dre Posted March 9, 2014 Report Posted March 9, 2014 Crimea cannot survive as an independent state, nor would Russia ever permit it to be one. The current move of the Crimean 'government' is to join Crimea to Russia. By self determination I didnt necessarily mean independance... I meant a choice whether to stay part of Ukraine, join Russia, or declare independance. So again... Lets say that Russia left, and international observers were allowed to monitor a referendum to make sure it was fair. Would ANY of you support the right of Crimeans to self determination? Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Argus Posted March 11, 2014 Report Posted March 11, 2014 By self determination I didnt necessarily mean independance... I meant a choice whether to stay part of Ukraine, join Russia, or declare independance. Staying part of Ukraine is not an option available on the 'free referendum'. You can choose to join Russia, or you can choose for Crimea to be independant. There is no option available to those who want to stay a part of Ukraine. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Bryan Posted March 11, 2014 Report Posted March 11, 2014 Imagine if France attacked Canada by saying they are protecting their fellow Frenchmen in Quebec. You have the situation backwards. Imagine if Quebec separated, and a small part wanted to stay Canadian. So Canada goes in to help them with that, and the international community (lead by France) labels it as an "attack" on an independent Quebec. That's what we are dealing with in Crimea. RUSSIANS, who always identified with Russia, who have been asking to re-join Russia for years. Then, when things are really getting crazy, they beg for Russia's help, and they finally get it. Quote
ASIP Posted March 11, 2014 Report Posted March 11, 2014 RUSSIANS, who always identified with Russia, who have been asking to re-join Russia for years. This statement is just plain false. Thus all your assertions are not true. Quote
Bryan Posted March 11, 2014 Report Posted March 11, 2014 This statement is just plain false. Thus all your assertions are not true. Learn some history and get back to me. Quote
WWWTT Posted March 11, 2014 Report Posted March 11, 2014 So much for the US being the world peacekeepers. Remember that phrase? I guess it only means anything when the US wants to invade a country. WWWTT Quote Maple Leaf Web is now worth $720.00! Down over $1,500 in less than one year! Total fail of the moderation on this site! That reminds me, never ask Greg to be a business partner! NEVER!
ASIP Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 Learn some history and get back to me. Relax. I do not think you are in a position to tell me your fantasies about Ukraine like they are "history". Hint. Being an ethnic Russian in Ukraine does not mean this person is eager to live in Russia. You seem cannot realize this notion. Quote
GostHacked Posted March 12, 2014 Author Report Posted March 12, 2014 Relax. I do not think you are in a position to tell me your fantasies about Ukraine like they are "history". Hint. Being an ethnic Russian in Ukraine does not mean this person is eager to live in Russia. You seem cannot realize this notion. You are new to this board and jumped right into the Ukraine threads. Forgive me if I am a little suspicious of your stated position as being genuine or factual. Quote
Argus Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 You have the situation backwards. Imagine if Quebec separated, and a small part wanted to stay Canadian. So Canada goes in to help them with that, Sixty years after the fact!? Are you kidding me? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 You are new to this board and jumped right into the Ukraine threads. Forgive me if I am a little suspicious of your stated position as being genuine or factual. He makes sense to me. A lot more than a lot of the Russian sympathisers here. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Big Guy Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 I believe that the Crimea will be partitioned and am not a Russian sympathizer but a pragmatist. Harper does what he thinks is best for Canada. Obama does what he thinks is best for Americans. Putin does what he thinks is best for Russia. Saddam did what he thought was best for Iraqis. Gaddafi did what he thought was best for Libyans. Karzai is doing what he thinks is best for the Afghans. The challenges and conflicts occur when one government tries to do what is best for its nation at the cost of what is best for another government and its nation. No government is going to make a deal with another nation (like free trade deals) that will not be generally beneficial to its people. No government is going to have a foreign policy which it feels does not benefit its people. I submit that Putin believes that the Crimea should become a part of Russia and not part of a government friendly to the West. Ukraine was quickly on its way to becoming a member of NATO with the possibility of nuclear weapons being stationed there. I do not agree with what the Russians are doing in the Ukraine but I understand why they are doing it. I think the people in Crimea should be allowed to make the decision as to their affiliation. The challenge is what process, acceptable to all concerned, is possible to establish majority opinion in the Crimea. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
GostHacked Posted March 12, 2014 Author Report Posted March 12, 2014 He makes sense to me. A lot more than a lot of the Russian sympathisers here. Right, who are those Russian sympathizers again? Quote
dre Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 (edited) Staying part of Ukraine is not an option available on the 'free referendum'. You can choose to join Russia, or you can choose for Crimea to be independant. There is no option available to those who want to stay a part of Ukraine. First of all Id like a cite for that. Next... you still didnt answer the question. Do you believe Crimeans should have a right to decide their own future or not? You DONT. This is just a sporting event for you. Edited March 12, 2014 by dre Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
