Merged Ukraine erupts in riots and general strike.

[trustbutverify]

For whatever reason the opposition neglects this part of the argument. Even if the process were symbolically followed, that still would've been a lot better than what they did.

If you honestly think a symbolic gesture would have made one whit of difference to anybody, you're kidding yourself.

 

[TheRealnz]

By all means, let's carve up all countries by ethnic, even religious lines. Maybe we could erect really tall walls to ensure they don't intermingle. Maybe we should start by kicking the ruling Alawites out of most of Syria and give them a tiny slice.

See my earlier post, these places have been Russian for well over a century. You decided to skip over most of it as well as most other posters here who have gone quiet.

 

[Caustic Logic]

Side-note: I just wanted to say that on reflection, History Hillary might have been right to compare recent events in Ukraine to events of WWII, and Putin's annexation of Crimea to the invasion of Poland.

The Poland example is pretty apt in some ways. Russia takes over the east half of a country, while Nazis take over the west half. From there, however, it falls apart in several ways.

 

[L.Y.S.]

People keep referring to balkanization, but there are instances where separations yield greater peace and prosperity for both parties, i.e. the Czech Republic and Slovakia.

Separation more often than not is a peaceful way to resolve disputes if done properly and peacefully.

 

[McHrozni]

The point being that Russia has a tendency to undergo rapid transformation in order to stay relevant. However backward we may feel that Russia is at the time. They manage to return to relevancy quite nicely.

I wouldn't say it's due to rapid transformation, sheer size and natural wealth do that for them. Mentally they're 150 years behind the west, if not more. Economically, they've returned to the tzarist times, with modern technology. Well, they never really left them, to be fair.

And the strategy is not total dependence on China (I apologize for saying this earlier), but increased economic activity in Asia.

Exactly the same thing, especially if they intend to sell them oil via pipelines.

The highlighted is a gross exaggeration. The stans are firmly under Russia's control and are entering into Russia's Customs Union by the end of the year. Russia has nearly 9 of the 12 non-Baltic FSU nations under their belt. The issue was always more or less Georgia, Ukraine, and Moldova.

Yes, and once Putins' power vanes for one reason or another, they'll queue to leave. Don't mistake forced servitude with friendship or loyalty. Stans follow Russia because they have no choice at this time. Once an opportunity presents itself, they will leave them.

Belarus is firmly in support of Moscow. I don't even know how you bring this allegation up. There is absolutely no evidence to back this claim.

Belarus expressed support for Ukraine in Crimea initially, then went on a completely neutral stance. It may not seem much, but that's not something a state "firmly controlled" would do.

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

The present issue is the "territorial integrity" of Ukraine, and I see no reason why that should be regarded as sacrosanct.

Russia was among the countries that guaranteed to guard Ukrainian integrity. I do wonder if Putin would be as bold if Ukraine possessed the third largest nuclear stockpile in the world. My guess would be no.

There have been many cases in modern history of states being compelled to surrender part of their territory, eg Serbia was compelled by NATO to surrender Kosovo. And decades before that Britain allowed Ireland to break away.

Neither is relevant, or was done in a way anywhere similar to Crimea.

The problem is that the new rulers of Ukraine are not wise; they are nationalist extremists, motivated by a 19th Century ideology of hatred for the "Muscovites".

Pot calling kettle black. There is nothing to suggest rulers of Ukraine are either severely nationalists or extremists. Putins' actions resemble a 19th century ideology and a hatred for liberalism. There is nothing 19th century in removing a corrupt politician from office and calling new elections in a few months' time.

McHrozni

 

[uke2se]

This is laughable, did the people of Kiev consider Eastern Ukraine when they overthrew Yanukovych? Did they consider Crimea?

There's no equivalency there. Don't even pretend there is. It makes you seem dishonest.

Sure enough, the Crimean referendum was a violation of International law and Ukrainian constitution. However...the Ukrainian constitution had already been violated by the mob when they removed Yanukovych from power so therefore it can be considered null and void.

Yanukovych was voted out by the Ukrainian parliament according to the Ukrainian constitution.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26304842

You cannot pick and choose aspects of a constitution to adhere too.

Agreed.

 

[Caustic Logic]

People keep referring to balkanization, but there are instances where separations yield greater peace and prosperity for both parties, i.e. the Czech Republic and Slovakia.

Separation more often than not is a peaceful way to resolve disputes if done properly and peacefully.

Could be good, could be not. I think it was bad for the Balkans, this balkanization.

I can't read, let alone assess, this new "map" of Ukraine of six regions, but It's interesting to look at.

 

[L.Y.S.]

