Holy shit! Russian conspiracies

[Freddy_Pickle]

But it is the issue, though, because they were engaging in obvious intervention, more blatantly and more severely than anything Russia did. You keep on harping on your idea that Ukraine is “part of Europe,” which would be totally irrelevant unless it were meant to suggest that European countries have some kind of authority to meddle in its affairs, by virtue of its being part of Europe. They don’t. Anything that goes on in Ukraine is no business of Europe’s whatsoever.

And you keep harping on the idea that since Russia has more in common with Ukraine than the rest of Europe, that its entitled to screw with Ukraine as much as it wants. If Europe doesn’t get to meddle in the affairs of Ukraine because its not in Europe (which is false) then why does Russia get to meddle in the affairs of Ukraine? It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize that you are biased, being a hypocrite, and presenting altogether immature and inaccurate opinions on Russia and the Ukraine.

No, I’m saying that when Europe blatantly and hypocritically interferes in Ukrainian affairs, it is a legitimate cause of concern for Russia, and indicative of an aggressive and expansionist policy towards Russia.

Why is it okay, then, for Russia to do the exact same thing? More importantly, a combined Europe has had alot more to be scared of from a combined USSR than the other way around. If what you are calling interferences should be taken as an aggressive and expansionist policy, then why shouldn’t the same Russia policies be considered aggressive and expansionist? The world has had alot more to worry about from an aggressive and expansionist Russia than an aggressive and expansionist Belgium. Sephiroth, I respect your opinions and I can tell you have done alot of research on Russia…but you’re being a total hypocrite. You’re saying its okay for Russia to mess with Ukraine because blah blah blah, but you list those same reasons for the condemnation of the EU and US. Personally, I don’t think any country or body of countries should be messing around with the politics of any other country.

How is this relevant to anything at all? If you want to talk about Ukrainian citizens, then half of them didn’t want Yuschenko to be president. There were at least as many opponents of Yuschenko as supporters of him.

Wow, reading that last statement really reminded me of some crybaby liberal crying about how Bush only won because blah blah blah. A great number of conspiracy theories popped off during and after the American election, too. That there are Russian conspiracy theorists following the Ukrainian election doesn’t boggle my mind that much.

So this assertion still doesn’t give any legitimacy to Yuschenko’s or the EU’s actions.

Why does it legitimize Russia’s actions then?

You seem to be labouring under the delusion that asserting something makes it true.

And you seem to believe that belief alone makes conspiracy theories true.

It can. Once again, there exists a skin condition which causes the same sort of lumpy texture as that observed on Yuschenko’s face, and can be triggered by as little as one drink, depending on one’s age, susceptibility, and medical history. In this case, it was someone over 50, with symptoms indicating chronic alcoholism, a medical history of illnesses resulting from it, and doctors’ orders to be on a strict diet.

So, now your story is that he has a skin condition? lol

If Islamic terrorists were to seize a theatre or school in Washington DC or New York, I really don’t think that any American president, Democratic or Republican, would do anything too differently, although the American military would have better weapons.

I would have to agree 100% on that one.

[Sephiroth_Katana]

And you keep harping on the idea that since Russia has more in common with Ukraine than the rest of Europe, that its entitled to screw with Ukraine as much as it wants.

I haven’t said this, but I guess it’s easier to make up straw men than to address what I did say.

If Europe doesn’t get to meddle in the affairs of Ukraine because its not in Europe (which is false) then why does Russia get to meddle in the affairs of Ukraine?

Ukraine isn’t part of Europe, and Russia doesn’t get to meddle in the affairs of Ukraine. However, if Europe thinks that Russia is supposedly doing something in Ukraine, that does not constitute an adequate justification for Europe to use these vague allegations as a cover for much more blatant intervention than most of what they’ve accused Russia of. Absolutely everything that happens in Ukraine is Ukraine’s business only.

More importantly, a combined Europe has had alot more to be scared of from a combined USSR than the other way around.

Contemporary Russia plus contemporary Ukraine does not equal the USSR. Do you suppose that, if Ukraine rejoined Russia tomorrow, Russia would start building military bases on the German and French borders, or stealing European markets, or destabilizing Europe’s territorial integrity, or advocating a Russian military presence in Europe? For one thing, Russia has too many of its own internal problems (economic stability, the threat of terrorism, and so forth) that it has to fix right now without the added grief of somehow trying to encroach on the European Union’s economic territory, which it wouldn’t be able to do anyway because the European Union is stronger economically than both Russia and Ukraine. If Russia and Ukraine decided to pursue a closer relationship, that would pose no economic threat to Europe, because Ukraine isn’t part of Europe to begin with, it’s not an important economic player in Europe, and it doesn’t have anything that belongs to Europe. Conversely, Ukraine is very important to Russia as an economic partner (and vice versa), which makes Europe’s attempts to exercise political and economic influence on Ukraine very threatening to Russia indeed.

If what you are calling interferences should be taken as an aggressive and expansionist policy, then why shouldn’t the same Russia policies be considered aggressive and expansionist?

Because “the same policies” would be if Russia decided to build military bases in Montreal, or Copenhagen, or Prague, and blatantly strongarmed elections in France and Germany’s most important trading partners. In reality, though, Russia withdrew from eastern Europe and dissolved the Warsaw Pact a long time ago. It is not actively moving into western Europe, whereas western Europe is actively encroaching onto eastern Europe. Pursuing closer ties with Ukraine, or any other former Soviet republic, is not moving into European territory, because that isn’t European territory; it’s not different at all from France and Germany deciding to pursue closer ties with each other.

Personally, I don’t think any country or body of countries should be messing around with the politics of any other country.

Very true. It also follows from this that no body of countries has a right to intervene anywhere based on allegations that someone else may be intervening there, and cynically derive benefit from this intervention under cover of platitudes about “democracy.” I eagerly await your scathing denunciation of the American government’s use of your taxpayer money to fund Yuschenko’s campaign.

That there are Russian conspiracy theorists following the Ukrainian election doesn’t boggle my mind that much.

Let me see if I have this right. So, if there are Ukrainian citizens who support Yuschenko (i.e. one half of Ukraine), then they are independent people who are making an informed decision with no outside influence whatsoever; their existence shows that OSCE didn’t try to encroach on Ukrainian politics, simply because they are not in the OSCE, and if they tell journalists that Russia is meddling in their election, then that must be the truth. On the other hand, if there are Ukrainian citizens who don’t support Yuschenko (i.e. one half of Ukraine), then by definition they are simply “conspiracy theorists,” or “crybaby liberals,” or otherwise not legitimate; thus, their existence doesn’t prove anything, and if they tell other journalists that what Europe is doing is far worse than anything it’s accusing Russia of doing, then that can safely be disregarded despite evidence that it’s true. Damn, that’s really “unbiased.”

Why does it legitimize Russia’s actions then?

I must have missed the day when Russia accused Yuschenko of poisoning his opponent even though the accusation didn’t make sense, encouraged and paid Yuschenko’s opponents to shut down the government and force a new election, and sent ten thousand observers to that election to ensure that its own preferred candidate won.

And you seem to believe that belief alone makes conspiracy theories true.

Ah, some good old smear tactics! So I take it that you would have no problem with Russia building a military base in Montreal or Havana?

So, now your story is that he has a skin condition? lol

Next time, you might want to read at least some of what I’ve said before replying.

[Freddy_Pickle]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freddy Pickle
And you seem to believe that belief alone makes conspiracy theories true.
Ah, some good old smear tactics! So I take it that you would have no problem with Russia building a military base in Montreal or Havana?

I guess you really are just a big hypocrite. You slam Europe for doing something Russia did, but have nothing to say about what Russia’s doing. Then you trash talk me, and when I respond in a facetious manner, you accuse me of doing the trash talking? You’re a work.

[The_984]

Well since lobsters, meat, and dessert were served, does that mean Viktor ate 2-3 lobsters, 3-4 lbs of meats, and 3 whole pies? Of course not. I’m going to guess he ate some of a lobster, a little bit of meat, and a piece of pie or something. That sounds reasonable, right? Then what makes you think he’d be completely unreasonable with the drinks? Especially while he was working? Have any of you ever been to a formal lunch of banquet? You don’t do 17 shots of tequila in front of your boss just because its there! This all reminds me of the scene in Forrest Gump when he drinks 16 Dr. Peppers because they’re available. I have a hard time seeing someone like Yushenko being so naïve that he pulled a Forrest Gump at this dinner and drank 14 shots of vodka, just because they were there.

