By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Obama: Ignoring Russian Aggression Would Have Global Consequences

 

What does Obama hope to accomplish? alterior motive?

I will post below. 29 14.29%
 
To calm the situation down 67 33.00%
 
See results 100 49.26%
 
Total:196
huiii on 30 March 2014
ArnoldRimmer said:
huiii said:

Exactly. The US acts according to selfish interests, just like any other country. All the other talk about human rights, democracy and what not is mainly just silly talk for the public ear.

huiii said:

That's pretty much my own impression as well. No one here in germany seems to believe that Russia now tries to swallow any more land, but the yellow press like BILD seems to be doing the best they can to drive such fears, for example by showing maps that shall demonstrate in which order they might now take the rest of europe, or portraying Putin as "the next Hitler". It's completely ridiculous! Is the media coverage in switzerland better?

1st part: I agree, the US just has the better PR-Department. it they attack someone it's to "free" them, if anyone else does it it's invasion...

2nd part: Nah, media coverage here is mostly neutral (at least the nespapers i read), though we had that article about Merkel (was it her?) comparing Putin to Hitler as well.
And our governmet says they condemn the anexion but decided not to go along with the EU sanctions (which imo is a joke anyway), because you know switzerland beeing neutral and all.... but honestly it's is pretty much saying "our western buddies don't like what you're doing so we don't like what you're doing either but we don't really care so go ahead and do it anyway." 
Plus we're a direct democracy so voting on something actually means something here, as opposed to the rest of the world where all you do is vote betwen shit party A and shit party B and are stuck with whoever winns, fucking the country over for the next 4 years. ;P

 

Und wieso zu Teufel schreib ich eigentlich auf Englisch... Naja so verstehen es die Anderen wenigstens auch.



Around the Network
Sharu on 30 March 2014

Putin: Ignoring Obama Would Have No Global Consequences



gigaSheik on 30 March 2014

Some people think Russia is Iraq that you invade whenever you want and thats it. Go ahead. Have a nice war. At least this time the enemy isn't a dead dog.



ArnoldRimmer on 30 March 2014
huiii said:

Plus we're a direct democracy so voting on something actually means something here, as opposed to the rest of the world where all you do is vote betwen shit party A and shit party B and are stuck with whoever winns, fucking the country over for the next 4 years. ;P

Yeah, most countries in the world love to present themselves as democracies, but at the same time, most of them actually try to keep the public influence to the absolute minimum, giving the population only the choice to decide between pest and cholera every four years.

I guess it's not the exact opposite in switzerland, but from what I've heard so far, it's really much better over there, more direct democracy and all. I really envy you for that!



huiii on 30 March 2014
ArnoldRimmer said:
huiii said:

Plus we're a direct democracy so voting on something actually means something here, as opposed to the rest of the world where all you do is vote betwen shit party A and shit party B and are stuck with whoever winns, fucking the country over for the next 4 years. ;P

Yeah, most countries in the world love to present themselves as democracies, but at the same time, most of them actually try to keep the public influence to the absolute minimum, giving the population only the choice to decide between pest and cholera every four years.

I guess it's not the exact opposite in switzerland, but from what I've heard so far, it's really much better over there, more direct democracy and all. I really envy you for that!

Well politicians are bastards wherever you are (a big part of them anyway), but we do have some mesure of influence through "Volksinitiativen" through which we can take direct influence in lawmakeing. Not that that's always a good thing either...



Around the Network
bonzobanana on 30 March 2014

This is a dangerous situation for sure. What Putin has done isn't right but the people themselves are generally in favour of it in that region even if the vote wasn't properly monitored. We just need the world to unite to provide the maximum pressure on Putin that he doesn't try to take any more territory.

Obama just needs to get maximum worldwide support for sanctions and pressure against Putin.

