Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Redcruisair wrote:You are, or at very least have been supportive of Putin and his plans.
It would be hard not to call you a staunch supporter of Russia's agenda in Ukraine.

I have been so. And I will admit I admire Putin for many things.
But am I a supporter of Russia's agenda in Ukraine? I don't even know what their agenda is, so I wouldn't say I support it.
Whether I support Russia or not depends on its actions. As Russian myself, my judgement will of course be weighted towards my own people, but when Russians do something really bad, I usually disagree. I will often try to explain things from a Russian perspective, but that doesn't mean I have to approve of it.

Co'tor Shas wrote:Pretty much. You deny anything that makes russia seem bad.

I don't. But in this conflict, it is not Russia who is bombing its own civilians for disagreeing with the government.
In this conflict, I am on the side of the people of Donbass.
And since you seem so willing to divide people into 'sides', may I ask whose side are you on?

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Co'tor Shas wrote:Pretty much. You deny anything that makes russia seem bad.

I don't. But in this conflict, it is not Russia who is bombing its own civilians for disagreeing with the government.
In this conflict, I am on the side of the people of Donbass.
And since you seem so willing to divide people into 'sides', may I ask whose side are you on?

I don't support either side, but I am against Russia's past and present actions. And don't pretend that Russia has the moral high ground here. It's their fault the conflict is even happening still (started with invading Crimea). They are the ones who have made being gay pretty much illigal. They are the ones who crack down on people for disagreeing with the government, when they are not staging an armed rebellion.

I might even support the separatists if it wasn't for Russia's involvement.

Given that Iron_Captain has close relatives fighting on the Separatist side, that may speak for his bias. Well beyond him being from a family which supports Putin's government (I don't attribute his support to his ethnicity like he does though, as that's an insult to those Russians who don't think too highly of the current government in place there and its appalling domestic and foreign policies) which evidently has had an effect on his political stance. =P

 Iron_Captain wrote:

You'll find Russians often behave paradoxically (from a Western pov at least). They want you to know that you do not need to be afraid of Russia, but that Russia is very fearsome nonetheless.

yes, because Russia has never invaded Finland.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Courage and honour, a free and adventurous, and a fierce loyalty to the Orthodox Church and the Russian nation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XV_SS_Cossack_Cavalry_Corps

You were saying? Because these guys were recruited right from the Kuban Host in the Ukraine. I'd say joining the SS is about as anti-Russian nation as you can get.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

The Tatars and Ukrainians were welcome to stay if they wanted to become Russian citizens. The fact that radicals on the Russian side choose to vent their rage on innocent individuals belonging to different ethnic groups is regrettable and horrible but you can't really blame it on the Russian government.

I've heard the 'can't blame the government for a few extremists' used to defend the lack of protection of civilians by their government before.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht

It was a lie then, it's most likely a lie now.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Co'tor Shas wrote:Pretty much. You deny anything that makes russia seem bad.

I don't. But in this conflict, it is not Russia who is bombing its own civilians for disagreeing with the government.
In this conflict, I am on the side of the people of Donbass.
And since you seem so willing to divide people into 'sides', may I ask whose side are you on?

I don't support either side, but I am against Russia's past and present actions. And don't pretend that Russia has the moral high ground here. It's their fault the conflict is even happening still (started with invading Crimea). They are the ones who have made being gay pretty much illigal. They are the ones who crack down on people for disagreeing with the government, when they are not staging an armed rebellion.

I might even support the separatists if it wasn't for Russia's involvement.

Neither side has the moral high ground. Thats the problem.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Co'tor Shas wrote:Pretty much. You deny anything that makes russia seem bad.

I don't. But in this conflict, it is not Russia who is bombing its own civilians for disagreeing with the government.
In this conflict, I am on the side of the people of Donbass.
And since you seem so willing to divide people into 'sides', may I ask whose side are you on?

I don't support either side, but I am against Russia's past and present actions. And don't pretend that Russia has the moral high ground here. It's their fault the conflict is even happening still (started with invading Crimea). They are the ones who have made being gay pretty much illigal. They are the ones who crack down on people for disagreeing with the government, when they are not staging an armed rebellion.

I might even support the separatists if it wasn't for Russia's involvement.

Neither side has the moral high ground. Thats the problem.

Pretty much.

Glad we agree on something.

