Total Posts:90|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Russia's actions in Crimea are imperialistic.

Jifpop09
Posts: 2,243
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2014 11:47:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Copy and Pasted from Poll

All the signs are there. Russia relied heavily on control of the black sea, for oil and other shipping. After the puppet was ousted, he most likely feared his privileges would be taken out with the president, including his precious fleet. That's imperialism, and with any luck, we'll freeze the assets of every Russian with any influence, and starve Russia into obliteration. They never got out of the recession, and are still having major trouble with slow growth and the collapse of big business. People who are criticizing the sanctions, how can you possibly expect results in the first two days? Its impossible.
Leader of the DDO Revolution Party
Jifpop09
Posts: 2,243
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 11:30:51 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/22/2014 4:54:00 AM, Juris wrote:
Russia wants to have its supremacy back ...

Agreed, many Russians over 30 lived through the Soviet era, and they pretty much lost all their power in a matter of day. I can't blame them for wanting to take back what they originally had, but I can't condone their actions.
Leader of the DDO Revolution Party
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 12:07:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 11:47:59 PM, Jifpop09 wrote:
Copy and Pasted from Poll

All the signs are there. Russia relied heavily on control of the black sea, for oil and other shipping. After the puppet was ousted, he most likely feared his privileges would be taken out with the president, including his precious fleet. That's imperialism, and with any luck, we'll freeze the assets of every Russian with any influence, and starve Russia into obliteration. They never got out of the recession, and are still having major trouble with slow growth and the collapse of big business. People who are criticizing the sanctions, how can you possibly expect results in the first two days? Its impossible.

To brand it imperialism and have the charge stick you have to maintain credibility. That credibility was lost with Kosovo and especially Iraq. But the question is: is credibility important? Not to the US/Nato who think they can win the propaganda war against Russia even without any remaining crediblility on their side.

Whether or not the sanctions have any effect on Russia, one thing is certain and that is that Russia will not yield to the pressure. The Crimea is too vital to their interests. The only thing that is most likely ensured is that there will be another cold war and that is going to be costly for all sides.

Question: Can all sides endure?
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 12:10:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/22/2014 4:54:00 AM, Juris wrote:
Russia wants to have its supremacy back ...

No, Russia was content with the status quo. US/Nato interference in the Ukraine and the illegal overthrow of Ukarine's government was what changed the situation.

Perhaps the US/Nato didn't think they could have won the popular vote of the people of the entire Ukraine. Perhaps Russia thought that it couldn't win either. With the Crimea being now separate, Russia can't win the popular vote in the remainder.
Juan_Pablo
Posts: 2,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 12:42:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/21/2014 11:47:59 PM, Jifpop09 wrote:
Copy and Pasted from Poll

All the signs are there. Russia relied heavily on control of the black sea, for oil and other shipping. After the puppet was ousted, he most likely feared his privileges would be taken out with the president, including his precious fleet. That's imperialism, and with any luck, we'll freeze the assets of every Russian with any influence, and starve Russia into obliteration. They never got out of the recession, and are still having major trouble with slow growth and the collapse of big business. People who are criticizing the sanctions, how can you possibly expect results in the first two days? Its impossible.

Yes. What President Putin did in Crimea is absolutely criminal. Sanctions will hurt this Russian government, and they will be used to prevent the Russians from claiming anymore territory in the Ukraine and that part of the world. In my very unprofessional opinion, ultimately the interim government of the Ukraine (and the eventual government that replaces after elections are held) will have to sit down with Russia (and other parties it invites) to negotiate and agree on what will become of Crimea; if Crimea goes to Russia, I see no way that Russia can walk away from this a complete winner; I mean Russia is going to have to make serious concessions to the Ukraine. A nation can't just break international laws and expect to get away with it without serious international repercussions.

As for the United States, there are reasons why we're going to want to maintain relations with Russia, as painful as this might be, and two of these reasons include Syria and Iran.

Currently the international community is trying to destroy all of Syria's chemical stockpiles, to prevent them from being used (they're illegal in the first place). And of course there is the whole issue of the Civil War in that country, which has killed hundreds of thousands of people. It's in the interest of the United States and other developed nations to see this come to an end, for the benefit of Syrians!

And we must absolutely make sure that Iran isn't allowed to construct nuclear weapons. This is something that effects the United States directly and personally. We need Russia to place pressure on Iran, so that it follows the agreement that has been made.

That's my very unprofessional opinion on this matter.

It's my greatest wish that Crimea is returned to the Ukraine and that the Russians decide to fully cooperate with us on Syria and Iran. Hopefully this is the route that's taken.
Jifpop09
Posts: 2,243
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 12:55:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/22/2014 12:07:33 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/21/2014 11:47:59 PM, Jifpop09 wrote:
Copy and Pasted from Poll

All the signs are there. Russia relied heavily on control of the black sea, for oil and other shipping. After the puppet was ousted, he most likely feared his privileges would be taken out with the president, including his precious fleet. That's imperialism, and with any luck, we'll freeze the assets of every Russian with any influence, and starve Russia into obliteration. They never got out of the recession, and are still having major trouble with slow growth and the collapse of big business. People who are criticizing the sanctions, how can you possibly expect results in the first two days? Its impossible.


