5 ms·

IMHO if your only/main source of news is the western media, you get a very one sided, anti-Russian point of view. Things are really not that black and white, th

IMHO if your only/main source of news is the western media, you get a very one sided, anti-Russian point of view. Things are really not that black and white, they almost never are in the global politics.

matthewmacleod 12y ago
Hmm. Is there actually any doubt that Russia is tacitly providing support to Novorossiya?
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- dfkf 12y ago
  There actually is, if by Russia you mean Russian government. Support to "Novorossiya" simply can't achieve anything, perhaps only help it last a little bit longer. When Russia wanted to change the status quo it had legal excuses and it acted openly and forcibly. Half-measures take you nowhere.
lambda 12y ago
I have read both Western and Russian sources on the conflict. Let's just say that I find the Western sources on the matter much, much more trustworthy. It's very clear that Russia is running a propaganda campaign, which is apparently reasonably effective within Russia but less convincing when you have access to other sources of information. The Russian propaganda campaign was even fairly effective at spreading the rumor on Western social media that the Ukrainian opposition movement consisted mostly of fascists, when in reality there was a fascist group that was associated with it but a relatively small percentage overall of the opposition to Yanukovych. After Russia snuck unmarked Russian soldiers into Crimea, which comes dangerously close to counting as perfidy, it was pretty clear that Russia and Russian sources could not be trusted on this matter. Now, are you trying to claim that Russia did not send troops onto Ukrainian soil to annex Crimea, and is not supporting the separatists in the east with at least arms and training? Or are you trying to claim that doing so is somehow justified, and if so, under what justification?
- mendort 12y ago
  The Russians just need a little Lebensraum. The West has continued its policy of containment even after the fall of the Soviet Union. This can be seen in the aggressive expansion of the EU and of NATO. It is necessary that Russia have scope to influence its neighbors and build partnerships in order for it to be a free and prosperous nation.
  - adamnemecek 12y ago
    I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not. I'm guessing yes but the only thing that gave it aways was the use of the word Lebensraum.
  - lotsofmangos 12y ago
    Here's to hoping that history is only rhyming. I do get the feeling that Putin is a bit smarter and a bit less insane, but I would be hesitant to bet on it. The apparent concentration of power in one individual makes Russia scary as hell at the same time as being very brittle.
- donrememberpass 12y ago
  Crimea is basically Russian, the vast majority of the population identifies themselves as Russian, 77% of the population only speak Russian. It was "given" to Ukraine after the fall of the USSR and was an autonomous region, it was part of Russia for like 200 years. To me, they had the right to "bring back" and protect people that were of their kind, Ukraine government even wanted to ban the Russian language in Ukraine! Let me give you an example, in the south of Latin America there's a kind of country people that share a culture of the same origin and are present in Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay, they are "gaúchos". Lets say tomorrow the north of Brazil takes over and outlaws being gaúcho. Wouldn't the gaúchos in Argentina and Uruguay be right to be against that? Give me a brake. Western corporate media is bullshit factory and propaganda machine, I don't find it trustworthy at all. I'm brasilian, BTW. Also, nobody talks that US is supporting their side with propaganda, money, arms, "military consultancy" since the start of all this. Apparently a USAID "non-profit" even gave out cakes to people during the revolution, how cute! From my point of view, the West side is obscuring facts waaaaaay more, but you can't know without really digging(well, that's the whole point, right?) How about people angry with their government was "the will of people must be respected" 5 months ago, but now people against the new one are "terrorists" and "send the army against them! Here, take some military consultancy". It would funny if it wasn't tragic. Sorry, but it's really easy to expose the USG hypocrisy, turkey anyone?
maxlybbert 12y ago
lambda's already replied about the relative trustworthiness of different media sources. However, lambda's earlier post was limited to why a US company can interfere with the contracts of non-US companies. The problem, of course, is that Red Hat can get into legal trouble if it does business, directly or indirectly, with the targeted companies, but Red Hat's independent partners are under a different legal system, and may well get into trouble by breaching their contracts at Red Hat's insistence.
- smsm42 12y ago
  Most contract law systems include the notion of force majeure, which significantly limits the liability for breach of contract in such circumstances. Government sanctions is a common example of force majeure.
Aloisius 12y ago
Out of curiosity, besides the Russian government-owned media and various crackpot conspiracy theory sites claiming, among other things, that the Jews did it, what news sources are presenting a pro-Russian point of view of this calamity?

matthewmacleod 12y ago

Hmm. Is there actually any doubt that Russia is tacitly providing support to Novorossiya?