I think personally think that both sides are nuts, and that the only way to truly decide this is to have free, open, an unbiased voting on he matter. That means no keeping people from the polls, no threatening or bullying, both sides laying down their weapons and promising to abide by the vote, and all Russian army personnel leaving Ukraine. Also, as much observation as possible, especially from the UN.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I think personally think that both sides are nuts, and that the only way to truly decide this is to have free, open, an unbiased voting on he matter. That means no keeping people from the polls, no threatening or bullying, both sides laying down their weapons and promising to abide by the vote, and all Russian army personnel leaving Ukraine. Also, as much observation as possible, especially from the UN.

I might point out that the elections were observed by international observers. Several groups attempted to rig the elections, and were caught and arrested. The election had a 60% turnout outside Donetsk. With 20 odd candidates from a bakers dozen parties, Poroshenko, an independant, won 54% of the vote. The next runner up got 12%. Poroshenko was not a member of the pro-temp government that replaced the previous administration. He had served the administration before the overthrown one as Minister of Trade, negotiating several favorable trade deals for the Ukraine.


Assuming that Donbas followed the same participation levels as the rest of the Ukraine, you're looking at about a 6% difference. Not nearly enough to have had another outcome.

If this guy is a hard core Nazi, he's the most stealth Nazi I've run across. Point of fact, his policy on cracking down on break away provinces should have a strong endorsement from one Vladimir Putin, who said, and did, the exact same thing on his taking office.

Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Co'tor Shas wrote:Pretty much. You deny anything that makes russia seem bad.

I don't. But in this conflict, it is not Russia who is bombing its own civilians for disagreeing with the government.
In this conflict, I am on the side of the people of Donbass.
And since you seem so willing to divide people into 'sides', may I ask whose side are you on?

I don't support either side, but I am against Russia's past and present actions. And don't pretend that Russia has the moral high ground here. It's their fault the conflict is even happening still (started with invading Crimea). They are the ones who have made being gay pretty much illigal. They are the ones who crack down on people for disagreeing with the government, when they are not staging an armed rebellion.

I might even support the separatists if it wasn't for Russia's involvement.

So you are just against Russia regardless of what happens? Altough you can say Russia escalated it by re-annexing Crimea, it is not Russia's fault the conflict is happening. That is the fault of the Ukrainian opposition who staged a coup against the democratically elected president. That is what got the conflict started.

BaronIveagh wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

You'll find Russians often behave paradoxically (from a Western pov at least). They want you to know that you do not need to be afraid of Russia, but that Russia is very fearsome nonetheless.

yes, because Russia has never invaded Finland.

Seriously? You are aware political realities change, aren't you?
What reason could Russia possibly have to invade Finland in the present day?

BaronIveagh wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Courage and honour, a free and adventurous, and a fierce loyalty to the Orthodox Church and the Russian nation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XV_SS_Cossack_Cavalry_Corps

You were saying? Because these guys were recruited right from the Kuban Host in the Ukraine. I'd say joining the SS is about as anti-Russian nation as you can get.

Not from their point of view. They wanted to overthrow the Soviet government (which was hostile to all the Cossacks stood for) and restore things to the way they were before. They believed they acted in Russia's best interests and saw the Nazis as an ally in their struggle against communism.
Nonetheless, the majority of Cossacks remained loyal and fought on the Soviet side.

BaronIveagh wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

The Tatars and Ukrainians were welcome to stay if they wanted to become Russian citizens. The fact that radicals on the Russian side choose to vent their rage on innocent individuals belonging to different ethnic groups is regrettable and horrible but you can't really blame it on the Russian government.

I've heard the 'can't blame the government for a few extremists' used to defend the lack of protection of civilians by their government before.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht

It was a lie then, it's most likely a lie now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum
So you can't come up with any real arguments?

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Russia escalated it by re-annexing Crimea, it is not Russia's fault the conflict is happening. That is the fault of the Ukrainian opposition who staged a coup against the democratically elected president. That is what got the conflict started.

Without russian "help" the month-long protests in Kiev would've removed russia's sock-puppet the former president much faster, with less bloodshed, and less reliance on right wing organisations. Anything happening since is due to russian propaganda sowing fear and mistrust, and the russian occupation of Crimea and eastern Ukraine.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
So you are just against Russia regardless of what happens? Although you can say Russia escalated it by re-annexing Crimea, it is not Russia's fault the conflict is happening. That is the fault of the Ukrainian opposition who staged a coup against the democratically elected president. That is what got the conflict started.

It's not Russia's fault they invaded, after all. It had to be done! The people (and the army, and the rest of the government, and the police) overthrew their great leader! Next thing you know, Russians might start thinking it was a good idea! And that would be bad (for Putin).

