Thread: Что происходит в Украине? События, новости.

Originally Posted by Hanna

Came across this video where some people in Moscow seem to think there is a war with Ukraine, so they are doing an anti-war demonstration. For whatever reason, the police is breaking it up.




If you try to have a spontaneous anti-war demonstration in London, the exact same thing will happen, but with a permission it's ok - however it can take a long time to get a permission and it may not be in the location you requested. As far as I understand the situation is even worse in Russia, and if the message is not appreciated, they get no permit.

I wouldn't have thought that there was a war with Ukraine to protest against, but clearly these people think so!

Because the Kremlin brainwashes a lot of people. You can tell simply by reading the other posts here.

Originally Posted by diogen_

You ask for the full moon! The task at hand is not just win the referendum but get the overwhelmingly smashing victory in order to demonstrate to the whole world the will of the populace! Beware, it’s the Putin plan and not a silly child’s play in democracy, after all!!

It's about who is the best liar. A competition at who can lie the best.

Originally Posted by 14Russian

Because the Kremlin brainwashes a lot of people. You can tell simply by reading the other posts here.

I hope you realize how the new illegal government in Kiev is brainwashing people now. The Kremlin can hardly keep up with such a great job.

Originally Posted by Throbert McGee

А как перевести "That's very subtle!" or "Wow, talk about subtlety!" на русский, с сохранением сарказма? (Note that in this context, "subtlety" means something like "a talent for understatement" -- умение преуменьшить? -- rather than the "understatement" itself.)

"That's very subtle!" or "Wow, talk about subtlety!" - Тонкий намёк! Да уж, тонкий намёк... (lit., what a subtle hint)

Originally Posted by shnuddy

I hope you realize how the new illegal government in Kiev is brainwashing people now. The Kremlin can hardly keep up with such a great job.

I'm well aware of the brainwashing on by both sides, thanks. But, how come one side gets a free ride but the other doesn't? Most of the forum posters are soft on what the Kremlin does.

You said to pm you to obtain insight on this brainwashing. Why not post it here? What's the big secret? I'll be happy to discuss it. I've spoken with various Ukrainians and Russians on skype, vk and other sides besides researching on my own. I'm against both sides and think Ukraine should have sought their own sovereignty without interference or intervention. I think they have faint hopes and they are mislead, to put it in a nutshell. Yet, the Kremlin can do no wrong on this issue according to most posters, it seems. Brainwashed? Yes, on all sides.

I think we are all "brainwashed" about certain things. No need to judge people for it. I just think people should be open to that possibility. Anything we heard a lot as children, or saw a lot of films about tends to be quite firmly ingrained.
I am definitely "brainwashed" about certain things. But it doesn't tend to be things I write about here though.

Technically there is no such thing as "brainwashing" though! This came up at university, and it's quite interesting. It's just a word that the CIA invented when they could not understand why some American soldiers who had been captured during the Korea war came back as convinced Communists. It didn't occur to them that Communism can genuinely appeal to a person on its own merits.

So they invented the expression "brainwashing" and a Hollywood film was made about it. And the term has been thrown around ever since. Totally ridiculous film btw.



The CIA did some experiments to try to brainwash people, because they thought that the USSR was already doing it... However after 5 years all they achieved was to drive a few people completely crazy. They did not manage to change anybody's opinion for real, or their personality. If you try extremely hard, all you will achieve, is to make the person schizophrenic.

People believe what they want to believe, anything else is just faking it for the sake of expediency.

Originally Posted by Throbert McGee

А как перевести "That's very subtle!" or "Wow, talk about subtlety!" на русский, с сохранением сарказма? (Note that in this context, "subtlety" means something like "a talent for understatement" -- умение преуменьшить? -- rather than the "understatement" itself.)

"Это весьма изящно и остроумно."

I am wondering about one thing. Why is the (ethnically) Russian-dominated part of Ukraine suddenly so afraid of the Ukrainian-dominated west and seems to think that the whole West is fascist in outlook, when that same west wanted to get closer and not farther away from the EC (which they would if they were fascist) and there have been no attacks on Russians before (that I know of)? Where have all those fascists been before now? What it all boils down to, how much of this is media-induced hysteria?

Of course I am aware that there were fascist agitators in Kiew who were at least partly responsible for the violence there, and that the interim government and the opposition made a huge mistake in accepting these same fascists (or any, really) into the interim government or even as armed guardians and did not immediately disarm them. But does the populace really think that half of them now suddenly hate the other half?

