XCR Forum banner
41 - 60 of 78 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,097 Posts
Discussion Starter · #41 · (Edited)
I'm also very concerned about the frankly extralegal means the western governments are using. Confiscation of private property, from private individuals, without due process, is being dressed up as 'sanctions'. No one seems to be calling that out, even though similar means have been used against domestic dissenters (most recently and notably by the Trudeau government against dissenters in Canada).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,031 Posts
I'm also very concerned about the frankly extralegal means the western governments are using. Confiscation of private property, from private individuals, without due process, is being dressed up as 'sanctions'. No one seems to be calling that out, even though similar means have been used against domestic dissenters (most recently and notably by the Trudeau government against dissenters in Canada).
Yeah....troubling is an understatement. And the fact that private industry is marching in lockstep with government overreach is part of the problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: willpgn

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts

Different take on Russia and Ukraine
Cute twist on the truth. Trying to blame shift so Russia can look like it has clean hands when it’s Russia who started the whole problem when they invaded Crimea. The barely there at the time Ukrainian army of course did not do well. However it seems they are making things pretty tough for the Russian army currently even though they are still not equally armed or as great in number.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
872 Posts
Cute twist on the truth. Trying to blame shift so Russia can look like it has clean hands when it’s Russia who started the whole problem when they invaded Crimea. The barely there at the time Ukrainian army of course did not do well. However it seems they are making things pretty tough for the Russian army currently even though they are still not equally armed or as great in number.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Twist on the truth, Russia clean hands, Crimea

What about the rest of it?
Gorlovka? July 27 2014 this was 2014 the Ukrainian army shells a town killing innocent citizens, not targeting fighting men they attacked the town square. This is just one example of the last 8 years in the Donbass.

When Sean asked earlier in this thread who started the hostilities in the Donbass you replied it's like kids in the back seat he touched me, he touched me first. It does matter who fired the first shots, it really does.

Ukraine can throw out Putins boy and move towards the EU but the Donbass can't remove themselves from Ukraine and a Government they believe corrupt?

In the video the guy makes valid points about Ukraine and the US and NATO
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,097 Posts
Discussion Starter · #47 ·
I think that any group of people has a right to remove themselves from any other group of people. The question is really what territory they take with them, and if it's just the territory where they live. It seems (and it's definitely far from clear) like the Russians recognized Donbass to include substantial territory that had not seceded from Ukraine.

I feel like the Ukrainians could have avoided a lot of this mess if they had just said 'yep, we recognize you guys as independent, and the border is the current "line of contact".' That also would have allowed them to join NATO (since having a current border dispute precludes entry).

There are a lot of lessons here for Moldova, if anyone there is watching.

The Russians have done a great job of using NATO's own rules against them. NATO won't admit any new members with border disputes, so Russia foments a rebellion and has the border region secede. The country (Ukraine or Moldova) refuses to recognize the secession, and is hence barred from joining NATO.

The real solution would be to just recognize the secession, let that region go it's own way, and move forward with the people who actually want to be part of your country.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,031 Posts
I think that any group of people has a right to remove themselves from any other group of people. The question is really what territory they take with them, and if it's just the territory where they live. It seems (and it's definitely far from clear) like the Russians recognized Donbass to include substantial territory that had not seceded from Ukraine.

I feel like the Ukrainians could have avoided a lot of this mess if they had just said 'yep, we recognize you guys as independent, and the border is the current "line of contact".' That also would have allowed them to join NATO (since having a current border dispute precludes entry).

There are a lot of lessons here for Moldova, if anyone there is watching.

The Russians have done a great job of using NATO's own rules against them. NATO won't admit any new members with border disputes, so Russia foments a rebellion and has the border region secede. The country (Ukraine or Moldova) refuses to recognize the secession, and is hence barred from joining NATO.

The real solution would be to just recognize the secession, let that region go it's own way, and move forward with the people who actually want to be part of your country.
But, there are pretty strong allegations of Russia helping to infiltrate and populate those two contested regions over the last 8 or so years. It's as if Russia was stacking the deck in its favor for separation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
872 Posts
I think that any group of people has a right to remove themselves from any other group of people. The question is really what territory they take with them, and if it's just the territory where they live. It seems (and it's definitely far from clear) like the Russians recognized Donbass to include substantial territory that had not seceded from Ukraine.

I feel like the Ukrainians could have avoided a lot of this mess if they had just said 'yep, we recognize you guys as independent, and the border is the current "line of contact".' That also would have allowed them to join NATO (since having a current border dispute precludes entry).

