Ukraine Megathread: Crimea River Build a Bridge, Get Over It

[Mister B]

Ah, so you re-read my post, which would indicate that it wasn't my original post from the quote trail included within it, and yet you opted to describe it as the original post anyway? Why did you do that?

A quick perusal through the posts shows that I didn't call a single post of yours an "original post". You're welcome to source me calling something an "original post", but you won't find anything, since now you're just making shit up. When you previously stated, "When you claimed that you were quoting my original post," that was a lie that you made up about me, since I never claimed to be quoting your original post. I would've caught that earlier, if I was on the lookout for you making up lies about me. Now I am on said lookout.

You might want to look a bit harder then.

Yes, the Sunday you shifted goal posts, or what you call, "making [your] stance perfectly clear." The term "failed" was absent from your original statement.

The term failed was not absent from my original statement. So either you didn't re-read my post, in which case you made a claim without even trying to check if that was true, or you did re-read my post in which case the quote history within that post would indicate that it wasn't original in the slightest but you decided to lie about it anyway to pretend that I was changing my position after the fact.

Absolutely, I couldn't let something that ridiculous pass without mocking it.

Odd, I didn't see you mocking your own "knowledge" of Georgia's divisiveness. I guess you could let something that ridiculous pass, as long as it was you that made that statement.

Why would I mock that? I'm genuinely glad you pointed it out - "Georgians were almost entirely united in opposition to the old government" is so much better a way to illustrate the fact that Georgia then is nothing like Macedonia now than "Georgians were highly divided." If you can think of any other way to improve my argument at the expense of yours don't hesitate to share it.

Macedonia would be different because unlike in Georgia, the people don't hate the current government and vastly prefer someone different, as evidenced by opinion polls (already sourced) and the size of pro-government rallies compared to anti-government rallies, which I can also source for you if you still don't believe it. You used them as bad examples to support a bad argument.

Part of the reason that the people turned on Shevardnadze and later Saakashvili, was poor economic management and Macedonia had an uptick in unemployment recently.

I don't know if you've seen the Q2 2015 unemployment numbers but the Q1 2015 statistics seem to be the latest official publication and they show unemployment at its lowest level since 1993.

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/macedonia/unemployment-rate

Furthermore, the World Bank forecasts Macedonia to be the fastest growing economy in SE Europe this year.

http://kurir.mk/en/?p=41201

Which is a far cry from the economic problems that lead to changes of government in Georgia.

I don't know about pride, but those are the facts. The government's approval rating is far above anyone else's in Macedonia making them - suprise, surprise - likely to remain in power. If you have any sources or facts that contradict that, let's hear it. If your argument amounts to "there might be a bigger challenge, although I've got no sources to show that there are" then that's an argument without facts, and I don't think anyone should be proud of that argument.

No, that's an idiotic assumption on your part that assumes that just because shit happened a certain way in the previous elections, it'll happen the same way in these elections, because the pro-government rallies are bigger than the pro-opposition rallies.

My assumption is that the most popular party lead by the most popular party leader will win the next election. I'm sorry that this assumption confuses you so but please, feel free to actually present an argument to the contrary.

[Estruia]

Russia threatens retaliation if the US stations heavy equipment in Eastern Europe.

[The balkens]

Russia threatens retaliation if the US stations heavy equipment in Eastern Europe.

With what?

[United Marxist Nations]

Russia threatens retaliation if the US stations heavy equipment in Eastern Europe.

With what?

Top men.

[The balkens]

With what?

Top men.

Top men.

Russia.

Top fucking kek.

[Estruia]

Russia threatens retaliation if the US stations heavy equipment in Eastern Europe.

With what?

According to the article, Russia's Defense Minister said that should American equipment end up in Eastern Europe, they will react with fortifying their Western borders and increasing the number of Russian troops stationed in Belarus.

[Jinwoy]

With what?

According to the article, Russia's Defense Minister said that should American equipment end up in Eastern Europe, they will react with fortifying their Western borders and increasing the number of Russian troops stationed in Belarus.

Lukashenko allows Russian soldiers in Belarus?

