| Kasz216 said:
1. Because the refferendum will lose. Hence why Cameron's original response was basiallly "Lets hol it tommorrow" and the SNP pushed it off. It's just a political move to embaress the SNP. Unless you can tell the future (I sure as hell can't!), I'm not sure if anyone should write off any future referendum result. Just because a poll says something, it don't mean shit. The actual results of the independence referendum (on the day) is what matters. I see it being very close. 2. Except it wasn't even disguised as anything. Well if they were intent on annexing a region, wouldn't they have just done it? Rather than try and make it look like it was approved by the general population. The Russians were in Sevastopol anyway (a military base leased to them by Ukraine) and were actually 'invited' over by former president Yakanovich (or however you spell it). On that basis, i'm not sure if it was really an invasion to begin with. But, I'm just going to accept the will of the Crimean people. Ukraine itself is a very polarised nation (split between Russia and EU supporters). The west may say Crimea was rigged, but with so many Russian speaking people there in the first place, the result was obvious. They didn't come over night.
3. Only like ~100,000 people died... Which is a small number compaired to the general pile of bodies generated by stalin's soviet Russia. still I'm not sure if losing between 30-50% of an enthic population due to ethnic cleansing counts as "not a big" deal. Just because something isn't your fight doesn't mean you have to support it, or want people to support it. Show me a source please because i have never heard of this. That said, ethnic cleansing sort of is our buisness international law wise. Even though rarely anything is done about it... and i'd think it's fair to argue that more then a majority vote should be needed for a group of people who suffered such penalties to be forced back into the nation that committed those acts on them. Espiecially when they themselves are overwhelmingly against it, and a large portion of those who inflicted it opon them just so happen to ethnically be the poeple who inflicted it opon them. The only thing that makes this "not our buisness" so to speak, is that Russia is fairly powerful. That's a fine arguement to make, it's logical, but it should be made honestly. It's not a matter of the US and UK "not bein a hypocrite because of iraq", or "Democratic majority." There's plenty of wrong doing in the world beside Russia but why should it be left up to us to sort it out. Why are we that arrogant that we even think we can sort out everyone else's problems? Especially when the west likely caused today's problems by imposing empires on the less fortunate places of the world. We are good at starting wars but crap at bring a long and prosperous peace to places we invaded like Iraq and Afghanistan, no matter our intentions. Not like we could afford yet another war (partly why I think we stayed out of Syria) or that the public would appreciate a war when we are told to cut back on everything. It's just cowardice and being selfish. Which is fine, I wouldn't start a war with Russia either. That said, I'm not going to pretend to give false morality for the "brave" decision to basically ignore the whoe thing... or even worse, dump on the guy for basically ignoring the situation but at least mentioning so displeasure about the situation. Where i'm from you blame people for hypocritical bad acts, and cheer them for hypocritical good ones. The Modern era of no major wars basically boils politics to a game of "who got there first". |
Xbox Series, PS5 and Switch (+ Many Retro Consoles)
'When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called the people's stick'- Mikhail Bakunin
Prediction: Switch 2 will outsell the PS5 by 2030
