5 ms·

Ukraine situation is way more complicated than Putin simply annexing it. Lots of history there and lots of US meddling as well as Russia. Additionally, our eco

Ukraine situation is way more complicated than Putin simply annexing it. Lots of history there and lots of US meddling as well as Russia. Additionally, our economic system is far from perfect too. Ever heard of occupy Wall Street? Lots of wealth inequality here. Awareness of the facts does not a Russophile make. Russia is a global superpower and it acts like a superpower, as do other superpowers.

varjag 10y ago
> Ukraine situation is way more complicated than Putin simply annexing it. Look, it's Europe. Everyone here has a history with everyone here. Russian annexation of Ukrainian territory, in violation of every possible treaty and its own constitution, is not a matter of opinion. It's also first in Europe since WW2.
- saynsedit 10y ago
  Russia isn't the only country that violates international treaties and its own constitution... Ever heard of Victoria Nuland, assistant Secretary of State for European affairs during the Ukrainian crisis? "Fuck the EU" she said: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957
  - varjag 10y ago
    Have you read the transcript outside this phrase? It's always the profanity part being quoted, for lack of anything controversial. But well, Britain said essentially the same during Brexit, and I don't see Putin fans upset with that. I know you make it some tit-for-tat scheme, where Russia is justified to retaliate the USA for some real or perceived sin. However Russia doesn't leash off on its stated archenemy, as humiliation of defeat is not something Putin is looking for. Instead it backstabs Ukraine, the nation without a functioning military and reeling from domestic crisis, which is hardly responsible for injustices of the United States.
    - saynsedit 10y ago
      "Putin fan" is not a term I would use to describe myself or anyone who is seriously analyzing the situation from a rational unbiased perspective. Nor would I use "tit-for-tat," "backstab," and "archenemy" to describe the events that have transpired. It makes it hard to discuss/analyze history with someone who is assessing the situation in those comic book terms with a clear anti-Russian bias. My intention was not to defend Russia but simply to give evidence on the complexity of events in Ukraine and the multiple actors involved. Personally I find this complexity extremely interesting. Is there a specific point you want to get across? Your dramatic retelling of the events in Ukraine is entertaining and I encourage you to adapt it into a screenplay and sell it to Hollywood. Aside from that I'm not quite sure what your specific point is.
      - varjag 10y ago
        > "Putin fan" is not a term I would use to describe myself or anyone who is seriously analyzing the situation from a rational unbiased perspective. You certainly wouldn't use it as you rightly perceive general hostility to Putin fans over here. I'm not sure what your propaganda fix is. Your casting me as an unsophisticated American, despite my blindingly obvious Russian reference username suggests you are a 2nd gen immigrant, so it's prolly RT. But it's certain you like to think that your opinion is not formed by propaganda in one bit, and you rather arrived to it independently (even if down to same exact talking points) at a bidding of your intellect. I won't even bother you asking the shebboleth of "чей Крым", as I certainly know the kind of "it's complicated" Putin-fan-in-a-hostile-environment answer it would entail. If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...
        saynsedit 10y ago
        The narrative you have invented for yourself to understand me with limited information is fascinating. You have a gift for storytelling! You should really start writing fiction. Not kidding at all. I loved Rainbow Six. Actually Clancy in general. It's just fun stuff to read. Throwing in Cyrillic makes it exciting. As for my propaganda fix, that's kind of unfair. I mean... What's your propaganda fix? Why are you so intent on labeling me? I'm a human with a brain like you dude... we're brothers on this planet. I read Wikipedia for the most part, read the Times, the Post. I monitor CNN and BBC, also Fox News from time to time. Lots of others less so, e.g. Vox, The Guardian, Slate, The Atlantic, Vice. I actually don't watch RT much at all outside of randomly linked YT clips, I'm not even totally sure what they air... You? Back to the topic at hand, what exactly was your point w.r.t. to the Ukraine situation? Do you disagree that it's a complicated geopolitical issue with multiple stake-holding actors?
ethanbond 10y ago
Yeah, he annexed it covertly, denied it was him, his loyal supporters denied it was him, and then when it turned out it was him, suddenly his loyal supporters justified with "lots of history and lots of US meddling." That does make you a Russophile.
- saynsedit 10y ago
  I don't believe I justified any of Russia's actions. It's a complicated situation and there are lots of questionable actors... For example, there is credible speculation that the US funded anti-Russian neonazis in Ukraine http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/07/04/is-the-u-s-training-neo-nazis-in-ukraine.html http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/07/04/is-the-u-s-... Am I saying the US is "bad"? Am I saying that Russia is "good"? No, I'm saying proxy conflicts like this are gray and complicated and it's not a typical "good guy" "bad guy" situation.
  - lern_too_spel 10y ago
    Betteridge's law of headlines applies to your linked article. > The House unanimously adopted bipartisan amendments to H.R. 2685, the “Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 2015.” And one of them specifically blocks training of the “Ukrainian neo-Nazi paramilitary militia ‘Azov Battalion.’” > This is in addition to criteria established in an amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, originally sponsored by Sen. Patrick Leahy, known as “the Leahy Vetting Process.” The Leahy process consists of screening foreign forces applying for U.S. Government training and support to certify that they haven’t committed any “gross human rights violations.” If they are found to have done so, support is withheld. So, no, the US is not intentionally funding neonazis and in fact, is trying very hard not to. They are providing training requested by the Ukrainian Ministry of Interior against a Russian aggressor that has shot down a civilian passenger aircraft, among many other crimes.
    - saynsedit 10y ago
      It's undeniable that the euromaidan protests had a strong right-wing nationalist component. They were violent and essentially terrorized the country. This essentially led the president of Ukraine to resign. That right-wing faction then controlled Ukraine's government, and is still very strong in Ukraine. We immediately recognized that new government and provided them with aid. That is insane! In the west, their only saving grace was that they were anti-Russian.
pnathan 10y ago
> Lots of history there and lots of US meddling as well as Russia. You're using a classic Soviet argument tactic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism You're not responding to the above poster on merit at all, you're deflecting.
- pessimizer 10y ago
  No, you're not responding on the merits. Mentioning the fact that America is involved with a faction in Ukraine and Russia is involved with a different faction in Ukraine when discussing Ukraine is not "whataboutism." Mentioning the fact that America is involved in any situation in the world ("how can they judge us on this when they do that?") that wasn't the exact situation under question could be "whataboutism." The OP didn't even express any disapproval of what Russia did in Ukraine, so how could it be "whataboutism?" Accusing someone of using a classic Soviet argument tactic is a classic Ad Hominem tactic.
  - codethief 10y ago
    > Accusing someone of using a classic Soviet argument tactic is a classic Ad Hominem tactic. This.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

varjag 10y ago

> Ukraine situation is way more complicated than Putin simply annexing it. Look, it's Europe. Everyone here has a history with everyone here. Russian annexation of Ukrainian territory, in violation of every possible treaty and its own constitution, is not a matter of opinion. It's also first in Europe since WW2.

saynsedit 10y ago
Russia isn't the only country that violates international treaties and its own constitution... Ever heard of Victoria Nuland, assistant Secretary of State for European affairs during the Ukrainian crisis? "Fuck the EU" she said: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957
- varjag 10y ago
  Have you read the transcript outside this phrase? It's always the profanity part being quoted, for lack of anything controversial. But well, Britain said essentially the same during Brexit, and I don't see Putin fans upset with that. I know you make it some tit-for-tat scheme, where Russia is justified to retaliate the USA for some real or perceived sin. However Russia doesn't leash off on its stated archenemy, as humiliation of defeat is not something Putin is looking for. Instead it backstabs Ukraine, the nation without a functioning military and reeling from domestic crisis, which is hardly responsible for injustices of the United States.
  - saynsedit 10y ago
    "Putin fan" is not a term I would use to describe myself or anyone who is seriously analyzing the situation from a rational unbiased perspective. Nor would I use "tit-for-tat," "backstab," and "archenemy" to describe the events that have transpired. It makes it hard to discuss/analyze history with someone who is assessing the situation in those comic book terms with a clear anti-Russian bias. My intention was not to defend Russia but simply to give evidence on the complexity of events in Ukraine and the multiple actors involved. Personally I find this complexity extremely interesting. Is there a specific point you want to get across? Your dramatic retelling of the events in Ukraine is entertaining and I encourage you to adapt it into a screenplay and sell it to Hollywood. Aside from that I'm not quite sure what your specific point is.
    - varjag 10y ago
      > "Putin fan" is not a term I would use to describe myself or anyone who is seriously analyzing the situation from a rational unbiased perspective. You certainly wouldn't use it as you rightly perceive general hostility to Putin fans over here. I'm not sure what your propaganda fix is. Your casting me as an unsophisticated American, despite my blindingly obvious Russian reference username suggests you are a 2nd gen immigrant, so it's prolly RT. But it's certain you like to think that your opinion is not formed by propaganda in one bit, and you rather arrived to it independently (even if down to same exact talking points) at a bidding of your intellect. I won't even bother you asking the shebboleth of "чей Крым", as I certainly know the kind of "it's complicated" Putin-fan-in-a-hostile-environment answer it would entail. If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...
      - saynsedit 10y ago
        The narrative you have invented for yourself to understand me with limited information is fascinating. You have a gift for storytelling! You should really start writing fiction. Not kidding at all. I loved Rainbow Six. Actually Clancy in general. It's just fun stuff to read. Throwing in Cyrillic makes it exciting. As for my propaganda fix, that's kind of unfair. I mean... What's your propaganda fix? Why are you so intent on labeling me? I'm a human with a brain like you dude... we're brothers on this planet. I read Wikipedia for the most part, read the Times, the Post. I monitor CNN and BBC, also Fox News from time to time. Lots of others less so, e.g. Vox, The Guardian, Slate, The Atlantic, Vice. I actually don't watch RT much at all outside of randomly linked YT clips, I'm not even totally sure what they air... You? Back to the topic at hand, what exactly was your point w.r.t. to the Ukraine situation? Do you disagree that it's a complicated geopolitical issue with multiple stake-holding actors?

ethanbond 10y ago

Yeah, he annexed it covertly, denied it was him, his loyal supporters denied it was him, and then when it turned out it was him, suddenly his loyal supporters justified with "lots of history and lots of US meddling." That does make you a Russophile.

saynsedit 10y ago
I don't believe I justified any of Russia's actions. It's a complicated situation and there are lots of questionable actors... For example, there is credible speculation that the US funded anti-Russian neonazis in Ukraine http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/07/04/is-the-u-s-training-neo-nazis-in-ukraine.html http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/07/04/is-the-u-s-... Am I saying the US is "bad"? Am I saying that Russia is "good"? No, I'm saying proxy conflicts like this are gray and complicated and it's not a typical "good guy" "bad guy" situation.
- lern_too_spel 10y ago
  Betteridge's law of headlines applies to your linked article. > The House unanimously adopted bipartisan amendments to H.R. 2685, the “Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 2015.” And one of them specifically blocks training of the “Ukrainian neo-Nazi paramilitary militia ‘Azov Battalion.’” > This is in addition to criteria established in an amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, originally sponsored by Sen. Patrick Leahy, known as “the Leahy Vetting Process.” The Leahy process consists of screening foreign forces applying for U.S. Government training and support to certify that they haven’t committed any “gross human rights violations.” If they are found to have done so, support is withheld. So, no, the US is not intentionally funding neonazis and in fact, is trying very hard not to. They are providing training requested by the Ukrainian Ministry of Interior against a Russian aggressor that has shot down a civilian passenger aircraft, among many other crimes.
  - saynsedit 10y ago
    It's undeniable that the euromaidan protests had a strong right-wing nationalist component. They were violent and essentially terrorized the country. This essentially led the president of Ukraine to resign. That right-wing faction then controlled Ukraine's government, and is still very strong in Ukraine. We immediately recognized that new government and provided them with aid. That is insane! In the west, their only saving grace was that they were anti-Russian.

pnathan 10y ago

> Lots of history there and lots of US meddling as well as Russia. You're using a classic Soviet argument tactic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism You're not responding to the above poster on merit at all, you're deflecting.

pessimizer 10y ago
No, you're not responding on the merits. Mentioning the fact that America is involved with a faction in Ukraine and Russia is involved with a different faction in Ukraine when discussing Ukraine is not "whataboutism." Mentioning the fact that America is involved in any situation in the world ("how can they judge us on this when they do that?") that wasn't the exact situation under question could be "whataboutism." The OP didn't even express any disapproval of what Russia did in Ukraine, so how could it be "whataboutism?" Accusing someone of using a classic Soviet argument tactic is a classic Ad Hominem tactic.
- codethief 10y ago
  > Accusing someone of using a classic Soviet argument tactic is a classic Ad Hominem tactic. This.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]