[The balkens]

With what?

According to the article, Russia's Defense Minister said that should American equipment end up in Eastern Europe, they will react with fortifying their Western borders and increasing the number of Russian troops stationed in Belarus.

Thats hilarious.

[Jinwoy]

According to the article, Russia's Defense Minister said that should American equipment end up in Eastern Europe, they will react with fortifying their Western borders and increasing the number of Russian troops stationed in Belarus.

Thats hilarious.

How is this funny? at all?

[The balkens]

Thats hilarious.

How is this funny? at all?

Because they aint doing shit otherwise.

[Jinwoy]

How is this funny? at all?

Because they aint doing shit otherwise.

[Estruia]

According to the article, Russia's Defense Minister said that should American equipment end up in Eastern Europe, they will react with fortifying their Western borders and increasing the number of Russian troops stationed in Belarus.

Lukashenko allows Russian soldiers in Belarus?

""Our hands are completely free to organize retaliatory steps to strengthen our Western frontiers," Yakubov added, specifically mentioning the possibility of beefing up Russian forces in Belarus, and hurrying the deployment of Iskander missiles to Kaliningrad."

According to this, yes. One can assume that given the wording, there are already Russian forces in Belarus.

[Shofercia]

Actually, he was being sarcastic. Pinky and the Brain reference.

How can you tell?

I think it was the theme song of Pinky and the Brain, about then taking over the World. That, and I know that WRA is a reasonable poster, so I doubt he'd think that Russia's out to conquer the World.

A quick perusal through the posts shows that I didn't call a single post of yours an "original post". You're welcome to source me calling something an "original post", but you won't find anything, since now you're just making shit up. When you previously stated, "When you claimed that you were quoting my original post," that was a lie that you made up about me, since I never claimed to be quoting your original post. I would've caught that earlier, if I was on the lookout for you making up lies about me. Now I am on said lookout.

You might want to look a bit harder then.

Yes, the Sunday you shifted goal posts, or what you call, "making [your] stance perfectly clear." The term "failed" was absent from your original statement.

The term failed was not absent from my original statement. So either you didn't re-read my post, in which case you made a claim without even trying to check if that was true, or you did re-read my post in which case the quote history within that post would indicate that it wasn't original in the slightest but you decided to lie about it anyway to pretend that I was changing my position after the fact.

That says "statement". Not "post". If you cannot even grasp that a statement is not a post, then you are worthless to debate with.

Odd, I didn't see you mocking your own "knowledge" of Georgia's divisiveness. I guess you could let something that ridiculous pass, as long as it was you that made that statement.

Why would I mock that? I'm genuinely glad you pointed it out - "Georgians were almost entirely united in opposition to the old government" is so much better a way to illustrate the fact that Georgia then is nothing like Macedonia now than "Georgians were highly divided." If you can think of any other way to improve my argument at the expense of yours don't hesitate to share it.

Except I used those two as examples, not comparisons, so it really didn't add jack shit to your argument; it simply pointed out that you had no idea what you were talking about when you brought up Georgia.

Part of the reason that the people turned on Shevardnadze and later Saakashvili, was poor economic management and Macedonia had an uptick in unemployment recently.

I don't know if you've seen the Q2 2015 unemployment numbers but the Q1 2015 statistics seem to be the latest official publication and they show unemployment at its lowest level since 1993.

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/macedonia/unemployment-rate

Furthermore, the World Bank forecasts Macedonia to be the fastest growing economy in SE Europe this year.

http://kurir.mk/en/?p=41201

Which is a far cry from the economic problems that lead to changes of government in Georgia.

And those are? Oh, I know what they are, I'm just curious as to how much more ignorance you'll show regarding Georgia.

No, that's an idiotic assumption on your part that assumes that just because shit happened a certain way in the previous elections, it'll happen the same way in these elections, because the pro-government rallies are bigger than the pro-opposition rallies.

My assumption is that the most popular party lead by the most popular party leader will win the next election. I'm sorry that this assumption confuses you so but please, feel free to actually present an argument to the contrary.

