Congratulations people of Crimea

[DoomYoshi]

Been illegal since 2005. Up until this year there was a total of 7 trials of human trafficking (in that same period 30k in the States), this year there was a blitz focused not on punitive measures but on actually freeing the women.

It is a problem of Canada. It is also a problem of Russia. Why not fight it on both fronts? I am doing everything I can here... I want my army and my armies allies (hint, hint, US&A) to do what they can about it.

There you have it, rent-seeking Yoshi.

You're saying that you'd be willing to have a (potentially thermonuclear) war with Russia over sex-slaves? I am not saying that isn't absolutely deplorable, and a major problem in the world today, but you'd want hundred of thousands of people to die for this?

I find that difficult to believe.

In Italy for thirty years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland, they had brotherly love; they had five hundred years of democracy and peace and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock.

And let's not play pretend here. Your Canada would get invaded, that's unquestionable. The U.S. and Russia would both prefer to fight it out in Europe and Canada than in their own countries.

That's not an entirely terrible idea. Canada should have mandatory military service.

[DoomYoshi]

From an environmental perspective, nuclear war isn't all that bad. The largest ecoreserve in Europe is the area immediately surrounding Chernobyl.

Canada is pretty much asking for a nuclear war. There are now only 500 hunters and trappers in the country (professional). It is time we learned about survivalism.

[patches70]

Been illegal since 2005.

So, up until 9 years ago sex slavery was legal in Canada? And you are blaming Russia? Bwahahahaha!

Up until this year there was a total of 7 trials of human trafficking (in that same period 30k in the States), this year there was a blitz focused not on punitive measures but on actually freeing the women.

Ha! My country is doing more to fight the problem than your country! Nyaa nyya na nyaaa yaaa.

Tell your officials to start enforcing the law then.

It is a problem of Canada. It is also a problem of Russia. Why not fight it on both fronts?

So, you claim your hatred of the Russian leaders and then also want their help? hmmmm.....You know, you'll catch more bees with honey than with shit.

I am doing everything I can here...

And that's all you can do in life!

I want my army and my armies allies (hint, hint, US&A) to do what they can about it.

f*ck you! I tell you what Yoshi, you join the military and go fight the good fight then if that's how you feel. But damn you to hell telling other people to go fight and die for your cause!

Yeah, it's easy to call for action when you ain't the one doing the killing and the dying. I have been civil with you, sir, and I will continue being civil with you, except for this one point.
f*ck you, fight your own fucking wars, do your own fucking killing.

Don't worry, if you start getting the shit kicked out of you, like I know you would eventually, Canada going up against Russia, we, the US would certainly come to the aid of our friends the Canadians.

Hopefully you are just being tongue in cheek with this last bit. I certainly hope so. But I have an extreme displeasure with fools who go calling others to go march off to war to fight and die and sacrifice while those calling for the war have no intention of fighting it for themselves.

By all means, Yoshi, you don't even have to join the Canadian military. Just become a mercenary and head over the Chechya and you can fight Russians to your heart's content. More power to you.

But I am tired of my country, my people doing all the fighting, dying and bleeding trying to change things that have been going on since the dawn of civilization.

There is a better way to go about it and for once it would be nice if we would just try a different line.

I shall now resume being civil to you. Accept my apologies if I offend you for telling you to lick my ass instead of fighting your wars for you.

Peace!

[DoomYoshi]

No offense. I understand that... wars in the end do depend on the lower class. If not for wars, what do they have? The Arsenio Hall show?

[tzor]

You give us way too much credit. Fifteen to twenty percent of Americans couldn't point to Ukraine on a map.

I would say that Fifteen to twenty percent of Americans can't point to America on the map.

[Juan_Bottom]

I'm an American, and a Northerner, and I view both secession and intimidation in a negative light. If Mexico sent paramilitary units into the Gadsden Purchase, how would these same people react?

I'd be pissed. But last I checked, I have a pretty clear vested interest in the non-invasion of the Gadsden Purchase. I don't have the same vested interest in making sure Ukraine isn't part of Russia (at least not enough of a vested interest to pound the table and demand that my country does something about it).

I disagree; if Mexico occupied the Gadsden Purchase it wouldn't affect you anymore than Russia occupying Ukraine.

