Post: #126

Wouldn't put it past the USA getting it's hands on Ukraine's gold...

http://voxday.blogspot.com/2014/03/the-i...crite.html

Quote: No one can reasonably take the US position on Crimean self-determination seriously anymore. Even the New York Times appears to be uncomfortable with the Obama administration's anti-democratic actions:

They wanted to break away from a country they considered hostile. The central government cried foul, calling it a violation of international law. But with the help of a powerful foreign military, they succeeded in severing ties.

The Kosovars’ secession from Serbia in 1999 drove a deep wedge between the United States and Russia that soured relations for years. Washington supported Kosovo’s bid for independence, culminating in 2008, while Moscow saw it as an infringement of Serbia’s sovereignty.

Now 15 years later, the former Cold War rivals again find themselves at odds, but this time they have effectively switched sides: Russia loudly proclaims Crimea’s right to break off from Ukraine while the United States calls it illegitimate. The showdown in Ukraine has revived a centuries-old debate over the right of self-determination versus the territorial integrity of nation-states.

The clash in Crimea is hardly an exact parallel of the Kosovo episode, especially with Russian troops occupying the peninsula as it calls a March 16 referendum to dissolve ties with Ukraine and rejoin Russia. Though the United States intervened militarily in Kosovo, it did not do so to take the territory for itself. But the current case underscores once again that for all of the articulation of grand principles, the acceptability of regions breaking away often depends on the circumstances.

Consider the different American views of recent bids for independence.

Chechnya? No.

East Timor? Yes.

Abkhazia? No.

South Sudan? Yes.

Palestine? It’s complicated.

It is an acutely delicate subject in the West, where Britain wants to keep Scotland and Spain wants to keep Catalonia. And the USA murdered hundreds of thousands in order to forcibly "keep the Union together" and deny the sovereign Southern States their right to self-determination. This has not escaped the attention of the world's second-rate powers, some of whom have indicated support for the Russian position:

Indian officials have told Telegraph India that, in the newspaper’s words, Delhi is “convinced that the West’s tacit support for a series of attempted coups against democratically elected governments — in Egypt, Thailand and now Ukraine — has only weakened democratic roots in these countries.”

This is the cost of sacrificing principles for pragmatism. You don't get to claim the moral high ground anymore and no one is going to view you as the good guy. Russia is acting perfectly within its rights: it has permission to station as many as 25,000 troops in the Crimea. Not only that, but its actions are far more in accord with legitimate democratic rule than those of the anti-democratic USA and EU, who are complicit in overthrowing Ukraine's democratically elected government as well as installing an unelected prime minister in Italy.

This comment from Zerohedge may explain the real reason for the drama in the Ukraine:

According to the staff of the "Borispol" airport in Ukraine, four large armed trucks and two cargo minivan Volkswagen without license plates arrived to the airport and parked near a transport aircraft at the end of one of runways. About fifteen people in black uniform, wearing masks and bullet-proof vests came out of these vans. Some of them were armed with assault rifles. These people have moved more than 40 heavy boxes from the trucks into the aircraft.... Later, one of the senior officials of the former Ministry of Revenue and Taxes reported that, according to his information, last night, at the order of one of the "new Ukrainian leaders" the entire gold reserve of Ukraine has been sent to in the United States.

If true, that seizure should permit the Federal Reserve to stave off the collapse of the markets for a little while longer. A lot of the recent international activity looks disturbingly like pre-positioning for economic collapse.

Post: #127

The Russians warned the west what would trigger war back in 1999
http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/openforum/...890854.php

Post: #128

(03-05-2014 09:26 PM)Roosh Wrote:  Feel free to post random thoughts, images, or links here that you feel don't deserve their own thread.

Hi Roosh,
I have nothing much to add other than it is all a pantomime. The committee of 300 wants a big war and they have hot spots all across the world now...Ukraine being one more.

I was talking to my Ukrainian fav#1 who comes from the western side of Ukraine recently. She is very worried because there are 5 men in her family of conscription age.....not least of which is her only son who is 21.

