Oh, so he's biased because he recognizes the self proclaimed gobernment in the east, a gobernment not even Russia recognizes even if they are the invaders, right? Well then I guess that makes the bombs that fall around him less real then. As far as I know all western and eastern press is biased too. The wikipedia article you linked, citation after citation they lead to western media articles, and we know how biased they can be, but because it's in Wikipedia it's a "fact", because people don't go to read where the citations come from. But wait, what if another media article says a different thing? Well I guess the one I present is the only trustful one. There is an information war going on, and you clearly take a single side of it and dismiss all other versions as propaganda.
Your implication that Western media is biased by definition is silly. As is your assumption that anyone posting from the war zone is perfectly objective and factual. Or that the moderation fallacy is anything but.
So again, why should I believe some guy speaking from a studio over a guy who is uploading his videos from the field? I guess all those civilians are actors and the bombs digital movie effects. Dismiss it all you like, but automatically dismissing it because you don't agree with it only proves you are taking a side and whatever doesn't fit with your version of reality (or the one someone else made for you) is not even worth discussing.
Yes, I am taking a side. Taking the side of the country being invaded by a hostile foreign power, a country whose eastern region is being torn apart by an insurgency astroturfed by Russia. Given how easy it is to stage or manipulate videos by proper framing, I don't take them as gospel. Especially not when they proclaim their agenda in the title.
My advise to everyone reading this thread is to look at both sides, read/watch all sides of the story, dismiss none, but take none for granted either, and draw your own conclussions, have your own oppinions, and not the opinions someone else is having for you on your favorite media channel.
All the while you'll keep dismiss anyone expressing a pro-Ukrainian and pro-European sentiment as influenced by biased Western media, eh?
Not much, if I am honest. But I just believe that Poland managed much of the changes by them self. It is what I believe from history, Warsaw Uprising, various protests like 1956 or 1970 and Solidarnoc at least tell me that Poland as nation was always open for changes and improvements. Hence why I believe that many of the economic changes came rather from the inside rather the outside. Not to mention there was much less Russian influence after the 1990s. For obvious reasons.
All I am saying is, Poland is a different case than the Ukraine. Russia will never ever give up on it. It is very sad but I feel a reality we simply have to accept. We could also demand that the US removes their whole presence in Cuba and Guantanamo and all their forces in the middle east. But how likely is that?
They will give up on it. The British Empire, the Russian Empire, the German Empire, the Soviet empire, they all were supposed to be never-ending and never fail. Reality begs to differ.
I also wager that they've already given up on Ukraine. Their intervention has already cost them their economy, soured relations with their bigger market, alienated them on the global stage, on top of killing several hundred Russian soldiers. We don't have to accept reality and give up. Hell, most of the 20th century was made by people who refused to accept it. Imagine Ghandi stating the following: "Britain will never ever give up on India. It is very sad but I feel a reality we simply have to accept."
It's a particularly apt comparison as well, as Ukraine was the colony of Russia for a good long while.
You know, I completely agree with what you say and the way you think. I just feel that we as the West have no reason to hold Russia on some standards that we cant keep either. Our words simply have no weight. Russia knows that it cant trust us, that we don't keep contracts, particularly the US has a nice habit of breaking agreements. Sure we can blame Russia for everything and we can just paint them as this evil empire. But is that realistic? We have done worse things than the Ukraine ... ask the French and their role in the Rwandan genocide with 1 million dead Africans. The German role in Kosovo which was also against international law, or selling technology for the production of toxic gas to Iraq and many more incidents, either by Britain, France, Germany the US and pretty much any global player.
Again, we are in no position to tell Russia what they can and what they can't do. Because we are, simply put, hypocrites.
Incorrect. You are using a form of the bog-standard, fallacious Soviet retort that America can't criticize the Soviet Union, because white people lynch black people over there. Whatever issues we have with our own countries doesn't make Russia's overt invasion of sovereign states more acceptable. The difference is, we are at least trying to do better. Because it's a start.
Besides, Europe, unlike Russia, isn't suppressing minorities, invading to reaffirm its primacy like in Ukraine and Georgia, or
openly persecuting NGOs that refuse to toe the party line. Imagine Germany doing shit like this to organizations focusing on preserving the memory of the atrocities of the Third Reich. People would be up in arms.
But Russia? "Oh, it's just Russia, it's political realism to accept them as such."
We can't have peace in the Ukraine without Russia. That is sadly the reality. I don't like it, really though we have to accept this as a fact. Russia is not Iraq or Afghanistan. They have geostrategical interests just like the US. They have concerns and no Russian politican not even someone like Gorbatschow or Ghandi could ignore those. And if we REALLY want to improve the situation of the common Ukrainian citicen, in the long run, than we have to pay attention to the Russian interests and get them all on one table. What ever if we like it or not. But as long we paint Russia as this devil, calling Putin the next Hitler, while we do MUCH(!) worse things ... why should they even feel like they have to give anything on what we say? We can throw sanctions at them as much we want, it will just lead to a situation of more stubborness, more violence and more Russian influence in the Ukraine in the end. The problem as I see it is that we push Russia on a wall here, we don't give them any options. No alternatives. Ask you self if we either the US or the European Union would be in Russias position, what would we do? What HAVE we done already? We started wars in the past because of LESS reasons than Russia here.