Everyone wants to live in Fantasyland Utopia, no one wants to live in a Dystopian Wasteland. It's understandable if some of them are too frightened to be able to confront their circumstances and effect change from within. Those ones will cover their eyes in the flag and loyally regurgitate the slogans being repeated by their regimes. The west is essentially a sprawling, right-wing, fascist mega-state.

This may all be true, but two wrongs don't make a right.

The fact that the U.S. has degenerated into a sadistic fascist police state does not mean that Russia has not.

The fact that BATF agents are able to literally get away with murder under the the guise of the War on Drugs, and that the the NSA plays Big Brother under the guise of the whimsically-titled "War on Terror" does not change the fact that former KGB agents in Russia enjoy the same immunity to the rule of law.

Calling Putin a hero because he's helping to embarrass Obama is like calling Stalin a nice guy because he helped defeat Hitler. One wicked tyrant scoring points at the expense of another is not an exercise in moral ascendancy.

This is what I'm talking about. I do not understand this rise of Putin-worship that has happened, especially in America. I'm sure that for many rednecks, they love Putin as the anti-hero, the anti-Obama hero, but is that really enough to explain away the positive reception that Putin gets in media? His country has a 99% conviction rate, an insanely high corruption rate, and just flooded Crimea with paramilitary units. Putin has been executing and imprisoning political enemies for years, including reporters. Putin's paramilitary in Crimea were detaining reporters and destroying their photographs and memory cards - that's how well they behave when the whole world is watching them. It's not a good place to live. Russia is 100X the police state that the United States is. So what is up with all the love?

Apologies if you took my post as an insult. It was in jest. The way you phrased it (is that the correct phrase? can you 'phrase' images?) was in a humorous way, too. If you actually cared about the comparison with history – Hitler > Sudetenland with Putin > Crimea, then I don't think you would have included the hosting of the Olympics.

That's a complete, inconsequential and irrelevant coincidence – but a funny one at that!


p.s. It is also a very different comparison with US/Mexico. You're right – people would be terribly upset. But that's a world away from what we're discussing.

It's not really that different. The Gadsden Purchase has a history of being Mexican property and is full of Mexican Americans.

The Olympics are important for 1 reason alone, and that is the perception of power. I don't believe that either Hitler or Putin needed the Olympics to boost their egos or their own perception of power; but that their entourage/nation needed it. Neither Putin nor Hitler cared what anyone in the west thought or thinks. But the Crimean's who describe themselves as Russians have seen a resurgence of Russian prominence in the last decade, and the success of the Olympics is paramount to that. At the same time, they've seen the government in Kiev degenerate into open corruption, followed by the messy revolution. It lends itself to the most dangerous word in politics - nationalism. Nationalism for the Crimean Russians, and Nationalism for the rest of Russia too. Victory has no price at all for them, and they are like no other people.
I would be very uncomfortable to be a Ukrainian or a Tatar in Crimea. Especially a Tatar... they weren't even permitted to vote during the Russian occupation.
And if Hollywood has taught me anything, it's that only the shallowest souls who are attracted to power.

[thegreekdog]

@ patches, sure, if one ascribes to realism. If one prefers "international liberalism" (i.e. invade countries to spread democracy and/or stop violence with violence), then one can insert as many moral claims as they see fit.

Okay, but that's still in the invader's best interest, right?

I'm 100% all in on patches70's theory. If the United States can demonstrate to me that it's in the country's best interest (and, more importantly my best interest) to do X, then I am in favor of said action (morality aside).

So, TGD, has the US, Obama, Kerry and the rest made the case to your satisfaction that it's important enough for us to intervene, that it's in your best interests? And more importantly, that it's in our nation's best interest?

For my part there has been zero reason provided for why it's worth it for the US to take such a line, especially considering consequences for said actions which would be/are inevitable.

I just can't see any upside to losing Russia just to gain the Ukraine. That's a horrible trade off. And pushing Russia and China closer together is absolutely horrible. One of our saving graces was that Russia and China pretty much hated each other. I prefer it like that. Now that I can view as in national interests, keeping those two from getting too chummy with each other. As it's going now, it's not going so well and it all could have been avoided by just keeping our noses out of Ukraine's business.