To brand it imperialism and have the charge stick you have to maintain credibility. That credibility was lost with Kosovo and especially Iraq. But the question is: is credibility important? Not to the US/Nato who think they can win the propaganda war against Russia even without any remaining crediblility on their side.

Whether or not the sanctions have any effect on Russia, one thing is certain and that is that Russia will not yield to the pressure. The Crimea is too vital to their interests. The only thing that is most likely ensured is that there will be another cold war and that is going to be costly for all sides.

Question: Can all sides endure?

For the last time, you ignorant troll. What the fuk do Kosovo and Irq have to do with Crimea? You don't care about the situation. You just feel like bashing the US. Which must I add, is awesome.
Leader of the DDO Revolution Party
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 1:07:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/22/2014 12:55:13 PM, Jifpop09 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 12:07:33 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/21/2014 11:47:59 PM, Jifpop09 wrote:
Copy and Pasted from Poll

All the signs are there. Russia relied heavily on control of the black sea, for oil and other shipping. After the puppet was ousted, he most likely feared his privileges would be taken out with the president, including his precious fleet. That's imperialism, and with any luck, we'll freeze the assets of every Russian with any influence, and starve Russia into obliteration. They never got out of the recession, and are still having major trouble with slow growth and the collapse of big business. People who are criticizing the sanctions, how can you possibly expect results in the first two days? Its impossible.


To brand it imperialism and have the charge stick you have to maintain credibility. That credibility was lost with Kosovo and especially Iraq. But the question is: is credibility important? Not to the US/Nato who think they can win the propaganda war against Russia even without any remaining crediblility on their side.

Whether or not the sanctions have any effect on Russia, one thing is certain and that is that Russia will not yield to the pressure. The Crimea is too vital to their interests. The only thing that is most likely ensured is that there will be another cold war and that is going to be costly for all sides.

Question: Can all sides endure?

For the last time, you ignorant troll. What the fuk do Kosovo and Irq have to do with Crimea? You don't care about the situation. You just feel like bashing the US. Which must I add, is awesome.

I feel your seething rage right through my monitor! But no matter how much you rage it's not enough. And so, if you are capable of calming down then you might want to try to answer the question on how Iraq and Kosovo differed in legality from what Russia has done.

And I'll begin by granting you that the legality of all three is questionable. However, Russia can claim the moral high ground through the results of the referendum. The US/Nato can't on Kosovo or Iraq.

I contend that Iraq was the most egregiously clear cut of aggression the world has seen since WW2 or Vietnam.

Rage on you fool, because it's only going to strengthen the idea that a fool is what you are. I revel in it!
Jifpop09
Posts: 2,243
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 1:09:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/22/2014 1:07:54 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 12:55:13 PM, Jifpop09 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 12:07:33 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/21/2014 11:47:59 PM, Jifpop09 wrote:
Copy and Pasted from Poll

All the signs are there. Russia relied heavily on control of the black sea, for oil and other shipping. After the puppet was ousted, he most likely feared his privileges would be taken out with the president, including his precious fleet. That's imperialism, and with any luck, we'll freeze the assets of every Russian with any influence, and starve Russia into obliteration. They never got out of the recession, and are still having major trouble with slow growth and the collapse of big business. People who are criticizing the sanctions, how can you possibly expect results in the first two days? Its impossible.


To brand it imperialism and have the charge stick you have to maintain credibility. That credibility was lost with Kosovo and especially Iraq. But the question is: is credibility important? Not to the US/Nato who think they can win the propaganda war against Russia even without any remaining crediblility on their side.

Whether or not the sanctions have any effect on Russia, one thing is certain and that is that Russia will not yield to the pressure. The Crimea is too vital to their interests. The only thing that is most likely ensured is that there will be another cold war and that is going to be costly for all sides.

Question: Can all sides endure?

For the last time, you ignorant troll. What the fuk do Kosovo and Irq have to do with Crimea? You don't care about the situation. You just feel like bashing the US. Which must I add, is awesome.

I feel your seething rage right through my monitor! But no matter how much you rage it's not enough. And so, if you are capable of calming down then you might want to try to answer the question on how Iraq and Kosovo differed in legality from what Russia has done.

And I'll begin by granting you that the legality of all three is questionable. However, Russia can claim the moral high ground through the results of the referendum. The US/Nato can't on Kosovo or Iraq.

I contend that Iraq was the most egregiously clear cut of aggression the world has seen since WW2 or Vietnam.

Rage on you fool, because it's only going to strengthen the idea that a fool is what you are. I revel in it!

The problem is, we are not talking about if the US was justified, which it wasn't (Kosovo was). We are talking about Russia's actions. Somehow you justify what their doing, because another country also did it -_-. The stupidity is seething through MY monitor.
Leader of the DDO Revolution Party
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 1:37:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Jifpop09 said: "
The problem is, we are not talking about if the US was justified, which it wasn't (Kosovo was). We are talking about Russia's actions. Somehow you justify what their doing, because another country also did it."

