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

[Respawn]

What I am saying is that the present and future status of the Russian economy is not relevant to the question of whether Russian actions in the current Ukrainian crisis are good or bad, justified or unjustified.

The sanctions and its impacts are a direct result of Russia's actions in Ukraine. The falling ruble is one such impact. How on earth isn't this relevant to the thread? What a bizarre assertion.

why are we talking about the Russian economy at all?"

Gee, I don't know, maybe it's starting to feel the effects of sanctions imposed on it due to Russia's actions in Ukraine.

I mean, what exactly is your argument here, anyway?

That the Ruble is falling? This is not an argument. It's fact.

What is your argument though? That I can't mention anything on how the Russian economy is faring in light of these UKRAINE RELATED sanctions because it somehow isn't related to the thread? Say what?

Or are you not trying to make an argument, and instead simply wish to gloat about any bad stuff - big or small - that happens to Russia?

At first, I never intended to make an argument. I just wanted to pass on information. I never expected anyone would deny simple facts or bizarrely accuse me of going off-topic. Whatever.

but if that's how you interpret it, then yeah smert moskalyam 14/88 heil bandera etc etc

Right, so that one vaguely-remembered poster saying that stuff a long time ago clearly means that everyone on the pro-Russian side is an antisemitic conspiracy theorist.

Before you said that "that none of us have claimed the existence of any conspiracies whatsoever". I just felt the need to correct you on this. No need to huff and puff here.

[Constantinopolis]

I call bullshit here. With genocide part. And cultural assimilation. Who, when and where ruled that USSR conducted the genocide? USA conducted genocide as part of their "Manifest destiny" (and British before them). Nazi's conducted genocide in accordance with "General plan OST" and "Final Solution". Their crimes are well documented and branded as such. Care to present me a real document, recognized internationally, that USSR had conducted the genocide?

Does "internationally recognized" translate to "admitted by Russia"? If not, you're probably familiar with the H-word by now.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor# ... nition.png

Among the countries recognizing the Holodomor as genocide are such "Russophobe" countries as Italy, Spain, Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, Peru and Ecuador.

Although Lyttenburg asked "Who, when and where ruled that USSR conducted the genocide?", the original issue was the claim that Russians - not Stalin personally, not the USSR government at some point in its history, not the Tsarist government or any other particular administration, but "Russia" as an abstract entity, meaning the Russian people - is somehow guilty of oppression and genocide against other peoples.

And that claim is bullshit.

Stalin is guilty of mass murder. Some of the Tsars are also guilty of mass murder. Various governments of various states based in Moscow are guilty of various types of oppression. But "Russia"-in-general, or "the Russians" as a people, are not guilty of anything.

Just like "America"-in-general isn't guilty of enforcing slavery or committing genocide against the Native Americans. Specific individuals and groups are guilty of that. If someone said "don't trust the Americans, remember what they did to the blacks!" the same way people say "don't trust the Russians, remember the Holodomor!" - or if someone blamed the present-day US for slavery in the same way people continually blame present-day Russia for the Holodomor - that would be (correctly) regarded as absurd, and xenophobically anti-American.

[Ainin]

I remember ya'll saying, on this thread or the Scottish independence one, that GDP/c was a good form to measure economic activity and local prosperity.

Of course it's a good way to measure economic activity. It's the very basic unit for measuring national wealth proportionally to the population.

It's definitely not a good way to measure local prosperity, unless someone wants to argue that Hong Kong is an egalitarian paradise where all are happy.

Unless that's changed, Russia still has a higher place on GDP/c than Ukraine

Yes. And nobody claims otherwise.

despite large swaths of Russian land being completely uninhabited and virtually useless.

You can say the same for Norway (4th), the US (6th), Canada (9th), Sweden (13th) and Iceland (14th). Population density has fuckall to do with it.

Sorry to say, Russia is worth more than the Ukraine despite sanctions.

Great. Congratulations for debunking the argument that nobody made.

[Baltenstein]

Does "internationally recognized" translate to "admitted by Russia"? If not, you're probably familiar with the H-word by now.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor# ... nition.png

Among the countries recognizing the Holodomor as genocide are such "Russophobe" countries as Italy, Spain, Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, Peru and Ecuador.

Although Lyttenburg asked "Who, when and where ruled that USSR conducted the genocide?", the original issue was the claim that Russians - not Stalin personally, not the USSR government at some point in its history, not the Tsarist government or any other particular administration, but "Russia" as an abstract entity, meaning the Russian people - is somehow guilty of oppression and genocide against other peoples.

And that claim is bullshit. Stalin is guilty of mass murder. Some of the Tsars are also guilty of mass murder. Various governments of various states based on Moscow are guilty of various types of oppression. But "Russia"-in-general, or "the Russians" as a people, are not guilty of anything.

This argument would be more valid if:

1.) The RSFSR, other than for a brief - very brief - period during Lenin's first years, hadn't been the most dominant state of the Soviet Union in all matters military, economic and political. Stalin being Georgian changes as little about the role Russia played inside the Soviet Union as do the facts that Hitler wasn't actually German and Napoleon wasn't actually French do about the roles Germany and France played in World War 2 and the Napoleonic Wars respectively.

2.) Modern Russia wouldn't constantly try to whitewash the Soviet Union's crimes and identify positively with it and its symbols on several occasions. This is something that you won't find on that level in any other post-Soviet republic, except maybe Belarus.

[Respawn]

Oh wow Respawn, I failed to realise that you live in Russia and can grasp the local economy and livelihoods of Soviet Russian citizens just by looking at the markets, and clamoring on about "well it must be worken! Exchange rates are bleeeeerrrrgh".
I didn't realise you had so much insight into the lives of ordinary Russians, and their economic health and prosperity (or lack thereof)

I made no mention about how this has impacted on the lives of ordinary Russian citizens. In fact, I specifically noted: "the impacts of the Ruble's collapse won't affect citizenry until much later on". If at all. So tell me, what was the point of this rant?

Like Ainin said. Congratulations for debunking the argument that nobody made. Top quality posting once again from Jinwoy.

[Lyttenburg]

I call bullshit here. With genocide part. And cultural assimilation. Who, when and where ruled that USSR conducted the genocide? USA conducted genocide as part of their "Manifest destiny" (and British before them). Nazi's conducted genocide in accordance with "General plan OST" and "Final Solution". Their crimes are well documented and branded as such. Care to present me a real document, recognized internationally, that USSR had conducted the genocide?

Does "internationally recognized" translate to "admitted by Russia"? If not, you're probably familiar with the H-word by now.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor# ... nition.png

Among the countries recognizing the Holodomor as genocide are such traditionally "Russophobe" countries as Italy, Spain, Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, Peru and Ecuador.

For the thousandth time. "Holodomor accusations" are like broken record by now.

tl;dr - no, Holodomor was not a "Genocide". Unless, you are also including people of other ethnicities who also died during that famine, the larges group being the Russians. Should in that case RF demand compensation from Georgia? Why not! This claim is equally unrealistic as any other.

The Armenian genocide was neither conducted by a Western country, nor is it a Western country today that is constantly denying it.

I admire the shamelessness of the Western double standards! When needed to be Turkey is "West's staunchest ally and one of the pillars of NATO". But if something... not nice... is involved, they are "not Westerners" - and forget about EU membership! YOu know who else denies the Armenian genocide? Azerbaidzhan. But it's okay - as long as the West can ude it against Russia, or get it's gas and oil, Azerbaidzhan is safe from reprecussions - despite the fact that that it's political model is oddly reminiscent of the one in Syria, or that it's civil right record is worse then Russia's. And, yet - they took part in Eurovision, even staged one. As for the rest - such beacons of democracy as US of A and GB still do not recognize it on the governmental level.

