May 21, 2022, 04:15:15 PM

Author Topic: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin  (Read 45735 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Toppa

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5518
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #300 on: May 08, 2014, 10:31:11 AM »
Putin signs law forcing bloggers to register with Russian media office
The Verge


President Vladimir Putin has signed a law tightening the Russian government's already strong hold on the internet. Earlier this week, Putin officially passed what's become known as the "bloggers law," which requires popular internet writers to follow rules normally reserved for larger media outlets. Under it, any blogger with more than 3,000 readers is required to register with the Roskomnadzor, Russia's media oversight agency. According to Reporters Without Borders, the law covers not only traditional blogs but microblogs and social networks. In addition to following existing laws, writers will be responsible for fact-checking any information they post and removing any inaccurate comments, and they're forbidden from harming the reputation of a person or group or using their platform to "hide or falsify information of general interest."

Aleksey Mitrofanov, head of the State Duma legislative body's information policies committee, has denied that this law regulates bloggers as a kind of mass media. "Special legal regulation for bloggers is to be introduced," he told the ITAR-TASS News Agency when the bill passed in April. "It is the other way around, bloggers who have been registered as an online publication are not subject to the operation of that law." But it apparently strips away one of the most basic elements of blogging: anonymous or pseudonymous publishing. Popular writers will be required to publish their surname, initials, and email address, apparently in addition to registering with the Roskomnadzor. Reporters Without Borders has criticized the law's wording as vague, and Global Voices notes that if a writer falls below 3,000 readers, they apparently bear the burden of proactively trying to get their name removed from the register. According to ITAR-TASS, individual violators will be fined between 10,000 and 30,000 rubles (roughly $280 to $850 at the current exchange rate), while "legal entities" will face fines of 300,000 rubles or $8,500.

Russia passed a sweeping internet-filtering bill in 2012, and the Kremlin has increasingly used its power to pressure critical media outlets. In December of last year, Putin dissolved the venerable RIA Novosti news service, putting its remains under the control of a supporter. A month later, Pavel Durov, founder of "Russian Facebook" VKontakte, sold his stake to an ally of Putin. Popular opposition blogger Alexei Navalny saw his blog blocked by ISPs in March; the news site of chess champion Garry Kasparov, among others, was also caught up in the crackdown. Along with the "blogger law," Putin also signed a bill barring profanity in films, theater, and other media, though its full scope is unclear.

The rules' implications for international bloggers seem nebulous, and while the Roskomnadzor will probably use external traffic measurements, some sites are attempting to make it harder to find a blog's readership. In April, ahead of the bill's passage, search engine Yandex shut down its blog search ranking tool. Later that month, LiveJournal head Dmitry Pilipenko announced that all LiveJournal subscription counts would stop at 2,500, with only bloggers and moderators able to see the real number. Page view-based rankings will also stop. "The above changes are based on plans to take measures to optimize the service," Pilipenko insisted. "All coincidences are accidental."




But he's definitely protecting freedom in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine...
The Guardian reported it slightly differently. He is quoted as calling for the referendum to be "postponed" and those in Donestk said they will consider what Putin has said. In Sloviansk some have expressed a feeling of betrayal.

Toppa now you just being stubborn for the sake of being stubborn.  Did you check other sources?

Quote
“We were told constantly about concerns over our troops near the Ukrainian border. We have pulled them back. Today they are not at the Ukrainian border but in places of regular exercises, at training grounds,” he said after meeting with Swiss president and current OSCE chief Didier Burkhalter.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10814096/Ukraine-crisis-Vladimir-Putin-withdraws-troops-from-border.html



Quote
Russian President Vladimir Putin took a step back from confrontation with the West over Ukraine, calling Wednesday for pro-Russian separatists in the east of the country to postpone an independence referendum that had been scheduled for Sunday. He also said he had withdrawn troops from the Ukrainian border.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/ukraine/article18505621/



Quote
Putin also said he had withdrawn some of the estimated 40,000 Russian troops from the Ukraine border. Pentagon spokesman Col. Steve Warren said "we have seen no change in the Russian force posture along the Ukrainian border."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/05/07/putin-ukraine-referendum/8802277/


I'll stop at three links.  You refuse to concede that Russia has massed troops on the border, posted comments from Putin 6 weeks ago and you dismissed them.  Same way I remember you dismissing talk of Russian troops being in Crimea.

 ??? I wasn't being stubborn or even critical of what you posted. I just said that The Guardian put a different spin on it - "postponed" vs "called off".

And I never said Putin did not have any troops on the border. I said US/NATO did not provide any credible evidence of this - and I also questioned whether it was an actual build-up or were the troops already there.

And now that Putin has said he will re-station his troops, NATO is now saying they haven't seen any signs that he has done so. Given the West's track-record on international conflict - and what they continue to do, I find it hard to believe anything they say.

