Home | Community | Message Board


MRCA Tyroler Gluckspilze
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post. Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next >  [ show all ]
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/20/09
Posts: 11,494
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 29 minutes, 12 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #25647396 - 11/29/18 10:35 PM (1 year, 7 months ago)

Crimeans are mostly ethnic Russians because of forced deportations of the indigenous Crimean Tartars under the Stalin regime. I agree that ethnic Russians likely support Russian annexation.

On the other hand, the minority population of Crimean Tartars is mostly opposed to Russian annexation, and in response there has been a documented wave of repression since Russian annexation.

UN Human Rights: Press briefing notes on Crimean Tatars

Human Rights Watch: Persecution of Crimean Tatars Intensifies


Just because you are opposed to American/Western imperialism, doesn't mean you need to support or turn a blind eye to Russian imperialism.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OnlineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 23,129
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 8 minutes, 43 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25647460 - 11/29/18 11:14 PM (1 year, 7 months ago)

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Crimeans are mostly ethnic Russians because of forced deportations of the indigenous Crimean Tartars under the Stalin regime. I agree that ethnic Russians likely support Russian annexation.

On the other hand, the minority population of Crimean Tartars is mostly opposed to Russian annexation



I know.  I spoke with the Crimean Tatars in Crimea and wrote about it here.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Just because you are opposed to American/Western imperialism, doesn't mean you need to support or turn a blind eye to Russian imperialism.





Tell us more about Russian "imperialism" post WWII.  :popcorn:


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OnlineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 23,129
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 8 minutes, 43 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #25647464 - 11/29/18 11:19 PM (1 year, 7 months ago)

Quote:

The Ecstatic said:
Gorgeous pictures, man!



Thanks buddy!

Quote:

The Ecstatic said:
Did you get to tour Livadia?



Yes, I visited and toured every place in my photos.


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.


Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (11/29/18 11:40 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/20/09
Posts: 11,494
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 29 minutes, 12 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #25647548 - 11/29/18 11:58 PM (1 year, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
I know.  I spoke with the Crimean Tatars in Crimea and wrote about it here.



Well, seeing as how your op made no reference to Crimean Tartars, and included statements like "The people here are VERY CLEARLY pro Russian, as Crimea has historically been a Russian territory until Khrushchev transferred it from Russia to Ukraine in 1954", I'm sure you can understand why I would feel that you are spreading pro-Russian propaganda that diminishes both historical and current human rights violations faced by the Tartars.



Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Tell us more about Russian "imperialism" post WWII.  :popcorn:



If imperialism is defined as major powers using force (military, economic, diplomatic) to subordinate weaker states to their interests, than I don't think it is very controversial to consider Russian actions in Georgia, Chechnya, East Ukraine, and Crimea to constitute imperialism.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OnlineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 23,129
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 8 minutes, 43 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25647598 - 11/30/18 12:26 AM (1 year, 7 months ago)

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
I know.  I spoke with the Crimean Tatars in Crimea and wrote about it here.



Well, seeing as how your op made no reference to Crimean Tartars, and included statements like "The people here are VERY CLEARLY pro Russian, as Crimea has historically been a Russian territory until Khrushchev transferred it from Russia to Ukraine in 1954", I'm sure you can understand why I would feel that you are spreading pro-Russian propaganda that diminishes both historical and current human rights violations faced by the Tartars.



The reason I said that is because 96% of population wanted to rejoin Russia.  To me that's "VERY CLEARLY pro Russian".  Not even the Tatars I spoke with disputed the election results; they know that they only make up a small fraction of the population.

And as you now saw, I DID talk about the human rights violations under Stalin.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Tell us more about Russian "imperialism" post WWII.  :popcorn:



If imperialism is defined as major powers using force (military, economic, diplomatic) to subordinate weaker states to their interests, than I don't think it is very controversial to consider Russian actions in Georgia, Chechnya, East Ukraine, and Crimea to constitute imperialism.



1.  The Georgian war was started by Georgia, and Russia never took a square inch from Georgia.  Don't tell me you think they weren't powerful enough.
2.  Chechnya belonged to Russia since WWII.  How do you have imperialism over your own country?
3.  Russia never took East Ukraine.  Which was very unfortunate for the Eastern Ukrainians who are now being killed by Ukrainians.
4.  Here's the story on Crimea:

Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Crimea had been a Russian territory since 1783, until Khrushchev transferred it to Ukraine in 1954 (without the approval of the Crimean people).  Russia has had a naval base in Crimea since 1783, which has always been under Russian control through today.