As for your other examples - neither the US nor Germany indulge on Russia's level of denying and playing down these historic crimes. Quite the opposite, in fact. Accusing Germany especially of trying to brush the Holocaust under the rug is beyond ridiculous.[/quote]

[Constantinopolis]

Although Lyttenburg asked "Who, when and where ruled that USSR conducted the genocide?", the original issue was the claim that Russians - not Stalin personally, not the USSR government at some point in its history, not the Tsarist government or any other particular administration, but "Russia" as an abstract entity, meaning the Russian people - is somehow guilty of oppression and genocide against other peoples.

And that claim is bullshit. Stalin is guilty of mass murder. Some of the Tsars are also guilty of mass murder. Various governments of various states based on Moscow are guilty of various types of oppression. But "Russia"-in-general, or "the Russians" as a people, are not guilty of anything.

This argument would be more valid if:

1.) The RSFSR, other than for a brief - very brief - period during Lenin's first years, hadn't been the most dominant state of the Soviet Union in all matters military, economic and political. Stalin being Georgian changes as little about the role Russia played inside the Soviet Union as do the facts that Hitler wasn't actually German and Napoleon wasn't actually French do about the roles Germany and France played in World War 2 and the Napoleonic Wars respectively.

And how many people blame present-day Germany or present-day France for the actions of Hitler and Napoleon? How many people regard every aggressive move by Japan with extreme paranoia as if they expect it to declare a new Greater Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere any day now? How many people talk about the restoration of the British Empire every time Britain sends troops to another country? A few people do, sure, but they are rightfully regarded as crazies.

Lots of countries have bloody histories, and many of them have never apologized and continue to glorify periods of their history when they were imperialist and/or oppressive, but, in Western popular opinion, Russia tends to get singled out for special treatment among these countries.

2.) Modern Russia wouldn't constantly try to whitewash the Soviet Union's crimes and identify positively with it and its symbols on several occasions. This is something that won't find on that level in any other post-Soviet republic, except maybe Belarus.

But you will find similar whitewashing of a bloody past in Turkey ("no Armenians were ever genocided here"), and in Mongolia ("long live glorious national hero Genghis Khan!"), and in Japan ("Comfort women? What comfort women?"), and of course in the United States (founded on life, liberty, and the pursuit of cotton profits from slaves happiness) and among the many West Europeans who still support their former colonial empires. And oh man, let's not even start talking about Israel/Palestine...

Countries whitewash their past. It's normal. Almost everyone does it. So, again, why single out Russia for special criticism?

The rare few countries that don't try to sweep past crimes under the rug (stay classy, Germany) should be singled out for special praise in this regard, but that's about it.

[Baltenstein]

tl;dr - no, Holodomor was not a "Genocide". Unless, you are also including people of other ethnicities who also died during that famine, the larges group being the Russians. Should in that case RF demand compensation from Georgia? Why not! This claim is equally unrealistic as any other.

Look up "genocide denial", please.
I wonder what your opinion on all those countries who officially recognize the Holodomor as genocide is - all part of anti-Russian conspiracy?

I admire the shamelessness of the Western double standards! When needed to be Turkey is "West's staunchest ally and one of the pillars of NATO". But if something... not nice... is involved, they are "not Westerners" - and forget about EU membership!

Yes, Turkey can be an integral part of NATO and not a Western country and not ready for EU membership at the same time. One is a mutual defense alliance, the other is a club of shared economic, political interests and democratic values.
That's also why, for example, Fascist dictatorships like Salazar's Portugal or Papadopoulos' Greece were members of NATO, but not of the EU. I don't see the problem, although I can see why somebody who thinks "West", "NATO", "EU", are completely synonomous in absolutely everything from shared values to foreign policies, does.

YOu know who else denies the Armenian genocide? Azerbaidzhan. But it's okay - as long as the West can ude it against Russia, or get it's gas and oil, Azerbaidzhan is safe from reprecussions - despite the fact that that it's political model is oddly reminiscent of the one in Syria, or that it's civil right record is worse then Russia's. And, yet - they took part in Eurovision, even staged one.

Are you honestly, HONESTLY arguing that the Eurovision song contest is a sign of counting as a Western democracy and being adored by the West?

As for the rest - such beacons of democracy as US of A and GB still do not recognize it on the governmental level.

As said above: The West is not one homogenous bloc - and the official stance of the US and GB is one thing (that you are totally free to condemn as hypocritical), the opinion of countless political movements, media, academics, human right groups that exist inside those countries and who very vocally DO recognize the Armenian genocide as genocide and are routinely lobbying and pressuring their governments to do so as well, is another.
In a healthy, pluralistic democracy, a country's population and civil society is never synonymous with its government and leaders, although you personally might think it is.

Lots of countries have bloody histories, and many of them have never apologized and continue to glorify periods of their history when they were imperialist and/or oppressive, but, in Western popular opinion, Russia tends to get singled out for special treatment among these countries.

Well, unlike those other countries, Russia is actively talking and doing "empire restoration". But yeah, other than that, every country who tries to whitewash its past imperial crimes should be - and gets - condemned for it, including Western ones.

But you will find similar whitewashing of a bloody past in Turkey ("no Armenians were ever genocided here"), and in Mongolia ("long live glorious national hero Genghis Khan!"), and in Japan ("Comfort women? What comfort women?"), and of course in the United States (founded on life, liberty, and the pursuit of cotton profits from slaves happiness) and among the many West Europeans who still support their former colonial empires.

Turkey gets internationally condemned and the EU has made it clear that they can forget any aspirations about membership if they don't recognize the Armenian genocide among other things.
Japan gets internationally condemned and receives major political flak from China and other East Asian nations.
Mongolia doesn't play any significant role on the global stage to be noticed, but of course their glorification of Mongol conquest should also be condemned. All the Westerners who try to praise their imperial past get flak both from inside their societies AND from abroad. As you said yourself, there is no British/French/other statesman who goes around openly saying "It's so sad that we lost our colonial empire, we should actively try to restore it" without anybody minding him.

[Costa Fierro]

You really think that situation both in the Ukraine and around Ukraine won't drastically change in 1 year, so, quite probably, no one would be interested about this treaty anymore?

Why should it? Ukraine becomes a proper federal state, peace deal is signed, people return to normal lives as best as they can. What makes you think it will change?

Stop lying.

Why would I lie to you?

Poroshenko became president 4 months ago. These were his promises during the elections, which he reiterated just after his inauguration. He launched an all out attack on Novorossiya - which resulted in massive losses of civilian lives.

There was already heavy fighting and yes, there will be civilian casualties. But massive? No. I'd imagine there would have been an increase of a few hundred as what can be expected fighting from village to village.

The fact that Rada is not working on bill about the status of Russian language (even after it was stressed agains as part of peace-talks) says they don't care about the government. The fact that Government don't work on it either, speaks that it just gives an empty promises.

The peace talks are still under negotiation. You can't draw up a peace deal halfway through and claim it's done and dusted. The language will be included in a final peace deal when it is finished.

Not yet. But it is de-facto independent, even in Pridniestrovye kind. This doesn't cancel the fact that government is doing absolutely nothing.

Aside from scoring a number of military successes and discussing a peace process. That doesn't seem like "nothing".

So? Crimeans think otherwise - and this is the only opinion which should be respected.

Was it respected the first time around? We only got to see the vocal pro-Russian movement, not those who opposed the vote or annexation.

