That's exactly what I was referring to as well. Although it isn't "pouring loads of cash" in - its a normal function of supporting democratic reforms in countries, which involves development and improved governance. There's a reason Putin banned USAID - an organization focused on improving governance in countries. He viewed them as an existential threat because democratic reforms and improved governance is a direct threat to his corrupt system.
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.
That's exactly what I was referring to as well. Although it isn't "pouring loads of cash" in - its a normal function of supporting democratic reforms in countries, which involves development and improved governance. There's a reason Putin banned USAID - an organization focused on improving governance in countries. He viewed them as an existential threat because democratic reforms and improved governance is a direct threat to his corrupt system.
I'm sure the Ukrainians needed a lot of convincing to turn against Russia.
When was this referendum held? Were there extenuating circumstances? You do realise there is a whole lot in between being concerned about a neighboring country and the american invasion of Iraq.
How does an election = handpicked?
Your whole line of argument is so childish. But America, but Iraq, but Abu ghraib, but they tapped Merkels phone etc. A parade of tu quoques. But it's understandable given that Serbia is basically Russias bitch. Your military conducts joint operations together, the largest company in your country is majority owned by Gazprom and your foreign minister compared the Ukraine situation to Kosovo! Maybe you could hold another military parade and invite Putin and give him medals for loaning you money.
Obviously. It would have to be the implemented and monitored by the UN. My post did nicely predict your reply though, don't you think?
Your prediction that I wouldn't put much faith in Russian "elections" is quite the feat. You're a regular Mystic Meg.
Indeed, yet you still had to do it in reply. I'll try again. Let's accept that it's bleeding obvious that referendums managed by one side or the other would be pointless, but would you support a call for fairly-managed referendums or not?
To explain where I'm coming from, I'm not a pacifist, I do believe in strong defence, but the US and UK hawks have made so many cock-ups lately that I need some convincing before supporting action. In the recent past interventionists have utterly misread Libya and Syria, how do I know this isn't another one? There does seem to be a lot of 'our side is always right and they're always wrong' stuff being said, which comes across as a bit childish to be honest, things just won't be solved by that.
Of course it's possible that if the UN offered to manage such a thing that Russia would block it. Now that would tell me something as well.
In principle I would yes, but what would you do about people who vote against separation and demand the right to a separate state from the separate state? Ukraine exists as a state and has a border and that border was guaranteed by international agreement and a vote of all the people who lived within the border. At that point it is the business of Ukrainians how this gets sorted out not Russia. Having an opinion or even helping to foster good will towards a trade deal one way or the other isn't a problem. Sending in the tanks when all else fails is.
So when Russia says having UN observers on the border would break the cease fire and restart the war, that didn't tell you anything.
I wasn't aware that was likely, but if it happened then I would say that if a majority of people felt that way then they should get their wish. It would justify the referendum anyway.
A majority of what though? The people living in one region, in one town, in one village? Or if a majority of people living in that house over there want independence they get it?
Referendums aren't that simple. Especially when a bordering nation's armed forces are involved.
This last bit should automatically negate the legitimacy of any referendum. If a referendum happens, it should be organic, not cynically orchestrated by a foreign country for the purpose of legitimizing a land grab.
Read the thread Raoul, it was like pulling teeth but we eventually managed to agree on that. It would have to be managed by the UN. Your opposition does make me doubt your interest in fairness though, I must confess.
I'm quite obviously a massive critic of what Putin is doing in Ukraine and don't see any inconsistency between that position and the need for referendums to be transparent and not cynically orchestrated by Putin. Its quite obvious he wanted to annex Crimea and was merely using the fake referendum to legitimize it.
Last edited:
Jesus, is this a deliberate wind-up? How many times do I have to post that I would want any future referendums to be arranged and monitored by the UN?
Well, you've got me laughing too, anyway. We might actually agree in the end, I just need convincing before I support some of the major measures that might be on the way.
It will be interesting to see what happens in the coming weeks. Cameron has again raised the idea of banning Russia from Swift, which should imo be the nuclear option and used as a last measure, as it would crush their entire financial system.
http://news.yahoo.com/britain-cites-option-cutting-russia-swift-banking-205652658.html
There would be a beautiful sense of poetic justice to that. There 19th century politics brings them 19th century economics.
Back to bartering I suppose. Not good.