In 2014, there were a series of violent events in Ukraine culminating in the coup of Ukraine’s democratically elected President.

The US was quick to back the new leader who was pro-US and anti-Russian, and there is indesputable evidence (a recording by Victoria Nuland stating who the US would put in charge after Viktor Yanukovych's ouster) showing the US helped orchestrate the coup.  Russian speaking Eastern Ukraine (especially the Donbass region) and Crimea wanted nothing to do with the new undemocratic Government and they both wanted to separate.

The Autonomous Republic of Crimea held a referendum, and overwhelmingly voted to go back to Russia.  Russia accepted Crimea back; however, Eastern Ukraine had to stay with Ukraine.

There were no military casualties in Crimea, as the people there predominantly wanted to rejoin Russia.  However there was (and still is) a great deal of conflict in Donbass between Western Ukraine and the Russian separatists.

Russia’s naval base in Crimea has great significance to both the US and Russia, as it is Russia’s only warm water naval port.  The US was hoping to snatch it for NATO, in violation of a 1990 promise not to expand NATO beyond Germany.  Meanwhile, Russia believes illegal coups orchestrated by foreign governments aren't legitimate, and the Autonomous Republic of Crimea therefore had a right to vote to leave.


I welcome any corrections by anyone to anything I've said above, and I can provide evidence for everything I've stated as well.




--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/20/09
Posts: 11,494
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 29 minutes, 12 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] * 1
    #25647640 - 11/30/18 01:05 AM (1 year, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
1.  The Georgian war was started by Georgia, and Russia never took a square inch from Georgia.  Don't tell me you think they weren't powerful enough.
2.  Chechnya belonged to Russia since WWII.  How do you have imperialism over your own country? See how much sense this makes?
3.  Russia never took East Ukraine.  Which was very unfortunate for the Eastern Ukrainians who are now being killed by Ukrainians.
4.  Here's the story on Crimea:



1. Yes someone had to make the first official shot, but that ignores the wider context of Russia-Georgia relations. Russia didn't have to take an inch of soil because supporting South Ossetia and Abkhazia serves Russian interests in the region without requiring official annexation.
2. Hawaii belonged to the USA since WWII. How do you have imperialism over your own country? See how much sense this makes?
3. Again, a country does not need to physically and openly take over sovereign territory to subvert a weaker state to their interests. Support of pro-Russian rebels and the presence of unofficial military sufficiently served Russian interests in the region.
4. Your story completely leaves out the presence of Russian military forces in Crimea before any referendum. The entire referendum happened under, at best, suspicious circumstances, and to downplay this as Russia protecting democracy really only serves to reveal your pro-Russian bias. Just because they oppose US imperialism doesn't excuse their own actions.



Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
And as you now saw, I DID talk about the human rights violations under Stalin.



Interesting phrasing. Am I to interpret this as you stating that human rights violations aren't occurring under Putin?


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OnlineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 23,129
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 8 minutes, 43 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25647661 - 11/30/18 01:32 AM (1 year, 7 months ago)

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
1.  The Georgian war was started by Georgia, and Russia never took a square inch from Georgia.  Don't tell me you think they weren't powerful enough.



1. Yes someone had to make the first official shot, but that ignores the wider context of Russia-Georgia relations. Russia didn't have to take an inch of soil because supporting South Ossetia and Abkhazia serves Russian interests in the region without requiring official annexation.



So having amicable relations with your neighbors is imperialism?  "I do not think it means what you think it means"

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
2.  Chechnya belonged to Russia since WWII.  How do you have imperialism over your own country?



2. Hawaii belonged to the USA since WWII. How do you have imperialism over your own country? See how much sense this makes?



Exactly, you can't have imperialism by its very definition.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
3.  Russia never took East Ukraine.  Which was very unfortunate for the Eastern Ukrainians who are now being killed by Ukrainians.



3. Again, a country does not need to physically and openly take over sovereign territory to subvert a weaker state to their interests. Support of pro-Russian rebels and the presence of unofficial military sufficiently served Russian interests in the region.



What interests are being served by Russia protecting Russian citizens there?

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
4.  Here's the story on Crimea:



4. Your story completely leaves out the presence of Russian military forces in Crimea before any referendum.



WRONG.  Let me quote myself for you:  "Russia has had a naval base in Crimea since 1783, which has always been under Russian control through today."