I wouldn't say it's due to rapid transformation, sheer size and natural wealth do that for them. Mentally they're 150 years behind the west, if not more. Economically, they've returned to the tzarist times, with modern technology. Well, they never really left them, to be fair.

Russia has been one of the most important engines of progress over the last 150 years, so this statement is laughable.

Exactly the same thing, especially if they intend to sell them oil via pipelines.

How is this even close? China, India, and Pakistan are different animals. A diversified economy in Asia would be greatly to Russia's benefit and would insulate their economy from hostile EU countries.

Yes, and once Putins' power vanes for one reason or another, they'll queue to leave. Don't mistake forced servitude with friendship or loyalty. Stans follow Russia because they have no choice at this time. Once an opportunity presents itself, they will leave them.

The Stans are willingly joining Russia's endeavors. Please find evidence for your assertion. So far all I've seen are statements and no proof. Turkestan has two choices: join China or Russia. Given China's even worse record with the Uighurs, Turkestan would be much better off with Russia. Say all you want about Russia, but China will aggressively colonize the region and completely supplant the population's locals with waves of Chinese immigrants. That entire region would be 80% Chinese within a few decades if under Chinese control.

Belarus expressed support for Ukraine in Crimea initially, then went on a completely neutral stance. It may not seem much, but that's not something a state "firmly controlled" would do.

Belarus is one of Russia's closest allies. It's not going anywhere.

 

[uke2se]

Russia has been one of the most important engines of progress over the last 150 years, so this statement is laughable.

You're going to have to explain this. How is a country - that was first a deeply opressed empire under a single ruler, then became a deeply opressed empire under a group of rulers and now finally has become a deeply opressed nation under a single ruler that is striving to rebuild the empire - one of the most important engines of progress?

 

[L.Y.S.]

You're going to have to explain this. How is a country - that was first a deeply opressed empire under a single ruler, then became a deeply opressed empire under a group of rulers and now finally has become a deeply opressed nation under a single ruler that is striving to rebuild the empire - one of the most important engines of progress?

In terms of science and technology, it has been one of the most important engines of progress.

 

[uke2se]

In terms of science and technology, it has been one of the most important engines of progress.

Could you please provide evidence for this assertion? Is your claim that Russian scientists are overrepresented when it comes to published papers, nobel prizes or anything of that nature? Are you simply saying that a lot of scientists come from Russia? If so, are there or were there more Russian scientists per capita than any other nationality?

 

[Border Reiver]

Russia has been one of the most important engines of progress over the last 150 years, so this statement is laughable.

Social progress - hardly, the rather harsh repression of the Soviet era caused thousands to flee. Say whatever you like about the "repressive" governments of the West, they generally didn't have to erect walls to keep their populations in their countries.

And despite the statements of Soviet Russia, women's rights were a whole lot less effective at driving social change.

Then there's that whole anti-gay thing.

Political progress - moving from one corrupt system to another over the last 150 years is what Russia has done. Tsarist to the Soviet dictatorships to the oligarchical rule of modern Russia, the effect on the bulk of the Russian population has been to change one corrupt ruling body for another.

Economic Progress - Russia was poor under the Czars with an underdeveloped industrial base, and was never seen as a major economic engine. Soviet Russia, not a whole lot of improvement here, and modern Russia again isn't a major economic force for anything except raw materials and some energy but in general, no one is beating down Russia's doors to do business there - see the above note on political corruption.

Technological progress - Sputnik, then what?

Military Progress - now we're talking. Russia's development in the military fields have caused great progress in other nations so that they can adapt and prepare for them.

In what area of human endeavour have the Russians or the Soviets been a very important engine of progress?

 

[McHrozni]

Russia has been one of the most important engines of progress over the last 150 years, so this statement is laughable.

I call Poe.

How is this even close? China, India, and Pakistan are different animals. A diversified economy in Asia would be greatly to Russia's benefit and would insulate their economy from hostile EU countries.

If Russia builds the oil pipeline to China, it is committed to sell oil to, or at least through China. Is that too hard to grasp for you?

The Stans are willingly joining Russia's endeavors. Please find evidence for your assertion.

The Stans are obeying Moscow for lack of a better option. You're mistaking fear for loyalty. Do not do that.

Given China's even worse record with the Uighurs, Turkestan would be much better off with Russia. Say all you want about Russia, but China will aggressively colonize the region and completely supplant the population's locals with waves of Chinese immigrants. That entire region would be 80% Chinese within a few decades if under Chinese control.

In the light of this, I question your assertion that Russia is better off by cooperating and strengthening China.

Belarus is one of Russia's closest allies. It's not going anywhere.

