Ukrainian Crisis thread 1.2

[red_elk]

Oh, so your statement about the causes of the famine was entirely about secondary or even tertiary causes of fairly minor importance to the even at hand? OK, then.

My statement was a general description of famine causes, and it is correct.
I'm still waiting for you to demonstrate where it is utterly contradicting with academic consensus over the issue.

The official Soviet statistic for the crop yield of 1932, as quoted by your boy Mark Tauger, is 68.9 million tons.

And the reason to trust official Soviet statistics (which censored signs of famine) on this issue is...?

 

[LamaGT]

Be careful about 'academic consensus' too. It sounds like conspiracy madness, but the US government literally paid academics to come out with anti-Russian accounts of Ukrainian history. The Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute was, for instance, set up by the CIA (or maybe it was the State Dept, I forget).

Yeah, it is rather intriguing that the US started "investigating" into the causes of the famine in 1985. I suppose that was the start of the long history of America using Ukraine as a tool to keep down the Soviet Union and then Russia.

I remember Cheezy saying he studied this matter thoroughly. It would be interesting to hear his opinion, assuming he's reading this topic. This is probably the 1871621th iteration of the "holodomor" discussion on this forum. Not the first time for the Ukraine topics, either.

 

[red_elk]

I remember Cheezy saying he studied this matter thoroughly.

He will be declared as another disgusting grand apologist of mother russia. Who goes against consensus of notable scholars. Even before he says a word

 

[Snorrius]

It's not only that the Soviet authorities failed to prevent or to respond effectively to the famine, they caused the famine. These are hardcore facts not really subject to interpretation.

Well, Ukraine and Russia should bill Georgia for the harm caused.

 

[Domen]

It is true that the famine of 1929-1933 took place not only in Ukraine, but also in other parts of the Soviet Union.

However, according to this map posted below, it took the most devastating death toll in ethnic Ukrainian areas:

The Soviet famine didn't just kill Ukrainians, but all across the southern Soviet Union. Those Wikipedia articles are written by rabid Ukrainian nationalists. There's even an article called:
Denial of the Holodomor

As you know, all modern 'post-imperial' nations need to have a genocidal persecutor, and all self-respecting ethnic genocides need to have a denial, otherwise they're not proper genocides.

So it was a Holo-do-hoax? What about the map I posted (% of deaths by region)?

Even on your map non-'ethnic Ukrainian' regions like Kuban and 'Russophone' areas attached to the the Ukrainian SSR are worst affected. Stalin was Georgian, Soviet officials at that time didn't care whether you were an 'ethnic Ukrainian' or 'ethnic Russian', they just cared if they thought you were backward and stood in the way of progress.

Which is the basis for your claim that Kuban was a non-ethnic Ukrainian region in ca. 1930, or that those areas attached to the Ukrainian SSR were Russophone at that partcular time ??? According to the Russian census of 1897 Kuban was an ethnic Ukrainian, Ukrainophone area.

Distribution of Ukrainians / Ukrainophones (people with Ukrainian mother tongue) according to the 1897 census (only areas with over 10%):



According to that census, in 1897 Kuban had 1,918,881 people, including:

Ukrainians (people with Ukrainian mother tongue) - 47.4%
Russians (people with Russian mother tongue) - 42.6%
Circassians - 2%
Karachays - 1.4%
Germans - 1.1%
Greeks - 1%
Others - 4.5% (incl. Armenians, Kabardins, Abkhazians, Nogays, Belarusians, etc.)

And according to P. Sulatycki's book "Kubań", Warsaw 1930, ethnic composition of Kuban in 1930 was:

Total population (in 1930) - ca. 3,357,000 people (density: 35 people / 1 km2), including:

Ukrainians - ca. 60%
Russians - ca. 30%
Circassians - ca. 3.6%
Turko-Tatars - ca. 2.1%
Germans - ca. 1.1%
Armenians - ca. 0.7%
Others - ca. 2% (including Poles, Czechs, Greeks, Georgians, Moldavians, etc.)

Religions of Kubań in ca. 1930 according to Sulatycki were:

Orthodox - 92.24%
Muslim - 5.38%
Protestants - 0.97%
Catholics - 0.38%
Others - 1.03%

Soviet officials at that time didn't care whether you were an 'ethnic Ukrainian' or 'ethnic Russian', they just cared if they thought you were backward and stood in the way of progress.

I agree.

The problem is that their understanding of "progress" was insane, and their methods of dealing with those who allegedly stood in its way - inhuman.