Anyway, this was Putin's exact statement. “We have been told that our troops by the Ukrainian border are a concern – we have pulled them back. They are now not near the border, but in places of regular exercises, at training grounds,”

In my opinion, Russia can put their troops anywhere they blasted like - it's on Russian territory. And after what happened in Odessa...

Kerry et al, keep accusing Russia of instigating the unrest, but by all evidence it seems the people in Eastern Ukraine are revolting on their own and they're pleading with Russia to help them.

Militia fighters in Slovyansk reacted angrily to Putin's comments. "He is a coward," said Ruslan, a self-defence guard standing in front of the city's rebel HQ. "He will pay for this with a revolution in [Moscow's] Red Square."

Many locals seemed bemused. "I don't know what's better, I just don't want war," said 40-year-old Irina standing next to a memorial to victims of the recent violence. "I wish Putin would at least arm our people."

Some said they believed that Putin was acting under pressure from the west. "It's clear that there will be world war three if Russians come here, so this is why they cannot act," said 35-year-old Andrey a member of the local self-defence militia who was wearing a black and orange striped Victory Day ribbon, a symbol of the Soviet Union's triumph over Nazi Germany. Victory Day celebrations are due to be held across the region on Friday, but some local authorities have cancelled rallies.


Ukraine Separatists to go ahead with Referendum despite Putin call for delay: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/08/ukraine-separatists-referendum-putin-call-delay
www.westindiantube.com

Check it out - it real bad!

Offline Bakes

  • Promethean...
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 21980
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #301 on: May 08, 2014, 11:53:59 AM »
Smh... okay, lol

Offline Tiresais

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2787
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #302 on: May 08, 2014, 01:18:34 PM »
What Bakes said. You can lead a horse to water....

At the end of the day, you're self-selecting your sources and not critically engaging with them.

Offline Toppa

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5518
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #303 on: May 08, 2014, 01:36:05 PM »
What Bakes said. You can lead a horse to water....

At the end of the day, you're self-selecting your sources and not critically engaging with them.

Which of my sources do you take umbrage with?
www.westindiantube.com

Check it out - it real bad!

Offline Toppa

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5518
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #304 on: May 08, 2014, 03:23:15 PM »
An unbiased (IMO) and tempered analysis of the Ukraine crisis

The Folly of Playing High-Stakes Poker with Vladimir Putin: More to Lose than Gain over Ukraine

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-folly-of-playing-high-stakes-poker-with-vladimir-putin-more-to-lose-than-gain-over-ukraine/5381246

www.westindiantube.com

Check it out - it real bad!

Offline Tiresais

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2787
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #305 on: May 09, 2014, 01:16:45 AM »
An unbiased (IMO) and tempered analysis of the Ukraine crisis

The Folly of Playing High-Stakes Poker with Vladimir Putin: More to Lose than Gain over Ukraine

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-folly-of-playing-high-stakes-poker-with-vladimir-putin-more-to-lose-than-gain-over-ukraine/5381246

Smh

Quote
Terry Glavin has criticized [the founder of the Centre for Research on Globalisation for] mouthing Baathist propaganda on behalf of the regime in Damascus' and 'his outrageous services to police states.' in reference to Chossudovsky's quotation on the Syria protests in August 2011. Chossudovky said "What we have are Islamists, gunmen, Salafi as well as Muslim Brotherhood gunmen, snipers shooting at civilians as well as police. . .these are death squads which are supported directly by Turkey and Israel. It is an intelligence operation. They come in, they cross the border, they go into communities. . they go into the Christian communities, they intimidate people, they shoot on them, they kill them. . ."

Quote
In 2001, Chossudovsky founded the Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG), located in Montreal, Canada, becoming its editor and director. It is "committed to curbing the tide of globalisation and disarming the new world order".[6] CRG maintains websites in several languages, including the English-language GlobalResearch.ca, which are critical of United States foreign policy and NATO as well as the official explanation of the September 11 attacks in 2001 and the war on terror. They are also concerned with media disinformation,[how?] poverty and social inequality, the global economic crisis, and politics and religion.[citation needed] He has called the Free Syrian Army a de facto paramilitary creation of NATO.[7] The deaths of protesters in Maidan Square in Kiev in spring 2014, according to Chossudovsky, were 'triggered by Neo-Nazi elements' used, 'to break the legitimacy of a duly elected government.'[8] He is a favoured commentator at Russia Today.[9] His opinion is regularly asked for by Press TV.

Toppa have some self-respect and vet your sources, this is embarrassing. If a student used this source they'd be docked marks for an unreliable source lacking peer-review.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2014, 01:21:20 AM by Tiresais »

Offline Toppa

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5518
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #306 on: May 09, 2014, 01:57:50 AM »
Care to comment on the content of the article?
www.westindiantube.com

Check it out - it real bad!

Offline Tiresais

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2787
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #307 on: May 09, 2014, 09:03:25 AM »
Since you appear reluctant to assess your own sources critically, let me deconstruct it for you.