There are a lot of lessons here for Moldova, if anyone there is watching.

The Russians have done a great job of using NATO's own rules against them. NATO won't admit any new members with border disputes, so Russia foments a rebellion and has the border region secede. The country (Ukraine or Moldova) refuses to recognize the secession, and is hence barred from joining NATO.

The real solution would be to just recognize the secession, let that region go it's own way, and move forward with the people who actually want to be part of your country.
I agree with what you posted, I do believe though that Ukraine joining NATO is the Crux of Russia's argument. If the US the UK and NATO had just agreed that they would not allow Ukraine to join NATO then that would have took any excuse that Russia had for everything other than the donbas area.

I especially agree with your last paragraph
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,097 Posts
Discussion Starter · #51 ·
But, there are pretty strong allegations of Russia helping to infiltrate and populate those two contested regions over the last 8 or so years. It's as if Russia was stacking the deck in its favor for separation.
Yes, I think they definitely did that. The best thing moving forward would be to proactively separate from the areas with a present population that wishes to secede. And allow anyone who does not wish to secede to move. That would require well recognized, clean referendum votes be held with International monitors to determine what the people there actually want. And that's impossible to do in the current environment. It makes way more sense to do that proactively--well before anyone else is involved. It would be easy for France (random example) to hold such a referendum in a border area to see if it wants to join Italy (or whatever). It just takes the politicians (and the citizens in other areas) getting over there egos and fixation on territory, and letting self determination speak. The current government of the Ukraine wasn't willing to do that, and that should be a lesson for other governments (like the government of Moldova) to move forward now--not after their country becomes a war zone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,031 Posts
  • Like
Reactions: scalton

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,031 Posts
Yes, I think they definitely did that. The best thing moving forward would be to proactively separate from the areas with a present population that wishes to secede. And allow anyone who does not wish to secede to move. That would require well recognized, clean referendum votes be held with International monitors to determine what the people there actually want. And that's impossible to do in the current environment. It makes way more sense to do that proactively--well before anyone else is involved. It would be easy for France (random example) to hold such a referendum in a border area to see if it wants to join Italy (or whatever). It just takes the politicians (and the citizens in other areas) getting over there egos and fixation on territory, and letting self determination speak. The current government of the Ukraine wasn't willing to do that, and that should be a lesson for other governments (like the government of Moldova) to move forward now--not after their country becomes a war zone.
But isn't that what the separatists are claiming was done EDIT in 2014 (though not with international oversight....and who can blame them? I wouldn't want the UN overseeing our elections) with the referendum to secede in the two contested states? The Ukranian government just declared the election invalid from my understanding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scalton

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,097 Posts
Discussion Starter · #54 · (Edited)
I agree with what you posted, I do believe though that Ukraine joining NATO is the Crux of Russia's argument. If the US the UK and NATO had just agreed that they would not allow Ukraine to join NATO then that would have took any excuse that Russia had for everything other than the donbas area.
Russia has legitimate security concerns that were not addressed by either Ukraine or NATO. And the western powers have repeatedly broken their word on NATO expansion, creeping ever closer to the Russian border. The western press has intentionally minimized and overlooked this, because the western press basically functions as a mouthpiece for western governments while pretending to be unbiased.

Still, I believe that any nation has a right to determine it's own foreign policy--joining alliances as it wishes. And NATO has a right to decide what it's membership criteria are, and who it allows to join.

Were I living in Ukraine, I think I would (prior to this war) have been in favor of a Swiss style system (military service followed by ongoing training and the issuing of a rifle to every adult citizen) and staying out of NATO. But since I am not Ukrainian, it's hard to say for sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,097 Posts
Discussion Starter · #55 ·
But isn't that what the separatists are claiming was done last year (though not with international oversight....and who can blame them? I wouldn't want the UN overseeing our elections) with the referendum to secede in the two contested states? The Ukranian government just declared the election invalid from my understanding.
I think the Ukrainian government had good reasons for declaring the vote invalid. For example, in Crimea, the two options on the ballot were (a) secede and declare independence and (b) secede and join Russia. There was no 'stay part of Ukraine' option on the ballot.

That's why it's important to proactively hold those votes before things get violent, and to do so in the most transparent, cleanest manner possible. Given the relatively illiberal (in the classical sense) government of the Ukraine, asking for international monitors would probably be the only way the Ukraine could get such a vote widely recognized.

