Reprehensible. If this sort of thing is going on, Putin should consider invading Crimea to protect the ethnic Russians there.
Russia Discussion
- Thread starter iSparky
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Reprehensible. If this sort of thing is going on, Putin should consider invading Crimea to protect the ethnic Russians there.
Like you weren't aware this sort of thing was going on..
These sort of one offs are being used to fan the paranoia for a Russian land grab.
Swoboda and Pravi Sektor members are now in the new Ukrainan parliament. German media reports on links with the NPD. Last week discussions in the Bundestag mention members of the new Kyew regime referring to Russians and Jews as 'Russensäue und Judenschweine'. Ah, don't mention it, just a one off thing. Been in partnership with much darker figures in the past, what's the big deal about supporting a few fascists now.
Russian land grab? Looks more like a return to the rightful owner.
The legal and rightful owner is Ukraine, and until such time as a legal referreundum is held in accordance with Ukrainian laws, that won't change in the eyes of the international community.
You really have no idea what you're talking about. What you see in this clip is just a tip of the iceberg. Because of the status of the people involved, this became big news (although western media ignored it), but the atmosphere of lawlessness is sweeping across Ukraine, and just because you don't see an average Joe suffering at the hands of some thugs on a regular basis, doesn't mean it's not happening. The new government are unable to control the situation and have little support outside of Kiev, the police are ineffective and unsure of their status at the moment with right wing enforcers claiming, they are now in charge of all police and security matters. It's chaos, and the worst individuals come to prominence in these type of circumstances.
As for Svoboda party, which I mentioned earlier, they're Ukrainian nazis and are quite open about it, check the internet, there's more than enough info to figure out what they're all about. Here's a video from Victory Day celebration from May'11 in Lviv, Western Ukraine, when the right wing thugs attacked WW2 veterans.
USA and EU helped bring right wing nationalists to power in Ukraine. Congratulations and enjoy.
Think about it, the only reason why any ancillary strains of ultranationalism have appeared in Ukraine, is to offset the pervasive influence of Russian policies inside Ukrainian territory - the corruption, the language dispute, Kremlin interference in Ukrainian politics, and playing of power politics with Energy policy all predated the events of this year and were a direct consequence of Putin attempting to treat Ukraine like a drifting satellite state of the former Soviet Union, rather than a sovreign, respected neighbor worthy of being dealt with through mutual respect. That is the real foundation the dispute and the sort of big brother bullying we have seen in Crimea is merely the latest chapter.
Yes, it's all Putin's fault. He invented corruption and spread it in Ukraine, he forced the local nationalists to dismiss Russian as one of state languages, it was his interference that created, organized and sponsored Euromaidan that toppled legally and democratically elected president, he signed agreements to meet all the opposition demands only to break it soon after, etc etc. If you want to blame him for using Energy policy as a political tool, what do you call those sanctions USA and Western Europe so often threaten various countries with? So you're allowed to play that game, but others can't? Putin's politics aren't mine, I realize that in many ways he's a throwback to the old days of the Cold War, when it comes to foreign policy, and I'm not too keen on the domestic governing system he's built in Russia, either. But I do know that he's far from being the only guilty party in this mess and certainly not the worst. And unlike USA, what happens in Ukraine, is far more important to him and his country, for obvious reasons.
The right wing anti-Russian and anti-Jewish nationalism has appeared in Western Ukraine long time ago, long before Putin, you need to check the history or talk to those friends of yours. It was there for many decades, just not out in the open,but was given full force once Ukraine became independent.
My biggest disappointment is EU. I could understand American approach, it's nothing new, they either bully you by using military force or sponsor and support the local opposition to damage the regimes they don't like. But being that normally they're safely thousands of miles away from the places they operate in, those interferences, more often than not, don't come back to bite them in the ass (save for some terrorist acts on US soil, but those are hard, if not impossible to prevent completely). But Europe knows what Ukraine is all about: the economy is in the shitter, corruption is through the roof, right wing nationalism is on the rise and the country is torn apart between the East and West in more ways than one. The shitstorm is coming and it will land at the EU's doorstep.
Sorry but this is a load of rubbish. There is a general phenomenon of the rise of ultra-nationalism/ fascism in post-communist societies. The Eastern part of today's Germany has this problem. Poland, Hungary, Serbia have got this problem as well. Look at the rise of Golden Dawn in Greece and they weren't even communist. Not to mention Russia itself is battling with the rise of the far-right, and for all this you blame Putin? You got fascists in the US, would you say this is a direct reaction to Washington's policies? This might provide good material for academic research but there is hardly a justification for accepting fascists as valid representatives of a 'democratic' country and providing them with logistical and financial support only because they are all oh so traumatised by what the evil Putin has done to their poor and misguided souls.
Some of what you say may be true, but it would be naive to suggest the perceived Russian hegemonic aspirations over Ukraine wouldn't result in a counterbalancing trend of Ukrainian nationalism.
That's a good point and probably one that hits at the heart of the matter. The increased democratization and Europeanization of Ukraine would threaten Russian nationalism, and the authoritarian style of "managed democracy" governance it has seen in Putin's 14 year reign. Putin, as a leader, cannot survive in a fully democratic society where the state doesn't limit civil society, intimidate media organizations, and curtail human rights; and accordingly neighboring states moving in that direction represent an existential threat to the current Russian system; and must therefore be either controlled, subverted, or invaded before their democratic drift reaches Moscow.
Russia refused to sign the February 21st Agreement. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/22/world/europe/ukraine.html?_r=0
I feel confident that 97% of the population would vote to stay as part of mother russia - or at least that's what the result would be
They have more legitimate grievances than Crimea does, especially with Putin's treatment of the Chechen people. Instead of the specter of oppression and violence, they've actually suffered it.
So your criteria is the level of suffering? Do you have any thoughts on how this could be measured quantitatively and if any restrictions should apply so that irrespective of the levels of suffering certain ethnic groups would not qualify and be eligible for self-determination?
Was Russia required to sign it? The US didn't sign it either so not sure what point you're making.
So? Who cares? The conflict was between Yanukovich and the opposition. He met their demands and signed an agreement with foreign ministers of France, Germany and Poland in attendance. They reneged on it before the ink was dry and that was that. The moment the opposition took over, they were accepted by US & EU as a new legitimate leaders of the country, which is not surprising at all since those Maidan leaders are owned, to various degrees, by US government, and EU, that are nothing, but American lackeys nowadays.
Victoria Nuland and Geoffrey R.Pyatt, picking and choosing the new Ukrainian government over the phone, should tell you just how independent these new leaders are and who really calls the shots there.
Last edited:
The US was not a party in the negotiations. The mediators were three EU foreign ministers, who all signed it, and an envoy from Russia, who refused. By not signing and endorsing the agreement, it leaves Russia's support for its implementation in doubt. Russia's support of the agreement was essential to its future. Instead, they refused and pressed their advantage in the uncertainty to invade and reclaim Crimea.
Those foreign ministers all signed and endorsed its implementation, which Russia refused to do. Without Russia's guarantee that it would be followed, the agreement was worthless.
Also, do you think the US keeps its revolution generator with the natural disaster cannon?
That's stretching things a bit, Raoul. Democracy has been kind to Putin, and his popularity is sky-high at the moment, so I doubt he has much to fear from the will of the Russian people. As you know yourself, Russia's interference in the affairs of it's border states is normal superpower behaviour, which, in this case, has been exacerbated by what Putin perceives as the catastrophic collapse of the old Soviet Union. In any case, NATO's ill-judged determination to extend itself to Russia's very borders was bound to foster paranoia.
The West should accept a sensible change in Crimea's status and leave it at that, while making it clear that any further Russian adventurism would have grave consequences.
Last edited:
Hard not to be selfish about this. Trade sanctions could be a kick in the balls for the green shoots of recovery in the EC economy. With Ireland one of the more vulnerable countries.
Not really a sound basis on which to judge this but feck it, I'm getting pragmatic in my old age.
Not really a sound basis on which to judge this but feck it, I'm getting pragmatic in my old age.
His popularity is in the low 70s right now, some of which can be attributed to Sochi and a good bit to his land grab in Crimea. He made a calculated gamble that invading Crimea would exploit a sort of dormant nationalism in the Russian psyche that harkens back to the good old days when Soviets could do that sort of thing without repercussions. But popularity by nationalism is shallow and temporary and won't last long if the Russian economy doesn't recover from its anemic growth, which won't be helped by the sanctions that are coming its way. In the end, the cost benefit will not work out in Russia's favor.
Putin's cynical attempt to imbue his legacy by stoking nationalism to restore Russian pride because the Soviet Union went tits up 23 years ago, will in the long term, only serve to set Russia back.
He doesn't really care he's got about £50bn in the bank.
I thought that you came from Caucasus or somewhere like that.
If you also think that Kosovo was totally related to Milosevic you're in denial. Oh by the way, congrats for the victory of Vucic. His boss is still in Hague, right? Your territory?
Last edited:
I thought that you came from Caucasus or somewhere like that.
If you also think that Kosovo was totally related to Milosevic you're in denial. Oh by the way, congrats for the victory of Vucic. His boss is still in Hague, right? Your territory?
Read my post in the proper context.
Šešelj is not Vučićs boss.
