Discussion Separatism in Ukraine and double standards.

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Leeea

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2020
3,599
5,340
106
Then Georgia...
To be fair Georgia keeps trying to split off more and more.

It is just every time a bunch of Russians keep coming through and murdering everyone.


Now if you think a governments merits are based on how well its can murder, rape, and torture a population, yea, Russia has merit. Otherwise Russia has no sovereignty anywhere. Russia is not like other Federal states, the Russian federal subjects are held together by fear, not mutual gain.


Western government rules by the consent of the people. Russian government rules by its ability to inflict terror.
 

Leeea

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2020
3,599
5,340
106
Ok, so HOW EXACTLY, is this different from republics of Donetsk and Luhansk seeking independence from Ukraine?!
Well, a bunch of Russian army* showed up and pointed guns at them and informed** them they were independent republics. That is how it is different.


*well, technically they were no longer Russian army, they all retired two months ago complete with all their equipment and gear

**there were actually a bunch of folks who didn't go along with this plan, they ended up in mass graves:

The Russian's just executed everyone who did not vote to support their plan.


If you ask me, that is radically different from all of the states that broke away from the USSR.
 

Leeea

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2020
3,599
5,340
106
I mean, it's not without reason these separatists want to split! Both republics used to be a part of USSR once. Their native language is Russian. Not Ukranian. So is their way of life. You can argue that these people should just get the F out, if they don't like the new Ukranian way of life. But that's exactly what they are trying to do. They are trying to separate, along with their lands, just like Poland did back in the day.
You realize everyone who was part of the USSR all know how to speak Russian, and nobody wants to be part of Russia?

Your are just repeating Russian propaganda at this point.


I already linked the mass graves. There were lots that didn't want to be part of Russia. The ones that spoke up were deposed of.



More importantly just watch the videos. As Ukraine liberates these lands they are delighted to see Ukrainian army. This is a war of liberation for Ukraine.

on the flip side, you have Russian grandmothers cooking poison pies for Russian soldiers.


It doesn't take a genius to see through the Russian cloud of disinformation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,382
7,445
136
It doesn't take a genius to see through the Russian cloud of disinformation.

It does take an interest in doing so.

So it appears that there are parties interested in endorsing Russian Genocide of others.

Perhaps our sense of morals are a luxury that must be worked on to maintain, lest our people's heads are also filled with the garbage we have encountered here. Because history will show that our civilization is the anomaly, and Russia's method is the standard human modus operandi. The one we performed in the past, and that we are trying to do better and avoid. But those of us born into these countries, we have taken for granted that which separates us from our ancestors. From large swaths of the planet today who, if given a chance, would murder us all. And in our neglect to clearly state the differences, we risk losing them ourselves. As we do not properly guard from infiltration and corruption unless we speak the truth of it.

When Republicans play coy with Russia's actions, that is the sort of corruption I speak of. The risk of what that means for us, and the world. Should such ideas once again come to power in America and we no longer champion the ideas of "good" in the world. Good, meaning we may not seize a people's land and cleanse it of the natives. We know this sin. The world repeatedly and endlessly knows this sin. It is our duty to stop it from continuing to happen. To do better and to protect others from human nature.

The imperial colonizers, the Genociders, we must not hesitate to show them our wrath. We need to openly declare it and champion our cause lest we risk forgetting who we are and lose our way again.


*This post was edited in tone and content
 
Last edited:

Leeea

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2020
3,599
5,340
106
When Ukraine split from USSR, its government slowly started appeasing Ukranian nationalists more and more. First, it was the overall anti-Russian sentiment (which is understandable, given past history), but then words turned into actions. They outlawed Russian is schools, they started forcing people to speak exclusively in Ukranian. There were even occasional attacks on Russian speakers just for speaking Russian. Eventually there was a horrific event in the Ukranian city of Odessa, where some pro-Russian demonstrators were attacked by nationalists, and chased into a large building. This building was then torched, and the pro-Russians were burned alive, while the nationalists were waiting under the windows for people to jump out just to shoot them in the head or beat them to death. This is historical fact, not some made up pro-Putin BS. Here's the link: Ukrainian rightists burn alive 39 at Odessa union building (peoplesworld.org)

Interesting you linked a pro-Russian and somewhat biased source. It conveniently neglects mentioning Russia arming its factions with AK-74s, of which 38 were arrest, 174 were treated at the local hospital and released, and 48 were killed in the firefight with local authorities. Very sad, but they did shoot it out with the police.

It seems a more neutral account of the chaos of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Odesa_clashes is in order.


