Да что тут скажешь, когда попал пальцем в небо.Quote:
Originally Posted by Basil77
Printable View
Да что тут скажешь, когда попал пальцем в небо.Quote:
Originally Posted by Basil77
Imo the only reason the Russian troops were in Crimea was to keep order and prevent violence. NOT to control the vote.
I saw videos and the voters looked really happy. I didn't see any guns pointed at the voters.
But the real question is this - When was the referendum of the Crimean people to join Ukraine? Khrushchev did NOT have the authority to give part of Russia to Ukraine. So how can giving Crimea to Ukraine be legal? It's NOT legal to give part of Russia to another country without even a referendum.
If the US gives lethal aid to Ukraine then that shames America. There's already way too much killing in Ukraine. Instead of offering lethal aid, our country should be supporting the peace plan in Minsk.
The Secretary of the Russian Security Council - Nikolai Petrushev - said that if the US gives lethal aid to Ukraine that Russia would retaliate. But not military, only diplomatic measures. He believes that the US offering lethal aid to Ukraine was just a method for provoking war with Russia and I agree. The violent provocations from our country need to stop.
Imo, it's a Russian-Ukrainian problem that should NOT be solved by the US. It can only be solved by diplomacy and the peace plans in Minsk.
Да, лучше сберечь бисер. Но если мы всё-таки получим адекватный ответ на простейший вопрос http://masterrussian.net/f16/latest-...tml#post269171 тогда, может быть, можно будет обсудить снятие крокоморатория. :druzja:Quote:
Originally Posted by Basil77
Израилю Европа и Америка обычно дают провести свои переодические АТО пару-тройку дней, не больше. Ну, максимум НЕДЕЛЮ!! А украинское АТО с благославления той же Европы и Америки идёт уже почти год, И поскольку, очевидно, эта АТО никак не собирается заканчиваться разгромом ВСН, то, хмм, не пора ли подкинуть ВСУ ещё оружия? И это вместо того, чтобы судить преступный режим Украины и заставить его выполнить свои международно-заверенные обязательства принятые им 21 февраля 2014 г о прекращении насилия. Посеешь ветер - пожнёшь бурю. :no:
За публичное прозрачное приравнивание модератора к свиньям Crocodile получает предупреждение.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
Za prozrachnoe priravnivanie Crocodile k flagam i parusam moderator poluchaet preduprejdenie. :tease:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lampada
Ukrainian "freedom of speech". All hail democracy.
https://meduza.io/en/news/2015/02/11...ian-aggressionQuote:
Ukraine considers jailing anyone who denies or justifies Russian aggression
I really hope that would not be made a law by the Supreme Rada. On the other hand, there was a forum member (profoundly-respected by me), who used to seriously say that a law in Ukraine means nothing unless real people were prosecuted by that law. So, we'll see, I guess ...
You are sure balanced. :D What about laws in Russia which more or less are anti-freedom? They will jail anyone who advocates splitting up Russia or allowing republics to separate. That's just one example. I didn't read any posts from you about that - criticizing it. That's what we call hypocrisy. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by hddscan
Anyway, does anyone have any direct evidence other than a pro-Kremlin article? I believe it - I just thought there would be something in the Russian or Ukrainian language. Btw, there is also mainstream news about Poroshenko being prepared to declare martial law. I think ordinary Ukrainians are the victim in all this. Both Poroshenko's regime and the Eastern regime (Donetsk and Lugansk republics) only care about fighting and conflict - some 1000s of people can die - it doesn't matter as long as they achieve their ends. Putin doesn't care. Russia is going broke. Ukraine is already broke. I don't see how Russia funds Novorossiya as things get worse. They cannot sustain themselves on their own. Apparently, you cannot criticize the conflict publicly - I was told. But, I think that's another lie. I've complained to Ukrainian nationalists and they disagree with me but there doesn't seem to be a law against it. They just think anyone sympathizing with the rebels or Russian aggression are Putin stooges. But, it is not against the law.
If the Rada want to make the bill a law, it is not surprising. The EU is full of laws against freedom of speech. Ukrainians just don't realize (yet!) that the values and principles are only popular speech. Yet, one cannot forget that you don't have freedom of speech in Russia. It is the same mentality - you have freedom of speech if it is accepted and supported by the Kremlin. These factions might be in conflict with one another but they both have common ideals. They just get there, in different ways.
