the invasion of Iraq was against a dictator who had committed human rights violations. Russia's invasion of Ukraine is not comparable, given that there haven't actually been any human rights violations from the current Ukrainian government.


Sure. The violations were not by the gov't, just by paramilitary Nationalist groups like "Right-Wind Sector" who brought that gov't to power and who are supported by that gov't. But the government had absolutely nothing to do with it.

This is not to mention that the legal Ukrainian president has requested the Russians to use force against the illegal gov't, but who cares, right? We don't like the guy, therefore he's not the legal president. Fuck the constitution. Except for that part that says Crimea cannot separate just by a popular vote. We like that part.

Sure, they weren't "people peacefully protesting" but from my understanding, the first violent action was by the Berkut police force dispersing the protest on November 30. Your portrayal of the events is just as, if not more dishonest. It wasn't the police responding to the protestors burning them alive by beating them with batons. It was protesters escalating to violence after pro-government forces kidnapped activists, violently dispersed rallies, and shot people.


You are entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts. Berkut started using live ammo, way too late in the situation, after they have been attacked with incendiary devices and rocks.

As of Nov. 30 events... Here is how it began. Protesters started throwing stuff at riot police - first eggs, then rocks and sticks. Try doing it to the police in any country and see how they respond.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. Gilbert K. Chesterton

engr
Posts: 322
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2010 3:08 am UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby engr » Sun Mar 16, 2014 11:34 pm UTC

Mambrino wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Another issue. Got a bunch of Russians living in your country? Better get rid of them before Russia decides it needs to protect them.


But if you actively begin 'getting rid of them', no doubt the Russian government would consider that the very proof they need to be protected by Russia.


Brilliant. We have liberals here condemning Russia for invading under, like, totally false pretext of defending ethnic Russians. Then we hear the same liberals arguing for expulsion or destruction of ethnic Russians in other countries, and then complaining that if you start doing that, then Russia would use it as another pretext for invading. Just... brilliant.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. Gilbert K. Chesterton

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby CorruptUser » Sun Mar 16, 2014 11:37 pm UTC

When did I advocate ethnic cleansing? I was warning that an unintended consequence of this may be ethnic cleansing. Because countries tend to do what's in their best interest, and Putin has made it clear it's not in a country's interest to have ethnic Russians.

engr
Posts: 322
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2010 3:08 am UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby engr » Sun Mar 16, 2014 11:42 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:And exit polls say 93% in favor of Russian union. Good ol' vote rigging to the rescue.


Also brilliant.
Too many votes in favor of Russia? That's gotta be vote rigging, there can't be such an overwhelming majority.
Narrow margin, still in favor of Russia? That's definitely vote rigging! Referendum results against Russia? Well, that proves that despite Russian rigging efforts, Ukrainians won. You can't lose.

Out of curiosity, when some areas in the US voted >90% for Obama, or some rural "red" areas voted overwhelmingly for Romney, is that overwhelming majority a proof of voter fraud? Or does this principle only apply abroad?

And if the military presence is the key difference, are all elections in Iraq and Afghanistan illegitimate, because US military is or was present there and would obviously influence election outcome? Were the post-WWII elections in Europe rigged, since the countries were occupied by Soviet and Allied forces?
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. Gilbert K. Chesterton

engr
Posts: 322
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2010 3:08 am UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby engr » Sun Mar 16, 2014 11:49 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Because countries tend to do what's in their best interest, and Putin has made it clear it's not in a country's interest to have ethnic Russians.


Having ethnic Russians is fine.
It's not in country's interests to threaten ethnic Russians with violence.
It's not in country's best interests to have semi-official militias walking on the streets and harassing people for speaking Russian, chanting "moskalei na nozhi" ("Knife the Russians!"), and erecting hanging trees labeled "for Ukraine's enemies".
It's not in country's best interests to glorify WWII-era Nazi collaborators.
That's for sure.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. Gilbert K. Chesterton

Mambrino
Posts: 388
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:45 pm UTC
Location: No we don't have polar bears. Except in zoos.

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby Mambrino » Mon Mar 17, 2014 12:19 am UTC

bigglesworth wrote:Well, there's the point that troops without insignia that do this sort of thing... don't really exist, I don't think. Can anyone tell me when a well-drilled militia of non-state soldiers has come out of the woodwork to occupy a country before?