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
dfkf 12y ago
There actually is, if by Russia you mean Russian government. Support to "Novorossiya" simply can't achieve anything, perhaps only help it last a little bit longer. When Russia wanted to change the status quo it had legal excuses and it acted openly and forcibly. Half-measures take you nowhere.

lambda 12y ago

I have read both Western and Russian sources on the conflict. Let's just say that I find the Western sources on the matter much, much more trustworthy. It's very clear that Russia is running a propaganda campaign, which is apparently reasonably effective within Russia but less convincing when you have access to other sources of information. The Russian propaganda campaign was even fairly effective at spreading the rumor on Western social media that the Ukrainian opposition movement consisted mostly of fascists, when in reality there was a fascist group that was associated with it but a relatively small percentage overall of the opposition to Yanukovych. After Russia snuck unmarked Russian soldiers into Crimea, which comes dangerously close to counting as perfidy, it was pretty clear that Russia and Russian sources could not be trusted on this matter. Now, are you trying to claim that Russia did not send troops onto Ukrainian soil to annex Crimea, and is not supporting the separatists in the east with at least arms and training? Or are you trying to claim that doing so is somehow justified, and if so, under what justification?

mendort 12y ago
The Russians just need a little Lebensraum. The West has continued its policy of containment even after the fall of the Soviet Union. This can be seen in the aggressive expansion of the EU and of NATO. It is necessary that Russia have scope to influence its neighbors and build partnerships in order for it to be a free and prosperous nation.
- adamnemecek 12y ago
  I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not. I'm guessing yes but the only thing that gave it aways was the use of the word Lebensraum.
- lotsofmangos 12y ago
  Here's to hoping that history is only rhyming. I do get the feeling that Putin is a bit smarter and a bit less insane, but I would be hesitant to bet on it. The apparent concentration of power in one individual makes Russia scary as hell at the same time as being very brittle.
donrememberpass 12y ago
Crimea is basically Russian, the vast majority of the population identifies themselves as Russian, 77% of the population only speak Russian. It was "given" to Ukraine after the fall of the USSR and was an autonomous region, it was part of Russia for like 200 years. To me, they had the right to "bring back" and protect people that were of their kind, Ukraine government even wanted to ban the Russian language in Ukraine! Let me give you an example, in the south of Latin America there's a kind of country people that share a culture of the same origin and are present in Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay, they are "gaúchos". Lets say tomorrow the north of Brazil takes over and outlaws being gaúcho. Wouldn't the gaúchos in Argentina and Uruguay be right to be against that? Give me a brake. Western corporate media is bullshit factory and propaganda machine, I don't find it trustworthy at all. I'm brasilian, BTW. Also, nobody talks that US is supporting their side with propaganda, money, arms, "military consultancy" since the start of all this. Apparently a USAID "non-profit" even gave out cakes to people during the revolution, how cute! From my point of view, the West side is obscuring facts waaaaaay more, but you can't know without really digging(well, that's the whole point, right?) How about people angry with their government was "the will of people must be respected" 5 months ago, but now people against the new one are "terrorists" and "send the army against them! Here, take some military consultancy". It would funny if it wasn't tragic. Sorry, but it's really easy to expose the USG hypocrisy, turkey anyone?

maxlybbert 12y ago

lambda's already replied about the relative trustworthiness of different media sources. However, lambda's earlier post was limited to why a US company can interfere with the contracts of non-US companies. The problem, of course, is that Red Hat can get into legal trouble if it does business, directly or indirectly, with the targeted companies, but Red Hat's independent partners are under a different legal system, and may well get into trouble by breaching their contracts at Red Hat's insistence.

smsm42 12y ago
Most contract law systems include the notion of force majeure, which significantly limits the liability for breach of contract in such circumstances. Government sanctions is a common example of force majeure.

Aloisius 12y ago

Out of curiosity, besides the Russian government-owned media and various crackpot conspiracy theory sites claiming, among other things, that the Jews did it, what news sources are presenting a pro-Russian point of view of this calamity?