Итак, зачем же идёт война на Донбассе? Слово Пушилину: ТАСС: Международная панорама - Пушилин: решение конфликта с Украиной возможно только в случае ее внеблокового статуса
Это то, за что воюет ДНР. Очевидно, Украина не согласна на это и, получается, хочет вступить в некий блок и военный союз, но вот беда - мешает война с ДНР. А теперь, господа, давайте-ка подкинем побольше оружия ВСУ, чтобы Украина додавила ДНР и вступила в блок и военный союз! Нда.. :no:Quote:
Полное и всеобъемлющее урегулирование конфликта с Украиной возможно только в случае ее внеблокового статуса и нейтралитета по отношению к любым военным союзам.
That will be a very effective tool for controlling the media in Ukraine. Since it includes "Russian propaganda" then it's very open-ended too. If nobody in Ukraine can support the Russian narrative then the only interviews reported will be pro-Kiev. It will also give Ukraine the power to arrest journalists working inside their borders.Quote:
Originally Posted by hddscan
It totally is an aggression against freedom of the press in Ukraine.
Calls for splitting up a country is not the same as jailing for having an opinion. If the law passes then anybody who would not agree that Russia is aggressor could get jailed, please not that no proof needed to prove that Russia is aggressor, anybody could get jailed for just disagreeing with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by 14Russian
If somebody says that those two things are the same, I would call it hypocrisy.
There are Russian and Ukrainian articles, but I was looking for English translation for convenience of members of this forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by 14Russian
i suppose you are saying the sowjet union acted illegally at the timeQuote:
Originally Posted by UhOhXplode
No. I'm saying that Nikita Khrushchev acted illegally at the time. The hammer and sickle represent the working people and the most important principle of communism was to give the power to the working people. So if Crimea was to leave Russia and become annexed to Ukraine then it should have been the decision of the working people in Crimea.Quote:
Originally Posted by eisenherz
Giving part of a country to another country with only a decree is something a Tsar would do, NOT a communist leader. The act of one man giving Crimea and Sevastopol to the Ukraine defies the principles of communism. It also defies the principles of self-determination.
Who really annexed Crimea? Кто на самом деле аннексировал Крым? | Красноярское Время
Мне это напомнило статью с "Цензора" пятилетней давности:Quote:
Originally Posted by SergeMak
http://storage4.static.itmages.ru/i/...bbcc4be953.jpg
Греки хотят выращивать мидий и устриц в Крыму | Новости Крыма
http://allcrimea.net/news/tema/big/g...u-31194-94.jpg
Крымчанам предлагают скинуться на строительство Керченского моста | Информационно-новостной портал 'Час Пик'
"Генподрядчиком в строительстве моста через Керченский пролив назначена компания «Стройгазмонтаж», российского бизнесмена Аркадия Ротенберга. Окончание строительства моста определено в срок не позднее декабря 2018 года."
Thanks for the link. You are the first person who ever answered my question. And yeah, the "Big Contract" has obviously been violated and it is no longer valid. And now I understand the Russian-Ukrainian relations much more.Quote:
Originally Posted by SergeMak
That's all really good news! I know that Turkey was doing business with Crimea but I didn't know about Greece wanting to grow mussels and oysters there. And I definitely can't wait to see the new bridge over the Kerch strait. I read there would also be a railway track on the bridge. Totally cool!Quote:
Originally Posted by Lampada
Ok, so the cease-fire was established, but IMHO it's no different from the previous cease-fires. All Ukrainian military wants is to re-group and get prepared for another assault, just like the previous times. Nothing is agreed upon, really, and no warranties has been given. Everywhere it is "possible" and "possibly". No concrete and long-term measures to establish the peace. You wouldn't normally purchase a car or a house on these types of conditions. :(
Тут он прав, увы. Хрущёв мог делать что угодно, но настоящее преступление на совести Ельцина. С такими президентами "волостей не напасёшься".Quote:
Просрали, а потом ещё по пьяне и узаконили это
Думаю, что договорённости при Ельцине были более-менее удовлетворительные. Самое важное - ядерное разоружение Украины было достигнуто. При сохранении автономии Крыма в реальности, а не на бумаге, государственная принадлежность, ИМХО, не так уж и принципиальна для людей (и для военных баз, вспомним хотя бы английскую военную базу на Кипре и американскую военную базу на Кубе). Но, скажем так, "имперские амбиции" Киева привели к постепенному упразднению крымской автономии. Вспомним, что первый крымский президент был уволен Киевом в 1995 году, а затем выгнан из Крыма и из страны (ему запретили въезд). Так, что не нужно всё валить на Ельцина (хоть он и не ангел), тем более, что есть прямые виновные. Вообще, меня удивляет как украинская пропаганда 20 лет кричала, что Россия полнится имперскими амбициями, и упорно не хотела признавать свои имперские амбиции. Соринка - бревно, однако. Курим википедию https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C...B2%D0%B8%D1%87
Quote:
Вскоре после избрания на пост президента, в интервью газете «Крымский курьер» Мешков заявил:
«Крымчане сделали свой выбор, проголосовав за единение с Россией, за восстановление экономических отношений, за восстановление военно-политического союза с Россией, за всё то, что было провозглашено РДК ещё в августе 1991 года. Это позволит прежде всего спастись всем гражданам Республики Крым от окончательного краха того, что раньше называлось экономикой. Естественно, этого достичь невозможно, если следовать курсу, предложенному киевским руководством на отрыв от России»[2].
