Ukrainian Conflict

[Daniel E.]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

I'll apologies. Though from a historical point of view, what I said was true. The US did defeat Mexico in 1848 after taking Mexico City. They did take half of what was then Mexico, and paid Mexico several million dollors for the lands. There was only about 1% of the Mexican population in that half of their country (the bid to get Anglos to move into Texas and California had been an effort to get anybody into those lands).

The last part was observation over the last 150+ years of immigration from Mexico north into the United States, and that places like California, with its 38 million people, are 31% Mexican (via US Census).

I am not saying your post was bad, but it's still off topic to this thread. Other people have also taken this further and I rather have everybody return to the thread topic instead.

[Kokukirin]

Virtually every major civilization or country had taken land from its neighbours at some point in history. But that's rather irrelevant to this topic. We are supposed to have moved past the stage where a strong country can annex the land it wants because it can. We made treaties and laws to enforce international relationships and set up the UN to mediate. What Russia is doing clearly undermines the rules that everyone is supposed to play by these days. Hell, even GWB went to the UN before invading Iraq.

[ganbaru]

Fresh confrontations raise tempers on ground in Crimea
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...A1Q1E820140308

[Der Langrisser]

Warning shots fired to turn monitors back from Crimea
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...A1Q1E820140308

[Roger Rambo]

Originally Posted by Der Langrisser

Warning shots fired to turn monitors back from Crimea
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...A1Q1E820140308

At this point I think it's going to be impossible for anyone to recognize this as a legitimate annexation based on democratic popular sovereignty. Not when you have the "Not Russian Army" and local pro-Russian militia running around and making a big spectacle about barring any outside monitoring of the election. If there was really so much clear cut support for the democratic transfer of the Crimea to the Russian Federation, why are they so afraid of election monitors? The first inclination allot of people will come to is that the pro-Russian elements aren't quite convinced they have as unstoppable of a popular sovereignty as they publicly claim (cause only 58% of the Crimea is ethnically Russia, and I can't imagine that is UNIFORMLY pro-annexation), so Russia is taking measures with their local supporters to tip the odds in their favor.


That's not exactly a land transfer that's going to leave any of Russia's neighbors feeling very comfortable.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Kokukirin

Virtually every major civilization or country had taken land from its neighbours at some point in history. But that's rather irrelevant to this topic. We are supposed to have moved past the stage where a strong country can annex the land it wants because it can. We made treaties and laws to enforce international relationships and set up the UN to mediate. What Russia is doing clearly undermines the rules that everyone is supposed to play by these days. Hell, even GWB went to the UN before invading Iraq.

Might Makes Right, Then, Now and the Foreseeable Future.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

Might Makes Right, Then, Now and the Foreseeable Future.

The whole point is that MMR as a philosophy is overall inefficient. Because you are forced to dedicate too much of your resources on defending yourself. This is why laws and regulations exist; because the realisation is that most of the time everyone is better off.

MMR is not a justification at all, it is just a claim that we shouldn't form societies. That anarchy is better.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

The whole point is that MMR as a philosophy is overall inefficient. Because you are forced to dedicate too much of your resources on defending yourself. This is why laws and regulations exist; because the realisation is that most of the time everyone is better off.

MMR is not a justification at all, it is just a claim that we shouldn't form societies. That anarchy is better.

i am not saying MMR is good or bad but it is the current rule right now and probably the foreseeable future. Anyone who thinks otherwise is living in a bubble.

[risingstar3110]

Even when it's clear that Russia is in the wrong here, however the fact that the current Ukrainian government was not legitimate in the first place, and took over power by coups (and likely: deceptions) making a good solution for Ukraine harder to get than ever.


I means people can get emotionally about the big bad Russian. But considering the politic and geopolitic involved, that won't change or bring in any better solution for Ukraine.

I was surprised at the lack of EU involvement, but of course , why the EU want another financial dead-weight. Putin actively involve however clearly gives him the winning hand now

[Roger Rambo]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

Might Makes Right, Then, Now and the Foreseeable Future.

Is that a really good policy to un-transparently pursue in a century where it's becoming increasingly possible for even small states to gain access to nuclear weapons? This is particularly relevant in this situation, because the Ukraine gave up its nuclear arsenal after the fall of the wall in exchange for guarantees of their territorial continuity from Russia. This doesn't exactly set a good precedent for how safe it is for nations to voluntarily give up their nuclear arsenals while near big powers, does it?

