Why in the sweet f**k's name are the police carrying molotovs ?
What is the reason of all this horrible riots in Ukraine cause i'm kinda stupid on world news :P
Protests has gripped Ukraine since the government rejected a far-reaching accord with the EU in favour of stronger ties with Russia in November 2013. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25182823)
(http://i.imgur.com/xVWYDsG.gif) :DHahaha, :cowboy: :cop:
Why in the sweet f**k's name are the police carrying molotovs ?2muchsandreaslastmission
Why in the sweet f**k's name are the police carrying molotovs ?They are using molotovs which were thrown at them earlier.
What is the reason of all this horrible riots in Ukraine cause i'm kinda stupid on world news :PThe protest at Maidan Nezalezhnosti in Kiev has been going on for over two months now and it was quite peaceful until the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine illegitimately passed totalitarian laws on January 16, 2014.
(http://i.imgur.com/xVWYDsG.gif)
Svensson on cop duty.
They are using molotovs which were thrown at them earlier.Struggling to know wether you were joking or not.
They are using molotovs which were thrown at them earlier.How to throw a destroyed/exploded molotov again? :eek:
And damn, I thought the London riots were bad.. This is like 10x worse police organisation.Oddly enough, I think we found something we agree on. This is a mess...
Oddly enough, I think we found something we agree on. This is a mess...This is walking a thin line of Protests and Anarchy.. I just wish the best for all the Ukranians
(http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/infocus/ukraine012214/u08_RTX17PNK.jpg)
If youcknow any Roman history you will recognise this tactic
How to throw a destroyed/exploded molotov again? :eek:In solviet ukraine the bottle brakes you :janek: :eek:
How to throw a destroyed/exploded molotov again? :eek:Catch it before the bottle breaks and replace the wick.
Catch it before the bottle breaks and replace the wick.Really? :uhm: That's brave :app:
Catch it before the bottle breaks and replace the wick.this is a total "In mother Russia" moment.
Catch it before the bottle breaks and replace the wick.It's real life, not naruto or ninja turtles.
It's real life, not naruto or ninja turtles.
Wonder why people react for an European/American/Asian/some of africa, without reacting for the arabic coutries and the other african countries. :lol:
(http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/infocus/ukraine012214/u08_RTX17PNK.jpg)Yes because hiding under shields instead of arresting protestors will get the job done!
If youcknow any Roman history you will recognise this tactic
It's real life, not naruto or ninja turtles.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25874370
Wonder why people react for an European/American/Asian/some of africa, without reacting for the arabic coutries and the other african countries. :lol:
Wonder why people react for an European/American/Asian/some of africa, without reacting for the arabic coutries and the other african countries. :lol:Because we've done it before and know what a mess it is. Most citizens do not support us going to war and would rather leave the countries to sort themselves out than plough millions into war at a huge economical and human cost. We've got our own problems here too without taking on others. The UK has intervened in several Arab countries to remove a dictator and install a democratic system of government for that to be overturned by another dictator. Seems democracy does not fit the puzzle in Arab countries.
It's real life, not naruto or ninja turtles.Because everyone is used to Arabic countries being in a mess. :rolleyes:
Wonder why people react for an European/American/Asian/some of africa, without reacting for the arabic coutries and the other african countries. :lol:
Because everyone is used to Arabic countries being in a mess. :rolleyes:
Because we've done it before and know what a mess it is. Most citizens do not support us going to war and would rather leave the countries to sort themselves out than plough millions into war at a huge economical and human cost. We've got our own problems here too without taking on others. The UK has intervened in several Arab countries to remove a dictator and install a democratic system of government for that to be overturned by another dictator. Seems democracy does not fit the puzzle in Arab countries.Yeah like stealing Iraq's petrol. Here is the right answer.
Vested interests.
Yes because hiding under shields instead of arresting protestors will get the job done!Yes, sure arresting people, that will work.. dude there is no way for them to arrest anyone, if a cop comes to cuff someone and there are twenty people bashing the cop to death there is no way he will arrest anyone, this isn't SAMP. people are afraid to die, nobody signed up for this shit, they are listening to orders, their order is to calm them, not arrest them, that is why they are hiding. As until the people calm down there is no way to stop this anarchy.
What about the other African countries, then? :rolleyes:The ones that are ran by Islam or the ones that are not?
their order is to calm them, not arrest themSo they were ordered to throw petrol bombs at civilians?
The ones that are ran by Islam or the ones that are not?I've said Africa not only Islamic countries in Africa.
South Africa is a fine example of a good country.
I've said Africa not only Islamic countries in Africa.Arabic countries are Islamic and most Islamic countries are in a mess..
Oh yeah why you asked that too?
Arabic countries are Islamic and most Islamic countries are in a mess..I said African too not Arabic only. :dead:
Yes, sure arresting people, that will work.. dude there is no way for them to arrest anyone, if a cop comes to cuff someone and there are twenty people bashing the cop to death there is no way he will arrest anyone, this isn't SAMP. people are afraid to die, nobody signed up for this shit, they are listening to orders, their order is to calm them, not arrest them, that is why they are hiding. As until the people calm down there is no way to stop this anarchy.To add something,they arrested several people but after all this they will be relased,so it's not worth risking your life...
It's ARAB* countries, not Arabic countries.Nazi.
And Khm.. please don't turn this into another topic about Arab countries.. it's about Ukraine and nothing else.
Nazi.:uhm:
And nah you will get my point later. ;)
I said African too not Arabic only. :dead:Because Islamic states are run on the basis of religion, which I think is wrong. They are also against anyone who isn't Muslim and treat women as second class citizens.
Why are they in a mess? What's the matter? What kind of mess?
Because Islamic states are run on the basis of religion, which I think is wrong. They are also against anyone who isn't Muslim and treat women as second class citizens.Out of curiosity.. what would happen if I went to the UK and sent letters pretending to be the Queen? Or if I just insult the Queen in public and trash her family's name?
An example from today of where an Islamic state has punished someone for not believing what they do. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-25874580)
Out of curiosity.. what would happen if I went to the UK and sent letters pretending to be the Queen? Or if I just insult the Queen in public and trash her family's name?That is different to a religion imposing their beliefs on other people. You would not be insulting a religion rather a person, which is not the same. Under our system you would be granted a fair trial with a lawyer, with no chance of being executed for what you have said against the head of state. In an Islamic state however, I would find it quite the opposite.
Because Islamic states are run on the basis of religion, which I think is wrong. They are also against anyone who isn't Muslim and treat women as second class citizens.How come a religion that promotes peace and being helpful and friendly with ANYONE to do like that? :P
An example from today of where an Islamic state has punished someone for not believing what they do. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-25874580)
Because Islamic states are run on the basis of religion, which I think is wrong. They are also against anyone who isn't Muslim and treat women as second class citizens.Win.