Your 'coup' that was composed of the Ukrainian parliament voting that he be removed from office. His own party voted against him. He also issued a statement of resignation, and then recanted it once he fled to Russia one step ahead of the police, who had been sent to arrest him for murder, among other things.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Seriously? You are aware political realities change, aren't you?

If Nazis show up on the steps of a synagogue with guns, they're gonna get a bad reaction, even if they really are just there to sell candy.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum
So you can't come up with any real arguments?

When dealing with European countries invading other countries for spurious ethnic reasons (Donbas/Crimea = Sudetenland, in case you missed the obvious), it's hard NOT to get a comparison to Nazi Germany, since they used the same excuses that Russia (and you) are using to defend their actions.

Unfortunately, the active war-zone has prevented discovery of any further mass graves of people abducted and killed by the Donbas insurgency beyond the two we already know about. I'm sure there are more, sadly. (Since i doubt Ukrainian artillery and rockets kidnapped them in public and slit their throats before flinging them in a trench).


Personally I don't see either side as 'right' or 'wrong' in this, to be honest. I see one country trying to invade another for political and economic reasons, and spreading a lot of propaganda about how it will unite all the lost groups of Russians into a pure Russian nation while sweeping deportations, mass graves, and racism under the carpet.. If you find it offensive that I point out that we've heard this before, if you swap 'Russian' with 'Aryan' or 'German', that's too damn bad.

Personally, I feel that the old saying holds true, it's not who's right, it's who's left. And this promises to be a long, bloody grind, like Chechnya and Bosnia.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I think personally think that both sides are nuts, and that the only way to truly decide this is to have free, open, an unbiased voting on he matter. That means no keeping people from the polls, no threatening or bullying, both sides laying down their weapons and promising to abide by the vote, and all Russian army personnel leaving Ukraine. Also, as much observation as possible, especially from the UN.

There was several independent polls in Eastern regions before the hostilities - all of them have shown overwhelming (70%+) support of unified Ukrane. It was one of the reasons why Russia moved from buying political influence to invasion. No way they can allow free elections to happen there.

elotar wrote:

There was several independent polls in Eastern regions before the hostilities - all of them have shown overwhelming (70%+) support of unified Ukrane. It was one of the reasons why Russia moved from buying political influence to invasion. No way they can allow free elections to happen there.

You know, one of the more interesting things about this whole thread is that, you, elotar, are actually in Russia. And another poster, who is posting from the opposite side of Europe, is trying to convince you that what you see going on in the politics of your own country is wrong.

I have the feeling, that if i was posting from the Donbas, that he would still be trying to argue the same things with me.

'I can see the Russian soldiers raping and pillaging from here'.

''There's no proof of that.'

'Let me just put the video I just shot of it on Youtube'.

'You're not an unbiased source, you whipped the footage up in some Ukrainian special effects studio with the help of the Americans'.

Denial is no mere river in Egypt.

“Admiration is the furthest thing from understanding.”

"Shill shill, shill shill shill shill shill, shill"

The Ukraine was just a state in the USSR, it was created by Lenin and never intended to be a nation. Could you imagine if you made a state in the US a nation, how long would it last? It wouldn't, it would be absorbed into another state, that's why the EU and corporate America want an independent Ukraine, because it will need protection and they can rule it as a puppet.

Joe Bidens financial ties to the Ukraine should also be taken into consideration.
http://thefederalist.com/2014/05/13/9-questions-to-ask-about-bidens-work-with-a-gas-company-in-ukraine/

I thought Putin was an warmongering authoritarian dictator, at least that's what the western media says.... he seems to be seeking a non violent solution with the backing of his people while the US gov seeks violence without the support of its people.

Invading a country, the most peaceful solution possible.

Also, the US was never intended to be a county either.

Edit: And since when have the EU and American corperations* had control over Ukraine?

had control over Ukraine?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-eu-clash-on-how-to-install-a-puppet-regime-in-ukraine-victoria-nuland/5367794

Invading a country, the most peaceful solution possible.

They can't invade because they have military access to the country.

Also, the US was never intended to be a county either.

In the beginning the first 13 states were 13 nations formed into an alliance, but by the latter part 1800's US states were being created as administrative districts. Its strange the USA RIGHTLY put down ethnic secessionist in their own country but seem to think any band of thugs that say their a political party deserves a nation. If you compare this to the US civil war, or any civil war really, its actually quite humane.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
At this point, is anyone here on Russia's side (other than the captain of iron)?