The people who live in the Ukraine are very, very concerned this is going to escalate in to a war. And US sponsored agents have been on the ground for some time.....so the whole pantomime is moving forward....not good.

Post: #129

Show 271 - Cashing the Doomsday Cheque (click on "Download .mp3"):

http://www.dancarlin.com//disp.php/csarc...ia-Ukraine

Post: #130

(03-08-2014 06:46 PM)DaveR Wrote:  

(03-08-2014 02:45 PM)Big Nilla Wrote:  Probably best for Russia to annex Crimea to starve Ukraine of pipeline and bases money and leave it at that... and use the Russian loyalists all over the rest of Ukraine to make it politically impossible for the West/NATO to tip Ukraine to that side. Basically keep Ukraine as it is... a mess.

I would say "divide and conquer" is definitely part of Russia's plan.

(03-08-2014 02:45 PM)Big Nilla Wrote:  What's best for Ukrainians (both the nationalists and Russians) is to simply go their own ways if they had a choice in the matter. There will never be stability in Ukraine, otherwise, since it is just a pawn for others to manipulate the "multiculturalism" split. As long as NATO isn't brought in to the western half the situation and split should be fine... sort of like the Czech Republic and Slovakia. But the nationalist part of Ukraine would probably be landlocked and not really have anything to build a strong economy with.

This is one thing I'm not so sure about.
Except for Crimea, Russian doesn't have absolute dominance in any of Ukraine's oblasts. Donetsk and Lugansk have the highest concentration (70-75%) but even in that region I think secession would be difficult. Many of the oligarchs come from that part of the country, and they know their control of the country is much stronger t

In other oblasts, the situation is split more on an urban/rural basis, with the cities being predominantly Russian and the rural areas being predominantly Ukrainian. Kirovograd is a very strong example of that, and also Odessa to some extent.

I don't mean to preclude a split, either. There are also differences in the economy of the South/East and the West. The former is more heavily industrialised, where as the West is less developed and more focused on agriculture and services.

(03-08-2014 02:45 PM)Big Nilla Wrote:  Also, will Russia completely turn off oil/gas pipelines on the mainland of Ukraine or still use all or some of them once South Stream is going?

I don't think Russia will continue to use it for transit. It's an old and extremely inefficient system which consumes a lot of so-called "technical gas" just to run the pumping stations. All countries involved need to get efficiency gains out of the new pipelines to start recouping their capital costs.

Check the following.. The blue lines are potential South Stream routes. The circle is where most of Ukraine's heavy industry is located. That part of the current pipeline system will still operate near full capacity even if much of the rest of the network is shut down.
The Slovak and Hungarian legs have been modernised, and once South Stream goes active, the plan is to reverse the flow of those pipelines. Eastern Slovakia and Eastern Hungary are quite industrialised. A few large smelters and other heavy industry operate in that area.

Where are you getting your numbers. Donetsk city, according to Wikipedia, for example:

Quote:The current nationality structure of the Donetsk City Municipality is as follows:

Russians: 493,392 people, 48.15%
Ukrainians: 478,041 people, 46.65%

Russia does not have absolute dominance in Crimea either.

It is as if people accept the pro-Russian version of the facts, and begin their thinking there (e.g. the country is split 50/50, etc.)

Post: #131

Post: #132

This thread could be called the Russian Conflict. Calling it the Ukraine conflict gives a Western and/or Russian - external - view of events.

Imagine if Mexico invades the US and occupies southern California and Texas. We would not call it the American conflict. More likely the "War of Mexican Aggression."

Post: #133

(03-09-2014 09:50 AM)Teedub Wrote:  Shit this could escalate into an armed conflict between Ukraine's new govt and Russia. Ukraine will of course be annihilated but they'll have the West's support and thus this could become a 1984 style continent v continent war

Or am I missing the mark and overestimating what could transpire?

There are many kinds of war. There are conventional wars and guerrilla wars for example.

I expect guerrilla war, mass protests, civic action if certain thresholds are crossed by Putin. It will be protracted.

As a friend of mine - who also cut his FSU chops with me in Lviv said - "Mr. Putin, I suggest you not do that. It will be your own personal Afghanistan."