That's better! It's something that can be addressed in a sane and sensible way.

The problem is not whether it's legally justified or not. That's of minor importance in the eyes of the world. The problem is always going to be whether it's seen to be morally justifiable. And I say that in this case Russia can claim the moral high ground.

But if Russia can do that then is it dependent on precedent? I believe the US and Nato set the bar much lower than the Crimea grab with both Kosovo and Iraq. Especially low with Iraq.

And so the question becomes, will the world come together in condemning Russia for it's venture in Crimea. I think it the world won't. China certainly won't, and didn't by it's refusal to vote with the US at the UNSC.

I'm saying that aggression just justifies more aggression and it's a fact of life you are going to have to accept.

As to military intervention by the US/Nato to gain back the Crimea? LOL! it's not on the table!

Thank you for quelling your outrage long enough to make a rational point.
Jifpop09
Posts: 2,243
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 1:39:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/22/2014 1:37:11 PM, monty1 wrote:
Jifpop09 said: "
The problem is, we are not talking about if the US was justified, which it wasn't (Kosovo was). We are talking about Russia's actions. Somehow you justify what their doing, because another country also did it."

That's better! It's something that can be addressed in a sane and sensible way.

The problem is not whether it's legally justified or not. That's of minor importance in the eyes of the world. The problem is always going to be whether it's seen to be morally justifiable. And I say that in this case Russia can claim the moral high ground.

But if Russia can do that then is it dependent on precedent? I believe the US and Nato set the bar much lower than the Crimea grab with both Kosovo and Iraq. Especially low with Iraq.

And so the question becomes, will the world come together in condemning Russia for it's venture in Crimea. I think it the world won't. China certainly won't, and didn't by it's refusal to vote with the US at the UNSC.

I'm saying that aggression just justifies more aggression and it's a fact of life you are going to have to accept.

As to military intervention by the US/Nato to gain back the Crimea? LOL! it's not on the table!

Thank you for quelling your outrage long enough to make a rational point.

I like how you only quote the part of my argument you agree with -_-. Where do you live Monty?
Leader of the DDO Revolution Party
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 1:40:09 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
And I should have also asked you jifpop, do you think that any 'legal' mechanism can be employed by the US/Nato to ameliorate the problem? LOL It would be like blowing smoke up a dead dog's as-!
ararmer1919
Posts: 362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 3:13:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/22/2014 12:10:59 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 4:54:00 AM, Juris wrote:
Russia wants to have its supremacy back ...

No, Russia was content with the status quo. US/Nato interference in the Ukraine and the illegal overthrow of Ukarine's government was what changed the situation.

Perhaps the US/Nato didn't think they could have won the popular vote of the people of the entire Ukraine. Perhaps Russia thought that it couldn't win either. With the Crimea being now separate, Russia can't win the popular vote in the remainder.

I still don't see how you can compare this three incidents. I'll try and help here. Is the US still in Iraq or Kosovo? Is the US government the government of Kosovo or Iraq? Is the US the ruler of these nations? Are they colonies or territories? Did we annex them and absorb them into the US?

Now answer all those (and just to help you out the answer is no). Then ask them all only switch US with Russia and Kosovo/Iraq with Crimea and answer them. (And the answer will be yes by the way.)
Jifpop09
Posts: 2,243
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 3:21:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/22/2014 3:13:07 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 12:10:59 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 4:54:00 AM, Juris wrote:
Russia wants to have its supremacy back ...

No, Russia was content with the status quo. US/Nato interference in the Ukraine and the illegal overthrow of Ukarine's government was what changed the situation.

Perhaps the US/Nato didn't think they could have won the popular vote of the people of the entire Ukraine. Perhaps Russia thought that it couldn't win either. With the Crimea being now separate, Russia can't win the popular vote in the remainder.

I still don't see how you can compare this three incidents. I'll try and help here. Is the US still in Iraq or Kosovo? Is the US government the government of Kosovo or Iraq? Is the US the ruler of these nations? Are they colonies or territories? Did we annex them and absorb them into the US?

Now answer all those (and just to help you out the answer is no). Then ask them all only switch US with Russia and Kosovo/Iraq with Crimea and answer them. (And the answer will be yes by the way.)

The funny thing is, it wasn't even a US intervention. It was NATO, and I can't blame countries for getting fed up with Yugoslavia. How many genocides and killings did they commit?
Leader of the DDO Revolution Party
ararmer1919
Posts: 362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 3:26:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/22/2014 3:21:16 PM, Jifpop09 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 3:13:07 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 12:10:59 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 4:54:00 AM, Juris wrote:
Russia wants to have its supremacy back ...

No, Russia was content with the status quo. US/Nato interference in the Ukraine and the illegal overthrow of Ukarine's government was what changed the situation.