There we go again, fear is not loyalty. I suspect Luashenko would leave Putin immediately, if he only had a better choice.

McHrozni

 

[dudalb]

Russia has been one of the most important engines of progress over the last 150 years, so this statement is laughable.





.

Ok,I will give you that Russia did have a golden age in literatures and Music in the Second Half of the 19th Century. But as far as politics and science goes,Russia has not exactly made great contributions.

And,of course, even if Russia was the leading nation in politics and science ,that would not give them the right for acts of aggression against their neighbors.

Once again I have to shake my head at people who call themselves "progressives" carrying the water for a pure thug like Putin.

 

[Snarf]

In what area of human endeavour have the Russians or the Soviets been a very important engine of progress?

Tetris

 

[Ziggurat]

Ok,I will give you that Russia did have a golden age in literatures and Music in the Second Half of the 19th Century. But as far as politics and science goes,Russia has not exactly made great contributions.

That's not entirely fair. They launched Sputnik. And there have actually been a large number of very important Soviet physicists who did very important work on quantum mechanics and nuclear physics. Their output hasn't matched the United States by any means, but it's still pretty respectable.

But that scientific achievement never seemed to materialize into tangible benefits outside of weapons (and even there they were always inferior to US weapons). The Soviets could do academics (although academic frauds were also quite common), but in terms of anything industrial of consumer-related, they were a giant vortex of immitation suck. The only real improvement since the Soviet days is that it's now much easier to import decent Western products into Russia, they still don't make anything good themselves.

 

[dudalb]

That's not entirely fair. They launched Sputnik. And there have actually been a large number of very important Soviet physicists who did very important work on quantum mechanics and nuclear physics. Their output hasn't matched the United States by any means, but it's still pretty respectable.

But that scientific achievement never seemed to materialize into tangible benefits outside of weapons (and even there they were always inferior to US weapons). The Soviets could do academics (although academic frauds were also quite common), but in terms of anything industrial of consumer-related, they were a giant vortex of immitation suck. The only real improvement since the Soviet days is that it's now much easier to import decent Western products into Russia, they still don't make anything good themselves.

I stand corrected. But in terms of Economics and Politics..and that is what we are really concerned with here....about the only Thing Russia has given the world is a good negative example.

 

[TheRealnz]

There's no equivalency there. Don't even pretend there is. It makes you seem dishonest.



Yanukovych was voted out by the Ukrainian parliament according to the Ukrainian constitution.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26304842



Agreed.

What happened in Crimea was a direct result of the events unfolding in Ukraine.

BS, he was overthrown without using constitutionally mandated procedures.

impeached Yanukovych without using constitutionally mandated procedures; freed its political friends and issued arrest warrants against its enemies; and turned a blind eye as armed militias brandished their Kalashnikovs in government offices and invaded the homes and offices of political rivals.

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articl...-of-legitimacy

From your article...."The vote to "remove Viktor Yanukovych from the post of president of Ukraine" was passed by 328 MPs.

Such ballots, passed by what is called constitutional majority, are binding and enter into force with immediate effect, the BBC's Ukraine analyst Olexiy Solohubenko reports."

Unfortunately they required another 10 votes. Thus illegal.

 

[uke2se]

What happened in Crimea was a direct result of the events unfolding in Ukraine.

BS, he was overthrown without using constitutionally mandated procedures.


http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articl...-of-legitimacy

From your article...."The vote to "remove Viktor Yanukovych from the post of president of Ukraine" was passed by 328 MPs.

Such ballots, passed by what is called constitutional majority, are binding and enter into force with immediate effect, the BBC's Ukraine analyst Olexiy Solohubenko reports."

Unfortunately they required another 10 votes. Thus illegal.

I know you are grasping at straws, but they voted 328 to 0. There was no opposition. The rest of the delegates either failed to show up or didn't vote. The Ukrainian parliament declared the president constitutionally unable to serve out his term. They acted according to the constitution, so it wasn't illegal.

We are after all talking about a country that was abandoned by their president. He fled, as he knew he wasn't going to get away with the same crap he had pulled on his countrymen anymore. He failed to sign in the law that would have reverted the country back to the 2004 constitution, and thus left the country in a sort of legal limbo. This has, unfortunately, let a lot of pro-dictatorship people in the West and East grasp on the straw of the 10 missing votes. The Ukrainian parliament did what they could and unanimously voted to impeach Yanukovych.

What Russia is doing is, as you admit, completely illegal, as was the Crimean referendum. I'm glad we agree on that at least. Perhaps now you'll get on board in discussing what is to be done against the aggressor state Russia.