Thread: Что произойдет в восточной Украине? (Eastern Ukraine?)

Originally Posted by Crocodile

To stop potential Russian invasion into the Eastern Ukraine (which they could not and a couple of C-300 won't help)?

At least to make an effort. That's what they say anyway.
Яценюк предупредил Путина, что попытка захватить Восток приведет к полноценной войне - Новости Украины. Главное�

Originally Posted by Hanna

—What is the mothertongue of most people in Eastern Ukraine, i.e. Donetsk, Kharkov, Lugansk.

Russian. As well as in the most Ukrainian big cities including Kiev.

—Can they speak the other language and how hard is it - is it a sensitive issue / big deal?

There is no problem in reading/understanding Ukrainian but speaking is more difficult as almost noone in the East actually speaks Ukrainian and there is no practice.

Are there people there who actually regard themselves as Russian, like people in Crimea? Or do they regard themselves as Ukrainians with Russian as mothertongue?

When people here say "Russian" or "Ukrainian" mostly they don't mean nation (like it is in Europe). Mostly it means ethnic backgroung (=национальность) which is a formal parameter that doesn't depend on one's choice. You see, in USSR we had a paragraph in our internal passports "национальность" and it mostly was automatically defined as "национальность" of the father (as far as I remember). And it has nothing to do with either mothertongue or citizenship or self-identification. There is no such paragraph in contemporary passports but the habit persists. There is a tendency to mean actual citizenship by "Ukrainian" but it is not a mainstream yet.

—How can Kiev satisfy the demands of the protesters in Donetsk and is it necessary?
—What exactly are the goals of the protesters in Eastern Ukraine?

I don't know about their goals. I don't know personally any protester and info about their demands comes contradictory. The sane formulations I remember are "to join Russia" or "to have more decentralization - more rights for the regions". The first one depends on Poo's tanks and "green humanoids", not on Kiev. The second is actually already accepted by Kiev as a goal (before Crimean invasion). But it requires changes in Constitution that requires a national referendum. As far as I know referendum is impossible with a part of the country is occupied by the enemy. So I have no idea how exactly it can be overcome.

—Are they really being discriminated or are they just exaggerating?

Who is exaggerating? Russian TV just produces complete gibberish. What is discrimination? You can speak Russian wherever and whenever you like (unless you are a professional talking head in specifically Ukrainian-language TV show or like, but there are abundant Russian-language TV shows for you). There are more literature comes in Russian than in Ukrainian and Russian is actually way more widespread than literary Ukrainian (not accounting for all kind of dialects and mixtures). Positions of Russian in Ukraine are stronger than positions of the Ukrainian. The "only state language is Ukrainian" problem is a frantic attempt to save Ukrainian (as a national symbol) from complete vanishing (like it is going on with Belarussian in Belarus).

—Why are they so against the new government and the change, what exactly is it they fear?

I doubt they fear anything. Maybe they want Russian wages which are supposedly higher or just enjoy participating in disorders?

—How many are happy to be Ukrainians ans how many are hoping of a repetition of Crimea?

Happy? Nobody is happy. But there are people who understand that they are responsible for their lives and country. And there are many people who don't care where to live just want to live better. Maybe most stupid of the latter for some reason hope that uncle Poo will come and happily share with them his oil-and-gas incomes.

—Can Putin be trusted when he says that Russia will never enter Eastern Ukraine?

Well... before I relied on his sanity and common sense but after Crimean invasion I can expect everything.

—What is the economic situation for people in Eastern Ukraine. Are most OK, or really struggling to cope?

Depends on your standards. If compared to the first half of 1990-s we all are insanely rich. All who survived 1990-s.

Originally Posted by it-ogo

his response to questions, see above.

Thanks for answering this. (Anyone reading his response, note that he lives in Eastern Ukraine, so his response is super relevant).

Here is how I understand your response.