Post: #134

My money is on Ukraine to win any sort of armed conflict involving ground troops. They have an army that will completely incapacitate the Russian soldiers:

Post: #135

(03-09-2014 07:08 PM)rastignac Wrote:  This thread could be called the Russian Conflict. Calling it the Ukraine conflict gives a Western and/or Russian - external - view of events.

Imagine if Mexico invades the US and occupies southern California and Texas. We would not call it the American conflict. More likely the "War of Mexican Aggression."

The Soviet Union fought the Great Patriotic War against Germany, while most would call it World War 2. Likewise, Vietnam refers to the "Vietnam" War as the American War. We can call it whatever we want, but I'm sure some people in the Middle East would call our "War on Terror" the "War of American Neo-imperialism.

And for what it's worth, when we refer to our actual war with Mexico, the one where Mexicans attacked American citizens living in land owned by Mexico, we just call it the Mexican-American war. Calling it the Ukraine conflict is right, because that's exactly what it is. Two power blocs fighting for control of Ukraine. You can bet if the US shared a border with Western Ukraine, we would have unmarked soldiers there.

Post: #136

(03-09-2014 07:04 PM)rastignac Wrote:  

(03-08-2014 06:46 PM)DaveR Wrote:  

(03-08-2014 02:45 PM)Big Nilla Wrote:  Probably best for Russia to annex Crimea to starve Ukraine of pipeline and bases money and leave it at that... and use the Russian loyalists all over the rest of Ukraine to make it politically impossible for the West/NATO to tip Ukraine to that side. Basically keep Ukraine as it is... a mess.

I would say "divide and conquer" is definitely part of Russia's plan.

(03-08-2014 02:45 PM)Big Nilla Wrote:  What's best for Ukrainians (both the nationalists and Russians) is to simply go their own ways if they had a choice in the matter. There will never be stability in Ukraine, otherwise, since it is just a pawn for others to manipulate the "multiculturalism" split. As long as NATO isn't brought in to the western half the situation and split should be fine... sort of like the Czech Republic and Slovakia. But the nationalist part of Ukraine would probably be landlocked and not really have anything to build a strong economy with.

This is one thing I'm not so sure about.
Except for Crimea, Russian doesn't have absolute dominance in any of Ukraine's oblasts. Donetsk and Lugansk have the highest concentration (70-75%) but even in that region I think secession would be difficult. Many of the oligarchs come from that part of the country, and they know their control of the country is much stronger t

In other oblasts, the situation is split more on an urban/rural basis, with the cities being predominantly Russian and the rural areas being predominantly Ukrainian. Kirovograd is a very strong example of that, and also Odessa to some extent.

I don't mean to preclude a split, either. There are also differences in the economy of the South/East and the West. The former is more heavily industrialised, where as the West is less developed and more focused on agriculture and services.

(03-08-2014 02:45 PM)Big Nilla Wrote:  Also, will Russia completely turn off oil/gas pipelines on the mainland of Ukraine or still use all or some of them once South Stream is going?

I don't think Russia will continue to use it for transit. It's an old and extremely inefficient system which consumes a lot of so-called "technical gas" just to run the pumping stations. All countries involved need to get efficiency gains out of the new pipelines to start recouping their capital costs.

Check the following.. The blue lines are potential South Stream routes. The circle is where most of Ukraine's heavy industry is located. That part of the current pipeline system will still operate near full capacity even if much of the rest of the network is shut down.
The Slovak and Hungarian legs have been modernised, and once South Stream goes active, the plan is to reverse the flow of those pipelines. Eastern Slovakia and Eastern Hungary are quite industrialised. A few large smelters and other heavy industry operate in that area.

Where are you getting your numbers. Donetsk city, according to Wikipedia, for example:

Quote:The current nationality structure of the Donetsk City Municipality is as follows:

Russians: 493,392 people, 48.15%
Ukrainians: 478,041 people, 46.65%

Russia does not have absolute dominance in Crimea either.

It is as if people accept the pro-Russian version of the facts, and begin their thinking there (e.g. the country is split 50/50, etc.)