An example from today of where an Islamic state has punished someone for not believing what they do. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-25874580)
Out of curiosity.. what would happen if I went to the UK and sent letters pretending to be the Queen? Or if I just insult the Queen in public and trash her family's name?Nothing, maybe someone would tell you to f**k off but otherwise nothing would happen to you..
religion that promotes peace and being helpful and friendly with ANYONEComedian. :lol:
That's just stupid and unreal ..to catch a flaming bottle full of petrol and alcohol....please.You should really check your sources because they actually are shooting at civilians, and they're aiming for the head. They were previously using rubber bullets and hospitals are now filled with people who lost an eye or have other head injuries. Now, "Berkut" is using 12-gauge Blondeau slugs.
And you need to be goddamn Psycho to burn people alive, I understand to use a bat,nightstick,brick,stones but this is just sick, and I admire those cops how they take it all and don't fight back.
If I was getting bombed with all those cocktails I would start shooting those pricks in the knee's without thinking about it, as would probably most of us. I'm not saying that the cops are innocent.
In the end When this police force starts to fightback, machinery will do the trick and all the news from CNN to BBC will show footage of beatings of peaceful protesters.
Comedian. :lol:You only saw the negative/dirty sides, you did not read the Quran to judge that as well...
You only saw the negative/dirty sides, you did not read the Quran to judge that as well...I don't want to read something that influences terror. :cry:
Also the same advice from you is returning; don't believe everything you see. ;)
I don't want to read something that influences terror. :cry:Then shut up, you have no right to speak about a religion of which you know nothing but the bullshit that's being shoved in your brain by your so-called "impartial", "fair" and "truthful" media.
Then shut up, you have no right to speak about a religion of which you know nothing but the bullshit that's being shoved in your brain by your so-called "impartial", "fair" and "truthful" media.No media has influenced my opinion on anything, the BBC constantly b!tch about UKIP but I still support them. :)
No media has influenced my opinion on anything, the BBC constantly b!tch about UKIP but I still support them. :)So your opinion formed on its own? Out of nowhere?
So your opinion formed on its own? Out of nowhere?We don't want your opinions, thank you - Hamza.
No, it formed after I worked with a few Muslims in a garage (who's main customers were also Muslim) and I heard things that I didn't know came from 'peaceful religious people' - My opinion after that will never change, thank god I quit that shit hole.Are we back to generalizing an idea by looking at few examples, Mikal? I thought we were done with that.
thingsSuch as?
Are we back to generalizing an idea by looking at few examples, Mikal? I thought we were done with that.A few examples.. :lol:
Such as?Extremist views.
Extremist views.Sounds familiar.
A few examples.. :lol:Removed - Hamza.
Well did you expect them to take the hate and shut up about it even between each other?
Well did you expect them to take the hate and shut up about it even between each other?What hate? They just had extremist views which caused me to hate them.
What hate? They just had extremist views which caused me to hate them.
Sounds familiar.Racism... the "terrorist" stereotype... the views on the way SOME Muslims handle women.. shit like that.
the views on the way SOME Muslims handle women..You mean like forcing them to stay at home, having to cover themselves fully when they go out, not being allowed to drive? And I'm sure many more restrictions.
Then shut up, you have no right to speak about a religion of which you know nothing but the bullshit that's being shoved in your brain by your so-called "impartial", "fair" and "truthful" media.This. Goes for Jacob as well, considering he's not too easy on the generalizing as well.
No, it formed after I worked with a few Muslims in a garage (who's main customers were also Muslim) and I heard things that I didn't know came from 'peaceful religious people' - My opinion after that will never change, thank god I quit that shit hole.Okay, so if I work with a few Christians in a garage and hear bad stuff coming from them, I'll be against Christianity for the rest of my life? Very narrow-minded of you.
What hate? They just had extremist views which caused me to hate them.You just proved to us how racist you're on this... You don't accept "some" other's opinions. And that's really bad, bad!
I don't want to read something that influences terror. :cry: [sic](referring to the Q'uran)
You mean like forcing them to stay at home, having to cover themselves fully when they go out, not being allowed to drive? And I'm sure many more restrictions.Not every Muslim forces the women to stay home, more and more people are giving up the idea. Every religion needs to be modernized, I know. And the amount of women actually wearing the hijab/niqab is getting lower and lower. Quite blasphemous but it disproves your thoughts.
And Islam isn't a race so it can't be racism. :rolleyes:
You just proved to us how racist you're on this... You don't accept "some" other's opinions. And that's really bad, bad!You just derped.
Yeah, let's not read the Bible too because it influenced Christianity which made English knights and other european knights go to the holy land and kill the natives and pillage their towns!God bless you.
Seriously, you are one of the most generalizing, racist, and closed-minded people I have come across on this forum. No wonder you always have a warning mark of some sort and few take your logic seriously. If I was operating under the same logic you just used against muslims, then after encountering you I would say that all Brits are over-nationalistic bigots who think Nazis fought in World War 1.
You just proved to us how racist you're on this... You don't accept "some" other's opinions. And that's really bad, bad!Islam isn't a race > Not racist.
Yeah, let's not read the Bible too because it influenced Christianity which made English knights and other european knights go to the holy land and kill the natives and pillage their towns!Yes, one of the reasons I don't read the bible, although pretty much everyone was stabbing everyone during them times regardless of Christianity..
Seriously, you are one of the most generalizing, racist, and closed-minded people I have come across on this forum. No wonder you always have a warning mark of some sort and few take your logic seriously. If I was operating under the same logic you just used against muslims, then after encountering you I would say that all Brits are over-nationalistic bigots who think Nazis fought in World War 1.- I'm not racist.
(http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/52e13aa16bb3f7fb4340e238-1200-/uke2.jpg)Seriously I think the media set this whole thing up to get some epic photo's.. :lol:
(http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/52e13aa16bb3f7fb4340e238-1200-/uke2.jpg)Jesus Christ.. that's my new background.
I no longer take this country's government as a European democratical countryYou should have done that in the XIV century; it's a bit late to do that now, don't you think?
president of Ukraine not is only rejecting to do what the Ukrainian nation wants (Them being the ones who elected him), but also use violence against them?Well, that's questionable. The protesters are only a small part of the population; others still live just like they did before Maidan. A referendum could determine what the people want.
(http://i.imgur.com/9gVW5Sl.gif)/gethit :rage:
Ukraine's President Viktor Yanukovych has offered the post of prime minister to opposition leader Arseniy Yatsenyuk.I doubt they will take it unless it comes with the option of the Presidential elections.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25896786
You should really check your sources because they actually are shooting at civilians, and they're aiming for the head. They were previously using rubber bullets and hospitals are now filled with people who lost an eye or have other head injuries. Now, "Berkut" is using 12-gauge Blondeau slugs.
