Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Until I figure out how to un-close it, at least.

0 (0%)

So yeah.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 0

Voting closed: May 01, 2014, 02:06:40 pm

[smjjames]

I'm going to ask again, do you think a vote result of 95% of the entire Crimean population is a REALISTIC number? Not just Sevastopol, ALL of Crimea.

"There was TV and internet reports of ukranians(natives, not russians with passports) submitting vote for secession and explaining their rationale. It's just escaped western media and I don't see a reason to repost it, because it's going to be axed immediately as a propaganda. Hint - pension and average wage size."

That's completely reasonable, some ethnic Ukranians might vote for secession and some ethnic Russians might vote against.

[XXSockXX]

I'm never very comfortable with the whole "territorial integrity of Ukraine must be respected" thing. I've spent the last three years arguing against the territorial integrity of the UK, Spain, Russia, Mali, Sri Lanka, China, the USA, Canada, France, Belgium... the list goes on.

Granted the Ukrainian Crisis is far more about "territory" and territory being annexed by another nation (Russia), not nationalist movements in favour of minorities like the Tatars.

Well, look at it this way: foreign countries (in this case Russia) must respect a country's (in this Ukraine's) territorial integrity. I'm pretty sure views on Crimea going independent or even joining Russia would have been a bit more favourable if the whole thing went down differently.
After all you're not in favour of achieving Scottish independence by France unilaterally invoking the Auld Alliance and invading the UK.

There was TV and internet reports of ukranians(natives, not russians with passports) submitting vote for secession and explaining their rationale. It's just escaped western media and I don't see a reason to repost it, because it's going to be axed immediately as a propaganda. Hint - pension and average wage size.

We need to comply with the idea that both eastern and western media brainwash us equally. "West" somehow thinks they doesnt brainwashed at all and their media is crystal clean. It's not.
Problem is - I actually don't watch russian tv and I read news from both sides of story, and typical westerner don't have such a luxury. Let's put it bluntly - you are misinformed.

Take for example Russian-Georgian conflict. You have your side of story. Then ask me what's going to happen if you come to Abkhazia with "I am Georgian" sign strapped to you. Thats another part of story.

That's not exactly true. Media here have been reporting that some people in Eastern Ukraine want to secede, it's just a question how representative that is. Last I heard the government in Kiev is thinking about letting them have a referendum, presumably about federalism and more autonomy.

Same with Georgia, while some media blamed Russia, it was pretty clear that the Georgian government was not blameless either.

[gogis]

Some sociology. Note that it was taken before the events in Crimea
http://www.kiis.com.ua/?lang=eng&cat=reports&id=236&page=1

Now think how people would ask the same questions

specially for Gogis: note that 66% of the people who supported Maydan wanted to have friendly relationships with Russia. Friendly up to the point of customs union. Even more. 58.4% of Svoboda supporters (nationalists, BTW) wanted the same

Also, note that 41% of Crimeans  wanted to join Russia. Only 41%. In a poll taken one month before the "referendum"

Fixed an error, looked in a wrong column

I literally don't trust any social report. Any country(capitalize it). It's so easy to manipulate that numbers it's not even funny (and yes, I imply "everywhere" here). I don't even want to discuss legitimacy of Crimea elections. Can I believe in 96 figure? Yes. Is it real? I have no idea.

You also fail big time here, because that poll was gathered before all that strange events.
And also Customs Union means No Europe. You understand that?
And not going to flame war here, russia and ukraine is "brothers", ofc most is going to be pro friendly relations. Hating is minority.

p.s. Do you realize all that shiz is about NATO going east?

[Owlbread]

If Eastern countries decide to join NATO that is their choice. It is not the Russian government's place to invade them and coerce them into doing what they want.

[gogis]

Same with Georgia, while some media blamed Russia, it was pretty clear that the Georgian government was not blameless either.

Well, most "general" west media see that as a pure agression act. In reality, in Abkhazia you will be celebrated as a russian and will be knived on sight as a georgian. That what I am talking about. It's great that you aware about controversy, but many not, this forum included. What Russia did in Crimea is a shady as fuck, but "west" did it worse. You can deny credibility of rumors of west orchestrating all damn thing, but in reality every damn russian belive it now. They watch this fucking TV. I was caught by surprise couple weeks ago when I was going from pub to home and taxi driver went ablaze about west, concluding in the end "fuck the west". I was dozed and everything and he was keep talking about Egypt and whatever, but he was damn clear about west. Irony is that he was clearly from Caucasus, idk, basically any nationality but russian (by origin). It was a wake call for me, some shit happens, and I don't like smell of it.