Who would want to trade with somebody like you. You decide later, on 2nd thought, you don't like how the deal went and then you end up at the door with a gun demanding it back.
Good article about 'Soviet mentality.'
With New Moves, Russia's Parliament Looks To Rewrite History : Parallels : NPR
Note, the Putin regime also sought and changed history text books - and outlaws any critique of Soviet history.
Russian Schools to Teach Putin’s Version of History - Bloomberg Business
Vladimir Putin to have entire chapter on him in Russian history book - Telegraph
Russia Moves to Ban Criticism of WWII Victory - TIME
Russia threatens to bar Europeans who deny Red Army 'liberated' them - Telegraph
Next time, you criticize the Poroshenko regime's policies (which is often justified), make sure to criticize Putin's lest you shall be exposed as hypocrites. :)
That's funny how you mean by this post what a savage country Ukraine is to have nuclear weapons, while just a few posts earlier, you seriously considered the terrorist organization called "DNR" a country that has a vote on military block issues and such. Potzreotism, anyone? (which is strange as you seem to be far away and thereby detached from its source)Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
That has little to do with the patriotism, which I am lacking, but rather with the common sense. Since the outset, Ukraine proved itself politically immature. Consider the latest events - democracy usually works so that to avoids situations that Ukraine had submerged itself onto. But looking at the history since 1991 would demonstrate the political immaturity in many ways. Giving that young democracy the WMD and expecting the country to be a reasonable political player would be naive and irresponsible, if not a crime. So, in light of all that, I think Ukraine should start importing political maturity and not lethal weapons.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric C.
Не понимаю, почему это важно (ядерное разоружение Украины). С ядерным оружием у новой страны и ответственность была бы другая, и отношение к ней соответствующее, да и не потянула бы Украина финансово, как мне кажется. Россия с нашими западными партнёрами в таких условиях продавили бы ядерное разоружение Украины, но чуть позже.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
При насильственном разделе СССР инициатива всё равно должна была исходить из Москвы, и так наплевать на миллионы соотечественников, которые вдруг оказались в другой стране...
Там можно было совсем о других границах договариваться, и уж Крым, конечно, нельзя было отдавать.
The BBC admits that Parubiy stood up for the snipers on Maidan BBC News - The untold story of the Maidan massacre
cglad you found a culprit that would absolve the sowjet union of accountability back then and give justification for annexation now...Quote:
Originally Posted by UhOhXplode
so easy... just blame Nikita Khrushchev
you should have told that logic to the Germans - it was Adolf Hitler, not us. Can you see the problem with this line of thinking?
If you are talking about the annexation of GDR by FRG in 1989 you are right. Hitler has nothing to do with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by eisenherz
@ SergeMak, i normally respect your arguments, even if we are of different opinons. Here however you miss the point completely. My point was that you cannot seperate the leader from the system propping him up, be it Hitler with Germany or be it Krushchev with the KPsSU. I was not talking about the merit or not so of any annexation. I was merely pointing out the flaw in logic of a different commentator using the supposed illegal actions of one man (Krushchev) as justification for everthing, and at the same time arguing that the soviet union has nothing to do with the actions of that one man.Quote:
Originally Posted by SergeMak
I never saw in English texts translated abbreviations. It's usually DDR and BRD.Quote:
Originally Posted by SergeMak
So, continuing your line of thought we come to a conclusion there are 3 objects we must take into account: a leader, a system and the people. So what you are suggesting is to equate all the three. Am I right?Quote:
Originally Posted by eisenherz
'Equate' is maybe not the correct word, as they are not necessarily the 'same' or 'equal', but the 3 are inter-connected and do not exist in isolation.Quote:
Originally Posted by SergeMak
Who argues? Only leaders pass by, systems change and people stay to suffer from what the previous two did and bear responsibility for them. Doesn't look too fair, does it?Quote:
Originally Posted by eisenherz
Sorry. I didn't know we were discussing the Russian Mistrals. Btw, how much did Ukraine pay for Crimea?Quote:
Originally Posted by 14Russian
When President Obama issues an Executive Order, that's NOT the fault of the government or the people. Nobody can stop his Executive Orders (Decrees).Quote:
Originally Posted by eisenherz
Anyway, when I look at Eastern Ukraine I see death and destruction. When I look at Crimea I see life and peace.
