4 ms·

The seriousness of the conflict depends on where you get your information, sadly. The situation geopolitically seems pretty simple, in broad strokes. Too bad t

by insuffi 13y ago

The seriousness of the conflict depends on where you get your information, sadly. The situation geopolitically seems pretty simple, in broad strokes. Too bad there's unfounded scaremongering on both sides(or should I say 3 or 4 sides).

mtrimpe 13y ago
It more seems that the seriousness of the conflict depends on whether you see this as an isolated incident (which just happens to be the worst violation of territorial integrity in Europe since WWII) or as yet another indicator that the exact same social dynamics that led us to WWII in the first place are intensifying significantly. I'm curious as to what your take on this is then though ...
- camus2 13y ago
  which just happens to be the worst violation of territorial integrity in Europe since WWII sure,but it's not like Kosovo ever happened... oh wait,NATO was on board with this...
  - mtrimpe 13y ago
    In Kosovo there was active, widespread genocide going on. Absolutely nothing of such kind was happening in Crimea. Additionally the Kosovo constitution offered room for secession and it's secession was consequently recognized by the vast majority of the international community. The votes on the UN council as to the legality of Russia's actions [1] say enough, but Huffinton Post wrote a fairly comprehensive article [2] about the topic. P.S. If you plan to link to the RT counter-piece [3] just let me know and I'll list all the factual inaccuracies for you. [1] http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/ukraine-vote.jpg http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/u... [2] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-l-phillips/crimea-is-not-kosovo_b_4936365.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-l-phillips/crimea-is-not... [3] http://rt.com/news/kosovo-crimea-referendum-recognition-441/ http://rt.com/news/kosovo-crimea-referendum-recognition-441/
    - vasac 13y ago
      Lies, lies, lies... In Kosovo there wasn't widespread genocide, especially not before NATO started dropping bombs - by far biggest atrocities (not genocide) started after March 24, 1999. Also you conveniently forgot those guys http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo_Liberation_Army#Status_as_a_terrorist_group http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo_Liberation_Army#Status_a... - local Russians in Crimea didn't pull anything remotely similar and I guess that they could if they wanted to provoke conflict. And if you plan to put some more lies about Kosovo I'll be glad to educate you more.
      - selimthegrim 13y ago
        Normally the day I side with Serbian nationalists is a cold day in hell, but vasac is right. This is the end result of one of the worst kludges of the 1974 SFRY constitution, a master class document in doublespeak and not actually resolving issues between parties. Case in point: Hungarians and Albanians were "nationalities", not "nations". Why couldn't they be "nations"? Because they "already had one". Way to make your minorities feel disenfranchised at one fell swoop.
      - mtrimpe 13y ago
        OK. I stand corrected on the genocide. Still; the NATO intervention was to stop a war between insurgents (supported by the populace) and a government that started waging war against the insurgents. In that case the equivalent would have been for Russia to militarily support the situation in Kiev, and it bears no similarity whatsoever to invading and annexing the, at that point, completely peaceful Crimea.
        vasac 13y ago
        First, I'm sorry for a hash tone of my first message. Second, I could argue that Russians just skipped the insurgency part. It would be trivially easy for them to create/support insurgency at Crimea and leave Ukrainian forces with no good choice: either they retreat immediately or they retreat under Russian assault (which will be justified as a war/genocide/whatever prevention). On Serbia/Kosovo: discrepancy between military might between Serbia and Albanians from Kosovo was so great that any insurgency was practically suicide. But if you know that you will be backed by NATO insurgency suddenly looks like a good idea. My point being that NATO action wasn't just consequence of war but part of a cause. Might makes right - works everywhere.
- insuffi 13y ago
  Oh boy. I think you're somewhat over-exaggerating the situation. Yes, Russia has not been the most subtle in taking over Crimea, but I can say without a doubt that any of the major superpowers would do the same if a country nearby were to experience a coup d'etat. Especially if that country was strategically important. While not technically legal, Crimea really is mostly comprised of Russians and has had a special legal status for ages. A 97% vote does not surprise me. Russians in other eastern european countries also reminisce of the "good old times". I think much of the backlash is due to Russia being projected as the stereotypical evil commie. I really don't want to venture into conspiracy theory territory, since that would probably hurt my credibility, but I would not be surprised to see the EU and US behind this as a means of trying to cut Russia off from the outside world(after inviting Ukraine into the EU failed). Don't forget the opposition has strong ties with the U.S. This might be of interest to you. http://www.globalresearch.ca/ukraine-protests-carefully-orchestrated-the-role-of-canvas-us-financed-color-revolution-training-group/5369906 http://www.globalresearch.ca/ukraine-protests-carefully-orch... Globalresearch is a credible think tank.
  - mtrimpe 13y ago
    OK. It's pretty clear that you've been heavily exposed to a single perspective of the situation. There is no way in hell 97% of the population voted in favor with 80+% turnout; especially given that 30+% of the population is Tatar or Ukrainian. Based on leaked reports to the Kremlin the real turnout is estimated at a bit over 30%. Regardless; the referendum was literally held at gunpoint after all Ukrainian news had been shut off and Russian television showed massive fascists uprising and murder in Kiev, which heavily scared the population and did make a large portion of the population believe they were being rescued. Thus, even if the results were true, it still would not have been a valid referendum. As for the protests, based on direct sources from real people the protests were organize by just that: real everyday people. Once again though; the regime was not overthrown by the protesters, but by Yanukovich losing moral authority after ordering shooting of civilians. If you want to argue the snipers were also a false flag operation then you'd indeed be well into conspiracy nut territory; but I can also point you to videos of Ukrainian snipers assembling if you want. Global Research also doesn't have that good of a reputation. In [1] it explicitly mentions one of it's main reality warping effects comes from a heavy reliance on Russia Today material. [1] http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch.ca http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch.ca

by insuffi 13y ago

mtrimpe 13y ago

It more seems that the seriousness of the conflict depends on whether you see this as an isolated incident (which just happens to be the worst violation of territorial integrity in Europe since WWII) or as yet another indicator that the exact same social dynamics that led us to WWII in the first place are intensifying significantly. I'm curious as to what your take on this is then though ...