At this point your just repeating Russian propaganda talking points.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi

Leeea

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2020
3,599
5,340
106
You can't just ignore Ukraine's past history, and "outlaw" Russian language and Russian customs, any more than you can outlaw Spanish in United states. Trying to kill people in Ukraine for wanting to live the Russian way while remaining on their native land is wrong.
Russian language is not outlawed in Urkaine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi

Leeea

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2020
3,599
5,340
106
The main point of my post is to discuss how the separatists in Ukraine are different from the separatists anywhere else in the world, and why they are deemed to be "in the wrong" by the world while others just like them are "in the right".
My point is they are not seperatists, they are armed Russian soldiers masquerading as separatists who viciously murder anyone who disagrees with them. Civilian or otherwise.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
110,512
29,099
146
The article explains that Kennan warned the U.S. about NATO expansion during the late 1990s, arguing that it would lead to aggression on part of Russia. Clinton proceeded with that, and that's what eventually happened.

Kennan came up with the idea of containment, which is in no way outdated. In fact, by the 1990s it became part of a grand chessboard strategy, employed by the U.S., which according to Carter is the most warlike country in modern history:


and has been at war with one country or another throughout much of its history:


and part of it involves decades of attacking, destabilizing, and intervening in various countries:


Part of that warmongering involved the containment strategy that Kennan was talking about, but with the fall of the Soviet Union became illogical. Why, then, did the U.S. pursue the same in the form of encirclement, which included using 400 out of over 700 bases to encircle countries like China?


The reason has to do with two ideologies: neoconservatism and neoliberalism.

The first argues that the U.S. is the sole superpower of the world and the beacon of freedom and democracy. All countries, therefore, but follow it, and those that do not are considered a threat to freedom and democracy and must thus undergo coercion, destabilization, or even intervention in order to implement regime change.

Ukraine experienced that through Vicky Nuland and co.

Neoliberalism argues that the U.S. economic system, which is free market capitalism, is the only way to ensure prosperity, and thus avoidance of conflict. That means all countries that do not follow the same are subject to structural adjustment, and thus their economies must be pried open.

Ukraine is about to experience that through Zelensky's deals with Wall Street:


Why are these ideologies important? Because they make countries dependent on the U.S. and on the dollar, and the U.S. needs that because of the Triffin dilemma: the creator of the currency used as a global reserve eventually experiences chronic trade deficits because its exports become too expensive and imports too cheap. With that, in order to maintain spending, it has to borrow continuously, which is what the U.S. has been doing since the early 1980s:


saupload_public_and_private_debt_burden.jpg


This explains why Kennan's containment became Clinton's encirclement. This also shows that that encirclement is part of a long history of warmongering by the U.S., leading to neoconservatism starting after WW2 then followed by neoliberalism, all needed to keep the dollar propped up, and with that endless borrowing and spending. That endless borrowing, in turn, is dependent on everyone else using the dollar, and to do that they must be kept weak and dependent on the U.S., which in turn has to remain the sole superpower of the world.

The problem is that the same Triffin dilemma has led to increased wealth for the Global South: Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS) and forty emerging markets. They are now answering back at the U.S. and NATO, forming new bilateral and multilateral relations, and slowly moving away from the dollar. You can read about it in the news today: Brazil, China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Russia, India, Mexico, and more, now planning to buy and sell oil and trade using various currencies.

In conclusion, what is now emerging is a multipolar world, and that should be the perspective of separatism in Ukraine and more, especially given the point that Ukraine, which the West was pushing to be part of NATO and to trade only with EU, is part of the same Global South:



Of course, there will always be counter-arguments to this, especially from the chicken hawks and neocons who argue that these are "nothingburgers," that it's impossible for such countries to take over because they're corrupt or authoritarian or evil, etc., similar to what one NATO adviser said:


That is, the future is a "liberal, post-modern life," and that the only ones who can experience that are "Europeans." Everyone else is hopeless, and thus must be dealt with.

the only thing I have to say is that you people seriously need to learn that "chicken hawk" is not the same as "war hawk." Like not at all, lol

You should take a moment to look up what "chicken hawk" means.

Either way, it makes me laugh when you guys post these screeds of barely-correlated data that is merely tangential to the fragile and speculative points you make...when you use phrases that you don't understand and inject some unintentional comedy into your analysis. it's like, should we take you seriously or not?
 

ralfy

Senior member
Jul 22, 2013
485
53
91
You think Ukraine belongs to you and not its people. So you act to kill them all and push them off their land.
I'll simply repeat the line I said about Orcs.

"You" refers to the Global South, right? That's most of the world population.

Given that, your reference to orcs is noted.
 

ralfy

Senior member
Jul 22, 2013
485
53
91
Perhaps the "global south" would implore us to be more like the Russians. And in a conflict, they would like us to demonstrate the Russian solution first hand.

Who is "us"? The U.S. and NATO ordering others around, and engaged in decades of mayhem?


Your last point is notable. I remember but can't find an interview with a former U.S. general who said during the early stages of the war that Russia will lose because it doesn't have the experience of the U.S. If that were the U.S., it would have ended the war on Day One because it would have bombed Ukraine back to the stone age.

I believe him. I just don't know if he or you understand the irony of your views. Isn't the U.S. supposed to stand for "freedom and democracy"? Or is it no different from what you call "orcs"?
 

ralfy

Senior member
Jul 22, 2013
485
53
91
Putin would have moved on his campaign of aggression Nato expansion or not. He once said the breakup of the USSR was the most shameful moment in his countries history and vowed to fix it.