I swear these world leaders act like spoiled children that absolutely cannot allow anyone else to throw egg on their face even if said world leaders threw said egg on their own face.

Short answer - no.
Long answer - your post.

[thegreekdog]

@ patches, sure, if one ascribes to realism. If one prefers "international liberalism" (i.e. invade countries to spread democracy and/or stop violence with violence), then one can insert as many moral claims as they see fit.

Okay, but that's still in the invader's best interest, right?

I'm 100% all in on patches70's theory. If the United States can demonstrate to me that it's in the country's best interest (and, more importantly my best interest) to do X, then I am in favor of said action (morality aside).

No, not necessarily. It depends on how the state's interests coincide with each major policymaker view of the "state's" interests. For example, most realists were against the Iraq War 2.0 invasion, but a small group of neocons got their way with their international liberal agenda. The "state" then invades Iraq because that was within the "state's" interests.

National interest varies in degrees too. There's 4 categories for state's interests: Vital, Important, Peripheral, and No Interest. Realists would put invading Crimea at Peripheral or Zero. International liberals would put it at Vital or Important.


I like the realist aspect of patches' points, but realism does have a normative guideline: maximize state security. Having a normative guideline is unavoidable but having a complementary, moral guideline is necessary; otherwise, you could find plenty of reasons to beat up or threaten other people.

For example, suppose the US could maximize GDP by an additional 10% per year by killing 25% of the poor people and 25% of the very old people. Poverty falls drastically (cuz some of them die), but also because growth of 10% per year is insanely awesome. We'd all be ballers within a generation.

How would you know that such a policy is in the country's best interests without relying on any moral guideline?

So many questions.

I guess the first thing is that morality does play a part in a nation's best interest (those of us that play Europa Universalis call it "Bad Boy Score"). Ignoring the cost in lives and dollars and ignoring that there was no benefit (that I can see) in invading Iraq, the invasion eroded the influence of the United States in the world and eroded the confidence of consumers in the United States generally. Further, if we drill down to the party level, we can see that the Iraq invasion has cut out a large swathe of the support for neo-conservatives so much so that most Republicans are going to go out and vote for an ostensible libertarian (if Phatscotty's polls can be believed). So our immoral actions, which may be in the nation's best interests, end up costing us and being not in our best interests. So, in Europea Universalis jargon, if, as France, I invade England, the Netherlands, and Spain and take huge chunks of land, the Prussians, Russians and Italian League are going to declare war on me. So not only is it immoral of me to invade, it's not in my best interest to invade England, the Netherlands, and Spain.

The second thing is that it just so happens that my view on military intervention happens to coincide nicely with morality so it's pretty easy for me to say "don't get involved because I don't want Americans and/or brown people to die" and also say "it's not in my best interest to pay more taxes and/or increase US debt to kill more brown people."

The third thing is that I'm fairly certain we (the United States) don't do anything for moral reasons only. We've let a whole lot of genocides or attempted genocides or violence go unchecked if it's not in our best interest or if it's in our best interest to let them go on.

[thegreekdog]

The mistake is in being sucked into the false choice that western leaders are either correctly pursuing state interests or incorrectly pursuing state interests.

Normal IR theories - defensive realism, offensive realism, feminist constructivism, liberalism, Marxism, etc. - don't apply here because state interests are not at play. These are personal interests, the opportunity to grow new markets and, with them, new power. The resulting spoils are being used to line individual bank accounts. When the U.S. loots a country it doesn't divvy up the booty between American citizens. The U.S. government is the personal commercial enterprise of the people running it. They have an interest assigning a portion of the treasure to various vassals (the Republicans to big business, the Democrats to social interest groups), but that's the cost of doing business, like paying your employees. It's not what Inghram and Schneider meant when they discussed pluralist policymaking.



Once one rejects this 5th grade civics way of looking at the world - capitalism, communism, etc. - and realizes the U.S. is neither capitalist nor communist, but is in fact a feudal nation, a landstaat run for the benefit of the MEP chiefs, the inconsistencies of state actions resolve themselves.

Yeah, I think most of us (e.g. BBS, patches, me) understand that. And that's ultimately kind of my point. If it's in my (thegreekdog's) best interest for Apple to sell more product in Country X and the only way for Apple to do that is for the United States to prop up a despot / invade / bomb / spy / sanction, then I'm in favor of it (again, ignoring morality, cost to me in present and future taxes, and the drop in United States influence).

