Allegro.cc - Online Community

Allegro.cc Forums » Off-Topic Ordeals » Annexing Uktaine. Objections?

Credits go to Aikei_c, Chris Katko, Derezo, gnolam, jhuuskon, Matthew Leverton, Max Savenkov, OICW, Thomas Fjellstrom, and torhu for helping out!
This thread is locked; no one can reply to it. rss feed Print
Annexing Uktaine. Objections?
type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

@Aikei, Thomas

I guess I'm wrong about the #2 in the referendum then. Ironically the western press mostly misses this point, as well as English wikipedia.

***

I'm not thinking Putin has done what he has done because of his care for the Crimeans, but he has certainly strengthened his already strong enough rule in Russia with this move. And the fact the people of Crimea benefit from the annexion cannot be denied.

I disagree about your claim regarding force. Force, is what took place in Iraq, Afganistan, Libya etc' etc'
No man killed by a soldier- isn't force. At least not completely. And well, you admitted yourself protection from current Kiev makes sense. And that the government doesn't make what it should do. And that this is result of western interference.

In addition to the question of the annexion done, or not done for the Crimeans, what's the alternative of for action?
Watch the west tear the nebhour apart, the government pass laws repressing the Russian people of Ukraine, and do nothing?

As of blocking Ukrainian channels.. Ukrain has block or has attempted to block Russian channels as well. Now again, why would you not react? Who wouldn't?

Should the west attempt to make the referendum in a fair matter, and not shout about constitution which has no moral basis in this specific case, it would perhaps be done in a compromisive way. Annexion still would've won.

But since it was solely done by Russia, top priority was peace and ease. Which was achieved.

I highly doubt they know what they are doing. It's all reactionary. None of this would have been an issue if the US didn't "take action" in ukraine to begin with.

Well, Russian reaction to sanctions seems no reaction(unless U.S. politicians really care about their assets in Russia being frozen :D), but that signing of things against Russian industry, if turned in to force seem to be able to trigger some vicous spiral of sanctions against each other, collapsing the world in to another 2009 style, and Russia to the 1990s style(much worse in the short term).

Although, there maybe anothing point in the story.. It may stop somewhere in the middle, if rough sanctions are turned on but not supported by EU.

And another thing, which I hope not something this Putin guy has in mind, is to isolate Russia to spurr local production or something. By nationalizing the things the west has here it have a chance. At great cost though, but it looks like Puti has the political power to dome something as reckless as this.

Yodhe23
Member #8,726
June 2007

type568 please stop exaggerating, and get a grip on what you are saying as you keep making fallacious arguments such as

".. And the fact the people of Crimea benefit from the annexion cannot be denied."

May I suggest you study the trivium and general semantics as a way of stop exaggerating in an effort to make your point, as all it does (in my mind) is do you a disservice by making you sound ignorant.

Though I find it funny that by your own reasoning and logic, the Palestinians and their neighbours have the right to invade Israel to protect "their people" from the well cataloged abuses by sombunal Israelis which exceed any documented or historical trouble of the ethnic Russians in Crimea.

www.justanotherturn.com

type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

I guess I should really try to be writing more neutral. But as of benefit.. Well it really can'y be denied. It's like if Kaliningrad was annexed by Germany. There is a question the people live there may be unwilling(not the case of Crimea), but as of their standard of living(assuming no double standard of social securities introduced) the people of Kaliningrad would benefit from the annexion. Well at least if not the language barier.

And about the topic you find funny. I lived in Israel for 15 years, not sure if it's right to say that now I don't live there.
However, I literally hate its millitary machine, the way politics evolve around it, the new settlements and the three years conscription service. And all these trouble without a moral/historical justification for existence or whatsoever. That's a very bold statement, and it is of course arguable. However, now the country exists for a while, and there's no solution. You can't displays the Israelis, & you can't displace the Palestians. & the guys don't seem to really like each other. Oh, and politicans on both sides capitalize on the hatred, and there are MANY haters. Sad to admit among those I know in Israel too, and those people study in universities(of which there are just 7 in Iarael), and are making Israeli future.
Long story short with Israel: Fucked up, and no solution.

