War with Russia
Discussion
Munter said:
It's about process.
The west supports a sovereign state, deciding to host a fair process that results in a section splitting off should that be the outcome.
The west does not support people from a neighbouring state turning up with weapons, standing on a bit of someone else's sovereign state and saying "this is ours now because we say the people want it to be".
Bingo. What this man just said.The west supports a sovereign state, deciding to host a fair process that results in a section splitting off should that be the outcome.
The west does not support people from a neighbouring state turning up with weapons, standing on a bit of someone else's sovereign state and saying "this is ours now because we say the people want it to be".
Munter said:
It's about process.
The west supports a sovereign state, deciding to host a fair process that results in a section splitting off should that be the outcome.
Except that faced with engaging in a political process to make this possible, or nailing our colours to the mast of the status quo irrespective of principles such as self-determination, 'we' chose the latter.The west supports a sovereign state, deciding to host a fair process that results in a section splitting off should that be the outcome.
Munter said:
It's about process.
The west supports a sovereign state, deciding to host a fair process that results in a section splitting off should that be the outcome.
The west does not support people from a neighbouring state turning up with weapons, standing on a bit of someone else's sovereign state and saying "this is ours now because we say the people want it to be".
really? so what happened on Kosovo then?The west supports a sovereign state, deciding to host a fair process that results in a section splitting off should that be the outcome.
The west does not support people from a neighbouring state turning up with weapons, standing on a bit of someone else's sovereign state and saying "this is ours now because we say the people want it to be".
AreOut said:
Munter said:
It's about process.
The west supports a sovereign state, deciding to host a fair process that results in a section splitting off should that be the outcome.
The west does not support people from a neighbouring state turning up with weapons, standing on a bit of someone else's sovereign state and saying "this is ours now because we say the people want it to be".
really? so what happened on Kosovo then?The west supports a sovereign state, deciding to host a fair process that results in a section splitting off should that be the outcome.
The west does not support people from a neighbouring state turning up with weapons, standing on a bit of someone else's sovereign state and saying "this is ours now because we say the people want it to be".
In this thread, and the other about the downed plane, the apologists have told us time and time again that this action by Russia is the EU's and NATO's fault.
Its their fault for trying to expand to the Russian border and this action is purely to protect themselves, and other such nonsense.
Well that worked well didn't it:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/26/nato-...
Its their fault for trying to expand to the Russian border and this action is purely to protect themselves, and other such nonsense.
Well that worked well didn't it:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/26/nato-...
I'm still trying to find this so called "Russian threat" as opposed to the very visible NATO threat that is being offered in return.
From all the reading between the lines of various news channels I still see that there is a section of the old Ukraine society at threat from the new Ukraine regime in which Russia are vocally wishing to aid.
(Similar but not exactly the same by any means, as to when western governments gave 'aid' to ISIS in Syria for their fight against Assad - under the same 'principal' westerners should be applauding Russia's sentiments?).
This by many people's standards is not a threat to europe or america.
The only threat that has been on display IMO is the expansion of NATO towards Russia's border.
From all the reading between the lines of various news channels I still see that there is a section of the old Ukraine society at threat from the new Ukraine regime in which Russia are vocally wishing to aid.
(Similar but not exactly the same by any means, as to when western governments gave 'aid' to ISIS in Syria for their fight against Assad - under the same 'principal' westerners should be applauding Russia's sentiments?).
This by many people's standards is not a threat to europe or america.
The only threat that has been on display IMO is the expansion of NATO towards Russia's border.
AA999 said:
skyrover said:
Try turning on the TV
Isn't that half the problem?We aren't given the basic facts by media, we are given 'opinion' and an agenda. No matter which organization's news outlet we watch.
Our interconnected world makes it a hell of a lot more difficult to keep things covered up compared to say, 30 years ago.
Some independent Russian journalists were trying to check the graves of some Pskov Division paratroopers recently 'deceased due to training accidents'. They had a welcome committee waiting:
http://tvrain.ru/articles/video_napadenija_na_zhur...
http://tvrain.ru/articles/video_napadenija_na_zhur...
Bluebarge said:
NATO is a defensive alliance. It has no permanent deployments east of Germany (this will probably change as a result of Putin's adventures). Don't attack it - no threat.
Warfare is not just hard power, economic warfare is part of the same package. The EU prodded the bear with the "support for democracy, freedom frites and binding economic agreements" strategy in Ukraine, courtesy of Ashton and co. Which resulted in the overthrow of a democratically (albeit corrupt) government and replacement with an approved appointed government, with ties to hard core fascist Ukrainian nationalists. The analogous strategy for Russia would be to offer Greece "economic advantages" and pour aid money into organisations like Syriza, to help Greece leave the undemocratic economic straitjacket of the EU. This then opens the option of military co-operation, naval bases etc.
A good rule is not to push the populist politician, who depends on nationalist fervour at home for power, with humiliation. It tends to evoke a strong response in return.
Edited by QuantumTokoloshi on Wednesday 27th August 12:59
skyrover said:
In Kosovo, the Albanian population was actually threatened by Serbia's military action. There were extensive expulsions, and the danger of genocide existed. Only afterwards did the intervention from outside take place. That intervention didn't happen to make Kosovo a part of Germany or the US. Where in the Crimean/East Ukrainian case, the intervention by Russian troops clearly aims to return these regions to Russia. That's a huge difference. Another point is that the Russian population in Ukraine isn't threatened - there is no fear of pogroms. Those dangers, which in the case of Kosovo really did exist, don't exist in Ukraine.
really? How much time have you spent on Kosovo exactly and when? Serbian military action was initiated because of albanian terrorist attacks on police stations and Serbs on Kosovo generally, I guess you would act differently in UK and just let them take your territory if mideast people requested the Republic of Essex?
it's not officially a US state but in reality it certainly acts on behalf of US, after all they haven't installed a huge military base there for nothing
1998-9 genocide is a hoax, admittedly there was a pressure on albanian population but that's hardly what you could call a genocide, let alone it was Albanians who started all of it...Serbs didn't have any reason to attract foreign military intervention especially knowing they wouldn't stand a chance against 19 much more powerful countries
1998-9 genocide is a hoax, admittedly there was a pressure on albanian population but that's hardly what you could call a genocide, let alone it was Albanians who started all of it...Serbs didn't have any reason to attract foreign military intervention especially knowing they wouldn't stand a chance against 19 much more powerful countries
AA999 said:
Isn't that half the problem?
We aren't given the basic facts by media, we are given 'opinion' and an agenda. No matter which organization's news outlet we watch.
Look on liveleakWe aren't given the basic facts by media, we are given 'opinion' and an agenda. No matter which organization's news outlet we watch.
Some of it is Russian propaganda (Anna news, RT tv) with the rebels filming most there stuff, some of it is extremely graphic but it will warn you when this is the case but overall you get to see how hard it is for the civilians ( rebel held areas are not only too dangerous but western journalists won't be allowed in) it also shows just how well equipped and well trained the pro Russians are
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff