Russian Navy "On Verge of Collapse"

In the US it very much depends on exactly what you say to insult them. If you don't accuse them of criminal or immoral acts without at least some evidence you will not even be charged. If they are a public figure they the odds on being convicted are even worse. As you can see from this news article simpy insulting the police is unlikely to result in you being fined for that:
http://blogs.denverpost.com/crime/2011/06/13/the-f-bomb-isnt-polite-or-illegal/48/
There is even a wiki page on it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_cop

Could it be because Putin seems to be taking pages from his (and Hitler's) playbooks?

At least some of the sources we have provided have been much better than anything you have provided has been. Then when you consider the logical flaws in your arguments it's not surprising that you haven't convinced anyone.

Trying to insult your opposition to cover your own lack of competency isn't very productive.

 

Indeed one network or another would have probably been happy to hire him. The publicity alone would have been worth more than his salary to them. At least in the US there's no way he could have been banned from working as a journalist either.

 

The original use of “harm’s way” back in the 17th century stressed avoidance, in the phrase “out of harm’s way” (“People send Children … to School to keep them out of Harm’s way,” 1711). Even more intriguingly, early uses of the phrase included the sense of “preventing the doing of harm,” rather than “keeping safe” (“Some great persons … have been made sheriffs, to keep them out of harm’s way,” 1661).
The first use of “in” with “harm’s way” is, as slipdigit described usually ascribed to John Paul Jones.

 

As to the "Historic bond" between the Ukraine and Russia:

"The dreadful famine that engulfed Ukraine, the northern Caucasus, and the lower Volga River area in 1932-1933 was the result of Joseph Stalin's policy of forced collectivization. The heaviest losses occurred in Ukraine, which had been the most productive agricultural area of the Soviet Union. Stalin was determined to crush all vestiges of Ukrainian nationalism. Thus, the famine was accompanied by a devastating purge of the Ukrainian intelligentsia and the Ukrainian Communist party itself. The famine broke the peasants' will to resist collectivization and left Ukraine politically, socially, and psychologically traumatized.
The policy of all-out collectivization instituted by Stalin in 1929 to finance industrialization had a disastrous effect on agricultural productivity. Nevertheless, in 1932 Stalin raised Ukraine's grain procurement quotas by forty-four percent. This meant that there would not be enough grain to feed the peasants, since Soviet law required that no grain from a collective farm could be given to the members of the farm until the government's quota was met. Stalin's decision and the methods used to implement it condemned millions of peasants to death by starvation. Party officials, with the aid of regular troops and secret police units, waged a merciless war of attrition against peasants who refused to give up their grain. Even indispensable seed grain was forcibly confiscated from peasant households. Any man, woman, or child caught taking even a handful of grain from a collective farm could be, and often was, executed or deported. Those who did not appear to be starving were often suspected of hoarding grain. Peasants were prevented from leaving their villages by the NKVD and a system of internal passports.
The death toll from the 1932-33 famine in Ukraine has been estimated between six million and seven million. According to a Soviet author, "Before they died, people often lost their senses and ceased to be human beings." Yet one of Stalin's lieutenants in Ukraine stated in 1933 that the famine was a great success. It showed the peasants "who is the master here. It cost millions of lives, but the collective farm system is here to stay." "

This document is held in the Library of Congress:




Addendum to the minutes of Politburo [meeting] No. 93.
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF PEOPLE'S COMMISSARS OF THE UKRAINIAN SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLIC AND OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY (BOLSHEVIK) OF UKRAINE ON BLACKLISTING VILLAGES THAT MALICIOUSLY SABOTAGE THE COLLECTION OF GRAIN.
In view of the shameful collapse of grain collection in the more remote regions of Ukraine, the Council of People's Commissars and the Central Committee call upon the oblast executive committees and the oblast [party] committees as well as the raion executive committees and the raion [party] committees: to break up the sabotage of grain collection, which has been organized by kulak and counterrevolutionary elements; to liquidate the resistance of some of the rural communists, who in fact have become the leaders of the sabotage; to eliminate the passivity and complacency toward the saboteurs, incompatible with being a party member; and to ensure, with maximum speed, full and absolute compliance with the plan for grain collection.
The Council of People's Commissars and the Central Committee resolve:
To place the following villages on the black list for overt disruption of the grain collection plan and for malicious sabotage, organized by kulak and counterrevolutionary elements:

1. village of Verbka in Pavlograd raion, Dnepropetrovsk oblast.

…

1. village of Sviatotroitskoe in Troitsk raion, Odessa oblast.
2. village of Peski in Bashtan raion, Odessa oblast.