They're all bastards. This Cold War thing is getting tedious now. I wish China, Brazil and India could start interfering in world politics to shake things up a bit. And Mexico, they're big and pacifist.
http://www.theonion.com/articles/crimean-voters-excited-to-exercise-democracy-for-l,35548/?ref=auto
http://en.ria.ru/world/20140319/188544777/Crimean-Tatars-Will-Have-to-Vacate-Land--Official.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/19/world/europe/south-ossetia-crimea.html?smid=fb-share
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/19/us-russia-estonia-idUSBREA2I1J620140319
http://en.ria.ru/world/20140319/188544777/Crimean-Tatars-Will-Have-to-Vacate-Land--Official.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/19/world/europe/south-ossetia-crimea.html?smid=fb-share
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/19/us-russia-estonia-idUSBREA2I1J620140319
I guess this is for collaborating with the government in Kiev? Just like in WWII. Also, there's no way 30% of Tatars voted to join Russia. Tatars boycotted the referendum and many conveniently weren't mailed voter cards.
I'm still not clear about what you consider to be the correct criteria for self-determination.
You talk bollocks and present it as a fact. Very little knowledge of the subject and yet you have enough arrogance to post this nonsense, as if you report directly from Crimea. Have you ever been to Russia, Crimea or Ukraine?
Why don't you just admit, that you know feck all about it, apart from what you've read online? Another internet expert.
I never said I had one, just that actual people dying is a more legitimate grievance than claiming that people could possibly, maybe, hypothetically be oppressed for speaking Russian (despite the president vetoing the law removing Russian). That is self-evident.
What part of what I said was false while presented as fact? Tatars did boycott the referendum and many didn't receive voter cards, video interviews with Tatars demonstrate that.
Name-calling and ad hominem attacks are the key to winning internet arguments.
You do talk bollocks, however. Comparing some land-exchange announcement (for which we need more details in order to understand exactly what is meant by it) with Stalin's WW2 mass deportation is as daft and disingenuous as Hilary Clinton's Putin-Hitler analogy.
It was hyperbole. That's what the
was for. It doesn't really matter what the justification is; taking land from the Tatars and forcing them elsewhere is certainly going to remind them of their past. They were already worried about their treatment under the Russian regime as it is. Apparently a whopping .5% of them voted in the referendum.You're attacking him. Attack the substance of his post instead.
It was hyperbole. That's what the
The voting numbers were a bit surreal, almost like when the likes of Saddam or Assad would win their "elections" by 99% to 1.
The Tartars obviously didn't vote in any numbers as they make up nearly 15% of the population and wouldn't brought the final results down significantly. Also, there appeared to be evidence of ballot stuffing which would take the illegitimacy of the referendum to new farcical heights.
It was hyperbole. That's what the
They don't just force them elsewhere. They'll be given land to build in Crimea.
It's about the so-called self acquisition lands. Many Crimean Tatar families over the last 25 years or so have built houses on lands without any documentation or legal right. Where possible, those houses will be legalized, but in cases, where for various reasons (zoning, architectural, agricultural, etc etc) it's not allowed by law, people will be offered other places in Crimea where they can legally build. I don't know the details, but I'm confident that Putin will spend a lot of money to resolve this issue as smoothly as possible, since Crimea is a matter of principle for him now. All this has to do with the problems of Tatars' return and resettling in Crimea from Central Asia, where they were deported by Stalin. This problem was not addressed during Soviet times, and by the looks of it, Ukraine hasn't done much about it, either. In Perestroika years, the Soviet government were developing a program, that aimed to resolve this, but before it could begin, the country fell apart and Crimea became part of the new independent Ukraine.
This is a very sensitive issue and should be handled as such. I can understand the Tatars' feelings on this, considering the treatment they endured at the hands of Soviet communist regime and it'll take time and a lot of genuine effort to mend the relationship between Russia and the Crimean Tatars. The resettlement is a difficult subject, given the history, but there's no other way to go about it.
There is no other way to go about it?
Just like those who use the new Ukrainian government's move to annul Russian as an official language as one of their very first acts when there are far more pressing issues as evidence of why Russians in Crimea should have been worried, Russia threatening to 'relocate' some of the Tartars, as one of their very first acts, a community they fecking relocated en masse to the middle of nowhere 60 years ago as punishment, a community that rightly views them with intense suspicion and even hatred, is more than a little bit suspicious would you not agree?
To be one of the very first things that they are thinking of doing is absolutely mind boggling. I have little doubt that Putin has little interest in repairing the relationship with the tartars or pouring large amounts of money in for them (and even if he does, that that money will end up reaching it's intended place anyway).
I don't know where you get that this is one of the very first things the Crimean government will deal with. I don't know their list of priorities, but I'm sure, it's something they'll address in due time. Just because it said in an interview, it's going to be done, doesn't mean it'll start tomorrow. Ignoring this issue will not make it go away, though. It's how they handle it, that's what matters. It'll take many years, if not decades to heal old wounds, but I hope for the best.
Also, Crimean Tatars will have a representation in Crimean government, both legislative and executive branches, with the position of a vice speaker and a deputy prime minister specifically given to them, and their language will be one of the state languages of Crimea, along with Russian and Ukrainian. These are just first steps on the way to make up for grave injustice that befell that nation during Soviet times.
Are you the type of person who gives someone a birthday present then wants it back soon as they get a better boyfriend?