New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
He doesnt, he supports the russian propaganda.
I deny it. International law states that any consultation under occupation is null and void. maybe some Austrians were happy with the Anschluss, maybe even the majority, but that does not matter as long as it was done under German occupation. Maybe the vote was even peaceful, there is no evidence of SS pointing guns at people heads int he polling station. Does that mean Austria is a part of Germany? Or that the Sudeten with a clear ethnic German majority at that time should have stayed with Germany? After the war they were expelled from there, I am sure Ukraine will do the same and nobody will be able to blame them.
This is why there are international treaties and laws, so such abuses leading to wars, leading to futile and huge losses and sufferance do not happen. Germany did those in the 30's and 40's, signed treaties with the intention of breaking them, Russia did it since it's beginnings and continues to do it. They are happy and consider themselves smart because they manage to grad a bit from Ukraine, a bit from Georgia (btw, almost every year Russia grabs more land in Georgia) and that will bring happiness and prosperity. It didnt happen since 1700 at least, wont happen now, but they never learn or understand these things. Nobody benefits from wars and aggression, not even the aggressor, even when they manage to maintain the occupation for decades.
Just look at Israel. How would have been without the occupation, without the colonization, how much money would have been freed for education, science and technology, culture, etc... Also, how would have been in the Eastern Europe without the war (true, started by the german abuse but in complicity with russians) and 40 years of russian occupation? Were we better off? Were the Russians themselves better off? I think the answer is obvious.
Irelevant even if it would have been true. The people in Austria and Sudeten were economically better off after the German annexation, but paid dearly during and after the war along with the occupying power, even more than those as some were expelled from their ancestral homes.
You dont need people to point their guns on your head to make "the right choice". Just the existence of those people around you will point you to do the "right thing" or else.
Its kinda like how your school bully asks you to buy him a sandwhich, should you do otherwise, you know you will suffer consequences later. Only that you will likely be imprisoned or shot rather than beaten up if you say something about it.
Ofc if ur bullied, the teacher will show up, but if the teacher is unable to intervene (country not functioning), you'll do exactly as the guys leading the show tells you to do.
And the 100 years was just a ballbark number.. In any case its been ages since then. By same logic we could now claim Karelia from Russia cause our scenteded criminal president gave it away in a deal to stop the war.
I actually quoted @stefeman, but i highlighted the quote from @bdsguy.
I've completely lost interest. No one gives a shit any more.
Last time I did math, "about 1/3 more or less" made a significant difference.
I like that one a lot - as a joke. For a start, there has never been any proof of evil Russias invasion into ukrostan. And, trust me, you would very definitely notice it if Russia ever invaded ukrostan.
But seriously, it's amazing me again and again how little people know. Russia was legally in Crimea. Russia had a contract for Sevastopol and some other bases for which they payed dozens of millions each year. As a part of that contract Russia was of course allowed to move around and in between its bases. THAT is the basis and not all those propaganda stories from washington and europe. The russian green men were legally there.
But granted, at some point they crossed the boundaries set by that contract. And Putin and others openly talk about that, That point was when the maidan regime obviously turned completely illegal and declared ethnic russians to be fair game, when, for instance, normal people returning to Crimea from kiev by bus were stopped, beaten, burned, and sometimes killed by ukro nazis. What should Russia do? Should they just watch it happen and let their people be murdered?
Bullshit. According to international law there is a perfectly legal situation. The people of Crimea have been asked what they want and about 95% of them wanted to be a part of Russia again - as they always were. The illegal situation was the time from 1954 when they suddenly weren't Russians anymore because some communist chief had given Crimea away as a gift. Illegally, well noted.
It's really incredible what kind of bullshit an intelligent man like you can believe and spread.
Whose view is the relevant one? Yours? Mine? Or the Crimeans? Obviously the latter - and they, the overwhelming majority of Crimeans, are very glad about being a part of Russia again.
You might want to tell people in Catalonia about that one. Around 90% of people backed independence.
To be fair, only what... 40% of the people voted? Still.. it's the will of the people. I'm very pro referenda. UK voted brexit, then it's the will of the people. Scotland voted remain, so they remain. Let people make their own choices. Wrong or not.