 

[luiz]

My statement was a general description of famine causes, and it is correct.
I'm still waiting for you to demonstrate where it is utterly contradicting with academic consensus over the issue.

It is not contradicting if you accept that the causes you described were not the main ones.

And the reason to trust official Soviet statistics on this issue is...?

I don't trust them to be precise, but I suppose they're in the ballpark of what actually happened. And this is a minor point in my opinion anyway.

 

[luiz]

Well, Ukraine and Russia should bill Georgia for the harm caused.

Well irony aside I agree that there's no reason why Russians should have take Stalin as one of their own. I wish more Russians would see him as a foreign despot, if nothing else because this would lower their opinion of him.

I agree.

The problem is that their understanding of "progress" was insane, and their methods of dealing with those who allegedly stood in its way - inhuman.

Precisely.

 

[red_elk]

It is not contradicting if you accept that the causes you described were not the main ones.

It is not contradicting without ifs, until you prove the opposite.

 

[Domen]

For example the Soviet officials considered Kulaks - rich peasants, who were industrious, disciplined, hard-working, smart, etc. (in general possesed character traits which made them rich) as "standing in the way of progress". So eliminate your hard-working, talented ones, to facilitate progress. Is this sane?

I understand Soviet anti-aristocratic sentiment because aristocrats get rich by birth, not by their own work.

But rich peasants? The did not stand in the way of "progress", but in the way of Communist Conflagration, as they didn't support far-left ideologies...

 

[Snorrius]

For example the Soviet officials considered Kulaks - rich peasants, who were industrious, disciplined, hard-working, smart, etc. (in general possesed character traits which made them rich) as "standing in the way of progress". So eliminate your hard-working, talented ones, to facilitate progress. Is this sane?

Surely not. But progressivism is not sane, whether it is socialism, or modern liberalism -- it is insanity on the loose. Remember ShirtGate? Progressivists were saying that this scientist in wrong t-shirt was staying in the way of "progress". Ludicrous. They are all insane, everyone.

Well irony aside I agree that there's no reason why Russians should have take Stalin as one of their own. I wish more Russians would see him as a foreign despot, if nothing else because this would lower their opinion of him.

Well, we have a kind of reaction renaissance in Russia, so let's hope the myth of Russian Emperors will eclipse the myth of Soviet Tsar some day. Personally I am not fan of Stalin either.

 

[Domen]

Remember ShirtGate? Progressivists were saying that this scientist in wrong t-shirt was staying in the way of "progress". Ludicrous.

You mean this?:


Link to video.

 

[Snorrius]

You mean this?:

Indeed . A pack of feminists started, let's called it, shirtstorm about this innocent t-shirt. The most funny was an article of some feminist who works in pornography industry and still dared to voice her opinion on how this t-shirt was inappropriate. They are insane beyond any help .

 

[Yeekim]

Just you seem to blame exclusively the Soviets, for the conflict which started before USSR was created.

Mostly I wanted to point out that said conflict existed and that, consequently, "Soviets = liberators of Ukraine" rhetoric leaves few important things unsaid.

Thats a pure nonsence, man. Countries is a countries, free elections is a free elections, they are orthogonal each other, a definition of a country have nothing to do with elections at all.

When one talks about "country", one usually also refers to the population. Surely it makes sense that people can't be considered "liberated" if they are denied self-governance?

 

[red_elk]

Mostly I wanted to point out that said conflict existed and that, consequently, "Soviets = liberators of Ukraine" rhetoric leaves few important things unsaid.

Any four-word description of such scale event would leave lots of important things unsaid.
I could add that part of Ukrainian population didn't want Soviet army to enter Ukraine, this is known.
Originally, I didn't even put it that way as you described - I simply said that Ukraine was liberated from Nazi rule. Which is basically a common knowledge, but caused disagreement from a few posters. "Ukraine just traded masters" assumes that nothing principally changed after its liberation. Equalizes protectorate occupied by Nazis, mass executions, dozens of concentration camps - with post-war rebuilding of Ukrainian SSR. Which is both ignorant and disrespectful for Soviet Ukrainians.

 

[LamaGT]

As a followup to my previous post about the Volnovakha bus, there are two videos of the event that are further evidence that it was a Ukrainian land mine, although it's also pretty clear it was accidental.



Link to video.