If you aware of media shenanigans(do you?) doesnt make it like everybody aware. We talk new cold war here, and it's scary

[Sergarr]

If Eastern countries decide to join NATO that is their choice. It is not the Russian government's place to invade them and coerce them into doing what they want.

But it is so cool~.

[gogis]

If Eastern countries decide to join NATO that is their choice. It is not the Russian government's place to invade them and coerce them into doing what they want.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/nato-s-eastward-expansion-did-the-west-break-its-promise-to-moscow-a-663315.html

[smjjames]

If Eastern countries decide to join NATO that is their choice. It is not the Russian government's place to invade them and coerce them into doing what they want.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/nato-s-eastward-expansion-did-the-west-break-its-promise-to-moscow-a-663315.html

A promise not to interfere with the eastern European nations or invade them would likely have had to be made by Moscow in order for those promises to be made.

It's one for the diplomats to argue over.

[XXSockXX]

Same with Georgia, while some media blamed Russia, it was pretty clear that the Georgian government was not blameless either.

Well, most "general" west media see that as a pure agression act. In reality, in Abkhazia you will be celebrated as a russian and will be knived on sight as a georgian. That what I am talking about. It's great that you aware about controversy, but many not, this forum included. What Russia did in Crimea is a shady as fuck, but "west" did it worse. You can deny credibility of rumors of west orchestrating all damn thing, but in reality every damn russian belive it now. They watch this fucking TV. I was caught by surprise couple weeks ago when I was going from pub to home and taxi driver went ablaze about west, concluding in the end "fuck the west". I was dozed and everything and he was keep talking about Egypt and whatever, but he was damn clear about west. Irony is that he was clearly from Caucasus, idk, basically any nationality but russian (by origin). It was a wake call for me, some shit happens, and I don't like smell of it.

If you aware of media shenanigans(do you?) doesnt make it like everybody aware. We talk new cold war here, and it's scary

Well, the problem is, there is no "general" Western media, as there is no "West" as a monolithic entity, even less than Russia is a monolithic entity, since the "West" is actually many very different countries. German media did have plenty of different opinions about the Georgia conflict, as it does now about Ukraine. US media, which I don't follow as closely, may be a bit more one-sided, but generally with 3 "Western" journalists you get 5 different opinions on most issues.

For example this:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/nato-s-eastward-expansion-did-the-west-break-its-promise-to-moscow-a-663315.htm

is an opinion you can hear quite often in German media, but it is not the only opinion and not necessarily the dominant one.

[gogis]

Gogis, I'm going to try to put this as simply as I can. This is not an attack, I am not a member of this argument, I don't care either way right now who is right or who is wrong. That said:

Your comprehension of english is not the problem. From what I can tell, you seem to understand what people mean fairly well. The PROBLEM is YOUR communication. The words you choose, the structure of your sentences, they make it extremely difficult to understand what your point is. When people say "I don't understand you," it is not an attack, it is them telling you "I do not know what you are trying to say and therefore cannot respond to your arguments."

People are not being grammar nazis, they are not nit-picking the use of "your" versus "you're" to attack you. They legitimately do not understand what it is you are trying to say, and because they do not understand, they cannot make a response to your statements.

And while you may be able to explain why your English-writing ability is lacking, being able to explain a problem does not make the problem go away. Even if we know why your sentences do not make sense, that does not mean they start making sense without any change.

Yeah I am ware of that problem. Problem is that any kind of way to learn english I found lately means grinding through all that simple words. But I know all that words for a decades, I know both american and  british pronouncing, actually, I just can't find a way to learn sentence structure and grammar and all that shit.

Then ask for help!