Quote
But a belligerent response aimed at “punishing Putin,” even if confined to economic measures, will probably just escalate the crisis.

But landing troops in Crimea, visiting during the Victory parade, arming separatists and moving troops to the boarder isn't? One-sided trash

Quote
If the United States and NATO violate international law as they have in the Balkans, Iraq, and other locales, other states will feel entitled to do so as well.

Rubbish, defending the sovereignty of a nation state is the prerogative of all nations in the United Nations - Russia has repeatedly violated that, which puts them in contravention to the UN's Charter. Again, one-sided trash, acting as if the US/NATO are the only actors in this crisis.

Quote
The prospect of a full blown new cold war, and perhaps even an armed clash, with Russia is all too real, if the United States and the European Union powers do not adopt more sober, realistic policies soon

Again, what utter trash - why are the US and EU the ones who should step down? How are teh policies not "realistic" or "sober" - Russia annexed a part of a foreign nation with European leanings, violating their sovereignty and reigniting the conflict, but when the US and EU apply economic sanctions, suddenly they're "drunk" on power?

Quote
Although Moscow’s actions in Afghanistan were largely defensive (albeit brutal), that is not how U.S. officials portrayed the situation to the American people and the world.

This is what your source thinks. Is this your opinion? Was the invasion of Afghanistan defensive? Is its brutality somehow excused by US funding of the Mujahedeen? Does that mean that Vietnam was a defensive war of the United States due to Chinese and Russian backing of Ho Chi Minh?

Quote
After the overthrow of pro-Russian Ukrainian President Victor Yanukovich in late February, Vladimir Putin’s government moved quickly to implement ambitious policy goals regarding the Crimean peninsula.

He sure did, moving troops into Crimea, funding and arming separatists in the region, and violating the treaties it held with both Ukraine and the International community.

Quote
n March 1, 2014, following an appeal by Crimean Prime Minister Sergey Aksyonov, Putin asked Russia’s Federation Council for permission to “use the armed forces of the Russian Federation on the territory of Ukraine until the normalization of the socio-political situation in that country.”

Self appointed! He was deputy of the Supreme council, representing Russian Unity, a party that had only 4% of the vote in the last election. Where did his legitimacy come from?

Quote
There is little doubt that the secession and change of sovereignty was widely popular among the reported 83.1% of Crimeans who voted... ...The presence of Russian troops likely discouraged opponents of secession from voting.[5]

Your source isn't even consistent - how can it have "little doubt" given the presence of Russian troops and the boycott of the Crimean minority and other dissenters? What the hell counts as a free and fair election to the author? There's a reason even those countries not ideologically aligned with Russia voted in favour or abstained on the vote against the UN resolution condemning the 'elections'.


That's enough time that I'll waste on the article - it's written by hacks, has no attempt to look at the source objectively, and doesn't even attempt to back up its arguments with evidence. This is exactly what I charged you with in your selection of sources - you must be more critical in the sources you trust on topics like this. You have swallowed the Russian media blitz hook-line-and-sinker without pausing to consider any of the most important issues in this crisis.

But I'm sure the new Russian law instituted today making it a criminal offence to "Publically call for the violation of the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation" is to protect teh democratic rights of the Crimeans, and definitely not to criminalise discussion about Crimean succession. I mean any news outlets publishing such evil definitely deserve the 5 years imprisonment or forced labour... Nothing to see here, definitely don't translate from Russian
« Last Edit: May 09, 2014, 09:28:16 AM by Tiresais »

Offline Toppa

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5518
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #308 on: May 09, 2014, 11:58:17 AM »
haha Well then it must have been a darn good article if it caused that reaction in you. The fact that from this very in-depth article, of at least three thousand words and touches on so many issues, you could only zone in on about five sentences that caused you such ire, is telling. lol Your qualms are easily refuted though, especially your faux outrage at Russia's violations when the article made the point that with countries like the US showing flagrant disregard for international law, it makes it easier for other countries to do so as well. But yeah, keep up the faux outrage and pretentious, self-righteous indignation. lol

Oh btw, in case you had missed it (or conveniently ignored it) the article called Russia's seizure of Crimea as illegal and a violation of the Warsaw Pact. But keep on chugging whatever it is you're chugging. I bet you're frothing at the mouth right now.
www.westindiantube.com

Check it out - it real bad!

Offline Toppa

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5518
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #309 on: May 09, 2014, 03:01:37 PM »
www.westindiantube.com

Check it out - it real bad!

Offline Tiresais

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2787
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #310 on: May 09, 2014, 04:25:11 PM »
haha Well then it must have been a darn good article if it caused that reaction in you. The fact that from this very in-depth article, of at least three thousand words and touches on so many issues, you could only zone in on about five sentences that caused you such ire, is telling. lol Your qualms are easily refuted though, especially your faux outrage at Russia's violations when the article made the point that with countries like the US showing flagrant disregard for international law, it makes it easier for other countries to do so as well. But yeah, keep up the faux outrage and pretentious, self-righteous indignation. lol

Oh btw, in case you had missed it (or conveniently ignored it) the article called Russia's seizure of Crimea as illegal and a violation of the Warsaw Pact. But keep on chugging whatever it is you're chugging. I bet you're frothing at the mouth right now.