So I ask again - DID he return Crimea?

Are you saying a President is expected to deliver every single promise he made in four months? High expectations.

a) Gas supply was cut off due to debts. Try not paying your local gus supplier and see what happened.

They were cut off in a petty act by the Russian government.

b) "Blah-blah, Invasions... blah-blah - annexation". It's is really tiresome mantras - change the record please.

Why? Are you uncomfortable about discussing it? You tend to roll out "America did this, America did that" when it comes to international law violations so why not Russia?

Russian military protected Crimea from what is happening right now in Donbas - war.

Crimea was never under threat.

Crimea reunited with Russia.

Annexed. The word you are looking for is "annexed".

End of the story. No amount of whining and "but it is illeagal!" would change the fact that Crimea is now part of Russia.

Illegally part of Russia. I'm going to keep repeating it until you accept that the invasion and annexation is illegal.

c) "Thousands of tons of military equipment"? Could you support such ballsy claim?

You make it so easy.

The fact reamain - Poroshenko broke yet another of his election promises.

How?

Gee - such insight of Russian politics! That is totally wrong - but this is not surprising, coming from you! Putin "poisons" smb? How can you argue with a person, who views Russia via overused tropes, myths, legends and stereotypes?

Same way how one can argue with someone whom refers to people they disagree with as "Rusophobes".

Could you provide me an example of a Russian oligarch exercising his "rule over entire country"?

Because that is totally what I claimed. I said Russia is ruled by ogilarchs, of which billionaires and rich politicians such as your beloved Putin make up the ogilarchy that is Russia.

Bottom line - you are incapable of admitting that you are wrong, and just like to dis Russia. Again - no surprise here.

Because I'm totes a Russophobe /sarcasm

... blah-blah - still better then Ukraine and improving.

Congratulations on being better than the Ukraine. A country that is undergoing a civil war.

Very simplistic way of painting things.

Because Russia is a very simple country. You have the two first world cities, which are Moscow and St Petersburg and you have the rest of Russia. Which is third world.

Have you been in Chelyabinsk, Kazan, Ekaterinburgh, Perm, Kransnoyarsk? All cities away from Moscow and St. Pete. I've been here in the last years. And I didn't felt that I'm in some sort of "backward province".

Because it's probably normal to you. You've spent your entire life growing up in a dysfunctional country bordering on being third world. What is normal for you and what is normal for me are two entirely different things.

Even here, in Moscow's oblasts' rayon's cities and towns I can't say that things in regards with pensions or healthcare are much different then in Moscow itself.

Moscow has more money to spend on healthcare and pensions than other oblasts and cities. Hence why the quality of care would be different. You have better quality hospitals, emergency services etc. The others don't.

No - they protected all non-Moldavians.

Which were ethnic Russians. Seriously, you go on about me not admitting things.

They intervened to protect Russian populations. Again, thank you for proving my point.

You are doing this deliberately, right? Calling Abkhazs "Russian population"? Say, Costa, how can you be treated seriously after that?

Au countraire, but knowing this requires studding the situation in the Ukraine, and not just repeating Kiev's official propaganda re-printed by the Independent and Free Western Media.

And the situation in the Ukraine isn't that different from the situation in Moldova 20 years ago. Ethnic Russians are "under threat" (usually perceived rather than physical) so Moscow is compelled to intervene to make sure that said Russians are not "genocided".

Let's compare the two, shall we?

Were Russians under threat in Moldova? Tick.
Were Russians under threat in Ukraine? Tick.

Were the threats in Moldova perceived rather than physical? Tick.
Were the threats in Ukraine perceived rather than physical? Tick.

Did Russia intervene in Moldova to protect ethnic Russians from said threats? Tick.
Did Russia intervene in Moldova to protect ethnic Russians from said threats? Tick.

Clearly this knowledge isn't as profound as you claim it is.

Calling that Ukraine was not an integral part of the USSR, but "oppressed state" is a bullshit.

All peoples were oppressed in the USSR. Equal opportunities discrimination by equal opportunities ogilarchs.

If it was so oppressed by a chunk of land that Lenin gave them (you know - "Novorossiya"), by schools, universities, libraries, museums, fabrics. bridges, roads, harbors, airports, trainstations, buildings that people from all Soviet Union built in UkSSR for UkSSR - why not destroying them, the "true symbols of Soviet oppression"?

Because a railway station is not something that symbolizes oppression. Statues do that. Iraqis didn't burn down all the buildings built by the government under Saddam's regime (the Americans did it for them) but they tore down many of his statues and posters because they were symbols of his regime and they wished to rid themselves from his presence.

The same thing can be said with statues of Lenin and other Soviet leaders. Ukraine suffered terribly in the early part of the USSR's existence and many Ukrainians see statues of Lenin and co. as reminders of that horrible past.

Because Russian liberals are not calling for peace - they are openly cheering for the Ukraine and call for Russia's capitulation before West's and Ukrainian demands - and to hell all those Donbas people, fighting for their independence!

Sure. Because calling for Russia to end it's aid to the rebels and condemning Russia's actions in Crimea is a sign of weakness.

That's why in Russia "liberal" is a swear word.

How sad.

[United Marxist Nations]

Although Lyttenburg asked "Who, when and where ruled that USSR conducted the genocide?", the original issue was the claim that Russians - not Stalin personally, not the USSR government at some point in its history, not the Tsarist government or any other particular administration, but "Russia" as an abstract entity, meaning the Russian people - is somehow guilty of oppression and genocide against other peoples.

And that claim is bullshit. Stalin is guilty of mass murder. Some of the Tsars are also guilty of mass murder. Various governments of various states based on Moscow are guilty of various types of oppression. But "Russia"-in-general, or "the Russians" as a people, are not guilty of anything.

This argument would be more valid if:

1.) The RSFSR, other than for a brief - very brief - period during Lenin's first years, hadn't been the most dominant state of the Soviet Union in all matters military, economic and political. Stalin being Georgian changes as little about the role Russia played inside the Soviet Union as do the facts that Hitler wasn't actually German and Napoleon wasn't actually French do about the roles Germany and France played in World War 2 and the Napoleonic Wars respectively.

2.) Modern Russia wouldn't constantly try to whitewash the Soviet Union's crimes and identify positively with it and its symbols on several occasions. This is something that you won't find on that level in any other post-Soviet republic, except maybe Belarus.

2)The people of the Soviet Republics might disagree, as many of them have a great deal of USSR nostalgia (in East Germany, this is called "Ostalgie"), and not without reason, the USSR was much more stable than the Russian Federation financially speaking. I'm sure they would agree that things should have been done differently, but most probably think the USSR was more good than bad.

Also, with regard to the Lenin statue (at least the one in Kiev), most Ukrainians didn't think it should be torn down; I'm sure there were various reasons, some probably supported the USSR (or at least Lenin), others probably thought it was good to have that reminder.

Most residents of Kiev (69%) had a negative attitude to the removal of Lenin’s monument during the mass protest actions, while 13% had a positive attitude and 15% remained indifferent.[13] - wiki

[Jinwoy]

This argument would be more valid if:

1.) The RSFSR, other than for a brief - very brief - period during Lenin's first years, hadn't been the most dominant state of the Soviet Union in all matters military, economic and political. Stalin being Georgian changes as little about the role Russia played inside the Soviet Union as do the facts that Hitler wasn't actually German and Napoleon wasn't actually French do about the roles Germany and France played in World War 2 and the Napoleonic Wars respectively.

