Disaster for Ukraine. Rebels route Ukrainian forces at Donetsk

[Duke Leto]

I'm sure someone has already observed this, but the thread title is kinda funny if you read it as the rebels helpfully showing the Ukrainians a route to where they were supposed to be going.

Yeah, I am pretty sure the title should say "Rebels rout Ukrainian forces...". Of course, 'route' is a homophone for 'root', which is Aussie slang for 'fuck', so I guess it is possible that "Rebels root Ukrainian forces..." was intended, in which case :laughing-smiley-014

"You must spread some reputation around before giving it to bilby again."

 

[angelo]

Looks as if the rivalry between east and west didn't end with the collapse of the Soviet Union. It's ongoing and Putin will not be bullied by anyone.

 

[Togo]

Jayjay not according to me, according to Pew. Take it with them.

The Pew results show the Russian army's referendum to be wildly inaccurate. If you think Pew are wrong, take it up with them.

And that's a strawman. What he is saying is not that more than 50% would not have voted to join Russia in a fair referendum, he's saying that it's not anywhere near the imaginary 97% that Russia's propaganda and those who parrot it in the West are claiming. And as for 97% approval rating and 80% turnout, those are just numbers thrown by the Russian military who orchestrated the referendum. Considering all the other lies from Russia and total lack of transparency (except for the ballot boxes of course) that 80% claim is hardly believable.

Easily believable if we remember what was going on in Kiev at that time.
If we did not have the chaos in Kiev then I don't think we would have got 80% voting yes, but in that environment it's believable.

Not really. In a time of chaos and disruption attendance at a poll would be less, not more. You're arguing that the Russian army, in a very short time, during an invasion, managed to arrange an accurate referendum with a far greater % turnout than national elections, where people have over a year to plan, arrange to transport each other to a polling booth, advertise the various options and make sure even remote areas have equal access to the polls. It simply isn't credible.

 

[dystopian]

90% participation was in Sevastopol and 96% of them said Yes.

This is blatantly false. "Voter turnout" in Sevastopol was an impossible 123%. According to the 'authorities', 474,137 people voted in Sevastopol. The latest population statistics of the city though (dating from November 1st, 2013), show it has a population of only 385,462. Almost a hundred thousand voters magically appeared to vote yes. It's a miracle that the Russians ever managed to launch a man into space if their math shows 90% participation.

 

[Sabine Grant]

I already did...you have not addressed it. .

No, you just asked a lot of questions of me rather than making your case.

I made my case. You denying it did does not invalidate that reality. It is on record now that you made a series of claims (which I specifically replied to) you will not support with documentation.

 

[Jayjay]

Jayjay not according to me, according to Pew. Take it with them.
But my guess would be they took that poll at different times.
Because that would be stupid to ask about "right to secede" after referendum.
And things were changing toward Russia fast

Did you even read your own links?

A clear majority of Ukrainians agree that their country should remain a single, unified state, according to a pair of new surveys conducted by the Pew Research Center in Ukraine and Russia – after Crimea’s annexation by Russia, but prior to recent violence in Odessa and other cities.

I'll take Pew's word for it rather than your "guess" as to what happened.

 

[thief of fire]

No, you just asked a lot of questions of me rather than making your case.

I made my case.

Where? All I saw was you asking questions, not making a case.
But feel free to make that case if you wish.

 

[Sabine Grant]

I made my case.

Where? All I saw was you asking questions, not making a case.

I had posted now 3 days ago. Then, I had to link to that post in order for you to pay attention to it. Your claims are clearly quoted in my post and clearly addressed by me. I will link you again to it and for the last time. My questions directly address YOUR quoted claims. If you have difficulty reading the flow of your quotes and my addressing them, there is nothing I can do for you. However , it will stay on record that you keep evading documenting your claims clearly quoted in my post.

http://talkfreethought.org/showthre...orces-at-Donetsk&p=72232&viewfull=1#post72232

 

[thief of fire]

Where? All I saw was you asking questions, not making a case.

I had posted now 3 days ago. Then, I had to link to that post in order for you to pay attention to it. Your claims are clearly quoted in my post and clearly addressed by me. I will link you again to it and for the last time. My questions directly address YOUR quoted claims. If you have difficulty reading the flow of your quotes and my addressing them, there is nothing I can do for you. However , it will stay on record that you keep evading documenting your claims clearly quoted in my post.

http://talkfreethought.org/showthre...orces-at-Donetsk&p=72232&viewfull=1#post72232

You don't make a case there. You just ask questions. I'm not sure why you can't tell the difference, but whatever.

 

[thief of fire]

delete

 

[Sabine Grant]

I had posted now 3 days ago. Then, I had to link to that post in order for you to pay attention to it. Your claims are clearly quoted in my post and clearly addressed by me. I will link you again to it and for the last time. My questions directly address YOUR quoted claims. If you have difficulty reading the flow of your quotes and my addressing them, there is nothing I can do for you. However , it will stay on record that you keep evading documenting your claims clearly quoted in my post.

http://talkfreethought.org/showthre...orces-at-Donetsk&p=72232&viewfull=1#post72232

You don't make a case there. You just ask questions. I'm not sure why you can't tell the difference, but whatever.

The questioning parts of my post are intended to challenge your clearly quoted claims. Are you not familiar with the high number of times within the context of a debate or discussion, claims will be challenged by questioning them? If you are not, I will suggest to you that you upgrade your debating skills.