(http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/52e13aa16bb3f7fb4340e238-1200-/uke2.jpg)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUhOnX8qt3I
(http://static01.nyt.com/images/2014/01/26/world/ukraine/ukraine-superJumbo.jpg)
I know that police can be brutal, and I believe you I saw some reports about protestants getting killed, but this is getting really out of hand.
It's unbelievable how they take all the beating and don't strike back
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stK3YPz6WTc
Anyway sad days for Ukraine.
I know that police can be brutal, and I believe you I saw some reports about protestants getting killed, but this is getting really out of hand.2:19
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stK3YPz6WTc
I know that police can be brutal, and I believe you I saw some reports about protestants getting killed, but this is getting really out of hand.Damn.. The cops are people too y'know..
It's unbelievable how they take all the beating and don't strike back
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stK3YPz6WTc
Anyway sad days for Ukraine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUhOnX8qt3IOnly a matter of time before someone posted that. :lol:
People in Ukraine don't know what they're fighting for.It's just senseless rioting, like the London riots.
It's just senseless , like London .There is always a reason, sadly when something becomes mainstream most people involved become senseless rioters
There is always a reason, sadly when something becomes mainstream most people involved become senseless riotersWhy mess up the quote?
ukrainian cops need to watch this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTRfOtmECp4
Why mess up the quote?humor.
humor.Humour* and I don't get it. :uhm:
Humour*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_and_British_English_spelling_differences#-our.2C_-or
Yes.... it's true. British isn't the only English! Oh my!True but we are the best.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_and_British_English_spelling_differences#-our.2C_-or
Yes.... it's true. British isn't the only English! Oh my!
True but we are the best.Yes
(http://i.imgur.com/6Bj8n9A.png)
Yes(http://msmreview.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/freedom_bombs.gif)(http://www.solarnavigator.net/history/explorers_history/Winston_Churchill_British_bulldog_portrait.jpg)
(http://msmreview.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/freedom_bombs.gif)Erm what does the US have to do with Mr Churchill? Apart from the fact that they bribed the shit out of him and threw the UK into years of debt in order for them to help during WW2..
(http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/were-gonna-free-the-shit-out-of-you.jpg)
Erm what does the US have to do with Mr Churchill? Apart from the fact that they bribed the shit out of him and threw the UK into years of debt in order for them to help during WW2..Why do people ask questions that they answer themselves in the same post..
Why do people ask questions that they answer themselves in the same post..Well the US didn't 'Free the shit out of' the UK, nor did they bomb it.. So thats why I questioned your post. :)
Well the US didn't 'Free the shit out of' the UK, nor did they bomb it.. So thats why I questioned your post. :)Nooo.. I'm just making fun out of the US..
If it has to result in violence, meaning killing people to get the word that they wont take their governments crap, so be it.
put our minds togetherOr just... you know... wreak havoc.
Or just... you know... wreak havoc.Haha, I agree with you for once.
Ukraine's PM Azarov and government resignSo when is the President resigning so nobody else has to die? I thought a President's duty was to look after his people above all in office, seems Mr Yanukovych is ignoring that.
Ukraine's President Viktor Yanukovych has accepted the resignation of the prime minister and his cabinet amid continuing anti-government protests.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25932352
So when is the President resigning so nobody else has to die? I thought a President's duty was to look after his people above all in office, seems Mr Yanukovych is ignoring that.
oh god, i'm, dying.(http://i.imgur.com/H5uqzRw.gif)
Both amazing and saddening how this has gotten intense, yet the rest of the world hardly gives a f**k.Wrong.
Too little too late. If a country, most of the countries population decides that something is f**ked up, goes on the streets protesting, risking their lives, and after a month the union says "oh maybe something is wrong" NO SHIT. Too little too f**king late.
Wrong.
"Europe's leaders are to consider urgent sanctions against Ukraine after the worst violence in months of unrest claimed at least 26 lives." (BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26258998))
I'm getting so pissed off at the media only showing a one sided perspective on this case. Both sides is a mess. Protesters are violent and so comes a violent reaction. Police are severely wounded and killed, guns and Molotov cocktails are used by protesters and so guns are used in reaction as immediate self defence. Hell theres even been reported that several protestors are using live ammunation, and thats infact terrorism.
Go take a look at liveleak.com and see some reality guys, 13 policemen are killed so far. Rest in peace.
Allegedly sniper killing both protestors and police officials: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=130_1393011276
inb4 anarchist / conspiracy / illerminaty posts
I heard that Vladimir Putin request a military intervention to occupy Ukraina in the Duman. Read it on the news today.Yeah, he sent a request to the Federation Council, but that doesn't matter at all. The occupation has already been started.
Romania's gov is next.Can't wait
I already know how this will end. Russia will annex Crimea, NATO and US will only throw nothing but warnings until it all will be forgotten. Americans always been pussies and always will be, they can only fight agaisnt Taliban - terrorist towelheads that can barely even handle a gun.Getting Crimea alone is rather pointless; they'll try to get entire Ukraine.
towelheadsMind your fucking manners.
I already know how this will end. Russia will annex Crimea, NATO and US will only throw nothing but warnings until it all will be forgotten. Americans always been pussies and always will be, they can only fight agaisnt Taliban - terrorist towelheads that can barely even handle a gun.
Romania's gov is next.Really ? There had been already around 2/3 civil wars since 2012; and nothing changed. Our situation will never change, our government it's filled with bandits and men which are willing to sacrifice a huge number of people for their own good (Iliescu <3). So calm your tits, corruption it's an attractive game.
Russian navy's roaming on the Black Sea, which it's ours;
What?Apparently the black sea is owned by Romania. :lol:
Apparently the black sea is owned by Romania. :lol:
What?Petrol.
Romania owns the Black Sea as much as Argentina does.Geography.
Geography.Politics.
Politics.And history.
And history.The Black Sea is international: it is not property of any country.
part of seaThere's your keyword, mate.
Fighting for "freedom and democracy" :app: :app:, this whole thing looks more pathetic when you want help from the west and America.
I wish only the worst for every american soldier, and people who idolize them should reconsider visiting a mental institution.
Here is a list of the country's that were bombed by "Democratic" US from 1945
Korea and China 1950-53 (Korean War)
Guatemala 1954
Indonesia 1958
Cuba 1959-1961
Guatemala 1960
Congo 1964
Laos 1964-73
Vietnam 1961-73
Cambodia 1969-70
Guatemala 1967-69
Grenada 1983
Lebanon 1983, 1984 (both Lebanese and Syrian targets)
Libya 1986
El Salvador 1980s
Nicaragua 1980s
Iran 1987
Panama 1989
Iraq 1991 (Persian Gulf War)
Kuwait 1991
Somalia 1993
Bosnia 1994, 1995
Sudan 1998
Afghanistan 1998
Yugoslavia 1999
Yemen 2002
Iraq 1991-2003 (US/UK on regular basis)
Iraq 2003-present
Afghanistan 2001-present
Pakistan 2007-present
Somalia 2007-8, 2011
Yemen 2009, 2011
Libya 2011.