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
The entire referendum happened under, at best, suspicious circumstances, and to downplay this as Russia protecting democracy really only serves to reveal your pro-Russian bias.



How can Russia protecting democracy serve to reveal a pro-Russian bias?  I can see how being against democracy reveals your anti Russia bias.


Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
And as you now saw, I DID talk about the human rights violations under Stalin.



Interesting phrasing. Am I to interpret this as you stating that human rights violations aren't occurring under Putin?



No, you are to interpret this as me stating that imperialism isn't occurring under Putin.


Edit:  Please look up the definition of imperialism before responding.  Thanks!


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.


Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (11/30/18 01:38 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/20/09
Posts: 11,494
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 29 minutes, 12 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25647732 - 11/30/18 03:03 AM (1 year, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
So having amicable relations with your neighbors is imperialism?  "I do not think it means what you think it means"



C'mon man, I see you call out qman for being dishonest in debate. You seem educated in geopolitical matters in this area, don't pretend like you don't know that South Ossetia and Abkhazia are considered sovereign territory of Georgia by the vast majority of the international community; and Georgia considers this land to be under Russian occupation. Is providing military support to separatist movements having amicable relations?



Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
What interests are being served by Russia protecting Russian citizens there?



Same interests that the USA has in protecting pro-EU/NATO Ukrainian citizens there.



Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
WRONG.  Let me quote myself for you:  "Russia has had a naval base in Crimea since 1783, which has always been under Russian control through today."



This makes no mention of the unidentified military forces that appeared throughout Crimea before any referendum was held, which were eventually admitted to have been Russian military. Why leave this fact out?



Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
How can Russia protecting democracy serve to reveal a pro-Russian bias?  I can see how being against democracy reveals your anti Russia bias.



Because it was a vote that occurred under Russian military occupation, yet you make no mention of this important fact. That selective reporting reveals a pro-Russian bias.



Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
No, you are to interpret this as me stating that imperialism isn't occurring under Putin.


Edit:  Please look up the definition of imperialism before responding.  Thanks!



So then why, in response to me saying "you are spreading pro-Russian propaganda that diminishes both historical and current human rights violations faced by the Tartars", you replied "I DID talk about the human rights violations under Stalin."

Why focus exclusively on Stalin, a historical name, at the expense of human rights violations occurring now under Putin?

UN Human Rights: Press briefing notes on Crimean Tatars

Human Rights Watch: Persecution of Crimean Tatars Intensifies


PS, here's your definition:

Quote:

im·pe·ri·al·ism

/imˈpirēəˌlizəm/

noun

noun: imperialism

a policy of extending a country's power and influence through diplomacy or military force.





Are you really telling me that imperialism isn't occurring under Putin?


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OnlineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 23,129
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 8 minutes, 43 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25647801 - 11/30/18 04:40 AM (1 year, 7 months ago)

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
So having amicable relations with your neighbors is imperialism?  "I do not think it means what you think it means"



C'mon man, I see you call out qman for being dishonest in debate. You seem educated in geopolitical matters in this area, don't pretend like you don't know that South Ossetia and Abkhazia are considered sovereign territory of Georgia by the vast majority of the international community; and Georgia considers this land to be under Russian occupation.



Why not tell the full story then if you want intellectual honesty?  South Ossetia and Abkhazia both declared their independence from Georgia after the break up of the Soviet Union.  Georgia didn't want to let them go (much like Britain didn't want to let the American colonies go).  The west sided with Georgia, Russia didn't.  Fighting broke out, and Russia went in as peacekeepers.  Not sure that peacekeeping is imperialism, but I see your argument.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
What interests are being served by Russia protecting Russian citizens there?



Same interests that the USA has in protecting pro-EU/NATO Ukrainian citizens there.



I agree.  Not imperialism to me either, but I see your argument.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
"Russia has had a naval base in Crimea since 1783, which has always been under Russian control through today."



This makes no mention of the unidentified military forces that appeared throughout Crimea before any referendum was held, which were eventually admitted to have been Russian military. Why leave this fact out?



Because it was irrelevant to the vote.  Almost no one in Crimea even knew they were there.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
How can Russia protecting democracy serve to reveal a pro-Russian bias?  I can see how being against democracy reveals your anti Russia bias.



Because it was a vote that occurred under Russian military occupation



Again, irrelevant to the vote.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
you are to interpret this as me stating that imperialism isn't occurring under Putin.