2.) Modern Russia wouldn't constantly try to whitewash the Soviet Union's crimes and identify positively with it and its symbols on several occasions. This is something that you won't find on that level in any other post-Soviet republic, except maybe Belarus.

2)The people of the Soviet Republics might disagree, as many of them have a great deal of USSR nostalgia (in East Germany, this is called "Ostalgie"), and not without reason, the USSR was much more stable than the Russian Federation financially speaking. I'm sure they would agree that things should have been done differently, but most probably think the USSR was more good than bad.

Not that I'm hating on you or anything, but RT posted a poll that showed that if you older and less educated, you were more likely to feel nostalgia for the soviet union.

[United Marxist Nations]

2)The people of the Soviet Republics might disagree, as many of them have a great deal of USSR nostalgia (in East Germany, this is called "Ostalgie"), and not without reason, the USSR was much more stable than the Russian Federation financially speaking. I'm sure they would agree that things should have been done differently, but most probably think the USSR was more good than bad.

Not that I'm hating on you or anything, but RT posted a poll that showed that if you older and less educated, you were more likely to feel nostalgia for the soviet union.

Which could also be taken to mean that people who are less educated have nostalgia for it because they had an easier time making a living.

[Laerod]

2)The people of the Soviet Republics might disagree, as many of them have a great deal of USSR nostalgia (in East Germany, this is called "Ostalgie"), and not without reason, the USSR was much more stable than the Russian Federation financially speaking. I'm sure they would agree that things should have been done differently, but most probably think the USSR was more good than bad.

Oh bullshit. Ostalgie may be widespread but those that genuinely whitewash the GDR's crimes are in a minority. There's a major difference between geeking out on Pittiplatsch and pretending that there was no such thing as an order to shoot anyone trying to flee that prison of a country.

[United Marxist Nations]

2)The people of the Soviet Republics might disagree, as many of them have a great deal of USSR nostalgia (in East Germany, this is called "Ostalgie"), and not without reason, the USSR was much more stable than the Russian Federation financially speaking. I'm sure they would agree that things should have been done differently, but most probably think the USSR was more good than bad.

Oh bullshit. Ostalgie may be widespread but those that genuinely whitewash the GDR's crimes are in a minority. There's a major difference between geeking out on Pittiplatsch and pretending that there was no such thing as an order to shoot anyone trying to flee that prison of a country.

I said that they acknowledge the bad, but think the good outweighed the bad; this is true even in East Germany (though I was referring more to the former USSR).

http://www.spiegel.de/international/ger ... 34122.html

I personally think the title of this article is misleading, but the information in the article is true, even if it is misinterpreted in the title.

[Laerod]

Oh bullshit. Ostalgie may be widespread but those that genuinely whitewash the GDR's crimes are in a minority. There's a major difference between geeking out on Pittiplatsch and pretending that there was no such thing as an order to shoot anyone trying to flee that prison of a country.

I said that they acknowledge the bad, but think the good outweighed the bad; this is true even in East Germany (though I was referring more to the former USSR).

http://www.spiegel.de/international/ger ... 34122.html

I personally think the title of this article is misleading, but the information in the article is true, even if it is misinterpreted in the title.

The article is a tad misleading. Having a more positive image than negative is not the same as whitewashing GDR wetwork.

[United Marxist Nations]

I said that they acknowledge the bad, but think the good outweighed the bad; this is true even in East Germany (though I was referring more to the former USSR).

http://www.spiegel.de/international/ger ... 34122.html

I personally think the title of this article is misleading, but the information in the article is true, even if it is misinterpreted in the title.

The article is a tad misleading. Having a more positive image than negative is not the same as whitewashing GDR wetwork.

Which is what I said in the first place.

[Occupied Deutschland]

How dare those damn upstarts in Ukraine and Eastern Europe not grovel at the mighty penis of the Russian Federation. Their rule brought such wondrous infrastructure alongside the secret police, gulags, massacres and political repression so it was OK.

Ok, here's a question for you: Was the westward expansion of the United States a good thing or a bad thing? Because, you know, the United States is literally built on the "yes we committed genocide and other horrible stuff, but we also brought economic development and prosperity so that makes it ok" trope.

And on this very forum there is a thread where many people are arguing that the British Empire was a good thing for the exact same reasons.

So, just to be clear, do you take a principled stand against all imperialism and all arguments of the type "yes we oppressed the natives but we also gave them modern industry", or do you just oppose it when Russians say it?

I actually do condemn the westward expansion of the US, as well as the British Empire on the same grounds.

The difference, of course, is that those actions and empires (including France's, which held on the longest and had some of the most blatant actions that few mention) are, literally and figuratively, history.

The attitude I was criticizing is cropping up TODAY in pro-Russian arguments concerning Crimea, East Ukraine, Abkhazia and South Ossettia. It is the spiritual successor of British people in the fifties deriding India because THEY had, after all, been the ones to build the country's infrastructure.

Eastern Europe (including Ukraine), Georgia, and other former Soviet satellite states are very much undergoing a reformation from colonial states to independent ones. In cases such as Poland and the Czech Republic, Slovakia and the like, that process is largely finished. In the Baltic states and Ukraine, it is ongoing. Hell, until recently it seemed Ukraine could even make that transition without any large-scale anti-Russian sentiment as it attempted to walk a middle-road policy between the EU and Russian Federation.

Of course, that possibility got slammed shut rather finally by Russian imperialism aimed at keeping Ukraine in their 'sphere of influence' (IE: maintaining control of its foreign policy ala the British Empire).

Also, will you stop confusing the Soviet Union with the Russian Federation? The Soviet Union wasn't some kind of ethnic Russian empire, it was a multi-ethnic state, with non-Russians playing a vastly more important role in its government than non-British people ever played in the British Empire, or than non-Anglo-Saxons ever played in the US government. Yes, the USSR was dominated by Russians, but to a far lesser extent than Western empires were dominated by their respective ruling ethnic groups. In fact, non-Russian minorities were vastly overrepresented in the Soviet government before Stalin took power, and even after Stalin's rise and the beginning of his terrible political repression, there was still the fact that all this repression was being ordered by an ethnic Georgian dictator.

So quit it with the "eebul oppressive Ruskies" crap. There is no evidence that Russians, as an ethnic group, committed a disproportionate share of the repression that has been such a charming feature of Eastern European life for the past 150 years. Every large and medium-sized ethnic group in the region is guilty of committing various atrocities against the others at some point in recent history.

I can assure you quite easily I do not confuse 'Russia' with the USSR.
Of course, I'm also not a blinking idiot. Russia was the top-dog player in the USSR, hence why Russification REMAINED A POLICY, background or overt, throughout the existence of the USSR. Not to mention Stalin, the great non-Russian example of a Soviet leader, was about as Russian as a non-Russian could get, hence why his reign reversed Lenin's more multinational ideas for the USSR and turned more towards a unified nation of various groups with Russians specifically called out as senior members (I forget where to find it, and admit it may be anecdotal and even untrue, but Stalin supposedly raised a toast at the end of the war to the Soviet Union but specifically to the Russian people who had been the leading force behind the Union's war effort).

This is a natural consequence, to some extent, of a land-based empire wherein one group was the predominant participant, held the capital city, and was generally considered the cultural 'center' of the country. So no, I'm not going to pretend that Russia was just some small constituent part of the USSR. Not when, to state the horribly obvious, they started the damn thing in the first place.

Are exchange rates Zionist neo-Nazi western homosexual propaganda to you?

Fascist conspiracy, no doubt.

The homosexualist and liberalist dominated cabal that controls international exchange rates is trying to keep the Russian man down by the manipulation of international monetary markets.