Why are we discussing this again?This is not meant at anyone specifically.
There could be 90% Ukrainians in an oblast and they would want to succeed if they are Russian culture. Its based on culture NOT the so called ethnicity statistic. In fact as mentioned a Ukrainian, Russian and Bela-Russian is the same ethnicity.That being said since so many are used to be in Ukraine majority don't want to succeed..but they do want a president that represents them and isn't a Western Nationalist!

Those media statistic make no sense.The designation is part of a gov't segregation and identification project.

The Western Ukrainians at least can be said to have their own unique culture but I THINK to be designated as an ethnicity it takes a few more variables.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_group
Its like saying a an American Hispanic who grew up in some white suburb would want to live in Chile because he is Hispanic. But if he is American why the fuck would he identify with them?

Eastern Ukrainians share most of the common ethnicity factors that a Russian does according to wiki.( cultural heritage, ancestry, history, homeland, language (dialect), or ideology, and with symbolic systems such as religion, mythology and ritual, cuisine, dressing style, physical appearance, etc.)
in fact they share 99%... but Western Ukrainians are different in language spoken,appearance and dress even(east is hotter), culture and religion among other factors.

Sorry to sound irritated but how many times can me, Dave and a bunch of others say this? Its getting to feel like herding cats here

Seriously if I call my Ukrainian wife a Russian she doesn't mind(she takes it as a compliment). However she will call me Russian(Russian-american)..but technically since before my family immigrated, they lived in Ukraine..one could even call some of my ancestry Ukrainian(a town in Ukraine is named after my family name).
This is what happens when you have a country formed that spent most of history as an unformed nation.There is a lack of identity.I suspect only those 25 and under might even have a full Ukrainian identity since those before then grew up in USSR,

Post: #137

http://www.savethemales.ca

More Blackwater involvement and our good friends the IMF.

Post: #138

(03-09-2014 07:04 PM)rastignac Wrote:  Where are you getting your numbers. Donetsk city, according to Wikipedia, for example:

I wrote "Russian," not "Russians." Allegiances in Ukraine have always been split along language lines (more specifically, what people consider their first language). I was referring to the fact that, even in Donetsk Oblast, approximately 25% of the population (mostly from villages and small towns) consider Ukrainian to be their first language.

(03-09-2014 07:04 PM)rastignac Wrote:  Russia does not have absolute dominance in Crimea either.

It is as if people accept the pro-Russian version of the facts, and begin their thinking there (e.g. the country is split 50/50, etc.)

Ukrainian as a first language is practically non-existent in Crimea. As Jim wrote, it's been discussed a few times already.

Post: #139

Odessa next? Survey says...



http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles...07117.html

"With the Crimea solidly in Russian hands, the future of Ukraine lies in Odessa."





Odessans on Friday on the classic stairs in Odessa.

Post: #140

(03-09-2014 07:32 PM)jimukr104 Wrote:  

(03-09-2014 07:04 PM)rastignac Wrote:  

(03-08-2014 06:46 PM)DaveR Wrote:  

(03-08-2014 02:45 PM)Big Nilla Wrote:  Probably best for Russia to annex Crimea to starve Ukraine of pipeline and bases money and leave it at that... and use the Russian loyalists all over the rest of Ukraine to make it politically impossible for the West/NATO to tip Ukraine to that side. Basically keep Ukraine as it is... a mess.

I would say "divide and conquer" is definitely part of Russia's plan.

(03-08-2014 02:45 PM)Big Nilla Wrote:  What's best for Ukrainians (both the nationalists and Russians) is to simply go their own ways if they had a choice in the matter. There will never be stability in Ukraine, otherwise, since it is just a pawn for others to manipulate the "multiculturalism" split. As long as NATO isn't brought in to the western half the situation and split should be fine... sort of like the Czech Republic and Slovakia. But the nationalist part of Ukraine would probably be landlocked and not really have anything to build a strong economy with.