YouTube

https://youtu.be/oRLON3ddZIw

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

It's easy to say the 7 foot, 350 pound muscle bound powerhouses dominating the diminutive pencil necks is the natural order of things...until all the pencil-necks start packing guns.

Originally Posted by risingstar3110

Even when it's clear that Russia is in the wrong here, however the fact that the current Ukrainian government was not legitimate in the first place, and took over power by coups (and likely: deceptions) making a good solution for Ukraine harder to get than ever.

Part of the problem here is that even if the Crimean vote and the Kiev uprising are equally illegitimate from a strictly legal sense, the former is still a far greater geopolitical problem than the latter. A shady internal power transfer between factions in a country might be dubious, but as long as it doesn't spill over too much, it doesn't rock the global boat too much. Afterall, the nation state is still intact more or less. So it's not STRICTLY as big of a concern for allot of outside countries.


Land grabs are another matter. That's something that nation states have to pay allot of attention to, since one set of justifications that were used to partition one country can easily be used to justify land grabs against practically anyone. It's just a limitation of how far the other party is willing to rationalize their behavior.

[risingstar3110]

Originally Posted by Roger Rambo

Part of the problem here is that even if the Crimean vote and the Kiev uprising are equally illegitimate from a strictly legal sense, the former is still a far greater geopolitical problem than the latter. A shady internal power transfer between factions in a country might be dubious, but as long as it doesn't spill over too much, it doesn't rock the global boat too much. Afterall, the nation state is still intact more or less. So it's not STRICTLY as big of a concern for allot of outside countries.

Land grabs areher matter. That's something that nation states have to pay allot of attention to, since one set of justifications that were used to partition one country can easily be used to justify land grabs against practically anyone. It's just a limitation of how far the other party is willing to rationalize their behavior.

The problem is those all are subjective judgement. You can't say that "Well... illegitimate coup is ok as long as it does not go too far. But hey, that land grab is going too far"

If you not going to play by law, you simply can't pass objective judgement. There are different element on all side that sway people opinions on this Russian invasion. The corrupted old government, and Russian clear interest for the against. Heavily neo-facist government and Russian ethnic population for the support. You may don't care what kind of skinhead sitting in Ukrainian office,and i will say who care about what Russia doing with their back yard. Things like that

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

"who care about what Russia doing with their back yard?"

Since when did Ukraine became Russian territory? Last I checked, "Backward" means you own it.

More accurate to say "Who care what Russia does with their neighbour?"

If Putin want to march his soldiers around his own lands, no one would care.

[risingstar3110]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

"who care about what Russia doing with their back yard?"

Since when did Ukraine became Russian territory? Last I checked, "Backward" means you own it.

More accurate to say "Who care what Russia does with their neighbour?"

If Putin want to march his soldiers around his own lands, no one would care.

That is an example btw, if you read the context of the whole post.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by risingstar3110

That is an example btw, if you read the context of the whole post.

I fail to see the point. The unrest of Ukraine is real, but it is separate from the Russian Invasion. Both are important, but one does not justify the other. Much like "Saddam is a cruel man" doesn't justify "Fucking up Iraq without an exit strategy".

Russia has invaded Ukraine. There is no buts or howevers. The fact that Russia had been able to absorb the criticism by simply denying his troops are his, proves that something is INSANE about all this. That some people here are genuinely trying to excuse Russia for the inexcusable.

[Haak]

Originally Posted by risingstar3110

Even when it's clear that Russia is in the wrong here, however the fact that the current Ukrainian government was not legitimate in the first place, and took over power by coups (and likely: deceptions) making a good solution for Ukraine harder to get than ever.

I means people can get emotionally about the big bad Russian. But considering the politic and geopolitic involved, that won't change or bring in any better solution for Ukraine.

Isn't that why the Ukrainian government is holding elections in May? It's not as if they've used the military to take over everything and declare themselves absolute rulers. As far as I can see, Russia's intense propaganda and now military involvement has been active in exaggerating the threat to ethnic Russians in Ukraine, stoked "us vs them" sentiments and fueled seperatism in an attempt to destabilise the current government. In short, they've made a difficult situation, ten times worse. And nowhere is this more apparent than in Crimea.

And we still don't even know if was an actual coup or not. All we know is that Yanukovich ran for it and we'll probably never know why. Apparently he was under threat but he sure as hell had enough time to burn papers and throw any incriminating evidence away before running off to Russia.

