Ukraine Crisis Thread III: a new European order?

[Verbose]

If they vote their independence will that mean that Russia will stand down and let them form their own, illegitimate country?

The way the question was framed, the people who voted won't know if that was what the voted for. What everybody does know, is that the people who came out and voted, voted against Kiev. How many or representative they are, or how their vote should be interpreted we can only take the word of the organisers who counted the ballots on trust, if the trust them. (In the end, they in turn might even end up fighting over that interpretation.)

 

[LoneRebel]

Someone in this thread claimed that Russia is becoming depopulated.

Apparently you are not familiarized with the post-2010 data:

Since about 2010 Russia once again has positive natural growth.

Ain't gonna last, though.

Something I've been wondering about - why is the life expectancy of men in Russia so low? Seriously, that's lower than quite a lot of third world countries.

 

[kramerfan86]

Ain't gonna last, though.

Something I've been wondering about - why is the life expectancy of men in Russia so low? Seriously, that's lower than quite a lot of third world countries.

isnt alcoholism fairly prevalent? That can start taking huge bites out of life expectancy.

 

[LoneRebel]

isnt alcoholism fairly prevalent? That can start taking huge bites out of life expectancy.

I've read that it is, but I can't imagine alcoholism decreasing life expectancy this much.

 

[kramerfan86]

I've read that it is, but I can't imagine alcoholism decreasing life expectancy this much.

On a mass scale it easily could. Earlier accidental deaths and even for those who avoid that likely a lot of death by liver failure. I dont know much about the Russian medical system but if its inferior the liver induced damage could easily be more lethal more quickly. Plus it can lead to a lot of cardiovascular problems.

 

[LamaGT]

Ain't gonna last, though.

And you are who? An expert demographer (assuming they exist...) who has studied the Russian situation in great detail?

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

Slavery has been practiced widely in the previous eras (including the USA as recently as 150 years ago, yay). I think it's safe to say that today it's a totally unacceptable practice.

I do not know the statistics but would it surprise you if today there were more slaves then 150 years ago?
Heck, we have even managed to economicaly enslave whole nations.

I think we can put "invasion to grab land" in the same category, so YES we can blame Russia for invading Crimea TODAY without having apologists practicing whataboutism by digging in past history to throw accusation of double-standards (because if we can use any past deed from any nation, then basically anything is excusable and acceptable, and it's just a way of mudying the subject).

O.K. without going to the past lets compare two recent invasions:
1. US invading Irak:
a)reason: unclear/fabulated
b)causalities: 1.000.000 dead
c)result of invasion and future prospect of the invaded teritory: Irak has become very unstable country with decimated infrastructure, different minorities set on killing each other and psychic scars among the population which will take decades to heal,....

2. Russias takeover of Crimea:
a)oficially protecting Russian population/ in reality protecting its vital naval base/military interests
b) 0
c) Crimeria is more likely to develop and prosper as opposed to when it was part of Ukraine and will enjoy flow of investment from Russia while the citizens minority rights are guaratneed....

Let me ask you two simple questions. Do you see those two invasions in the same category? Which one of the two is less acceptable/ totaly unacceptable today?

 

[Commodore]

1. US invading Irak:
a)reason: unclear/fabulated
b)causalities: 1.000.000 dead
c)result of invasion and future prospect of the invaded teritory: Irak has become very unstable country with decimated infrastructure, different minorities set on killing each other and psychic scars among the population which will take decades to heal,...

a) The publicly stated reason was fabricated, but we did actually have a good reason for being there and we achieved that goal. And no, it was not for oil or any other conspiracy theorist reason you might think of.

b) Source or it's a BS claim. And when I say source, I want a source that says the US was solely responsible for one million deaths in Iraq.

c) Actually Iraq has a brighter future than you think. The government we helped establish is slowly pushing back the insurgent groups trying to overthrow it and they will achieve victory soon. There is also a lot of foreign investment going on in Iraq right now and as the security situation improves those foreign investments will increase. Those investments will also go a long way to rebuild the damaged infrastructure. Of course this is going to take decades to happen, but were you really expecting Iraq to turn into a paradise the moment we ousted Saddam? If you did, then you are terribly naïve. The US essentially killed two birds with one stone by invading Iraq: We eliminated a global strategic threat (no I'm not talking about Saddam) and we laid the foundation for a stronger Iraq that will eventually act as a stabilizing force in the region to counter the growing influence of Iran.

 

[Akka]

I do not know the statistics but would it surprise you if today there were more slaves then 150 years ago?
Heck, we have even managed to economicaly enslave whole nations.

And it makes slavery acceptable somehow ?

O.K. without going to the past lets compare two recent invasions:
[...]
acceptable/ totaly unacceptable today?

I'm not going to bicker about details, 'cause I opposed USA invading Iraq just like I oppose Russia invading Crimea.
But just as above : does that make invading other nations acceptable somehow ?

You're just trying to justify the unacceptable. That's repulsive in itself, and on top of that it's very hypocrital, which adds another layer of disgust on top of it.

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

a) The publicly stated reason was fabricated, but we did actually have a good reason for being there and we achieved that goal. And no, it was not for oil or any other conspiracy theorist reason you might think of.

The goal was to spend money on weapons. A loads of money, no wait, I mean insanely ridiculous amount of money:http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...2a5dce-97ed-11e2-814b-063623d80a60_story.html

b) Source or it's a BS claim. And when I say source, I want a source that says the US was solely responsible for one million deaths in Iraq.