In this one we see how the field close to the checkpoint was shelled with Grads. The craters are quite regular and you can also see the directionality in them, there are darker spots that are off-center, closer to the checkpoint.
After an hour and a half they turn the camera around, and we see that lonely explosion crater. Judging from eye, it must be a good 200 meters away from the center of the Grad craters.
I think this video in itself already only hurts the Ukrainian narrative, because it doesn't disprove at all the rebel's version (indeed making it even more plausible), but it also shows that if it truly was a Grad this was nothing less than an "act of God" (or should I say devil?), seeing how far that shot is compared to the others.


Link to video.

In this video though, we can clearly see how there were people running away into the field before the explosion, we can see that it has a visible flame unlike the other Grad shots, and we can hear a distinctly different, and most importantly not louder, sound from that explosion.


While I'm usually not a follower of conspiracy theories, this here is just an orgy of evidence that the Ukrainians are lying. Not that the DPR isn't lying either, since they said they never actually shelled that place which isn't true.

 

[red_elk]

If I understand correctly, the area is controlled by loyalists. If the bus was hit by rebels Grad missile, they could simply show crater left after explosion. Crater left by missile can be very easily distinguished from anything else, because of remains of missile's tail part:

 

[Darza]

When one talks about "country", one usually also refers to the population. Surely it makes sense that people can't be considered "liberated" if they are denied self-governance?

Thats quite unusual description i must say. Some part of population of country could see themselves absolutely fine and enjoy "self-governance" by the same time the other part of it feel it other way. And they are in a same country at the same time. With idea of "one usually also refers to the population" - we would have to name very many of historic countries as something else instead, and decide what "countries as it" are quite modern stuff, not presented in past. But as the historic countries has been usually called, err, countries, as a staple word, maybe its better for continuity to name the entities you're about as some other name instead, to prevent unneeded confusion.

Duh, whats the point in that Boeing deja vu stuff? "Another victory!>we're never claimed it!>conspiracy scheme to defame innocents". And again with some 6-years-old-level photoshop involved.

Link to video.

Link to video.
There is crates (starting around 2:00 at first video), there is seen what its not "lonely crater" but following the spreading pattern (starting around 2:40 on a second) (thought being on an edge of it, thankfully for a row of cars waiting there). While initial video data was indeed inconclusive, and could be interpreted various ways (say as described here), thats im fully agree with. But second iteration of "We're achieved another military success!" then "Oh, it was civilians, so it was the other guys, staged it to frame us [deleting previous victory messages]" is quite ridiculous.

 

[LoneRebel]

As you know, all modern 'post-imperial' nations need to have a genocidal persecutor, and all self-respecting ethnic genocides need to have a denial, otherwise they're not proper genocides.

Something about this statement troubles me. I wonder what it is. Not merely that it's dripping with arrogance, because that is par for the course from its originator anyway. Maybe it's the implication that imperialism is only bad when it's Great Satan USA doing it. When it's Russian imperialism, it's perfectly acceptable. Screw the Ukrainians, they're a bunch of malcontents who didn't get how good Russia was for them, right?

Not that I was surprised, since posts like this perfectly encapsulate the attitude of Russian nationalists and their deranged supporters abroad.

Well, Ukraine and Russia should bill Georgia for the harm caused.

Things I learned today: Germany should put all the blame for the Nazi regime on Austria.

It's a funny statement, yes. Good for a joke. But utterly devoid of merit as a serious proposition.

The Soviet Union was the Russian Empire under a different government, don't kid yourself.

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

Something on different side:
5 Russian Weapons of War America Should Fear:
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/5-russian-weapons-war-america-should-fear-12016

 

[Snorrius]

It's a funny statement, yes. Good for a joke. But utterly devoid of merit as a serious proposition.
The Soviet Union was the Russian Empire under a different government, don't kid yourself.

The whole this discussion about "Holodomor" does not worth serious discussion. Surely there was a lot of people who suffered because of incompetent economic policies of Soviet government, but they were not Ukrainians exclusively, nor they were specific target.

As for "Russian Empire" -- that's very debatable. if we take "Russian" as ethnicity -- Soviet Empire's governments was quite non-Russian, especially first ones, Ukrainians, actually, had quite a lot of power. If we take "Russian" as cultural than it was not really Russian either. Also Russians did not really get much benefit from this "Empire" like any dweller of metropoly should. It was more like modern white Europeans who have to pay respect, money and resources to any nation they have colonized earlier and whose descendants decided to colonize Europe now. Soviet Union was a prototype of EU which is a quite strange bureaucratic entity -- not really German, French or English. SU was not really Russian, Ukrainian or whatever either. Its own thing.