This is one thing I'm not so sure about.
Except for Crimea, Russian doesn't have absolute dominance in any of Ukraine's oblasts. Donetsk and Lugansk have the highest concentration (70-75%) but even in that region I think secession would be difficult. Many of the oligarchs come from that part of the country, and they know their control of the country is much stronger t

In other oblasts, the situation is split more on an urban/rural basis, with the cities being predominantly Russian and the rural areas being predominantly Ukrainian. Kirovograd is a very strong example of that, and also Odessa to some extent.

I don't mean to preclude a split, either. There are also differences in the economy of the South/East and the West. The former is more heavily industrialised, where as the West is less developed and more focused on agriculture and services.

(03-08-2014 02:45 PM)Big Nilla Wrote:  Also, will Russia completely turn off oil/gas pipelines on the mainland of Ukraine or still use all or some of them once South Stream is going?

I don't think Russia will continue to use it for transit. It's an old and extremely inefficient system which consumes a lot of so-called "technical gas" just to run the pumping stations. All countries involved need to get efficiency gains out of the new pipelines to start recouping their capital costs.

Check the following.. The blue lines are potential South Stream routes. The circle is where most of Ukraine's heavy industry is located. That part of the current pipeline system will still operate near full capacity even if much of the rest of the network is shut down.
The Slovak and Hungarian legs have been modernised, and once South Stream goes active, the plan is to reverse the flow of those pipelines. Eastern Slovakia and Eastern Hungary are quite industrialised. A few large smelters and other heavy industry operate in that area.

Where are you getting your numbers. Donetsk city, according to Wikipedia, for example:

Quote:The current nationality structure of the Donetsk City Municipality is as follows:

Russians: 493,392 people, 48.15%
Ukrainians: 478,041 people, 46.65%

Russia does not have absolute dominance in Crimea either.

It is as if people accept the pro-Russian version of the facts, and begin their thinking there (e.g. the country is split 50/50, etc.)

Why are we discussing this again?This is not meant at anyone specifically.
There could be 90% Ukrainians in an oblast and they would want to succeed if they are Russian culture. Its based on culture NOT the so called ethnicity statistic. In fact as mentioned a Ukrainian, Russian and Bela-Russian is the same ethnicity.That being said since so many are used to be in Ukraine majority don't want to succeed..but they do want a president that represents them and isn't a Western Nationalist!

Those media statistic make no sense.The designation is part of a gov't segregation and identification project.

The Western Ukrainians at least can be said to have their own unique culture but I THINK to be designated as an ethnicity it takes a few more variables.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_group
Its like saying a an American Hispanic who grew up in some white suburb would want to live in Chile because he is Hispanic. But if he is American why the fuck would he identify with them?

Eastern Ukrainians share most of the common ethnicity factors that a Russian does according to wiki.( cultural heritage, ancestry, history, homeland, language (dialect), or ideology, and with symbolic systems such as religion, mythology and ritual, cuisine, dressing style, physical appearance, etc.)
in fact they share 99%... but Western Ukrainians are different in language spoken,appearance and dress even(east is hotter), culture and religion among other factors.

Sorry to sound irritated but how many times can me, Dave and a bunch of others say this? Its getting to feel like herding cats here

Seriously if I call my Ukrainian wife a Russian she doesn't mind(she takes it as a compliment). However she will call me Russian(Russian-american)..but technically since before my family immigrated, they lived in Ukraine..one could even call some of my ancestry Ukrainian(a town in Ukraine is named after my family name).
This is what happens when you have a country formed that spent most of history as an unformed nation.There is a lack of identity.I suspect only those 25 and under might even have a full Ukrainian identity since those before then grew up in USSR,

Ok. I will stop throwing out Wikipedia facts and arguments against the traditional Russian view of Ukraine because it is not useful, fruitful here. And I don't want to be a dick.

And I will admit to "associating" almost exclusively with the under 25 set. They have firm "convictions". It has obviously colored my sense of the country.

Post: #141

(03-10-2014 06:32 AM)rastignac Wrote:  Ok. I will stop throwing out Wikipedia facts and arguments against the traditional Russian view of Ukraine because it is not useful, fruitful here. And I don't want to be a dick.

And I will admit to "associating" almost exclusively with the under 25 set. They have firm "convictions". It has obviously colored my sense of the country.