• Ethnicity is not really relevant to this and people's ethnicity in this part of the world is a complex issues - whether Ukrainian, Russian, a mix or something else.
• Everybody speaks Russian in everyday life, because it's convenient.
• People are not well off, but they have seen much worse times if they remember the 1990s.
• There is no strong sense of nationality in this region - either way.
• Many people are attracted by the possibility of higher incomes as a result from being Russian citizens rather than Ukrainian. (Maybe because of the Soviet legacy, a lot of people don't feel a buzz in their heart at the thought of Ukraine, because they grew up identifying themselves primarily as Soviet)
• Nobody is discriminated in Eastern Ukraine and there IS TV in Russian.
• The protesters in Eastern Ukraine have not formulated any specific demands and some may be there just to fight with no particular reason.
• You had a complete u-turn in your view of Russia because Putin choose not to respect Ukraine's borders.

[*]Ethnicity is not really relevant to this and people's ethnicity in this part of the world is a complex issues - whether Ukrainian, Russian, a mix or something else.

Yes, though ethnic jews can have their own view. I did meet in my life several expressions of antisemitism as private opinions, if it is really a problem, only jews can say.

All other ethnoses are treated the same.

• Everybody speaks Russian in everyday life, because it's convenient.
• People are not well off, but they have seen much worse times if they remember the 1990s.
• There is no strong sense of nationality in this region - either way.
• Many people are attracted by the possibility of higher incomes as a result from being Russian citizens rather than Ukrainian. (Maybe because of the Soviet legacy, a lot of people don't feel a buzz in their heart at the thought of Ukraine, because they grew up identifying themselves primarily as Soviet)
• Nobody is discriminated in Eastern Ukraine and there IS TV in Russian.

Yes.

• The protesters in Eastern Ukraine have not formulated any specific demands and some may be there just to fight with no particular reason.

That's my impression.

You had a complete u-turn in your view of Russia because Putin choose not to respect Ukraine's borders.

Yes.

I can confirm from today's phone-talks: there are massively military presence at Konotop, Putivl, Sumy and Belopolye (check the map below). Soldiers are digging trenches and so.






People from these towns who told me that (they are my good friends and relatives) say that soldiers and even officers are totally demoralised, even guys from western regions have zero will to fight with "Russian agressors". They are all discussing the main problem: should they desert or surrender to Russians (yes, they really belive that it's an invasion incoming). I feel really sorry for them.

Hmmm, nothing in there about threatening DOS attacks...

Throbert McGee, is this a guy who was unhappy in marriage?

It's offtopic, though.

Originally Posted by Paul G.

Throbert McGee, is this a guy who was unhappy in marriage?

It's offtopic, though.

I have no idea what Dale Carnegie's marriage was like, and I'm not sure why you bring it up. The point was simply если вы хотите "завоёвывать друзей и оказывать влияние на людей", то вам следует не намекать настолько публично о какой-нибудь DoS-атаке.

It's just very bad manners, really -- ох, вам не стыдно!

What do you mean? You think we allow you or other impudent Americans to decide which questions must be? LOL

No, but representatives of all Ukrainians, including pro-EU Western Ukrainians, should have had input into what the referendum questions were.

And since we're being impudent, let me make clear that to Americans, there's really not the slightest difference at all between хохлы and москали, or between them and бульбаши, for that matter -- as far as we're concerned, all of you have an unnatural addiction to borscht and you all talk like just Bela Lugosi from Dracula, so who the hell can tell you apart?



Robert мечет чеснок к Paul и убежает...

Originally Posted by Throbert McGee

The point was simply если вы хотите "завоёвывать друзей и оказывать влияние на людей", то вам следует не намекать настолько публично о какой-нибудь DoS-атаке.
It's just very bad manners, really -- ох, вам не стыдно!

1. I had got the point. But I don't want "to win friends" and blah-blah-blah.
2. If you support violence, be ready to feel the same on your own back. Is it too complicated truth?

No, but representatives of all Ukrainians, including pro-EU Western Ukrainians, should have had input into what the referendum questions were.

Mate, you repeat illogical bullshit. If some people living on a territory must ask the Government about their right to independence, the Government (and other citizens) will never allow them to vote for that. It's obvious. And your own American officials already said about that when they explained Kosovo precedent.
I know that Americans are very weak in geography. But what about history? It would be a good idea to organize a referendum about independence in the UK the 18 century. What do you think, why did the bloody American colonists violate the rights of all the peoples of the UK?

Robert мечет чеснок в Paul и убегает...

Originally Posted by Paul G.