[risingstar3110]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

I fail to see the point. The unrest of Ukraine is real, but it is separate from the Russian Invasion. Both are important, but one does not justify the other. Much like "Saddam is a cruel man" doesn't justify "Fucking up Iraq without an exit strategy".

How is it "separate" through? The coup was leading directly to the invasion. I also don't see anyone here calling Russian's invasion a correct thing to do through.

And I will be frank. You are having the urge to antagonising the Russian too much, that anyone who don't hold touch burning the Russian flag in your eyes would be guilty of "justifying Russian invasion".

[risingstar3110]

Originally Posted by Haak

Isn't that why the Ukrainian government is holding elections in May? It's not as if they've used the military to take over everything and declare themselves absolute rulers. As far as I can see, Russia's intense propaganda and now military involvement has been active in exaggerating the threat to ethnic Russians in Ukraine, stoked "us vs them" sentiments and fueled seperatism in an attempt to destabilise the current government. In short, they've made a difficult situation, ten times worse. And nowhere is this more apparent than in Crimea.

And we still don't even know if was an actual coup or not. All we know is that Yanukovich ran for it and we'll probably never know why. Apparently he was under threat but he sure as hell had enough time to burn papers and throw any incriminating evidence away before running off to Russia.

It's an illegitimate/unconstitutional coup as pointed out here:

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by risingstar3110

How is it "separate" through? The coup was leading directly to the invasion. I also don't see anyone here calling Russian's invasion a correct thing to do through.

And I will be frank. You are having the urge to antagonising the Russian too much, that anyone who don't hold touch burning the Russian flag in your eyes would be guilty of "justifying Russian invasion".

I don't care about Russians. I care about the Invasion. If you think this is about me being anti-Russian then you are still missing my point. I am against invasions, I don't care who are the ones doing them. I was quite prepared to praise Putin for stopping America from bombing Syria, but that doesn't mean I am supportive of either side for the shit they pull. I am against military invasions no matter how anyone try to brush it off or deny there is an invasion.

Antagonising Russia too much? I antagonise any nation that deserve it. America, Russia, my birth nation or my current nation. I judge nations by their actions, not by their names.

[risingstar3110]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

I don't care about Russians. I care about the Invasion. If you think this is about me being anti-Russian then you are still missing my point. I am against invasions, I don't care who are the ones doing them. I was quite prepared to praise Putin for stopping America from bombing Syria, but that doesn't mean I am supportive of either side for the shit they pull. I am against military invasions no matter how anyone try to brush it off or deny there is an invasion.

Antagonising Russia too much? I antagonise any nation that deserve it. America, Russia, my birth nation or my current nation. I judge nations by their actions, not by their names.

The problem is you are jumping on every discussion and accusing every point made on the topic as justifying Russian invasion (or invasion in general).

Of course that is not the exact words, but the sentiment was always there. Discussing about how current Ukrainian government is illegitimate? Justifying invasion. Discussing about Russian geopolitical interest over Ukraine? Justifying invasion. Discussing about how effective Putin was on taking over Crimea? Justifying invasion. It seems I will never get any agreement from you unless i write something about how big bad Russians will end the world

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by risingstar3110

The problem is you are jumping on every discussion and accusing every point made on the topic as justifying Russian invasion (or invasion in general).

Of course that is not the exact words, but the sentiment was always there. Discussing about how current Ukrainian government is illegitimate? Justifying invasion. Discussing about Russian geopolitical interest over Ukraine? Justifying invasion. Discussing about how effective Putin was on taking over Crimea? Justifying invasion. It seems I will never get any agreement from you unless i write something about how big bad Russians will end the world

Discussing about how current Ukrainian government is illegitimate?
Easy to sort out with an election. Not like the former leader will ever stand for office again.

Discussing about Russian geopolitical interest over Ukraine?
Nothing that Russia can't deal with peacefully. Russia decided to do it the invasive way.

Discussing about how effective Putin was on taking over Crimea?
What is there to discuss? All media is being controlled there. All we have is RT propaganda.

And I will discuss big bad Russians the same way I discuss big bad anyone else. If it walks like a quck, quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck, I am going to call it a duck.

The invasion IS IMPORTANT. Yet so many here wants to talk about something else, like it is somehow irrelevant. Like it somehow has no effect on anything. That it is somehow NORMAL.