I think it's a matter of reading what was written more carefully. There are many nuances surrounding ethnicity, nationality, citizenship, first language and native proficiency.

Also, if you're taking your data from a young subset of the population in Lvov, your views will be just as biased as someone taking data from an older subset of the population in Sevastopol. The Curzon Line and Soviet Ukrainisation programs in that region are still very relevant in today's politics.

Post: #142

Just talked with some family in Doneskt yesterday, an old women that lived in Argentina in the 40`s, and since the 50`s is in Ukraine. She is worried about the whole issue, and she tell me that while her main lenguage is russian, the ukranians that wants the Russians in Doneskt (doing somenthing similar to Crimea) are a very loud minority. Heck, she had good memories of the soviet times, but she knows that Ukraine`s future lies in the EU. Her own words.

Post: #143

(03-10-2014 06:32 AM)rastignac Wrote:  

(03-09-2014 07:32 PM)jimukr104 Wrote:  

(03-09-2014 07:04 PM)rastignac Wrote:  

(03-08-2014 06:46 PM)DaveR Wrote:  

(03-08-2014 02:45 PM)Big Nilla Wrote:  Probably best for Russia to annex Crimea to starve Ukraine of pipeline and bases money and leave it at that... and use the Russian loyalists all over the rest of Ukraine to make it politically impossible for the West/NATO to tip Ukraine to that side. Basically keep Ukraine as it is... a mess.

I would say "divide and conquer" is definitely part of Russia's plan.

(03-08-2014 02:45 PM)Big Nilla Wrote:  What's best for Ukrainians (both the nationalists and Russians) is to simply go their own ways if they had a choice in the matter. There will never be stability in Ukraine, otherwise, since it is just a pawn for others to manipulate the "multiculturalism" split. As long as NATO isn't brought in to the western half the situation and split should be fine... sort of like the Czech Republic and Slovakia. But the nationalist part of Ukraine would probably be landlocked and not really have anything to build a strong economy with.

This is one thing I'm not so sure about.
Except for Crimea, Russian doesn't have absolute dominance in any of Ukraine's oblasts. Donetsk and Lugansk have the highest concentration (70-75%) but even in that region I think secession would be difficult. Many of the oligarchs come from that part of the country, and they know their control of the country is much stronger t

In other oblasts, the situation is split more on an urban/rural basis, with the cities being predominantly Russian and the rural areas being predominantly Ukrainian. Kirovograd is a very strong example of that, and also Odessa to some extent.

I don't mean to preclude a split, either. There are also differences in the economy of the South/East and the West. The former is more heavily industrialised, where as the West is less developed and more focused on agriculture and services.

(03-08-2014 02:45 PM)Big Nilla Wrote:  Also, will Russia completely turn off oil/gas pipelines on the mainland of Ukraine or still use all or some of them once South Stream is going?

I don't think Russia will continue to use it for transit. It's an old and extremely inefficient system which consumes a lot of so-called "technical gas" just to run the pumping stations. All countries involved need to get efficiency gains out of the new pipelines to start recouping their capital costs.

Check the following.. The blue lines are potential South Stream routes. The circle is where most of Ukraine's heavy industry is located. That part of the current pipeline system will still operate near full capacity even if much of the rest of the network is shut down.
The Slovak and Hungarian legs have been modernised, and once South Stream goes active, the plan is to reverse the flow of those pipelines. Eastern Slovakia and Eastern Hungary are quite industrialised. A few large smelters and other heavy industry operate in that area.

Where are you getting your numbers. Donetsk city, according to Wikipedia, for example:

Quote:The current nationality structure of the Donetsk City Municipality is as follows:

Russians: 493,392 people, 48.15%
Ukrainians: 478,041 people, 46.65%

Russia does not have absolute dominance in Crimea either.

It is as if people accept the pro-Russian version of the facts, and begin their thinking there (e.g. the country is split 50/50, etc.)