It is simply political realism if you want so.
Russia has options and alternatives. The simplest of them is to be a partner for Europe, Ukraine (it's just Ukraine, not the Ukraine, by the way), and not be a giant asshole. What you're proposing is appeasement, a strategy that does not work. It only encourages hostile powers to push further. When will you say that standing up to Russia is OK?
When Russian green men appear in Estonia and Latvia? Or will you state that it's OK, because both were invaded and annexed by the Soviet Union and kept as SSRs for some 50 years?
When an insurgency starts in eastern Poland? Or will you state that it's because of perfectly understandable grievances the people have and it's not like Russians are openly landing troops there?
When Germany goes into recession because of a Russian embargo? Or will you flog yourself for being a resident of Germany and say that Russia is perfectly reasonable to do so because the Soviet Union was invaded by the Reich a century ago?
I like you Crni, but seeing you flog yourself and Europe on and on for not being perfect pains me. All the more because it is not an isolated instance and it weakens Germany and Europe both. It's a form of apathy and surrender. Since you're not perfect and won't be perfect, why should you ever try being better?
Now, if I was in Russia's position (assuming omnipotence and freedom to do as I see fit), I would immediately pull back forces from Ukraine and cut the insurgents loose, while burying any and all ties to them with extreme prejudice. Probably sacrifice a few generals on the altar of public opinion, before arranging convenient suicides or accidents for them (it's Russia, these things do happen). Do my best to mend relations with Europe and Ukraine, so that the embargo is lifted and the economy stops spiraling down into the shitter. Force a government-backed program of modernization and innovation so that Russia wouldn't be slave to its own natural resources and experience economic upheavals whenever the price of oil and other commodities falls down. Repeal legislation that targets minorities or forces NGOs to register as foreign agents. Then build upon it, slowly, to make Russia a partner, not an bully.
Of course, I don't really classify as an
RWA, not to the degree that the current Russian administration does, so the results might be skewed.
Yes! Because it pretty much is! I HATE to say it ... but it is the world we are living in. The US started their shitty Iraq war for a lie. Both Germany and France had big resentments with it. But no one in the US gave a flying fuck about it.
And now? 100 000 death Iraqis later. A nation left in Civil war. The middle east a bigger shit hole than ever before. And? Do people even care about it anymore? No. When something bad happens, all you hear as reason is, because Muslims! And not because we tend to fuck up everything forgeting how people can hate us even after 20 years, after we bombed their families.
I promise you. Even if the Russians march in to the Ukraine with 1 million soldiers tomorrow. In 10 years no one here will remember it anymore. And THAT, is if you ask me, the really sad part about it all :/!
You certainly don't seem to care. You're advocating apathy and resignation instead of at least disagreeing with the state of affairs. You're saying "It's the world we are living in" and basically stating we shouldn't care about it, because we are horrible people. Yes, we are. But we're trying to do better - and we are doing better. Hell, Europe has had an historically unprecedented period of peace for the first time in recorded history, after a history that's soaking wet with spilled blood.
Yes, the Middle East is a region fraught with strife, in no small part due to the interference of pretty much the whole world there. From the crusades to the War on Terror, both the West and the East meddled in the affairs of the Middle East. But we can do better and we should be trying. Advocating apathy and self-flagellation is only hurting the chances of that happening.
Not a conspiracy. Just a lot of preasure. There are huge American interests with the Ukraine. And in my opinion instead of beeing more neutral the European Union is pushed in to supporting the US interests here, which are not aboutthe Ukraine but to isolate Russia.
What interests? In strict economic terms, Ukraine barely rates as 0.1% of the U.S. foreign trade. It's not a significant partner by any rate.
I agree that the U.S. has a political state in Ukraine, but so does the European Union. And with good reason - Russia has demonstrated that it's unwilling to be a partner. You can appease it or you can make a stand against it.
"There are huge Polish interests with Czechoslovakia. And in my opinion instead of beeing more neutral the British Empire is pushed in to supporting the Polish interests here, which are not about Czechoslovakia but to isolate Germany."
But everyone who knows even one thing about Russia can tell you here: They will never ever let the Ukraine go. They simply won't. They will rather make another Georgia, satellite state out of the Ukraine and overruning it with their military force before they allow the Ukraine to become a member of the European Union which is, from a Russian point of view, the first step to becoming a member of the NATO. And the NATO is still from its core a weapon from the cold war which is heavily dominated by the US and created with the idea of fighting Russia/the Sovietunion.