I don't need that. That call is usual for somebody sick... My english skills is not mandatory at my work or/and somehow affect my life. It's a complementary hobby(i watch alot of us/uk tvshows). I realise that you have a right to demand better content from me, but you can't deny that I can demand better content from you. This threads was filled with bullshit of cosmic proportions, so I wrote some lines in response. Like it or not. I also was warned because I wrote "I have KGB ties" and somehow it's looked like a real threat, despite the fact KGB does not exists for more than 20 years. I stick to my guns, I am black swan here, I am hated and belittled here, it's actually makes it's fun.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

If Eastern countries decide to join NATO that is their choice. It is not the Russian government's place to invade them and coerce them into doing what they want.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/nato-s-eastward-expansion-did-the-west-break-its-promise-to-moscow-a-663315.html

Can you provide a proof of that promise? I mean a document, a treaty. Words of Putin "NATO promised us" don't qualify. Even words of some Western politician doesn't qualify. In international relationships you need a piece of a paper

[gogis]

Well, the problem is, there is no "general" Western media, as there is no "West" as a monolithic entity, even less than Russia is a monolithic entity, since the "West" is actually many very different countries. German media did have plenty of different opinions about the Georgia conflict, as it does now about Ukraine. US media, which I don't follow as closely, may be a bit more one-sided, but generally with 3 "Western" journalists you get 5 different opinions on most issues.

I actually hold no grudge to german media (call this coincidence), but US media? General line of thinking? Bias is obvious.

[Owlbread]

Well, look at it this way: foreign countries (in this case Russia) must respect a country's (in this Ukraine's) territorial integrity. I'm pretty sure views on Crimea going independent or even joining Russia would have been a bit more favourable if the whole thing went down differently.
After all you're not in favour of achieving Scottish independence by France unilaterally invoking the Auld Alliance and invading the UK.

Yeah, I agree. My problem is when a part of a country, like Azawad in Mali, fought for its independence and declared it unilaterally then was quashed by the French and African Union on the excuse of "protecting the territorial integrity of Mali". That was wrong. The Crimean situation is very different indeed.

[smjjames]

Gogis, I'm going to try to put this as simply as I can. This is not an attack, I am not a member of this argument, I don't care either way right now who is right or who is wrong. That said:

Your comprehension of english is not the problem. From what I can tell, you seem to understand what people mean fairly well. The PROBLEM is YOUR communication. The words you choose, the structure of your sentences, they make it extremely difficult to understand what your point is. When people say "I don't understand you," it is not an attack, it is them telling you "I do not know what you are trying to say and therefore cannot respond to your arguments."

People are not being grammar nazis, they are not nit-picking the use of "your" versus "you're" to attack you. They legitimately do not understand what it is you are trying to say, and because they do not understand, they cannot make a response to your statements.

And while you may be able to explain why your English-writing ability is lacking, being able to explain a problem does not make the problem go away. Even if we know why your sentences do not make sense, that does not mean they start making sense without any change.

Yeah I am ware of that problem. Problem is that any kind of way to learn english I found lately means grinding through all that simple words. But I know all that words for a decades, I know both american and  british pronouncing, actually, I just can't find a way to learn sentence structure and grammar and all that shit.

Then ask for help!

I don't need that. That call is usual for somebody sick... My english skills is not mandatory at my work or/and somehow affect my life. It's a complementary hobby(i watch alot of us/uk tvshows). I realise that you have a right to demand better content from me, but you can't deny that I can demand better content from you. This threads was filled with bullshit of cosmic proportions, so I wrote some lines in response. Like it or not. I also was warned because I wrote "I have KGB ties" and somehow it's looked like a real threat, despite the fact KGB does not exists for more than 20 years. I stick to my guns, I am black swan here, I am hated and belittled here, it's actually makes it's fun.

If you don't want help, then fine, but at least don't take a question asking for clarification of what you said as an attack.

The point Descan was making is that you are not always clear in your writing, so if someone isn't sure what you said and asks you to clarify, then clarify.

[gogis]

If Eastern countries decide to join NATO that is their choice. It is not the Russian government's place to invade them and coerce them into doing what they want.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/nato-s-eastward-expansion-did-the-west-break-its-promise-to-moscow-a-663315.html

Can you provide a proof of that promise? I mean a document, a treaty. Words of Putin "NATO promised us" don't qualify. Even words of some Western politician doesn't qualify. In international relationships you need a piece of a paper

What happened with a good old gentleman word? Should I cite Bismark right now?