dre Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 I do not agree with what the Russians are doing in the Ukraine but I understand why they are doing it. I think the people in Crimea should be allowed to make the decision as to their affiliation. The challenge is what process, acceptable to all concerned, is possible to establish majority opinion in the Crimea. I agree... But the west has summarily decided any such excersize in self determination would not be legitimate. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
bjre Posted March 12, 2014 Report Posted March 12, 2014 First of all Id like a cite for that. Next... you still didnt answer the question. Do you believe Crimeans should have a right to decide their own future or not? You DONT. This is just a sporting event for you. If US invasion of Grenada is talk about, then it is right. If Crimea is current own by Russia, then Crimean should have a right to decide their future. It depends on who is doing that, not what he does. More precisely, anything US like to do that is political right, anything US don’t want other’s to do, that is not political right. That is the law. Anything US is doing, that can be called democracy, anything others want to do but US don't want them to do, that can be called dictator. Quote "The more laws, the less freedom" -- bjre "There are so many laws that nearly everybody breaks some, even when you just stay at home do nothing, the only question left is how thugs can use laws to attack you" -- bjre "If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." -- Thomas Jefferson
carepov Posted March 13, 2014 Report Posted March 13, 2014 Harper does what he thinks is best for Canada. Obama does what he thinks is best for Americans. Putin does what he thinks is best for Russia. Saddam did what he thought was best for Iraqis. Gaddafi did what he thought was best for Libyans. Karzai is doing what he thinks is best for the Afghans. The challenges and conflicts occur when one government tries to do what is best for its nation at the cost of what is best for another government and its nation. No government is going to make a deal with another nation (like free trade deals) that will not be generally beneficial to its people. No government is going to have a foreign policy which it feels does not benefit its people. Leaders usually do what's best for themselves, the interests of "their people" often overlap but are a secondary priority. Quote
Rue Posted March 13, 2014 Report Posted March 13, 2014 First of all Id like a cite for that. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/in-crimeas-sham-referendum-all-questions-lead-to-yes/article17396854/ "The language of the new Crimea Referendum makes Quebec’s referendums appear to be models of clarity. According to the Kyiv Post, voters in Crimea next Sunday will be asked whether they support the union of Crimea with Russia (an act of irredentism) or whether Crimea should be independent (secession). There is no alternative – one cannot vote for the status quo ante of remaining within Ukraine." Quote
Rue Posted March 13, 2014 Report Posted March 13, 2014 I agree... But the west has summarily decided any such excersize in self determination would not be legitimate. The West has not decided anything....and go read what the referendum asks. Quote
Big Guy Posted March 13, 2014 Report Posted March 13, 2014 Leaders usually do what's best for themselves, the interests of "their people" often overlap but are a secondary priority. I respectfully disagree. While the offshoot of governing a stable and secure society ( relatively safe and secure for the average citizen) also makes it comfortable for the leadership I do not believe that the personal interests of those in charge are the primary priority. The leadership of a country has a far better understanding of the needs and wants of its citizens than do the interlopers. Many societies do not have an educated and informed populace that is required to sustain a democracy so dictatorships or monarchies are the only form of governing that will sustain public order. If the government does not have the support of a very large number of the population then it does not survive. It must therefore identify and facilitate their needs and wants. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Rue Posted March 14, 2014 Report Posted March 14, 2014 (edited) I believe that the Crimea will be partitioned and am not a Russian sympathizer but a pragmatist. Harper does what he thinks is best for Canada. Obama does what he thinks is best for Americans. Putin does what he thinks is best for Russia. Saddam did what he thought was best for Iraqis. Gaddafi did what he thought was best for Libyans. Karzai is doing what he thinks is best for the Afghans. The challenges and conflicts occur when one government tries to do what is best for its nation at the cost of what is best for another government and its nation. No government is going to make a deal with another nation (like free trade deals) that will not be generally beneficial to its people. No government is going to have a foreign policy which it feels does not benefit its people. I submit that Putin believes that the Crimea should become a part of Russia and not part of a government friendly to the West. Ukraine was quickly on its way to becoming a member of NATO with the possibility of nuclear weapons being stationed there. I do not agree with what the Russians are doing in the Ukraine but I understand why they are doing it. I think the people in Crimea should be allowed to make the decision as to their affiliation. The challenge is what process, acceptable to all concerned, is possible to establish majority opinion in the Crimea. Lol you a commie? Actually the Ukraine sent all its missiles back to Russia as part of an agreement between them, the US and Russia. The agreement states the Ukraine remains nuclear weapons free. I do not doubt NATO expansion in the Baltic and in particular Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Slovakia, the Czech Republic was a big ego bruising to the Russians and in particular Putin. His predecessor Boris Yaltsin was seen as a drunk fool who capitulated to the West and allowed NATO to swallow up its former empire. Putin absolutely detested the Clinto-Yaltsin alliance and openly denounced it as an embarassement to Russia. He seesYaltsin and Gorbacjhev as traitors. He represents the rump of the Soviet Communist Party that Yuri Andropov former head of the KGB tried to save. he represents the middle ranks of the Communist Party. when the Soviet empire collapsed. These mid ranking officials were