That assumption doesn't confuse me, so unless you want to average a lie per post, you can stop that bullshit. It's just that, you see, there's this place called Latvia, where the most popular party led by the most popular leader just happens to be in opposition. That means that they're not in power.

Lukashenko allows Russian soldiers in Belarus?

""Our hands are completely free to organize retaliatory steps to strengthen our Western frontiers," Yakubov added, specifically mentioning the possibility of beefing up Russian forces in Belarus, and hurrying the deployment of Iskander missiles to Kaliningrad."

According to this, yes. One can assume that given the wording, there are already Russian forces in Belarus.

Russia and Belarus are cooperating in the field of anti-aircraft batteries. In order for Russian soldiers to operate anti-aircraft batteries in Belarus, Russian soldiers would have to be present in Belarus.

[Shofercia]

Anyways, Yats has done it again. He's now the official record holding idiot, excuse me, leader, of the lowest approval rating ever recorded: http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2 ... -Free-Pass

Inflation in Ukraine now hovers at 60 percent—and higher for many foodstuffs. Citing a locally conducted poll last week, Bloomberg News put Poroshenko’s popularity at 13 percent. For Arseniy Yatsenyuk, the prime minister carrying the ball on the austerity program, it is 1.6 percent. This is not a stable situation.

That rather excellent article explains why the IMF is doing the wonky-wonky dance:

Until a few days ago, the Greek and Ukrainian debt crises looked like twins: Two sovereigns with immense debts, creditors at their throats, looming deadlines, and deep fiscal and economic problems. One of the biggest guns among the creditors is that toughest of taskmasters, the International Monetary Fund. As of last week Greece and Ukraine look like mirror images. And it’s not a pretty reflection. In the Greek case, I.M.F. negotiators abruptly broke off talks Thursday with the Tsipras government in Athens, accusing it of failing to make a meaningful commitment to meeting the fund’s famously austere conditions for debt relief, notably the targets for budget surpluses.

No succor for the long-suffering Greeks unless Alexis Tsipras, their anti-austerity prime minister, does things our way: This is the fund’s message. With the collapse of last-ditch talks Sunday, Greece now teeters at the edge of a calamitous default and an exit from the European currency union. The next day, Christine Lagarde published an open letter to Ukraine’s creditors. In it, the I.M.F.’s managing director castigated investors holding Ukrainian debt for not offering the Poroshenko government in Kiev the kind of debt relief the fund says Athens must not have. Astonishingly enough, Lagarde committed the fund to ladling out its $17.5 billion bailout even if Kiev defaults on its debt, as Finance Minister Natalie Jaresko now threatens. “The I.M.F., in general, encourages voluntary pre-emptive agreements in debt restructurings,” Lagarde’s letter said, “but in the event that a negotiated settlement with private creditors is not reached and the country determines that it cannot service its debt, the fund can lend to Ukraine consistent with its Lending-into-Arrears Policy.”

The schedules pressing on these two crises are now critical. Of Ukraine’s $70 billion in sovereign debt, $23 billion must be either paid or restructured this month. Greece has payments of $23 billion due this year; this month it owes the I.M.F. $1.8 billion and private lenders $1.7 billion. One seriously doubts Lagarde and her colleagues celebrate this weird coincidence, given the very unflattering light it casts. In 40 years of I.M.F.-watching, I’ve never seen it behave in so nakedly political a fashion. Take this as a tale of two debtors and there’s no shred of virtue in the fund’s part in it.

Of course what's even more hilarious is that Russia and Greece can now build a coalition to get that sweet, sweet 20% veto power, to deny Ukraine loans, unless Greece gets them too. It's only fair. Lagarde's a phenomenal hypocrite. If only this was predicted, by, say, Forbes, in say, February of 2014?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2 ... -for-ruin/

