Havoc in Kiev: Snipers fire on protesters/opposition (NSFW)

[Jaskalas]

Well, for a little while you actually sounded like you knew what you were talking about.

Even though this fits loosely with my 'prediction' in post in post #161, I'm surprised Putin is doing this in such a 'naked' way.

IMO, that's a bad sign: He doesn't feel constrained. I thought he'd at least look for some plausible pretext.

Fern

Is he really "wrong" though?

Two ways of looking at this in the context of the demographically Russian parts of Ukraine. On one hand it's a Russian invasion. OTOH, Russia is simply being welcomed in to help protect the pro-Russian provinces. At the moment it's limited to Crimea.

This may simply be the former Ukraine government protecting itself in the land it still holds. If they want to be Russian, or even independent, who are we to say no? Who are we to say it's a bad thing for Russia to be protecting / controlling Crimea? IMO Russia does not cross the line unless they seize Kiev and occupy all or most of Ukraine. Until such acts of aggression they may be viewed as a peacekeeping force to protect Ukraine from a civil war.

 

[fskimospy]

Is he really "wrong" though?

Two ways of looking at this in the context of the demographically Russian parts of Ukraine. On one hand it's a Russian invasion. OTOH, Russia is simply being welcomed in to help protect the pro-Russian provinces. At the moment it's limited to Crimea.

This may simply be the former Ukraine government protecting itself in the land it still holds. If they want to be Russian, or even independent, who are we to say no? Who are we to say it's a bad thing for Russia to be protecting / controlling Crimea? IMO Russia does not cross the line unless they seize Kiev and occupy all or most of Ukraine. Until such acts of aggression they may be viewed as a peacekeeping force to protect Ukraine from a civil war.

Russia is treaty bound to respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine. So as for who is to say that the Russians are wrong for doing this, well, that would be the Russians of about 20 years ago.

 

[gevorg]

Lol. Whatever you need to tell yourself. Go ask the people in prison for the crime of protesting against Putin what they think about his effective lifetime presidency.

While I appreciate your "two wrongs make a right" style of argument, I was asking for a way to effectively contain Russian aggression. Did you have one? Or wait, maybe your next post is about how this isn't aggression at all.

Bringing up Pussy Riot is hilarious. I'm not saying two wrongs make it right, I'm saying pull the log out of your own eye, before speaking of specks of others. If Russia invades Ukraine beyond Crimea, it will be war, there is no euphemism for that. Russia's government is corrupt, there are many problems there, but it doesn't make Putin or Medvedev a dictator, no matter how much US neocons want to portray that image (was Bush a dictator by invading Iraq?). If your definition of a dictator is so broad (or conveniently changes), then we can call Bush or Obama a dictator just based on what was recently revealed about NSA. Anyway, the fact that you equated Ukraine to Syria, makes it very unlikely that we'll be on the same page here.

actually that's not true at all....our definition of dictator is drastically different than most Russians definition. BTW -- Just for your information before you start with this most stuff....
I speak Polish and I speak Russian and I have friends in the Ukraine who told me and I posted in another thread that the Russians were already in the Ukraine.....so I think that lends some credibility two my telling you there ids a drastic difference in the meaning of the word -- dictator by Russians and Americans...

LOL, yes, we all have friends around the world. What languages have to do with this? I'm an Armenian who also speaks Russian. I don't claim credibility from the languages I know. :whiste:

The Ukrainians are divided right now, obviously some of them might think of Putin as a dictator, especially ones who side with banderovci. Poland has a whole history of Russophobia. Have you been to Russia recently? Have you spoken to people in Russia? I've been there several times in the past few years (for work, software dev), and speak with various folks regularly over Skype. This is where *I* can claim some credibility on what Russians say/think, at least on the sample of people that I converse with. Beats CNN/Fox/etc for sure.