The constant accusations that people who disagree with you are conspiracy theorists are getting tiresome too, given the fact that none of us have claimed the existence of any conspiracies whatsoever.

Except for those of 'you' who have.
The most grand and obvious example being the Russian government and media itself (Those aren't Russian soldiers in Crimea! MH17 was shot down by a plane basically incapable of doing so! Satellite photographs of Russian military equipment entering Ukraine are from a video game! Blackwater mercenaries are in Ukraine! Snipers in Kyiv were double-agents of Pravy Sektor inciting violence! Etc.), but with their fair share from folks around here.
The first of those was a common sentiment expressed by a person in this thread, the second was also pushed by another person. The last was pushed by a person in this thread's predecessor (or perhaps the one before that, there's been a lot of comments so it might have been in the first thread on this).

We also have constant allusion to the "free and fair Western media" in amusing quotation marks and similar such sentiments. Would you care to suggest what that's supposed to suggest if not Western media deliberately conspiring to make Russia look bad?

Refusing to consider facts in contravention of your opinion on a matter I can live with. It's understandable and I've seen it so much on NSG as to be immune. It's somewhat frustrating, but it's excusable. What's not acceptable and worthy only of mockery is the deliberate creation of and manipulation of facts and information to promote a mythos wherein one's 'side' is a valiant protector of all good, righteous and anti-nazi in the world and the other is a group of baby-eating neo-nazis seconds away from opening up camps aimed at exterminating Russians. Because it's a mythos so full of shit that it would embarrass a colon.

I'm not trying to pinpoint specific posters and say 'Dey's doin' wrong things!' here, merely contesting that there isn't an undercurrent of conspiracy claims attached to many pro-Russian arguments. It's suggested, outright or merely by allusion, that Poroshenko was installed by 'the West' and that's supposed to be taken on faith and conspiracy-building. It's suggested MH17 was actually shot down by a Ukrainian SU-25, and that's supposed to be taken on faith and conspiracy-building ('high impact holes in fuselage means it couldn't have been a SAM missile!' Uhh...No?). It's suggested that the snipers in Kyiv were Pravy Sektor agent-provocateurs, and that's supposed to be taken on faith and conspiracy-building. Meanwhile, whenever anything even vaguely requires a minor logical leap (Russian soldiers in Crimea, Russian military equipment crossing into Ukraine, Russian 'volunteers' and volunteers crossing into Ukraine, Russian PARATROOPERS in Ukraine, RUSSIANS themselves being involved in the initial spate of unrest in East Ukraine) even when it has photographic or video evidence, it is summarily dismissed.

Russia and pro-Russian argument demands the ebul West extend a broad benefit of the doubt to Russia and Russian actions or outright demands that the West not doubt Russian stories of events until enough evidence could be gathered to prove Russia's story bullshit in a court of law using strict scrutiny as some kind of standard (that very thing, it shall be noted, has cropped up in one of these threads as the demanded standard).
Which is, of course, creating a get-out-of-jail-free excuse since such evidence when gathered can THEN be excused as either more 'agent-provocateurs' from the ebul neo-nazis, other Ukrainian propaganda, or as 'local self-defense forces with weapons from the corner store merely impersonating Russian soldiers' or 'Russian paratroopers that got lost' or 'volunteers who are on vacation from the Russian military' or etc. etc..

[Geilinor]

Does "internationally recognized" translate to "admitted by Russia"? If not, you're probably familiar with the H-word by now.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor# ... nition.png

Among the countries recognizing the Holodomor as genocide are such "Russophobe" countries as Italy, Spain, Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, Peru and Ecuador.

Although Lyttenburg asked "Who, when and where ruled that USSR conducted the genocide?", the original issue was the claim that Russians - not Stalin personally, not the USSR government at some point in its history, not the Tsarist government or any other particular administration, but "Russia" as an abstract entity, meaning the Russian people - is somehow guilty of oppression and genocide against other peoples.

Russia doesn't mean "the Russian people", Russia means the Russian Federation, the successor state of the USSR of which the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic was a part.

[United Marxist Nations]

Although Lyttenburg asked "Who, when and where ruled that USSR conducted the genocide?", the original issue was the claim that Russians - not Stalin personally, not the USSR government at some point in its history, not the Tsarist government or any other particular administration, but "Russia" as an abstract entity, meaning the Russian people - is somehow guilty of oppression and genocide against other peoples.

Russia doesn't mean "the Russian people", Russia means the Russian Federation, the successor state of the USSR of which the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic was a part.

Could have just said the Successor state of the RSFSR, which would have been more accurate, since the RSFSR wasn't "a part" of the Russian Federation, actually the reverse, IIRC.

Also, OD, you're right about Marshal Stalin's toast, he did make that; he also once boasted that he had forgotten how to speak Georgian (which is funny because he spoke Russian so poorly).

[Constantinopolis]

I owe you a full reply, Occupied Deutschland, but for now my time is limited so I'll only address one point:

We also have constant allusion to the "free and fair Western media" in amusing quotation marks and similar such sentiments. Would you care to suggest what that's supposed to suggest if not Western media deliberately conspiring to make Russia look bad?

That is supposed to suggest that most Western media outlets and their reporters have an ingrained bias, same as media and reporters from other countries, which results in them making "their" side look good and the opposing side look bad, often without realizing that this is what they're doing.

They are not "conspiring" to make Russia look bad. The media is composed of people, who have the same cultural biases as the general populations of the countries they are from. And many people in the West honestly believe that the West (meaning, in most cases, their own particular country and its allies) are champions of good in the world and anyone standing against them must be either stupid, corrupt, evil, or some combination of these. Similar self-aggrandizing "patriotic" opinions are common among the general populations of most countries - especially former empires (and yes, that includes Russia). Reporters and media agencies, even ones that genuinely wish to stay objective, often default to this "our country good, our enemies bad" analysis of the situation. Not because they are actively trying to lie (unless they're Fox News, of course), but because "the West and its allies are the good guys" seems like objective truth to them, and they operate under that assumption when they decide which stories to investigate.

So a lot of Western reporters only go investigate wrong-doings by the anti-Western side, because they expect to find many of them, while failing to seriously investigate what the pro-Western side is doing, because hey, "they're the good guys", right? So we can trust them. They surely don't have any dark secrets for us to find. It would be a waste of time to investigate them. Especially when they have a war to fight.

It's not a conspiracy, it's just an understandable human tendency to believe what your country's allies are telling you and be suspicious only of their enemies.

There is no such thing as objectivity in media, even when the journalists themselves are trying to be objective, because you can't investigate and report everything. You're going to have to choose some things and not others. And those choices will be inevitably coloured by your personal beliefs about who the "good guys" and "bad guys" are. You will be suspicious of the "bad guys" and naive about the "good guys".

Only very few of the absolute best journalists in the world successfully avoid this.

[Lyttenburg]

Joke on Poroshenko resulted in invitation to join the ATO.

Correspondents who painted the fence of the residence of the Ukrainian President Poroshenko in yellow and blue colors of the Ukrainian flag, were sent to the war zone in the anti-terrorist operation in the Donbass. They have already have been handed over the draft board papers.

Journalists and activists of Evromaydan on the birthday of the President of the Ukraine Petro Poroshenko, painted the fence of his residence in the colors of Ukrainian flag and gave him a car tire and a box of chocolates from the confectionery factory Roshen, still owned by Poroshenko. Immediately after these comic action they've received summons for service in the area of ​​the ATO in Donbass. This is related by the "pundits" themselves, who came under the walls of the channel "112 Ukraine" to have a an impromtu press conference, according to news agency "112.UA".