[thegreekdog]

I disagree; if Mexico occupied the Gadsden Purchase it wouldn't affect you anymore than Russia occupying Ukraine.

it would affect me more, but you're right, I still probably wouldn't care enough to go to war if Tuscon was part of Mexico.

[saxitoxin]

This is what I'm talking about. I do not understand this rise of Putin-worship that has happened, especially in America. I'm sure that for many rednecks, they love Putin as the anti-hero, the anti-Obama hero, but is that really enough to explain away the positive reception that Putin gets in media?

More talking points JB's been fed by the extreme right-wing, corporate-backed Madison Avenue PR agencies that work for the Obama/Bush administration. Max Blumenthal, son of Clinton advisor Sid Blumenthal, and a prominent progressive peace activist and journalist, writing on the so-called "resignation" of Liz Wahl from RT, described exactly "the JB Phenomenon" - how neo-cons turn average Americans in flyover states into frothing-at-the-mouth war hysterics, screaming for blood:

Behind the coverage of Wahl’s dramatic protest, a cadre of neoconservatives was celebrating a public relations coup. Desperate to revive the Cold War, head off further cuts to the defense budget and restore the legitimacy they lost in the ruins of Iraq, the tightknit group of neoconservative writers and stewards had opened up a new PR front through Wahl’s resignation.

It was a full 19 minutes before Wahl resigned. Inside the offices of the Foreign Policy Initiative, a neoconservative think tank in Washington D.C., a staffer logged on to the group’s Twitter account to announce the following:

“#WordOnTheStreet says that something big might happen on RT in about 20-25 minutes.”

The tweets from FPI suggested a direct level of coordination between Wahl and the neoconservative think tank. Several calls to FPI for this story were not answered.

Just over an hour later, an exclusive interview with Wahl appeared at The Daily Beast. It was authored by James Kirchick, a 31-year-old writer whose work has appeared in publications from the neoconservative Commentary to the Israeli paper Haaretz.

In fact, Kirchick was a senior fellow at FPI, the neoconservative think tank that had hyped up Wahl’s resignation minutes before she quit. Launched by Weekly Standard founder William Kristol and two former foreign policy aides to Mitt Romney, Dan Senor and Robert Kagan (the husband of [Obama's] Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland), FPI grew directly out of the Project for a New American Century that led the public pressure campaign for a unilateral U.S. invasion of Iraq after the Bin Laden-orchestrated 9/11 attacks.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/how ... n_20140319

This, of course, is what progressives and peace supporters are up against. We can't match the signal-to-noise ratio of the neo-con sound machine that makes the dime-a-dozen JB's of America wildly dance about, being pulled from issue to issue - one day rallying for war against Kony, the next rallying for war against Syria, then forgetting it and moving to call for war on Russia for a few days until some new shiny bauble is flashed in front of him and he's screaming for war against someone else ... he's oblivious to the fact that every line he pounds out is a line composed by corporate America.

[mrswdk]

But damn you to hell telling other people to go fight and die for your cause!

I think you'll find that everyone who joins a national army joins in the knowledge that at some point they will be sent to fight on behalf of someone else.

[GoranZ]

In 1936 Hitler/Germany hosted the Olympics in Berlin. After showing off German prestige through this event; he sent foriegn agents throughout Austria, eventually annexing it into his Reich. It didn't get much attention in the world, as Hitler and everyone else shrugged it off as uniting people with a common history.
Czechoslovakia cried "We're surrounded!" Yet again, nobody paid much mind until Germany annexed them too. As we know today, Hitler wanted to surround Czechoslovakia in a pincher all along.

Today, Putin/Russia hosts the Olympics, then sends agents into Crimea eventually illegally annexing the Crimea into Russia. And nobody pays much attention, because as the apologists in the page have already said "they're mostly of the same ancestry." Now the Ukraine is in a pincher; the Russians have confiscated all but 1 of their warships, and the Ukrainian army has been decimated by a decade of corruption. Will Ukraine be forced to surrender herself the same way Czechoslovakia did? I don't know, but these are events are eerily similar.