 

[norseamd]

Bringing up Pussy Riot is hilarious. I'm not saying two wrongs make it right, I'm saying pull the log out of your own eye, before speaking of specks of others. If Russia invades Ukraine beyond Crimea, it will be war, there is no euphemism for that. Russia's government is corrupt, there are many problems there, but it doesn't make Putin or Medvedev a dictator, no matter how much US neocons want to portray that image (was Bush a dictator by invading Iraq?). If your definition of a dictator is so broad (or conveniently changes), then we can call Bush or Obama a dictator just based on what was recently revealed about NSA. Anyway, the fact that you equated Ukraine to Syria, makes it very unlikely that we'll be on the same page here.

with that arguement neither would the roman emperor be a dictator

 

[Jaskalas]

Russia is treaty bound to respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine. So as for who is to say that the Russians are wrong for doing this, well, that would be the Russians of about 20 years ago.

What violation? If we ask Canada to send in forces to protect a town, have they invaded and violated that town?

You think Crimea does not want them there to protect them from Ukraine nazis? Maybe they do.

 

[Fern]

What violation? If we ask Canada to send in forces to protect a town, have they invaded and violated that town?

You think Crimea does not want them there to protect them from Ukraine nazis? Maybe they do.

The Ukraine has a government, and AFAIK a legitimate one. IIRC, it been recognized by other countries.

And they want Russia OUT. So IMO Russia has no right to be there even if Russian speaking people in Crimea asked them to come on over. BTW: No one, not even Russia, is claiming the Crimea people wanted and asked Russia to come in AFAIK.

Fern

 

[Whiskey16]

and this is how Cuban missile crisis happens...

Yes, if you are referring that situation being ultimately the result of first the USA instigating the Bay of Pigs invasion of unmarked militia groups into the sovereign state of Cuba.

Sound familiar?

....then the US placement of nuclear missile into Turkey, onto the doorstep of the USSR, followed by the USSR playing tit-for-tat with a now reasonably insecure Cuba who was all too welcome to host similar missiles on its territory to help ensure detent against the USA. Practically, this worked for Cuba and the USSR. The USA's cards were played and it withdrew the arms from Turkey, and to this day the USA remains out of Cuba.

 

[Brainonska511]

What violation? If we ask Canada to send in forces to protect a town, have they invaded and violated that town?

You think Crimea does not want them there to protect them from Ukraine nazis? Maybe they do.

The Crimean government directly asking the Russians to come on over is like Michigan asking Canada to come over. The recognized international government is the one that is supposed to call the shots on foreign policy issues, like 'inviting' occupying forces.

 

[Whiskey16]

The Crimean government directly asking the Russians to come on over is like Michigan asking Canada to come over. The recognized international government is the one that is supposed to call the shots on foreign policy issues, like 'inviting' occupying forces.

This. Legally it is a matter between sovereign states.

Entry of a foreign power is only legal if with permission of the domestic state (the country rather than sub-jurisdictional governments) or with a UN Security council Chapter VI (again requiring the domestic state's agreement)or VII authorisation. Such a Chapter VII resolution may come after the fact of invasion of that invading state was demonstrated to be preluded first by military action by the other state onto its territory or possibly current ethnic based crimes being violently carried out against its citizens in an offending state. Neither are the case against Russia or Russians.

A justification to protect national citizens isn't valid with such a simple statement either. They are resident and currently freely secure beyond the jurisdiction of the foreign state. The mere presence of specific nationals does not give legal credence to military invasion nor territorial expansion (re: WWII, some of the later expansion by the USSR, or currently Israel into Palestine).

 

[Abwx]

The Ukraine has a government, and AFAIK a legitimate one. IIRC, it been recognized by other countries.

And they want Russia OUT. So IMO Russia has no right to be there even if Russian speaking people in Crimea asked them to come on over. BTW: No one, not even Russia, is claiming the Crimea people wanted and asked Russia to come in AFAIK.

Fern

It is not a legitimate governement and afaik the first move of this fascist mob that currently govern this state was to suppress the current law about recognized language in Ukraine, in short russian is no more an official language , hence its use in national and local administrations is de facto forbidden starting from theses days, an aknowledgment that the Kiev mobsters that saized the power are a bunch of ultra nationalists and racists if such a blatant violation of rights of the russian speaking people
is the first decision of thoses arsonists and other skin heads...