Who's ready for WWIII?I AM, wait that means no more school, right?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26424738
I AM,
Who's ready for WWIII?I see the potential for a peaceful solution here. We should offer the people of 'occupied Ukraine' the chance to have a referendum on whether they should be annexed to Russia (as I think
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26424738
Jacob, I don't want a peaceful solution, I want the world smell of uranium, the seas fill with blood of many, I want to hear on the news "the first nuke USA launched in fourty years is on it's way to Moskov, brace for impact in 2 hours 28 minutes"I hope you've got a substantial nuclear bunker then. And by the way it's more like 20 minutes compared to 2 hours.
I hope you've got a substantial nuclear bunker then. And by the way it's more like 20 minutes compared to 2 hours.Okay than 20 minutes, and I don't need a bunker , why would you want to survive something like that, no, you just die with the group, as your and everyone elses name will be forgotten after a third of the planed will be wiped with nuclear explosions. Either you die with everyone else or you live seeing everyone around you suffer. North Korea didn't achieve it, here's hope for Russia
Given enough sentiment on both sides, even an annexation justified "by referendum" can still trigger civil war. The cultural divide must be taken into consideration too.
While the facts that you pointed out are true, it does not justify putin's invasion of another nation.Stopped reading after this sentence. The government of Crimea REQUESTED Russian troops to be send to protect the Russian ethnic majority there. Funny how everything is centered around this while everyone seems to have forgotten that the current Ukrainian self-appointed 'head' of the state is a nationalist who illegally took his power with support of the EU. If Russia would want to invade Ukraine it would've wiped them out in less than 24 hours. :D
Stopped reading after this sentence. The government of Crimea REQUESTED Russian troops to be send to protect the Russian ethnic majority there. Funny how everything is centered around this while everyone seems to have forgotten that the current Ukrainian self-appointed 'head' of the state is a nationalist who illegally took his power with support of the EU. If Russia would want to invade Ukraine it would've wiped them out in less than 24 hours. :D
Nothing new though, same happened in Georgia in 2008 when they decided to attack Russian civilians in Abkhazia & South Ossetia, got their asses penetrated and resulted in massive butthurt of the West.
The government of crimea had no right to ask russia to do anything even remotely of the sort. Let alone the fact that it is the government who upon independence from Ukraine enjoy not only exponential power, but great popularity in any future independent states of Crimea or if Crimea is to be integrated into Russia.
It should also be mentioned that the act by the crimean government, if anything, is treason and illegal as you seem to be so interested in the legality of things. Crimea is legally part of Ukraine, and it's elected officials have a duty toward their parent nation. Asking for and aiding an armed invasion by another country is an act of treason.Like I said, its not if that aid is called by the offical legimit Government of that country.
The government of crimea had no right to ask russia to do anything even remotely of the sort. Let alone the fact that it is the government who upon independence from Ukraine enjoy not only exponential power, but great popularity in any future independent states of Crimea or if Crimea is to be integrated into Russia.But the official president did, and he had the right to do so.
That would pretty much cement the political presence of any crimean leaders and parties leading the revolution.
It should also be mentioned that the act by the crimean government, if anything, is treason and illegal as you seem to be so interested in the legality of things. Crimea is legally part of Ukraine, and it's elected officials have a duty toward their parent nation. Asking for and aiding an armed invasion by another country is an act of treason.Lol pls don't compare the Russian revolution to this. The few thousand protestors of Maidan have the 'right' to decide which law is obsolete and which isn't? For a country of millions?
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/02/ukraine-parliament-ousts-president-yanukovich-2014222152035601620.html
The russian revolution was also illegal. The Ukrainian president was removed by a huge majority in his parliament, where the people voting against him were the representatives of the people of ukraine. Laws can and should be overturned when they become obsolete.
Also the question is not of wiping out, that'd be stupid as i pointed out should you of bothered to read. Any such attacks would result in just about the entire western side of the world exploding on Russia, but with the help of most Asian countries as well.The wiping out part was sarcasm, guess you missed it. You seem to forget that this isn't a game between Ukraine & Russia. It's a game between Russia and EU+NATO.
By slowly taking Ukraine, Russia is able to keep a large portion of Ukraine to it's own benefit with minimal cost. It's a game of strategy and money, afterall.
Again, i don't claim that this is necessarily so. However so far there has been absolutely no sign of any actual threat to the crimean people or the Russian minority in any parts of Ukraine (If anything, Russia has practically multiplied the risk of anything like it by invading Ukraine in the name of the Russian Minority).Multiplied the risk? How so? Before stationing, or how you like to call it 'invasion', there was chaos and fighting all over Crimea. Now, all fights have stopped, no one died and not a shot has been fired. You should look past the blown up statements by the West once in a while.
Just a little curious.. Why do these topics always turn into these arguments? Whether or not it's this persons fault or this persons, I think the point of these topics are to just make people aware.. That's what I view it as at least.Because people have different opinions, and reaching that medium where everyone agrees is impossible. The fact that this topic was made to people be aware about a thing that is happening, and while this progressed "slightly" in the meanwhile, you know the whole WW3 threat, I think it's appropriate for everyone to voice their opinion.
Lol pls don't compare the Russian revolution to this. The few thousand protestors of Maidan have the 'right' to decide which law is obsolete and which isn't? For a country of millions?
The wiping out part was sarcasm, guess you missed it. You seem to forget that this isn't a game between Ukraine & Russia. It's a game between Russia and EU+NATO.
Multiplied the risk? How so? Before stationing, or how you like to call it 'invasion', there was chaos and fighting all over Crimea. Now, all fights have stopped, no one died and not a shot has been fired. You should look past the blown up statements by the West once in a while.Chaos and fighting all over crimea? Who were they fighting from?
he has just as much power as the U.K's president does to ask russia to invade the U.S.And who's our President?
And who's our President?
The ukrainian president was ousted from the country, hence the people of Ukraine who he claims to represent no longer recognize him as the president. He may have the ability to call foreign invasion on paper, but in the end he has just as much power as the U.K's president does to ask russia to invade the U.S.Why would you compare a president asking a country he has no stable political relationship with to invade a country he has absolutely nothing to do with, with the Ukranian president asking for safety and protection of the Pro-Russian majority region within Ukraine. :uhm:
Secondly, i may not be a graduate in international law but Russia's license in sevastopol is only for them to house their fleet. It is not to invade Ukraine with it. Also you mention that they exited their bases and tried to make the Ukrainian forces Turn/Surrender in order for them to protect Crimeans. Yet, who do crimeans face any threat from? If they form the majority there as you say, why would their lives be threatened by EU favoring Ukrainians?All the questions you asked can be simply answered by googling. The illegally empowered politics that are going on now in Ukraine, powered by the EU, are setting laws which are absolutely NOT democratically chosen, but merely by the protesters who represent only their cause, like I previously said. The people protesting against Yanukovich were mainly, well, people, not political leaders of any kinds of movements. The only truly active political party within the mass was the nationalist party, which obviously was a minority, else there would have been a different president. This is just simple logic. Setting up an illegal parliament and pulling laws out of their asses that benefit a party with no democratic elected power whatsoever doesn't sound like the "will of all the people" now does it.