"The whole story started when a group of activists on September 26 came to the walls of the place, where lives our President Poroshenko. Activists staged a performance there, painted in yellow and blue color the fence. Personally, I was there as a journalist who covered the event. What happened after: everyone, absolutely everyone who participated in this event, or was nearby or even on his own or news-company car, absolutely everyone received a message in different ways that tomorrow at 08:00 am each of these people should arrive in your recruitment office to be send to ATO. We believe it is done quite deliberately, that there is an order - to destroy all these people"- said the participant, journalist Alex Kutepov.

Meanwhile, Ukrainian Defense Minister Valeriy Geletey, commenting on the situation, said that no one in the Ukrainian military enlistment offices purposefully took anyone away, and getting summons by these people called a coincidence.

But it is Putin who is "bloody dictator" and "journalist killer". Oh, and, probably, he killed Bambi's mother. Posing shirtless.

And oligarch Poroshenko, who still owns his compnaies and fails miserably to fulfull his election promises (which he promised to fulfill in the matter of weeks) is the true hope for the Democratic and EU-aligned Ukraine. And the questions about conscriprion of Poroshenko's, Tymoshenko's, Yatsenyuk's or Yarema sons in the glorious Ukrainian Army are brushed away.

Цэ перемога!

[Laerod]

Russia doesn't mean "the Russian people", Russia means the Russian Federation, the successor state of the USSR of which the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic was a part.

Could have just said the Successor state of the RSFSR, which would have been more accurate, since the RSFSR wasn't "a part" of the Russian Federation, actually the reverse, IIRC.

If that's true then Russia can return the Security Council seat it's illegitimately occupying.

[Lyttenburg]

Why should it? Ukraine becomes a proper federal state, peace deal is signed, people return to normal lives as best as they can. What makes you think it will change?

I'm sorry, in what parallel dimension did "Ukraine becomes a proper federal state" (not even close, and Rada is not even working on that), "peace deal is signed" (still no, only the cease fire), "people return to normal lives as best as they can" (where?!)

Why would I lie to you?

Everything to confirm your "strong opinion"!

There was already heavy fighting and yes, there will be civilian casualties. But massive? No. I'd imagine there would have been an increase of a few hundred as what can be expected fighting from village to village.

Oh! I finally got it! Costa - you know absolutely nothing about the Ukraine! Only a totally ignorant person would claim that "Poroshenko's summer offensive" caused only "a few hundred" increase in losses. This, or being totally ideologically "reliable" comrade, totally beleiving the Free West's party line and ignore those pesky "facts".

The peace talks are still under negotiation. You can't draw up a peace deal halfway through and claim it's done and dusted. The language will be included in a final peace deal when it is finished.

Oh, and when did you became an insider in the dealing of Rada at such young age (and still living in your country)? Just another evidence that "you know nothing" about the Ukraine and it's inner dynamics, Costa Fierro.

Aside from scoring a number of military successes and discussing a peace process. That doesn't seem like "nothing".

Ukrainian military is demoralized. It is in very shitty shape. Just in one week time "assured victory" became a bitter defeat. And you again demonstrate your ignorance of the subject. Poroshenko talked about East's "special status" and "greater autonomy" since his election company. You attempts to defend him and his regime no matter what are ridiculous, due to your massive lack of knowledge.

When the current Kiev's regime launched an all-out attack on Novorossiay after all the fine words about "helping and understanding the East" while the only suggestion to the post war "order" from it's representatives was to institute the "filtration camps" (and not a word about the autonomy) this speaks volumes. But not for you, of course.

"It's not dead, it's resting!", right?

Was it respected the first time around? We only got to see the vocal pro-Russian movement, not those who opposed the vote or annexation.

Can't help - representative democracy in work! But if you want - c'mon, travel to Russian Крым. People here are hospitable. Surely, they will be helpful for your fact-finding. As for anti-Russian sentiments, even if they exist, still, it is the minority who exhibit them

Are you saying a President is expected to deliver every single promise he made in four months? High expectations.

I'm expecting said president to deliver just some of them. "Nothing" is Poroshenko's personal score so far.

They were cut off in a petty act by the Russian government.

Billions of dollars of debt are now "petty act"? Again - try not to pay for gas and see what comes. But, probably, your parents won't agree to entertain your curiosity in this regard. Didn't they teach you to pay your bills/taxes in the West?

Crimea was never under threat.

Bullshit. It was Poroshenko who got himself appointed by the couped in junta in February as un-elected governor of Crimea. Thankfully, "Polite Men in Green" were already at Sevastopol's airport to tell him (politely) to fly his jet away. All what is trasnpiring in the East now, all repressions carried out by oligarchs-governors in their "border fiefs" right now - what has been threatening the Crimea and its Russian majority.

Annexed. The word you are looking for is "annexed".

"Re-united" with their fellow people in Russia. I know, this sounds like getting your "gonades" cut with a sickle and then smashed with a hammer for Russophobes. That's why I won't refrain from this (correct) term.

Illegally part of Russia. I'm going to keep repeating it until you accept that the invasion and annexation is illegal.

You know, some smart bloke said that "insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results"

All the West (and some... opinionated westerners) can do is whine and not deny the reality.

"Няш-мяш - Крым наш!"

You make it so easy.

Srsly? Wikidorkia is the only thing you have?

Well, if we believe SUCH "sources", then I can safely claim that American mercenaries from "Academi" are fighting in the East, that CIA supplies the Ukrainian government with intelligence, that Baltic states and Poland served as a staging areas and situated training camps for anit-Russian mercenaries currently fighting in ATO, that sniper shooting in February (still not investigated) has been carried out by oligarch-paid bandits, to trigger the violent uprising and usurp the power in the Ukraine!

See? Anyone can play this game!

How?

Oh, I'm always forgetting that you nothing about the subject and only have a "strong opinion" as your ultimate weapon! What, you already forgot? Poroshenko promised to "improve relations with Russia". He, again, failed in that miserably.

There is quite a big chance, that you have never read Poroshenko's electoral promises, or his inaguratial speech, where he made all these (and many, many other's promises) and now is defending him and his regime basing only on my answers. In that case this is just... sad.

Because that is totally what I claimed. I said Russia is ruled by ogilarchs, of which billionaires and rich politicians such as your beloved Putin make up the ogilarchy that is Russia.

And still - no examples.

Слив засчитан.

Because I'm totes a Russophobe /sarcasm

Yes. No, really - you are Russophobe.

Congratulations on being better than the Ukraine. A country that is undergoing a civil war.

Russia has always managed to be better then the Ukraine. Even during the reigned by the beloved by the West Yushenko. And the war (especially this one), is a lousy excuse for country to remain so hopelessly corrupt and backward when its current leadership goes for a great length to promise the West reforms (and promising to carry out them right now). IS there a war in Kiev, Poltava, Lvov? No - it is not even feels like there is a war in these cities, people (and local authorities) work as if everything is normal. So what excuses they have?

Because Russia is a very simple country. You have the two first world cities, which are Moscow and St Petersburg and you have the rest of Russia. Which is third world.

and

Because it's probably normal to you. You've spent your entire life growing up in a dysfunctional country bordering on being third world. What is normal for you and what is normal for me are two entirely different things.

You know, Costa - you have an obvious edge here. You are a Russophobe, after all, so you are dissing countries you don't like and people living here without any fear of appearing as bigot or offending someone. You are self-righteous and totally believe that your opinion, your culture, way of life etc. are the onle "good" and "acceptable" ones.