Originally Posted by bitpicker

how much of this is media-induced hysteria?

Pretty much everything you read or hear these days. One criminal group has just overthrown the other one. The other one induced hysteria in order to try and gain its positions back (or at least to negotiate its new share).

Originally Posted by bitpicker

I am wondering about one thing. Why is the (ethnically) Russian-dominated part of Ukraine suddenly so afraid of the Ukrainian-dominated west and seems to think that the whole West is fascist in outlook, when that same west wanted to get closer and not farther away from the EC (which they would if they were fascist) and there have been no attacks on Russians before (that I know of)? Where have all those fascists been before now? What it all boils down to, how much of this is media-induced hysteria?

Of course I am aware that there were fascist agitators in Kiew who were at least partly responsible for the violence there, and that the interim government and the opposition made a huge mistake in accepting these same fascists (or any, really) into the interim government or even as armed guardians and did not immediately disarm them. But does the populace really think that half of them now suddenly hate the other half?

Ethnically-Russian-dominated part of Ukraine is Crimea (58% ethnic Russians, AFAIR) and that is all. There are Russan-language-dominated parts of Ukraine (including, for example, Kiev itself and most big cities).

I live in the Eastern Ukraine and I don't see any notable hysteria around. There was a kind of hysteria in 2004 about "they disrespect our choice" but the revolution of 2004 changed nothing. What I see now is apathy, depression and fear of Russian invasion and war. Normally a person from Eastern Ukraine doesn't care much about any ultras in the West or even happy if they kick some b5tts of some corrupted officials. The hysteria and hatred comes from Russia - and I understand why it is difficult for the foreigner to distinguish the sources: they are much more numerous, aggressive and well-organized.

This is democracy, correct?:

No Room for 'Nyet' in Ukraine's Crimea Vote to Join Russia

I read not just here but another site in which Russians (let's suggest, neo-Soviet viewpionts) that option number two allowed to remain part of Ukraine.

Citations below:
“The restoration of this [1992] constitution would be a step towards notional independence under Russian control... Those citizens who were content with Crimea remaining part of Ukraine on the same basis as it has been for the last 20 years do not have a voice in this referendum. There is no third option available.”

At first glance, the second option seems to offer the prospects of the peninsula remaining within Ukraine.

But the 1992 national blueprint - which was adopted soon after the collapse of the Soviet Union and then quickly abolished by the young post-Soviet Ukrainian state - is far from doing that.

This foresees giving Crimea all the qualities of an independent entity within Ukraine - but with the broad right to determine its own path and choose relations with whom it wants - including Russia.

With the pro-Russian assembly already saying it wants to return Crimea to Russia, this second option only offers a slightly longer route to shifting the peninsula back under Russian control, analysts say.
The option of asking people if they wish to stick with the status quo - in which Crimea enjoys autonomy but remains part of Ukraine - is not on offer.

Medvedev said the vote would be fair, however. People only had to answer one question in the referendum, he added, before correcting himself to say there were in fact two questions. “Either to be with Russia or to be with Ukraine,” he said. -end

So, it's either Russia now or Russia later? That's fair and democratic, right? Unless someone here wants to explain what is wrong with the logic in the article. Also, the rationalization has much propaganda in suggesting they (i.e. Crimea) either sticks with a radical 'far-right' Ukraine or Russia (neo-Soviet). Yet, as I explained previously, there is no real 'far-right' in Ukraine that has power or influence. Unless, this description includes full cooperation and allegiance to US and Israeli groups. Nuland, one of the major orchestrators, is Jewish. So, is the interim PM. There are a number of Government appointees recently, who are as well. They are all given the approval from those in the US that bankrolled the revolution after it escalated and not much has changed since the previous regime except for some different people in higher positions. Ultimately, it will not be a 'far-right' regime but a US-sanctioned Government with some radicals in military positions. However, they are only 'far-right' in the sense that they are against 'Russian' (read: Kremlin) control. They want their own power. But, calling them nazis is inaccurate. Svoboda and Right Sector have both communicated with Jewish organizations and the ambassador in Israel. Svoboda has pledged to build a large Jewish museum in Ukraine. There has been assurances from Jewish communities that they're on their side. None of the far-right organizations that are publicly in the news have been outspoken against the USA or EU. The initial position was they were against any outside influence or control. It was a quest for independence and sovereignty but it is nothing of the sort. So, Ukraine has been taken by one 'side' that has no sincere concern or regard for their citizens but only profit and power and a second side, Russia, who is also opportunist and have imperial ambitions. The 2nd side, Russia, also has little regard for their own citizens but is infamous for propaganda and pretense - and is not any more trustworthy than the current Government in Ukraine. Ukrainian citizens, both ethnic Russians and Ukrainians are in the middle, not to mention everyone else living there.