Wow you're not even reading your own biased articles - nowhere does it say that it's illegal, nor a violation of the Warsaw Pact. They note that the UN voted to declare the referendum illegal, but nowhere does it condemn the Russian annexation. Moreover, the Warsaw Pact was disbanded, so your point is just about wrong on every count you could be

I stopped because it was pointless - my position was justified. Your childishness is clear for all who can read and you've carried yourself in an intellectually dishonest manner throughout - I point out your sources are trash, you post a trash source, I point out as much so you challenge that, and I then prove it. In response, you say I "foam at the mouth". Pathetic.

Offline Ramgoat

  • Full Warrior
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #311 on: May 09, 2014, 04:55:31 PM »
haha Well then it must have been a darn good article if it caused that reaction in you. The fact that from this very in-depth article, of at least three thousand words and touches on so many issues, you could only zone in on about five sentences that caused you such ire, is telling. lol Your qualms are easily refuted though, especially your faux outrage at Russia's violations when the article made the point that with countries like the US showing flagrant disregard for international law, it makes it easier for other countries to do so as well. But yeah, keep up the faux outrage and pretentious, self-righteous indignation. lol

Oh btw, in case you had missed it (or conveniently ignored it) the article called Russia's seizure of Crimea as illegal and a violation of the Warsaw Pact. But keep on chugging whatever it is you're chugging. I bet you're frothing at the mouth right now.

Wow you're not even reading your own biased articles - nowhere does it say that it's illegal, nor a violation of the Warsaw Pact. They note that the UN voted to declare the referendum illegal, but nowhere does it condemn the Russian annexation. Moreover, the Warsaw Pact was disbanded, so your point is just about wrong on every count you could be

I stopped because it was pointless - my position was justified. Your childishness is clear for all who can read and you've carried yourself in an intellectually dishonest manner throughout - I point out your sources are trash, you post a trash source, I point out as much so you challenge that, and I then prove it. In response, you say I "foam at the mouth". Pathetic.
Who are you to claim that his sources are trash . Too much to read here so I wont be bothered but the Russian justification  for reuniting with Crimea can be summarized in one word ...KOSOVO

Offline Toppa

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5518
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #312 on: May 09, 2014, 09:03:14 PM »
haha Well then it must have been a darn good article if it caused that reaction in you. The fact that from this very in-depth article, of at least three thousand words and touches on so many issues, you could only zone in on about five sentences that caused you such ire, is telling. lol Your qualms are easily refuted though, especially your faux outrage at Russia's violations when the article made the point that with countries like the US showing flagrant disregard for international law, it makes it easier for other countries to do so as well. But yeah, keep up the faux outrage and pretentious, self-righteous indignation. lol

Oh btw, in case you had missed it (or conveniently ignored it) the article called Russia's seizure of Crimea as illegal and a violation of the Warsaw Pact. But keep on chugging whatever it is you're chugging. I bet you're frothing at the mouth right now.

Wow you're not even reading your own biased articles - nowhere does it say that it's illegal, nor a violation of the Warsaw Pact. They note that the UN voted to declare the referendum illegal, but nowhere does it condemn the Russian annexation. Moreover, the Warsaw Pact was disbanded, so your point is just about wrong on every count you could be

I stopped because it was pointless - my position was justified. Your childishness is clear for all who can read and you've carried yourself in an intellectually dishonest manner throughout - I point out your sources are trash, you post a trash source, I point out as much so you challenge that, and I then prove it. In response, you say I "foam at the mouth". Pathetic.

Actually, not the Warsaw Pact, the Budapest one.

From the article:

Quote
According to the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, signed on December 5, 1994, Ukraine agreed to relinquish its stockpile of nuclear weapons between 1994 and 1996.  In return, the signatories (the United States, Russian Federation, and United Kingdom, and later China and France) pledged to respect Ukrainian independence and sovereignty, refrain from the use of force, and avoid using economic pressure in Ukraine to influence its domestic politics. Putin’s annexation of Crimea is a violation of the Budapest Memorandum, as well as other international agreements.  But so, too, was the extensive economic pressure by the United States and EU on and within Ukraine–prior to the Crimean annexation–to influence its domestic politics.  While the Maidan revolution was not a “U.S.-backed fascist coup,” as Russian reporters claim, it was hijacked by Right Sector and other radical groups.  Moreover, clear evidence indicates that U.S. funds were a force multiplier for several opposition groups on Maidan working to overthrow Yanukovych.  Speaking to the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation Conference on December 16, 2013, Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland announced, “We have invested more than five billion dollars … to promote Ukraine to the future it deserves.”[69]  In a Washington Post article on September 27, 2013, National Endowment for Democracy president Carl Gershman referred to Ukraine as “the biggest prize.”[70]  It is hardly surprising that Moscow would react badly to such Western meddling in a neighboring country deemed essential to Russia’s security.  That is especially true because such actions occurred on the heels of NATO’s seemingly inexorable eastward expansion.
www.westindiantube.com

Check it out - it real bad!

