Malaysian Airliner crashes in Ukraine

[Kahlenberg]

It certainly detracts heavily from "terrorism" and throw plenty of credence to "horrible accident questionably covered up".

I think nobody honestly thinks the flight was shot down on purpose.

[Imperializt Russia]

It certainly detracts heavily from "terrorism" and throw plenty of credence to "horrible accident questionably covered up".

I think nobody honestly thinks the flight was shot down on purpose.

Except Ukraine, Russia and John Kerry.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

I think nobody honestly thinks the flight was shot down on purpose.

Except Ukraine, Russia and John Kerry.

Yeah, about that. Why is Kerry trying to ruin everything for the rest of the world? His violent anti-Russian attitude may just deny our acces to.the site.

[Kahlenberg]

I think nobody honestly thinks the flight was shot down on purpose.

Except Ukraine, Russia and John Kerry.

Really? I didn't read anything like that. Kerry - as far as I know, I don't read everything the man says everyday - blames Russia for supplying the system that was used to shoot the plane down but never claimed there was intent to shoot down the airliner. Russia officially claimed it's a tragedy and that it remains unsure what caused the plane to crash but that Ukraine is responsible because it happened in her airspace, if I'm correct. I'm not sure about the Ukrainian official statement.

[Kahlenberg]

Except Ukraine, Russia and John Kerry.

Yeah, about that. Why is Kerry trying to ruin everything for the rest of the world? His violent anti-Russian attitude may just deny our acces to.the site.

That would be odd. Why would the seperatists deny Dutch and international experts access because of the remarks of an American?

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Yeah, about that. Why is Kerry trying to ruin everything for the rest of the world? His violent anti-Russian attitude may just deny our acces to.the site.

That would be odd. Why would the seperatists deny Dutch and international experts access because of the remarks of an American?

The same reason Kerry seems to see no difference between pro-Russians and actual Russians. The Netherlands an tge US are close allies. If the US wants to drag us along on their anti-Russian campaign, we will jump to their aid. And I don't think the rebels are experienced masters of internatiol politics.

[Imperializt Russia]

Except Ukraine, Russia and John Kerry.

Really? I didn't read anything like that. Kerry - as far as I know, I don't read everything the man says everyday - blames Russia for supplying the system that was used to shoot the plane down but never claimed there was intent to shoot down the airliner. Russia officially claimed it's a tragedy and that it remains unsure what caused the plane to crash but that Ukraine is responsible because it happened in her airspace, if I'm correct. I'm not sure about the Ukrainian official statement.

I'm being facetious.

Kerry claims to have "overwhelming evidence" of everything happens and demands that America steps in against the side supported by Russia.

[Tahar Joblis]

That's not the only difference

No, it's just the major salient difference.

Again, I condemned Stalin's removal of population.

Which demonstrates that you can acknowledge that Moscow isn't always right.

Apparently that's not enough for you, so you repeat that ad nauseum. Population removal bad. Very bad. Anyways, what I am saying, is that it's foolish to equate Crimea with Lebensraum, since the locals aren't being removed from Crimea.

You're still using the word wrong. "Lebensraum," again, isn't an activity or process. It's a noun. A static, inactive noun.

What I am equating is the quality of the excuse. The excuses offered for why Russia should be wanting to control more territory westward, in particular by United Marxist Nations, are every bit as flimsy as the excuses offered by Hitler. In some cases, the excuses offered by Putin are the same excuses - claiming that Russia has the right and responsibility to intervene for the good of ethnic Russians, for example.

I see, so if China conquers those uninhabited islands, they're engaging in Lebensraum

Lebensraum, again, is not an activity. Lebensraum is a static passive object. It can be considered synonymous with "livable space." Your reaction to my use of the word has demonstrated nothing but the fact that your grasp of Germanic languages is shaky. Saying "engaging in Lebensraum" is like saying "doing potato" or "performing the condominium." It's complete nonsense phraseology. Come back to this topic when you've figured out what the word actually means. "Lebensraum" isn't a policy. It's a way of describing territory.

Yep, there comes the defense.

Defense?