After watching the situation at Ukraine for the last several weeks my attitude changed drastically. I'm not saying anything about current nazi coup "goverment" in Kiev (they are just criminals and not worth mentioning). I somehow started supporting Putin whom I despised for the last 10 years or so. Also I've got my final confirmation for my life philosophy: "the only way to be totally objective in this world - to be cynical as hell".

Originally Posted by Hanna

Technically there is no such thing as "brainwashing" though! This came up at university, and it's quite interesting. It's just a word that the CIA invented when they could not understand why some American soldiers who had been captured during the Korea war came back as convinced Communists. It didn't occur to them that Communism can genuinely appeal to a person on its own merits.

You are mostly correct, Hanna, but not totally. The term "brainwashing" was popularized in English by the CIA, but it was a direct translation of a phrase originally coined in Chinese:

The Chinese term 洗腦 (xǐ năo, literally "wash brain") was originally used to describe methodologies of coercive persuasion used under the Maoist government in China, which aimed to transform individuals with a reactionary imperialist mindset into "right-thinking" members of the new Chinese social system. The term punned on the Taoist custom of "cleansing/washing the heart/mind"(洗心, xǐ xīn) before conducting certain ceremonies or entering certain holy places.

Note, however, that the original Chinese phrase did not imply total mind control under which people were put into a zombie-like trance (as happened to Laurence Harvey's character in The Manchurian Candidate); it was more analogous to "politically correct propaganda."

So they invented the expression "brainwashing" and a Hollywood film was made about it. And the term has been thrown around ever since. Totally ridiculous film btw.

Portions of it were scientifically ridiculous, yes, but they were consistent with what the public generally believed about The Mysterious Power Of Hypnosis[tm] at the time.

And the underlying political warning about far-left communists and far-right fascists (beloved Disney actress Angela Lansbury, in the 1962 film!) mutually exploiting each other as tools (to the disadvantage of the masses) is not ridiculous at all, IMHO.

P.S. Here's Angela's iconic scene:



And the key quote, at the end:

"...rallying a nation of television viewers into hysteria, to sweep us up into the White House with powers that will make martial law look like anarchy!"

I was honestly surprised that Hanna called the film "totally ridiculous" -- one would think that the theme of the American public being manipulated like ignorant sheep would've been like delicious candy for her! (Alas, the film was rude enough to suggest that Russian and Chinese Communists might be almost as dangerous as jingoistic American right-wingers. I can see how that could result in cognitive dissonance: "Okay, Americans are dumb sheep -- thumbs up! But Communism is actually a bad idea -- thumbs down!")

Originally Posted by 14Russian

I'm against both sides and think Ukraine should have sought their own sovereignty without interference or intervention.

Well, in theory that sounds great. But in the real world it's impossible. If Ukraine were a spherical horse in the interstellar space and could have flown away to some remote planet of its own, everyone would be happy to let them seek their own sovereignty or whatever they like to seek. In the real world every country pokes its nose in every other country's business. US pokes its nose into Ukraine's and Russia's affairs, EU pokes its nose into Ukraine's and Russia's affairs. Why shouldn't Russia do the same?

What I see now is apathy, depression and fear of Russian invasion and war.

And what most simple Russians feel is irritation, spite, fear of war and terrorism and anticipation of worsening of already not easy economic situation which of course if happens will be accredited to the ridiculous inability of Ukrainians to maintain elementary order in their own country. Now for most Russians Ukraine is a notorious dog on the hay which worsens its own life and bring their neighbors down. Nobody wins. The world becomes a worse place to live, thanks to our "brotherly nation".

Originally Posted by Basil77

After watching the situation at Ukraine for the last several weeks my attitude changed drastically. I'm not saying anything about current nazi coup "goverment" in Kiev (they are just criminals and not worth mentioning). I somehow started supporting Putin whom I despised for the last 10 years or so. Also I've got my final confirmation for my life philosophy: "the only way to be totally objective in this world - to be cynical as hell".

Hahaha! Well thanks for your honest admission. I'll watch out for you waving an Edinaya Rossiya banner on TV, ROFL!!!