You´ve been served: http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/deathcount/explanation

c) Actually Iraq has a brighter future than you think. The government we helped establish is slowly pushing back the insurgent groups trying to overthrow it and they will achieve victory soon. There is also a lot of foreign investment going on in Iraq right now and as the security situation improves those foreign investments will increase. Those investments will also go a long way to rebuild the damaged infrastructure. Of course this is going to take decades to happen, but were you really expecting Iraq to turn into a paradise the moment we ousted Saddam? If you did, then you are terribly naïve. The US essentially killed two birds with one stone by invading Iraq: We eliminated a global strategic threat (no I'm not talking about Saddam) and we laid the foundation for a stronger Iraq that will eventually act as a stabilizing force in the region to counter the growing influence of Iran.

This is perverted seeing of the world. You dont need to kill milions and spend billions to counter someones growing influence....

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

And it makes slavery acceptable somehow ?

Thats not my argument. I am just pointing out the absurdity. If something is less acceptable today then 150 years ago how come we have more of it?

I'm not going to bicker about details, 'cause I opposed USA invading Iraq just like I oppose Russia invading Crimea.
But just as above : does that make invading other nations acceptable somehow ?

No it should be apparently something extremely rare and done as a last eventuality. But again sometimes you have to enter some place swiftly to avoid future large causalities.

You're just trying to justify the unacceptable. That's repulsive in itself, and on top of that it's very hypocrital, which adds another layer of disgust on top of it.

Russian inhabited Crimea under Russian control is perfectly justifiable. Really its much more Russian then it ever was Ukrainian....

 

[ywhtptgtfo]

Thats not my argument. I am just pointing out the absurdity. If something is less acceptable today then 150 years ago how come we have more of it?

It's all about proportionality.

 

[timtofly]

O.K. without going to the past lets compare two recent invasions:
1. US invading Irak:
a)reason: unclear/fabulated
b)causalities: 1.000.000 dead
c)result of invasion and future prospect of the invaded teritory: Irak has become very unstable country with decimated infrastructure, different minorities set on killing each other and psychic scars among the population which will take decades to heal,....

2. Russias takeover of Crimea:
a)oficially protecting Russian population/ in reality protecting its vital naval base/military interests
b) 0
c) Crimeria is more likely to develop and prosper as opposed to when it was part of Ukraine and will enjoy flow of investment from Russia while the citizens minority rights are guaratneed....

Let me ask you two simple questions. Do you see those two invasions in the same category? Which one of the two is less acceptable/ totaly unacceptable today?

Have you been to Iraq or Crimea? Were the interest of the population of Crimea really an issue? The dictator of Iraq was already using genocide and had just waged a war that was more deadly than the so-called effects of the US invasion. Were the people of Crimea under such duress?

Months after the US invasion there was an insurgence of outside interest compelled to wreck havoc. Did the same thing happen in Crimea? Is the crisis in Ukraine even over?

There is also a religious angle to Iraq in which different sects do not even get along with each other. Is that an issue in Ukraine?

 

[red_elk]

Have you been to Iraq or Crimea? Were the interest of the population of Crimea really an issue? The dictator of Iraq was already using genocide and had just waged a war that was more deadly than the so-called effects of the US invasion. Were the people of Crimea under such duress?

Months after the US invasion there was an insurgence of outside interest compelled to wreck havoc. Did the same thing happen in Crimea? Is the crisis in Ukraine even over?

There is also a religious angle to Iraq in which different sects do not even get along with each other. Is that an issue in Ukraine?

So, your point is... Ukraine and Iraq cases are not really comparable? Yes, they aren't - Russia took over land with friendly population and with zero casualties instead of going into crazy adventure on the other side of the world, killing hundreds of thousands, losing in the end anyway. That's the whole idea.

 

[ywhtptgtfo]

So, your point is... Ukraine and Iraq cases are not really comparable? Yes, they aren't - Russia took over land with friendly population and with zero casualties instead of going into crazy adventure on the other side of the world, killing hundreds of thousands, losing in the end anyway. That's the whole idea.

Ah my little propagandist, zero casualties is pushing it.

 

[Væringjar]

US invasion of Iraq was far far far worse than this. US soldiers did so many bad things. Funny thing is, same US soldiers don't want to go to fight against Russia! lols.



I'm wondering that why those "good guys" didn't say this when US declared war on Iraq? Killing Iraqis are easier, right? Russians are not easy targets. Oh, also, they're Muslims... That should be fun! Crusaders you know.

Anyway, I'm not supporting what Russia did but you can't say that it's same with Invasion of Iraq.

 

[red_elk]

Ah my little propagandist, zero casualties is pushing it.

What this supposed to mean, did you hit your head against something?

 

[LoneRebel]

And you are who? An expert demographer (assuming they exist...) who has studied the Russian situation in great detail?

What, you really think Russia's population will start increasing every year from now on? Be my guest. You're welcome to believe whatever makes you feel better.

 

[GamezRule]

US invasion of Iraq was far far far worse than this. US soldiers did so many bad things. Funny thing is, same US soldiers don't want to go to fight against Russia! lols.

Please just stop equating enlisted soldiers in the United States Army with the actions taken by those in command of them. Believe it or not, the people that are in the Army aren't bad people. Now Marines on the other hand...

 

[Væringjar]

@Ceoladir

Oh really?

This is just one of the numberless events...

Green and three other soldiers went to the home of an Iraqi family in Mahmoudiya, Iraq, near a traffic checkpoint in March 2006. At the home, Green shot and killed three members of the al-Janabi family before becoming the third soldier to rape 14-year-old Abeer Qassim al-Janabi before killing her. He was convicted and sentenced in 2009.

They are not bad you say? Yeah sure.