There would be a beautiful sense of poetic justice to that. There 19th century politics brings them 19th century economics.
Indeed. Putin getting dose of his own medicine. By using gas as a political weapon, he's been more or less doing to Ukraine what the west is doing to him.
There would be a beautiful sense of poetic justice to that. There 19th century politics brings them 19th century economics.
What a lovely person you are, looking forward to enjoy witnessing the misery of others. Schadenfreude is a wonderful thing.
Cheers. Tbf, Schadenfreude is the Cafs motto (see RAWK thread and almost every tagline).
If inflicting economic hardship is what it takes to get Russia (well, Putin) to stop invading, bullying and sabotaging it's neighbours for it's own ends, then I'm all for it.
By organic you mean what the US did in Iraq, Libya and many other places? Invading sovereign countries, killing its leaders, quite a few of its citizens and installing new US friendly regimes is what makes it organic, right?
You're so blinded by your bias, you can't even think straight. Maidan in Kiev that toppled the democratically and legally elected president - that's no problem. But what happened in Crimea is somehow unacceptable. Look up the the word 'hypocrisy' next time you're on the Merriam Webster.
And who gets to decide which country deserves to get sanctioned and to what degree? What happens when those dishing out sanctions do things that are equally bad or worse? Do they sanction themselves? Would you be as willing and happy about it if you were living in the country that is on the receiving end of it rather than the other way around?
Who would be happy being on the receiving end of a Russian invasion?
More tedious propaganda. I think its obvious what organic means - here its a movement that comes from the people within, and without the coercion of a neighboring army.
Your point about hypocrisy is well taken. The US usually gets its way because its the world's most powerful nation, and therefore sets the agenda around the world, usually with multilateral support. Whether we like it or not, in the end its all about power and ideas and the actor at the top of the pecking order gets to call the shots. In this case Russia is challenging that order and is getting a harsh reminder that its only the 9th most powerful country in the world.
Indeed. I have a bit of sick in my mouth for saying this... but I actually respect that Camerons stance on this. Europe has stood back long enough and need to take genuine action against Russia, if sanctions are enough to make them back out then so be it.
The US invaded Libya? Who knew?
They also helped topple the Ukrainian government to allow fascists to take over.
Also:
So if the Ukrainians cutting off gas to the east is genocide, what is it when Russia cuts off gas to Ukraine?
A benevolent gesture and part of the Kremlin's new drive toward renewable sources of energy in wider Ukraine.
He has invaded eastern Ukraine resulting in thousands of deaths and is now babbling about genocide in an area that he controls.
Why then are you getting all emotional about what's happening in Ukraine at the moment? It's all about power and about the top dog calling the shots. At the moment Russia is calling the shots in Ukraine. Are the US that sick that they would risk going into conflict with Russia over some tactics that they themselves have been applying worldwide over the last several decades?
Also, about that 'organic revolution' nonsense. Trouble is people don't believe it's organic but that it was orchestrated. People don't believe what the US officials are saying because they are all lying sacks of shite. The US has zero credibility when it comes to lecturing the world on human rights and democracy.
Who says I'm getting emotional? My points are well thought out and grounded in reality. I prefer looking at this from a strategic perspective rather than through a lens of propagandist fantasies woven by an authoritarian regime.
All the points you're making in this thread are completely irrelevant, though. You say Putin's system is authoritarian. You complain about Putin's propaganda and corruption but none of this matters at all. No one believes that the U.S. care about democracy and minority rights in Ukraine when at the same time the U.S. work with Saudi Arabia and Qatar. That's how schizophrenic your arguments against Putin sound. Powerful nations dominate and subdue weaker nations, that's all there is to it.
That's all that needs to be said. Russia is economically far less powerful than the west which is why they will capitulate in the end. Their economy will not be able to withstand going into a complete depression at a time when oil prices are low and their top companies are being sanctioned from doing business in the west.
Well exactly, we finally agree. Don't know if you've read the Melian dialogue from Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War. That's what this situation reminds me of. No moral arguments, just hard facts.
Yeah I agree with this position as well. The frustration many of the leaders who have negotiated have with Putin is he talks the talk and pretends to be genuinely interested in negotiations, all the while ordering his military and rebel proxies to continue pressing forward for more land. In effect, he is lying to both western leaders as well as his own citizens, and there will come a point when negotiations will be futile because nothing he says can be trusted.