Why are we discussing this again?This is not meant at anyone specifically.
There could be 90% Ukrainians in an oblast and they would want to succeed if they are Russian culture. Its based on culture NOT the so called ethnicity statistic. In fact as mentioned a Ukrainian, Russian and Bela-Russian is the same ethnicity.That being said since so many are used to be in Ukraine majority don't want to succeed..but they do want a president that represents them and isn't a Western Nationalist!

Those media statistic make no sense.The designation is part of a gov't segregation and identification project.

The Western Ukrainians at least can be said to have their own unique culture but I THINK to be designated as an ethnicity it takes a few more variables.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_group
Its like saying a an American Hispanic who grew up in some white suburb would want to live in Chile because he is Hispanic. But if he is American why the fuck would he identify with them?

Eastern Ukrainians share most of the common ethnicity factors that a Russian does according to wiki.( cultural heritage, ancestry, history, homeland, language (dialect), or ideology, and with symbolic systems such as religion, mythology and ritual, cuisine, dressing style, physical appearance, etc.)
in fact they share 99%... but Western Ukrainians are different in language spoken,appearance and dress even(east is hotter), culture and religion among other factors.

Sorry to sound irritated but how many times can me, Dave and a bunch of others say this? Its getting to feel like herding cats here

Seriously if I call my Ukrainian wife a Russian she doesn't mind(she takes it as a compliment). However she will call me Russian(Russian-american)..but technically since before my family immigrated, they lived in Ukraine..one could even call some of my ancestry Ukrainian(a town in Ukraine is named after my family name).
This is what happens when you have a country formed that spent most of history as an unformed nation.There is a lack of identity.I suspect only those 25 and under might even have a full Ukrainian identity since those before then grew up in USSR,

Ok. I will stop throwing out Wikipedia facts and arguments against the traditional Russian view of Ukraine because it is not useful, fruitful here. And I don't want to be a dick.

And I will admit to "associating" almost exclusively with the under 25 set. They have firm "convictions". It has obviously colored my sense of the country.

The ethnic issue...is like mentioned akin to Hitler thinking Jews are a different race and Slavs also.Heck most Jews aren't even an ethnic group(you know the difference right?Jewish Russian and Russian jew).
In the American revolution much of the fighting was actually done Anglo Saxon vs Anglo Saxon(they even both often had Brit nationalities).

I get annoyed when the Western media uses the Ethnicity term. They do that because they think of Ukraine like Yugoslavia which actually was an ethnic division.

Ukrainians vs Russians is family vs family. Winston Churchill played the cousin card to try to get USA into WW2... altogether as % of numbers we had more Aryans than Anglo ancestry at that time.


Don't beat your self over it since I wouldn't take seriously polls done on facebook in America either... since those active tend to be young(i don't even use social networking) and even deviants/alternatives. Successful folks I know have better things to do than playing on Facebook..see my point?
Young start out liberal but often get more conservative as older. If you notice its always the young protesting in America...then 20 years later they don't even believe what they were protesting about.
The problem is there is an assumption that those same under 25 will continue to be LIBERAL... but I THINK other wise. Those same liberals selling black market jeans during perestroika are now conservative.
Someone under 25 will only have lived in Ukraine and think of themselves as Ukrainian. However the problem of identity comes up.. because there is 2 UKRAINEs.
Therefore you can be a loyal Ukrainian and all but still have different views based on where you grew up.
However many of those young Ukrainians are also victims of Yushchenkos Ukrainian project... he basically pushed Ukrainian language and culture on the young. I call it being victims because they were taught things that went against many of the things their families fought and died for. Also Yushcenko himself was full of shit and pretended to be a nationalist(same thing Tymoshenko is doing). He admitted later he didn't believe any of that crap and that Ukrainian language is redneck language. He even made sure his son went to Russian language school.
Nationalists believe in Banderas and a host of other characters that Odessa and the East consider HIM enemies and traitors.It doesn't make them any less Ukrainian but it shows a cultural difference.
Historically people will kill each other other religion and cultural difference more than even for nationality.
Many pro Russain might be anti-Putin now after the invasion but that isn't going to change their culture. They are still going to speak Russain, like Russain movies and go to Russain church. They also aren't wanting closer ties to West at Russia's expense. In 2012 poll showed only 1 out of 6 eastern and southern Ukrainians wanted EU pact(only 50% in the west).
NATO membership I think was in 2007 around 15%.