Not that I would be on Russia's side, but I certanly prefer to have a balance of terror than a single super power that has no opponents.

I have been so. And I will admit I admire Putin for many things.

So do I, in a world where nations cease to be nations as we dissolve into a sea globalism controlled by elites who operate above and beyond the laws of any nation, he might be the only credible threat to a new world order.

 Sienisoturi wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
At this point, is anyone here on Russia's side (other than the captain of iron)?

Not that I would be on Russia's side, but I certanly prefer to have a balance of terror than a single super power that has no opponents.

I sympathise with Russia's motives - putting a stop to eastward NATO expansion. Russia is panicking at the prospect of a hostile military alliance that was founded for the specific purpose of combating Russia (USSR) creeping right up to its borders.

Russia's borders are militarily indefensible - thats why they've been obsessed with setting up puppet States to act as buffer zones along its borders. That was the purpose of the Warsaw Pact. If at some point in the future, several decades from now, Russia and the USA/EU/NATO come to blows, Russia will be screwed.


But that does not equate to my being on Russia's side. If anything, I want a political compromise between Russia and the USA - because lets face it, this is very much a Cold War style proxy war.

 Sienisoturi wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
At this point, is anyone here on Russia's side (other than the captain of iron)?

Not that I would be on Russia's side, but I certanly prefer to have a balance of terror than a single super power that has no opponents.

wut?

O.o

Did the US do something bad to Austria?

elotar wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I think personally think that both sides are nuts, and that the only way to truly decide this is to have free, open, an unbiased voting on he matter. That means no keeping people from the polls, no threatening or bullying, both sides laying down their weapons and promising to abide by the vote, and all Russian army personnel leaving Ukraine. Also, as much observation as possible, especially from the UN.

There was several independent polls in Eastern regions before the hostilities - all of them have shown overwhelming (70%+) support of unified Ukrane. It was one of the reasons why Russia moved from buying political influence to invasion. No way they can allow free elections to happen there.

I am still not convinced Russia wants to annex Eastern Ukraine.
But you are right. Most Eastern Ukrainians want to remain part of Ukraine (or at least they did before Ukraine started bombing them). They mostly just wanted more autonomy, not becoming part of Russia like Crimea.

BaronIveagh wrote:
You know, one of the more interesting things about this whole thread is that, you, elotar, are actually in Russia. And another poster, who is posting from the opposite side of Europe, is trying to convince you that what you see going on in the politics of your own country is wrong.

I have the feeling, that if i was posting from the Donbas, that he would still be trying to argue the same things with me.

What? Not all Russians agree with each other? now that is interesting...
Seriously, you think it is interesting Russians can have disagreements too? Russians are people like everyone else, they disagree with each other on politics as much as Americans or others.
And I may no longer live in Russia, but as the son of a diplomat I have always been very interested in politics, and you bet I know my way around Russian politics.
Of course I would still disagree with you if you posted from Donbass and still had the same ridiculous and insulting arguments with Nazis. It seems you can't make any arguments without drawing the Hitler card.

BaronIveagh wrote:
'I can see the Russian soldiers raping and pillaging from here'.

''There's no proof of that.'

'Let me just put the video I just shot of it on Youtube'.

'You're not an unbiased source, you whipped the footage up in some Ukrainian special effects studio with the help of the Americans'.

Denial is no mere river in Egypt.

Now you have gone from ridiculous to completely nuts.
Unlike elotar I might add, I never put forward any arguments saying: ''yes but this video was filmed in special effects studio so it is fake'' or anything like that.
Now I dare you to find a video of Russian soldiers raping and pillaging. Maybe that would finally lend some weight to your arguments.

Ironclad Warlord wrote:

had control over Ukraine?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-eu-clash-on-how-to-install-a-puppet-regime-in-ukraine-victoria-nuland/5367794

OK then, planing, but no actual results (unlike the Russians ). Still, not good.
Edit: Wow, that site is biased.

Invading a country, the most peaceful solution possible.

They can't invade because they have military access to the country.
Huh?

Also, the US was never intended to be a county either.

In the beginning the first 13 states were 13 nations formed into an alliance, but by the latter part 1800's US states were being created as administrative districts. Its strange the USA RIGHTLY put down ethnic secessionist in their own country but seem to think any band of thugs that say their a political party deserves a nation. If you compare this to the US civil war, or any civil war really, its actually quite humane.
Humane? And I wasn't compairing the war, I was compairing that the colonies were not supposed to be a country. Even if they were not supposed to be a county, it gives Russia no right to do what it is doing.

 whembly wrote:

 Sienisoturi wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
At this point, is anyone here on Russia's side (other than the captain of iron)?