Well, uh, Russians aren’t exactly known for eating three lobsters at a dinner. They are however more culturally inclined to have quite a bit of al-key-hall at dinners. As for your formal lunch example, that’s basing it from a Western/American point of view. No, they don’t take 17 shots of tequila (nor would Russians. It would be vodka!), but then again, it’s not in our cultural upbringing to drink “heavily” during meals or throw all night drinking parties with a few friends (save for the college life). In Russia and Russian cultures, this is considered more acceptable. In fact, I believe when most important business contracts are signed, a celebratory shot (or shots) is shared between all the higher ups.

And yes, sometimes, people do go and get plastered at formal parties. It’s a scene parodied in so many shows and movies it’s not even funny any more.

[Cala]

Also, people tend to drink more (alcoholic drinks or no) largely because they help people eat food (ever eat a hot dog on a bun and wash it down with a drink?), but also because they’re less filling.

[Sephiroth_Katana]

You slam Europe for doing something Russia did

No, I attacked Europe for trying to delegitimize Yuschenko’s opponent in the eyes of the whole world by making and spreading nonsensical accusations of “poisoning,” paying and vocally encouraging Yuschenko’s supporters to shut down the government, blockade roads and force a new election based on clearly flawed “observations,” and sending ten thousand “observers” to that new election to ensure that Yuschenko won. Europe used these vague and often obviously false accusations of “something Russia did” as a cover for cynical, blatant intervention that exceeds what they’re accusing Russia of doing by several orders of magnitude.

You’re a work.

You were so busy being “facetious” that you still haven’t answered my question. I’ll ask a third time. Would you, or would you not, have a problem with Russia building military bases tomorrow in Montreal or Havana?

[Freddy_Pickle]

As if that was relative to anything we’ve been discussing, but no I wouldn’t have a problem if they built a base in either of those places. Or Mexico even, and I live in Arizona.

[Cala]

Russia building military bases in North America? Fuck man, I’d be concerned. As far as I know, military bases tend to exist so you have a slight toehold in the country you want to attack. I don’t see a realistic reason why Russia would need to have military bases in North America.

[Freddy_Pickle]

Using that same logic, I have a hard time believing the USA wants to attack Romania or Poland. I live near several large bases and I wouldn’t feel any more or less threatened if another one popped up.

[Sephiroth_Katana]

Using that same logic, I have a hard time believing the USA wants to attack Romania or Poland.

What? The purpose of building bases is to establish one’s military power in that region, not to attack the country one is building them in. The purpose of building bases in Romania and Poland (and Gruzia and Uzbekistan) is to isolate and encircle Russia. In the same way, the purpose of the USSR moving missiles to Cuba during the Cuban Missile Crisis was to gain military leverage against America, not to attack Cuba, and not to create jobs for Cubans. This is no different.

As if that was relative to anything we’ve been discussing

On the contrary, that’s the central issue here. What the United States and European Union are doing in the former Soviet republics is not at all different from Russia building bases in Cuba, Canada and Mexico. Except Russia isn’t building bases there, so they’re not “doing the same thing Russia did,” but rather are engaged in aggressive expansionism. Moreover, the West would quickly have a military response to such an act on Russia’s part, whereas Russia has done practically nothing in response to Western advances on its borders, and yet still gets accused of all sorts of misdeeds (by the same people who are indiscriminately committing them) anyway.

no I wouldn’t have a problem if they built a base in either of those places.

If that’s true, then why should the European Union concern itself with anything that goes on in Ukraine?

[Freddy_Pickle]

What? The purpose of building bases is to establish one’s military power in that region, not to attack the country one is building them in.

Which is exactly why I have a hard time swallowing cala’s logic.

The purpose of building bases in Romania and Poland (and Gruzia and Uzbekistan) is to isolate and encircle Russia.

Yes, we’ve already heard your Russian conspiracy theories. There’s no need to reiterate your paranoid rhetoric. We get it okay?

On the contrary, that’s the central issue here.

You seem to have several, everchanging, different, and inaccurate central issues…other than that there is a huge international conspiracy against Russia and Putin.

Moreover, the West would quickly have a military response to such an act on Russia’s part, whereas Russia has done practically nothing in response to Western advances on its borders…

Thats because the EU and US are not advancing on Russia’s borders, acting aggressively towards Russia, or at odds with the former Soviet Union at all. Russia is part of Europe and more importantly, WHITE. Russia understands this. Its not a superpower anymore, so it doesn’t get to act like one. Russia has alot to gain from a strengthened Europe, as does Ukraine.