Perhaps the US/Nato didn't think they could have won the popular vote of the people of the entire Ukraine. Perhaps Russia thought that it couldn't win either. With the Crimea being now separate, Russia can't win the popular vote in the remainder.

I still don't see how you can compare this three incidents. I'll try and help here. Is the US still in Iraq or Kosovo? Is the US government the government of Kosovo or Iraq? Is the US the ruler of these nations? Are they colonies or territories? Did we annex them and absorb them into the US?

Now answer all those (and just to help you out the answer is no). Then ask them all only switch US with Russia and Kosovo/Iraq with Crimea and answer them. (And the answer will be yes by the way.)

The funny thing is, it wasn't even a US intervention. It was NATO, and I can't blame countries for getting fed up with Yugoslavia. How many genocides and killings did they commit?

Lol. I'm pretty sure he doesn't understand the difference between the US and NATO. To him it's just the same thing. And to many.
Jifpop09
Posts: 2,243
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 3:32:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/22/2014 3:26:27 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 3:21:16 PM, Jifpop09 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 3:13:07 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 12:10:59 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 4:54:00 AM, Juris wrote:
Russia wants to have its supremacy back ...

No, Russia was content with the status quo. US/Nato interference in the Ukraine and the illegal overthrow of Ukarine's government was what changed the situation.

Perhaps the US/Nato didn't think they could have won the popular vote of the people of the entire Ukraine. Perhaps Russia thought that it couldn't win either. With the Crimea being now separate, Russia can't win the popular vote in the remainder.

I still don't see how you can compare this three incidents. I'll try and help here. Is the US still in Iraq or Kosovo? Is the US government the government of Kosovo or Iraq? Is the US the ruler of these nations? Are they colonies or territories? Did we annex them and absorb them into the US?

Now answer all those (and just to help you out the answer is no). Then ask them all only switch US with Russia and Kosovo/Iraq with Crimea and answer them. (And the answer will be yes by the way.)

The funny thing is, it wasn't even a US intervention. It was NATO, and I can't blame countries for getting fed up with Yugoslavia. How many genocides and killings did they commit?

Lol. I'm pretty sure he doesn't understand the difference between the US and NATO. To him it's just the same thing. And to many.

The extremely stupid thing, is he's Canadian. And Canada is a member of NATO. I don't know how he'll respond to that, lol.
Leader of the DDO Revolution Party
ararmer1919
Posts: 362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 3:58:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/22/2014 3:32:15 PM, Jifpop09 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 3:26:27 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 3:21:16 PM, Jifpop09 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 3:13:07 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 12:10:59 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 4:54:00 AM, Juris wrote:
Russia wants to have its supremacy back ...

No, Russia was content with the status quo. US/Nato interference in the Ukraine and the illegal overthrow of Ukarine's government was what changed the situation.

Perhaps the US/Nato didn't think they could have won the popular vote of the people of the entire Ukraine. Perhaps Russia thought that it couldn't win either. With the Crimea being now separate, Russia can't win the popular vote in the remainder.

I still don't see how you can compare this three incidents. I'll try and help here. Is the US still in Iraq or Kosovo? Is the US government the government of Kosovo or Iraq? Is the US the ruler of these nations? Are they colonies or territories? Did we annex them and absorb them into the US?

Now answer all those (and just to help you out the answer is no). Then ask them all only switch US with Russia and Kosovo/Iraq with Crimea and answer them. (And the answer will be yes by the way.)

The funny thing is, it wasn't even a US intervention. It was NATO, and I can't blame countries for getting fed up with Yugoslavia. How many genocides and killings did they commit?

Lol. I'm pretty sure he doesn't understand the difference between the US and NATO. To him it's just the same thing. And to many.

The extremely stupid thing, is he's Canadian. And Canada is a member of NATO. I don't know how he'll respond to that, lol.

Shh. We're not supposed to let him know. His whole perspective of reality may very well shatter. I doubt his mind could take it. Lol
Jifpop09
Posts: 2,243
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 4:00:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/22/2014 3:58:41 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 3:32:15 PM, Jifpop09 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 3:26:27 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 3:21:16 PM, Jifpop09 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 3:13:07 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 12:10:59 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 4:54:00 AM, Juris wrote:
Russia wants to have its supremacy back ...

No, Russia was content with the status quo. US/Nato interference in the Ukraine and the illegal overthrow of Ukarine's government was what changed the situation.

Perhaps the US/Nato didn't think they could have won the popular vote of the people of the entire Ukraine. Perhaps Russia thought that it couldn't win either. With the Crimea being now separate, Russia can't win the popular vote in the remainder.

I still don't see how you can compare this three incidents. I'll try and help here. Is the US still in Iraq or Kosovo? Is the US government the government of Kosovo or Iraq? Is the US the ruler of these nations? Are they colonies or territories? Did we annex them and absorb them into the US?

Now answer all those (and just to help you out the answer is no). Then ask them all only switch US with Russia and Kosovo/Iraq with Crimea and answer them. (And the answer will be yes by the way.)