1. I had got the point. But I don't want "to win friends" and blah-blah-blah.
2. If you support violence, be ready to feel the same on your own back. Is it too complicated truth?

Thanks for being a good sport about the Dracula joke!

As for your other points, I completely agree that between Kosovo and our own American Revolution (not to mention the North's position in the Civil War!) the U.S. is certainly living in the proverbial glass house, and shouldn't throw stones.

And your own American officials already said about that when they explained Kosovo precedent.
I know that Americans are very weak in geography. But what about history? It would be a good idea to organize a referendum about independence in the UK the 18 century. What do you think, why did the bloody American colonists violate the rights of all the peoples of the UK?

P.S. Thanks for the grammar corrections! Убежает was really just a typo -- or should I say a "think-o", or brain fart? -- I mean, I know the conjugations of бегать/бежать if I had thought about it for two more seconds.

However, I really had no idea of the correct preposition if you throw garlic "at" someone (meaning "to throw it in someone's general direction, intending to hit them with it but not necessarily succeeding in hitting the target.")

I also have great trouble with expressions like "to kiss someone's hand"; "to slap someone's cheek"; "to hit someone in the nose"; "to step on someone's foot," "to pin a medal on someone's coat," "to spill paint/sauce/mud on someone's clothes," etc. (cases where there are logically two direct objects -- the person, and some thing or body part associated with the person.)

Originally Posted by Throbert McGee

However, I really had no idea of the correct preposition if you throw garlic "at" someone (meaning "to throw it in someone's general direction, intending to hit them with it but not necessarily succeeding in hitting the target.")

"На" implies that you throw it "on" from above, as if it falls "on the surface/object". Я бросил чеснок на стол. So when you said "на Paul" (oops, we got a pun here) it means you threw garlic at Paul from above, for example, from a window.
"В" = "at". Я бросил чеснок в стену. Here I wanted to strike the wall.

I also have great trouble with expressions like "to kiss someone's hand"; "to slap someone's cheek"; "to hit someone in the nose"; "to step on someone's foot," "to pin a medal on someone's coat," "to spill paint/sauce/mud on someone's clothes," etc. (cases where there are logically two direct objects -- the person, and some thing or body part associated with the person.)

to kiss someone's hand = поцеловать [чью-нибудь] руку
to hit someone in the nose = ударить [кого-нибудь] в нос (по носу)
to step on someone's foot = наступить на [чью-нибудь] ногу
to pin a medal on someone's coat = приколоть медаль на [чей-нибудь] мундир/китель

I don't buy the 'warning shots' excuse, sorry.

It's completely your problem. I don't give a fck, sorry.

" Also, no option for 'status quo' - even though that would be a low percentage vote. It still needs to be an option. Pootin just utilizes the illusion of 'democracy' to get the desired result."

How can I argue with a person who even doesn't know what questions were in the voting paper? You look incompetent.

Pro-Russian Crimean officials. Who decided the wording and questioning? Same.

What do you mean? You think we allow you or other impudent Americans to decide which questions must be? LOL

Russian soldiers were already there. Big deal. It just made it that much easier to take over and ensure they get the results they wanted.

Russian soldiers had nothing to do with the referendum. And you know it for sure. Also they couldn't influence on the result.

there wasn't any consulation or discussion.

With whom? It's the business of Russian people and people of Crimea. All the needed consultations were conducted. Too little time? It's our problem, not yours. When Texas, Scotland or Quebec will separate, I will be the last man who cares about their speed.

Originally Posted by Paul G.

How can I argue with a person who even doesn't know what questions were in the voting paper? You look incompetent.


What do you mean? You think we allow you or other impudent Americans to decide which questions must be? LOL


Russian soldiers had nothing to do with the referendum. And you know it for sure. Also they couldn't influence on the result.


With whom? It's the business of Russian people and people of Crimea. All the needed consultations were conducted. Too little time? It's our problem, not yours. When Texas, Scotland or Quebec will separate, I will be the last man who cares about their speed.

"How can I argue with a person who even doesn't know what questions were in the voting paper? You look incompetent."
LOL! It's been translated and is all over the referendum topics online. I had it translated, also. You can't argue because you are not good at debate.

