I see you cited my question but could not in good faith respond to it:
“By setting up their own government and military structure, are the anti-Maidan Russian-speakers doing any thing different than the Iraqi Kurds did when they split off the northern provinces from Iraq?”
The US and UK helped the Iraqi Kurds set up their own government and military by operating the Northern No Fly Zone for nearly a decade.
So there is a precedent for what’s happening in Eastern Ukraine.
If 'New Russia" sets up its own government and military, do you favor an invasion by western Ukraine to destroy that new government and new military by force? You know use of force against civilian buildings etc 2008 Sakaashvilli style?
Well who knows, maybe NFBW will come up with some examples of past years’ horrible prosecution of Russian-speakers in Ukraine. He hasn’t so far, but one can hope.
[QUOTE=NotfooledbyW]
If 'New Russia" sets up its own government and military, do you favor an invasion by western Ukraine to destroy that new government and new military by force? You know use of force against civilian buildings etc 2008 Sakaashvilli style?
[/QUOTE]
See, here you are spinning again. There is no ‘western Ukraine’…there is THE UKRAINE. It’s all their sovereign territory, no matter how you try to spin this. So, do I favor the current government of the entire Ukraine using force to bring potential breakaway provinces back into the fold? Yeah, I do, though obviously as a last resort.
Let me ask YOU a question (that you won’t answer, because you’ll spin and dance for all you are worth)…would you favor, oh, say the US government using force to bring the break away states back into the union in, oh, let’s just say 1861? I mean, let’s be honest here…the southern states probably DID have a majority of people who were in favor of breaking away from the union, unlike this farce of vote this weekend, with it’s swing from 60-70% polled in favor of staying in the Ukraine to 90+% now magically in favor of breaking away. Was the US justified in it’s use of force to hold it’s union together?
Um, no. The two situations are nothing alike…except in your own mind.
There is nothing to respond to, since it’s a stupid fucking assertion of situations that aren’t remotely similar, except in your own mind. The key aspect is what I DID respond too, which, stunningly, you fucking ignored, which is that the vote itself was a farce and has zero legality. But you want to pretend it does, and then make ridiculous analogies to the Kurds in Iraq post-GW I.
You say there is no western Ukraine. So if I were to drive west from Donetsk, I would not travel through the western regions of Ukraine. I would instead cross the border into eastern Poland or eastern Hungary.
And why does Wikipedia define such a place as western Ukraine?
They even use Western Ukraine with a capital “W”.
The rest of your argument goes downhill from your first error.
And Yes the southern states needed to defeat the north in order to secede. The Feds were justified in 1861 to force the south to remain in the Union.
The southern states joined the union voluntarily and agreed to be governed by the Federal government.
And there was no unconstitutional trigger in 1860 such as a violent protest leading to the overthrow of the elected President who was popular with the South.
You need to learn to assess facts and incorporate them into your arguments, if you wish to argue in good faith.
That had to be one of the most convoluted load of horseshit I’ve ever seen. Because there is a wiki article about Western Ukraine, suddenly that means that they are really separate countries. Good thing there isn’t a wiki article about the Western United States…or, I don’t know, South West England, say…
[QUOTE=NotfooledbyW]
And Yes the southern states needed to defeat the north in order to secede. The Feds were justified in 1861 to force the south to remain in the Union.
The southern states joined the union voluntarily and agreed to be governed by the Federal government.
And there was no unconstitutional trigger in 1860 such as a violent protest leading to the overthrow of the elected President who was popular with the South.
[/QUOTE]
Good grief. You are really something. :rolleyes: So, basically you are still on about your buddy Yanukovych being tossed out due to the ‘violent protest’ (and still ignoring WHY it turned violent, or why he had to flee). Yet you see some sort of similarity between what happened with the Kurd’s in Northern Iraq, while totally rejecting (because it’s inconvenient to your position) the analogy between this situation and the US Civil War?
How is my argument not in good faith? As for the rest, that exploding noise was my industrial strength irony meter…you fucking melted it down with this one. You are so far off the scale that the number has too many zeroes to count.