Seriously, you can admire somebody's skills and professional behaviour in certain situations, without necessarily LIKING them, or planning to vote for them, or whatever. I don't think he is sympathetic or likable, but some of his one-liners are very witty and he is a talented politician. Machiavelli,lol.....

If this was a chess game, he is in a tricky spot, but he hasn't actually made any mistake yet. It's like he is playing by the book, considering every move very carefully.

He was NEVER going to win public support in Western Europe regardless of what he does ("free gas for all of Europe, forever!", "damn Russians, what are they up to now?!") So it was probably no point even trying....

Another thing is, he's got Lavrov and some very talented foreign policy advisors. While the USA doesn't seem to read up and understand local areas/cultures/priorities properly, Russia does this and it's always been famous for it, in the subject of political science. It worked in Syria. Simultaneously the USA seems to get distracted with their "ideology" and wishful thinking, whereas modern Russia is more practical and pragmatic I think it will pay off in the long run, if Russia can keep its head cool.

But this is not over yet! There is plenty of scope for things going terribly wrong.

I was very much affected by what it-ogo wrote. Fingers crossed they can reach a conclusion internally in Ukaine, that will be satisfactory to all. If things go completely out of hands in Eastern Ukraine - Russia might find itself in very deep waters and could easily end up committing a terrible mistake.



Hats off to ThrobertMcGee for his insights into China in the 1960s. Very interesting.

The thing that made me write off that film as tosh was that whoever wrote the script didn't seem to know the first thing about the ideologies or the countries he is depicting (other than the US). There was plenty of genuine faults to bring up, and there ARE some good anti-communism and anti USSR books. No need to hype, lie and exaggerate like this film does.

Why do you spread this bullshit?

Originally Posted by it-ogo

What I see now is apathy, depression and fear of Russian invasion and war.

"Fear of Russian invasion" is a product of Ukrainian and Western Media only. Ukraine was occupied by the Nazi squads and American special services. Of course, it doesn't mean anything at all. Mere trifle. Yeah, we must believe it, because authoritative and competend dude (it-ogo) said that he knows everything better.
The usurpers assassinated 100 people to justify their "revolution". It's indeed a trifle. Never mind. Let's talk about "how Russia poisons our souls". Dudes, your "souls" are already in hell after that.

Military occupation of Crimea is an international aggression act with bad long-term consequenses for everyone.

"Military occupation of Crimea" is your fantasy. Russia just protects its military base which is located there according to the pact. Even your Minister of Defence said (quoting from memory): "we don't have a legal ground to attack Crimea, because there are no illegal Russian forces in that territory. So if we attack, it would be regarded as a war crime against own people".
So "military occupation of Crimea" is just a "motto" which was thrown in the informational field. It has no any proof. Cynical people pronounce this bullshit again and again, thus silly people believe that's true. Select in what group you are.

Originally Posted by Paul G.

Why do you spread this bullshit?

"Fear of Russian invasion" is a product of Ukrainian and Western Media only. Ukraine was occupied by the Nazi squads and American special services. Of course, it doesn't mean anything at all. Mere trifle. Yeah, we must believe it, because authoritative and competend dude (it-ogo) said that he knows everything better.
The usurpers assassinated 100 people to justify their "revolution". It's indeed a trifle. Never mind. Let's talk about "how Russia poisons our souls". Dudes, your "souls" are already in hell after that.


"Military occupation of Crimea" is your fantasy. Russia just protects its military base which is located there according to the pact. Even your Minister of Defence said (quoting from memory): "we don't have a legal ground to attack Crimea, because there are no illegal Russian forces in that territory. So if we attack, it would be regarded as a war crime against own people".
So "military occupation of Crimea" is just a "motto" which was thrown in the informational field. It has no any proof. Cynical people pronounce this bullshit again and again, thus silly people believe that's true. Select in what group you are.

You must get rid of your illusions, it-ogo! All that masked military men riding back and forth in Crimea are "Nazi squads and American special services".

I had to laugh out loud when I read this morning that Putin, who wants to save the Russians in Ukraine from the Ukrainian faschists, invited only politicians from various European extreme right-wing parties to watch the referendum. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Originally Posted by bitpicker

I had to laugh out loud when I read this morning that Putin, who wants to save the Russians in Ukraine from the Ukrainian faschists, invited only politicians from various European extreme right-wing parties to watch the referendum. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

The rest have just refused.