And pigs fly.
The north koreans are happy too when you ask from the right people. I like how the Russians glorified the fact every crimean accepted a russian passport/identity when you know that they would do nothing with their current ukrainan one. Being an illegal without papers is not a good option, so the passport handout was obviously a great success. Its like a story straight from North Korea.
I was thinking about that, too (and about the kosovo; no referendum, nothing, yet nobody makes noise. But then that was the "good guys" (nato)...).
As for Catalonia I don't take any side in the matter per se. But I'm appalled by the rude and brutal behaviour of madrid. After all, the Catalonians did but something very democratic. But they had no "polite green men" protecting them and so madrid could do what kiev couldn't.
TL;DR The powers that be don't care a fuck about democracy or the law. Their friends can behave like brutal assholes and it will be OK; their opponents, however, could rain down gold coins on the people and still there would be many to blabber about brutal oppression and evil Putin.
Which part of "multiple attempts of strongly western entities and ngos to show that Crimeans were somehow forced by Russia were made - and utterly failed" is above your intellectual capacity?
Again: carnegie foundation is one of the better known - and staunchly western (read: us of a) minded entities which tried to somehow find a not insignificant number of unhappy Crimeans. They failed and had to admit that the overwhelming majority is happy with how things turned out.
"Protecting them".. lmao now thats rich.
Catalonia was the exact opposite of Crimea.
In Catalonia the police prevented you to vote
In Crimea the "police" forced you to vote ("the right" thing) with their strong presence and general message that the Crimea is part of Russia again.
Lies. The americans are legally in japan, this does not mean they can disarm and confine to premises the japanese army and police and organize a referendum for japan to join US and the nth+1 state. Sure, probably much fewer japanese would want that, but I am sure they might find some areas where many americans live in a city or another. An, in case of doubt, who supervises that if not the americans and who declares the result if not them? Even more, the americans won the war and japan unconditionally surrendered, yet, they did not annex japan.
If they didn't talk you would have maintained those were volunteers and local civilians revolted against the nazis in Kiev.
As noted, referenda under occupation are null and void, you recognize the illegal (and rejected by the Ukrainian government) presence of russian troops there which prevented the national forces to restore the legality and constitutional order, this is textbook occupation. You may say those were locals or volunteers with tanks and weapons people made in their basements and garages taking great risks and losses under the cruel and illegal oppression of the nazis, but it is not gonna fly in the face of reality.
The people of Sud-Tirol would probably be happy to be part of Austria again, but that does not mean they can as long as Austria recognized the border and signed a treaty with italy. Nor can Austria claim Bosnia and Croatia because were once under the Habsburgs, or Hungary Transylvania as long as the peace treaties and other international laws such as UN Charta prevent it. Russia imagines can tear up the treaties it signed whenever it thinks it serves it's interest because is stronger than the other party.
Hitler thought exactly the same as well as the japanese which withdrew from the league of nations when the international laws prevented them from their war of aggression. What followed we all know, and it is mind-boggling that intelligent people today cannot see beyond lies and propaganda KNOWING in detail the precedents.
Hey, does anyone remember when we were talking about CPU mining?
Theres nothing like a good shitstorm at Sunday nights.. Should we talk about religion next time? I just love debating with @bsdguy
"Debating". Bunch of masterdebaters here aren't we.
It was satisfying, but not enough to jack off to this discussion.
The discussion with you now ends as you simply don't accept reality.
Nope, a simple fact.
Interesting point, albeit for a reason you might not like. You see, the fact that someone says "bsdguy is blindly pro Russia!" doesn't make it a fact. What I am interested in is truth and reality (as in "what really happened").
Now the really funny part is this: I became quite pro russian because I looked for the truth, not the other way around. I was brought up very pro us-american, pro-western, pro "democracy"; we even had family ties to the us of a. I had a scholarship offer for the us of a (fulbright), I have worked for us-american corps. and at one point in time I worked even in a very close relationship with the us military.
I like Putin for a simple reason: he highly values the law and he has guided Russia from a very sad state to a powerhouse. I don't care whether he happens to be russian; I'd like him as well if he happened to be the us-american president. I like what he stands for; for proper legal proceedings and for his people and I sincerely wish we had leaders with similar values.