PS. @Rag... you remember you asked a Russain guy what he thought of Putin?
Well a more fair question would to be "what do you think about politicians?"
i bet you money that they would claim all are criminals and thief's. You think the Brooklyn Russians believe in paying taxes and don't think USA gov't is full of thieves?
One of the reasons Brooklyn has the highest car insurance is because of them scamming the system. Almost all the doctors here rip of medicare and my neighborhood doesn't have a large supermarket because the Russians kept tripping on Tomatos and suing.
Our people are con artists..so makes sense the gov't would be also lol.Ones gov't reflects the citizen.

Post: #144

(03-10-2014 10:07 AM)Mekorig Wrote:  Just talked with some family in Doneskt yesterday, an old women that lived in Argentina in the 40`s, and since the 50`s is in Ukraine. She is worried about the whole issue, and she tell me that while her main lenguage is russian, the ukranians that wants the Russians in Doneskt (doing somenthing similar to Crimea) are a very loud minority. Heck, she had good memories of the soviet times, but she knows that Ukraine`s future lies in the EU. Her own words.

Agreed most don't want that. Putin made a mistake and now many who supported him are scared of him. Fear leads to Hate according to YODA lol.
The south and East just don't support the nationalist gov't..that doesn't mean they want to be in Russia. If Putin did nothing..there would more likely be a separation in the future I think. But I still believe that unless the country splits there will always be a gap widening due to the political system there.
Btw she seems brainwashed by the new gov't. "Ukraine`s future lies in the EU" is the same line that the new leader has said(exactly)..however it is kind of foolish considering these people NEVER had a European history or culture and the very fabric of EU ideas is actually against many of the internal beliefs of their being.Turkey is more Euro mentality and they still aren't allowed in!
An example is Romania had to agree to gov't reforms to enter EU..but they are still beating gays, gypsies and breaking 75% of the Social contract requirements of being an EU member including widespread corruption. You cant teach an old dog new tricks!.

Post: #145

This is what Ukrainians from the far right do to pro Russian who try to succeed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VivY94Cp0s0

Post: #146

Jim, Dave, Icarus, others... what do you think of Klitschko?
Heart in the right place but he's naïve and won't be allowed to get a sniff of real power since he's probably not corrupt?

Post: #147

Someone in the West doesn't like Timoshenko:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/cri...77693.html

Quote:Prominent UK banks are at the centre of a dispute over allegations that numerous foreign accounts were set up in the name of former Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko and her family. A leaked report, seen by The Independent, claims that 85 bank accounts containing millions of pounds were linked to Ms Tymoshenko and relatives.

Post: #148

(03-10-2014 04:52 PM)Big Nilla Wrote:  Jim, Dave, Icarus, others... what do you think of Klitschko?
Heart in the right place but he's naïve and won't be allowed to get a sniff of real power since he's probably not corrupt?

Some tidbits:
1.He is not smart..his brother is the smart one.
2. He and his party UDAR is a stooge of Germany. Their imperialistic ways is being accomplished by Klitschko.
3. The extremists tried to make him look like a sellout for signing accord and shaking VK hand.
4. Because of number 3 he apologized to the street and asked for forgiveness and went to parliament and have them vote VK out.
5.Because of 4 and the obvious violation to the accord...Russia seized Crimea. Therefore Klitschko is responsible for the Russain occupation more than any other person.. except for maybe Red sector that actually probably shot the protesters and they were the ones that promised to chase VK out.
6. Putting 1-5 together you will see he has been a tool for the interests of others(E.G. Germany, Red Sector)

It means the more extremist ultra nationalists have a better chance now.

Post: #149

This is from a few years ago...a Russian comedy song about shutting off gas to Ukraine:

Post: #150

@Jim I couldn't agree more about your assessment of Klitschko. He is nose deep in German ass. I understand why given his boxing career blew up there but still it is obvious whose interests he would serve. I think he even has residency there unless he gave it up.