Not that I would be on Russia's side, but I certanly prefer to have a balance of terror than a single super power that has no opponents.

wut?

O.o

Did the US do something bad to Austria?

No, but having a balance of terror certanly eases being a neutral state that will benefit from both sides.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

I have the feeling, that if i was posting from the Donbas, that he would still be trying to argue the same things with me.

Yea, something like it is happening in fb, when people from the region try to tell, that they are not surrounded by child-eating nazis.

I've already said that this conflict is accompanied by propaganda campaign never seen in the history. It's really hard to understand, what's happening there - you need to break throught tons of disinformation and emotional arguments, conserning "important elements of russian identity". Most people are not ready for this, so they just stop at some point and take neutral position like "both sides are evil".

Unfortunately, this position is quite far from the reality.

 Sienisoturi wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Sienisoturi wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
At this point, is anyone here on Russia's side (other than the captain of iron)?

Not that I would be on Russia's side, but I certanly prefer to have a balance of terror than a single super power that has no opponents.

wut?

O.o

Did the US do something bad to Austria?

No, but having a balance of terror certanly eases being a neutral state that will benefit from both sides.

Hmmm... not looking towards another Cold War thankyouverymuch.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Russia is panicking at the prospect of a hostile military alliance that was founded for the specific purpose of combating Russia (USSR) creeping right up to its borders.

Try to compare NATO forces in Eastern Europe with opposing russian forces. You are a little wrong about side, which got reasons to panic.

Ironclad Warlord wrote:

had control over Ukraine?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-eu-clash-on-how-to-install-a-puppet-regime-in-ukraine-victoria-nuland/5367794

Oh God, that page again? I'll say the same thing I said last time that was used as a source without anything else backing it up:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Andrew1975 wrote:

I remain amazed that you believe the revolution was the US' doing. A popular former president gets thrown in jail on trumped-up charges, the administration responsible takes numerous actions the majority of the country doesn't approve of, and somehow the US talks the populace into going out and getting shot?

I'm Amazed that you don't see this, as this is pretty standard and has happened repeatedly in the past.

CANVAS, the organization that doesn't accept funding from governments, and is largely funded by a single Serb, is secretly a CIA operation?

Do you just make up stuff as you go. Canvas among others is heavily funded by the US state department.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-us-engineered-arab-spring-the-ngo-raids-in-egypt/28433

Global Research "about" page wrote:The Global Research website was established on the 9th of September 2001, two days before the tragic events of September 11. Barely a few days later, Global Research had become a major news source on the New World Order and Washington’s “war on terrorism”.

Since September 2001, we have established an extensive archive of news articles, in-depth reports and analysis on issues which are barely covered by the mainstream media.

In an era of media disinformation, our focus has essentially been to center on the “unspoken truth”.

During the invasion of Iraq (March-April 2003), Global Research published, on a daily basis, independent reports from the Middle East, which provided an alternative to the news emanating from the “embedded” journalists reporting from the war theater. Since 2004, Global Research has provided detailed analysis and coverage of US-NATO-Israel preparations to wage a pre-emptive nuclear attack on Iran.

Emphasis mine. Do you have anything other than that page supporting that CANVAS takes government money? You'll have to excuse me, but a source claiming to provide news about a "New World Order" is about as far down the ladder of credibility as one can get, especially when it claims that CANVAS is the same entity as Otpor! with a new name. Yes, some of the people involved are the same, that does not make it the same organization. Further, they don't even bother to cite any sources. If I'd written that and turned it in to my Professor as an academic paper I'd be either laughed or kicked (probably both at the same time) out of that course faster than I could say "potato-peeling primordial pygmy plant".

First it tries to equate Otpor! with CANVAS, despite the two being two distincive organizations, then it tries to claim that just because Otpor! recieved funding from the US that means that CANVAS does too, and THEN goes on to claim that Mohammed el-Baradei clearly knew that the Arab Spring was coming because he formed a political coalition. It couldn't possibly be the other way around, that the change came because they did that in the first place, it has to be a conspiracy!

I'm sorry, but that's insane. Utterly, completely insane. It's quite possible that CANVAS really IS recieving US funding for all we know, but that web page doesn't contain any proof for it. At all.