The following measures should be undertaken with respect to these villages :

1. Immediate cessation of delivery of goods, complete suspension of cooperative and state trade in the villages, and removal of all available goods from cooperative and state stores.
2. Full prohibition of collective farm trade for both collective farms and collective farmers, and for private farmers.
3. Cessation of any sort of credit and demand for early repayment of credit and other financial obligations.
4. Investigation and purge of all sorts of foreign and hostile elements from cooperative and state institutions, to be carried out by organs of the Workers and Peasants Inspectorate.
5. Investigation and purge of collective farms in these villages, with removal of counterrevolutionary elements and organizers of grain collection disruption.

The Council of People's Commissars and the Central Committee call upon all collective and private farmers who are honest and dedicated to Soviet rule to organize all their efforts for a merciless struggle against kulaks and their accomplices in order to: defeat in their villages the kulak sabotage of grain collection; fulfill honestly and conscientiously their grain collection obligations to the Soviet authorities; and strengthen collective farms.
CHAIRMAN OF THE COUNCIL OF PEOPLE'S COMMISSARS OF THE UKRAINIAN SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLIC - V. CHUBAR'.
SECRETARY OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY (BOLSHEVIK) OF UKRAINE - S. KOSIOR.
6 December 1932.




Think the Ukrainians have forgotten?

 

Going back to the original point of this thread the following article may be of interest:
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htsurf/articles/20150203.aspx

Even more recent article on the Ukraine though:
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htmurph/articles/20150203.aspx
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htwin/articles/20150201.aspx
http://www.strategypage.com/on_point/2015020404823.aspx

 

On another thread a poster claimed he had posted "lots of stuff" in this thread that supported his position. Since I didn't reacall much of note I thought I'd look through and see just what sources were linked here. They are as follows with my comments after each:

Youtube video a political/comercial meeting. I.e. of limited or no merit.

A document discussing the Greek financial situation unfortunately in German and no gist given but at best marginally on topic. and another youtube video.

An editorial hypothesising about the effects of revoking a law and about the potential of another one that wasn't passed. While some may have worried about the effects of passing the second I can't see that there was much in the way of a practical effect of revoking the old law. So even though it's an opinion piece it actually contradicts some of Bundes's statements on the topic.

Another youtube video this one shows "NAF fighters" with US weapons. Of course it's not clear how they got them or even if they are erally "NAF: fighters. So another useless youtube video.

An opinion piece from a very left wing publication noted for it's poor articles. Note that the quoted part doesn't really suppport Bunde's position it just claims that it "may" not be flawed.

So we have a bunch of reader comments with no real knowledge of how much or little they know or even if it's just one person multiposting. Not of much use is it.
Then we have an article about a small group of seperatist. It does mention an infusion of Russian aid as being critical though. Interesting that someone who keeps claiming he is neutral celibrates the success of one side.

Another youtube video. Any idea what the providence of this is. Not that it supports Bunde's main contentions anyway.

More vidoes apparently opinion pieces.


Too many quotes so I need to break this in two ....
Continued in my next post.

 

Continueing the above.
...

In this case he may be right examples of "disinformation" of course the open question is which way. Kind of hard to tell with youtube videos

What is a "Nato 'journalist'". I don't reacall seeing that as a job descripiton for any NATO employees. In any case another youtube video. Although it does sound like at least one person was making some very reasonable comparisons between Putin and a famous historical character.

A forum link. This one actually has the possiblity of being a decent source, or not. Unfortunately I can't get to it right now and I suspect it's not in English in any case. The fact that it's recomended by someone as biased and as far from neutral (in spite of his claims to the contrary) as Bund has shown himself to be is not encouraging though.

And another youtube video.

That might qualify as a "lot of stuff" but almost nothing has any real merit when discussing the issues at hand.

 

Saluted, because of the effort you put into this mishmash. I started, but it was too easy to discredit, yet such a large wall of misinformation, I couldn't be bothered. As a whole, it weakens his case tremendously, as it just gets more and more tenuous.

Together with the fact that he admitted he hadn't the faintest clue of the background of either of the Ukrainian elections, nor was inclined to follow up on it, yet spoke in such vitriolic, categorical terms really shows how he has bought into the Pro-Russian propaganda.

I blame the misdeeds of 2002. Selling the idea of WMD in Iraq, hurt Western government's, & Western media's credibility for a long time yet to come.

 

All you guys need to learn to make your points quickly and succinctly...verbose replys dont get read.

 

A Verbage a day keeps the Aussie away!

 

Lol. GS does have a sense of ha ha. Lets see more of that...I'll try to be smarter in return.

 

There is a thousand year history between these people. To judge all this time based on the actions of one man is a mistake.

 

This is a joke right? This comes from someone who accuse others of being biased?!

I'll bite LWD (but you knew that already ) which playbook and which pages exactly are we talking about?

This sounds like an opinion from someone who has already made up his mind on what's happening and who's to blame. How else can so many sources that individuals such as Chomsky, Kissinger, Matlock, Baker etc all claim to be true simply be brushed of the shoulder?

How can some one who claims that a certain state is responsible for shooting down of an airliner prior to the official report coming out be unbiased?