Ukraine’s interim prime minister, Arseniy “Yats” Yatsenyuk, may prove to be arsenic to the beleaguered nation. “Recall the phone exchange between the Ukraine ambassador and Victoria Nuland (Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs) that got leaked out, where she basically said ‘we want Yats in there.’ They like him because he’s pro Western,” says Vladimir Signorelli, president of boutique investment research firm Bretton Woods Research LLC in New Jersey. “Yatsenyuk is the the kind of technocrat you want if you want austerity, with the veneer of professionalism,” Signorelli said. “He’s the type of guy who can hobnob with the European elite. A Mario Monti type: unelected and willing to do the IMFs bidding,” he said... “Yatsenyuk was saying that what the Greeks did to themselves we are going to do ourselves,” said Signorelli. “He wants to follow the Greek economic model. Who the hell wants to follow that?” Also today, Yatsenyuk promised to implement “very unpopular measures” to stabilize the country’s finances. The government said it needs $35 billion to support the country over the next two years. His language in a news report broadcast by Bloomberg today indicates he is heading toward a potentially destabilizing austerity campaign...

Ahh yes, the Greek Model... http://sputniknews.com/politics/2015061 ... 52999.html

Ukrainian leadership, including the president and prime minister, has failed to change the course of the nation for the better: the country is plagued by deep financial and economic troubles, ravaged by an ongoing war, pulled back by widespread corruption and the lack of meaningful reforms. Yet the people who promised to tackle these major challenges but failed to deliver on their promises remain in power. For the majority of Ukrainians war is the worst time to change those in charge, said Telepolis, a German Internet magazine. "Above all the war in eastern Ukraine is an important stabilizing factor for the current government," the media outlet added.

In other words, to remain in power they need to flare the flames of war in eastern Ukraine. But few are willing to fight for Kiev there, Telepolis said. According to the magazine, there is no one, who could replace Poroshenko or Yatsenyuk. Yet the latter has managed to dash the hopes of almost everyone since the February 2014 coup which brought him to power. "Ukrainians are not satisfied with the work of current Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk. Both Ukrainians and the governments in the West viewed him as an ideal candidate at the time of an economic crisis, but in the end almost everyone is disappointed in Yatsenyuk," Telepolis explained. Generally speaking, "hardly anyone is satisfied with the unsuccessful policies [of the current authorities]," the media outlet said, adding that the Yatsenyuk government has completely failed in some areas, for instance with regard to tax reform...

Hence the 1.6% approval rating. No wonder Yanukovich had to be ousted violently. It's all in the name of Democracy and Human Rights folks! If the pro-US leader fails to win a Democratic election, it's totally legit to oust the guy who did, or at the very least, support said ouster. Silly folks, what don't you understand about Democracy? Remember the Iraqi Version?

[Mister B]

You might want to look a bit harder then.



The term failed was not absent from my original statement. So either you didn't re-read my post, in which case you made a claim without even trying to check if that was true, or you did re-read my post in which case the quote history within that post would indicate that it wasn't original in the slightest but you decided to lie about it anyway to pretend that I was changing my position after the fact.

That says "statement". Not "post". If you cannot even grasp that a statement is not a post, then you are worthless to debate with.

Pointless semantics. In this thread, my statements and posts are the same thing. This is both my original post and my original statement on the matter of the Macedonian government becoming hostile to the US after an attempt to topple it, in which the world "failed" is quite clearly used. If you think in this instance that the words "post" and "statement" are not synonymous please explain to me how a statement I made hours after the one I linked to is my "original" statement, as you have claimed.

Why would I mock that? I'm genuinely glad you pointed it out - "Georgians were almost entirely united in opposition to the old government" is so much better a way to illustrate the fact that Georgia then is nothing like Macedonia now than "Georgians were highly divided." If you can think of any other way to improve my argument at the expense of yours don't hesitate to share it.

Except I used those two as examples, not comparisons, so it really didn't add jack shit to your argument; it simply pointed out that you had no idea what you were talking about when you brought up Georgia.

You did make a comparison. You compared Georgia at the time of the Rose revolution to Macedonia now and claimed that because in the former the people didn't get pissed off at the US for helping to get rid of the old government that Macedonia would be the same, completely ignoring the fact that the old Georgian government was incredibly unpopular and that the current Maceodnian government is more popular than any other political group in the country. If you can't see why people would react differently to getting rid of one of the least popular leaders versus getting rid of the most popular leaders then you are beyond help.