 

[k3n]

The Crimean government directly asking the Russians to come on over is like Michigan asking Canada to come over. The recognized international government is the one that is supposed to call the shots on foreign policy issues, like 'inviting' occupying forces.

Crimea is an "autonomous" state, unlike Michigan. Also Michigan, doesn't comprise of British or French Canadians as it's majority population. Also the majority learned Russia as their first language as far as I know. Finally, Crimea was "gifted" by Soviet Ukrainian leader, Nikita Khrushchev, in the 1950s. Michigan on the other hand, during the French-Indian war to Britain, then America?

A better analogy would be Quebec Canada, begging France for "protection", as a result of British Canadians electing an anti-French Fascist. Of course, these are 2 NATO member states, so its a bit difficult to take seriously. But then again look at Greece and Turkey, arguing over Cyprus.

A must watch video, for those who want to know why Crimea is very vital Russia's existence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6jHhzj08yQ&feature=c4-overview&list=UUwnKziETDbHJtx78nIkfYug

 

[fskimospy]

Crimea is an "autonomous" state, unlike Michigan. Also Michigan, doesn't comprise of British or French Canadians as it's majority population. Also the majority learned Russia as their first language as far as I know. Finally, Crimea was "gifted" by Soviet Ukrainian leader, Nikita Khrushchev, in the 1950s. Michigan on the other hand, during the French-Indian war to Britain, then America?

A better analogy would be Quebec Canada, begging France for "protection", as a result of British Canadians electing an anti-French Fascist. Of course, these are 2 NATO member states, so its a bit difficult to take seriously. But then again look at Greece and Turkey, arguing over Cyprus.

A must watch video, for those who want to know why Crimea is very vital Russia's existence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6jHhzj08yQ&feature=c4-overview&list=UUwnKziETDbHJtx78nIkfYug

An important thing to note is that one of the primary reasons the population there is majority Russian is due to a campaign of ethnic cleansing that Russia engaged in. It is pretty crazy to cite the high prevalence of Russians in a place as a good reason for some kind of humanitarian intervention when they are that way due to a previous crime against humanity your country participated in.

Regardless, Crimea is universally recognized as a part of Ukraine. While it has a significant degree of autonomy, it unarguably is Ukrainian territory. Russia is also undeniably violating not only international law, but numerous agreements to which it is signatory. Third, even the ousted president doesn't want Russian troops in there.

 

[Genx87]

What does "autonomous" even mean when it comes to Crimea? In many ways Michigan is also "autonomous". They have their own constitution, govt, police force, laws, tax collection, and national guard units.

 

[k3n]

An important thing to note is that one of the primary reasons the population there is majority Russian is due to a campaign of ethnic cleansing that Russia engaged in. It is pretty crazy to cite the high prevalence of Russians in a place as a good reason for some kind of humanitarian intervention when they are that way due to a previous crime against humanity your country participated in.

Regardless, Crimea is universally recognized as a part of Ukraine. While it has a significant degree of autonomy, it unarguably is Ukrainian territory. Russia is also undeniably violating not only international law, but numerous agreements to which it is signatory. Third, even the ousted president doesn't want Russian troops in there.

Ukrainian parliament under Yanukovych, signed an agreement (around 51-49%) with Russia to maintain military presence in Crimea until 2042, similar to how America has a military presence in Guantanamo bay, and communist revolutionary Cuba really can't do a thing about it. Cuba is another strategic location, in the western hemisphere, in military terms as well.

As far as I know, Yanukovych was impeached by politicians (325 to 0) under duress/threats of Molotov totting mobs. Eastern & Southern Ukraine have a right to be concerned; just as American minorities should be concerned if a KKK/white nationalist organized riots, overthrew and had Obama "impeached".