I, OTOH, am not like you - this you managed to het right. We differ greatly, due to our upbringing, age, cultures etc. The thing is - I don't have "messianic complex", that is so widespread among the westerners. I do not consider my way of life the only true one and that it should be accepted universally.

Also, If I don't know something about another country I either refrain from making unsupported claims about it (e.g., about it being "second" or "third" world) do not trust clichés and tropes about it (I won't claim, for example, that "New Zealand is an insignificant puny weak country with no history whatsoever full of Kiwis and only good for filming LotR, Hobbit and Xena" 'cause I don't want to offend other New Zealanders and demonstrate my ignorance').

You, OTOH, are a real Russophobe, the one whom Bziezhinskiy, MacCain would consider as their own. You are ignorant and don't want to learn about Russia, instead repeating all possible clichés and still want to to be taken seriously by others. This way of thinking is superplus good, citizen! Be strong in your ignorance! "Blessed be the mind to small to doubt"! It looks like that there is nothing that would change your strong (as is often the case with teenagers) opinion. You still believe that knowing nothing about Russia and Ukraine you can effectively defend West’s newest "darlings" - new Kiev's regime. While this line of behavior is admirable in pet shop when you are dealing with the attempt to return the dead parrot, in reality it looks lame. And your next lines are confirming this:

Which were ethnic Russians. Seriously, you go on about me not admitting things.

After I pointed out that Russians defended all non-Moldavans in Priednistrovye. Look - even your favorite Wikidorkia is stating that Russians constitute 30.35% and the Ukrainians 28.81%. Or, what - for you Ukrainians = Russians? Please, don't tell that to the Right Sector activists personally - they would not understand you.

And the situation in the Ukraine isn't that different from the situation in Moldova 20 years ago. Ethnic Russians are "under threat" (usually perceived rather than physical) so Moscow is compelled to intervene to make sure that said Russians are not "genocided".

You fail your history. Again. Try again, Costa. Although, I have little hope in that. Let me just say that Russian army intervened only after several months of open warfare. Not "on the pretext of perceived threats". You just don't know how ridiculous you look.

All peoples were oppressed in the USSR. Equal opportunities discrimination by equal opportunities ogilarchs.

Were the middle-class Welshmen equally oppressed as the Indians in 1890s?

Because a railway station is not something that symbolizes oppression. Statues do that. Iraqis didn't burn down all the buildings built by the government under Saddam's regime (the Americans did it for them) but they tore down many of his statues and posters because they were symbols of his regime and they wished to rid themselves from his presence.

The same thing can be said with statues of Lenin and other Soviet leaders. Ukraine suffered terribly in the early part of the USSR's existence and many Ukrainians see statues of Lenin and co. as reminders of that horrible past.

A tad hypocrtical here, but for Westerner everything is okay, as it looks. You know, in Zaporoszhye there is still a Lenin's monument standing on the "Lenin's square", with "Lenin's street" going out from it to "Lenin's factory". What, people in Kiev and Kharkov were oppressed more then the people of Zaporozhye?

Sure. Because calling for Russia to end it's aid to the rebels and condemning Russia's actions in Crimea is a sign of weakness.

Calling for abandoning of people of Novorossiya to their very grim fate, for Returning of Crimea and for bowing to American demands is nothing other then calls for capitulation while the RF is now engaged in the conflict against the Western unipolar "NWO"

tl;dr

Costa! You are hopeless. There is no way you can see the light and change you position. You are 100% indoctrinated by the Western propaganda and, the saddest thing of all, your own country is not even a major player in this conflict - or even a significant "friend and ally" of the US of A, which would excuse such unashamed support for the Ukrainian regime. The rest of discussion would be just an exercise in phallometry and not a real dispute with any hope of reaching of consensus.

And that's all I can say to you, Costa

[drops the mic]

[Costa Fierro]

I'm sorry, in what parallel dimension did "Ukraine becomes a proper federal state" (not even close, and Rada is not even working on that), "peace deal is signed" (still no, only the cease fire), "people return to normal lives as best as they can" (where?!)

So what are these "massive changes" you are talking about?

Oh! I finally got it! Costa - you know absolutely nothing about the Ukraine!

I seem to have a better grasp of the conflict than someone who lives across the border. Ironic, isn't it?

Only a totally ignorant person would claim that "Poroshenko's summer offensive" caused only "a few hundred" increase in losses. This, or being totally ideologically "reliable" comrade, totally beleiving the Free West's party line and ignore those pesky "facts".

"Free West's party line". What would this party line be? Is it a conga line? Who is promoting it?

Oh, and when did you became an insider in the dealing of Rada at such young age (and still living in your country)?

What's wrong with living in NZ? Have you even left Russia?

Just another evidence that "you know nothing" about the Ukraine and it's inner dynamics, Costa Fierro.

You speak of these "inner dynamics". Is there something that you are not telling us, Lyt? Is there a deeper level beyond the ethnic conflict between Ukrainians and Russians? Is there some sort of conspiracy?

Ukrainian military is demoralized.

Says you.

It is in very shitty shape.

Says you.

Just in one week time "assured victory" became a bitter defeat.

"Bitter defeat" implies that Kiev is currently under Russian occupation. It is not. What the Russians have done is only succeeded in breaking the encirclement of Donetsk. That's it.

Poroshenko talked about East's "special status" and "greater autonomy" since his election company.

The special status is still under discussion.

When the current Kiev's regime launched an all-out attack on Novorossiay after all the fine words about "helping and understanding the East" while the only suggestion to the post war "order" from it's representatives was to institute the "filtration camps" (and not a word about the autonomy) this speaks volumes.

It does speak volumes about the bullshit the Russian media forces down the throats of ordinary Russians. No words about the all out attack by Russian forces? Or is that OK because it's saving precious Russian lives from those evil Nazis?

Can't help - representative democracy in work!

It's not a representative democracy. Representative democracies don't arbitrarily decide who can stand for parliament and who can not. Why don't you go and ask the communists in Crimea about this apparently representative democracy that they aren't a part of, hmm? Or are communists not worthy of being represented in parliament?

But if you want - c'mon, travel to Russian Крым. People here are hospitable. Surely, they will be helpful for your fact-finding. As for anti-Russian sentiments, even if they exist, still, it is the minority who exhibit them

You seem certain of this. But then again, a lot of things you seem certain about are bullshit so I'll take this with a bit of salt, if you don't mind.

I'm expecting said president to deliver just some of them. "Nothing" is Poroshenko's personal score so far.

Most of what he has promised is dependent on a final peace deal and the war ending. I thought someone who understood the "inner dynamics" of the conflict would understand that sorting out a political deal with regards to autonomy would be done once a peace deal was agreed upon.

Guess not.

Billions of dollars of debt are now "petty act"? Again - try not to pay for gas and see what comes. But, probably, your parents won't agree to entertain your curiosity in this regard. Didn't they teach you to pay your bills/taxes in the West?

They do. Most of our utilities companies, however, don't randomly shut off power.

Bullshit. It was Poroshenko who got himself appointed by the couped in junta in February as un-elected governor of Crimea.

Poroshenko was never governor of Crimea. The only coup took place was after the Russian invasion where the Council of Ministers was dissolved and a pro-Russian prime minister was installed. Poroshenko wasn't involved in any coup prior to his election.

Thankfully, "Polite Men in Green" were already at Sevastopol's airport to tell him (politely) to fly his jet away. All what is trasnpiring in the East now, all repressions carried out by oligarchs-governors in their "border fiefs" right now - what has been threatening the Crimea and its Russian majority.