My brain is working fine, use yours before you insult me.

For every similarity between German occupation of Austria and Crimean merger with Russia there are at least 10 differences...
1. Austria was independent state in the moment of German annexation.
2. Austria was independent long time before Germany.
3. Crimea was not independent state in the last few centuries and currently it was part of Ukraine.
4. Hitler was Austrian.
5. Putin is not Crimean.
6. Crimea was gifted to Ukraine in 1954 from president of USSR who was Ukrainian.
7. In the last 2 centuries Crimea always had Russian solders on its soil, Austria didn't had German.
8. The Olympics in Berlin was summer... then one in Sochi was Winter
9. Seventy thousand people were arrested immediately after the annexation of Austria by Germany.
10. Jews are not attacked in Crimea.

You are quite off according to your logic. You say that your brain is working properly. If you still think that Putin and Hitler have much in common check your brain again

[saxitoxin]

His country has a 99% conviction rate

Hilarious.

U.S. Conviction Rate (federal): 93%
Japan Conviction Rate: 99%+

Just a shocking lack of critical thinking and an incredible willingness to absorb corporate spin like a sponge. Just shocking. Your mind should be a treasure, JB. Treat it like one and put a filter on what you let in. Stop treating it like a garbage dump where you deposit hollow talking points and used Ho-Ho wrappers.

[GoranZ]

Does the Russian government have an incentive to lie about information? Do they have the ability to influence media companies? (same goes for the companies' owners, and their valuation of reporting truth versus abiding by consumer preferences and 'orders from above').

If the answer is, Yes, and Yes, then that's some evidence.

Figuring out the strength of that influence is difficult, but there's proxies like "how democratic is Russia?, how free is their press, what's the correlation like between freedom of press and democracy, what about economic freedom, etc.?"

If I had to guess, I'd say that Russia's media isn't as free as the Uhmerica's. A safe assumption is that both are pretty much propaganda on the topic of foreign policy.

I agree that figuring out the strength of the influence from the media is hard to tell but I think that US also target foreign media(especially in UK and Europe) not only their domestic ones. So basically US's influence is quite bigger then Russian one. On the other hand Russia has RT which is made primarily for foreign market as counter balance to US influence of foreign media.
Beside threw RT I dont know how Russian government influence is shaped in Russia itself(I dont know Russian so having access to Russian channels doesn't help), in US is easier since same media is influencing everything.

History shows, including recent history, Russia is a propaganda machine. Like I said, pretty much all governments are propaganda machines. That is one of the fundamental things about governance, propaganda.

History shows that American media are widely used for US propaganda. If we take US public opinion before the witch hunt for Weapons of Mass destruction in Iraq and after it, everyone can notice that media made the crucial change in public opinion. And that lead to war with Iraq and of course finding zero Weapons of Mass destruction in Iraq. What can I say hats off to those that made the propaganda, and what were you thinking to the US public.
On the other hand majority(55%) of Russians approve merger with Crimea before Ukrainian crisis, and the peak currently is 90% approval, which could have been as an effect of several factors including media but not nearly as much as with the influence of American media in US. So if you like to say "Russia is a propaganda machine" then you will have to say "US is at least 5 x Russia's propaganda machine", otherwise you are simply WRONG.

[BigBallinStalin]

I like the realist aspect of patches' points, but realism does have a normative guideline: maximize state security. Having a normative guideline is unavoidable but having a complementary, moral guideline is necessary; otherwise, you could find plenty of reasons to beat up or threaten other people.

Whoa BBS, you need to consider something that you might not have! If you do indeed like the realist aspect.

You see the argument goes (see JB's post for an example) is that Putin is trying to take over the world, or Europe or that he's bent on conquering a la Hitler and such.
But that argument falls apart quickly when we actually look at the facts.

The first fact one must consider is that at least thus far, Russia has acted rationally towards the Ukraine. Even if you don't like what Russia is doing, if you are honest with yourself you'll admit that it shouldn't surprise you and that even we might very well do the exact same thing in their position.

The second fact is that considering that Russia is acting rationally, we have to understand Russia's current situation, which may not be widely understood by the average person. Russia has not established any Russian rule over non Russian people. Even in Georgia, Russian intervened on the side of the Ossetians, who identify and consider themselves Russian. So this doesn't fit at all with the non realist position that Russia is turning into a conquering menace out to take over the world.