Also correct me if i am wrong, but the president of the country is the speaker for the parliament, and power remains with the Ukrainian parliament, which was elected by the people and was also responsible for impeaching the Ex president of Ukraine. Not just people who roamed the streets.
You keep straining that the president of Ukraine was elected by the whole majority, not by a few thousand people. Yet the people who ousted him were also the representatives of the people, they weren't elected by a few thousand people either. Ukraine's ex president fell out of favor with the people, and people protested against him. That's legal last time i checked. The president is not there to do whatever he feels like, he is a representative of the people and it is his duty to serve their wishes, not his own. Hence he was ousted, any legal powers he has is only the result of bureaucracy and should not be taken over the will of the people.
In democracy aswell a few people represent the interests of millions [Even billions in the case of India]. So by that logic, democrazy is useless? The few thousand people protesting were the ones who had the balls and the Ability to stand up to a ukrainian police formation shaped like a spartan war unit. They were the men who had the balls to go and fight instead of going for their job or their families in order to fight for what they believed in. Not everybody can do that. They did have widespread support of the people however, plus it is not the protestors who ousted the president. It was the legally elected parliament which did so.Actually, the Russian revolution was much more complex than just a few people rioting against the Tsar, and I won't bother explaining it to you and will leave you to look it up yourself, to not derail the thread. The few people who stood up in Ukraine are the same people that firstly wanted an EU integration, then wanted an independent Ukraine and now are split between pro-independance, backed up by EU and NATO and pro-Russian 'movements', backed up by Russia. This easily proves that they don't represent shit but their own personal wish, and whoever supports them. If you're to blame the Russian government for invasion, in this case, it is as much of an invasion as it is of the EU's and NATO's. If they really cared for safety of Ukraine, they wouldn't support a specific group in the first place. Like I said, it's a game between EU+NATO on one side & Russia on the other.
Did you even read the very line you just quoted? Guess you missed it. If Russia is to stage a direct armed invasion of Ukraine, they would immediately get blasted by the western side of the world (Or E.U + NATO...) who would advocate bans to the South aswell. However if russia is to slowly take Crimea, it will not give the west (Or E.U + NATO..) enough momentum to pursuade the U.N and hence the south.Yeah just like in Syria, right? :lol: I thought the whole 'big WWIII feeling' was already a thing of the past.
Chaos and fighting all over crimea? Who were they fighting from?
There were protests for crimea to succeed, not riots. And there are still (And a lot more) protests going on in crimea against Russian Occupation. The fighting hasn't stopped, if anything it's going strong.
Also no one died, no one died earlier either. No shots fired, there would of never even been the need for a shot fired if Russia hadn't decided to just invade Ukraine in the first place.
Also there were absolutely no reports of the Russian minority in other parts of Ukraine ever being threatened. None. Nobody said anything to them, except small clashes at protests for-against.
If anything, by invading Ukraine in the name of Crimea Russia has aggravated any racists in Ukraine and gave them a fallacious means to justify attacking the minority Russia is invading in the name of.But no one is invading anything. :neutral2: Unless you label every support from outside an invasion, then Syria was invaded by at least 15 countries last year. :lol:
Also, you should note that now all it takes to start a full blown shootout and deaths of many is one hotheaded soldier. One misunderstanding. That's all. If the Ex Ukrainian president had any care for ukrainian lives, why would he ask a external army to invade his own country to 'protect' lives knowing that it is the duty of Ukrainian troops to protect their country's sovereignty? What can Russia do that the Ukrainian Police and army can't to maintain Law and Order? Also what exactly has Russia done since they got there? Protests and clashes are still going strong and have only increased since Russian occupation as most Loyalists didn't bother clashing with the Majority russian speakers before, but now for the love of their country they dare to go out on the streets and protest against the Russian troops and even keep getting attacked for it and hence as the volume of anti russian protestors has increased, so has the intensity of the clashes.Let me repeat the things that were said a dozen times already, but just for the sake of it: The Russian soldiers 'stationed' in Crimea were ALREADY stationed there before all this began for the major part. They are in a state of alertness to protect the ethnic Russian population from getting pulled down the gutter together with the nationalists in Kiev. No one ever forced the people in Crimea to fight for Russia, yet they decided so themselves, and those people are the majority. As you like the term majorities, then what gives the few thousands of EuroMaidan the right to decide the faith of the other thousands who want entirely the opposite? EuroMaidan may overthrow their government, by your logic, as they wish, but people, by definition UKRANIANS who do not agree to that (in this case being the Russian ethnic majority in Crimea) may not? Weird logic.
Also, here's Russia accepting to integrate Crimea into RussiaYes, just like the majority of Crimeans want themselves.
http://time.com/15527/russia-embraces-potential-crimea-split-from-ukraine/
Yep, definitely there for humanitarian purposes.And for the 4th time or so, I don't know where you got this from. Russian soldiers in Crimea are there to protect the wish of the Russian ethnic MAJORITY, in Crimea. They don't want their rights being taken away just as much as the EuroMaidan protestors want, being encouraged by the West.
Did you even read the very line you just quoted? Guess you missed it. If Russia is to stage a direct armed invasion of Ukraine, they would immediately get blasted by the western side of the world (Or E.U + NATO...) who would advocate bans to the South aswell. However if russia is to slowly take Crimea, it will not give the west (Or E.U + NATO..) enough momentum to pursuade the U.N and hence the south.
Report: Russian soldiers storm Ukrainian military base in Crimea (http://www.haaretz.com/news/world/.premium-1.578553)You're a bit late. :D
You're a bit late. :D
(http://images3.kurir-info.rs/slika-900x608/sa-nocnim-vukovima-cetnici-na-krimu-1394144216-457277.jpg)
The Chetniks officially became part of the army of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. They've got a various duties from patrolling to checking vehicles and passengers at the checkpoints. They said that they do not carry guns, but if necessary, they will.
SCOTLAND
Now WHY is it allowed for Brit's to stop their land's from breaking away
IF NATO had the right to do the same with Kosovo, than Russia has with Crimea.
IF CRIMEA AND KOSOVO have the right to become seperate countries, so do SCOTLAND and TEXAS.