Yes. And it isn't just
Tchebu wrote:2) No... we think it's you. Here's a youtube video that proves it. And here are some sanctions against you.


There are ...I don't know? dozens? a hundred? many enough western journalists on the field producing tons of verifiable photography and videos. Practically all western professionals and hobbyists, government-affiliated or otherwise, seem to agree that those troops have the clothing, equipment, and vehicles that not-Russian-military troops would be very unlikely to obtain in these numbers and on short notice. Not to speak of the fact the 'militia' has acted like a trained, disciplined unit, and are very unlike a local militia would be. I think the Russian claim that those troops are a local militia is the caricature here

However. I'm not expert in Ukraine constitutional law, so (1) is kind of murky, I agree. Also (3) the referendum; it probably wasn't rigged, but result of ~95% sound mightily suspicious. Was all of the populace allowed to vote? The referendum was organized very soon and held when the situation was still very heated. I don't think Ukrainian government was really given a chance to campaign and present its viewpoint. (Compare and contrast to the upcoming vote on Scottish independence.) On the contrary, apparently (I'm based this on the Western reporting of Russian reporting so I might be mistaken) the Russian populace in Crimea think the government in Kiev consists of anti-Russian nazi-fascists, who would drive their tanks straight to the Simferopol if it weren't for these polite 'self-defence troops' holding them off.

You original point about if Russian military has occupied Crimea de jure... I don't think there could be any other way than Russian government acknowledging those troops as their own soldiers, and they're not going to do that: admitting ''yes they're our troops'' after claiming for all this time ''nope they're not ours'' would be even more ridiculous than continuing the 'local militia' story. In international politics, there really isn't or can't be such de jure resolutions in these kind of situations where the publicly stated viewpoints of partial countries (on what the situation is) differ as much as they do here.

'Edited for reply:
(and again for clarity)

engr wrote:
Mambrino wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Another issue. Got a bunch of Russians living in your country? Better get rid of them before Russia decides it needs to protect them.


But if you actively begin 'getting rid of them', no doubt the Russian government would consider that the very proof they need to be protected by Russia.


Brilliant. We have liberals here condemning Russia for invading under, like, totally false pretext of defending ethnic Russians. Then we hear the same liberals arguing for expulsion or destruction of ethnic Russians in other countries, and then complaining that if you start doing that, then Russia would use it as another pretext for invading. Just... brilliant.


Wasn't the ...sardonic (that's the word I guess?) nature of that exchange imminent? Oh dear. Yes, I (for one) tried to say you really can't commit ethnic cleansing either because (in addition that it's wrong, d'uh) then the pretext wouldn't be false, as you aptly pointed out. I figure that was the CorruptUser's 'Catch-22' point: if it suits his needs, Putin is able to to present himself as a defender of ethnic Russian minorities in neighbouring countries against persecution whether they're being persecuted or not.
Last edited by Mambrino on Mon Mar 17, 2014 12:34 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6816
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Ukraine Crisis [New Title]

Postby sardia » Mon Mar 17, 2014 12:33 am UTC

engr wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Because countries tend to do what's in their best interest, and Putin has made it clear it's not in a country's interest to have ethnic Russians.


Having ethnic Russians is fine.
It's not in country's interests to threaten ethnic Russians with violence.
It's not in country's best interests to have semi-official militias walking on the streets and harassing people for speaking Russian, chanting "moskalei na nozhi" ("Knife the Russians!"), and erecting hanging trees labeled "for Ukraine's enemies".
It's not in country's best interests to glorify WWII-era Nazi collaborators.
That's for sure.

Are you against Western support of Ukraine solely due to ideological grounds? Because there's a lot more to this than 'he said, she said ethnic cleansing'. For one thing, you're completely ignoring the impulsive nature of the decision to invade Crimea. You're painting Ukrainians who don't support Russia's occupation of their country as Nazi collaborating violent nationalists. That's a pretty heavy accusation to throw around. Are you saying that if Russia had not invaded, this would be a repeat of Croatian War? Or are you merely painting both sides as having their hands dirty? I'm curious if you're full of Prorussian propaganda or are just critical of how corrupt/violent Ukraine is.

What's your sourcing for these accusations? Are you disputing that Russia has rigged elections?

Edit: I looked at your original post several pages back, and it appears to be youtube videos instead of an actual source. Do you have anything more concrete? Like a journalist?


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 22 guests