The "Polite Men in Green" were the ones that forced the government out and replaced it with a pro-Russian one in the first place. That was the only coup that took place in Crimea post-Maidan. I'm not sure where you got your information from, but it is false.

"Re-united" with their fellow people in Russia.

Annexed.

You know, some smart bloke said that "insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results"

This explains a lot.

Srsly? Wikidorkia is the only thing you have?

You asked for evidence. I provided some.

Well, if we believe SUCH "sources", then I can safely claim that American mercenaries from "Academi" are fighting in the East,

Prove it then.

that CIA supplies the Ukrainian government with intelligence,

I wouldn't be surprised. They have the capabilities to do so. Although that depends on whether or not the CIA values Ukraine enough to send them said information.

that Baltic states and Poland served as a staging areas and situated training camps for anit-Russian mercenaries currently fighting in ATO,

I doubt it.

that sniper shooting in February (still not investigated) has been carried out by oligarch-paid bandits,

As opposed to police officers acting on orders from their superiors.

to trigger the violent uprising and usurp the power in the Ukraine!

Maidan was already undergoing violence before the shootings happened.

See? Anyone can play this game!

The difference is I have evidence to back up my statements. You haven't provided me with anything.

Poroshenko promised to "improve relations with Russia". He, again, failed in that miserably.

Do you expect him to improve relations with Russia immediately, even when they essentially invade Ukraine? If a bully is punching you in the playground, do you still say "let's be friends" when said bully is punching you?

Слив засчитан.

If you have something to share, say it so we can all understand.

Yes. No, really - you are Russophobe.

And why am I such? Is it because I disagree with you? Because I do not support Russia's actions?

Russia has always managed to be better then the Ukraine.

Because having more valuable resources is in no way related to Russia's economic growth whatsoever.

And the war (especially this one), is a lousy excuse for country to remain so hopelessly corrupt and backward

Because Russia is transparent and progressive with no corruption whatsoever?

You know, Costa - you have an obvious edge here.

I do come with a warning label. You may cut yourself occasionally on these edges.

You are a Russophobe, after all

Ooh, more ad hominems. So are you going to try to disprove what I am saying or are you just going to throw out your version of trollnaming?

So you are dissing countries you don't like

That isn't really limited to myself. But for the sake of the argument, yes I make disparaging remarks about the countries I do not like. What, should I only concentrate on the good things and not say anything about the bad? Should we only discuss the good things that Russia has left the world? What would they be? Reliable assault rifles? Alcoholic beverages? Fighter jets? Endlessly entertaining Youtube videos?

You seem to be comfortable dissing "the West" and referring to it as some sort of hivemind so the least I can do is return the serve.

and people living here without any fear of appearing as bigot or offending someone.

Why? The only time someone should modify their language is to fit within site rules. Everything else is self censorship and quite frankly, I really couldn't care less if someone calls me a bigot or your favorite word. If I seem prejudiced, fine. Everyone has prejudices. You're quite happy airing them to whoever bothers to devote their time replying to your posts so why seem so antsy if someone does it back to you? I'm not saying you shouldn't be defensive, but don't be so damned uptight about people saying things about Russia.

You are self-righteous and totally believe that your opinion, your culture, way of life etc. are the onle "good" and "acceptable" ones.

My opinion is my opinion. My culture is my culture (whatever culture I apparently have). My way of life is fine. I'm not saying it's the only good or acceptable one. What have you got against "the West" as a whole anyway?

I, OTOH, am not like you - this you managed to het right.

I don't think we're that different.

The thing is - I don't have "messianic complex", that is so widespread among the westerners.

And the Lord Jesus sayeth that this here assumption is totally false.

I do not consider my way of life the only true one and that it should be accepted universally.

That's fine. If you want to make the conscious decision to live in a world of prejudice and hate, that's totally OK.

Also, If I don't know something about another country I either refrain from making unsupported claims about it (e.g., about it being "second" or "third" world)

Yet apparently you claim everyone in the west has a "messiah complex".

do not trust clichés and tropes about it (I won't claim, for example, that "New Zealand is an insignificant puny weak country with no history whatsoever full of Kiwis and only good for filming LotR, Hobbit and Xena" 'cause I don't want to offend other New Zealanders and demonstrate my ignorance').

FYI, that's not actually offensive.

You, OTOH, are a real Russophobe,

Again, more ad hominems.

You are ignorant and don't want to learn about Russia

Oh, I'm not ignorant. I just say the things that ordinary Russians don't want to talk about. You know, "taboo subjects".

Not "on the pretext of perceived threats".

Aw, you believe that Moscow doesn't invade countries for no reason.

Were the middle-class Welshmen equally oppressed as the Indians in 1890s?

Perhaps. A lot were probably employed in very dangerous factories with little to no rights, very low wages, poor living conditions and made to do dangerous work. I'd call that a pretty shit deal.

A tad hypocrtical here, but for Westerner everything is okay, as it looks. You know, in Zaporoszhye there is still a Lenin's monument standing on the "Lenin's square", with "Lenin's street" going out from it to "Lenin's factory". What, people in Kiev and Kharkov were oppressed more then the people of Zaporozhye?

The people of Zaporozhye likely view the USSR differently to those of the west. After all, communist parties in Ukraine have their greatest support bases in the east, do they not?

Calling for abandoning of people of Novorossiya to their very grim fate, for Returning of Crimea and for bowing to American demands is nothing other then calls for capitulation while the RF is now engaged in the conflict against the Western unipolar "NWO"

OK. Firstly, can you prove that the people calling for peace are calling for Crimea to be returned and to bow down to the Americans (I wasn't even aware they had made demands, you would have thought they made them clear). Also, the Russia government is now engaged in a war against the NWO? Gee, the Jewish Illuminati Lizard Aliens are more powerful than we thought!

Costa! You are hopeless.

I suppose I am. You sure showed me with the NWO and the incessant ad hominems! /sarcasm

There is no way you can see the light and change you position.

But you said I am Jesus so what light is there to see? I am the light!

You are 100% indoctrinated by the Western propaganda

And for good measure, let's throw the "indoctrination" claim in. Apparently Jesus is so gullible he believes in whatever the West's hivemind media says. Not the glorious independent and free thinking media that Russians are blessed (obviously not by Jesus or his father) to have.

and, the saddest thing of all, your own country is not even a major player in this conflict - or even a significant "friend and ally" of the US of A,

I thought you said you weren't going to call NZ small and insignificant?

The rest of discussion would be just an exercise in phallometry and not a real dispute with any hope of reaching of consensus.

What was there to dispute? You said something. I disproved it and you responded with ad hominems, appeals to the common crowd to try and make me look bad and yourself good and claims about Russia's glorious crusade against the NWO. What kind of consensus would result out of this?

[United Marxist Nations]

Could have just said the Successor state of the RSFSR, which would have been more accurate, since the RSFSR wasn't "a part" of the Russian Federation, actually the reverse, IIRC.

If that's true then Russia can return the Security Council seat it's illegitimately occupying.

You can't dissolve a Permanent Security Council seat; it had to be given to someone, and Russia was the best choice because it got the most of the USSR's stuff of the Republics (even though none of them got more than half of it). Moreover, the pick of the successor wasn't left up to the Council, it was left up the USSR; it got to pick which Republic got it. Another thing is that the USSR's UN thing is pretty complicated, because some of its Republics had their own UN membership.

However, in terms of what a successor state is, all of the former Soviet Republics are successor states of their respective Republics.