Now WHY is it allowed for Brit's and 'Muricans to stop their land's from breaking away, BUT NOT ALLOWED for Serbia and Ukraine?
Also 'Murican's have no land that is actually theirs, they did a genocide and almoast killed an entire human race (indians) and stole a f**king continend from them!
If Russia is to stage a direct armed invasion of Ukraine, they would immediately get blasted by the western side of the world (Or E.U + NATO...) who would advocate bans to the South aswell.
Implying Russia has no one to support them. Russia won't go for a direct armed invasion of Ukraine, not in a million years. But if, for some reason, a war would break out then China and even North Korea (the whole country is basically a military base, must not be underestimated) would offer to help Russia.
The only thing the West can do is get UN to force Putin out. If UN's sanctions go trough then Russia will be blocked from pretty much all trade with the West and Europe. However Russia is rich on resources and they will still be able to trade with China, not to mention the fact that China would VETO those sanctions anyway.
While I do think Putin has lost some sense over the years, I'd much rather leave Crimea to him. Crimea and even Ukraine are people of the same culture, traditions and values as the Russians and it pains me deeply that they are in a conflict, especially since I've got family ties on both sides. With the Ukrainian government in a state of anarchy I'd rather let Putin handle Crimea than NATO or EU.
I agree with Putin being better equipped to handle Crimea, seeing as the Ukrainian Govt. clearly failed to control the masses there. That doesn't mean i'm in favor of crimean integration into the R.F though.
Crimeans may want to integrate into Russia, but that doesn't mean Russia has any right to storm into Ukraine and try to take Crimea. It's the message. You can't just walk into another country and take a large chunk of it because the other country is not strong enough to put up a fight. Putin's being a bully, who's to say China won't walk into India and just take a major chunk of it following Putin's lead.
If crimea really want to secede from Ukraine, they should properly identify that with the Ukrainian government. Directly trying to leave by means of armed Invasion is not the way to go.
Also while Russia would be isolated from both the American and European sides, it wouldn't be too hard to convince south asian countries (Except China ofc) and maybe even australia to follow Suit. Assuming Russia goes with a armed invasion that is.
Though again, what Russia is doing is wrong. For the most part Crimea is a semi autonomous republic and faced little threat from what was going on in East Ukraine, there was no need for them to ask Russia to invade. They should of informed the Ukrainian parliament and properly fought for their right to secede. If the Ukrainian parliament failed to recognize Crimea's wishes then Russia's actions can be justified for once.
IF NATO had the right to do the same with Kosovo, than Russia has with Crimea.
IF CRIMEA AND KOSOVO have the right to become seperate countries, so do SCOTLAND and TEXAS.
Now WHY is it allowed for Brit's and 'Muricans to stop their land's from breaking away, BUT NOT ALLOWED for Serbia and Ukraine?
Also 'Murican's have no land that is actually theirs, they did a genocide and almoast killed an entire human race (indians) and stole a f**king continend from them!
Shhh
All the answers are in bumba
http://goo.gl/rTS5vk
[citation needed]
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26503478GIANT balls if I may add, Russia is how many times bigger? Let's say 50 times bigger than Ukraine, and they have the balls to fight it? Good on them.
@Jake
Only fair. Ukraine has the full right to defend it's sovereignty. Russian troops digging in, Ukraine mobilizing. I applaud the bravery of the Ukrainian soldiers with the balls to stand their ground for their country.
IF NATO had the right to do the same with Kosovo, than Russia has with Crimea.
IF CRIMEA AND KOSOVO have the right to become seperate countries, so do SCOTLAND and TEXAS.
Now WHY is it allowed for Brit's and 'Muricans to stop their land's from breaking away, BUT NOT ALLOWED for Serbia and Ukraine?
Also 'Murican's have no land that is actually theirs, they did a genocide and almoast killed an entire human race (indians) and stole a f**king continend from them!
IF NATO had the right to do the same with Kosovo, than Russia has with Crimea.NATO violated the International Law when they bombed Serbia in 1999. They attacked one sovereign country without having a decision from UN Security Council. Even the ex. Chancellor of Germany Gerhard Schroder admitted that. What is happening at Crimea is violation of the International Law too, but someone has to put an end to Western propaganda forever.
IF CRIMEA AND KOSOVO have the right to become seperate countries, so do SCOTLAND and TEXAS.
Now WHY is it allowed for Brit's and 'Muricans to stop their land's from breaking away, BUT NOT ALLOWED for Serbia and Ukraine?
Also 'Murican's have no land that is actually theirs, they did a genocide and almoast killed an entire human race (indians) and stole a f**king continend from them!
Now WHY is it allowed for Brit's and 'Muricans to stop their land's from breaking away, BUT NOT ALLOWED for Serbia and Ukraine?Now what the fuck do you mean by stopping THEIR lands from breaking away ?
NATO violated the International Law when they bombed Serbia in 1999. They attacked one sovereign country without having a decision from UN Security Council. Even the ex. Chancellor of Germany Gerhard Schroder admitted that. What is happening at Crimea is violation of the International Law too, but someone has to put an end to Western propaganda forever.
Russian with: AlbanianCrimea actually has big Russian population, you can't compare it with Kosovo. (yep, the number media told you is bigger than real one)
Crimea with: Kosovo
Ukraine with: Serbia
Kiev with: Belgrade...
Precentage is similar i believe.Yeah, similar my ass, it's like 3x smaller
If Kosovo was taken from Serbia, why cant Crimea be taken from Ukraine?Because Crimea was like part of Russia for very long time (afaik).
SO WAS KOSOVO A PART OF SERBIA THAN TURKS TOOK IT BY FORCE!!!Then it goes like this
Russian with:AlbanianSerbia
Crimea with: Kosovo
Ukraine with:SerbiaAlbania
Then it goes like this
SO WAS KOSOVO A PART OF SERBIA THAN TURKS TOOK IT BY FORCE!!!Someone has to make this kid shut the fuck up.You better thank god you're on the internet and not irl.
Someone has to make this kid shut the f**k up.You better thank god you're on the internet and not irl.Dangerous.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26503478>BBC
>BBC
oh god lol
IF NATO had the right to do the same with Kosovo, than Russia has with Crimea.The difference is that Ukrainians weren't killing Russian civilians prior to the invasion. :)
IF CRIMEA AND KOSOVO have the right to become seperate countries, so do SCOTLAND and TEXAS.
So a particular news source shouldn't even be looked at just because it's from the west.Funny because I never said that, but you're the one basing your whole view of the world on one news source without even questioning the authenticity, or looking beyond the surface of mass media.
Yep, i'm the one with a shortsighted view of the world..
The difference is that Ukrainians weren't killing Russian civilians prior to the invasion. :)Because Russia is stronger.