If tapped and leaked phone conversations by high officials in the white house, congressional hearing/questions, former statesmen and intellects or numerous foreign newspapers/journals and actual
video footage claims otherwise not be enough? What more do you need?

Personally, I doubt such scrutiny of your sources but hey prove me wrong

 

It was merely indicative.

1000 year history, I think not, at best 300 years, perhaps. More likely 150-200 years. "These people" seems to be a modern creation to justify the national-states.

The oldest mention of the word ukraina dates back to the year 1187. In the following decades and centuries this term was applied to fortified borderlands of different principalities of Rus' without a specific geographic fixation.

After the South-Western Rus' was subordinated to the Polish Crown in 1569, a particular part of its territory from eastern Podoliato Zaporozhie got the unofficial name Ukraina due to its border function to the nomadic Tatar world in the south.

In the sixteenth century, the only specific ukraina mentioned very often in Polish and Ruthenian texts was the south-eastern borderland around Kiev, and thus ukraina came to be synonymous with ‘the voivodship of Kiev’ and later ‘the region around Kiev’.

After the area Ukraine and Crimea became aligned with the Russian Empire in the Russo-Turkish War (1768–1774), Catherine the Great and her immediate successors encouraged German immigration into Ukraine and especially into Crimea, to thin the previously dominant Turk population and encourage more complete use of farmland.

It's only when, in the nineteenth century, that Ukrainian romanticism and nationalism came into existence this name was adopted as the name of the country. Just as with most countries in the West, it is born from the idea of the Nation-state. At this time, (still in the 19th century), Ukraine was a rural area largely ignored by Russia and Austria. With growing urbanization and modernization, and a cultural trend toward romantic nationalism, a Ukrainian intelligentsia committed to national "rebirth" and social justice emerged. During this time an established a policy of Russification, suppressed the use of the Ukrainian language in print, and in public.

It's hard to find pre-romanticism texts with references to "Ukrainians" in the context of a distinct Ukrainian identity, thereof my questioning the "1000 year history". But if you are aware of some, I know you'll enlighten me.

 

True to judge it all on one man in general can be a mistake, But one must take it into context. Has been a relatively short time since that one man was in charge and his actions are directly affecting the situation to this day.

Had he not implemented his policies the famine would more then likely not have occurred.

Had he not shifted large numbers of ethnic Russians into the Ukraine and Crimea the internal strife currently taking place would more then likely not exist.

So in this case judging the actions based off of Stalin is justified as it has been his actions that have led to the situation today. Putin may still have tried something but without Stalin's actions he would not have had the domestic support to do so.

 

Hardly. Compare the actions of Putin and Hitler prior to the start of WWII. There are way too many parallels. Taking over parts of other countries in violation of international law, sigining treaties and then violating them in the process, use of "agent provocatuers".

Indeed, and your point is? He has come hear parroting the party line supplying no significant support for his position and almost (not totally I'll admit) ignoring the evidence presented that at the very least his position is questionable.

It's pretty clear from the above if you want more I'll provide it.

The facts are more important than the opinions and statements of individuals particularly politicians or those with axes to grind.

1) That's awfully close to a strawman. I have never claimed that the Russian state ordered the airliner shot down. Indeed I find it unlikely that they intentionally ordered an airliner shot down. On the other hand forces that they had supplied and that were under at least some Russian control pretty clearly did shoot it down and then they and those forces hindered the investigation. Now it could have been Russian troops that pulled the trigger or it could have been seperatist and either could have given the order. There is a good chance we will never find out. On the other hand all that is pretty clear from the evidence to date no need to wait for the report. Especially since the report is likely to be at the very least worded "carefully".

Without context and no way of knowing how they were edited videos are extremely questionable sources. Point me to a good transcrit from a reliable sources and I'll look at it. PLS note though that hyperbole, sarcasm, and just poor choice of words are not unknown from those sources.

Not my job. I've given my sources if you think they are wrong then make a good case for it.

 

I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing with any stance here, but I'm quite intrigued by the attacks on opinions.
It's the stump. The politics area.
Riddled with opinions, or it wouldn't be politics?

 

From an article on the strategy page:

http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/russia/articles/20150217.aspx
Sounds like the Russian economy doesn't have problems at all doesn't it. {in case there is any doubt that's me being somewhat sarcastic}

 

More sanctions have been made to Russia and the more there is the faster the economy goes down. Without oil and gas money they don´t have anything to make profit with. They made a deal with Hungary recently but I don´t think in the short run that is nothing but a minor political victory.

 

A deal with Hungary wont mean much of anything, Even less given current economic conditions. Only thing that can keep Russia going is a big deal with China, And any such deal would result in all the military tech the China wants from Russia being handed over..

Russia needs to decide if they want to give Russia all their tech or if they want a couple thousand square km's in Ukraine...