And if Russia is truly out to retake it's former vassals as people like JB complain then-

My point is that you'll still lean on moral guidelines even if your approach is 'amoral'.

[Juan_Bottom]

Is that Saxitoxin character still a thing here?

History shows that American media are widely used for US propaganda. If we take US public opinion before the witch hunt for Weapons of Mass destruction in Iraq and after it, everyone can notice that media made the crucial change in public opinion. And that lead to war with Iraq and of course finding zero Weapons of Mass destruction in Iraq. What can I say hats off to those that made the propaganda.
On the other hand majority(55%) of Russians approve merger with Crimea before Ukrainian crisis, and the peak currently is 90% approval, which could have been as an effect of several factors including media but not nearly as much as with the influence of American media in US. So if you like to say "Russia is a propaganda machine" then you will have to say "US is at least 5 x Russia's propaganda machine", otherwise you are simply WRONG.

Nationalism on both accounts.

Russia's media is less free, because as I pointed out their government imprisons, detains, and assassinates reporters. To my knowledge no reporters have been killed by Obama's cronies.
Furthermore, your media is what you make of it. I like NPR and Vice. In Europe American media corporations behave differently than they do here, in accordance with what sells. So does the same bullshit sports story sell in Macedonia? I have no idea. But the Millennial generation has been turning more and more to sites like Upworthy and Vice. I think you'd be surprised at how literate some Americans are with current events. in the same vein that we have low scholarly expectations, we also have the largest percentage of geniuses. I'm sure it's the same with current events literacy.

For every similarity between German occupation of Austria and Crimean merger with Russia there are at least 10 differences...
1. Austria was independent state in the moment of German annexation.
2. Austria was independent long time before Germany.
3. Crimea was not independent state in the last few centuries and currently it was part of Ukraine.
4. Hitler was Austrian.
5. Putin is not Crimean.
6. Crimea was gifted to Ukraine in 1954 from president of USSR who was Ukrainian.
7. In the last 2 centuries Crimea always had Russian solders on its soil, Austria didn't had German.
8. The Olympics in Berlin was summer... then one in Sochi was Winter
9. Seventy thousand people were arrested immediately after the annexation of Austria by Germany.
10. Jews are not attacked in Crimea.

You are quite off according to your logic. You say that your brain is working properly. If you still think that Putin and Hitler have much in common check your brain again

This is a waste of my time and yours. Your examples are very shallow, like "Russians don't speak German." It's really low bar, Goranz. And for your number 10, as I pointed out the Crimeans did not allow the Tatars to vote. That's around 300,000 Crimeans who did not participate in the illegal vote to join with Russia. Approximately 20-30% of Crimeans are Taters, and approximately 20% are Ukrainian. So how is it that 98% of Crimea voted to join Russia? There would be at least another 300,000 Taters, though many more, but the Russians enacted a pogram to move them out of choice lands in the Crimea in the 40s and 50s.
On the 18th, you will be well aware, the Russians announced that many of the Taters will be required to leave their homes in Crimea. While Ukrainians have been beaten, intimidated, and held hostage in Crimea, the Taters have largely stayed in their communities or fled to Kiev.

And of course, Crimea belonged to the Taters before Russia violated a peace treaty and annexed it into Russia. But it's like that all over Europe. You can go back thousand years and still not know where these land disputes come from. What matters today is the rule of law, civility, and respect. Russia provoked a war, violated international law, and literally activated paramilitary groups and sent them into the Ukraine to terrorize their population. They rigged the vote, and they are chasing Muslims out of Crimea. They are the bad guys here.

[GoranZ]

History shows that American media are widely used for US propaganda. If we take US public opinion before the witch hunt for Weapons of Mass destruction in Iraq and after it, everyone can notice that media made the crucial change in public opinion. And that lead to war with Iraq and of course finding zero Weapons of Mass destruction in Iraq. What can I say hats off to those that made the propaganda.
On the other hand majority(55%) of Russians approve merger with Crimea before Ukrainian crisis, and the peak currently is 90% approval, which could have been as an effect of several factors including media but not nearly as much as with the influence of American media in US. So if you like to say "Russia is a propaganda machine" then you will have to say "US is at least 5 x Russia's propaganda machine", otherwise you are simply WRONG.