 

[theeedude]

An important thing to note is that one of the primary reasons the population there is majority Russian is due to a campaign of ethnic cleansing that Russia engaged in. It is pretty crazy to cite the high prevalence of Russians in a place as a good reason for some kind of humanitarian intervention when they are that way due to a previous crime against humanity your country participated in.

Regardless, Crimea is universally recognized as a part of Ukraine. While it has a significant degree of autonomy, it unarguably is Ukrainian territory. Russia is also undeniably violating not only international law, but numerous agreements to which it is signatory. Third, even the ousted president doesn't want Russian troops in there.

Kosovo was universally recognized as part of Serbia too. Didn't stop NATO from supporting its independence. What's good for the goose... If Crimeans want to be independent of Ukraine, then they will be. There will be a referendum, so we'll know soon.

 

[k3n]

Kosovo was universally recognized as part of Serbia too. Didn't stop NATO from supporting its independence. What's good for the goose... If Crimeans want to be independent of Ukraine, then they will be. There will be a referendum, so we'll know soon.

Another legitimate post indeed.

And let's not forget the Kosovo Liberation Army, an organization that had close ties to Al-Qaeda, as well being involved in organ, human/sex and drug trafficking. This was the organization that we were suppose to sympathies with.

Of course Russia under Putin, rather than Boris Yeltsin, probably wouldn't stand by such 1999 NATO bombings of Serbia, if they could relive the history.

 

[michal1980]

Liberals actually believed that Russia was moving into a post cold war stance. They believed the rest button theory. Russia has been this whole time has just been bidding its time looking for weakness, to return to its glory superpower position.

The left is just to stuck on stupid to realize that. They don't believe countries want to have super power influences. they are stuck on post modern liberalism, lets all hand hold and sing.

 

[fskimospy]

Ukrainian parliament under Yanukovych, signed an agreement (around 51-49%) with Russia to maintain military presence in Crimea until 2042, similar to how America has a military presence in Guantanamo bay, and communist revolutionary Cuba really can't do a thing about it. Cuba is another strategic location, in the western hemisphere, in military terms as well.

As far as I know, Yanukovych was impeached by politicians (325 to 0) under duress/threats of Molotov totting mobs. Eastern & Southern Ukraine have a right to be concerned; just as American minorities should be concerned if a KKK/white nationalist organized riots, overthrew and had Obama "impeached".

In that case it would sound like you are making the argument that Yanukovych is still the legitimate president of Ukraine. In that case, the 'legitimate' president of Ukraine is also against a Russian invasion. So really no matter what government you think is legitimate they are universally against this violation of Ukranian sovereignty.

The Ukraine-Russian agreement on military bases there does not give Russia any authority whatsoever to undertake the actions it is currently taking. It's not like the US would cite the Gitmo lease as cause to occupy Santiago de Cuba.

 

[fskimospy]

Liberals actually believed that Russia was moving into a post cold war stance. They believed the rest button theory. Russia has been this whole time has just been bidding its time looking for weakness, to return to its glory superpower position.

The left is just to stuck on stupid to realize that. They don't believe countries want to have super power influences. they are stuck on post modern liberalism, lets all hand hold and sing.

You have no clue what you're talking about.

Maybe you can explain why Russia pulled a similar move in regards to Georgia when all the tough talking real world conservatives were running the US? Did they sense weakness then as well?

 

[michal1980]

You have no clue what you're talking about.

Maybe you can explain why Russia pulled a similar move in regards to Georgia when all the tough talking real world conservatives were running the US? Did they sense weakness then as well?

Right, I have no clue as to what I'm talking about. Yet Russia invaded the Ukrain after Obama said not too.


Watching the ketchup king on TV right now, he's spinning he's wheels to explain what the US position will be.

 

[k3n]

deleted

 

[Jaskalas]

An important thing to note is that one of the primary reasons the population there is majority Russian is due to a campaign of ethnic cleansing that Russia engaged in. It is pretty crazy to cite the high prevalence of Russians in a place as a good reason for some kind of humanitarian intervention when they are that way due to a previous crime against humanity your country participated in.