"What do you mean? You think we allow you or other impudent Americans to decide which questions must be? LOL"
I'm not American. I know from other posts of yours, you don't respect that Ukrainians might want a voice. Yes, even if they are misled, they still have a voice in their own country - the parts left, anyway.

"Russian soldiers had nothing to do with the referendum. And you know it for sure. Also they couldn't influence on the result."
They made sure no one met with anyone in Crimea to talk about it, didn't they? Your responses are getting tedious.

"With whom? It's the business of Russian people and people of Crimea. All the needed consultations were conducted."
Sure they were. I know you value freedoms and rights (yeah, right). Maybe when you personally feel yours are impinged, you might sing a different tune but your outlook is all self-centered and centric. It's good that the Russians got what they wanted. They are misled like Ukrainians, though, but they'll find out soon enough. However, the *mob majority* rules so at least you like that part of 'democracy' (LOL).

Can certain people stop discussing Crimea and the referendum in this thread please? You are distracting the topic which is Eastern Ukraine. There is one special thread for Crimea and one generic thread for anything Ukraine-related where you can discuss Crimea.

Originally Posted by Hanna

Can certain people stop discussing Crimea and the referendum in this thread please? You are distracting the topic which is Eastern Ukraine. There is one special thread for Crimea and one generic thread for anything Ukraine-related where you can discuss Crimea.

Ok, you're right.

LOL! It's been translated and is all over the referendum topics online. I had it translated, also. You can't argue because you are not good at debate.

If you had it translated, why did you write this bullshit about "status-quo"? They could vote for Ukraine as well. There was such a question.

you don't respect that Ukrainians might want a voice. Yes, even if they are misled, they still have a voice in their own country - the parts left, anyway.

Firstly, de jure there is no such country as Ukraine. So even if I want to ask someone I can't. Well, Americans can do that because this criminal Ukrainian Government is kinda "twin soul" for them.
Secondly, the right of Nations to self-determination doesn't imply asking someone. A nation just postulates its will and that's all. Of course, you know it, too. Because there is Kosovo's precedent, for example.

They made sure no one met with anyone in Crimea to talk about it, didn't they?

I don't understand the question. What do you mean? Who did meet with? Russian soldiers with the citizens? Or the citizens with each other?
Russian soldiers live in Crimea as ordinary people, with their families etc. I don't understand what you meant.
Anyway, Russian soldiers had nothing to do with the result. They just protected important objects because there was likelihood that Ukraininan soldiers (well, some of them) might fulfil criminal commands from Kiev. I even don't speak about armed Nazi bandits who wanted to come to Crimea and "teach" its inhabitants how to live further. Oh, I'm sure it would be a democratic choice and you would approve it!

They are misled like Ukrainians, though, but they'll find out soon enough.

I don't understand your hint. What will we find out? Make it clear and afterwards we can check it.

I have a question here. The so-called 'temporary government' in Ukraine, as the title suggests, were supposed to be temporary until the new elections would make a new Parliament and a new government. That, I think, was the plan. Now, the temporary government had already signed a couple of historic documents with huge long-term implications. Unilaterally, I stress. Without much consultation with the society. So, my question is when is the new Maidan planned to oust the power-greedy individuals who by all means exceeded their authority and start the trial in the Supreme Court of Ukraine subsequently cancelling their actions as anti-constitutional?

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Now, the temporary government had already signed a couple of historic documents with huge long-term implications. Unilaterally, I stress. Without much consultation with the society.

I got the impression that this was the plan right from the beginning. Bring up a new government, quickly sell everything they could sell, sign a few compelling treaties and inspire a near civil-war situation. Next Yulya will appear all in white and bring peace to Ukraine.

Originally Posted by Crocodile

I have a question here. The so-called 'temporary government' in Ukraine, as the title suggests, were supposed to be temporary until the new elections would make a new Parliament and a new government. That, I think, was the plan. Now, the temporary government had already signed a couple of historic documents with huge long-term implications. Unilaterally, I stress. Without much consultation with the society. So, my question is when is the new Maidan planned to oust the power-greedy individuals who by all means exceeded their authority and start the trial in the Supreme Court of Ukraine subsequently cancelling their actions as anti-constitutional?

After the victory in the war. During the foreign invasion even temporary government obviously have bigger credits.

Originally Posted by it-ogo

After the victory in a war.

What war?