What Putin has done is reckless and hugely de-stabilising for that region. Even China has failed to support Russia.



nanarchy on 30 March 2014
bonzobanana said:
This is a dangerous situation for sure. What Putin has done isn't right but the people themselves are generally in favour of it in that region even if the vote wasn't properly monitored. We just need the world to unite to provide the maximum pressure on Putin that he doesn't try to take any more territory.

Obama just needs to get maximum worldwide support for sanctions and pressure against Putin.

What Putin has done is reckless and hugely de-stabilising for that region. Even China has failed to support Russia.

I seriously doubt Putin has any desire to take any more of that region. He was forced into a corner with crimea due to the need to protect his bases and winter ports. If the world tries to push him further into a corner with sanctions and pressure it is more likely to escalate and invoke a negative response rather than stablise the situation, If he wanted the rest of Ukraine he would have taken it already. Obama needs to learn to keep his nose out of this one, he is on the wrong side of the argument due to selfish interests.



Kasz216 on 30 March 2014
ArnoldRimmer said:
Kasz216 said:

They said nothing of the sort.  Don't drift off into Alex Jones territory now.

Eh... Who the hell is Alex Jones?

Kasz216 said:

The reason nobody made a big deal about the Nuland conversations except "Fuck the EU" is because that was the only actual thing in it that was anything news worthy.

Maybe not where you live, but in my country, a lot of people do consider it a big deal. Reading articles on the topic on websites of prominent national mass media was quite bizarre in that respect. While most media over here concentrated solely on the silly and irrelevant "Fuck the EU" phrase, it was extraordinary just how many reader comments below the articles found the 5 billion dollars and the fact that the US apparently tries to decice who should be ukrainian president much more disturbing.

But that's a generally interesting phenomenon over here btw: There are extremely many people complaining about the current national mass media coverage of the crimea crisis. I've never seen anything like it, so many people feel that the national mass media currently do a very bad job at objectively informing about the topic. Many people currently actually feel better informed by "Russia Today", which is almost funny since most people are perfectly aware that it's pretty much "russian state television" and there is still significant russia-phobia in german society ("Der Russe steht vor der Tür!"). There are already petitions for a german language version of "Russia today"...

Kasz216 said:

There is nothing in the Nuland converseation that suggests the US had anything do with anything that happened in the Ukraine.

Even if that were true, there was also nothing in the Nuland conversation that suggests the US had nothing do with it either. As I said, while the "5 billion" and "no Klitschko please" comments are no of course no clear proof of anything, many people made up their own opinion about it. Especially since there are other articles etc. that fit well into the picture.

There's also no proof that this phone conversation (like the other recent ones with Timoschenko etc.) etc. was wiretapped and leaked by some russian intelligence service. And yet, people over here are convinced that they are responsible, even though they will probably never openly admit to it.

Kasz216 said:

and i'm guessing th Etc. is the faked Klitcshko emails.  Where a government employee emails Klitchsko with the eastern europeon equilvent of AOL.  As opposed to a government account, or even a CIA account.  Because clearly people conduct political intrigue over private email servers that can be monitored eaisly by the private companies at their own discretion... and leaving a trail for as long as they want to store the emails.

What Klitschko emails are you referring to? I cannot remember having read about that, can you give me a link?

Kasz216 said:

Your bias is making you miss some pretty obvious stuff... it's fun to think the worst of the US and that it's behind EVERYTHING, but really... seriously?

There is nothing in my posting that suggests I consider the worst of the US and that it's behind EVERYTHING.

Kasz216 said:

There is enough to complain about that to latch on to some silly stuff like your trying to draw connectiongs between the rothcilds and the illuminati controlling everything.

 

You don't believe that right?  The Rothchild consiracy theory stuff?  If so... I'm just not going to bother.

Sorry, you lost me once again. Rothschild conspiracy? I have no clue what you're even talking about. I've heard about the illuminati of course, but from what I know they only existed about a decade, and that was centuries ago - so what exactly should they have to do with crimea? and why?

Confusing your lines are, young padawan.