Regardless, Crimea is universally recognized as a part of Ukraine.

Like the Falkland Islands, it is for the people of Crimea to decide who they are. Not you. Not the Ukrainian government. It is the present occupants who would fight for their homes, for their land. It is they who Russia is now protecting from Western aggression.

I do not deny people the right of self determination. Neither should you.

 

[Whiskey16]

Like the Falkland Islands, it is for the people of Crimea to decide who they are. Not you. Not the Ukrainian government. It is the present occupants who would fight for their homes, for their land. It is they who Russia is now protecting from Western aggression.

I do not deny people the right of self determination. Neither should you.

:'confused:

Who's fighting? Who's occupying? Who has invaded?

Jaskalas, the onus is upon you to present to the forum this "Western aggression" in the Ukraine.

Are you attempting a parody post to deny the Russian military invasion into the Ukraine?

If it must be. then by all means, self determination. Democratic self determination without presence of the invading and illegal occupation of an expansionist and autocratic foreign power, Russia. Yet, that's done and that's the way the annexation of this portion of Ukraine is enacting. The Russian aggression may now only cease and retract at the will of Putin.

Jaskalas, your post is totally inane and devoid of rational thought.

 

[Jaskalas]

:'confused:

Who's fighting? Who's occupying? Who has invaded?

Jaskalas, the onus is upon you to present to the forum this "Western aggression" in the Ukraine.

You appear incensed by my idea. I'll try to explain it better.

This mess started with pro-western protestors staging a sort of revolution in which the Ukrainian government surrendered. Immediately afterwards the new government provoked the Russian Ukrainians, and their protestors started damaging / ripping up Russian symbols across the country.

This pissed off eastern Ukraine. There were talks of civil unrest or civil war starting due to the two sides being royally pissed off at each other. Suddenly armed men seize control of Crimea and secure airfields for Russian military to land.

It stands to reason that the disturbance in Ukraine was going to escalate into sectarian violence or civil war. That the new government of western Ukraine was going to claim eastern Ukraine by force. Thus western aggression.

Russia is in Crimea to prevent it. They have achieved that by establishing security before Kiev could assert control over Crimea by force. They saw what was coming with the pro-Russian protests in the east and before the new Ukranian government could crush their own people Russia stepped in.

Are you attempting a parody post to deny the Russian military invasion into the Ukraine?

It is for the people of Crimea to decide if they welcome the protection of Russia or not. I'll quote one of them.

"Crimea is Russia," one elderly lady told AFP in front of a statue of Soviet founder Lenin that dominates a square next to the occupied parliament building in the regional capital Simferopol.

- 'We will not surrender' -

You want to force Crimea to recognize their new pro-western government. A government at the mercy of the mob which overthrew the last government. You want to deny ethnic Russians protection from that western mob. There are two different peoples in Ukraine. They need not be forced together by violence. No one should stand for that.

 

[fskimospy]

Like the Falkland Islands, it is for the people of Crimea to decide who they are. Not you. Not the Ukrainian government. It is the present occupants who would fight for their homes, for their land. It is they who Russia is now protecting from Western aggression.

I do not deny people the right of self determination. Neither should you.

Is this a parody post? You appear to have uncritically swallowed the Russian narrative that has little if any evidence backing it. Why? Invasion and takeover by Ukraine? How do you explain the complete lack of mitary mobilization by the Ukraine until the Russian invasion? How do you explain how both the current AND the ousted Ukrainian presidents oppose this Russian aggression? How do you explain that the guy who called for Russian intervention got 4% of the vote in the last election?

All that goes without even mentioning Russia's atrocious record not only for self determination in Russia as a whole, but in the Crimea in particular. The idea that you are arguing for the ability of an area to engage in self determination supported by a state that purposefully engaged in an ethnic cleansing campaign there to make it more pro-Russian is a pretty vile endorsement of the political utility of crimes against humanity. To mate that with a high minded appeal to universal rights is either dangerously naive or again, a parody post.