Slartibartfast
Member #8,789
June 2007
avatar

Yodhe23 said:

Though I find it funny that by your own reasoning and logic, the Palestinians and their neighbours have the right to invade Israel to protect "their people" from the well cataloged abuses by sombunal Israelis which exceed any documented or historical trouble of the ethnic Russians in Crimea.

Following his logic that's not true, since their quality of life will decrease if they are annexed by any of Israel's neighbours, and he claims the quality of life will increase for the annexed Crimeans :P
Maybe it should be the other way around and Israel should annex those palestinians that prefer to live in Israel :)

Also, according to Google/dictionary "sombunal" is not a word, so I wonder what you meant. Firefox spellcheck suggests "somnambulism" (sleep walking), is that what you meant?

type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

"Israel should annex."

How long you think will the politicians signing the annexion will stay in power? :D Surely not long enough to benefit from the newly annexe votes :P

Yodhe23
Member #8,726
June 2007

Sombunal - Some-but-not-all (see Maybe Logic and Robert Anton Wilson)

And yes it can be denied, with great ease. For some will benefit and other won't, those who think they will may not, and those who think they won't may; see Zen stories about Luck for a philosophical interpretation of this
(http://www.thedailyzen.org/2011/12/zen-koan-maybe.html).

www.justanotherturn.com

Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

Why'd we spend all this time perfecting nukes if we're not going to use them to solve problems? ???

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

Yodhe23
Member #8,726
June 2007

That's what Project Orion was for!

www.justanotherturn.com

Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

Check out Project Thor.

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

Yodhe23
Member #8,726
June 2007

Sounds like a plot from a Heinlein novel... Oh wait, it is/was. Though I prefer Philip K Dick's, "Time out of Joint" that uses a similar tactic.
Though lets face it, whichever faction gets established in space first is going to an unprecedented leverage over anyone left on Earth.
Being at the bottom of a gravity well doesn't seem to make for good strategic positioning.

www.justanotherturn.com

NiteHackr
Member #2,229
April 2002

I have a two word solution for this problem: BUTT OUT

Works wonders.

--
Deluxe Pacman 1 & 2 (free) with source code available
https://nitehackr.github.io/games_index.html

Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

Yodhe23 said:

Though lets face it, whichever faction gets established in space first is going to an unprecedented leverage over anyone left on Earth.

Perhaps. But it's not difficult to make a missile that can hit a satellite.

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

Perhaps. But it's not difficult to make a missile that can hit a satellite.

The majors posses this stuff, Chinese have tested one not long ago. :)
The western media were so cute with their saber rattling accusations.

Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
avatar

An electromagnetic pulse from a high altitude nuclear device can be quite devastating as well. The USA would be particularly susceptible to this type of attack.

For example (from the article)

Quote:

E1 can destroy computers and communications equipment and it changes too quickly for ordinary surge protectors to provide effective protection against it, although there are special fast-acting surge protectors that will block the E1 pulse.

“Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty. This is known as "bad luck.”

― Robert A. Heinlein

type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

I remember reading USSR had been developing stuff of the kind, but I don't think it ever had anything of the kind in service. Probably just small stuff as penetration aides for MIRV.

OICW
Member #4,069
November 2003
avatar

Sorry, I've had some life to do meanwhile. So what did I miss? :)

[My website][CppReference][Pixelate][Allegators worldwide][Who's online]
"Final Fantasy XIV, I feel that anything I could say will be repeating myself, so I'm just gonna express my feelings with a strangled noise from the back of my throat. Graaarghhhh..." - Yahtzee
"Uhm... this is a.cc. Did you honestly think this thread WOULDN'T be derailed and ruined?" - BAF
"You can discuss it, you can dislike it, you can disagree with it, but that's all what you can do with it"

type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

Party's over. Russian forces ain't going in to mainland Ukraine, west ain't gonna do anything about Crimea. Waiting for the next wave of unrest, which isn't comeing hopefully. In any case not earlier than 25th May(presedential elections). I may make a new topic then.

NiteHackr
Member #2,229
April 2002

Russia has never had ANY intention to invade Ukraine. They have always only been there to protect Crimea and the Russian people while they voted. This whole "crisis" had been created by the west. And it will be made worse by unwarranted sanctions.