I don't know if you've seen the Q2 2015 unemployment numbers but the Q1 2015 statistics seem to be the latest official publication and they show unemployment at its lowest level since 1993.

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/macedonia/unemployment-rate

Furthermore, the World Bank forecasts Macedonia to be the fastest growing economy in SE Europe this year.

http://kurir.mk/en/?p=41201

Which is a far cry from the economic problems that lead to changes of government in Georgia.

And those are? Oh, I know what they are, I'm just curious as to how much more ignorance you'll show regarding Georgia.

I'm pretty sure you already described it - "Part of the reason that the people turned on Shevardnadze and later Saakashvili, was poor economic management". I'm contrasting that with Macedonia which has the lowest unemployment in its independent history and the fastest economic grwoth in the region. Why you would try and draw a line between that and the economic mismanagement of Shevardnadze and Saakashvili I can't fathom.

My assumption is that the most popular party lead by the most popular party leader will win the next election. I'm sorry that this assumption confuses you so but please, feel free to actually present an argument to the contrary.

That assumption doesn't confuse me, so unless you want to average a lie per post, you can stop that bullshit. It's just that, you see, there's this place called Latvia, where the most popular party led by the most popular leader just happens to be in opposition. That means that they're not in power.

That's odd, I could have sworn I was talking about Macedonia and not Latvia. Macedonia being the country where the current government is three and a half times as popular as the leading opposition party, where the prime minister is six times as popular as his rival, rather than Latvia where at the last election the most popular party won only 1.1% more votes thn the next most popular party and only just over half a much as the second and third parties combined. You've really got a thing for making meaningless comparisons between Macedonia and other countries, haven't you?

[West Aurelia]

Vice tracked down a Russian soldier who was in Ukraine.

[Griffonian Order]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/rus ... story.html

This, is the funniest moment of Present-day; but my arsenal of nukes needs to be bigger then yours, while america throws more equipment into Europe(They have the right to, with russia destabilizing the region).

All I have to say is,

[West Aurelia]

A Russian reporter was kidnapped, beaten, and interrogated by DPR rebels.

[Bengazia]

Despite Belarusians having its own language most of them believe they are just a subgroup of the Russian ethnos. As such Belarusians would not mind if Russia annex them.

[The balkens]

A Russian reporter was kidnapped, beaten, and interrogated by DPR rebels.

Probably was a spy for the ebil western facist Jews. *nods*

[Malgrave]

Russia threatens retaliation if the US stations heavy equipment in Eastern Europe.

With what?

science

[Geilinor]

With what?

science

That reminds me of debating Lyttenburgh.

[United Marxist Nations]

science

That reminds me of debating Lyttenburgh.

He barely debated anyone; most of his posts were updates on things, usually showing the incompetence of the Ukrainian government. I also don't seem to recall him caring that much about the MH17 downing. And, let's not forget that the Ukrainian government did know that the rebels were capable of downing a commercial airliner (from having lost their own planes) and never redirected civilian air-traffic around the area; it was reckless of them.

[United Marxist Nations]

A Russian reporter was kidnapped, beaten, and interrogated by DPR rebels.

Probably was a spy for the ebil western facist Jews. *nods*

Most of your posts seem to be unproductive satire of satirical opinions nobody really holds just to show how much you dislike Russia and their line in the Ukraine, without actually contributing much to the thread in any meaningful way. I mean, there is a difference between just giving your opinion, and giving it in a way that is deliberately meant to be a strawman that is irritating to the other side.

[Estruia]

That reminds me of debating Lyttenburgh.

He barely debated anyone; most of his posts were updates on things, usually showing the incompetence of the Ukrainian government. I also don't seem to recall him caring that much about the MH17 downing. And, let's not forget that the Ukrainian government did know that the rebels were capable of downing a commercial airliner (from having lost their own planes) and never redirected civilian air-traffic around the area; it was reckless of them.

Yes, because it's the Ukrainian Government's fault that the Rebels are heartless fucks who would intentionally shoot down a commercial airliner filled with innocent civilians. OBVIOUSLY, EVERYTHING IS KIEV'S FAULT!