Nationalism on both accounts.

IDK what Americans think about Iraqis but I'm sure majority doesn't hate them(and that's wast majority). Russians also doesn't hate the Ukrainians(or opposite). There goes your nationalism down the toilet.

So does the same bullshit sports story sell in Macedonia?

Get a life If you dont know some sport it doesn't mean its bullshit sport. However it could mean that you are not smart enough to understand it

Approximately 20-30% of Crimeans are Taters, and approximately 20% are Ukrainian. So how is it that 98% of Crimea voted to join Russia?

12% of Crimea population excluding Sevastopol are Tatars. And over 50% of NonRussians in Crimea voted for merger with Russia, other voted against or didn't voted. You wont get very far with fabricated numbers, at least not in CC, but you can try to lie to your kids, they might believe you

What matters today is the rule of law, civility, and respect.

Like in Serbia, Iraq, Lybia and many others. Sorry but we all know what is the exact meaning of American rule of law, American civility, and American respect, we have seen it all in practice

Russia provoked a war, violated international law, and literally activated paramilitary groups and sent them into the Ukraine to terrorize their population. They rigged the vote, and they are chasing Muslims out of Crimea. They are the bad guys here.

What war? So far there wasn't any war actions in Crimea.
If you like to implement international law go a head, undo what US had done in the last 25 years and we can talk, until then you are wasting your time by calling for international law.
From what I see majority of Crimean population is quite happy as part of Russia, so no one is terrorizing them.
If they dont like to live in Crimea, Muslims can go were ever they want no one is holding them back.
You are not the smartest around... its very obvious

[Symmetry]

From what I see majority of Crimean population is quite happy as part of Russia, so no one is terrorizing them.

Key part highlighted.

[Pope Joan]

Hell, I grew up hating Russia (I had a "Better Dead than Red" T-shirt) and that we were eventually going to fight a war with the commies.

And I grew up loving USA. The key difference was that a democratic state had to scare its population to smithereens to justify its military spendings, while a communist state did not need to bother.

I think the Ukraine's #1 export to the US is porn. I might be wrong about that.

Probably right, according to http://www.ustr.gov/countries-regions/europe-middle-east/russia-and-eurasia/ukraine, the biggest category is Iron and Steel , worth $384 million... But if you add the value of Russian brides (Russian Bride Scam Capital is Lugansk in Ukraine) to porn, it could very well be true

[Pope Joan]

Russians also doesn't hate the Ukrainians(or opposite).

It is true that Russians dont hate Ukrainians. On the opposite, there is a sizeable minority of Ukrainians who hate Russians. I guess it is a side-effect of years of fraternal assistance.

Let me focus the conversation on what options the West has at the moment. Off course, there is McCain who wants a shooting war with Ruskies but it is not a serious option. I also dont consider an option of further escalation, which is possible but (hopefully) not likely.

1) Tighten the sanctions until regime change in Russian or reversal of annexation of Crimea.
2) Recognize the annexation (and quietly force/bribe Ukraine to do so as well).
3) Keep face-saving toothless sanctions and let the situation in limbo for years.

IMHO, 1 is better than 2 and 2 is better than 3, but I am afraid that Obama+EU will go for 3 to keep pretence of doing something, and let the next set of elected politicians to sort out the mess. May I suggest to revoke Obama's Nobel unless he sorts one of the international conflicts (of his choosing) while in office?

[mrswdk]

3 will happen.

[saxitoxin]

Russia's media is less free, because as I pointed out their government imprisons, detains, and assassinates reporters.

You also pointed out that Russia has a 99% conviction rate. When it was observed that the U.S. has a 93% and Japan a 99%+ you just moved on to this newest fantasy without even a moment of shame or embarrassment.

Here's the problem: you spend 10-15 minutes getting your brain blasted to kingdom come by the Fox News' and NPRs of the world (as Max Blumenthal explained) and then come charging over here to repeat what you heard to us without applying an ounce of critical thinking. Everything in all your posts can be easily dismissed like your "99%" stat, but what's the point? When someone gently offers correction for your many serious cognitive errors you just start screaming like a mad man. You don't stop to reflect on why you were misled with your 99% statistic, nor stop to think about working to improve your own comprehension skills so that you can engage in meaningful dialog instead of just ranting and raving.