 

[thief of fire]

You don't make a case there. You just ask questions. I'm not sure why you can't tell the difference, but whatever.

The questioning parts of my post are intended to challenge your clearly quoted claims.

Challenging claims is not the same as making a case.
That is why I said "feel free to make a case", as you had not done so. But if you don't want to that's ok.

I will suggest to you that you upgrade your debating skills

Uh huh.

Here. I wrote.

If you think the government was legit, then feel free to make your case.

You replied

I already did

But you hadn't made a case that the government was legit, you merely asked some questions.

 

[Togo]

The questioning parts of my post are intended to challenge your clearly quoted claims.

Challenging claims is not the same as making a case.

She did make a case. You were trying to justify Russia's invasions and treaty violations on the grounds that the government in Kiev was illegitimate, neo-Nazis, and thugs. Sabine pointed out that you had no actual evidence for this, and provided evidence to the contrary. It's not up to her to disprove your assertions, it's up to you to back them up with something.

Or we can just treat your claim that the Kiev government was illegitimate as something you don't care to back up, and we can move on. It's not like it would justify Russia's actions anyway.

 

[thief of fire]

Challenging claims is not the same as making a case.

She did make a case. You were trying to justify Russia's invasions and treaty violations on the grounds that the government in Kiev was illegitimate, neo-Nazis, and thugs. Sabine pointed out that you had no actual evidence for this, and provided evidence to the contrary. It's not up to her to disprove your assertions, it's up to you to back them up with something.

No she didn't which is why neither of you are mentioning any specifics about this alleged case. Rather than be a boor and waste our time, why not state what the case is.
We have had at least half a dozen posts from you and sabine but neither of you have stated what this actual "case" is.

Or we can just treat your claim that the Kiev government was illegitimate as something you don't care to back up, and we can move on. It's not like it would justify Russia's actions anyway.

Presently you seem incapable of either "moving on" or stating what Sabine's case is...so can you stop wasting our time or do something useful?

It's not difficult. if you see some kind of case presented by Sabine then just state what you think Sabine's case for the government in Kiev being legit is. What is stopping you from stating that case rather than rambling on. All I see is questions and no case stated.

 

[Togo]

What is stopping you from stating that case rather than rambling on. All I see is questions and no case stated.

A reluctance to cooperate with your clumsy attempt to shift the burden of proof.

You claimed the Ukrainian government was illegitimate, you can't back it up, let's move on.

 

[Harry Bosch]

No she didn't which is why neither of you are mentioning any specifics about this alleged case. Rather than be a boor and waste our time, why not state what the case is. We have had at least half a dozen posts from you and sabine but neither of you have stated what this actual "case" is. Presently you seem incapable of either "moving on" or stating what Sabine's case is...so can you stop wasting our time or do something useful? It's not difficult. if you see some kind of case presented by Sabine then just state what you think Sabine's case for the government in Kiev being legit is. What is stopping you from stating that case rather than rambling on. All I see is questions and no case stated.

(sigh) This thread has been torture! Do you or do you not have evidence that the popularly elected gov of Ukraine are "neo-nazis"? It's a simple question!

 

[Sabine Grant]

No she didn't which is why neither of you are mentioning any specifics about this alleged case. Rather than be a boor and waste our time, why not state what the case is. We have had at least half a dozen posts from you and sabine but neither of you have stated what this actual "case" is. Presently you seem incapable of either "moving on" or stating what Sabine's case is...so can you stop wasting our time or do something useful? It's not difficult. if you see some kind of case presented by Sabine then just state what you think Sabine's case for the government in Kiev being legit is. What is stopping you from stating that case rather than rambling on. All I see is questions and no case stated.

(sigh) This thread has been torture! Do you or do you not have evidence that the popularly elected gov of Ukraine are "neo-nazis"? It's a simple question!

To add that my post specifically pointed to the role of the Parliament which, to my knowledge, was not illegitimate and certainly not into the hands " of nazis" and "thugs who murder people". I asked him whether he was aware that the Ukrainian Parliament was part of a legitimate government as the legislative branch of the government. He did not address it.

It appears Thief of Fire is not that informed about which institutions constitute a government. Clearly, he was to reflect whether the removal of the head of the executive branch of the government implies that the legislative branch is then illegitimate. What I am observing here is avoidance on his part. And of course no documentation that somehow the Parliament or legislative branch of the government was in the hands of "thugs murdering people" and "nazis". I even wonder whether he was aware that the Parliament had voted to prompt presidential elections to be held in May.

His counter claim to my initial contention that Russia violated Article 6 of the Treaty of partition was to rehash that the "Government was illegitimate". He has yet to address my challenging his counter claim as I have clearly pointed to the legitimacy of the legislative branch of the Ukrainian government. Clearly, I have also questioned how his claims (clearly quoted) of "thugs murdering people" and "nazis" apply to the members of the Ukrainian parliament, again the legislative branch of the government.

It is indeed Thief Of Fire's responsibility to address the challenges I presented in my post rather than his persistent dismissal.

 

[barbos]

Ukrainian neo-nazi in Spain at some University:

 

[barbos]

Crimean district attorney. Apparently she is very popular in ..... Japan, a lot of fans over there.

 

[Jayjay]

Ukrainian neo-nazi in Spain at some University:

The video does not tell, how do you conclude they are neo-nazis? And if they are, what specific role do these specific people in the video have in the government in Kiev?