My asserted facts that you have not tried to refute are not dependent upon the legality or the accuracy of the quite imperfect referendum vote. Since you have no way to confirm your statement that the vote is a farce there is no reason to argue against your opinion that it is a farce. I say it matters what the people in the anti-Maidan regions think about it and not what someone who does not live there thinks about it.
It is not arguing in good faith to suggest that my reference to western Ukraine means that I believe for one second that western and eastern and northern and southern and central Ukraine are separate countries. I never said that and am pointing out another major error in your argument.
If 'New Russia" sets up its own government and military, do you favor an invasion by the interim Federal Government of Ukraine to destroy that new government and new military by force? You know use of force against civilian buildings etc 2008 Sakaashvilli style?
And if the interim Ukrainian government does launch an attack on the separatist regions and succeeds in driving the separatists out of government buildings, what then? Do they bring in police from western Ukraine to maintain order? How do you think that will go?
I am not ignoring anything. You have made another mistaken assumption. I am dealing with facts by not presuming to know why a peaceful protest turned violent for the purpose of assessing blame. Sticking to facts on February 18, eleven police were killed during the Maidan protests. Twice as many protesters died on that day. My statement was that Yanukovich was forced out of office by violent protest and that the people now seeking to separate their regions from the interim government of Ukraine had nothing to do with any of that violence that occurred in Ukraine. Yet the violent protest leads to a drastic change in the lives of several million people and their heritage and economuc ties to Russia.
“By setting up their own government and military structure, are the anti-Maidan Russian-speakers doing any thing different than the Iraqi Kurds did when they split off the northern provinces from Iraq?”
Did or did not the Kurds set up their own government and military and achieve complete autonomy from the regime in Baghdad prior to the US and UK invasion of Iraq in 2003?
Yes. It is different. Kurds were oppressed, and massacred, in tens of thousands, by Saddam’s regime. You have yet to point out even one example of oppression of “Russian-speakers” in Ukraine prior to some of them starting to clamor for secession.
No need. My question is not that.
“By setting up their own government and military structure, are the anti-Maidan Russian-speakers doing any thing different than the Iraqi Kurds did when they split off the northern provinces from Iraq?”
What is different about setting up your own government and military and becoming autonomous from a central authority?
The reasons. Kurds were oppressed, and massacred, in tens of thousands, by Saddam’s regime. You have yet to point out even one example of oppression of “Russian-speakers” in Ukraine prior to some of them starting to clamor for secession.
So, you gots nuffing. Simply more of your blind faith that everything was on the up and up, despite the evident huge swing from 60-70% for staying in the Ukraine translating into fucking 90+% for ‘independence’. I mean, anyone with even a minimum of skepticism would question 90% of ANY population voting for anything. But, what the fuck, you swallowed that line for the Crimea, why not here too? And as for those polls, well, you didn’t take them, and thus you can hand wave that away as well because, frankly, you have zero ability for critical thinking. And both pieces of evidence together? Oh, no problem for you to swallow that as well, so all is good.