So then why, in response to me saying "you are spreading pro-Russian propaganda that diminishes both historical and current human rights violations faced by the Tartars", you replied "I DID talk about the human rights violations under Stalin."



Because that's what I talked about in a thread that's over a year old before we ever had this discussion.


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OnlineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 23,129
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 8 minutes, 43 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #25647819 - 11/30/18 05:29 AM (1 year, 7 months ago)

As mentioned above, I don't think a lot of the examples are imperialism, but I see your arguments.

However, there is one thing that is unquestionably imperialism:

Orchestrating a coup against Ukraine's democratically elected leader in an attempt to take conrol of Russia's only warm water base.


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleCitizen X
Call me Pepper,,
Other User Gallery
Registered: 01/19/14
Posts: 7,384
Loc: Djibouti
Re: Crimea [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #25647826 - 11/30/18 05:46 AM (1 year, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
:awesomenod:  The REAL reason the US orchestrated the coup in Ukraine.




Are you saying that the US government is working with a *portion of the Russian government to overthrow the current regime? Or, we did this?

Can you elaborate please


--------------------


Rate me here


Edited by Citizen X (11/30/18 05:49 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OnlineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 23,129
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 8 minutes, 43 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: Cinnamon]
    #25648530 - 11/30/18 02:40 PM (1 year, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Citizen X said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:

Cinnamon said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Sevastopol Harbor - a Russian Naval town that's now open to the general public



The REAL reason for annexation right there.

access to world domination by sea.



:awesomenod:  The REAL reason the US orchestrated the coup in Ukraine.



Are you saying that the US government is working with a *portion of the Russian government to overthrow the current regime? Or, we did this?

Can you elaborate please



I have no evidence Russia was involved in the coup.  But there is plenty of evidence the US was:

We have Victoria Nuland’s intercepted phone call and Obama’s admission to name just a few of the many sources of evidence.


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OnlineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 23,129
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 8 minutes, 43 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #25649732 - 12/01/18 02:26 AM (1 year, 6 months ago)

Here's a great article I just found.  Some of this I've already stated, but it backs my points up, and if you click on the link to the article, it provides sources for each of these claims:

Stop Saying, “Putin Invaded Ukraine and Annexed Crimea”
Quote:

Putin did not “invade” Crimea in 2014. Russia has a naval base in Sevastopol, Crimea, and thus it’s normal for Russian soldiers to be in Crimea.

Putin did not “annex” Crimea. Crimea had a referendum and the people overwhelmingly (>95%) chose to go with Russia.

Why the referendum was not “rigged”: More than 75% of Crimeans speak Russian as their native language. Deciding whether to join Russia or Ukraine is a no-brainer – it’s similar to asking a region if they want to be a part of the U.S. or Mexico.  Nobody protested after or since the referendum.

Historical link between Russia-Ukraine-Crimea: It’s important to remember that Crimea has belonged to Russia for 200+ years (since 1783). In 1954, Russian leader Khrushchev – a Ukrainian by birth – transferred Crimea to Ukraine. He did it as a goodwill gesture to celebrate the 300th anniversary of Ukraine becoming a part of Russia. Nobody in Russia at that time could foresee the fall of the USSR.  The eastern half of Ukraine is predominantly made up of ethnic Russians and would gladly secede and join Russia any time. In fact, Ukraine has been virtually split in half for the last three years.

Crimea’s Strategic Importance: Black Sea – where Crimea is located – is strategically important to Russia, since it’s the only gateway to the Mediterranean, Africa, etc. Thus it’s important for shipping, oil/gas pipelines, as well as for military operations. It’s not an exaggeration to say that it would be suicidal for Russia to give up Crimea and control of Black Sea.

Neocon Schemes: As Asst. Sec. of State Victoria Nuland admitted, since 1991, the US has spent more than $5 billion to lure Ukraine away from Russia. This was spent on propaganda, bribes, NGOs, recruitment of activists etc.  Rather than waiting for a new election, Western elites staged violent protests in Ukraine’s capital and simply overthrew the government. (Neo-Nazi groups such as Svoboda played a major role in the riots.) Then new unelected President and Prime Minister were hand-chosen by the West and installed as puppets.