I'm not under the illusion that the government of the Ukraine is run by angels. Like any government, it's run by people who hold their own self interest first and foremost. The difference between Zelensky and Putin is largely one of degree and time--give Zelensky life tenure and I imagine he'd be very similar to Putin in terms of how he governed. The solution to that is probably not to remove one person, though, and (contrary to US government positions as expressed by action) it's also not to invade.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
264 Posts
Guys I've been seeing some suspicious stuff coming to light about these US funded labs in Ukraine. Embassy deleting documents, cagey politicians, Russians complaining about pork seasonings. We probably won't get to the bottom of it for 6 months when they finally respond to FOIA requests, but something stinks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,097 Posts
Discussion Starter · #58 ·
It's interesting that Victoria Nuland was basically in charge of Ukraine policy in the (second) Bush administration, the Obama administration and the Biden Administration. And the time period when the Russians backed off Ukraine was when she was not running policy over there.

I wonder if Putin told Trump 'if you guys don't stop running labs over here we're going to invade Ukraine' and then Trump shut down (or at least backed away from) the labs. The neo-con foreign policy establishment (represented by Nuland) has been in firm control of US foreign policy since at least 9/11 (probably well before), and the career state department folks (as well as a whole lot of other beltway lifers) hated the Trump administration for 'not listening to them.' Is this just another iteration of that same story?

We know for sure that the US government funds bio labs in many foreign countries (Wuhan Institute of Virology, anyone?) doing research that would be illegal within the USA. We know for sure that there were large kickbacks rolling back and forth to the Ukraine after 2014 (how much did Burisma pay Hunter Biden for doing nothing?). There's a pretty convoluted money trail in there.

I don't think that any of this justifies Russia invading the Ukraine, but it does seem like the average person in the Ukraine has become a victim of political machinations by multiple governments, including the government of the USA.

I hope that Ukraine pulls through this, recognizes the independence of Donbas, joins the EU but not NATO, and starts a Swiss style 'take your rifle home' national defense system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
Let’s get one thing straight. Lots of propaganda and excuse making from Putin and those supporting him.

Bio labs? Proof? Why would you be bombing cities if you knew where they are?
This is flat out Russia imperialism. Many times Putin has said that he is wants the borders of the old USSR restored and that it was a terrible thing that they were reduced.

Crimea was a test planned from at least 2007 possibly earlier ( Russians are long range planners) His logic was/is if I can annex Crimea on a false pretense without too much blow back, then we can move to step one ( destabilize The Donbas very normal Soviet tactic) with this destabilization we can ride into Ukraine as the saving heroes. We regain Ukraine suffer sanctions and a lot of whining from spineless Western leaders.

So he waits until we have a weak spineless president and annexes Crimea. What does he get? Some sanctions and a lot of whining from the West.

Step two agents provocateurs already in Donbas stir the pot and start and promote discord and violent actions necessitating Ukraine center all government to act. As I said often used Soviet tactic.

Crimea annexed, Donbas destabilized, when to move in Ukraine and what excuses to use? Ah genocide ( no proof) criminals in power failed state) did he happen to look at his own government? Believe me payola is a way of life in Russia).

We have another spineless less than useless individual in the White House so he makes up his back story as well as his excuses and move to “ liberate” Ukraine.

One small problem Ukraine does not want to be “ liberated” by the way Russian troops weren’t welcomed in the Donbas either.

So now the bear has a problem things are going as planned, the sanctions are bigger than anticipated. So he threatens that which even as he says it knows if it occurred it would be the end of Russia. Bluff. His second bluff is about a no fly zone again bluff as there is not a lot he can do about it.

Time to step and push the rat into the corner, yet leave him an out and see which way he jumps.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,031 Posts
Right....it seems they are trying to get out in front of this, do damage control and project blame on the Russians (via Rubio's pointed question about who would be to blame in such a scenario).....however, she never admits that the US is the one funding the Ukrainian labs... Further, they are supposedly BSL-2 labs....not BSL-4s....meaning reports of Anthrax and Plague being tested there are unlikely. Then there's the early war reports that Russia hit 8 of these (allegedly now 26) sites with missile strikes...something that would be unlikely if you didn't wish to potentially spread a pathogen and equally unlikely if you planned to 'expose' the West's involvement in the "plandemic" and the release of bioweapons like COVID 19 (as the conspiracy theorists are claiming Putin's 'real' intentions with the invasion) since you'd be destroying the very evidence needed as proof.

What Nuland didn't say was if the Russians were trying to take control of these labs intact or if they were destroying them. That would be telling in and of itself as to the motivation for the objective.
 
41 - 60 of 78 Posts
Top