You have brought up a few interesting points, but you’re entirely too biased and convinced of the reality of these far-fetched conspiracy theories of yours. I’ve always been interested in conspiracy theories myself, but have enough brains to realize they’re completely full of shit.

[Curtis]

Actually, I think that Putin and the Russian people do think Russia has the potential to once again become a superpower. They don’t consider themselves part of Europe - they are generally much more authoritarian and socially conservative in their political views. The older generations are nostalgic for the USSR. Furthermore, Putin does not want to fuse with Europe and has been doing things to restore Russia as a power in its own right. Why is he seizing as much political power as he can? Why the ongoing war in Chechnya? In fact, the man who engineered the failed coup against Yeltsin back in 1991 is on record saying something like ‘Vladimir Putin is achieving is achieving what we were trying to achieve’. I think its perfectly reasonable for both the West and Russia to be capable of the things people are accusing them of. But, as I said before, Yuschenko is probably the fair winner.

[Freddy_Pickle]

Russia understands its not a superpower anymore? Tell that to Putin, or the Russian people.

Putin already knows that Russia is not a superpower anymore. Definately a regional power, like Brazil or South Africa, but not a superpower by any stretch of the word.

Why is he seizing as much political power as he can?

Probably because he is scared. Thats usually why most dictators sieze all the power they can.

Why the ongoing war in Chechnya?

Because religious wackos in Chechnya don’t seem to be able to chill without killing a bunch of kids or some stupid shit. As I said above, blaming Chechnya on Russia is like blaming the US for 9/11.

[Sephiroth_Katana]

Yes, we’ve already heard your Russian conspiracy theories. There’s no need to reiterate your paranoid rhetoric. We get it okay?

Ah, a smear tactic right out of the book: when you can’t refute your opponent, it’s much easier to ignore everything he says and try to marginalize him than to actually present reason and facts. The funny thing is, though, that pointing out facts based on obvious evidence is apparently now a “conspiracy theory,” while some idiotic story about “poisoning” is presented with a straight face as serious discussion material.

You seem to have several, everchanging, different, and inaccurate central issues…

Would it really be too much to ask you to read my posts once in a while?

Thats because the EU and US are not advancing on Russia’s borders, acting aggressively towards Russia, or at odds with the former Soviet Union at all.

Come back when you can present an argument for this statement other than repeating it over and over. (By the way, I also love how you quoted just that one statement out of context! Keep at it, son!) You won’t be able to, though, because when one country or group of countries builds military bases a hemisphere away from its own borders, on foreign soil on all sides of another country’s border, moves these bases closer to that country, and engages in blatant intervention in the politics of neighbouring countries, that constitutes a hostile policy. If Russia ever did the same thing to the European Union or the United States, it would be called just that. But, since the West thinks that its own rules don’t apply to it, it’s viewed as a matter of course, when it’s discussed at all.

[Freddy_Pickle]

Ah, a smear tactic right out of the book: when you can’t refute your opponent, it’s much easier to ignore everything he says and try to marginalize him than to actually present reason and facts.

A smear tactic would be calling you names or something. I’m not doing that. You also claim that I’ve been misrepresenting reason and facts. This is where you’re wrong. I’m simply stating the fact that you seem to believe all these conspiracy theories. Yes, there usually is a little negativity associated with conspiracy theorists, which is why I’m guess you’re getting so defensive about being called out as one. Oh well. I’ve never met a conspiracy theorist anyone took seriously. Seeing as I’m actually interested in the theories, and seeing as how most people are not, I’m going to guess that most people will agree with me regarding conspiracy theorists.

Come back when you can present an argument for this statement other than repeating it over and over.

OOOOooOOOooooooo…am I not a part of this global Russian conspiracy, too? What about the aliens I sold vodka to?

You won’t be able to, though, because when one country or group of countries builds military bases a hemisphere away from its own borders, on foreign soil on all sides of another country’s border, moves these bases closer to that country, and engages in blatant intervention in the politics of neighbouring countries, that constitutes a hostile policy.

Well it also constitutes a whole hell of alot of suspicion for those pesky space aliens, too. And don’t forget the Knights of Colombus and their trickery. (Or the Illuminati for that matter)!

[Sephiroth_Katana]

A smear tactic would be calling you names or something. I’m not doing that.