Horrific Results: Just like they destroyed Libya and Syria in “humanitarian wars” and then moved on with no guilt, the Neocons have done the same in Ukraine. For three years, a civil war has been raging on in Ukraine.  Its debt-to-GDP ratio has doubled and close to 60% of the people live below the poverty line. Its industries are crumbling, and pensions/social welfare have been deeply slashed. Neo-Nazi groups are on the rise, and 80% of young people are desperate to leave the country. One group estimates that one in four prostitutes in Europe are now from Ukraine.

Basically, the country is ruined and has no future. Congrats to Neocons and warmongers who keep repeating like robots, “Putin invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea.” Still bitter at Putin, the Pentagon has included $350 million of military aid to Ukraine for the coming fiscal year. More Ukrainians will keep dying for the globalist agenda.




--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OnlineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 23,129
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 8 minutes, 43 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #25649795 - 12/01/18 03:41 AM (1 year, 6 months ago)

This is absolutely hilarious... "A US contractor accidentally revealed a US military specialist deployment in the combat zones in Ukraine via a Job Advertisement on LinkedIn."

Job description
Mission Essential is accepting applications for linguist candidates who speak Ukrainian to provide foreign language interpretation and translation services to support classified Contingency Operations in support of the U.S. Military in Ukraine.

Whoopsie, we weren't supposed to know about that!  :shocked:


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/20/09
Posts: 11,494
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 29 minutes, 12 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] * 1
    #25650059 - 12/01/18 09:26 AM (1 year, 6 months ago)

Quote:

Putin did not “invade” Crimea in 2014. Russia has a naval base in Sevastopol, Crimea, and thus it’s normal for Russian soldiers to be in Crimea.



Is it normal for troops to take over government buildings in another Crimean city entirely? You know, the ones who looked and acted exactly like exactly like Russian paratroopers, only minus their insignia?

At the time Putin flatly denied they were his troops, that he was in the process of annexing part of another European country; but one month after Russia's formal annexation of the peninsula, Putin admitted he had "of course" deployed troops to Crimea.

He has since been filmed saying he gave the order to begin planning the operation to annex Crimea several weeks before the people who live there were given the chance to vote on it, albeit in a referendum marshalled by men with Kalashnikovs.



Quote:

Why the referendum was not “rigged”: More than 75% of Crimeans speak Russian as their native language. Deciding whether to join Russia or Ukraine is a no-brainer – it’s similar to asking a region if they want to be a part of the U.S. or Mexico.  Nobody protested after or since the referendum.



Once again, completely avoiding any discussion of the Tartars or a history of forced demographic changes. Why gloss over this history and act like Crimea naturally had a Russian population? Tartars have definitely been protesting, but unfortunately Russia made protest against Russian annexation illegal, and has arrested those who participate. 

UN Human Rights: Press briefing notes on Crimean Tatars

Human Rights Watch: Persecution of Crimean Tatars Intensifies

Why are you diminishing this reality, and painting a picture of a unified Russian Crimea happy to be home? Why are you diminishing the reality of Russia's human rights violations?


Quote:

Crimea’s Strategic Importance: Black Sea – where Crimea is located – is strategically important to Russia, since it’s the only gateway to the Mediterranean, Africa, etc. Thus it’s important for shipping, oil/gas pipelines, as well as for military operations. It’s not an exaggeration to say that it would be suicidal for Russia to give up Crimea and control of Black Sea.



"Suicidal for Russia to give up Crimea", yet you still believe that Russia was completely innocent and hands off during this time?



Quote:

Neocon Schemes: As Asst. Sec. of State Victoria Nuland admitted, since 1991, the US has spent more than $5 billion to lure Ukraine away from Russia. This was spent on propaganda, bribes, NGOs, recruitment of activists etc.  Rather than waiting for a new election, Western elites staged violent protests in Ukraine’s capital and simply overthrew the government. (Neo-Nazi groups such as Svoboda played a major role in the riots.) Then new unelected President and Prime Minister were hand-chosen by the West and installed as puppets.



I notice you edited out the part here that blamed George Soros for the events surrounding Euromaidan. Why edit it out? Arr you worried that connection to the George Soros 'globalists' conspiracy will undermine the article/argument?





You don't have to paint Russia as a faultless agent to criticize the actions of the US and the EU leaders. Ignoring or diminishing the negative actions of Russia does nothing but harm your points about the neoliberal west, by revealing a heavy pro-Russian bias, and casting a reason to doubt any truthful thing you may be sharing.

