4 ms·

The main problem in this whole story is the inability to punish the misbehavior without getting hit by the backlash. It's the same with Russia's recent activiti

by danbruc 12y ago

The main problem in this whole story is the inability to punish the misbehavior without getting hit by the backlash. It's the same with Russia's recent activities. We lack efficient means of punishment on a global scale when dealing with powerful nations. Therefore the best option is usually to improve defense measures and that takes time.

coldtea 12y ago
What "recent activities"? I'm afraid the very powerful nations that have done what TFA says have also frame your understanding of what Russia did. Some thinking points: a) Russia is next to Ukraine, so it's like they're dealing with a dispute in their borders (e.g not like certain countries that go across the globe to the middle east or asia to assert their "national interests"). b) Ukraine's legitimate voted for government was toppled by a minority (including nazi sympathizers) with western support. c) The population of Ukraine has tons of people that are pro-Russia and are of Russian descent. Crimea in particular had voted to unite with Russia time and again. Imagine Mexico's legitimate government had been toppled by a Russian-supported coalition (with pro-nazi's among them). Imagine Baja California had 90% people of USA descent that had voted for union with California. What the US response to that would be?
- twoodfin 12y ago
  So you'd support a US invasion of Mexico under those circumstances? Somehow I doubt it.
  - coldtea 12y ago
    Under those circumstances? Yes. Or at least I'd understand it and respect the resoning behind it. I don't expect "knight on a white horse" or a beacon of justice, and I don't judge all situations the same. It's all a matter of degree and case-by-case basis, there's no black and white in politics. For the same reasons I'm against USSR's invasion of Afghanistan or Hungary too. So, comparatively speaking, this is a 10 times more defensible situation that an all-powerful country invading/bombing a smaller one (and under false pretextes at that) to secure cheap resources and/or a favorable diplomatic outcome in the area. The hypocrisy of people treating those two situations the same is incredible.
- danbruc 12y ago
  Russia violated the territorial integrity of the Ukraine. Period. The inner situation is obviously complex and splitting the Ukraine into two states may actually be the best option to resolve the inner conflicts, but this is the business of the Ukraine and not Russia.
  - coldtea 12y ago
    >but this is the business of the Ukraine and not Russia. Well, it was also not the business of outside powers, EU and US for starters, who supported (including secret funds) the toppling of the legitimate Ukranian government. Second, countries with active invasions/occupations far away from their borders, with no local population there, under false pretexes, and with 100 times the casualties and force, have so little moral high ground on this it's funny.
    - danbruc 12y ago
      Financial support and the violation of territorial integrity are two very different things. As far as I can tell the financial support did not even come from other governments but NGOs and the like. It is also wrong to call it a minority, according to the numbers I have read it was more like 40% against the government and pro association agreement with the European Union, 40 % the other way around and the rest undecided with support for the movement dropping when things became violent. And toppling a democratically elected government by its own people is completely okay when the government does no longer follow the will of the people. Admittedly it is not that straight forward in the case of the Ukraine with the opinion split almost fifty-fifty but at least it seems to be absolutely reasonable to me to demand reelections. Your second point seems to assume that I am a US citizen and me being hypocrite. I am not a US citizen and I fully acknowledge that the USA has done worse things in the last decades. But that does not even matter at all - the misbehavior of other nations is no justification for the behavior of Russia.
Htsthbjig 12y ago
What are those Russia recent activities? The misbehavior in Ukraine was US gobertment giving 6 billion dollars to rebels against the democratically elected, Russian speaking majority. It was the Secretary of State of the US who talked about the 6 billions they gave. After forcing a coup d'Etat in Ukraine and protecting the rebels (no violence should be used), the Pro Russian majority revolted and then the US of course change their opinion to VIOLENCE SHOULD BE USED against pro Russians. It become clear that the US put a puppet in Ukraine gobertment. It was only after that Russia secured Sevastopol against the occupation. Sevastopol has been Russian for centuries. US was alone in their war against Russia until the civilian plane crashed. Europe leaders were told by companies that breaking almost a trillion dollars pacific relationship with Russia in order to satisfy US interest was crazy. Instantly after the crash US and Germany (then France) condemned Russia without proof. To this day we have not a single proof that Pro Russians hit the plane. Quite the contrary, the Pro Russians were winning and hitting a commercial plane was against their interest. In fact I bet it was manufactured like the chemical attack in Syria in order to put public opinion on the side of politicians. I am not Russian, I am European, and seeing European leaders go against their interest following the war mongering US is disgusting. The US is afraid about Europe-Russia and China integration, as it could force US out of Euroasia, and the petrodollar to collapse. The US wants to invade Iran in order to steal their natural gas(more reserves than anywhere else in the world), and Syria in order to force European gaseoduct gas to be controlled by the US. For this first they have to weak Russia, as Russia faced the US when the US attacked both countries. Russia has their Mediterranean fleet in Syria and a pacific relationship with Iran. If someone should be punished, it is the US.