The funny thing is, it wasn't even a US intervention. It was NATO, and I can't blame countries for getting fed up with Yugoslavia. How many genocides and killings did they commit?

Lol. I'm pretty sure he doesn't understand the difference between the US and NATO. To him it's just the same thing. And to many.

The extremely stupid thing, is he's Canadian. And Canada is a member of NATO. I don't know how he'll respond to that, lol.

Shh. We're not supposed to let him know. His whole perspective of reality may very well shatter. I doubt his mind could take it. Lol

We wouldn't want that, lol. Anyone's, I made a poll relevant to this....

http://www.debate.org...
Leader of the DDO Revolution Party
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 4:06:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/22/2014 3:21:16 PM, Jifpop09 wrote:
The funny thing is, it wasn't even a US intervention. It was NATO, and I can't blame countries for getting fed up with Yugoslavia. How many genocides and killings did they commit?
Post-breakup Yugoslavia (mainly Serbia at this point) committed no genocide. Kosovo was not free from blame when it comes to killing and oppressing the minority of Serbs in northern Kosovo. Why wasn't Croatia attacked for cleansing its land of Serbs and becoming the most ethnically-pure country in Europe? Why wasn't Kosovo attacked for expelling Serbs, burning their houses, churches, and other historical landmarks, especially those belonging to the UNESCO World Heritage sites?

Try again Ma'am.
Jifpop09
Posts: 2,243
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 4:09:12 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/22/2014 4:06:39 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
Just saw this. Looks like another Ukrainian base has fallen.

http://www.usatoday.com...

Wow, I thought the Ukrainians left by now. Maybe they're not finished packing up. Anyways, Russia is obviously not fighting fair.

That idiot Monty denied that the Ukrainian was shot at the other base, and claimed the base was taken peacefully....... BULL $HIT
Leader of the DDO Revolution Party
Jifpop09
Posts: 2,243
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 4:11:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/22/2014 4:06:37 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 3/22/2014 3:21:16 PM, Jifpop09 wrote:
The funny thing is, it wasn't even a US intervention. It was NATO, and I can't blame countries for getting fed up with Yugoslavia. How many genocides and killings did they commit?
Post-breakup Yugoslavia (mainly Serbia at this point) committed no genocide. Kosovo was not free from blame when it comes to killing and oppressing the minority of Serbs in northern Kosovo. Why wasn't Croatia attacked for cleansing its land of Serbs and becoming the most ethnically-pure country in Europe? Why wasn't Kosovo attacked for expelling Serbs, burning their houses, churches, and other historical landmarks, especially those belonging to the UNESCO World Heritage sites?

Try again Ma'am.

Not a ma'am, but what I actually meant, is various ethnic groups within the country were committing genocide. Which countries got sick of. The Yugoslavia government wasn't exactly a force for good though.
Leader of the DDO Revolution Party
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 5:09:50 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/22/2014 4:09:12 PM, Jifpop09 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 4:06:39 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
Just saw this. Looks like another Ukrainian base has fallen.

http://www.usatoday.com...

Wow, I thought the Ukrainians left by now. Maybe they're not finished packing up. Anyways, Russia is obviously not fighting fair.

That idiot Monty denied that the Ukrainian was shot at the other base, and claimed the base was taken peacefully....... BULL $HIT

Your link says "pro" Russian forces stormed the base. Hey, wait a minute, that's not Russians at all? Dooohhhhhhhhh!
Jifpop09
Posts: 2,243
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 5:14:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/22/2014 5:09:50 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 4:09:12 PM, Jifpop09 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 4:06:39 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
Just saw this. Looks like another Ukrainian base has fallen.

http://www.usatoday.com...

Wow, I thought the Ukrainians left by now. Maybe they're not finished packing up. Anyways, Russia is obviously not fighting fair.

That idiot Monty denied that the Ukrainian was shot at the other base, and claimed the base was taken peacefully....... BULL $HIT

Your link says "pro" Russian forces stormed the base. Hey, wait a minute, that's not Russians at all? Dooohhhhhhhhh!

Then it said they were Russian if you read the article -_-. The reason why they invaded, was because Crimea is responsible for shipping 50% of their economy, and if your to stupid to realize that, then go elsewhere. You obviously don't realize that Russias economy is 100% dependent on oil, or you would of asked why they didn't invade eastern Ukraine.
Leader of the DDO Revolution Party
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 5:38:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/22/2014 1:07:54 PM, monty1 wrote:
And I'll begin by granting you that the legality of all three is questionable. However, Russia can claim the moral high ground through the results of the referendum.
Anyone who knows anything about elections knows the referendum was faked. a 58% pro-Russian victory can be assumed from a purely ethnic basis for the referendum. Ignorance, one-sided ethnic defections from the Ukrainian/ Tatar population (Unlikely, these groups were both subjected to Russian genocide in the past 4 generations; and politics in the region in general have a strong ethnic basis) and clever wording of the resolution (e.g. calling it an "independence" resolution when most observers know it's a vote for Russian puppetry or annexation) might push that up to 68%. With the high reported turnout numbers, selective turnout can't account for more than 5% if anything. That doesn't add up to 96%. 96% on a referendum with strongly ethnic basis where the majority ethnic group only accounts for 58% and the minorities both have a strong enmity to that majority just doesn't happen when actual votes are actually counted. I don't think actual elections in the sense Westerners think of them get held very often at all anywhere Russia has sway. Not that i'm a fan of elections, but, you know.