A smear tactic is an attempt to marginalize an opponent in some way without actually addressing his argument, usually through the use of irrelevant but pejorative-sounding phrases. Like when a politician’s response to his opponent consists solely of something like, “His rhetoric doesn’t reflect American values!”

OOOOooOOOooooooo…am I not a part of this global Russian conspiracy, too? What about the aliens I sold vodka to?

Arguing is so much easier when you don’t have to trouble yourself with reading what the other person says, isn’t it? Now run along home, kid.

[Freddy_Pickle]

I’m going to keep letting you make an ass out of yourself, I honestly don’t have the time, man. Have a great Black History Month!

[Sephiroth_Katana]

Thanks, man, you too!

[Curtis]

“Putin already knows that Russia is not a superpower anymore. Definately a regional power, like Brazil or South Africa, but not a superpower by any stretch of the word.”

He knows this, but he doesn’t accept it. You belive that Russia tried to interfere in Ukraine’s election, right? If Russia is so much a part of Europe, if the government accepts its position as a ‘regional power’, why would they do that? Unless they don’t consider themselves part of Europe, and want to reclaim international glory. As they certainly do. Do Brazil and South Africa try to pull the shit that Russia did in Ukraine? Either you accept Russia still wants to be a superpower, therefore aggresively orchestrating the conspiracies listed in Sinistral’s first post, or that they don’t want to be a superpower thus no conspiracies.

The War in Chechnya is just as much about shoring up Putin’s popularity as it is ‘national security’. Sort of like the invasion of Iraq. Putin restarted this war as he was running for president of Russia, and the school bombings and theater takeover happened after Putin restarted the war. Because he didn’t want Chechnya to be an independent country and needed an issue to win the election. Also, how do the Russians support of this war jibe with the extreme pacifistic values of Western Europe, as well as Europe’s condemnation of the war? I thought Russia was part of Europe, right?

The Chechens, unlike al-Qaeda, want a real political goal - an independent Chechen country. Russia won’t let them have one. Granted, the Chechens have done horrible things that are bad under any circumstance, but their struggle is more analagous to what’s going on inPalestine than a bunch of ‘religious whackos’ a la al-Qaeda. Russia is to blame for Chechnya. That doesn’t condone the actions of the Chechen terrorists, but the problem is far removed from 9/11. (Though many members of al-Qaeda are Chechen, those ones are religious whackos). As a proviso I want to add that the Russians have acted in a much more despicable matter than the Israelis, so don’t take this as the opening of an argument about the Palestinian crisis.

[Freddy_Pickle]

You belive that Russia tried to interfere in Ukraine’s election, right? If Russia is so much a part of Europe, if the government accepts its position as a ‘regional power’, why would they do that?

ETA tried to interfere in Spanish elections, does that make ETA a superpower? Of course not. Various powers have always tried to disrupt various governments from the beginning of time. That doesn’t make said disruptive power is a super power.

Do Brazil and South Africa try to pull the shit that Russia did in Ukraine?

They have in the past. And again, that doesn’t make either Brazil or S. Africa a super power.

The War in Chechnya is just as much about shoring up Putin’s popularity as it is ‘national security’. Sort of like the invasion of Iraq.

Except for the fact that Chechens continue to attack Russians, and Iraqis haven’t posed a threat to Americans in a long time.

Also, how do the Russians support of this war jibe with the extreme pacifistic values of Western Europe, as well as Europe’s condemnation of the war? I thought Russia was part of Europe, right?

The UK is part of Europe, and its actually at went to war against two soverign nations. Only a simpleton would assume every European is some house-listening, shiny-glasses-wearing, euro-driving, funny-clothed weirdo. Russia, whether a few of you like it or not, has been a part of Europe since the early Kiev state. Who do you really think the average Russian associates more with…Europeans or Asians?

The Chechens, unlike al-Qaeda, want a real political goal - an independent Chechen country. Russia won’t let them have one. Granted, the Chechens have done horrible things that are bad under any circumstance, but their struggle is more analagous to what’s going on inPalestine than a bunch of ‘religious whackos’ a la al-Qaeda.

Whats going on in Israel/Palestine is a struggle between religious wackos. As a matter of fact, two extremist groups of religious wackos. There are plenty of Muslims in Russia who don’t want to have their own country…but not all of them are religious extremists, like the people in Chechnya, Palestine, Taliban Afghanistan, or the Lord’s Resistance Army.