--
Deluxe Pacman 1 & 2 (free) with source code available
https://nitehackr.github.io/games_index.html

type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

NiteHackr said:

Russia has never had ANY intention to invade Ukraine. They have always only been there to protect Crimea and the Russian people while they voted. This whole "crisis" had been created by the west. And it will be made worse by unwarranted sanctions.

I'm Russian/Israeli, currently in Russia, and I own Russian stocks. I consider my actions astonishingly correct during this crisis, my Russian investments are green for the year, I'm out of the knockdown with more cash than with what I dived in to it(exceptional timing, I'm honestly proud of myself. My best crises management during my almost four year experience).

However, I'd be in much better shape if was more aggressive in my purchases. I did realize pretty fast west ain't gonna do shit about Crimea, as I mentioned here long before. But regarding Russia not invading Ukraine, I made it clear for myself only during this weekend, it was a real threat in my eyes which had effect on my investment positioning.

Eastern Ukraine, much of it- not just Crimea, is largely Russian speaking, with people in Donetsk demanding a referendum similar to this of Crimea and being denied the right to have it. There was violence. An action of force DID seem legitimate and possible to me.

NiteHackr
Member #2,229
April 2002

type568 said:

Eastern Ukraine, much of it- not just Crimea, is largely Russian speaking, with people in Donetsk demanding a referendum similar to this of Crimea and being denied the right to have it. There was violence. An action of force DID seem legitimate and possible to me.

I see what you mean, yeah, I suppose so. But lets reverse the roles here. If it was the USA, and Americans living in a neighbouring country were threatened, does anyone out there believe the USA would NOT respond with force to protect it's own people?

I think Russia has a legitimate interest in the region and in protecting it's own people and the west needs to butt out.

--
Deluxe Pacman 1 & 2 (free) with source code available
https://nitehackr.github.io/games_index.html

type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

I totally agree of course.

Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
avatar

NiteHackr said:

the west needs to butt out.

The politicians need to be perceived as Doing Something(TM) to protect us from every conceivable harm while trying to entrench themselves into total control.

And so we initiate a new Cold War, but one of words. We insult the President of Russia and do him small injuries when it is not clear what we demand to make our wasp stings stop. He will not relinquish the Crimea. The last time the West tried to pry the Crimea out of the fingers of the masters of the Kremlin, it took an army.

“Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty. This is known as "bad luck.”

― Robert A. Heinlein

type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

I am maybe wrong, and probably the show goes on. I'm 1.8 leveraged on Russian stocks, 1.1 Leveraged on American. Worrisome.

So, Crimea is back home, clear & clean.
{"name":"%D0%9C%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BE_%D0%B7%D0%B0%D0%BA%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%BA%D0%B8_%D0%A1%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8F.jpg","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/2\/1\/21600a1633d0955d7d2b3a2fb700cf97.jpg","w":640,"h":480,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/2\/1\/21600a1633d0955d7d2b3a2fb700cf97"}%D0%9C%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BE_%D0%B7%D0%B0%D0%BA%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%BA%D0%B8_%D0%A1%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8F.jpg
From wikipedia.
Here
3(14) June
YEAR 1783
SEVASTOPOL
City Was Founded
Sea Fortress of
Southern Russia*

Now the scary part.. Here even though authenticity is a bit doubtful, but photos look legit. Zerohedge is an "always counter trend" news source. Reuters doesn't report any positive news either though. I'm a bit scared of Russian intervention. I don't want any shots fired. I'd love to see it back to Russia though.

*-Translation is ugly by me, and yes I can read it from the photo pretty clearly. Sevastopol is one of the cities in Crimea, biggest one I guess.

Append:
Actually it's not enough to trigger it I think. But it may spook the already scared market :~S
And a later-stage intervention should it go violet or osmething is very likely.

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

I've heard that the Ukraine gov't elections are go, and there's a "Internet Party of Ukraine". Apparently the leader of that party dresses up as Darth Vader. It seems it is at least cheering people up.

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
avatar

He wanted to compete for presidency. But he didn't qualify :(



Go to: