The Instigator
chazbaz66
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Jifpop09
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points

USA has no right to tell Russia what they can do in Ukraine

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Jifpop09
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/8/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 767 times Debate No: 51954
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (10)
Votes (2)

 

chazbaz66

Pro

Here's why the US does not have the right to demand Russia to not invade Ukraine. Ukraine is unstable and virtually governmentless right now; Russia will stabilize the Crimea and any other regions it occupies. The areas Russia has occupied is made up of a population of people that are mainly Russian blooded. These areas were once apart of Russia, not just the Soviet Union, but the old Russian Empire. They were not given up by Russia but taken based on a treaty signed by other countries; not unlike how the Palestinians were killed raped and slaughtered by the Israeli's who returned to Israel because of the Balfour Declaration, made by an outside party, England.

A more important reason why the US cannot say anything on this issue is because it is hypocritical. Has the US never invaded a troubled nation? does Vietnam, Kuwait, and Iraq sound familiar? How many people in these countries had American blood? why did the US have a right to go into these places? American boys died over in these places for oil? Now Russia occupies a small portion of Ukraine where Russian blooded people live, and they stabilize the civil war torn region, and they are breaking international law? If you ask me, the UN should want to put the US in check if they can "break international law" while other countries "cant"
Jifpop09

Con

Here's why the US does not have the right to demand Russia to not invade Ukraine. Ukraine is unstable and virtually governmentless right now

Ukraine is unstable, but do you know where this unstability is stemming from? Russia itself. After they invaded Crimea, they have been stirring up pro russian nationalism and violence. Many millitia's are popping up all over the Ukraine, and we have substantial evidence that Russian agents are stirring them up on purpose, and they should be condemned for these actions.[1]



The areas Russia has occupied is made up of a population of people that are mainly Russian blooded.

And how is this a justifiable excuse for breaking multiple international laws? Are you so ignorant, where you believe the sovereign status of a nation should be determined by ethnic blood alone? For shame sir, I think you know better.[2]

Russia will stabilize the Crimea and any other regions it occupies.

And your proof is.........what? Is it their beautiful show of strength in Abkhazia[3]? Maybe how smoothly and casually them moved and stabilized Moldova's resource rich Transinistria region[4]. Lets not kid ourselves people. Russia will play this game for decades to come.

Oh, a civil war! Lets side with the rebels, help them secure independence, and move into the unrecognized nation, and deny were there. Truth is folks, whats happening in Ukraine is a repeat. Russia has already lined up its excuse to invade.

Get this! Russia, the great and splendous nation, has firmly told Ukraine NOT to resist the rebels. They said that "military preperation", would only "escalate" matters, and "warned" Ukraine against it. So, lets examine Russia's logic on this one......[5]

<They essentially want Ukraine to not arm its military, so the rebels wont feel threatened and fight.>




Now, if anyone of you has shown the slightest bit of intelligence, you would realize this is a thinly veiled excuse for yet another invasion. Don't be on the fool side of history people.

These areas were once apart of Russia, not just the Soviet Union, but the old Russian Empire.

So you want to talk about history do you? I'll tell you about Ukraines history. Lets start with the dark ages. Ukraine was a desolate place, mostly consisting of small tribal people. Then............came the vikings. They established a great city called Kiev, with a distinct culture from the small tribal kingdoms of Russia. Then as history progressed, and the vikings slowly lost their lands, Ukraine was divided into many small kingdoms and city states, until a prince secured the states, to form the kingdom of Kievan Rus. Following a couple of successor states to Kievan Rus, the lands were subjugated by the Polish-Lithuanian kingdom, and formed into a commonwealth.

After a series of partitions to Russia in the 1790's, the Tsar came to gradually gain more influence over the east, while Austria controlled the west. Once again, the Ukranian people had been thrown around between leaders.

For hundreds of ears the Tsar suppressed Ukranian self determination, until the unrest following WW1, where the Ukranians finnaly were ready to stand up to the abuse against the crown. They staged a vicious war of independence, which was crushed by the USSR regional oblasts, and passed over to a even more oppresive and inhumane regime. [6]

Now, after a 1500 year history of divison, the Ukranian people have finnaly recieved the independence that they have rightfully earned after much oppression. And here comes Russia, high and mightly once again liberating the poor souls of the iron curtain.Tell me again, why the fuk Russia is entitled to whatever they want.

Now, should we sit back and let this damn Putin character relive his glory years in the Soviet Union, or do we back up the Ukranian people, and help them avoid Russia's cheap imperial tactics? I say we do whats right. Whats neccesary. Show Putin that we wont stand for this, and we play by the rules now. Things have changed, and once again Russia's living in the past.

They were not given up by Russia but taken based on a treaty signed by other countries; not unlike how the Palestinians were killed raped and slaughtered by the Israeli's who returned to Israel because of the Balfour Declaration, made by an outside party, England.