Let's be blunt: War pushes people to migrate. This is one of the major reasons that Ossetia has experienced depopulation: Not simply residents being killed, but residents leaving because war is dangerous and inconvenient.

People have migrated out of the eastern parts of the Ukraine because of the fighting. Most have probably gone elsewhere in the Ukraine, as the population of the area was (and may still be) majority-Ukrainian. There's been very serious depopulation of the region. Easily >10% in many towns and cities.

The fact that some alleged 110,000 persons have fled to Russia out of the some 6.7 million people living in the area before Putin's partisans popped in for party-time... well, it's neither surprising nor exceptional in any way, nor does it reflect any better on the separatists than on the Ukrainian government. Nor is it the fault of the Ukrainian government that armed separatists largely organized under Muscovite leadership (quite literally in the case of Borodai) decided to start a war.

I wasn't aware that the Russian Civil War, (1917-1922,) was ancient history.

You had three examples of the West intervening in internal affairs. Your other two examples (which I was referring to) were from the 13th and 16th centuries to try to establish a pattern of the West intervening in Russian civil affairs.

The Russian Civil War I discussed in much more detail.

The fact that German-funded militants systematically disrupted the operations of the transitional government and then conducted a coup in 1917, overthrowing the transitional government shortly before elections took place, is worth some note. The fact that foreign support was offered for anti-Communist forces during the Civil War had nothing to do with dislike for Russia and everything to do with fear of communism.

So again, out of the Europeans Wars, you named two. Both of which lasted less than two years.

I named quite a bit more than two.

I listed 10 separate episodes in which Russia invaded what is currently, in the modern age, the sovereign territory of one or more members of NATO. In some cases, such as 1939, Russia invaded territory belonging to multiple modern NATO members (in that case, five of them). Russia is batting .333 with Finland, for example, having first conquered it from Sweden, failed to reconquer it after the Fins declared independence, and then failed again with the Winter War.

This included, by the way, three of your own examples.

And I forgot that during the Napoleonic Wars, Russia actually had started fighting against Napoleon in 1805. By the time Napoleon invaded Russia itself in 1812, he had already defeated Russians in Austria, Germany, and Poland... and the Russians were planning an offensive against Napoleon. It's just that, like Hitler, Napoleon moved quicker.

Tell, would you support Russia returning all of its land that it gained during those wars?

A great deal of the land that Russia took in those invasions no longer belongs to Russia.

Then you brought up the Russian Ukrainian Civil War, where Russian Ukrainian troops did a lot of invading places that didn't want to be Russian Ukrainian. How about we hold a true and democratic vote, Tahar Joblis, on whether the DonBass Republic, Crimea, Novorossiya, Carpathia, etc, wants to be with the soon-to-be economically devastated Kiev Government, how about that?

An actual and honestly conducted vote in Crimea without any Russian invasion would have been unlikely to get a majority.

I favor allowing a clear and honest democratically expressed opinion leading to independence and if necessary realignment. I see no evidence that any election conducted by Russian separatists would be anything but a sham.

I brought up WWI in the context of Allied Intervention in the Russian Civil War, after Russia withdrew from WWI, and was promptly invaded by the Allies during the Russian Civil War.

The Russian armies did their fair share of invading... both in WWI and in the civil war itself.

Mongolia, as I pointed out, wasn't even part of the Russian Empire before its collapse.

Speaking of being greedy, if Russia was actually greedy during the Napoleonic Wars, Russia would've sided with Prussia kicked the Anglo-Austrian-French butts and captured all of Poland

Bullshit.

Tsar Alexander made nice with Napoleon for a couple years so he could pursue his own territorial ambition. Then he made plans to turn on Napoleon. Only problem was that Napoleon saw it coming and turned on him first. The sequence of events 1808-1812 is actually pretty similar to the Hitler-Stalin routine 1939-1941 when you think about it that way.

not just Congress Poland, kicked Czartoriski out of the government and denied Poland any autonomy whatsoever, at the get-go. As for the Ottoman Empire being destroyed, that was done during WWI, partially by the Allies, and not every Russo-Ottoman War resulted from Russian aggression,

Oh, there were other military actions between the two states, but every one of the ones I listed involved Russian troops invading the Ottoman Empire before Ottoman troops invaded the Russian Empire.