Offline Toppa

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5518
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #313 on: May 09, 2014, 09:03:59 PM »
And Ramgoat, it's "her" not "his".  :D
www.westindiantube.com

Check it out - it real bad!

Offline Tiresais

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2787
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #314 on: May 10, 2014, 03:10:32 AM »
haha Well then it must have been a darn good article if it caused that reaction in you. The fact that from this very in-depth article, of at least three thousand words and touches on so many issues, you could only zone in on about five sentences that caused you such ire, is telling. lol Your qualms are easily refuted though, especially your faux outrage at Russia's violations when the article made the point that with countries like the US showing flagrant disregard for international law, it makes it easier for other countries to do so as well. But yeah, keep up the faux outrage and pretentious, self-righteous indignation. lol

Oh btw, in case you had missed it (or conveniently ignored it) the article called Russia's seizure of Crimea as illegal and a violation of the Warsaw Pact. But keep on chugging whatever it is you're chugging. I bet you're frothing at the mouth right now.

Wow you're not even reading your own biased articles - nowhere does it say that it's illegal, nor a violation of the Warsaw Pact. They note that the UN voted to declare the referendum illegal, but nowhere does it condemn the Russian annexation. Moreover, the Warsaw Pact was disbanded, so your point is just about wrong on every count you could be

I stopped because it was pointless - my position was justified. Your childishness is clear for all who can read and you've carried yourself in an intellectually dishonest manner throughout - I point out your sources are trash, you post a trash source, I point out as much so you challenge that, and I then prove it. In response, you say I "foam at the mouth". Pathetic.
Who are you to claim that his sources are trash . Too much to read here so I wont be bothered but the Russian justification  for reuniting with Crimea can be summarized in one word ...KOSOVO

I claim they are trash, and supported that by showing how her source was biased. How is Kosovo an example? Were there foreign troops in Kosovo? Did a politician representing 4% of the votes seize presidency of Kosovo?

Offline Tiresais

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2787
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #315 on: May 10, 2014, 03:14:52 AM »
Quote
Actually, not the Warsaw Pact, the Budapest one.

From the article:

Quote
According to the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, signed on December 5, 1994, Ukraine agreed to relinquish its stockpile of nuclear weapons between 1994 and 1996.  In return, the signatories (the United States, Russian Federation, and United Kingdom, and later China and France) pledged to respect Ukrainian independence and sovereignty, refrain from the use of force, and avoid using economic pressure in Ukraine to influence its domestic politics. Putin’s annexation of Crimea is a violation of the Budapest Memorandum, as well as other international agreements.  But so, too, was the extensive economic pressure by the United States and EU on and within Ukraine–prior to the Crimean annexation–to influence its domestic politics.  While the Maidan revolution was not a “U.S.-backed fascist coup,” as Russian reporters claim, it was hijacked by Right Sector and other radical groups.  Moreover, clear evidence indicates that U.S. funds were a force multiplier for several opposition groups on Maidan working to overthrow Yanukovych.  Speaking to the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation Conference on December 16, 2013, Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland announced, “We have invested more than five billion dollars … to promote Ukraine to the future it deserves.”[69]  In a Washington Post article on September 27, 2013, National Endowment for Democracy president Carl Gershman referred to Ukraine as “the biggest prize.”[70]  It is hardly surprising that Moscow would react badly to such Western meddling in a neighboring country deemed essential to Russia’s security.  That is especially true because such actions occurred on the heels of NATO’s seemingly inexorable eastward expansion.

Russia was giving subsidised gas rates, among other economic packages, to Ukraine and thus violating that treaty for years. Again, no mention of that. Moreover, it was illegal in Russia's own constitution, necessitating an amendment before admitting Crimea to the Russian Federation (it banned allowing sub-divisions of foreign states admission, they changed the wording to say that "if central government is ineffective, we're toats allowed to annex all your shit", paraphrasing).

Your source is biased, I've shown that, and I've shown that the individuals involved have no credibility. What is your response?

You also haven't responded to my points about Putin's credibility - the guy is suppressing freedom of speech in his own country and made it illegal to protest the annexation of Crimea in the country - how can you then claim that the vote on Crimean independence was free and fair when Russian troops were intimidating voters and large minorities refused to participate?