So yeah, I totally DO support any country (like Russia) that gives a region (like Crimea) life and peace.
Imo, you should READ the article that SergeMak posted. I was VERY HAPPY to find it.
Who actually annexed the Crimea?
And NO I don't see any problem with my line of thinking.
I did not expect you to ...Quote:
Originally Posted by UhOhXplode
You don't know what a trade is?!? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by UhOhXplode
It (nuclear disarmament) is important because it was believed that Ukraine could be independent and would have Crimea as part of its territory if they didn't not have a nuclear weapon. So, if you look at it from their p.o.v., the evidence is that this arrangement or trade did not work or benefit them in the end. The ultimate result is that they lost this 'deal.' In fact, you pro-Putin people should be thanking Khrushchev. He convinced Ukraine not to have nuclear weapons. If they declined, Russia would not be interfering with the conflict right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by maxmixiv
As much as I respect the BBC in general, this article is not a reliable source of information. There is some guy who said he was shooting because some officer has asked him to. If that is all true and not just made up, we still don't know who is the guy, who was the officer etc. Besides, the most important thing was to find out who was shooting at the protesters and not at Berkut (that we could guess on our own). That, in my understanding, gave 'legitimacy' to the subsequent uncontrolled violence and the ousting of the legally elected President. Had there been some investigation carried out by the BBC and backed by it, that, I think, would be somewhat more reliable. :unknown:Quote:
Originally Posted by SergeMak
Я понимаю, что у вас там отношение к Ельцину более эмоциональное, чем у меня (и это, возможно, справедливо), но всё-таки, думаю, не стоит вешать всех собак на Ельцина, тем более, что есть конкретные виновные (=Верховная Рада и Кучма) в деградации ситуации в Крыму. Что касается связи украинского ядерного оружия и политической зрелости.. ну вот ты думаешь, что "с ядерным оружием у новой страны и ответственность была бы другая, и отношение к ней соответствующее". Попробую привести тебе пример двух азиатских стран: КНР и КНДР. Китай - пример зрелого политического мышления. Китай интегрирован в мировую экономику, но проводит свою *почти* независимую политику. Китаю позволительно иметь ядерное оружие, т.к. Китай не бьётся чуть-что в истерике. А вот КНДР никто этого разрешить не может, т.к. малейшая неувязочка провоцирует неадекватную агрессивную реакцию, например Северная Корея пригрозила США "смертельными ударами" из-за фильма о Ким Чен ЫнеQuote:
Originally Posted by maxmixiv
Вот, с моей точки зрения, Украина с 1991 г последовательно демонстрирует неадекватную реакцию на происходящее и последовательное нарушение договорённостей. Это не по политическим понятиям. Последний вопиющий пример - несоблюдение договора от 21 февраля 2014 г. Как, скажи, можно договариваться о чём-то с такими людьми? Полагаться на слово таких людей - это преступная халатность. Ну, а последующие договоры о перемирии лишь подтвердили правило. А как тебе многократные попытки Украины присобачить неподходящее американское ядерное топливо для АЭС? Ведь чудом чуть второго Чернобыля не случилось. А если дать таким людям ядерное оружие? Вот, ты говоришь Украина не потянула бы, а если бы это рассматривалось как какая-нибудь "необходимая мера безопасности от России", тогда как? Тогда было бы как с ВСУ - полная халатность при полной некчемности и ненужности. А если бы проводок где перегорел? В силу уважения к Украине не буду приводить аналогию с обезьяной и гранатой, хотя она и напрашивается...
Well, I'm not by all means a pro-Putin, but I must say Ukraine had blown the 'deal' from their end by happily waiving the Crimean Autonomy status in 1995 they had originally agreed upon. Ukrainian government was legally ok with Crimea electing their own President. But, as soon as the newly elected President had said that Crimea will build strong economic and cultural ties with Russia, the Supreme Rada had decided in 1995 that the Crimean Constitution of 1992 is all of a sudden unconstitutional, so they fired the Crimean President and abolished the Crimean Autonomy. The Autonomy status had been a vital condition to the 'deal'. So, since Ukraine had violated the 'deal', the 'deal' is no longer valid. So, unfortunately, IMHO Ukraine can't complain, but should finally grow up and start assuming responsibility for their actions. Dixi.Quote:
Originally Posted by 14Russian