The difference is that Ukrainians weren't killing Russian civilians prior to the invasion. :)
Just curiouse, when USA kills innocent civilians and invades a country it is ok? :)Yes. Please do tell me how you will tell a country of which the president is keeping a briefcase to destroy a continent with him at all times to not do something.. please do tell.
Funny because I never said that, but you're the one basing your whole view of the world on one news source without even questioning the authenticity, or looking beyond the surface of mass media.
>BBC
oh god lol
So can you please point out the part of my post that said i focused on one news source? Cause i seem to of quoted multiple in this very topic..Please stop putting words in my mouth. You gave me one source, and it was BBC's, main mass media of the West, on top of that you admit that it is authentic, at least from your POV, which indeed implies that you focus on one news source. You want my sources? You should've asked earlier when I followed a live discussion of an Ukranian living in Crimea saying absolutely nothing is going on and the media is blowing it up as usual. Besides that, I have followed a few lectures online from my university who were held by Ukranians stating the facts plain and simple: the people don't know what they want, and explain the how's and why's. All you seem to do is circlejerking recycled opinions that have been countered twice now by me alone, so you try to personally put me in a bad light by implying I'm all hurdur conspiracy because I pointed out the lack of your perspective. What exactly is illogical in my 'arguments'? If you like to spit, then why don't you try and specify your saliva.
Also, just how is the source not authentic? The article provides genuine video footage, unless you are going to claim it is fake. Also, the only thing that says anything against it is your text-based input on a online forum where anybody can type almost anything. Let alone the fact that you have not even been able to cite any sources against it, and your very argument is plain.. illogical.
You really think another country takes your home and the entire state will just sit like Rosy birds cheering Russia, nobody standing up and opposing them?..
Also as you seem to claim that mass media is in some large conspiracy to hide information, please tell me the Borus theory of Ukrainian politics.
Also, just how do you explain this then?
Just curiouse, when USA kills innocent civilians and invades a country it is ok? :)No, but not relevant to your first sentence that I quoted.
Please stop putting words in my mouth. You gave me one source, and it was BBC's, main mass media of the West, on top of that you admit that it is authentic, at least from your POV, which indeed implies that you focus on one news source. You want my sources? You should've asked earlier when I followed a live discussion of an Ukranian living in Crimea saying absolutely nothing is going on and the media is blowing it up as usual. Besides that, I have followed a few lectures online from my university who were held by Ukranians stating the facts plain and simple: the people don't know what they want, and explain the how's and why's. All you seem to do is circlejerking recycled opinions that have been countered twice now by me alone, so you try to personally put me in a bad light by implying I'm all hurdur conspiracy because I pointed out the lack of your perspective. What exactly is illogical in my 'arguments'? If you like to spit, then why don't you try and specify your saliva.
Now, besides your above post, it's also pretty remarkable that you, by your logic, fully support that if a government isn't 'sufficient' for the people, the people (on the streets) have all rights to do whatever they want, meaning you support Nazism as well? Because that's exactly how it went back in the 1933-1939 days a bit to the western side of Europe. People unhappy -> elect Hitler and no one intervenes -> WW2 :lol: Perhaps another example in hopes to get this through your head: Imagine, in your country, there are riots protesting against the government. Now, the government flees, without election, the protestors (note: not 'all' people ;) ) decide to put up a government that you do not agree with. I can't put it any more simple than this.
Let me give you a fair tip of advice; To get to know a situation, try to look at it in both ways, which you not only failed, but for the sake of the argument REFUSE to do so to not make yourself look stupid. Also, perhaps use other types of source besides BBC and Wikipedia to not make a fool out of yourself. Now that I feel that I've said everything in here, and in previous posts, pure out of informational purposes, you may continue circlejerking your logical fallacies to not making it look like you indeed have no idea what you're talking about. :D I'm only going to reply to your answer to the question I stated above.
Here, enjoy a media source at the opposite side of BBC and CNN: http://rt.com/ they also have cool video footage!! :lol:
What exactly is illogical in my 'arguments'? If you like to spit, then why don't you try and specify your saliva.
You should try to look beyond your sources of mass media
Imagine, in your country, there are riots protesting against the government. Now, the government flees, without election, the protestors (note: not 'all' people ;) ) decide to put up a government that you do not agree with. I can't put it any more simple than this.If the president of the country has fled, then a acting president needs to be appointed in his place. The maidan protestors did not put in the acting president, the Ukranian government did.
Yet still you failed to answer my question, continued to recycle and kept attacking me personally for the sake of argument. :app:
You want my sources?Never said i want your sources, but you seem to of been gracious enough to give them to me anyway
What exactly is illogical in my 'arguments'?My answer:
Again, you took only a part of what i said and tried to "circlejerk" it in your own words. There are 1.9 million people in crimea, and you claim that not a single person of those 1.9 million people is offended by a foreign country walking into their home with guns, shoving guns into the face of your country's soldiers in the area and capturing/stealing planes/ships belonging to the ukrainian government stationed in crimea.I even quoted the question specifically
Then, you claim that there is absolutely nothing going on. Just how is that not illogical?
There is evidence all over the web that there are large scale protests all over crimea against Russian occupation, but i doubt Russia Today glorifies it in detail. Given the fact that you rigorously claim that Crimea is peaceful while there is clear evidence against it based solely on the claims "Russia today said so" makes me question who exactly is the one with limited perspective..
Now, besides your above post, it's also pretty remarkable that you, by your logic, fully support that if a government isn't 'sufficient' for the people, the people (on the streets) have all rights to do whatever they want, meaning you support Nazism as well?My answer:
Most countries in the world had their governments brought about by the people standing up to oppressive governments.
Drawing a baseless conclusion that "You support people standing up to their government? You're a nazi!" is an insult, and not only do you disrespect the millions that died in the Second world war and all of the nazi party's activities but the world community at large.
continued to recycleThe only point where i recycled anything is when you recycled your claim of maidan protestors ruling the country, when i had previously pointed out that the government is the legally elected government. No protestor just walked into the senate and became the president. Feel free to point out anything else i recycled.
kept attacking me personally for the sake of argument. :app:
Drawing a baseless conclusion that "You support people standing up to their government? You're a nazi!" is an insult, and not only do you disrespect the millions that died in the Second world war and all of the nazi party's activities but the world community at large.
Then your second conclusion, "You think BBC is authentic? You focus just on it!", but you justify Russia Today to be authentic...
and you claim that not a single person of those 1.9 million people is offended by a foreign country walking into their home with guns, shoving guns into the face of your country's soldiers in the area and capturing/stealing planes/ships belonging to the ukrainian government stationed in crimea.
Then, you claim that there is absolutely nothing going on. Just how is that not illogical?
Also, can you please cite me where it says that the protestors are ruling the streets?
Contrary to what you keep repeating, nobody from the maidan simply walked into the senate and became the president. The government is still the legally elected government chosen by the people of Ukraine. .Your references to me in your post:
You gave me one source, and it was BBC's, main mass media of the West, on top of that you admit that it is authentic, at least from your POV, which indeed implies that you focus on one news source.
All you seem to do is circlejerking recycled opinions that have been countered twice now by me alone, so you try to personally put me in a bad light by implying I'm all hurdur conspiracy because I pointed out the lack of your perspective.Ps: Also false. You're the only one "circlejerking" anything. Feel free to prove my wrong by quoting exactly what i circlejerked.
Now, besides your above post, it's also pretty remarkable that you, by your logic, fully support that if a government isn't 'sufficient' for the people, the people (on the streets) have all rights to do whatever they want, meaning you support Nazism as well?
Perhaps another example in hopes to get this through your head: Imagine, in your country, there are riots protesting against the government. Now, the government flees, without election, the protestors (note: not 'all' people ;) ) decide to put up a government that you do not agree with. I can't put it any more simple than this.
Let me give you a fair tip of advice; To get to know a situation, try to look at it in both ways, which you not only failed, but for the sake of the argument REFUSE to do so to not make yourself look stupid.Ps: Looking both ways doesn't mean looking at russia today alone. Given this whole argument is sparked based on you claiming the BBC is inauthentic because it's western media
Also, perhaps use other types of source besides BBC and Wikipedia to not make a fool out of yourself.
Now that I feel that I've said everything in here, and in previous posts, pure out of informational purposes, you may continue circlejerking your logical fallacies to not making it look like you indeed have no idea what you're talking about.
Here, enjoy a media source at the opposite side of BBC and CNN: http://rt.com/ they also have cool video footage!! :lol:
You keep nagging and repeating on and on and on about things that already were explained with obvious facts, at which point you just switch to something else I stated in order to personally try making me look like the bad guy. Seeing that you are unable to read my previous posts, let me be kind enough to sum them up for you:
You are also manipulating my sentences in forms (ref: the nazism) which yet again shows how clueless you are and insist in continuing the argument to put me in the black light to seem to know what you are doing. Try following the suggestions I gave you before to keep this healthy. ;)Again, you keep claiming that i don't understand what you are saying but fail to actually provide your explanation. Please kindly go ahead and explain to me what you meant by the nazism context instead of blatantly attacking me with generalities and accusing me of things i never did.
>Russia didn't invade anything, no one is taking any homes, no one is shoving any guns in anyone's mouth as troops are stationed in legal bases in Crimea by international law
>You refuse to look at Crimea's history and demographical aspects
>I don't only look at RT as I only provided that link as the counterpart of your BBC link as I already stated my sources which, that you failed to bring me, are not all internet and news websites. My POV is Crimea, not Russia nor NATO.
>BBC
oh god lol
You keep making references of how i keep repeating and nagging and what not, but fail to provide any examples whatsoever. Can you please mention where i constantly repeated something? (Other than where you claim that i don't understand something yet refuse to explain it, where you constantly claim that i am repeating stuff failing to provide any examples and also any repetitions that had to be repeated as a reply to you repeating the claim/question)You don't ask, so I assumed you knew exactly what I was talking about. You want an example of yourself repeating? Reread the very same post you have just made. I'll point it out a bit lower in mine.
Also, yep, i switched to something else.But you continue to reply with something that has been countered already, wrapping it up in a nice post to make it look unique.
You posted something, i replied entirely based on what you posted and countered it.
You claimed that i didn't answer your questions, i quoted all your questions and my replies to it.
You claimed i am trying to attack you in my post. I posted all my references of you in which not a single attack against you has been made, whereas your previous post was filled with attacks against me. It is not something else you stated. It is exactly what you stated.I'm not claiming anything, the fact that you use ad hominems to your argumentation speaks for itself.
Then suddenly you post this, which is not at all derived from my earlier post but you didn't forget to steal contents from it and apply it into another context. Yep, i'm the one trying to switch to something else.Again, you keep claiming that i don't understand what you are saying but fail to actually provide your explanation. Please kindly go ahead and explain to me what you meant by the nazism context instead of blatantly attacking me with generalities and accusing me of things i never did.It is not my fault you are unable to comprehend a basic example. In fact, I think you understood it perfectly as you have yet again turned it into an ad hominem in order to not make it look like you have exactly no idea what you are talking about. Surprise surprise, I have this pointed out already -> Your first example of your repetitions. I made the connection of your logic supporting the people on the streets picking a government without external intervention nor legal election. This is a very comparable situation to Germany during the interbellum. If you fail to see that, then it is your duty to go and look it up yourself as it seems to me you don't even know what happened. Again, I'm not a teacher.
>First of all, you took the shoving guns in people's faces out of it's original context. Russia surrounding Ukrainian bases and demanding them to hand over all their Ships and Planes may be legal on paper (I highly doubt it, but as Cofi is a international lawyer, meh..) but you claim that there is absolutely no unrest in crimea against it. But of course you stripped the statement and put it in the context of invasion to frame me.You're the one shouting "INVASION!!!" on every chance you get. I use that to counter you, not my fault you get frustrated because of it. And if you doubt the international law pointed out by Cofi then you have just made yourself lose all credibility you had left. :|
>So essentially, just because crimea used to be a part of Russia, Russia has the right to annex crimea? (Which i highly doubt is legal. Taking over crimea is one thing, annexing it into it's own territory is illegal).Again, blowing things out of proportion. I think I've said this 8 times by now :lol: And yet again: No one is annexing anything, no one is invading anything. Your argument is not only invalid, but amusing, as you asked for an example of you repeating yourself again and again as this is exactly the perfect example. A second one by now and that only from the post you just made. :D
>And yet your original post wasIf you find it insulting of me pointing out your logical fallacies covering up baseless argumentation then I suggest you stop posting in order to not be 'insulted' in the future. :)
PS: The Nietzsche quote was there because it was a useful bit of advice, not to make it look pretty. Your quote is just another insult.
There are 1.9 million people in crimea, and you claim that not a single person of those 1.9 million people is offended by a foreign country walking into their home with guns, shoving guns into the face of your country's soldiers in the area and capturing/stealing planes/ships belonging to the ukrainian government stationed in crimea.
Then, you claim that there is absolutely nothing going on. Just how is that not illogical?
There is evidence all over the web that there are large scale protests all over crimea against Russian occupation, but i doubt Russia Today glorifies it in detail.
You don't ask, so I assumed you knew exactly what I was talking about. You want an example of yourself repeating? Reread the very same post you have just made. I'll point it out a bit lower in mine.
Apart from that, everything has been explained in previous posts from my side upon the Crimea situation, hence I refer to them. It's not a matter of me refusing giving explanation, but more of you refusing to read. If you're too lazy to do that then too bad because I will not spoonfeed you as I don't have the patience of being a teacher. :lol: