4 ms·

Obvious propaganda piece. Both sides are doing bad things. Intelligent observers can read about the situation widely and decide for themselves what the driver

Obvious propaganda piece. Both sides are doing bad things. Intelligent observers can read about the situation widely and decide for themselves what the drivers of the situation are, but this piece doesn't add much. Just for the sake of fairness, I could play devils advocate for either side, but an intelligent reader will do that for themselves, so I'll skip it. Also, I checked their list of stories, and they all seem to be negative...

qaq 10y ago
Would be interesting to see what do you think Russia is doing right in this conflict?
- finid 10y ago
  It's interesting how people take sides on these issues. Many in the US who can count all the wrongs Russia is guilty of in the conflict in Ukraine see nothing wrong with the US position in Syria.
  - qaq 10y ago
    This itself could be a subject of a long discussion, but does not seem to be related to the topic at hand.
- solnyshok 10y ago
  from Putin's Russia standpoint, it is probably best to maintain fire in the conflict, without adding too much powder or lending overwhelming force to separatists. He uses Donbass conflict as "grappling hook" in the Ukraine's back, that basically prevents it from joining EU or NATO. (Current regulations deny membership to any country that has unresolved territorial claims or participates in the military conflict.) And it bleeds Ukrainian resources, destablilizes economy, etc. So, he is pretty much doing best by not winning this conflict decisively. (btw, why don't you ask yourself what EU/USA is doing right in this conflict?)
  - qaq 10y ago
    I meant right in a different sense, but you provide a fairly accurate description about what is going on. US and some EU members and China are pretending Budapest memorandum does not exist, which serves them well in the short term, but will obviously have severe consequences in the long term.
hourislate 10y ago
Why is it obvious propaganda? I didn't find anything wrong with the article. It presents a story. Small and medium size business have been crushed and most have been pillaged by mercenaries and gangsters in the free for all the followed Russian adventurism. Readers here are intelligent enough to see your poor attempt at discrediting an article that is what it is. How much proof do you need and why defend the indefensible?
dgudkov 10y ago
>Both sides are doing bad things. Such statements downplay the root cause and pretend like all parties are equally guilty which is never the case. All sides did bad things in WW2, although it doesn't make all parties equally guilty. It was Hitler who started it. It was Putin who started the war against Ukraine by annexing Crimea. He personally and Russia in general bear the responsibility for the war they planned, prepared, started, financed and still keep running.
- douche 10y ago
  The bigger issue might have been the settlement after the fall of the Soviet Union that kept Russia away from the Black Sea ports. It was almost a historical inevitability that Russia would seek a warm-water port. Sevastopol is the major Russian Black Sea port, and always has been.
  - niftich 10y ago
    Novorossiysk is an existing Russian warm-water port on the Black Sea, with better links to the Russian heartland. Sevastopol's chief geopolitical advantage over Novorossiysk is force projection, as it sits closer to the Turkish Straits and nearby foreign ports like Odessa, Constanta, and Varna, outside and/or wanting to be outside of Russia's sphere of influence.
- lolc 10y ago
  Wars are not a simple "he started it" deal. One could draw uncanny parallels between the current situation and the conflicting alliances during World War 2.
- finid 10y ago
  > It was Putin who started the war against Ukraine by annexing Crimea. What happened before Russia annexed Crimea? If you can answer that question honestly, you'll get to the root of that conflict. Just be honest with yourself.
  - dgudkov 10y ago

qaq 10y ago

Would be interesting to see what do you think Russia is doing right in this conflict?

finid 10y ago
It's interesting how people take sides on these issues. Many in the US who can count all the wrongs Russia is guilty of in the conflict in Ukraine see nothing wrong with the US position in Syria.
- qaq 10y ago
  This itself could be a subject of a long discussion, but does not seem to be related to the topic at hand.
solnyshok 10y ago
from Putin's Russia standpoint, it is probably best to maintain fire in the conflict, without adding too much powder or lending overwhelming force to separatists. He uses Donbass conflict as "grappling hook" in the Ukraine's back, that basically prevents it from joining EU or NATO. (Current regulations deny membership to any country that has unresolved territorial claims or participates in the military conflict.) And it bleeds Ukrainian resources, destablilizes economy, etc. So, he is pretty much doing best by not winning this conflict decisively. (btw, why don't you ask yourself what EU/USA is doing right in this conflict?)
- qaq 10y ago
  I meant right in a different sense, but you provide a fairly accurate description about what is going on. US and some EU members and China are pretending Budapest memorandum does not exist, which serves them well in the short term, but will obviously have severe consequences in the long term.

hourislate 10y ago

Why is it obvious propaganda? I didn't find anything wrong with the article. It presents a story. Small and medium size business have been crushed and most have been pillaged by mercenaries and gangsters in the free for all the followed Russian adventurism. Readers here are intelligent enough to see your poor attempt at discrediting an article that is what it is. How much proof do you need and why defend the indefensible?

dgudkov 10y ago

>Both sides are doing bad things. Such statements downplay the root cause and pretend like all parties are equally guilty which is never the case. All sides did bad things in WW2, although it doesn't make all parties equally guilty. It was Hitler who started it. It was Putin who started the war against Ukraine by annexing Crimea. He personally and Russia in general bear the responsibility for the war they planned, prepared, started, financed and still keep running.

douche 10y ago
The bigger issue might have been the settlement after the fall of the Soviet Union that kept Russia away from the Black Sea ports. It was almost a historical inevitability that Russia would seek a warm-water port. Sevastopol is the major Russian Black Sea port, and always has been.
- niftich 10y ago
  Novorossiysk is an existing Russian warm-water port on the Black Sea, with better links to the Russian heartland. Sevastopol's chief geopolitical advantage over Novorossiysk is force projection, as it sits closer to the Turkish Straits and nearby foreign ports like Odessa, Constanta, and Varna, outside and/or wanting to be outside of Russia's sphere of influence.
lolc 10y ago
Wars are not a simple "he started it" deal. One could draw uncanny parallels between the current situation and the conflicting alliances during World War 2.
finid 10y ago
> It was Putin who started the war against Ukraine by annexing Crimea. What happened before Russia annexed Crimea? If you can answer that question honestly, you'll get to the root of that conflict. Just be honest with yourself.
- dgudkov 10y ago