Stop being a mouthpiece for Russian state propaganda.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OnlineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 23,129
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 8 minutes, 43 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25650689 - 12/01/18 03:25 PM (1 year, 6 months ago)

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Is it normal for troops to take over government buildings in another Crimean city entirely? You know, the ones who looked and acted exactly like exactly like Russian paratroopers, only minus their insignia?



Is it normal for citizens to stage a coup against a democratically elected leader?

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
At the time Putin flatly denied they were his troops, that he was in the process of annexing part of another European country; but one month after Russia's formal annexation of the peninsula, Putin admitted he had "of course" deployed troops to Crimea.



The Russians already had troops in Crimea, and there is absolutely NO evidence that the Russian military took over any Government buildings.  They were used as peacekeepers, so the violence that was seen in mainland Ukraine wouldn't spread to Crimea.  Only 6 people died in all of Crimea as a result of the Ukrainian coup, which were mainly the result of protests staged by the Tartars.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
He has since been filmed saying he gave the order to begin planning the operation to annex Crimea several weeks before the people who live there were given the chance to vote on it, albeit in a referendum marshalled by men with Kalashnikovs.



According to your article, Putin knew the referendum was coming and that the vast majority of Crimea would vote to rejoin Russia, so of course he prepared for it.  Can you provide evidence showing the referendum was marshalled by men with Kalashnikovs?  No one I spoke with in Crimea said they saw any sign of unusual Russian activity during the referendum.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Why the referendum was not “rigged”: More than 75% of Crimeans speak Russian as their native language. Deciding whether to join Russia or Ukraine is a no-brainer – it’s similar to asking a region if they want to be a part of the U.S. or Mexico.  Nobody protested after or since the referendum.



Once again, completely avoiding any discussion of the Tartars or a history of forced demographic changes. Why gloss over this history and act like Crimea naturally had a Russian population?



I acknowledged the history of the Tatars.  It doesn't change the vote.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Tartars have definitely been protesting, but unfortunately Russia made protest against Russian annexation illegal, and has arrested those who participate. 

UN Human Rights: Press briefing notes on Crimean Tatars

Human Rights Watch: Persecution of Crimean Tatars Intensifies



As I just mentioned above, the protests led to the small number of deaths that occurred in Crimea during that time.  You don't think anyone should be held accountable?

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Why are you diminishing this reality, and painting a picture of a unified Russian Crimea happy to be home? Why are you diminishing the reality of Russia's human rights violations?



I'm not.  I haven't argued with you about human rights violations, and I haven't argued that the Tatars weren't mistreated.  But the fact remains that 96% of the population favored leaving Ukraine after the coup.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
"Suicidal for Russia to give up Crimea", yet you still believe that Russia was completely innocent and hands off during this time?



I don't know what you mean.  Russia was very happy that the Crimean people overwhelmingly voted to return to Russia, and they fully supported the vote (it appears one side respects democracy while the other side stages coups against democratically elected leaders).

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Quote:

Neocon Schemes: As Asst. Sec. of State Victoria Nuland admitted, since 1991, the US has spent more than $5 billion to lure Ukraine away from Russia. This was spent on propaganda, bribes, NGOs, recruitment of activists etc.  Rather than waiting for a new election, Western elites staged violent protests in Ukraine’s capital and simply overthrew the government. (Neo-Nazi groups such as Svoboda played a major role in the riots.) Then new unelected President and Prime Minister were hand-chosen by the West and installed as puppets.



I notice you edited out the part here that blamed George Soros for the events surrounding Euromaidan. Why edit it out? Arr you worried that connection to the George Soros 'globalists' conspiracy will undermine the article/argument?



No, the article was too long, so I cut down the larger bullet points.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
You don't have to paint Russia as a faultless agent to criticize the actions of the US and the EU leaders. Ignoring or diminishing the negative actions of Russia does nothing but harm your points about the neoliberal west, by revealing a heavy pro-Russian bias, and casting a reason to doubt any truthful thing you may be sharing.

Stop being a mouthpiece for Russian state propaganda.



Now you're just making things up.  I never said Russia was faultless, and I agreed the Tatars were mistreated.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinechibiabos
Cosmic Pond Scum
I'm a teapot User Gallery


Registered: 03/16/17
Posts: 3,857
Last seen: 22 hours, 39 minutes
Re: Crimea [Re: shivas.wisdom] * 2
    #25650809 - 12/01/18 04:36 PM (1 year, 6 months ago)

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:





Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OnlineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 23,129
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 8 minutes, 43 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: chibiabos]
    #25650855 - 12/01/18 05:02 PM (1 year, 6 months ago)

If you can't provide evidence, why do I have to agree with you?

So ya, you're right... make believing with me is like talking to a brick wall.

I don't play make believe in the political forum.


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/20/09
Posts: 11,494
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 29 minutes, 12 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] * 1
    #25653945 - 12/03/18 09:37 AM (1 year, 6 months ago)

Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Is it normal for troops to take over government buildings in another Crimean city entirely? You know, the ones who looked and acted exactly like exactly like Russian paratroopers, only minus their insignia?



Is it normal for citizens to stage a coup against a democratically elected leader?



Is it normal for 'whataboutism' to come from a Putin mouthpiece? :lol:

I'm not defending the coup or the actions of any western players, I'm responding to your defence of Russian actions so drop the "what about the coup" dance. Was it normal for Russian ground combat forces to man roadblocks and seize strategic points on the Crimean peninsula?



Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
At the time Putin flatly denied they were his troops, that he was in the process of annexing part of another European country; but one month after Russia's formal annexation of the peninsula, Putin admitted he had "of course" deployed troops to Crimea.



The Russians already had troops in Crimea, and there is absolutely NO evidence that the Russian military took over any Government buildings.  They were used as peacekeepers, so the violence that was seen in mainland Ukraine wouldn't spread to Crimea.  Only 6 people died in all of Crimea as a result of the Ukrainian coup, which were mainly the result of protests staged by the Tartars.



Why would Putin send out uninsigniad soldiers and deny their status as Russian troops, instead of properly identifying them as Russian peacekeepers from the start? What reason, other than subterfuge?



Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
He has since been filmed saying he gave the order to begin planning the operation to annex Crimea several weeks before the people who live there were given the chance to vote on it, albeit in a referendum marshalled by men with Kalashnikovs.



According to your article, Putin knew the referendum was coming and that the vast majority of Crimea would vote to rejoin Russia, so of course he prepared for it.  Can you provide evidence showing the referendum was marshalled by men with Kalashnikovs?  No one I spoke with in Crimea said they saw any sign of unusual Russian activity during the referendum.



Yes, Putin claimed to know because of "secret, undated opinion polls showed 80% of Crimeans favoured joining Russia." As you like to say, "there is absolutely NO evidence" that Putin knew the opinion of Crimeans before he gave the order to begin planning the operation to annex.

"No one I spoke with...", well the thing about anecdotal evidence...



Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Why the referendum was not “rigged”: More than 75% of Crimeans speak Russian as their native language. Deciding whether to join Russia or Ukraine is a no-brainer – it’s similar to asking a region if they want to be a part of the U.S. or Mexico.  Nobody protested after or since the referendum.



Once again, completely avoiding any discussion of the Tartars or a history of forced demographic changes. Why gloss over this history and act like Crimea naturally had a Russian population?



I acknowledged the history of the Tatars.  It doesn't change the vote.



Yes, you "acknowledged" it briefly in another thread, and briefly again when I brought it up here. I never said you haven't acknowledged it, I said you were glossing over this history, acting like Crimea naturally had a Russian population, and avoiding any discussion of the Tartars.

For example, the claim "Nobody protested after or since the referendum", is patently false. Crimean Tartars have been protesting and experience serious attacks on their human rights since the referendum. I've linked these two reports multiple times in this thread now, but you continue to gloss over any discussion with your claim that you "acknowledged" the issue in some obscure corner of this forum once before. Here they are again:



Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Tartars have definitely been protesting, but unfortunately Russia made protest against Russian annexation illegal, and has arrested those who participate. 

UN Human Rights: Press briefing notes on Crimean Tatars

Human Rights Watch: Persecution of Crimean Tatars Intensifies



As I just mentioned above, the protests led to the small number of deaths that occurred in Crimea during that time.  You don't think anyone should be held accountable?



Akhtem Chiygoz was arrested for organising protests and Ilmi Umerov was arrested for “separatism” after he criticised Russia's seizure of his homeland. Neither was connected to, or charged with, any murder. Who is being held accountable in the death of Reşat Amet? During his (peaceful and solitary) protest in front of the Crimean Council of Ministers building in Simferopol's Lenin Square, he was abducted by three unidentified men in military uniform from the "Crimean self-defense" detachments who took him away. On 15 March 2014 Reşat's body was found by police in a forest about 60 kilometers east of the Crimean capital. The body bearing marks of violence and torture, with his head bound with duct-tape and his legs shackled. A pair of handcuffs was laying near his body.