camus2 13y ago
which just happens to be the worst violation of territorial integrity in Europe since WWII sure,but it's not like Kosovo ever happened... oh wait,NATO was on board with this...
- mtrimpe 13y ago
  In Kosovo there was active, widespread genocide going on. Absolutely nothing of such kind was happening in Crimea. Additionally the Kosovo constitution offered room for secession and it's secession was consequently recognized by the vast majority of the international community. The votes on the UN council as to the legality of Russia's actions [1] say enough, but Huffinton Post wrote a fairly comprehensive article [2] about the topic. P.S. If you plan to link to the RT counter-piece [3] just let me know and I'll list all the factual inaccuracies for you. [1] http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/ukraine-vote.jpg http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/u... [2] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-l-phillips/crimea-is-not-kosovo_b_4936365.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-l-phillips/crimea-is-not... [3] http://rt.com/news/kosovo-crimea-referendum-recognition-441/ http://rt.com/news/kosovo-crimea-referendum-recognition-441/
  - vasac 13y ago
    Lies, lies, lies... In Kosovo there wasn't widespread genocide, especially not before NATO started dropping bombs - by far biggest atrocities (not genocide) started after March 24, 1999. Also you conveniently forgot those guys http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo_Liberation_Army#Status_as_a_terrorist_group http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo_Liberation_Army#Status_a... - local Russians in Crimea didn't pull anything remotely similar and I guess that they could if they wanted to provoke conflict. And if you plan to put some more lies about Kosovo I'll be glad to educate you more.
    - selimthegrim 13y ago
      Normally the day I side with Serbian nationalists is a cold day in hell, but vasac is right. This is the end result of one of the worst kludges of the 1974 SFRY constitution, a master class document in doublespeak and not actually resolving issues between parties. Case in point: Hungarians and Albanians were "nationalities", not "nations". Why couldn't they be "nations"? Because they "already had one". Way to make your minorities feel disenfranchised at one fell swoop.
    - mtrimpe 13y ago
      OK. I stand corrected on the genocide. Still; the NATO intervention was to stop a war between insurgents (supported by the populace) and a government that started waging war against the insurgents. In that case the equivalent would have been for Russia to militarily support the situation in Kiev, and it bears no similarity whatsoever to invading and annexing the, at that point, completely peaceful Crimea.
      - vasac 13y ago
        First, I'm sorry for a hash tone of my first message. Second, I could argue that Russians just skipped the insurgency part. It would be trivially easy for them to create/support insurgency at Crimea and leave Ukrainian forces with no good choice: either they retreat immediately or they retreat under Russian assault (which will be justified as a war/genocide/whatever prevention). On Serbia/Kosovo: discrepancy between military might between Serbia and Albanians from Kosovo was so great that any insurgency was practically suicide. But if you know that you will be backed by NATO insurgency suddenly looks like a good idea. My point being that NATO action wasn't just consequence of war but part of a cause. Might makes right - works everywhere.
insuffi 13y ago
Oh boy. I think you're somewhat over-exaggerating the situation. Yes, Russia has not been the most subtle in taking over Crimea, but I can say without a doubt that any of the major superpowers would do the same if a country nearby were to experience a coup d'etat. Especially if that country was strategically important. While not technically legal, Crimea really is mostly comprised of Russians and has had a special legal status for ages. A 97% vote does not surprise me. Russians in other eastern european countries also reminisce of the "good old times". I think much of the backlash is due to Russia being projected as the stereotypical evil commie. I really don't want to venture into conspiracy theory territory, since that would probably hurt my credibility, but I would not be surprised to see the EU and US behind this as a means of trying to cut Russia off from the outside world(after inviting Ukraine into the EU failed). Don't forget the opposition has strong ties with the U.S. This might be of interest to you. http://www.globalresearch.ca/ukraine-protests-carefully-orchestrated-the-role-of-canvas-us-financed-color-revolution-training-group/5369906 http://www.globalresearch.ca/ukraine-protests-carefully-orch... Globalresearch is a credible think tank.
- mtrimpe 13y ago
  OK. It's pretty clear that you've been heavily exposed to a single perspective of the situation. There is no way in hell 97% of the population voted in favor with 80+% turnout; especially given that 30+% of the population is Tatar or Ukrainian. Based on leaked reports to the Kremlin the real turnout is estimated at a bit over 30%. Regardless; the referendum was literally held at gunpoint after all Ukrainian news had been shut off and Russian television showed massive fascists uprising and murder in Kiev, which heavily scared the population and did make a large portion of the population believe they were being rescued. Thus, even if the results were true, it still would not have been a valid referendum. As for the protests, based on direct sources from real people the protests were organize by just that: real everyday people. Once again though; the regime was not overthrown by the protesters, but by Yanukovich losing moral authority after ordering shooting of civilians. If you want to argue the snipers were also a false flag operation then you'd indeed be well into conspiracy nut territory; but I can also point you to videos of Ukrainian snipers assembling if you want. Global Research also doesn't have that good of a reputation. In [1] it explicitly mentions one of it's main reality warping effects comes from a heavy reliance on Russia Today material. [1] http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch.ca http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch.ca