Right: they have every reason to attack Ukraine even though they have more than enough resources. Give me a break. He was too busy taking down oligarchs who propped him him. Meanwhile, adventurist Clinton figured that he needed to show voters that he's just as aggressive as his opponents:


Finally, count on neocons to say the same thing about any perceived threat to th U.S., that is, China also has a campaign of aggression, Iran, Syria, Libya, and Afghanistan all have campaigns of terror. And all for what? To keep the petrodollar propped up?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Pohemi

ralfy

Senior member
Jul 22, 2013
485
53
91
the only thing I have to say is that you people seriously need to learn that "chicken hawk" is not the same as "war hawk." Like not at all, lol

You should take a moment to look up what "chicken hawk" means.

Either way, it makes me laugh when you guys post these screeds of barely-correlated data that is merely tangential to the fragile and speculative points you make...when you use phrases that you don't understand and inject some unintentional comedy into your analysis. it's like, should we take you seriously or not?

Right. A chicken hawk is a liberal who thinks that the U.S. has to "stan for Ukraine" while a war hawk wants to save Ukraine from the "evil empire." See any of them talking about Yemen, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, and more? Crickets.


Oh, right. It's all "whataboutism" and "nothingburgers," "unintentional comedy." But all you're trying to do is to hide the fact that you're simply an ignoramus.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Pohemi

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
Who is "us"? The U.S. and NATO ordering others around, and engaged in decades of mayhem?


Your last point is notable. I remember but can't find an interview with a former U.S. general who said during the early stages of the war that Russia will lose because it doesn't have the experience of the U.S. If that were the U.S., it would have ended the war on Day One because it would have bombed Ukraine back to the stone age.

I believe him. I just don't know if he or you understand the irony of your views. Isn't the U.S. supposed to stand for "freedom and democracy"? Or is it no different from what you call "orcs"?
I for one would be very interested to see this interview. I’m sure you can dig it up for us, right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,049
12,719
136
Well, a bunch of Russian army* showed up and pointed guns at them and informed** them they were independent republics. That is how it is different.


*well, technically they were no longer Russian army, they all retired two months ago complete with all their equipment and gear

**there were actually a bunch of folks who didn't go along with this plan, they ended up in mass graves:

The Russian's just executed everyone who did not vote to support their plan.


If you ask me, that is radically different from all of the states that broke away from the USSR.
But that is not how Tucker Carlson describes it though.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Pohemi

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,049
12,719
136
Who is "us"? The U.S. and NATO ordering others around, and engaged in decades of mayhem?


Your last point is notable. I remember but can't find an interview with a former U.S. general who said during the early stages of the war that Russia will lose because it doesn't have the experience of the U.S. If that were the U.S., it would have ended the war on Day One because it would have bombed Ukraine back to the stone age.

I believe him. I just don't know if he or you understand the irony of your views. Isn't the U.S. supposed to stand for "freedom and democracy"? Or is it no different from what you call "orcs"?
Side note; you know why they’re called Orcs?
 

Pohemi

Diamond Member
Oct 2, 2004
8,613
10,860
146
Right. A chicken hawk is a liberal who thinks that the U.S. has to "stan for Ukraine" while a war hawk wants to save Ukraine from the "evil empire."
Nope, try again.
Oh, right. It's all "whataboutism" and "nothingburgers," "unintentional comedy." But all you're trying to do is to hide the fact that you're simply an ignoramus.
Projecting harder than pcgeek11, congratulations.

"Durr you can't dispute my bullshit claims so you just resort to insults!" No, you just get the responses that your posts deserve. You're a moron.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meghan54

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
110,512
29,099
146
Right. A chicken hawk is a liberal who thinks that the U.S. has to "stan for Ukraine" while a war hawk wants to save Ukraine from the "evil empire." See any of them talking about Yemen, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, and more? Crickets.

lol, no. You still don't know what words mean. Keep working, bro.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meghan54 and Pohemi

GoPackGo

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2003
6,414
468
126
Ukraine gave up their nukes in exchange for a promise that Russia would never invade... If Ukraine still had nukes I bet Putin would not have ordered the invasion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thecoolnessrune

WelshBloke

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
30,335
7,987
136
Well, one would have said that till very recently, when our utterly-crap government argued that the Scots aren't allowed to hold another referendum without UK parliament's explicit permission.

I really don't care about Scottish independence either way (often seems to me the Scots get a pretty good deal as things are - it constantly annoys me that there's this perception that "London" is full of rich people, while both Scotland and the North of England are hard-done-by, when the reality is quite different). (And the Northern parts of England elect a far higher proportion of Tory MPs than does London).

But the Tories are clearly the biggest driver of independence sentiment in Scotland - banning Scots from even having a vote on the topic seems akin to declaring they are prisoners rather than willing partners.
There has to be a limit on how often you call a referendum on something though. You can't just keep calling one until you get the result that you want, particularly for something as complicated as splitting a nation up.