Uh, no. It's easier to get into NATO than the European Union. And pray tell, why won't Russia let Ukraine go? They already did. The occupation and annexation of Crimea and the ongoing insurgency in the East has destroyed any chance Russia had at retaining Ukraine in its sphere of influence. Short of outright invasion and subjugation of Ukraine, they aren't going to win. Ukraine isn't another Georgia. It has close to ten times as much people and is ten times larger.
Why are you arguing that Ukraine should be kept under Russian thumb?
There's tons of Russian volunteer fighters in Ukraine, but that does not take away the Ukrainian Russian speakers. These count - 100% - as Ukraniain people, with a strong separatist agenda. That agenda has most definitely been fueled by Russian interests (because duh, Russia stands to gain), but that does not invalidate their opinions as "bullshit". Maybe I misunderstand your use of the word. These locals are not trying to fool you - they genuinely believe they will be better off on the side of the Russian border, and they genuinely believe that a war of liberation is the way to go.
Your assumption that all Ukrainians speaking Russian are separatists wanting to tear Eastern Ukraine away and join russia is insulting to Ukraine - and contradicted by facts. If that was the case, then why isn't the entire south-eastern Ukraine up in arms, but merely a quarter of it, the one closest to the Russian border? And after the Ukrainian counter-offensive, it's not even that?
Whatever grievances the Ukrainians there might have had with Kiev, do you honestly believe they all support destroying their own cities and land by starting a separatist insurgency? That they're all totally fine with shooting down hundreds of people on board MH-17?
It is extremely important to not dismiss the statements from innocent - even brainwashed people - because they are an important gauge to read society from.
It is far too easy to say about a 1930s half-nazi German "what a doofus, let's not even listen to his ravings", because doofuses like him ended up burning down half the continent.
We must take into account when people believe something to be really real. It is important to note that many Ukrainians believe Russia is saving them, they are in turn being interviewed on Russian TV, with genuine heartfelt tears in their eyes, and then the Russian population believes Russia is rightfully punishing The West.
Should we laugh and dismiss at it, and pretend it "doesn't count", or should we truly try to acknowledge that this is not "bullshit" to them, but "real truth". Just as real as "War for Freedom" is for two thirds of Americans? Again, look at what real life reprecussions that public support has, for real people in the middle east.
What's your point? Given that Russia and the insurgents have a vested interest in portraying their side as winning and experiencing widespread support, I'm not going to treat them on equal terms with what the rest of the country (the other 90% of Ukrainians) say.
Hell, I'm not going to treat anything Russia says as anything other than lies, smoke, and mirrors, given that the highest offices of the government deliberately lied about the Russian invasion and occupation of Crimea.
My second point kind of goes about the same thing: You must be careful about dismissing the "bad countries", the warlords you mention, dictators, tyrants, hell, let's imagine the worst of the worst, a kind of Sauron Baphomet Leviathan Shaytan Barbara Streisand and STILL people would go about their usual business. They would get up, eat breakfast, go to work, work, go home, because this is what people DO in real life dictatorships.
Under Pinochet's Chile, it is easy for us to imagine all this bloodshed, thousands dead, tens of thousands imprisoned. This still leaves millions going about their daily business. They might not agree with the state of affairs, but they have no intention of rebelling.
The insurgents in Eastern Ukraine are not a country or even countries. They might style themselves as such, but they're, well, insurgents, fighting a rebellion against the legitimate government of Ukraine. The fact that there are civilians there doesn't give them any more legitimacy or makes me more inclined towards them.
And shit like
mass graves doesn't help either.
I'm not saying "Russians are good" or "Dictatorship is okay", I'm saying - look at the world. There are many many people who genuinely THINK and SAY that Russia is there to save them. This matters because it creates public opinion if not only locally. People's reality changes according to public opinion, we can see that with religion and faith. It is NOT an automatic that humanity will eventually shed irrationalism, and become rational. This changes like the wind, it changes with public opinion, and it behooves us to play close attention to where the wind is blowing.
To be clear, I agree with your position, I just want to point out that you can't see this as purely "Russia invading", they ARE invading - by proxy - using irregulars, one can define, redefine, interpret that to hell - but alongside that are real Ukrainian locals, who genuinely believe they are fighting for their freedom. With bombs and guns. Freedom fights tend to be brutal.
I have a feeling that some discussions here happen because "observation" gets confused with "support". To observe and explain why something happens - and even acknowledge it cannot be helped - is not the same as supporting :I
I disagree that this is a fight for freedom. It's a foreign funded insurgency, much like the USA did in Nicaragua and other South American countries. Whatever legitimate grievances the Ukrainians in the affected regions had, going straight to armed insurrection suddenly strikes me as either an overreaction - or deliberate interference by a foreign powers.
And, as I can see by my sources, it's all but explicitly confirmed - including by "Strielkov" (Igor Girkin, one-time "defense minister" of the insurgents).
It also raises one question nobody has been able to answer: If eastern Ukraine is really so fed up, why didn't they rebel ten years ago, when the Orange Revolution did pretty much the same thing as Euromaidan?