So................... I was under the impression I was debating someone who did his homework?
Apparently not, or you would know that Russia lost Ukraine after the new federation divided the soviets into different countries. And soon after, Ukraine hosted a referendum. A legal one, unlike the fraud infested Crimean one. And I wont even go into Israel with you. Its clearly off topic.[7] [8]


A more important reason why the US cannot say anything on this issue is because it is hypocritical. Has the US never invaded a troubled nation? does Vietnam, Kuwait, and Iraq sound familiar? How many people in these countries had American blood? why did the US have a right to go into these places? American boys died over in these places for oil?

Wait, wait, wait! So, your telling me that the US is not allowed to do anything right due to things it did in the past? I was going to refrain from calling you an idiot, but well...........
And I'm not going to even put the time into arguing your obvious anti-american stance, which seems to have spread to Israel as well.

If you ask me, the UN should want to put the US in check if they can "break international law" while other countries "cant"

Unlikely, but I'm not really expecting any logic from you anymore. You see, the US has this little thing called the "veto". You didn't hear it from me, but this "veto" can be used to to overide any ruling by the security council. Something that Russia has used to stop the referendum from being called illegitimate.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alright, so thats all. I stand to reason that my opponent has no solid arguments. His R1 arguments were about some sort of entitlement that Russia gets. I wont even acknowledge his second paragraph. Really, the whole "They did it so we can too" argument is pathetic.

[1] http://www.reuters.com...

[2] http://www.nbcnews.com...

[3] http://www.washingtonpost.com...

[4] http://www.ibtimes.com...

[5]http://edition.cnn.com...

[6]http://www.torugg.org...

[7]http://www.coldwar.org...

[8] http://www.usatoday.com...
Debate Round No. 1
chazbaz66

Pro

chazbaz66 forfeited this round.
Jifpop09

Con

Vote Pro!
Debate Round No. 2
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Jifpop09 2 years ago
Jifpop09
Sorry, I meant con
Posted by ararmer1919 2 years ago
ararmer1919
Oh I woundnt be that foolish either. Of course oil was a factor. Might even one of the top 5. But it certainly wasn't THE factor and thier were literaly dozens of them. That's the point I like to get across. As for the troops taking oil pumps and what not. While I was not there personal I know and work with plenty who were including several who were those troops guarding the pumps. Taking over any enemies key natural resource facilities is a standard and important strategy in any war.
Posted by Jifpop09 2 years ago
Jifpop09
Aramer, I'm not so foolish to conspiracize that the Iraq war was over oil, but also wont lie to myself that it wasn't a 4th motivator. Not exactly why we invaded, but troops were diverted to stop hostile's from blowing the oil pumps following the occupation. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but some argue that we shouldn't voluntarily protect their resources. I disagree with them, but whatever.
Posted by Charliemouse 2 years ago
Charliemouse
ok so obviously neither of you is able to read in Russian nr Ukrainian. next, Russia has the right to take Crimea legally using underhand tactics but that doesn't make it right. Crimea has coal, a beautiful beach and an old Russian military base with nuclear loaded submarines and that's why Russia wanted Crimea rather than the whole country. the thing is that it was all very well played: the Maydan rebels overthrew Yanukovych and that idiot pissed off to Russia. we were left without a president so nobody was there to overrule Putin's theft of our city. legal but mean, and neither of you are right in everything you say but my sources are pretty damn straight. and finally, I gained just one ounce of respect for the usa govt after they decided not to get involved after all. it may have saved many, many American lives from Russia. so lastly, loom out America and all other countries out there. don't make the mistake we made. if you shake hands with Russia, you best count your fingers afterwords
Posted by ararmer1919 2 years ago
ararmer1919
Also their is no civila war in Ukraine so how is Russia stabilizing that? There is no oil in Vietnam. The US never invaded Kuwait, and Iraq war was NOT fought over oil. If your going to make such claims such as the US having no right to criticize Russia then maybe you should look up why these wars took place first.
Posted by ararmer1919 2 years ago
ararmer1919
Russia signed the treaty as well pro. And it's not taken. It was givin to the people of Ukraine.
Posted by Jifpop09 2 years ago
Jifpop09
No, its just the fact that we already debated something similar, it looks bad if you vote :(
Posted by Jevinigh 2 years ago
Jevinigh
I pull a hair for what ( anything) I do "comes off as".
Posted by Jifpop09 2 years ago
Jifpop09
Please don't vote on this though, as it might come off as strategic.
Posted by Jevinigh 2 years ago
Jevinigh
pssst Hey Pro. http://www.npr.org...

Also: http://www.telegraph.co.uk...

*slides back into the shadows*
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by ESocialBookworm 2 years ago
ESocialBookworm
chazbaz66Jifpop09Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by travis18352 2 years ago
travis18352
chazbaz66Jifpop09Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: pro forfited the debate and pro also didnt use any sources. con made a very informative argument therefor all points are awarded to con