As for "evil Russia terrorizes ukrostan" - if you think I's paint everything nicely you are dead wrong. In fact, it is one of my few points of harsh criticism of Putin that he did and does not invade ukrostan; because that's what he should do imo. He should free the world from that nazi cancer scum. I'd be the first one to happily and with a big grin say "YES! Russia (finally) invaded ukrostan and cleaned it up in a week" if only Russia did it.
But Russia didn't. Instead they (as I see it) made themselves look like idiots because they calmly watch how thousands upon thousands of their people have been and are massacred by the ukro nazis.
So, sorry, but to accuse me of denying the (alleged) "fact" of russian troups in ukrostan is ridiculous. I would open a bottle of champagne if they finally were there.
There was and is no occupation. There is a lot of blabla but no evidence, plus the Crimeans themselves are more than happy.
As for what the ukro regime says or says not, I don't care a fuck. Let's see how they handle the mass killing by an ukrainian oligarchs daughter ...
A rich oil and gas reserve, gold, diamonds, a lot of other ores, big forests plundered by the Putin's oligarchy with western complicity does not one powerhouse make as Saudi Arabia recently found out in Yemen. All that oil and money for hardware didnt solve the problem in 2-3 days or a week as Putin boasted about destroying ukraine. True, Saudi Arabia does not have nuclear weapons, but Putin didnt invent them, nor can he use them against a country which does not have them, as the international laws state...
Oh, you are right, he doesnt give a shit about that... He can always claim he has evidence (like the military plane which put down the malaysian one) they kept one or two to use against Russian civilians and he only prevented them from doing so, if he would even bother to do that. If Romanian cities are a legitimate target because it has radar capabilities in a village, then anything goes.
Russia is no stronger than it was in 1989, true, it has now an economy, it still cannot sustain the military as it could not do it back then, but at least people have food to put on the table for now. When they will start to look into the fridge instead of TV, icons or Putin portraits, things will change.
So Putin should have proven his own words when he agreed the troops which "protected" the referendum were his?
Even if, for the sake of the argument, we agree the post referendum situation would be legal and according to the international law and the right of self-determination, the moment until the referendum was not, Russia did invade a foreign country which it recognized as such as well as guaranteed the borders of, it's troops were on Ukraininan soil without approval, interfered with the police and military activities of a sovereign country, violating the rules of engagement as they didnt wear the military insignia of the russian army and without declaring a war while the referedum itself has been held under occupation (Ukraine did not have control of it's territory at the time, Russian army (or navy, rather) held that prerogative). Until the results were not announced, no matter how fake etc, there was no right for the russian army to be there, let alone to support separatists in a country which it guaranteed the borders in an international multilateral treaty under the UN framework.
If russia didnt like the treaty it signed, should have called all parties to renegotiate it, to allow for an internationally supervised referendum, as it happened in East Timor, for example, or Namibia, Algeria, etc. Creating facts on the ground will never fly if you are not Israel, all other countries must respect their international obligations.
Instead of solving the situation peacefully, as a member of UN security council could have forced a resolution or at least gather some support for a real referendum, russia shot itself in the foot, it made a peaceful resolution impossible now and we will all have to bear the consequences.
@Maounique
The gap between our views are just too big it seems and much of what you say is imo invented or bent and driven by aversion or even hatred against Russia and Putin.
I suggest therefore to simply drop it. We will anyway see rather sooner than later who is right.
While I agree with the fact a resolution will be found either through war or through the collapse of the oligarchy when the Russians will no longer have bread and vodka, I do not agree you will see who was right as you do not see now clear facts. You are probably a firm believer that Venezuela is a victim of an international conspiracy as well as Russia and this is why people are going hungry in the workers paradise while still voting in majority for the communists or oligarchs or both.
Just curious, where do you live? have you seen communism and dictatorship, have you any idea how propaganda works? I see through the american and religious propaganda all the time, but the russian one is even more crude, their motivation even more transparent you either have 0 experience with the russians or you are one of them if you are even contemplating the official russian line might come close to the truth sometimes.