1) They are "Trying to pick the Ukrainian president" by asking people to not run.  I'm not sure what's so scandalous about asking someone not to do something.

People are hyperinflating that into meaning.

 

2) And the US has invested over like  5 billion in the Ukraine... since 1991.  Again, why people find this controversial, I can't quite understand.

That's a number Nuland uses publically in speeches.  It's not some magical leak nobody was meant to hear, and that nobody knew existed... it wasn't reported as news in the US.... because it wasn't news. 

The Nuland Leak happened in what February?

Here is a public speach in December... where she specifically mentions the 5 billion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2y0y-JUsPTU#t=447

Again... it's totally conspiracy theory level bunk to take that as meaning something more then it was.


Alex Jones by the way is a extreme right wing conspiracy theory nut job... who basically can only find work on extreme right wing radio shows and coincidentally Russia Today.

 

3) http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2014_02_23/Anonymous-Ukraine-releases-Klitschko-e-mails-showing-treason-3581/

 

Note the @delfi email address.  lol.  Like someone is going to use a home address to send super secret government emails.

 

4) The Rothchild's are accused by people like Alex Jones (Who works at russia today and deals with conspiracy theories like the ones your talking about) of creating central banks to basically control the world and every government

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4311

and you didn't really answer the question.



Kasz216 on 30 March 2014
mai said:

Sure, Kasz, because the States are known for not interfering in foreign countries internal affairs and people's personal lifes that far, far, faaaar outreach usual diplomatic and legal range of actions :D

Yes, that specific conversation is nothing of interest for the most part, but pieces fall into place if you take into account Yakimenko's testimony. Of course, there's a chance he's lying, but I'm afraid you're expecting too much if you want evidence that could be taken into court.

You know, I don't usually support "blame the Americans" kind of attitude. Say, I know that wasn't Americans who ruined Libya, Libyans did, but in order to ignore the obvious you have to stick your fingers into your ears, close eyes and scream "la-la-la, don't hear anything, don't see anything, conspiracy, conspiracy, conspiracy".

 

//With that being said, I do watch American media on the subject sometimes, even though I watched enough to have an idea what to expect, yet  from time to time when they in "attack" mode on given hot topic  they manage to amuse me with the ability to create an alternate reality millions live in,  acting almost in unisone with Ukrainian meda right now, which I watch too btw. There's smth Orwellian in all this, so Alex Jones might not be that "nuts" as people might want to describe him, he's just minding his own "geschaft" parasitizing on people's minds and channelling them into one direction.


Yeah, in the same way basically every leader of a failng nation that is on the opposite side of the US blames everything on the US.


It's no different then say, Maduro blaming Venezuela's entire crash on the US.


As for Libya?  Really people believe that?  Haven't even seen that one.  Didn't people notice how the US essentially had to practically be brought in kicking and screaming by god damn france, who usually tends to be the last nation that supports US nationbuilding projects.

The only reason the US was involved in Libya is because NATO is a huge ass waste of US money that more or less makes the US the main source of military force for Europe who are free to ignore their own military research and spending.

 

Now Egypt or Syria, there is stuff to talk about.   But Libya?

If anyone set up a revolution there why you'd point your fingers at the US before the French I  don't quite know.  Honestly, I'd look first at France for Syria too at least.



Kasz216 on 30 March 2014

and as for US acting in it's own national interests.

can anyone actually articulate what the USA gets from manipulating the Ukraine?

I mean, if we're playing a finger pointing self interest game...

Russia has some pretty well defined interests in the Ukraine and Crimea.

 

The US... nothing really.

 

The only thing i've even really seen suggested is natural gas pipelines that go to europe.

Not sure what benefit controlling the middle of a natural gas pipeline gets you.  Let alone, having someone else own it, who can still pretty much do whatever they want.


Espiecally Obama who is pretty anti-US Natural gas, to the point of where to get europeons along to get sanctions his big concession will likely be being forced to export way more nat gas then he wants to europe in the first place.