Maybe your goal is to be perceived as the village loon? Or the ugly American? Either way your increasingly bizarre mannerisms are kinda sidelining your relevance. The other person on the pro-war side here, Dukasaur, speaks sanely and intelligibly and his opinions - though wrong - are taken seriously. But anyway, you know, whatever.

[GoranZ]

From what I see majority of Crimean population is quite happy as part of Russia, so no one is terrorizing them.

Key part highlighted.

Well that's what even western media are showing. No major reports that someone is repressed in Crimea by the Russian government. But if you see something else that's your problem which doesn't concern me

Russians also doesn't hate the Ukrainians(or opposite).

It is true that Russians dont hate Ukrainians. On the opposite, there is a sizeable minority of Ukrainians who hate Russians. I guess it is a side-effect of years of fraternal assistance.

Yes there is some minority of Ukrainians that dont like Russians but that's changing according to the propaganda from the media or the politicians. Regardless of those influences they are still minority.

3) Keep face-saving toothless sanctions and let the situation in limbo for years.

I think that this will happen but this will not make large damage to Russian economy on short to medium term... But the trade with Ukraine might do much bigger damage. Disruption in Ukraine-Russia trade and with that Russia-EU gas trade could generate serious economic problems for Ukraine, Russia and EU. I think exactly this is whats Putin and good part of EU politicians are afraid of, Ukrainian politicians dont look that far into the future, anyway they dont know if they are expandable.

Russia's media is less free, because as I pointed out their government imprisons, detains, and assassinates reporters.

You also pointed out that Russia has a 99% conviction rate. When it was observed that the U.S. has a 93% and Japan a 99%+ you just moved on to this newest fantasy without even a moment of shame or embarrassment.

Here's the problem: you spend 10-15 minutes getting your brain blasted by the Fox News' and NPRs of the world (as Max Blumenthal explained) and you then come charging over here to repeat what you heard to us without applying even an ounce of critical thinking. Everything said in all your posts can be easily dismissed like your "99%" stat, but what's the point? When someone gently offers correction for your various comprehension errors you just start screaming like a mad man. You don't stop to reflect on why you were misled with your 99% statistic, nor do you stop to think about possibly working to improve your own cognitive skills so that you can engage in meaningful dialog instead of just ranting and raving.

Maybe your goal is to be perceived as the village loon? Or the ugly American? I dunno. Whatever.

Wasting your time with him, he already posted quadrillion false informations and surprisingly never looked even to check the responses about his false data. Maybe he is living in his own reality(weed or something )

[saxitoxin]

Russia's media is less free, because as I pointed out their government imprisons, detains, and assassinates reporters.

You also pointed out that Russia has a 99% conviction rate. When it was observed that the U.S. has a 93% and Japan a 99%+ you just moved on to this newest fantasy without even a moment of shame or embarrassment.

Here's the problem: you spend 10-15 minutes getting your brain blasted by the Fox News' and NPRs of the world (as Max Blumenthal explained) and you then come charging over here to repeat what you heard to us without applying even an ounce of critical thinking. Everything said in all your posts can be easily dismissed like your "99%" stat, but what's the point? When someone gently offers correction for your various comprehension errors you just start screaming like a mad man. You don't stop to reflect on why you were misled with your 99% statistic, nor do you stop to think about possibly working to improve your own cognitive skills so that you can engage in meaningful dialog instead of just ranting and raving.

Maybe your goal is to be perceived as the village loon? Or the ugly American?

Wasting your time with him, he already posted quadrillion false informations and surprisingly never looked even to check the responses about his false data. Maybe he is living in his own reality(weed or something )

LOL, could be; he's mostly irrelevant due to his craziness, but it is still a little distracting when he suddenly takes a 10-day interest in some issue other people - like yourself or Joan - have been attentive to for years and shows up in page 25 of these threads to start ranting ... eventually he either just chases everyone away like in the Syria thread or he'll lose interest and move on to the next thing that's making headlines - the daytime Emmy awards, or Kony, or Freedom Fries, or whatever