The violence was BECAUSE of the government response. THAT’S WHAT YOU AREN’T ADDRESSING! That’s the narrative you are trying to handwave aside. There are a bunch of timelines of events (in fact, I posted one earlier in this cluster fuck of a thread…that you ignored), but hell, let’s go with al Jazeera (since I assume you would agree they are about as neutral as it gets, and actually their timeline is pretty damned good):
Notice that actual story…your buddy decides, against his earlier campaign promises, to abandon the treaty with the EU and instead move closer to Russia’s sphere of influence (after Putin buys $15 billion in Ukrainian debt and drops the price of gas…wonder why the shift? :p). Protests ensue…NON-VIOLENT protests to this point. Then, ‘Anti-protest laws are passed and quickly condemned as “draconian”’. Yeah, your buddy was the sole of democracy there, ehe? Then ‘Two protesters die after being hit with live ammunition. A third dies following a fall during confrontation with police’. Starting to see some kind of pattern here? Of COURSE you aren’t, because you blindly follow your own narrative about violent protesters and the poor, beleaguered President having to flee from ‘thugs’ and unconstitutional coups and other happy horseshit like that. I don’t think you’ve actually even bothered to try and grasp the complexity of this situation, or even WHY your buddy was deposed, since it doesn’t mesh with your own ridiculous world view on this subject. But, let’s move on:
Notice the escalation here? People tried to protest. Protest stifled. Protesters arrested. Protesters killed by police. Protesters take Kiev City Hall. They negotiate a settlement in exchange for the release of 234 prisoners(!!). More protests leading to clashed between protesters and police…MORE protesters die. Protesters say fuck it and take back government buildings. Then GOVERNMENT SNIPERS SHOOT PROTESTERS FROM ROOFTOPS (despite Red’s attempted narrative about how the protesters were shooting themselves to…well, do something). What happens next?
I’m sure none of this is going to sink through, but I’m sick of hearing your pro-Russian narrative that attempts to spin things so that it’s the poor Yanukovich who has to flee (for reasons unknown but probably having to do with the EU and evil US…or something) the nasty, thugish protesters and evil parliament who seized power for no reason other than they wanted to depose the rightful king. While YOU won’t read the actual narrative, hopefully someone who is on the fence about this and has the ability to slog through page after turgid page of your pedantic rhetoric and loopy logic will.
1.Where are you getting this 60-70% figure from? The Pew poll does not provide specific figures for the Donetsk and Lugansk oblasts. Instead, it talks about an arbitrarily defined “East Ukraine” in which Donetsk and Lugansk are lumped in with 9 other regions, where the level of support for separatism or autonomy is much lower. This “East” region does not represent Donetsk and Lugansk. For example, it includes Poltava oblast, which, for all intents an purposes, is a part of central Ukraine in terms of identity and so on. Sumy oblast (other than Putivl county, which has an ethnic Russian majority) is also basically a central Ukrainian region, even if it is technically located in the north-east.
The vote was not on “independence” from Ukraine but on “self-reliance” for the Donetsk and Lugansk regions. There’s a difference. They deliberately stopped short of using the word “independence.” This was undoubtedly done to leave room for wide autonomy within Ukraine. However, if the Ukrainian government refuses to give them wide autonomy and continues to try to suppress the movement by force, using heavy weaponry against civilians, don’t be surprised if they push for full independence.
[QUOTE=FactChecker]
1.Where are you getting this 60-70% figure from? The Pew poll does not provide specific figures for the Donetsk and Lugansk oblasts. Instead, it talks about an arbitrarily defined “East Ukraine” in which Donetsk and Lugansk are lumped in with 9 other regions, where the level of support for separatism or autonomy is much lower. This “East” region does not represent Donetsk and Lugansk. For example, it includes Poltava oblast, which, for all intents an purposes, is a part of central Ukraine in terms of identity and so on. Sumy oblast (other than Putivl county, which has an ethnic Russian majority) is also basically a central Ukrainian region, even if it is technically located in the north-east.
[/QUOTE]
The Pew report cited up thread. Honestly, I don’t know enough about the region to parse what the figures meant. What I DO know is that you’d be hard pressed to find a population that would actually vote for 90% that the sun would rise in the east and set in the west, or that the sky was blue, let alone something like this.
The reason why I put independence in quote was because that was the term used by the poster I was engaged with up thread. Yes, the actual vote wasn’t for independence, it stopped short…thus the quote marks for the word.
As for being surprised, I won’t be, since I think this is all part of a choreographed dance being orchestrated by Russia using Russian agents or pro-Russian groups in eastern Ukraine, and that eventually they will attempt to break away, not to be independent (or even ‘independent’ :p) but to basically be annexed by Russia in the same way the Crimea was. That’s the trajectory for all of this, IMHO and FWIW, and that’s regardless of whether the Ukraine decides to fight for that territory or not. Guess we shall see.