You should read those human rights reports, because mass arrests of Crimean Tatars have occurred, along with punitive searches, and banning of Crimean Tartar organizations and media. The claim that "Nobody protested after or since the referendum", is a lie! If you had bothered to read either of those reports you would see that detention and prosecution for "separatism" has happened to Crimean Tartars for as little as posting a comment on social media criticizing the occupation of Crimea (Suleiman Kadyrov), or peacefully staged single-person pickets to protest the arrest and prosecution of other Tatars. 

Avoiding all this, while gleefully exclaiming "Nobody protested after or since the referendum." is to diminish the reality of human rights abuses that Crimean Tatars are experiencing at the hands of Russian authorities.



Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Why are you diminishing this reality, and painting a picture of a unified Russian Crimea happy to be home? Why are you diminishing the reality of Russia's human rights violations?



I'm not.  I haven't argued with you about human rights violations, and I haven't argued that the Tatars weren't mistreated.  But the fact remains that 96% of the population favored leaving Ukraine after the coup.




Yes, you are diminishing this reality. See above. You aren't arguing against it, you are just nodding your head briefly and moving on to talking about how happy the majority of Crimeans are to be part of Russia, without any further discussion. That is diminishing the reality of the situation.



Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
"Suicidal for Russia to give up Crimea", yet you still believe that Russia was completely innocent and hands off during this time?



I don't know what you mean.  Russia was very happy that the Crimean people overwhelmingly voted to return to Russia, and they fully supported the vote (it appears one side respects democracy while the other side stages coups against democratically elected leaders).



I'm saying that you have to be incredibly naive or deliberately obtuse to think that Russia, when faced with a US-led coup with potential consequences that would be "suicidal for Russia", would take a hands-off approach to the situation and just hope that local democracy would be enough to prevent the worst from happening.



Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
I notice you edited out the part here that blamed George Soros for the events surrounding Euromaidan. Why edit it out? Arr you worried that connection to the George Soros 'globalists' conspiracy will undermine the article/argument?



No, the article was too long, so I cut down the larger bullet points.



So you agree with the assessment that George Soros was largely responsible for the events surrounding Euromaidan?



Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
You don't have to paint Russia as a faultless agent to criticize the actions of the US and the EU leaders. Ignoring or diminishing the negative actions of Russia does nothing but harm your points about the neoliberal west, by revealing a heavy pro-Russian bias, and casting a reason to doubt any truthful thing you may be sharing.

Stop being a mouthpiece for Russian state propaganda.



Now you're just making things up.  I never said Russia was faultless, and I agreed the Tatars were mistreated.



Where in this thread have you talked about Russian faults with regards to the situation in Ukraine?


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleMycolorado
Hobbyist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/23/16
Posts: 6,128
Loc: Interdimensional Bootcamp
Re: Crimea [Re: shivas.wisdom] * 1
    #25654061 - 12/03/18 10:43 AM (1 year, 6 months ago)

Since the Crimeans wanted to go back to Russia, couldn’t the whole affair be considered an act of liberation as opposed to annexation?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Bama gonna Crimea river
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
Therian 4,148 88 03/24/14 07:23 PM
by Brian Jones
* No White Construction Workers on Infrastructure Projects using stimulus money
( 1 2 all )
lonestar2004 2,544 39 01/26/09 11:17 AM
by Seuss
* W.Va.'s Byrd now longest-serving senator luvdemshrooms 1,171 19 07/08/10 04:29 PM
by lines
* Defiance of the Northern Aliance GabbaDj 1,057 8 11/26/01 12:01 AM
by GabbaDj
* WTC Construction Manager: Towers Were Designed to Take Numerous Plane Crashes usefulidiot 2,256 18 11/16/04 01:35 PM
by Rose
* Say something constructive
( 1 2 all )
Silversoul 1,776 37 11/21/05 12:44 AM
by kilgore_trout
* Need constructive criticism on political poem mr_minds_eye 1,731 15 03/16/02 02:47 PM
by Anonymous
* Constructing propaganda. Winning hearts and minds... carbonhoots 319 1 04/17/03 09:28 PM
by Anonymous

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
2,278 topic views. 3 members, 2 guests and 3 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Print Topic ]
Search this thread:
Original Seeds Store - Cannabis Seeds
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2020 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.099 seconds spending 0.01 seconds on 17 queries.