When your economy is fucked, you don't piss off your biggest trading partner

You act as though it's Ukrainians' fault that the Russians have acted like enormous assholes. Putin is the one sitting around violating the territorial integrity of a neighboring sovereign nation, holding trade hostage to a political strong-man routine, and acting in bad faith, e.g., the earlier Russian ban on Poroshenko's chocolate when it looked like Yanukovich was going to sign with the EU.

Let's make this perfectly clear: Russia has acted in bad faith repeatedly. Russia has played the "we're your biggest trading partner so you have to do what we say" card over and over again to push for policies that are detrimental to Ukrainian interests and contrary to what the will of the Ukrainian people is.

[Kahlenberg]

A pretty good summary of Dutch-Russian relations sofar and the possible implications of the recent events: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/07/time-for-the-dutch-to-man-up-109159.html#.U80dL7Fc8tU

[Imperializt Russia]

Apparently that's not enough for you, so you repeat that ad nauseum. Population removal bad. Very bad. Anyways, what I am saying, is that it's foolish to equate Crimea with Lebensraum, since the locals aren't being removed from Crimea.

You're still using the word wrong. "Lebensraum," again, isn't an activity or process. It's a noun. A static, inactive noun.

What I am equating is the quality of the excuse. The excuses offered for why Russia should be wanting to control more territory westward, in particular by United Marxist Nations, are every bit as flimsy as the excuses offered by Hitler. In some cases, the excuses offered by Putin are the same excuses - claiming that Russia has the right and responsibility to intervene for the good of ethnic Russians, for example.

Some of the Lebensraum areas initially seized by the Nazis were lands that were unfairly ceded from Germany after the First World War, as some ill-thought-out punitive measure.

Lebensraum was a policy, and it was one of violent ethnic cleansing. Was Collectivisation just a noun?
Lebensraum is not a term that can be particularly well-applied to Russia's retaking of Crimea though - like some Lebensraum territories - it had previously been ceded in a manner many thought unfair.

[Ducrotia]

I've heard that Ukrainian and Russian forces are denying being in the area where the plane went down. I've also heard that two civilians have reported seeing the flash of a missile around the place and time of the incident.

Link? Source?

I heard it on NPR.

[The Alma Mater]

It certainly detracts heavily from "terrorism" and throw plenty of credence to "horrible accident questionably covered up".

I think nobody honestly thinks the flight was shot down on purpose.

Oh, I have seen many theories Including a rather prominent crackpot one where the plane was filled with corpses before it took off and deliberately crashed.

One that is ...somewhat .. believable is that Putin had it shot down deliberately as a "fuck you, I am powerful" gesture. This would then fit in the "look, we invade this country. What ya gonna do about it ? Whatyagonna do ? Ah, it has been DAYS; we control this area now - you not gonna do anything are ya, wuss" pattern established before. He does something outrageous.. but noone acts. People wait, and then something like acceptance follows.

Of course, the above makes many assumptions about Putin and the invasion that most Russians would vehemently deny; and are assumptions that indeed do not have that much supporting evidence.
But still.

[Boxica]

All of this because of Putin's asshole move to try and strenghten russia by gaining territories from the old russian empire. What a 'President'.

[Lyttenburg]

Oh, I have seen many theories Including a rather prominent crackpot one where the plane was filled with corpses before it took off and deliberately crashed.

One that is ...somewhat .. believable is that Putin had it shot down deliberately as a "fuck you, I am powerful" gesture. This would then fit in the "look, we invade this country. What ya gonna do about it ? Whatyagonna do ? Ah, it has been DAYS; we control this area now - you not gonna do anything are ya, wuss" pattern established before. He does something outrageous.. but noone acts. People wait, and then something like acceptance follows.

Of course, the above makes many assumptions about Putin and the invasion that most Russians would vehemently deny; and are assumptions that indeed do not have that much supporting evidence.
But still.

Yeah, this is crack-pot bat-shit LSD induced insane theory.

NEXT!

[The Alma Mater]

Oh, I have seen many theories Including a rather prominent crackpot one where the plane was filled with corpses before it took off and deliberately crashed.

One that is ...somewhat .. believable is that Putin had it shot down deliberately as a "fuck you, I am powerful" gesture. This would then fit in the "look, we invade this country. What ya gonna do about it ? Whatyagonna do ? Ah, it has been DAYS; we control this area now - you not gonna do anything are ya, wuss" pattern established before. He does something outrageous.. but noone acts. People wait, and then something like acceptance follows.

Of course, the above makes many assumptions about Putin and the invasion that most Russians would vehemently deny; and are assumptions that indeed do not have that much supporting evidence.
But still.

Yeah, this is crack-pot bat-shit LSD induced insane theory.

NEXT!

Still better than the "plane was filled with corpses from the start" and "the recording was fabricated a day in advance" theories we saw
But yes.

[Estado Paulista]

If it's the Russians, we need to do what we should have done sixty years ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7V4tOdboWA

MacArthur, anti-communism and nuclear warfare. This song couldn't be any better.

[The Alma Mater]

Britain hates Putin's (and to slightly lesser extent - Russia's) guts for a long, long time. But, because as the old proverb goes, "Pecunia non olet", they are quite happy to have our oligarchs and bearcats in "Londongrad" and would do anything in their power, to prevent any sanctions, that would hamper their spending money in Britain.

Correct me, if I'm wrong, but the same can be said about the Netherlands.

Honestly ? What most Dutch want is just to have the bodies back. And their possesions as intact as possible as mementos.
They may be yelling for blood, they may be crying for vengeance - but in truth what they want most is to say goodbye.
And yes, they will roll over like lapdogs if that is what it takes.

[Free Tristania]

If it's the Russians, we need to do what we should have done sixty years ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7V4tOdboWA

The only good Russki....

[OMGeverynameistaken]

I'm pretty sure the US would know if mh-17 was escorted, the russians would know for sure. It seems unlikely that neither party would have mentioned it, but we'll see.

Given that this was most likely accidental, that probably only would have increased the likelyhood of civilian aircraft being fired upon.

[Estado Paulista]

If it's the Russians, we need to do what we should have done sixty years ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7V4tOdboWA

The only good Russki....

The only good communist...

[Free Tristania]

The only good Russki....

The only good communist...

They haven't changed a bit since.

[Lyttenburg]

The only good communist...

They haven't changed a bit since.

Every Russian is good.

Care to elaborate on "They haven't changed a bit since", ol' timer? Cause, you've probably were alive during the McCarthy's era and all those spike of USSR/Russophobia.

Or, you are just a some edgy youngster repeating like a drivel a party line about the "ebul Rushins!".

[OMGeverynameistaken]

They haven't changed a bit since.

Every Russian is good.

Care to elaborate on "They haven't changed a bit since", ol' timer? Cause, you've probably were alive during the McCarthy's era and all those spike of USSR/Russophobia.

Or, you are just a some edgy youngster repeating like a drivel a party line about the "ebul Rushins!".

Given that he's expressed his hope for Russians to contract AIDS previously in this thread, I think we know the answer to that.

[The Alma Mater]

They haven't changed a bit since.

Every Russian is good.

Care to elaborate on "They haven't changed a bit since", ol' timer? Cause, you've probably were alive during the McCarthy's era and all those spike of USSR/Russophobia.

Or, you are just a some edgy youngster repeating like a drivel a party line about the "ebul Rushins!".

What was that quote again ? "Russians only have two friends - their navy and their airforce" - or something like that ?

[Lyttenburg]

Every Russian is good.

Care to elaborate on "They haven't changed a bit since", ol' timer? Cause, you've probably were alive during the McCarthy's era and all those spike of USSR/Russophobia.

Or, you are just a some edgy youngster repeating like a drivel a party line about the "ebul Rushins!".

What was that quote again ? "Russians only have two friends - their navy and their airforce" - or something like that ?

"Army and Fleet" - in Alexander III times there were not airforce. Yet.

And despite that often quoted phrase he've radically changed the whole direction of Russian foreign policy allying with France (a Republic! With the "Marselliese" for a national anthem! Shock! Shock and horror!), which later transformed into Entente. Because Russia also have "partners" and "strategic interests"