too youngt to retire so they grabbed all the money they could, put it in Switzerland, Cyprus and various other offshore accounts and bided their time until Boris drank himself to death and then they retook power. Putin is just a stooge representing the alliance between organized crime syndicates and the new commies who avoid using the name Marxist. This is about regaining the empire and showing the West (as symbolized by NATO) that Russia is back under Putin and not to be messed with. The not so subtle navy base in Syria, the meddling in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Georgia, is all pay back for the humiliation of the collapse of the Soviety Empire and what the Yanks did to the Russians in Afghanistan. It was not too long ago the CIA propped up the Taliban and called them freedom fighters (Mujahadeen). The Russians loved it when these same Mujahadeen turned on the US and say now, had a make over and were called Taliban.. Me- I look at the old Soviet Empire and its cronies, and I look at Putin-I just see one of these cronies recyceld. Unlike Leonid Breshnev or Kruschev he isn't as fat and wears nicer suits. He's just a nother Yuri Andropov. You don't climb the KGB (aka Federal Security Bureau) unless you are a die hard Stalinist in bed with organized crime. The only way an economy exists in Russia is by organized crime. No one else can coordinate it. Its the weakness of all commie empires. They have no idea how to run a business. So they delegate out their economic management to organized crime in return for a percentage of the profits and they become the police force protecting the crime syndicates. Putin is just a hired thug. He works for criminals. Period. If he does not do what he is told he will end up Borscht. How much empire building he will be allowed is anyone's guess. In this lastest fiasco he is protecting natural gas exports all controlled by his crime syndicates and this the appointment of one of them as governor of Crimea. Putin can flex muscle but it must be in the best interests of the crime syndicate. If he gets too carried away they could decapitate him. Accidents do happen. Of course he sucks and blows up to Saudi Arabia, and Iran. He needs to try find ways to prevent their oil exports from competing with his. Iran is fine as long as it ships all its oil at below market prices to China-get cozy with the US and turn back on the pipes and he is going to be very upset. Right now Iran is a puppet of China which is good for Russia. It knocks one oil and gas exporter competitor out.That takes out one major supplier. Sudan, Angola, Mozambique, all send their oil to China at below market prices. Again that is good for Uncle Vladimir. That leaves him sucking up to Saudi Arabia and Venezuela and if you don't think he is assisting the chaos in Syria, Iraq and Yemen to destablize the West think again. The same man who denounced Chechnyan Muslim extremists has zero problems enganing in intercourse with Syrian and Iranian terrorists, Hamas, Hezbollah. Vlad the Impaler. who will stop him right now? President Bam Bam? Stevie Harper. Mr. Cameron? Mr. Hollandaise Sauce? Fraulein Merkel? I doubt it. If I were an ally of the US I would be biding my time hoping the next Prez will be a bit more macho on world stage. Some think that means Jeb Bush or Hilary Clinton. No I say Colin Powell. He is exactly the guy the US needs. Edited March 14, 2014 by Rue Quote
Bonam Posted March 14, 2014 Report Posted March 14, 2014 Rue, just so you know, Russia is not communist anymore, and there are plenty of capitalists in Russia running successful businesses. Russia has a lot of problems, but apart from the lingering effects of 75 years of communist oppression, communism is no longer one of them. Certainly organized crime is a problem, as you mention, but I don't think Putin is the pawn of the crime syndicates... rather, he tells the crime syndicates what to do, in a sense, the criminal empires are just another arm of the Russian government. Quote
GostHacked Posted March 14, 2014 Author Report Posted March 14, 2014 Rue, just so you know, Russia is not communist anymore, and there are plenty of capitalists in Russia running successful businesses. Russia has a lot of problems, but apart from the lingering effects of 75 years of communist oppression, communism is no longer one of them. Certainly organized crime is a problem, as you mention, but I don't think Putin is the pawn of the crime syndicates... rather, he tells the crime syndicates what to do, in a sense, the criminal empires are just another arm of the Russian government. So corporate fascists?? True they don't seem to reflect a communist society anymore, but what are they now? Seems to be a bit hard to define. Quote
kromvelos Posted March 14, 2014 Report Posted March 14, 2014 I think we should hold ukraine people, but absolutely recognize the new Ukrainian government, when there are questions about the legitimacy, it's too early Quote
-TSS- Posted March 15, 2014 Report Posted March 15, 2014 I'm very pessimistic about all this. The thing has been allowed to escalate to a situation where none of the parties involved has an honourable retreat. Goes to say much about our Finnish government that they fully support the EU-sanctions on Russia because of Ukraine even though we in Finland are desperately dependant on trade with Russia. WTF!!! Idiots but they have been voted in by ourselves. Quote
carepov Posted March 15, 2014 Report Posted March 15, 2014 I respectfully disagree. While the offshoot of governing a stable and secure society ( relatively safe and secure for the average citizen) also makes it comfortable for the leadership I do not believe that the personal interests of those in charge are the primary priority. The leadership of a country has a far better understanding of the needs and wants of its citizens than do the interlopers. Many societies do not have an educated and informed populace that is required to sustain a democracy so dictatorships or monarchies are the only form of governing that will sustain public order. If the government does not have the support of a very large number of the population then it does not survive. It must therefore identify and facilitate their needs and wants. Oh really. The size of the Swiss bank accounts of these so-called selfless leaders seems to contradict your theory. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.