by danbruc 12y ago

coldtea 12y ago

What "recent activities"? I'm afraid the very powerful nations that have done what TFA says have also frame your understanding of what Russia did. Some thinking points: a) Russia is next to Ukraine, so it's like they're dealing with a dispute in their borders (e.g not like certain countries that go across the globe to the middle east or asia to assert their "national interests"). b) Ukraine's legitimate voted for government was toppled by a minority (including nazi sympathizers) with western support. c) The population of Ukraine has tons of people that are pro-Russia and are of Russian descent. Crimea in particular had voted to unite with Russia time and again. Imagine Mexico's legitimate government had been toppled by a Russian-supported coalition (with pro-nazi's among them). Imagine Baja California had 90% people of USA descent that had voted for union with California. What the US response to that would be?

twoodfin 12y ago
So you'd support a US invasion of Mexico under those circumstances? Somehow I doubt it.
- coldtea 12y ago
  Under those circumstances? Yes. Or at least I'd understand it and respect the resoning behind it. I don't expect "knight on a white horse" or a beacon of justice, and I don't judge all situations the same. It's all a matter of degree and case-by-case basis, there's no black and white in politics. For the same reasons I'm against USSR's invasion of Afghanistan or Hungary too. So, comparatively speaking, this is a 10 times more defensible situation that an all-powerful country invading/bombing a smaller one (and under false pretextes at that) to secure cheap resources and/or a favorable diplomatic outcome in the area. The hypocrisy of people treating those two situations the same is incredible.
danbruc 12y ago
Russia violated the territorial integrity of the Ukraine. Period. The inner situation is obviously complex and splitting the Ukraine into two states may actually be the best option to resolve the inner conflicts, but this is the business of the Ukraine and not Russia.
- coldtea 12y ago
  >but this is the business of the Ukraine and not Russia. Well, it was also not the business of outside powers, EU and US for starters, who supported (including secret funds) the toppling of the legitimate Ukranian government. Second, countries with active invasions/occupations far away from their borders, with no local population there, under false pretexes, and with 100 times the casualties and force, have so little moral high ground on this it's funny.
  - danbruc 12y ago
    Financial support and the violation of territorial integrity are two very different things. As far as I can tell the financial support did not even come from other governments but NGOs and the like. It is also wrong to call it a minority, according to the numbers I have read it was more like 40% against the government and pro association agreement with the European Union, 40 % the other way around and the rest undecided with support for the movement dropping when things became violent. And toppling a democratically elected government by its own people is completely okay when the government does no longer follow the will of the people. Admittedly it is not that straight forward in the case of the Ukraine with the opinion split almost fifty-fifty but at least it seems to be absolutely reasonable to me to demand reelections. Your second point seems to assume that I am a US citizen and me being hypocrite. I am not a US citizen and I fully acknowledge that the USA has done worse things in the last decades. But that does not even matter at all - the misbehavior of other nations is no justification for the behavior of Russia.

Htsthbjig 12y ago

What are those Russia recent activities? The misbehavior in Ukraine was US gobertment giving 6 billion dollars to rebels against the democratically elected, Russian speaking majority. It was the Secretary of State of the US who talked about the 6 billions they gave. After forcing a coup d'Etat in Ukraine and protecting the rebels (no violence should be used), the Pro Russian majority revolted and then the US of course change their opinion to VIOLENCE SHOULD BE USED against pro Russians. It become clear that the US put a puppet in Ukraine gobertment. It was only after that Russia secured Sevastopol against the occupation. Sevastopol has been Russian for centuries. US was alone in their war against Russia until the civilian plane crashed. Europe leaders were told by companies that breaking almost a trillion dollars pacific relationship with Russia in order to satisfy US interest was crazy. Instantly after the crash US and Germany (then France) condemned Russia without proof. To this day we have not a single proof that Pro Russians hit the plane. Quite the contrary, the Pro Russians were winning and hitting a commercial plane was against their interest. In fact I bet it was manufactured like the chemical attack in Syria in order to put public opinion on the side of politicians. I am not Russian, I am European, and seeing European leaders go against their interest following the war mongering US is disgusting. The US is afraid about Europe-Russia and China integration, as it could force US out of Euroasia, and the petrodollar to collapse. The US wants to invade Iran in order to steal their natural gas(more reserves than anywhere else in the world), and Syria in order to force European gaseoduct gas to be controlled by the US. For this first they have to weak Russia, as Russia faced the US when the US attacked both countries. Russia has their Mediterranean fleet in Syria and a pacific relationship with Iran. If someone should be punished, it is the US.