Anyway Toppa, I'm not really interested in arguing over the minuté and that's not why I joined in the thread again - my position has always been that the situation in Ukraine is incredibly hard to discern either way due to political meddling and espionage on both sides - I'm more interested in you moving beyond your narrow subset of sources and looking at the broader picture. If you want to understand the truth you need to be reflexive - knowing when you bias your own opinion on the matter and questioning how you select and trust your sources. That's not to say that you trust my sources either, rather that you are more critical - had you done a simple google search on the Centre, or critically read the source you'd never have picked them as a trustworthy source - it's got clear leanings towards the Russian state and these concerns are borne out in the content of the article.

« Last Edit: May 10, 2014, 03:19:37 AM by Tiresais »

Offline Toppa

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5518
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #316 on: May 10, 2014, 09:33:44 AM »
Yeah, of course it is "hard to discern" for people like you who like to bury your heads in the sand.

Keep throwing around strawmen arguments like "Putin's credibility" and see if it'll get you anywhere. I already know exactly why you (and the British press) have it in for Putin and Russia.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2014, 09:36:21 AM by Toppa »
www.westindiantube.com

Check it out - it real bad!

Offline Tiresais

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2787
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #317 on: May 10, 2014, 09:56:09 AM »
Wow. Firstly a strawman argument is when you misrepresent the original position - questioning Putin's credibility can't be a strawman as it's not a misrepresentation of Putin's credibility. Secondly, how am I burying my head in the sand? I read your articles, but they are woefully biased and/or simplistic, and often distort the picture and sometimes even make basic factual errors.

One of us us "burying their head in the sand", but it isn't me. Given your resistance to evidence competing with your narrow view on the matter, there's nowhere else to go - you keep reading the same rubbish conforming with your position, and ignore the overwhelming evidence. That you think anyone "has it in" for Putin is just worrying - you're defending a man with a proven track record of distorting the truth, suppressing the freedom of expression, and invading his neighbours. How have I distorted the laws he has passed? Do you not accept that Russia has passed laws (which you can easily check yourself) making it illegal to question Crimea's independence?

I just can't understand how you totally ignore all contrary evidence, genuinely I can't understand how you can sit there and say everyone has it in for Putin, using the very medium he is restricting both technology (internet) and the method (blogging/forums). You have the whole of the internet, a thousand different sources on the same topic, so why are all yours biased so obviously and why can't you see that?

Offline Toppa

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5518
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #318 on: May 10, 2014, 07:59:27 PM »
Wow. Firstly a strawman argument is when you misrepresent the original position - questioning Putin's credibility can't be a strawman as it's not a misrepresentation of Putin's credibility. Secondly, how am I burying my head in the sand? I read your articles, but they are woefully biased and/or simplistic, and often distort the picture and sometimes even make basic factual errors.

One of us us "burying their head in the sand", but it isn't me. Given your resistance to evidence competing with your narrow view on the matter, there's nowhere else to go - you keep reading the same rubbish conforming with your position, and ignore the overwhelming evidence. That you think anyone "has it in" for Putin is just worrying - you're defending a man with a proven track record of distorting the truth, suppressing the freedom of expression, and invading his neighbours. How have I distorted the laws he has passed? Do you not accept that Russia has passed laws (which you can easily check yourself) making it illegal to question Crimea's independence?

I just can't understand how you totally ignore all contrary evidence, genuinely I can't understand how you can sit there and say everyone has it in for Putin, using the very medium he is restricting both technology (internet) and the method (blogging/forums). You have the whole of the internet, a thousand different sources on the same topic, so why are all yours biased so obviously and why can't you see that?

lol Please stop it with your tiresome (and hypocritical) "indignation". 1) I have not ignored any so-called "facts". 2) Have you condemned the West for funding and supporting the overthrow of a democratically elected government? 3) "...you're defending a man with a proven track record of distorting the truth, suppressing the freedom of expression, and invading his neighbours." - Were you talking about America?

I don't even know what you are talking about. What "evidence" am I ignoring? what "narrow" view on the matter am I defending? In your book the U and the UK are justified in anything they do but when it comes to other countries....oh no, how dare they! You are a joke. My "biased" sources - yeah - when 9/10 news articles I quote from are the Guardian and the BBC. They are biased in favour of whom, exactly? Certainly not Russia.
www.westindiantube.com

Check it out - it real bad!

Offline Tiresais

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2787
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #319 on: May 11, 2014, 08:32:57 AM »
Wow. Firstly a strawman argument is when you misrepresent the original position - questioning Putin's credibility can't be a strawman as it's not a misrepresentation of Putin's credibility. Secondly, how am I burying my head in the sand? I read your articles, but they are woefully biased and/or simplistic, and often distort the picture and sometimes even make basic factual errors.

One of us us "burying their head in the sand", but it isn't me. Given your resistance to evidence competing with your narrow view on the matter, there's nowhere else to go - you keep reading the same rubbish conforming with your position, and ignore the overwhelming evidence. That you think anyone "has it in" for Putin is just worrying - you're defending a man with a proven track record of distorting the truth, suppressing the freedom of expression, and invading his neighbours. How have I distorted the laws he has passed? Do you not accept that Russia has passed laws (which you can easily check yourself) making it illegal to question Crimea's independence?

I just can't understand how you totally ignore all contrary evidence, genuinely I can't understand how you can sit there and say everyone has it in for Putin, using the very medium he is restricting both technology (internet) and the method (blogging/forums). You have the whole of the internet, a thousand different sources on the same topic, so why are all yours biased so obviously and why can't you see that?

lol Please stop it with your tiresome (and hypocritical) "indignation". 1) I have not ignored any so-called "facts". 2) Have you condemned the West for funding and supporting the overthrow of a democratically elected government? 3) "...you're defending a man with a proven track record of distorting the truth, suppressing the freedom of expression, and invading his neighbours." - Were you talking about America?

I don't even know what you are talking about. What "evidence" am I ignoring? what "narrow" view on the matter am I defending? In your book the U and the UK are justified in anything they do but when it comes to other countries....oh no, how dare they! You are a joke. My "biased" sources - yeah - when 9/10 news articles I quote from are the Guardian and the BBC. They are biased in favour of whom, exactly? Certainly not Russia.

Toppa you show your ignorance - go back through this thread and read for yourself. Seriously you are completely ignoring what you don't want to hear and it's embaressing

1) You have ignored the laws the Russia has passed and Putin's double standards and out-right lying about troops in Crimea

2) Yes, yes I have, 3 times now in this thread. Again you only read/hear what you want to hear because you are so wrapped up in defending a single side of this conflict - you don't even realise how selective your information intake is.

3) Applies to both sides in this conflict but clearly not in equal measure - Putin's infractions are clearly more egregious, given his "Hitler-youth-esk" movements murdering and intimidating journalists in Russia and passing laws that successfully inhibit freedom of speech (not yet passed in America)

I have frequently criticised the UK's colonial policies, not sure what role they have in this conflict as it seems marginal at best.

Toppa you're a shrieking propagandist, mindlessly parroting Russian propaganda without critically assessing it. I've pointed out numerous times the specifics of these problems and you ignore them or deflect. There's really not much else to say, given that I've pointed out specifics and you clearly ignore them.

Offline Toppa

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5518
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #320 on: May 11, 2014, 01:41:45 PM »
Tiresais, you're an idiot and a waste of my time. I don't know who you're trying to fool here - yourself maybe.

In the meantime Ukrainian forces continue to kill civilians.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 01:44:15 PM by Toppa »
www.westindiantube.com

Check it out - it real bad!

Offline Tiresais

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2787
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #321 on: May 11, 2014, 03:23:27 PM »
Tiresais, you're an idiot and a waste of my time. I don't know who you're trying to fool here - yourself maybe.

In the meantime Ukrainian forces continue to kill civilians.

More deflection, no engagement with my points.

Offline Toppa

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5518
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #322 on: May 11, 2014, 05:30:09 PM »
Tiresais, you're an idiot and a waste of my time. I don't know who you're trying to fool here - yourself maybe.

In the meantime Ukrainian forces continue to kill civilians.

More deflection, no engagement with my points.

Didn't  I say you were a waste of my time?

Look! More Russian propaganda - but this time reported in the German media! Oh dear, Evil Putin strikes again.


German Media: 400 US contractors fighting against civilians in Eastern Ukraine
http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/25271/53/
www.westindiantube.com

Check it out - it real bad!

Offline Tiresais

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2787
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #323 on: May 12, 2014, 01:59:37 AM »
Tiresais, you're an idiot and a waste of my time. I don't know who you're trying to fool here - yourself maybe.

In the meantime Ukrainian forces continue to kill civilians.

More deflection, no engagement with my points.

Didn't  I say you were a waste of my time?

Look! More Russian propaganda - but this time reported in the German media! Oh dear, Evil Putin strikes again.


German Media: 400 US contractors fighting against civilians in Eastern Ukraine
http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/25271/53/

Again, more deflection - did Putin pass these anti-freedom of speech laws or not? Did Putin put troops on the ground in Crimea violating the treaties, or not? Did Putin have to rush to change his own constitution to annex Crimea or not? Did the referendum take place under the watchful gaze of Russian troops or not? Did he lie about the presence of these troops or not?

You are creating some strawman whereby my argument is "America good, Russia bad", which I am not.

Offline Toppa

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5518
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #324 on: May 12, 2014, 12:25:15 PM »
1) What does Russia's supposed 'anti-freedom' laws have to do with ANYTHING?

2) EVERYONE knows that Russian troops took over Crimea! Why are you beating a dead horse? Are you retarded or something?

3)I already said I'm done going back and forth with you...I don't know why you keep harping on about these nothing points.
www.westindiantube.com

Check it out - it real bad!

Offline Tiresais

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2787
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #325 on: May 12, 2014, 04:52:41 PM »
1) What does Russia's supposed 'anti-freedom' laws have to do with ANYTHING?