Also, why are you talking about Kosovo and Iraq, not, say, Chechnya and Dagestan? If Russia had the moral high ground, referendums would be held in this places. Real referendums. And everyone knows the outcome of those referendums would be votes for independence. North Ossetia would probably vote for independence and union with South Ossetia too, at least if Georgia backed off of South Ossetia.

Granted, if Russia were not such tyrants they would actually have a legitimate causus belli in Crimea and a few other regions of Ukraine for what the Maidan government is doing. But Russia does everything the Maidan does, it's been doing it forever, and it does worse things.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2014 6:06:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/22/2014 5:38:29 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 3/22/2014 1:07:54 PM, monty1 wrote:
And I'll begin by granting you that the legality of all three is questionable. However, Russia can claim the moral high ground through the results of the referendum.
Anyone who knows anything about elections knows the referendum was faked. a 58% pro-Russian victory can be assumed from a purely ethnic basis for the referendum. Ignorance, one-sided ethnic defections from the Ukrainian/ Tatar population (Unlikely, these groups were both subjected to Russian genocide in the past 4 generations; and politics in the region in general have a strong ethnic basis) and clever wording of the resolution (e.g. calling it an "independence" resolution when most observers know it's a vote for Russian puppetry or annexation) might push that up to 68%. With the high reported turnout numbers, selective turnout can't account for more than 5% if anything. That doesn't add up to 96%. 96% on a referendum with strongly ethnic basis where the majority ethnic group only accounts for 58% and the minorities both have a strong enmity to that majority just doesn't happen when actual votes are actually counted. I don't think actual elections in the sense Westerners think of them get held very often at all anywhere Russia has sway. Not that i'm a fan of elections, but, you know.

Also, why are you talking about Kosovo and Iraq, not, say, Chechnya and Dagestan? If Russia had the moral high ground, referendums would be held in this places. Real referendums. And everyone knows the outcome of those referendums would be votes for independence. North Ossetia would probably vote for independence and union with South Ossetia too, at least if Georgia backed off of South Ossetia.

Granted, if Russia were not such tyrants they would actually have a legitimate causus belli in Crimea and a few other regions of Ukraine for what the Maidan government is doing. But Russia does everything the Maidan does, it's been doing it forever, and it does worse things.

I'm talking about Kosovo and Iraq because they are much more egregious examples of aggression than Crimea. I can't say enough about the outrageous example of Iraq because it has to undoubtedly stand as the worse example of evil aggression since the Nazi's exploits of WW2 and before. Perhaps even a worse example.

The country is a criminal pariah empire and there's no getting around that fact. I would go so far as to say that without the examples of Kosovo and Iraq (both times for Iraq), Russia would be standing on tenuous ground right now.

No, two US wrongs don't make one Russian right. But it takes the wind out of the US/Nato's sails when the two are compared against the one on their moral merits.

Scream about it all you want you fukking clowns, it's not going to change the facts on the ground.
ararmer1919
Posts: 362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/23/2014 7:54:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/22/2014 6:06:04 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 5:38:29 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 3/22/2014 1:07:54 PM, monty1 wrote:
And I'll begin by granting you that the legality of all three is questionable. However, Russia can claim the moral high ground through the results of the referendum.
Anyone who knows anything about elections knows the referendum was faked. a 58% pro-Russian victory can be assumed from a purely ethnic basis for the referendum. Ignorance, one-sided ethnic defections from the Ukrainian/ Tatar population (Unlikely, these groups were both subjected to Russian genocide in the past 4 generations; and politics in the region in general have a strong ethnic basis) and clever wording of the resolution (e.g. calling it an "independence" resolution when most observers know it's a vote for Russian puppetry or annexation) might push that up to 68%. With the high reported turnout numbers, selective turnout can't account for more than 5% if anything. That doesn't add up to 96%. 96% on a referendum with strongly ethnic basis where the majority ethnic group only accounts for 58% and the minorities both have a strong enmity to that majority just doesn't happen when actual votes are actually counted. I don't think actual elections in the sense Westerners think of them get held very often at all anywhere Russia has sway. Not that i'm a fan of elections, but, you know.

Also, why are you talking about Kosovo and Iraq, not, say, Chechnya and Dagestan? If Russia had the moral high ground, referendums would be held in this places. Real referendums. And everyone knows the outcome of those referendums would be votes for independence. North Ossetia would probably vote for independence and union with South Ossetia too, at least if Georgia backed off of South Ossetia.

Granted, if Russia were not such tyrants they would actually have a legitimate causus belli in Crimea and a few other regions of Ukraine for what the Maidan government is doing. But Russia does everything the Maidan does, it's been doing it forever, and it does worse things.

I'm talking about Kosovo and Iraq because they are much more egregious examples of aggression than Crimea. I can't say enough about the outrageous example of Iraq because it has to undoubtedly stand as the worse example of evil aggression since the Nazi's exploits of WW2 and before. Perhaps even a worse example.

You just compared Iraq war with nazi exploits of WW2... You continue to show your stupidity. Congrats. The real reason you won't bring up Chechnya and Dagestan is because it completely blows up your entire argument. Not that you had one anyway because your ideas on Iraq and Kosovo are so utterly wrong it's ridicules and even if you were right they still would have no similarities whatsoever to Crimea. You. Fail.

The country is a criminal pariah empire and there's no getting around that fact. I would go so far as to say that without the examples of Kosovo and Iraq (both times for Iraq), Russia would be standing on tenuous ground right now.

Nope. And I kinda get your bitchin about the last Iraq war, but the first one? You really do just stretch your concept of reality I order to do everything you can to make America look bad don't you?

No, two US wrongs don't make one Russian right. But it takes the wind out of the US/Nato's sails when the two are compared against the one on their moral merits.

No it doesn't.

Scream about it all you want you fukking clowns, it's not going to change the facts on the ground.

Facts????!?!!!! How cute.
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/23/2014 11:42:45 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/23/2014 7:54:43 AM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 6:06:04 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 5:38:29 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 3/22/2014 1:07:54 PM, monty1 wrote:
And I'll begin by granting you that the legality of all three is questionable. However, Russia can claim the moral high ground through the results of the referendum.
Anyone who knows anything about elections knows the referendum was faked. a 58% pro-Russian victory can be assumed from a purely ethnic basis for the referendum. Ignorance, one-sided ethnic defections from the Ukrainian/ Tatar population (Unlikely, these groups were both subjected to Russian genocide in the past 4 generations; and politics in the region in general have a strong ethnic basis) and clever wording of the resolution (e.g. calling it an "independence" resolution when most observers know it's a vote for Russian puppetry or annexation) might push that up to 68%. With the high reported turnout numbers, selective turnout can't account for more than 5% if anything. That doesn't add up to 96%. 96% on a referendum with strongly ethnic basis where the majority ethnic group only accounts for 58% and the minorities both have a strong enmity to that majority just doesn't happen when actual votes are actually counted. I don't think actual elections in the sense Westerners think of them get held very often at all anywhere Russia has sway. Not that i'm a fan of elections, but, you know.

Also, why are you talking about Kosovo and Iraq, not, say, Chechnya and Dagestan? If Russia had the moral high ground, referendums would be held in this places. Real referendums. And everyone knows the outcome of those referendums would be votes for independence. North Ossetia would probably vote for independence and union with South Ossetia too, at least if Georgia backed off of South Ossetia.

Granted, if Russia were not such tyrants they would actually have a legitimate causus belli in Crimea and a few other regions of Ukraine for what the Maidan government is doing. But Russia does everything the Maidan does, it's been doing it forever, and it does worse things.

I'm talking about Kosovo and Iraq because they are much more egregious examples of aggression than Crimea. I can't say enough about the outrageous example of Iraq because it has to undoubtedly stand as the worse example of evil aggression since the Nazi's exploits of WW2 and before. Perhaps even a worse example.

You just compared Iraq war with nazi exploits of WW2... You continue to show your stupidity. Congrats. The real reason you won't bring up Chechnya and Dagestan is because it completely blows up your entire argument. Not that you had one anyway because your ideas on Iraq and Kosovo are so utterly wrong it's ridicules and even if you were right they still would have no similarities whatsoever to Crimea. You. Fail.

The country is a criminal pariah empire and there's no getting around that fact. I would go so far as to say that without the examples of Kosovo and Iraq (both times for Iraq), Russia would be standing on tenuous ground right now.

Nope. And I kinda get your bitchin about the last Iraq war, but the first one? You really do just stretch your concept of reality I order to do everything you can to make America look bad don't you?

No, two US wrongs don't make one Russian right. But it takes the wind out of the US/Nato's sails when the two are compared against the one on their moral merits.

No it doesn't.

Scream about it all you want you fukking clowns, it's not going to change the facts on the ground.

Facts????!?!!!! How cute.

I see no real reason to suggest that the US war on Iraq didn't exceed the Nazi invasion of Poland in outright evil aggression. The US invaded and occupied, killing hundreds of thousands of innocents for Iraq's oil.

Saddam had nationalized his country's oil and kept it secure for Iraq's purposes. The US was intent on developing Iraq's oil industry in order to start the oil flowing in large quantity, thereby bringing down the price of oil on the world market. Pure and evil aggression no matter how it's viewed.

In the case of Nazi Germany many would suggest that Germany was forced by the terms of the WW1 treaty of Versailles to move on neighbouring Poland. The resultant WW2 was then taken out of the hands of Hitler.

Neither are excusable in any way. Both are examples of the worst of outright aggression the world has seen in the 20th. and 21st. century so far.
Jifpop09
Posts: 2,243
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/23/2014 11:46:30 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/23/2014 11:42:45 AM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/23/2014 7:54:43 AM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 6:06:04 PM, monty1 wrote:
At 3/22/2014 5:38:29 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 3/22/2014 1:07:54 PM, monty1 wrote:
And I'll begin by granting you that the legality of all three is questionable. However, Russia can claim the moral high ground through the results of the referendum.
Anyone who knows anything about elections knows the referendum was faked. a 58% pro-Russian victory can be assumed from a purely ethnic basis for the referendum. Ignorance, one-sided ethnic defections from the Ukrainian/ Tatar population (Unlikely, these groups were both subjected to Russian genocide in the past 4 generations; and politics in the region in general have a strong ethnic basis) and clever wording of the resolution (e.g. calling it an "independence" resolution when most observers know it's a vote for Russian puppetry or annexation) might push that up to 68%. With the high reported turnout numbers, selective turnout can't account for more than 5% if anything. That doesn't add up to 96%. 96% on a referendum with strongly ethnic basis where the majority ethnic group only accounts for 58% and the minorities both have a strong enmity to that majority just doesn't happen when actual votes are actually counted. I don't think actual elections in the sense Westerners think of them get held very often at all anywhere Russia has sway. Not that i'm a fan of elections, but, you know.

Also, why are you talking about Kosovo and Iraq, not, say, Chechnya and Dagestan? If Russia had the moral high ground, referendums would be held in this places. Real referendums. And everyone knows the outcome of those referendums would be votes for independence. North Ossetia would probably vote for independence and union with South Ossetia too, at least if Georgia backed off of South Ossetia.

Granted, if Russia were not such tyrants they would actually have a legitimate causus belli in Crimea and a few other regions of Ukraine for what the Maidan government is doing. But Russia does everything the Maidan does, it's been doing it forever, and it does worse things.

I'm talking about Kosovo and Iraq because they are much more egregious examples of aggression than Crimea. I can't say enough about the outrageous example of Iraq because it has to undoubtedly stand as the worse example of evil aggression since the Nazi's exploits of WW2 and before. Perhaps even a worse example.

You just compared Iraq war with nazi exploits of WW2... You continue to show your stupidity. Congrats. The real reason you won't bring up Chechnya and Dagestan is because it completely blows up your entire argument. Not that you had one anyway because your ideas on Iraq and Kosovo are so utterly wrong it's ridicules and even if you were right they still would have no similarities whatsoever to Crimea. You. Fail.

The country is a criminal pariah empire and there's no getting around that fact. I would go so far as to say that without the examples of Kosovo and Iraq (both times for Iraq), Russia would be standing on tenuous ground right now.

Nope. And I kinda get your bitchin about the last Iraq war, but the first one? You really do just stretch your concept of reality I order to do everything you can to make America look bad don't you?

No, two US wrongs don't make one Russian right. But it takes the wind out of the US/Nato's sails when the two are compared against the one on their moral merits.

No it doesn't.

Scream about it all you want you fukking clowns, it's not going to change the facts on the ground.

Facts????!?!!!! How cute.


I see no real reason to suggest that the US war on Iraq didn't exceed the Nazi invasion of Poland in outright evil aggression. The US invaded and occupied, killing hundreds of thousands of innocents for Iraq's oil.

Saddam had nationalized his country's oil and kept it secure for Iraq's purposes. The US was intent on developing Iraq's oil industry in order to start the oil flowing in large quantity, thereby bringing down the price of oil on the world market. Pure and evil aggression no matter how it's viewed.

In the case of Nazi Germany many would suggest that Germany was forced by the terms of the WW1 treaty of Versailles to move on neighbouring Poland. The resultant WW2 was then taken out of the hands of Hitler.

Neither are excusable in any way. Both are examples of the worst of outright aggression the world has seen in the 20th. and 21st. century so far.

Are you seriously comparing the two. The invasion of Iraq, while misguided and wrong, overthrew a dictator and led to the establishment of Republican. The occupation of Poland, was an unjust massacre of an army, and extermination of milllions of Jews. Are you really that stupid,lol?

Anyways, accept my debate, and I'll prove that Canada has done the same damn things as the US.
Leader of the DDO Revolution Party
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/23/2014 12:07:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
jifpop said:

"Are you seriously comparing the two. The invasion of Iraq, while misguided and wrong, overthrew a dictator and led to the establishment of Republican. The occupation of Poland, was an unjust massacre of an army, and extermination of milllions of Jews. Are you really that stupid,lol?

Anyways, accept my debate, and I'll prove that Canada has done the same damn things as the US."

I'm seriously comparing the two and am firmly of the opinion that the Iraq war for oil was equally an egregious act of aggression as the invasion of Poland.

Your "Stupid" insult noted.

determine some way of forming a panel of impartial judges to decide a debate and I will gladly debate you on any topic you choose, providing I can be convinced that I should take the opposite side in your debate.