2) EVERYONE knows that Russian troops took over Crimea! Why are you beating a dead horse? Are you retarded or something?

3)I already said I'm done going back and forth with you...I don't know why you keep harping on about these nothing points.

Your stances so far in this topic have centred around a supposed conspiracy/media campaign against Putin. His anti-democratic policies and suppression of freedom of expression are a signifier of his character, which you are yet to deal with. Do you trust Putin? Do you think he cares about Crimean freedom of expression? Ultimately, do you think the Crimean referendum was a free and fair election?

Secondly, that is a sharp change in your tune - on pages 7-8 you get into a lengthy argument with Bakes disputing any build-up of Russian troops, you insult me for questioning whether it's ever acceptable to launch a coup against a democratic government on page 8 but have no problem with Putin landing troops in Crimea to enforce the annexation of the region, you make claims like "Crimea was part of Russia since 1783" but baulk from applying that principle anywhere else (Britain annexing Trinidad anyone?) and yet you seem resistant to criticism of Putin's actions in the region. Your position is self-contradicting - do you care about self-determination or not? Should ethnic groups all be in the same country or is there such a thing as a multi-ethnic country for you? How do you know what Crimeans want exactly?

They're nothing points to you because you have considerably narrowed your focus on only information that confirms your pre-existing position, which is a shame because you're clearly putting a bunch of effort into selectively promoting pro-Russian sources - if you applied the same effort in getting a well-rounded opinion of the crisis you'd be better off.

Offline Toppa

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5518
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #326 on: May 12, 2014, 05:49:13 PM »
Yup - you really are retarded. From the little I've read of your post, I will say that if you were paying attention, you would have realised that Bakes and I were debating whether there was truly a build up of the 40,000 troops on the Russian-Ukraine border. Absolutely nothing to do with Crimea. Anyway, dude - I'm not going to condescend respond to you anymore.
www.westindiantube.com

Check it out - it real bad!

Offline Tiresais

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2787
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #327 on: May 13, 2014, 03:22:54 AM »
Yup - you really are retarded. From the little I've read of your post, I will say that if you were paying attention, you would have realised that Bakes and I were debating whether there was truly a build up of the 40,000 troops on the Russian-Ukraine border. Absolutely nothing to do with Crimea. Anyway, dude - I'm not going to condescend respond to you anymore.

Welp when you care about the issue enough to read a broader range of sources the topic will still be here. That and when you actually decide to respond to my points, which you constantly deflect. You of course always have the option of moving to Russia and/or Crimea to see how life under Putin is.

Offline Tiresais

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2787
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #328 on: May 13, 2014, 06:41:17 AM »
Don't worry Toppa, clearly his secondary career as an Ice Hockey player is secure.

Vladimir Putin plays ice hockey in Sochi
Telegraph UK


Russian President Vladimir Putin plays an ice hockey game in a league he created in 2011

President Vladimir Putin has frequently been seen striking a sporting pose, but on Saturday, the Russian leader played a full game of ice hockey with amateur and professional players.

Mr Putin scored 11 times, helping his team to a 21:4 victory.

The game was organised by the Night Hockey League and took place in the Bolshoy Arena in Sochi's Olympic park as part of the festival of Russian amateur hockey.

Mr Putin created the league in 2011 in an attempt to keep athletes competing over the age of 40.
Speaking after the match, Mr Putin said: “There are no winners or losers here. This is a friendly game. It’s a show and everyone enjoyed it."

Watch/Read More
« Last Edit: May 13, 2014, 07:12:27 AM by Tiresais »

Offline Toppa

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5518
    • View Profile
Re: A premature history of the second Cold War and Putin
« Reply #329 on: May 13, 2014, 12:16:42 PM »
Quelle surprise! And I am absolutely certain he was appointed to the board SOLELY ON MERIT.

Joe Biden’s son Hunter to head legal unit at Ukraine’s largest private gas company

Vice President Joseph R. Biden’s youngest son, Hunter, has been appointed head of legal affairs at Ukraine’s largest private gas producer.
Burisma Holdings said in a statement that Hunter Biden will be in charge of the company’s legal unit and will provide support for the company among international organizations.
“Burisma’s track record of innovations and industry leadership in the field of natural gas means that it can be a strong driver of a strong economy in Ukraine,” Mr. Biden said.
“As a new member of the Board, I believe that my assistance in consulting the Company on matters of transparency, corporate governance and responsibility, international expansion and other priorities will contribute to the economy and benefit the people of Ukraine,” he said.
White House press secretary Jay Carney said Tuesday that Mr. Biden’s new position “does not reflect an endorsement by the administration,” Time magazine’s Zeke Miller reported.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/13/joe-bidens-son-hunter-head-legal-unit-ukraines-lar/#ixzz31cYJEmWe
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

www.westindiantube.com

Check it out - it real bad!